Examining the Relationship Between Teacher Leadership and Academic Achievement

Öz

The aim of this research is to examine the relationship between teacher leadership and academic achievement of students through meta-analysis. For this purpose, an analysis of the effect sizes of 47 independent samples obtained from a total of 54 primary studies was carried out according to the inclusion criteria. Findings revealed that there is a positive yet weak association between teacher leadership and academic achievement. The distribution of effect sizes does not differ statistically with respect to the leadership type, academic field, education level, analysis unit, participant, location, and publication type. However, the size of effects significantly differs by the education levels. Accordingly, the effect size value in terms of the relationship between teacher leadership and students' academic achievement is weak for the elementary school, with Fz = .12, while it is moderate for the university, high school, and middle school with values of Fz = .26, Fz = .38, and Fz = .30 respectively.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• : Academic achievement
• teacher leadership
• meta analysis

Öğretmen Liderliği ve Akademik Başarı Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı öğretmen liderliği ile öğrencilerin akademik başarıları arasındaki ilişkiyi meta analiz yöntemiyle incelemektir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda dahil etme kriterlerine uygun toplam 47 temel araştırmadan elde edilen 54 bağımsız örnekleme ait etki büyüklüklerinin analizi yapılmıştır. Çalışmada genel olarak, öğretmen liderliği ve akademik başarı arasında pozitif yönlü fakat zayıf düzeyde bir ilişki olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. Etki büyüklüklerinin dağılımı liderlik türü, akademik alan, eğitim kademesi, analiz birimi, katılımcı, bölge ve yayın türüne göre istatistiksel olarak farklılaşmamaktadır. Fakat etki büyüklükleri farklı eğitim kademlerine göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı biçimde farklılaşmaktadır. Buna göre, öğretmen liderliği ile öğrencilerin akademik başarısı arasındaki ilişkinin etki büyüklüğü cinsinden değeri ilkokul kademesi için Fz=.12 biçiminde zayıf düzeyde iken üniversite, lise ve ortaokul kademelerinde ise sırasıyla Fz=.26, Fz=.38 ve Fz=.30 olmak üzere orta düzeydedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Akademik başarı
• meta analiz.
• öğretmen liderliği

Kaynakça

1. Altunay, E. (2017). Sınıf yönetiminde öğretmenlerin öğretimsel liderlik rolleri. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 20(37), 19-44
2. Araşkal, S., & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2019). Examining the factors affecting teachers’ leadership: Qualitative research. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 25(3), 419-468.
3. Balwant, P. (2016). Transformational instructor‐leadership in higher education teaching: A meta‐analytic review and research agenda. Journal of Leadership Studies, 9(4), 20-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21423
4. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
5. Borenstein, M. & Hedges, L. V. (2019). Effect sizes for meta-analysis. In Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (Eds.). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp.207-242). Russell Sage Foundation.
6. Borenstein, M., Higgins, J. P., Hedges, L. V., & Rothstein, H. R. (2017). Basics of meta analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Research Synthesis Methods, 8(1), 5-18.
7. Burns, J.M. (2004). Transforming leadership: A new pursuit of happiness. Grove Press
8. Can, N. (2014). Öğretmen liderliği. Ankara: Pegem Akademi

9. Cicolini, G., Comparcini, D., & Simonetti, V. (2013). Workplace empowerment and nurses' job satisfaction: a systematic literature review. Journal of nursing management, 22(7), 855-871. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12028
10. Çakan, M. (2003). Geniş ölçekli başarı testlerinin eğitimindeki yeri ve önemi. Eğitim ve bilim, 28(128).
11. Harris, A. (2005). Teacher leadership: More than just a feel-good factor? Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 201-219.
12. Hoy, A.W., & Hoy, W.K. (2006). Instructional leadership: a learning-centered guide. (2nd edition). Boston: Pearson Education Company, USA.
13. Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 755–768. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755.
14. Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2001). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop as leaders (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
15. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. California: Sage Publications.
16. Littell, J. H., Corcoran, J., & Pillai, V. (2008). Systematic reviews and meta‐analysis. Oxford University Press
17. Mangin, M. M., & Stoelinga, S. R. (2008). Teacher leadership: What it is and why itb matters. In M. M. Mangin & S. R. Stoelinga (Eds.), Effective teacher leadership: Using research to inform and reform (pp. 1–9). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
18. McKenzie, M.J, et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88, 105906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906
19. Neumerski, C. M. (2012). Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: What do we know about principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here? Educational Administration Quarterly, 49, 310–347. doi:10.1177/0013161X12456700
20. Nguyen, D., Harris, A., & Ng, D. (2019). A review of the empirical research on teacher leadership (2003–2017) Evidence, patterns and implications. Journal of Educational Administration, 58 (1), 60-80. DOI: 10.1108/JEA-02-2018-0023
21. Olejnik, S., & Algina, J. (2000). Measures of effect size for comparative studies: Applications, interpretations and limitations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 241­286.
22. Paul, J., & Barari, M. (2022). Meta‐analysis and traditional systematic literature reviews—What, why, when, where, and how?. Psychology & Marketing.39 (6),1-17. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21657
23. Park, S., & Beretvas, S. N. (2019). Synthesizing effects for multiple outcomes per study using robust variance estimation versus the three-level model. Behavior research methods, 51, 152-171. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1156-y
24. Samawi, H. (2021). Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis. In Applied Meta-Analysis with R and Stata (pp. 237-252). Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429061240
25. Schott, C., van Roekel, H., & Tummers, L. (2020). Teacher leadership: A systematic review, methodological quality assessment and conceptual framework, Educational Research Review, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100352.
26. Shen, J., Wu, H., Reeves, P., Zheng, Y., Ryan, L., & Anderson, D. (2020). The association between teacher leadership and student achievement: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 31, 100357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100357
27. Sokol, A., Gozdek, A., & Figurska, I. (2015). The importance of teacher leadership in shaping the creative attitudes of students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1976-1982.
28. Şişman, M. (2004). Öğretim liderliği (2. basım). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık
29. Tan, C. Y., Dimmock, C., & Walker, A. (2021). How school leadership practices relate to student outcomes: Insights from a three-level meta-analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. DOI: 10.1177/17411432211061445
30. Wenner, J.A., & Campbell, T. (2017). The theoretical and empirical basis of teacher leadership: a review of the literatüre. Review of Educational Research, 87(1), 134-171
31. Woods, P., Bennett, N., Harvey, J. A., & Wise, C. (2004). Variabilities and dualities in distributed leadership. findings from a systematic literature review. Educational Management Administration Leadership, 32(4), 439-457.
32. Wynne, J. (2002). Teacher leadership in education reform. ERIC Digest. http://www.ericdigests.org/2002-4/teachers.html adresinden 17.05.2023 tarihinde erişildi York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255–316.