Geleceğin eğitim yöneticilerinde liderlik düşüncesinin BİT yönetişimi üzerinden geliştirilmesi: Uzunlamasına bir vaka çalışması

Öz

Eğitimde dijital liderlik genellikle beceriler ve teknoloji entegrasyonu çerçevesinde ele alınmaktadır; ancak geleceğin eğitim yöneticilerinin liderlik düşüncesini yapılandırılmış öğrenme süreçleri yoluyla nasıl geliştirdikleri yeterince bilinmemektedir. Bu çalışma, lisansüstü bir eğitim yönetimi dersinde uygulanan sıralı öğrenme görevlerinin liderlik düşüncesi, yönetsel muhakeme ve mesleki kimlik gelişimini nasıl desteklediğini incelemektedir. Boylamsal nitel durum çalışması deseninde yürütülen araştırmada, beş katılımcının on beş haftalık süreçte ürettiği yazılı ürünler dört zaman noktasında tematik analiz ile incelenmiştir. Bulgular, öğrencilerin başlangıçta altyapı, öğretmen kapasitesi ve eşitlik odaklı problem çerçevelemesinden uluslararası karşılaştırmalar yoluyla politika odaklı anlamlandırmaya; ardından bağlamsal yönetsel muhakemeye ve son olarak altyapı, yönetişim, öğretmen gelişimi ve eşitliği bütünleştiren kolektif stratejik çözümlere ilerlediğini göstermektedir. Çalışma, yapılandırılmış öğretim sıralamasının liderlik düşüncesini geliştiren bir mekanizma olabileceğini ve BİT yönetişiminin geleceğin eğitim yöneticileri için sistem düşüncesi ve karar verme becerilerini geliştiren pedagojik bir bağlam sunduğunu göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijital liderlik
• eğitim yönetimi
• BİT yönetişimi
• liderlik düşüncesi

Developing future education managers’ leadership thinking through ICT governance: A longitudinal case study

Öz

Digital leadership in education is often discussed in terms of skills and technology integration; however, less is known about how future education managers develop leadership thinking through structured learning processes. This study examines how sequenced learning tasks in a graduate education management course support the development of leadership thinking, managerial judgment, and professional identity. A longitudinal qualitative case study design was used. Written artefacts from five participants over fifteen weeks were analysed using thematic analysis across four time points to trace developmental change. Findings show a clear progression from initial problem framing focused on infrastructure, teacher capacity, and equity, toward policy-oriented sensemaking through international comparison. This evolved into context-sensitive managerial judgment and finally collective strategic solutions integrating infrastructure, governance, teacher development, and equity. The study suggests that instructional sequencing can function as a mechanism for developing leadership thinking and positions ICT governance as a pedagogical context for building systems thinking and decision-making capacity in future education managers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digital leadership
• educational management
• ICT governance
• leadership thinking

Kaynakça

1. AlAjmi, M. K. (2022). The impact of digital leadership on teachers’ technology integration during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kuwait. International Journal of Educational Research, 112, 101928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.101928
2. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press.
3. Bond, M., Zawacki‐Richter, O., & Nichols, M. (2019). Revisiting five decades of educational technology research: A content and authorship analysis of the British Journal of Educational Technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 12–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12730
4. Bonesso, S., Cortellazzo, L., & Gerli, F. (2024). Developing leadership behaviours in higher education: A quasi-experimental study on the effect of experiential learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(1), 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2214125
5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
6. Calvard, T. (2025). Sensemaking and Management Learning: Productive tensions and unrealized possibilities. Management Learning, 56(1), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/13505076241279067
7. Clapp-Smith, R., Hammond, M. M., Lester, G. V., & Palanski, M. (2019). Promoting Identity Development in Leadership Education: A Multidomain Approach to Developing the Whole Leader. Journal of Management Education, 43(1), 10–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918813190
8. Cotrim, F. S., & Da Silva Gomes, J. F. (2024). Longitudinal studies of leadership development: A scoping review. Current Psychology, 43(37), 29558–29586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06567-4

9. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
10. Dasruth, J., Naicker, S. R., & Smith, C. (2024). Teachers’ perceptions of principals’ digital leadership practices in a school district in a developing country. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 10, 101192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.101192
11. DeRue, D. S., & Myers, C. G. (2013). Leadership Development: A Review and Agenda for Future Research. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199755615.013.040
12. Dexter, S., & Richardson, J. W. (2020). What does technology integration research tell us about the leadership of technology? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 52(1), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2019.1668316
13. Dillard, N., Sisco, S., & Collins, J. C. (2024). Expanding Experiential Learning in Contemporary Adult Education: Embracing Technology, Interdisciplinarity, and Cultural Responsiveness. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2024(184), 30–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20539
14. Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2020). COVID 19 – school leadership in disruptive times. School Leadership & Management, 40(4), 243–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2020.1811479
15. Ho, W. W. Y., & Lau, Y. H. Y. (2025). Role of reflective practice and metacognitive awareness in the relationship between experiential learning and positive mirror effects: A serial mediation model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 157, 104947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2025.104947
16. Ingles, D. M., & Retallick, M. S. (2025). Reflective Practice in an Experiential Learning Program: An Exploratory Content Analysis of Reflective Writing in Experiential Learning Portfolios. Journal of Agricultural Education, 66(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.v66i2.3029
17. Jameson, J., Rumyantseva, N., Cai, M., Markowski, M., Essex, R., & McNay, I. (2022). A systematic review and framework for digital leadership research maturity in higher education. Computers and Education Open, 3, 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100115
18. Kane, G. (2019). The Technology Fallacy: People Are the Real Key to Digital Transformation. Research-Technology Management, 62(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2019.1661079
19. Karakose, T., Polat, H., Tülübaş, T., & Demirkol, M. (2024). A Review of the Conceptual Structure and Evolution of Digital Leadership Research in Education. Education Sciences, 14(11), 1166. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111166
20. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
21. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
22. Louws, M., Struyf, A., Van Haeften, N., Middelbeek, L., Schenke, W., Walraven, A., De Vries, B., Brouwer, P., & Lockhorst, D. (2025). Actors’ involvement during collective sensemaking of educational change: A review study from a systems lens. Journal of Educational Change, 26(4), 599–629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-025-09536-1
23. Maitlis, S., & Christianson, M. (2014). Sensemaking in Organizations: Taking Stock and Moving Forward. Academy of Management Annals, 8(1), 57–125. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2014.873177
24. McCarron, G. P., McKenzie, B. L., & Yamanaka, A. (2023). Leadership identity development. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2023(178), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20552
25. McCarthy, A. M., Maor, D., McConney, A., & Cavanaugh, C. (2023). Digital transformation in education: Critical components for leaders of system change. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 8(1), 100479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100479
26. Meijer, A., & Bekkers, V. (2015). A metatheory of e-government: Creating some order in a fragmented research field. Government Information Quarterly, 32(3), 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.04.006
27. Mintzberg, H. (2009). Managing. CA: Berrett-Koehler.
28. Niță, V., & Guțu, I. (2023). The Role of Leadership and Digital Transformation in Higher Education Students’ Work Engagement. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(6), 5124. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20065124
29. Okunlola, J. O., Naicker, S. R., & Uleanya, C. (2024). Digital leadership in the fourth industrial revolution enacted during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2317258. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2317258
30. Owen, J. E. (2023). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). New Directions for Student Leadership, 2023(178), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20550
31. Raelin, J. A. (2018). What are you afraid of: Collective leadership and its learning implications. Management Learning, 49(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507617729974
32. Reissner, S., & Armitage-Chan, E. (2024). Manifestations of professional identity work: An integrative review of research in professional identity formation. Studies in Higher Education, 49(12), 2707–2722. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2322093
33. Sosa-Díaz, M. J., Sierra-Daza, M. C., Arriazu-Muñoz, R., Llamas-Salguero, F., & Durán-Rodríguez, N. (2022). “EdTech Integration Framework in Schools”: Systematic Review of the Literature. Frontiers in Education, 7, 895042. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.895042
34. Sunderman, H. M., & Orsini, J. (2024). Leader(ship) Identity Development and Meaning Making: A Scoping Review. Journal of Leadership Studies, 18(3), 23–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21905
35. Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
36. Villarroel Henríquez, V., Castillo Rabanal, I., & Santana Abásolo, J. (2025). Applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle for deep learning: A systematic literature review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 12, 102096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.102096
37. Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001
38. Wei, J. (2024). Reflective learning: A new leadership development framework driving engineering innovation. Reflective Practice, 25(3), 352–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2024.2320141
39. Witthöft, J., Aydin, B., & Pietsch, M. (2025). Leading digital innovation in schools: The role of the open innovation mindset. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 57(6), 1430–1449. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2024.2398528
40. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.