Eğitim Yöneticisi Adaylarının Sosyal Becerilerinin Bazı Değişkenlere Göre İncelenmesi

Abstract

Summary Discussions about the characteristics that administrators must have have continued from the past to the present. While some give importance to administrative knowledge, some give importance to technical knowledge and skills about the field or social skills. If we remember that administration is human engineering (Açıkalın, 1998), the importance of social skills in administration can be realized more easily. As you know, the source of educational administrators in Turkey is the teachers and school administrator. The method of raising a qualified educational administrator depends on raising a qualified teacher (Acar, 2002). Educational administrators play an important role in using the human and material sources effectively to reach educational institutions to their goals. To realize these missions, educational administrators are expected to have social skills. For this reason, it is believed that determining the social skills level of educational administrators is important. It is possible that social skills of educational administrators vary according to some variables. If these differences can be evaluated, a new point of view will be reached. However, in this study, we focused on the relationship between social skill and locus of control and some personnel characteristics. The fact that this subject is important in raising educational administrators and there is no study in our country, which deals with social skills with some variables, particularly locus of control encourages us to do this study. The aim of this study is to determine whether the social skills of the candidates of educational administrators are show difference in terms of their locus-of-control, sex, branch and participation in activities such as theatre and conference. In this study replies to the following questions were searched parallel to this general aim: The following questionnaire to be investigated in terms of candidate educational administrators total and subscale mean scores on social skills inventory; 1. Are there any differences on social skills mean scores regarding internal and external locus of control? 2. Are there any gender differences? 3. Are there any differences for branches? 4. Are there any differences for participating in activities such as conferences and going to theater? Method The population of the study is the postgraduate students who are attending the MA programme in the section of Educational Administration and Supervision at the Institution of Educational Sciences, at Gazi University. There are 140 students attending that programme. 106 of these students were chosen randomly and they are the sample of the study. In this study, the data about the sex, branch and participation in social activities such as theatre and conference was collected by the personal information form; the data about their beliefs in internal and external locus-of-control measurement by Rotter's and the data about their social skills was collected by Riggio's (1989) social skills inventory. To analyze the data, t-test and one dimensional variance analysis were used. Results When Table show that the mean of the subscores of emotional sensitivity, social expressivity and social control of candidates of educational administrator with a trend of inner locus-of-control is higher than the ones with the external locus-of-control. This finding shows that emotional sensitivity, social expressivity and social control varies according to inner and external locus-of-control. On the other hand, the mean of the subscale of social sensitivity of candidates of educational administrators with more external tendencies is higher than those with more internal tendencies. In Table 2, a significant difference was found between the mean of the subscale of emotional sensitivity of male and female candidates. This finding shows that only emotional sensitivity in the candidates changes according to sex. In other words, females have a higher level of emotional sensitivity than males. According to Table 3, there is no significant difference between the mean of the total scores, scores of subscore of social skills of Social Scientists and the scores of Applied Scientics. These findings show that branch is not a characteristic of social skills. The result of the one-dimensional variance analysis in Table 4 shows that among the mean scores of only social control subscale participation in activities such as theatre and conference. According to the results of the LSD test given, the mean scores of the subscale of social control of candidate's who “frequently” participate in activities such as theatre and conference is higher, than the ones who participate in such activities “sometimes” or “rarely”. Discussion and Conclusion In the study a few important findings have been revealed. These findings have been interpreted by comparing them with the findings in the literature. In Table 1A and 1B, the mean scores of the subscales of social control, social expressivity and emotional sensivity of those with more internal tendencies is higher than the scores of those with more external tendencies. The finding that emotional expressioness of those with more internal tendencies is higher the emotional expressioness of those with more external tendencies seems to support Hexel's (2003) finding that the individual with more external tendencies have more difficulties in expressing their emotional than the ones with more internal tendencies. A study by Cerlogio and others (2001) revealed that those with more external tendencies are interested more in others problems. The fiding that social sensitivity is higher among those with more external tendencies supports the finding. It is natural for us to accept that social skills are higher for those with more internal tendencies than those with more external tendencies. Because as stated in the literature according to Rotter (1990) unlike those with more internal tendencies those with more external tendencies express their success on failures according to outer characters but not according to their own skills and characters. Individuals with this character are thought to be bat bad developing themselves. In the study, only a significance difference infavour of female candidates was noticed for the subsore of emotional sensitivity. This finding seems to support the findings of Depaulo and Rosentha (1979), Riggio (1986) and Argyl (1990) that women are more skillful at understanding and conveying nonverbal messages. In the study only the difference in the social control subscale scores is significant in terms of the score of subscale of social skills according to participation in activities such as theatre and conference. This finding is consistent with Kulas's (1994) finding that there is a relation between participating in different activities and being the locus of control as internal and external tendencies. As a result social skills of candidates of educational administrators changes according to their social skills, locus of control, sex and participation in activities such as theatre and conference. It is hoped that the results of this study will help the executives of the Ministry National Education and lectures at the Institute of Educational Sciences to develop politics.

Keywords

• skills , locus of control , internal locus of control , external locus of control

Eğitim Yöneticisi Adaylarının Sosyal Becerilerinin Bazı Değişkenlere Göre İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu araştırma, eğitim yöneticisi adaylarında sosyal becerilerin denetim odağı, cinsiyet, branş gibi özeliklere ve tiyatro, konferans gibi etkinliklere katılma sıklığına göre farklılık gösterip göstermediğinin incelendiği betimsel bir çalışmadır. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Eğitim Yöneticiliği ve Deneticiliği Bilim Dalında 2005-2006 öğretim yılında yüksek lisans yapmakta olan 106 yönetici adayına Rotter'in (1996) geliştirdiği “Rotter'in İç-Dış Kontrol Odağı Ölçeği”, Riggio'nun (1986, 1989) “Sosyal Beceri Envanteri” ile “Kişisel Bilgi Formu” uygulanmıştır. Verilerin çözümlenmesinde t-testi ve tek yönlü varyans analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma bulguları; eğitim yöneticisi adaylarının iç ve dış denetim odağına sahip olmaları açısından, “Sosyal Beceri Envanteri”nin duyuşsal duyarlık, sosyal anlatımcılık, sosyal duyarlık ve sosyal kontrol alt ölçek puanlarının ortalamalarında önemli farklılıklar olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Sosyal beceri Envanteri'nden alınan puanların ortalamaları sadece duyuşsal duyarlık alt ölçeğinde cinsiyete göre farklılık göstermiş, branş değişkenine göre ise tüm alt ölçek puanlarının ortalamaları arasında anlamlı bir farklılık görülmemiştir. Diğer taraftan Sosyal Beceri Envanteri'nden alınan puanların ortalamaları; sadece sosyal kontrol alt ölçeğinde tiyatro-konferans gibi etkinliklere katılma sıklığına göre anlamlı farklılık göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• sosyal beceri , denetim odağı , iç denetim , dış denetim.

Kaynakça

1. Acar, Hüseyin (2002). Eğitim yöneticileri nasıl yetiştirilmeli? 21. Yüzyıl Eğitim yöneticilerinin Yetiştirilmesi Sempozyumu. Ankara: A.Ü. Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Yayınları, 313-326.
2. Açıkalın, Aytaç (1998). Toplumsal Kurumsal ve Teknik Yönleriyle Okul Yöneticiliği. (4. ve Son Basım). Ankara: Pegem.
3. Anderson, C.R. & Schnier, C.E. (1978), Locus of control, leader behavior and leader performance among management students. Academy of Management Journal, 21 (4), 690-698.
4. Argyle, M. (1990). The Psychology of Interpersonal Behavior. Penguin: Harmondsworth, UK.
5. Arnold, H.J. (1985). Task performance, perceived competence and attributed causes of performance as determinants of intrinsic motivation. Academy of Management, Journal, 28, 876-888.
6. Ashkansay, N.M., & Tse, B. (2000). Transformational leadership as management of emotion: A conceptual review. In N.M. Ashkansay & C. E. Hartel (Eds.), Emotions in the workplace: Research, theory, and practice (pp.3-18). Westport, CT: Quorum Books/Greenwood Publishing Group.
7. Bass, B.M. (1981). Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership, New York: Free Press.
8. Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectation. New York: The Free Press.

9. Bass, B.M. (2002). Cognitive, social, and emotional intelligence of transformational leaders. In R.E. Riggio, S.E. Murphy & F.J. Pirozzolo (Eds.), Multiple Intelligences and Leadership, 105-118. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Bass, B.M., Avolio, B.J. & Atwater, L. (1996). The transformational and transactional leadership of men and women. International Review of Applied, Psychology, 45, 5-34.
11. Becker, T.E., Billings, R.S. Eveleth, D.M. & Gilbert, N.L. (1996). Foci and bases of employee commitment: Implications for job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 464-482.
12. Bernardi, R.A. (1997). The relationshpi among locus of control, perceptions of stress, & performance. Journal of Applied Business Research, 13 (4), 1-8.
13. Burger, M.J. (2004). Kişilik: Çev.: İnan Deniz, Erguvan Sarıoğlu, İstanbul : Kaknüs Yayınları.
14. Byrman, A. (1986). Leadership and Organizations. London: Rout Ledge & Kegan Paul.
15. Carlopio, J., Andrewartha, G. & Armstrong, H. (2001). Developing Management Skils, 2nd edn. Australia: Prentice Hall.
16. Conger, J.A. & Kanungo, R.N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12: 637-647.
17. Çelenk, S .(2002). Geleceğin eğitim yöneticilerinin yetiştirilmesinde bir model önerisi . 21. Yüzyıl Eğitim Yöneticilerinin Yetiştirilmesi Sempozyumu (16-17 Mayıs 2002 Ankara). Ankara: A.Ü. Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Yayınları, 65-81.
18. Dağ, İ. (1991). Rotter’in iç-dış kontrol odağı ölçeği (RİDKOÖ’nin Üniversite öğrencileri için güvenirliği ve geçerliği. Psikoloji Dergisi, 7 (27), 1-9.
19. Depaulo, B.M. & Rosenthal, R. (1979). Ambivalence, discrepancy, and deception in nonverbal communication. In R. Rosenthal (Ed.) Skill in nonverbal communication: Individual differences (pp.204-248). Cambridge, MA. Oelgeschlager, Gunn, & Hain.
20. Eagly, A.H. & Johnson, B.T. (1990). Gender and leadership style : A metoanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 223-256.
21. Ferris, G.R., With, L.A., & Hochwarter, W.A. (2001). The interaction of social skill and general mental ability on work outcomes. Journal at Applied Psychology, 86, 1075-1082.
22. Findly, M.J. & Cooper, H.M. (1983). Locus of control and academic achievement: a literature review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(2), 419-427.
23. Flauto, F.J. (1999). Walking the talk: The relationship between leadership and communication competence. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6, 89-97.
24. Govindarajan , V. (1989). Implementing competitive strategy at the business unit level: implications of matching managers to strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 251-269.
25. Groves, K. (2002). An examination of leader social intelligence and follower openness to organizational change as key components of charismatic leadership. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Claremont Graduate University.
26. Groves, K.S. (2005). Gender differences in social and emotional skills, and charismatic leadership. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 2(3), 30-46.
27. Gut, M. D. & Safran , P. S. (2002). Cooperative learning and social stories: effective social skills strategies for reading teachers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 18, 87-91.
28. Haas, J.W. & Arnold, C.L. (1995). An examination of the role of listening in judgments of communication competence in co-workers. The Journal of Business Communication, 32, 123-139.
29. Haas, J.W. & Sypher, B.D. (1991). The impact of communication abilities on individual success in organizational settings. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Atlanta, G.A.
30. Hackman, M.Z., Furniss, A., Hills, M.J., & Paterson, T.J. (1992). Perceptions of genderrole characteristics and transformational and transactional leadership behaviors. Perceptual and Motor Skill. 75, 311-319.
31. Hamel, G. & Prahalad, C.K. (1991). Corporate Imagination and Expeditionary Marketing. Cambridge, MA: Harward Business Review.
32. Hexel, M.(2003). Alexithymia and attachment style in relation to locus of control. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1261-1270.
33. Hiers, J.M. and Heckel, R.V. (1977). Seating choice, leadership and locus of control. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 17 (2), 313-314.
34. Howell, J.M. & Avolia, B.J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional leadership, locus of control and support for innovation: key predictors of consolidated business unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychoolg, 78 (6), 891-902.
35. Hyatt, T.A. & Prawitt, D.F. (2001). Does congruence between audet structure and auditors locus-of control affect job performance? The Accounting Review, 76 (2), 263-274.
36. Jackson, L. Rothmann, S. (2001). Sense of coherence, self-efficacy, locus of control and as predictors of job satisfaction. Poster session presented at the 10th European Congress on Work and Organisaitonal Psychology, Prague, Czech Republic.
37. Johnson, A.L., Luthans, F. & Hennessey, H.W. (1984). The role of locus of control in leader influence behavior. Personnel Psychology, 37 (1), 61-75.
38. Judge, A. &Bono, J.E. (2000). Five factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 751-65.
39. Kilduff, M. & Day, D.V (1994). Do chameleons get ahead? The effects of selfmonitoring an managerial careers. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 1047-1060.
40. Kotler, P. (1988). The Leadership Factor, New York: Free Press, NY.
41. Kruger, J. &Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own in competence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality an Social Psychology, 6, 1121-1134.
42. Kulas, H. (1996). Locus of control in adolescence : a longitudional study. Adolescence,31/123, 721-9.
43. Langley, Andrew (2000). Emotional intelligence a new evaluation for management development? Career Development International, 5/3, 177-183.
44. Larson, A. (1968). The President Nobody Knew, New York: Popular Library, N.Y.
45. Marlowe, H. A. (1986). Social Intelligence: Evidence for multidimensionality and construct independence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 52-58.
46. Özdemir, A. (2006). Eğitim Yöneticisi adaylarında denetim odağının bazı değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi , 10/1-2,9-23.
47. Papa, M.J. & Tracy, K. (1988). Communicative indices of employee performance with new technology. Communication Research, 15, 524-544.
48. Payne J.H. (2005). Reconceptualizing social skills in organizations: exploring the relationship between communication competence, job performance, and supervisory roles. Journal of Leadership and organizational Studies, 11 (2), 63-77.
49. Penley, L. E., Alexander, E.R., Jernigan, I.E., & Henwood, C.I (1991). Communication abilities of managers : the relationship to performance. Journal of Management, 17, 57-76.
50. Place, H. (1979). A biographical profile of women in management. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52 (4) 264-276.
51. Richmond, V.P. &Roach, K.D. (1992). Willingness to communicate and employee success in U.S. organizations. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 20, 95-116.
52. Riggio ,R.E.(1989). Social skills inventory manual. Palo Alto, Ca: Consulting Psychologist Press.
53. Riggio, R.E. (1986). Assessment of basic social skills. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 647-660.
54. Rotter, J.B. (1990). Internal versus external control of reinforcement. American Psychologist, 45 (4), 489-493.
55. Siu, O. & Cooper, C.L. (1998). A. study of occupational stress, job satisfaction and quitting intention in Hong Kong firms: The role of locus of control and organizational commitment. Stress Medicine, 14, 55-66.
56. Solmuş, T. (2004). İş yaşamı, denetim odağı ve beş faktör kişilik modeli. Türk Psikoloji Bülteni, 34-35, 196-2005.
57. Sosik, J.J. & Megerian, L.E. (1999). Understanding leader emotional intelligence and performance. Group and Organization Management, 24, 367-390.
58. Sosik, J.J. (2001). Self-other agreement on charismatic leadership. Group and Organization Management, 26, 484-511.
59. Spector, P.E. (1988). Development of the work locus of control scale. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 61, 335-340.
60. Spector, P.E. (1997). Job Satisfaciton: Application, Assesment, Cause and Consequences. California: SAGE Publications.
61. Storms, P.L. & Spector, P.E. (1987). Relationship of organizational frustration with reported behavioral reactions: the moderating effects of locus of control. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 69, 227-234.
62. Sypher, B.D., Bostrom, R.N. & Seibert, J.H. (1989). Listening, communication abilities, and success at work. The Journal of Business Communication, 26, 293-303.
63. Tümkaya, S. (2001). Denetim odakları farklı ilkokul öğretmenlerinin bazı değişkenlere göre tükenmişlikleri. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 2(15), 29-40.
64. Uzun, G. (2005). Kadın ve erkek yöneticilerin liderlik davranışları arasındaki farklılıklar ve bankacılık sektöründe uygulama. Çukuroava Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İşletme Anabilim Dalı (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Adana.
65. Wilson, G.D. (Ed). (1973). The Psychology of Conservatism. London: Academic Press.
66. Yeşilyaprak, B. (2004). Denetim Odağı, Eğitimde Bireysel Farklılıklar. (Edit. Yıldız Kuzgun-Deniz Deryakulu) Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. Yüksel, G. (1998). Sosyal beceri envanterinin Türkçe’ye uyarlanması: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları. Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 2 (9), 39-48.
67. Yüksel, G. (2004). Sosyal Beceri Envanteri. Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
68. Zinser, R. (2003). Developing career and employability skills: a Us case Study. Education + Training. 45 (7), 402-410.
69. Zorn, T.E. & Violanti, M.T. (1996). Communication abilities and individual achievement in organizations. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 139-146.