You are here

Okulun Örgüt Yapısı İle Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Proaktif Davranışları Arasındaki İlişki

The Relationship Between School Organizational Structure And Classroom Teachers’ Proactive Behaviors

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Keywords (Original Language):

Abstract (2. Language): 
The purpose of the present study was to explore the relationship between school organizational structure and classroom teachers’ proactive behaviors. Data in this study were collected from a total number of 295 classroom teachers utilizing the mechanistic structure, organic structure and proactive behaviors scales. Mean, standard deviation, correlation and regression test used in analysis of the data. Data analysis indicated that there was a significant negatively correlation between mechanistic school structure and proactive behavior, whereas there was a significant positively correlation between organic school structure and proactive behavior.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmanın amacı okul örgütsel yapısı ile sınıf öğretmenlerinin proaktif davranışları arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Bu çalışmanın verileri 2013-2014 öğretim yılında Bolu il merkez ilçe sınırları içerisinde yer alan ilkokullarda görev yapan 295 sınıf öğretmeninden elde edilmiştir. Araştırmanın verileri mekanik okul yapısı, organik okul yapısı ve proaktif davranış ölçekleri kullanılarak elde edilmiştir. Verilerin analizinde aritmetik ortalama ve standart sapma, korelasyon ve regresyon analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada mekanik okul yapısı ile proaktif davranış arasında negatif ve anlamlı ilişki, organik okul yapısı ile proaktif davranış arasında olumlu ve anlamlı ilişki bulunmuştur.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
1789
1802

REFERENCES

References: 

Asgari, A., Silong, A. D., Ahmad, A., & Samah, B. A. (2008). The relationship between transformational
leadership behaviors, organizational support, trust in management and organizational
citizenship behaviors. European Journal of Scientific Research, 23(2), 227–242.
Belschak, F., den Hartog, D., & Fay, D. (2010). Exploring positive, negative, and contextdependent aspects
of proactive behaviors at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 267-173.
Bindl, U.,& Parker, S. (2010). Proactive work behavior: Forward-thinking and change-oriented
action in organizations. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational
psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 567-598). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Burns, T.,& Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock Publications
Carpenter, M. , Bauer, T. & Erdoğan, B. (2013). Principles of Management: A Behavioral Approach.
Flat World Knowledge.
Cerit, Y. (2013). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin proaktif davranışları sergileme düzeylerinin bazı demografik
değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. ULEAD 2013 Annual Congress: International Congress on
Research in Education, Mayıs.
Cogliser, C. C.,& Schriesheim, C. A. (2000). Exploring work unit context and leader-member exchange:
A multi-level perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 487-511.
Conley, S. & You, S. (2014). Role stress revisited: Job structuring antecedents, work outcomes, and moderating
effects of locus of control. Educational ManagemenAt dministration & Leadership, 42(2), 184-206.
Conley S and Glasman NS (2008) Fear, the school organization, and teacher evaluation. Educational
Policy, 22(1), 63–85.
Covin, J.G. & Slevin, D.P. (1991). A Conceptual Model of Entrepreneurship as Firm
Behavior.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7-25.
Crant, J. M. (2000). Proactive behavior in organizations. Journal of Management, 26, 435–462.
Courtright J A, Fairhurst G T ve Rogers L E (1989) Interaction Patterns in Organic and Mechanic
Systems. Academy of Management Journal, 32 (4), 773-802.
De Dreu, C. K. W. (2006). When too little or too much hurts: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship
between task conflict and innovation in teams. Journal of Management, 32 (1), 83-107.
DiPaola, M. F.,& Hoy, W. K. (2005). School characteristics that foster organizational citizenship
behavior. Journal of School Leadership, 15, 308-326.
Fay, D.,& Sonnentag, S. (2012). Within-person Fluctuations of Proactive Behavior: How Affect and
Experienced Competence Regulate Work behavior. Human Performance, 25(1), 72-93.
Freund, A. & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2007). Organizational (role structuring) and personal (organizational
commitment and job involvement) factors: Do they predict interprofessional team effectiveness?.
Journal of Interprefessional Care, 21(3), 319-334.
Ghitulescu, B. E. (2013). Making Change Happen: The Impact of Work Context on Adaptive and
Proactive Behaviors.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49(2), 206–245.
Grant, A.M. and Ashford, S., (2008). The Dynamics of Proactivity at Work. Research in organizational
Behavior, 28, 3-34.
1800 Yusuf CERİT, Nuri AKGÜN...
K. Ü. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi 23 (4)
Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance: Positive behavior
in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 327–347.
Griffin, M. A., Parker, S. K., & Mason, C. (2010). Leader vision and the development of adaptive
and proactive performance: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 174-182.
Hirst, G., Knippenberg, D.V., Chen, C., & Sacramento, C.A. (2011). How Does Bureaucracy impact
individual creativity? A Cross-level investigation of team contextual influences on goal
orientation-creativity relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 624-641.
Hoy, W.K. & Miskel, C.G. (2010). Eğitim yönetimi: Teori, araştırma ve uygulama(çev. Ed. S. Turan).
Ankara: Nobel.
Jogaratnam, G. & Tse, E. C. (2006). Entrepreneurial orientation and the structuring of organizations:
Performance evidence from the Asian hotel industry. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 18(6), 454-468.
OECD. (2006). Demand-sensitive schooling. Evidence and issues. Paris: Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD).
Hoy, W. K.,& Sweetland, S. R. (2001). Designing better schools: The meaning and nature of enabling
school structure. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 296-321.
McAllister, D.J., Kamdar, D., Morrison, E.W., & Turban, D.B. (2007). Disentanglingrole perceptions:
How perceived role breadth, discretion, instrumentality, andefficacy relate to helping and
taking charge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1200–1211.
Messick,, P.P. (2012). Examining relationships among enabling school structures, academic optimism
and organizational citizenship behaviors (Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University).
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1033785180? accountid=15310
Miller R. J. & Rowan, B. (2006). Effects of organic management on student achievement. American
Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 219-253.
Parker, S.K. (1998). Enhancing role breadth self-efficacy: The roles of job enrichment and other
organizational interventions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 835–852.
Parker, S. K., Bindl, U. K., & Strauss, K. (2010). Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation.
Journal of Management, 36, 827–856.
Parker, S.,& Collins, C. (2010). Taking stock: Integrating and differentiating multiple proactive
behaviors. Journal of Management, 36, 633-662.
Parker, S., Williams, H., & Turner, N. (2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behaviorat
work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 636-652.
Pearson, L. C.,& Moomaw, W. (2005). The relationship between teacher autonomy and stress,work
satisfaction, empowerment, and professionalism. Educational Research Quarterly, 29, 37-53.
Rasmussen, C. & Marrongella, K. (2006). Pedagogical content tools: Integrating student reasoning
and mathematics in instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(5), 388-423.
Raub, S. (2008). Does bureaucracy kill individual initiative? The impact of structure on organizational
citizenship behavior in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality
Management, 27, 179–186.
Rowan, B. (2002). Teachers’ work and instructional management: Alternative views of the task of
teaching. Teory and Research in educational Administration (129-150). (ed.) W.K. Hoy & C.
Miskel. Information Age Publishing
Rowan, B. (1990). Commitment and control: Alternative strategies for the organizational design of
schools. In C. Cazden (Ed.), Review of research in education(Vol. 16, pp. 353–389). Washington,
DC: American Educational Research Association.
Sonnentag, S. & Kruel, U. (2006). Psychological detachment from work during off job time: The
role of job stressors, job involvement, and recovery related self-efficacy. Europen Journal of
Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(2), 197-217.
Okulun Örgüt Yapısı İle Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Proaktif Davranışları... 1801
K. Ü. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi 23 (4)
Somech, A.,& Wenderow, M. (2006). The impact of participative and directive leadership on teachers’
performance: The intervening effects of job structuring, decisions domain, and leadermember
exchange. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(5), 746-772.
Stamper, C. L.,& Van Dyne, L.(2001). Work status and organizational citizenship behavior: A field
studyof restaurant employees. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 517-536.
Thomas, J., Whitman, D.S., & Viswesvaran, C., (2010). Employee Proactivity in Organizations: A
Comparative Meta-Analysis of Emergent Proactive Constructs. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 83, 275-300.
Thompson, J.A. (2005). Proactive Personality and Job Performance: A Social Capital Perspective.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1011-1017.
Van De Bunt, L. (2012). Leadership and situational antecedents of proactive behavior. University
van Amsterdam.dare.uva.nl.
Visscher, A. (2013). Introduction to organizational and management aspects of schoolls, in A. J.
Visscher (Ed.) Managing Schools towards High Performance,(3-36). Taylor & Francis.
Yücel, A.S., Koçak, C., ve Cula, S., An Analysis on Proactive-Reactive Personality Profiles in Student-
Teacher Relationship Through The Metaphorical Thinking Approach. Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics Science & Technology Education, 6(2), (2010), 129-137.
Zhang, Z., Wang, M. and Shi, J. (2012). Leader-Follower Congruence in Proactive Personality and
Work Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Leader-Member Exchange. Academy of Management
Journal, 55(1), 111-130.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com