The Model of Situation Leadership for School Administrators under the Yala Primary Educational Service Area Office 3

Abstract

The objectives of this research were to 1) study condition and the model of situation leadership for school administrators under the Yala Primary Educational Service Area Office 3, and 2) create the model of situation leadership for school administrators under the Yala Primary Educational Service Area Office 3.

The research process involved two steps: Step 1: to study documents and research related to situation leadership in identifying interview topics and collecting qualitative data, using semi-structured interviews with 11 participants were conducted. The data was analyzed by employing content analysis to establish a conceptual framework and outline the draft model of situation leadership. Step 2: to proceed validating the draft model of ethical leadership qualities, submitting to three experts confirming its accuracy of the draft model of situation leadership and assessing content validity were executed. The index of item objective congruence (IOC) of three experts ranged from 0.67 to 1.00 with a confidence level of .971. The model of situation leadership was then given to 256 samples. The data was analyzed by using statistical package for means and standard deviations.

The results showed that: 

1. The condition and model of situation leadership for school administrators under the Yala Primary Educational Service Area Office 3 consisted of four types which were
   1) telling, 2) selling, 3) participating, and 4) delegating.
2. The model of situation leadership for school administrators under the Yala Primary Educational Service Area Office 3 involved four types as follow: 1. Telling included 1) establi shed rules, regulations, and guidelines clearly, 2) created a well-organized working atmos phere, and 3) were responsible for devising action plans to enable educational staffs to achieve goals. 2. Selling included 1) supported teachers and educational staffs in every aspect for effective educational management, 2) gave advice as being good role model in accountability, self-development, and continuous improvement in individual work, and 3) were as advisors, providing guidance and recommendations. 3. Participating included 1) emphasized equality and fairness towards teachers and staffs, 2) engaged in consultation with teachers and staffs before doing individual work, and 3) employed various skills in working. 4. Delegating included 1) monitored and evaluated work performance regularly and consistently, 2) prioritized problems affecting work performance, and 3) showed encourage ment and concern to teachers and educational staffs. After assessing the suitability level for implementation, it was found that overall and in specific aspects was at a high level.