1,721,437 research outputs found

    Regression between headmaster leadership, task load and job satisfaction of special education integration program teacher

    No full text
    Managing school is a daunting task for a headmaster. This responsibility is exacerbated when it involves the Special Education Integration Program (SEIP). This situation requires appropriate and effective leadership in addressing some of the issues that are currently taking place at SEIP such as task load and job satisfaction. This study aimed to identify the influence of headmaster leadership on task load and teacher job satisfaction at SEIP. This quantitative study was conducted by distributing 400 sets of randomized questionnaires to SEIP teachers across Malaysia through google form. The data obtained were then analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and AMOS software. The results show that there is a significant positive effect on the leadership of the headmaster and the task load of the teacher. Likewise, the construct of task load and teacher job satisfaction has a significant positive effect. However, for the construct of headmaster leadership and teacher job satisfaction, there was no significant positive relationship. This finding is very important as a reference to the school administration re-evaluating their leadership so as not to burden SEIP teachers and to give them job satisfaction. In addition, the findings of this study can also serve as a guide for SEIP teachers to increase awareness of the importance of managing their tasks. This study also focused on education leadership in general and more specifically on special education leadership

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore