The Relationship Between School Principals’ Perceived Transformational Leadership Behavior and Teachers’ Motivation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aims to determine whether there is a relationship between transformational leadership and teachers’ motivation and whether this relationship if any, differs significantly based on various demographic variables. Within the framework of this aim, two scales were applied to 418 teachers working at primary, middle, and high schools in Istanbul. The data collection tools used in the study are the “Multidimensional Work Motivational Scale” developed by Gagné et al. (2010), and the “Transformational Leadership Scale” developed by Brestrich (2000). During the analysis of the data collected through scales, mean, frequency, and descriptive values such as standard deviation were used as well as independent groups t-test, multivariate variance analysis (MANOVA), and canonical correlation analysis. The results showed that as teachers perceive their principals as transformational leaders, their motivation including their inner motivation decreases. Besides, teachers’ perceptions of the transformational leadership skills of the principals change according to time of working in their current school, education levels and gender. It was also explored that the motivation status of female teachers was higher than male teachers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".