The Guidelines for Developing Creative Leadership of School Administrators under Roi Et Primary Educational Service Area Office 3

Abstract

This research consists purposes were 1. to study the components and indicators of creative leadership among school administrators 2. to examine the current conditions, desired conditions and priority needs for creative leadership among school administrators under Roi Et Primary Educational Service Area Office 3 and 3. to investigate guidelines for developing creative leadership among school administrators under Roi Et Primary Educational Service Area Office 3. This study employed a mixed-methods design integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches. The research instruments consisted of an appropriateness assessment form for the components and indicators, a questionnaire, a semi-structured interview form and an appropriateness and feasibility assessment form. The sample consisted of 317 participants, including 31 school administrators and 286 teachers. The sample size was determined based on the Krejcie and Morgan table and the participants were selected through multistage sampling. The target groups included 5 experts for evaluating the appropriateness of the components and indicators, 6 experts for interviews and 9 experts for evaluating the development guidelines, all selected by purposive sampling. Quantitative data were analyzed using percentage, mean, standard deviation and the Modified Priority Needs Index, while qualitative data were analyzed through content analysis. The findings revealed that 1) creative leadership of school administrators comprised 5 components and 37 indicators and the appropriateness of the components and indicators was rated at 100 percent 2) the overall current condition was at a high level (x̄ = 3.58, S.D. = 0.30), the overall desired condition was at the highest level (x̄ = 4.62, S.D. = 0.18) and the overall Modified Priority Needs Index was 0.29, with the priority needs ranked from highest to lowest as creativity, flexibility and adaptability, imagination, vision and teamwork and 3) the synthesized development guidelines were rated as highly appropriate overall (x̄ = 4.40, S.D. = 0.55) and feasible at the highest level overall (x̄ = 4.63, S.D. = 0.48).