GUIDELINES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF DIGITAL LEADERSHIP OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS UNDER THE SONGKHLA PRIMARY EDUCATIONAL SERVICE AREA OFFICE 2
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research aimed to: 1) Examine the current state of digital leadership among school administrators under the Songkhla Primary Educational Service Area Office 2; and 2) Explore guidelines for developing digital leadership among school administrators under the Songkhla Primary Educational Service Area Office 2. The study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 investigated the current state of digital leadership through document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 13 experts. The interview instrument was validated for content validity, yielding an Index of Item-Objective Congruence (IOC) of 1.00 for all items. Phase 2 focused on exploring development guidelines through semi-structured interviews with five experts, and the data were analyzed using content analysis. The research findings revealed that: 1) The current state of digital leadership among school administrators consisted of five components: digital vision, digital communication, digital learning culture, digital professionalism, and digital knowledge. Administrators emphasized the use of empirical data, transparent communication, and ethical use of technology. However, gaps were identified in competencies related to advanced data utilization and technology, particularly in data analytics and the application of artificial intelligence (AI), which have not yet been systematically implemented. Additionally, challenges were found in the imbalance among personnel, systems, and the contextual conditions of schools. 2) The guidelines for developing digital leadership should be implemented systematically, focusing on developing data-driven vision, designing coherent communication systems, fostering a learning culture in which leaders serve as role models, and enhancing professionalism alongside ethics and data security. Continuous development of competencies in data, technology, and AI is also essential. Moreover, efforts should include reducing redundant workloads, designing digital systems that support operational efficiency, and adjusting practices to promote innovation in alignment with school contexts, leading to sustainable development in the digital era.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
กระทรวงศึกษาธิการ. (2567). นโยบายและจุดเน้นของกระทรวงศึกษาธิการ ประจำปีงบประมาณ พ.ศ. 2568 - 2569. กรุงเทพมหานคร: กระทรวงศึกษาธิการ.
ชัยยา บัวหอม. (2563). การใช้เทคโนโลยีสารสนเทศในการบริหารงานของบุคลากรโรงเรียนน้ำเกลี้ยงวิทยา. ใน รายงานการวิจัย. โรงเรียนน้ำเกลี้ยงวิทยา อำเภอน้ำเกลี้ยง จังหวัดศรีสะเกษสำนักการเขตพื้นที่การศึกษามัธยมศึกษา เขต 28.
สำนักงานเขตพื้นที่การศึกษาประถมศึกษาสงขลา เขต 2. (2568). แผนพัฒนาการศกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน พ.ศ. 2566-2570 (ฉบับทบทวน ประจําปีงบประมาณ พ.ศ. 2568). สงขลา: สำนักงานเขตพื้นที่การศึกษาประถมศึกษาสงขลา เขต 2.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการการศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน. (2562). แนวทางการส่งเสริมการจัดการเรียนการสอนโดยบูรณาการสื่อและเทคโนโลยีในสถานศึกษา. กรุงเทพมหานคร: สำนักวิชาการและมาตรฐานการศึกษา.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการการศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน. (2563). นโยบายและจุดเน้นการพัฒนาการศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน พ.ศ. 2563. กรุงเทพมหานคร: สำนักงานคณะกรรมการการศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน.
สำนักงานเลขาธิการสภาการศึกษา. (2560). แผนการศึกษาแห่งชาติ พ.ศ. 2560-2579. กรุงเทพมหานคร: พริกหวานกราฟฟิค.
Banoglu, K. (2012). The relationship between principals’ technology leadership competency and school stakeholders’ perceptions about the effectiveness of technology use in schools. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(2), 1074-1078.
Dexter, S. (2011). School technology leadership: Artifacts in systems of practice. Journal of School Leadership, 21(2), 166-189.
Dexter, S. (2018). The role of leadership for information technology in education: Systems of practices. In J. Voogt, G. Knezek, R. Christensen, & K.-W. Lai (Eds.), Second handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 483-498). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Ertmer, P. A. & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
European Commission. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Fullan, M. (2002). Leadership and sustainability. Principal Leadership, 3(4), 16-20.
Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hatlevik, O. E. & Christophersen, K. A. (2013). Digital competence at the beginning of upper secondary school: Identifying factors explaining digital inclusion. Computers & Education, 63(4), 240-247.
Hinings, B. et al. (2018). Digital innovation and transformation: An institutional perspective. Information and Organization, 28(1), 52-61.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2018). ISTE Standards for Education Leaders. Washington, DC: ISTE.
Kane, G. C. et al. (2019). The technology fallacy: How people are the real key to digital transformation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065-1078.
Ottestad, G. (2013). School leadership for ICT and teachers’ use of digital tools. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 8(1-2), 107-125.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Prensky, M. (2010). Teaching digital natives: Partnering for real learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators (DigCompEdu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Ribble, M. (2021). Digital citizenship in schools. (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
Roman, A. V. et al. (2019). Defining e-leadership as competence in ICT-mediated communications: An exploratory assessment. Public Administration Review, 79(6), 853-866.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization (Rev. ed.). New York: Doubleday.
Sheninger, E. C. (2019). Digital leadership: Changing paradigms for changing times. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Trust, T. (2012). Professional learning networks designed for teacher learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(4), 133-138.
Van, W. M. et al. (2019). Defining e-leadership as competence in ICT-mediated communications: An exploratory assessment. Public Administration Review, 79(6), 853-866.
Voogt, J. & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299-321.
Westerman, G. et al. (2014). Leading digital: Turning technology into business transformation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
