The Development of Indicators to Measure Leadership, Based on the Rule of Law of School Administrators under the Office of Basic Education Commission
Main Article Content
Abstract
The research article consisted of the following objectives: 1) to investigate the conceptual framework of leadership based on the rule of law for school administrators; 2) to explore the components and indicators of leadership based on the rule of law of school administrators; and 3) to examine the structural validity of an indicator model for measuring leadership based on the rule of law of school administrators. The study used a mixed-method approach. A sample group included 300 secondary school directors, who were chosen using stratified random sampling. A sample size was proportionally calculated. The tool used was a questionnaire with 5-point Likert scale. The statistics used were mean, standard deviation, content analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis.
From the study, the following results are found: 1) The conceptual framework of leadership based on the rule of law of school administrators included 4 components and 11 indicators; 2) The components and indicators of leadership based on the rule of law of school administrators comprise (1) social responsibility with 3 indicators, (2) equity and equality with 3 indicators, (3) transparency and information disclosure with 3 indicators, and (4) service mind with 2 indicators; and 3) From examining the structural validity of a model, the results found that indicators measuring leadership based on the rule of law of school administrators are congruent with empirical data with the following GoF (goodness of fit): chi-square value = 24.30, df = 22, p-value – 0.33, Relative x2 = 1.104; GFI = .99; AGFI = .96; RMR =.02; SRMR = .01; RMSEA = .02, while the factor loading has a statistical significance of 0.01.
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Views and opinions expressed in the articles published by The Journal of MCU Peace Studies, are of responsibility by such authors but not the editors and do not necessarily reflect those of the editors.
References
Chaisen, P. (2020). The Rule of Law with Power Administration in Government Office. Bangkok: Office of the Constitutional Court.
Insawang, J. (2021). The Rule of Law: Buddhist Jurisprudence (Rule of Law with Dhrama in Religious). Bangkok: Office of the Constitutional Court.
Jongjakapun, K. (2013). The Rule of Law Meaning, Main Point and Result of Contravention Rule of Law. (2nd ed.). Bangkok: Charoenrut Printing.
Manoprom, K., Buranacha, S., Umnueyra, S., & Gunma, N. (2020). The Model of Authentic Leadership Development for Administrators in Basic Education Schools. Journal of Education Burapha University, 31(1), 152-168.
Stephen, L. (2018). The Rule of Law with Human Rights and Sustainable Development. TIJ Journal: The Rule of Law with Sustainable Development, 1(1), 109-114.
Thailand Institute of Justice. (2017). The Rule of Law and Sustainable Development of His Majesty the King Rama IX. TIJ Quarterly, 1(005), 4-7.
The Secretariat of The Senate. (2017). Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (B.E. 2560). Bangkok: The Secretariat of The Senate Printing.
Wiratchai, N. (1999). Lisrel Model: Statistical Analysis for Research. (3rd ed.). Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University.
WJP. (2020). The World Justice Project Rule of Law Index® 2020. Washington DC: World Justice Project.