Latest- Relationship between Principals’ Technology Leadership and Teacher’s Technology Use in Secondary Schools
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to identify the relationship between leadership behaviour and computer use and management and teaching operations in schools. Researchers want to look at technology leadership for measuring the NETS-A international standard system (ISTE, 2014) and the impact of technology achievement in these schools.
Methodology- A systematic random sampling was conducted to select 74 principals and 374 teachers from 74 schools from the National Secondary School in Kedah in this cross-sectional survey. The Principal Technology Leadership Assessment (PTLA) is based on the National Education Technology Standards-Administrator, NETS-A (2009). The technology leadership questionnaire contains 65 Likert-scale items used to obtain information about the involvement of principals in their work.
Findings- The results of the study show that the overall leadership skills of the principals based on the five standards in the NETS-A are high based on the findings of mean analysis and standard deviation but showed moderate achievement in each field of TTU teacher study. The SMART-PLS analysis also indicated that the gender, age, and experience of the principal were not moderators because the results were not significant. Simple Linear regression was used to identify the principal technological leadership relationship with teacher computer use and the results were not significant.
Significance-Principals as technology leaders need to facilitate and enhance ICT integration as ICT contributions have been shown to be key factors for increasing productivity, promoting economic growth, and reducing poverty in a country.
Keywords: Technology, Technology leadership, NETS-A Standards
References
1. Chen, Y.; Gong, X.;C.C.; Y. Access to the Internet and Access to Finance: Theory And Evidence. Sustainability 2018, 10, 25-34.
2. Chin, W. W. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. Dalam G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research, 295-336. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. Dalam V. E. Vinzi, W. W. Chi, J. Henseler, & H. Wang. (Eds.). Handbook of partial least squares concept, methods and applications 655-690. Berlin: Springer.
4. Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modelling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. Dalam Hoyle, R. H., Statistical strategies for small sample research 307–341. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
5. Chua Y.P.(2009). Statistik penyelidikan lanjutan-ujian regresi, analisis factor dan analisis SEM.Kuala Lumpur,McGraw Hill ms 302
6. Chua, Y. P. (2013). Mastering research statistics. Shah Alam: McGraw Hill Education.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research 4. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
8. Davies, P. M. (May, 2010). On school educational technology leadership. Management in Education. doi:org/10.1177/0892020610363089
9. Dexter, S. (March, 2011). Artifacts in Systems of Practice. Journal of School Leadership. doi:10.1177/105268461102100202
10. Educational Policy Planning and Research Division. (2012). National Education Policy, Ministry of Education. Shah Alam, Selangor: Giga Wise Network Sdn. Bhd.
11. Fong, S. F., Ch'ng, P. E., & Por, F. P. (2013). Development of ICT Competency Standard Using the Delphi Technique. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 299-314.
12. Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101.
13. Ghita-Mitrescu, S.; Duhnea, C. Internet Banking in Romania at a Glance. Ovidius Univ. Ann. Econ. Sci. Ser. 2016, 16, 508-514.
14. Gosmire, D., & Marilyn Grady. (February, 2007). 10 questions to answer for technology to succeed in your school. A Bumpy Road: Principal as Technology Leader, 16-21.
15. Hair, J. F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis 7. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
16. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM),2. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
17. Hair, J. F., Money, A. H., Samouel, P., & Page, M. (2007). Research methods for business. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
18. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19, 139-151.
19. Hamsha, I. (2011). Evaluation of Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC Malaysia) Contribution in Malaysia Economy. (Master of Science), Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University.
20. Hamzah, M. I. M., Juraime, F., Hamid, A. H. A., Nordin, N., & Attan, N. (2014). Technology leadership and its relationship with school-Malaysia Standard of education quality (School-MSEQ). International Education Studies, 7(13), 278.
21. Henseler, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least square modeling in international marketing. New Challenges to International Marketing Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277-319.
22. Imam Ghozali, & Hengky Latan. (2015). Partial least squares: Konsep, teknik dan aplikasi menggunakan program SmartPLS 3.0 untuk penelitian empiris. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
23. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational standards for administrators. Retrieved October 27, 2006 from http://cnets.iste.org/tssa/pdf/tssa.pdf.
24. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2009). NETS for Administrators. Eugene, OR: Author. Retrieved from http://www. iste. org/ Content /NavigationMenu/NETS/ForAdministrators /2009Standards/NETS_for_ Administrators_2009.htm
25. Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWinston.
26. Jamalludin Harun & Zaidatun Tasir. (2003). Multimedia dalam pendidikan. Pahang: PTS Publication & Distributors.
27. Koehler, M. & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical Content knowledge J. Educational Computing Research, 32(2) 131-152
28. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size For Research Activities. Educational And Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
29. Lay, C.L. (2007). Smaller isn’t always better: School size and school participation among young people. Social Science Quarterly, 88(3), 790-815.
30. Lay, Y. F. & K, C. H. (2009). Pengenalan Kepada Analisis Data Komputer dengan SPSS. Selangor:Venton Publishing.
31. Leithwood, K. (2005) Educational leadership: A review of the research. Prepared for the Laboratory for Student Success at Temple University Center for Research in Human Development and education. Retrieved on June 22, 2015.
from http://www.temple.edu/lss/pdf/ReviewOfTheResearchLeithwood.pdf
32. Leong, M. W. (2010). Kepimpinan Teknologi Pengetua dan Tahap Aplikasi TMK guru Sekolah Menengah, Seremban. Kertas projek Sarjana Kepengetuaan yang tidak diterbitkan. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya.
33. Markauskaite, L. (2006). Gender issues in preservice teachers’ training: ICT literacy and online learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22 (1), 1-20.
34. Meijers, H. Does the Internet generate economic growth, international trade, or both? Int. Econ. Policy 2014, 11, 137-163.
35. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2010). Policy on ICT in Education Malaysia. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education.
36. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2012a). Educative Summary Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025(Preschool to Post-Secondary Education). Putrajaya.
37. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013b). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 (Preschool to Post-Secondary Education). Putrajaya.
38. Ministry of Finance. (2014). Feedback on The Auditor General's Report, Series 3. Putrajaya: Ministry of Finance.
39. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2007). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK): Confronting the wicked problems of teaching with technology. In C.Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2007,2214-2226.
40. Mishra, P and Koehler, M. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6) 1017– 1054
41. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2008). Introducing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City.
42. Moidunny, K. (2009). The effectiveness of the National Professional Qualifications For Educational Leaders (NPQEL) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Bangi: The National University of Malaysia.
43. Murray, J. (2013). Critical issues facing school leaders concerning data-informed Decision-making. School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation, 33(2), 169-177.
44. Noraini Idris,I. (2013). Penyelidikan dalam pendidikan, ms 56,114-122. Kuala Lumpur, Mc Graw Hill Education.
45. Nordin, & Norazah (2010). A Quantitative Analysis of Malaysian Secondary SchoolTechnology Leadership, Management Science and Engineering, April 1, 2010.
46. Page-Jones, A.B. (2008). Leadership behaviour and technology activities: The relationship between principals and technology use in schools. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida).
47. Peruski, L., & Mishra, P. (2004). Webs of activity in online course design and teaching. ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 12(1), 37-49.
48. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531-544.
49. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539-569.
50. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
51. Pradhan, R.P.; Mallik, G; Badchi, TP. Information cmmuncation technology (ICT) Infrastructure and economic growth: A causality evinced by cross-country panel data. IIMB Manag. Rev. 2018, 30, 91-103.
52. Raman, A. (2014). Mengukur tahap keyakinan teknologi pedagogi kandungan (PTPK) dalam kalangan guru pelatih di Universiti Utara Malaysia. Sintok: Universiti Utara Malaysia.
53. Richardson, J.W.,& McLeod, S. (2011). Technology Leadership in Native American Schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 26(7). http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/26-7.pdf
54. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5. New York: The Free Press.
55. Sathiamoorthy. K., Leong, M. W. & M. Jamil Saleh (2011). Principal Technology Leadership and Teachers’ ICT Applications in two different school settings in Malaysia, Paper submitted for presentation at the International Conference On "Aplication of ICT in economy and education“ (icaictee 2011), December 2 – 3, 2011, UNWE, Sofia, Bulgaria 15
56. Sathiamoorthy Kannan, Sailesh Sharma, & Zuraidah Abdullah (2011). Principal’s Strategies for Leading ICT Integration: The Malaysian Perspective. Creative Education 2012. 3, Supplement, 111-115 Published Online December 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ce).
57. Sathiamoorthy, K., Sailesh, S., & Zuraidah Abdullah. (2012). Principal's Strategies for Leading ICT Integration: The Malaysian Perspective. Creative Education, 3, 111-115.
58. Seay, D. A. (2004). A study of the technology leadership of Texas high school principals. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Texas, 2004. ProQuest ID 765816391.
59. Sepehrdoust, H. Impact of imformation and communication technology and Financial development on economic growth of OPEC developing economies Soc. Sci. 2018.
60. Shahrinaz, I. (2009). Students acceptance in using blog as learning tool in an international private university. Prosiding ICI9. International Conference on Information. 12–13 August 2009. Kuala Lumpur: The Legend Hotel.
61. Siti Norazlina, K. (2008). Halangan terhadap penggunaan komputer dan ICT di dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran (P&P) di kalangan guru di Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Luar Bandar di daerah Kulai Jaya, Johor (Kertas Projek Sarjana Muda yang tidak diterbitkan). Johor: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
62. Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 36, 111-147.
63. Thompson, A.D. Mishra, P. (2007-2008). Breaking News: TPCK Becomes TPACK! Journal of Computing in Teacher Education. 24(2), 38-39
64. Yusup Hashim (2008). Kajian kompetensi pengetua/guru besar dalam standards pendidikan. Kepimpinan teknologi pendidikan dalam kurun ke-21:Cabaran untuk pentadbir sekolah. Kolokium ICT, Institut Aminuddin Baki, 18 Jun, 2013.
2. Chin, W. W. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. Dalam G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research, 295-336. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. Dalam V. E. Vinzi, W. W. Chi, J. Henseler, & H. Wang. (Eds.). Handbook of partial least squares concept, methods and applications 655-690. Berlin: Springer.
4. Chin, W. W., & Newsted, P. R. (1999). Structural equation modelling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. Dalam Hoyle, R. H., Statistical strategies for small sample research 307–341. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
5. Chua Y.P.(2009). Statistik penyelidikan lanjutan-ujian regresi, analisis factor dan analisis SEM.Kuala Lumpur,McGraw Hill ms 302
6. Chua, Y. P. (2013). Mastering research statistics. Shah Alam: McGraw Hill Education.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research 4. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
8. Davies, P. M. (May, 2010). On school educational technology leadership. Management in Education. doi:org/10.1177/0892020610363089
9. Dexter, S. (March, 2011). Artifacts in Systems of Practice. Journal of School Leadership. doi:10.1177/105268461102100202
10. Educational Policy Planning and Research Division. (2012). National Education Policy, Ministry of Education. Shah Alam, Selangor: Giga Wise Network Sdn. Bhd.
11. Fong, S. F., Ch'ng, P. E., & Por, F. P. (2013). Development of ICT Competency Standard Using the Delphi Technique. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 299-314.
12. Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101.
13. Ghita-Mitrescu, S.; Duhnea, C. Internet Banking in Romania at a Glance. Ovidius Univ. Ann. Econ. Sci. Ser. 2016, 16, 508-514.
14. Gosmire, D., & Marilyn Grady. (February, 2007). 10 questions to answer for technology to succeed in your school. A Bumpy Road: Principal as Technology Leader, 16-21.
15. Hair, J. F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis 7. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
16. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM),2. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
17. Hair, J. F., Money, A. H., Samouel, P., & Page, M. (2007). Research methods for business. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
18. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19, 139-151.
19. Hamsha, I. (2011). Evaluation of Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC Malaysia) Contribution in Malaysia Economy. (Master of Science), Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University.
20. Hamzah, M. I. M., Juraime, F., Hamid, A. H. A., Nordin, N., & Attan, N. (2014). Technology leadership and its relationship with school-Malaysia Standard of education quality (School-MSEQ). International Education Studies, 7(13), 278.
21. Henseler, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least square modeling in international marketing. New Challenges to International Marketing Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277-319.
22. Imam Ghozali, & Hengky Latan. (2015). Partial least squares: Konsep, teknik dan aplikasi menggunakan program SmartPLS 3.0 untuk penelitian empiris. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
23. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational standards for administrators. Retrieved October 27, 2006 from http://cnets.iste.org/tssa/pdf/tssa.pdf.
24. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2009). NETS for Administrators. Eugene, OR: Author. Retrieved from http://www. iste. org/ Content /NavigationMenu/NETS/ForAdministrators /2009Standards/NETS_for_ Administrators_2009.htm
25. Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWinston.
26. Jamalludin Harun & Zaidatun Tasir. (2003). Multimedia dalam pendidikan. Pahang: PTS Publication & Distributors.
27. Koehler, M. & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical Content knowledge J. Educational Computing Research, 32(2) 131-152
28. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size For Research Activities. Educational And Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
29. Lay, C.L. (2007). Smaller isn’t always better: School size and school participation among young people. Social Science Quarterly, 88(3), 790-815.
30. Lay, Y. F. & K, C. H. (2009). Pengenalan Kepada Analisis Data Komputer dengan SPSS. Selangor:Venton Publishing.
31. Leithwood, K. (2005) Educational leadership: A review of the research. Prepared for the Laboratory for Student Success at Temple University Center for Research in Human Development and education. Retrieved on June 22, 2015.
from http://www.temple.edu/lss/pdf/ReviewOfTheResearchLeithwood.pdf
32. Leong, M. W. (2010). Kepimpinan Teknologi Pengetua dan Tahap Aplikasi TMK guru Sekolah Menengah, Seremban. Kertas projek Sarjana Kepengetuaan yang tidak diterbitkan. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya.
33. Markauskaite, L. (2006). Gender issues in preservice teachers’ training: ICT literacy and online learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22 (1), 1-20.
34. Meijers, H. Does the Internet generate economic growth, international trade, or both? Int. Econ. Policy 2014, 11, 137-163.
35. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2010). Policy on ICT in Education Malaysia. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education.
36. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2012a). Educative Summary Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025(Preschool to Post-Secondary Education). Putrajaya.
37. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013b). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 (Preschool to Post-Secondary Education). Putrajaya.
38. Ministry of Finance. (2014). Feedback on The Auditor General's Report, Series 3. Putrajaya: Ministry of Finance.
39. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2007). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK): Confronting the wicked problems of teaching with technology. In C.Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2007,2214-2226.
40. Mishra, P and Koehler, M. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6) 1017– 1054
41. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2008). Introducing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City.
42. Moidunny, K. (2009). The effectiveness of the National Professional Qualifications For Educational Leaders (NPQEL) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Bangi: The National University of Malaysia.
43. Murray, J. (2013). Critical issues facing school leaders concerning data-informed Decision-making. School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation, 33(2), 169-177.
44. Noraini Idris,I. (2013). Penyelidikan dalam pendidikan, ms 56,114-122. Kuala Lumpur, Mc Graw Hill Education.
45. Nordin, & Norazah (2010). A Quantitative Analysis of Malaysian Secondary SchoolTechnology Leadership, Management Science and Engineering, April 1, 2010.
46. Page-Jones, A.B. (2008). Leadership behaviour and technology activities: The relationship between principals and technology use in schools. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida).
47. Peruski, L., & Mishra, P. (2004). Webs of activity in online course design and teaching. ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 12(1), 37-49.
48. Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12, 531-544.
49. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539-569.
50. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
51. Pradhan, R.P.; Mallik, G; Badchi, TP. Information cmmuncation technology (ICT) Infrastructure and economic growth: A causality evinced by cross-country panel data. IIMB Manag. Rev. 2018, 30, 91-103.
52. Raman, A. (2014). Mengukur tahap keyakinan teknologi pedagogi kandungan (PTPK) dalam kalangan guru pelatih di Universiti Utara Malaysia. Sintok: Universiti Utara Malaysia.
53. Richardson, J.W.,& McLeod, S. (2011). Technology Leadership in Native American Schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 26(7). http://jrre.psu.edu/articles/26-7.pdf
54. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5. New York: The Free Press.
55. Sathiamoorthy. K., Leong, M. W. & M. Jamil Saleh (2011). Principal Technology Leadership and Teachers’ ICT Applications in two different school settings in Malaysia, Paper submitted for presentation at the International Conference On "Aplication of ICT in economy and education“ (icaictee 2011), December 2 – 3, 2011, UNWE, Sofia, Bulgaria 15
56. Sathiamoorthy Kannan, Sailesh Sharma, & Zuraidah Abdullah (2011). Principal’s Strategies for Leading ICT Integration: The Malaysian Perspective. Creative Education 2012. 3, Supplement, 111-115 Published Online December 2012 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ce).
57. Sathiamoorthy, K., Sailesh, S., & Zuraidah Abdullah. (2012). Principal's Strategies for Leading ICT Integration: The Malaysian Perspective. Creative Education, 3, 111-115.
58. Seay, D. A. (2004). A study of the technology leadership of Texas high school principals. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Texas, 2004. ProQuest ID 765816391.
59. Sepehrdoust, H. Impact of imformation and communication technology and Financial development on economic growth of OPEC developing economies Soc. Sci. 2018.
60. Shahrinaz, I. (2009). Students acceptance in using blog as learning tool in an international private university. Prosiding ICI9. International Conference on Information. 12–13 August 2009. Kuala Lumpur: The Legend Hotel.
61. Siti Norazlina, K. (2008). Halangan terhadap penggunaan komputer dan ICT di dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran (P&P) di kalangan guru di Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Luar Bandar di daerah Kulai Jaya, Johor (Kertas Projek Sarjana Muda yang tidak diterbitkan). Johor: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
62. Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 36, 111-147.
63. Thompson, A.D. Mishra, P. (2007-2008). Breaking News: TPCK Becomes TPACK! Journal of Computing in Teacher Education. 24(2), 38-39
64. Yusup Hashim (2008). Kajian kompetensi pengetua/guru besar dalam standards pendidikan. Kepimpinan teknologi pendidikan dalam kurun ke-21:Cabaran untuk pentadbir sekolah. Kolokium ICT, Institut Aminuddin Baki, 18 Jun, 2013.
Authors
[1]
“Latest- Relationship between Principals’ Technology Leadership and Teacher’s Technology Use in Secondary Schools”, Soc. sci. humanities j., vol. 4, no. 03, pp. 1797–1814, Mar. 2020, Accessed: Apr. 25, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://sshjournal.com/index.php/sshj/article/view/531
Copyright and license info is not available