European Journal of Education Studies
ISSN: 2501 - 1111
ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
Volume 3 │Issue 4│2017
doi: 10.5281/zenodo.400855
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR ADMINISTRATIONS IN
THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
Toansakul Santiboon1, Yupaporn Yupas2i
Curriculum and Instruction Department, Faculty of Education,
1
Mahasarakham University, Maha Sarakham, Thailand, 44000
Science Education Department, Faculty of Education,
2
Rajabhat Mahasarakham University, Maha Sarakham, Thailand, 44000
Abstract:
Comparatively speaking, the performance of Thai administrators in international
studies of Thailand's relatively weak human resource base has been pinpointed as one
of the underlying factors in the cause of the economic and financial crisis that has hit the
country over recent years very poor. This research reports on a study that investigated
the role that Thai administrators’ interpersonal relationships with their teachers play in
enhancing the teachers’ teaching plan and students’ achievement in the subject and in
forming or changing the teachers’ attitudes to teaching arrangement. The
questionnaires were administered to a sample of 716 teachers in 80 schools under the
Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC) throughout of Thailand. Administratorteacher interactions were assessed with the 48-item Questionnaire on Administrator
Interaction (QAI) which was adapted version from the Questionnaire on Teacher
Interaction (QTI) (Wubbles & Levy, 1993). This questionnaire has an Actual and
Preferred Forms. Teachers’ attitudes were assessed with the Test of Administrator-Related
Attitudes (TOARA) which was based on the Test of Science-Related Attitudes (TOSRA)
Fraser,
. Statistically significant differences were found between the teachers’
perceptions of actual and preferred administrator interpersonal behaviours. It was
found that administrator interpersonal behaviour was high on factors such as
Leadership, Helping/Friendly, Understanding and Teacher Responsibility/Freedom behaviour,
while factors such as Uncertain, Dissatisfied, Admonishing, and Strict behaviours were far
less prominent. Significant differences were found between teachers’ perceptions of
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved.
© 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group
431
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
actual and preferred administrator interpersonal behaviours, and a typology
comparison of teachers’ perceptions of Thai administrators could be classified as
Authoritative in both the actual and preferred administrators’ interpersonal behaviours.
“ssociations between teachers’ perceptions of their administrators’ interpersonal
behaviour with their attitudes to their school administration were found. The multiple
correlations were significant for the Actual Form of the QAI and the TOARA, 39% of
the variance in teacher’s attitude to their schools was attributable to their perceptions.
Based on the findings, suggestions for determining and effecting the school
administrations by school’s administrator interpersonal behaviour for improving
sustainable educational development in school’s administration in Thailand with
teachers’ perceptions are provided.
Keywords: interpersonal behaviours, school administrators, basic education schools,
teachers’ perceptions, Thailand, Office of Basic Education Commission (OBEC),
leadership
1. Background
Thailand's relatively weak human resource base has been pinpointed as one of the
underlying factors in the cause of the economic and financial crisis that has hit the
country over recent years. Many have highlighted the lack of Thai graduates capable of
independent analytical thought as one factor responsible for the country's economic
downfall. The fact of the crisis has brought home the need for a thorough reexamination of the country's human resource development system and set the stage for
across-the-board reform of Thai education. Recognizing the urgent need for education
reform, the government, acting through the Office of the National Education
Commission (ONEC) under the Prime Minister's Office, has formulated policies and
plans to bring about necessary changes within the Thai system. The National Education
Act is the country's master legislation on education which will provide the framework
for education reforms: learning reform, administrative reform, reform in learning and
teaching, learners as the Center of Learning, and teachers as agents of learning reform.
Regarding the Ministry of Education, the 1999 National Education Act and its
2002 Amendment as well as the 2003 Act for Streamlining of Ministries and
Governmental Agencies mandate the amalgamation of the 3 ministries and agency
responsible for education, namely, Ministry of Education, Ministry of University
Affairs, and Office of the National Education Commission into a single Ministry of
Education with a new administrative structure. The need for school reform can be
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
432
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
explained in both international and national contexts. Internationally, societies are
changing from industrial to information-based societies in which the creation and
dissemination of knowledge play critical roles in industrial to information-based
societies in which the creation and dissemination of knowledge play critical roles in
both individual and social development. However, that school reform does not simply
happen within a classroom, but the whole system, within which education takes places,
needs to change. Subsequently, the key elements for successful reform at the state,
school and classroom levels are introduced. Inefficient management and administration
of the education system, inequity of access to quality education, inadequately qualified
teachers, and a rigid learning environment are identified as prime causes for the failure
to address the private sector's human resource needs.
To successful implement school reform in Thailand, a number of key areas must
be addressed including the approaches to learning and curriculum reforms,
professionalization of teachers, appropriate assessment, use of technology, and
considering
unique
Thai
cultural
aspects,
especially,
professionalization
of
Administrators. The professionalization of administrators requires the establishment of
systematic support mechanisms including administrators licensing and administrator
incentive schemes. Quality assurance of educational institutions is also an important
tool for changing the way administrating is conducted by focusing on educational
outputs consistent with schooling reform administrations.
Administrators in school district central offices oversee public schools under
their jurisdiction. This group includes those who direct subject-area programs,
supervise instructional coordinators and curriculum specialists, and work with them to
evaluate curriculums and teaching techniques and improve them. Administrators also
may oversee career counseling programs and testing that measures students’ abilities
and helps to place them in appropriate classes. With site-based management,
administrators have transferred primary responsibility for many of these programs to
the principals, assistant principals, teachers, instructional coordinators, and other staff
in the schools.
Focusing on administrators, unlike teachers, work a twelve-month year and are
fairly busy most of that time. Whether running a small, private day-care center or an
overcrowded public high school, an administrator’s tasks are many and various,
ranging from curriculum development to student discipline. The most familiar school
administrator is the principal. Any one of these administrators may be responsible for
infrastructure maintenance, the hiring and training of teachers, and student affairs.
International research efforts over the last 30 years have firmly established
classroom environment as a thriving field of study (Fraser, 1994). Recent classroom
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
433
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
environment research has the teacher-student interactions that occur in the classroom
(Wubbels & Levy, 1993). This study was to improve, adapt, and describe the
determinants and effects of the actual and preferred of teachers' perceptions to extend
this notion in order to obtain more comprehensive picture of administrator
interpersonal behaviour within educational service area in school educational base
environments in Thailand.
This study discusses the school environment instrument selected for use in this
research. The rationale for the selection of the Questionnaire on Administrator
Interaction (QAI) is followed by a discussion of the climate of school environments
including how administrating is one of unique features of educational reform with in
school environment and therefore, the selection of the Test Of Administration-Related
Attitude (TOARA). Because teachers' perceptions of school environment have been
favourably associated with teacher’s attitude to school’s administration, it was decided
to select an appropriate measure of teachers’ attitudes.
(a)
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
434
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
(b)
Figure 1: Leary model of interpersonal behaviour (Wubbels, Creton, Levy &
Hooymayers, 1993, p.15) and Model for administrator interpersonal behaviour
characteristics (Wubbels, 1993).
2. Using the School Environment Instruments
In the last decade, many countries have used learning environment instruments in
conducting research studies. In addition to a form, which measures perceptions of
actual environment, the instruments have an additional form, which measures
preferred environment. The preferred form is concerned with goals and value
orientations as it measures perceptions of the environment ideally liked or preferred.
Although item wording is almost identical for actual and preferred forms, the directions
for answering the two forms instruct student clearly as to whether they are rating what
their class is actually like or what they would preferred it to be like.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
435
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
2.1 The Questionnaire on Administrator Interaction (QAI)
The Questionnaire on Administrator Interaction (QAI) was adapted version from the
Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction (QTI). Historically, the QTI, classroom
environment research grew out of the studies of Moos and Walberg in the late 1960s
and early 1970s. Since then, a number of instruments have been developed with which
it is possible to conduct research focusing on the classroom environment. Wubbels,
Creton and Hoomayers (1985) focused on the teacher variable for improving the
learning environment, and developed a model to map administrator interpersonal
behaviour. It was based on the model for interpersonal behaviour of Leary (1957).
Wubbels et al. (1985) adapted the Leary model and developed a model for interpersonal
teacher behaviours. They mapped the behaviours of teacher with a proximity
dimension (Cooperation, C - Opposition, O) and an influence dimension (Dominance, D
- Submission, S). These dimensions can be represented in a coordinate system divided
into eight equal sections as shown in Figure 1. Each sector of the diagram represented
the
following
typical
Helping/Friendly,
interpersonal
Understanding,
behaviours
Student
of
the
Responsibility/
teacher:
Freedom,
Leadership,
Uncertain,
Dissatisfied, Admonishing, and Strict behaviours. The Leary model of the two original
dimensions of dominance-submission and hostility-affection was used in clinical
psychology and psychology settings to describe interpersonal behavior. Leary used the
model for developing a checklist of directly observable interaction to be called the
Interpersonal Adjective Checklist (ICL) that had 128 items.
The QTI, which measures students' perceptions of teacher interpersonal
behaviour, is based on this model (Wubbels & Levy, 1993). The Australia version of the
QTI containing 48 items was used in studies involving science classes in Western
Australia and Tasmania. The Thai version was translated of the QAI containing 48
items that it was intended this shorter Australian version would be used and adapted
measures teachers' perceptions of administrator interpersonal behaviour of the typical
interpersonal
behaviours
of
administrator
into
Leadership,
Helping/Friendly,
Understanding, Teacher Responsibility/ Freedom, Certain, Satisfied, Monishing, and
Strict behaviours in this study.
The 16 categories of interpersonal behaviour developed by Leary were later
reduced to eight categories (Wubbels, Creton, Levy, & Hooymayers, 1993). These eight
can be presented in a two-dimensional system as represented in Figure 1(b). Wubbels
(1993) further divided each of the four quadrants of the Leary model into two sections,
making a total of eight (Figure 1-b). The sections in the model for interpersonal
administrator behaviours are labeled DC, CD, CS, SC, SO, OS, OD and DO according to
their position in the coordinate x-y system. These behavioural aspects were labeled
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
436
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
respectively Leadership, Helping/Friendly, Understanding, Student Responsibility and
Freedom, Uncertain, Dissatisfied, Admonishing and Strict Behaviours. Characteristics
of these behaviours appear in the sections of Figure 1.
3. Research Aims
1. To assess comparisons between the teachers’ perceptions of their actual and
preferred administrator interpersonal behaviours to their administrations under
the Office of ”asic Education Commission in school’s administration
environments in Thailand.
2. To assess associations between teachers’ perceptions of their administrators’
interpersonal behaviours under the Office of Basic Education Commission in
school’s administration environments in Thailand.
4. Research Procedures
4.1 Research Instruments
In addition to the main questionnaires QAI, and the Test of Administration-Related
Attitudes (TOARA), this adapted version from the Test of Science-Related Attitudes
(TOSRA) (Fraser, 1981a). The TOARA questionnaire was selected to use with the aim of
investigating any possible relationships with teachers' perceptions about their
administrator's interpersonal behaviour in administrations in the basic education of
school’s administration environments. The TO“R“ consists of eight scales.
4.2 Sample
The main study involved the teachers who are teaching at the schooling educational
base of the office of The Basic Education Schools under the Office of Basic Education
Commission (OBEC) of Thailand. The study was conducted at 40 school environments.
Overall, data were collected using the Thai versions of the QAI, and TOARA from a
sample of 716 teachers in The Basic Education Schools under the Office of Basic
Education Commission (OBEC) throughout in Thailand.
5. Results
5.1 Validation and Reliability of the QAI and the TOARA
The results given in Table 1 shows that on average item means for each of the eight QAI
scales, that they contain six items, score from 0 to 4, so that the minimum and maximum
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
437
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
score possible on each of these scales is 0 and 24, respectively. Because of this difference
in the number of items in the eight scales, the average item mean for each scale was
calculated so that there is a fair basis for comparison between different scales. These
means were used as a basis for constructing the simplified plots of significant
differences between forms of the QAI shown in Figure 1. For the remaining eight scales,
Leadership,
Helping/Friendly,
Understanding,
Teacher
Responsibility/Freedom,
Certainty, Satisfied, Monishing and Strict behaviours, there were significant differences
between students' perceptions of their actual and preferred teachers’ interpersonal
behaviour.
Table 1: Scale Internal Consistency (Cronbach Alpha Reliability) and Ability to
Differentiate Between Classrooms (ANOVA) for the QAI
Scale
Form
t-test
Scale
Scale
Alpha
Discrim.
Mean
ANOVA
Mean
Std.
Reliability
Validity
Differ.
2.37*
16.43*
0.15*
2.94*
29.29*
0.90*
2.64*
15.90*
0.13*
3.00*
28.15*
0.84*
4.68*
25.31*
0.18*
3.97*
65.86*
0.79*
5.17*
28.55*
0.18*
3.43*
35.39*
0.89*
(Eta2)
Dev.
Leadership
Actual
18.86
3.45
0.80
0.41
Preferred
21.59
2.54
0.74
0.59
Actual
18.16
3.99
0.77
0.48
Preferred
21.10
2.70
0.73
0.56
Actual
18.67
3.50
0.81
0.40
Preferred
21.31
2.72
0.76
0.52
Teacher
Actual
17.62
3.59
0.71
0.43
Responsibility/
Preferred
20.62
2.76
0.78
0.60
Actual
16.31
4.14
0.82
0.41
Preferred
20.99
3.58
0.74
0.59
Actual
16.04
4.40
0.72
0.33
Preferred
20.01
3.15
0.77
0.52
Actual
15.71
3.99
0.76
0.42
Preferred
20.88
2.95
0.73
0.61
Actual
16.41
3.68
0.71
0.49
Preferred
19.84
2.85
0.79
0.46
Helping/Friendly
Understanding
Freedom
Certainty
Satisfied
Monishing
Strict
* Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed)
The internal consistency reliability of the version QAI used in this study was
determined by calculating Cronbach alpha coefficient for the 48 items of the QTI using
both actual and preferred teachers’ perceptions scores. Table
consistency of the Q“I, which ranged from .
to .
reports the internal
when using the teachers’ actual
scores and from 0.73 to 0.79 when using the teachers’ preferred scores. This
characteristic was explored using a series of one-way analyses of variance on the scales
of the QAI, which suggests that each scale of the QAI was able to differentiate
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
438
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
significantly p < .
between teachers’ perceptions in actual and preferred school
administration environments by the administrator in the same school; environments.
The eta2 statistic which is the ratio of
between
to
total
sums of squares and
represents the proportion of variance in scale scores accounted for class by membership,
ranged from 0.13 to 0.90 for different scales. In term of the TOARA, internal consistency
(Cronbach alpha coefficient) was obtained for the sample in this present study as
indices of scale reliability is 0.74.
5.2 Comparison of teachers' perceptions of their actual and preferred administrator
interpersonal behaviours in the basic school administration environments in
Thailand
On comparing differences between the teachers' perceptions of their actual and
preferred administrator interpersonal behaviour in
basic school administration
environments in Figure 1, it was found that teachers' preferred perceptions an
environment with upper levels of Leadership, Helping/Friendly Understanding,
Teacher Responsibility/Freedom Certainty, Satisfied, Monishing, and Strict behaviours
than teachers’ actual perceptions.
It is clear from a comparison of the preferred people for Thai administrators with
the actual that Thai administrators would preferred their teachers to be friendlier, more
understanding, more teacher responsibility and freedom, and demonstrate leadership
behaviours. They would also prefer their administrators to be more admonishing,
satisfied, certain, and strict behaviours.
Score Means
25
20
15
Actual Form
Preferred Form
10
5
QAI Scales
fu
l
el
p
T
ea
ch
er
H
Le
ad
er
s
hi
/fr p
ie
U
e
re
n
sp de nd
ly
on r s
ta
si
n
bi
lit din
y/
g
fre
ed
om
C
er
ta
in
ty
S
at
is
fi
M ed
on
is
hi
ng
S
tri
ct
0
Figure 3: Simplified plot of significant differences between teachers' perceptions of their
actual and preferred scores of the QA
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
439
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
Associations between teachers' perceptions of their administrators' interpersonal
behaviour in school administration environments and their attitudes toward school
administration:
The simple correlation values (r) are reported in Table 2 which show significant
correlations
p< .
between teachers’ attitudinal outcomes and administrators’
interpersonal behaviour on all of eight scales. These associations are positive for the
scales of Leadership, Helping/Friendly, Understanding, Certain, Monishing, Satisfied
and Strict. That is, in school administration environment where the administrators
perceived greater leadership, helping/friendly and understanding behaviours in their
teachers, there was a more favourable attitude towards their school administration
environment. The second type of analysis consisted of the more conservative
standardized regression coefficient
β
which measures the association between
teachers’ perceptions on each scale of the Q“I and their attitudes towards school
administration when the effect of relationships between the scales is controlled.
The multiple correlation R is significant for Actual Forms of the QAI and shows
that when the scales are considered together there is a significant (p<0.001) association
with the TO“R“. The R value indicates that
% of the variance in teacher’s attitude
to their school administration environment was attributable to their perceptions of their
administrators’ interpersonal behaviour. The beta weights β show that in school
administration environments where the administrators perceived greater leadership,
helping/friendly, understanding, teacher responsibility/freedom, certain, monishing,
satisfied and strict behaviours in their administrators, there was a more favorable
attitude towards their school administration environments.
Table 2: Associations between QTI Scales and Attitudes to Physics Classes in Terms of Simple
and Multiple Correlations R and Standardized Regression Coefficient β
Scale
Simple Correlation
Standardized Regression Weight
Attitude (r)
Attitude β
Leadership
0.25*
0.21*
Helping/Friendly
0.27*
0.20*
Understanding
0.26*
0.21*
Teacher Responsibility/Freedom
0.22*
0.30*
Uncertain
0.25*
0.31*
Dissatisfied
0.33*
0.32*
Admonishing
0.26*
0.21*
Strict
0.21*
0.26*
Multiple Correlation (R)
R
2
0.63*
0.39
n = 716, *p<0.05, **p<0.01
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
440
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
6. Conclusions
In this study, appropriate statistical procedures were used in order to follow the two
research aims, regarding the validation of the questionnaires. The procedures included
Cronbach alpha coefficient, discriminant validity; compare means (t-test) and one-way
ANOVA. The two instruments, namely, the Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction
(QAI), and the Test Of Administration-Related Attitude (TOARA), are valid and
reliable for use in schools of the office of the base educational service in Thailand.
Overall, Thai base educational service area of schools’ administrators show
relatively favourable perceptions of their school administration environments.
However, the actual and preferred perceptions of
teachers of their administrators’
interpersonal behaviour in school administration environments were measured with
the QAI. The comparisons of the Actual Form with the Preferred Form indicated that
administrators’
roles
understanding,
certain,
would
prefer
satisfied,
more
monishing
leadership,
helping/friendly
and
behaviours
strict
in
and
their
administrators in school administration environments tended to be greater than what
they actually perceive to be provided.
This study is very important because it is one of only a handful of studies in the
field of school administration environments in Thailand, and it represents one of only a
few studies worldwide that has focused on the school administration environment at
the office of educational service area in Thailand.. This study is significant in that, by
translating, field-testing, refining, validating, and using the two modified versions of
the QAI and the TOARA. Overall, the findings of the present study have made several
distinctive contributions to the field of school administration environments that were
studies to be carried out in Thailand.
6.1 Implications for Improving School Administration Environments for Sustainable
Educational Development
This study still has several tentative implications for school’s administrators, and
educational researchers in Thailand. Two generally applicable instruments were used:
the Questionnaire on Administrator Interaction (QAI), and the Test Of AdministrationRelated “ttitude TO“R“ , and were found valid and reliable for use in Thailand’s
schools. The availability of these instruments provides a means by which teachers’
perceptions can be monitored for administrators to attempt to improve their
administration roles; To successful implement school reform in Thailand, a number of
key areas must be addressed including the approaches to learning and curriculum
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
441
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
reforms, appropriate assessment, use of technology, and considering unique Thai
cultural aspects, especially, professionalization of Administrators.
Based on the findings, suggestions for improving the school environment are
needed. “dministrators have to give administrations’ roles which promote school
cohesion, give teachers practical activities related to what students learn in school
classes, give ideas related to teachers’ prior knowledge, previews to connect to future
school environments, make a clearly organizational plan for advising, and vary the rate
of delivery where appropriate. Administrators should change and use more effective
body movements and gestures, introduce a stated organization of school administration
environments, give sufficient variety in supporting information, promote higher order
thinking, and should give feedback that is informative and incorporates teachers’ and
students’ responses, or provider of outlines and handout of the reader roles of school’s
administrator.
“lthough Thailand’s administrator interpersonal behaviours were perceived by
teachers as favourable, evidence from research on administrator-teacher relationships
indicated widely differing teachers’ perceptions of their actual and preferred
administrator interpersonal behaviors in school administration environments. Teachers
preferred their administrators to exhibit more positive leadership, helping/friendly, and
understanding, and student responsibility/freedom, certainty, satisfied, monishing and
strict behaviours. However, the administrators’ interpersonal behaviours showed a gap
between the actual and preferred administrators’ interpersonal behaviour in all of the
behaviours measured. Therefore, it is important for school’s administrators to improve
their interpersonal behaviour towards teachers so that this gap between teachers’ actual
and preferred administrator interpersonal behaviour will decrease. Thus, school’s
administrators should develop the reader roles of administrating activities in school
environments that will enable them to exhibit more cooperatives to achieve behaviours
and less oppositional ones.
6.2 Suggestions for Tomorrow Research in Thailand
School environment research in Thailand is one of the reforms the Thai government has
been providing in accordance with the Ninth National Education Development Plan
(2002-2006). Most of the administrators who are administrating in primary and
secondary education, must improve their administrating by using the findings of school
administration environment research. This present study is one of the first school
administration environment studies in Thailand involving two separate measures, the
Questionnaire on Administrator Interaction (QAI), as well as the Test Of
Administration-Related Attitude (TOARA). These instruments have been shown to be
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
442
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
reliable and valid for use in future studies in Thailand. By using these instruments, a
number of school administration environment research directions can be pursued in
Thailand.
References
1. Creton, H., Hermans, H. A., & Wubbels, T. (1990). Improvement interpersonal
teacher behaviour in the classroom: A systems communication perspective.
South Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 18, 54-49.
2. Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B., & Rickards, T. (1996). Assessing teacher-teacher
interpersonal relationships in science classes. Australian Science Teachers
Journal, 42(3), 28-33.
3. Fisher, D. L., Henderson, D. & Fraser, B. J. (1995). Interpersonal behaviour in
senior high school biology classes. Research in Science Education, 25, 125-133.
4. Fisher, D. L., Rickards, T. W., Goh, S.C., & Wong, A. F. L. (1997b). Perceptions of
interpersonal teacher behaviour in secondary science classrooms in Singapore
and Australia. Journal of Applied Research in Education, 1, 2-13.
5. Fraser, B. J. (1981). Test of Science-Related Attitudes (TOSRA). Melbourne:
Australian Council for Education Research.
6. Henderson, D., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (2000). Interpersonal behaviour,
laboratory learning environments and teacher outcomes in senior biology
classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 26-43.
7. Khine, M. S., & Fisher, D. L. (2001, December). Classroom environment and
teachers' cultural background and secondary science classes in an Asian context.
Paper presented at annual conference of Australian Association for Research in
Education, Perth.
8. Kim, H. B., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (2000). Classroom environment and
administrator interpersonal behaviour in secondary science classes in Korea.
Evaluation and Research in Education, 14, 3-12.
9. Koul, R., & Fisher, D. l. (2003, December). Science classroom environments in
India. Paper presented at annual conference of Australian Association for
Research in Education, Brisbane.
10. Leary, T. (1957). An interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: Ronald
Press.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
443
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
11. McRobbie, C., Fraser, B. J., & Giddings, G. J. (1991). Comparison of personal and
class forms of the science laboratory environment inventory. Research in Science
Education, 21, 244-252.
12. Nair, C. S., & Fisher (2001). Learning environments and teacher attitudes to
science at the senior secondary and tertiary levels. Issue In Education Research,
vol. 11.
13. Quek, C.L., Fraser, B., & Wong, A.F. (2001, December), Determinants and effects
of perceptions of chemistry classroom learning environments in secondary
school gifted education classes in Singapore. Paper presented at annual
conference of Australian Association for Research in Education, Perth, WA.
14. Rickards, T., & Fisher, D. L. (1996). Associations between teacher-teacher
interpersonal behaviour, gender, cultural background and achievement.
Proceedings Western Australian Institute for Educational Research Forum 1996.
15. Scott, R. H., & Fisher, D. L.
, December . The impact of teachers’
interpersonal on examination results in Brunei. Paper presented at annual
conference of Australian Association for Research in Education, Perth.
16. Santiboon, T., & Fisher, D. (2004, September). Actual and preferred learning
environments in physics classes in Thailand. Paper presented at the International
Conference on Science and Technology of Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand.
17. Santiboon, T., & Fisher, D. (2005, August). Learning environments and teacherstudent interactions in physics classes in Thailand. Sustainable communities and
sustainable environments: Envisioning a role for science, mathematics and
technology education: Proceeding of the 4th international conference on science,
mathematics and technology education (pp. 511-520). British Columbia, Canada:
Curtin University of Technology, Western Australia.
18. Soerjaningsih, W., & Nusantara, B. (2001, December). Learning environment
teacher-teacher interpersonal behaviour and achievement among university
teachers in Indonesia. Paper presented at annual conference of Australian
Association for Research in Education, Perth.
19. Waldrip, B., & Fisher, D. L. (2001, December). Perceptions of teacher-teacher
interactions in exemplary science teachers’ classroom. Paper presented at annual
conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Perth.
20. Wong, A. F. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1996). Environment-attitude associations in the
chemistry laboratory classroom. Research in Science & Technological Education,
1, 12-22.
21. Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., & Hooymayers, H. (1991). Interpersonal teacher
behaviour in the classroom. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Wallerg (Eds.), Educational
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
444
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
Environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences (pp. 141-161). Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
22. Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., & Hooymayers, H. (1993a). Comparison of
students’ and teachers’ perceptions of interpersonal teacher behaviour. In T.
Wubbels & J. Levy (Eds.), Do you know what do look like? International
relationships in education (pp. 64-68). London: Falmer Press.
23. Wubbels, T., Creton, H., Levy, J., Hooymayers, H. (1993c). The model for
interpersonal teacher behaviour. In T. Wubbels & J. Levy (Eds.), Do you know
what do look like? International relationships in education (pp. 13-28). London:
Falmer Press.
24. Wubbels, T., & Levy, J. (1993). Do you know what do look like? International
relationships in education (pp. 146-162). London: Falmer Press.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
445
Toansakul Santiboon, Yupaporn Yupas
INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOURS OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS THROUGH THEIR
ADMINISTRATIONS IN THE BASIC EDUCATION SCHOOLS IN THAILAND
Creative Commons licensing terms
Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms
will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community
to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that
makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this
research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall
not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and
inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access
Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes
under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 4│ 2017
446
Open Access Publishing Group