«MEASUREMENT AND VALIDATION OF SENGE’S LEARNING ORGANIZATION MODEL IN KOREAN VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOLS by JOO HO PARK (Under the direction of Jay W. ...»
MEASUREMENT AND VALIDATION OF SENGE’S LEARNING ORGANIZATION
MODEL IN KOREAN VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOLS
JOO HO PARK
(Under the direction of Jay W. Rojewski)
This study measured and tested Senge’s fifth discipline model of learning organizations in a culturally different population, the context of Korean Vocational high schools. Participants were full-time vocational and academic teachers of 976 in public trade industry-technical and business high schools. This study includes three research focuses. First, by using exploratory factor analysis, responses from Korean vocational high school teachers to questionnaire items designed to test the theoretical constructs and indices of Senge’s learning organization model were analyzed to establish a measurement model. Second, the hypothesized model was tested using confirmatory factor analysis. Thus, results provided strong evidence for the construct validity of the measurement model (i.e., instrument) to measure the learning organization concept in school contexts. Third, multi-group confirmatory factor analysis referred to the factorial invariance tests that examined how generalizable the hypothesized learning organization model was for the two different teacher groups (vocational and academic teachers). Factorial invariance was detected across the two teacher groups. Consequently, the results and findings of this study provides strong evidence that the five disciplines of the learning organization model can be operationalized, measured, and applied in Korean educational contexts. At the level of extending and generalizing learning organization theory, the creation of a measurement model related to the idea of “schools as learning organizations” and confirmation of the generalizability of Senge’s learning organization theory to culturally different organizations are important contributions to the literature on learning organizations. Results of this study support the notion that the theory of learning organization and related concepts, initially developed against the background of Western culture, can also apply to a South Korean school context which reflects Asian culture.
INDEX WORDS: Learning Organization, Schools as Learning Organizations, Korean Vocational High Schools, Exploratory Factor Analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, and Multi-Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis.
MEASUREMENT AND VALIDATION OF SENGE’S LEARNING ORGANIZATION
MODEL IN KOREAN VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOLSby
JOO HO PARKB.A. in Education, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, 1989 B.A. in Public Administration, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea, 1992 M.Ed. in Human Resource and Organizational Development, The University of Georgia, 2003 A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
The completion of this dissertation resulted from the support of many people, as well as my own endeavors. I am indebted to numerous individuals for their support and assistance. First I offer my sincere gratitude and deepest appreciation to my advisor, Dr. Jay Rojewski. He graciously provided encouragement and expertise during the entire process of this study.
I am grateful for the guidance I received from my committee members, Dr. John Shell, Dr. Roger Hill, and Dr. Seock-Ho Kim. Their invaluable assistance and expertise was critical to my success. Also, I am very appreciative of the insightful comments from Dr. Wendy Ruona and Dr. Karen Watkins on the item review for my instrument development.
Special appreciation goes to the many vocational high school teachers, school administrators, and supervisors in the Offices of Education in Seoul city, Incheon city, and Gyeonggi province who assisted with the data collection for the study.
I thank my Korean colleagues in the Korean Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development, Dr. Chang Yul Byeon, Dr. Sang Jin Lee, Dr. Yung-Chul Kim, Dr. Young Jun Kim, Dr. Yu Mi Seo, Yoongsoo Park, and Changbin Yim for their lovely friendship and support to complete this dissertation. I truly appreciate the Korean-American Educational Commission for providing financial support for my study at The University of Georgia.
Finally, I dedicate this dissertation to my grandmother, parents, three brothers, and my family members (my wife, Sun Jin; my son, Dong Il; and my daughter, Su Jeong) who always
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Statement of Purpose
Significance of the Study
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
The Concept of Learning Organization
Theoretical Foundations of Learning Organization
Major Learning Organization Models and Characteristics
Schools as Learning Organizations
The Learning Organization and Korean Secondary Vocational Education..............60 3 METHOD
4 ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
Exploratory Factor Analysis
Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Multiple Group Analysis
5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUION
Research Questions and Findings
Implications at Theory and Practice Levels
A SAMPLE CONTENT VALIDITY RATING FORM
B ITEM AND THEORETICAL SOURCES
C BACK TRANSLATION OF KOREAN ITEMS
D LEARNING ORGANIZATION QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SCHOOLS..................192
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR SCHOOLS
F COVER LETTERS FOR DATA COLLECTION
G CORRELATION MATRIX FOR THE EFA
H COVARIANCE MATRIX FOR THE CFA
I LISREL SYNTAX FOR CFA AND FACTORIAL INVARIANCE TESTS............217
Table 2.1: Comparison of Learning Organization Models
Table 2.2: Major Korean Vocational High Schools and Student Enrollment, 1990-2003.
......... 61 Table 2.3: Academic and Vocational Students in Korean High Schools
Table 2.4: Major Programs and Courses Offered by Korean Vocational High Schools.
........... 63 Table 2.5: Ratio of High School Students Advancement to Higher Education
Table 2.6: Number of Foreign Labors
Table 2.7: Changes in Korean Sociocultural Paradigms
Table 2.8: Comparison of Learning Organization and the Korean Educational Reform Policy Approach
Table 3.1: Public Vocational High Schools and Teachers in Seoul Megalopolis, 2005.
............ 90 Table 3.2: Target Population and Sampled Numbers
Table 3.3: Survey Instrument Development Process
Table 3.4: Operational Definition of Each Construct
Table 3.5: Summary of Item Refinement and the Procedure of Content Validity
Table 3.6: Items for the Five Subscales
Table 3.7: Instance of Response Scale
Table 3.8: Reliability Statistics from Pilot Test and Item Reduction
Table 4.2: Descriptive Statistics for Questionnaire Items with EFA Sample
Table 4.3: KMO and Bartlett’s Test
Table 4.4: Communalities Matrix
Table 4.5: Comparison of Both Promax’s and Direct Oblimin’s Pattern Matrix
Table 4.6: List of Items Dropped from Analysis
Table 4.7: Loaded Items and Rotated Factor Matrix Using Refined Item Pool
Table 4.8: Factor Correlation Matrix
Table 4.9: Reliability Coefficients of the Subscales Obtained from EFA
Table 4.10: Frequencies for Demographic Variables of CFA Sample
Table 4.11: Descriptive Statistics for the CFA Sample
Table 4.12: Major Parameter Estimates and Loading Values
Table 4.13: Correlation Matrix of Latent Factors
Table 4.14: Model Fit Indices of the Hypothesized Hierarchical Model
Table 4.15: Comparison of Demographic Variables for Two Teacher Groups
Table 4.16: Means and Standard Deviations on Items for Vocational and Academic Teacher Groups
Table 4.17: Results of Factorial Invariant Tests across Vocational and Academic Teacher Groups
Figure 1.1: Senge’s (1990) fifth discipline model of learning organization
Figure 2.1: Theoretical foundations of learning organization
Figure 4.1: Scree plot
Figure 4.2: A measurement model of learning organization
Figure 4.3: A hypothesized learning organization model for the CFA
Figure 4.4: The path diagram as a hierarchical factor structure
In human beings as well as in organizations, learning and change are usually inseparable;
learning changes us while change requires learning. It is essential that, like human beings, organizations change over time to insure their growth and long-term survival. Organizational change is facilitated by a continual learning process that is varied and complex (Lord & Ranft, 2000; Schwandt & Marquardt, 2000). As with two faces of a coin, learning and change have been applied conceptually to all organizations, including schools. In this respect, schools are viewed as living self-made systems which continuously grow, evolve, and recreate themselves through all levels of learning (Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, Smith, Dutton, & Kleiner, 2000).
Since the early 1990s, the term learning organization “has become one of the new buzzwords in the management, psychology, and human resource development literature” (Garavan, 1997, p. 18). In fact, the notion of the learning organization has become increasingly accepted as an organizational development or change strategy in business and industry. The learning organization concept is currently becoming more noticeable in public or non-profit institutions such as schools, hospitals, and the military in the context of defining values, structure, and prescriptive strategies (Fenwick, 1996; Marsick & Watkins, 1999).
Today, all organizations need to deal with the constantly changing demands caused by the latest wave of information technology, increasing worker diversity, and non-traditional family
structure, systems, and cultures. “Educational systems are undergoing a period of intense transition and transformation as we enter the global market, with global information systems and an awareness of ecological interconnectedness of all natural systems” (Diggins, 1997, p. 418).
The requirement of change by organizational environments calls for new ways of re-culturing and restructuring schools, since school systems should strive to be structurally effective and adaptable to rapidly changing educational environments. It is within the context of a globally changing set of demands that educators and researchers have noted the necessity and advantages of transforming schools into learning organizations (e.g., Dalin, 1996; DuFour, 1997; Fullan, 1993, 1995; Isaacon & Bamburg, 1992; Keefe & Howard, 1997; Leithwood, Leonard, & Sharrat, 1998; O’Sullivan, 1997; Redding & Kamm, 1999; Senge et al., 2000; Silins, Mulford, & Zarins, 2002; Zederayko & Ward, 1999).
Two primary strategies have emerged for applying the learning organization concept in school settings to target school change; as a school reform strategy (Duffy, 1997; Fullan, 1995;
Weller & Weller, 1997) and as professional development for teachers (Dilworth & Imig, 1995;
Lashway, 1998; Redding & Kamm, 1999; Waddock, 1994; Zederayko & Ward, 1999).
Increasingly, attention has been given to understanding school change through the notion of learning organization in both theory and practice (Hajnel, Walker, & Sackney, 1998).
Despite a growing need, few systematic empirical investigations have examined the constructs of the learning organization concept in schools (Griego & Gerory, 1999; Silins, Zarins, & Mulford, 1998). When the proposition that schools should become learning organizations is addressed without confirmation or identification of a concrete construct or variables defining the construct, school efforts to become learning organizations exist in name only (Zederayko, 2000).
extensive and diversified over the past many years, whereas the efforts to diagnose and measure this concept have been rare.
More recently, a few studies have examined the dimensions and features related to schools as learning organizations. By synthesizing findings from three independent studies, Leithwood et al.