The Influence of Individual Skills, Organizational Structure, and External Environment on the Digital Leadership of School Principals in Deli Serdang

Dea Nadhirah Mulyadi; Muhammad Fadhli

doi:10.55681/armada.v4i6.2303

Authors

Dea Nadhirah Mulyadi Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia
Muhammad Fadhli Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55681/armada.v4i6.2303

Keywords:

Digital Leadership, Individual Skills, Organizational Structure, External Environment

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the influence of individual skills, organizational structure, and external environment on the digital leadership of school principals in Deli Serdang Regency. The study employed a quantitative approach with a causal-associative design involving 181 junior high school principals selected through systematic sampling. Data were collected using questionnaires and analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The findings reveal that individual skills, organizational structure, and external environment have positive and significant effects on digital leadership. Among these variables, individual skills emerged as the most dominant factor influencing principals’ digital leadership. Furthermore, the R-square value of 0.67 indicates that 67% of the variance in digital leadership can be explained by these three variables, while the remaining 33% is influenced by other factors outside the research model. These findings highlight that strengthening individual competencies, supported by adaptive organizational structures and a conducive external environment, is essential for enhancing the effectiveness of digital leadership in schools.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49-82.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2016). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

El Sawy, O. A. (2001). Redesigning enterprise processes for e-business. McGraw-Hill.

Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (2020). Professional capital after the pandemic: Revisiting and revising classic understandings of teachers' work. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 327-336.

Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. Pearson.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2017). Digital leadership: Changing paradigms for changing times.

Journal of Educational Administration, 55(4), 436-449.

International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2017). ISTE standards for educators.

Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators

Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. (2022). Survei literasi digital guru Indonesia 2022. Kemendikbudristek.

Kerlinger, F. N. (1992). Foundations of behavioral research (3rd ed.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2014). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1-47.

Netolicky, D. M. (2016). Transformational professional learning: Making a difference in schools. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 1(4), 258-277.

Nettles, S. M., & Herrington, C. (2007). Revisiting the importance of the direct effects of school leadership on student achievement: The implications for school improvement policy. Peabody Journal of Education, 82(4), 724-736.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2018). Education 2030: The future of education and skills. OECD Publishing.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). PISA 2018 results: What students know and can do. OECD Publishing.

Pettersson, F. (2018). On the issues of digital competence in educational contexts: A review of literature. Education and Information Technologies, 23(3), 1005-1021.

Schleicher, A. (2018). World class: How to build a 21st-century school system. OECD Publishing.

Schleicher, A. (2019). PISA 2018 insights and interpretations. OECD Publishing.

Sugiyono. (2014). Metode penelitian pendidikan: Pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.

Sugiyono. (2016). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta. Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.

Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers' pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555-575.

UNESCO. (2020). Global education monitoring report 2020: Inclusion and education: All means all. UNESCO Publishing.

Universitas Sumatera Utara. (2023). Studi efektivitas implementasi program Merdeka Belajar di Sumatera Utara. USU Press.

We Are Social & Hootsuite. (2023). Digital 2023: Indonesia. Retrieved from https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2023-indonesia

Wicaksono, A. (2020). Peran kepemimpinan digital kepala sekolah dalam meningkatkan kualitas pembelajaran berbasis teknologi di Indonesia. Jurnal Administrasi Pendidikan, 27(2), 156-170.