The effect of authoritative school climate on students academic achievement

Ismail Siti Syamimi, Zainol Zuraidah,

Full Text

This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of authoritative school climate, particularly the disciplinary structure and student support, on student academic achievement. The study adopted a quantitative approach and a sample survey method. 200 students were selected from two secondary schools in Zone 5 Kinta Utara, Ipoh using a systematic sampling method. Multiple linear regressions were used to test the proposed hypotheses. The results show that the student supports have a significant and positive effect on the student’s academic achievement, but not disciplinary structure. Accordingly, to boost student achievement, the school administrators should adopt authoritative school climate, specifically by embedding the student support culture among all school teachers and support staffs. Despite the results provide insights on the significance of the authoritative school climate to increase student achievement, this study is subjected to some limitations, which require improvement and replication in the future studies.

References

1. Yahaya, A., & Majid, N. A. (2011). Hubungan antara budaya formal sekolah dan gaya pembelajaran pelajar dengan pencapaian akademik pelajar sekolah menengah. Journal of Educational Psychology and Counseling, 2(1), 78-112. 2. Bond, Trevor G, & Fox, Christine M. (2007). Applying the Rasch Model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Taylor & Francis Group. 3. Booker, K.C. (2006). School belonging and the African American adolescent: what do we know and where should we go? The High School Journal, 89(4), 1-7. 4. Brand, S., Felner, R. D., Seitsinger, A., Burns, A., & Bolton, N. (2008). A large scale study of the assessment of the social environment of middle and secondary schools: The validity and utility of teachers' ratings of school climate, cultural pluralism, and safety problems for understanding school effects and school improvement. Journal of School Psychology, 46(5), 507-535. 5. Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: research, policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers college record, 111(1), 180-213. 6. Cornell, D., & Huang, F. (2016). Authoritative school climate and high school student risk behavior: A cross-sectional multi-level analysis of student self-reports. Journal of youth and adolescence, 45(11), 2246-2259. 7. Cornell, D., Shukla, K., & Konold, T. R. (2016). Authoritative school climate and student academic engagement, grades, and aspirations in middle and high schools. AERA Open, 2(2), 2332858416633184. 8. Creswell, J. (2008). Education research. New Jersey: Pearson-Merill Prentice Hall. 9. Davis, J. A. (1971). Elementary survey analysis. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 10. Ghazali, D., & Sufean, H. (2016). Metodologi penyelidikan dalam pendidikan: Amalan dan analisis kajian. Kuala Lumpur. Universiti Malaya. 11. Gregory, A., Cornell, D., Fan, X., Sheras, P., Shih, T. H., & Huang, F. (2010). Authoritative school discipline: high school practices associated with lower bullying and victimization. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 483. 12. Goodenow, C. (1993). The psychological sense of school membership among adolescents: Scale development and educational correlates. Psychology in the Schools, 30(1), 79-90. 13. Jia, Y., Konold, T. R., & Cornell, D. (2016). Authoritative school climate and high school dropout rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 31(2), 289. 14. Juani Munir (2016). SPM 2015 menurun berdasarkan GPN. Retrieved April 18, 2017 from http://www.utusan.com.my/berita/nasional/spm-2015-menurun berdasarkan-gpn-1.196881 15. Jumalinja Abd Jalil. (2015). Kualiti perkhidmatan dan kepuasan pelanggan restoran hotel dan syarikat penerbangan di Malaysia. UPSI 16. Kamaruzaman. (2013). Kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan instrumen kajian. Jabatan Pembangunan Pengurus, Pemimpin dan Eksekutif Pendidikan Institut Aminuddin Baki, Genting Highlands. 17. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2013). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025. 18. Jia, Y., Konold, T. R., & Cornell, D. (2016). Authoritative school climate and high school dropout rates. School Psychology Quarterly, 31(2), 289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/spq0000062 19. Malaysian Digest (2015). Ranking pendidikan Malaysia merosot belakang Vietnam. Retrieved Febuary 18, 2017 from http://malaysiandigest.com/bahasa-malaysia/553464-ranking pendidikan-malaysia-merosot-belakang-vietnam.html 20. Moss, W. (1979). Superintendent leadership orientations and its relationship to school board satisfaction. Ed.D. University of Missouri-Columbia. 21. Ali, N., Habidin, N. F., Jamaludin, N. H., Khaidir, N. A., & Shazali, N. A. (2013). Customer relationship management and organizational performance in Malaysian healthcare industry. International Journal of Advancements in Research and Technology, 2(1), 1-5. 22. Othman & Rahmadhaniah. (2008). Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi pencapaian akademik pelajar Tahun 4 Perdana, Jabatan Pendidikan Teknikal dan Kejuruteraan, Sesi 2007/2008, Fakulti Pendidikan UTM, Skudai. 23. Roslihah Binti Mat Nor. (2006). Kecemerlangan akedemik pelajar Sekolah Menengah Harian Biasa: satu kajian kes di Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tengku Mahmud Besut, Terengganu. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Tesis Projek Sarjana Muda. 24. Sabitha Marican (2006). Penyelidikan sains sosial – pendekatan pragmatik. Selangor: Edusystem Sdn Bhd. 25. Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school climate research. Review of educational research, 83(3), 357-385. 26. Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 57, 375-400. 27. Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2016). School climate: A review of the construct, measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 315-352. 28. Wang, M. T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633-662. 29. Yip, M. C. W. (2007). Differences in learning and study strategies between high and low achieving university students: A Hong Kong study. Educational Psychology. 25(5), 597-606.