School Principals in Bani Kinanah Employment of Dialogue and its Connection to School Decisions Effectiveness from the Perspectives of Teachers’ Point of View(https://doi.org/10.63386/618166)
School Principals in Bani Kinanah Employment of Dialogue and its Connection to School Decisions Effectiveness from the Perspectives of Teachers’ Point of View
Amneh Ahmed Dagamseh – PhD Researcher, Educational Administration
Saleh Nasser Aleimat- Professor of Educational Administration Yarmouk University
ABSTRACT
The purpose of the study was to determine the extent to which Bani Kinanah District school administrators use the conversation technique and how it relates to the calibre of decisions made by the instructors. A questionnaire was employed as a data gathering instrument in a descriptive, correlational survey technique. A sample of 384 male and female instructors were given the study. The findings demonstrated that Bani Kinanah District school leaders used the discussion technique to a great degree. The findings also showed that Bani Kinanah District’s school judgements were of a high calibre. The findings showed a statistically significant beneficial relationship between the quality of school choices and the extent to which Bani Kinanah District school leaders used the conversation technique. Given the results of the study, it is advised that school principals keep using the ability to have productive conversations with teachers, administrators, students, and parents in the educational process. The Ministry of Education also suggests that training programs be made available to principals, particularly those who are new, in order to educate and qualify them on the fundamentals of productive communication.
Keywords: Dialogue Approach, Quality of School Decisions, Principals, Teachers.
Introduction
Through dialogue, a person may expand his thoughts and experiences, get ready to give and be creative, and take part in creating a better life. Whether speaking, listening, reading, or writing, it allows the person to engage with people and connect with them via the arts of language. This indicates that the person engages in discourse and communication with others, either as a sender or a recipient.
According to Al-Dimashqi (2018), the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) engaged in discourse with others by listening, asking questions, and treating them with respect. “Have you finished, Abu al-Walid?” he asked Utbah. Additionally, he addressed Heraclius, the Christian Roman ruler, saying, “From Muhammad ibn Abdullah to Heraclius, the great Roman emperor.” The words of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), recounted by Muslims on the advice of Aisha (may God be pleased with her), which states: The Messenger of God taught us to treat people with respect, are the foundation of this prophetic etiquette in discussion.
According to Harran (2019), philosophy and discourse were not mutually exclusive. Through questioning and answering, elucidating philosophical and moral meanings and concepts, and engaging in discussion with young people, Socrates employed the dialogical technique. Al-Jabouri (2021) showed how Plato changed the link between philosophy and conversation by transferring debate and dialogue from oral to written statements, from public social discourse to private elite discourse, and from verbal to written statements. Regarding Aristotle, he thought that conversation was a way to reach the truth by exchanging ideas and viewpoints, and his method was founded on reasoning and discussion. He proposed theories and then provided proof and evidence to back them up using the technique of deduction. He emphasised the need of attentive listening and respect for differing opinions, with a focus on mutual understanding between the dialogue’s participants.
As a result, dialogue is regarded as one of the most crucial forms of communication in day-to-day life because it fosters interpersonal understanding and communication skills, allows people to learn about one another’s experiences, promotes intellectual growth and reform, and allows for the analysis and exchange of information and cultures. It also helps to clarify the cultural and civilisational realities of nations and peoples and spreads the values of tolerance, honesty, and respect for differing viewpoints (Erstad, Hagtvet & Wertsch, 2024).
According to Schraube (2024), the value of dialogue in educational institutions is emphasised in fostering efficient communication among its constituents in order to establish a learning atmosphere that stimulates engagement and involvement. Teachers, administrators, and parents may make well-informed decisions that support the educational process by exchanging ideas and experiences through dialogue. Teachers and students who engage in dialogue also develop personal and social values and become more confident in their ability to voice their viewpoints. Additionally, communication encourages schools to address changes and obstacles and embrace conduct that aligns with the nature of administrative job. A research by Rietmulder and Marjanovic-Shane (2023) found that organisational traits and instructional effectiveness are significantly correlated with the kind of discussion culture a school has. The school administrator has to be aware of and informed about effective communication and conversation techniques in order for discussions between the administration and all parties engaged in the teaching-learning process to be beneficial.
According to Abu Qatta (2025), school principals can use the dialogue method with teachers by implementing effective communication and interaction strategies with them, such as holding regular meetings, using email, and hosting online discussion groups. They can also use the dialogue method to settle disputes between teachers in a constructive way and involve teachers in decision-making at the school level.
According to Al-Rubaie and Al-Taie (2021), the school principal’s attempts to create an effective dialogue approach are reflected in the meetings he hosts for teachers, administrators, students, parents, and local community institutions. He does this by creating a welcoming atmosphere that encourages everyone to voice their opinions and by outlining the meeting’s goals, which helps to steer the conversation and guarantees that everyone is aware of what should be covered. It is crucial that the principal demonstrates interest in other people’s viewpoints by paying close attention to what they have to say, responding to what they have to say in order to foster a sense of respect and gratitude, taking notes on the key topics covered in order to follow up on the ideas and suggestions made, and giving feedback on what has been proposed.
According to Rajab (2021), the decision-making process is a key component of managing educational institutions and the primary force behind their human resources and operations. It influences every aspect of management, from establishing work procedures and systems to choosing and overseeing employees to establishing goals and plans. Administrative decision-making is also a methodical procedure that follows a set of criteria, including problem definition, alternative setting, evaluation, and selection, as well as announcement and implementation of the decision. Administrators can purposefully connect the different organisational components with the use of these methods.
According to Baydar (2022), school administration is a complex, interwoven administration with a critical dimension and unique qualities, making it one of the most challenging and complex decisions. It focusses on achieving social responsibility rather than making money or dealing with machines. Making judgements is one of the responsibilities of the school administrator. These decisions help the school succeed by increasing its effectiveness and ongoing growth, particularly during times of crisis and danger. under order to make sensible and successful educational judgements under these circumstances, the principal of the school must be personally competent and wise. This means that the principal must practice and possess the abilities that enable him to make wise and effective decisions.
According to Ahmed (2023), school principals need to have a certain set of procedural and mental abilities to make sure their choices are sound and efficient. Of these abilities, the most crucial ones are: The first step is to precisely define the issue, collect data, and identify its underlying causes. The second step is to find potential alternatives, think through various options, and assess each one according to particular standards like cost, efficacy, and implementation time. Third, weighing the possible dangers associated with each option and steering clear of choices that might have unfavourable effects. Fourth, making choices based on the information at hand and a dispassionate assessment of the options. Fifth, making sure the choice is implemented effectively and keeping an eye on the outcomes to make sure the intended goals are met. Sixth, examining the procedure and assessing the outcomes. This facilitates experience-based learning and enhances decision-making in the future.
According to Hamdy (2024), one of the most important factors that has a big influence on the calibre of administrative judgements is discussion. Effective dialogue techniques enable leaders to interact with their teams more effectively, which promotes understanding and idea sharing. Leaders who engage in effective discussion are better able to hear other points of view, which aids in the process of making well-informed decisions that consider all relevant data and perspectives. Additionally, school principals might use the conversation approach to improve the calibre of their administrative judgements.
It became evident from the researcher’s analysis of prior study and educational literature that a number of scholars have conducted separate studies on “director dialogue and the quality of directors’ administrative decisions.” A research by Sanjani (2024) compared the crisis management techniques used by principals in public and private secondary schools in Anambra State using the perspectives of discussion and arbitration. A causal comparative research strategy was used in the study. All 561 secondary school principals from both public and private institutions made up the study sample. The findings demonstrated that the principals of Anambra State’s public and private secondary schools concurred that conversation and arbitration were efficient crisis management techniques.
From the viewpoints of principals and instructors, Al-Otaibi’s study (2023) sought to determine the efficacy of dialogue in educational communication inside schools as well as the degree to which school leaders use conversation in decision-making. The questionnaire served as a instrument for gathering data, and the descriptive survey approach was applied. It was used on a sample of 425 female teachers and 57 female principals. The findings demonstrated that female principals engage in a significant amount of practice and conversation in their schoolwork.
In order to find out how Chinese teachers felt about their principals using the conversation approach in classrooms, Gilbert (2022) carried out a research. 53 administrators and teachers participated in group and individual interviews using a multiple case study methodology. The findings indicated that a number of factors, chief among them the principal’s monopoly on decision-making, teachers’ lack of job security, psychological burnout during the early years of their employment with the school, social gossip, and conflict or lack of self-control during formal faculty meetings, hinder teachers’ engagement in dialogue with their principals.
The goal of Al-Sharari’s (2020) study was to determine how the Jerash Governorate’s primary school teachers may be encouraged to engage in discourse by the school administration. The study collected data using a questionnaire and a descriptive methodology. A sample of 264 male and female teachers were given the study. The findings demonstrated the critical role that school management had in encouraging a culture of communication among educators.
In Virginia, USA, Klein (2017) carried out a research to investigate how to encourage candid and open communication between high school administrators and instructors. The study collected data using a questionnaire and a descriptive methodology. A sample of 445 male and female instructors were given the study. The findings indicated that there was a moderate level of support for genuine and open communication between educators and school officials.
Regarding research on the calibre of school decisions, Al-Khalidi (2024) carried out a study to determine how well school principals in the Irbid District made decisions from the viewpoint of their instructors. A questionnaire was employed as a data collecting instrument, and the descriptive survey technique was applied. A sample of 103 male and female teachers were given the study. As demonstrated by the findings, teachers gave government school principals a high rating for decision-making effectiveness.
The purpose of Musa’s (2023) study was to determine the level of decision-making efficacy among Palestinian government secondary school administrators. The study collected data using a questionnaire and the descriptive survey technique. A sample of 108 male and female principals participated in the survey. The findings demonstrated that Palestinian government secondary school principals made decisions with a high degree of efficacy.
A research by Supriadi et al. (2021) investigated how management information systems (MIS) affected the calibre of choices made by Indonesian principals of vocational secondary schools. The study collected data using a questionnaire and the descriptive survey technique. A sample of 19 principals, both male and female, were given the study. The findings demonstrated that MIS significantly affects how well vocational school principals make decisions.
The goal of Mayasari and Kemal’s (2020) study was to determine how organisational culture, communication, and creativity affect principals’ decision-making. A sample of 105 male and female principals was subjected to a descriptive survey technique, using a questionnaire as a data gathering instrument.
The findings demonstrated that school administrators’ decision-making process is directly and favourably impacted by organisational culture, innovation, and communication. The main source of information used to direct the researchers in the current study in terms of issue definition, formulation, technique, and community was previous research. Through these research, they were able to have a thorough grasp of the theoretical frameworks that should be included and to use them while describing the findings. The topic, community, sample, factors, and timing of the current study set it apart. The usage of discussion by Bani Kinanah District school leaders and its connection to the calibre of school choices were the main topics of the study. The study is among the few Arab studies that examined the relationship between the two factors, as far as the researchers are aware.
Study problem and questions
In order to address globalisation, intellectual and cultural openness, and the effects of contemporary technology on education and society at large, school leaders must embrace a dialogue culture marked by sensitivity and virtuous conduct. Raising a generation that values constructive discourse is crucial in order to expose the drawbacks and advantages of transparency and show how it can improve trust between teachers, students, administrators, and school personnel—a skill that is thought to be essential to the effectiveness and efficiency of educational establishments. According to Al-Sharari’s (2020) research, schools should foster and implement a culture of conversation since it fosters more intelligent, productive, and perceptive pupils and improves the bond between instructors and students. The school principal instills a sense of responsibility in the staff by showing interest in them, collaborating with them, and consulting them on school-related issues. This encourages the staff to work harder to bring about change and progress. Perhaps this trust makes school educational leaders happier in their jobs, improves the calibre of their administrative choices, and makes them more optimistic about the challenges they confront.
The results of Al-Khalidi’s study (2024) showed that the effectiveness of decision-making among government school principals was high. Accordingly, the problem of the study is determined by revealing the degree to which school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue method and its relationship to the quality of school decisions from the teachers’ point of view, by answering the following questions:
1- To what extent do school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue approach, from the teachers’ perspective?
2- What is the quality of school decisions in schools in Bani Kinanah District, from the teachers’ perspective?
3- Is there a statistically significant correlation at the significance level (α=0.05) between the degree to which school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue approach and the quality of school decisions?
Study Objectives
The study sought to identify the extent to which school principals in the Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue method, from the teachers’ perspective, to adopt this type of dialogue in their interactions with school staff and make it the dominant feature of communication within the school. It also sought to identify the quality of administrative decisions in schools in the Bani Kinanah District, from the teachers’ perspective, to guide principals in making their decisions within a well-thought-out strategic plan characterized by identifying the problem, developing alternatives, evaluating them, and selecting the best of them.
Significance of the Study:
Theoretical Significance: The theoretical significance of the study is its contribution to enriching the theoretical literature with studies on school principals’ use of dialogue, the effectiveness of school decision-making, and the relationship between them, and the scientific contribution it may make to the Arabic literature.
Technical and Procedural Definitions: The current study included the following:
– Dialogue method, technically defined as: “A communication method used to exchange ideas and information between two or more people” (Al-Ramamaneh, 2023, 36). Procedurally, it is defined as: How school principals in the Bani Kinanah District implement dialogue in school meetings with teachers, students, parents, and local community institutions. This includes the use of questions and answers, the exchange of opinions, active listening, and the provision of feedback. The dialogue method relies on mutual respect and positive interaction, with each party seeking to understand the other’s point of view and expressing their own clearly. It was measured by the overall score obtained by principals based on teachers’ responses to the instrument developed for this purpose.
– The quality of administrative decisions, technically defined as: “A reflection of future behavior and the consequences of that behavior” (Al-Rakabi, Al-Khazai, and Al-Karwi, 2018, 47). It is procedurally defined as: an activity undertaken by managers for the purpose of issuing judgments or decisions about situations or problems, which can be measured through the study sample’s response to the instrument used.
Study Limits: The current study is defined by the following:
– Thematic Limit: This study addresses the degree to which school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue method and its relationship to the quality of school decisions from the teachers’ perspective.
– Human Limit: A sample of male and female teachers from schools in Bani Kinanah District.
– Spatial Limit: Public schools in Bani Kinanah District.
– Temporal Limit: The study was conducted during the first semester of the 2024 academic year.
Methods and Procedures
This chapter describes the study methodology, its population and sample, the method of selection, and the study instrument.
Study Methodology: The descriptive, correlational survey method was used, given its suitability for the purposes of the current study.
Study Population: The study population consisted of all teachers working in schools in the Bani Kinanah District, totaling 1,948 teachers, according to statistics from the Educational Planning Department in the Bani Kinanah District Education Directorate for the academic year 2025.
Study sample: The study sample consisted of (384) male and female teachers from government schools in Bani Kinanah District. They were selected using a simple random method to ensure that the sample represents the community from which it was taken, according to the statistical sampling table contained in Krejcie and Morgan (1970). The questionnaire link was distributed electronically to all members of the study community.
Study Instrument
The researchers developed a questionnaire to collect the data necessary to achieve the study objectives. The questionnaire consisted of two parts: the first included the respondent’s personal data, and the second consisted of two axes. The first measured the degree to which school principals employ the dialogue approach, and the second measured the quality of school decisions. To formulate the paragraphs for the first axis (the degree to which school principals employ the dialogue approach), theoretical literature and previous studies were consulted, such as the study by Al-Otaibi (2023) and Al-Sharari (2020). These resulted in the formulation of (31) paragraphs distributed across four areas. To formulate the paragraphs for the second axis (the quality of school decisions), the researchers consulted the studies of Al-Khalidi (2024) and Musa (2023). This axis included (25) paragraphs distributed across four areas.
Content Validity of the Instrument
To verify the content validity of the instrument , it was presented in its initial form to a group of (10) experts and specialists from several universities. The aim was to provide their opinions on its paragraphs in terms of affiliation, clarity of linguistic formulation, and any amendments they deemed appropriate. Based on the comments and opinions of the arbitrators, the proposed amendments were made. These included amending the wording of paragraphs (4, 6, 8, 15, 17, 20, 21), and deleting paragraphs (9, 25) from the axis (The Degree of Employment of School Principals in Bani Kinanah District in the Dialogue Method). Thus, the number of paragraphs in this axis in its final form became (36). As for the second axis (The Level of Quality of School Decisions), the wording of paragraphs (7, 9, 11, 16, 21) was amended, and paragraphs (5, 17) were deleted. Thus, the number of paragraphs in the axis in its final form became (23).
Instrument stability: For the purpose of verifying the internal consistency stability of the instrument , Cronbach’s alpha equation was used based on the data of the first application of the survey sample. For the purpose of verifying the stability stability (Test-Retest) of the instrument , its axes and domains, it was reapplied to the survey sample with a time interval of two weeks between the two applications. Then, the Pearson Correlation coefficient was calculated between the values of the two applications. Table (1) shows the internal consistency stability coefficients and the stability stability of the instrument .
Table (1): Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and stability reliability of the instrument, its axes and domains
| The first axis: The degree of employment of school principals in Bani Kinanah District, dialogue method | |||
| Field
|
Cronbach’s alpha | reliability | number of items |
| Teachers
|
0.90 | 0.94** | 9 |
| Students
|
0.92 | 0.85** | 10 |
| Parents
|
0.90 | 0.94** | 10 |
| Meetings
|
0.89 | 0.98** | 10 |
| College | – | 0.97** | 49 |
| Axis II: The quality level of school decisions from the teachers’ perspective | |||
| Cronbach’s alpha | reliability | number of items | |
| Identify the problem | 0.83 | 0.90** | 5 |
| Develop alternatives | 0.86 | 0.64** | 5 |
| Evaluate alternatives and select the best one | 0.89 | 0.70** | 6 |
| Announce, implement, and evaluate the decision | 0.93 | 0.58** | 7 |
| College | – | 0.90** | 23 |
It is noted from Table (1) that the values of Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for the domains of the (dialogue style) axis ranged between (0.89-0.92), while the values of stability reliability for the domains of the same axis ranged between (0.85-0.98), and the value of the retest reliability coefficient as a whole was (0.97). It is also noted that the values of Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for the domains of the (quality of school decisions) axis ranged between (0.83-0.93), while the values of retest reliability ranged between (0.58-0.90), and the retest reliability coefficient on the axis of the level of quality of school decisions as a whole was (0.90). These values are considered appropriate and make the instrument applicable to the original sample.
The study instrument ‘s correction criterion: The statistical model with relative grading was adopted to make judgments about the arithmetic means of the study instrument , its domains, and the items that follow those domains. This was done by dividing the range of numbers (1-5) into five categories to obtain the range of each level, i.e. (5-1/5=0.80). Accordingly, the levels will be as follows:
Table (2): Statistical criterion for determining the level of arithmetic means
| Arithmetic means category | degree of practice |
| 4.20-5.00 | Very large |
| 3.40-أقل 4.20 | Large |
| 2.6-أقل من 3.40 | Medium |
| 1.80-أقل من 2.6 | Small |
| 1-أقل من 1.8 | Very Small |
Presentation and Discussion of Results:
First: The results of the first question, which stated: “What is the degree to which school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue method from the teachers’ point of view?” To answer this question, the arithmetic means and standard deviations were calculated for the degree to which school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue method and its fields, and Table (3) shows that.
Table (3): Arithmetic means and standard deviations for the axis of the degree of employment of school principals in Bani Kinanah District, dialogue method on the fields in descending order
| Arrangement | field | The axis and its fields | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Level |
| 1 | 1 | Teachers | 3.87 | 0.79 | large |
| 2 | 3 | Parents | 3.83 | 0.78 | large |
| 3 | 4 | Meetings | 3.82 | 0.80 | Large |
| 4 | 2 | Students | 3.81 | 0.81 | Large |
| Total axis score | 3.83 | 0.77 | large | ||
It is noted from the results in Table (3) that the arithmetic means of the fields of the axis of the degree of employment of school principals in Bani Kinanah District, the dialogue method, ranged between (3.81-3.87), within a large level, and came according to the following order: The field of (teachers) came in first place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.87), and a standard deviation of (0.79), to a large degree, followed by the field of (parents), with an arithmetic mean of (3.83), and a standard deviation of (0.78), to a large degree, then the field of (meetings), with an arithmetic mean of (3.83), and a standard deviation of (0.80), and finally came the field of (students), with an arithmetic mean of (3.81), and a standard deviation of (0.81), to a large degree. Perhaps the reason is due to the awareness of the principals of schools in Bani Kinanah District of the importance of promoting a culture of dialogue in the educational environments they manage, in addition to the role of a culture of dialogue in strengthening the cohesion of school staff and strengthening the bonds of connection, friendliness, understanding, cooperation, and trust between all school staff and members of the local community. The reason is also attributed to the conviction of the principals of schools in Bani Kinanah District that a culture of dialogue works to provide a comfortable atmosphere in the work environment, which leads to an increase in their productive efficiencies and teaching performance. The results of the current study agreed with the results of Al-Otaibi’s study (2023), which showed that female principals practice and activate dialogue in school work to a large extent. However, they differed from the results of Klein’s study (2017), which showed that the level of promoting open and authentic dialogue between teachers and school administration was at an average level.
Teachers’ Field
Table (4): Arithmetic means and standard deviations for the items in the (Teachers’) field, arranged in descending order
| Arrangement | Paragraph | School principals employ the following dialogue method with teachers: | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Degree |
| 1 | 6 | Helps teachers develop the skills of persuasion and influence on others | 3.95 | 0.96 | Large |
| 2 | 1 | Teachers are encouraged to have mutual respect with colleagues. | 3.94 | 0.93 | Large |
| 3 | 2 | Gives teachers the opportunity to participate in decision-making | 3.93 | 0.94 | Large |
| 4 | 3 | He accepts teachers’ opinions with open arms. | 3.88 | 0.94 | Large |
| 5 | 4 | Takes into account teachers’ wishes during dialogue and discussion | 3.85 | 0.95 | Large |
| 6 | 7 | It seeks to create a positive attitude among teachers towards cultural and intellectual issues. | 3.84 | 1.01 | Large |
| 7 | 9 | Disseminates the concepts and values of moderation, balance, and tolerance among teachers. | 3.83 | 1.00 | Large |
| 8 | 5 | Teachers are encouraged to participate in courses and programs to promote a culture of dialogue. | 3.82 | 0.94 | Large |
| 9 | 8 | Urges teachers to provide interesting learning situations to develop dialogue with students. | 3.78 | 0.98 | Large |
| The whole field | 3.87 | 0.79 | large | ||
The results in Table (4) show that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ ratings on the items in the teachers’ domain was (3.87), and a standard deviation of (0.79), to a large extent. The highest rating was for item (6), “Helps teachers develop the skills of persuasion and influencing others,” with an arithmetic mean of (3.95), and a standard deviation of (0.96), to a large extent. Perhaps the reason is that there is a positive relationship between the administration and the teachers, based on mutual trust and constant and ongoing dialogue between them. Item (8), which states, “Encourages teachers to provide interesting educational situations to develop dialogue with students,” came in last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.78), and a standard deviation of (0.98), to a large extent. Perhaps the reason is that there is an educational climate dominated by sustainable dialogue between the parties involved in the educational learning process.
Student field
Table (5): Arithmetic means and standard deviations of the items in the (students) field, arranged in descending order.
| Arrangement | Paragraph | School principals employ the following dialogue method with teachers: | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Degree |
| 1 | 14 | Students learn about the role of modern technology in communicating with others. | 3.88 | 0.95 | Large |
| 2 | 10 | Students are encouraged to respect the opinions of others. | 3.86 | 0.95 | Large |
| 3 | 15 | Students are urged to admit mistakes and apologize for them. | 3.84 | 0.98 | Large |
| 4 | 18 | Follows an open door policy for dialogue with students | 3.83 | 0.98 | Large |
| 5 | 17 | Takes into account students’ opinions related to the educational process | 3.82 | 0.94 | Large |
| 6 | 11 | Develops the values of tolerance among students | 3.81 | 0.98 | Large |
| 7 | 16 | Explain to students the concept of forgiveness when able | 3.79 | 0.99 | Large |
| 8 | 12 | Students gain the ability to engage in constructive dialogue. | 3.77 | 0.99 | Large |
| 9 | 13 | It enhances the students’ concept of balance, moderation and balance. | 3.73 | 0.97 | Large |
| 10 | 19 | Students are encouraged to discuss before making decisions. | 3.72 | 0.96 | Large |
| The whole field | 3.81 | 0.81 | large | ||
Table (5) shows that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ ratings for the student domain items was (3.81), with a standard deviation of (0.81), to a large extent. The highest rating was for item (14), “Students know the role of modern technology in communicating with others,” with an arithmetic mean of (3.88), a standard deviation of (0.95), and to a large extent. This may be due to the fact that modern technology has become a matter of high importance when communicating with others, and has become an integral part of students’ daily lives, such as communicating with teachers and colleagues easily at any time and place, in addition to the importance of using technology in education. Item (19), which states, “Students are encouraged to dialogue before making decisions,” came in last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.72), a standard deviation of (0.96), and to a large extent. This may be due to the fact that dialogue before making decisions is important in developing students’ skills and improving their learning, in addition to the role of dialogue in providing students with the opportunity to freely express their ideas.
Parents and community organizations
Table (6): Arithmetic means and standard deviations for the items in the field (parents and local community institutions), arranged in descending order.
| Arrangement | Paragraph | School principals employ the following dialogue method with teachers: | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Degree |
| 1 | 22 | Shows commitment to suggestions made by parents during meetings | 3.95 | 0.89 | Large |
| 2 | 21 | Sends continuous notifications to parents about their children’s behavioral and educational status. | 3.89 | 0.94 | Large |
| 3 | 20 | Uses social media to communicate with parents | 3.86 | 0.93 | Large |
| 4 | 26 | It allows parents to hold training sessions for teachers and students on the constructive dialogue method. | 3.85 | 0.94 | Large |
| 5 | 27 | Involves local community institutions in organizing dialogue seminars with students | 3.83 | 0.94 | Large |
| 6 | 24 | Holds periodic meetings with parents to inform them of the most important educational developments. | 3.82 | 0.92 | Large |
| 7 | 25 | Takes parents’ opinions into account regarding the activities held by the school. | 3.81 | 0.99 | Large |
| 8 | 28 | Parents are informed of the Ministry of Education’s regulations. | 3.79 | 0.93 | Large |
| 9 | 23 | Answers parents’ inquiries on a regular basis | 3.66 | 1.03 | Large |
| 10 | 29 | Discusses community institutions in solving school-related problems. | 3.65 | 0.95 | Large |
| The whole field | 3.83 | 0.78 | large | ||
Table (6) shows that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ ratings on the items in the field of parents and local community institutions was (3.83), with a standard deviation of (0.78), to a large degree. The highest rating was for item (22), which states, “He shows commitment to the suggestions presented by parents during meetings,” with an arithmetic mean of (3.95), a standard deviation of (0.89), and to a large degree. This may be due to the fact that the school principal’s commitment to the suggestions presented by parents during meetings is very important for achieving trust and cooperation between them, improving relations between the school and parents, enhancing trust between the concerned parties, and providing a cooperative environment. Item (29), which states, “He discusses with local community institutions to solve problems related to the school,” came in last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.65), a standard deviation of (0.95), and to a large degree. This may be due to the school principal’s awareness of the importance of cooperation with the local community in improving the quality of education and meeting students’ needs. Cooperation with the local community also helps solve school-related problems.
Meetings area
Table (7): Arithmetic means and standard deviations of the items in the (meetings) field, arranged in descending order.
| Arrangement | Paragraph | School principals employ the following dialogue method with teachers: | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Degree |
| 1 | 36 | Controls his emotions during the meeting | 3.89 | 0.97 | Large |
| 2 | 32 | Uses positive reinforcement phrases in the meeting to encourage participation in the discussion. | 3.88 | 0.96 | Large |
| 2 | 33 | He changes his mind if there is a better opinion. | 3.88 | 0.97 | Large |
| 4 | 38 | Uses facial expressions to suggest to the other party that he is interested in what is being said. | 3.84 | 0.96 | Large |
| 5 | 31 | All teachers are informed of the decisions made after the meeting. | 3.82 | 0.95 | Large |
| 6 | 35 | He changes his tone of voice depending on the occasion and importance of the topic of discussion. | 3.80 | 0.94 | Large |
| 7 | 37 | Helps teachers control feelings of anger during dialogue | 3.79 | 0.97 | Large |
| 8 | 34 | Raise school problems in a timely manner to help find quick and appropriate solutions. | 3.74 | 0.96 | Large |
| 9 | 30 | The dialogue and discussion is directed to all teachers during the meeting. | 3.73 | 1.00 | Large |
| 10 | 39 | Uses descriptive phrases while listening such as: (Yes, and it seems so) | 3.72 | 0.95 | Large |
| The whole field | 3.82 | 0.80 | large | ||
Table (7) shows that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ ratings for the meeting domain items was (3.82), with a standard deviation of (0.80), to a large extent. Item (36), which states “He controls his emotions during the meeting,” came in first place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.89), a standard deviation of (0.97), and to a large extent. Perhaps the reason for this is that school principals seek to control their emotions, which maintains his respect in front of others, and enables him to make informed decisions. While item (39), which states “He uses descriptive phrases while listening such as: (Yes, and it seems so)” came in last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.72), a standard deviation of (0.95), and to a large extent. Perhaps this is due to the fact that school principals have the skill to communicate and connect with others. Their use of such phrases confirms their understanding of what is being said, shows that they are listening effectively, and enhances positive communication and creates a positive environment based on mutual respect between them and the other party.
Second: The results of the second question, which stated: “What is the level of quality of school decisions in the schools of Bani Kinanah District from the teachers’ point of view?” The arithmetic means and standard deviations were calculated for the axis of the level of quality of school decisions and its areas, and Table (10) shows that.
Table (8): Arithmetic means and standard deviations of the level of quality of school decisions, arranged in descending order.
| Arrangement | field | The axis and its fields | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Level |
| 1 | 3 | Identify the problem | 3.81 | 0.81 | Large |
| 2 | 4 | Develop alternatives (solutions) | 3.80 | 0.84 | Large |
| 3 | 1 | Evaluate alternatives and choose the best one | 3.69 | 0.86 | Large |
| 4 | 2 | Announcing, implementing and evaluating the decision | 3.68 | 0.90 | Large |
| Total to axis | 3.75 | 0.78 | Large | ||
It is noted from Table (8) that the arithmetic mean of the quality of school decisions in the schools of Bani Kinanah District was (3.75), with a standard deviation of (0.78), to a large degree. This result indicates the extensive experience and knowledge possessed by school principals, as estimated by the sample members, in the educational field and the management of their schools, to understand the challenges and opportunities they face during school work and propose the best solutions and alternatives to resolve them. In addition, the principals possess a strategic school vision that helps them make decisions that are in line with the general and specific goals of the school, and in a manner commensurate with its human and material capabilities to ensure the school’s success and excellence. The results of the current study are consistent with the results of the study (Supriadi et al., 2021), which showed that management information systems have a significant impact on the quality of the decision-making process for vocational school principals.
Problem definition area
Table (9): Arithmetic means and standard deviations of the paragraphs of the (problem definition) domain, arranged in descending order
| Arrangement | field | Paragraphs | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Level |
| 1 | 3 | Communicates with the parties involved in the problem to determine its dimensions. | 3.89 | 0.96 | Large |
| 2 | 4 | Collects information related to the problem, both quantitatively and qualitatively. | 3.87 | 0.94 | Large |
| 3 | 2 | Addresses the dimensions of the problem facing school administration in clear and precise terms. | 3.85 | 0.90 | Large |
| 4 | 1 | Explains the causes of the problem facing school administration | 3.75 | 0.92 | Large |
| 5 | 5 | Analyzes available information about the problem to verify its validity. | 3.71 | 1.03 | Large |
| Total to axis | 3.81 | 0.81 | Large | ||
The results in Table (9) show that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ ratings for the items in the (problem definition) domain was (3.81), with a standard deviation of (0.81), at a significant level. Item (3) “Communicates with the parties involved in the problem to determine its dimensions” came in first place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.86), and a standard deviation of (0.96), at a significant level. This may be due to the managers’ keenness to collect comprehensive and accurate information about the problem that may not be known to the manager, which helps the manager understand the problem more deeply and identify its root causes. This, in turn, may help managers build strong and effective partnerships with the parties involved in the problem, making them more willing to participate in solutions to eliminate problems that may hinder the educational process. Item (5) came in last place, which states “Analyzes the available information about the problem to ensure its validity”, with an arithmetic mean of (3.71), and a standard deviation of (1.03), at a significant level. Perhaps this is because managers believe that analyzing information helps them identify patterns and trends that point to the root causes of a problem, assess its impact, and build a robust database that can be used in the future.
The field of developing alternatives (solutions)
Table (10): Arithmetic means and standard deviations of the items in the (setting alternatives) field, arranged in descending order
| Arrangement | field | Paragraphs | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Level |
| 1 | 6 | Involves specialists in identifying the best alternatives to solve the problem. | 3.88 | 0.92 | Large |
| 2 | 7 | Involves problem owners in developing alternatives and solutions | 3.83 | 0.96 | Large |
| 3 | 10 | Discusses innovative alternatives to solve problems objectively in light of available possibilities. | 3.82 | 0.96 | Large |
| 4 | 8 | Provides all information about the problem to participants in developing alternatives to solve it. | 3.78 | 0.97 | Large |
| 5 | 9 | Exchange views objectively to arrive at the best possible alternatives to solve the problem. | 3.75 | 0.94 | Large |
| Total to axis | 3.80 | 0.84 | Large | ||
Table (10) shows that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ estimates of the level of quality of school decisions in the schools of Bani Kinanah District on the items in the field of (developing alternatives) reached (3.80), and a standard deviation of (0.84), which is a significant level. Item (6), which states “Involves specialists in determining the optimal alternatives to solve the problem,” came in first place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.88), and a standard deviation of (0.92), and a significant level. This may be due to the managers’ feeling that specialists possess the knowledge and experience necessary to understand the various aspects of the problem, and their participation provides valuable insights that help in better evaluating alternatives and generating new and innovative ideas that contribute to reaching the optimal solution. Item (9), which states “Exchange opinions objectively to reach the best possible alternatives to solve the problem,” came in last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.75), and a standard deviation of (0.94), and a significant level. This may be due to managers’ efforts to promote transparency in the workplace and to exchange ideas freely and cooperatively with employees to encourage their creative thinking.
The field of evaluating alternatives and selecting the best one.
Table (11): Arithmetic means and standard deviations for the field of (evaluating alternatives and selecting the best one) in descending order
| Arrangement | field | Paragraphs | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Level |
| 1 | 15 | Chooses the solution that prevents the problem from recurring in the future for an appropriate period of time. | 3.82 | 1.00 | Large |
| 2 | 11 | Evaluates the alternatives to the decision in light of their pros and cons. | 3.76 | 1.01 | Large |
| 3 | 16 | Aligns the alternative taken to solve the problem with the powers granted to him | 3.75 | 0.96 | Large |
| 4 | 13 | Chooses the solution that is compatible with the internal and external conditions of the school | 3.70 | 1.04 | Large |
| 5 | 12 | Ensure that the proposed alternatives meet the needs of the parties affected by the decision. | 3.69 | 1.02 | Large |
| 6 | 14 | Chooses the most appropriate alternative to solve the problem in light of the available capabilities | 3.44 | 1.15 | Large |
| Total to axis | 3.69 | 0.86 | Large | ||
Table (11) shows that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ ratings for the items in the field (evaluating alternatives and choosing the best one) reached (3.69), and a standard deviation of (0.86), at a significant level. The highest rating was for item (15), “Chooses the solution that prevents the problem from recurring in the future for an appropriate period of time,” with an arithmetic mean of (3.82), and a standard deviation of (1.00), at a significant level. This may be due to the school principals’ keenness to eliminate all routine problems that the school has been accustomed to dealing with throughout the academic year, and to prevent the repetition of efforts to solve the same problem again, as well as the school administration’s attention to providing a more stable and positive educational environment, and utilizing the financial resources spent on routine problems to spend them on the educational process. Item (14), which states, “Chooses the most appropriate alternative to solve the problem in light of the available capabilities,” came in last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.44), and a standard deviation of (1.15), at a significant level. Perhaps the reason for this is that school principals, both male and female, are aware of the human and material resources and capabilities available to them, so that principals do not exaggerate in adopting alternatives to problems if they are not available or unable to provide them.
The scope of announcing, implementing and evaluating the decision
Table (12): Arithmetic means and standard deviations for the field (announcing, implementing and evaluating the decision) arranged in descending order
| Arrangement | field | Paragraphs | arithmetic mean | standard deviation | Level |
| 1 | 17 | Formulate the decision in precise, clear and concise terms. | 3.82 | 1.00 | Large |
| 2 | 18 | Provides the necessary material and human resources to implement the decision before it is issued. | 3.76 | 0.99 | Large |
| 3 | 19 | Develop a plan to implement the decision, including its stages and implementation procedures, according to priorities. | 3.73 | 1.01 | Large |
| 4 | 20 | The decision is modified or another is sought if it does not solve the problem. | 3.70 | 0.98 | Large |
| 5 | 21 | Everyone involved in implementing the decision is officially notified of their responsibilities and roles to adhere to. | 3.63 | 1.01 | Large |
| 6 | 22 | He carefully follows up on the decision implementation plan to correct errors and remove implementation obstacles. | 3.57 | 1.04 | Large |
| 7 | 23 | Continuously evaluates the ability of the implemented decision to solve the problem and prevent its recurrence according to the standards | 3.56 | 1.08 | Large |
| Total to axis | 3.68 | 0.90 | Large | ||
Table (12) shows that the arithmetic mean of the sample members’ ratings for the items in the field (announcement, implementation, and evaluation of the decision) reached (3.68), with a standard deviation of (0.90), at a significant level. The highest rating was for item (17), which states, “The decision is formulated in precise, clear, and concise terms,” in first place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.82), a standard deviation of (1.00), and at a significant level. This may be due to the keenness of school principals to issue their messages and decisions in a clear and simple language that all school staff understand, in addition to its importance in facilitating the implementation process, which contributes to providing a positive and organized educational environment. Item (23), which states, “Continuously evaluates the ability of the implemented decision to solve the problem and prevent its recurrence according to the standards,” came in last place, with an arithmetic mean of (3.56), a standard deviation of (1.08), and at a significant level. Perhaps the reason for this is that school principals continually evaluate and measure the effectiveness of decisions made for existing school problems, and their tireless efforts to ensure their validity and suitability for school problems, in addition to the principals proposing alternatives that may be more effective and dynamically advanced for school problems, and comparing them to prevent those problems from appearing again, and solving them radically.
Third: The results of the third question, which stated: “Is there a statistically significant correlation at the significance level (α = 0.05) between the degree to which school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue method and the level of quality of school decisions?” Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated between the degree to which school principals employ the dialogue method and its areas and the quality of school decisions and its areas, and Table (15) illustrates this.
Table (13): Values of the correlation coefficients of the axis of the degree of employment of school principals, the dialogue method and its areas, and the axis of the level of quality of school decisions and its areas.
| Relationship | statistician | teachers | Students | Parents | meetings | kidney |
| Identify the problem | Correlation coefficient | 0.69** | 0.72** | 0.71** | 0.76** | 0.75** |
| Setting alternatives | Correlation coefficient | 0.63** | 0.65** | 0.68** | 0.70** | 0.70** |
| Evaluate alternatives and choose the best one | Correlation coefficient | 0.70** | 0.73** | 0.76** | 0.78** | 0.77** |
| Announcing, implementing and evaluating the decision | Correlation coefficient | 0.66** | 0.69** | 0.72** | 0.74** | 0.73** |
| The kidney for the second axis | Correlation coefficient | 0.72** | 0.75** | 0.77** | 0.79** | 0.78** |
It is clear from the results in Table (13) that there is a statistically significant positive correlation at the significance level (α = 0.05) between the degree to which school principals in Bani Kinanah District employ the dialogue method and the axis of the level of quality of school decisions. This means that the higher the degree to which school principals employ the dialogue method, the higher the level of quality of school decisions. Perhaps the reason for this is that the adoption of the dialogue method by the principals of the schools of Bani Kinanah District has strengthened effective communication between all parties concerned with the educational process (teachers, students, parents, and local community institutions), in addition to the principals opening free, unrestricted channels for communication with them and among themselves, which has allowed for the exchange of ideas, opinions, and observations between all school members, which has contributed to improving the quality of school decisions, by defining problems more precisely and better, developing diverse alternatives, and evaluating these alternatives fully, which leads to making more accurate and effective decisions, and has contributed to creating a more effective educational environment, and instilling a sense of belonging and responsibility in all school members, which has raised the level of their commitment to implementing the decisions taken.
Recommendations: In light of the study’s findings, the following are recommended:
– School principals should continue to adopt the skill of effective dialogue in the educational process when communicating with school staff (teachers, administrators, students, and parents).
– The Ministry of Education should offer training courses for principals, especially new ones, to train and qualify them on the main pillars of effective dialogue.
– School principals should continue to issue their administrative decisions in a scientific, organized, and thoughtful manner.
– Researchers, specialists, and graduate students should be invited to conduct further research and studies on the method of dialogue and its relationship to the quality of administrative decisions: a proposed training program.
References
Abu Qattah, M (2025). Managing Educational Institutions: Influential Theories and Trends. Cairo: Anglo-Egyptian Library.
Abu, Abdul M (2024). Dialogue in Islam: Facts and Results. Beirut: Dar Al-Rafidain for Publishing and Distribution.
Al-Jabouri, S (2021). Philosophical Thought and the System of Superior Wisdom. Amman: Dar Al-Khaleej for Publishing and Distribution.
Al-Khalidi, K (2024). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Decision-Making among Public School Principals in Irbid District from the Perspective of Their Teachers. Assiut University Journal, 2(40), 114-142.
Al-Otaibi, G (2023). Educational dialogue as a mechanism for communication and decision-making among female principals of public schools in the city of Mecca. Unpublished master’s thesis, Umm Al-Qura University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Al-Rikabi, A & Al-Khaza’i, A & Al-Karwi, H (2018). Educational and Administrative Decision-Making: Between Reality and Aspiration. Amman: Dar Amjad for Publishing, Distribution and Printing.
Al-Rubai’i, M & Al-Ta’i, M (2021). The Effective School of the Future. Beirut: Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyyah.
Al-Sharari, Fatima (2020). The Role of School Administration in Promoting a Culture of Dialogue among Primary School Teachers in Jerash Governorate. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Jadara University, Irbid, Jordan.
Baydar, F. (2022). The relationship between participation in administrative decisions and school effectiveness: An empirical study on teachers. International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 9(1), 143-152.
Erstad, O., Hagtvet, B. E., & Wertsch, J. V. (Eds.). (2024). Education and Dialogue in Polarized Societies: Dialogic Perspectives in Times of Change. Oxford University Press.
Gilbert, B. L. (2022). Trust, dialogue and teacher commitment: A case study of two international schools (Doctoral dissertation, UCL (University College London)).
Hamad, S (2023). Total Quality Management in Education. Amman: Dar Al-Mu’taz for Publishing and Distribution.
Hamdi, A (2024). The Art of Effective Communication. Cairo: Sima Publishing, Distribution, and Printing House.
Haran, H (2019). Debate and Dialogue in Contemporary Religious Thought. Beirut: Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyyah.
Krejcie, R., & Morgan, D. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
Mayasari, L. I., & Kemal, I. (2020). Does Organisational Culture and Creativity Influence Principal’s Decision Making?. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 14(2), 625-639.
Musa, Z (2023). The effectiveness of decision-making among public secondary school principals in Palestine from their perspective. Al-Quds Open University Journal of Educational and Psychological Research and Studies, 14(41), 58-72.
Rajab, Ahmed (2021). Management and the Art of Decision-Making. Cairo: Arab Press Agency.
Rietmulder, J., & Marjanovic-Shane, A. (2023). Freedom, dialogue, and education in a democratic school. Dialogic Pedagogy: A Journal for Studies of Dialogic Education, 11(2), A21-A48.
Sanjani, M. A. F. (2024). The Impact of School Principals on Graduate Quality Through Character Education Initiatives. Journal of Educational Management Research, 3(1), 30-46.
Schraube, E. (2024). Digitalization and learning as a worlding practice: Why dialogue matters. Taylor & Francis.
Supriadi, D., Usman, H., & JABAR, C. (2021). Good School Governance: An Approach to Principal’s Decision-Making Quality in Indonesian Vocational School. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership, 6(4), 796-831.