Professional Documents
Culture Documents
بحث واقع التواصل بين المدرسة والمجتمع د فايز شلدان PDF
بحث واقع التواصل بين المدرسة والمجتمع د فايز شلدان PDF
"
" "
31 30 2011
2011
) (46
) (299
( :
1 ) (%61
2 )
( .
2
) (
.
.
5
1
.
2 .
3 .
The study aims at identifying the reality of communication between schools and local
community institutions. To achieve this goal, the researchers used the analytical descriptive
approach; the researchers set up a ques onnaire of 46 items distributed on four
dimensions: family, media, government institutions, and non-governmental institutions. The
sample included (299) managers and secondary school teachers out of (7082) directors and
teachers for the academic year 2010 - 2011. Moreover, the sta s cal methods used in this
research are: (average program, percentages, T. test, and analysis of variance).
The study results:
The statistically significant differences related to gender (male, female)in the first
,second ,third ,and the fourth dimension were in favor of females.
There were no statistically significant differences due to (manager, teacher) variable.
in the first ,second ,third ,and the dimension , and there were statistically significant
differences in the fourth dimension in favor of managers.
There were no statistically significant differences due to (education qualification)
variable.
There were no statistically significant differences related to the school district in the
first and third dimensions, but there were differences in the second and fourth in
favor of the middle district.
There were no statistically significant differences due to the variable of years of
service.
The study recommendations:
It is necessary to activate the mechanisms of communication between schools and
local community institutions to improve the relationship between them.
The importance of parental involvement in the events held by the school.
Take advantage of the services provided by community organizations.
)(2002
).(2009
) (1995
4
) (2009 .
.
:
)
(
2 )>
(0.05
) (.
3 .
1
.
2 .
5
3 .
4 :
.
:
)
( .
:
.
: 2011/ 2010.
: ) (.
:
:
) ( ).(2011
).(307 :1997
:
.
: ""
.
:
.
1 ) (1995 "
"
)(40
(40) (120) :
3 ) (2009 "
"
) (65 ) (53
:
7
: :
4 ) (1995
.
5 ) (2006 Wright & Rogers
)
(
) (210 (48) (162)
1 :
2 :
:
9
) (
) : (
""
"
".
(.
10
:
)(
.:
: ).(660 :1979
) (98 : 2001
:
.1 .
.2
.
.3 .
11
.4
.
.5
.
.6
.
.7
).(119: 2000
).(358 :2001
-1
-2
-3
.
-4
.
-5
.
-6 .
12
) . (50 :2006
:
1 :
) (68 :2006
)(18 :2006
2 :
) (32 :2010
.
3
13
) (2008
4 :
) (17 :2010
).(28 :2005
14
).(202 2005
) .(69 2006
6 :
"
"
) .(Decker + Decker 2003
) (Dorman, 1998
(Gestwiki,
) 2000
1 :
" ") (173 2005
15
"
) (119 :2006
""
).(121 :2006
) (2003
) (
( .
) (181 175 2005
16
2020
) (2009
"
1996
: :
" ) .(83 :1999
17
: :
)(6655 )2011 / 2010 ( ) (1
.
) (1 2011/2010
76
73
149
1858
2227
4085
21
16
37
558
1089
1647
15
16
31
434
489
923
112
105
217
2850
3805
6655
: :
1 : ) (40
.
2 : ) (299
) (%3.5 ) (6655
) (.
) (2
88
29.4
211
70.6
299
%100
) (3
97
32.4
104
34.8
98
32.8
299
%100
) (4 ) (
20
6.7
279
93.3
299
%100
: :
:
:
18
1 .
2 .
3 ) (50
) (10
) (46 )
(.
:
) (
) (Weight ):(3
) (1" "
) (weighted mean
) (attitude ):(4
) (4
1 1.79
1.80 2.59
2,60 3.39
3.40 4.19
4.20 5
) (5/4 ) (0.80
5 4 3 2 1 4.
" ":
.
: )(40
19
) (5
0,689
0.01
24
0,614
0,680
0.01
25
0,793
0.01
0,794
0.01
26
0,757
0.01
0,790
0.05
27
0,734
0.05
0,770
0.01
28
0,754
0.01
0,722
0.01
29
0,777
0.01
0,711
0.01
30
0,712
0.01
0,625
0.01
31
0,766
0.01
0,674
0.01
32
0,677
0.01
10
0,497
0.01
33
0,635
0.01
11
0,692
0.01
34
0,651
0.01
12
0,725
0.01
35
0,702
0.01
13
0,712
0.01
36
0,739
0.01
14
0,747
0.01
37
0,682
0.05
15
0,774
0.05
38
0,772
0.01
16
0,739
0.01
39
0,735
0.01
17
0,608
0.01
40
0,694
0.01
18
0,672
0.01
41
0,803
0.01
19
0,826
0.01
42
0,720
0.01
20
0,808
0.01
43
0,727
0.01
21
0,811
0.01
44
0,816
0.01
22
0,696
0.01
45
0,765
0.01
23
0,731
0.01
46
0,740
0.01
0.01
) (5
.
-1
).(6
) (6
0,842
0,00
0,786
0,00
0,910
0,00
0,919
0,00
) (6
.
20
: :
1 :
. SpearmanBrown Coefficient =
"
) alpha
(cronbach coefficient
0,767
0,774
0,769
0,769
0,833
) (SPSS
1 ". "person
2
.
3 .
4 T.Test .
5 One Way anova .
6 .scheffe ) (.
21
::
)(8
3.3746
1.03309
67.04
2.9365
1.11697
58.66
3.3378
1.17136
66.06
3.5351
1.14748
70.06
3.0334
1.20634
60.06
2.4548
1.10845
49.00
10
2.3010
1.08824
46.00
11
3.0836
1.17426
61.06
2.8829
1.20528
57.06
10
) (.
4.3077
.88555
86.00
11
3.3679
1.32038
67.02
(.
) (8 ) (10 "
) (".
) (4 " "
) (70.6
.
) (6 " "
) (%49
22
) (7 " )
("
) (%46
: :
)(9 ) (
2.8595
1.02010
57.00
2.7191
1.19338
54.02
2.7926
1.08860
55.08
) (.
2.1940
1.01788
43.08
2.1706
.96985
43.04
10
3.4080
1.33389
68.00
3.3177
1.27023
66.02
2.3077
1.18108
46.00
2.5853
1.24590
51.06
10
) ( .
2.2341
1.11670
44.06
) (9 ) (6 "
" ) (68:00
) (7 "
" ) (66.02
.
) (4 "
) (" )(43.08
23
) (5" "
) (43.04
: :
)(10 ) (
2.9967
1.03463
59.80
3.3378
1.05054
66.60
3.8060
1.01457
76.00
3.2943
1.22351
65.80
2.6589
1.15742
53.00
11
3.4247
1.06035
68.40
71.00
67.80
68.60
10
2.6622
1.10957
53.20
10
11
2.3980
1.16094
47.80
12
12
3.3478
1.19819
66.80
3.5552
1.07728
) .
3.3946
1.14902
(.
3.4348
1.12249
) (10 ) (3 "
"
) (76.00
).(1995
) (7 " "
) (71.00
.
24
) (5 "
"
) (53.00
) (11 "
" ) (47.80
: :
)(11 ) (
3.2207
1.16641
3.3010
64.40
1.09132
66.00
3.1773
1.08003
63.40
3.6254
1.04920
72.40
2.9264
1.11184
58.40
10
3.3344
1.05956
66.60
3.7525
1.18390
75.00
3.2575
1.11604
65.00
62.00
50.60
13
3.0134
1.19274
10
2.5318
1.09368
11
2.8595
1.31090
12
2.8729
1.21673
13
.
.
3.3946
57.00
12
57.40
11
67.80
1.19764
) (11 ) (7 "
"
) (75.00
25
) (4 " "
) (72.40
.
) (10 "
" )(57.00
) (10 "
" )(50.60
) (12 .
) (12
34.62
8.71
63
26.59
8.46
53
38.31
9.64
64
41.32
10.93
63.5
140.92
32.79
61
) (1995 )(2009
) (%61
) (2006
26
)
(
:
1 )( T-test
:
) (13 ""
88
30.2955
8.59452
211
36.4171
8.12383
88
27.7614
sig
5.837 -
0.00
9.31072
1.55
0.122
211
26.0995
8.05307
88
34.9773
10.36237
-3.95
0.00
211
39.7014
8.98416
87
37.4023
11.94411
211
42.9336
10.07521
87
130.6667
36.33362
211
145.1517
30.31275
-4.07
-3.53
0.00
0.00
"" ""
) (
)( )(
2 ) ) ( T-test
:
) (14 ""
20
37.1500
8.75560
1.34
sig
0.178
27
279
34.4337
8.69518
20
27.4000
6.97665
279
26.5305
8.56492
20
39.9000
7.53867
279
38.1971
9.77152
20
45.3500
8.80356
279
41.0288
11.02177
20
149.8000
27.71965
279
140.2842
33.08061
0.658
0.443
0.446
0.763
0.08
1.714
0.211
1.255
"" ""
) (
).(2009
"" ""
" "
.
3 ) (
) (15 ""
" "
259.318
86.439
1.141
.333
22353.451
295
75.774
22612.769
298
211.662
70.554
21120.739
295
71.596
21332.401
298
651.907
217.302
27026.166
295
91.614
27678.074
298
205.357
68.452
35265.358
294
119.950
35470.715
297
.985
2.372
.571
.400
.071
.635
28
4306.182
1435.394
315111.043
294
1071.806
319417.225
297
1.339
.262
"" ""
.
4 ) ( T-test
:
) (15 ""
422.884
211.442
22189.886
296
74.966
22612.769
298
516.463
258.232
20815.938
296
70.324
21332.401
298
372.899
186.449
27305.175
296
92.247
27678.074
298
768.549
384.275
34702.166
295
117.634
35470.715
297
7206.404
3603.202
312210.821
295
1058.342
319417.225
297
" "
2.821
3.672
2.021
3.267
3.405
.061
.027
.134
.040
.035
"" ""
29
) ( ) (
"" ""
0,05
)(16 )(
*2,987-
0,44
2,543-
* 0.05
) (17 ) (
*3,856-
1,279
2,577
-
* 0.05
) (
30
5 ) ( T-test
:
) (15 ""
53.247
26.624
22559.522
296
76.215
22612.769
298
50.924
25.462
21281.477
296
71.897
21332.401
298
96.136
48.068
27581.937
296
93.182
27678.074
298
104.194
52.097
35366.521
295
119.887
35470.715
297
732.618
366.309
318684.607
295
1080.287
319417.225
297
" "
.349
.705
.354
.516
.435
.339
.702
.598
.648
.713
"" ""
: :
:
-1
31
)(2006
)(Walkers + Demesy
) (
.
-2 : :
..
.
...
)(.
- .
) (Wright +
.Rogers
- .
- .
-3 .
32
. .
) ( .
- .
2 .
3 .
4
.
5 .
6
.
33
.1 ) (2001 .
.2 ) (1999 . :
- .3 ) .(2009 :
.
.4 ) (2009
http://forum.moe.gov.om/~moeoman/vb/showthread.php?t=306032
.5 ) (2001 .
.6 ) (2011
http://www.abegs.org/Aportal/Post/Show?id=11070&forumid=23
.2011/7/31
.7 ) .(2006 :
.
.8 ) (1979 .
.9 ) (2008
http://www.socialar.com/vb/showthread.php?t=12
.10 ) (1997
.
.11 ) .(1990
.
.12 ) .(2010 : .
.13 ) .(2009
:
.14 ) (2005 : .
34
. 1 ( 2002) .15
.(2006) .16
. :
( 2002) .17
http://www.startimes.com/f.aspx?t=3913963 (20117 14)
: .(2005) .18
.
:
19. Decker & Decker (2003) Home, school, and community partnerships,
Lanham: scarecow press.
20. Demsey, H, and Walker, J. (2002) Family, school communication. A
paper prepared for the research committee of the metropolitan
Nashville/ Dacidson county board of Educa on, March 8
21. Dorman, M. (1998). Using e-mail to enhance instruction. The Journal
of school health, 68 (6), 260 261.
22. Gestwiki, (2000). Home, school, and community relations, A guide to
working with families.
23. Rogers, R. and Wright, V. (2000). Assessing Technologys Role in
communication between parents and middle schools, Electronic
Journal for the integration of Techmology in Education, Vol. 7, P. (36
58)
35