Identification of the Components of Standardizing School Principals’ Duties for Presenting an Appropriate Model
Keywords:
school duties, standardization of school duties, school performance, educational strategies, educational systemAbstract
ABSTRACT
The present study aimed to identify the components of standardizing school principals’ duties in order to propose an appropriate model. This study was fundamental in nature and conducted using a qualitative approach. The research tradition employed was Grounded Theory. The statistical population consisted of academic experts, including faculty members holding doctoral degrees and possessing more than 10 years of teaching experience, who were selected through purposive sampling. The researcher achieved theoretical saturation after conducting interviews with 16 experts. In addition to the library research method, semi-structured interviews were used to collect data. Data analysis was carried out using the grounded theory approach. The findings indicated that identifying and analyzing the different dimensions of the standardized model of school duties requires simultaneous attention to causal, contextual, intervening, and strategic factors. Causal conditions include factors that directly influence the formation and performance of schools and provide the necessary foundation for designing and implementing standardized duties. The central phenomenon of the study was the “standardized model of school duties,” which encompasses performance evaluation indicators and key components of quality education. Contextual conditions refer to environmental and socio-economic-cultural characteristics that affect school performance. Intervening conditions include barriers and limitations that may challenge the implementation of standardized school duties. Strategies consist of a set of actions designed to achieve the standardized model of school duties and to address anticipated barriers and limitations. Consequences represent the outcomes of the successful implementation of the standardized model of school duties and its associated strategies. Successful implementation of this model can enhance educational quality, reduce inequalities, and increase stakeholder satisfaction.
Downloads
References
1. Hosseinzadeh Z, Ghasemi F, Hosseinzadeh P, Jalilzadeh M, editors. Foundations of standards and standardization in education. First International Conference on Management, Teaching and Educational Research; 2023; Tehran.
2. Mesiono M, Nasution PMG, Napiah MA, Hidayat R. Implementation of national education standards in improving the quality of education. Edukasi Islami: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam. 2022;11(1).
3. Khoobchehreh M, Akbari A, Pourshafei H, Cherabin M. Identifying and prioritizing the dimensions and components of standard education. Educational Leadership and Management. 2019;48(13):87-110.
4. Khoobchehreh M, Akbari A, Pourshafei H, Cherabin M. Explaining the components of standard education. Journal of the Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. 2020;63(4):2575-85.
5. Taghadomi MS, Mazandarani A. Electronic educational standards: A comparative study across continents. Iranian Journal of Comparative Education. 2025;7(4):3227-49.
6. Ideland M, Jober A, editors. Googlified students in the tension of global standardization and personalized learning. ECER 2019: Education in an Era of Risk – The Role of Educational Research for the Future; 2019; Hamburg, Germany.
7. Zhang L, Basham JD, Yang S. Understanding the implementation of personalized learning: A research synthesis. Educational Research Review. 2020;31:100339.
8. Zhao Y, Li T, Liu W. The benefits and drawbacks of standardized curriculum in education. Research and Advances in Education. 2023;2(10):41-7.
9. Khanifar H. Guide to Developing Skill-Based Education Standards. Tehran: Ministry of Cooperatives, Labour and Social Welfare; 2011.
10. Hessari F, Eslami M, Pouladi Rishehri A. Relationship between academic achievement motivation and professional characteristics of smart school teachers. Educational Strategies. 2024;16(5):452-61.
11. La Velle L, Newman S, Montgomery C, Hyatt D. Initial teacher education in England and the Covid-19 pandemic: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Education for Teaching. 2020;46(4):596-608.
12. Ling Y, Chung SJ, Wang L. Research on the reform of management system of higher vocational education in China based on personality standard. Current Psychology. 2023;42(2):1225-37.
13. Arasteh M, Shah Hosseini A. Identifying and explaining the components of designing educational space equipment for implementing the school bag plan in schools: A case study of the first elementary level. Fine Arts Journal: Visual Arts. 2024;28(3):89-100.
14. Nurcholis C, Kridasakti SW, Hardianto H. The centralization and standardization of student services in Universitas Terbuka. Technium Social Sciences Journal. 2024;56:25-35.
15. Nahorniuk O, Levytska L. Integrating professional and educational standards for developing IT curriculum. Universum. 2024(4):160-8.
16. Oladele OK. The Future of Education: Personalized Learning and Artificial Intelligence2024.
17. Surur M, Wibawa RP, Jaya F, Suparto AA, Harefa D, Faidi A, et al. Effect of education operational cost on the education quality with the school productivity as moderating variable. Psychology and Education. 2020;57(9):1196-205.
18. Shaturaev J. Indonesia: Superior policies and management for better education (Community development through education). Archive of Scientific Research. 2021;1(1).
Downloads
Published
Submitted
Revised
Accepted
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Sirous Mirzabigi (Author); Saber Sharifi; Maryam Eslampanah, Anahita Faraji (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
