1. No category

EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
Survey relationship between learning audit of managers and
learning organization in Karaj girls’ high school
Masoomeh Arabporyan1*, Rodabeh konani2
1
2
MA curricula, technical and professional lecturer
Department of Education and Vocational University
*corresponding Author
ABSTRACT
The purpose of present paper is to survey relationship between learning audit of
managers and learning organization in girls’ high school. The statistical
population of the study includes whole of female teachers, of this number 200
people were selected by random sampling. To questionnaires for collecting data
were used: learning organization and learning audit of managers. The data
collected were analyzed by using statistical methods. The results showed that
the condition of application component of the respecter (organizational
learning) was lower than mean and there were statistically significant
differences. Between the observed mean and statistical mean and component of
system thinking and mental model had the highest mean and also audit learning
managers view had significant positive correlation between managers and
teachers and it was upper than mean. By calculating correlation coefficient
between the component of learning organization and learning audit of
managers, this result
KEY WORDS: the significant correlation between individual skill and learning
audit were found
Introduction
In the current era, which is named global village and information age, learning
is the only source of strength and durability in organizations. Organizations to
improve their organizational ability have to learn how to perform properly in an
environment of constant change, rapid advances of technology and increasing
competitiveness. To accommodate to the new changes a new suited
organization needs to be shaped and the most successful organizations after
1990s were "learning organizations".
1
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
Learning organization is a phenomenon that was introduced at the beginning of
90s and the emergence of such organizations was because of circumstances,
theories and changes in organizational environments before that decade. All
organizations began their efforts to survive and to survive in turbulent
environment around him they had to quit dynamic framework and be
transformed into a learning organization. Some need to make profound changes
in their bases.
Learning organization theorist, Senge, proposes that nowadays organizations
should be able to adapt to constant changes to achieve success. In other words,
organizations should be turned into learning organizations.
Given the importance and rule of management in organizations, managers need
to use their innovation to construct organizations which provide improved
learning and performance for employees and the organization itself. Efficiency
of organizations, that are learning organizations by today's management
knowledge, requires creativity in approaches and systems management; learning
organization is topic of today's scientific debates of management knowledge and
in such organizations, presence of innovative managers is vital to solve
problems.
Thus, learning is necessary for people's growth and education in organizations is
highly important. It can be concluded that nowadays the organization's
knowledge and ability to learn determines value and status of each organization
and learning is actually the key to scientific learning and consequently
promotion of thought capital and the learning organization is one that knows
how to utilize this knowledge and provide opportunity and tools for the
employees to create and use this knowledge.
Organizational learning process:
According to Halber (1991), organizational learning process includes:
1- Learning: Organizational learning occurs when an organization obtains
the necessary knowledge. Learning the knowledge of truths and
information is performed through environment control and using
information systems to store and retrieve information, researches,
execution, and training etc.
2- Information distribution: The process through which the organization
common with the departments and its members shares the information
2
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
obtained. Knowledge is recorded in the form of skill, letters, notes,
informal articles and reports.
3- Information interpretation: To share knowledge and information, they
should be analyzed and interpreted, and through information
interpretation, distributed information makes sense.
4- Organizational memory: Organizational memory refers to a reservoir in
which knowledge is stored for future use. Organizational memory has a
very critical role in organizational learning and there are many factors
which provide organizational memory. One part of organizational
memory is in the minds of those people who, based on his experience,
attain knowledge, and another part of the organizational memory is in the
culture because the organizational culture contains past experiences that
affect people. Information technologies that are used to store the
knowledge create another part of the organizational memory. The nature
of the usage of organizational memory highly depends on people because
people determine which information to be stored and which information
to be used.
Organizational memory is influential on the minds of people. Haber (1999)
presented organizational learning process as below.
Arjris Delshon (1996) described three types of organizational learning with
three levels of learning as below.
1- Single-loop learning: Single-loop learning occurs when in the context of
the organizational objectives and policies, errors are detected and
corrected. Senge single-loop learning is known as adaptive learning, and
Fayvl and Liner learning are known as low-level learning.
Single-loop learning is a form of learning that can be found in simple cybernetic
systems such as thermostats. The systems have a self-regulatory ability through
negative feedback. The fact means that they are able to detect and correct any
deviation from the determined norms. It should be noted, however, they aren't
able to assess the norms and their appropriateness for changing environmental
conditions.
2- Double-loop learning: Double-loop learning occurs when the errors are
discovered and corrected by the organization and the organization
questions the norms, procedures, policies and objectives and tries to
3
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
modify and amend them. Senge double-loop learning is known as
productive and Fayvl and Liner double-loop learning is known as high
level.
In the double-loop learning, rather than blindly follow a predetermined internal
mechanism, the deviations is as goals of the environmental requirements that
control the behavior of the system; While the first feedback loop only identifies
any deviation from the established goals without any attention to its causes,
second feedback loop not only leads to different activities but also leads to
different approaches to the selection of activities.
3- Triple-loop learning (Secondary): This type of learning occurs when
organizations learn how to run single-loop learning and double-loop
learning. In other words, triple-loop learning is the ability to learn about
learning. It doesn't occur in the first form of learning if organizations are
not aware that learning must occur, it means that the knowledge of
learning styles and processes and learning structures is required to
promote learning.
Shafaei carried out a research at Tarbiat Modarres University titled "barriers to
creating learning organizations in Iran". In the study the prospect of learning
organizations, desirable and ideal organizations are investigated.
To achieve such organizations, we are faced with numerous obstacles and the
barriers and to creating learning organizations in the country the most
substantial barriers include:
1- Employees' misconceptions about power of managers and managers
tendency to Power
2- Lack of management knowledge of managers and lack of knowledge and
rationality in decision-making
3- Subsystem thought and atomistic views
4- Misconceptions about employees
5- Pragmatism and lack of time to learn
6- Hierarchical structure is the major obstacle.
Hoveydar in Isfahan University investigated relationship between application of
components of learning organization and improvement of the education quality.
The study demonstrated that there is a positive correlation between components
4
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
of learning organization and grades of quality improvement and research
hypotheses were confirmed.
Post at University of Illinois investigated relationship between quick and fast
learning with the performance and growth process of employees in the twentyfirst century in learning organizations and believed that several organizations
welcome the principles of learning organizations as a base for development of
their structure. Learning organization is directed to continuous learning and
staff are constantly developing their capacities and abilities.
Krad Ford's study (2004) concluded that the principals believed on five
principles of mental patterns, shared vision, team learning, individual abilities,
and systemic thinking to achieve development and maintenance of schools and
for learning organization, and he believed in a system of leadership to achieve
change, creativity and a common vision.
In a research, "learning organization and its aspects as key factors in the
performance of companies", Davis concluded that the organizations that have
deep learning directing used most of learned material for organizational
development and successful performance.
Skankin et al in a research, "investigation of characteristics of a learning
organization as a learning environment" concluded that: A learning organization
is different from a traditional organization. In this sort of organizations,
hierarchy yields to bilateral cooperation and learning exists at three levels:
individual, group and organizational. There are four factors based on
organizational learning: organization's support for the learning environment,
cooperation and knowledge exchange, high level culture of communication and
initiatives for improvement and expansion of the organization. Additionally,
learning and work procedures are inseparable from each other.
Behroozi et al studied the effective factors on willingness of members of
cultural and educational organizations to transform into learning organizations,
and concluded that there is a significant relationship between the willingness to
transform into learning organizations and aware leadership in the organization,
dynamic structure, encouragement to creativity and innovation, common
insight, teamwork and cooperation, delegation of power, and continuous
relation with the environment.
Mostafavi in "components of learning organization in high schools and its
relationship with the creativity of teachers in high schools in Urmia region 1,
5
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
concluded that the components of the learning organization in high schools are
low and the creativity of teachers in high schools is moderate, and among the
components of the learning organization there is the most relationship between
personal ability and the creativity of teachers. Moreover, there was a significant
relationship among components of personal ability, mental patterns, and
systemic thinking and creativity, and there is not a relationship between the
common vision and team learning and creativity teachers.
However, time learning or what is often called adaptive learning is important,
but for the learner organization adaptive learning should be combined with
creative learning - which increases the ability of employees to innovate.
Maleki Varseen and Qolenjy Tabrizi in a study titled "Comparison of the
components of the learning organization in high schools in Tabriz" concluded:
Current status of the components of the learning organization in schools in
Tabriz is above moderate level and there is difference among girls'
governmental, private and high ranked high Schools.
What should managers do to create a learning organization? Peter Senge has
introduced five principles or components:
1- Personal abilities: To organizational learning be achieved senior
managers should allow all organizational staff to improve their personal
abilities. Managers should allow the staff to experience, create, and
search for what they want.
2- Mental models: As a part of the acquisition of personal skills,
organizations need to encourage employees to develop and use complex
mental models. These models are complex procedures of thinking which
challenge employees to find out new approaches or better ways to do a
duty and deepen their insight into doing a specific duty. Senge believes
that managers should encourage employees to show more willingness to
examination and more ventures.
3- Common vision: Managers should do their best to improve team
creativity. Senge thinks that team learning (learning that occurs in a group
or a team) is more important than individual learning to enhance
organizational learning. He points out that the most important decisions
in team learning starts with dialogue. The name comes from the Greek
words dialogs, meaning free flow. It means that through a group, it is
allowed to discover prospects that are not accessible by employees.
6
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
4- Team learning: Managers should emphasize the importance of creation of
a common vision. A common mental model that all members use to
frame problems or opportunities.
5- Systemic thinking: Managers should encourage Systemic thinking (a
concept which is derived from systems theory). The most important
advantage of Peter Senge's works is the way he employs systems theory.
Systematic thinking is the conceptual base of learning organization.
Questions related to the study of organizational learning and managers' learning
investigation
1- How is the application of components of the learning organization in
girls' high school?
2- How much is the principals' learning in teachers' eyes?
3- How is the relationship of components of the learning organization with
principals' learning investigation?
Research method
The research is descriptive and correlational. The population consisted of all
high school female teachers in the school year 92-93 with total number of 1500
and 200 teachers were randomly selected as samples. To obtain data two
questionnaires, organizational learning Nife and learning investigation of
principals in teachers' view, were used.
Results:
Answer of question 1. Components of learning organization and investigation of
principals learning
Table 1: Comparison of averages of components of learning organization
Personal
abilities
Mental
models
Common
vision
Team
7
N
Range
Minimum Maximum Mean
Std.
Deviation
200
3.00
2.50
5.50
3.9550
.58687
200
2.50
2.83
5.33
4.4225
.37319
200
3.50
1.25
4.75
2.4900
.58124
200
2.50
1.75
4.25
3.0200
.59803
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
learning
Systemic
200
thinking
Components
of learning 200
organization
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
4.00
2.25
6.25
4.6250
.77411
1.04
3.25
4.29
3.7835
.28745
The data used for each variable is equal to their average. For instance, for
personal skills, it equals to scores of questions is 0 to 6 of the questionnaire, as
specified in the Excel file.
By comparison of the observed average, the level of application of learning
organization components with statistical average of 4 is specified.
According to the results of Table 1, the level of application of learning
organization components is lower than average amount. But if we consider the
components separately components of mental skills and systemic thinking have
an average higher than moderate level and other components have an average
lower than moderate level.
Table 2: T table
N
Components
of learning 200
organization
Observed Statistical Standard
t
average average
deviation
3.7835
4
.28745
pvalue
df
199
10.649
0.000
Since p-value <0.05, there is a significant difference between the observed
average and statistical average.
According to the results of Table 2 using the T-test components are significant
different.
Answer of question 2. Investigation of principals' learning in teachers' view
Table 3: Average of principals learning investigation Descriptive Statistics
N
Range Minimum
Investigation of principals' 200 19
learning in teachers' view
8
0
Maximum. Mean
Std.
19
11.06
Deviation
3.515
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
Investigation of principals' learning in teachers' view
To obtain information given above related data of sum of all scores were used.
In investigation of principals' learning in teachers' view, scores range was from
zero to eighteen. Thus the statistical average is:
In the next step, using one-sample T test, the statistical average was compared
with observed average.
Table 4: T table
According to the table above p-value <0.05, there is a significant difference
between observed average and statistical average.
According to the results of tables 3 and 4, there is a significant difference
between averages of principals' learning investigation and teachers have
positively and better evaluated principals' learning.
Answer of question 3. Investigation of relationship of principals' learning in
teachers' view and components of learning organization
Firstly, we investigated being normal or not. None of them were normal.
Spearman correlation factor is used.
Table 5: Correlation factor of components of learning organization with learning
investigation
components
of
learning organization
0.95
Spearman correlation coefficients
.179
Significant level
200
N
9
Learn audit
Spearman's
rho
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
There was not a significant relationship between components of learning
organizations and learning investigation.
Table 6: Correlation factor of personal abilities with learning investigation
personal abilities
.144
.042
200
Spearman correlation coefficients
Significant level
Learn audit
N
Spearman's
rho
Since p-value <0.05, there is a significant relationship between personal abilities
and learning investigation. There is a significant relationship between the
personal abilities and learning investigation.
Table 7: Correlation factor of mental models with learning investigation
mental models
- .041
Spearman correlation coefficients
.566
Significant level
200
N
Learn audit
Spearman's
rho
There is not a significant relationship between mental models and learning
investigation.
Table 8: Correlation factor of common vision with learning investigation
Shared vision
- .056
Spearman correlation coefficients
.428
Significant level
200
N
Learn audit
Spearman's
rho
There is not a significant relationship between common vision and learning
investigation.
Table 9: Correlation factor of team learning with learning investigation
Team learning
.094
Spearman correlation coefficients
.184
Significant level
200
N
10
Learn audit
Spearman's
rho
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
There is not a significant relationship between team learning and learning
investigation.
Table 10: Correlation factor of systemic thinking with learning investigation
There is not a significant relationship between systemic thinking and learning
investigation.
According to the results given above, there is a significant relationship between
personal abilities and learning investigation. Thus we will investigate in a
regression model whether the learning investigation can predict personal
abilities.
Table 11
The correlation factor that can be seen in the table above is related to parametric
(Pearson) state.
Table 11
11
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
Table 12
According to the findings in tables 10, 11 and 12, the p-value = 0.111> 0.05, the
regression coefficient can equal to zero.
Discussion and Conclusion
About the first research question "how is the application of components of the
learning organization in girls' high school?"
The results show that application of components of the learning organization in
girls' high school of Karaj is lower than moderate level and among them, mental
models and systemic thinking had averages upper than moderate level and
systemic thinking had the highest average and common vision had the lowest
average among components. This conclusions are similar to the results of
Mostafavi (1381) and Krad Ford (2011) and is different from Hoveyda (1386),
Shoghi (1386), Maleki and Avarsin (1389). About the second research question
"how much is the principals' learning in teachers' eyes?" The results showed that
the level of principals' learning investigation in teachers' view, and according to
statistical experiments there was a significant difference between the statistical
average and the observed average. Teachers positively evaluated the level of
principals' learning and their attention to learning. About the third question "is
there a significant relationship between components of the learning organization
with principals' learning investigation?" the results demonstrated that there is
not a significant relationship between components of the learning organization
and learning investigation and among all components, there is a significant
relationship only between personal abilities and learning investigation. There
was not any significant relationship among learning investigation and mental
models, common vision, systemic learning and systemic thinking. Thus the
personal abilities are only predicted by learning investigation.
12
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
References
1- Behrozi, Mohammad et al, Factors influencing the willingness of educational and
cultural organizations to become learning organizations, New approach in
Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. I, No. 3.
2- jafari, Mostafa. (1385) Changed dance in the new era. Tadbir magazine, issu 030
3- Seyed javad edin, seyed reza, (1386), Theories of management and organization at
Tehran Publications.
4- Rahman seresht, hossein (1386), Theories of organization and management 1,
modernism to post-modernism, Volume I, Tehran during.
5- Rahnavard, faraj ollah (1378), Organizational
Organization, Journal of Public Administration, p 11
Learning
and
Learning
6- Senge, Peter (1385) The fifth commandment create a learning organization,
translation of Hafiz Mohammad Kamali steer clear, Tehran: Industrial
Management.
7- Shafaee, Reza (1380), Barriers in learning organizations. Thesis Arshd.danshgah
teacher training.
8- Shafi, korosh and shafi, arezo (1385), Human resource management in learning
organizations, devise Journal, No. 176, pp. 30, 34.
9- Atafar, Ali and bahrami Sasani, Mojgan (1388). The use of components of the
learning organization at the University of the Free State and Kord, Association -.
Iranian Higher Education, Vol. II, No 1.
10- Karimi, Iman (1390). The relationship between creativity and emotional
intelligence components with the application of a learning organization and
secondary schools in the city in the year (1390-1391), MS Thesis, University of
Bu-Ali, 98.
11- Mostafavi, Beckham (1388). Examination of the learning organization and its
relationship with the creativity of teachers in middle schools in District 1 Urmia,
thesis - Master of Science, Islamic Azad University of Tabriz.
12- Nekoii, Mahmoud and beheshti far, Melike, Learning organizations, first print.
13- Hoveyda, Reza (1386). Investigate the relationship between the application
components of the learning organization and improve the quality of education,
thesis guidance, unpublished, University of Isfahan.
14- Atafar, Ali and Bahrami (2009). Maser of Using of learning Organization. Journal
of high Education in Iran. No 1. (in Persian)
15- Behrozi, Mohammad (2009). Investing affecting factors on in clination to change
into learning Organization. Journal of new way to administration.
16- Craw ford clorrinmace (2004). High school principal leader ship practice and
beliefs. Within the learning organization. University of Virginia.
13
EPHEMERA
http://ephemerajournal.com/
ISSN: 1298-0595
Vol.27; No.3 (2015)
17- Davis. Deborah (2005). The learning organization and it's dimension as key
factors in firmper for mance. The university of wisconisty. DAL-A66/03.P.861.
18- Hoveid.Reza (2007). Investigating relationship between learning organization and
improvement of instruction quality. Thesis of M.A. Esfahan university. (in
Persian)
19- Huber. G P (1991). Organization learning. Organization Science. Vol.2.pp.88-115
20- Jafari. Mostafa (2006). Changing dance in new age. Tadbir (ir)
21- Mostafavi,Behcom (2009). relationship between the principal of learning
organization in high school and creativity of teachers, oromieh, thesis of M.A.
Azad university. (in Persian)
22- Nekoi. Mohammad learning organization
23- Post. Grlands (1998). An investigation into the application of accelerated learning
theory as it relates to improving employee performance in the learning
organization for the twenty- first century. Northern Illinois university.
24- Rahman seresht, Hosein (2007).organization and management theory cipper.
25- Senge, Peter (2006). The fifth discipline. Translated by kamali. (in Persian)
26- Senge.P.M (1990). “the fifth discipline: the and Practice Of learning
Organization”, New York, Doubleday.
27- seyed javadain. Seyed reza (2007). Organization and management theory.
Negah.tehran.. (in Persian)
28- Shafi, Koroshand shafi Arezo (2006). Human resource management in learning
organization. Tadbir Journal. No1. No 1. (in Persian)
29- shfaee, Reza (2001). The barrier of learning organizations thesis of M.A. teacher
training university. (in Persian)
14