ISSN 0798 1015

Vol. 41 (Issue 05) Year 2020. Page 20

Ability to make effective management decisions as one of the key competences of a modern school manager

Сapacidad de tomar las decisiones administrativas efectivas como una de las competencias clave de un gerente de la escuela moderna

MAKARENKO, Iryna Y. 1

Received: 15/10/2019 • Approved: 26/01/2020 • Published 20/02/2020

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Methodology

3. Results

4. Conclusions

Bibliographic references

1. Introduction

Nowadays, in the context of modern educational reforms, the problem of training heads of middle level educational institutions (New Ukrainian School Concept, 2016-2029) is becoming increasingly important, regarding the mechanisms for implementing these strategic changes in school practical activities. The increasing autonomy of general educational institutions is demanding increasing responsibility from the subjects of education, who directly carry out managerial functions in the holistic system of intra-school pedagogical management.

Management in the educational system at any level of competence, along with an object and a subject of pedagogical analysis, is characterized by two interacting subsystems – managing and managed – both embedded in the structure of the holistic self-integrated system. This system requires purposeful interaction of its components; transparency in the logistics of functioning the phase interaction between the subjects of management by means of their direct and feedback connections; working-out the decisions by the managing subsystem to be met by managed one in terms of corresponding requirements, norms, criteria of assessment and self-efficiency in school managers’ activity.

Many researchers of the problem of intra-school pedagogical management point out that the ability of school managers to make effective management decisions is one of their key competences and a component of their psychological readiness for management (Bondar (2000), Karamushka (2003), Marmaza (2007), Safonova (2007), Khrykov (2006) and others).

Modern technologies and tools for constructing an algorithm of effective management decision are well-developed (Poshnev (2000), Mescon (2006), Armstrong (2006), Drucker (2004), etc.). Equally, in the modern management of organizations, the adaptation of these mechanisms to the system of pedagogical management is well-studied (Konarzhevsky (2000), Danilenko (2003), Moiseev (2001), etc.). However, practical experience shows that despite all that, the majority of management decisions by school managers are made purely reflexively, often without deep understanding and considerable time expenses. The problem of the ability to make effective management decisions by school managers is very critical today, and without addressing this issue, the further successful implementation of today's fundamental state-level reforms in the secondary education sector will face greater obstacles ahead.

1.1. Intra-school pedagogical management system

Pedagogical management can be considered within the area of pedagogical knowledge, which is regarded in the theory, principles, and patterns of self-organized pedagogical systems (Fedorova, 2004). Here, the three-level management in every educational institution is of paramount importance.

The hierarchical approach to organizational management structuring translates into singling out three categories of managers: at technical, managerial, and institutional levels, as well as their functional responsibilities. Based on that, we have identified three levels of intra-school pedagogical management: technological-executive, didactic-methodological, and administrative-regulatory. Each of these levels interacts with one another, creating a coherent, individually separate, self-organized, synergetic system of intra-school pedagogical management. The system is illustrated in fig. 1.

Figure 1
A holistic system of three-level
inter-school pedagogical management

After the modern educational reforms, management decisions should be made on the basis of constructive cooperation of managers at all levels of intra-school pedagogical management.

Thus, at the administrative-regulatory level, the head teachers and their deputies act as managers. We will conditionally call them first-level managers. It is they, who are responsible for strategic management decisions at the educational institution level, and it is they, who delegate responsibilities to the managers of the relevant lower level and hold them accountable for the state of affairs at the facility they run, as well as for the realization and execution of tactical and operational goals.

School managers at the didactic-methodical level (conditionally, the second level) are the heads of methodological associations of the educational institution.

The methodological work is a holistic system of interrelated activities aimed at comprehensive improvement of each teacher’s qualifications and professional skills, the development and growth of the teaching staff’s creative potential as a whole and, ultimately, the improvement of the educational process.

It is up to the first- and second-level managers to determine whether methodical work will be done just for the sake of appearance (because it is traditionally required to be reported annually), or will it be aimed at achieving clearly defined work objectives.

At the same time, teachers are key elements in improving the quality of education, because they are the so-called operational managers, who directly execute the management decisions of the first- and second-level managers, and they constantly make their own management decisions in the course of the educational process with students. Teachers make up the third level of intra-school pedagogical management – the technological executive one. The management process is a continuity of decision-making acts that are connected with the execution of recurring management functions.

While performing the functions of managing at any of the three levels, a significant number of management decisions need to be made by school managers: planning, organizing, motivating, controlling, and coordinating all processes, which take place in the educational setting.

Thus, the initial impetus of the decision-making process gives the information about the state of the parameters of the object, which is monitored, and the action is carried out after making the appropriate decision. A management decision must be transformed into managerial influence and managerial influence – into an executive activity.

The question is what makes an effective management decision.

According to Mescon (2006), making the right decision means its further efficiency, along with ensuring this efficiency. In other words, making the right decision per se without planning it strategically and not working out the mechanism of its implementation to the end, one can lose the effect of the decision itself.

In addition, decision-making principles should be identified; alternative solutions analyzed; decision optimization performed; consequences predicted; contingencies, risks, and recommendations how to cope with difficult situations foreseen. Getting a managerial decision across to the executors is an important task, and the management efficiency depends on the realization of this task.

Formed in the selection process among alternatives, a management decision is in a way a certain corollary of management activities – the result of reflections on actions and intentions, conclusions, discussions, and projections aimed at the realization of management goals.

Therefore, it goes about a certain behavioral standard of effective performance in school managers’ particular activity, namely the competence "ability to make effective management decisions", which is the ability to identify sources of necessary and objective information, systematically analyze them, make logical conclusions, etc.

The efficiency of an educational institution depends on the quality of management decisions. Hence, it is of vital importance for every school manager at any level of intra-school pedagogical management to master theoretical knowledge and combine them with management decision-making skills. The leading cause of the decision inefficiency is either lack of knowledge or failure to follow the algorithm of decision-making and its realization.

The objective of the research is bringing to light the formation level of one of the key competences of modern school managers "the ability to make effective management decisions".

In order to study and diagnose the formation of competence “ability to make effective management decisions” among the mid-level managers in the system of holistic three-level intra-school pedagogical management, the pedagogical research has been done. In total, 202 people were under study, among them 16 headmasters of general educational institutions in Kryvyi Rih, 32 their deputies, and 154 subject teachers (32 of whom are heads of methodological associations of natural, physical, and maths sciences). The age of respondents varies from 23 to 60 years, their experience in the specialty ranges from 1 to 30 years.

The study was conducted from January through June 2019, during which the main indicators of the level of competence formation "the ability to make effective management decisions" were diagnosed with the help of the selected monitoring tools.

It is necessary to evaluate both professional-managerial and personal-organizational criteria to diagnose the competence "ability to make effective management decisions".

While assessing the professional and managerial qualities of secondary education managers, it is the availability, level, and depth of knowledge about the decision-making process and its essence, along with the ability to apply such knowledge while carrying-out the duties that have been under study.

Personality and organizational qualities are evaluated on the basis of personal abilities that influence the efficiency of management decision and the speed of its implementation, the degree of skill formation and the abilities that indicate the management orientation of the individual.

The present research is based on ideas worked out by educators on the problem of making effective managerial decisions by assessing the level of school managers’ competence formation "ability to make effective management decisions". The study is done on six main indicators: the development level of critical thinking; the degree of risk-taking and the level of motivation for achieving goals and success; the level of reflexivity development; communication and organizational skills; level of stress resistance; knowledge level of the theory and technology of making effective management decisions.

The abbreviations in the paper read as follows: R – level of competence "ability to make effective management decisions"; K – level of critical thinking development; M – the degree of risk-taking and the level of motivation for achieving goals and success; O – level of reflexivity development; C – communication and organizational skills; S – level of stress resistance; Z – knowledge level of the theory and technology of making effective management decisions.

The functional equation for those indicators is:

R = f (K, M, O, C, S, Z).

The following monitoring tools to diagnose the above-mentioned indicators of the level of competence “ability to make effective management decisions” have been used in the study: the author's methodology  for school managers to “determine the availability and depth of their knowledge of effective management decisions” (questionnaire, rating scale, research procedure and logistics, 2019); the diagnostic test "on the level of critical thinking" (Nepryakhin, 2018); the questionnaire about “the degree of risk-taking and the level of motivation for achieving goals and success” (Ehlers, 2003); the test on "determination of communication and organizational skills" (Fedoryshyn, 2003); the diagnostic test on "determining the level of reflexivity development" (Karpov, 2018); the test on "determination of the level of stress resistance" (Kirsheva, 1995).

The diagnostic test “on the level of critical thinking” (Nepryakhin, 2018) allows to establish the level of a person’s critical attitude to the essence of the problem, to analyze and identify the causes that triggered it. It is in critical thinking that the logic of the mind is reflected and realized in providing a logistics of actions and operations that guarantee the adequacy of the critically worked-out decisions.

The test to determine the level of stress resistance (Kirsheva, 1995) aims at determining the manager’s psycho-physiological state at the time of making a managerial decision. Thus, a state of physical fatigue or emotional irritation can cause imprudent and misguided management decisions. Therefore, with a high level of stress resistance, the manager is able to regulate their own activities, cope with negative emotions, etc.

The Questionnaire “assessment the degree of risk-taking and the level of motivation for achieving goals and success” (Ehlers, 2003) is an informative way of identifying the leading motives that motivate school managers to pursue educational goals. The level of forming professional motivation affects the process of implementation of the taken decisions, along with work efficiency and quality.

The assessment test of "communication and organizational skills" (Fedoryshyn, 2003) allows to establish the level of formation of school managers’ organizational and communication abilities. After all, it is the implemented decision that counts, and not just good intentions. It takes a lot of organizational work to realize it.

The diagnostic test of "determining the level of reflexivity development" (Karpov, 2018) involves diagnosing the development of the individual’s reflexive consciousness. It is the reflexive consciousness with mature critical thinking and constructive purposefulness that constantly controls the process of obtaining, substantiation, and self-evaluation of the produced result, together with the optimum and rationality of the chosen methods of action.

The study and diagnosis of the competence of school managers’ "ability to make effective management decisions" in a comprehensive system of intra-school pedagogical management began with the author's questionnaire to assess the availability and depth of the managers’ knowledge about the problem of making effective management decisions.

Regardless of intra-school pedagogical management level the respondents belong to, the questions were formulated in the way not to affect the quality of the respondents' answers. Managers at any of three pedagogical management level – headmasters or their deputies, heads of methodical associations, specialty teachers – need to have a high level of competence "ability to make effective management decisions" to implement a technique of making effective management decisions, which is the basis for achieving all objectives of educational process. The efficiency of the entire educational system depends on that of management processes and decisions.

Summing up the answers provided by the respondents, we can make the following conclusions: 1) 89% of respondents associate the definition of "management decision" with "deliberate intention, the need to do something based on awareness and goal setting, along with ways to achieve the goals while solving a problem", 7% believe that the management decision is "just an order to action (instructions, work plans, norms, etc.)", the last 4% identified "management decision" as "law for the educational institution to be fulfilled"; 2) only 74% of the respondents were able to name more than eight requirements to be met by management decisions, 34% – four to five requirements, 19% – two to three requirements. Among the most common answers are: “diagnostics of decisions, collegiality, predictability and definitiveness, etc.”; 3) 51% of respondents were able to name all management functions, 32% identified only three (planning, organization and control), 10% identified management functions only with control and coordination, 7% identified only organization and control; 4) a clear and detailed structural algorithm (stages) of managerial decision-making was provided only by 21% of respondents, 39 % made some mistakes in the logic of algorithm construction, 40% identified stages in the simplified chain of "information gathering – decision preparation – decision making" ; 5) among the mentioning decision-making methods by the respondents, 18% use the “decision tree” method, 27% use “meta-tools”, 8% use case modeling, 32% use subjective judgments and intuitive approach, 15% – expert assessments.

Thus, summing up the results of the questionnaire, one can conclude that the vast majority of school managers, regardless of their level of intra-school pedagogical management, require additional training in the technique of making effective management decisions. This concerns not only their theoretical knowledge of decision-making theory, but also its application in practice. It is important to master the basic methods of making managerial decisions and imparting them to executors, etc.

The next step in diagnosing the formation of the school managers’ ability to make effective management decisions was to conduct a series of tests and questionnaires to find out the indicators of personality and organizational criteria.

By using the test diagnostics of an individual’s critical thinking (Nepryakhin, 2018), the study findings on the selected sample of school managers are presented below. In this test, the levels of respondents’ critical thinking development were assessed by 8 categories: evaluation of information and ability to break it down into components; identification of strengths and weaknesses of a phenomenon; defining concepts and evaluating the strength of evidence; identification of causes and effects; ability to make decisions rationally, without the influence of emotions and impulses; search for a strategy and choice of the best solution; search for new, original and partially unexpected solutions. The results are presented in fig. 2.

Figure 2
An indicator of the ability
to think critically

The highest percentage of school managers with a high level of critical thinking development was found among directors of educational institutions and their deputies (37.5%) (level 1 of intra-school pedagogical management) and heads of methodological associations (34.4%) (level 2 of intra-school pedagogical management). Correspondingly, 25.4% of the specialty teachers (level 3 of intra-school pedagogical management) have a high level of critical thinking.

The school managers with developed critical thinking do not take arguments and conclusions for granted. They evaluate information and recognize hidden values. While answering the questionnaire, they reveal the ability of logical reasoning and creation of consistent logical models.

At the same time, 6.2% of school managers at the level 1, 12.5% of those at the level 2 and 17.2% at the level 3 of intra-school pedagogical management were diagnosed with a low degree of critical thinking development. Inadequate development of critical thinking qualities translates, as a rule, into lack of independence in their decisions, inability to filter out unreliable information and take into account relevant and objective facts.

The average level of critical thinking development for school managers at level 1, level 2, and level 3 is 56.3%, 53.1% and 57.4%, correspondingly. They often, though not always, see the strengths and weaknesses of statements and thoughts, along with failures in logical reasoning. At the same time, such managers are not always able to consider multiple connections between phenomena, to make prognoses and support them with evidence.

Thus, summing up the diagnosing the development of critical thinking qualities by Nepryakhin (2018), it is evident that the subjects as a whole are characterized by different levels of critical thinking. At the same time, level 1 and level 2 managers have higher development of critical thinking. It is the result of performing their functional duties along with their responsibility for management decisions. On the other hand, lack of critical thinking among teachers as managers at level 3 of intra-school pedagogical management cannot be ignored. The teaching process is not based solely on imparting knowledge and skills from teacher to student. Students should be taught the ability to draw conclusions, make their own decisions, and think critically.

Thus, apriori, without an adequate level of the above-mentioned knowledge and skills, educators will not be able to teach them to students.

Next, go the results of diagnosing the selected representative sample, regarding the managers’ degree of risk-taking and the level of motivation for achieving goals and success. The study was conducted using the Ehlers questionnaire (2001). A clear summary of the diagnosis is presented in fig. 3.

Figure 3
Indicator of expressive desire for
risk and motivation for success

Management decisions act as a way of continuous influence of the managing subsystem on the managed, which ultimately leads to the achievement of the set goals. The signature of the individual’s managerial activity is a constant choice, conflict of motives. It is the conflict resolution or leveling that is shown in the behavior of managers through their choice of alternatives. Therefore, successful managers must be characterized by high levels of motivation for success and their ability of risk-taking.

The results of the diagnostics are the following: among the managers of level 1 the indicator of motivation for success and the ability of risk-taking is 45.8% , among the managers of level 2 – 25%, and level 3 – 18%. There is a certain tendency towards decrease in the indicator proportionally the level of intra-school pedagogical management. The hierarchy of managerial functions logically implies the importance of decision-making efficiency and strategy. This trend is confirmed by the number of teachers with low levels of risk-taking and motivation to succeed: 16.4% compared to 6.3% and 6.2% among school managers of 1 and 2 levels, correspondingly.

The results of this study indicate the need for level 1 and level 2 managers to plan their own work to increase motivation for the achievement among specialty teachers, who, in their turn, should upgrade their skills to be competitive in the field.

Another, not less important indicator of the personality-organizing criterion of the competence "ability to make effective management decisions" is the level of their stress resistance.

The test results of this indicator are presented in fig. 4.

Figure 4
An indicator of school
managers’ stress resistance

Managers of level 1 are characterized by the highest percentage of stress resistance – 56.3%. The lower the level of intra-school pedagogical management, the more decrease in stress resistance. So, among the managers of level 2, only 34.4% have high stress resistance, among the managers of the level 3 – 17.2%. At the same time, among level 3 managers, low level of stress resistance reaches 30.3%, and among level 1 and level 2 managers, it is 12.5% and 28.1% respectively.

This is due to several factors. According to the respondents' answers, at the administrative-normative level of intra-school pedagogical management, headmasters and their deputies have to constantly upgrade their self-organization,  and  increase their emotional intelligence, while the managers of level 2 and 3 either do not attach proper significance to the problem or cannot successfully cope with it.

Apart from this, the heavy teaching load of direct practical work with students in the educational process affects the emotional sphere of teachers, putting them under the daily stress in school life.

The study results of the sampling group using the diagnostic test Fedoryshyn (2003) are presented below. The objective of the study is to determine the manifestation of individual’s communication and organizational abilities. The correlation of these two personal qualities gives a chance to assess the ability of school managers to make effective decisions. The results are presented in fig. 5 and fig. 5a.

Figure 5
Indicator of manifestation of communication abilities

-----

Figure 5a
Indicator of manifestation of organizational abilities

Organizational and communication skills in making effective management decisions are manifested in the organization of both developing and executing a management decision.

The school managers with a high degree of communication and organizational skills are identified: 50% and 62.5% of level 1, 56.2% and 62.5% of level 2, and 36% and 23.8% of level 3. Correspondingly, with a low degree: 0% and 2.1% of level 1, 6.3% and 3.1% of level 2, and 9.9% and 16.4% of level 3.

All other school managers with an average degree of communication and organizational skills are identified, correspondingly: 47.9% and 37.5% of level 1, 37.5% and 34.4% of level 2, and 54.1 and 59.8% of level 3.

Thus, the results obtained show that the indicators of school managers’ communication and organizational skills at all three levels are quite good.

Last but not least, we diagnosed another indicator of the personality-organizing criterion of the competence "ability to make effective managerial decisions" – an individual measure of expressiveness of personality reflexivity. The results are presented in fig. 6.

Figure 6
Indicator of
reflexivity manifestation

In this case, the ability of school managers to reflect on the role of colleagues and their own professional activity, along with intermediate results of an assignment, and conditions of the task has been diagnosed. It is the reflection that makes it possible to increase the efficiency of implementation of decision-making on all stages, to compensate for the manifestation of some participants’ non-optimal style, and to iron out the negative impact of their individual and psychological features.

The results indicate that there are an insufficient number of school managers with a high level of reflexivity. Thus, only 25% of managers of level 1, 21.9% of level 2 and 20.5% of level 3 are able to analyze their own professional activity. They do not fully know the methods of self-reflection, nor do they always predict and imagine the course of future work.

At the same time, the overwhelming majority of respondents have an average level of reflexivity: 56.3% of level 1, 46.9% of level 2 and 50% of level 3, correspondingly. The low level of reflexivity among school managers is a thought-provoking matter of great importance. Therefore, it should be considered and carefully analyzed on the administrative-normative, the didactic-methodological, and technological-executive levels of intra-school pedagogical management.

3.1. Discussion

Summing up the results of diagnosing the school managers’ personal-organizational and professional-managerial qualities, which determine the formation of one of the key competencies "ability to make effective management decisions", assessing the availability and depth of knowledge of the decision theory, along with the ability to think critically, levels of stress resistance, reflexivity, communication and organizational skills, the following considerations can be presented:

The subjects of the study (school managers of levels 1, 2 and 3) can be differentiated into 4 groups according to the level of the competence “ability to make effective management decisions”.

The school managers who demonstrated a high level of critical thinking, organizational and communication skills, stress resistance and reflexivity, as well as showed a strong desire to achieve goals, have been identified. In addition, they provided the most complete questionnaire questions, regarding the knowledge of the technology of making an effective management decision. We have identified this group as a group with a high level of competence to make effective management decisions. It included 25% of level 1 managers, 18.8% of level 2 and 12.3% of level 3.

These educators-managers are able to take into account all the necessary sources of information, their decisions are always rational and strategically oriented to the optimal implementation. They are prone to objective judgment and aimed at achieving a common goal. They are characterized by a high level of professional motivation. The difficult managerial decisions are made under their personal responsibility.

The second group consists of school managers who demonstrated a high level of communication and organizing skills, critical thinking, and professional motivation, but at the same time tend to have a medium level of stress resistance and a low level of reflexivity. Questionnaires, regarding the availability of knowledge of a decision theory have not always been fully answered. We have identified this group as a group with sufficient competence to make effective management decisions, and this group included 47.9% of level 1 managers, 40.6% of level 2, and 25.4% of level 3.

While making managerial decisions, such school managers take into account the general issues of the organization of the educational process. They thoroughly substantiate and analyze material from a wide range of sources. They are able to evaluate conflicting information, to consider a number of options, as well as to act optimally in crisis situations. At the same time, they are not always able to analyze their own professional activity and predict its future course.

The third identified group of school managers demonstrated average critical thinking, a tendency to medium and low levels of stress resistance, medium and below average degrees of motivation for success. At the same time, in the same group of respondents, there are representatives with a high level of communication and organizational skills and reflexivity. Thus, we refer this group of school managers to that with an average competence to make effective management decisions. It included 27.1% of level 1 school managers, 34.4% of level 2, and 43.4% of level 3.

Such decision makers are able to identify key points, process only available information, and make subjective judgments based on their own experience.

At last, we identified school managers who showed low levels of critical thinking, reflexivity, professional motivation, and stress resistance. In addition, their knowledge of decision theory is partially fragmented. This group is identified as that of school managers with a low-level ability to make effective management decisions. It included 0% of level 1 managers, 6.2% of level 2, and 18.9% of level 3.

Such managers, unfortunately, often make decisions erratically and unconstructively, there is no hierarchy of priorities, important information is ignored.

The generalized results, regarding the formation of the competence "ability to make effective management decisions" of managers of levels 1, 2, and 3 of intra-school pedagogical management are presented in fig. 7.

Figure 7
Levels of school managers' competence
to make effective management decisions

Effective managerial decisions must be made while performing a managerial function at any level of intra-school pedagogical management. Changes in the activity of the educational institution and educational process are conditioned by taken managerial decisions. Such decisions are involved not only in intellectual but also in psychological process. In the work practice of a comprehensive educational institution, special procedures aimed at developing the competence “ability to make effective management decisions” can be introduced. On the one hand, it is necessary to take measures that will contribute to raising the school managers’ level of awareness of the theory and techniques to make effective management decisions. On the other hand, it is critical to develop indicators of the personality-organizational criterion of the competence "ability to make effective management decisions", in particular, the level of critical thinking, communication and organization skills, and motivation to success.

As corollary of the study, it should be emphasized that school managers have different levels of competence to make effective management decisions. At the same time, it can be noted that, as a whole, managers perform their management functions at an acceptable level and try to increase their managerial competence and aim at self-improvement.

Based on the results of the study, we consider it appropriate to introduce into work practice of a secondary educational institution at all levels of pedagogical management the system of forming the competence "ability to make effective management decisions". The system includes structural components that interact with each other: such as modeling, situational, and strategic.

1. The modeling component

The basis for a scientific approach to making effective management decisions is formed by models as conditional representation of reality. Modeling helps translate complex decision-making factors into a logical scheme, subject to a detailed analysis.

Such models give possibility to find out alternative solutions to problems and evaluate potential results, as well as identify the data needed for assessing existing alternatives. In the end, it leads to well-grounded conclusions.

2. The situational component

The efficiency of any built-up management decision-making model depends on the specific conditions for its implementation. Before looking for a solution, it is necessary to consider a situation, that is, take into account many facts and factors of judgment, thoughts, etc. The school manager should relate specific techniques to specific situations, ensuring that under the circumstances, the institution objective is achieved most efficiently. A manager's ability of being flexible is a sign of effective management in the context of variable internal and external environment.

3. The strategic component

Strategic planning is the basis for all management decisions. It is an auxiliary tool that makes it possible to observe in dynamics how successfully a decision is put into practice. A clear strategy to achieve this goal gives an opportunity to make the most effective management decisions among a number of alternatives.

The leading school managers with a high level of the competence "ability to make effective management decisions", along with the help of external experts in decision-making management can master the apparatus of modeling and decision-making theory, along with the mechanisms of situational and strategic approaches in the course of conducting various forms of training: lectures, seminars, workshops, videoconferences and webinars, specialist consultation as a form of an individual training.

Armstrong, M. (2006). Management: methods and techniques. Kiev: Knowledge Press.

Bondar, V.I. (2000). Theory and technology of school process management. Kiev: FADA, LTD.

Danilenko, L., & Karamushka, L. (2003). Educational management. Kiev: School World.

Drucker, P.F. (2004). Management problems in the 21st century. Moscow: Williams Publishing House.

Ehlers, T. (2003). Diagnostic test "Determination of expressiveness of risk aspiration and level of motivation for success". In G. Nikiforov (Ed.), Workshop on psychology of management and professional activity. (p.211). St. Petersburg: Speech.

Fedorishin, B. (2003). The self-assessment test of communicative and organizational skills. In A. Krylov (Ed.), Practicum in general, experimental and applied psychology (pp.322- 325). St. Petersburg: Peter.

Fedorova, M. (2004). Pedagogical synergetics as a basis of modeling and realization of activity of the teacher of the high school. (Master's thesis). Stavropol State University, Stavropol.

Karamushka, L.M. (2003). Management Psychology. Kyiv: Millennium.

Karpov, A. (2018). Test "Determination of the level of development of reflexivity". In V. Bondar (Ed.), Adaptive teaching to the student's teaching profession: theory and practice. (pp.295-297). Kyiv: Publishing House of NP Drahomanov.

Konarzhevsky, Y.A. (2000). Management and Intra-school Management. Moscow: Pedagogical Search Center.

Krykov, Y.M. (2006). Management of the educational institution. Kiev: Knowledge.

Marmaza, O.I. (2007). Management in education: a roadmap for a supervisor. Kharkiv: Basis.

Mescon, M.H., Albert, M., & Hedouri, F. (2006). Fundamentals of management. Moscow: Williams LLC.

Moiseev, A.M. (2001). Quality of school management: what a valley to be. Moscow: September.

Nepryakhin, N. (2018). Critical thinking test. Retrieved from http: // www.critical-thinking.ru/test/

Poshnev, A.G., Rumyantseva, Z.P., & Salomatina, N.A. (2000). Organization management. Moscow: INFRA-M.

Safonova, L.V. (2007). Teacher self-management. Ekaterinburg: Basis.

The concept of the New Ukrainian School. (2016). Retrieved from http://mon.gov.ua/activity/education/zagalna_serednya/en-sch-2016/konczepcziya.html.

1. Associate professor. Department of Pedagogy. Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University. i.makarenko@ukr.net