Archive

Volume 7, Number 3 / June issue 2021
Ebru Tozkar, Mehmet Bayansalduz
Examination of the relationships between the perception of leadership power of the athlete students, physical education and sports teachers, motivation for success in sports and team cohesion
Abstract

This study was carried out to examine the relationship between the students' Perceptions of Leadership Power towards Physical Education and Sports Teachers and Achievement Motivation and Team Harmony in Sports. Due to the decreasing success rate of the Turkish sports; it is thought that the study conducted to examine the relationship between team harmony, achievement motivation and the perceptions towards the Physical Education and Sports Teachers who are coaching students in basic and secondary education institutions is of importance to the field of sport.
This study has been prepared in relational scanning model and the universe of this study consists of student athletes in a total of 44 primary and secondary educational institutions, which were chosen considering the regional distribution in overall Turkey and were allowed by the approval of 21 Provincial Directorate of National Education; the sample of this study consists of 315 student athletes who were selected by random sampling method from these schools are.
In the study, the study of Wann et al. (Wann, DL, Metcalf, LA, Brewer, KR Whiteside, HD, 2000) Leadership Power in Sports - Other developed by French and Raven (French, J. Raven, BH, 1959). (LPS-O athletes form) and its Turkish adaptation study (Konter, 2008), Sports Leadership Power Perception Scalewhich was conducted by Konter, Sports-Specific Achievement Motivation Scale (SSAMS) which was developed by Willis in 1982 and adapted by Tiryaki and Godelek, The Measurement of Colesion in Sport Team which was developed by Neil Widmeyer, Lawrance R. Brawley and Albert Carron (1985) and adapted by Suleyman MORALI (Morali, 1994) were used.
In data analysis, student athletes’ demographic information was arranged with diagnostic statistics sheets; Pearson correlation analysis was used to determine the relationships between the students' perception of leadership power, achievement motivation and team fit levels. In addition, t-i test analysis (in peer groups) and anova analysis (groups made up three or more) were used to test whether there were significant differences in terms of leadership power perception, achievement motivation and team compliance levels in terms of demographic findings. In statistical analyzes, the significance level was taken as 0.05.
As a result; In our study, it was found out that teachers' leadership power levels had an effect of 14.8% on the levels of achievement motivation of athletes. It was found that there was a positive weak relationship between the motivation of the students and the leadership power of their teachers. It was observed that there was no relationship between the levels of team adaptation of individuals and their teachers' leadership power levels.
Keywords: Leadership Power Perception, Success Motivation, Team Harmony

Cite this article:
Ebru Tozkar, Mehmet Bayansalduz. Examination of the relationships between the perception of leadership power of the athlete students, physical education and sports teachers, motivation for success in sports and team cohesion. Acta Scientiae et Intellectus, 7(3)2021, 84-100.


REFERENCES

  1. Anshel, M.H. (2003). Sport Psychology: From Theory to Practice (4 th edition). San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings.
  2. Bayansalduz, M. (2012). Analyzing the relationship between task and ego orientation, collective efficacy and perceived coaching behavior: A research on footballers. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B-Social and Educational Studies, 4(1), 481-494.
  3. Bayansalduz, M. (2014). An investigation into the state-trait anger expression level of taekwondo students attending high school. The Anthropologist, 18(3), 921-926.
  4. Baybars, R.E. (2002). "Comparison of Physical Education and Sports Teaching Education Programs Applied in Universities in Turkey with Universities in Some Countries" Dumlupinar University, Institute of Social Sciences Physical Education and Sports Department Master Thesis, Kutahya.
  5. Bolat, N.K. (2007). The motivation and success levels of primary school 6th and 7th grade science and technology students according to their learning styles. Osmangazi University. Unpublished Master Thesis, Eskisehir.
  6. Brophy, J. (2012). Motivating students to learn. Routledge: New York.
  7. Burton, D., Raedeke, T.D. (2005). Sport Psychology For Coaches, Human Kinetics.
  8. Can, Y., Guven, H., Soyer, F., Demirel, M., Bayansalduz, M., & Sahin, K. (2009). Elit taekwondo sporcularinda aile-antrenor-kulup destegi ve basari motivasyonu arasindaki iliskinin incelenmesi. Uluslar arasi Insan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 240-252.
  9. Cox, R.H. (1994), Sport Psycholog, Concepts and Aplications; 3. Edition; Brown Bencmark, Dubugue 194-199.
  10. Cuceloglu, D. (1996). Man and his behavior. (6th Edition). Istanbul: Remzi Publishing House.
  11. Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
  12. Dorak, F., & Vurgun, N. (2006). Empathy and Team Unity Relationship in Terms of Team Sports. Spormetre Physical Education and Sport Sciences Journal, 4 (2), 73-77.
  13. French, J.R., Raven, B., & Cartwright, D. (1959). The bases of social power. Classics of organization theory, 7, 311-320.
  14. Gill, D. (2000). Psychology and the study of sport. Handbook of sports studies, 228-40.
  15. Gursimsek, I. (2002). Motivational beliefs about learning and use of strategies in pre-service teachers. Mugla University SBE Journal, 8.
  16. Koca, F., Kirandi, O., Can, Y., Yanar, S., Erol, B.M., & Bayansalduz, M. (2017). Sporcu kimlik algisi ile basari motivasyonu ve rol tatmini arasindaki iliskilerin incelenmesi.
  17. Kocaoluk, F., & Kocaoluk, M.S. (1998). Primary school program. Istanbul: Milsan Basim Sanayi AS.
  18. Konter, E. (2008). Leadership Strength Perceptions of Football Players According to the Number of Playing in National Teams. Spormeter Physical Education and Sport Sciences Journal, 6 (2), 81-86.
  19. Lumpkin, A. (1990). Physicaleducation and sport: A contemporary introduczion . St. Louis: Times Mirror.
  20. Lyle, J. (2002). Sports coaching concepts: A framework for coaches’ behavior. London & N.
  21. Matud, M.P. (2004). Gender differences in stress and coping styles. Personality and individual differences, 37(7), 1401-1415.
  22. Morali, S. (1994). Measuring Team Unity and Solidarity in Team Sports. Ege University PhD Thesis, 13.
  23. Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  24. Piaget J. (1937). The birth of intelligence in the children. Oxford, England. Delachaux and Niestle 429.
  25. Soyer, F., Can, Y., Guven, H., Herguner, G., Bayansalduz, M., & Tetik, B. (2010). Sporculardaki basari motivasyonu ile takim birlikteligi arasindaki iliskinin incelenmesi. Uluslararasi Insan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1), 225-239.
  26. Tiryaki, S., & Godelek, E. (1997). Adaptation Study of Sports Specific Achievement Motivation Scale for Turkish Athletes. 1. International Sports Psychology Symposium Proceedings, 1.
  27. Tseng, C.H., Tuan, H.L., & Chin, C.C. (2010). Investigating the Influence of Motivational Factors on Conceptual Change in a Digital Learning Context Using the Dual‐Situated Learning Model. International Journal of Science Education, 32(14), 1853-75.
  28. Tutko, T.A., & Richards, J.W. (1971). Psychology of coaching. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  29. Yukl, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of theory and research. Journal of management, 15(2), 251-289.