Treffer: Development and Validation of the AI-Driven Pedagogical Leadership Agility Scale (AIDPLA): Exploring Ethical and Spiritual Dimensions of Educational Leadership in Jordan.
Original Publication: New York : Academy of Religion and Mental Health.
Akkaya, B., Kayalidere, U., Aktaş, R., & Karğin, S. (2022). Agile leadership approach and development of a scale for measuring agile leader’s behaviour. Journal of Business Research-Turk, 12(2), 1605–1621.
Almahasees, Z., Al-Harahsheh, A., & Albudairi, Y. (2024). AI-powered education: Revolutionizing teaching and learning through artificial intelligence in Jordan. Research Journal in Advanced Humanities. https://doi.org/10.58256/dqpagd83. (PMID: 10.58256/dqpagd83)
Al-Omari, A. (2024). The impact of artificial intelligence on the school management: A study of opportunities and challenges in Jordan. INTED2024 Proceedings, 5478–5486.
Alshamsi, S. A. S. A., Hussain, T. P. R. S., & Ali, S. S. S. (2024). The role of artificial intelligence on the public energy sector performance in the United Arab Emirates: The mediation role of organizational agility. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 12(1), e2808–e2808. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v12i1.2808. (PMID: 10.55908/sdgs.v12i1.2808)
Amakyi, M. (2021). Instructional leadership practices of heads of senior high schools in Ghana. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 8(7), 424–435. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.87.10594. (PMID: 10.14738/assrj.87.10594)
Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20. (PMID: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007)
Educational leadership and artificial intelligence for sustainable development. OP Avurakoghene & AO Oredein, Educational Leadership and Artificial Intelligence for Sustainable Development, Shodh Sari-An International Multidisciplinary Journal, 2(3),211-223. https://doi.org/10.59231/SARI7600.
Beekun, R. I., & Badawi, J. A. (1999). Leadership an Islamic perspective. Amana Beltsville.
Blancia, G. V. V., Fetalvero, E. G., Baldera, P. R., & Mani, M. C. (2024). The mediating effects of artificial intelligence literacy on the association between computational thinking skills and organizational agility among secondary school teachers. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 82(5), 616–629. (PMID: 10.33225/pec/24.82.616)
Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, 149. (PMID: 29942800600451010.3389/fpubh.2018.00149)
Bouland-van Dam, S. I., Oostrom, J. K., & Jansen, P. G. (2022). Development and validation of the leadership learning agility scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 991299. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991299. (PMID: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991299366191039817000)
Bush, T., & Glover, D. (2014). School leadership models: What do we know? School Leadership & Management, 34(5), 553–571. (PMID: 10.1080/13632434.2014.928680)
Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315757421 .
Charbonnier-Voirin, A. (2011). The development and partial testing of the psychometric properties of a measurement scale of organizational agility. M@n@gement, 14(2), 119–156. (PMID: 10.3917/mana.142.0119)
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(7). https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868 .
Crispín, R. L., Huayta-Franco, Y. J., Pimentel, J. F. F., Arenas, R. D., & Flores, E. (2022). Management performance, pedagogical leadership and school management in the learning. MOJEM: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Management, 10(2).
Day, C., Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: How successful school leaders use transformational and instructional strategies to make a difference. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221–258. (PMID: 10.1177/0013161X15616863)
De Meuse, K. P., Dai, G., & Hallenbeck, G. S. (2010). Learning agility: A construct whose time has come. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(2), 119. (PMID: 10.1037/a0019988)
DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage Publications.
Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399–412. (PMID: 2484411510.1111/bjop.12046)
Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. (PMID: 1835296910.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x)
Floridi, L. (2018). Soft ethics, the governance of the digital and the General Data Protection Regulation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society a: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376(2133), 20180081. (PMID: 10.1098/rsta.2018.0081)
Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., Luetge, C., Madelin, R., Pagallo, U., & Rossi, F. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28, 689–707. (PMID: 30930541640462610.1007/s11023-018-9482-5)
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. (PMID: 10.1177/002224378101800104)
Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 693–727. (PMID: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.001)
Fullan, M. (2014). Three keys to maximizing impact. In Jossey-Bass and Ontario Principal’s Council, Toronto.
Fullan, M., Azorín, C., Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2024). Artificial intelligence and school leadership: Challenges, opportunities and implications. School Leadership & Management, 44(4), 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2023.2246856. (PMID: 10.1080/13632434.2023.2246856)
Golino, H., Christensen, A. P., & Moulder, R. (2020). EGAnet: Exploratory graph analysis: A framework for estimating the number of dimensions in multivariate data using network psychometrics. R package version 0.9, 5.
Golino, H. F., & Epskamp, S. (2017). Exploratory graph analysis: A new approach for estimating the number of dimensions in psychological research. PLoS ONE, 12(6), e0174035. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174035. (PMID: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174035285948395465941)
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. In Cengage Learning EMEA.
Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. F. (2013). Running on empty? Finding the time and capacity to lead learning. NASSP Bulletin, 97(1), 5–21. (PMID: 10.1177/0192636512469288)
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2015). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2013). The power of professional capital. The Learning Professional, 34(3), 36.
Harris, A. (2004). Distributed leadership and school improvement: Leading or misleading? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32(1), 11–24. (PMID: 10.1177/1741143204039297)
Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But…. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629. (PMID: 10.1080/19312458.2020.1718629)
Heifetz, R., & Linsky, M. (2003). Leadership on the line: Staying alive through the dangers of leading. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00022-5. (PMID: 10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00022-5)
Heikka, J., Pitkäniemi, H., Kettukangas, T., & Hyttinen, T. (2021). Distributed pedagogical leadership and teacher leadership in early childhood education contexts. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 24(3), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1623923. (PMID: 10.1080/13603124.2019.1623923)
Holter, A. C., & Frabutt, J. M. (2012). Mission driven and data informed leadership. Journal of Catholic Education, 15(2), 253–269. (PMID: 10.15365/joce.1502082013)
Hwang, G., Xie, H., & Gasevic, D. (2020). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100001.
Ifenthaler, D., & Schumacher, C. (2016). Student perceptions of privacy principles for learning analytics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 923–938. (PMID: 10.1007/s11423-016-9477-y)
Jiao, P., Ouyang, F., Zhang, Q., & Alavi, A. H. (2022). Artificial intelligence-enabled prediction model of student academic performance in online engineering education. Artificial Intelligence Review, 55(8), 6321–6344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-022-10155-y. (PMID: 10.1007/s10462-022-10155-y)
Joiner, B. (2019). Leadership agility for organizational agility. Journal of Creating Value, 5(2), 139–149. (PMID: 10.1177/2394964319868321)
Joiner, B., & Josephs, S. (2007). Leadership Agility. Insight (American Society of Ophthalmic Registered Nurses), 33(3), 32–37.
Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications.
Koenig, H. G., & Al Zaben, F. (2021). Psychometric validation and translation of religious and spiritual measures. Journal of Religion and Health, 60(5), 3467–3483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-021-01373-9. (PMID: 10.1007/s10943-021-01373-934331172)
Koenig, H. G., & Carey, L. B. (2024). Religion, spirituality and health research: Warning of contaminated scales. Journal of Religion and Health, 63(5), 3729–3743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-024-02112-6. (PMID: 10.1007/s10943-024-02112-639196443)
Koenig, H. G., & Carey, L. B. (2025). Approaches for analyzing the relationship between spirituality and health using measures contaminated with indicators of mental and social health. Journal of Religion and Health, 64(2), 1276–1286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-025-02249-y. (PMID: 10.1007/s10943-025-02249-y39808227)
Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. (PMID: 27330520491311810.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012)
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077. (PMID: 10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077)
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 1986, 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1427 . (PMID: 10.1002/ev.1427)
Luckin, R., & Holmes, W. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education.
MacBeath, J. (2012). Leadership for learning: Concepts, principles and practice. Leadership for Learning, 2, 1–9.
Male, T., & Palaiologou, I. (2012). Learning-centred leadership or pedagogical leadership? An alternative approach to leadership in education contexts. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 15(1), 107–118. (PMID: 10.1080/13603124.2011.617839)
Marin, A. R., & Jiménez, O. R. (2024). Advancing education through AI-powered learning strategies and teaching techniques. ICERI2024 Proceedings.
Martinez, I., & Tadeu, P. (2018). The impact of pedagogical leadership on pedagogical coordination in secondary schools. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 3(3), 1–15. (PMID: 10.46303/ressat.03.03.1)
Menon, S., Suresh, M., & Raghu Raman, R. (2022). Curriculum agility in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 46(9), 1175–1194. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2022.2058355. (PMID: 10.1080/0309877X.2022.2058355)
Mercado, M. M., & Hoyos, C. C. (2025). Leadership challenges to strengthen inclusive teacher skills through agile change management in higher education. In Multidisciplinary organizational training of human capital in the digital age (pp. 97–128). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
Metwallii, M. M. A. S. (2024). Artificial Intelligence in Education Leadership : Challenges and Opportunities. Liverpool John Moores University.
Miao, F., Holmes, W., Huang, R., & Zhang, H. (2021). AI and education: A guide for Policymakers. Unesco Publishing.
Milfont, T. L., & Fischer, R. (2010). Testing measurement invariance across groups: Applications in cross-cultural research. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1), 111–130. (PMID: 10.21500/20112084.857)
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x)
Netolicky, D. M. (2020). School leadership during a pandemic: Navigating tensions. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 391–395. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-05-2020-0017. (PMID: 10.1108/JPCC-05-2020-0017)
Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3r ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Pedro, F., Subosa, M., Rivas, A., & Valverde, P. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Challenges and opportunities for sustainable development.
Rességuier, A., & Rodrigues, R. (2020). AI ethics should not remain toothless! A call to bring back the teeth of ethics. Big Data & Society, 7(2), 2053951720942541. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720942541. (PMID: 10.1177/2053951720942541)
Resseguier, A., & Rodrigues, R. (2021). Ethics as attention to context: Recommendations for the ethics of artificial intelligence. Open Research Europe, 1, 27. (PMID: 376451061044602410.12688/openreseurope.13260.2)
Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. (PMID: 10.1177/0013161X08321509)
Schmitt, N., & Kuljanin, G. (2008). Measurement invariance: Review of practice and implications. Human Resource Management Review, 18(4), 210–222. (PMID: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.03.003)
Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers?: AI and the future of education. John Wiley & Sons.
Senge, P. M., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., & Dutton, J. (2012). Schools that learn (updated and revised): A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. Crown Currency.
Sergis, S., & Sampson, D. G. (2017). Teaching and learning analytics to support teacher inquiry: A systematic literature review. In Learning analytics: Fundaments, applications, and trends: A view of the current state of the art to enhance e-Learning (pp. 25–63). Berlin: Springer.
Sözer Boz, E., & Tabak, H. (2025). Exploring the relationship between learning climate in schools and agile leadership using multi-group path analysis: Does “Willingness to work” have a mediating role? Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v8i3.4658. (PMID: 10.11114/jets.v8i3.4658)
Srivastava, A. P., Yadav, M., Yadav, R., Singh, B., & Dewasiri, N. J. (2023). Exploring digital agility and digital transformation leadership: A mixed method study. Journal of Global Information Management, 31(8), 1–23. (PMID: 10.4018/JGIM.332861)
Storey, V. A., & Cunningham, B. (2024). Artificial Intelligence, Educational Leadership, Knowledge Production, and Transfer: A New Infrastructure. In J. Kenneth Young, (Eds), pp 5.
Striepe, M., & Cunningham, C. (2022). Understanding educational leadership during times of crises: A scoping review. Journal of Educational Administration, 60(2), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-03-2021-0057. (PMID: 10.1108/JEA-03-2021-0057)
Strobl, C., Malley, J., & Tutz, G. (2009). An introduction to recursive partitioning: Rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests. Psychological Methods, 14(4), 323. (PMID: 19968396292798210.1037/a0016973)
Takona, J. (2024). AI in education: Shaping the future of teaching and learning. International Journal of Current Educational Studies, 3(2), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijces.121. (PMID: 10.46328/ijces.121)
Tam, A. C. F. (2015). The role of a professional learning community in teacher change: A perspective from beliefs and practices. Teachers and Teaching, 21(1), 22–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2014.928122. (PMID: 10.1080/13540602.2014.928122)
Tian, M., Risku, M., & Collin, K. (2016). A meta-analysis of distributed leadership from 2002 to 2013: Theory development, empirical evidence and future research focus. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(1), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214558576. (PMID: 10.1177/1741143214558576)
Uhl-Bien, M., & Arena, M. (2018). Leadership for organizational adaptability: A theoretical synthesis and integrative framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.12.009. (PMID: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.12.009)
Webb, R. (2005). Leading teaching and learning in the primary school: From ‘educative leadership’to ‘pedagogical leadership.’ Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 33(1), 69–91. (PMID: 10.1177/1741143205048175)
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education–where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0. (PMID: 10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0)
Weitere Informationen
The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to design a novel scale for measuring AI-driven pedagogical leadership agility, with a particular focus on its ethical and spiritual dimensions within educational leadership, and second, to evaluate the psychometric properties of this scale among secondary school administrators in Jordan. The primary aim was to provide a reliable and valid instrument to support leaders in navigating AI integration while maintaining ethical accountability and fostering spiritually informed leadership practices. The study proceeded in two main phases. Initially, the conceptual framework and item pool were developed based on a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with educational experts. Subsequently, data were collected from a stratified random sample of 740 secondary school principals in Jordan, and construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), exploratory graph analysis (EGA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Reliability was assessed through Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, composite reliability, and test-retest stability, while convergent validity, discriminant validity, and measurement invariance across gender were also evaluated. The analyses revealed a robust five-factor structure underpinning the scale, consisting of 33 items distributed across Algorithmic Vision in Educational Leadership, Spiritual Visionary Leadership, Ethics and Algorithmic Transparency in AI-Enabled School Leadership, AI-Enabled Innovative Educational Leadership, and AI-Responsive Crisis Management Leadership. CFA confirmed excellent model fit, and reliability indices demonstrated strong internal consistency and stability. Among the dimensions, Spiritual Visionary Leadership and Ethics and Algorithmic Transparency showed the highest reliability and predictive importance. Overall, findings suggest that the AI-Driven Pedagogical Leadership Agility Scale (AIDPLA) is a valid and reliable tool for assessing leadership agility infused with ethical and spiritual considerations in the context of AI integration in Jordanian secondary education.
(© 2025. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)
Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Ethics Approval: The current study avoids the need for publication consent by not sharing private information, carrying out experiments, or working with sensitive data. Also, all methods followed relevant guidelines and regulations or the Declaration of Helsinki 1964. Informed Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.