A Development of Ethical Leadership, and the Cause-and-Effect Factors of Ethical Leadership Scales for Students at Thailand National Sports University

  • Jutatip Suangsuwan มหาวิทยาลัยการกีฬาแห่งชาติ วิทยาเขตสมุทรสาคร
คำสำคัญ: 1. Ethical leadership; 2. Cause and effect factors of ethical leadership; 3. Scales development


This secondary research developed student ethical leadership and its causes and effects
scales. There were six objectives: 1) To examine the construct validity of the ethical leadership;
and its cause and effect; 2) To examine the discriminatory power of the developed scales; 3 )
To create T-normal criteria for measuring the variables; 4) To examine the slope parameters of
each item and the Threshold values of variables; 5) To examine the different functions of items
on each variable; and 6) To compare the number of validated items using Classical Testing
Theory (CTT) and Item Response Theory (IRT) methods. The secondary data set comprises 1,048
students from the 16 campuses of Thailand National Sports University (TNSU). The research
procedures were as follows: 1 ) Reviewing research documents regarding the meaning
components of ethical leadership, its causes and effects in primary research; 2) Carrying out data
analysis to answer the research objectives, including analyzing the difference in mean scores
using the independent t-test; 3) Checking the structural validity of the variables by confirmatory
factor analysis; 4) Creating measurement criteria by finding normalize T-score; 5) Analyzing
according to the IRT concept by examining the joint slope parameters of the items and its
Threshold values of each answer item in each variable with Multilog program; 6) Checking the
different functions of each item with the SIBTEST program; and 7) Comparing the number of
items that pass the criteria of CTT and IRT using t-test dependent.
The main research results can be summarized as follows: (1 ) All 62 variables are
validated: the index values of all models were not statistically significant. (2) The developed
scales have discriminatory power. The results of testing the difference in the mean scores of the
group of people with high, and low score for each variable show that t-values for each variable
and its items are statistically significant (p value <.01). (3) The normalized T score for all 62
variable scales in the raw score ranged from 2to 20 points. The normalized T score ranged from
2.25 to 65.24. Sample characteristics that be measured can be classified into three groups,
namely, those with low, medium, and high measurement score. (4 ) The common slope
parameters of each item assessment item and the Threshold value of each answer item for all
211 items of 62 variables have β values distributed over a range of 
. The slope parameters of
the item ranged from 2.17 to 6.86, and the Threshold values of each answer item were
β1<β2<β3<β4. (5) Items in each variable classified according to the background of the sample
(e.g., gender, faculty, year of study, region, etc.) reveal that there were 13 items biased toward
gender, 19 items biased toward faculty, 16 items biased toward year of study, and 7 questions
biased toward region. (6) Questions examined by analysis using CTT and IRT methods indicate
that 27 of 62 variables had the same number of questions. There were 33 variables with no
statistically-significantly difference, and there were only two variables with a distinct difference
in their average number of scales.


Boonrueang, K., Manokarn, M. & T. Thongngok (2017). Ethical leadership among school
administraotors in Lampang Primary Educational Service Area 3. Veridian E-Journal,
Silapakorn University, 10(3), 1409-14260.
Chaichompu, S. (2014). Ethical leadership in school administration. Educational Administration,
Burapha University, 8(2), 1-15.
Chaiyapornpattana, N. (2011). Development of a Multidimensional Thinking Styles Scale Based
on Theory of Mental Self-Government for Sixth Grade Students. Doctor of Philosophy
Thesis, Educational Measurement and Evaluation, Education: Chulalongkorn University.
Choojeen, K. (2019). Factors Affecting Ethical Leadership of Basic Education School
Administrators Under the Office of the Basic Education Commission. Doctor of
Philosophy Thesis, Educational Administration, Education: Sukhothai Thammathirat Open
Edmonson, S., Fisher, A. & B, Polnick. (2003). Portrait of an ethical administrator, paper presented
at the Annual Conference of the American Association of School Administrators, New Orleans,
LA, April 21-25.
Hair, J. T., and others. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N.P., Ray, S. (2021). An Introduction to
Structural Equation Modeling. In: Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLSSEM) Using R. Classroom Companion: Business. Springer, Cham.
Hassan, S. S., Kaur, N., George, A. J., Singh, S., & David, R. (2024). Role of ethical leadership in
corporate governance: A systematic review. IUP Journal of Corporate Governance, 23(1),
Kanchanawasi. S. (2007). New Testing Theory. 3rd edition, additional revised edition. Bangkok:
Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University.
Marungruang, P. (2012). Development of Parenting Quality Indicators: An Analysis of
Psychometric Properties Using Multigroup SEM. Doctor of Philosophy Thesis, Educational
Measurement and Evaluation, Education: Chulalongkorn University.
Panphet K. (2022). Ethical leadership based on Vuddhidhammas for school administrators in the
4.0 era. Journal of Education Review, 9(1), 491-498.
Phatthiyathani., S. (2019). Educational Measurement. 12th ed. Karalasin: Prasan Publishing.
Pradujprom, P., Pantong, K. & R. Kitiyanusan. (2021). Development of normal T criteria for
measuring growth for students. High school level. Research and Development Institute
Journal Bansomdejchaopraya Rajabhat University, 6 (1), 147-158.
Saenglertuthai, J. (2017). Quality of tools used in research. Journal of Curriculum Research and
Development, 7(1), 1-15.
Sakolkijrungroj, S. (2015). Applying Item Response Model for Developing the Thai Happiness
Scale: Computer-adaptive testing. Doctoral dissertation, Measurement and Cognitive
Technology College of Research and Cognitive Sciences: Burapha University.
Suangsuwan, J. (2008). A Development of the Indicators and the Cause and Effect Model of
Collaboration of Primary School Teachers in Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Province. Doctor
of Philosophy Thesis, Educational Research and Psychology, Education: Chulalongkorn
Suangsuwan, J. (2022). Development of the Indicators and the Cause-and-Effect Model of
Student Ethical leadership at Thailand National Sports University. Samut Sakhon:
Thailand National Sports University, Samut Sakhon Campus.
Supanprakan. S. (2012). Development of a Moral Leadership Measurement Instrument for
School Administrators. Doctoral Degree Thesis. Educational Measurement and
Evaluation, Faculty of Education, Chulalongkorn University.
Takong, S. & S. Jariyawat. (2018). Indicators of moral leadership for administrators in basic
educational schools: A structural relationship model. Nakhon Phanom University
Journal, 8(1), 49-58.
Trivedi, C. (2020). Measurement Model: Understanding the Error. Derived from
Wiratchai, N. (1999). LISREL Model: Analysis Statistics for Research. 3rd ed. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn
Wongpitakkul, C. (2019). Strategies for Ethical Leadership Development forPolice Trainees in the
Upper-Northern Thailand. Doctorate Thesis, Educational Leadership and Human
Resource Development, Graduate School: Chiang Mai University.