www.ijcrsee.com
169
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
Original scientific paper
Received: December 21, 2023.
Revised: April 02, 2024.
Accepted: April 10, 2024.
UDC:
373.3.091(497.11)
10.23947/2334-8496-2024-12-1-169-183
© 2024 by the authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
*Corresponding author: radivojevic034@gmail.com
Nikola Radivojević1* , Vladislava Pajić2 , Sead Osmanović3
The Influence of Organizational Factors on the School’s
Achievements
1Academy at applied studies Sumadija, Kragujevac, Serbia, e-mail: radivojevic034@gmail.com
2OS „Sveti Kirilo i Metodije”, Novi Sad, Serbia e-mail: vladislavapajic777@gmail.com
3Technical University of Kosice Slovakia, Faculty of Economics, Kosice, Slovakia
e-mail: seadosmani@yahoo.com
Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to examine the influence of the most significant organizational factors on primary
school achievements, with a note that the achievement of the school is expressed through the quality of outcome knowledge.
The research was conducted on a sample of 460 employees, from 21 primary schools, of which 439 are professionals and 21
are principals in the South Bačka County, Republic of Serbia. The collected data were processed using the Gretl software and
AMOS for modelling structural equations. More precisely, the research is based on the application of exploratory and confirmatory
factor analysis. A neural network based on a standard multilayer perceptron model was used in the paper to test the validity
of the obtained results of the AMOS model. The results of the research show that school management is the most important
factor in school achievement and that this influence is most pronounced through teaching staff and school infrastructure. The
results, also show that teachers’ competencies have the strongest direct influence on the quality of outcome knowledge. The
results obtained indicate that decision-makers and creators of social policies must pay special attention to the selection of school
principals as well as their professional education, while school principals to the selection of teachers. Future researchers are
recommended to use the Sobel test to precisely determine the indirect influences of school management on school achievement.
Keywords: organizational factors, school’s achievements, primary education, outcome knowledge.
Introduction
Primary school is considered a complex system, because it consists of many functionally connected
elements. Elements that comprise the primary school system are teachers, the teaching process and
students who are expected to adapt to change, as well as an interactive approach to achieve the expected
goal. School is a so-called learning space both for teachers and professional associates as well as for
educators and students. It represents a team effort in which all actors exchange experiences and acquired
knowledge, which they expand daily, creating new ones. The school nurtures the principles of good
practice, following current events, it encourages independence in the acquisition of knowledge, supports
creativity and freedom of expression, advocates permanent employee training, monitors innovations in
information and communication technologies, and strives to implement effective approaches characterized
by flexibility. Hence, the quality of work of a school assessed according to the potential and readiness
for the application of new knowledge, and the recognition and daily acquisition of new knowledge
(Pribudhiana, Bin Don and Bin Yusof, 2021), that is, through its achievements, which are reflected in
the degree of quality of learning outcomes. Namely, as the quality of educational work is a key factor in
achieving the entire existence of the school, it seems logical that the achievements of the school should
be expressed through a category such as the achieved results of educational learning outcomes including
skills, knowledge, attitudes of students and competencies acquired through formal school education. This
is more, because a quality education also implies a stimulating atmosphere which enables students to
develop individually, daily. Outcomes allow students to see to what extent they have achieved the planned
www.ijcrsee.com
170
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
programs, which will serve as a basis for their enrollment into the next educational level. The choice of
work methods, as well as materials of different content, are harmonized with the planned outcomes so
that they can expect, and verify with certainty, what the student will be capable of doing, and what he will
know, after the adoption of teaching content. What the teacher strives to teach students represents the
learning goal, and what the student has adopted at the end of learning represents the outcome. One of the
indirect ways of checking the quality of work, through the achieved outcomes of students completing their
primary school education, can be the results achieved at the primary school exit exam which, together
with school grades, give a result based on which students have the opportunity to enroll into high school
(Baketa, Dedic and Jokic, 2020).
Factors that greatly affect the quality of schoolwork and educational outcomes are school
management, teaching processes, infrastructural conditions, motivation, curriculum, pre-knowledge.
(Wargocki and Wyon, 2017; Park and Weng, 2020; Tang, 2020; Gupta et al., 2023). Also, teaching staff
is, to a significant degree, a mediator in the educational processes which, with its knowledge and skills,
adapts the content to the characteristics of the students. Teaching staff also monitors students’ aspirations
and abilities, as well as the technical possibilities of the institution, adapting them to the abovementioned
characteristics of the students. When implementing the curriculum, the creativity of teachers and a
combination of work methods is important, so that teaching content is adopted at a higher level and as
such persists longer in the minds of students. Successful management of an institution implies versatility
and leadership qualities of the principal, who will be able to recognize, enable, motivate, successfully
communicate, perceive and improve the existing qualities (Dou, Devos and Valcke, 2017).
Namely, from the above it can be easily concluded that organizational factors have a crucial role in
learning outcomes, i.e., the outcome knowledge. The question that arises is which of the organizational
factors has the strongest influence. Identifying the factors with the greatest influence and their ranking
according to the intensity of influence is significant both for the creators of educational policies and for
the management of schools. When they have knowledge about the importance of factors on learning
outcomes and the school’s, they will make more effective decisions regarding the allocation of, as a rule,
limited resources. They will invest in those factors that have a greater impact. Therefore, identifying the
factors with the greatest influence enables the desired goal to be achieved efficiently. In this context, the
goal of this work is to determine the effects of the most significant limiting factors on school achievement
in the South Bačka County, Republic of Serbia.
Materials and Methods
Most authors (Harden, 2002; Hussey and Smith, 2002; Levenberg, 2016; Barak and Levenberg,
2016) who deal with the topic of education believe that it is a pedagogical process in the function of
enriching human knowledge. International law has defined education as one of the basic human rights
and a general social good. Barak and Levenberg (2016) believe that educational changes are very
fast with contemporary work models inevitably following the rapid development of technology, hence
the work is directed towards encouraging initiatives, creativity, curiosity, risk acceptance and flexibility.
Improving the professionalism of staff, and encouraging team spirit, tolerance and humane principles
supports the development of each individual and is in line with the highest principles of preparation
for life skills. However, in such circumstances, it is important to understand how organizational factors
contribute to the achievement of this function of education. In other words, it is important to understand
how key organizational factors influence learning outcomes, which represent what has been achieved
and evaluated, at the end of the learning process, and not simply what the aspirations or the intentions
were (Harden, 2002), and which when set appropriately can be used in curriculum planning, teaching
and learning, which facilitates the management process (Hussey and Smith, 2002). This is especially
important when you have to the last years, there has been a significant focus on school’s accountability for
learning outcomes. Policymakers have emphasized the need for educational institutions to transparently
demonstrate student learning, while accrediting associations have set higher standards for institutions.
Blömeke et al., (2022) point out that teacher competence is a key factor for learning outcomes. They
emphasize that recognizing the significance of human resources is crucial in developing teaching quality,
and the quality of the entire educational process, the most important thinks for education achievement.
They emphasize the importance of three main sets of educator/teacher competencies: knowledge of
www.ijcrsee.com
171
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
information technology, working with people and working in a team and for a team. According to Ho et al.,
(2023), the preferred forms of teacher psychological competency that are within the function of methodical
competency are social and emotional intelligence, cognitive autonomy, openness to new experiences,
visualization of methodical situations and solutions, realistic judgment, objectivity and critical thinking,
cognitive receptivity to innovation, creative and divergent thinking, stability of the value system, maturity
of attitudes, wealth and stability of interest, self-perception (self-image), etc. Research conducted in Spain
(Aragon-Sancheze, Barba-Aragón and Sanz-Valle, 2003) points to the significance of human resources
training, with always current innovations and their direct impact on the quality of work outcomes. Fuadi,
Nasution and Wijaya (2023) emphasize the importance of management of teacher professionalism
development and suggest that the efforts of management must be known as efforts to develop teacher
professionalism in the form of increasing expertise, and skills, broadening horizons, coaching carried out on
the initiative and in collaboration with the regional government. A similar view is expressed by Rusyn et al.
(2021). Especially important are the competencies of the teachers, which encourage student’s motivation.
While certain students demonstrate a willingness to resolve the challenges they encounter during lessons
or at school, others tend to avoid seeking solutions for the problems they face. Among the various factors
that influence students’ behaviours within the same school, motivation emerges as a primary determinant.
Motivation plays a crucial role in the effectiveness of the learning-teaching process as it empowers
students to actively engage in their educational journey (Brooker et al., 2018; Yu, Gao and Wang, 2021;
Karakose et al., 2023), which is presented through the expectancy-value theory of motivation in learning
(Lo et al., 2022). At the same time, learning outcomes affect student motivation. Namely, according to the
theory of expectations, a positive learning outcome leads to improved expectations, increases the value
of the reward and clearly connects the learning effort with the achievement of the goal and the reward.
This cycle leads to the strengthening of student motivation. The teacher’s expectation plays a special role
in this (Gentrup et al., 2020; Johnston, Wildy and Shand, 2023). On the contrary, amotivation represents
an internal state in which students exhibit reluctance towards participating in classroom activities and
become disengaged from the lesson (Leroy and Bressoux, 2016). In the case of amotivation, students
lack any driving reasons to take action, and more significantly, it can lead to feelings of disappointment,
ultimately negatively impacting productivity and overall well-being. For this reason, the competencies
of teachers are important, which encourage and motivate students. The importance of motivation for
school employees is particularly emphasized by Anselmus et al., (2022), Ahmadi et al., (2023), Robinson
(2022) etc. These studies particularly emphasize the importance of teachers’ motivational beliefs which
direct and sustain their efforts to engage in relationship-building behaviours and, thus, lead to positive
relationships with their students.
The infrastructure of the school is closely related to the previous one. It is not only important
for student motivation, but also for teachers, especially contributing to the improvement of self-efficacy,
which is considered a key concept in Bandura’s Social Learning Theory. Studies on self-efficacy have
emphasized its cognitive nature and their results showed that students’ perceived self-efficacy was
positively associated with learning outcomes such as task choice, task persistence, effective student
activities, and academic achievement (Girelli et al., 2018; Gutiérrez and Tomás, 2019; Hayat et al., 2020).
Brinson (2015) points to the importance of technology in facilitating the learning process and evaluating
outcomes. Therefore, the results of learning outcomes are also used as a starting point for the further
development of more advanced programs, and thus the development of information systems adapted to
programs adjusted to the adoption of new curricula. Research shows that school conditions and equipment
affect the organizational aspects of the school and thus have an impact on the education and learning
process (Doyer and Bean, 2023). However, budget is often imposed as a limiting factor (Dadmand and
Pooya, 2023).
Bouslama et al. (2003) propose a new academic model, based on the availability of laptops and IT
classrooms, that will respond to the challenges of contemporary society and demonstrate how technology
is used to facilitate the learning process, as well as being able to assess its impact on the success of
learning outcomes. Brinson (2015) illustrates that learning success in virtual classrooms is the same, or
greater, than that in traditional classrooms, according to all categories of learning outcomes (knowledge
and understanding, research skills, practical skills, perception, analytical skills and social and scientific
communication). It has been observed that learning theories need to be more heavily considered when
developing virtual applications to make them more relevant to learning outcomes, which will increase the
www.ijcrsee.com
172
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
accuracy of simulation (Radianti et al., 2020). Similar views were expressed by other authors (Alfoudari,
Durugbo and Aldhmour, 2023; García-Tudela, Prendes-Espinosa and Solano-Fernández, 2023;
Dimitriadou and Lanitis, 2023; Dai et al., 2023; Dadmand and Pooya, 2023; Doyer and Bean, 2023, Uyen
and Thu, 2023).
Therefore, technological changes affect the shaping of both the education process and the learning
outcomes and goals (Young, Klemz and Murphy, 2003). In this respect, education management, as well
as the teaching and learning process, needs to be redesigned according to the needs of the individual
and the sustainable development of the knowledge economy. The challenge is to effectively utilize these
technologies in a way that serves the interests of students. Young, Klemz and Murphy (2003) believe that
it is precisely through the use of ICT that we can influence the actualization of values that substantially
support the paradigm according to which education is a student-centered process. It may be concluded
that organizational learning is at the core of this process and that ICT are the optimal means for this
transformation.
School management also plays an important role in this process. Analysis of data from scientific
literature indicates that school management directly affects the scope and breadth of infrastructure and ICT
implementation, the development of teacher competencies and learning outcomes. School management
encourages and facilitates development planning and the development of the school (West-Burnham,
1997) and provides support in the management of the teaching process. Research in the United States
indicated what we often find in our country as well, a lack of functional knowledge and basic skills in
those who become able to work, over time (Nonaka, 1994). This is reflected through the harmonization
of theoretical knowledge with the ability of its implementation while following the development of new
technologies that enable greater functionality.
However, management, in an educational system, is achieved by an established state and
educational policy. Hence, Harris and Hoppkins (2008) state that the theory of school leadership must
be non-individualistic. Understanding school leadership must go beyond thinking about principal-hero.
Leadership in the school environment can be manifested at different levels. Fullan (2011) points out the
importance of the context within which school leadership is interpreted and considers it important to state
the causes and ways of interpreting context in relation to the desired outcomes.
Conceptualization of previously performed analysis of the empirical studies on the impact of
organizational factors on the school’s achievements graphically can be displayed by the following research
model, with a note that the achievement of the school is expressed through learning outcomes i.e., the
quality of outcome knowledge, which is expressed through the results achieved at the primary school
exit exam. More precisely, the students’ achievements were measured through the success of the final
matriculation exam, which at the time of examination consisted of 3 tests: a test in mathematics, a test in
the Serbian language and a combined test. The combined test includes material from biology, physics,
chemistry, history and geography.
Figure 1. Conceptual model
www.ijcrsee.com
173
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
The model assumes the role of management is crucial, so it is assumed that school management
primarily affects the competency of teachers, and school infrastructure but also, directly, the quality of
outcome knowledge. The effect of management on the quality of outcome knowledge is also indirect
so that by selecting a quality teaching staff and investing in school infrastructure, it influences a higher
quality of outcome knowledge. In addition, a quality teaching staff will influence an investment in
school infrastructure, which also has a positive effect on the quality of outcome knowledge. In other
words, teachers directly affect the quality of knowledge, by requiring management to invest in school
infrastructure, while classroom equipment enables the modernization of the teaching process, thus raising
the quality of outcome knowledge. On the other hand, it was assumed that the second most important
factor influencing the quality of outcome knowledge was student motivation and it was assumed that this
connection is twofold; higher student motivation leads to a higher quality of knowledge, which in turn
empowers students and further increases their motivation.
Based on the presented model, it is possible to define the main hypothesis: The better management
of organizational factors in primary education will lead to better the school’s achievements, as well as and
six auxiliary hypotheses were derived from the main hypothesis:
H1: School management has a positive impact on the quality of primary education learning outcomes;
H2: School management has a positive impact on teacher competency.
H3: School management has a positive impact on the infrastructural conditions at the school.
H4: Teacher competency has a positive effect on the quality of primary education learning outcomes;
H5: Infrastructural conditions at the school have a positive effect on increasing the quality of primary
education learning outcomes;
H6: The quality of learning outcomes has a positive effect on student motivation;
H7:
Student motivation positively affects learning outcome quality, i.e., the quality of outcome knowledge.
H8: Teacher competency has a positive impact on the infrastructural conditions at the school.
The data were collected based on a structured questionnaire, which was compiled based on
relevant statements proposed in the scientific literature. The validity of the questionnaire was tested by
applying principal component analysis (PCA), since a high Cronbach’s alpha value does not indicate
a high reliability as it can simply be the result of a large number of items included in the analysis. The
research was conducted during 2022. The respondents assessed the statements from the questionnaire
using the five-point Likert scale, with ratings from (1), “completely disagree”, to (5), “completely agree”.
The heterogeneous sample included employees holding different positions within an educational
institution, i.e., primary school (teachers, professional associates and principals). The schools included in
the research are from the territory of the South Bačka County (Novi Sad School Administration), selected
according to the random sampling method. The schools included in the research were selected according
to the random sampling method. The number of participants in this research numbered 460 employees,
from 21 primary schools, of which 439 are professionals and 21 are principals. Of the professionals, 114
are male (26%) and 325 are female (74%).
The sample adequacy is tested using the KMO test adequacy test (test value = 0.873). The results
of the questionnaire validity test were shown in Table A1 in the Appendix, with the note that promax
rotation was used. The results of the PCA indicate that items are grouped according to expectations, ie,
so that the questionnaire can be used reliably in further analysis. The collected data were processed using
the Gretl software and AMOS for modeling structural equations.
Although principals and teachers may have different views on the factors that are the subject of
study in this paper, for example on the issue of the quality of school management work, the ANOVA
analysis shows that there are no significant differences between these two groups of respondents. The
stated view is confirmed by the ANOVA analysis results shown in Table A2 in the Appendix, from which it
can be seen that in the case of all four factors, the critical values of the test are greater than the value of
the F test for a confidence level of 0.05.
Results
Before the AMOS model parameters were assessed, a correlation analysis of the indicators
was conducted. A crucial requirement for the accurate utilization of factor and structural analysis is that
indicators be highly correlated and mutually replaceable. Table 2 shows the correlation matrix of indicators
www.ijcrsee.com
174
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
(variables that are measured in the model), the average variance extracted (AVE) and Cronbach’s alpha
for estimating the reliability of the multi-item sections and the goodness-of-fit indices for the SEM model.
Table 1. Correlation Matrix (squared correlation), AVE (average variance extracted)
SM TC SIC StM QOK
SM 1
TC 0.569 1
SIC 0.548 0.563 1
StM 0.602 0.419 0.594 1
QOK 0.512 0.534 0.502 0.521 1
AVE 0.611 0.569 0.691 0.672 0.641
Reliability 0.713 0.778 0.722 0.781 0.726
RMSEA (root mean square error of approximation) 0.046
RMSR (root mean square residual) 0.051
NNFI (non-normed fit index) 0.978
AGFI (adjusted GFI) 0.902
Note: SM – School management, TC - Teachers’ competences, SIC - School infrastructural condition, StM -
Student motivation, QOK - Quality of outcome knowledge.
All squared correlations are signicant at 1% level of condence
The correlation matrix analysis indicates that the variables are highly correlated with each other.
The AVE for each construct was greater than the square of the correlation coefficient for the corresponding
inter-constructs, which confirms discriminant validity, while the results of convergent validity of measures
also contribute to convergent validity. Values of Cronbach’s alpha in all cases are above 0.7, indicating
an acceptable level of reliability for each construct. According to the goodness-of-fit indices, the proposed
structural model was found to fit the data well.
Table 2. Results of hypothesis testing
Variables Coeff. Stand. error Critical value P value Results
QOK←SM 0.208 0.067 3.097 < 0.01 H1 accept
TC←SM 0.909 0.039 23.343 < 0.01 H2 accept
SIC ←SM 0.470 0.052 9.117 < 0.01 H3 accept
QOK←TC 0.673 0.062 10.926 < 0.01 H4 accept
QOK←SIC 0.462 0.060 7.650 < 0.01 H5 accept
SM←QOK 0.621 0.029 21.755 < 0.01 H6 accept
QOK←StM -0.475 0.096 -4.930 < 0.01 H7 reject
SIC←TC 0.322 0.042 7.624 < 0.01 H8 accept
www.ijcrsee.com
175
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
Figure 2. Tested structural model
The results of the confirmatory factor analysis are shown in Table 2 and Figure 2. Namely, Table 2
shows the values of the regression coefficient estimates together with the statistical significance tests. All
examined connections are statistically significant. The strongest connection was made between school
management and teacher competency: ß=0.909, t=23.343, p<0.01, which indicates the importance of
management in the management of teaching staff, as well as the impact that this relationship has on
the quality of schooling outcomes. Management has an impact on the quality of outcome knowledge
through competent staff - the link between teacher competency and the quality of outcome training being
also positive and significant: ß =0.673, t=10.926, p<0.01, but also with the teaching staff influencing
the maintenance and improvement of the institution’s infrastructure: ß =0.322, t=7.624, p<0.01. In other
words, good management influences the school having a quality teaching staff, which directly affects
the quality of outcome knowledge, as does a good school infrastructure that provides students with
better teaching and thus, consequently, better outcome knowledge (ß=0.462, t=7.650, p<0.01). The
direct influence of management on the quality of outcome knowledge is not so pronounced, but it is
still statistically significant: ß=0.208, t=3.097, p<0.01. In other words, the influence of management is
most pronounced through teaching staff and school infrastructure: ß=0.470, t=9.177, p<0.01, which is the
ultimate goal of their function. When it comes to student motivation, it has a negative impact on the quality
of outcome knowledge, which is very likely a consequence of the existence of an opposite connection
between the quality of outcome knowledge and student motivation. However, the connection has been left
in the model because it significantly affects the suitability and validity of the model. The negative impact
of motivation on the quality of outcome knowledge could mean that when students are less motivated,
teachers work harder and thus achieve a higher quality of outcome knowledge (Tella, 2007). On the
other hand, achieving better outcomes has a positive effect on students’ motivation - positive outcomes
additionally motivate students (Johnson et al., 1981).
Figure 2 shows the coefficients of determination. As can be seen, the quality of outcome
knowledge is explained with 55.8% of the predictor variance, i.e., the infrastructure, teacher competency,
student motivation and school management share about 56% of the variance with the quality of outcome
knowledge. Teacher competency was explained with 55.4% variance, school infrastructure with 55.4%,
and student motivation was explained with 52% variance to the quality of outcome knowledge. This model
has a significant percentage of explained variance.
Based on structural model testing, which is in accordance with the data, all initial hypotheses can
be accepted with certainty, except H7. H7 hypothesis, which refers to the influence of students’ motivation,
has also been rejected because a connection was recorded in the opposite direction from the one that
was assumed.
Thus, the structural model was tested by analyzing structural equations. With their testing, it can be
concluded with certainty that school management is key to the quality of students’ outcome knowledge.
The action of management is threefold. The influence of competent teaching staff is most pronounced,
followed by the influence of a quality infrastructure, with direct influence being of the least influence. In
www.ijcrsee.com
176
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
other words, school management is the most responsible and can achieve the greatest action. It does so
by maintaining and influencing the quality of teaching staff, as well as by providing students and teachers
with a quality infrastructure within which the teaching process can be performed at a high level and at
that level can influence the most favourable learning outcomes. The greatest direct impact on learning
outcomes is the teacher’s competence.
The results obtained by the AMOS model were subjected to validation using a neural network,
which was developed in the paper. The paper uses a standard multilayer perceptron (MLP) model. The
network was used to confirm the importance of organizational factors that were the subject of research
in this paper. The structure of the network is shown in Figure 3, while information about Neural Network
Hyperparameters is shown in Table A3 in the Appendix.
Figure 3. Neural network for testing AMOS model
For network testing, about 70% and about 30% for prediction testing. A summary of the neural
network is shown in Table 3. The relatively low values of the relative errors during training and testing
of the network indicate its high validity, which implies that it can be used to validate the obtained results
regarding the importance of the influence of organizational factors that are the subject of analysis in the
paper.
Table 3. Summary of neural network quality
Training Sum of Squares Error 0.360
Relative Error 0.002
Stopping Rule Used
1 consecutive step(s)
with no decrease in
errora
Training Time 0:00:00.02
Testing Sum of Squares Error 0.122
Relative Error 0.002
Note: aError computations are based on the testing sample.
www.ijcrsee.com
177
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
As can be seen based on the analysis of the importance of factors (Table 4 and Figure 4), the most
significant influence on school achievements is school management, followed by teacher competence,
then school infrastructure and finally student motivation. These findings are consistent with the findings of
the AMOS model, which implies that the obtained results can be reliably interpreted.
Table 4. Independent Variable Importance
Importance Normalized Importance
School management 0.631 100.0%
School infrastructural condition 0.076 12.0%
Teachers’ competences 0.288 45.6%
Student motivation 0.005 0.8%
Figure 4. Independent variable importance
Discussions
By analyzing structural equations, we were primarily interested in testing a theoretical-conceptual
model developed based on seven auxiliary hypotheses, which were set up to answer the main hypothesis.
Results show that the influence of school management is key to the quality of students’ outcome knowledge
and that its performance is threefold. Through teaching staff, this impact is most pronounced, followed
by a quality infrastructure of the institution, while direct impact is the least pronounced. Such a finding
is logical and clear if the impact of school management on learning outcomes is looked at through the
following chain: management shapes policies affecting the selection and support of teachers. Through
quality infrastructure, teachers can perform better, thus directly influencing learning outcomes. The direct
impact of management on student learning outcomes is less pronounced, as it is achieved indirectly
through supporting teachers and creating optimal learning conditions.
The positive impact of school management on teachers’ competencies can be explained through
the support, resources, and atmosphere provided by the school. Effective management can establish
clear goals, provide regular professional development, and offer mentorship, directly contributing to
the development of teachers’ competencies. Good management can also ensure a fair distribution of
resources, including materials, training, and technological tools, supporting teachers in implementing
innovative teaching methods. Dedication to creating a positive work environment can motivate teachers
to continuously enhance their skills and contribute to the quality of instruction. Ultimately, well-led schools
create an environment that fosters the professional development of teachers, enabling them to effectively
impart knowledge to students.
The positive impact of school management on school infrastructure can be explained through the
following arguments: Efficient Resource Allocation - effective school management contributes to the proper
www.ijcrsee.com
178
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
allocation of resources. Through careful budget planning and management, the management can ensure
sufficient funds for maintaining and improving the school’s infrastructure; Strategic Planning - school
management implementing long-term and strategic planning can identify priorities in infrastructure. For
instance, setting clear goals and strategies can lead to improvements, such as renovating classrooms,
acquiring modern equipment, or maintaining the premises; Effective Maintenance - management plays a
crucial role in ensuring regular maintenance of school facilities. Continuous monitoring of infrastructure
conditions and timely problem-solving can extend the lifespan of buildings and enhance their functionality;
Enhanced Communication with the Local Community - well-managed schools establish effective
communication with the local community. Through open communication, the management can attract
additional funds, donations, or volunteer work that directly contributes to improving infrastructure; Focus
on Student Needs - Management that prioritizes student needs recognizes that quality infrastructure
directly impacts the learning experience. This may involve creating a stimulating environment that
supports learning and development; Efficient Partnerships with External Resources - management that
forms partnerships with organizations outside the school, local government, or the private sector can
secure additional resources and support for infrastructure projects. These points highlight the role of
management in guiding the school towards optimal resource utilization and improving infrastructure,
directly contributing to the overall educational environment.
The finding that teacher competencies have the strongest direct positive influence on the quality of
primary education learning outcomes can be explained by the fact that teachers with strong competencies
create a stimulating environment, tailor instruction to various learning styles, and provide support for
individual student needs. Namely, The ability to tailor instruction to different students and learning styles
enables a personalized approach, directly supporting learning. Secondly, teachers’ expertise in effectively
delivering content, motivating students, and managing classroom dynamics is crucial for creating a
stimulating environment. Teachers with strong competencies can recognize individual student needs and
provide appropriate support. Additionally, teachers’ competencies in employing diverse teaching methods
and integrating technology contribute to dynamic instruction, often encouraging student engagement
and deeper understanding of the material. This expertise directly contributes to enhancing the quality of
teaching, leading to improved learning outcomes. this finding indicates that more attention must be paid
to the training of teachers, but also to the selection of personnel during employment in education. These
findings are in line with the results of research by Hattie (2003; 2012), which proved the influence and
importance of teachers on student achievement. Hattie (2003; 2012) clearly show that the role of the
teacher has a significant impact on student achievement. Studies show that the quality of teaching directly
affects student success, which confirms the importance of professional development of teachers and their
engagement in the classroom.
The finding that quality infrastructure has a positive effect on the quality of primary education
learning outcomes can be explained by the fact that quality infrastructure provides an optimal environment
for education. Well-equipped classrooms, laboratories, and access to technology facilitate a more effective
learning process because support diverse teaching methods and create an inspiring atmosphere, all
contributing to the improvement of students’ academic achievements.
The finding that learning outcomes can positively impact student motivation has significant
implications for school managers and education policymakers. School managers should recognize the
importance of achieving measurable and positive learning outcomes as it can enhance student motivation,
contributing to a better school environment in the long run. Managing resources, supporting teachers,
and promoting innovative teaching methods can further facilitate the attainment of successful learning
outcomes. Education policymakers should consider implementing strategies that encourage diverse
teaching methods and provide support for teachers. Additionally, they need to support policies promoting
measurable standards and the evaluations of learning outcomes. On the other side, the finding that
motivation has a negative impact is surprising. The negative impact of motivation on learning outcomes can
stem from various factors. For instance, insufficient or inadequate motivation may lead to a lack of student
engagement and reduced attention during lessons, affecting the absorption of material. Additionally, a lack
of motivation can result in inadequate effort in learning and completing school tasks, directly impacting the
achievement of successful outcomes. However, the finding is a signal to school managers and education
policymakers that they must recognize the need for approaches that encourage and sustain student
motivation, while also considering factors that may contribute to its absence. Proper support for teachers,
www.ijcrsee.com
179
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
including teaching methods, and the development of programs focusing on motivation can help overcome
these challenges.
Conclusions
Based on the above, we can conclude that school management is key to the school’s achievements,
which is expressed in this paper through the quality of students’ outcome knowledge since we are talking
about schools as non-profit institutions whose basis and purpose is education. The action of management
is threefold, it is most pronounced through teaching staff, followed by the influence of the quality of the
institution’s infrastructure, with the weakest being direct influence. In this manner, we see that school
management is extremely important and that the greatest action can be achieved by maintaining and
influencing the quality of teaching staff, as well as by providing students and teachers with a quality
infrastructure so that the teaching process is realized at a high level and so that it can, in turn, influence
better learning outcomes. Quality teaching staff affects the quality of learning outcomes directly, which is
important, especially for those schools that do not have enough financial resources to invest in either the
modernization of teaching or the institution itself.
The results obtained in this manner allow decision-makers to influence, in the future, those
organizational factors which are ranked as the most important, about the goal which they want to achieve,
and which will make the greatest contribution under the given conditions. School management influences
the selection, and the building of teachers’ competencies, while the given competence can indirectly affect
the overall success of students through the establishment of an adequate school infrastructure, which
affects the quality of outcome knowledge and therefore the overall success of students.
It remains for future researchers to examine whether and to what extent the differences in the
socio-demographic characteristics of teachers and students by region affect the intensity of the influence
of organizational factors on the school’s achievement, expressed in the category of quality of outcomes
knowledge.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Academy at applied studis Sumadija, Kragujevac, for financially
supporting this research.
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, R, N. and P, V.; methodology, O, S.; software, R, N.; formal analysis, G, R,
N. and P, V.; writing—original draft preparation, R, N and O, S. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
References
Ahmadi, A., Noetel, M., Parker, P., Ryan, R. M., Ntoumanis, N., Reeve, J., ... & Lonsdale, C. (2023). A classication system
for teachers’ motivational behaviors recommended in self-determination theory interventions. Journal of Educational
Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000783
Alfoudari, A. M., Durugbo, C. M., & Aldhmour, F. M. (2023). Exploring quality attributes of smart classrooms from the perspectives
of academics. Education and Information Technologies, 1-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11452-3
Anselmus Dami, Z., Budi Wiyono, B., Imron, A., Burhanuddin, B., Supriyanto, A., & Daliman, M. (2022). Principal self-efcacy
for instructional leadership in the perspective of principal strengthening training: work engagement, job satisfaction and
motivation to leave. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2064407. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2064407
Aragon-Sanchez, A., Barba-Aragón, I., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2003). Effects of Training on Business Results. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(6), 956-980. https://doi.org/10.1080/0958519032000106164
Baketa, N., Dedic, Z. R., & Jokic, B. (2020). All Are Equal, But Some Are More Equal Than Others: Secondary School Principals’
Perspectives on the State Matura Exams and Issues of Equity and Equality of Access to Tertiary Education for Pupils from
www.ijcrsee.com
180
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
Grammar Schools and VET in Croatia. Revija za sociologiju, 50(2), 223-251. http://doi.org/10.5613/rzs.50.2.4
Barak, M., & Levenberg, A. (2016). A model of exible thinking in contemporary education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22,
74-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.09.003
Blömeke, S., Jentsch, A., Ross, N., Kaiser, G., & König, J. (2022). Opening up the black box: Teacher competence,
instructional quality, and students’ learning progress. Learning and Instruction, 79, 101600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
learninstruc.2022.101600
Bouslama, F., Lansari, A., Al-Rawi, A. M., & Abonamah, A. A. (2003). A Novel Outcome-Based Educational Model and its
Effect on Student Learning, Curriculum Development, and Assessment. Journal of Information Technology Education:
Research, 2, 203-214. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111473/.
Brinson, J. R. (2015). Learning Outcome Achievement in Non-Traditional (Virtual and Remote) Versus Traditional (Hands-On)
Laboratories: A Review of the Empirical Research. Computers & Education, 87, 218-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compedu.2015.07.003
Brooker, A., Corrin, L., De Barba, P., Lodge, J., & Kennedy, G. (2018). A tale of two MOOCs: How student motivation and
participation predict learning outcomes in different MOOCs. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1).
https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3237
Dadmand, F., & Pooya, A. (2023). Schools budgeting according to the condition of equipment and buildings under different
scenarios changing the number of students using the system dynamics. Governmental Accounting, 9(2), 121-140.
https://doi.org/10.30473/gaa.2021.57985.1458
Dai, Z., Sun, C., Zhao, L., & Zhu, X. (2023). The Effect of Smart Classrooms on Project-Based Learning: A Study Based on
Video Interaction Analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-
10056-x
Dimitriadou, E., & Lanitis, A. (2023). A critical evaluation, challenges, and future perspectives of using articial intelligence
and emerging technologies in smart classrooms. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1186/
s40561-023-00231-3
Dou, D., Devos, G., & Valcke M. (2017). The Relationships Between School Autonomy Gap, Principal Leadership, Teachers’
Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(6), 959-
977. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216653975
Doyer, I., & Bean, W. L. (2023). As easy as OEE: enabling productivity improvement in schools by using overall equipment
effectiveness as framework for classroom data analysis. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma. https://doi.
org/10.1108/IJLSS-03-2022-0057
Fuadi, A., Nasution, W. N., & Wijaya, C. (2023). Management of Teacher Professionalism Development: A Multi-Site Study of
State Madrasah Aliyah in Langkat Regency. Tafkir: Interdisciplinary Journal of Islamic Education, 4(1), 180-199. https://
doi.org/10.31538/tijie.v4i1.444
Fullan, M. (2011). The Six Secrets of Change, What the Best Leaders do to Help. Their Organizations Survive and the Live.
San Francisco; Jossey-Bass.
García-Tudela, P. A., Prendes-Espinosa, P., & Solano-Fernández, I. M. (2023). The Spanish experience of future classrooms
as a possibility of smart learning environments. Heliyon, 9(8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18577
Gentrup, S., Lorenz, G., Kristen, C., & Kogan, I. (2020). Self-fullling prophecies in the classroom: Teacher expectations,
teacher feedback and student achievement. Learning and Instruction, 66, 101296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
learninstruc.2019.101296
Girelli, L., Alivernini, F., Lucidi, F., Cozzolino, M., Savarese, G., Sibilio, M., & Salvatore, S. (2018). Autonomy supportive contexts,
autonomous motivation, and self-efcacy predict academic adjustment of rst-year university students. In Frontiers in
Education, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00095
Gupta, A., Mazumdar, B. D., Mishra, M., Shinde, P. P., Srivastava, S., & Deepak, A. (2023). Role of cloud computing in
management and education. Materials Today: Proceedings, 80, 3726-3729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.07.370
Gutiérrez, M., & Tomás, J. M. (2019). The role of perceived autonomy support in predicting university students’ academic
success mediated by academic self-efcacy and school engagement. Educational Psychology, 39(6), 729-748. https://
doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1566519
Harden, R. M. (2002). Learning Outcomes and Instructional Objectives: Is There a Difference? Medical teacher, 24(2), 151-
155.https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159022020687
Hayat, A. A., Shateri, K., Amini, M., & Shokrpour, N. (2020). Relationships between academic self-efcacy, learning-related
emotions, and metacognitive learning strategies with academic performance in medical students: a structural equation
model. BMC medical education, 20(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-01995-9
Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Abingdon: Routledge.
Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers Make a Difference, What is the research evidence? Working paper.
Ho, H. C., Poon, K. T., Chan, K. K. S., Cheung, S. K., Datu, J. A. D., & Tse, C. Y. A. (2023). Promoting preservice teachers’
psychological and pedagogical competencies for online learning and teaching: The TEACH program. Computers &
Education, 195, 104725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104725
Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2002). The Trouble with Learning Outcomes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 3(3), 220-233.
www.ijcrsee.com
181
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787402003003003
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and Competition: Theory and Research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book
Company.
Johnson, D.W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., & Nelson, D. (1981). Effects of Cooperative, Competitive and Individualistic
Goal Structures on Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47-62. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
2909.89.1.47
Johnston, O., Wildy, H., & Shand, J. (2023). A grounded theory about how teachers communicated high expectations to their
secondary school students. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-
00689-2
Leroy, N., & Bressoux, P. (2016). Does amotivation matter more than motivation in predicting mathematics learning gains?
A longitudinal study of sixth-grade students in France. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44, 41-53. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.02.001
Lo, K. W., Ngai, G., Chan, S. C., & Kwan, K. P. (2022). How students’ motivation and learning experience affect their
service-learning outcomes: A structural equation modeling analysis. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 825902. https://doi.
org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.825902
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hoppkins, D. (2008). Seven Strong Claims About Successful. School Leadership and Management,
28(1), 27-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430701800060
Karakose, T., Polat, H., Yirci, R., Tülübaş, T., Papadakis, S., Ozdemir, T. Y., & Demirkol, M. (2023). Assessment of the relationships
between prospective mathematics teachers’ classroom management anxiety, academic self-efcacy beliefs, academic
amotivation and attitudes toward the teaching profession using structural equation modelling. Mathematics, 11(2), 449.
https://doi.org/10.3390/math11020449
Nonaka, I. (1994). A Dynamic Theory of Organizations Knowledge Creation. Organization science, 5(1), 14-37 https://doi.
org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14
Park, S., & Weng, W. (2020). The relationship between ICT-related factors and student academic achievement and the
moderating effect of country economic index across 39 countries. Educational Technology & Society, 23(3), 1-15.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26926422
Pribudhiana, R., Bin Don, Y., & Bin Yusof, M. R. (2021). Determining the Inuence of Teacher Quality toward Teacher
Readiness in Implementing Indonesian Education Policy. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 93, 373-390.
https://techniumscience.com/index.php/conference/article/view/2877
Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T.A., From, J., & Wohlgennant, I. (2020). A Systematic Review of Immersive Virtual Reality Applications
for Higher Education: Design Elements, Lessons Learned, and Research Agenda. Computers & Education 147.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
Robinson, C. D. (2022). A framework for motivating teacher-student relationships. Educational Psychology Review, 34(4),
2061-2094. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09706-0
Rusyn, H. A., Stynska, V., Matsuk, L., Korostelova, Y. Y., & Stetsyk, S. P. (2021). Efciency of the project method in the
development of professional competencies in future teachers. Revista de la Universidad del Zulia, 12(35), 303-321.
http://dx.doi.org/10.46925//rdluz.35.18
Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., & Woodwark, M. (2013). Learning goals: A qualitative and quantitative review. New developments
in goal setting and task performance, 195-212.
Tang, K. N. (2020). The importance of soft skills acquisition by teachers in higher education institutions. Kasetsart Journal of
Social Sciences, 41(1), 22-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2018.01.002
Tella, A. (2007). The Impact of Motivation on Student’s Academic Achievement and Learning Outcomes in Mathematics Among
Secondary School Students in Nigeria. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(2), 149-
156. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75390
Uyen, V.T.N., & Thu, P.X. (2023). The Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method: Selection of Support Equipment for Classroom
Instructors. Applied Engineering Letters, 8(4),148-157. https://doi.org/10.18485/aeletters.2023.8.4.2
Wargocki, P., & Wyon, D. P. (2017). Ten questions concerning thermal and indoor air quality effects on the performance of
ofce work and schoolwork. Building and Environment, 112, 359-366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.11.020
West-Burnham, J. (1997). Managing Quality in Schools. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Young, M. R., Klemz, B. R., & Murphy, J. W. (2003). Enhancing Learning Outcomes: The Effects of Instructional Technology,
Learning Styles, Instructional Methods, and Student Behavior. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(2), 130-142. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0273475303254004
Yu, Z., Gao, M., & Wang, L. (2021). The effect of educational games on learning outcomes, student motivation, engagement and
satisfaction. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 522-546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120969214
www.ijcrsee.com
182
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
Appendix
Table A1. Results of Principal factor analysis (factor loading)
Variable Item Factor loading
SM SIC TC SM
SCHOOL
MANAGEMENT
(SM)
The school principal develops fair relations with the school staff 0.755
The school principal respects suggestions from the pedagogical and psy-
chological school service 0.788
The school principal respects parent suggestions 0.891
The school principal respects suggestions made by the student parliament 0.774
The school principal provides continuous training for school employees 0.752
The school principal provides good conditions for teaching at school 0.872
The school principal provides pleasant conditions for staying at the school 0.783
SCHOOL
INFRASTRUCTURAL CONDI-
TION (SIC)
The classrooms are pleasant for school teaching 0.775
The gym and other fields are a good place for students’ physical activities 0.714
Computer cabinets are equipped with modern equipment 0.696
The safety of students at school is accompanied by the presence of persons
professionally trained for this activity 0.783
Hallways, restrooms and other school areas are modernly equipped 0.709
The school yard is landscaped and safe for children 0.716
The students’ achievements have been prominently displayed within the
school 0.752
TEACHERS’
COMPETENCES
(TC)
Teachers are adequately educated to teach 0.827
Teachers have developed communication skills 0.901
Teachers adequately transfer knowledge to students 0.772
Teachers use an interactive approach in teaching 0.763
Teachers continuously monitor achievements in their profession and apply
them to teaching 0.754
Teachers’ competencies affect the quality of knowledge with which students
will be able to enroll in their desired school at the end of their schooling 0.811
Teachers only profess to agree with the introduction of innovations while in
practice they do not advocate their implementation due to the uncertainties
that they carry with them 0.729
STUDENT
MOTIVATION
(SM)
Students strive to achieve the desired result throughout the year 0.729
Students perceive innovations in work as a challenge 0.744
Each teacher can motivate students 0.801
Clear, understandable explication, explanation and presentation motivates a
student for a quality of outcome knowledge 0.762
The diversity of didactic-methodological possibilities, on the basis of which
an appropriate choice can be made (depending on the specific situation),
affects motivation 0.713
Encouraging students to notice the value of what they are learning, i.e.,
make them want to learn and use the abilities they have, is the principle
according to which teachers stimulate motivation 0.717
Teachers’ interest, participation and enthusiasm for what they are teaching
motivates students 0.738
www.ijcrsee.com
183
Radivojević N., Pajić V., & Osmanivić S. (2024). The inuence of organizational Factors on the school’s achievements,
International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 12(1), 169-183.
Table A2. The results of ANOVA
Groups Count Between Groups
Principal 21 F P-value F crit
Teacher 439
Schoool mangament 2.939 0.087 3.862
Teachers’ competences 0.989 0.321 3.862
School infrastructural condition 0.258 0.612 3.862
Student Motivation 3.114 0.078 3.862
Table A3. Information about Neural Network Hyperparameters
Learning Algorithm Back-propagation
Optimizer Adam
Learning Rate 0.1
Loss Sum Squared Error
Epochs 500
Hidden Layer(s) Activation Function Hyperbolic tangent
Output Layer Activation Function Identity
