İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin Paydaş ve Teftiş Hakkındaki Görüşleri

Bu çalışma, Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB) tarafından geliştirilen genel ve özel alan öğretmen yeterliklerini geliştirmek amacıyla hizmet öncesi ve hizmet içi İngilizce öğretmenlerinin paydaş katılımı ve teftişin rolü hakkındaki görüşlerini bulmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu araştırma nitel araştırma yöntemine dayanmaktadır çünkü ve katılımcıların iki açık uçlu soruyu cevapladıkları mülakat formundan elde edilmiştir ve elde edilen veriler gömülü teorinin sürekli karşılaştırma yöntemine göre analiz edilip sınıflara ayrılmıştır. Çalışmaya 366 İngilizce öğretmeni adayı ve 84 İngilizce öğretmeni katılmıştır. Bulgular öğretmen adaylarının yaklaşık yarısının (n: 179, 49%) ve İngilizce öğretmenlerinin yaklaşık üçte birinin (n: 28, 33.3%) öğretmen yeterliklerini geliştirmek amacıyla paydaşların katılımı konusunda olumlu görüş bildirdiğini göstermektedir fakat bazı öğretmen adayları (n: 111, 30.4%) ve İngilizce öğretmenleri (n: 30, 35.6%) öğretmenlik mesleğiyle ilgili yeterliklerin geliştirilmesi konusunda teftişin rolü konusunda olumsuz görüş bildirmişlerdir. Bulgular ışığında katılımcı İngilizce öğretmenlerin paydaş katılımından yana oldukları ama teftiş uygulamalarına ilişkin bazı endişeleri olduğu söylenebilir

English Teachers’ Perspectives about Stakeholders and Inspection

This study aims to find out the perspectives of pre-service and in-service English teachers about the participation of stakeholders and role of inspection to improve the generic and field-specific teacher competencies set by the Turkish Ministry of National Education (MoNE). This study is based on qualitative research methods since the data were collected with the help of a written interview form (WIF) where the participants answered open-ended questions and the data were analysed and categorized by two coders according to the constant comparison method of grounded theory. 366 preservice and 84 in-service English teachers participated in the study. The findings show that about half of the pre-service teachers (n: 179, 49%) and one third of the in-service teachers (n: 28, 33.3%) held positive attitude towards the participation of stakeholders to improve teacher competencies. However, some teacher candidates (n: 111, 30.4%) and in-service English teachers (n: 30, 35.6%) had negative opinions about the role of inspection on their professional competencies. In light of the findings, it can be said that while the participant English teachers are in favor of stakeholder participation they have some concerns about the implementation of inspection

PDF

___

Adoniou, M. (2013). Preparing teachers: The importance of connecting contexts in teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(8), 47-60.
AkbabaAltun, S. &Memişoğlu, S. P. (2008). The opinions of teachers, administrators and supervisors regarding performance assesment.Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 53, 7-24.
Aslanargun, E. &Göksoy, S. (2013). Who should supervise teachers?UşakÜniversitesiSosyalBilimler Dergisi, ÖzelSayı, 98-121.
Bickmore, D. L.&Bickmore, S. T. (2010). A multifaceted approach to teacher induction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1006-1014.
British Council and TürkiyeEkonomiPolitikalarıAraştırmaVakfı (TEPAV) (November, 2013). National needs analysis of English language teaching at state schools in Turkey. Ankara: Mattek Publishing.
Burkert, A. (2009). Recent innovative developments in language education: The EPOSTL as a tool to bridge the gap between theory and practice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Graz, Graz.
Burns, S. N. & Grove, S. K. (2003). Understanding nursing research. 3rd edition. Philadelphia: Saunders.
Cresswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioralresearch.Thousands Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Çırak, S. &Demir, S. (2014). Examining classroom teachers’ views about their competencies concerning the integration of technology. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 99-113.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. New York: Oxford University Press.
Genç, S. Z. (2005). İlköğretim 1. Kademedeki okul-aile işbirliği ile ilgil iöğretmen ve veli görüşleri. Türk EğitimBilimleriDergisi, 3(2), 227-243.
Glaser, B. G. &Strauss, A. L. (1980). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research (11th ed.). New York: Aldine Publishing Company.
Harding, K.& Parsons, J. (2011).Improving teacher education programs. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(11), 51-61.
Isıkoglu, N., Basturk, R.,&Karaca, F. (2009). Assessing in-service teachers’ instructional beliefs about Student centered education: A Turkish perspective. Teaching and TeacherEducation, 25, 350-356.
Jensen, B. (2010). What Teachers Want: Better Teacher Management. Melbourne: Grattan Institute.
Jetnikoff, A. (2011). What do beginning English teachers want from professional development? Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(10), 53-64.
Kani, Z. G. (2011). A case study on the English language teacher trainees' perceptions about teacher competencies identified by Common European Framework (CEF) and European Language Portfolio (ELP). Unpublished master’s thesis, ÇanakkaleOnsekiz Mart University, Institute Of Social Sciences, Çanakkale.
Kleinhenz, E. & Ingvarson, L. (2007). Standards for Teaching: Theoretical Underpinnings and Applications. Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/teaching_standards/1.
Maxwell, J. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62,279- 299.
Mayer, D., Mitchell, J., MacDonald, D., & Bell, R. (2005). Professional standards for teachers: A case study of professional learning. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(2), 159-179.
Memduhoğlu, H. B. (2012). The issue of education supervision in Turkey in the views of teachers, administrators, supervisors and lecturers. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(1), 149-156.
Memduhoğlu, H. B. &Mazlum, M. M. (2014). The story of change: The metaphoric perceptions about education supervisors.Trakya University Journal of Education, 4(1), 28-47.
Miles, M. B.& Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. London: Sage Publication.
Newby, D. (2007). The European portfolio for student teachers of languages. Retrieved from http://www.babylonia-ti.ch/.
Newby, D. (2012). Insights into the European portfolio for student teacher of languages (EPOSTL). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholarship.
Oğuz, E., Yılmaz, K. & Taşdan, M. (2007). İlköğretim denetmenlerinin ve ilköğretim okulu yöneticilerinin Denetim inançları. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi Sayı, 17, 39-51.
Örücü, D. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ metaphors towards school, school administrators and Turkish education system. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20(3), 327-358. doi: 10.14527/kuey.2014.014.
Thornberg, R. (2012). Informed grounded theory. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56(3), 243-259.