Öğretmenlerin Perspektifinden Okul Müdürlerinin Öğretim Liderliği Davranışlarının Değerlendirilmesi
Bu araştırmada, öğretmenlerin perspektifinden okul müdürlerinin öğretim liderliği davranışlarının değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Hallinger ve Murphy tarafından geliştirilen öğretim liderliği modelinin boyutlarının ölçüt alındığı bu çalışma, fenomenolojik desende kurgulanmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu kamu okullarında görev alan 15 öğretmen oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma verileri içerik analizine tabii tutulmuştur. Araştırma sonuçları okul müdürlerinin öğretim liderliği bakımından bu modelde belirtilen bazı alanlarda güçlü, bazı alanlarda ise zayıf davranışlar gösterdikleri görülmüştür. Okul müdürleri okulun amaçlarını iletme, müfredatı izleme, ulaşılabilir olma, ders zamanını etkili kullanma, öğretmen başarısını takdir etme ve öğrenciyi öğrenmeye teşvik etme konularında güçlü davranışlar sergilemişlerdir. Diğer taraftan okulun amacını belirleme, müfredatı geliştirme, öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimine katkıda bulunma ve öğrenci öğrenmelerini izleme konularında da zayıf davranışlar sergiledikleri görülmüştür.
An Evaluation of School Principals’ Instructional Leadership Behaviours from the Perspective of Teachers
The primary aim of this study was to evaluate school principals’ instructional leadership behaviours based onteachers’ views. The instructional leadership model developed by Hallinger and Murphy (1985) was used, andthe phenomenological design of qualitative research was employed. The participants were 16 teachers workingat public schools in Turkey. The data were analysed using content analysis technique. The results showed thatschool principals performed well in some of the areas determined by Hallinger and Murphy while performingweakly in other areas. They performed strong behaviours in conveying the objectives of the school, organisingthe curriculum, being available, preserving the time allocated to instruction, appreciating teachers’ success andmonitoring student development. However, they were reported to show a weak performance in determining theschool objectives, improving the curriculum, contributing to teachers’ professional development and followingstudent learning. Based on the results, it can be suggested that policy-makers should create favourable conditionsfor school principals to act more independently in curriculum development. Moreover, school principals shouldmake an effort to ensure teachers’ professional development and form a school culture that would strengthenprofessional cooperation among teachers. Above all, school principals’ knowledge and expertise regarding instructionalleadership can be enhanced by means of in-service training programs.
___
- Aktepe, V., & Buluç, B. (2014). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin algılarına göre okul yöneticilerinin
öğretim liderliği özelliklerinin değerlendirilmesi. [Elementary school teahcers’ perceptions
of school administrators’ instructional leadership characteristics]. Gazi Üniversitesi
Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(2), 227-247.
- Al-Mahdy, Y. F. H., Emam, M. M., & Hallinger, P. (2018). Assessing the contribution
of principal instructional leadership and collective teacher efficacy to teacher
commitment in Oman. Teaching and Teacher Education, 69, 191-201. doi:
10.1177/1741143217700283
- Alsaleh, A. (2018). Investigating instructional leadership in Kuwait’s educational reform
context: school leaders’ perspectives. School Leadership & Management, 38, 1-25. doi:
10.1080/13632434.2018.1467888
- Anıl, F., & Sarpkaya, R. (2014). Anadolu ve meslek lisesi okul yöneticilerinin öğretimsel
liderlik rolleri. [Instructional leadership roles of Anatolian and vocational high school
administrators]. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi,
4(1), 1-21.
- Arslantaş, H. İ., & Özkan, M. (2012). Okul müdürlerinin çatışma çözmede yapıcı – yıkıcı
olmaları ile öğretim liderliği arasındaki ilişki. [The relationship between school principals’
being constructive-destrictive in conflic resolution and instructional leadership].
Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 34, 231-240.
- Ayık, A., & Şayir, G. (2014). Okul müdürlerinin öğretimsel liderlik davranışları ile örgüt
iklimi arasındaki ilişki. [The relationship between school principals’ instructional
leadership behaviours and organisational climate]. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi,
13(49), 253-279. doi: 10.17755/esosder.39460.
- Balcı, A. (2008). Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin bilimleşme düzeyi. [Evolution of educational
administration as a scientific discipline in Turkey]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim
Yönetimi Dergisi, 14(2), 181-209.
- Baş, G., & Yıldırım, A. (2010). İlköğretim okulu müdürlerinin öğretim liderliği davranışlarının
farklı değişkenler açısından değerlendirmesi. [Evaluationg of primary school
principals’ instructional leadership behaviours in terms of different variables]. E-Journal
of New World Sciences Academy, 5(4), 1909-1931.
- Bellibaş, M. S., & Gedik, Ş. (2014). Özel ve devlet okullarında çalışan müdürlerin öğretim
liderliği becerileri açısından karşılaştırılması: Karma yöntem. [Comparison of private
and state school principals’ instructional leadership skills]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim
Yönetimi, 20(4), 453-482. doi: 10.14527/kuey.2014.018
- Bellibas, M. S., Bulut, O., Hallinger, P., & Wang, W.C. (2016). Developing a validated
instructional leadership profile of Turkish primary school principals. International Journal
of Educational Research 75, 115-133.doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2015.10.002
- Bellibas, M. S., & Liu, Y. (2017). Multilevel analysis of the relationship between principals’
perceived practices of instructional leadership and teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions.
Journal of Educational Administration, 55(1), 49-69. doi: 10.1108/JEA-12-
2015-0116
- Bellibas, M. S., & Liu, Y. (2018). The effects of principals’ perceived instructional and
distributed leadership practices on their perceptions of school climate. International
Journal of Leadership in Education, 21(2), 226-244.
- Berry, B., Johnson, D., & Montgomery, D. (2005). The power of teacher leadership. Educational
Leadership, 62(5), 56-60.
- Beycioğlu, K., & Dönmez, B. (2006). Eğitim yönetiminde kuramsal bilginin üretimine ve
uygulanmasına ilişkin bir değerlendirme. [An evaluation on the production of theoretical
knowledge and its application in educational administration]. Kuram ve Uygulamada
Eğitim Yönetimi, 47(47), 317-342.
- Beycioglu, K. & Wildy, H. (2015). Principal preparation: The case of novice pridncipals in
Turkey. K. Beycioğlu & P. Pashiardis (Ed.). In Multidimensional perspectives on principal
leadership effectiveness (pp.1-17). USA: IGI Global.
- Blase, J., & Blase, J. (2000). Effective instructional leadership: Teachers’ perspectives
on how principals promote teaching and learning in schools. Journal of Educational
Administration, 38(2), 130-141. doi: 10.1108/09578230010320082
- Borden, A. L. (2011). Relationships between Paraguayan principals’ characteristics, teachers’
perceptions of instructional leadership and school outcomes. International Journal
of Leadership in Education, 14(2), 203-227. doi: 10.1080/13603124.2010.482675
- Bozkurt, S., & Arslanargun, E. (2015). Öğretim sürecinin yönetimi ve öğrenci başarısının
değerlendirilmesine yönelik okul müdürlerinin öğretim liderliği davranışları. [School
principals’ instructional leadership behaviours towards the management of the instructional
process and the evaluation of student achievement]. Eğitim ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi,
6(11), 151-174.
- Brandon, J., Hollweck, T., Donlevy, J. K., & Whalen, C. (2018). Teacher supervision and
evaluation challenges: Canadian perspectives on overall instructional leadership. Teachers
and Teaching, 24(3), 263-280. doi: 10.1080/13540602.2018.1425678
- Bursalıoğlu, Z. (2017). Okul yönetiminde yeni yapı ve davranış. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
- Bush, T. (2015). Understanding instructional leadership. Educational Management Administration
& Leadership, 43(3), 487-489. doi: 10.1177/1741143215577035
- Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2017). Bilimsel
araştırma yöntemleri. [Scientific research methods]. Ankara: Pegema Akademi.
- Calık, T., Sezgin, F., Kavgacı, H., & Kılınç, A., Ç. (2012). Okul müdürlerinin öğretim
liderliği davranışları ile öğretmen öz yeterliği ve kolektif öğretmen yeterliği arasındaki
ilişkilerin incelenmesi. [Examining the relationships between school principals’ instructional
leadership behaviours and teacher self-efficacy and collective teacher efficacy].
Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(4), 2487-2504
- Can, N., & Çelikten, M. (2000). Türkiye’de eğitim yöneticilerinin yetiştirilmesi süreci.
[The process of training educational administrators in Turkey]. Milli Eğitim Dergisi,
148(8), 43-50.
- Cansoy, R., & Polatcan, M. (2018). Examination of instructional leadership research
in Turkey. Journal of Educational Administration, 10(1), 276-291. doi: 10.15345/iojes.2018.01.020
- Çelikten, M. (2005). A perspective on women principals in Turkey. International Journal
of Leadership in Education, 8(3), 207-221. doi: 10.1080/13603120500041835
- Christensen, L. B., Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2015). Araştırma yöntemleri: Desen ve
analiz [Research methods: Design and analysis]. (Translator: A. Aypay). Ankara: Anı
Yayıncılık.
- Coyle, M. (1997). Teacher leadership vs. school management: Flatten the hierarchies. The
Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 70(5), 236-239.
doi: 10.1080/00098655.1997.10543923
- Creswell, J. W. (2013). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods]. (Translator:
L. Bütün & B. Demir). Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
- Duyar, I., Gumus, S., & Bellibas, M. S. (2013). Multilevel analysis of teacher work attitudes:
The influence of principal leadership and teacher collaboration. International
Journal of Educational Management, 27(7), 700-719.
- Giorgi, A. (2006). Concerning variations in the application of the phenomenological method.
The Humanistic Psychologist, 34(4), 305-319.
- Giorgi, A. (2008). Difficulties encountered in the application of the phenomenological
method in the social sciences. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 8(1), 1-9.
- Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian
approach. Pittsburgh, PA, US: Duquesne University Press.
- Gumus, S., & Akcaoglu, M. (2013). Instructional leadership in Turkish primary schools:
An analysis of teachers’ perceptions and current policy. Educational Management Administration
& Leadership, 41(3), 289-302. doi: 10.1177/1741143212474801.
- Gumus, E., & Bellibas, M. S. (2016). The effects of professional development activities on
principals’ perceived instructional leadership practices: multi-country data analysis
using TALIS 2013. Educational Studies, 42(3), 287-301. doi:10.1080/03055698.2016.
1172958
- Gumus, S., Bellibas, M. S., Esen, M., & Gumus, E. (2018). A systematic review of studies
on leadership models in educational research from 1980 to 2014. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 25-48. doi:10.1080/13603124.2018.15087
53
- Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the instructional leadership behavior of
principals. Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217–248. doi: 10.1086/461445
- Hallinger, P., & Heck, R.H. (1996). Reassessing the principals’ role in school effectiveness:
a review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly,
32(1), 5-44. doi: 10.1177/0013161X96032001002
- Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional
and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-352.
- Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy
that refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 221-239. doi:
10.1080/15700760500244793
- Hallinger, P. (2011). A review of three decades of doctoral studies using the principal
instructional management rating scale: A lens on methodological progress in educational
leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 271-306. doi:
10.1177/0013161X10383412
- Hallinger, P., & Lee, M. (2014). Mapping instructional leadership in Thailand: Has education
reform impacted principal practice? Educational Management Administration
& Leadership, 42(1), 6-29. doi: 10.1177/1741143213502196
- Hallinger, P. & Wang, W.C. (2015). The evolution of instructional leadership. P. Hallinger,
W. C. Wang, C. W. Chen, & D. Liare, (Ed.) In Assessing Instructional Leadership with
the Principal Instructional Management Rating Scale (pp. 1-23). Dordrecht, Netherlands:
Springer.
- Hallinger, P., Walker, A., Nguyen, D. T. H., Truong, T., & Nguyen, T. T. (2017). Perspectives
on principal instructional leadership in Vietnam: a preliminary model. Journal of
Educational Administration, 55(2), 222-239. doi:10.1108/JEA-11-2015-0106
- Hallinger, P., Hosseingholizadeh, R., Hashemi, N., & Kouhsari, M. (2018). Do beliefs
make a difference? Exploring how principal self-efficacy and instructional leadership
impact teacher efficacy and commitment in Iran. Educational Management Administration
& Leadership, 46(5), 800-819. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2017.10.007
- Harris, A. (2004). Distributed leadership and school improvement: leading or misleading?
Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32(1), 11-24. doi:
10.1177/1741143204039297
- Harris, A., & Spillane, J. (2008). Distributed leadership through the looking glass. Management
in Education, 22(1), 31-34. doi: 10.1177/0892020607085623
- Harris, A., Jones, M., Cheah, K. S. L., Devadason, E., & Adams, D. (2017). Exploring
principals’ instructional leadership practices in Malaysia: insights and implications.Journal
of Educational Administration, 55(2), 207-221. doi: 10.1108/JEA-05-2016-0051
- Heck, R. H., Larsen, T. J., & Marcoulides, G. A. (1990). Instructional leadership and
school achievement: Validation of a causal model. Educational Administration Quarterly,
26(2), 94-125. doi: 10.1177/0013161X90026002002
- Heck, R. H. (1992). Principals’ instructional leadership and school performance: Implications
for policy development. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(1),
21-34. doi: 10.3102/01623737014001021
- Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2009). Assessing the contribution of distributed leadership
to school improvement and growth in math achievement. American Educational Research
Journal, 46(3), 659-689. doi: 10.3102/0002831209340042
- Hoadley, U., Christie, P., & Ward, C. L. (2009). Managing to learn: instructional leadership
in South African secondary schools. School Leadership and Management, 29(4),
373-389. doi: 10.1080/13632430903152054.
- Hopkins, D. (2013). Instructional leadership and school improvement. A. Harris, C. Day,
D. Hopkins, M. Hadfield, A. Hargreaves, C. Chapman (Eds.), Effective leadership for
school improvement (pp. 65-81). London: Routledge.
- İnandı, Y., & Özkan, M. (2006). Resmi ilköğretim okulları ve liselerde görev yapan yönetici
ve öğretmenlerin görüşlerine göre müdürler ne derece öğretim liderliği davranışları
göstermektedir? [To what extent school principals perform instructional leadership
behaviours based on the views of administrators and teachers working in prmary and high
schools?]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2), 123-149.
- Kalman, M., & Arslan, M. C. (2016). School principals’ evaluations of their instructional
leadership behaviours: realities vs. ideals. School Leadership & Management, 36(5),
508-530. doi:10.1080/13632434.2016.1247049
- Kamu Yönetimi Araştırma Projesi (KAYA) [Public Administration Research] (1991).
Retrieved fromhttp://www.todaie.edu.tr//resimler/ekler/185a8f8def383a8_ek.pdf on
10/06/2018.
- Kaparou, M., & Bush, T. (2015). Instructional leadership in centralised systems: evidence
from Greek high-performing secondary schools. School Leadership & Management,
35(3), 321-345. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2015.1041489
- Krug, S. E. (1992). Instructional leadership: A constructivist perspective. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 28(3), 430-443. doi:10.1177/0013161X92028003012
- Kuhnert, K. W., & Lewis, P. (1987). Transactional and transformational leadership: A
constructive/developmental analysis. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 648-657.
doi: 10.5465/amr.1987.4306717
- Lai, E., & Cheung, D. (2013). Implementing a new senior secondary curriculum in Hong
Kong: instructional leadership practices and qualities of school principals. School Leadership
& Management, 33(4), 322-353. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2013.813459
- Laverty, S. L. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison
of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, 2(3), 21-35.
- Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership redefined: An evocative context for teacher leadership.School
Leadership & Management, 23(4), 421-430. doi:10.1080/1363243032000150953
- Lee, M., Hallinger, P., & Walker, A. (2012). A distributed perspective on instructional
leadership in International Baccalaureate (IB) schools. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 48(4), 664-698. doi: 10.1177/0013161X11436271
- Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1990). Transformational leadership: How principals can help
reform school cultures. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(4), 249-280.
doi: 10.1080/0924345900010402
- Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational
conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational
Administration, 38(2), 112-129. doi: 10.1108/09578230010320064
- Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (2003). Toward a second generation of school leadership
standards. P. Hallibger (Ed.), Reshaping the landscape of school leadership development:
A global perspective (pp.257-272). Tokyo: Sweet & Zeitlinger.
- Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). A review of transformational school leadership
research 1996–2005. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 177-199. doi:
10.1080/15700760500244769
- Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful
school leadership. School Leadership and Management, 28(1), 27-42. doi:
10.1080/13632430701800060
- Leithwood, K., Patten, S., & Jantzi, D. (2010). Testing a conception of how school leadership
influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 671-706.
doi: 10.1177/0013161X10377347
- Lin, C. S. (2013). Revealing the “essence” of things: Using phenomenology in research.
Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 4, 469-478.
- Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. L. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: An
integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397. doi: 10.1177/0013161x03253412
- Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Algının fenomenolojisi (Translator: E. Sarıkartal & E. Hacımuratoğlu).
İstanbul: İthaki Yayınları.
- May, H., & Supovitz, J. A. (2011). The scope of principal efforts to improve instruction.Educational
Administration Quarterly, 47(2), 332-352. doi: 10.1177/0013161X10383411
- Ministry of National Education. (1949). IV. Millî Eğitim Şurası Kararları. [Decisions of the
Fourth National Education Council] Retrieved fromhttps://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_
dosyalar/2017_09/29164715_4_sura.pdf on 10/06/2018.
- Ministry of National Education. (2017). Millî eğitim bakanlığı ortaöğretim kurumları yönetmeliğinde
değişiklik yapılmasına dair yönetmelik. [Regulations on making changes
in the regulations on high school institutions of the Ministry of National Education].
Retrieved from http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2017/09/20170916-15.htm on
15/06/2018
- Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. London: Sage Publications.
- Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the
UK. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 961-972. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.010
Murphy, J. (1998). What’s ahead for tomorrow’s principals? Principal, 78(1), 13-14.
- Nettles, S. M. and Herrington, C. (2007). Revisiting the importance of the direct effects of
school leadership on student achievement: The implications for school improvement
policy. Peabody Journal of Education, 82 (4), 724-736. doi: 10.1080/01619560701603239
- Örücü, D., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Akademisyenlerin gözünden Türkiye’de eğitim yönetiminin
akademik durumu: Nitel bir analiz. [The academic state of educational administration
in Turkey from the perspectives of academics: A qualitative analysis] Kuram
ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 17(2), 167-197.
- Padilla-Diaz, M. (2015). Phenomenology in educational qualitative research: Philosophy
as science or philosophical science. International Journal of Educational Excellence,
1(2), 101-110.
- Pansiri, N. O. (2008). Instructional leadership for quality learning: An assessment
of the impact of the primary school management development project in Botswana.
Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(4), 471-494. doi:
10.1177/1741143208095789
- Parlar, H., & Cansoy, R. (2017). Examining the relationship between ınstructional leadership
and organizational health. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(4),
18-28. doi:10.11114/jets.v5i4.2195
- Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3.Ed.). Londodn: Sage
Publication.
- Recepoğlu, E., & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2014). Türkiye’de okul yöneticilerinin seçilmesi ve yetiştirilmesi:
mevcut sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. [Selection and placement of school principals
in Turkey: Current problems and suggestions] Turkish Studies, 9(2), 1817-1845. doi:
10.7827/TurkishStudies.6136
- Rigby, J. G. (2014). Three logics of instructional leadership. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 50(4), 610-644. doi: 10.1177/0013161X13509379
- Robinson, V. M. (2010). From instructional leadership to leadership capabilities: Empirical
findings and methodological challenges. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9(1),
1-26. doi: 10.1080/15700760903026748
- Sağır, M., & Emişoğlu, S., P. (2013). Primary school administrators’ degrees of encountering
problems in instructional leadership roles and the problems they encounter.
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 39-56.
- Sahin, S. (2011). Öğretimsel liderlik ve okul kültürü arasındaki ilişki (İzmir İli Örneği).
[The relationship between instructional leadership and school culture (Case of Izmir province)]
Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 11(4), 1909-1928
- Scheerens, J. (2012). Summary and conclusion: Instructional leadership in schools as loosely
coupled organizations. J. Scheerens (Ed.), School leadership effects revisited (pp.
131-152). Netherlands: Springer, Dordrecht.
- Sebastian, J., & Allensworth, E. (2012). The influence of principal leadership on classroom
instruction and student learning: A study of mediated pathways to learning. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 626-663. doi: 10.1177/0013161x11436273
- Serin, M. K., & Buluç, B. (2012). İlköğretim okul müdürlerinin öğretim liderliği davranışları
ile öğretmenlerin örgütsel bağlılıkları arasındaki ilişki. [The relationship between
primary school principals’ instructional leadership behaviours and teachers’ organisational
commitment] Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 3(3), 435- 459.
- Silins, H. C. (1994). The relationship between transformational and transactional leadership
and school improvement outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement,
5(3), 272-298. doi: 10.1080/0924345940050305
- Simsek, H. (2002). Türkiye’de eğitim yöneticisi yetiştirilemez! [Educational administrators
cannot be trained in Turkey!] C. Elma & Ş. Çınkır (Ed). Proceedings of the Symposium
on Training Educational Administrators in the 21st Century. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi
Eğitim Fakültesi Yayınları.
- Sişman, M. (2004). Öğretim liderliği. [Instructional leadership] Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
- Sheppard, B. (1996). Exploring the transformational nature of instructional leadership.
Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 325-44.
- Smylie, M. A., Conley, S., & Marks, H. M. (2002). Exploring new approaches to teacher
leadership for school improvement. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of
Education, 101(1), 162-188. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7984.2002.tb00008.x
- Sofo, F., Fitzgerald, R., & Jawas, U. (2012). Instructional leadership in Indonesian school
reform: overcoming the problems to move forward. School Leadership & Management,
32(5), 503-522. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2012.723616
- Southworth, G. (2002). Instructional leadership in schools: Reflections and empirical evidence.School
Leadership & Management,22(1), 73-91. doi: 10.1080/13632430220143042
- Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership
practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23-28. doi:
10.3102/0013189X030003023
- Tan, C. Y. (2012). Instructional leadership: toward a contextualised knowledge
creation model. School Leadership & Management, 32(2), 183-194. doi:
10.1080/13632434.2011.614944
- Terosky, A. L. (2016). Enacting instructional leadership: perspectives and actions of
public K-12 principals. School Leadership & Management, 36(3), 311-332. doi:
10.1080/13632434.2016.1247044
- Ünal, A., & Çelik, M. (2013). Okul yöneticilerinin öğretimsel liderlik davranışı ile öğretmenlerin
örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışlarının analizi [The Analysis of the Instructional
Leadership Behaviour of the Principals with the Organizational Citizenship Behaviours
of the Teachers]. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(2), 239-258.
- van Manen, M. (2007). Phenomenology of practice. Phenomenology & Practice, 1(1),11-
30.
- Yavuz, M., & Bas, G. (2010). Perceptions of elementary teachers on the instructional leadership
role of school principals. US-China Education Review, 7(4), 83-93.
- Yang, Y. (2014). Principals’ transformational leadership in school improvement. International
Journal of Educational Management, 28(3), 279-288. doi: 10.1108/IJEM-04-
2013-0063
- Yılmaz, E., & Kurşun, A., T. (2015). Okul müdürlerinin öğretimsel liderlik davranışları
ile öğretmenlerin akademik iyimserlik düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. [The relationship
between school principals’ instructional leadership behaviours and teachers’ academic
optimism]. Çağdaş Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(1), 1-14.
- Zheng, X., Yin, H., & Li, Z. (2018). Exploring the relationships among instructional
leadership, professional learning communities and teacher self-efficacy
in China. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(5), 1-17.
doi:10.1177/1741143218764176