Peer Supervision: Its Applicability İn Turkey And Assessment İn Terms Of Some Supervision Principles
Author :
Abstract
The objective of the research is to study the efficacy and applicability of peer supervision in Turkey within the frame of several principles of educational supervision with regard to the opinions of English teachers working at state secondary schools. In accordance with this objective, peer supervision practice was carried out with 12 teachers volunteering to be in the working group and working at four state secondary schools in two districts of Istanbul. The pattern of the research was formed with regard to embedded mixed pattern. In the research, “single group pre & post test model”, which is a pre experiment model was adopted. Within this scope, qualitative data was collected through an experimental research. The quantitative data of the research was collected via ““The Survey Regarding the Ideas of Teachers of English on the Efficacy of Peer Supervision at Secondary Schools” generated by the researchers and the qualitative data was collected through interview forms. Qualitative date of the research was analysed via McNemar Bowker (X2) and Kappa tests. Qualitative data of the research was resolved through content analysis. At the end of the research, peer supervision is seem to be an effective approach by the teachers comprising the working group within the content of both effective supervision of teaching process and efficacy of the supervisor. In order to get the expected benefit from peer supervision, teachers have drawn attention to the importance of prevention of the voluntary basis and planning including school management. Moreover, teachers consider peer supervision as appropriate for continuous and situational principles and as practicable for Turkey.
Keywords
Abstract
The objective of the research is to study the efficacy and applicability of peer supervision in Turkey within the frame of several principles of educational supervision with regard to the opinions of English teachers working at state secondary schools. In accordance with this objective, peer supervision practice was carried out with 12 teachers volunteering to be in the working group and working at four state secondary schools in two districts of Istanbul. The pattern of the research was formed with regard to embedded mixed pattern. In the research, “single group pre & post test model”, which is a pre experiment model was adopted. Within this scope, qualitative data was collected through an experimental research. The quantitative data of the research was collected via ““The Survey Regarding the Ideas of Teachers of English on the Efficacy of Peer Supervision at Secondary Schools” generated by the researchers and the qualitative data was collected through interview forms. Qualitative date of the research was analysed via McNemar Bowker (X2) and Kappa tests. Qualitative data of the research was resolved through content analysis. At the end of the research, peer supervision is seem to be an effective approach by the teachers comprising the working group within the content of both effective supervision of teaching process and efficacy of the supervisor. In order to get the expected benefit from peer supervision, teachers have drawn attention to the importance of prevention of the voluntary basis and planning including school management. Moreover, teachers consider peer supervision as appropriate for continuous and situational principles and as practicable for Turkey.
Keywords
- Açıkalın, A. (1980). Orta dereceli okııl öğretmenlerinin atama yer değiştirme ilkeleri ve amaçları. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi. Ankara.
- Adu, E. O., Akinloye, G. M., & Olaoye, O. F. (2014). Internal and external school supervision: ıssues, challenges and wayforward. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 7(2): 269-278.
- Akıllı, M. (2007). Öz değerlendirme ve akran değerlendirmesi yöntemlerinin öğretmen eğitimine katkısı. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum.
- Alila, S., Määttä, K., & Uusiautti, S. (2016). How does supervision support ınclusive teacherhood? International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(3), 351-362.
- Andrews, T. E.,& Barnes, S. (1990). Assessment of teaching. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education: A project of the association of teachereducators(pp. 569-598). New York: Macmillan.
- Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher Professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10-20. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007
- Aydın, İ. (2005). Öğretimde denetim. Ankara: PegemA Yayınları.
- Aydın, M. (2014). Çağdaş eğitim denetimi. Ankara: Gazi Kitapevi
- Beach, D. B., and J. Reinhartz. (1989). Supervision: Focus on instruction. New York: Harper & Row.
- Baker, W. & McNicoll, A. (2006). I can get by with a littl ehelp from my friends: Peer Mentoring – Critical friends for the reflective practitioner. Proceedings of the 2006 Annual International Conference of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia Inc. Perth.
- Başar, H. (2000). Eğitim denetçisi. Ankara. Pegem-A yayıncılık.
- Bell, A., & Mladenovic, R. (2008). The benefits of peer observation of teaching for tutor development. Higher Education, 55(6), 735-752.
- Benshoff, J. M. (1992). Peer consultation for professional counselors. ERIC Digest. ERIC Number: ED347476.
- Benzley, J., D. Kauchak, & K. Peterson. (1985). Peer evaluation: An interview study of teachers evaluating teachers. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
- Billow, R. M., & Mendelsohn, R. (1987). The peer supervisory group for psychoanalytic therapists. Group, 11(1), 35-46.
- Blackmore, J. A. (2005). A critical evaluation of peer review via teaching observation within higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, 19 (3), 218 – 232.
- Bodenhausen, J. 1990. Teacher attitudes towards peer evaluation: What shapes them? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
- Bogo, M. & McKnight, K. (2006). Clinical supervisionin social work: A review of the research literature. The Clinical Supervisor, 24(1–2), 49–67.
- Borders, L. D. (1991). A systematic approach to peer group supervision. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69(3), 248-252.
- Bozak, A.,Yıldırım, C., ve Demirtaş, H. (2011). Öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimi için alternatif bir yöntem: Meslektaş gözlemi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(2), 65-84.
- Ceylan, M. ve Ağaoğlu E. (2010). Eğitim denetçilerinin danışmanlık rolü ve danışmanlık modelleri İlköğretim Online, 9(2), 541-551,
- Chase, B. (1998). NEA's role: Cultivating teacher professionalism. Educational leadership, 55(5), 18-20.
- Cresswell, J.W. & Clark, L.P. (2015). Karma yöntem araştırmaları tasarımı ve yürütülmesi. (Y. Dede ve S. B. Demir. Çev. Ed.), Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. (Orijinal basım tarihi, 2011).
- Defaru, G., & Asrat, D. (2015). The current practices and problems of school based supervision in primary schools of Jile Timuga Woreda. Science, Technology and Arts Research Journal, 4(1), 180-186. doi: 10.4314/star.v4i1.30
- Drake, T.L., & Roe, W.H. (2003). The principalship (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
- Engin, M. (2003). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin ilköğretim müfettişlerinin rehberlik ve mesleki yardım görevlerine ilişkin algı ve beklentileri. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. İstanbul.
- Gerard, R.J. (2002). Peer evaluatıon as a predictor of future success. Unpublished doctoral thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, USA.
- Gitlin, A. & Smyth, J. (1989). Teacher evaluation: Educative alternatives. Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
- Glikman, C. D., Gordon, S.P. ve Ross_Gordon, J.M. (2014). Denetim ve öğretimsel liderlik: Gelişimsel bir yaklaşım. (M. Bilgin Aksu ve E. Ağaoğlu, Çev. Ed.). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
- Godden, J. (2010) Paper on supervision in socialwork, with particular reference to supervision practice in multidisciplinary teams, Birmingham: BASW.
- Gökçe, F. (1994). Egitimde denetimin amaç ve ilkeleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 10, 73-78
- Gündüz, H. B., & Akar, E. (2016). Peer Supervision: An Alternative Approach in Teachers’ Professional Development and School Achievement. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(3). 211233. doi: 10.15345/iojes.2016.03.017
- Haefele, D. L. (1992). Evaluating teachers: An alternative model. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 5(4), 335-345.
- Hansen, J. C., Robins, T. H., & Grimes, J. (1982). Review of research on practicum supervision. Counselor Education and Supervision. 22, 15 -24
- Heller, D. A. (1989). Peer supervision: A way of professionalizing teaching. Indiana: Phi Delta Kappan.
- Johnson, R. B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education, 118(2), 282- 292.
- İlğan, A.. (2008). İlköğretim müfettişleri ve öğretmenlerinin farklılaştırılmış denetim modelini benimseme ve uygulanabilir bulma düzeyleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 55, 389 – 422.
- Kadushin, A. & Harkness, D. (2002). Supervision in socialwork. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel.
- Kauchak, D., Peterson, K., & Driscoll, A. (1985). An interview study of teachers' attitudes toward teacher evaluation practices. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 19(1), 5-10.
- Kumrow, D. & Dahlen, B. (2002). Is peer review an effective approach for evaluating teachers? The Clearing House, 75(5), 238-241.
- McNicoll, A. ( 2008). The power of peer supervision - No-one knows as much as all of us. Paper for workshop, New Zealand Mentoring Centre.
- Merriam, S.B. (1995). What can you tell from an N of 1? : Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4, 51- 60.
- Miles, M. B. & Huberman, M. A. (1994). An expanded source book qualitative data analysis. California: Sage Publications
- Lowe, A. M. (2000). A study of the evaluation of secondary school teachers in selected schools in southern California as perceived by secondary school teachers and evaluators. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Azusa Pacific Universıty, California, USA. UMI Number: 9971329.
- Lower, M. A. (1987). A study of principals' andteachers' perceptions of and attitudes toward the evaluation of teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.
- Odell, S. J. & Ferraro, D. P. (1992). Teacher mentoring and teacher retention. Journal of Teacher Education,
- Olivia, P. F. and Pawlas, G. E. (2001). Supervision for today's schools. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- Orum, A. M., Feagin, J. R. & Sjoberg, G. (1991). The nature of the case study. In A. M. Orum, J. R. Feagin& G. Sjoberg (Eds.), A case for the case study (pp.1-26). USA: The University of North Carolina Press.
- Öz, M. F. (2003). Türkiye Cumhuriyeti milli eğitim sisteminde teftiş. Eskişehir: Osmangazi Üniversitesi Yayınları, No: 88.
- Paliokosta, P., & Blandford, S. (2010). Inclusion in school: a policy, ideology or lived experience? Similar findings in diverse school cultures. Support for Learning, 25(4), 179-186. doi:10.1111/j.14679604.2010.01464.x
- Pattison, S. (2010). Reaching out: A proactive process to include young people with learning disabilities in counselling in secondary schools in The UK. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 38(3), 301-311. doi:10.1080/03069885.2010.491849
- Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
- Punch, K. F. (2005). Introduction to social research quantitive and qualitive approaches. London: Sage Publications.
- Saban, A. (2000). Hizmet içi eğitimde yeni yaklaşımlar. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 145(1), 25-27.
- Sergiovanni T.J (2001) The Principalship: A Redefinition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Sergiovanni, T. J. and Starratt, R. J. (2006). Supervision: A redefinition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Siegel, S. (1957). Nonparametric tests. The American Statistician, 11(3), 13-19.
- Şenol, Y. (2009). Probleme dayalı öğrenme sürecinde bir klinik denetim ve akran danışma uygulaması: Akdeniz Üniversitesi tıp fakültesi örneği. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Antalya.
- Taşdan, M. (2008). Çağdaş eğitim denetiminde meslektaş yardımlaşması. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(1), 69-92.
- Thakral, S. (2015). The historical context of modern concept of supervision. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS), 6(1), 79-88.
- Tsui, M. S. (2005). Social work supervision: Context and concepts. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, Inc.
- Tunison, S. D. (2001). Instructional supervision: The policy-practice rift. The Journal of Educational Thought.
- Vidmar, D. J. (2005). Reflective peer coaching: Crafting collaborative self-assessment in teaching. Research Strategies, 20(3), 135-148.
- Wanzare, Z., & da Costa, J. L. (2000). Supervision and staff development: Overview of the literature. Nassp Bulletin, 84(618), 47-54.
- Wasonga, C. O., Wanzare, Z. & Rari, B. O. (2011). Adults helping adults: Teacher-initiated supervisiory option for Professional development. International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies, 3(8), 117-120.
- Wexley, K. & Klimoski, R. (1984). Performance appraisal: An update. In K. Rowland & G. Ferris (Eds.), Research in personel and human resources management, (pp. 35-79). Greenwich, Ct: JAI Press.
- Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.
- Yıldırım, K. (2010). Nitel araştırmalarda niteliği artırma. İlköğretim Online, 9(1), 79- 92.
- Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage publications.