Author :
Year-Number: 2018-Volume 10, Issue 3
Language : null
Konu :
Abstract
The most significant element of schools, i.e., the building block of educational system, seems to be school administrators. Learning motivation, perception and level of school principal and vice-principals are considered as significant for the success of educational system. This study was conducted in order to analyse Professional learning perceptions of school administrators at different career phases. The study was structured with a qualitative approach. The study group consists of 15 school administrators. In-depth interviews were utilized in order to gather data. Semi-structured interview forms were used as data collection tool with respect to professional learning process. Categories and themes were created following content analysis for the assessment of qualitative data. As a result of the analysis of qualitative data, it seems that professional leaning levels of school administrators differ based on career phases. Three different themes were obtained following the content analysis of the data gathered thereof. These themes were identified as follows; School Culture Based on Professional Learning, Professional Learning within the Context of Professional Administration and Professional Learning within the Context of Reflective Thinking
Keywords
Abstract
The most significant element of schools, i.e., the building block of educational system, seems to be school administrators. Learning motivation, perception and level of school principal and vice-principals are considered as significant for the success of educational system. This study was conducted in order to analyse Professional learning perceptions of school administrators at different career phases. The study was structured with a qualitative approach. The study group consists of 15 school administrators. In-depth interviews were utilized in order to gather data. Semi-structured interview forms were used as data collection tool with respect to professional learning process. Categories and themes were created following content analysis for the assessment of qualitative data. As a result of the analysis of qualitative data, it seems that professional leaning levels of school administrators differ based on career phases. Three different themes were obtained following the content analysis of the data gathered thereof. These themes were identified as follows; School Culture Based on Professional Learning, Professional Learning within the Context of Professional Administration and Professional Learning within the Context of Reflective Thinking
Keywords
- by Bakioğlu (1994).
- included in both ends (Karasar, 1995:165). The interviews were the basis of data collection as a method
- as many as possible "(deMarrais, 2004:52). Semi-structured face-to-face interviews are used as an
- opportunity to understand "the words that reveal perspectives" (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007:104). Stating the interview process in detail in the research, it was aimed to increase external validity
- principals between September 01-30, 2016. Participants were informed about the research during the
- Demirel, 2012:240). Content analysis is identified as a careful, detailed, systematic study and
- interpretation of a text in order to reveal the model, theme and meaning (Büyüköztürk, 2012:241). The data were analyzed under the following four stages: 1. Encoding the data, 2. Determining the
- findings (Yıldırım and Şimşek, 2008:259-260). Within the analysis process, interview records and written
- strategies, which were developed to ensure validity and reliability by Lincoln and Guba (1985: quoted
- by: Yıldırım and Şimşek, 2005:228), were used in the research. Accordingly following ‘’credibility’’ and
- identification, b) purposive sampling may be utilized (Erlandson et al., 1993, Quoted by: Yıldırım and
- Şimşek, 2005:228). Following strategies were followed in order to ensure transferability of the research:
- (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2008:228). This is why it was paid attention in the research to ask the questions in
- transcribed and read several times (Punch, 2011:18), and the interviews were encoded based on the
- (2006:19) identifies thematic analysis as division of the data into units first, and then classification of
- (2014:488), professional learning refers to long-term and systematically planned applications that
- they should always make an effort for development (Al-Hınai, 2003; quoted by Bayhan, 2011:275). For
- (Fenwick, 2004), prepare school environment (Balcı, 1988) and eliminate the obstacles regarding
- development (Díaz-Maggioli, 2004). Because, sustainability of professional learning and professional
- promise development (Sikes, 1990). Therefore, school administrators are required to develop
- school and increase the efficiency of the school (Tufan, ve Urhan, 2000: 40-41). While school management (i.e., school principal and vice-principals) is accepted as a level of
- teaching profession in terms of management (Şişman, 2004) is identified as a special area of
- targets and applications (Aydın, 2005: 152). School administrators, who took part in the study, emphasize that school administrators should
- specialization along with humanitarian values. In the study by Çetin and Adıgüzel (2006:179), it is
- throughout their careers (Darling Hammond et al., 2007:64). Professional and personal characteristics
- (Curry, 2002) points outs that preparation programs for the school principals should be prepared more
- cooperation and development in daily practices of the school (Dufour, 2011:67). That the school
- determine professional learning on its own (Şahin, 2014; Collinson and Cook, 2007). Professional
- assigned (İnceçay, 2007: 196). School administrators point out that it is possible to be open to
- education (Lieberman and Pointer Mace, 2010), this will create great changes in the thoughts and
- as regards their adaptation to technology (Hacıfazlıoğlu, Karadeniz and Dalgıç, 2011:99). To turn quick
- school principal training programs re insufficient (Chapman, 2005), school directors are affected by the
- economic conditions to a large extent (Whitaker, 2001; Carrigan et al., 1999), they failed to allocate
- expenditures of the families and children (Balyer, 2013). According to Cameron, Mulholland, ve
- Branson, (2012: 378), it is essential to take into consideration professional requirements, the necessities
- to this Zepeda (2014:302) also concluded in his study regarding professional development in education
- that professional learning should be built on adult learning (Fogarty and Pete 2004, Matthews and Crow
- 2010, Zepeda 2011), however that there is no sample research for professional learning in literature.
- requests (Ramsey 2006, Sorenson 2006), transition from teaching orientation to learning orientation
- (Ellison and Hayes, 2006) and the more stressful and care requiring structure of that (Crow 2006)
- obtained by the administrator (Raelin and Coghlan, 2006: Quoted by: Dalgıç, 2011:64). Experiences of
- published study on reflective thinking, Dalgıç (2013:353) suggests that school administrators should
- regarding their own duties, Turan, Yıldırım and Aydoğdu (2012:74) suggest that similar studies should
- expectations and coping with challenges in the 21st century (Leonard, 2010:1), challenging working
- conditions, encountered by them (Bellamy et al., 2007:1) and changing future conditions as well as
- successful school expectations (Ellison and Hayes, 2006:7-8). There is a need for the administrators with
- Zepeda (2014:39), it is essential that joint applications of professional development initiatives should be
- phases are determined (Bakioğlu, 1994) and the findings in this research support each other. Professional learning levels of school administrators at different career phases is an issue, which
- Aydın, İ. (2005). Öğretimde denetim. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
- Bakioğlu, A. (1994). Okul Yöneticisinin Kariyer Basamakları: İngiliz Eğitim Sisteminde Yöneticilerin Etkinlikleri Üzerindeki Faktörler. M.Ü. Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(17-28). İstanbul.
- Balcı, A. (1998). Yüksek öğretimde toplam kalite yönetimi ölçeği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 15(15), 319-334.
- Balyer, A. (2013). Okul Müdürlerinin Öğretimin Kalitesi Üzerindeki Etkileri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 19(2), 181-214.
- Bayhan, G. (2011). Öğretmenlerin profesyonelliğinin incelenmesi. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
- Bellamy, G. T., Fulmer, C. L., Murphy, M. J., & Muth, R. (2007). Principal accomplishments: How school leaders succeed. NY: Teachers College Press.
- Bilgin, N. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde içerik analizi: teknikler ve örnekler çalışmalar. Siyasal Kitabevi.
- Blandford, S. (2000). Managing Professional Development in Schools. London: Routledge.
- Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
- Bottoms, G. (2010). What School Principals Need to Know about Curriculum and Instruction, Southern Regional Education Board, 1-5.
- Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (12. baskı). Ankara: Pegem A.
- Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (4. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem A.
- Cameron, S., Mulholland, J., ve Branson, C. (2013). Professional learning in the lives of teachers: towards a new framework for conceptualising teacher learning, Asia-Pasific Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4). 377-397.
- Carrigan, M. & Szmigin, I. (1999). Market Research Society. Journal of the Market Research Society; London Vol. 41, Iss. 3: 311-326.
- Chapman, J.D. (2005). Recruitment, Retention and Development of School Principals, International Institute for Educational Planning. Educational Policy Series, UNESCO, 1-37.
- Collinson, V. and Cook, T.F., (2007). Organizational learning: Improving learning, teaching and leading in school systems. Sage, Thousand Oaks.
- Crow, G.M. (2006). Complexity and the beginning principal in the United States: perspectives on socialization. Journal of educational administration, 44(4), 310–325.
- Curry, N. D. (2002). The implementation of professional learning communities components and perceptions of self-efficacy by teachers and school administrators. Doctoral dissertation. Texas A&M UniversityCommerce, USA.
- Dalgıç, G. (2011). Okul yöneticilerinin yansıtıcı düşünme beceri ve uygulamalarının incelenmesi: İstanbul ve Kopenhag Örneği, Doktora tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
- Dalgıç, G. (2013). The Effect of Stakeholders on the Reflective Practice of School Principals Practices in Istanbul and Copenhagen. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practic. sf 1-25
- Darling-Hammond, L., Meyerson, D., LaPointe, M. M., & Orr, M. T. (2007). Preparing principals for a changing world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- deMarrais, K. (2004). Qualitative interview studies: Learning through experience. In K. de Marrais & S. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (pp. 5168). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Díaz-Maggioli, G. (2004). Teacher-centered professional development. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Publications.
- DuFour, R., (2002). In the Right Context. Journal of Staff Development, 22(1), 14-17.
- Dufour, R., (2011). Work together: But only if you want to. Phi delta Kappan, 92(5), 57-61. https://www.researchgate.net/publication adresinden 09.09.2016 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
- Ellison, J. & Hayes, C., (2006). Effective School Leadership: Developing Principals Through Cognitive Coaching. Hawker Brownlow Education, CG0698.
- Ekinci, Ö. ve Yıldırım, A., (2009). İl eğitim denetmenleri ve ilköğretim okulu yöneticilerinin hizmet içi eğitim faaliyetlerine yönelik beklentileri. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 10(1).
- Fenwick, Tara. 2004. “Teacher Learning and Professional Growth Plans: Implementation of a Professional Policy”. [Ebscohost].
- Fogarty, R.J. and Pete, B.M. (2004). The adult learner: some things we know. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
- Fullan, M. (2006). Leading professional learning, Department of Education and Training, Northern Territory Government.
- General Teaching Council for England [GTCE], (2004). “Teachers Professional Learning Framework”, [http://www.gtce.org.uk/cpd_home/tplfpubs, 28-11-2004].
- Hacıfazlıoğlu, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. & Dalgıç, G. (2011). Okul Yöneticilerinin Teknoloji Liderliğine İlişkin Algıları: Metafor Analizi Örneği. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi (EBAD-JESR),1(1), 97-121.
- Institute for Educational Leadership. (2000). Leadership For Student Learning: Reinventing The Principalship. Washington, DC: P.4.
- İnceçay, V., (2007). Öğretmenlerin Profesyonel Öğrenmesine etki eden faktörlerin incelenmesi. (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans tezi), Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
- Karasar, N. (1995). Araştırmalarda Rapor Hazırlama, 8. Basım, Sanem Matbaacılık, Ankara.
- Knapp, M. S. (2003). Professional development as a policy pathway. In R. E. Floden (Ed.). Review of Research in Education (109-158). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
- Konan, N., (2013). İlköğretim Okulu Yöneticilerinin Okuma Alışkanlıkları. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 19(1), 31-59.
- Leonard, J. C., (2010). Finding the time for instructional leadership: management strategies for strengthening the academic program. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
- Lieberman, A. & Pointer Mace, D. (2010). Making practice public: Teacher learning in the 21st century. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 77-88.
- Opfer, V.D., Pedder, D, J. & Lavicza, Z., (2011) The influence of school orientation to learning on teachers' professional learning change, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22:2, 193-214.
- Ömür, Y. E. (2014). Lise yöneticilerinin yenilik yönetimi becerileri ile okullardaki örgütsel öğrenme mekanizmalarına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri, (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans tezi), Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu.
- Peker, Ö. (1995). Yönetimi Geliştirmenin Sürekliliği. TODAİE Yayınları: 258, Ankara.
- Punch, K. F. (2011). Sosyal araştırmalara giriş (Çev. Bayrak, Arslan ve Akyüz). Ankara: Siyasal.
- Ramsey, R.D., (2006). Lead, follow, or get out of the way: how to be a more effective leader in today’s schools. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
- Senge, P. (2004). Beşinci Disiplin. (Çev. Ayşegül İldeniz, Ahmet Doğukan). İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
- Sykes, G. (1999). “Teacher and Student Learning: Strengthening Their Connection”. In Hammond, D. L., Sykes, G. Ed. Teaching as the Learning Profession Handbook of Policy and Practice. First Edition. California: Jossey-Bass Inc.
- Sorensen, K. L. (2006). Department of Psychology, The University of Georgia, First published.
- Şahin, F. (2014). Ortaöğretim Kurumlarında Örgütsel Öğrenmeyi Destekleyici ve Engelleyici Faktörler, (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi), Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
- Şişman, M. (2002). Öğretim Liderliği. Pegem Yayınları, Ankara.
- Taşocak, G. (2002). Hemşirelik eğitiminin çağdaş yönelimlerle irdelenmesi, Afyon Sağlık Meslek Yüksekokulu. Afyon.
- Tufan, R. ve Urhan, R. A. (2000). Okul Yöneticilerinin Kendilerini Geliştirmeleri. Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi, 25(269), Ankara.
- Turan, S., Yıldırım, N. ve Aydoğdu, E. (2012). Okul Müdürlerinin Kendi Görevlerine İlişkin Bakış Açıları. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 2(3), 64.
- Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri, Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
- Varoğlu, K. ve Basım, N. (2014). Örgütsel değişim ve öğrenme. Beta Yayıncılık, (2. Baskı), İstanbul.
- Wells, M. (2014). Elements of effective and sustainable Professional learning, Professional Development in Education, 40(3), 488-504, Professional Development in Education.
- Zepeda, S.J. (2011). Professional development: what works (2nd ed.). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
- Zepeda, S. J., Parylo, O. & Ed Bengtson, E. (2014). Analyzing principal professional development practices through the lens of adult learning theory. Professional Development in Education, 40(2), 295-315.
