Okul Yöneticilerinin Motivasyonel Dili ile Öğretmen Öz Yeterliği Arasındaki İlişki Üzerine Bir Çalışma

Year 2018, , 177 - 183, 11.04.2018

Selçuk Demir

https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.384848

Cited By: 7

Abstract

Bu
çalışmada okul yöneticilerinin kullandığı motivasyonel dil ile öğretmen öz
yeterliği arasındaki ilişkinin tespit edilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada
ilişkisel tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini, Hatay il
merkezinde bulunan Milli Eğitim Bakanlığına bağlı kamu ortaokullarında
2017–2018 eğitim-öğretim yılında görev yapmakta olan öğretmenler arasından
yansız olarak seçilmiş 26 okulda çalışan 321 öğretmen oluşturmaktadır.
Verilerin toplanmasında “Motivasyonel Dil Ölçeği” ve “Öğretmen Öz Yeterlik
Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Veriler SPSS programı ile analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma
bulgularına göre; okul müdürünün kullandığı motivasyonel dil öğretmen öz
yeterliğini pozitif ve anlamlı olarak yordamaktadır. Ayrıca, motivasyonel dilin
empatik dil alt boyutu öğretmen öz yeterliğini anlamlı olarak yordarken,
yönlendirici dil ve anlam oluşturucu dil alt boyutları öğretmen öz yeterliğini
anlamlı olarak yordamamaktadır. Öğretmen öz yeterliğini arttırmak için okul
yöneticisinin algılanan motivasyonel dilini güçlendirme ve geliştirmeye yatırım
yapmalarında fayda görülmektedir.

Keywords

Motivasyonel Dil, Öz Yeterlik, Okul Yöneticisi, Öğretmen

A Study on the Relationship Between School Administrators’ Motivational Language and Teacher Self-Efficacy

Abstract

In
this study, it was aimed to determine the relationship between school
administrators’ motivational language and teacher self-efficacy. Survey-based
relational design was used. The research sample consists of 321 teachers in 26
schools that were selected randomly from the middle schools affiliated to the
Ministry of National Education at Hatay’s city center in 2017-2018 academic
year. Data analyses were performed with the program of SPSS. Data were
collected by “Motivational Language Scale” and “Teacher Self-Efficacy Scale”.
According to the study findings, motivational language used by school
administrators positively and significiantly predicts teacher self-efficacy.
While empathetic sub-scale and sub-dimension of motivational language
significantly predict teacher self-efficacy, directing-giving and
meaning-making do not predict. It may be beneficial for school managers to
invest in developing and strengthening motivational language in order to
enhance teacher self–efficacy.   

Keywords

Motivational Language, Self-Efficacy, School Manager, Teacher

References

• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman press.
• Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Journal of Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 269–290.
• Betoret, F.G., & Artiga, A.G. (2010). Barriers perceived by teachers at work, coping strategies, self-efficacy and burnout. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 637-654.
• Brannon, K.L. (2011). The effects of leader communication medium and motivating language on perceived leader effectiveness. Doctorate Dissertation. Arizona, USA: Northcentral University.
• Busch, T., Fallan, L., & Pettersen, A. (1998). Disciplinary differences in job satisfaction, self‐efficacy, goal commitment and organisational commitment among faculty employees in norwegian colleges: An empirical assessment of indicators of performance. Quality in Higher Education, 4(2), 137-157, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1353832980040204
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E.K., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. V., & Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem A.
• Caprara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P.S. (2006). Teachers' self-efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students' academic achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 473–490.
• Chory-Assad R. M. (2002). Classroom justice: Perceptions of fairness as a predictor of student motivation, learning, and aggression. Communication Quarterly, 50 (1), 58-77.
• Conger, J. (1991). Inspiring others: The language of leadership. Academy of Management Executives,1, 31-44.
• Fraenkel, J.R.,Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. Dubai: Oriental Press.
• Gkolia, A., Belias, D., & Koustelios, A. (2014). Teacher’s job satisfaction and self-efficacy: A review. European Scientific Journal,10(22), 321-342.
• Gutierrez-Wirsching, S., Mayfield, J., Mayfield, M., & Wang, W. (2015). Motivating language as a mediator between servant leadership and employee outcomes. Management Research Review, 38(12), 1234-1250.
• Hefferon, K., & Boniwell, I. (2011). Positive Psychology: Theory, Research and Applications. New York: Mc Graw-Hill Open International Publishing Ltd..
• Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
• Kreitner, R., & Kinichi, A. (2009). Organizational Behaviour. New York: Mc Graw-Hill International Edition, Ninth edition.
• Lunenburg, F.C., & Ornstein, A.C. (2012). Educational Administration: Concepts and Practices. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning Publishing, Sixth Edition.
• Lüscher, L. S., & Lewis, M. W. (2008). Organizational change and managerial sensemaking: Working through paradox. Academy of Management Journal, 51 (2), 221-240.
• Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2002). Leader communication strategies: Critical paths to improving employee commitment. American Business Review, 20(2), 89-94.
• Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2006). The benefits of leader communication on part-time worker outcomes: A comparison between part-time and full-time employees using motivating language. Journal of Business Strategies,23(2), 131-153.
• Mayfield, J., & Mayfield, M. (2007). The effects of leader communication on a worker's intent to stay: An investigation using structural equation modeling. Human Performance, 20(2), 85-102, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08959280701332018.
• Mayfield, J., Mayfield, M. & Kopf, J. (1995). Motivational language: Exploring theory with scale development. The Journal of Business Communication, 32(4), 329-344.
• Mayfield, J., Mayfield, M., & Kopf, J. (1998). The effects of leader motivating language on subordinate performance and satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 37(3-4), 235-248.
• Mert, İ. S. (2011). Yöneticilerin kullandıkları motivasyonel dil ve performans üzerindeki etkisi. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14 (26), 197-214.
• Mulvaney, M.A. (2014). Leave programs/time off and work-stress family employee benefits programs, organizational commitment, and self-efficacy among municipal employees. Public Personnel Management, 43(4), 459-489.
• Murray, K. (2015). Liderk Dili. (çev. Ümit Şensoy). İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür yayınları.
• Murray, K. (2016). Liderlik ve İletişim. (çev. Ümit Şensoy). İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür yayınları.
• Özdamar, K. (2003). Modern Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi.
• Özen, H. (2013). Okul müdürlerine yönelik motivasyonel dil ölçeği: Türk kültürüne uyarlama, dil geçerliği ve faktör yapısının incelenmesi. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3 (1), 87-103.
• Robbins, S.P., & Judge, T.A. (2012). Örgütsel Davranış (Çev. Ed. İnci Erdem). Istanbul: Nobel yayıncılık.
• Rosario, P., Blas, R., & Valle, A. (2009). Teachers' self-efficacy, motivation and teaching strategies. Escritos de Psicología, 3(1), 1-7.
• Schmitz, G.S., & Schwarzer, R. (2000). Selbstwirksamkeitserwartung von Lehrern: Langsschnitt befunde mit einem neuen Instrument. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 14 (1), 12-25.
• Sullivan, J.J. (1988). Three roles of language in motivating theory. The Academy of Management Review, 13(1),104-115.
• Templar, R. (2011). The Rules of Management (Expanded edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education Limited.
• Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of educational research, 68(2), 202-248.
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805.
• Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers' sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of educational Psychology, 82(1), 81−91.
• Yang, H.L., Kao, Y.H., & Huang, Y.C. (2006). The job self-efficacy and job involvement of clinical nursing teachers. Journal of Nursing Research, 14(3), 237-249.
• Yukl, G., O'Donnell, M., & Taber, T. (2009). Influence of leader behaviors on the leader‐member exchange relationship. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(4), 289-299.
• Yılmaz, M., Köseoğlu, P., Gerçek, C., & Soran, H. (2004). Yabancı dilde hazırlanan bir öğretmen öz-yeterlik ölçeğinin Türkçe’ ye uyarlanması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 260-267.