Öğretim Lideri Olarak Okul Müdürlerinin Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarısı Üzerindeki Etkisinin İncelenmesi

Abstract

Müdürler, yalnızca okulu yöneten yönetici rolünde değil, aynı zamanda öğretimi yönlendiren, geliştiren lider durumundadır. Öğretim liderliği bu anlamda, okulda öğrenci başarısını arttırmak için müdürün kendisinin bizzat gösterdiği ya da başkaları tarafından gösterilmesini sağladığı davranışlar olarak ifade edilmektedir. Buna göre öğretim liderliği öğretmenlerin öğretme, öğrencilerin de öğrenme durumlarını doğrudan ya da dolaylı olarak önemli ölçüde etkileme davranışlarıdır. Her okulun öğrenciler ve öğretmenler üzerinde olumlu ya da olumsuz etkisi olan bir öğrenme iklimi vardır. Okul sistemleri küreselleşen bu dönemde okul liderlerini program ve hesap verebilirlik çerçevesinde güçlendirmek yoluyla öğrenci başarısı üzerinde daha çok yoğunlaşmaktadırlar, Artık okulun başarısı genellikle öğrencilerinin yani çıktılarının kalitesiyle ve nitelikleriyle ölçülmektedir. Bu anlamda birçok araştırmacı okul müdürünün öğrenci başarısı üzerindeki rolünün önemli olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Bu bağlamda yapılan çalışmanın amacı ilköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmen görüşlerine göre okul müdürlerinin öğrencilerin akademik başarısı üzerindeki etkisini ortaya koymaktır. Araştırmada genel tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın evrenini 2010-2011 öğretim yılında İstanbul ili Kadıköy ve Kartal ilçelerindeki ilköğretim kurumlarında görev yapan 3400 öğretmen; örneklemini ise, evrenden amacına uygunluğu nedeniyle oransız elaman örnekleme yöntemiyle seçilen 680 öğretmen oluşturmaktadır. Nicel olarak yürütülen bu araştırmada veriler araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen 20 maddelik bir ölçekle toplanmıştır. Ölçeğin Cronbach Alfa güvenirlik katsayısı 0,90’dır. Ölçekle elde edilen veriler yüzde, frekans, ortalama, standart sapma, testi ve tek yönlü varyans analizi ile çözümlenmiştir. Öğretmen görüşlerine göre müdürlerin öğrencilerin akademik başarısına etkisi “az düzeyinde” olmuştur. Elde edilen bu sonuca göre, öğretmenlerin, müdürlerin öğrencilerin akademik başarısı üzerindeki etkisini algılamalarının oldukça düşük düzeyde olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Öğretmen görüşleri arasında cinsiyet, yaş, kıdem, eğitim, ödül ve hizmet içi eğitim değişkenine göre anlamlı farklılıklar bulunmamıştır. Öğretmen görüşleri, belirtilen değişkenlere göre farklılık göstermemiştir. Müdürlerin öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına daha çok katkıda bulunabilmeleri için, müdürlerin öğretmenlerin profesyonel gelişim çabalarını teşvik etmesi, öğretmenlerin öğretimsel problemler ya da konularla ilgili olarak her an başvuruda bulunacak ortamı sağlaması, okulun akademik hedeflerini öğretmenlerle paylaşması, öğretmenlere profesyonel kaynak ve materyal sağlaması gerekmektedir

Keywords

• Öğretim lideri,müdür,öğretmen,öğrenci

A Study On Effects Of School Principals’ On Student Achievements As Instructional Leaders

Abstract

School principals are not only managers who just manage of a school but they are also leaders that lead and develop instruction in this respect. Instructional leadership is defined as a way of behavior that is shown by the leaders themselves or others to improve student achievement at a school in this sense. In this manner, instructional leadership is a behaviour that is affecting the work of a teachers’ teaching work and students’ learning process either directly or indirectly. Each school has a climate that has an effect on students learning process either positive or negative. School systems are focusing on successes and empowerment of students more by means of accountability and program in the global world. Nowadays school success is usually evaluated with the quality of graduates. A lot of scholars imply the effect of a school principal on student achievement as an instructional leader. Therefore the main purpose of this study is to find out effects of school principals on student achievement as instructional leaders according to the opinions of primary school teachers. In this study descriptive method has been applied. The population of the study is 3400 teachers currently working in Kartal and Kadıköy townships in İstanbul province in the 2010-2011 academic years. The sampling is 680 teachers out of that population chosen with unproportional sampling method. The study has been conducted quantitively and the data has been gathered by means of a 20item-scale that has been developed by the researchers themselves. The Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of the scale is 0,90. The data has been analyzed with arithmetic mean, standard deviation, test and one way variant analysis. According to the results of the study, school principals’ effect on student achievement has been found low in general. In other words it has been understood that according to perceptions of teachers, school principals’ effect on student achievement is quite low. As a result of the study there are no significant meanings between the perceptions of the teachers surveyed according to their sex, age, length of service, education, rewards taken and in-service training variables. In other words teacher views have not shown any differences. Principals should take some steps at their schools. In this sense they should provide professional resources and materials to teachers, encourage teachers’ development efforts, and share academic priorities with teachers. He should also be accessible at any time for both teachers and students at school for counseling academic issues

Keywords

• Instructional leadership,principal,teacher,student

References

1. Alig-Mielcarek, J. M. (2003). A Model Of School Success: Instructional Leadership, Academic Press
2. And Student Achievement. Ohio University, Doctoral Dissertation.
3. Bossert, S., Dwyer, D., Rowan, B. & Lee, G.(1982). The Instructional Mangement Role of ThePrincipal, Educational Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 34-64.
4. Briggs, K.L. & Wohlstetter, P. (2003). Key Elements of Successful School-Based ma- nagement
5. Strategy. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14 (3), 351-372.
6. Cavanagh, F.R. & Romanoski, J.T. (2006). Development Of A Model Of School Prin- cipal
7. Behaviours: Rasch Model And Structural Equation Model Analyses Of Teacher Ob- servations, Australian Reseach Council, 1-26.
8. Cotton, K. (2003). Principals and Student Achievement. Melbourne: Hawker Brown- low Education.

9. Cravens, X. & Huff, J. (2007). The Influence Of Principal Instructional Leadership Practice On School-Wide Professional Community, Conference Preceedings For Convention, 1-23.
10. De Maeyer, S., Rymenans, R., Van Petegem, P., Bergh, H. & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2007). EducationalLeadership and Pupil Achievement: The Choice of a valid conceptual model to test effects in school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Impro- vement, 18 (2), 125-145.
11. DfES (UK, Department for Education and Skills) (2007). PriceWatersCoopers Re- port, London: DfES. Retrieved on 28.03.2008.
12. Dinham, S. (2004). Principal Leadership for Outstanding Educational Outcomes. Jo- urnal of Educational Administration, 43 (4), 338-356.
13. Dorman, J.P., Fraser, B.J. & Mc Robbie, C.J. (1995). Associations Between School Level Environment and Science Classroom Level Environment In Secondary Schools, Re- search In Science Education, 25 (3), 333-351.
14. Draper, J. & McMichael, P. (2003). Keeping the show on the road: The role of the acting headteacher. Educational Management and Administration. 31(1), 67-81.
15. Fısher, D. & Cresswell, J. (1998). Actual and Ideal Principal Interpersonal Behavi- our, Learning Environment Research, 1, 231-247.
16. Fisher, D. & Frey, N. (2002). 5 Lessons for Leaders. Principal Leadership, 3 (3), 53-56.
17. Fullan, M. (2001). The Role Of Principal In School Reform, Teachers Collage Press,1-24.
18. Fulmer, C.L. (2006). Becoming Instructional Leaders: Lessons Learned from Instruc- tional Leadership Work Samples. Educational Leadership and Administration, 18 (1), 109-172.
19. Gamage, D., Adams, D. & Mc Cormack, A. (2009). How Does a School Leader’s Role Influence Student Achievements? A Review of Research Findings and Best Practices, Internati- onal Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 4(1), 1-15.
20. Gentilucci, J.L. & Muto, C.C. (2007). Principals’ Influence on Academic Achieve- ment: The Student Perspective. The National Association of Secondary School Principals, Bulletin Sep 2007. Retrieved on October 18, 2007 from ProQuest Education Journal, http:// ProQuest.umi.com. library.newcastle.edu.au/
21. Gurr, D., Drysdale, L. & Mulford, B. (2006). Models of Successful Principal Lea- dership. School Leadership and Management, 26 (4), 371-395.
22. Hale, E. & Rollins, K. (2006). Leading the Way to Increased Student Learning. Prin- cipal Leadership, 6 (10), 6-10.
23. Hallinger, P. & Murphy, J.F. (1985). Assessing the Instructional Mangement Behavi- our of Principals, Elementary School Journal, 86 (2), 217-247.
24. Hallinger, P. & Murphy, J.F. (1987). Assessing and Developing Principal Instructio- nal, Leadership.Educational Leadership, 45(1), 54-61.
25. Hallinger, P. & Heck, R. (1996). Reassessing the Principal’s Role in School Effecti- veness: A review of the Empirical Research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly. 32(1), 5-44.
26. Harris, A. (2004). Distributed Leadership and School Improvement. Educational Ma- nagement Administration & Leadership, 32 (1), 11-24.
27. Heck, R. (2000). Estimating the Impact of School Quality on School Outcomes and Improvement: a Valu-Added Approach. Educational Administration Quarterly. 36(4), 513-552.
28. Janerrette, D. and Sherretz, K. (2007). School Leadership and Student Achievement. Education Policy Brief. Retrieved on October 17, 2007, from http://www.rdc.udel.edu/.
29. Karasar, N. (2004). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
30. Leithwood, K. A. & Montgomery, D.J. (1982). The Role Of Elementary School Prin- cipal İn Program İnvolvement, Review of Educational Research, 52, 309-339.
31. Louis, K. S. & Kruse, S. (1995). Professionalism and Community: Perspectives From Urban Schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
32. Louis, K. S. & Marks, H. M. (1998). Does Professional Community Affect the Class- room? Teachers’ Work and Student Experiences in Restructuring Schools. American Journal of Edu- cation, 106(4), 532-575.
33. Louis, K. S., Marks, H. & Kruse, S. (1996). Teachers’ Professional Community in Restructuring Schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33(4), 757-798.
34. Marsh, D.D. & LeFever, K. (2004). School Principals as Standards-Based Educatio- nal Leaders. Educational Management, Administration, and Leadership, 32 (4), 387-404.
35. McLaughlin, M. & Talbert, J. (2001). Proffesional Communities and The Work Of High School Teaching, Chicago: University Of Chicago Pres.
36. OECD. (2001a). Report on Hungary/OECD seminar on Managing Education for Li- felong Learning, 6 December 2001, Budapest.
37. OECD. (2001b). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000. Paris: OECD.
38. Purkey, S.C. & Smith, M.S. (1982). Too Soon Too Cheer? Synthesis of Research On Effective Schools, Educational Leadership, 40 (3), 64-69.
39. Quinn, D. M. (2002). The Impact of Principal Leadership on Behaviours on Instruc- tional Practice and Student Engagement. Journal of Educational Administration, 40 (5), 447-467.
40. Robertson, J. & Miller, T. (2007). School Leadership and Equity: The case of New Zealand. School Leadership & Management, 27 (1), 91-103.
41. Rosenholtz, S.J. (1989). Teachers’ Workplace: The Social Organization Of Schools. New York:Longman.
42. Ross, J.A. & Gray, P. (2006). School Leadership and Student Achievement: The Me- diating Effects of Teacher Beliefs. Canadian Journal of Education, 29 (3), 798-822.
43. Şişman, M. (2002). Öğretim Liderliği. Ankara: PegemA Yayını.
44. Townsend, T. (1997). What Makes School Effective? A Comparison between School Communities in Australia and the USA. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 8 (3), 311- 326.
45. Waters, J.T., Marzano, R.J. & McNulty, B. (2004). Leadership That Sparks Learning. Educational Leadership, 61 (7), 48-51.
46. Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. A. (2003). Balanced Leadership: What 30 Years Of Research Tells Us About The Effect Of Leadership On Student Achievement. Denver, CO: MCREL.
47. Wubbels, T., Creton, H. & Hooymayers, H. (1993). Review of Research on Teacher Communication Styles With Use Of The Leary Model, Journal of Classroom Interaction, 27 (1) 1-11.
48. Youngs, P. & King, M. B. (2002). Principal Leadership for Professional Develop- ment To Build School Capacity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(5), 643-670.