What Difference does Placement School Make? Contribution of School Characteristics to Professional Growth of Pre-Service Teachers

Öz

This qualitative phenomenological study attempted to gain insight into perceptions of pre-service teachers about the characteristics of placement schools in relation to their contributions to their professional growth. Collected through focus-group interviews with four groups, each consisting of six pre-service teachers who were in their last year in the program and had already taken practice courses at a public university in Turkey in the 2012-2013 academic year, qualitative data were then subjected to content analysis. The findings generated five major themes: conceptions of placement school, placement school characteristics, placement school experiences, contributions of placement schools to professional growth, and suggestions for placement school selection and experience. Pre-service primary school teachers tended to define the meaning of a better-served placement school that was equated with resource richness or abundance. However, the most striking finding from this study was that great placements were largely dependent on the quality of mentor teachers rather than other factors like resource richness or abundance in placement schools.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mentor teacher,placement school,pre-service primary school teacher,professional growth,teacher education

References

1. Afyonkarahisar Provincial National Education Directorate. (2013a, September 16). Types of schools and institutions (Letter No. 34691520/903.02.02/2495836). Retrieved July 8, 2015 from http://afyon.meb.gov.tr/2013/09/16/2495836.pdf
2. Afyonkarahisar Provincial National Education Directorate. (2013b, September 5). Types of institutions (Letter No. 34691520/903.02.02/2008456). Retrieved February 15, 2018 from http://afyon.meb.gov.tr/2013/08/05/kurum_tipleri.pdf
3. Aslanargun, E., Kılıç, A., & Acar, F. E. (2012). Uygulama öğretmenlerinin öğretmen adaylarına rehberlik düzeyleri.Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(39), 1-21.
4. Aytaç, A. (2010). Öğretmenlik uygulaması dersi kapsamında uygulama öğretim elemanlığının değerlendirilmesi. Unpublished master‘s thesis, Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Burdur, Turkey.
5. Bilgin-Aksu, M., & Demirtaş, H. (2006). Öğretmen adaylarının okul deneyimi II dersine ilişkin görüşleri (İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi örneği). Inönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(11), 3-21.
6. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
7. Borg, J. R., Borg, M. O., & Stranahan, H. A. (2012). Closing the achievement gap between high-poverty schools and low-poverty schools.Research in Business & Economics Journal, 5, 1-24.
8. Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2009). Teacher preparation and student achievement.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 416-440.

9. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., Ronfeldt, M., & Wyckoff, J. (2011). The role of teacher quality in retention and hiring: Using applications to transfer to uncover preferences of teachers and schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(1), 88-110.
10. Brush, T., & Saye, J. W. (2009). Strategies for preparing preservice social studies teachers to integrate technology effectively: Models and practices. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 46-59.
11. Bural, B. (2010). Zihin engelliler öğretmenliği öğretim uygulaması dersinde karşılaşılan güçlüklerin öğretmen adayları açısından değerlendirilmesi (Konya ili örneği) (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Selçuk Üniversitesi, Konya, Türkiye.
12. Cochran-Smith, M., Villegas, A. M., Abrams, L., Chavez-Moreno, L., Mills, T., & Stern, R. (2015). Critiquing teacher preparation research: An overview of the field, part II. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(2), 109-121.
13. Cole, K. M. (1995, November 9). Novice teacher efficacy and field placements. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Biloxi, MS.
14. Çetin, Ö. F., & Bulut, H. (2002).Okul deneyimi I, II ve öğretmenlik uygulaması derslerinin uygulama öğretmenleri ve öğretmen adayları tarafindan değerlendirilmesinin incelenmesi.Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(2), 69-75.
15. Çetin, Ö. F., Uludağ, E., & Akın, M. (2007). Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi ile Almanya’nın Bavyera Eyaleti Augsburg Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesinin okul uygulamaları arasındaki benzerlik ve farklılıklar. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), 159-166.
16. Demircioğlu, İ. H. (2003). Tarih uygulama öğrencilerinin uygulama öğretmenleri ve uygulama okulları hakkındaki görüşleri: KTÜ Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi örneği. Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(1), 185-192.
17. Eisenhardt, S., Besnoy, K., & Steele, E. (2012). Creating dissonance in pre-service teachers’ field experiences. SRATE Journal, 21(1), 1-10.
18. Erdem, E., & Erdoğan, Ü. I. (2012). Okul ve üniversite işbirliği yönünden öğretmenlik uygulamalarının irdelenmesi: Kimya eğitimi örneği. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Özel Sayı 1, 167-176.
19. Ergen, H. (2013). Türkiye’de eğitimde planlama yaklaşımları ve kullanılan eğitim göstergeleri. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), 151-167.
20. Fletcher, S. S., & Luft, J. A. (2011). Early career secondary science teachers: A longitudinal study of beliefs in relation to field experiences. Science Teacher Education, 95(6), 1124-1146.
21. Ganser, T. (1995). Principles for mentor teacher selection. The Clearing House, 68(5), 307-309.
22. Graham, S., & Roberts, J. (2007). Student-teachers’ perspectives on positive and negative social processes in school. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(4), 399-410. doi:10.1080/13540600701391952
23. Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. W. (2000). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9), 2055–2100.
24. Grossman, P., Ronfeldt, M., & Cohen, J. (2012). The power of setting: The role of field experience in learning to teach. In K. Harris, S. Graham, T. Urdan, A. Bus, S. Major, & H. L. Swanson (Eds.), American Psychological Association (APA) educational psychology handbook: Applications to teaching and learning (Vol. 3, pp. 311–334). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
25. Hampton, B., Peng, L., & Ann, J. (2008).Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of urban schools.The Urban Review, 40(3), 268-295.
26. Hoy, W. K., & Rees, R. (1977). The bureaucratic socialization of student teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 28(1), 23-26.
27. Hoy, W. K. & Woolfolk, A. E. (1990). Socialization of student teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 279-300.
28. Huling, L. (1998). Early field experiences in teacher education. Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED429054)
29. Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers: A critical review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 201-233.
30. Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62, 129-169.
31. Kale, M. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik uygulaması dersinde karşılaştıkları sorunlar. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(2), 255-280.
32. Kasapoğlu, K. (2014). Facilitators and distractors of effective learning: Perceptions of middle school students, teachers and parents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
33. Kasapoğlu, K. (2015). A review of studies on school experience and practice teaching in Turkey. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 147-162.
34. Kiraz, E., & Yildirim, S. (2007). Enthusiasm vs. experience in mentoring: A comparison of Turkish novice and experienced teachers in fulfilling supervisory roles. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(2), 250-261.
35. Knoblauch, D., & Hoy, A. W. (2008). “Maybe I can teach those kids.” The influence of contextual factors on student teachers’ efficacy beliefs.Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 166-179.
36. Korkmaz, H., Gücüm, B., & Hakverdi, M. (2006, July-August). Preservice science teachers’ field experiences with educational technologies as part of portfolio development: A Turkish perspective. Paper presented at the 12th Symposium of the International Organization for Science and Technology Education (IOSTE), Penang, Malaysia.
37. Köroğlu, H., Başer, N., & Yavuz, G. (2000). Okullarda uygulama çalışmalarının değerlendirilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19, 85-95.
38. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
39. Kvale, S. (2007). Doing interviews. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
40. Kumar, K. (1987). Conducting group interviews in developing countries. A.I.D. program design and evaluation methodology report no. 8. Washington, DC: USAID. pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNAAL088.pdf
41. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
42. Lloyd, G. M. (2008). Curriculum use while learning to teach: One student teacher's appropriation of mathematics curriculum materials. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(1), 63-94.
43. Mahlios, M., Engstrom, D., Soroka, G., & Shaw, D. M. (2008). A study of student teachers’ reflections on their beliefs, thoughts, and practices. Action in Teacher Education, 30(1), 64-80. doi: 10.1080/01626620.2008.10463482
44. Marczak, M., & Sewell, M. (n.d.). Using focus groups for evaluation. Tucson, Arizona: The University of Arizona. Retrieved June 19, 2014 from http://ag.arizona.edu/sfcs/cyfernet/cyfar/focus.htm
45. Miles, B. M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
46. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Eğitim Kurumu Yöneticileri Atama Ve Yer Değiştirme Yönetmeliği. (2013). T.C. Resmi Gazete, 28728, 4 Ağustos 2013.
47. Moulding, L. R., Stewart, P. W., & Dunmeyer, M. L. (2014). Pre-service teachers’ sense of efficacy: Relationship to academic ability, student teaching placement characteristics, and mentor support. Teaching and Teacher Education, 41, 60-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.03.007.
48. Mullinix, B. B. (2002). Selecting and retaining teacher mentors. ERIC Digests. Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED4777728).
49. Odabaşı, H. F., Kurt, A. A., Haseski, H. İ., Mısırlı, Ö., Ersoy, M., Karakoyun, F., & Günüç, S. (2011). Öğretmenlik uygulamasında alan faktörü: BÖTE bölümü örneği. Eğitim Teknolojisi: Kuram ve Uygulama, 1(1), 24-40.
50. Özen, A., Ergenekon, Y., & Batu, E. S. (2009). Zihin engelliler öğretmenliği adaylarının uygulama okulları ve uygulama sınıf öğretmenleri hakkındaki görüşleri. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(1), 185-200.
51. Padilla-Diaz, M. (2015). Phenomenology in educational qualitative research: Philosophy as science or philosophical science? International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(2), 101-110.
52. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.
53. Ronfeldt, M. (2012). Where should student teachers learn to teach? Effects of field placement school characteristics on teacher retention and effectiveness. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(1), 3-26.
54. Ronfeldt, M. (2015). Field placement schools and instructional effectiveness. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(4), 304-320.
55. Ronfeldt, M., & Grossman, P. (2008). Becoming a professional: Experimenting with possible selves in professional preparation. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(3), 41-60.
56. Ronfeldt, M., Kwok, A., & Reininger, M. (2016). Teachers’ preferences to teach underserved students. Urban Education, 51(9), 995-1030.
57. Ronfeldt, M., & McQueen, K. (2017). Does new teacher induction really improve retention? Journal of Teacher Education, 1-17. doi:10.1177/0022487117702583
58. Ronfeldt, M., & Reininger, M. (2012). More or better student teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1091–1106.
59. Ronfeldt, M., Reininger, M., & Kwok, A. (2013). Recruitment or preparation? Investigating the effects of teacher characteristics and student teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 20(2), 1-19.
60. Ronfeldt, M., Schwartz, N., & Jacob, B. A. (2014). Does pre-service preparation matter? Examining an old question in new ways. Teachers College Record, 116(10), 1-46.
61. Sağ, R. (2008). The expectations of student teachers about cooperating teachers, supervisors, and practice schools. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 32, 117-132.
62. Sempowicz, T., & Hudson, P. (2012). Mentoring preservice teachers’ reflective practices to produce teaching outcomes. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 10(2), 52–64.
63. Sharpe, L., Hu, C., Crawford, L., Gopinathan, S., Khine, M. S., Moo, S. N., & Wong, A. (2003). Enhancing multipoint desktop video conferencing (MDVC) with lesson video clips: Recent developments in pre-service teaching practice in Singapore. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 19, 529-541. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00050-7
64. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
65. Sılay, İ., & Gök, T. (2004, Temmuz). Öğretmen adaylarının uygulama okullarında karşılaştıkları sorunlar ve bu sorunları gidermek amacıyla hazırlanan öneriler üzerine bir çalışma. XIII. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kurultayında sunulmuş sözlü bildiri, İnönü Üniversitesi, Malatya, Türkiye.
66. Skilbeck, M., & Connell, H. (2004). Teachers for the future: The changing nature of society and related issues for the teaching workforce. A report to the Teacher Quality and Educational Leadership Taskforce of the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment Training and Youth Affairs. Retrieved June 19, 2014 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED534330.pdf
67. Şahin, Ç. (2010).Okul deneyimi II işbirliğinde tarafların karşılıklı beklentileri. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 3(1), 29-42.
68. Şahin, İ., Erdoğan, A., & Aktürk, A. O. (2007).Öğretmen adaylarının okul uygulamalarından doyumlarını yordayıcı faktörler. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17, 509-517.
69. Şimşek, N. (2013). Öğretmen adaylarının okul deneyimi ve öğretmenlik uygulaması derslerinde karşılaştıkları güçlüklerle ilgili algılarının belirlenmesi. Siirt Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1, 94-110.
70. Tang, S. Y. F. (2002). From behind the pupil’s desk to the teacher’s desk: A qualitative study of student teachers’ professional learning in Hong Kong. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 30(1), 51-65. doi:10.1080/13598660120114977
71. Tarman, B. (2012). Prospective teachers' beliefs and perceptions about teaching as a profession. Educational Science: Theory & Practice, 12(3), 1964-1973.
72. Truscott, D. M., & Truscott, S. D. (2005). Differing circumstances, shared challenges: Finding common ground between urban and rural schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(2), 123-130.
73. Ünlüönen, K., & Boylu, Y. (2007). Ticaret ve turizm eğitim fakültesinde uygulanan okul deneyimi ve öğretmenlik uygulaması derslerine yönelik öğretmen ve öğretim elemanı görüşleri üzerine bir araştırma. Millî Eğitim, 173, 331-360.
74. Walker, R. J. (2013). 12 characteristics of an effective teacher (2nd ed.). Morrisville, NC: Lulu Publishing.
75. Yalın-Uçar, M. (2012). Öğretmenlik uygulamasına ilişkin durum çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(4), 2637-2660.
76. Yeşil, R., & Çalışkan, N. (2006). Okul deneyimi I dersinden öğrencilerin beklentileri ve bu beklentilerin karşılanma düzeyi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(1).
77. Yeşilyurt, E., & Semerci, Ç. (2012). Öğretmenlik uygulaması öğretim programına yönelik paydaşların görevlerini yerine getirme düzeylerinin değerlendirilmesi. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 5(8), 1345-1357.
78. Yıldırım, A. (2013). Türkiye’de öğretmen eğitimi araştırmaları: Yönelimler, sorunlar ve öncelikli alanlar. Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(169), 175-191.
79. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (Genişletilmiş 10. baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
80. Yıldızlar, M., Kargı, E., & Ünal-Bozcan, E. (2011). Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti anaokullarında “okul deneyimi” uygulamaları: Okul öncesi eğitimde iyi örnekler sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. e-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(1), 562-568.
81. Zeichner, K. M. (1980). Myths and realities: Field-based experiences in preservice teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 31(6), 45-9, 51-55.
82. Zeichner, K. M., & Gore, M. (1990). Teacher socialization. In R. W. Huston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 329-348). New York, NY: Macmillan.
83. Zeichner, K. M., & Grant, C.A. (1991). Biography and social structure in the socialization of student teachers: A re-examination of the pupil control ideologies of student teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 7(3), 298-314.