The Quest for Quality in Teacher Education in Turkey: The Abrogation of Teacher Programs from Secondary Education

Abstract

Within the scope of restructuring the secondary education efforts of the Ministry of National Education, it has been decided to abrogate the secondary school level teachers' schools. The purpose of this study is to evaluate Turkey's teacher education practices and the quest for qualified teacher education through the perceptions of the graduates of these high schools. The study is a phenomenological research based on interpretation. Data were obtained through interviews. The data obtained were analyzed in the vetting of candidate teachers, the curriculum to be used in the education process and its accreditation, and whom to be certified as teachers. The main results of this study, conducted with participants from the secondary school level teachers schools’ graduates, show that, in terms of teacher education, teachers' high schools present various opportunities by enrolling successful candidates, educating them as leaders, preparing them for multi-cultural environments. In order to educate qualified teachers, the participants suggest teacher education programs should include individual and group activities, involve training, arts, basic science, and values education courses. In the selection and approval of tenure teacher, besides academic achievement and diploma, advanced communication skills, patience, confidence, and patriotism should be sought in the candidates.

Keywords

• Teacher education,teacher education policies,teachers' highs schools,qualified teacher

References

1. Abe, T. O. (2014). The effect of teachers’ qualifications on students’ performance in mathematics. Sky Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 10-14. Retrieved from http://www.skyjournals.org/sjer/pdf/2014pdf/Feb/Abe%20pdf.pdf
2. Aydin, A. & Baskan, G.A. (2005) The problem of teacher training in Turkey. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment, 19(2), 191-197. doi: 10.1080/13102818.2005.10817215.
3. Aydin, R., Sahin, H. & Topal, T. (2008). Turkiye’de ilkogretime sinif ogretmeni yetistirmede nitelik arayislari [Searching for quality in the training of primary school teachers in Turkey]. Turkiye Sosyal Arastirmalar Dergisi [Turkish Journal of Social Research], 12(2), 119-142. Retrieved from http://acikerisim.giresun.edu.tr/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/345/Temel%20Topal5.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
4. Borich, G.D. (1996). Effective teaching methods. New York: Macmillan.
5. Brewer, D. & Goldhaber, D.D. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification status and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 129-145. doi:10.2307/1164392
6. Campbell, J., Kyriakides, L., Muijs, D. & Robinson, W (2004). Assessing teacher effectiveness, developing a differentiated model. London: Routledge Falmer Taylor & Francis.
7. Darling-Hammond, L. & Sykes, G. (1999). Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8. Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School leadership study: Developing successful principals. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Educational Leadership Institute.

9. Dilaver, H. H. (1994). Turkiye’de ogretmen yetistirme ve istihdam sartlari [Teacher training and employment conditions in Turkey]. Istanbul: Milli Egitim Bakanligi Yayinlari [Ministry of National Education Publications]. No: 2775.
10. Fenstermacher, G., & Richardson, V. (2005). On making determinations of quality in teaching. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 186-213. Retrieved from http://www-personal.umich.edu/~gfenster/teaqual14ss.PDF
11. Gabriel, J.G. (2005). How to thrive as a teacher leader. Alexandria: ASCD.
12. Galluzzo, G. R., & Craig, J. R. (1990). Evaluation of preservice teacher education programs. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 599-616). New York: Macmillan.
13. Gay, G. (1994). A synthesis of scholarship in multicultural education. Urban Monograph Series.
14. Goodlad, J. I. (1994). Educational renewal: Better teachers, better schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15. Guler, A., Halicioglu, M. B., Tasgin, S. (2015). Sosyal Bilimlerde nitel arastirma yontemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Istanbul: Seckin.
16. Hanushek, E. (2002). Teacher quality. In L. Izumi & W. Evers (Eds.), Teacher quality (pp. 1-12). Palo Alto, CA: Hoover Institution.
17. Haycock, K. (1998, Summer). Good teaching matters . . . a lot. Education Trust, 3(2), 3-14. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/i25163244
18. Higher Education Council [HEC]. (1998). Egitim fakulteleri ogretmen yetistirme programlarinin yeniden duzenlenmesi [Reorganization of teacher training programs in education faculty]. Retrieved from http://www.yok.gov.tr/egitim/ogretmen/ogretmen_yetistirme_lisans/rapor.doc
19. Higher Education Council [HEC]. (2017). Egitim fakulteleri yeniden yapilandiriliyor, gelecek donem “basari sira sinirlamasi” uygulamasi geliyor [The training faculties are being restructured and the next semester, the "success sequence limitation" comes to practice]. Retrieved from http://www.yok.gov.tr/web/guest/icerik/-/journal_content/56_INSTANCE_rEHF8BIsfYRx/10279/27747321
20. Hodgman, M. R. (2012). Boundaries and applications: The teacher quality debate in America. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 9(3), 223-228. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/DELL/Downloads/7088-Article%20Text-28305-1-10-20120709.pdf
21. Howey, K. R., & Strom, S. M. (1986). Teacher selection reconsidered. In M. Haberman & J.M. Backus (Eds.), Advances in teacher education (Vol. 3, pp. 1–34). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
22. Izumi, L. T., & Evers, W.M. (2000). Teacher quality. Stanford: Hoover Institution.
23. Jain, A. (2016). Quality control indicators in teacher education. International Journal of Education and Applied Research, 6(1), 70-71. Retrieved from http://ijear.org/vol61/TEP2016/18-dr-aarti-jain.pdf
24. Karakale, S. (2005). Ogretmenlerin etkili ogretmen tanimlarinin etkili ogretmenlik boyutlarina gore incelenmesi [Analyzing teachers’ definitions of effective teachers according to effective teaching dimensions]. Egitim ve Bilim [Education and Science], 30(135), 1-10. Retrieved from http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/5044/1266
25. Killen, R. (2013). Effective teaching strategies: Lessons from research and practice. Melbourne: Cengage Learning.
26. Law No: 430 (Unification of Education Act). (1924, 6 March). Official Newspaper (Number: 63). Retrieved from http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/110.html
27. Law No: 439. (Milli Egitim Bakanligina Bagli Yuksek ve Orta Dereceli Okullar Ogretmenleri ile Ilkokul Ogretmenlerinin Haftalik Ders Saatleri ile Ek Ders Ucretleri Hakkinda Kanun [Ministry of National Education, Law on Regular Course Hours and Additional Course Fees of Primary and Secondary School Teachers and Primary School Teachers]). (1964, 3 December). Official Newspaper (Number: 11654). Retrieved from http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/86.html
28. Law No: 2547 (Higher Education Law). (1981, 4 November). Official Newspaper (Number: 17506). Retrieved from http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.2547.doc
29. Leithwood, K., Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004, September). How leadership influences student learning. Report commissioned by the Wallace Foundation.
30. McCaffrey, D., Koretz, D., Lockwood, J. & Hamilton, L. (2004). Evaluating value-added models for teacher accountability. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
31. Monk, D. H. (1994). Subject area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13, 125-145. doi: 10.1016/0272-7757(94)90003-5
32. Monk, D. & King, J. (1994). Multilevel teacher resource effects on pupil performance in secondary mathematics and science. In Ronald G. Ehrenberg (ed.), Choices and consequence. Ithaca, NY: ILR.
33. National Education Main Law. (Milli Egitim Temel Kanunu). (1973, 14 June). Official Newspaper (Number: 14574). Retrieved from http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.1739.pdf
34. Oss, D. I. B. (2018). The relevance of teachers’ practical knowledge in the development of teacher education programs. Profile: Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 20(1), 167-178. doi: 10.15446/profile.v20n1.62327.
35. Qualified Teacher Training Congress. (2017, 30 November). Hurriyet Newspaper. Retrieved from http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/nitelikli-ogretmen-yetistirme-kongresi-40663291: 18.03.2018Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Rice, J.K. (2003). Teacher quality: Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington, D.C.: Economic Policy Institute.
36. Rowan, B., Chiang, F.S., & Miller, R. J. (1997). Using research on employee’s performance to study the effects of teacher on students’ achievement. Sociology of Education, 70, 256-284.
37. Sherwood, H. S. (2018). Profiles of pre-service teacher education: An investigation into the nature of selected exemplary programs in Jamaica and Michigan. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(2), 139-156. doi: 10.5539/jel.v7n2p139
38. Slavin, R. E. (2015). Educational psychology: Theory and practice. (10th edition). London: Pearson.
39. Sunbul, M. (1996). Ogretmen niteligi ve ogretimdeki roller [Teacher quality and its roles in teaching]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi [Educational Administration: Theory and Practice], 2(1), 597-607. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/DELL/Downloads/5000050999-5000068858-1-PB.pdf
40. Stronge, J. H., Gareis, C.R., & Little, C.A. (2006). Teacher pay and teacher quality: Attracting, developing, and retaining the best teachers. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
41. Taskaya, S. M. (2012). Nitelikli bir ogretmende bulunmasi gereken ozelliklerin ogretmen adaylarinin goruslerine gore incelenmesi [The analysis of the characteristics a qualified teacher according to opinions of prospective teachers]. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi [Social Science Institute Journal], 33(2), 283-298. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/219613
42. Tatto, M. T. (2015). The role of research in the policy and practice of quality teacher education. Oxford Review of Education, 41(2), 171–201. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2015.1017405
43. Teacher Education and Development General Directorate. (2017). 2017-2013 Teacher strategy document. Retrieved from: http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2017/06/20170609-13-1.pdf
44. Uyulgan, M. A. & Akkuzu, N. (2015). Ogretmen adaylarinin gozunden nitelikli ogretmen secimi: Ortaogretim fen ve matematik alanlari egitimi bolumunde okuyan ogrencilerin durumu [Qualified teacher selection from the prospectives of pre-service teachers: The situation of the students majored in the department of secondary science and mathematics education]. Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi [Kastamonu Education Journal], 23(3), 917-940. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/209828
45. Vegas, E., Murnane, R., & Willett, J. (2001). From high school to teaching: Many steps, who makes it? Teachers College Record, 103, 427-449. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ631742
46. Waters, R. (2016). Teaching the next generation of teachers. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
47. Westheimer, J. (2004). The politics of civic education. Political Science and Politics, XXXVII(2), 231-234. doi: 10.3102/00028312041002237
48. Whitehurst, G. (2002, March). Scientifically based research on teacher quality: Research on teacher preparation and professional development. Paper presented at the White House Conference on Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers, Washington, D.C.
49. Yetim, A. A. & Goktas, Z. (2004). Ogretmenin mesleki ve kisisel nitelikleri [Teachers’ occupational and personal qualifications]. Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi [Kastamonu Education Journal]. 12(2), 541-550. Retrieved from http://w3.balikesir.edu.tr/~goktas/yayinlar/ogretmenin%20_kisisel_nitelikleri.pdf
50. Yildirim, A. & Simsek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel arastirma yontemleri [Qualitataive research techniques in social science ]. Ankara: Seckin.
51. Yun, J. T., & Moreno, J. F. (2006, January/February). College access, K–12 concentrated disadvantage, and the next 25 years of education research. Educational Researcher, 35(1), 12-19. doi: 10.3102/0013189X035001012