An Investigation of Pre-Service and In-Service Teachers’ Perceptions of Teacher Quality in Turkey

Year 2019, Volume: 9 Issue: 3, 537 - 549, 30.12.2019

Görsev Sönmez Boran Burcu Gürkan Nuri Can Aksoy

https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.576151

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Present study
investigates the senior-level Turkish pre-service and in-service teachers’
perceptions of teacher quality with a descriptive survey method. Data for this
study were gathered through Teacher Quality Survey (TQS) and open-ended
questions from 210 pre-service teachers enrolled in four different universities
in Turkey and 147 in-service teachers from different majors. Results of the
study showed that both pre-service and in-service teachers think that teachers’
relationship with the students affect students’ success and teachers should
take the individual differences into consideration. Moreover, according to the
pre-service teachers, teachers should know how to teach and assess what they
teach, and they need to know time management. On the other hand, in-service teachers
consider that teachers should follow current developments, should have the
researcher identity and should understand students’ needs and interests.
Present study also suggested both academic and practical implications

Keywords

in-service teacher, pre-service teacher, teacher education

References

• Akyüz, Y. (2009). Türk Eğitim Tarihi. Pegem Akademi, Ankara. Ata, Bahri (2001). 1924 Türk basını ışığında Amerikalı eğitimci John Dewey’in Türkiye seyahati, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(3).
• Bozdoğan, A. E., Aydın, D. & Yıldırım, K. (2007). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik mesleğine ilişkin tutumları, Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD), 8(2).
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (Geliştirilmiş 2. baskı). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
• Cresswell. J. (2002). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods Approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of State policy evidence. Journal of Education Policy Analysis, 8(1).
• Duck, L. (2000). The ongoing professional journey, Educational Leadership, 57(8), 43-45.
• Eby, J. (1994). Reflective planning, teaching and evaluation: K-12. New York: Merrill.
• Freeman, D. & Richards, R. J. (1993). Conceptions of Teaching and the Education of Second Language Teachers, TESOL Quartery, 27(2).
• Goldhaber, D. & Brewer, D. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school Teacher certification status and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(2),129-146.
• Hanushek, E. (1997). Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: An update. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 100(1), 84-117.
• Hanushek, E. A. & Rivkin, S. G. (2007). Pay, working conditions and Teacher quality, Future of Children, 17(1).
• Harris, D. N. & Sass, T. R. (2010). Teacher training, teacher quality, student achievement, Journal of Public Economics, 95.
• Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
• M. E. (2015). Teacher quality and school improvement: what is the role of research?, Oxford Review of Education, 41(2).
• Okpala, C. O. & Ellis, R. (2000). The perceptions of college students on teacher quality: A Focus on teacher qualifications, Education, 126(2).
• Ornstein, A. C., & Levine, D. U. (2003). Foundations of education (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
• Özbek, R., Kahyaoğlu, M. & Özgen, N. (2007). Evaluation of Candidate Teachers’ Opinions on Teaching Profession, Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(2).
• Sabers, D., Selby, L., & Nolan, P. (1995). Computers empower students with special Needs, Educational Leadership, 53(2)., 82-84.
• Sanders, W. L. & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. In Education Trust, Thinking K-16: Good teaching matters: How well qualified teachers can close the gap.
• Seferoğlu, G. (2004). A study of alternative English teacher certification practices in Turkey, Journal of Education for Teaching, 30(2).
• Seker, H., Deniz, S. & Görgen, İ. (2005). Tezsiz yüksek lisans öğretmen adaylarinin öğretmenlik yeterlikleri üzerine değerlendirmeleri, Kuram ve UYgulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 42.
• Semerci, C., Semerci, N., Eliüşük, A. & Kartal, E. (2012). Öğretmenlik mesleğinin gündemine ilişkin öğretmen görüşleri (Bartın ili örneği). Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(1), 22-40.
• Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 19(2), 4-14.
• Wiswall, M. (2013). The dynamics of teacher quality, Journal of Public Economics, 100.
• Yetim, A. A. & Göktaş, Z. (2004). Öğretmenin mesleki ve kişisel yetenekleri, Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 12(2).