Öğretim Becerileri, Kişilik Özellikleri, Alan Bilgisi ve Mesleki Gelişim Bağlamında Etkili Öğretmen Özellikleri

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı öğretmenlerin etkili öğretmen özelliklerinde kendilerini nasıl algıladıklarını görev yapılan okul türü, cinsiyet, kıdem ve branş değişkenlerine göre belirlemektir. Araştırmada nedensel karşılaştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Veri toplama aracı olarak “Etkili Öğretmen Özellikleri Envanteri” kullanılmıştır. Çalışma grubunu devlet ve özel okullarında görev yapan 364 öğretmen oluşturmaktadır. Betimsel istatistikler ile karşılaştırma testleri kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada devlet okulu öğretmenlerinin alan bilgisinde kendilerini özel okul öğretmenlerine göre daha yetkin algıladığı, mesleki gelişimde özel okul öğretmenlerine göre mesleki gelişime daha çok önem verdiği; özel okul öğretmenlerinin ise öğretim becerilerinde kendilerini devlet okulu öğretmenlerine göre daha yetkin algıladıkları görülmüştür. Hem devlet hem de özel okul öğretmenleri kendilerini olumlu kişilik özelliklerinde görmektedir. Cinsiyet ve branş ise alan bilgisi, öğretim becerileri, kişilik özellikleri ve mesleki gelişim özelliklerinde farklılık yaratmamaktadır. Kıdem alan bilgisi, kişilik özellikleri ve mesleki gelişim özelliklerinde farklılık yaratmamakta ancak 0-5 yıl kıdeme sahip öğretmenlerin 21 yıl ve üzeri kıdeme sahip olanlara göre kendilerini öğretim becerilerinde daha yetkin algıladığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

• Etkili Öğretmen Özellikleri
• Öğretim Becerileri
• Alan Bilgisi
• Kişilik Özellikleri
• Mesleki Gelişim

Effective Teacher Characteristics in Terms of Instructional Skills, Personality Traits, Subject Matter Knowledge and Professional Development

Abstract

This study aims to determine teachers’ perceptions of effective teacher characteristics according to school type, gender, seniority, and branch. The study was designed according to causal-comparative research design. "Effective Teacher Characteristics Inventory" was used to collect data. The sample consists of 364 teachers working in public and private schools. Descriptive statistics and comparison tests were used to analyze the data. The results revealed that public school teachers perceive themselves as more competent in terms of subject matter knowledge and give more importance to professional development than private school teachers; private school teachers perceive themselves as more competent than public school teachers in terms of instructional skills. However, in terms of personality traits, both public and private school teachers perceive themselves as positive. Gender and branch do not make any significant difference in subject matter knowledge, instructional skills, personality traits, and professional development. Seniority does not make a significant difference in terms of personality traits and professional development. However, teachers with 0-5 years of experience perceive themselves as more competent in terms of instructional skills than those with experience of 21 years or more.

Keywords

• Effective Teacher Characteristics
• Instructional Skills
• Subject Matter Knowledge
• Personality Traits
• Professional Development

References

1. Antecol, H., Eren, O., & Özbeklik, S. (2015). The effect of teacher gender on student achievement in primary school. Journal of Labor Economics, 33(1), 63-89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/677391?origin=JSTOR-pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
2. Arum, R. (1996). Do private schools force public schools to compete? American Sociological Review, 61(1), 29-46. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2096405 sayfasından erişilmiştir.
3. Boyd, P. C., Boll, M., Brawner, L., & Villaume, S. K. (1998). Becoming reflective professionals: An exploration of preservice teacher's struggles as they translate language and literacy theory into practice. Action in Teacher Education, 19(4), 61-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.1998.10462892
4. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2013). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem.
5. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem.
6. Condrat, V. (2018). Backward design: when a good ending makes a good beginning. Inspiring Professional Excellence in Teaching Languages (March 16th-17th, 2018) içinde, 64-75.
7. Çalışkan, S., Güney, Z., Sakhieva, R., Vasbieva, D., & Zaitseva, N. (2019). Teachers’ views on the availability of web 2.0 tools in education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 14(22), 70-81. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i22.11752
8. Danişman, Ş., & Tanışlı, D. (2018). Examination of mathematics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of probability. MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(2), 16-34. https://mojes.um.edu.my/article/view/12622/8117 sayfasından erişilmiştir.

9. Eason, R., Giannangelo, D. M., & Franceschini, L. A. (2009). A look at creativity in public and private schools. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(2), 130-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.04.001
10. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. The USA: Sage.
11. Gholam, A. P., & Kobeissi, A. H. (2012). Teacher evaluation instruments/systems in Lebanon and other major Arab countries in comparison to evidenced-based characteristics of effective teacher evaluation instruments (Doctoral Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3544957).
12. Giroux, H., & McLaren, P. (1986). Teacher education and the politics of engagement: The case for democratic schooling. Harvard Educational Review, 56(3), 213-239.
13. Kim, L. E., Dar-Nimrod, I., & MacCann, C. (2018). Teacher personality and teacher effectiveness in secondary school: Personality predicts teacher support and student self-efficacy but not academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(3), 309-323.
14. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. Yale University Press.
15. Larrivee, B. (2008). Meeting the challenge of preparing reflective practitioners. The New Educator, 4(2), 87-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/15476880802014132
16. Minor, L. C., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Witcher, A. E., & James, T. L. (2002). Preservice teachers' educational beliefs and their perceptions of characteristics of effective teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 96(2), 116-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220670209598798
17. Moran, C. (2005). Teacher and principal perceptions of dispositional characteristics needed by middle school teachers to be most effective in the classroom (Doctoral Dissertation). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3199445).
18. Morgan, B. (2009). Fostering transformative practitioners for critical EAP: Possibilities and challenges. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(2), 86-99. https://doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2008.09.001
19. Özdamar, K. (2013). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi. Eskişehir: Nisan Yayıncılık.
20. Öznacar, B., Güven, Z., & Yilmaz, E. (2017). A Study into teaching styles of elementary school teachers in terms of several variables. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(1), 552-560.
21. Polk, J. A. (2006). Traits of effective teachers. Arts Education Policy Review, 107(4), 23-29. https://doi.org/10.3200/AEPR.107.4.23-29
22. Raufelder, D., Nitsche, L., Breitmeyer, S., Keßler, S., Herrmann, E., & Regner, N. (2016). Students’ perception of “good” and “bad” teachers: Results of a qualitative thematic analysis with German adolescents. International Journal of Educational Research, 75, 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2015.11.004
23. Sansone, D. (2017). Why does teacher gender matter? Economics of Education Review, 61, 9-18.
24. Saygılı, S. (2013). Sanayi toplumundan bilgi toplumuna geçiş sürecinde eğitimde dönüştürücü bir entelektüel olarak öğretmenler. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi [Özel Sayı], 263-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.09.004
25. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26. Swainston, T. (2008). A reflective resource for performance management, effective teachers in secondary schools. London: Network Continuum.
27. Şimsek, Ö., & Sarsar, F. (2019). Investigation of the self-efficacy of the teachers in technological pedagogical content knowledge and their use of ınformation and communication technologies. World Journal of Education, 9(1), 196-208. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v9n1p196
28. Tajeddin, Z., & Alemi, M. (2019). Effective language teachers as persons: exploring pre-service and ın-service teachers' beliefs. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 22(4). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1204608 sayfasından erişilmiştir.
29. Tezgiden-Cakcak, Y. (2016). Öğretmen eğitiminin temel sorunsalı: Nasıl bir öğretmen yetiştirmeyi hedefliyoruz? Eleştirel Pedagoji, 45, 60-68.
30. Toraman, Ç. (2019). Ortaokul öğretmenlerinin etkili öğretmen özellikleri ile öğretmenlik mesleğini seçme nedenleri üzerine bir araştırma. (Doktora tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr sayfasından erişilmiştir.
31. Toraman, Ç., & Çakmak, M. (2020). The relationship between effective teacher characteristics and reasons for choosing teaching profession: Development of an effective teacher inventory. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 7(3), 420-435. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.707272
32. Tosuntaş, P. Ş. B., Çubukçu, Z., & Beauchamp, G. (2021). Teacher performance in terms of technopedagogical content knowledge competencies. Kastamonu Education Journal, 29(1), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.726886
33. Tran, T. T. T., & Do, T. X. (2020). Student evaluation of teaching: do teacher age, seniority, gender, and qualification matter? Educational Studies, 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1771545