Öğretmenin Algıladığı Disiplinin ve Mesleki Gelişim Engellerinin Öz-Yeterlik ve Öğretim Uygulamaları ile İlişkileri

Yıl 2026, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 1, 77 - 97, 13.01.2026

Alper Uslukaya

https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.1689216

Öz

Bu çalışma, öğretmenin algıladığı disiplin ile mesleki gelişim engellerinin, öğretmen öz-yeterliği ve öğretim uygulamaları arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmada, TALIS 2018 Türkiye veri setinden elde edilen 8.342 öğretmene ait veriler kullanılmıştır. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkileri incelemek için Bayesci parametre kestirimine dayalı bir yapısal eşitlik modeli oluşturulmuştur. Bulgular, algılanan disiplinin öğretim uygulamaları ile doğrudan bir ilişkisi olmadığını göstermiştir. Ancak, bu ilişkinin öğretmen öz-yeterliği aracılığıyla dolaylı olarak kurulduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, mesleki gelişim engellerinin, algılanan sınıf disiplin problemleri ile öğretim uygulamaları arasındaki hem doğrudan hem de dolaylı ilişkileri (öğretmen öz-yeterliği aracılığıyla) düzenleyebildiği görülmüştür. Nitekim düşük düzeydeki mesleki gelişim engellerinin, bu doğrudan ve dolaylı ilişkileri daha da güçlendirdiği belirlenmiştir. Bu sonuçlar, algılanan disiplin problemlerinin öğretmenlerin öz-yeterliğini olumsuz yönde etkileyerek öğretim uygulamaları üzerinde dolaylı bir zarara yol açabileceğine işaret etmektedir. Ayrıca, mesleki gelişim engellerinin düşük olduğu durumlarda, bu olumsuz etkilerin daha belirgin hale geldiği anlaşılmaktadır. Çalışma, elde edilen bulgular ışığında politika yapıcılara, eğitim uygulayıcılarına ve araştırmacılara yönelik çeşitli öneriler sunularak tamamlanmıştır.

Relationships of Teacher’ Perceived Disciplinary and Professional Development Barriers with Self-Efficacy and Teaching Practices

Öz

This study aims to examine the relationship between teacher’ perceived disciplinary, professional development barriers, teacher self-efficacy, and teaching practices. The research utilizes data from 8.342 teachers obtained from the TALIS 2018 Turkey dataset. A structural equation model based on Bayesian parameter estimation was developed to analyze the relationships between the variables. The findings revealed that teacher’ perceived disciplinary had no direct relationship with teaching practices. However, it was determined that this relationship is established indirectly through teacher self-efficacy. Furthermore, professional development barriers were found to moderate both the direct and indirect relationships (via teacher self-efficacy) between perceived classroom discipline problems and teaching practices. Indeed, it was determined that lower levels of professional development barriers strengthened these direct and indirect relationships. These results indicate that perceived classroom discipline problems can negatively impact teachers' self-efficacy, thereby indirectly harming teaching practices. Additionally, it is understood that these negative effects may be more pronounced in situations where professional development barriers are low. The study concludes by offering various recommendations for policymakers, educational practitioners, and researchers, based on the findings.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Classroom discipline problems , teacher self-efficacy , teaching practices , professional development barriers.

Etik Beyan

This study used secondary, anonymized data from the TALIS 2018 Turkey dataset. Since the data are publicly available and contain no identifiable personal information, no additional ethical approval was required. The research was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant ethical research standards.

Kaynakça

• Acat, B., & Dönmez, İ. (2009). To compare student centred education and teacher centred education in primary science and technology lesson in terms of learning environments. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 1805-1809.
• Akdemir, A. S. (2013). History and problems of teacher training programs in Türkiye. Electronic Turkish Studies, 8(12), 15-28.
• Aloe, A. M., Amo, L. C., & Shanahan, M. E. (2014). Classroom management self-efficacy and burnout: A multivariate meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 101–126.
• Altun, T., & Cengiz, E. (2012). Upper primary school teachers’ views about professional development opportunities. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(3), 672-690.
• Andrews, P. (2007). Barriers to innovation, Leadership Excellence, 24(10), 19-31.
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Multiple-group factor analysis alignment. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 21(4), 495-508.
• Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2019). Latent variable interactions using maximum-likelihood and Bayesian estimation for single-and two-level models. Mplus Web Notes, 23.
• Bakker, A. B. (2022). The social psychology of work engagement: state of the field. Career Development International, 27(1), 36-53.
• Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273.
• Bakker, A. B., Hakanen, J. J., Demerouti, E., & Xanthopoulou, D. (2007). Job resources boost work engagement particularly when job demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 274–284.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
• Barnes, K. L., & Moon, S. M. (2006). Factor structure of the psychotherapy supervisor development scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 39(3), 130–140.
• Bear, G. G. (2014). Preventive and classroom-based strategies. In Handbook of classroom management (pp. 15-39). Routledge.
• Bellibas, M. S., & Gumus, E. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions of the quantity and quality of professional development activities in Turkey. Cogent education, 3(1), 1172950.
• Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258.
• Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. University of Chicago Press
• Casey, B. J., Getz, S., & Galvan, A. (2008). The adolescent brain. Developmental Review, 28(1), 62-77.
• Chen, R. J. C., Lin, H. C., Hsueh, Y. L., & Hsieh, C. C. (2020). Which is more influential on teaching practice, classroom management efficacy or instruction efficacy? Evidence from TALIS 2018. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21(4), 589-599.
• Cohen, D.K., & Hill, H.C. (1998). State policy and classroom performance: Mathematics reform in California. Washington , DC : Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
• Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 113-143.
• Craft, A. (2002). Continuing professional development: A practical guide for teachers and schools. Routledge.
• Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality teaching. National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future.
• Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1-44. De Wet, C. (2010). Victims of educator-targeted bullying: A qualitative study. South African Journal of Education, 30, 189–201.
• Ding, M., Li, Y., Li, X., & Kulm, G. (2010). Chinese teachers’ attributions and coping strategies for student classroom misbehaviour. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 30(3), 321–337.
• Doyle, W. (1986). Classroom organization and management. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. A project of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 392–431). Macmillan.
• Eccles, J. S., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Buchanan, C. M., Reuman, D., Flanagan, C., & Iver D. M. (1993). Development during adolescence: The impact of stage-environment fit on young adolescents’ experiences in schools and in families. American Psychologist, 48(2), 90–101.
• Emmer, E. T., & Evertson, C. M. (2016). Classroom management for middle and high school teachers. Pearson.
• Enders, C. K., & Bandalos, D. L. (2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(3), 430-457.
• Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. Norton.
• Fischer J., He J., Klieme E. (2020). The structure of teaching practices across countries: A combination of factor analysis and network analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 65, 1–11.
• Freiberg, H. J., & Lamb, S. M. (2009). Dimensions of person-centered classroom management. Theory into Practice, 48(2), 99-105.
• Ghasemi, A., & Zahediasl, S. (2012). Normality tests for statistical analysis: a guide for non-statisticians. International journal of endocrinology and metabolism, 10(2), 486.
• Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., Bailes, L. P., & Nichols, R. (2019). From school leadership to differentiated instruction: A pathway to student learning in schools. The Elementary School Journal, 120(2), 197-219.
• Goh, P. S. C., & Wong, K. T. (2014). Beginning teachers’ conceptions of competency: Implications to educational policy and teacher education in Malaysia. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 13, 65-79.
• Gün, B., Oruç Ertürk, N., & Kaynardağ, A. (2014). Exploring language teachers’ perceptions of teacher development in Turkish context. Celal Bayar University Journal of Social Science, 12(4), 19-33.
• Gür, B. S., & Çelik, Z. (2009). National Education System in Turkey: Structural problems and suggestions. SETA.
• Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
• Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested‐self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337-421.
• İlğan, A. (2013). Öğretmenler için etkili mesleki gelişim faaliyetleri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(ÖYGE Özel Sayısı), 41-56.
• Jenkins, A., & Ueno, A. (2017). Classroom disciplinary climate in secondary schools in England: What is the real picture?. British Educational Research Journal, 43(1), 124-150.
• Jerrim J., Sims S., Oliver M. (2023). Teacher self-efficacy and pupil achievement: Much ado about nothing? International evidence from TIMSS. Teachers and Teaching, 29(2), 220–240.
• Jerrim, J., Prieto-Latorre, C., Marcenaro-Gutierrez, O. D., & Shure, N. (2025). Teacher Self-Efficacy, Instructional Practice, and Student Outcomes: Evidence from the TALIS Video Study. American Educational Research Journal, 62(2), 378-413.
• Kauppi, T., & Pörhölä, M. (2012). Teachers bullied by students: Forms of bullying and perpetrator characteristics. Violence and Victims, 27, 396–413.
• Kengatharan, N., & Gnanarajan, A. H. (2023). Teacher self-efficacy and student misbehaviour: the moderating role of gender–classroom management. International Journal of Educational Management, 37(2), 507-525.
• Khan, A. K., Khalid, M., Abbas, N., & Khalid, S. (2022). COVID-19-related job insecurity and employees’ behavioral outcomes: mediating role of emotional exhaustion and moderating role of symmetrical internal communication. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34(7), 2496-2515. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2021-0639
• Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2017). Self-efficacy and psychological ownership mediate the effects of empowering leadership on both good and bad employee behaviors. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24(4), 466-478.
• Krumpal, I. (2013). Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: A literature review. Quality & quantity, 47(4), 2025–2047.
• Lee, J. A., & Kim, C. J. (2019). Teaching and learning science in authoritative classrooms: Teachers’ power and students’ approval in Korean elementary classrooms. Research in Science Education, 49, 1367–1393.
• Lopes, J. A., & Oliveira, C. (2022). Teacher and school determinants of perceived classroom discipline: A multilevel analysis of TALIS 2013. Learning Environments Research, 25(1), 41-58.
• Luyten, H., & Bazo, M. (2019). Transformational leadership, professional learning communities, teacher learning and learner centred teaching practices; Evidence on their interrelations in Mozambican primary education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 60, 14-31.
• Mavi, D., Tuti, G., & Ozdemir, M. (2025). How Does Teacher Academic Optimism Affect Teacher Self‐Efficacy: Mediating Role of Teacher Professional Development and Teacher Subjective Well‐Being?. Psychology in the Schools, 62(4), 1013-1025.
• McLean, D., Eklund, K., Kilgus, S. P., & Burns, M. K. (2019). Influence of teacher burnout and self-efficacy on teacher-related variance in social-emotional and behavioral screening scores. School Psychology, 34(5), 503.
• Ninković, S. R., & Knežević Florić, O. Č. (2018). Transformational school leadership and teacher self-efficacy as predictors of perceived collective teacher efficacy. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 49-64.
• OECD (2019b). TALIS 2018 technical report. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/talis/TALIS_2018_Technical_Report.pdf
• OECD. (2019a). A teachers’ guide to TALIS 2018. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/talis/TALIS-Teachers-Guide-to-TALIS-2018-Vol-I_ENG.pdf
• OECD. (2021). Building the future of education: The OECD's education strategy. France Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/education/future-of-education-brochure.pdf
• Özdemir, M., Kaymak, M. N., & Çetin, O. U. (2023). Unlocking teacher potential: The integrated influence of empowering leadership and authentic leadership on teacher self-efficacy and agency in Turkey. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 17411432231217136.
• Özdemir, S., Sezgin, F., Kılınç, A. Ç., & Polatcan, M. (2025). A cultural lens to school leadership effects on teacher instructional practices: The mediation of teacher collective efficacy and the moderation of uncertainty avoidance. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 53(3), 515-535.
• Parise, L. M., & Spillane, J. P. (2010). Teacher learning and instructional change: How formal and on-the-job learning opportunities predict change in elementary school teachers' practice. The Elementary School Journal, 110(3), 323-346.
• Pines, A. M. (2002). Teacher burnout: A psychodynamic existential perspective. Teachers and Teaching, 8(2), 121–140.
• Pines, A. M., & Aronson, E. (1988). Career burnout: Causes and cures. Free Press.
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual review of psychology, 63(1), 539-569.
• Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891
• Reese, S. (2010). Bringing effective professional development to educators. Techniques: Connecting Education and Careers, 85(6), 38-43.
• Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A.J., Ganesan, S. and Moorman, C. (2008). Cross-sectional versus longitudinal survey research: concepts, findings, and guidelines. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(3), 261-279.
• Scales, P., Pickering, J., Senior, L., Headley, K., Garner, P., & Boulton, H. (2011). Continuing professional development in the lifelong learning sector. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
• Scherzinger, M., & Wettstein, A. (2019). Classroom disruptions, the teacher–student relationship and classroom management from the perspective of teachers, students and external observers: A multimethod approach. Learning Environments Research, 22, 101–116.
• Schunk, D. H. (1994). Self-regulation of self-efficacy and attributions in academic settings. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Selfregulation of learning and performance (pp. 75–99). Routledge.
• Schunk, D. H., & Meece, J. L. (2006). Self-efficacy development in adolescence. In F. Pajares, & T. C. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy Beliefs of adolescents, (pp. 71–96). Information Age Publishing.
• Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self‐efficacy as a predictor of job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied psychology, 57, 152-171.
• Seferoğlu, S. S. (2004). Teacher competencies and professional development. Journal of Education in Science and Intelligence, 58, 40-41.
• Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 611–625.
• Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2014). Teacher self-efficacy and perceived autonomy: Relations with teacher engagement, job satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion. Psychological Reports, 114(1), 68-77.
• Sotarauta, M., Saarivirta, T., and Kolehmainen, J. (2012). What is preventing the renewal of municipalities? (Municipal Sector Development Foundation Research Publication Series; No. 66). Kaks-Municipal Sector Development Foundation. Available at: http://www.kaks.fi/sites/default/files/TutkJulk_66_net.pdf
• Tabachnick, B., G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (sixth ed.) Pearson.
• Toytok, E. H., & Yıldırım, M. B. (2018). Meslek liselerinde disiplin sorunları ve nedenleri. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(3), 1759-1778.
• Travers, C. J., & Cooper, C. L. (1996). Teachers under pressure: Stress in the teaching profession. Psychology Press.
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783–805.
• Tunç, B., Yıldız, S., & Doğan, A. (2015). Meslek liselerinde disiplin sorunları, nedenleri ve çözümü: bir durum analizi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(2), 384-403.
• Uibu, K., & Kikas, E. (2014). Authoritative and authoritarian-inconsistent teachers' preferences for teaching methods and instructional goals. Education 3–13, 42(1), 5–22.
• Uslukaya, A., & Demirtas, Z. (2023). Can a supportive supervisor be a treasure for teachers? A multilevel analysis of the relationship between perceived supervisor support, work engagement, and burnout. Psychology in the Schools, 60(11), 4667-4685.
• Uslukaya, A., Demirtaş, Z., & Alanoğlu, M. (2022). Is presenteeism good or bad? A phenomenological study in schools. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 15(4), 758-787.
• Uslukaya, A., Demirtaş, Z., Alanoglu, M., & Zincirli, M. (2025). Exploring the Moderating Roles of Family‐Work Conflict in the Relationship Between Work‐Family Conflict and Teacher Well‐Being. Psychology in the Schools. 62, 1271–1282.
• Vidić, T., Đuranović, M., & Klasnić, I. (2021). Student misbehaviour, teacher self-efficacy, burnout and job satisfaction: Evidence from Croatia. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 79(4), 657.
• Wilson, C. M., Douglas, K. S., & Lyon, D. R. (2011). Violence against teachers: Prevalence and consequences. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2353–2371.
• Zhou, Q., Martinez, L. F., Ferreira, A. I., & Rodrigues, P. (2016). Supervisor support, role ambiguity and productivity associated with presenteeism: A longitudinal study. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3380–3387.
• Zyphur, M. J., & Oswald, F. L. (2013). Bayesian probability and statistics in management research: A new horizon. Journal of Management, 39(1), 5-13.