Öğretmenlerin Mesleki İşbirliği: Mevcut Durum, Engeller ve Öneriler

Öz

Öğretmenlerin işbirliğine yönelik tutumlarını ve uygulamadaki durumu merkeziyetçi bir eğitim sisteminde inceleyen az sayıda çalışma vardır. Bu araştırmada, Türkiye’de öğretmenlerin mesleki işbirliğine yönelik tutumları ve işbirliği uygulamaları incelenmiştir. Karma yöntemli araştırmanın nicel kısmında 274; nitel kısmında ise 53 öğretmenden veri toplanmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, Türkiye’de öğretmenler işbirliğine yönelik olumlu bir tutuma sahiptir. Ancak bu olumlu tutumlar davranışlara daha düşük düzeyde yansımaktadır. Mesleki işbirliği denildiğinde öğretmenlerin aklına ilk önce aynı branştaki öğretmenler ile yapılan çalışmalar gelmektedir. Öğretmenler, merkeziyetçi sistemin de etkisi ile resmi toplantı (öğretmenler kurulu vb.) ya da çalışma gruplarını işbirliği çalışması olarak belirtmiştir. Katılımcılar en çok eğitim-öğretim etkinlikleri ve öğrencilerin kişilik gelişimi konularında işbirliği yapmakta; informal olarak yaptıkları sohbetleri ve günlük konuşmaları işbirliği olarak görmektedir. Öğretmenlere göre mesleki işbirliği çalışmaları genel olarak okul iklimine önemli katkılar yapmakta, öğretmenlerin iş doyumunu, motivasyonunu ve performansını yükseltmekte; aidiyet duygusunu artırmakta; okulun sorun çözme becerisini geliştirmekte ve öğrencilere yararlı olmaktadır. Katılımcılar, genel olarak mesleki işbirliği çalışmalarının olumsuz bir yönünü belirtmemiştir. İşbirliği çalışmalarının önündeki en önemli engeller öğretmenlerin kişilik farklılıklarından ve eğitim sisteminden kaynaklanmaktadır. Öğretmenler, bazı öğretmenlerin ünlü olma çabasını ve merkezi sınavlara dayalı rekabet ortamını önemli engeller olarak belirtmiştir. Katılımcılara göre mesleki işbirliği çalışmalarını artırmak için iletişimi artırıcı ve özendirici önlemler alınması gereklidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öğretmenlerin mesleki işbirliği
• tutum
• işbirliği davranışları
• Türk eğitim sistemi

Teachers’ Professional Collaboration: Current Status, Barriers and Suggestions

Öz

There are few studies examining teachers’ attitudes towards collaboration and the situation in practice in a centralized education system. In this research, teachers’ attitudes towards professional collaboration and collaboration behaviours in Turkey were examined via mixed method research. The data were collected from 274 teachers for the quantitative part and the qualitative part consisted of 53 teachers as participants. According to the results, teachers have a positive attitude towards collaboration. However, these positive attitudes are reflected in behaviours at a lower level. When it comes to professional collaboration, teachers immediately think of the work which is carried out with teachers in the same branch. With the effect of the centralized system, teachers in the study defined official meetings or working groups as collaboration activities. They mostly collaborate on the issues such as ‘educational activities and personality development of students’. They also indicated informal conversations and daily conversations as collaboration. According to the teachers, professional collaboration studies make important contributions to the school climate in general, increase teachers’ job satisfaction, motivation, performance and their sense of belonging. Moreover, teachers also stated that these studies improve the problem-solving skills of the school and they are beneficial to the students as well.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Teachers’ professional collaboration
• Attitudes
• Collaboration behaviours
• Centralised education system
• Turkey
• Öğretmenlerin mesleki işbirliği
• tutum
• işbirliği davranışları
• Türk eğitim sistemi

Kaynakça

1. References Altinkurt, Y. (2014). The relationship between school climate and teachers’ organizational silence behaviors. The Anthropologist, 18(2), 289-297, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09720073.2014.11891546
2. Avalos-Bevan, B. and Bascopé, M. (2017). Teacher informal collaboration for professional improvement: Beliefs, contexts, and experience. Hindawi Education Research International, 4, Article ID 1357180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1357180.
3. Avila, I. (2016). Effects of teacher collaboration on student achievement in elementary school (Master Dissertation). California State Polytechnic University.
4. Bayrakci, M. (2010). In-service teacher training in Japan and Turkey: A comparative analysis of institutions and practices. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 10-22.
5. Blankstein, A. M. (2007). Out of the box leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
6. Brodie, K. (2021). Teacher agency in professional learning communities. Professional Development in Education, 47(4), 560-573, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1689523
7. Burton, T. (2015). Exploring the impact of teacher collaboration on teacher learning and development (Doctoral Dissertation). University of South Carolina - Columbia. http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3107.
8. Carroll, T. G. and Foster, E. (2010). Who will teach? Experience matters. Washington, DC: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED511985.pdf.

9. Cerit, Y. (2009). The relationship between teachers' levels of organizational trust and their levels of collaboration. Uludag University Journal of Education Faculty, 22(2), 637-657.
10. Coban, O. and Atasoy, R. (2020). Relationship between distributed leadership, teacher collaboration and organizational innovativeness. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(4), 903-911, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v9i4.20679
11. Cook, L. and Friend, M. (1993). Educational leadership for teacher collaboration. In B. S. Billingsley, D. Peterson, D. Bodkins, M. B. Hendricks (Eds.). Program leadership for serving students with disabilities (pp. 421-444). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED372532.pdf.
12. Cotton, K. (2003). Principals and student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
13. Creswell, J. W. and Plano-Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. DuFour, R. (2011). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
15. Duyar, İ., Gumus, S. and Bellibas, M. S. (2013). Multilevel analysis of teacher work attitudes. International Journal of Educational Management, 27(7), 700-719, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2012-0107.
16. Ervin, S. R. (2011). The relationship between teacher collaboration and student achievement (Doctoral Dissertation). The University of Southern Mississippi. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/731.
17. Fakılı, A. (2019). Teacher perceptions of occupational professionalism and collaborative climate (Master Thesis). Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University, Turkey.
18. Forte, A. M. and Flores, M. A. (2014). Teacher collaboration and professional development in the workplace: a study of Portuguese teachers. European Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 91-105, DOI: 10.1080/02619768.2013.763791
19. Fretwell, D. H. and Wheeler, A. (2001). Turkey: Secondary education and training. Secondary education series. World Bank, Washington, DC. Human Development Network.
20. Friend, M. D. and Cook, L. (2014). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (7th Edition), London: Pearson Education.
21. Friend, M. ve Cook, L. (1990). Collaboration as a predictor for success in school reform. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1(1), 69-86, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532768xjepc0101_4.
22. Friend, M. ve Cook, L. (1992). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals. White Plains, NY: Longman.
23. Goddard, R., Goddard, Y., Kim, E. S. and Miller, R. (2015). A theoretical and empirical analysis of the roles of instructional leadership, teacher collaboration, and collective efficacy beliefs in support of student learning. American Journal of Education, 121(4), 501-530. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/681925.
24. Goddard, Y., Goddard, R. and Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 109(4), 877-896.
25. Hargreaves, A. (1991). Contrived collegiality: a micropolitical analysis. In: J. Blase, (Edt.). The politics of life in schools (pp. 46-72). New York, NY: Sage.
26. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times. Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. London: Cassell.
27. Hoy, W. K. and Tarter, C. J. (1997). The road to open and healthy schools: A handbook for change, elementary edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
28. Hsieh, H. F. and Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277-1288.
29. Johnston, W. R. and Berglund, T. (2018). The prevalence of collaboration among American teachers: National findings from the American teacher panel. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2217.html.
30. Kelchtermans, G. (2006). Teacher collaboration and collegiality as workplace conditions: A review. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 52, 220-237.
31. Learning Forward. (2011). Standards for Professional Learning. https://learningforward.org/standards/leadership/
32. Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509-536.
33. McHenry, A. N. (2009). The relationship between leadership behaviors, teacher collaboration, and student achievement (Doctoral Dissertation). The University of Southern Mississippi. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/1091.
34. MetLife. (2010). The MetLife Survey of the American Teacher: Collaborating for Student Success. New York: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. ERIC ID: ED509650. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED509650.
35. OECD. (2009). Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS. TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264068780-en.
36. OECD. (2013). Teaching and Learning International Survey TALIS 2013 Conceptual Framework. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/education/school/TALIS%202013%20Conceptual%20Framework.pdf.
37. OECD. (2014a). TALIS 2013 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/education/school/talis-2013-results.htm.
38. OECD. (2016a). PISA 2015 Results (Volume II): Policies and Practices for Successful Schools, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264267510-en.
39. OECD. (2017). Education at a Glance 2017: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2017-en.
40. OECD. (2019). TALIS 2018 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning. https://www.oecd.org/education/school/talis-2013-results.htm.
41. OECD. (2019a). Results from TALIS 2018: Country Note - Turkey. OECD Publishing, Paris.
42. OECD. (2019b). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en.
43. OECD. (2020). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume II): Teachers and School Leaders as Valued Professionals, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/19cf08df-en.
44. Ozdogru, M. (2021). Cooperation between teachers: Current situation, barriers and solution proposals. Journal of Education and Humanities: Theory and Practice, 12(23), 125-147.
45. Plauborg, H. (2009). Opportunities and limitations of learning within teachers’ collaboration in teams: Perspectives from action learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 6, 25-34, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14767330902731293.
46. Rivera, E. A., McMahon, S. D. and Keys, C. B. (2014). Collaborative teaching: School implementation and connections with outcomes among students with disabilities. Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community, 42(1), 72-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10852352.2014.855067.
47. Selimoglu, B. (2021). The relationship between teachers' perceptions of organizational climate and their attitudes towards professional cooperation (Master Thesis). Siirt University Institute of Social Sciences, Turkey.
48. Torres, D. G. (2019). Distributed leadership, professional collaboration, and teachers’ job satisfaction in U.S. schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 79(2019), 111-123, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.001.
49. TUIK. (2017). Turkish Statistical Institute - Household consumption expenditure 2017. Ankara: TUIK.
50. Weindling, D. (2005). Teachers as collaborative professionals: A survey of the views of ATL members. London: Association of Teachers and Lecturers.
51. Yılmaz, K., and Çelik, M. (2020). Öğretmenler arasında mesleki işbirliğine yönelik tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi [Development of scale of attitude towards professional collaboration among teachers]. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(2), 731-740.
52. Yılmaz, K., Yoldaş, C. and Yangil, K. (2004). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin mesleki gelişimleri ile ilgili görüşleri [Opinions of classroom teachers about their professional development]. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Burdur Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(7), 198-210.