Öğretmen görüşlerine göre çeşitli yönetim becerilerinin okul müdürleri için önem dereceleri

Yıl 2011, Sayı: 30, 58 - 75, 01.12.2011

İdris Şahin Kadir Beycioğlu Necla Fırat

Öz

Günümüz değişen okul yönetimi bağlamında, müdürlerin yönetimi becerileri önem kazanmaktadır. Bu çalışma çeşitli yönetim becerilerinin okul müdürleri için önem derecelerini öğretmen görüşleriyle belirleyebilmeyi amaçlamıştır. Çalışma kapsamında öğretmen görüşlerinin kişisel özelliklere göre farklılarına bakılmıştır. Sonuçlar öğretmenlerin, okul müdürlerinin yönetim becerilerini “yüksek” düzeyde önemli gördüklerini ortaya koymuştur. Ayrıca bireysel farkındalık becerileri alt boyutunda kadın ve erkek öğretmenlerin görüşleri arasında farklılık olduğu ve bu farklılığın kadın öğretmenlerin lehine olduğu gözlenmiştir. Aynı alt boyutta, okul müdürü olmak isteyen öğretmenler ile okul müdürü olmak istemeyen öğretmenlerin görüşleri arasında müdür olmak isteyenler lehine farklılık olduğu görülmüştür. Kıdem değişkenine göre de katılımcı görüşleri arasında farklılıklar bulunmuştur. En önemli yönetim becerileri olarak ise birinci sırada“Personelin nasıl değerlendirileceği”; ikinci sırada “Eğitim sistemi içinde bulunan herkesin (aile, çevre vb.) eğitim-öğretim sürecine katılımını cesaretlendirmek”;  üçüncü sırada ise “Öğrenciler üzerinde katkı sağlayıcı farklılıklar yaratabilme arzusunu göstermek” olarak sıralanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Liderlik, okul müdürlüğü, yönetim becerileri, öğretmen görüşleri

TEACHERS’ OPINIONS RELATED TO THE EXTENT OF CRITICAL MANAGEMENT SKILLS FOR PRINCIPALS

Öz

The changing context of school management in our age makes principals’ management skills important. This study aimed to reveal teachers’ opinions related to the extent of critical management skills for principals. It also aimed to explore if there were any differences in teachers’ opinions with regard to their demographic variables. Results showed that teachers think that the extents of management skills for principals were critical on a high degree. In addition the results showed that female teachers were more concerned about those critical skills in self-awareness dimension. In the same dimension, there was a statistically significant difference between teachers who planned to be a principal and teachers who did not. According to teachers’ opinions, the item “how to assess staff” was the most important skill for principals, the second was “ability to encourage involvement by all parties in the educational system”, and the third was “demonstrating a desire to make a significant difference in the lives of students.”

Anahtar Kelimeler

Leadership, school principalship, management skills, teachers’ opinions

Kaynakça

• Balcı, A. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: Yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık Brandt, R. (2003). Is this school a learning organization? Ten ways to tell. Journal of Staff Development. 24 (1), 10-16.
• Begley, P. T. (2001). In pursuit of authentic school leadership practices. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 4, 353-365.
• Beycioğlu, K. ve Aslan, M. (2007). The need for organizational innovations in public elementary schools. International Journal of Educational Reform, 16, 27-37.
• Beycioğlu, K. ve Aslan, B. (2010). Öğretmen liderliği ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalıĢması. İlköğretim Online, 9(2), 764-775.
• Clarke, S. P. (2000). The principal at the center of the reform”. International Journal of Leadership in Education. 3(1), 57-73.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L. ve Morrison, K. (2005). Research methods in education. (5th Ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
• Cheng, Y. C. (2002). The changing context of school leadership: Implications for paradigm shift. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.). Second International handbook of educational leadership and administration. (103-132) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Dana, N. F. (2009). Leading with passion and knowledge. Thousand Oaks: Corwin. Daresh, J., C. ve Arrowsmith, T. (2003). A practical guide for new school leaders. London: Sage.
• Day, C. ve Gu, Q. (2010). The new lives of teachers. New York: Routledge.
• Dimmock, C. (1996). Dilemmas fo school leaders and administrators in restructuring. In K. Leithwood, J. Chapman, David Corson, P. Hallinger & A. Hart (Eds.). International handbook of educational leadership and administration. (135-170). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Dimmock, C. (1999). The management of dilemmas in school restructuring: A case analysis. School Leadership and Management, 19, 97-113.
• Dimmock, C. ve Walker, A. (2000). Developing comparative and international educational leadership and management: A cross-cultural model. School Leadership & Management, 20, 143 – 160.
• DiPaola, M. F. (2003). Conflict and change. In N. Bennett, M. Crawford, & M. Cartwright (Eds.). Effective educational leadership. (143-158). London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Fernandez, A. (2000). Leadership in an era of change: Breaking down the barriers of the culture of teaching. In C. Day, A. Fernandez, T.E. Hauge, & J. Moller (Eds). The life and work of teachers: International perspective in changing times. (235-250). London: Routledge Falmer.
• Fullan, M. (2000a). The role of the principal in school reform (Adapted from the New meaning of educational change, 3rd Edition). Paper presented at Principals Institute 10th Year Celebration. New York.
• Fullan, M. (2000b). The return of large-scale reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1, 5-28. Fullan, M. (2002). The change leader. Educational Leadership. 59(8), 16-21.
• Fullan, M. (2005). The new meaning of educational change. (3 rd Ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
• Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P. ve Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction. (8th Ed.). Berkshire: Allyn and Bacon.
• Goodson, I. F. (2001). Social histories of educational change. Journal of Educational Change. 2(1), 45-63. Goddard, J. T. (2003). Leadership in the (Post) modern era. In N. Bennett & L. Anderson (Eds.). Rethinking educational leadership: Challenging the conventions. (11- 26) London: Sage.
• Gunter, H. M. (2001). Leaders and leadership in education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Hallinger, P. (1992). The evolving role of American principals: From managerial to instructional to transformational leaders. Journal of Educational Administration. 30(3), 35-48.
• Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33, 329-351.
• Hargreaves, A. (2008). The emotional geographies of educational leadership. In B. Davies & T. Brighouse (Eds.). Passionate leadership in education. (129-150) London: Sage.
• Harris, A. (2002). Effective leadership in schools facing challenging context. School Leadership and Management, 22, 15-26.
• Harris, A. (2004). Editorial: School leadership and school improvement: A simple and a complex relationship. School Leadership and Management, 24, 3-5.
• Harris, A. (2008). Distributed Leadership. New York: Routledge.
• Harris, A ve Day, C. (2003). From singular to plural? Challenging the orthodoxy of school leadership. In N. Bennett & L. Anderson (Eds.). Rethinking educational leadership: Challenging the conventions. (89-99) London: Sage.
• Karasar, N. (1995). Araştırmalarda rapor hazırlama. Ankara: 3A AraĢtırma Eğitim DanıĢmanlık Ltd.
• Kondakçı, Y., Zayim, M. ve ÇalıĢkan, Ö. (2010). Okul yöneticilerinin değiĢime hazır olma tutumlarının okulun öğretim düzeyi, yöneticilerin deneyimi ve okul büyüklüğü bağlamında incelenmesi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 155-175.
• Lakomski, G. (2008). Functionally adequate but casually idle: W(h)ither distributed leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 46 (2), 159-171.
• Lehtonen, R. ve Pahkinen, E. (2004). Practical methods for design and analysis of complex surveys (2nd Ed.). West Sussex: Wiley & Sons.
• Leithwood, K. ve Jantzi, D. (1999). The relative effects of principal and teacher sources on student engagement with school. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 679-706.
• Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., Earl, L., Watson, N., Levin, B. ve Fullan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership for large scale leadership: The case of England's National Literacy and Numeracy Strategy. School Leadership and Management, 24, 57-79.
• Leithwood, K., Begley, P. T. ve Cousins, J. B.. (2005). Developing expert leadership for future schools. London: The Falmer Press.
• Leithwood, K. ve Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 529-561.
• Mcinerney, P. (2003). Moving into dangerous territory? Educational leadership in a devolving education system. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 6, 57 – 72.
• Muijs, D. (2004). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. London: Sage. Mulford, B., Sillins, H. ve Leithwood, K. (2004). Educational leadership for organizational learning and improved student outcomes. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Oplatka, I. (2003). School change and self renewal: Some reflections from life stories of women principals. Journal of Educational Change, 4, 25-43.
• Riley, K. ve MacBeath, J. (2003). Effective leaders and effective schools. In N. Bennett, M. Crawford, & M. Cartwright (Eds.). Effective educational leadership. (173- 185). London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
• Robinson, V. M. J. (2008). Forging the links between distributed leadership and educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration, 46 (2), 241-256.
• Sillins, H. & Mulford, B. (2002). Leadership and school results. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.). Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration. (561-612). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Southworth, G. (2008). Primary school leadership today and tomorrow. School Leadership and Managements, 28(5), 413-434. Spillane, J. P. (2003). Educational leadership. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 343 – 346s.
• Sergiovanni, T. J. (1995). The principalship a reflective practice perspective (3rd Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• Sillins, H. ve Mulford, B. (2002). Leadership and school results. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.). Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration. (561-612). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Sleeers, P., Geijsel, F. ve Van den Berg, R (2002). Conditions fostering educational change. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.). Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration. (75-102) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Stoll, L., Bolam, R. ve Collarbone, P. (2002). Leading for change: Building capacity for change. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.). Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration. (41-74) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
• Stoll, L., ve Sammons, P. (2007). Growing together: School effectiveness and school improvement in the UK. In T. Townsend (Eds.). International handbook of school effectiveness and school improvement. (207-222) Dordrecht: Springer.
• Thomson, P. (2009). School leadership: Heads on the block? London: Routledge.