Türkiye’de Öğretmen Liderliğinin Önündeki Engeller: Bir Meta-Sentez Çalışması

Öz

Bu araştırmada, Türkiye’de öğretmen liderliğinin önündeki engelleri araştıran çalışmaların meta-sentez yöntemiyle incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Araştırmaya dâhil edilen çalışmalara “Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu (YÖK) Ulusal Tez Tarama Merkezi” ile “ULAKBİM Sosyal Bilimler Veri Tabanı” kullanılarak ulaşılmıştır. Araştırma amacına ve önceden belirlenen kriterlere uygun 20 çalışma belirlenmiştir. Araştırma Walsh ve Downe (2005) tarafından geliştirilen meta-sentez aşamalarına uyularak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ulaşılan verilerin derinlemesine analizi ve yeniden yorumlanması sonucu Türkiye’de öğretmen liderliğinin önündeki engeller ana teması altında 7 alt temaya ulaşılmıştır. Bu alt temalar yönetici tutum ve davranışları, örgütsel nedenler, öğretmenlerden kaynaklı durumlar, bürokratik etkenler, eğitim sisteminden kaynaklanan sorunlar, öğretmen yetiştirmeden kaynaklanan sorunlar ve okulla ilgili sorunlardan oluşmaktadır. Öğretmen liderliğinin önündeki olumsuz yönetici tutum ve davranışlarından kaynaklanan engeller; öğretmeni desteklememe, yetkiyi paylaşmama, hiyerarşi anlayışı, kararlara katmama, örnek liderlik davranışı göstermeme, riskten kaçma, yeniliğe açık olmama, öğretmen gelişimine engel olma, çalışmaları görmezden gelme, başarıyı takdir etmeme, öğretmeni sınırlama ve öğretmene özerklik tanımamadır. Örgütsel nedenlerden kaynaklı engeller; olumsuz okul kültürü ve iklimi, demokratik olmayan ortam, yetersiz ücret, iş yükü, güvensiz ortam, teşvik edici unsurların olmaması, zaman yetersizliği, katılım imkânı sunulmaması ve akademik başarı odaklı kültürdür. Öğretmenlerden kaynaklı engellerle ilgili olarak ise liderlik becerisi eksikliği, sorumluluk almama, kişisel sorunlar, yetersiz meslektaş desteği, olumsuz liderlik algısı, gelişime kapalı olma, öğretmenler arası iletişim ve işbirliği eksikliği öne çıkmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• liderlik
• Öğretmen liderliği
• Lider öğretmen
• Öğretmen liderliği engelleri

Barriers to Teacher Leadership in Turkey: A Meta-Synthesis Study

Öz

In this study, it is aimed to examine the studies investigating the barriers to teacher leadership in Turkey through meta-synthesis method. The studies included in the research were accessed by using the "Council of Higher Education (YÖK) National Thesis Scanning Center" and "ULAKBİM Social Sciences Database". Twenty studies were identified in accordance with the research purpose and predetermined criteria. The research was conducted by following the meta-synthesis stages developed by Walsh and Downe (2005). As a result of in-depth analysis and reinterpretation of the data, 7 sub-themes were reached under the main theme of barriers to teacher leadership in Turkey. These sub-themes consisted of administrator attitudes and behaviors, organizational reasons, situations arising from teachers, bureaucratic factors, problems arising from the education system, problems arising from teacher training and school-related problems. Barriers to teacher leadership stemming from negative administrator attitudes and behaviors include not supporting teachers, not sharing authority, hierarchy, not participating in decisions, not showing exemplary leadership behavior, risk aversion, not being open to innovation, hindering teacher development, ignoring work, not appreciating success, limiting teachers and not giving teachers autonomy. Barriers stemming from organizational reasons are negative school culture and climate, undemocratic environment, inadequate wages, workload, insecure environment, lack of incentives, lack of time, lack of opportunities for participation, and academic achievement-oriented culture. Regarding the barriers arising from teachers, lack of leadership skills, lack of responsibility, personal problems, insufficient collegial support, negative leadership perception, being closed to development, and lack of communication and cooperation among teachers stand out.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Leadership
• teacher leadership
• teacher leader
• barriers to teacher leadership

Kaynakça

1. Au, W. (2007). High-stakestesting and curricular control: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Educational Researcher, (36), 258-267. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07306523
2. Beachum, F., & Dentith, A. M. (2004). Teacher leader creating cultures of school renewal and transformation. The Educational Forum, 68(3), 276-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131720408984639
3. Beycioğlu, K., & Aslan, B. (2012). Öğretmen ve yöneticilerin öğretmen liderliğine ilişkin görüşleri: Bir karma yöntem çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 2(2), 191-223. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/108175
4. Bond, N., & Sterett, W. (2014). Developing teacher leaders through honorary professional organizations in education: Focus on the college student officers. Education, 135(1), 25-38. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=googlescholar&id=GALE|A386917889&v=2.1&it=r&sid=AONE&asid=e1638a76
5. Bondas, T., & Hall, O.C. (2007). A decade of meta synthesis research in health sciences: A meta-method study. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, (2), 101-113. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482620701251684
6. Buckner, K. G. & McDowelle, J.O. (2000). Developing teacher leaders: Providing encouragement, opportunities and support. Nassp Bulletin, 84(616), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263650008461607
7. Burgess, J., & Bates, D. (2010). Other duties as assigned: Tips, tools and techniques for expert teacher leadership, ASCD.
8. Cranston, J., & Kusanovich, K. (2016). Ethnotheatre and creative methods for teacher leadership. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39844-0

9. Çelik, V. (2008). Sınıf yönetimi (4. Baskı). Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice. ASCD.
10. Danielson, C. (2007). The many faces of leadership. Teachers as Leaders, 65(1), 14-19. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/the-many-faces-of-leadership
11. Deal, T., & Peterson, K. (1999). Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership. Jossey-Bass. Finfgeld, D. L. (2003). Meta-synthesis: The state of the art-so far. Qualitative health research, 13(7), 893- 904. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303253462
12. Greenlee, B. J. (2007). Building teacher leadership capacity through educational leadership programs. Journal of Research for Educational Leaders, 4(1), 44-74. http://www2.education.uiowa.edu/archives/jrel/spring07/documents/greenlee_0705.pdf
13. Harris, A. (2002). Effective leadership in schools facing challenging context. School Leadership and Management, 22(1), 15-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430220143024a
14. Harris, A. (2004). Distributed Leadership and School Improvement. Educational. Management Administration & Leadership, 32(1), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143204039297
15. Harris, A., & Lambert, L. (2003). Building leadership capacity for school improvement. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
16. Harris, A., & Muijs, D. (2005). Improving schools through teacher leadership. Open University.
17. Harrison, C., & Killion, R. (2007). Ten roles for teacher leaders. Educational Leadership, 65(1), 74-77. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/ten-roles-for-teacher-leaders
18. Hart, A. W. (1990). Impacts of the school social unit on teacher authority during work redesign. American Educational Research Journal, 27(3), 503-532. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312027003503 Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2009). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop as leaders (Third edition). Corwin Press.
19. Lee, J. S., Sachs, D. & Wheeler, L. (2014). The crossroads of teacher leadership and action research. The clearing house: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 87(5), 218-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2014.924896
20. Leithwood, K. (2003). Teacher leadership: Its nature, development, and impact on schools and students. In M. Brundrett, N. Burton, R. Smith (Eds.), Leadership in education (pp. 103-117). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446215036.n7
21. Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1999). Changing leadership for changing times. McGraw-Hill Education (UK). https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem.1999.13.6.301.4
22. Lichtenstein, B., Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., Seers, A., Douglas, J., & Schreiber, C. (2006). Complexity leadership theory: An interactive perspective on leading in complex adaptive systems. Emerald Complex Organ 8(4), 2-12. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1007&context=managementfacpub
23. Little, J. W. (2003). Constructions of teacher leadership in three periods of policy and reform activism. School Leadership & Management, 23(4), 401-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/1363243032000150944
24. Mascall, B., Leithwood, K., Straus, T. & Sacks, R. (2008). The relationship between distributed leadership and teachers' academic optimism. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 214-228. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230810863271
25. Miles, M, B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded Sourcebook. (2nd ed). Sage.
26. Miller, L. (2015). School–university partnerships and teacher leadership: Doing It. The Educational Forum, 79(1), 24-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2015.972810
27. Millwater, J.& Ehrich, L. C. (2009). Teacher leadership: Interns crossing to the domain of higher professional learning with mentors? Australian Teacher Education Association.
28. Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the UK. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(8), 961-972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.04.010
29. Murphy, J. (2005). Connecting teacher leadership and school improvement. Thousand Oaks, Corwin Press.
30. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri. (M. Bütün, & S. Beşir Demir, Çev. Edt.). Pegem Akademi (Orijinal eserin basım tarihi 2001).
31. Pellicer, L., & L. Anderson (1995). A Handbook for teacher leaders. Thousand Oaks, Corwin Press.
32. Phelps, P. H. (2008). Helping teachers become leaders. The Clearing House, 81(3), 119-122. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.81.3.119-122
33. Poekert, P. E. (2012). Teacher leadership and professional development: Examining links between two concepts central to school improvement. Professional Development in Education, 38(2), 169-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2012.657824
34. Polat, S., & Ay, O. (2016). Meta-sentez: Kavramsal bir çözümleme. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(1), 52-64. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/365967 Reeves, D. B. (2008). Reframing teacher leadership to improve your school. ASCD.
35. Sawyer, R. D., Neel, M. & Coulter, M. (2016). At the crossroads of clinical practice and teacher leadership: A changing paradigm for professional practice. Intenational Journal of Teacher Leadership, 7(1), 17-36. https://www.cpp.edu/ceis/education/international-journal-teacher-leadership/documents/Sawyer_IJTL.pdf
36. Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 8(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
37. Urbanski, A., & Nickolaou, M. B. (1997). Reflections on teachers as leaders. Educational Policy, 11(2), 243-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904897011002008
38. Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2005). Meta‐synthesis method for qualitative research: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(2), 204-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.x
39. Ward, L. & Parr, J. (2006). Authority, volunteerism, and sustainability: Creating and sustaining an online community through teacher leadership. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5(2), 109-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760600586366