Bir Yükseköğretim Kurumunda Yeni Öğretim Görevlilerine Verilen Hizmet İçi Eğitim Programı’nın Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’de bir devlet üniversitesinde yabancı diller yüksekokulunda mesleğe yeni başlayan öğretim görevlilerine verilen hizmet içi eğitim programını, uygulama ve etkinlik açısından değerlendirmektir. Bu çalışma nitel araştırma yöntemlerinin kullanıldığı bir durum çalışmasıdır. Veriler yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme yöntemi ile programa katılan 12 öğretim görevlisinden toplanmıştır. Çalışmanın sonunda uygulanan hizmet içi programın, mesleğe yeni başlayan öğretim görevlilerinin kendilerini yetkin hissetmelerine ve mesleki açıdan gelişmelerine önemli ölçüde katkı sağladığı tespit edilmiştir. Bu çalışmanın sonuçlarının, yükseköğretim kurumlarında çalışan yöneticilere, göreve yeni başlayan öğretim görevlilerinin yetiştirilmesine yönelik etkili hizmet içi eğitim programları geliştirmeleri veya mevcut programları iyileştirmeleri için ihtiyaç duyacakları gerekli bilgileri sağlaması beklenmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öğretim görevlisi
• hizmet içi eğitim,
• yükseköğretim
• mesleki gelişim

Evaluation of an In-service Training Program Given to the New Faculty at a Higher Education Institution

Öz

The purpose of this study is to evaluate an in-service training program given to the new faculty working at the School of Foreign Languages at a public university in Turkey in terms of implementation and effectiveness. The study adopted a qualitative case study design. The data were collected by semi-structured interview method from 12 lecturers who attended the in-service training program. At the end of the study, it was found that the in-service training program has contributed significantly to the new faculty members’ feeling competent and their professional development. The results of this study are expected to provide the administrators working in higher education institutions with the necessary information they will need to develop effective in-service training programs for the training of new faculty members or to improve existing programs.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Faculty members
• higher education, in-service training
• professional development

Kaynakça

1. Achinstein, B., & Barrett, A. (2004). Reframing classroom contexts: How new teachers and mentors view diverse learners and challenges of practice. Teachers College Record, 106(4), 716-746.
2. Athanases, S. Z., & Achinstein, B. (2003). Focusing new teachers on individual and low performing students:The centrality of formative assessment in the mentor’s repertoire of practice. Teachers College Record, 105(8), 1486–1520.
3. Breaux, A. & Wong, H. (2003). New teacher induction: How to train, support, and retain new teachers. Mountain View, CA: Harry K. Wong Publications.
4. Cameron. M. (2007). Learning to teach: A literature review of induction theory and practice. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
5. Carver, C. L., & Katz, D. S. (2004). Teaching at the boundary of acceptable practice: What is a new teacher mentor to do? Journal of Teacher Education, 55(5), 449-462.
6. Chubbuck, S. M., Clift, R. T., Allard, J., & Quinlan, J. (2001). Playing it safe as a novice teacher. Implications for programs for new teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(5), 365-376.
7. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nd ed.).London: Sage Publications Ltd.
8. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2008). The landscape of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

9. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103, 1013-1055. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/0161-4681.00141
10. Glazerman, S., Dolfin, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Isenberg, E., Julieta, L. (2008). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Results from the first year of a randomized controlled study (NCEE 2009-4034). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
11. Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 548-594). New York: Macmillan
12. Goldrick, L., Osta, D., Barlin, D., & Burn, J. (2012). Review of state policies on teacher induction. Santa Cruz, CA: New Teacher Center. Retrieved from www.newteachercenter.org
13. Lincoln, S. Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, InElo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K. ve Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: a focus on trustworthiness, SAGE Open, 1-10.
14. Luft, J. A., & Cox, W. E. (2001). Investing in our future: A survey of support offered to beginning secondary science and mathematics teachers. Science Educator, 10(1), 1-9.
15. Helsel DeWert, M., Babinsky, L. M., & Jones, B. D. (2003). Safe passages: Providing online support to beginning teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 311-320.
16. Isenberg, E., Glazerman, S., Bleeker, M., Johnson, A., Lugo-Gil, J., Grider, M., Dolfin, S., & Britton, E. (2009). Impacts of comprehensive teacher induction: Results from the second year of a randomized controlled study — Executive summary (NCEE 2009-4073). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
17. Miles, M, B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded Sourcebook. (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18. Molner Kelley, L. (2004). Why induction matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(5), 438-448.
19. Murnane, J. R., & Phillips, R.B. (1981). What Do Effective Teachers of Inner-City Children Have in Common? Social Science Research, 10(1), 83–100. DOI: 10.1016/0049-089X(81)90007-7
20. Napper-Owen, G. E., & Phillips, D. A. (1995). A qualitative analysis of the impact of induction assistance on first-year physical educators. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14(3), 305-327.
21. Norman, P. J., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (2005). Mind activity in teaching and mentoring. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(6), 679-697.
22. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd Ed.). London: Sage Publications, Inc.
23. Raymond, M., Fletcher, S. H., & Luque, J. (2001). Teach for America: An evaluation of teacher differences and student outcomes in Houston, Texas. Stanford, CA: Center for Research on Education Outcomes. Retrieved March 2018, from http://credo.stanford.edu/downloads/tfa.pdf.
24. Reiman, A. J., Bostick, D., Lassiter, J., & Cooper, J. (1995). Counselor- and teacher-led support groups for beginning teachers: A cognitive-developmental perspective. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, 30, 105-117.
25. Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J.F. (2001). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73, 417–458. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468- 0262. 2005.00584.x
26. Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Knoxville, YN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
27. Strong, M., & Baron, W. (2004). An analysis of mentoring conversations with beginning teachers: Suggestions and responses. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 47-57.
28. Wechsler, M.E., Caspary, K., Humphrey, D. C., & Matsko, K. K. (2012). Examining the Effects of New Teacher Induction. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 111(2), 387-416.
29. Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.