Araştırma Makalesi
PDF EndNote BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey

Yıl 2022, Cilt 42, Sayı 3, 2431 - 2467, 30.12.2022
https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.1136783

Öz

This study, with an aim to understand English language teaching (ELT) teachers` and school principals` perspectives regarding the supervisory process in Turkey, adopted a qualitative approach. Three public schools (a primary, a secondary and a high school) were selected, and six ELT teachers and three school principals formed the sample. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with the ELT teachers and school principals, and observation forms filled out by the school teachers were analysed as well. Five themes emerged from the data analysis, which highlight the issues regarding the supervisory process. These are; teacher supervision is not grounded on a well-planned process, supervision cycle lacks the pre-meeting phase, school principals are regarded as the ultimate authority, principals are not qualified enough to supervise ELT teachers, and the official teacher supervision guidelines lack sufficient information.

Kaynakça

  • Acheson, K.A. & Gall, M.D. (1992). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers: Preservice and in-service applications, 3rd edn. NY: Longman.
  • Acheson, K. A. & Gall, M. D. (2003). Clinical supervision and teacher development: Preservice and in-service applications, 4th edn. NY: Wiley.
  • Anuna, M. (2004). Educational administration and supervision. In M. Anuna (Eds.), Educational supervision: The Nigerian Experience. Owerri: International Universities Press Ltd.
  • Bailey, K. M. (2006). Language teacher supervision: A case-based approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Blase, J. & Blase, J. (1999). Principals` instructional leadership and teacher development: teachers` perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 349-378.
  • Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). “Using thematic analysis in psychology”. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  • Bush, T. (2009). Theories of educational leadership and management, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Campbell, T. F. (2013). Teacher supervision and evaluation: a case study of administrators` and teachers` perceptions of mini observations. PhD Thesis. College of Professional Studies. Retrieved June 17, 2016 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
  • Celebi, N. (2010). Public high school teachers` opinions on school administrators` supervision duty in Turkey. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 5, 212-231.
  • Chen, C, W. & Cheng, Y. (2013). The supervisory process of EFL teachers: a case study. TESL-EJ, 17(1), 1-21.
  • Cogan, M. L. (1973). Clinical supervision. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  • Daresh, J. C. (2001). Supervision as proactive leadership. USA: Waveland Press.
  • Firincioglu Bige, E. & Yengin Sarpkaya, P. (2015). Teachers` views about the course supervision of primary school principals. Anthropologist, 19(1), 193-204.
  • Freeman, D. (1982). Observing teachers: three approaches to in-service training and development. TESOL Quarterly, 16(1), 21-28.
  • Gebhard, J. G. (1984). Models of supervision: choices. TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 501-514.
  • Gebhard, J. G. (1990). The supervision of second and foreign language teachers. ERIC Digest, ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics (EDO-FL-90-06), Washington, D.C.: Centre for Applied Linguistics.
  • Glickman, C. D. (1990). Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental Approach, 2nd edn. USA: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical Supervision. NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  • Gray, D. E. (2014). Doing Research in the Real World, 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  • Hismanoglu, M. & Hismanoglu, S. (2010). English Language Teachers` Perspectives of Educational Supervision in Relation to Their Professional Development: A Case Study of Northern Cyprus. Research on Youth and Language, 4(1), 16-34.
  • Ibara, E. C. (2013). Exploring clinical supervision as instrument for effective teacher supervision. Africa Education Review, 10(2), 238-252.
  • Isherwood, G. B. (1983). Clinical Supervision: A Principal`s Perspective. Journal of Educational Administration, 21(1), 14-20.
  • Kalule, L. & Bouchamma, Y. (2014). Teacher Supervision practices and characteristics of in-school supervisors in Uganda. Educ Asse Eval Acc, 26, 51-72.
  • Kayaoglu, M. N. (2012). Dictating or Facilitating: The Supervisory Process for Language Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(10), 103-117.
  • Kowalski, T. J. & Brunner, C. C. (2005). The school superintendent: Roles, challenges, and issues. In F. W. English (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of educational leadership: Advances in theory, research, and practice (pp. 142-167). London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
  • Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Language teacher education for a global society: a modular model for knowing, analysing, recognising, doing, and seeing. USA: Taylor & Francis.
  • Little, J. W. (2007). Teachers` accounts of classroom experience as a resource for professional learning and instructional decision making. In P. A. Moss (Ed.) Evidence and decision making (pp.217-240). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Marshall, K. (2005). It`s Time to Rethink Teacher Supervision and Evaluation. The Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 727-735.
  • Marshall, K. (2009). Rethinking teacher supervision and evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
  • Minnear-Peplinski, R. M. (2009). Principals` and teachers` perceptions of teacher supervision. PhD Thesis. University of Nevada. Retrieved June 17, 2016 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
  • MEB. (2000). Job descriptions of school administrators. Turkish Official Journal Number: 2508. Ankara: Turkish Ministry of Education.
  • MEB (2014). School supervision council boards guidance and counselling directive. Turkish Ministry of Education. Retrieved from; http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/maarifmuf_0/maarifmuf_1.html
  • Mosher, P. & Purpel, D. (1972). Supervision: A reluctant profession. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
  • Moswela, B. (2010). Instructional Supervision in Botswana Secondary Schools: An Investigation. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 38(1), 78-87.
  • Nelson, B. S. & Sassi, A. (2000). Shifting approaches to supervision: The case of mathematics supervision. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36 (4), 553-584.
  • Nwaoguegbe, D. E. (2004). Clinical supervision. In M. Anuna (Ed.) Educational supervision: The Nigerian Experience. Owerri, Nigeria: International Universities Press Ltd.
  • Nwogu, J. I. (1980). A guide to effective supervision of instruction in Nigerian schools. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishing Co Ltd.
  • Pajak, E. (2001). Clinical Supervision in a Standards-based Environment: Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(3), 233-243.
  • Rehman, A. A. & Al-Bargi, A. (2014). Teachers` Perspectives on Post Observation Conferences: A Study at a Saudi Arabian University. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(8), 1558-1568.
  • Reinhartz, J. & Beach, D. M. (1987). A Comprehensive Supervision Model for Promoting Professional Development. The Clearing House, 60(8), 363-366.
  • Robinson, G. W. (2009). Principals` Perceptions Regarding the Role of the Professional Development and Appraisal System in Teacher Supervision in Texas. PhD Thesis. University of Houston. Retrieved June 17, 2016 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
  • Rooney, J. (1993). Teacher evaluation: No more "super" vision. Educational Leadership, 51(2), 43-44.
  • Rooney, J. (2005). Teacher Supervision: If It Ain`t Working… Educational Leadership, 63(3), 88-89.
  • Sergiovanni, T. J. & Starratt, R. J. (2002). Supervision: A redefinition. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
  • Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research, 4th edn. L.A: Sage.
  • Smith, W. & Andrews, R. (1989). Instructional leadership: How principals make a difference. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (2000). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques. California: Corwin Press Inc.
  • Tang, S, Y, F. & Chow, A. W. K. (2007). Communicating feedback in teaching practice supervision in a learning-oriented field experience assessment framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 1066-1085.
  • Ugurlu, C. T. (2014). Current Problems in Terms of Supervision Process of School Principals` Views. H. U. Journal of Education, 29(3), 184-196.
  • Yesil, D. & Kis, A. (2015). Examining the Views of Teachers on School Principals` Classroom Supervision. Journal of Educational Science Institute, 2(3), 27-45.
  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods, 4th edn. CA:Sage.
  • Zepeda, S. J. (2002). Linking Portfolio Development to Clinical Supervision: A Case Study. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(1), 83-102.
  • Zepeda, S. J. (2003). The Principal as Instructional Leader: A Handbook for supervisors. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
  • Zepeda, S. (2007). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts, 2nd edn. New York: Eye on Education.
  • Wallace, M. J. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: a reflective approach. GB: Cambridge University Press.

Türkiye`deki İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin ve Okul Müdürlerinin Sınıf Denetim Sürecine İlişkin Perspektifleri

Yıl 2022, Cilt 42, Sayı 3, 2431 - 2467, 30.12.2022
https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.1136783

Öz

Türkiye'deki İngilizce öğretmenlerinin (ELT) ve okul müdürlerinin denetim sürecine ilişkin bakış açılarını anlamak amacıyla yapılan bu çalışma, nitel bir yaklaşım benimsemiştir. Üç devlet okulu (bir ilkokul, bir ortaokul ve bir lise) seçilmiş ve altı İngilizce öğretmeni ve üç okul müdürü örneklemi oluşturmuştur. İngilizce öğretmenleri ve okul müdürleri ile yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler yapılmış ve okul öğretmenleri tarafından doldurulan gözlem formları da analiz edilmiştir. Veri analizinden, denetim süreciyle ilgili konuları vurgulayan beş tema ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunlar; öğretmen denetimi iyi planlanmış bir sürece dayanmamaktadır, denetim döngüsü toplantı öncesi aşamadan yoksundur, okul müdürleri nihai otorite olarak kabul edilmektedir, müdürler İngilizce öğretmenlerini denetlemek için yeterli niteliklere sahip değildir ve resmi öğretmen denetim yönergeleri yeterli bilgiden yoksundur.

Kaynakça

  • Acheson, K.A. & Gall, M.D. (1992). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers: Preservice and in-service applications, 3rd edn. NY: Longman.
  • Acheson, K. A. & Gall, M. D. (2003). Clinical supervision and teacher development: Preservice and in-service applications, 4th edn. NY: Wiley.
  • Anuna, M. (2004). Educational administration and supervision. In M. Anuna (Eds.), Educational supervision: The Nigerian Experience. Owerri: International Universities Press Ltd.
  • Bailey, K. M. (2006). Language teacher supervision: A case-based approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Blase, J. & Blase, J. (1999). Principals` instructional leadership and teacher development: teachers` perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 349-378.
  • Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). “Using thematic analysis in psychology”. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
  • Bush, T. (2009). Theories of educational leadership and management, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Campbell, T. F. (2013). Teacher supervision and evaluation: a case study of administrators` and teachers` perceptions of mini observations. PhD Thesis. College of Professional Studies. Retrieved June 17, 2016 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
  • Celebi, N. (2010). Public high school teachers` opinions on school administrators` supervision duty in Turkey. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 5, 212-231.
  • Chen, C, W. & Cheng, Y. (2013). The supervisory process of EFL teachers: a case study. TESL-EJ, 17(1), 1-21.
  • Cogan, M. L. (1973). Clinical supervision. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  • Daresh, J. C. (2001). Supervision as proactive leadership. USA: Waveland Press.
  • Firincioglu Bige, E. & Yengin Sarpkaya, P. (2015). Teachers` views about the course supervision of primary school principals. Anthropologist, 19(1), 193-204.
  • Freeman, D. (1982). Observing teachers: three approaches to in-service training and development. TESOL Quarterly, 16(1), 21-28.
  • Gebhard, J. G. (1984). Models of supervision: choices. TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 501-514.
  • Gebhard, J. G. (1990). The supervision of second and foreign language teachers. ERIC Digest, ERIC Clearinghouse on Language and Linguistics (EDO-FL-90-06), Washington, D.C.: Centre for Applied Linguistics.
  • Glickman, C. D. (1990). Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental Approach, 2nd edn. USA: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Goldhammer, R. (1969). Clinical Supervision. NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  • Gray, D. E. (2014). Doing Research in the Real World, 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
  • Hismanoglu, M. & Hismanoglu, S. (2010). English Language Teachers` Perspectives of Educational Supervision in Relation to Their Professional Development: A Case Study of Northern Cyprus. Research on Youth and Language, 4(1), 16-34.
  • Ibara, E. C. (2013). Exploring clinical supervision as instrument for effective teacher supervision. Africa Education Review, 10(2), 238-252.
  • Isherwood, G. B. (1983). Clinical Supervision: A Principal`s Perspective. Journal of Educational Administration, 21(1), 14-20.
  • Kalule, L. & Bouchamma, Y. (2014). Teacher Supervision practices and characteristics of in-school supervisors in Uganda. Educ Asse Eval Acc, 26, 51-72.
  • Kayaoglu, M. N. (2012). Dictating or Facilitating: The Supervisory Process for Language Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(10), 103-117.
  • Kowalski, T. J. & Brunner, C. C. (2005). The school superintendent: Roles, challenges, and issues. In F. W. English (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of educational leadership: Advances in theory, research, and practice (pp. 142-167). London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
  • Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Language teacher education for a global society: a modular model for knowing, analysing, recognising, doing, and seeing. USA: Taylor & Francis.
  • Little, J. W. (2007). Teachers` accounts of classroom experience as a resource for professional learning and instructional decision making. In P. A. Moss (Ed.) Evidence and decision making (pp.217-240). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Marshall, K. (2005). It`s Time to Rethink Teacher Supervision and Evaluation. The Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 727-735.
  • Marshall, K. (2009). Rethinking teacher supervision and evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
  • Minnear-Peplinski, R. M. (2009). Principals` and teachers` perceptions of teacher supervision. PhD Thesis. University of Nevada. Retrieved June 17, 2016 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
  • MEB. (2000). Job descriptions of school administrators. Turkish Official Journal Number: 2508. Ankara: Turkish Ministry of Education.
  • MEB (2014). School supervision council boards guidance and counselling directive. Turkish Ministry of Education. Retrieved from; http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/maarifmuf_0/maarifmuf_1.html
  • Mosher, P. & Purpel, D. (1972). Supervision: A reluctant profession. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
  • Moswela, B. (2010). Instructional Supervision in Botswana Secondary Schools: An Investigation. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 38(1), 78-87.
  • Nelson, B. S. & Sassi, A. (2000). Shifting approaches to supervision: The case of mathematics supervision. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36 (4), 553-584.
  • Nwaoguegbe, D. E. (2004). Clinical supervision. In M. Anuna (Ed.) Educational supervision: The Nigerian Experience. Owerri, Nigeria: International Universities Press Ltd.
  • Nwogu, J. I. (1980). A guide to effective supervision of instruction in Nigerian schools. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishing Co Ltd.
  • Pajak, E. (2001). Clinical Supervision in a Standards-based Environment: Opportunities and Challenges. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(3), 233-243.
  • Rehman, A. A. & Al-Bargi, A. (2014). Teachers` Perspectives on Post Observation Conferences: A Study at a Saudi Arabian University. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(8), 1558-1568.
  • Reinhartz, J. & Beach, D. M. (1987). A Comprehensive Supervision Model for Promoting Professional Development. The Clearing House, 60(8), 363-366.
  • Robinson, G. W. (2009). Principals` Perceptions Regarding the Role of the Professional Development and Appraisal System in Teacher Supervision in Texas. PhD Thesis. University of Houston. Retrieved June 17, 2016 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
  • Rooney, J. (1993). Teacher evaluation: No more "super" vision. Educational Leadership, 51(2), 43-44.
  • Rooney, J. (2005). Teacher Supervision: If It Ain`t Working… Educational Leadership, 63(3), 88-89.
  • Sergiovanni, T. J. & Starratt, R. J. (2002). Supervision: A redefinition. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
  • Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research, 4th edn. L.A: Sage.
  • Smith, W. & Andrews, R. (1989). Instructional leadership: How principals make a difference. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Sullivan, S., & Glanz, J. (2000). Supervision that improves teaching: Strategies and techniques. California: Corwin Press Inc.
  • Tang, S, Y, F. & Chow, A. W. K. (2007). Communicating feedback in teaching practice supervision in a learning-oriented field experience assessment framework. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 1066-1085.
  • Ugurlu, C. T. (2014). Current Problems in Terms of Supervision Process of School Principals` Views. H. U. Journal of Education, 29(3), 184-196.
  • Yesil, D. & Kis, A. (2015). Examining the Views of Teachers on School Principals` Classroom Supervision. Journal of Educational Science Institute, 2(3), 27-45.
  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods, 4th edn. CA:Sage.
  • Zepeda, S. J. (2002). Linking Portfolio Development to Clinical Supervision: A Case Study. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(1), 83-102.
  • Zepeda, S. J. (2003). The Principal as Instructional Leader: A Handbook for supervisors. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
  • Zepeda, S. (2007). Instructional supervision: Applying tools and concepts, 2nd edn. New York: Eye on Education.
  • Wallace, M. J. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: a reflective approach. GB: Cambridge University Press.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Sosyal
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Zeynep BÜTÜN IKWUEGBU> (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam Universitesi
0000-0001-5472-1178
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Aralık 2022
Yayınlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022, Cilt 42, Sayı 3

Kaynak Göster

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { gefad1136783, journal = {Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi}, issn = {1301-9058}, address = {}, publisher = {Gazi Üniversitesi}, year = {2022}, volume = {42}, number = {3}, pages = {2431 - 2467}, doi = {10.17152/gefad.1136783}, title = {ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey}, key = {cite}, author = {Bütün Ikwuegbu, Zeynep} }
APA Bütün Ikwuegbu, Z. (2022). ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey . Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , 42 (3) , 2431-2467 . DOI: 10.17152/gefad.1136783
MLA Bütün Ikwuegbu, Z. "ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey" . Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 42 (2022 ): 2431-2467 <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/gefad/issue/74614/1136783>
Chicago Bütün Ikwuegbu, Z. "ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey". Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 42 (2022 ): 2431-2467
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Türkiye`deki İngilizce Öğretmenlerinin ve Okul Müdürlerinin Sınıf Denetim Sürecine İlişkin Perspektifleri AU - ZeynepBütün Ikwuegbu Y1 - 2022 PY - 2022 N1 - doi: 10.17152/gefad.1136783 DO - 10.17152/gefad.1136783 T2 - Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 2431 EP - 2467 VL - 42 IS - 3 SN - 1301-9058- M3 - doi: 10.17152/gefad.1136783 UR - https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.1136783 Y2 - 2022 ER -
EndNote %0 Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey %A Zeynep Bütün Ikwuegbu %T ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey %D 2022 %J Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi %P 1301-9058- %V 42 %N 3 %R doi: 10.17152/gefad.1136783 %U 10.17152/gefad.1136783
ISNAD Bütün Ikwuegbu, Zeynep . "ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey". Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 42 / 3 (Aralık 2022): 2431-2467 . https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.1136783
AMA Bütün Ikwuegbu Z. ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey. GEFAD. 2022; 42(3): 2431-2467.
Vancouver Bütün Ikwuegbu Z. ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2022; 42(3): 2431-2467.
IEEE Z. Bütün Ikwuegbu , "ELT Teachers' and School Principals' Perspectives Regarding the Supervisory Process in Turkey", Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 42, sayı. 3, ss. 2431-2467, Ara. 2022, doi:10.17152/gefad.1136783