INVESTIGATING OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS FOR TEACHERS IN TURKEY AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Abstract

This article presents an overview of professional development in Turkey and the United States examines similarities and differences in the two countries. The primary objective of this study is to investigate professional development programs for teachers in Turkey and the United States. In fulfilling this goal, descriptive scanning method has employed. The researcher has screened articles, conference papers, research reports, master theses and PhD dissertations in the current study. When teacher professional development programs of Turkey and the United States are examined, the results can be summarized as follows: Professional development contexts in Turkey and the USA are considerably different. However, the two countries also have similarities. Both Turkey and the USA want greater teacher competence and quality, seamless career-long professional development for teachers, and a better balance of theory and practice in professional development.

Keywords

• Teacher, Professional development programs, Turkey. United States of America

TÜRKİYE’ DE VE AMERİKA BİRLEŞİK DEVLETLERİ’NDE ÖĞRETMENLERE YÖNELİK MESLEKİ GELİŞİM PROGRAMLARIN İNCELENMESİ

Öz

Bu makale, Türkiye ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nde mesleki gelişim ile ilgili genel bir bakış sunmakta olup, iki ülke arasındaki benzerlik ve farklılıkları incelemektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, Türkiye’de ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde öğretmenlere yönelik mesleki gelişim programlarını araştırmaktır. Bu amaca ulaşabilmek için, tanımlayıcı tarama yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmacı bu çalışma da; makaleleri, konferans bildirilerini, araştırma raporlarını, yüksek lisans tezlerini ve doktora tezlerini taramıştır. Türkiye ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nde öğretmen mesleki gelişim programları incelendiğinde, sonuçlar şöyle özetlenebilir: Türkiye ve ABD'de mesleki gelişim bağlamları oldukça farklıdır. Bununla birlikte, iki ülke benzerliklere de sahiptir. Hem Türkiye hem de ABD, daha fazla öğretmen yetkinliği ve kalitesi, öğretmenler için kesintisiz mesleki mesleki gelişim ve mesleki gelişimde teori ve pratiğin daha iyi dengesini istemektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öğretmen, Mesleki gelişim programları, Türkiye, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri

Kaynakça

1. Abazoğlu, İ. (2014). Dünyada Öğretmen Yetiştirme Programları ve Öğretmenlere Yönelik Mesleki Gelişim Uygulamaları, International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume, 9(5), 1-46.
2. Bryan, B., C. (1943). In-Service Education in elementary science. Education in Elementary Science, 27(3), 99-103.
3. Burden, P. R. (1990). Teacher Development. In Houston, W., R. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education (p. 311-328). New York: Macmillan.
4. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2001). Research methods in education (6th Edition), New York: Rotledge Falmer.
5. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Educational research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cros, F.,
6. Duthilleul, Y., Cox, C. and Kantasalmi, K.(2004). Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers Country Note: Spain.
7. Çalık, M., Ünal, S., Coştu, B. & Karataş, F.Ö. (2008). Trends in Turkish Science Education. Essays in Education, Special Edition, 23-45.
8. Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, C.R., Andree, A., Richardson, N. and Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional Learning in the Learning Profession. A Status Report on Teacher Development in the United States and Abroad. Dallas: National Staff Development Council.

9. Dewey, J. (1939). Türkiye Maarifi hakkında rapor. Devlet Basımevi, İstanbul.
10. Duttweiler, P., C. (1989). Components of an Effective Professional Development Program. Journal of Staff Development, 10(2), 2–6.
11. Efendioğlu, A., Berkant, H. G. & Arslantaş, Ö. (2010). John Dewey’in Türk Maarifi Hakkında Raporu ve Türk Eğitim Sistemi. 1. Ulusal Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Kongresi, 54-60. Balıkesir-Ayvalık, Turkey.
12. ETUCE - European Trade Union Committee for Education. (1995). Teacher Education in Europe. Brussels. t05.pdf
13. Fullan, M. & Hargreaves, A. (1992). Teacher Development and Educational Change. London: Falmer Press.
14. Gabel, D., Kagan, M.H., & Sherwood, R.D. (1980). A summary of research in science education - 1978. Science Education, 64(4), 429-568.
15. Gatewood, C., W., & Obourn, S., E. (1963). Improving Science Education in the United States A paper presented at the Commonwealth Conference on The Teaching of Science in Schools, Ceylon, USA, 9-21 December 1963.
16. George, J.M., & Lubben, F. (2002). Facilitating Teachers' Professional Growth Trough Their Involment in Creating Content-Based Materials in Science. International Journal of Educational Development, 22 (6), 659-672.
17. Gökdere, M. ve Çepni, S. (2004). Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Hizmet içi İhtiyaçlarının Değerlendirilmesine Yönelik Bir Çalışma: Bilim Sanat Merkezi Örneklemi. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24 (2), 1-14.
18. Göktaş, Y., Hasançebi, F., Varısoğlu, B., Akcay, A., Bayrak, N., Baran, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2012). Trends in educational research in Turkey: A content analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(1), 443-460.
19. Gözütok, F. D. (1991). Ortaöğretim Öğretmenlerinin Öğretmenlik Formasyonu Açısından Eğitim İhtiyaçlarının Saptanması. Eğitimde Nitelik Geliştirme. Eğitimde Arayışlar I. Sempozyumu. İstanbul.
20. Hoban, G.F. (1996). A Professional Development Model Based on Interrelated Principles of Teacher Learning. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The University of British Columbia.
21. Jayarajah, K., Saat, R.M. & Rauf, R.A.A. (2014). A review of science, technology, engineering & mathematics (STEM) education research from 1999–2013: A Malaysian perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(3), 155-163 DOI: 10.12973/eurasia.2014.1072a
22. Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1980). Improving In service Training: The Messages of Research. Educational Leadership, 37(5), 379-385.
23. Kaptan, S. (1998). Bilimsel araştırma ve istatistik teknikleri (11.Baskı). Ankara: Tek Işık Web Ofset.
24. Kavcar, C. (2002). Cumhuriyet Döneminde Dal Öğretmeni Yetiştirme. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 35 (1-2), 114.
25. Koran, J., J., Jr. (1977). Application of Science Education Research to the Classroom: Validating Science Teacher Training Through Student Performance, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14(1), 89-96.
26. Lalitha, H.,D., A. (2005). A Qualitative Investigation. University of Wollongong Thesis Collections. Web: http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/527/
27. Lin, T.C., Lin, T.J. & Tsai, C.C. (2014). Research trends in science education from 2008 to 2012: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals, International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1346-1372, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2013.864428
28. Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K.E., & Hewson. P.W. (1996). Principles of effective Professional development for mathematics and science education; A synthesis of standards. National Institute for Science Education Brief (May 1996): 1-6.
29. Mayers, S. (2008). Continuing Education. EBSCO Research Starters. EBSCO Publishing Inc.
30. Mohlman, G., G., Kierstead, J., & Gundlach, M. (1982). A Research Based In service Model for Secondary Teachers. Educational Leadership, 40(1), 16.
31. NSF (National Science Foundation) (2008). Science and Engineering Indicators. Web: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c1/c1s6.htm
32. National Society for the Study of Education. (1947). Science education in American schools. Forty-Sixth Yearbook, Part I. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 135.
33. OECD, (2005). Teachers Matter: Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers.
34. Philips, H. (1991). Teachers' Professional Development: Australia: Australian Group.
35. Potter, G., (1942). In-Service Training of Teachers in Science. Science Education, 26(5), 172- 177.
36. Resmi Gazete. (1937). Köy Eğitmenleri Kanunu, 24 Haziran 1937, s:3696.
37. Rodrigues, S. (2005). International Perspectives on Teacher Professional Development: Changes Influenced by Politics, Pedagogy and Innovation. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
38. Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M. & Dündar, H. (2014). Eğitim ve bilim dergisinde yayınlanan araştırmaların eğilimleri: İçerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(173), 430-453.
39. Sözbilir, M., Kutu, H., & Yaşar, M. D. (2012). Science education research in Turkey: A content analysis of selected features of papers published. In J. Dillon& D. Jorde (Eds). The World of Science Education: Handbook of Research in Europe (pp.341-374). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
40. Suri, H. & Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research systhesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395-430.
41. Turbill, J. & B. (1993). From a Personal Theory to a Grounded Theory of Staff Development. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of Wollongong.