Rethinking Educational Supervision

Yıl 2009, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 2, 71 - 93, 01.04.2009

Kadir Beycioğlu Burhanettin Dönmez

Öz

The history of educational school supervision has been influenced by the history of the interaction of intellectual movements in politics society philosophy and industrial movements The purpose of this conceptual and theoretical study is to have a brief look at the concept of educational supervision with related historical developments in the field The paper also intends to see the terms and issues critically and to conceptualize some issues associated with educational supervision in practice In the paper the issues are discussed and a number of suggestions are addressed for debate

Anahtar Kelimeler

Educational supervision, educational supervisor, educational supervision history, issues.

Eğitim Denetimini Yeniden Düşünmek

Öz

Eğitim ve eğitim sistemleri hızla kabuk değiştirmekte ve yenileşmektedir. Eğitim etkinliklerinin
geliştirilmesinde en önemli araçlardan olan denetimin de bu değişimden etkilenmesi kaçınılmazdır. Bu
çalışmanın amacı, eğitim denetimi ve eğitim denetçisi kavramlarına, tarihsel gelişimi içinde, sınadığı
kuramsal dönemleri de ele alarak, kısaca bakabilmek ve eğitim denetimi birikimindeki kavramsal olguları ve
sorunları daha yakından görebilmektir. Bu çalışma kapsamında öncelikle eğitim denetimi ve eğitim denetçisi
kavramlarına bakılmış, alana ilişkin tarihsel gelişim süreci ve kuramsal dönemler ele alınmış, günümüz
eğitim denetimi alan yazınında tartışılan sorunlara kısaca değinilmiş ve geliştirilen öneriler tartışmaya
açılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Eğitim denetimi, eğitim denetçisi, eğitim denetimi tarihi, sorunlar

Kaynakça

• Abercrombie, D.W., Upson, A.J., Winship, A.E. & Shurman, J.G. (1893). On supervising private schools. The School Review, 1, (9), 557-566.
• Alexander, T. (1923). Principles of supervision of teaching in elementary schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 1, (1), 3-9.
• Alfonso, R. J. Firth, G. R. & Neville, R., F. (1975). Instructional supervision: A behavior system. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
• Aydın, İ. (2005). Öğretimde denetim: Durum saptama, değerlendirme ve geliştirme. Ankara: PegemA.
• Aydın, M. (1986). Çağdaş eğitim denetimi. (2. Baskı) Ankara: İM Eğitim Araştırma Yayın Danışmanlık.
• Başar, H. (1995). Eğitim denetçisi: Rolleri, yeterlikleri, seçilmesi, yetiştirilmesi. Ankara: Pegem.
• Başar, H. (1996). Eğitim denetiminde eylem-zaman planlaması ve uygulaması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 2, (8), 493-498.
• Başar, H. (2007). Okulda denetim: denetim kavramı. http://yunus.hacettepe.edu.tr/~alerbas/okulda_denetim.htm 04.01.07’de alındı.
• Beycioğlu, K.& Dönmez, B. (2006). Eğitim yönetiminde kuramsal bilginin üretimine ve uygulanmasına ilişkin bir değerlendirme. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi,12, (47), 317-342.
• Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L. J. D. (2003). Dönüşümsel bir antropoloji için cevaplar. (Nazlı Ökten, Çev.). İstanbul: Birey Yayınları.
• Bozkurt, E. (1995). Eğitimde değerlendirmenin gerekliliği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi,1, (4), 531-534.
• Burnham, R. M. (1976). Instructional supervision: Past, present and future perspectives. Theory into Practice, 15, (4), 301-305.
• Burton, W. H. (1925). The making of supervisory programs I. The Elementary School Journal, 26, (4), 264-272.
• Burton, W. H., & Brueckner, L. J. (1966). Supervision: A social process. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.
• Cela, C. J. (1989). Pascual Duarte ve ailesi. (Alev Tokatlı, Çev.) (2.Baskı). İstanbul: Can Yayınları.
• Collins, B. A. (2004). Teacher performance evaluation: a stressful experience from a private secondary school. Educational Research, 46, (1), 43-54.
• Davis, S. H. (1998). Superintendents’ perspectives on the involuntary departure of public school principals: The most frequent reasons why principals lose their jobs. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, (1), 58-90.
• Ehren, M. C. M. & Visscher, A., J. (2006). Towards a theory on the impact of school inspections. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54, (1), 51-72.
• Everton, T., & Galton, M. (2004). Supervisor, collaborator or critical friend: The changing role of university tutors in teacher research. Teacher Development, 8, (2&3), 241-262.
• Fehr, S. J. K. (2001). The role of the educational supervisor in United States public schools from 1970 to 2000 as reflected in the supervision literature (Doctoral Dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 2001). ProQuest Information and Learning (UMI No. 3020446).
• Feyerabend, P. (1999a). Yönteme karşı. (Ertuğrul Başer, Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• Feyerabend, P. (1999b). Özgür bir toplumda bilim. (Ahmet Kardam, Çev.) (2.Baskı). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• Fink, D. (2005). Developing leaders for their future not our past. In M. J. Coles & G. Southworth (Eds). Developing leadership: Creating the schools of tomorrow. ss.1 20. Berkshire: Open University Press.
• Foucault, M. (2001). Yapısalcılık ve post yapısalcılık. (Ümit Umaç ve Ali Utku, Çev.) (2.Baskı). İstanbul: Birey Yayıncılık
• Frase, L. E. (2005). Refocusing the pruposes of teacher supervision. In F. W. English (Ed.). The SAGE handbook of educational leadership: Advances in theory, research, and practice. ss.430-462. London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
• Fullan, M., Cuttress, C. & Kilcher, A. (2005). Eight forces for leaders of change. Journal of Staff Development, 26, (4), 54-64.
• Glanz, J. (1994). History of educational supervision: Proposal and prospects. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the council of professors of instructional supervision. Chicago, IL, March 18, 1994.
• Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2001). Supervision and instructional leadership. (5th Ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• Goldhammer, R., Anderson, R. H., & Krajewski, R. J. (1980). Clinical supervision: Special methods for the supervision of teachers (2nd Ed). NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
• Grant, B., M. (2005). Fighting for space in supervision: Fantasies, fairytales, fictions and fallacies. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18, (3), 337-354.
• Green, B. (2005). Unfinished business: Subjectivity and supervision. Higher Education Research & Development, 24, (2), 151-163.
• Greenfield, T. & Ribbins, P. (1993). Greenfield on educational administration: Towards a human science. London & New York: Routledge.
• Grimmet, P. P. (1981). Clinical supervision and teacher thought processes. Canadian Journal of Education, 6, (4), 23-29.
• Habermas, J. (1993). “Öteki” olmak, “öteki”yle yaşamak. (İlknur Aka, Çev.) (3.Baskı). İstanbul:Yapı Kredi Yayınları
• Habermas, J. (1998). Sosyal bilimlerin mantığı üzerine. (Mustafa Tüzel, Çev.) İstanbul: Kabalcı Yayınevi
• Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33, (3), 329-351.
• Ham, M. C. (1987). Enhancing supervisiory effectiveness through collaborative action research. Peabody Journal of Education, 64, (3), 44-56.
• Hargreaves, A. (2005). Sustainable leadership. In B. Davies (Ed). The essentials of school leadership. ss.173-189. London: Paul Chapman Publishing & Corwin Press.
• Harper, C.A. (1936). Co-ordinator, not supervisor. The school review, 44, (3), 199- 201.
• Harris, B., M. (1963). Supervisory behavior in education. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
• Harris, B.M. & Valverde, L.A. (1976). Supervisors and educational change. Theory into Practice, 15, (4), 267-273.
• Hayes, F.B. (1925). Supervision from the point of view of the teacher. The School Review, 33, (34), 220-226.
• Holland, P. (1989). Stories of supervision: Tutorials in a transformative practice of supervision. Peabody Journal of Education, 66, (3), 61-77.
• Holland, P.& Garman, N (2001). Towards a resolution of the crisis of legitimacy in the field of supervision. Journal of Curriculum & Supervision, 16, (2), 95- 111.
• Holland, P. (2005). The case for expending standards for teacher evaluation to include instructional supervision perspective. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education,. 18, (1), 67-77.
• Holland, P. & Adams, P. (2002). Through the horns of a dilemma between instructional supervision and the summative evaluation of teaching. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 5, (3), 227-247.
• Houston, P. D. (2006). The superintendent: Championing the deepest purposes of education. In P. Kelleher & R. Van Der Bogert (Eds). Voices for democracy: Struggles and celebrations of transformational leaders (The 105th Yearbook of the national Society for the Study of Education Part I). ss.1-9. Massachutes: Blackwell.
• Hoy, W. K. & Forsyth, P. B. (1986). Effective supervision: Theory into practice. NY: McGraw-Hill.http://www.coe.ohio-tate.edu/whoy/online%20books_4.htm#Eff. 21.08.06’da alındı.
• Kayıkçı, K. (2005). Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı müfettişlerinin denetim sisteminin yapısal sorunlarına ilişkin algıları ve iş doyum düzeyleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 11, (44), 507-527.
• 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. ss.142-167. London, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
• Köklü, M. (1996). Etkili denetim. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 2, (6), 259.
• Kuhn, T. S. (2006). Bilimsel devrimlerin yapısı. (Nilüfer Kuyaş, Çev.). İstanbul: Kırmızı Yayınları.
• Lyotard, J. F. (2000). Postmodern durum (Ahmet Çiğdem, Çev.) (3.Baskı). Ankara: Vadi Yayınları.
• Macnab, D. (2004). Hearts, minds and external supervision of schools: Direction and development. Educational Review, 56, (1), 53-64.
• Marks, J. R., Stoops, E. & King-Stoops, J. (1985). Handbook of instructional supervision: A guide for the practitioner. (3rd Ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• McKean, R. C., & Mills, H., H. (1965). The supervisor. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India.
• McNerney, C. T. (1951). Educational supervision. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• McNicol, S. (2004). Incorporating library provision in school self-evaluation. Educational Review, 56, (3), 287-296.
• Mirick, G. A. (1918). Administration and supervision. The Elementary School Journal, 19, (4), 285-290.
• Nelson, B., S. & Sassi, A. (2000). Shifting approaches to supervision: The case of mathematics supervision. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36, (4), 553-584.
• Oktay, F. (1999). Denetim alt sistemleri üzerine karşılaştırmalı bir araştırma Ankara: Armağan.
• Oliva, P. F. & Pawlas, G. E. (2004). Supervision for today’s schools. (7th Ed). New Jersey: Wiley Publishing.
• Otto, H. J. (1943). The supervision of instruction. Review of Educational Research, 13, (4), 372-380.
• Öztürk, S. (1996). Türkiye eğitim sisteminde denetim ve denetmen yetiştirme sürecinin analizi. (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi) Malatya: İ.Ü.Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
• Page, M. L. (2003). Race, culture, and the supervisory relationship: A review of the literature and a call to action. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18, (2), 161-174.
• Pajak, E. & Glickman, C.D. (1989). Informational and controlling language in simulated supervisory conferences. American Educational Research Journal, 26, (1), 93-106.
• Sergiovanni, T. J. & Starratt, R. J. (2002). Supervision: A redefinition. (7th Ed). NY: Mc Graw Hill.
• Sergiovanni, T.J., Burlingame, M., Coombs, F.S. & Thurston, P.W. (1999). Educational governance and administration. (4th Ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• Shaw, I., Newton, D. P., Aitkin, M. & Darnell, R. (2003). Do OFSTED inspections of secondary schools make a difference to GCSE results. British Educational Research Journal, 29, (1), 63-75.
• Süren, F. (1995). Yeğenim hoş geldin. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 1, (1), 77-78.
• Swaffield, S. & MacBeath, J. (2005). School self-evaluation and the role of a critical friend. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35, (2), 239-252.
• Şimşek, H. (2004). Eğitim yöneticilerinin yetiştirilmesi: Karşılaştırmalı örnekler ve Türkiye için öneriler. http://www.hasansimsek.net 09.01.07’de alındı.
• Tanrıöğen, H. (1997). Öğretimin denetimine yönelik bir model: Yönlendirilmiş yoğun denetim. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 3, (3), 111.
• Taymaz, H. (1995). Teftişte karşılaşılan sorunlar ve öneriler. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi,1, (1), 109-111.
• Taymaz, H. (2005). Eğitim sisteminde teftiş: Kavramlar, ilkeler, yöntemler (6.Baskı). Ankara: PegemA.
• Van Der Bogert, R. (2006). Democracy during hard times. In P. Kelleher & R. Van Der Bogert (Eds). Voices for democracy: Struggles and celebrations of transformational leaders (The 105th Yearbook of the national Society for the Study of Education Part I). ss.146-169. Massachutes: Blackwell.
• Waite, D. (1993). Teachers in conference: A qualitative study of teacher-supervisor face-to-face interactions. American Educational Research Journal, 30, (4), 675-702.
• Waite, D. (1995). Rethinking instructional supervision: Notes on its language and culture. London: Falmer Press.
• Waite, D. (2006). Whiter supervision. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 8, (2). http://redie.uabc.mx/vol8no2/contents-waite.html 15.01.2007’de alındı.
• Walker, A. & Dimmock, C. (2005). Developing leadership in context. In M. J. Coles & G. Southworth (Eds). Developing leadership: Creating the schools of tomorrow. ss.80-94. Berkshire: Open University Press.
• Weiss, E. M. & Weiss, S. (2001). Doing reflective supervision with student teachers in a professional development school culture. Reflective Practice, 2, (2), 125-154.
• Zeng, D. (1993). The recent development of instructional supervision in China: A study of the organization and function of the elementary and secondary school teaching and research section (Doctoral Dissertation, Ohio University, 1993). ProQuest Information and Learning (UMI No. 9416173).
• Zepeda, S. J. (2001). At odds: Can supervision and evaluation co-exist? The Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 4, (1). http://www.ucea.org/html/cases/V4-Iss1/index41.htm 02.04.06’da alındı
• 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. (2006). High stakes supervision: We must do more. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 9, (1), 61-73.