Awareness Levels of Classroom Teachers about Teacher Authonomy (An Example of the Province of Izmir)

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3, 79 - 94, 21.03.2014

Püren Üzüm Mehmet Karslı

Öz

The purpose of this study is to determine the awareness level of classroom teachers about teacher autonomy.
For this purpose, related literature was reviewed and an item pool was prepared from the literature obtained
and was presented to educational sciences and Turkish Language experts to be viewed. After the review of the
experts, some of the items were eliminated and some of them had been rewritten. The participants of the study
were expected to give answers for items given on a scale ranging from Totally Disagree, Disagree, No Idea,
Agree and Totally Agree. The pilot study of the questionnaire was applied to 100 classroom teachers and final
form of questionnaire was shaped. The questionnaires were distributed to 1000 instructors and 779
questionnaires have been returned. Factor analysis was then done to determine the structure validity. Because
of the modular structre of the scale, factor analysis was done seperately for each subtest which can be defined
within the superstructure (Teacher Autonomy) and are relevant in and of themselves. The reliability of the
scale has been analyzed through Cronbach’s Alpha Value and the scale was found to be reliable. It shows
that the scale can be applied to determine the level of awareness of classroom teachers as it applies to teacher
autonomy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Autonomy; teacher autonomy; dimentions of autonomy

Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Öğretmen Özerkliğine İlişkin Farkındalık Düzeyleri (İzmir İli Örneği)

Öz

Bu çalışmada sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğretmen özerkliğine ilişkin farkındalık düzeylerini ortaya çıkarılması
amaçlanmıştır. Belirtilen amaçtan yola çıkılarak öncelikli olarak öğretmen özerkliği ile ilgili alanyazın
derinlemesine incelenmiştir. Bu kapsamda ortaya çıkan alanyazından uzman görüşleri sonrası pilot
uygulamaya gidilmiş; geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizi yapılarak “Öğretmen Özerkliği Ölçeği” elde edilmiştir.
Betimsel nitelikte tarama modelindeki araştırmanın uygulaması benzeşik örnekleme ile seçilen ve İzmir
İli’ndeki beş merkez ilçede gerçekleştirilmiştir. 779 sınıf öğretmeninden elde edilen veriler SPSS programında
çözümlenmiştir. Yapılan analizde anlamlı farklılıklar Kruskal Wallis H testi ve Mann Whitney U testi ile test
edilmiştir. Bu araştırma ile elde edilen bulgular doğrultusunda sınıf öğretmenlerinin teknik ve psikolojik
anlamda öğretmen özerkliğine ilişkin farkındalıklarının yüksek; politik anlamda öğretmen özerkliğine ilişkin
farkındalık düzeylerinin orta düzeyde olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Özerklik; Öğretmen özerkliği; Özerklik boyutları

Kaynakça

• Anderson, L. W. (1987). The Decline of Teacher Autonomy: Teers or Cheers?. International Review of Education, 3 (3), 357-373.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., E. K. Çakmak, Ö. E. Akgün, Ş. Karadeniz, F. Demirel. (2010). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınevi.
• Can, N. (2009). The Leadership Behaviours of Teachers in Primary Schools in Turkey. Education, 129(3), 436-447.
• Castle, K. (2004). The Meaning of Autonomy in Early Childhood Teacher Education. Journal of Early Childhood, Teacher education, 25(1), 3-10.
• Euyrdice Avrupa Birimi. Avrupa'daki Öğretmenlerin Sorumluluk ve Özerklik Düzeyleri, 2008. <http://www.euyrdice.org>
• Firestone, W. A. (1991). Merit Pay and Job Enlargement as Reforms: Incentives, Implementation and Teacher Response. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 13(3), 269-288.
• Freidman, I. A. (February 1999). Teacher-Perceived Work Autonomy: The Concept and Its Measurement. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59(1), 58-76.
• Franklin, H. N. (1988). Principle Consideraiton and its Relationship to Teacher Sense of Autonomy. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, 1998), Dissertation Abstracts International.
• Ingersol, R.M. (1997). The Status of Teaching As a Profession: 1990-1991 (NCES 97-104). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
• Ingersol, R.M. (2007). Short on Power Long on Responsibility. Educational Leadership, 65(1), 20-25.
• Lamb, T. E. (2007). Learner Autonomy and Teacher Autonomy, Synthesising an Agenda. Lamb T.E. and Reinders, H. (Eds.), Learner and Teacher Autonomy: Concepts, Realities and Responses içinde. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Lamb, T. E. (2000). Findind a Voice-Learner Autonomy-Teacher Education in an Urban Context. B. Sinclair, I. McGrath and T.E. Lamb (Eds.), Learner Autonomy, Teacher Autonomy: Future Directions içinde (118127). Harlow: Pearson Education.
• Lightfoot, S. L. (1986). On Goodness of Shool: Themes of Empowerment. Peabody Journal of Education, 63(3), 9-28.
• Little, J.V. (1990). The Persistence of Privacy: Autonomy and Initiative in Teachers Professional Relations. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 509-536.
• Mackenzie, A. (2000). Changing Contexts: Connecting Teacher Autonomy and Instıtutıonal Development. A.S. Mackenzie, E. Mc Cafferty (Eds.), Developing Autonomy: Proceeings of the JALT CUE Conference içinde (223-232). Tokyo: The Japan Associaiton for Language Teaching College and University Edweators Special Interest Group.
• McGrath, Ian. (2000). Teacher Autonomy. B. Sinclair, I. McGrath and . E. Lamb (Eds.), Learner autonomy, Teacher Autonomy: Future Directions içinde (100-110). London: Longman.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2005). Talim Terbiye Kurulu Program Geliştirme Çalışmaları. (http:/ /www.meb.gov.tr)
• Mustafa M. ve Cullingford C. (2008). Teacher Autonomy and Centralised Control: The Case of Textbooks. International Journal of Educational Development, 28, 81-88.
• Pearson, L. C. ve W. Moomaw. (2005a). The Relationship Between Teacher Autonomy and Stress, Work Satisfaction, Empowerment and Professionalism. Educational Research Quarterly, 28(1), 37-53.
• Pearson, L. C. ve Moomaw. W. (2005b). Continuing Validation of the Teaching Autonomy Scale, Manuscript submitted for publication.
• Pearson, L. C. ve Hall, B. W. (1993). Initial construct validation of the teaching Autonomy Scale. Journal of educational research, 86 (3), 172-177.
• Porter, A. C. (1989). External Standarts and Good Teaching: The Pros and Cons of Telling Teachers What to Do. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 11, 343-36.
• Rosenholtz, S. J. (1987). Education Reform Strategies: Will They Increase Teacher Commitment?. American Journal of Education, 95(4), 534-562.
• Short, P. M. (1994). Defining Teacher Empowerment. Education, 114 (4), 488-492.
• Smith, R. C. (2000). Starting with Ourselves: Teacher-Learner Autonomy in Language Learning. B. Sinclair, I. McGrath and T. E. Lamb (Eds.), Learner Autonomy-Teacher Autonomy: Future Directions içinde (89-99). London:Longman.
• Smith, R.C. (2001). Learner and teacher development: Connections and Constraints. The Language Teacher, 25(6), 43-4.
• Steh, B. ve Pozarnik B. M. (2005). Teachers’ Perception of Their Professional Autonomy in the Environment of Systemic Change. D. Beijoard et al. (Eds.), Teacher Professional Development in Changing Conditions içinde (349-363).
• Thavenius, C. (1999). Teacher Autonomy for Learner autonomy. S. Cotteral and D. Crabbe (Eds.), Learner Autonomy in Language Learning: Defining the Field and Effecting Change içinde (159-166). Frankfurt: Lang.
• Tort-Moloney, D. (1997). ‘Teacher Autonomy: A Vygotskian Theoretical Framework’, CLCS Occasional Paper, 48, Dublin Trinity College, CLCS.
• Vieira, F. (2003). Addressing constraints on autonomy in school context: Lessons from working with teachers. D. Palfreyman & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures: Language education perspectives içinde (pp.220-39). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• White, P. A. (1992). Teacher Empowerment Under ‘Ideal’ School-Site Autonomy. Educational and Policy Analysis, 14(1), 69-82.
• Yan, H. (March 2010). A Brief Analysis of Teacher Autonomy in Second Language Acquisition. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(2), 175-176.