Türkiye, Finlandiya, Meksika ve Güney Kore’deki Ortaokul Öğretmenlerinin İş Doyumları: TALIS 2018 Araştırması

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, TALIS 2018 verilerine göre Türkiye, Finlandiya, Meksika ve Güney Kore ülkelerindeki ortaokul öğretmenlerinin iş doyumunu incelemektir. Araştırmanın örneklemini Türkiye’den 196 okuldan 3.952 öğretmen, Finlandiya’dan 148 okuldan 2.851 öğretmen, Meksika’dan 193 okuldan 2.926 öğretmen ve Güney Kore’den 163 okuldan 2.931 öğretmen oluşturmuştur. Bu doğrultuda öğretmenlerin iş doyumu indeks puanları, Düzey 1’de tanımlanarak seçkisiz etkili tek yönlü ANOVA modeli ile incelenmiştir. Ardından, okullar arasındaki iş doyumu indeks puanlarındaki farklılaşmanın kaynağı iki düzeyli modelle ele alınmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında, öğretmen iş doyumuna ait indeks puanının büyük bir oranının öğretmen düzeyindeki değişkenlerden kaynaklandığı görülmüştür. Bunun yanında, Türkiye, Finlandiya, Meksika ve Güney Kore’de öğretmenliği ilk kariyer mesleği olarak seçenlerin iş doyumlarının daha yüksek olduğunu saptanmıştır. Ayrıca öğretmenlerinin öz yeterlik algılarının iş doyumlarını pozitif yönde etkilediği görülmüştür. Araştırmadan elde edilen bir diğer sonuca göre, okullar arasında öğretmen iş doyumu puanı açısından yaşanan farklılaşmada paydaş katılımı değişkeninin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir etkiye sahip olduğu saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İş Doyumu, Katılım, Özyeterlik, TALIS.

Lower Secondary School Teachers’ Job Satisfaction in Turkey, Finland, Mexico and South Korea: TALIS 2018 Survey

Öz

This study is aim to examine the job satisfaction of secondary school teachers in Turkey, Finland Mexico and South Korea. According to the TALIS 2018 data. The sample of the study was composed of 3,952 teachers in 196 schools from Turkey, 2,851 teachers in 148 schools from Finland, 2,931 teachers in 163 schools in South Korea and 2,926 teachers in 193 schools in Mexico. Accordingly, job satisfaction index scores of teachers were defined in Level 1 and analyzed with random-effect oneway ANOVA model. Then, the source of the difference in job satisfaction index scores between teachers and schools was examined with two-level model. Within the scope of the research, it has been observed that a large proportion of the teacher job satisfaction index score came from the variables at the teacher level. Besides this, it was found out that teachers who had chosen teaching as the first professional career in Turkey, Finland, Mexico and South Korea had higher job satisfaction than the others. According to another result obtained from the study, it was seen that the participation index had a statistically significant effect on the differentiation of teachers' job satisfaction scores among schools. For the results of the study, it was pointed out that the stakeholder engagement index had a statistically significant effect on the difference in the teachers' job satisfaction score among schools.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Job Satisfaction, Involvement, Self-efficacy, TALIS.

Kaynakça

1. Akdemir, A. S. (2013). Türkiye'de öğretmen yetiştirme programlarının tarihçesi ve sorunları. Electronic Turkish Studies, 8(12), 15-28.
2. Baloğlu, N., Karadağ, E., Çalışkan, N. & Korkmaz, T. (2006). İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin mesleki benlik saygısı ve iş doyumları arasındaki ilişkinin değerlendirilmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 345-358.
3. Bandura, A. (1982). The assessment and predictive generality of self-percepts of efficacy. Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry, 13(3), 195-199.
4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
5. Barth, R. S. (2006). Improving relationships within the schoolhouse. Educational leadership, 63(6), 8-13.
6. Bartneck, C. & Hu, J. (2008). Exploring the abuse of robots. Interaction Studies, 9(3), 415-433.
7. Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978-988.
8. Borenstein, J. & Pearson, Y. (2013). Companion robots and the emotional development of children. Law, Innovation and Technology, 5(2), 172-189.

9. Breakspear, S. (2012). The Policy Impact of PISA: An Exploration of the Normative Effects of International Benchmarking in School System Performance. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 71. OECD Publishing (NJ1).
10. Brief, A. P. & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 279-307.
11. Buluç, B. & Demir, S. (2015). İlk ve Ortaokul Öğretmenlerinin Öz-Yeterlik Algıları ile İş Doyumları Arasındaki İlişki. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 16(1), 289-308.
12. Bussey, K. & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and differentiation. Psychological review, 106(4), 676-713.
13. Butt, G., Lance, A., Fielding, A., Gunter, H., Rayner, S. & Thomas, H. (2005). Teacher job satisfaction: lessons from the TSW Pathfinder Project. School Leadership & Management, 25(5), 455-471.
14. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L. & Steca, P. (2003). Efficacy beliefs as determinants of teachers' job satisfaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 821-832.
15. Carr, N. G. (2015). The glass cage: How our computers are changing us. London: Bodley Head.
16. Crossman, A. & Harris, P. (2006). Job Satisfaction of Secondary School Teachers. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 34(1), 29-46.
17. Desjardins, R. & Warnke, A. (2012). Ageing and skills: A review and analysis of skill gain and skill loss over the lifespan and over time. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 72, Paris: OECD Publishing.
18. Dou, D., Devos, G. & Valcke, M. (2017). The relationships between school autonomy gap, principal leadership, teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(6), 959-977.
19. Heck, R. H. (2000). Examining the Impact of School Quality on School Outcomes and Improvement: A Value-Added Approach.
20. Hu, L. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
21. Jung, I. (2005). ICT-pedagogy integration in teacher training: Application cases worldwide. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 94-101.
22. Kansanen, P. (2003). Teacher education in Finland: Current models and new developments. In B. Moon, L. Vlăsceanu, and C. Barrows (Eds.), Institutional approaches to teacher education within higher education in Europe: Current Models and New Developments (pp. 85–108). Bucharest: UNESCO – CEPES.
23. Klassen, R. M. & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers' self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 741-756.
24. Klassen, R. M., Usher, E. L. & Bong, M. (2010). Teachers’ collective efficacy, job satisfaction, and job stress in cross- cultural context. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78(4), 464-486.
25. Kumar, S. P. & Saha, S. (2017). Influence of Trust and Participation in Decision Making on Employee Attitudes in Indian Public Sector Undertakings. SAGE Open, 7(3), 1-13.
26. Limon, İ. & Durnalı, M. (2017). Adaptation of Collaborative Climate Scale into Turkish: The Study of Validity and Reliability. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 7(2), 282-294.
27. Locke, E. (1969). What is job satisfaction? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4(4), 309-336.
28. Menon, M. E. & Athanasoula-Reppa, A. (2011). Job satisfaction among secondary school teachers: the role of gender and experience. School Leadership & Management, 31(5), 435-450.
29. Munoz de Bustillo Llorente, R. & Fernandez Macias, E. (2005). Job satisfaction as an indicator of the quality of work. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), 34(5), 656-673.
30. Muthén, L. K. & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus user's guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
31. OECD. (2019a). TALIS 2018 Database. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/talis/talis-2018-data.htm
32. OECD. (2019b). TALIS 2018 Technical Report. Paris: OECD Publishing.
33. Ozdemir, N. (2019). Principal leadership and students’ achievement: Mediated pathways of professional community and teachers’ instructional practices. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy, 16(1), 81-104.
34. Pink, D. H. (2017). Drive (L. Göktem, Trans.). İstanbul: Mediacat Yayınları.
35. Price, H. E. & Collett, J. L. (2012). The role of exchange and emotion on commitment: A study of teachers. Social science research, 41(6), 1469-1479.
36. Räty, H., Snellman, L., Kontio, M. & Kähkönen, H. (1997). Opettajat ja peruskoulun uudistaminen [Teachers and reforms of the comprehensive school]. The Finnish Journal of Education Kasvatus, 28(5), 429-438.
37. Saracaloğlu, A. S., Serin, O., Bozkurt, N. & Serin, V. (2000). Öğretmen adaylarının mesleğe yönelik tutumlarını etkileyen faktörler (Sözlü Bildiri). IX. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi, Erzurum.
38. Sebastian, J., Huang, H. & Allensworth, E. (2017). Examining integrated leadership systems in high schools: Connecting principal and teacher leadership to organizational processes and student outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 28(3), 463-488.
39. Sharkey, A. (2015). Robot teachers: The very idea Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 38, 46-47.
40. Sharkey, A. & Sharkey, N. (2012). Granny and the robots: ethical issues in robot care for the elderly. Ethics and information technology, 14(1), 27-40.
41. Shillingford, S. & Karlin, N. (2014). Preservice teachers’ self efficacy and knowledge of emotional and behavioural disorders. Emotional and behavioural difficulties, 19(2), 176-194.
42. Skaalvik, E. M. & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059-1069.
43. Stearns, E., Banerjee, N., Mickelson, R. & Moller, S. (2014). Collective pedagogical teacher culture, teacher-student ethno-racial mismatch, and teacher job satisfaction. Soc Sci Res, 45, 56-72.
44. Takayama, L., Ju, W. & Nass, C. (2008). Beyond dirty, dangerous and dull: what everyday people think robots should do (Sözlü Bildiri). 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).
45. Tatto, M. T., Schmelkes, S., Guevara, M. D. R. & Tapia, M. (2006). Implementing reform amidst resistance: The regulation of teacher education and work in Mexico. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(4-5), 267-278.
46. Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S. & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A Review of School Climate Research. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 357-385.
47. Tschannen-Moran, M. & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 944-956.
48. Watt, H. M. G. & Richardson, P. W. (2008). Motivations, perceptions, and aspirations concerning teaching as a career for different types of beginning teachers. Learning and Instruction, 18(5), 408-428.
49. Yıldırım, A., Ünal, A. & Çelik, M. (2011). Öğretmen kavramına ilişkin öğretmen, yönetici ve müfettiş algılarının analizi. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(2), 92-109.