Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

COMPARATIVE INVESTIGATION OF ACCREDITATION APPLICATIONS OF TEACHER EDUCATION OF SOME COUNTRIES: A META SYNTHESIS STUDY

Yıl 2022, , 127 - 150, 15.02.2022
https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.769395

Öz

Kaynakça

  • ADELMAN, C. & Silver, H. (1990). Accreditation: The American Experience. Council for National Academic Awards: London.
  • AITSL (2015). Canberra: The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. Available: http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/board-of-directors-resources/statement-of-intent-july-2015-final.pdf?sfvrsn=2 Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • AITSL (2016). Guidelines for the accreditation of teacher education programs in Australia, Available: http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/initial-teacher-education-resources/guidance-for-the-accreditation-of-initial-teacher-education-in-australia.pdf. Erişim Tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • ARAUJO, C. M., Pedro, C., Aguayo, C. Y. and Schady, N. (2016). Teacher Quality andLlearning Outcomes in Kindergarten: (IDB Working Paper Series ; 665).
  • BAKİOĞLU, A. & Baltacı, R. (2010). Quality in Accreditation Education. Ankara: Nobel Pub.
  • BONDAS, T., ve Hall, E. O. (2007). Challenges in approaching metasynthesis research. Qualitative Health Research, 17(1), 113-121.
  • BORKO, H., Liston, D. & Whitcomb, J. A. (2007). Genres of Empirical Research in Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58 (1), 3-11.
  • CAEP, 2018. Board of Directors Governance Policy. Washington DC: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation.
  • Available: http://caepnet.org/~/media/ Files/caep/governance/governance-policy-ratified-june-2017.pdf?la=enCAEP(2018). Erişim Tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • CHİNG, Gregory S. (2013). Higher education accreditation in the Philippines: A literature review. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266483026 _Higher_education_accreditation_in_the_Philippines_A_literature_review. Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • COCHRAN, S. M. (2005).The New Teacher Education: For Better or for Worse? Educational Researcher, 34,3–17.
  • COLE, A. L.& Knowles, J. G. (1998). Reforming Teacher Education Through Self-Study. In A. L. Cole, R. Elijah, & J. G. Knowles (Eds.), The heart of the matter: Teacher educators and teacher education reform (pp. 41–54). San Francisco, CA: Caddo Gap.
  • CHEA (2006). Recognition Policy and Procedures. Washington, D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
  • DEY, N. (2011). Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Higher Education in India. Academic Research International, 1(1), 104-110.
  • M.G. (2014). Accreditation Models in Teacher Education: The cases of United States, Australia and India. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(3).
  • DİCKEY, F. G. & Miller, J. W. (1972). Federal Involvement in Nongovernmental Accreditation. Educational Record, 53(2), 138-42.
  • DİLL, D. & Beerkens, M. (2013). Designing the Framework Conditions for Assuring Academic Standards: Lessons Learned About Professional Market and Government Regulation of Academic Quality. Higher Education, 65(3), 341–357.
  • EPDAD (2012). Öğretmen Eğitiminde Program Değerlendirme Ve Akreditasyon El Kitabı, http://www.epdad.net/belgeler-ve-formlar. Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • HERNES, G., & Martin, M. (2005). Policy rationales and organizational and methodological options in accreditation: Findings from an IIEP research project. Paper presented at the Accreditation and the Global Higher Education Market
  • IMİG, D.G. & Imig, S. R. (2006). The teacher effectiveness movement: How 80 years of essentialist control have shaped the teacher education profession. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2), 167-180.
  • ITT, 2017. Initial teacher training criteria and supporting advice Information for accredited initial teacher training providers. United Kingdom: National College for Teaching and Leadership. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/594123/Initial_teacher_training_criteria_and_supporting_advice.pdf Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • GUPTA, R. (2011). Teacher Education in India and United States of America: A Study. University News. 49(46), 11-16.
  • GÜNÇER, B. (1999). Ögretmen Eğitiminde Akreditasyon: İngiltere ve A.B.D.Örnekleri. http://www.yok.gov.tr/egitim/ogretmen/ogretmen_egitiminde_kalite.htm. Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020.
  • KELLS, H. R. (1998). Self Study Processes. New York: Macmillian.
  • KİNGSBURY, A. (2007). The measure of learning. Available: http://www.usnews.com/ usnews/news/articles/ 070304/12college.htm Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • CRESWELL, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • MİTCHELL,K.J.,Robinson,D.Z.,Plake,B.S.,&Knowles,K.T.(2001). Testing Teacher Candidates: The Role Of Licensure Tests In Improving Teacher Quality. Washington,DC:National Academy Press.
  • NCTL (2015). National College for Teaching and Leadership Framework Document November 2015. United Kingdom: National College for Teaching and Leadership. Available: www.gov.uk/government/publications Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • NCTL (2018). Statutory guidance Initial teacher training (ITT): criteria and supporting advice. United Kingdom: Department of Education and National College for Teaching and Leadership Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ initial-teacher-training-criteria/initial-teacher-training-itt-criteria-and-supporting-advice#note1 Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • NEUMAN, W.L. (2011) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 7th Edition, Pearson, Boston.
  • NOBLİT, G. W., ve Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies Newbury Park: Sage.
  • NODDİNGS, N.(1984).Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
  • SANDELOWSKİ, M., ve Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer Publishing Company.
  • SANDELOWSKİ, M., Docherty, S. ve Emden, C. (1997). Focus on qualitative methods qualitative metasynthesis: Issues and techniques. Research in Nursing and Health, 20, 365-372.
  • SİBGATULLİNA, A. (2015). Contemporary Technologies to Improve the Quality of Education When Training Teachers. International Education Studies, 8(3).
  • STİLES L. J. (1976). Policy and Perspective: Is Teacher Education Obselete? The Journal of Educational Research, 69(6).
  • SYKES, G. T. Bird, & M. Kennedy. 2010. “Teacher Education: Its Problems and Some Prospects.”Journal of Teacher Education, 61 (5), 464–476.
  • TEACHR. (2017). TEACHR Ranking and Accreditation Framework for TEIs. Draft Available: http://ncte-india.org/ncte_new/pdf/NCTE_SOP_on_RandA_v.pdf Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • TOY, Y. B. (2015). Türkiye’de Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmen Eğitimi Araştırmalarının Tematik Analizi ve Öğretmen Eğitimi Politikalarının Yansımaları. Eğitim ve Bilim. 40(178) 23-60.
  • U.S. Department of Education Accreditation and Quality Assurance. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-accreditation. html. Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • YILDIRIM, A. (2011). Öğretmen eğitiminde çatışma alanları ve yeniden yapılanma. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 1-17.
  • YÖK. (1999). Türkiye’de Öğretmen Eğitiminde Akreditasyon ve Standartlar. YÖK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitim’i Geliştirme Projesi Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmen Eğitimi. Ankara:
  • YÖDEK. (2006). Yükseköğretim Kurumlarında Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Rehberi. Yükseköğretim Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Komisyonu, Ankara.
  • ZEİCHNER, K. (2014). The Struggle for the Soul of Teaching and Teacher Education in the USA. Journal of Education for Teaching. 40(5), 551-568.
  • ZİMMER, L. (2006). Qualitative Meta-Synthesis: A Question of Dialoguing With Texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, (53), 311-318.

BAZI ÜLKELERİN ÖĞRETMEN EĞİTİMİ AKREDİTASYON UYGULAMALARININ KARŞILAŞTIRMALI OLARAK İNCELENMESİ:BİR META SENTEZ ÇALIŞMASI

Yıl 2022, , 127 - 150, 15.02.2022
https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.769395

Öz

Farklı eğitim sistemlerine sahip bazı ülkelerin öğretmen eğitimi akreditasyon uygulamaları ve işlemleri açısından karşılaştırmayı amaçlayan bu çalışma meta-sentez yöntemiyle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmaya dahil edilen ülkelerde öğretmen eğitimi akreditasyonunda yetkili olan kurumların; tarihsel gelişimi, vizyonları, hedefleri, yönetimi, uygunluk şartları, temel standartları, akreditasyon süreci ve seviyesi, süre ve maliyet durumları açısından karşılaştırmalar yapılmıştır. Araştırmaya dahil edilen ülkelerde, öğretmen eğitimi akreditasyonunda asıl amacın öğretmen eğitiminde mükemmelliği teşvik etmek ve böylece eğitimli ve sürdürülebilir kaliteli toplumların yaratılmasına katkıda bulunabilecek mükemmel öğretmenler yetiştirmek olduğu belirlenmiştir. Böylece öğretmen yetiştiren kurumların akreditasyonunda benimsenen uygulama yöntemleri büyük ölçüde benzerdir. Amerika’da CAEP, İngiltere’de NCTL, Avusturalya’da AITSL ve Türkiye’de ise YÖK ülkelerinde öğretmen eğitimini akredite etmede başlıca yetkili kurullardır. Genellikle akreditasyon süreci tüm ülkelerde, akredite olmak isteyen kurum veya programın uygunluğunun belirlenmesi ve ilgili kurum veya program tarafından sunulan kendi iç değerlendirme raporu ile başlar. Ardından akredite olma talebinde bulunan kurum veya program akreditasyon ekibi tarafından ziyaret edilir. Kurum ve program, önceden belirlenen standartlara uygunluğu açısından incelendikten sonra akreditasyon uygulaması akreditasyon ekibinin kurum veya program hakkındaki kararıyla sonuçlanır. Avustralya ve Türkiye’de akreditasyon uygulamaları çok eskilere dayanmazken ABD ve İngiltere bu konuda daha köklü ülkeler olduğu bilinmektedir.

Kaynakça

  • ADELMAN, C. & Silver, H. (1990). Accreditation: The American Experience. Council for National Academic Awards: London.
  • AITSL (2015). Canberra: The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. Available: http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/board-of-directors-resources/statement-of-intent-july-2015-final.pdf?sfvrsn=2 Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • AITSL (2016). Guidelines for the accreditation of teacher education programs in Australia, Available: http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/initial-teacher-education-resources/guidance-for-the-accreditation-of-initial-teacher-education-in-australia.pdf. Erişim Tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • ARAUJO, C. M., Pedro, C., Aguayo, C. Y. and Schady, N. (2016). Teacher Quality andLlearning Outcomes in Kindergarten: (IDB Working Paper Series ; 665).
  • BAKİOĞLU, A. & Baltacı, R. (2010). Quality in Accreditation Education. Ankara: Nobel Pub.
  • BONDAS, T., ve Hall, E. O. (2007). Challenges in approaching metasynthesis research. Qualitative Health Research, 17(1), 113-121.
  • BORKO, H., Liston, D. & Whitcomb, J. A. (2007). Genres of Empirical Research in Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58 (1), 3-11.
  • CAEP, 2018. Board of Directors Governance Policy. Washington DC: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation.
  • Available: http://caepnet.org/~/media/ Files/caep/governance/governance-policy-ratified-june-2017.pdf?la=enCAEP(2018). Erişim Tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • CHİNG, Gregory S. (2013). Higher education accreditation in the Philippines: A literature review. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266483026 _Higher_education_accreditation_in_the_Philippines_A_literature_review. Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • COCHRAN, S. M. (2005).The New Teacher Education: For Better or for Worse? Educational Researcher, 34,3–17.
  • COLE, A. L.& Knowles, J. G. (1998). Reforming Teacher Education Through Self-Study. In A. L. Cole, R. Elijah, & J. G. Knowles (Eds.), The heart of the matter: Teacher educators and teacher education reform (pp. 41–54). San Francisco, CA: Caddo Gap.
  • CHEA (2006). Recognition Policy and Procedures. Washington, D.C.: Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
  • DEY, N. (2011). Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Higher Education in India. Academic Research International, 1(1), 104-110.
  • M.G. (2014). Accreditation Models in Teacher Education: The cases of United States, Australia and India. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(3).
  • DİCKEY, F. G. & Miller, J. W. (1972). Federal Involvement in Nongovernmental Accreditation. Educational Record, 53(2), 138-42.
  • DİLL, D. & Beerkens, M. (2013). Designing the Framework Conditions for Assuring Academic Standards: Lessons Learned About Professional Market and Government Regulation of Academic Quality. Higher Education, 65(3), 341–357.
  • EPDAD (2012). Öğretmen Eğitiminde Program Değerlendirme Ve Akreditasyon El Kitabı, http://www.epdad.net/belgeler-ve-formlar. Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • HERNES, G., & Martin, M. (2005). Policy rationales and organizational and methodological options in accreditation: Findings from an IIEP research project. Paper presented at the Accreditation and the Global Higher Education Market
  • IMİG, D.G. & Imig, S. R. (2006). The teacher effectiveness movement: How 80 years of essentialist control have shaped the teacher education profession. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2), 167-180.
  • ITT, 2017. Initial teacher training criteria and supporting advice Information for accredited initial teacher training providers. United Kingdom: National College for Teaching and Leadership. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/594123/Initial_teacher_training_criteria_and_supporting_advice.pdf Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • GUPTA, R. (2011). Teacher Education in India and United States of America: A Study. University News. 49(46), 11-16.
  • GÜNÇER, B. (1999). Ögretmen Eğitiminde Akreditasyon: İngiltere ve A.B.D.Örnekleri. http://www.yok.gov.tr/egitim/ogretmen/ogretmen_egitiminde_kalite.htm. Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020.
  • KELLS, H. R. (1998). Self Study Processes. New York: Macmillian.
  • KİNGSBURY, A. (2007). The measure of learning. Available: http://www.usnews.com/ usnews/news/articles/ 070304/12college.htm Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • CRESWELL, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • MİTCHELL,K.J.,Robinson,D.Z.,Plake,B.S.,&Knowles,K.T.(2001). Testing Teacher Candidates: The Role Of Licensure Tests In Improving Teacher Quality. Washington,DC:National Academy Press.
  • NCTL (2015). National College for Teaching and Leadership Framework Document November 2015. United Kingdom: National College for Teaching and Leadership. Available: www.gov.uk/government/publications Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • NCTL (2018). Statutory guidance Initial teacher training (ITT): criteria and supporting advice. United Kingdom: Department of Education and National College for Teaching and Leadership Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ initial-teacher-training-criteria/initial-teacher-training-itt-criteria-and-supporting-advice#note1 Erişim tarihi: 15.06.2020.
  • NEUMAN, W.L. (2011) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. 7th Edition, Pearson, Boston.
  • NOBLİT, G. W., ve Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies Newbury Park: Sage.
  • NODDİNGS, N.(1984).Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
  • SANDELOWSKİ, M., ve Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. Springer Publishing Company.
  • SANDELOWSKİ, M., Docherty, S. ve Emden, C. (1997). Focus on qualitative methods qualitative metasynthesis: Issues and techniques. Research in Nursing and Health, 20, 365-372.
  • SİBGATULLİNA, A. (2015). Contemporary Technologies to Improve the Quality of Education When Training Teachers. International Education Studies, 8(3).
  • STİLES L. J. (1976). Policy and Perspective: Is Teacher Education Obselete? The Journal of Educational Research, 69(6).
  • SYKES, G. T. Bird, & M. Kennedy. 2010. “Teacher Education: Its Problems and Some Prospects.”Journal of Teacher Education, 61 (5), 464–476.
  • TEACHR. (2017). TEACHR Ranking and Accreditation Framework for TEIs. Draft Available: http://ncte-india.org/ncte_new/pdf/NCTE_SOP_on_RandA_v.pdf Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • TOY, Y. B. (2015). Türkiye’de Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmen Eğitimi Araştırmalarının Tematik Analizi ve Öğretmen Eğitimi Politikalarının Yansımaları. Eğitim ve Bilim. 40(178) 23-60.
  • U.S. Department of Education Accreditation and Quality Assurance. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-accreditation. html. Erişim Tarihi: 15.05.2020
  • YILDIRIM, A. (2011). Öğretmen eğitiminde çatışma alanları ve yeniden yapılanma. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 1-17.
  • YÖK. (1999). Türkiye’de Öğretmen Eğitiminde Akreditasyon ve Standartlar. YÖK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitim’i Geliştirme Projesi Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmen Eğitimi. Ankara:
  • YÖDEK. (2006). Yükseköğretim Kurumlarında Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Rehberi. Yükseköğretim Akademik Değerlendirme ve Kalite Geliştirme Komisyonu, Ankara.
  • ZEİCHNER, K. (2014). The Struggle for the Soul of Teaching and Teacher Education in the USA. Journal of Education for Teaching. 40(5), 551-568.
  • ZİMMER, L. (2006). Qualitative Meta-Synthesis: A Question of Dialoguing With Texts. Journal of Advanced Nursing, (53), 311-318.
Toplam 45 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Abdullah Adıgüzel 0000-0001-7184-3644

Yayımlanma Tarihi 15 Şubat 2022
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022

Kaynak Göster

APA Adıgüzel, A. (2022). BAZI ÜLKELERİN ÖĞRETMEN EĞİTİMİ AKREDİTASYON UYGULAMALARININ KARŞILAŞTIRMALI OLARAK İNCELENMESİ:BİR META SENTEZ ÇALIŞMASI. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 51(233), 127-150. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.769395