MATH AND SCIENCE TEACHERS` AUTONOMY SUPPORT PERCEPTIONS AND THEIR CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STYLES

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to investigate the autonomy support and teachers` classroom management styles vary in terms of their subject matter and experience. The research was conducted on 178 math and science teachers. The data were collected with Teacher Autonomy Support Scale and Turkish version of Attitudes and Beliefs on Classroom Control (ABCC) Inventory. The findings have discerned that teachers` autonomy support is at medium level and teachers had interventionist orientations on instructional management dimension and most of them had nonintervionist orientations on people management dimension. And also teachers who had interactionalist orientations are more autonomy supportive than others.

Keywords

• Academic Achievement, Perception of Responsibility, Teacher`s Efficacy, Classroom Management Style, Teacher Education,

İLKÖĞRETİM MATEMATİK İLE FEN VE TEKNOLOJİ ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN SINIF YÖNETİM BİÇEMLERİ VE ÖZERKLİK DESTEĞİ ALGILARI

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı branş ve kıdeme göre öğretmenlerin sınıf yönetim biçemleri ve özerklik desteği algılarını incelemektir. Araştırma 178 matematik, fen ve teknoloji öğretmeninin katılımıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmada veri toplama amacıyla Öğretmen Özerklik Desteği ve Sınıf Yönetimine Yönelik Tutum ve İnanç ölçekleri kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda öğretmenlerin özerklik desteğinin orta düzeyde olduğu, ders yönetiminde müdahaleci, insan yönetiminde müdahaleci olmayan biçemi benimsedikleri belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca etkileşimci öğretmenlerin öğrenci özerkliğini daha fazla destekleridikleri bulunmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Akademik Başarı, Sorumluluk Algısı, Öğretmen Yeterlilik Algısı, Sınıf Yönetim Biçemi, Öğretmen Eğitimi,

Kaynakça

1.  Assor, A., Kaplan, H., and Roth, G., (2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teaching behaviors predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(2), 261–278, DOI: 1348/000709902158883.
2.  Benware, C. and Deci, E., (1984). Quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set. American Educational Research Journal, 21(4), pp:755–765,DOI: 10.3101/00028312021004755.  Black, A. and Deci, E., (2000). The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective. Science Education, 84(6), pp:740–756, DOI: 1002/1098-237X(200011).
3. Cai, Y., Reeve, J., and Robinson, D.T., (2002). Home schooling and teaching style: Comparing the motivating styles of home school and public school teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), pp: 372–380, DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.372.
4. Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M., (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), pp: 1024–1037, DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1024.
5. Deci, E., Ryan, R., Schwartz, A., and Sheinman, L., (1981). An instrument to assess adults’ orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(5), pp: 642–650, DOI: 10.1037/0022-0663.73.5.642.
6.  Filak, V.F. and Sheldon, K.M., (2008). Teacher support, student motivation, student need satisfaction, and college teacher course evaluations: Testing a sequential path model. Educational Psychology,. 28(6), pp: 711–724, DOI:10.1080/01443410802337794.
7.  Grolnick, W., and Ryan, R., (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning: An experimental and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, pp: 890-898, DOI: 1037/0022-3514.52.5.890.
8.  Güvenç, H., (2011). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin özerklik destekleri ve mesleki özyeterlik algıları. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 17(1), pp: 99-116. Güvenç, E., (2012a). İlköğretim Matematik Öğretmenlerinin Sınıf Yönetim Biçemleri ve Mesleki Özyeterlik Algıları, 7. Ulusal Eğitim Yönetimi Kongresi, Malatya, Bildiri Özetleri, ss: 310-311.

9.  Güvenç, E., (2012b). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin sınıf yönetim biçemleri ve denetim odakları. Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33, pp: 64-80.
10.  Güvenç, E., (2012c). Öğretmen Adayı Öğrencilerin Sınıf Yönetim Biçemleri ve Denetim Odakları. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
11.  Martin, N.K. and Baldwin, B., (1994). Beliefs regarding classroom management style: Differences between novice and experienced teachers. Annual Conference of the Southwest Educational Research Association (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED387471)
12.  Martin, N.K. and Baldwin, B., (1996). Perspective regarding classroom management style: Differences beetween elementary and secondary level teachers. Annual Meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED393835).
13.  Martin, N.K., Yin, Z., and Baldwin, B., (1998). Construct validation of the attitudes and beliefs on classroom control inventory. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 33(2), pp: 6-15.
14.  Martin, N.K, Yin, Z., and Mayall, H., (2006). Classroom management training, teaching experience and gender: Do these variables impact teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward classroom management style? Annual Conference of the Southwest Educational Research Association (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED494050).
15.  McLeod, J., Fisher, J., and Hoover, G., (2003). The key elements of classroom management: Managing time and space, student behavior, and instructional strategies. Alexandria, USA. ASCD.
16.  Reeve, J., Bolt, E., and Cai, Y., (1999). Autonomy-supportive teachers: How they teach and motivate students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), pp: 537–548, DOI: 1037/0022-0663.91.3.537.
17. Reeve, J., (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), pp: 159–175, DOI: 1080/00461520903028990.
18. Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L., (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, pp:54–67, DOI: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
19. Savran, A. ve Çakıroğlu, J., (2004). Preservice science teachers’ orientations to classroom management. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 26, pp: 124-130.
20.  Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., and Dochy, F., (2009). The synergistic relationship of perceived autonomy support and structure in the prediction of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), pp: 57–68, DOI: 10.1348/000709908X304398.
21.  Tekbıyık, A. ve Akdeniz, A.R., (2008). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programını kabullenmeye ve uygulamaya yönelik öğretmen görüşleri. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi (EFMED), 2(2), pp: 23-37.
22.  Temizöz, Y. ve Özgün, K.S.A., (2008). Matematik öğretmenlerinin kullandıkları öğretim yöntemleri ve buluş yoluyla öğrenme yaklaşımı konusundaki görüşleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 33(149), pp: 89 Vansteenkiste, M., Smeets, S., Soenens, B., Lens, W., Matos, L. and Deci, E.L., (2010). Autonomous and controlled regulation of performance-approach goals: Their relations to perfectionism and educational outcomes. Motivation and emotion, 34(4), pp: 333-353, DOI: 1007/s11031-010-9188-3.