ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ SINIF YÖNETİMİNDE ETİK DUYARLIKLARININ İNCELENMESİ: BİR KARMA YÖNTEM ÇALIŞMASI

Öz

Bu çalışmada, öğretmen adaylarının sınıf yönetimine ilişkin etik duyarlıklarının belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Karma araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan yakınsayan paralel desende yürütülen çalışma, 2017-2018 öğretim yılında Akdeniz Bölgesindeki bir devlet üniversitesinde okuyan son sınıf öğretmen adayları ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmanın nicel kısmında betimsel istatistikler, ilişkisiz örneklemlerde t-testi ve tek yönlü varyans analizi kullanılmış; nitel kısmında veriler dokümanlardan elde edilmiş ve içerik analizi yöntemiyle incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda, öğretmen adaylarının etik duyarlık puanlarının ilişki yönetiminde çözüm boyutu dışında diğer boyutlarda yüksek olmasına rağmen, sınıftaki olayı etik açıdan değerlendirmeleri sınırlı ve gerekçelendirmelerinin de yüzeysel olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Öğretmen adaylarının etik duyarlıklarının cinsiyet ve program değişkenleri açısından bazı boyutlarda farklılaştığı gözlenmiştir. Öğretmen adaylarının okullardaki öğretmenlik deneyimlerinin hem nicelik hem de nitelik olarak arttırılması ve öğretmen eğitimi programına eklenen eğitimde ahlak ve etik derslerinin teorikten çok uygulamaya dönük şekilde yürütülmesinin yararlı olacağı söylenebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Etik
• Etik duyarlık
• Sınıf yönetimi
• Öğretmen adayları

THE INVESTIGATION OF ETHICAL SENSITIVITY OF PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS ON CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT: A MIXED METHOD STUDY

Öz

This study aimed to determine the ethical sensitivity of pre-service teachers on classroom management. The study, designed with a convergent parallel model from the mixed research methods, was conducted with final year pre-service teachers at a state university in the Mediterranean region in the 2017-2018 academic year. Descriptive statistics, independent sample t-test, and one way ANOVA was performed in the quantitative part of the study; the data were collected through documents and examined with the help of content analysis in its qualitative part. As a result of the study, it was found that the ethical sensitivity mean scores of the pre-service teachers were high except for solution sensitivity in relationship management through the number of their ethical evolution in school experience reports were limited, and they were superficial. It was observed that their ethical sensitivity differed statistically significant in terms of their genders and programs in some dimensions. It can be advised that the quantity and quality of teaching experience in schools should be increased and that morality and ethics in the education course, added in the teaching training curriculum, should be carried out more practically rather than theoretically.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ethics
• Ethical sensitivity
• Classroom management
• Pre-service teachers

Kaynakça

1. Altınkurt, Y., & Yılmaz, K. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlerin mesleki etik dışı davranışlar ile ilgili görüşleri. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(22), 113-128.
2. Bebeau, M. J., Rest, J. R., & Yamoor, C. M. (1985). Measuring dental students' ethical sensitivity. Journal of Dental Education, 49(4), 225-235.
3. Bergem, T. (1993). Examining aspects of professional morality. Journal of Moral Education, 22(3), 297-312.
4. Bergem, T. (1986). Teachers' thinking and behavior. An empirical study of the role of social sensitivity and moral reasoning in the teaching performance of student teachers. Scandinavian Journal of Educationl Research, 30(4), 193-203.
5. Bourke, K., & O'Neill, J. (2009). Professional development for ethical teaching. New Zealand Annual Review of Education, 18, 107-122.
6. Bowles, W., Collingridge, M., Curry, S., & Valentine, B. (2006). Ethical practice in social work. McGraw-Hill Education.
7. Brabeck, M. M., Rogers, L. A., Sirin, S., Henderson, J., Benvenuto, M., Weaver, M., & Ting, K. (2000). Increasing ethical sensitivity to racial and gender intolerance in schools: Development of the racial ethical sensitivity test. Ethics & Behavior, 10(2), 119-137.
8. Buzzelli, C. A., & Johnston, B. (2002). The moral dimensions of teaching: Language, power, and culture in classroom interaction. Psychology Press.

9. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Pegem Akademi.
10. Campbell, E. (2003). The ethical teacher. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
11. Campbell, E. (2013). Cultivating moral and ethical professional practice: Interdisciplinary lessons and teacher education. In M. N. Sanger, & R. D. Osguthorpe (Eds.), The moral work of teaching and teacher education: Preparing and supporting practitioners. Teachers College Press.
12. Carr, D. (2000). Professionalism and ethics in teaching. Routledge.
13. Chan, S. Y., & Leung, P. (2006). The effects of accounting students' ethical reasoning and personal factors on their ethical sensitivity. Managerial Auditing Journal, 21(4), 436-457.
14. Clarkeburn, H. (2002). A test for ethical sensitivity in science. Journal of Moral Education, 31(4), 439-453.
15. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
16. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
17. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
18. Dewey, J. (1975). Moral principles in education. Southern Illinois University Press.
19. Edmonds, W., & Kennedy, T. (2017). An applied reference guide to research designs; Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. Sage Publication.
20. Ehrich, L. C., Kimber, M., Millwater, J., & Cranston, N. (2011). Ethical dilemmas: A model to understand teacher practice. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 17(2), 173-185.
21. Fedeles, M. (2004). The teachers' concerns questionnaire: The development and validation of a measure of high school teachers' moral sensitivity. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(08). (UMI No. NQ93117).
22. Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. Mc Grawall Hill.
23. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tahtam, R.L., & Black, W.C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
24. Johns, B. H., McGrath, M. Z., & Mathur, S. R. (2008). Ethical dilemmas in education. Rowman and Littlefield.
25. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 159-174.
26. Mahoney, D. (2008). Ethics in the classroom: Bridging the gap between theory and practice. Rowman & Littlefield.
27. Mason, J. (2002). Qualitative researching (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
28. McNeel, S. P. (1994) College teaching and student moral development, In J. R. Rest & D. Narvaez (Eds) Moral Development in the professions: Psychology and applied ethics (pp. 27–49). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Myyry, L., & Helkama, K. (2002). The role of value priorities and professional ethical training in moral sensitivity. Journal of Moral Education, 31, 35–50.
30. Narvaez, D. (2001). Ethical sensitivity. Activity booklet 1. http:// www.nd.edu/*dnarvaez/ 2 Mart 2017 tarihinde alınmıştır.
31. Osguthorpe, R. D. (2008). On the reasons we want teachers of good disposition and moral character. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 288-299.
32. Ottekin-Demirbolat, A., & Aslan, H. (2014). İlk ve ortaokul öğretmenlerinin etik duyarlılıklarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi (Sinop ili örneği).. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 187-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/jesr.2014.4os11a
33. Patton, M. Q. (2005). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Sage Publications.
34. Pelit, E., & Güçer, E. (2006). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik mesleğiyle ilgili etik olmayan davranışlara ve öğretmenleri etik dışı davranışa yönelten faktörlere ilişkin algılamaları. Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2, 95-119.
35. Pieper, A. (2012). Etiğe giriş (G. Sezer ve V. Atayman, Çev.). Ayrıntı Yayını.
36. Rest, J. R. (1984). Research on moral development: Implications for training counseling psychologists. The Counseling Psychologist, 12(3), 19-29.
37. Rest, J. R. (1982). A psychologist looks at the teaching of ethics. Hastings Center Report, 12(1), 29-36.
38. Robin, D. P., Reidenbach, R. E., & Forrest, P. J. (1996). The perceived importance of an ethical issue as an influence on the ethical decision-making of ad managers. Journal of Business Research, 35, 17–28.
39. Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Sage Publications.
40. Sabbagh, C. (2009) Ethics and teaching. In L. J. Saha, & A. G. Dworkin (Eds), The international handbook of research on teachers and teaching (pp. 683–693). Springer.
41. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socio-scientific issues. Journal of Moral Education, 33, 339–358.
42. Sanger, M. (2008). What we need to prepare teachers for the moral nature of their work. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(2), 169-185.
43. Sanger, M., Osguthorpe, R. D., & Fenstermacher, G. D. (2013). The moral work of teaching in teacher education. In M. N. Sanger, & R. D. Osguthorpe (Eds), The moral work of teaching and teacher education: Preparing and supporting practitioners (pp. 3-14). Teachers College Press.
44. Shaub, M. K., Finn, D. W., & Munter, P. (1993). The effects of auditors' ethical orientation on commitment and ethical sensitivity. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 5(1), 145-169.
45. Soltis, J. F. (1986). Teaching professional ethics. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(3), 2-4.
46. Sparks, J. R., & Hunt, S. D. (1998). Marketing researcher ethical sensitivity: Conceptualization, measurement, and exploratory investigation. Journal of Marketing, 62, 92–109.
47. Strike, K. A., & Ternasky, P. L. (1993). Ethics for professionals in education: Perspectives for preparation and practice. Teachers College Press. Paperback: ISBN-0-8077-3215-X; Hardcover: ISBN-0-8077-3216-8.
48. Svara, J. H. (2007). The ethics primer for public administrators in government and nonprofit organizations. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
49. Teddlie C., & Tashakkori A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage.
50. Tirri, K. (2010). Teacher values underlying professional ethics, In R. T. T. Lovat, & N. Clement (Eds). International research handbook on values education and student wellbeing. Springer.
51. Tirri, K., Toom, A., & Husu, J. (2013). The moral matters of teaching: A Finnish perspective. In C. J. Graig, P.C. Meijer, & J. Broeckmans (Eds.), From teacher thinking to teachers and teaching: The evolution of a research community (pp. 223–239). Emerald Publishing.
52. Uğurlu, C. T., & Polat, S. (2011). Sınıf öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin öğretmenlik mesleğine ilişkin tutumları. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 35(1), 68-74.
53. Warnick, B. R. (2013). Understanding student rights in schools: Speech, religion, and privacy in educational settings. Teachers College Press.
54. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin yayıncılık.
55. Zubay, B., & Soltis, J. F. (2005). Creating the ethical school: A book of case studies. Teachers College Press.