Yıl: 2012 Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 97 - 109 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables

Öz:
Bu çalışmanın amacı, sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğrenci kontrol ideolojileri ile ilgili görüşlerini incelemektir. Araştırmanın örneklemini, Niğde ili merkezi ve bağlı bulunan köy ve kasabalardaki ilköğretim okullarında görev yapmakta olan 176 sınıf öğretmeni oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmada "tarama modeli" kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada veri toplamak için "öğrenci kontrol ideolojileri ölçeği" kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın amacına dayalı olarak, yüzde, standart sapma, bağımsız gruplar t-testi, tek-yönlü ANOVA analizi gibi istatistik test teknikleri kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada elde edilen sonuçlara göre, sınıf öğretmenlerinin genel olarak insancıl öğrenci kontrol ideolojisine sahip bulundukları sonucuna varılmıştır. Sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğrenci kontrol ideolojilerinin cinsiyete göre farklılaşmadığı, ancak mesleki kıdeme, eğitim durumuna ve görev yapılan okulun yerleşim birimi değişkenlerine göre mesleki kıdemi 1-5 yıl, lisansüstü eğitim yapan ve görev yapılan okulun yerleşim birimi şehir merkezi olan öğretmenler lehine anlamlı şekilde farklılaştığı saptanmıştır.
Anahtar Kelime:

Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Öğrenci Kontrol İdeolojilerinin Farklı Değişkenler Açısından Analizi

Öz:
The main purpose of this study was to analyse pupil control ideology of primary (classroom) teachers. 176 primary teachers working in elementary schools from Nigde province and its districts constituted the sample of the research. The "survey method" was employed in this research. The data of this research were collected by using the "Pupil Control Ideology Scale". In order to analyse the data obtained, mean, standard deviation, the independent samples t-test, one-way ANOVA analysis were used. Results of this study show that primary teachers had "humanistic pupil control ideology" in general. Also, it was found out that there was not a statistical significant difference between primary school teachers in terms of gender. On the other hand, it was found a statistical significant difference between primary teachers in relation to occupational seniority in favour of younger teachers. It was also found out that there were statistical significant differences between primary teachers in terms of educational level and settlement place of school variables in favour of teachers with postgraduate level of education and working in schools in the city centre.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Altuğ, S. C. (2007). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğrenci kontrol ideolojilerinin bazı demografik değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Unpublished master's thesis, Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.
  • Baş, G. (2011). Teacher student control ideology and burnout: Their correlation. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(4), 84-94.
  • Beycioğlu, K., Konan, N. & Aslan, M. (2007). Pupil control ideology among high school teachers in Malatya, Turkey. 17-21 September. Paper presented at the European conference on educational research, Ghent, Belgium.
  • Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. (Revised ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Cadavid, V. & Lunenburg, F. C. (1991). Locus of control, pupil control ideology, and dimensions of teacher burnout. 3-7 April. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American educational research association, Chicago, IL, USA.
  • Celep, C. (1997a). Prospective student teachers' control orientation. Education and Science, 21(106), 12-22.
  • Celep, C. (1997b). Classroom teachers' factors affecting the sense of efficacy: In terms of the management, work group, belief about student, and pupil control orientation. Paper presented at the third national classroom teachers symposium, Çukurova University Education Faculty, Adana, Turkey.
  • Celep, C. (1998). Teachers' sense of efficacy, teachers' management work group, belief about student, and pupil control orientation. Paper presented at the seventh national educational sciences congress, Selçuk University Education Faculty, Konya, Turkey.
  • Deibert, J. & Hoy, W. K. (1974). Custodial high schools and self-actualization of students. Educational Research Quarterly, 2, 24-31.
  • Ekiz, D. (2003). Eğitimde araştırma yöntem ve metodlarına giriş. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Helsel, A. R. (1971). Value orientation and pupil control ideology of public school educators. Educational Administration Quarterly, 7, 24-33.
  • Honey, M. & Moeller, B. (1990). Teachers' beliefs and technology integration: Different values, different understandings. Technical Report No. 143. Center for Technology in Education, New York.
  • Hoy, W. K. & Miskel, C. (2008). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice. (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Hoy, W. K. (2007). The pupil control studies: A historical, theoretical, and empirical analysis. In Hoy, W. K. & DiPaola, M. (Eds.), Essential ideas for the reform of American schools. USA: Information Age Publishing.
  • Hoy, W. K. (2001). Pupil control studies: A historical, theoretical, and empirical analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 39(5), 424-441.
  • Hoy, W. K. (1969). Pupil control ideology and organizational socialization: A further examination. The School Review Quarterly, 77(3-4), 257-265.
  • Hoy, W. K. (1967). Organizational socialization: The student teacher and pupil control ideology. The Journal of Educational Research, 61(4), 163-155.
  • Johns, F., Karabinus, N. & MacNaughton, R. (1989). School discipline guidebook: Theory into practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Jones, D. R. & Harty, H. (1980). Secondary school student teacher classroom control ideologies and amount of engaged instructional activities. The High School Journal, 64, 13-15.
  • Jones, L. P. & Blankenship, J. W. (1972). The relationship of pupil control ideology and innovative classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 9(3), 281-285.
  • Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. (15th ed.). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Keyser, M. W. (2000). Active learning and cooperative learning: Understanding the difference and using both styles effectively. Research Strategies, 17, 35-44.
  • Lunenburg, F. C. & Ornstein, A. C. (2008). Educational administration: Concepts and practices. (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Books/Cole.
  • Lunenburg, F. C. & Mankowski, S. A. (2000). Bureaucracy and pupil control orientation and behavior in urban secondary schools. 24-28 April. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American educational research association, New Orleans, LA, USA.
  • Lunenburg, F. C. & Cadavid, V. (1992). Locus of control, pupil control ideology, and dimensions of teacher burnout. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 19, 13-22.
  • Lunenburg, F. C. (1991). Educators' pupil control ideology as a predictor of educators' reactions to student disruptive behavior. The High School Journal, 74, 81-87.
  • Lunenburg, F. C. & Schmidt, L. J. (1989). Pupil control ideology, pupil control behavior, and the quality of school life. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 22, 36-44.
  • Lunernburg, F. C. (1984). Pupil control in schools: Individual and organizational correlates. Lexington, MA: Ginn and Company.
  • Manke, M. P. (1997). Classroom power relations: Understanding student-teacher interaction. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • McMillan, J. H. & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence based inquiry. Boston: Brown and Company.
  • Multhauf, A. P., Willower, D. J. & Licata, J. W. (1978). Teacher pupil-control ideology and behaviour and classroom environmental robustness. The Elementary School Journal, 79(1), 40-46.
  • Okafor, P. C. (2006). School climate, pupil control ideology, and effectiveness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St. John's University School of Education and Human Services, New York.
  • Richardson, V. (1966). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In Sikula, J., Bettery, T. J. & Guyton, E. (Eds.), The handbook of research on teacher education. New York: Macmillan Company, Inc.
  • Rideout, G. & Windle, S. (2010). Beginning teachers' pupil control ideologies: An empirical examination of the impact of beliefs about education, mentorship, induction, and principal leadership style. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 104(1), 1-30.
  • Schmidt, L. J. (1992). Relationship between pupil control ideology and the quality of school life. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 45, 889-896.
  • Şişman, M. & Turan, S. (2004). Eğitim ve okul yönetimi. In Özden, Y. (Ed.). Eğitim ve okul yöneticiliği el kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Turan, S. & Can, S. (2008). Öğretmenlerin öğrenci kontrol ideolojileri. Uşak Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1(1), 95-113.
  • Yılmaz, K. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarının demokratik değerler ile öğrenci kontrol ideolojilerine ilişkin görüşleri arasındaki ilişki. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2), 297-315.
  • Yılmaz, K. (2009). Primary school teachers' views about pupil control ideologies and classroom management styles. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 4, 157-167.
  • Yılmaz, K. (2007). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin okul yöneticilerinin liderlik davranışları ve öğrenci kontrol ideolojilerine ilişkin görüşleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 32(146), 12-23.
  • Yılmaz, K. (2002). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin okul yöneticilerinin liderlik davranışları ve öğrenci kontrol ideolojilerine ilişkin görüşleri. Unpublished master's thesis, Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.
  • Willard, A. M. (1972). On the concept of ideology in political science. The American Political Science Review, 66, 478-510.
  • Willower, D. J., Eidel, T. L. & Hoy, W. K. (1973). The school and pupil control ideology. (Revised ed.). University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
APA BAŞ G (2012). An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. , 97 - 109.
Chicago BAŞ GÖKHAN An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. (2012): 97 - 109.
MLA BAŞ GÖKHAN An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. , 2012, ss.97 - 109.
AMA BAŞ G An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. . 2012; 97 - 109.
Vancouver BAŞ G An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. . 2012; 97 - 109.
IEEE BAŞ G "An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables." , ss.97 - 109, 2012.
ISNAD BAŞ, GÖKHAN. "An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables". (2012), 97-109.
APA BAŞ G (2012). An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(1), 97 - 109.
Chicago BAŞ GÖKHAN An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 1, no.1 (2012): 97 - 109.
MLA BAŞ GÖKHAN An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, vol.1, no.1, 2012, ss.97 - 109.
AMA BAŞ G An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2012; 1(1): 97 - 109.
Vancouver BAŞ G An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2012; 1(1): 97 - 109.
IEEE BAŞ G "An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables." Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, ss.97 - 109, 2012.
ISNAD BAŞ, GÖKHAN. "An Analysis of Pupil Control Ideology of Primary Teachers From Different Variables". Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 1/1 (2012), 97-109.