SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Anadolu Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (Internatıonal Anatolian Social Sciences Journal) / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1

UNDER CYNICAL GAZES: CLASSROOM TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF CYNICISM AND ITS EFFECTS

SİNİK BAKIŞLAR ALTINDA: SINIF ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN SİNİZM ALGILARI VE ETKİLERİ

Hamit Özen(Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi)0000-0001-7604-5967
Abdullah İnal(TC MİLLİ EĞİTİM BAKANLIĞI ESKİŞEHİR)0009-0005-1110-079X
Pages
149–177
Publication Date
2025-03-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that factors such as discrimination, threats and mobbing, gossip and vested interests, inappropriate administrative behaviors, and a closed school management system prominently influence teachers' perceptions and experiences of organizational cynicism.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to explore the consequences of organizational cynicism- cynical behaviors arising from teachers' attitudes toward their institutions- from the perspectives of classroom teachers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 16 classroom teachers working at a primary school in the Odunpazarı district of Eskişehir during the 2023-2024 academic year.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that factors such as discrimination, threats and mobbing, gossip and vested interests, inappropriate administrative behaviors, and a closed school management system prominently influence teachers' perceptions and experiences of organizational cynicism.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2023-2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Okul müdürü · Sınıf öğretmeni · Nitel araştırma

Abstract

This study aims to explore the consequences of organizational cynicism- cynical behaviors arising from teachers' attitudes toward their institutions- from the perspectives of classroom teachers. The research employs a phenomenological approach, a qualitative research method. The study group consisted of 16 classroom teachers working at a primary school in the Odunpazarı district of Eskişehir during the 2023-2024 academic year. A purposive sampling method was employed, and data were collected using a semi-structured interview technique. The collected data were analyzed using content analysis. The findings indicate that factors such as discrimination, threats and mobbing, gossip and vested interests, inappropriate administrative behaviors, and a closed school management system prominently influence teachers' perceptions and experiences of organizational cynicism. Additionally, managerial attitudes, workload, teacher interactions, and school climate emerged as key reasons behind the development of organizational cynicism among teachers Examining the outcomes of organizational cynicism reveals its impact on motivation and job satisfaction, professionalism, teacher identity, and educational outcomes. Strategies including communication and collaboration, professional development, and maintaining focus effectively mitigate the negative effects of organizational cynicism. These strategies help teachers mitigate the challenges associated with cynicism, fostering a healthier and more satisfying work environment. In conclusion, the study underscores the necessity for teachers, administrators, and policymakers to develop strategies that mitigate the effects of organizational cynicism.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, sınıf öğretmenlerinin kurumlarına karşı geliştirdikleri duygular ve buna bağlı olarak ortaya çıkan sinik davranışların, yani örgütsel sinizmin sonuçlarını, öğretmen görüşleri doğrultusunda belirlemektir. Araştırma, nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden olgubilim (fenomenoloji) yaklaşımı ile desenlenmiştir. Çalışma grubu, 2023-2024 eğitim-öğretim yılında Eskişehir ili Odunpazarı ilçesindeki bir ilkokulda görev yapan 16 sınıf öğretmeninden oluşmaktadır. Araştırmada, uygun örnekleme yöntemi tercih edilmiş ve veri toplamak amacıyla yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme tekniği kullanılmıştır. Toplanan veriler, içerik analizi yöntemiyle çözümlenmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, sınıf öğretmenlerinin örgütsel sinizmi algılama ve deneyimleme süreçlerinde ayrımcılık, tehdit ve mobbing, dedikodu ve çıkar ilişkileri, idarenin uygunsuz davranışları ile kapalı okul yönetimi gibi unsurlar ön plana çıkmıştır. Ayrıca, öğretmenlerde örgütsel sinizmin ortaya çıkış nedenleri arasında yönetici tavırları, iş yükü, öğretmenler arası etkileşimler ve okul iklimi öne çıkmaktadır. Örgütsel sinizmin çıktıları incelendiğinde, motivasyon ve iş tatmini, profesyonellik, öğretmen kimliğine etkiler ve eğitime yönelik sonuçlar dikkati çekmektedir. Örgütsel sinizmin olumsuz etkileriyle başa çıkabilmek için iletişim ve iş birliği, mesleki gelişim ve odaklanma gibi stratejiler kullanılmakta; bu sayede öğretmenlerin sinizmden kaynaklanan sorunları azaltarak daha sağlıklı ve tatmin edici bir iş ortamı oluşturabildikleri gözlemlenmektedir. Sonuç olarak, örgütsel sinizmin etkilerinin hafifletilmesi için öğretmenlere, yöneticilere ve politika yapıcılara yönelik stratejiler geliştirilmesinin gerekli olduğu vurgulanmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özen, H., İnal, A. (2025). UNDER CYNICAL GAZES: CLASSROOM TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF CYNICISM AND ITS EFFECTS. Uluslararası Anadolu Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (Internatıonal Anatolian Social Sciences Journal), Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1, 149–177. https://doi.org/10.47525/ulasbid.1576388

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (80)

  1. Abdurrezzak, S., Yıldızbaş, T., Y., Özkul, R., & Doğan, Ü. (2023). Investigation of teachers' perception levels of organizational cynicism and organizational loneliness. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 8(3), 396-406. https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.1167626
  2. Adams, C. & Miskell, R. (2016). Teacher trust in district administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(4), 675-706. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x16652202
  3. Akan, D., Bektaş, F., & Yıldırım, İ. (2014). Sınıf öğretmeni algılarına göre etik liderlik ve örgütsel sinizm arasındaki ilişki. Education Sciences, 9(1), 48-56. https://doi.org/10.12739/NWSA.2014.9.1.1C0605
  4. Arens, A. & Morin, A. (2016). Relations between teachers’ emotional exhaustion and students’ educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 800-813. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000105
  5. Arslan, E. (2022). Nitel araştırmalarda geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 51(Özel Sayı 1), Ö395–Ö407.
  6. Aydın, Y. T. (2017). İlkokul ve ortaokul öğretmenlerinin örgütsel sinizm ile örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı ilişkisi: Ankara Altındağ ilçesi örneği (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  7. Bastian, J. (2023). Educator Attrition and Mobility During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Educational Researcher.
  8. Beard, K. & Hoy, W. (2010). The nature, meaning, and measure of teacher flow in elementary schools: a test of rival hypotheses. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(3), 426-458. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x10375294
  9. Boies, K. & Fiset, J. (2018). I do as i think: exploring the alignment of principal cognitions and behaviors and its effects on teacher outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 55(2), 225-252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x18785869
  10. Boyce, J. & Bowers, A. (2016). Different levels of leadership for learning: investigating differences between teachers individually and collectively using multilevel factor analysis of the 2011-2012 schools and staffing survey. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 21(2), 197-225. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2016.1139187
  11. Brandmo, C., Tiplic, D., & Elstad, E. (2019). Antecedents of department heads’ job autonomy, role clarity, and self-efficacy for instructional leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 24(3), 411-430. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1580773
  12. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  13. Brenninkmeijer, V., Vanyperen, N. W., & Buunk, B. P. (2001). I am not a better teacher, but others are worse: Burnout and perceptions of superiority among teachers. Social Psychology of Education, 4(3), 227-243.
  14. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi.
  15. Camburn, E., Goldring, E., Sebastian, J., May, H., & Huff, J. (2015). An examination of the benefits, limitations, and challenges of conducting randomized experiments with principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 187-220. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x15617808
  16. Castro, A. (2022). Managing competing demands in a teacher shortage context: the impact of teacher shortages on principal leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 59(1), 218-250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x221140849
  17. Cloutier, C. & Ravasi, D. (2020). Using tables to enhance trustworthiness in qualitative research. Strategic Organization, 19(1), 113-133.
  18. Creswell, J. W. (2017). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: Beş yaklaşıma göre nitel araştırma ve araştırma deseni (S. B. Demir, Çev.). Siyasal Kitabevi.
  19. Dean, J. W., Brandes, P., & Dharwadkar, R. (1998). Organizational cynicism. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 341-352.
  20. Dixon, L., Pham, L., Henry, G., Corcoran, S., & Zimmer, R. (2021). Who leads turnaround schools? characteristics of principals in tennessee's achievement school district and innovation zones. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(2), 258-299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x211055702
  21. Erkuş, A. (2009). Davranış bilimleri için bilimsel araştırma süreci (İkinci baskı). Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  22. Fatima, S. & Wolf, S. (2020). Cumulative risk and newly qualified teachers’ professional well-being: evidence from rural ghana. Research in Comparative and International Education, 15(4), 414-436. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499920926792
  23. Folger, R.,& Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Sage.
  24. Fuller, B. Vd. (2017), “Do Academic Preschools Yield Stronger Benefits? Cognitive Emphasis, Dosage, And Early Learning”, Journal Of Applied Developmental Psychology, 52, 1-11.
  25. Green, J. C., Krayder, H. & Mayer, E. (2005). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in social inquiry. In b. Somekh & c. Lewin (eds.). Research Methods in The Social Sciences (pp. 275-282). Sage.
  26. Hallinger, P., Hosseingholizadeh, R., Hashemi, N., & Kouhsari, M. (2017). Do beliefs make a difference? exploring how principal self-efficacy and instructional leadership impact teacher efficacy and commitment in iran. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(5), 800-819. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217700283
  27. Heck, R. & Chang, J. (2017). Examining the timing of educational changes among elementary schools after the implementation of nclb. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(4), 649-694. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x17711480
  28. Holquist, S., Mitra, D., Conner, J., & Wright, N. (2023). What is student voice anyway? the intersection of student voice practices and shared leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 59(4), 703-743. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x231178023
  29. Hourani, R. B. & Stringer, P. (2014). Professional development: perceptions of benefits for principals. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 17(3), 304–326.
  30. Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Keer, H. (2011). The relation between school leadership from a distributed perspective and teachers’ organizational commitment. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(5), 728-771. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x11402065
  31. Ingersoll, R. & Tran, H. (2023). Teacher shortages and turnover in rural schools in the us: an organizational analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 59(2), 396-431. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x231159922
  32. Jabbar, H. (2017). Recruiting “talent”: school choice and teacher hiring in new orleans. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(1), 115-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x17721607
  33. Jennings, P. & Greenberg, M. (2009). The prosocial classroom: teacher social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 491-525. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325693
  34. Jennings, J., Deming, D., Jencks, C., Lopuch, M., & Schueler, B. (2015). Do differences in school quality matter more than we thought? new evidence on educational opportunity in the twenty-first century. Sociology of Education, 88(1), 56-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040714562006
  35. Johnson, P. & Chrispeels, J. (2010). Linking the central office and its schools for reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 738-775. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x10377346
  36. Johnson, L. (2017). The lives and identities of uk black and south asian head teachers. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(5), 842-862. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217717279
  37. Kassing, J. W. (1998). Development and validation of the organizational dissent scale. Management Communication Quarterly, 12(2), 183-229.
  38. Kılınç, A. Ç. (2018). The relationship between organizational justice, trust, and organizational cynicism in schools. Educational Research and Reviews, 13(12), 440-448.
  39. Kondakçı, Y., Beycioğlu, K., Sincar, M., & Uğurlu, C. (2015). Readiness of teachers for change in schools. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(2), 176-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2015.1023361
  40. Kraft, M., Papay, J., Johnson, S., Charner-Laird, M., Ng, M., & Reinhorn, S. (2015). Educating amid uncertainty. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(5), 753-790. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x15607617
  41. Kraft, M. & Gilmour, A. (2016). Can principals promote teacher development as evaluators? a case study of principals’ views and experiences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(5), 711-753. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x16653445
  42. Lee, J. (2020). Is “whole child” education obsolete? public school principals’ educational goal priorities in the era of accountability. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(5), 856-884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x20909871
  43. Lee, M., Hallinger, P., & Walker, A. (2012). A distributed perspective on instructional leadership in international baccalaureate (ib) schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 664-698. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x11436271
  44. Liu, S. & Hallinger, P. (2018). Principal instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher professional learning in china: testing a mediated-effects model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(4), 501-528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x18769048
  45. Liou, J.-C. (2016). Performance Measures for Evaluating the Dynamic Authentication Techniques. International Journal of Cyber-Security and Digital Forensics, 5(2), 83–93
  46. Louis, K., Murphy, J., & Smylie, M. (2016). Caring leadership in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 310-348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x15627678
  47. Malin, J., Bragg, D., & Hackmann, D. (2017). College and career readiness and the every student succeeds act. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(5), 809-838. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x17714845
  48. Martínez, M., Rivera, M., & Marquez, J. (2019). Learning from the experiences and development of latina school leaders. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(3), 472-498. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x19866491
  49. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397-422.
  50. Naus, F., van Iterson, A., & Roe, R. A. (2007). Organizational cynicism: Extending the exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect model of employees’ responses to adverse conditions in the workplace. Human Relations, 60(5), 683-718.
  51. Nelson, J., Grissom, J., & Cameron, M. (2021). Performance, process, and interpersonal relationships: explaining principals’ perceptions of principal evaluation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 57(4), 641-678. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x211009295
  52. Özdem, G. (2015). An overview of postgraduate thesis within the field of education policies in Turkey (1989-2014). Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 14(24222), 631-646. https://doi.org/10.21547/jss.256758
  53. Özen, H., Korkmaz, M., Konucuk, E., Çeven, B., Sayar, N., Menşan, N.Ö., Chan, T.C., (2024). Mathematics Teachers’ Experiences of Positive Error Climate. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 38, 108-142, DOI: 10.14689/enad.38.1910
  54. Paletta, A., Ferrari, E., & Alimehmeti, G. (2019). How principals use a new accountability system to promote change in teacher practices: evidence from italy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(1), 123-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x19840398
  55. Pan, H., Chung, C., & Lin, Y. (2023). Exploring the predictors of teacher well-being: an analysis of teacher training preparedness, autonomy, and workload. Sustainability, 15(7), 5804. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15075804
  56. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri (M. Bütün & S. B. Demir, Çev.). Pegem Akademi.
  57. Patrick, S. (2022). Organizing schools for collaborative learning: school leadership and teachers’ engagement in collaboration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(4), 638-673. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x221107628
  58. Price, H. (2011). Principal–teacher interactions. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(1), 39-85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x11417126
  59. Robson, C. (2015). Real world research. (N. D. Ş. Çınkır, Çev.) Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık
  60. Rogers, L. K. (2022). Principal supervisors and the challenge of principal support and development. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(4), 527–560.
  61. Shen, B., McCaughtry, N., Martin, J., Garn, A., Kulik, N., & Fahlman, M. (2015). The relationship between teacher burnout and student motivation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 519-532. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12089
  62. Roegman, R., Perkins-Williams, R., Budzyn, M., Killian-Tarr, O., & Allen, D. (2021). How conceptions of equity inform principal data use: a purposeful examination of principals from four school districts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(2), 183-222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x211056084
  63. Schaufeli, W. B. & Enzmann, D. (1998). The burnout companion to study and practice: A critical analysis. CRC press.
  64. Shin, H. & Park, S. (2012). Exploring the impact of online peer feedback on EFL learners' writing. Language Learning & Technology, 16(1), 71–89.
  65. Stauffer, S. & Mason, E. (2013). Addressing elementary school teachers’ professional stressors. Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(5), 809-837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x13482578
  66. Steele, J., Steiner, E., & Hamilton, L. (2020). Priming the leadership pipeline: school performance and climate under an urban school leadership residency program. Educational Administration Quarterly, 57(2), 221-256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x20914720
  67. Swen, C. (2019). Talk of calling: novice school principals narrating destiny, duty, and fulfillment in work. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56(2), 177-219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x19840387
  68. Tichnor-Wagner, A., Harrison, C., & Cohen‐Vogel, L. (2016). Cultures of learning in effective high schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(4), 602-642. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x16644957
  69. Tikkanen, L., Pyhältö, K., Soini, T., & Pietarinen, J. (2021). Crossover of burnout in the classroom – is teacher exhaustion transmitted to students? International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 9(4), 326-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2021.1942343
  70. Tran, N., Nguyen, C., Nguyen, G., Ho, T., Bui, Q., & Hoang, N. (2020). Workplace conditions created by principals for their teachers’ professional development in vietnam. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 25(2), 238-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1708472
  71. Wang, Y., Bowers, A., & Fikis, D. (2016). Automated text data mining analysis of five decades of educational leadership research literature. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(2), 289-323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x16660585
  72. Wang, Y. (2018). Pulling at your heartstrings: examining four leadership approaches from the neuroscience perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 55(2), 328-359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x18799471
  73. Wang, F., Pollock, K., & Hauseman, C. (2022). Time demands and emotionally draining situations amid work intensification of school principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 59(1), 112-142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x221132837
  74. Weaver-Hightower, M. B. (2018). How to write qualitative research. Routledge.
  75. Woodland, R. & Mazur, R. (2018). Of teams and ties: examining the relationship between formal and informal instructional support networks. Educational Administration Quarterly, 55(1), 42-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x18785868
  76. Vatansever Bayraktar, H. & Mutlu, H. (2023). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin örgütsel Sinizm algısı. Rumeli Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, 34, 543-561.
  77. Veelen, R., Sleegers, P., & Endedijk, M. (2017). Professional learning among school leaders in secondary education: the impact of personal and work context factors. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(3), 365-408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x16689126
  78. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (On Birinci Baskı). Seçkin Yayınevi.
  79. Yorulmaz, A. & Çelik, S. (2016). İlkokul öğretmenlerinin örgütsel bağlılık, örgütsel sinizm ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışları arasındaki ilişki. Kalem Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1), 161-193.
  80. Young, M., Winn, K., & Reedy, M. (2017). The every student succeeds act: strengthening the focus on educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(5), 705-726. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x17735871