SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Participatory Educational Research / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2

The Institutionalization of Ethics in Schools: A Qualitative Research on Teachers

Mehmet Hilmi KOÇ
Tuncer FİDAN
Pages
80–101
Publication Date
2020-08-01
DOI
—
🏛️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)

Besides, there are also certain strategies that administrators and teachers can use to reverse this tendency.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to reveal teachers’ views on the institutionalization of ethical and unethical behaviors in school settings.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 20 teachers working in schools in Istanbul.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Besides, there are also certain strategies that administrators and teachers can use to reverse this tendency.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:institutionalization of the ethics · explicit institutionalization · implicit institutionalization

Abstract

This study aims to reveal teachers’ views on the institutionalization of ethical and unethical behaviors in school settings. This is a phenomenological study, one of the qualitative research designs. Purposeful sampling method was used in this study. The study group consisted of 20 teachers working in schools in Istanbul. A semi-structured interview form was developed to collect data. A content analysis was conducted to analyze the contents of the interviews. Based on the findings, it can be said that there are no systematic efforts to institutionalize ethics in schools. One of the most significant results of this study was that there was a tendency to respond negatively or to not respond to ethical behaviors in schools, while there was no institutional response to unethical behaviors. Unethicality, rather than ethicality, might be expected to institutionalize in schools where teachers have difficulties for their ethical behaviors, but do not have any problems for their unethical behaviors. In such conditions, teachers predominantly make individual efforts to act ethically since they are mostly devoid of the support of a strong institutional environment encouraging ethical behaviors. Furthermore, according to the participants, there was no ethical consensus on what should be done on facing unethical behaviors. The results of this study indicated that there could be a tendency towards the institutionalization of unethicality rather than ethicality in schools. A formal structure, such as an ethical committee, which can control the application of ethical principles and codes and evaluate change requirements in this process, is required to hinder the institutionalization of unethicality in schools. Besides, there are also certain strategies that administrators and teachers can use to reverse this tendency.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOÇ, M. H., FİDAN, T. (2020). The Institutionalization of Ethics in Schools: A Qualitative Research on Teachers. Participatory Educational Research, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 2, 80–101. https://ajindex.com/articles/239128

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Acar, A.G. (2000). Etik değerlerin kurumsallaştırılması üzerine bir araştırma (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul Üniversitesi,
  2. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
  3. Adams, J. S., Tashchian, A., & Shore, T. H. (2001). Codes of ethics as signals for ethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(3), 199-211.
  4. Amundsen, I., & Pinto, V. (2009). Public sector ethics. Compendium for teaching at the Catholic University of Angola (UCAN), Luanda: The Catholic University of Angola. Arastaman, G., Fidan, İ. Ö., & Fidan, T. (2018). Nitel Araştırmada Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik: Kuramsal Bir İnceleme. YYÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (YYU Journal of Education Faculty), 15(1), 37-75.
  5. Aydın Pehlivan, İ. (2012). Yönetsel mesleki ve örgütsel etik. PEGEM, Ankara.
  6. Bakioğlu, A., & Koç, M.H. (2017). Lise öğretmenlerinin mesleki değerlere ilişkin görüşlerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(3), 270-296.
  7. Babbie, E. R. (2006). The practice of social research. Belmont: Wadsworth. Balcı, A. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: Yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler (Genişletilmiş 10. Baskı). Ankara:
  8. PegemAkademi. Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193-209.
  9. Blasi, A. (1999). Emotions and moral motivation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 29(1), 1-19.
  10. Booth, P., & Schulz, A. K. D. (2004). The impact of an ethical environment on managers' project evaluation judgments under agency problem conditions. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 29(5-6), 473-488.
  11. Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595-616.
  12. Chiu, R. K. (2003). Ethical judgment and whistle blowing intention: Examining the moderating role of locus of control. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(1-2), 65-74.
  13. Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2014). Above the glass ceiling: When are women and racial/ethnic minorities promoted to CEO? Strategic Management Journal, 35(7), 1080-1089.
  14. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousands Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Demmke, C. and Moilanen, T. (2011). Effectiveness of good governance and ethics in central administration: evaluating reform outcomes in the context of the financial crisis. Luxembourg: European Institute of Public Administration. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd