SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2

EMPOWERED TEACHERS - STRONGER INSTITUTIONS

Yonca ÖZKAN
Pages
122–130
Publication Date
2014-03-09
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)

Based on this premise, it was conducted with 73 teachers functioning at Turkish primary educational institutions; all expressing views on matters building and enhancing an autonomous stand in the institution.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz Most educational institutions practice a ‘hierarchical’ approach toward decision making.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Decisions are taken and made, mostly, by one person, who usually is the headmaster.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Based on this premise, it was conducted with 73 teachers functioning at Turkish primary educational institutions; all expressing views on matters building and enhancing an autonomous stand in the institution.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler Decision making · shared decision making · teacher empowerment

Özet

Öz Most educational institutions practice a ‘hierarchical’ approach toward decision making. Decisions are taken and made, mostly, by one person, who usually is the headmaster. Despite the fact that this approach, which sidelines ‘practitioners’, may lead to effective consequences on part of the institution, it however, may also lead to some kind of unease on part of the teachers wishing to voice their views on topics such as selection of instructional material, syllabus design, rules setting, exams, assessment, meetings, etc. This study argues that powerful teachers lead to powerful institutions. Based on this premise, it was conducted with 73 teachers functioning at Turkish primary educational institutions; all expressing views on matters building and enhancing an autonomous stand in the institution.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZKAN, Y. (2014). EMPOWERED TEACHERS - STRONGER INSTITUTIONS. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2, 122–130. https://ajindex.com/articles/6253

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Armstrong, M. A. (1984). Handbook of personnel management practice. London: Kogan Page Ltd. Bascia, N. (1996). Teacher leadership: Contending with adversity. Canadian Journal of Education, 21(2), 155-169.
  2. Belasco, J.A., & Alutto, J.A. (1972). Decisional participation and teacher satisfaction. Educational Administration Quarterly, 8(1), 44-58.
  3. Bezzina, C. (1997). Restructuring schools in Malta. The International Journal of Educational. Management, 11(5), 194-202.
  4. Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of teacher empowerment on teachers’ organizational commitment, professional commitment and organizational citizenship behavior in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 277-289.
  5. Bridges, E. (1967). A model for shared decision-making in the school principalship. Educational Administration Quarterly, 3, 49-61.
  6. Conley, S. C. (1989). Who's on First?: School Reform, Teacher Participation, and the Decision-Making Process. Education and Urban Society, 21, 366-379.
  7. Conway, J., & Calzi, C. (1996). The dark side of shared leadership. Educational Leadership, 53(4), 45-49.
  8. Cosh, J. (1999). Peer observation: a reflective model. ELT Journal, 53(1), 22-27.
  9. Dwivedi, R.S. (1988). Dynamics of human behavior at work. New Delhi: Oxford Publishing Ltd. Halliday, L. (1993). Why delegate? A resource book for educational administration. London: Commonwealth Secretariat. Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change．ELT Journal, 45(3), 218-229.
  10. Griffin, G. (1995). Influences of shared decision-making on school and classroom activity. The Elementary School Journal, 96(1), 29-45.
  11. Koul, L. (1984). Methodology of educational research. New Delhi: Hindustani offset printers. Kunz, D., & Hoy, W. (1976). Leadership style of principals and the professional zone of acceptance of teachers. Educational Administration Quarterly, 12(3), 49-64.
  12. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1997). Explaining variations in teachers’ perceptions of principals’ leadership. Journal of Educational Leadership, 35(4), 312-331.
  13. Leithwood, K., Jantzi, D., & Steinbach, R. (1998). Changing leadership for changing times. Toronto: Draft Version. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2009). Does school context matter? Relations with teacher burnout and job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 518-524.
  14. Smith, R.C. (2001). Learner and teacher development: Connections and constraints. The Language Teacher, 25(6), 43-4.
  15. Somech, A. (2010). Participative Decision Making in Schools: A Mediat