. -,.~ .2... V: v.7:u-t. I: 1.. 2.. .v. L... . ‘ vii ‘ 9“'6 ~ ~ ’1- .~ 1~-. .. . .uifi .l. , I inf: L. v.51}. ._ 2:: ~ .r . v .0: .c> 5. .. ... Juf.’ f.l.'.. IJflfl ... . ‘—.a44 .I.I.>r.lrl, LTf. 2..., 4. . A 1.... 31.5.; 1,163.17 1 ‘ .. "1.. ,p. I r. w. a..,...,.m. ,. . nxkt, 2 : Vanna... A . .3 .. 1.53.2 l..., . , ;/1 . ‘ A ‘ r . x 1. . , . I. . .. . WWHHHWWIWW 3 1293 00852 1548 This is to certify that the thesis entitled ‘ l The Role of the Supervisor in the Turkish School System presented by Galip Karagozoglu has been accepted towards fulfillment ! of the requirements for Ph. D. 4d . Education egmwln / u ’ _..a v I Major professor Date August 7, 1972 0—7639 c... PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE JW ll —— . w , We: MSU Is An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution ammo-“em ABSTRACT THE ROLE OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS IN THE TURKISH EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM BY A. Galip Karagozoglu The Problem The purpose of this study was to give a pieture of current supervisor and teacher perceptions in the light of existing conditions in Turkey and in the light of current views of modern supervision. The study focused on ten main objectives related to the roles of supervisors in secondary schools. The study is recognized to be an initial exploratory research in the supervisory system in Turkey, which is an area never before studied intensively. Procedure Two questionnaires, one each addressed to teachers and supervisors, provided the basic data for the study. The questionnaires contained 87 questions for teachers and 83 questions for supervisors in four sections: personal char- acteristics, questions about supervisors and their activie ties, the importance and frequency of application of 21 A. Galip Karagozoglu selected supervisory activities, and problems of teachers and supervisors. Responses were obtained in the spring of 1971 from 104 ministry supervisors and from a representative sample of 1,041 secondary school teachers who had been superVised in the last three school years (1968-69, 1969-70, 1970-71). The return rate was 87.1 per cent for teachers and 90 per cent for supervisors. Findings 1. Teachers generally do not perceive current supervisory activities as helpful. 2. Teachers have little confidence in the objec- tivity of evaluations of teachers by supervisors. 3. Teachers tended to perceive supervisors as not well qualified in subject matter fields, in professional knowledge, and in evaluation techniques. 4. Teachers and supervisors converged generally in perceiving several suggested activities to be important. 5. Both groups diverged generally in their per- ceptions of the frequency of application of the activities. Teachers consistently estimated the frequencies of applica- tion of the activities to be lower than the supervisors estimated. 6. .There was generally high level within-group agreement among teachers and supervisors in their perceptions of the supervisors' role. 7. Supervisors may have an unrealistically high assessment of what they are accomplishing. A. Galip Karagozoglu 8- A large majority of both teachers and supervisors want change in the system. The change which is more emphasized by both groups is to separate the two conflicting roles: (a) supervisors as counsellors or helpers to teachers; and (b) supervisors as investigators of teachers' or administrators' breaches. THE ROLE OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS IN THE TURKISH EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM BY A. Galip Karagozoglu A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1972 0‘ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express his deep appreciation to members of his Doctorate Committee: to Professor R. Featherstone, who served as Chairman of the Committee, and to Professors C. Brembeck and E. Melby, for their time, professional advice, and valuable suggestions. Grateful acknowledgement is extended to Professor W. Brookover, who travelled all the way to Michigan to Ankara, Turkey, to preside over the author's oral examina- tion. The author is also grateful and wishes to acknowledge with sincere appreciation, the continuous assistance, constant inspiration and professional guidance given to him during the completion of this study in Turkey, by Professor B. Bohnhorst and by Professor K. Neff, members of the MSU field team in Ankara of the National Education Research and Planning Project in Turkey. O The author wishes to express his appreciation to the officials of the Ministry of Education in Turkey, especially: Mr. Nusret Karcioglu, Undersecretary; Ali Olmezoglu, former Chairman of the Board of Supervisors; the personnel of the Planning, Research and Coordination Department; and those Ministry supervisors and secondary school teachers who par— ticipated directly by providing the data for the completion of this study. ii The opportunity to carry out this study was made possible by funds granted by the United States Agency for International Development, for which the author wishes to express his appreciation. Finally, the author is grateful to his wife Nurten and.sons Okan and Hakan, for their assistance, encouragement and understanding during his years of graduate study. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS O O O O I O I O O O O C 0 LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O O O I O O O O 0 LIST OF FIGURES AND CHARTS. . . . . . . . . . LIST OF APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O C O 0 Chapter I. II. III. INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 Introductory Statement . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . Specific Objectives . . . . . . . . Delimitation of the Study . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . Overall Rationale of the Study. . . . . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . Evolution of Supervision in the U.S.A. . . Today's Supervision . . . . . . Perceptions about Supervision and Roles of Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . Review of the Turkish Literature'. . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . TURKISH EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM AND THE ROLES OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS. . . . . . . . . Introduction. . . . . . . . . . The System of Schools. . . . . . . . Primary Education . . . . . . . . . Secondary Education First Cycle . . . . Secondary Education Second Cycle . . . . Higher Education . . . . . . . . . Administration . . . . . . . . Training and Appointments of Teachers . . Definition and Status of Supervisors. . . Structure of the Board of Supervisors . . Appointment of Supervisors . . . . . . Duties and Activities. . . . . . . . iv Page ii vi viii ix [—1 meONWF-J 20 21 23 28 37 42 44 44 44 45 46 48 51 52 58 66 71 73 77 Chapter Supervision of Examination . . . . . Investigation and Inspection of the Newly Established Private or Public Educational Institutes. . . . . . . . . . . Inquires and Investigations. . . . . . Research Functions of the Supervisors . . Problems of Supervision . . . . . . . IV. DESIGN OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . Preliminary Research Activities . . . . Development of the Instrument . . . . . Sample Selection . . . . . . . . . Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . Processing of the Data . . . . . . . Limitations of the Instrument . . . . . Limitations of Interpreting Perceptual Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . V. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA . . . Introduction: Objectives and Techniques . Objective I: Group Characteristics . . . Objective II: Characteristics of Super- visory Visits. . . . . . . . . . Responses to Section III of the Question— naires . . . . . . . . . . . . Objective III: Role Perception of Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . Objective IV: Consensus Among Supervisors. Objective V: Role Perception of Teachers. Objective VI: Consensus Among Teachers. . Objective VII: Convergence-Divergence Between Teachers and Supervisors . . . Objective VIII: Effects of Independent Variables on Responsed. . . . . . . Objective IX: Problems of Teachers and Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . Objective X: Reorganization of the System. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . Implications. . . . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O O O O O O O O I C O . APPENDICES O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O Page 93 96 97 99 100 108 108 108 112 114 117 118 120 123 123 128 133 147 156 159 160 162 164 172 188 194 197 198 198 203 208 213 218 5.4 5.7 5.8 LIST OF TABLES Newly Opened Schools . . . . . . . . . Number of Returns from Teachers' Questionnaires Types of Schools of Graduation for Teachers and Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . Experience in Education of Teachers and Supervisors. . . . . . . . . . . . Teachers' Perceptions of Whether They Change Their Teaching Methods When a Supervisor Enters the Classroom. . . . . . . . . Teachers' Perceptions of How They Themselves Feel When a Supervisor Enters Their Classroom . . . . . . . . . . . . Opinion About Supervisors' Behavior with Respect to Human Relations. . . . . . . Belief in the Helpfulness of Supervisors to Improve Educational and Teaching Processes of the School . . . . . . . . . . . Degree of Agreement Among Supervisors on the Recommendations They Make to Teachers . . . Comparison of Sample Proportions of Teachers With the National Proportions of Teachers by School Size. . . . . . . . . . . . The Numbers of Supervisory Visits Which Teachers Experienced Since Becoming a Secondary School Teacher . . . . . . . Opinion About the Adequacy of Supervisors' Specific subject Field Knowledge. . . . . Opinion About the Adequacy of Supervisors' Professional Knowledge . . . . . . . . Opinion About the Number of the Supervisors Who Know Which Criteria to Use in Teacher Evaluation 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 vi Page 101 116 130 131 134 135 136 137 139 140 141 142 142 142 Table Page 5.13 Opinion About the Number of Supervisors Who Know Professional Techniques in Education. . 143 5.14 Opinion About Agreement Among Supervisors as to the Criteria to be Used for Teacher Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 5.15 Opinion About How Many of the Teachers' Successes can be Evaluated Accurately by the Supervisors. . . . . . . . . . . . 143 5.16 Opinion Among Supervisors About How Many of the Supervisors have the Ability to Measure the Successes of Teachers Accurately . . . 144 5.17 Ranks of Weighted Assessments of Importance and Frequency of Application of 21 Selected Supervisory Activities . . . . . 157 5.18 Problems of Teachers . . . . . . . . . 190 5.19 Problems of Supervisors . . . . . . . . 192 vii LIST OF FIGURES AND CHARTS Figure Page 1.1 Paradigm of Status Role Concepts . . . . . 15 1.2 Convergence on Role Perception . . . . . . 17 1.3 Divergence on Role Perception . . . . . . 18 3.1 Structure of the Ministry of Education . . . 53 3.2 Provincial Organization of the Ministry of Education . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 3.3 Structure of the Board of Supervisors. . . . 72 5.1 Convergence Between Role Expectation and Role Performance as Perceived by Supervisors . . 159 5.2 Divergence Between Role Expectation and Role Performance Perceived by Teachers . . . . 163 5.3 Divergence Between Teachers and Supervisors on the "Role Performance" of Supervisors . . 166 5.4 Convergence Between Teachers and Supervisors on the Role Expectation for Supervisors . . 167 5.5 Role Conflict and Role Convergence in the Perceptions of Supervisors and Teachers . . 171 viii Appendix I. II. III. IV. LIST OF APPENDICES Page Research Data . . . . . . . . . . . 219 A. Questions for Both Teachers and Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . 220 B. Questions on Importance and Frequency of Application of 21 Selected Activities. 227 C. Questions Only for Teachers . . . . . 234 D. Questions Only for Supervisors . . . . 237 Questionnaire for Teachers (English) . . . 243 Questionnaire for Supervisors (English) . . 256 Questionnaires for Teachers and Supervisors (in Original Turkish Form). . . . . . . 269 ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Introductory Statement The importance of supervision in Turkish education has grown over the years because of real and pressing needs in the Turkish educational system. Teachers today face increasingly complex educational tasks. In today's schools teaching and learning are becoming more important than ever before. Teachers are expected not only to give knowledge of the three R's, but to improve desired attitudes, develop essential skills, and strengthen loyalties to the society and to the way of life which will directly influence the development of society. The educational process is particularly complex and intricate. Expanding knowledge constantly requires teachers to study and keep up with new trends, developments and directions. Barrl points out, however, that the academic and professional training of teachers, despite excellent 1A. S. Barr, William H. Burton, and Leo J. Brueckner, Supervision: Principles and Practices in the Improvement of Instruction (D. Appleton Century Company, 1938). progress, is absurdly low. Moreover education is develop- ing so rapidly that teachers, even if they are well trained, cannot possibly keep abreast of current develop- ments. Therefore, supervision is constantly necessary to introduce new ideas and innovations into the teaching learning environment. Teachers in Turkey need to keep informed concerning this specialized body of professional knowledge. The increasing size of schools and teaching staff, the large number of inexperienced beginning teachers and the high percentage of failure in secondary schools indicate the need for more professional help which will provide the necessary support to aid teachers in their difficult job. These aids might be best provided by supervisors who recognize their main job as "assistance in the development of a better teaching-training situation in the schools."1 This key role of supervisors would appear to be highly related to helping teachers improve their teaching methods and to finding solutions to their educational problems. But how many of the Ministry supervisors do perceive their key role in these terms? To what roles are they assigned by tradition and by regulation? Among these roles, which do they perceive as most important? How do the supervisors' views of their roles compare and contrast with teachers' views of the roles supervisors do or should lKimball Wiles, Supervision for_§etter Schools, Second Edition (Prentice Hall, Inc., 1965). perform? What is the frame of reference within which supervisors carry out their present roles, especially with reference to supervision of classroom instruction? What do Turkish supervisors consider their main problems to be? What do Turkish teachers believe their main problems are? The present research attempts to provide some answers to these and similar questions. The aim has been to give a picture of current supervisor and teacher percep- tions in the light of existing conditions in Turkey and in the light of current views of modern supervision as they have been advanced, mainly by American educators. Any discrepancies which the research reveals may help point the way to improved supervision in Turkish schools. Statement of the Problem The Turkish educational system is a highly central- ized organization. The Ministry of Education in Ankara has the right to make all important policy and administra- tive decisions.' A national curriculum is pursued in every school and all educational activities are controlled by the supervisors appointed by the central government. There are two types of supervisors in the Turkish educational system. The first is the elementary school supervisor, whose job is to control the elementary level (grades 1 to 5) educational institutions within a prescribed province. The second is the Ministry supervisor, whose job is to control secondary level (grades 6 to 11) and all other educational units and institutions, excluding universities. Ministry supervisors have very high status in the hierarchial structure. Both types of supervisors are appointed by the Minister of Education. The words "supervisor" and "supervision" in the Turkish language imply an inspection function more than do the English words. A supervisor (Mufettis) is the person who inspects, administers, controls and directs educational activities, in which at the same time he is expected to provide professional help to the teacher in the improvement of the educational process. Today Turkish secondary level educational insti- tutions in particular face many crucial educational prob- lems, which paralyze educational efforts to reach the desired goals of Turkish education. 1. In order to establish a productive teaching process there are certain basic qualifications that a teacher must possess before teaching in various levels of the secondary schools. Presently in Turkey the quality of instruction in the secondary school is suffering because at least 70 per cent of the teachers have no more than junior college level training. This fact would appear to present a special challenge to the task of supervision. 2. There is a general criticism made by the Turkish National Commission on Education and shared by the majority of Turkish educators that the schools of Turkey "are unable to prepare children adequately for life" and that "socially, culturally, and economically" education is "not functional."l An important recommendation made by the same commission stated that the quality of teaching, the teachers, and the physical facilities would have to be greatly improved if Turkey were to attain the level of develOpment and westernization to which it has aspired. 3. In 1970-71 there were approximately 110 Ministry supervisors working in the secondary level educa- tional institutions in Turkey. Since there were 38,814 secondary school teachers in Turkey the supervisor/ teacher ratio was approximately 1/350. Therefore some teachers might not have an opportunity to be visited by a supervisor for many years. For example, in the 1968-69 school year, Ministry supervisors were able to supervise only 7,826 teachers out of 38,814. These facts in themselves indicate a need for extending and strengthening supervisory services to secondary schools in Turkey. As these services evolve, however, the key question is in which directions should they change? In terms of modern concepts of supervision, are those secondary teachers who benefit from present services satisfied with the help they receive? Do super- visors believe they are doing a good job and the right job? How do supervisors and teachers think supervision in Turkey might best be improved? These are the problems to which the present study is addressed. lEgitim Milli Komisyonu Raporu, Milli Egitim Bakaviligi, 1959. Specific Objectives The study will focus on ten main objectives related to the roles of supervisors in secondary schools. These are: 1. What are the group chracteristics of the teachers and supervisors including sex, age, academic field of preparation, experience and supervisor-teacher ratio? 2. What are the main characteristics of supervisory visits including human relations, helpfulness, frequency of supervisory visits, and qualifications of supervisors? 3. What is the role perception of supervisors about themselves in acting toward teachers and the profes— sion, including, "What should a good supervisor do?" and, "What do supervisors do?" 4. To what extent is there a consensus among supervisors in their perceptions of the supervisors' role? 5. What is the role perception of teachers for supervisors in acting toward teachers and the profession, including, "What should a good supervisor do?" and, "What do supervisors do?" 6. To what extent is there a consensus among teachers in their perceptions of the supervisors' role? 7. How do the supervisors' perceptions of their roles converge or agree with the role perceptions held by teachers? 8. What are the differences in role perceptions among teachers and supervisors according to the independent variableS? 9. What are the most crucial problems which supervisors and teachers perceive they have faced in recent years? 10. How do teachers and supervisors believe super- vision might best be reorganized in Turkey? Delimitation of the Study Although there are two types of supervisors in the Turkish educational system, this study is concerned only with the role of Ministry supervisors who are responsible to supervise all secondary level educational activities. The role of elementary school supervisors is not included in this study. All Ministry supervisors and 10 per cent of the secondary school teachers who had been supervised in the last three school years were used as samples. Two forced-choice questionnaires, one each for teachers and supervisors, were developed and used to collect the neces- sary data. Consequently this study is subject to all of the limitations inherent in the use of mailed questionnaires for data gathering. But it was assumed that teachers and supervisors are literate and understand what was asked, and that they were honest and sincere in their responses. Definition of Terms Ministry of Education The organization which is responsible for all general, vocational technical and cultural educational activities of Turkey. The head is the Minister who is a member of the cabinet. Board of Supervisors The organization or the office where all the Ministry supervisors are assigned. This office is reSpon- sible to supervise all Turkish schools and the personnel who work in the educational institutions. Ministry Supervisor The Ministry supervisor is the person attached to the Board of Supervisors, appointed by the Minister of Education, to supervise all educational activities and personnel on behalf of the Minister of Education for the improvement of the educational process. Ministry super- visors are concerned not only with all secondary level Operations, but also oversee all other educational activi— ties as well, excluding the universities. Elementary supervisors, who are assigned to provincial education offices, also come under the supervision of Ministry supervisors. For further description of the roles of Ministry supervisors, see Chapter III. Elementary School The school which admits children between the age of 6-12 for a five year compulsory education. For further description of the Turkish educational system, see Chapter III. Secondary Schools The schools between elementary school and univer- sity. These schools admit students who hold an elementary school diploma. There are various types of secondary schools, such as general, vocational, and technical, on two levels. Lower secondary schools are three years after elementary school and upper secondary schools are three or four years after lower secondary schools. For further description of the Turkish educational system, see Chapter III. Role The dynamic aspects of positions, offices or status within an institution. In this study "role" refers to denoted characteristics expected of supervisors. Perception Cleminsonl defines perception as . . . the interaction or transaction between an individual and a stimulus configuration in the fif 1G. F. Cleminson, "The Major Purposes and Functions of Supervision as Perceived by New Jersey Public School Superintendents, Supervisors and Building Principals" (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Fordham University, 1965). 10 environment in which the form or quality of the individual's responses derives primarily from his total prior experience, rather than from the pattern or quality of the stimulus configuration per se. Supervision. The Dictionary of Education defines supervision as: All efforts of designated school officials toward providing leaderShip to teachers and other educa— tional workers in the improvement of instruction; includes the stimulation and professional growth and development of teachers, the selection and revision of educational objectives, materials of instruction and methods of teaching and evaluation of instruction. Democratic Supervision The term democratic supervision used in this study postulates supervision as a problem solving process, by sharing ideas, procedures, materials, developing curri- culum, organizing staff for educational activities and stimulating and respecting the participation of all educa- tional staff. Supervisory Practices Supervisory Practices refers in this study to things that the supervisors might do or recommend in order to help teachers to improve the educational process in the schools and other institutions. lCarter V. Good, Dictionary of Education (McGraw Hill, 1945). 11 Role Expectation In this study role expectation is defined as expectation of any person or members of any group from an actor in a defined situation. Role Theory A better understanding of the role of the Turkish Ministry Supervisor in the Turkish educational system can perhaps be obtained by applying concepts developed from studies in the area of role theory. The following section of this chapter reviews some selected studies and concepts which derive from the study of roles in education. These concepts have been adapted for use in Chapter V in helping interpret findings of the present study. Role theory's various key terms have been used by social scientists in different ways. Nevertheless, it seems possible to see a degree of commonality in the mean- ings of their terms. As Gross, Mason and McEachern point out: Another reason for some of these differences in definition is simply semantic; the same phenomena are frequently given different names. What Linton and Newcomb define as a role, Davis defines as a status. What Davis defines as a role, Newcomb calls role behaviour and Sarbin, role enactment. Gross et a1. classify the meaning of role into three categories: lN. Gross” W. S. Mason and A. McEachern, E lora— tions in Role Analysis, Studies o£_the School Su er1nten- dency Role (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1958), p. 17. 12 a. "Normative culture pattern," which includes cul- tural elements in the concept of the role. Linton's definition of role falls in this category: "The sum total of the ideal patterns which control the reciprocal behavior between individuals and between the individual and society." b. In the second category ". . . role is treated as an individual's definition of his situation with references to his and others‘ social positions . . ." Sargent's definition has been included in this category: "A person's role is a pattern or type of social behavior which seems situationally apprOpriate to him in terms of the demands and expectations of those in his group." c. Gross gt_al.place in the third category those definitions which deal with role as the behavior of actors occupying social positions. They say that: "A role defined in this way does not refer to normative patterns for what actors should do, nor to an actor's orientation to his situation, but to what actors actually do as posi- tion occupants." They include Davis' definition in this category: How an individual actually performs in a given position, as distinct from how he is supposed to perform, we call his role. The role, then, is the manner in which a person actually carries 'out the requirements of his position. It is the dynamic aspect of status or office and as such is always influenced by factors other than the stipulations of the position itself. Gross et a1. feel that theoretical formulations concerned with role analysis must include three main l3 elements--socia1 locations, behavior, and expectation-- which are common in the various definitibns of role.l ) Owens2 developed a vocabulary for the concepts relevant to role theory. He defines the main elements of role theory as follows: l-Role. The various offices or positions in an organization carry with them certain expectations of behavior held by both onlookers and by the person occupying the role. These expectations generally define role, with some additional expec- tation that the individual will exhibit some of his own idiosyncratic personality in his role behavior. Z-Role DescriptiOn. This refers to the actual behavior of an individual performing a role, or, more accurately, to a report stemming from one individual's perception of that behavior. 3-Role Prescription. This is the relatively abstract idea of what the general norm in the culture is for role. What kind of role behavior is expected of a teacher in this country, for example? 4-Role Expectation. This refers to the expectations that one person has of the role behavior of another. Teachers, for example, expect certain behavior from a principal, and the principal has his own expecta— tion of behavior for teachers. Thus, as teacher and principal interact in their roles in the school, they have complementary role expectations. S-Role Perception. This is used to describe the perception that one has of the role expectation that another person holds for him. In dealing with the P.T.A. president, for example, the principal knows that he has some role expectation of him; his estimate of that expectation is role perception. Brookover and Gottlieb state that the two concepts, status and role, are actually inseparable in social phenomena. Therefore, they use these two concepts as a lIbid., pp.312-18. 2R. G. Owens, Or anizational Behavior in Schools (Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970), pp. 71-72. 14 single one: status—role. By this they mean that "the complex of expectations which apply to a particular posi— tion in a social system apply also to the individual occupying that position." They mention that status-role may be distinguished from the concept "position," which they define as "location in a social group or social system." Brookover and Gottlieb2 also developed a concep- tual paradigm designed to show the relationships among status, office, role, actor, role perception, self involvement and related concepts in role theory. They divide the concept "role" into seven elements. A Actor's personality brought to situation (previous experience, needs, and so on). SI = Self-involvement--actor's image of the ends anticipated from participation in the status. A projection of his self-image into the role. P = Actor's perception of what he thinks others expect of him in a particular role. BI = Behavior in interaction with others in which P and R are continually redefined. R = Role--Other's expectations of actor "A," the incumbent in a specific position. 0 = Office--Other's expectations of any actor in a particular situation, i.e., history teacher in X school. S = Other's expectation of any actor in a broadly defined position, i.e., teachers. 1W. B. Brookover and D. Gottlieb, A Sociology of Education, Second Edition (American Book Company, 1964), pp. 322- 323. , Figure l.l.--Paradigm of Status—Role Concepts.l 1Adapted from W. B. Brookover, "Research on Teacher and Administrator Roles," Journal of Educational Sociology: 23: 2-13. In Brookover's paradigm, it is possible to observe how different expectations may be held for incumbents of a given position. The paradigm suggests that quite different and perhaps incompatible expectations for the actor may be held by different persons and groups. Sometimes expec- tations of the actor might be incompatible with the expectations of significant others. Brookover and Gottlieb see this situation as role conflict, and they define it as a: . . . situation in which the incumbent of a focal position perceives that he is confronted with incompatible expectations in a particular area of behavior. In this study this definition of "role conflict" will be used.1 lIbid., p. 344. 16 Sarbin and Allen1 say that an actor sometimes finds himself in two or three incompatible positions requiring contradictory role enactment. They call it role conflict. They classify role-conflict, into two categories: "Interrole conflict" and "intrarole conflict." According to them, "interrole conflict" is due to simul- taneous occupancy of two or more positions having incom- patible role expectations. The second type of role con- flict "intrarole conflict," involves contradictory expectations held by two or more groups of relevant others regarding the same role. Owens2 points out that: Role conflicts are commonly though to be a source of less than satisfactory performances in inter- personal behavior in organizations. There are many sources of role conflict, all of which inhibit optimum performance by the role incumbent. An obvious role conflict is a situation in which two persons are unable to establish a satisfactory, complementary, or reciprocal role relationship, which can result from a wide variety of causes and not infrequently may involve a complex set of conflict behaviors. For the purpose of the present study a paradism was developed based on Brookover's model. This adapted paradism will be used as a device to help analyze the data presented in the latter part of this study. In the paradism code letters refer to the following explanations: 1T. R. Sarbin and V. L. Allen, "Role Theory," The Handbook of Social Psychology (Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1968), pp. 488-567. 2Owens, op. cit., p. 72. 17 S = Supervisor T = Teacher RE = Role expectation RP = Role perception SRE = Supervisors' role expectation for themselves TRE = Teachers' role expectation for themselves SRP = Supervisors' role perception for themselves TRP = Teachers' role perception for supervisors It is assumed that if there were to be a high con- vergence between (SRE=SRP)=(TRE=TRP) there would be no role conflict between supervisors and teachers. Circles representing this convergence would overlap each other in the form as shown in Figure 1.2. \ TEE ~ \ _ / WWW-v? Figure l.2.--Convergence in Role Perception. 18 If there were to be high divergence between Super- visors and Teachers in (SRE), (TRE), (SRP) and (TRP), one might anticipate that there might be various role conflicts between supervisors and teachers with respect to the role of supervisors. Then the model would be diagrammed in the following form. Overlapping spaces in the circles refer to the convergence between the supervisors' group and the teachers' group and also the convergence within groups among teachers and supervisors. am « Figure l.3.--Divergence in Role Perception. Overall Rationale of the Study In making this study the researcher was aware that he was investigating an area never before studied inten- sively in Turkey, the relationship between teachers' and supervisors' perceptions on the role of supervisors. From this study the expectation and hope was a simple and modest one of exhibiting possible differences 19 in views between teachers and supervisors about this important relationship, but about which the supervisor and teacher group might not have adequate documentation. The following study therefore is recognized to be an initial exploratory research. It is hoped that the light which it sheds on the differences in perception between teacher and supervisory groups may be useful to develop improved objectives, practices, training, philoso- phy and organization of supervision in the Turkish educa— tional system. Some of the main implications suggested by the study are presented in the final chapter. It is the researcher's intention to bring these findings directly to the attention of key administrative decision makers so that they may make better decisions and plans in the light of information presented. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to review some of the main ideas and concepts in the educational literature concerning the supervisor's role and supervisory techniques. This review aims only to highlight very briefly the chief transitions in concepts undergirding the role of the supervisor from about 1800 to the present. Moreover, the review focuses almost entirely on American educators' con- cepts, because the researcher intended to conduct his study in the light of American educational supervisory concepts. It is believed that the basic ideas of the professional roles of supervisors have been mainly developed and advanced by American educational leadership. Since the literature is an enormous one, this review will be restricted to what may be presumed to be a representative selection of it. In the first part of this chapter, the evolution of supervision in the American educational system will be reviewed, and in the second part perceptions about existing supervision and supervisory activities will be presented. 20 21 The last section of the chapter contains a brief review of Turkish literature on supervision, which is miniscule compared with the American literature. Evolution of Supervision in the U.S.A. A clear understanding of modern supervision is in part dependent upon an understanding of the chronological development of supervisory activities in the American school system. Inspection of American schools appeared in the early 18th century. Supervision of public schools was by local civil or religious officers and by special committees of laymen with power to visit and inspect schools. The nature of supervisory activities was "to inspect schools for the sake of control, observation of rules and maintenance of the existing standards. These committees were not interested in helping the teacher to improve his teaching skills but to identify the deficient teacher and to dismiss him. Early in the 19th century these committees or boards were replaced by such positions as "acting visitor," "school clerk" or "superintendent of schools." Later these positions were filled by professional educators. In this era as Lucio and McNeil say: Teachers were regarded as instruments that should be closely supervised to ensure that they mechanically carried out the methods of procedure 22 determined by administrative and special superV1sors. ' At the beginning of the 20th Century there was an important change in the concept of the role of super- visor. Various new subjects, such as music, home econo- mics, physical education, and drawing were introduced into the curriculum. Consequently, in order to teach these new subjects, special teachers were employed and general supervisors were appointed to assist regular teachers in these special areas. These officers were actually travel- ling teachers moving from one school to another. By 1913 the development of "scientific management" influenced educational administrators to apply organiza- tional principles to school supervision. Lucio and McNeil refer to this sort of supervision as "scientific super- vision."2 In this type of supervision, supervisory staff had the largest share in determining proper methods. The teacher was expected to be a specialist in producing "the product." The focus was the "development of the pupil." In the process the supervisor's main duties were to dis- cover the best teaching procedures and give these best methods to the teachers for their guidance. 1W. H. Lucio and J. D. McNeil, Supervision: A Synthesis of Thought and Action (McGraw-Hill Book Com- pany, Inc., 1962), pp. 3-20. 2 Ibid., p. 3-20. 23 The concept of supervision during this period was one of inspection through direct classroom observation and demonstration, with the focus of attention being placed upon the teacher's weaknesses. In conference with teachers after classroom visits, the supervisor tried to effect improvement in teaching to produce the desired "product."1 In the early 1930's, writers in educational admin- istration began to conceive supervision as guidance rather than inspection. According to Lucio and McNeil, the emphasis in supervision shifted to democratic human rela- tions in which the teacher's feelings were recognized but not his ability to reason. This type of supervision was classified as the "training and guidance" type. Personal and cultural development of teachers as well as their 0 I I Q 2 improvement in technical matters concerned superV1sors. Today's Supervision In the late 1940's, supervision became associated with percepts respecting human personality and encouraging wide participation of the teacher, supervisor, adminis- trator, pupil and others in the formulation of mutually accepted educational goals.3 In 1954 Palmer identified 1M. F. Wallace, "An Investigation of Supervisor Practices in the Waterbury Public Elementary Schools (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Connecticut, 1964). 2B. Grossman, "Teachers' Methodological Emphasis and Their Evaluation of Supervisory Practices" (unpub- lished Doctor's dissertation, Rutgers State University, 1967). 3Lucio and McNeil, op. cit., pp. 3-20. 24 this type of supervision as "democratic leadership." The successful supervisor has been described as an educational leader who makes use of cooperative techniques in a demo- cratic manner. In addition, the supervisor works for improvement of the total teaching-learning process, as well as for the improvement of teachers in service.1 Responsibility for handling this democratic supervision has been shared by principals, superintendents, special supervisors, coordinators, curriculum directors, consul- tants, and other supervisory leaders appropriate to different school situations.2 Bradfield,3 Neagley and Evans4 and Burton and Brueckner5 are among those contem- porary educators who adhere to the view that modern super- vision's basic approach involves democratic leadership. According to Neagley and Evans, characteristics of modern supervision include the following: 1J. M. Gwynn, Theory and Practice of Supervision (Dodd, Mead and Company, 1969), P. 13. 2 Wallace, op. cit. 3L. E. Bradfield, Supervision for Modern Elemen- tary_Schools (Charles E. Merrill, 1964). . 4R. L. Neagley and N. D. Evans, Handbook for Effective Supervision of Instruction (Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1964). 5W. H. Burton and L. J. Brueckner, Supervision: A Social Process (Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1955), pp. 10-180 25 The establishment and maintenance of satisfac- tory human relations among all staff members is primary . . . . Any supervisory program will succeed only to the extent that each per— son involved is considered as a human being with a unique contribution to make in the educative process. Relationships among all personnel must be friendly, open, and informal to a great extent. Modern supervision is democratic in the most enlightened sense. "Democracy" does not mean "laissez-faire" with each staff member pro- ceeding as he pleases. Rather, the term implies a dynamic, understanding, sensitive leadership role. Modern supervision is comprehensive in scope. It embraces the total public school program, kindergarten through the twelfth or fourteenth years. Grossman derived a summary of present-day thinking about modern supervision from recent literature. His underlying premise is that modern supervision has the following characteristics:2 1. Provide an atmosphere of understanding support, security and confidence in which good human relations are fostered. Involve teachers and other school personnel in making plans and in executing them. Solve problems that are considered important by teachers and supervisors. Provide individual help to teachers with specific problems. Improve all aspects of the teaching-learning situation. Provide teachers with all available resources. lNeagley and Evans, op. cit., pp. 4-6. 2Grossman, op. cit., p. 27. 10. ll. 12. 26 Emphasize the development of a cooperative attitude among all members of the staff. Aim for self-improvement on the part of the teacher. Provide a program for improvement in instruction that is planned sequentially. Foster leadership in others. Use scientific methods in solving problems and in experimenting. Use evaluation as a continuous process. According to Gwynn it is possible to classify the supervisor's main responsibilities in three main points: 1. 2. The responsibility to give individual help to the teacher. The responsibility to coordinate and make more available to all personnel the instruc— tional services of the school. The responsibility to act as a resource person for the superintendent and other administrative personnel, as a special agent in training teachers in service, and as an interpreter of the school and its program both to school per— sonnel and to the public. In order to discharge the foregoing major respon- sibilities competently, the supervisor in the modern school should be well prepared to perform the following tasks: 1. 2. To aid the teacher and the principal in understanding children better. To help the teacher to develop and improve individually and as a co-operating member of the school staff. To assist school personnel in making more interesting and effective use of materials of instruction. leynn, op. cit., pp. 14-25. 27 4. To help the teacher to improve his methods of teaching. 5. To make specialized personnel in the school system of maximum assistance to the teacher. 6. To assist the teacher in making the best possible appraisal of the student. 7. To stimulate the teacher to evaluate his own planning work and progress. 8. To help the teacher achieve poise and a sense of security in his work and in the community. 9. To stimulate faculty groups to plan curriculum improvements and carry them out co—operatively and to assume a major responsibility in coordi- nating this work and improving teacher education in service. 10. To acquaint the school administration, the teachers, the students and the publip with the work and progress of the school. The above references may serve to portray the evolution of supervision in the American school system and the transition from traditional concepts of super- vising to the modern way. Burton and Brueckner, using caption words, contrast the difference between traditional and modern supervision in this manner. Contrasts in Supervision Traditional Modern 1. Inspection 1. Study and analysis 2. Teacher focused 2. Aim, material, method, 3. Visitation and conference teacher, pupil and env1ronment 4 Random and haphazard or a meager, formal plan 3. Many diverse functions 4. Definitely organized 5. Imposed and author1tar1an and planned 6' One person usually 5. Derived and co-operative 6. Many persons Ibid., p. 27. 2Burton and Brueckner, op. cit. 28 Perceptions about Supervisors and Roles of Supervisors A great deal of research has been conducted in the United States to investigate the effectiveness of supervisory activities in the educational process and to examine the importance of the supervisor's roles in these activities. The literature reveals that most educators believe in the benefit of supervision if it is directed to assist the teachers in the educational process. Contemporary educators such as Heald and Moore,1 Wiles,2 Harris,3 and Curtin4 suggest that the basic role of supervision should be assistance for the improvement of the teaching-learning situation in the school system. In providing this necessary assistance, today's supervisor has a task that is more demanding than ever in the history of educational supervision. As Greene says: His work is characterized by a variety of tasks, diverse human relationships involving peers, superordinates plus a range of procedural prob- lems, nebulous goals, and a lack of evaluative instruments to measure the significant aspects of his influence on teacher learning. If he does not have a clear perspective of his tasks, his objectives and direction, it follows that the present pressures of the public and the intensified conflicting demands of an uncertain 1James E. Heald and Samuel A. Moore, The Teacher and Administrative Relations in School Systems TMacMilIan, 1968). 2Wiles, op. cit. 3B. Harris, Supervisory Behavior in Education (Prentice-Hall, 1963). 4James Curtin, Supervision in Today's Elementary Schools (MacMillan, 1964). 29 anxious society will cause the inadequate educational leader to flounder and be ineffec- tual. In contrast the highly motivated and competent educational leader will assess the reality of the situation, identify problems, plan his strategy, and perceive his task as an exciting challenge. Bail made a study to survey the role perception of supervisors among 205 elementary school teachers, 34 principals and 2 superintendents. He found that 40.2 per cent of the 460 respondents received inspectional visits but no supervisory assistance, 29.2 per cent received very little supervision, 25.7 per cent received no supervision, and only 4.3 per cent obtained very help- ful democratic supervision. Types of supervision they have ranked the highest among 32 choices were: construc- tive criticism, recommendations of new teaching methods, demonstration teaching and suggestions concerning materials and equipment.2 Damah made a study among 14 American and Iraqi teachers concerning the supervisory practices in Iraq and the U.S. He found that the following supervisory activi- ties were rated as helpful by more than 50 per cent of both American and Iraqi teachers: individual conferences with the supervisors, demonstrating lessons, intervisita- tions, classroom observations, faculty meetings, workshops, 1John D. Greene, Implications for Educational Pragtice in Supervision: Perspective and PropositiOns (ASCD Publication, 1967). 2F. M. Bail, "Do Teachers Receive the Kind of Supervision they Desire?" Journal of Educational Research, 40:713-16 (May, 1947). 30 audio-visual aids, directed professional readings and local research and experimentation.1 In a related study Grossman found that supervisory practices considered by teachers to be useful are: having a helpful attitude, holding informal conferences, showing teachers how to teach, helping with discipline, observing teachers informally, assisting with planning, providing administrative assistance. Teachers also support princi- ples of good supervision such as the support of teachers, assistance to teachers, and reliance on teacher judgment. They do not care to have supervisors structure improvement programs or evalute their work.2 Antell's study revealed that teachers favored a supervisory program which met their realistic professional needs for teacher participation in curriculum development and the provision of necessary instructional resources.3 To determine the most effective behavior of super- visors, Foster made a study to explore perceptions of supervision. Two hundred and sixty critical incidents had been identified by the subjects as essential to effective supervision: provision for in-service teacher growth, 1M. I. Damah, "Supervisory Practices in the United States Suitable for Use in the Secondary Schools of Iraq" (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Maryland, 1965). 2 . Grossman, op. c1t. 3H. Antell, "Teachers Appraise Supervision," Journal of Educational Research, 38:606-11 (April, 1945). 31 routines for securing and distributing curriculum materials, and skills in building positive human relations with teachers and community.1 In a study conducted by Louisiana school super- visors, Landry reports that the most persistent activities of supervisors were visiting the classes, doing clerical work, conferring with principals and teachers, working with lay groups, travelling and participating in group conferences. At least half of the activities were found to be unrelated to improving instruction. The most com- monly reported practices that were perceived as related to improving instruction included working with principals, engaging in classroom visitation, initiating ideas and suggestions, serving as a resource person and providing individual help to teachers.2 Hallberg analyzed the expected and actual behavior of supervisors by using a questionnaire which was directed to supervisors, superintendents, principals and teachers. Among the findings, the supervisory behavior con- sidered to be of highest value by all four professional groups were: lLucille E. Foster, "Perceived Competencies of School Supervisors" (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Stanford University, 1959). 2Thomas Landry, "Louisiana Supervisors Examine Their Practices," Educational Administration and Supervision, 45:305-311 (1959).; 3H. I. Hallberg, "Analysis of the Expected and Actual Behaviors of Supervisors in the Role Concept of Four Professional Groups" (unpublished Doctor's disserta- tion, University of Oregon, 1960). 32 giving support to teachers who are willing to try out new techniques in instructional materials and teaching. calling attention of teachers and principals to new and worthwhile professional literature. serving as a member of working committees when invited. striving to secure good working conditions for staff members. helping all personnel to have faith in themselves. recognizing individual differences in staff personnel. striving to build working rapport between himself and the professional staff. helping to maintain ethical standards of the profession. taking an active role in local professional organizations. serving on state-wide committees sponsored by the State Department of Education, when invited. reading professional literature regularly. evaluating the objectives of the curriculum. Indiana ASCD made a three-year study about the perceptions of supervision among Indiana administrators, principals, faculty members teaching elementary and secondary education courses, parents, supervisors, and teachers. An opinionnaire was sent to a random-strati- fied sample of 50 persons in each of six groups in Indiana. They found that the main functions of supervisors - develop curriculum to meet the needs of the community. 33 - help teachers achieve the most effective learning environment. - improve instruction. - inspire teachers. — render expert advice concerning methods and materials. - serve as consultant or coordinator. According to the research the most important contri- butions of the supervisors were: help teachers--especia11y new ones--to improve, provide teacher guidance and improve morale, and serve as leader in curriculum development. The least important contributions of the supervisors were: creating an unnatural situation in the classroom, doing the teacher's work, evaluating teachers (checking up, inspecting), performing clerical jobs (ordering, counting delivering), and writing reports and keeping records.l Saunders tried to identify the most highly valued supervisory endeavors as seen by teachers. In this study opinions of 312 teachers were secured regarding the work of the supervisor in gaining teacher confidence, promoting morale and showing interest in the individual as a teacher and as a person. Responses that received the highest ranking were as follows: A successful supervisor: - Respects you as an individual - Cooperates in solving problems lCarolyn Guss, "How is Supervision Perceived," Supervision: Emerging Profession (ASCD Publication, 1969). 34 - Helps promote friendly faculty relations. The two responses ranked lowest by these teachers were: - Recognizes your need for freedom from pupil contact. - Helps establish and maintain your community status.1 A significant conclusion was made by Berkheimer after analyzing the present literature dealing with the supervisor's role. He summarized that: a. There is a growing concern for the clarification of the role of the supervisor, b. The responsibilities of the supervisor are numerous, varied and complex and, c. The recommended supervisor activities are apparently related to curriculum leadership, in-service programs, self growth, public relations, selection and use of materials, evaluation and research.2 To date, most studies of role interaction between school supervisory and teaching personnel have been made with reference to the U.S. educational system, which is a decentralized system, with every state having its own way of administering the educational process. Consequently a wide range of administrative organizations might be observed from state to state. It is possible that patterns of inter- action might be unique to the particular school system. 1O. L. Jack Saunders, "Teachers Evaluate Supervisors Too," Educational Administration and Supervision, 41:70 (Nov. 1955), pp. 402—406. 2G. D. Berkheimer, "An Analysis of the Science Supervisors' Role in the Selection and Use of Science Curriculum Materials" (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966). 35 Research on role expectation might therefore be limited in providing information of administrative systems in general. Some of the following studies, however, appear to contri— bute some general understanding of role expectations for educational administrators. Research on "roles" is an intricate undertaking. As Brookover and Gottlieb state: Students in each of these disciplines have come to recognize that understanding human behavior involves understand the interaction between people in various types of groups and social systems. . . . The school as a particular segment or social system is understood, therefore, only in relation to the complex of interacting individuals who occupy the various positions in the school system and behave in patterns expected of various actors in the system. When examining this complex of behavior from the point of view of the structure of the group or social system, we focus on a series of positions and statuses which are related to each other and whose occupants are in interaction with each other.1 Gross, Mason and McEachern studied the role of the school superintendency.2 Their study has made an important contribution to role theory in educational administration. The primary focus of the study was on consensus within and between groups in role expectations held for the superintendents position. Some of the main findings of the study were as follows: a. There was a definite convergence between groups in role expectations held for the superintendent's position. b. Analysis suggested that there tends to be less agreement between incumbents of two positions on items which are of direct relevance to their relationship than there is on items which are only indirectly relevant. . f 2“,, lBrookover and Gottlieb, op. cit., p. 322. 2Gross et al., op. cit., pp. 140-141. 36 c. In defining the division of responsibilities between their two positions, school board members and superintendents would each assign greater responsibility than the other to his own position. Boss made a study on role expectations held for the intermediate school district superintendent in Michigan. He found that: Incumbents of the office, board of education members, and recognized knowledgeable individuals hold dif- ferent and sometime conflicting expectations regard- ing the various selected aspects of the intermediate school district superintendent‘s position. The investigation indicated that potential role conflict was probable in over one-third of the items analyzed. The greatest divergence of opinion existed in the sub-category of superintendent items. Sixty per- cent of the items in the participation area indicated a possibility of role conflict. Approximately one- third of the items in both the characteristic and performance categoriis were classified as potential role conflict areas. Beeman's study of the superintendency showed that superintendents seemed in favor of maintaining their status if they were less mobile, and superintendents were mainly in favor of the hierarchial distance when any dispute or conflict with subordinates existed.2 The role of elementary special area teacher and the elementary consultant were studied by Hoffman. He lLaVerne H. Boss, "Role Expectations Held for the Intermediate School District Superintendents in Michigan" (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Michigan State University, 1963). 2M. Seeman, "Social Mobility and Administrative Behavior," American Sociological Review, Vol. 23 (1958), pp. 633—642. 37 found that there was inconsistency in role perceptions held for the various roles of elementary special area teacher and the elementary consultant. This divergence seemed more clear among incumbents of the two statuses and persons holding administrative and teaching positions.l Review of Turkish Literature Turkish literature in educational supervision does not have many sources. The researcher found only a few studies which dealt directly with the role of supervisors in the Turkish educational system. One or two additional studies had been conducted or reports prepared which con- tained indirect implications for supervision. In Turkish educational history, when the words "supervision" and "supervisors" were first used is not known. In 1869 "Regulations for General Education" included the responsibilities of supervisors who would be responsible to "inspect" the schools. In 1874 "Regulations for General Education" also mentioned a committee responsible for the inspection of all schools, libraries, museums, and publish- ing houses. It was also the responsibility of this com- mittee to solve problems among personnel and to "punish" those who acted against the regulations. l J. D. Hoffman, "A Study of the Perceptions that Administrators, Elementary Teachers, Consultants, and Special Area Teachers have of Elementary Special Area Teacher and Consultant Role" (unpublished Doctor's dis- sertation, Michigan State University, 1959). 38 Su made a study on the old regulation books of supervision. According to him, he could not find any record about when the first book of regulation was pre- pared and published. In the archives of the Ministry of Education he found a draft of one provisional book of regulations, but he could not find out whether it had been published. Su says that the first complete book of regulations for supervisory activities was published in 1914. This book has 44 articles and explains the respon- sibilities and duties of the Turkish supervisor as follows: 1. to control whether the regulations prescribed in laws are followed and applied in the educa- tional institutions. 2. to warn the responsible persons to perform the teaching activities according to "scientific education." 3. to encourage the administrators to extend compulsory education. 4. to inspect the teaching procedure and enlighten the teachers. 5. to inspect the general administration and accounting of the schools. 6. to control the behavior and attitudes of educa- tion personnel.l American educator Ellsworth Tomkins was invited to Turkey to participate in meetings for the reorganization of secondary education. In 1952 he prepared his report covering various aspects of secondary education of Turkey. In his report he said: lKamil Su, "Milli Egitimle Ilgili Eski Bir Teftis Yonetmeligi," Olkucu Ocretmen, Ankara, 1969. 39 I asked hundreds of teachers and directors of secondary school whether Ministry supervisors were helpful during the supervisory activities. None of them said "Yes.". . . I suppose that the teachers do not believe in the benefit of the applied supervisory methods. Many school direc- tors reported that they did not wish to discuss educational problems with the supervisors. This is not a desired situation in supervision. All the teachers of 75 secondary schools emphasized that a "two or three hour visit" of the supervisor is not enough to judge the teacher's performance in the school. They claimed that after supervision there have been no individual conferences with supervisors. In order to reorganize the supervisory activities in the M.O.E. Tomkins suggested the following actions: 1. Responsibility to promote the teacher should be taken from the supervisors and be given the superintendents and school directors. 2. The concept of "inspection" must be replaced by "supervision" and supervisors must not act as "inspectors." 3. Supervisors should be the helpers of teachers to improve the teaching—learning activities in the schools.1 Ozgunes in his report on the organization of the Ministry of Education emphasizes the importance of super- visory activities in the educational process. He concedes that the Ministry supervisor usually acts as an inspector only for the faults and deficiencies of teachers. Also he mentions that in modern educational systems the supervisor is expected to be a person who trains the teacher in lEllsworth Tomkins, Turkive Cumhuriyeti Orta Dereceli Okullarda Organizasyon, Idare ve Teftis, Maarif Basimevi, Istanbul, 1954, pp. 11-13. 40 service, is not a boss but a guide, is not a fault-finder but helper, and finally is the teacher of the teachers.1 Bursalioglu in his book writes that in the classi— cal educational organizations (he implies Turkish system) the Board of Supervisors is the most conservative or the least modernized unit. In these organizations the supervisor performs his duties as "the inspector for clerical work or public prosecutor." Therefore he can not spare his time for the evaluation of teachers and the improvement of teaching-learning activities.2 Erturk made a study on the behavior of Turkish teachers. In the study he compared the behavior of teachers in 1960 and 1970. He asked two questions relevant to the roles of supervisors. While in 1960, 69.23 per cent of the teachers perceived supervisors and school directors as "professional colleagues," in 1970, 48.40 per cent of them had this perception. Another interesting finding was that in 1960, 79.72 per cent of the teachers felt freedom in expressing their ideas against supervisors' suggestions, but in 1970, 70.37 per cent of the teachers felt the same way. It was assumed that in the ten year period there should have been modernization and democratization in supervisor-teacher lMehmet Ozgunes, Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Merkez Teskilati Ozerinde Bir Inceleme. VII. Milli Egitim Surasi Dokumanlari, Milli Egitim Basimevi, Ankara, 1962, p. 19. 2Ziya Bursalioglu, Egitim Idaresi, Kalaba Yayinevi, Ankara, 1967, p. 22. 41 relationships. But the study shows that in these two aSpects of supervision, there had been some inclination toward authoritarianism on the supervisor's side.1 Ogus made a study among 876 secondary school teachers about "The Problems of Secondary School Teachers." In the study he included six questions about supervision and supervisors. He gathered the following remarks from the teachers. Approximately 65 per cent of the teachers believed that: - teachers are not evaluated objectively. - there is no consensus among supervisors about the criteria used in teacher evaluation. - not having any information about the teacher evaluation report by the supervisor creates insecurity in the feelings of teachers. - if a teacher is evaluated by the supervisor from a different branch, there will be no professional development on the teacher's side. - there is a discrepancy between teaching methods taught in teacher training colleges and the teaching methods suggested by supervisors. - supervisory activities do not help the in-service training of teachers. The Board of Supervisors has prepared in the last four years some manuals and handbooks for supervisory activities such as general supervision, class visitations, lSelahattin Erturk, On Yil Oncesine Kiyasla Qgretmen Davranislari, Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Planlama- Arastirma ve Koordinasyon Dairesi, Ankara, 1970. 2Ihsan Ogus, VOrta Ogretmde Ogretmenlerin Sikayetleri" (research in the progress for master's thesis, submitted to Hacettepe University, 1971). 42 regulation and process for inquiries, and supervision of private and minority schools. The Board also prepared and published in 1968 "The Regulations of the Board of Supervisors." Since the contents of these handbooks and manuals will be discussed in detail in Chapter III, there will be no citing of them here beyond the main concepts in supervisory activities which can be deduced from these publications and which reflect the philosophy of the Board: - the supervisor seems to be the controller representing the central organization. - although the supervisor is expected to be democratic in his relationship with the teacher, at the same time he performs within regulations which compel him to be authoritarian. - supervisor is expected to keep a social distance between himself and the teachers. Summary To summarize the research findings and the concepts in the relevant literature, several main points can be presented. First, the establishment and maintenance of satis— factory and democratic relationship among all staff members is considered necessary in modern supervision. Second, modern supervision is conceived as democratic in the most enlightened sense. It is not a laissez-faire action but rather a dynamic, understanding, sensitive leadership role. Third, modern supervision embraces the total school pro? gram. Therefore the supervisor must be well trained in various disciplines. Fourth, supervision is not primarily to control or to rate the teacher, but must aim to help. 43 the teacher in identifying, diagnosing and solving problems and in promoting his professional growth. Fifth, teacher evaluation is an intricate activity in which all aspects of educational activities must be taken into consideration. Sixth, prior to about 1935 in the U.S. and up to 1960 in Turkey the concept of supervision was limited chiefly to inspection and rating, or to direction and enforcement; but since those days there have been some attempts to move the basis of supervisory activities from traditional concepts to modern ones. CHAPTER III TURKISH EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM AND THE ROLES OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS Introduction This chapter describes the Turkish educational system and the part which Ministry supervisors perform in the system. A summary of the system of the schools is presented first. Then an overview of the organization of administration is given. This is followed by a section on the training and assignment of teachers. The last sec— tions of the chapter deal with: the definition and status of supervisors, the structure of the Board of Supervisors, appointment of supervisors, their duties and activities and the problems of supervision in Turkish schools. The System of Schools The Turkish educational system is a typical cens tralized organization. The Ministry of Education (M.O.E.) in Ankara has the sole right to make important policies and administrative decisions. The appointment of teachers and administrators, the selection of textbooks, and the selection of subjects for the curriculum are all decided by the central office. 44 45 The Turkish school system comprises both public and private sectors. Public education represents the larger share and it is financed by the M.O.E. Although the private sector does not receive any financial alloca- tions from the National Budget, its activities are con— trolled by the M.O.E. From primary through the university, all public education in Turkey is free. University students might pay a symbolic fee for registration, but in public primary and secondary schools, administrators cannot ask any money from the students. Primary Education Primary schooling is the first and only compulsory part of the Turkish educational system. By Law 222, the primary period starts when a child reaches seven years of age. When he completes the fifth grade he receives a diploma which gives him the right to attend middle school (orta okul). Elementary school graduates either go into the job market or continue their education in general middle, vocational or technical schools. There are three types of elementary schools in Turkey. First there are village schools, usually consist- ing of one or two rooms with one or two teachers teaching five grades. Eventually, if the school grows to enroll enough students to fill five grades, there will be one teacher for each grade, as in other schools in urban centers. In the 1969-70 school year there were 33,772 village schools, with 80,045 teachers and 3,125,500 46 students. The school-student ratio was 1/92 and the teacher-student ratio was 1/39. Secondly, there are city schools, having 1,769,090 students in 3,340 institutions, with 45,371 teachers in 1969-70. The school-student ratio was 1/629 and the teacher-student ratio was 1/39. Great increases in the enrollments in some city schools have been managed only by a system of working two or three shifts. It is a reality that the M.O.E. cannot provide sufficient school buildings to meet the increase in the numbers of pupils, hence, gity schools become more crowded day by day. Thirdly, there are regional boarding schools, which provide elementary and junior high school facilities to students who live in remote and sparsely pOpulated areas, especially in the eastern part of Turkey. In the l969e70 school year there were 38 regional boarding schools, with 15,522 students. These schools apply the same curricula as the regular elementary schools. There are also some private elementary schools run by private individuals or companies. These schools receive tuition decided by the M.O.E., and also they are subject to the supervision of the M.O.E. Secondary Education--First Cycle Secondary education in Turkey is comprised of two cycles. The first consists of middle schools (orta okul) for general and technical-vocational education. The main 47 function of the first cycle is to prepare students age 12-14 for the second cycle of secondary education. The first cycle admits students having elementary school diplomas and runs for three years. Those who complete this three- year education, by an examination at the end of third year, are granted a diploma and the graduates are allowed to enter lycee or equivalent technical-vocational and profes- sional schools. First cycle schools are normally located in or near small towns or cities. However, a few villages do have these institutions. In 1969-70, there were 1892 middle schools with 800,900 students and 13,979 teachers. The teacher-student ratio was 1/57 and the schoolnstudent ratio was 1/423. There are some vocational and technical schools in the first cycle of secondary education. Their goal is to prepare skilled laborers and lower level techni- cians. Since the 1959-60 school year, there has been a trend in the M.O.E. to transform these schools into general middle schools, because the 12-14 age group was considered to be too young for technical and vocational training.1 At the present time the curricula of these first cycle technical and vocational schools is the same as that of the general middle school, with the exception of 6-10 hours per week of vocational training. There are some vocational schools, such as technical agricultural and lTurkey--The Mediterranean Regional Prpject (Paris: O.E.C.D. Pfiblication, 1965), p. 76. 48 horticultural schools, health schools for girls, and mid- wife Schools, which are not affected by the new policy decision to follow the general middle school curriculum. Secondary Education-—Second Cycle The second cycle of secondary education generally consists of a three year period. It is in many respects a continuation of the first cycle and the source of supply for higher education.1 Lycees (Lise) are the prime institutions of this cycle. The educational functions of the lycees are: (a) to provide a general course in the essential "disciplines" as the best training for the development of cultured and moral men and women, and (b) to prepare for the universities. From the second year of the lycee, the curriculum is carried on in two streams known as "literature" and "science." The science section prepares students for branches of the natural sciences and engineering. The literature section prepares for varying fields of the social sciences and arts. Those who complete a lycee education receive a "Lycee Diploma" which qualifies its holder to enter universities. Second cycle Secondary educational institutions other than lycees are not regarded as highly valued schools to attend. It is possible to see from the following table that lycee students comprise 60 per cent of all secondary second cycle students. lIbid., p. 79. 49 School Students in all second cycle Lycee Year secondary schools students ' % 1969-70 366,863 213,982 60 At the meetings of the 8th National Convention of Education in 1970, the lycee's functions were discussed and it was decided that lycees should prepare students not only for the universities but also for occupations and vocations according to their abilities.1 Besides lycees giving general education, there are two more tracks in the second cycle of Turkish secondary education. One of these is "technical institutions," where the duration of education also is three years. Besides some sort of high school level academic work, students in these institutions take more technical courses and do practical shop work. Today there are several types of technical schools which aim to give students the necessary skills and know- ledge for them to become skilled technicians. Most of these schools are for boys, such as boy's technical insti- tutes, building institutes, motor-mechanics institutes, institutes of chemical studies, etc. Although Turkish economic development requires more well-trained technicians, unfortunately the graduates of technical schools more fre- quently prefer to work in government offices as office personnel. Moreover, the prestige of these schools among parents and students is not very high. 1Tebligler Dergisi, 1631, Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Ankara, 1970. 50 Girls' institutes also exist for the "technical" training of girls after the first cycle of secondary education. The objectives of these institutions are: a. to increase the knowledge of girls by giving them general information at the secondary level, b. to insure that they are trained as skilled and well informed home-makers and as mothers, as required by an advanced society, and c. to prepare them as producers who can earn their own living when necessary. The third track in the second cycle of secondary education of Turkish education consists of vocational educational institutions. These institutions train person~ nel for various specific fields. Commercial schools, hotel schools, secretarial schools, religious schools and teacher training schools are included here. The duration of educa— tion in these institutions may be three or four years. Teacher-training schools are administered by the General Directorate of Teacher Training Schools. There are two types of elementary teacher training schools: six-year schools, which provide a six year course for elementary school graduates, and three-year teacher training schools offering a three year program for middle school diploma holders. Since the 1970-71 school year, these latter three—year schools have become four—year institutions, and students who are admitted beginning with the 1970—71 school year have to attend four years in order to be qualified 1"Technical and Vocational Education in Turkey" (Published by Ministry of Education of Turkey, Serial No. D-4S, General No. 203, 1965). 51 as an elementary school teacher. Since the teacher-training schools for elementary are mainly state boarding institutions, lower middle class and village students especially, who cannot afford the educational expenses of high school and universities, prefer attending these institutions. In the 1970-71 school year 238,877 students applied for admission and took the required entrance examinations. Of these, only 17,419 were admitted. Higher Education Higher levels of education in Turkey include two types of educational institutions. The first are the universities, and the second are higher colleges. In the Turkish educational system almost all univer- sities are free and public institutions. They are autono- mous organizations and not related to any branch of the government. There are special acts which give them authority to receive money from the National Budget. The Ministry of Education as of 1971 had no power over univere sities in controlling their administrative and academic activities. Universities emphasize science and scientific research and are four to six-year institutions. Since the universities admit only lycee graduates and by a nation— wide competitive examination, this recruitment policy increases the prestige of lycees as the only gate to a university education. 52 On the other hand, there are various kinds of public higher colleges where teachers, technicians, and businessmen are trained. The colleges are three or four-year institu- tions into which lycee graduates, as well as their corres- ponding vocational or technical school graduates, can be admitted. All these institutions, except those academies which have autonomy similar to universities, are controlled and inspected by the Ministry of Education. There have been some private colleges established since 1962. These private institutions are subject to control and certified by the Ministry of Education. How- ever, the Turkish Constitutional Court reached a decision in 1971 that existence of private higher institutions is against the constitution. Therefore they must be abolished. How and when these institutions will be closed down is still a question mark today. Administration The Turkish educational system is controlled and administered by the National Ministry of Education (M.O.E.). The power and the authority in the decision-making process is mostly concentrated in the Minister, who is a member of the cabinet, and in his Undersecretaries. The authority is more hierarchical than functional. Therefore the Minister makes final decisions concerning the administration of all educational institutions. Consequently every bit of paper work must be signed by either the Minister or one of his Undersecretaries (See Chart I). 53 nfioufl n— _ . 415 H ED” EHE804 . — no 0 n-ouedu—Hl EOE In. H! Bu Hue Huh ad fill t SOONUM 05 and?“ wave H9955": no» uiounu m6 Nana.— 44.4394: unnhdnpfl noZfioufl z: Una Papa 22.: uufl Scum “OH «42.3 , . . , 5:28am 33m mot . . PUMP... mflaamu .5 ab :35: zwmmmmm . A 8:59: I SEQ: .8335 :3 “Hana \ ; \ nauaduufi A13“ luau. 9-4 4:02.409 ‘0 H m.mv m.mh ma «H OH ma ma HH 9.5a N.OH N.mm ma 0H ha «a om 0H ma ma AH Am.vmv Am.hvv Am.HwV AN.vmv Am.mmv Am.mmv Am.Hmv Aw.vvv Am.mmv Av.mmv Am.mmv va ma Ha ma ha OH om ma NH mmeODw m.uwnomwu mo cofiumsam>m who» loommflpmm m commu op mpocume coflumsam>m mo auwwum> m mcfimo Eoonmmmao may mpwmuso mmflue>fluom Mecca mo muommmm m>fiummms paw m>AUHwom on» muwnommu wzu spas mcwmmsomfla mponumE m.um£ommu on» mo uowmwm m>Hummms paw w>Hpflmom 0:» mumnommu wnu nuflz mcflmmsomfin mponumE coflumsam>w ucmEm>mH£om ucmpsuw so mumcommu msfipflsw mEmHnoum Hmsoflumospm co mumcommu ou HOmfl>pm Hmsoflumospm cm mcHEoomm mQOmme coflumuumGOEmp mafi>ww moms Hews» mafiumuumGOEmp paw waoou mcfinomw» Boa ou mumnowwu may msfiospouucH mumcommu cufl3 mmocm lummcoo HmcoHuMUSpw msflpaom msoHUSHOme Haws» ham mEmHnonm mcflamflomflp ucmpsum co muonomwu mcflumfimmd msoHuMOHHnsm HMCOHmmmwoum ou mumnommu mcwospouucH mpocumE.maH£omwu Hews» mo usoEm>oumEH mcu co muwzommu msflumwmmd vena\e mvua\s mvua\s Hena\s ovna\s mmua\e mmua\s hmIH\B oMIH\H mmuH\s emua\s coaumoaammm mocwuuomEH mHOmH>Hma9m cofiuMOHammd mocmuHOQEH mumnomme mufl>fluo< .OZ EmuH .mmHuH>Huom mHOmH>Hmm5m pmuomawm Hm mo COHumuwammm mo xocwsqmum paw mosmuuomEH mo muswEmmomm< pmunmfimz mo mxsmmllwa.m mamas 158 . <8 as.sa u «m mk.ma u aem ss.sm n sum m em u m ov.~H n Hm -.HH n Hem m~.em u Hum m~.om u Ham m.om ma 0.0m AH m.mm NH is.omc ma muomfl>umcsm can Emummm c0wmfl>umm5m msu wuflo -flufluo on mumgommu mansoaa< smuaxs ~.ms m m.ms m ¢.ms a 1m.smc H monumsflcfl Suez poomm mum hmzu cmnz munmflu mumnommu msfluomuoum mmla\9 «.44 ms m.nv ma o.~m ma Am.vmc ms monomoumcm 30: How mammomoum .mumsommu mcwummoo< mmla\e o.Hm H m.mn m m.em m Am.wnv m mumnommu wo macacflmo 05p mcfluommmwm Hmua\e o.am m m.mn v w.mm a AH.mnv m mumcomwu «0 EmHOAuHHo w>fluosuumcoo mafixmz omna\e m.mm oa m.~m ma m.mv m an.nmv m mmsmmwaaoo Hmsqm mm muwcommu mcflummua vaH\B o.mm ma m.mm Hm H.oa Hm Am.wmv Hm mmaoauum nmflabsm ou mumnomou mswmmusoosm mvua\e o.mo Ha m.mm m m.mm m Am.mmv n pmumsam>m on Haw; son» 30a sum swap to pmpommxm xaamcoflmmmmoum me pass mumsomm» map mcflsuomaH sv-a\s «.mn v m.mn m v.5v m Am.onv v mannoum Hmcoflumospm Hams» nufl3 muouwuumw ICHEUM paw muwnomwp mcflmamm vaH\B m.mm m m.mm NH H.Hv n Am.mmv m macs; m an mmmoozm mumnoomu mcflumsam>m mvua\s 159 Objective IV: To What Extent is There a Consensus Among Supervisors in Their Perceptions of Role Expectation and Role Performance? The data in Table 5.17 suggest that supervisors display a high convergence between their perceptions of role expectation and role performance. There is a high degree of overlap among the items which the supervisors ranked highest in importance and highest in frequency of application, which observation may be interpreted as indicating high convergence between role expectation and role performance as perceived by supervisors for their own role (Rho correlation is (.75). SRE: Supervisors‘ perception of role expectation for themselves. SRP: Supervisors' perception of role performance for themselves. Figure 5.l.-—Convergence Between Role Expectation and Role Performance as Perceived by Supervisors. 160 The small difference (6.96) between the means of weighted assessment of importance (64.43) and application (57.47) also supports the conclusion that what supervisors expect from a "good" supervisor they think they also per- form in their present roles. The test of significant dif- ference between the means failed to indicate any significant difference between the supervisors' perceptions of role expectation and role performance. Objective V: What is the Role Perception of Teachers for Supervisors? Though analysis of the independent variables reveals some interesting within group differences, it seems that there is generally a high level of agreement among teachers also in their perceptions of the supervisors' role. According to the assessed weight quotients of the items, teachers also perceived all 21 supervisory activities as important, though also on different levels. The mean of the assessed weight quotients of the activities for importance as perceived by teachers was 60.23 and the standard deviation of the mean was 11.22. These two figures also support the conclusion that teachers had high consensus on their role expectations for supervisors and they seemed to believe that a "good" supervisor may be expected to perform all the 21 activities. The data in Table 5.17, on the other hand, display \ that teachers have very low assessments of supervisors role 161 performance. Teachers tended to mark almost all items as "sometimes" or "never" applied. Only two activities--"making constructive criticism of teachers" (T/l-SO) and "respecting the opinions of teachers" (T/1-51)--had weight quotients of application larger than 50 points. (The supervisors gave weight quo- tients of over 50 points to 14 of the activities.) For the remaining 19 activities teachers registered relatively low assessments of the frequency of application. Examina- tion of the data displays that, according to teachers, supervisors do not perform these 21 activities very fre- quently. The low mean of frequency of application (34.2) supports this conclusion. At the same time, the standard deviation of the mean (13.78) suggests that members of the teachers' group are consistent in their perception of the supervisors' role performance. The data on the role perception of teachers for supervisors suggests the conclusions that: (a) There was generally a high level of agreement among teachers in their perception of the supervisor's role. (b) There was also a high level of agreement among teachers that supervisors were not performing their expected role. 162 Objective VI; To What Extent is There a gensensus Among Teachers in Their Peggeption of the Sppervisors' Role E oectation and Role Performance? The data in Table 5.17 display on the surface what might appear to be convergence in what teachers expect from supervisors and what supervisors perform. In terms of the rankings of the weight quotients for importance and application there is a (.81) Rho correlation between the role expectation and role performance of teachers for supervisors. Also eight items are placed among the first ten high ranking items in both important and frequently applied activities. One might be tempted to conclude that what teachers perceive as important, supervisors also per- form, and that there is no conflict between the role expectation and role performance of supervisors as perceived by teachers. There is, however, a significant divergence if we use the means of weighted assessments of importance and frequency to show the degree of divergence between role expectation and role performance of supervisors as perceived by teachers. The reader will recall that there was a high level of agreement among teachers on the importance of the selected activities, The mean of weighted assessment of importance was 60.23. By contrast, teachers displayed low assessments of supervisors' role performance. Their mean for the weighted assessments of frequence of application was only 34.2. The difference between the mean is 26.03. 163 The "Z“ test value (6.62) shows that this difference is significant beyond the .01 level. TRE: Teachers' perception of role expectation for supervisors TRP: Teachers' perception of role performance for supervisors Figure 5.2.—-Divergence Between Role Expectation and Role Performance Perceived by Teachers. For some specific activities there were distinctive divergences between teachers' perceptions of role expecta- tin and role performance for supervisors. Teachers per— ceived some activities--such as introducing teachers to new teaching tools and demonstrating their uses (T/1-38), becoming an educational advisor to teachers on educational problems (T/l—40), and protecting teachers' rights when they are faced with injustice (1-53)--as important but relatively less frequently applied activities. On the other hand, some activities--such as discussing with teachers the 164 positive and negative aspects of the teachers' method (T/l-42), discussing with teachers the positive and negative aspects of their activities outside the classroom (T/1-43), using a variety of evaluation methods to reach a satisfactory evaluation of teacher's success (T/1-44), and allowing teachers to criticize the supervision system and supervisors (T/l-54)--were perceived as relatively less important but more frequently applied. These data taken together suggest the conclusions that: (a) Teachers displayed a divergence in their perceptions of role expectations and role performance for supervisors. (b) There is a relatively high positive relation- ship between the rank order of importance and the rank order of frequency of application of 21 items. It seems likely that if an activity is deemed important, it will be more fre- quently applied. If an activity is considered relatively less important, it will be rela- tively less frequently applied. Ob'ective VII; How Do Sgpervisors' Perce tions of Their Roles Converge or Agree with Role Perceptions Held By Teachers? In their assessing the importance and frequency of applications of 21 selected supervisory activities, the teachers and supervisors both diverged and converged in their perceptions. The two groups converged generally in 165 perceiving the activities as possessing importance, but again the teachers consistently estimated the frequencies of application of the activities to be lower than the supervisors' estimates. In the majority of cases of these latter assessments, the difference between the two groups was highly significant. While supervisors expressed that they frequently applied these activities, teachers said that they were not frequently applied. If one examines the percentages of both groups on the "never" choices, it is possible to see this discrepancy very clearly. In almost every item the percentages of teachers' responses on the "never" choices are 10-15 per cent higher than the percentages of supervisors' responses. However, a significant positive relationship and a high convergence might also be observed between teachers and supervisors, as in Table 5.17, which shows the ranked weight quotients of frequently applied activities. This should not be interpreted to mean that there is no diver- gence between the groups on the role performance of super- visors. This means instead that both groups tended to agree on the relative frequencies of application of the several activities with respect to each other but at dif- ferent over-all levels of application. 166 TRP SRP: Supervisors‘ perception of their role performance TRP: Teachers' perception of supervisors' role performance Figure 5.3.-—Divergence Between Teachers and Supervisors on the "Role Performance" of Supervisors. The teachers seemed to incline toward the less frequently applied choices ("sometimes" and "never"), while supervisors inclined toward the more frequently applied choices ("always" and "sometimes“). The mean of the two groups on the weight quotients of application were 34.2 for teachers and 57.47 for supervisors. The difference between means is significant beyond the .01 level, which confirms that supervisors tended to think they more fre— quently apply these activities, and indicates a definite divergence between the groups on their perceptions of role 167 performance on the part of supervisors. It might be that supervisors might have an (unrealistically) high assessment of what they are accomplishing or, on the contrary, teachers might have (unrealistically) low assessments of what super- visors are doing. Whichever may be more realistic, their assessments were not the same. The data also suggests a congruency between super- visors and teachers on the degree of importance of the selected 21 supervisory activities. Since both the super- visors and the teachers perceive most of these activities as important, this may imply that it would be well to include these 21 activities among those accepted by both groups as activities that a "good supervisor" should per- form. In other words they might be accepted as "role expectations" for supervisors. . 0‘ Q “ I. ’3‘“? I s: - “x311:- TRE: Teachers' perception of role expectation for supervisors. SRE: Supervisors' perception of role expec- tation for themselves. Figure 5.4.--Convergence Between Teachers and Supervisors on the Role Expectation for Supervisors. 168 If the rankings of items are compared between teachers' and supervisors' responses, it is possible to see a convergence on perceptions of role expectation. Seven items out of ten received high rankings of importance from both groups. _Among the first five items the convergence was higher (four out of five). The Rho correlation coeffi- cient of (.74) for the importance of the 21 items supports the above interpretation. The very small difference (4.20) between the two groups' means of weighted importance quotients similarly indicates convergence (the mean of weighted assessment of importance for teachers was it = 60.23, for the supervisors is = 64.43). It seems possible also to observe further patterns between supervisors and teachers in their assessments of importance and of application of the 21 selected super- visory activities. If one examines the assessed weight quotients on the five top ranked important activities, it appears that teachers emphasize attitudinal aspects of supervisory activities, such as protecting teachers' rights, respecting the opinions of teachers, and making constructive criticisms of teachers. On the other hand, supervisors seem more to emphasize technical and professional activities as important, such as assisting teachers improve their teaching methods, introducing teachers to new teaching tools and demonstrating their uses, and helping teachers and administrators with their educational problems. 169 In case of the five most frequently applied acti- vities, again teachers registered high rankings of atti- tudinal activities, such as making constructive criticism of teachers, respecting the opinion of teachers, treating teachers as equal colleagues, and protecting teachers' rights. Supervisors also registered high ranking of such activities as respecting the opinions of teachers, making constructive criticisms of teachers, and protecting teachers' rights. The data on application again suggest the existence of a communications gap between how supervisors perceive what they attempt to do and how teachers perceive the services they receive. The supervisors appear to possess a much higher estimate of the regularity with which they perform various activities than the teachers possess as they perceive the supervisors performing them. The data seem to support the conclusion that teachers perceive human relations activities as relatively more important and more frequently applied, and supervisors perceive technical supervisory activities as important. But supervisors also indicate that human relations activi- ties are more frequently applied, which may suggest that supervisors might find it easier to apply good human rela- tions than to provide technical assistance to teachers. The data also indicate that there seems to be high congruency betweensupervisors and teachers on the 10 low ranked important and the ten low ranked frequently applied 170 supervisory activities. It seems likely that if an activity is less important it will be less frequently applied. These patterns suggest that both teachers and supervisors in Turkey, though they differ in their percep- tions of the supervisors over-all regularity of application, tend to agree on which of the activities are relatively more or less important, and which are relatively more or less frequently applied. Rho correlations tend to confirm these observations. Brookover and Gottlieb1 define role conflict as a ". . . situation in which the incumbent (supervisor) of a focal position perceives that he is confronted with incom- patible expectations (of teachers) in a particular area of behavior." The data support the conclusion that the teachers and supervisors both diverged and converged in their perceptions. According to Brookover's and Gottlieb's definition of role conflict these divergences could be classified as "role conflict" between or within the groups. As a summary of this section, Figure 5.5 attempts to diagram these role conflicts and role convergences more clearly. The figure indicates that: (a) There is high convergence between supervisors' perceptions of their role expectation (SRE) and their role performance (SRP). (b) There is a high divergence or role conflict between teachers' role expectation 1Brookover and Gottlieb, op. cit., p. 344. 171 I Figure 5.5.--Role Conflict and Role Convergence in the (c) (d) Perceptions of Supervisors and Teachers. for supervisors (TRE) and teachers' perceptions of supervisors' role performance (TRP). There is a convergence among supervisors' role expectation, teachers' role expectation and supervisors' perceptions of their own role performance. But there is a divergence or role conflict between teachers' perceptions of supervisors' role performance on the one side and super- visors' role expectations, teachers' role expectations and supervisors' perceptions of of role performance on the other side. 172 Objective VIII: What are the Differences in Perceptions Among Teachers and Su ervisors According to the Independent Variables? As previously mentioned, to examine the possible existence of varying effects of independent variables within each of the two populations, items in Section II, III and IV were analyzed in more depth. The independent variables studied for teachers were "sex," "experience" and "field of study in which they were prepared," and for supervisors age," "field of study" and "experience in supervision." Sex was not chosen as an independent vari- able for supervisors because of the small proportion of female supervisors (10.58%) in the sample. "Field of study," as an independent variable, was separated into three categories: (1) subjects which emphasize social values, yig., Turkish literature and the social sciences; (2) subjects which emphasize logic and exactness, Xii'r mathematics and physical science; and (3) subjects which emphasize specific technical skills, namely foreign languages and technical and vocational subjects. Experience in teaching was separated into two categories: (1) less] experienced teachers who have less than 10 years experi- ence in teaching; and (2) more experienced teachers who have 10 or more years experience in teaching. For super— visors "age" as an independent variable was separated into two categories: (1) Younger supervisors who are younger than 46 years old; (2) older supervisors, who are older than 46 years old. Experience in supervision was separated 173 into three categories: (1) supervisors with less than 5 years experience; (2) supervisors with 5—9 years experience; and (3) supervisors with more than 9 years experience. The effects of independent variables were tested in two ways.. First a chi-square technique was used to test whether there were significant differences among independent variable distributions, such as male-female, younger-older, etc., as compared with total group distri— butions. Second "Z" tests were used to test differences between the proportions in the distributions. Differences significant beyond the .05 level were accepted. Since the "2" value for the .05 level of significance is 1.96, "Z" values larger than 1.96 were interpreted as a basis for rejecting the null hypothesis of no significant difference between proportions. In both the groups the effects of independent variables were observed to be significant in many items. But in the supervisors' group, the independent variables seemed to have fewer effects on the responses of the super- visors than were observed among the teachers. In case of the teachers' group the independent variables appeared to have varying effects among the items as follows: "Sex" and "field of study" had some effects on the teachers' perceptions of the supervisors' professional educational knowledge (T/l-18). Relatively greater propor- tions of female teachers seemed to perceive supervisors as "very goOd" or "good" in their educational knowledge 174 (Z=2.00). Greater proportions of male teachers believed that supervisors' knowledge in education was "very little" (Z=2.35). The teachers of foreign languages and technical and vocational subjects tended more to perceive the super- visors as having very little or no educational knowledge (the Z value is 2.50 for the difference in proportions between Turkish and social science teachers on the one hand and foreign language and technical and vocational teachers on the other, and the Z value is 2.27 between the latter and mathematics and science teachers). "Sex" and "field of study" showed some effects also on the responses of the teachers for item (T/1-19): "How good was the last supervisor's knowledge in your specific field?" Proportionately more female teachers (67.68%) than the male teachers (58.81%) said that their last supervisors' specific field knowledge was "very good" or “good" (Z=3). A greater proportion of male teachers (23.09%) than female teachers (17.96%) said that the supervisor's specific field knowledge was only "fair" (Z=2.08). "Field of study" also made some differences in teachers' responses to this item. Proportionately more Turkish literature and social science teachers (68.48%) than the teachers from other fields of study said that the last supervisor's specific field know~ ledge was "very good" or "good" (Z=4.72). However, propor- tionately more teachers of foreign languages and of technical 175 and vocational subjects than the Turkish literature, social science, or science and mathematics teachers said the last supervisor's specific field knowledge was "very little" or "none" (Z=7.5). Experience in teaching affected the responses of teachers to item (T/1-22): "During your supervision do you know what supervisors expect or to what they will pay special attention concerning educational matters?" A greater proportion of younger teachers who have less than 10 years experience in teaching (25.04%) than the older teachers (18.49%) said that they know "little" of what supervisors expect of them (Z=2.92). All three independent variables had some effects on the responses of the teachers to item (T/l-23) "How do you feel when a supervisor enters your classroom?" A greater proportion of female teachers (40.05%) than male teachers (25.42%) said that they become excited (Z=5.35), whereas a greater proportion of male teachers (31.74%) than female teachers (18.80%) said they remain especially calm (Z=5). Also a greater proportion of less experienced teachers (34.52%) than more experienced ones (24.88%) said that they become excited (Z:3.84). More Turkish literature and social science teachers (34.12%) than foreign language' and vocational and technical teachers seemed to become excited when a supervisor enters the classroom (Z=2.35). Sex and field of study had some effects on responses to item (T/l-24) "When a supervisor enters your class do 176 change your teaching method?" A greater proportion of male teachers (13.18%) than the female teachers (7.46%) said that they become more organized and they teach their best (Z=3.52). A greater proportion of female teachers(85.36%) compared to male teachers (80.00%) said that they behave as usual and teach as usual (Z=2.24). Also a greater pro- portion of Turkish literature and social science teachers (14.63%) said that they become more organized and teach their best (Z=2.5). Sex made some differences in the responses of the teachers to item (T/l-27) "How many of the supervisors believe in the helpfulness of the supervisory activities?" A greater proportion of male teachers (28.81%) than female teachers (18.53%) believed that all or more of the super- visors believe in the helpfulness of the supervisory activities (Z=3.84%). A greater proportion of female teachers (67.30%) than the male teachers (57.32%) said that "few" or "none" of the supervisors believe in the helpfulness of supervisory activities (Z=3.33). Field of study and experience in education had some effects in the responses of teachers to item (T/l-29): "In order to improve education and teaching processes, how many of the supervisors are equipped adequately with specific subject field knowledge?" Differencesfbetween the group of Turkish literature and social scienceiteachers and the group of mathematics and science teachers were not observed to be significant. 177 But the group of foreign language and technical, vocational teachers differed from the others. Greater proportion of teachers of Turkish literature and social science (38.64%) as well as teachers in mathematics and science (39.94%) said that "all" or "most" of the supervisors were equipped adequately with specific subject field knowledge, whereas a greater proportion of foreign language and technical and vocational teachers (67.58%) said that "half" of the supervisors had adequate subject field knowledge (Z=2.22). Moreover a greater proportion of those who have less than ten years' experience said that "all" or "most" of the super- visors had adequate subject field knowledge (Z=2.5). To item (T/l-30): "How many of the supervisors are equipped adequately with professional educational know- ledge?" A greater proportion of younger teachers (37.27%) than older teachers (29.93%) believed that "all" or "most" of the supervisors are equipped adequately with profes- sional educational knowledge (Z=2.5). To item (T/l-32): "How many of the supervisors know professional evaluation techniques in education?" A greater proportion of younger teachers (34.05%) than older teachers (27.83%) said that "all" or "most" of the supervisors know professional evaluation techniques in education (Z=3.30). To item (T/1-33) a greater proportion of male teachers (41.05%) than female teachers (33.61%) said that among "all" or "most" supervisors there is an agreement as to the criteria to be used when teachers' evaluations are 178 being made (Z=2.66). A greater proportion of female teachers (39.34%) than male teachers (31.79%) were hesitant to give any opinion about this item. A greater proportion of older teachers (42.03%) than younger teachers (36.10%) expressed their idea that there was agreement among "all" or "most" supervisors as to the criteria to be used in teacher evaluation (Z=2.14). Proportionately more younger teachers (37.40%) than older teachers (29.05%) were hesi- tant to express their view about this item (Z=3.07). Independent variables had some effects on the responses of teachers for the degree of importance and the frequency of application of the 21 supervisory activities. To item (T/1-34, T/l-55): "Assisting teachers on the improvement of their teaching methods,‘ a greater pro- portion of male teachers (60.12%) than female teachers (50.97%) responded as that this activity is "sometimes" applied (Z=3.00). Also a greater proportion of more experienced teachers (17.27%) than less experienced (10.02%) said that it was "never" applied (Z=3.5). Field of study had some effects on the responses for item (T/l-35, T/l-56): "Introducing teachers to pro- fessional publications" a greater proportion of Turkish and social science teachers (40.70%) than science and mathe- matics (32.48%) and foreign languages, technical, voca- tional teachers (31.40%) said that this activity is "always" applied whereas more foreign language, technical, vocational teachers (38.57%) than science, mathematics (29.63%) and 179 Turkish, social science teachers (27.37%) said it was "sometimes" applied. All "Z" values are larger than 1.96. A greater proportion cf male teachers (47.68%) than female teachers (39.23%) said that "assisting teachers on student discipline problems and their solution (T/l-36, T/l-57) is a "very important" problem (Z=3.00), whereas a greater proportion of more experienced teachers (17.72%) than less experienced ones (12.11%) perceived this activity with lesser importance (Z=3.00). Also more male teachers (44.76%) than female teachers (35.51%) said that this activity is "sometimes" applied. To item (T/l-37, S/l-58): "Holding educational con— ferences with teachers," a greater proportion of more experienced teachers, 10 years and more (17.15%) than the less experienced teachers (10.82%) perceived this activity with lesser importance (Z=3.00). Also a greater propor- tion of less experienced teachers (52.50%) than more experienced teachers (44.47%) said that this activity is "sometimes" applied (Z=2.84), whereas a greater proportion of more experienced teachers (39.56%) than less experienced teachers (30.67%) expressed their idea that this activity is "never" applied (Z=3.19). To item (T/l—38, T/l-59): "Introducing the teachers to new teaching tools and demonstrating their uses," a greater proportion bf female teachers (45.68%) than the male teachers (39.75%) siid that this activity is an "important" one (Z=2.00). A greater prOportion of science and 180 mathematics teachers (61.36%) perceived this activity as "very important" in contrast to the proportion of Turkish, and social science teachers (46.92%) and foreign language, technical and vocational teachers (48.90%), who said that it is an "important" activity. Also more science and mathematics teachers (36.57%) than Turkish, social science teachers said that this activity is "never" applied. All "Z" values for the significance of differences between the proportions are larger than 1.96. To item (T/l-39, T/l-60): "Giving demonstration lessons on how a given subject can be taught best, more male teachers (37.77%) than female teachers (32.23%) per- ceived it as "important." Field of study had some effects on this item also. A greater proportion of Turkish and social science teachers (51.19%) than science, mathematics teachers (42.49%) and foreign language, technical and voca- tional teachers (41.03%) perceived this activity as "very important." (Z values are 2.40 and 2.67 respectively.) Also a greater proportion of male teachers (42.43%) than female teachers (34.64%) said that this activity is "sometimes" applied. To item (T/1-40, T/l-6l): "Becoming an educational advisor to teachers on educational problems when they need it," a greater proportion of male teachers (39.39%) than female teachers (29.58%) said that it is "sometimes" applied (Z=2.83). 181 To item (T/l-4l, T/l-62): "Guiding teachers on student achievement methods," more male teachers (42.06%) than female teachers (33.43%) said that it is "sometimes" applied (Z=3.00), whereas a greater proportion of more experienced teachers (35.29%) than less experienced teachers (25.83%) said that it is "never" applied. To item (T/l-44, T/l-65): "To reach a satisfactory evaluation of the teachers' success, if it is needed, using a variety of evaluation methods," a greater propor- tion of male teachers (45.08%) than female teachers (34.16%) perceived it as "very important" (Z=3.66). A greater proportion of male teachers (60.84%) than female teachers (52.60%) perceived item (T/1-46, T/l-67): "Sincerely helping teachers and administrators with their educational problems" as "very important" (Z=2.66), while a greater proportion of female teachers (43.01%) than male teachers (35.91%) said that it is an "importanfl activity (Z=2.33). Also more male teachers (37.09%) than female teachers (29.81%) said that it was "sometimes" applied. To item (T/l-47, T/1-68): "To inform teachers what is professionally expected of them and how they will be evaluated," a greater proportion of male teachers (61.06%) than female teachers (49.59%) said that it is a "very important" activity (Z=3.66) whereas more female teachers (42.88%) than male teachers (32.69%) said that it is "important" (Z=3.33). Also a greater proportion of less experienced teachers (39.90%) than more experienced teachers 182 (29.13%) perceived this activity as sometimes applied, whereas a greater proportion of more experienced teachers (30.34%) than less experienced teachers (22.85%) said that it was "never" applied. A greater proportion of male teachers (26.00%) than female teachers (15.98%) said that item (T/1-48, T/l-69): "Encouraging teachers to publish articles concerning educa- tion and teaching" is a "very important" activity (Z=4.48). To item (T/l-49, T/l—70): "Treating teachers as equal colleagues,‘ a greater proportion of female teachers (51.53%) than male teachers (43.57%) said that supervisors "always" treat teachers as equal colleagues (z=2.66), whereas a greater proportion of male teachers (35.11%) than female teachers (27.86%) said that supervisors "sometimes" treat teachers as equal colleagues (Z=2.48). To item (T/l—53, T/l-73): "Accepting teachers' proposals for new approaches to education which are not against teaching laws and regulations," a greater propor- tion of male teachers (41.19%) than female teachers (32.78%) said that this activity was "sometimes" applied (Z=2.66). To item (T/l-54, T/l-75): "Allowing teachers to criticize the supervision system and supervisors," a greater proportion of male teachers (33.65%) than female teachers (28.13%) said that this activity was "sometimes" applied (Z=2.12). 183 Independent variables had also some effects on the responses of teachers on the degree of importance of the teachers' problems. The problem of "ineffectiveness of the disciplinary system" (T/276) was perceived by a greater proportion of female teachers (32.24%) than male teachers (24.49%) as "important" (Z=3.l9), while a greater proportion of male teachers (64.36%) than female teachers (54.75%) perceived it as "very important" (Z=3.00). To the problem of "Inadequacy of teaching aids," (T/2-7) a greater proportion of Turkish-social science teachers (36.05%) than science-mathematics teachers (25.85%) and foreign language, technical, vocational teachers (32.96%) responded that it is an "important" problem (Z=2.89). Also a greater proportion of more experienced teachers (35.89%) than lesser experienced teachers (28.36%) said so (Z=2.83). However, a greater proportion of lesser experienced teachers (64.92%) than more experienced teachers (56.68%) perceived it as "very important" (Z=2.66). For item (T/2-10): "Inadequacy of student activi- ties," the field of study of teachers displayed some dif- ferences on the responses. A greater proportion of science and mathematics teachers (43.73%) than Turkish and social science (31.82%) and foreign language, technical, and ‘vocational teachers (35.23%) perceived this activity as "not important" (Z=3f20 and Z=2.5) respectively. More {Turkish and social science teachers (41.61%) and foreign 184 language, technical and vocational teachers (38.64%) than science, mathematics teachers perceived it "important" (Z=3.47 and Z=2.89 reSpectively). To item (T/2-l3): "Unavailability of research persons in the community to ask their professional help," a greater proportion of male teachers (59.39%) than female teachers (51.83%) responded as that this problem is "not important." To item (T/2-l4): "Requirement of testing students with two written and one oral examination," proportinately more foreign language, technical and vocational teachers (56.27%) and science and mathematics teachers (46.69%) than Turkish and social science teachers (42.01%) said that it is "not an important" problem. However, a greater propor- tion of Turkish and social science teachers (37.50%) than foreign language, technical and vocational teachers (26.53%) perceived it as "important." To item (T/2.16): "Inability to resolve attendance problems," a greater proportion of Turkish and social science teachers (30.10%) than foreign language, technical and.vocational teachers (22.35%) said that it is "not important" (Z=2.4l). However, more foreign language, “technical and vocational teachers (39.66%) and science and Imathematics teachers (38.82%) than Turkish and social science teachers perceived it very important (all "Z" values are larger tl’fan 1.96). 185 To item (T/2.18): "Over crowded classes,‘ propor- tionately more foreign language, technical and vocational teachers (27.25%) than science and mathematics teachers (19.88%) and Turkish and social science teachers (21.84%) responded as that this problem is "important." Also more science and mathematics teachers (72.33%) and Turkish and social science teachers (71.33%) than foreign language, technical and vocational teachers (62.64%) perceived this problem as "very important." All "Z" values are larger than 1.96. To item (T/2.21): "Teaching program is too heavy," proportionately more Turkish and social science teachers (61.56%) and science and mathematics teachers (59.60%) than foreign language, technical, and vocational teachers (45.89%) responded as that this is a "very important" problem. Effects ofIndependent Variables on SuperVisors Resppnses Age made differences on the responses of super- visors for item (S/1-33): "Presenting the teachers with the new teaching tools and demonstrating their uses." A greater proportion of the older supervisors (73.75%) found this activity "very important," whereas (50%) of the younger supervisors perceived so (Z=2.05). Age also had some effects on the responses of supervisors for item (S/l-42): "To inform the teachers what is professionally expected of them and how they will 186 be evaluated." Proportionately more older supervisors (67.50%) perceived this activity as "very important" while (34.78%) of the younger supervisors said so (Z=2.95). Moreover a greater proportion of younger supervisors (52.17%) than the older supervisors (28.75%) said that this activity is "important" (Z=l.99). For the frequency of application of this item (S/l-63) proportionately more older supervisors (61.25%) than the younger supervisors (34.78%) said that this activity is always applied. Experience in supervision had some effects on the responses of supervisors for item (T/1-66): "Making con- structive criticism of the teachers." All supervisors (100%) who had more than 10 years and more experience in supervision displayed a total agreement that they always make constructive criticism of the teachers, whereas (69.05%) of the less experienced supervisors said so (Z=2.10). Among the items on the problems of supervisors, independent variables had effects only on two items. For the item (S/2-8): "Lack of enough time allowed to each teacher during supervision," a greater proportion of older supervisors (46.25%) who are 46 years and over, than the younger supervisors (21.74%) perceived this prob- lem as "very important" (Z=2.46). For the item (S/2.20): "Work load of supervisory duties not allowing proper time for self improvement and reading professional publications," there was a discrepancy between the Turkish-social science supervisors on the one 187 hand and the science-mathematics supervisors on the other hand on the degree of importance of this item. A greater proportion of the first group (59.26%) than the latter group (30.43%) perceived this problem as "important." However a greater proportion of science-mathematics supervisors (69.57%) than Turkish-social science super- visors (33.33%) said that this problem is "very important." General Observations on Effects of Independent Variables The data suggest that in Turkey female teachers may tend to give higher estimates to the qualification of the male "authority" figures in their profession than male teachers are prepared to give to their fellow male "authority figures." Sex differences in this study may be mainly a reflection of dominance--submissiveness relation- ships between males and females in the Turkish society at large. Teachers in those fields (Turkish literature and social sciences) which were presumed in this study to emphasize social values appeared to hold higher estimates of supervisors' subject field knowledge than did teachers fronlnmme exact or technical fields. Perhaps specific anowiedge is relatively more crucial to evaluating success le teaching mathematics, science, foreign language or technical vocational subjects, than it is in areas of social value. These findings of difference in effects of field of preparation throw further light both on the 188 teachers' generally relatively low estimates of supervisors' subject field knowledge and on supervisors' ranking high the problem of having to supervise teachers in fields outside ones own field of preparation. The data suggest the issue is a real one and that supervisors as well as teachers are aware of it. The differences which younger inexperienced teachers displayed in their responses from older teachers do not reflect a sense of rebelliousness or rejection of the supervisor's "authority." On the contrary, they display patterns of higher estimates of supervisors' capacities, less knowledge of what supervisors expect of them, and more excitement when supervisors enter their classes. These appear to be patterns of awe for authority rather than resistance or rejection of it. Older teachers, by contrast, may be more "hardened" in the profession, more aware that supervisors may be made of "common clay" like themselves, and more prepared to believe they know as well-~or better-- than supervisors. Objective IX: What are the Most Crucial Problems which SuperyisOrs and Teachers Perceive Theypgave Faced in Recent Years? In Section IV of the questionnaires teachers and supervisors were given some questions based on "problems" ‘which had been identified in the literature. The problem list for supervisors contained 15 questions and the teachers' list 16. Both teachers and supervisors were asked to rate 189 the problems on an evaluation scale which contained five choices: "very important," "important," "lacking impor- tance," "not important" and "this is not a problem." In order to find the weight of importance of the problems, an index was developed. Each of the choices was given a different weight as follows: very important (+5), important (+3), lacking importance (+1), and the choices of "not important" and "this is not a problem" were combined and given a weight of (-l). The total weighting for each question was found by multiplying the frequency of each choice by its weight value, and then adding them to find the total weight. Then a quotient of weight (Wq) for each problem was calculated using the same method described above on pages 15-16. The following weighted lists of problems for teachers and supervisors were then prepared. Item code numbers as per Appendix I, II, and III are entered in parentheses after each problem listed. As a concluding question among the problems listed for supervisors in Section IV, supervisors were asked :Mhether despite the above problems they were happy with ‘their supervisory duties in general. Although the super+ xnisors found all problems to have some degree of importance, 85.58 per cent of the supervisors said that they liked their job and duties. If one examines Table 5.18 it is possible to see tjuat among the seven problems at the top of the teachers' 190 TABLE 5.18.--The Problems of Teachers. Rank Weight Order Quotient . Over crowded classes (2-18). 81.8 Inadequacy of teaching aids (207). 80.1 Ineffectiveness of the disciplinary system (2-6). 76.3 4. Lack of facilities for learning new innovations and information in education (2-19). 76.2 5. Teachers' desire to further educate himself is not aided by the Ministry (2-17). 72.9 Teaching program is too heavy (2-21). 72.1 Lack of chances given to attend profes- sional courses and seminars (2-20). 71.2 . Too many class hours a week (2-11). 67.1 9. Lack of proper teacher-student relations (2-8). 64.6 10. Inability to solve attendance problems (2-16). 57.8 11. Inadequate school library (2-9). 57.8 12. Insufficient number of available resource books in teaching field in the community (2—12). 57.1 13. Inadequacy of student activities (2-10). 47.8 14. Administrators' lack of assistance to teachers in educational matters (2-15). 36.6 15. Requirement of testing students with two written and one oral examination (2-14). 34.4 16. Unavailability of research persons in the community to ask their professional help (2-13). 29.2 191 weighted ranking of sixteen problems, three of them have to do with professional advancement of teachers, such as lack of facilities for learning innovations, teachers' desire for further education not aided by the Ministry of Education, lack of chances to attend professional courses and seminars. The remaining four among the top seven teachers' problems may be construed as representing key frustrations to teachers' efforts to do a professional job, such as, overcrowded classes, inadequate teaching aids, ineffective discipline, and an overburden curriculum. Teachers perceived overcrowded classes as their most important problem. I In case of the supervisors, Table 5.19, only one of the problems presented to supervisors had to do with professional improvement, but the supervisors rated it third from the top (workload too heavy to engage in self- improvement or to read professional publications). Two of the top seven supervisors' problems had to do with inadequate support for their efforts on the part of the .Ministry of Education, such as, lack of consideration of supervisors' proposals by the Ministry of Educaton, lack cof Ministry of Education assistance in providing schools :mith recommended publications and teaching tools. The :supervisors ranked Ministry of Education lack of consideraa ‘tion of their proposals as their most important problem, and it is interesting to note in connection with the super- xnisors' complaints about failure on the part of the Ministry (3f Educaton to provide recommended teaching tools, the 192 TABLE 5.19.--The Problems of Supervisors. Rank Weight Order Quotient 1. Lack of consideration given to supervisors' proposals by relating departments of the Ministry of Education (2-15). 81.5 2. Scientific evaluation methods not used by the supervisors in order to measure teachers' success accurately (everybody does what he pleases) (2-16). 75.2 3. Work load of supervisory duties not allowing proper time for self-improvement and reading professional publications (2-20). 74.4 4. In some circumstances to be required to supervise subject areas which are outside of one's field (2-11). 74.1 5. Lack of assistance given by the Ministry of Education in providing the schools with recommended publications and teaching tools (2-19). 73.3 Insufficient money paid for this duty (2-10). 72.1 7. Lack of enough time allowed to each teacher during supervision (2—8). 69.3 8. Investigation duties interferring with the counselling duties (2-7). 67.3 9. Lack of follow-up by supervisors on the recommendations they make (2-13). 67.3 10. Too much time required to prepare super- visory reports (2-9). 63.8 11. The number of teachers to one supervisor (2-6). 61.9 12. Teachers' not expressing the problems that they face (2-18). 60.0 13. Lack of cooperation from teachers on the improvement of teaching and educational matter (2-14). 58.8 14. Facing difficulties in localities (food, board, adjustment to the climate) (2-12). 58.4 15. Lack of cooperation by the administrators in the improvement of teaching (2-17). 56.4 "I: 193 teachers at the same time rank inadequate teaching aids as their most important problem next to overcrowded class- rooms. The supervisors ranked fourth the problem of having to supervise subject areas outside their own field. It is interesting to compare this response to the relatively low estimate which many teachers had of supervisors' subject field knowledge. Among their top seven problems, the supervisors listed the lack of accuracy in measuring teacher success as their second most important problem. The supervisors thus also appear to register a concern about effective teacher evaluation, even though their per- ceptions of their own capacities to achieve accurate eval- uations is higher than teachers' perceptions of supervisors' capacities to do so. Supervisors ranked 7th the lack of timeto spend with individual teachers. In view of the size of their workload, it is not surprising to find supervisors rank 6th the insufficient pay they receive for their work, while 85 per cent of them at the same time indicated never- theless that they like their jobs and duties. These rankings of problems suggest certain degrees of convergence among the supervisors and teachers in their perceptions. Both groups indicate concern for such key problems as lack of adequate teaching tools and the need for accurate evaluation. Both groups share a common con- cern for professional self improvement. Both are frustrated by barriers to their accomplishing their professional 194 objectives. Both groups apparently desire to do their respective professional tasks in a professional manner. Objective X: How Do Teachers and Supervisors Believe Supervision Might Best Be Reorganized in Turkey? Both the teachers and supervisors were asked three questions concerning (1) changing the criteria for appoint- ment of supervisors; (2) whether the current supervisory system should be changed; and (3) if so, what type of organization should be accepted. The following paragraphs present the responses of the teachers and supervisors on these three items. Opinion About Changipg the Criteria for Appointment of Supervisors (T/l-76,r§/l-7l) For this item 5 choices were given to the super- visors and the teachers (15.27% of the teachers did not answer the item). In contrast to 16.52 per cent of the teachers, 39.42 per cent of the supervisors preferred the first choice, which suggested that present regulations should continue (8 years of teaching experience including 3 years of administrative experience and a diploma from a higher education institution). The teachers showed a slight preference for the fourth choice, which suggested that years of teaching and length of administrative experi- ence should be increased (teachers--20.l7%, supervisors-- 3 l 18.27%). 195 Whether the Current Supervisory System Should be Chapged (T12—23, $22-22. If so, What Type of Organization should be Accepted (T12-24, 312-23) The teachers and the supervisors appeared to agree that the current supervisory system should be changed. Over 75 per Cent of the two groups said "yes," whereas only 6.92 per cent of the teachers and 17.31 per cent of the supervisors said "no." The first choice suggested that the current system should continue but investigation duties should be taken away from the supervisors and the supervisors should only be responsible for evaluation of educational activities. Only 8.55 per cent of the teachers marked this choice, but it received the highest percentage of choice among the supervisors (29.81%). Of the teachers, 31.32 per cent and 22.12 per cent of the supervisors preferred the second choice, which suggested that there should be two types of supervisors, one to handle investigations and the administrative super- vision and the second to serve as helper and counsellor to teachers on educational and teaching matters. This was the most popular choice among the two groups taken together. The data on reorganization of the present super- visory system suggest that a large majority (over 75%) of both.groups want change in the supervisory system. This xmight imply that both groups do not seem satisfied with the present system. Nevertheless, neither teachers nor .supervisors voted in large numbers for reducing or 196 liberalizing the current criteria for appointment of super- visors. Indeed a plurality of supervisors indicated a preference for continuing current standards while the choice slightly most favored by teachers was for increasing the number of years of experience in teaching and administrative posts required to become a supervisor. Responses of both groups to the alternatives offered in the questionnaires as to what type of different super- visory system should be accepted showed what appeared to be a common concern with the conflict in the roles of super— visors (a) as counsellor or helper to teachers, and (b) as investigator of teachers' or administrators' breaches. Among the supervisors a plurality (29.81%) voted for taking investigation duties away from supervisors altogether and making supervisors responsible only for evaluation of educational activities. Among the teachers a plurality (31.32%) voted for separating the two conflicting roles of supervisors into two separate professional positions--one to handle investigations and administrative matters and ‘the other to serve as helpers and counsellors to teachers. DMDre than 22 per cent of the supervisors also voted for ‘this same choice, making it the favorite choiCe among the 'two groups combined. The data suggest that there would be .a sizeable measure of support in both the teacher and :supervisor groups for a change in the superviSory system varich would liberate the counsellor role from the investi- gator's role and provide increased professional support and 197 help to teachers. The above data also seem to confirm Tomkin's suggestions that supervisors should be the helpers of teachers to improve the teaching-learning activities in the schools and the concept of "inspection" must be replaced by supervision.l W The purpose of this chapter was the presentation and the analysis of the following data derived from the questionnaires sent to teachers and supervisors: (a) the group characteristics of the teachers and supervisors; (b) the main characteristics of supervisory visits and qualifications of supervisors; (c) the role perception of supervisors about themselves; (d) the degree of consensus among supervisors on supervisors' role; (e) the role per- ception of teachers for supervisors; (f) the degree of consensus among teachers in their perceptions of supervisors' role; (g) the degree of convergence or agreement between teachers' and supervisors' groups on the supervisors' roles; (h) the effects of independent variables on teachers' and supervisors' responses; (i) the problems which teachers and supervisors say they have faced in recent years; and (j) opinions of teachers and supervisors on the reorganiza- tion of the supervisory system in Turkey. The following chapter presents the findings and implications of the study. 1Tomkins, op. cit., p. 53. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Summary The purpose of this study was to give a picture of current supervisor and teacher perceptions in the light of existing conditions in Turkey and in the light of current views of modern supervision. The study focused on ten main objectives related to the roles of supervisors in secondary schools. These are: (l) The group characteristics of the teachers and supervisors; (2) the main characteristics of supervisory visits and qualifications of supervisors; (3) the role perception of supervisors about themselves; (4) the degree of consensus among supervisors on supervisors' role; (5) the role perception of teachers for supervisors; (6) the degree of consensus among teachers in their perceptions of supervisors' role; (7) the degree of convergence or agree“ :ment.between teachers' and supervisors' groups on the supervisors' roles; (8) the effects of independent variables cu) teachers' and supervisors' responses; (9) the problems vdrich teachers and supervisors say they have faced in recent .4 198 199 years; and (10) opinion of teachers and supervisors on the reorganization of the supervisory system in Turkey. The study is recognized to be an initial exploratory research in the supervisory system in Turkey, which is an area never before studied intensively. It was hoped from this study that it would provide some useful data which could be used to develop improved objectives, practices, training, philosophy and organization of supervision in the Turkish education system. Some of the main ideas and concepts in the educa- tional literature concerning the supervisor's role and supervisory techniques were reviewed in Chapter II. This review focused mainly on - evaluation of supervision in the American educational system — existing supervision and supervisory activities - Turkish literature on supervision. As a summary of the research findings and the concepts in the relevant literature, several points may be represented: First, the establishment and maintenance of a satis- factory and democratic relationship among all staff members is necessary. Second, modern supervision is democratic in the most enlightened sense. It is not a laissez-faire action, but instead a dynamic, understanding, sensitive leadership role. Third, modern supervision embraces the total school program. Therefore the supervisor must be well trained in various disciplines. Fourth, supervision 200 is not aimed to control and to rate the teacher but must aim to help the teacher in identifying, diagnosing and solving problems and his professional growth. Fifth, teacher evaluation is an intricate activity in which all aspects of educational activities must be taken into consideration. Sixth, prior to 1935 in the U.S. and to 1960 in Turkey, supervision was limited chiefly to inspection and rating or direction and enforcement. But since those days there have been attempts to move the aims of supervisory activities from traditional to modern ones. The Turkish educational system and the roles and activities of Ministry supervisors are described extensively in Chapter III: the system of schools--primary, secondary, and higher education; administration of education; training and appointments of teachers; definition and status of supervisors; structure of the Board of Supervisors; appoint— Inent of supervisors--duties and activities of supervisors-- such as general supervision, classroom supervision, «examination supervision, investigation and inspection of :newdy established private or public educational institutions, :investigations, and research; and finally six main problems <>f the Turkish supervisory system have been presented and «described. These latter six problems are found to be: 1. Since the number of educational institutions axud teachers have increased rapidly in recent years and the number of supervisors have remained the same, the supervisory 201 activities may tend to become routine, done mainly for the sake of applying the regulations. 2. In Turkey, since the operation of supervisory activities is controlled from the Board of Supervisors in the Capital at Ankara, local administrators in the provinces do not have under their jurisdiction any personnel for super- visory activities for educational institutions above the elementary schools. 3. Supervisors do not have any Special professional training to be Ministry supervisors. They are trained as teachers, and after some years of "successful" service in teaching and administrative positions, they are appointed as supervisors. Consequently Turkish Ministry supervisors have limited or no additional professional training and it may fairly be said that they are not equipped with necessary professional knowledge in supervisory techniques. 4. Not enough time is allowed to each teacher during supervision and there is also a severe lack of time for supervisors' and teachers to devote to their own» professional improvement. 5. The multiplicity of functions of the supervisors reveals perhaps the most crucial problem. A supervisor is expected to be an educator who helps the teacher profes- sionally, an administrator who controls and improves the admdnistrative process, an evaluator who makes merit rating (pf personnel, a judge or prosecutor to solve personal con- .f1icts among the personnel, and a researcher to introduce 202 new ideas and innovations into the field of education. Some of these roles conflict with each other, and perform- ing them effectively, all at the same time, seems impossible. 6. There is no consistent follow-up on supervisory activities. .Since the supervisors do not have any per- manently assigned locality, the probabilities of meeting the same teacher again are very slight. In Chapter IV the design of this study is presented. Two questionnaires, one each addressed to teachers and supervisors, were developed which would elicit from teachers and Ministry supervisors their perceptions of the role and activities of the Ministry supervisors. The questionnaires contained questions in four sections (personal character- istics, questions about supervisors and their activities, the importance and frequency of application of 21 super- visory activities, the problems of teachers and supervisors). The samples were drawn from two populations of teachers and supervisors and contained 1196 teachers and 104 supervisors. The data were collected successfully in the spring of 1971 and the return rate was 87.1 per cent for teachers and 90 per cent for supervisors. The data were processed in an IBM 1620 computer in the Planning, Research and Coordination Department of the Ministry of Education. In.interpreting the data, several different types of analysis were used. Chi-square techniques were used to test the significance of observed differences between 203 supervisors' responses and teachers' responses. In order to test the significance of differences among the propor- tions of independent variable distributions (such as male- female, younger-older, etc.), "Z" test techniques were used. A Spearman Rank Order (Rho) correlation technique was used to show relationships between the teachers' and supervisors' responses to the categories of importance and the categories of frequency of application of 21 selected supervisory activities. Finally, an index was developed to find an overall weight quotient within each group for every item. This process provided data with which to rank and classify activities according to each group's perception of their importance and frequency. In Chapter V responses for each item were presented, analyzed and discussed in accordance with the objectives mentioned in Chapter I. The main findings of the study are summarized immediately below under "Conclusions." Conclusions In the light of the discussions in Chapter V, the main indications and conclusions which may reasonably be drawn from this study may be summarized as follows: 1. Findings for Section I of the questionnaire indicate that: - Supervisors as a group are older than teachers with a quarter-century mean age difference between the two groups. 204 - Supervisors have proportionately more higher education than teachers. - The position of supervisor in Turkey appears to be one which is achieved usually after lengthy experience in teaching and administration, near the end of one's professional career in education. 2. Findings from Section II of the questionnaire show that: - Teachers generally do not perceive current super- visory activities as helpful. The data indicated that teachers may be supervised no more than once a year or once in two years, and therefore may not regularly receive help when they need it. - There seems to be an underlying communications gap between supervisors and teachers regarding profes- sional help provided by supervisors and received by teachers. While supervisors said they frequently provide professional help, teachers on the contrary said they are not helpful. - Teachers have little confidence in the objectivity of evaluation of teachers by supervisors. - Regarding the qualifications of supervisors in terms of their professional capacities and atti- tudes, the teachers and supervisors had different perceptions. The teachers tended to perceive the supervisors as not well qualified in subject matter fields, in professional knowledge, and in evaluation 205 techniques. On the other hand supervisors perceived themselves as well qualified in the above fields. The data suggest that supervisors enter into their contacts with teachers with much higher levels of confidence in their own qualifi- cations and capacities than the teachers have. - Most of the teachers perceived supervisors as sincere, friendly and likeable, which may reflect the fact that teachers are more accepting of supervisors as fellow human beings than as authori- ties in teaching. 3. Findings from Section III of the questionnaires indicate that in the assessment of the importance and fre- quency of application of 21 selected supervisory activities, the teachers and supervisors both diverged and converged in their perceptions: - There was a high level within-group agreement among supervisors in their perception of the supervisors' role and also there was a high level within-group agreement among supervisors that they think they perform these role activities most of the time. - Supervisors displayed a high convergence between their perceptions of role expectation and role performance. - There was a high level within-group agreement among teachers in their perception of the superv visors' role. 206 - There was also a high level within-group agree- ment among teachers that supervisors were not performing their expected role. - Teachers displayed a divergence in their perceptions of role expectations and role performance for supervisors. - Both groups converged generally in perceiving 21 several activities to be important. This shows that there is a high level convergence between supervisors' and teachers' role expectation for supervisors. - There was a high divergence or role conflict between teachers' role expectation for super- visors (TRE) and teachers' perceptions of supervisors' role performance (TRP). - There was a convergence among supervisors' role expectations, teachers' role expectation and supervisors' perceptions of their own role per- formance. - There is a divergence or role conflict between teachers' perceptions of supervisors' role per- formance on the one side, and supervisors' role expectations, teachers' role expectations and supervisors' perceptions of role performance on the other side. - It appears that teachers emphasize attitudinal aspects of supervisory activities while supervisors 207 seem more to emphasize technical and professional activities as important. - Supervisors seem to have an unrealistically high assessment of what they are accomplishing. - Teachers perceive human relations activities as important and more frequently applied, while supervisors perceive technical supervisory acti- vities as important, but they too perceive that human relations activities are frequently applied. - Teachers and supervisors had a high consensus on which are the less important and least frequently applied activities. If an activity was perceived less important by both groups, it seems probable that it would also be perceived by both groups as least frequently applied. 4. Findings from Section IV of the questionnaire indicate the following: - A large majority of both teachers and supervisors want change in the system. This suggests that both groups do not seem satisfied with the present system. The change which is more emphasized by both groups is to separate the two conflicting roles: (a) supervisors as counselors or helpers to teachers, and (b) supervisors as investigators of teachers' or administrators' breaches. Both ( groups emphesized that the supervisors' role 208 should be to help the teachers to improve teaching— learning activities. - Teachers and supervisors display certain degrees of convergence in their perceptions of key prob- lems of education, such as lack of adequate teach- ing tools and the need for accurate evaluation. - Also both groups share a common concern for professional self-improvement. - Teachers and supervisors feel frustrated by barriers to their accomplishing professional objectives. But supervisors say that despite the problems they face on supervisory duties, they like their super- visory job. 5. Findings from the analyses of independent vari- ables show that: - Female teachers and less experienced teachers tend to give higher estimates to the qualifications of supervisors and hold their authority in greater awe. - Turkish literature and social sciences teachers hold higher estimates of supervisors' subject field knowledge than do teachers from other fields. Implications From the findings of this study certain implications may be suggested. These implications might be useful to the decision makers of the Ministry of Education of Turkey, should they undertake to reorganize and develop the educa- tional supervisory activities of Turkey. 209 l. The educational supervisory system in Turkey should be reorganized in the light of modern supervisory principles in order to eliminate deficiencies identified by this study. For this purpose: - The number of supervisors could well be incrased fourfold at least (to a minimum ratio of one supervisor for one hundred teachers). - In order to provide necessary professional help to teachers when they need it, supervisors should be based closer to the schools, perhaps in pro- vincial or regional centers. - The present conflict in roles between educational counselor and investigator should be separated and supervisors should deal only with educational activities. — Supervisory roles of the Ministry supervisors and criteria for evaluating the teachers should be cooperatively redefined and jointly implemented by both the supervisors (the evaluators) and the teachers (the evaluatees). 2. The Ministry of Education should regularly supply the supervisors with new teaching materials, new resource books, and other publications to be used to introduce new ideas to teachers. 3. The Ministry of Education should support the supervisors' proposals concerning development of educational activities. 210 4. Supervisors are expected to have better training and educational knowledge than teachers. Supervisors should perhaps, therefore, be provided with advanced in-service training and studies designed specifically to give them more skill in supervision. For this purpose: — Decision makers should take into consideration developing a program of in—service seminars for supervisors, in order to train them in new trends in education and modern supervisory techniques. These seminars might well include representation from among both teachers and present supervisors in order to help strengthen communications between these two groups of professional people. - A sound program of professional training for supervisors should be organized with the colla— boration of the universities. This program might well emphasize modern educational philosophy, modern educational supervision techniques, curri- culum development, tests and measurements, human relations and child development. 5. Greater numbers of supervisors should be added to the staff and efforts should be made to select new staff from among relatively younger people. A greater number of younger people might add strength to the syStem and expedite its modernization. 6. The data indicate that teachers as recipients do not have high esteen for supervisors' ability to evaluate 211 teachers' successes accurately. This may exhibit the teacher's distrust of the objectivity of the supervisors' evaluations of teachers. Also Ogus's study makes the point that "teachers are not evaluated objectively." From this finding it is suggested that: a) the function of evaluating the teachers' per- formance should be excluded from supervisors' role; b) if evaluating teachers' successes is a must for the promotion of teachers, this function could be given to the school directors com- pletely, who in the present system are the main immediate evaluators of teachers. 7. An experiment and a follow-up study should be made to evaluate further developments of the supervisory system. For example, the following steps might be taken. A number of younger candidates for supervisory duties should be selected as a pilot group, and they should be given at least one or two years' advanced training in education and educational supervision techniques beyond the university level. Secondly, these candidates should work in the field as supervisors in applying modern supervisory techniques and in conducting in-service.work- shops with teachers at provincial levels. Thirdly, after a sufficient term of application in the field (3-5 years) an evaluation should be made to measure whether these 212 supervisors succeed in achieving improved practices and effects which would be beneficial to the system as a whole. BIBLIOGRAPHY 213 BIBLIOGRAPHY Anonymous. Ders Teftislerinde Dikkate Almacak Ortak Esaslar. Milli Egitim Bakanligi Teftis Kurulu, Ankara, 1967. . Egitim Milli Komisyonu Raporu. Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Ankara, 1959. . Imtihan Teftislerinde Dikkate Alinacak Esaslar. Milli Egitim Bakanligi Teftis Kurulu, Ankara, 1971. . Milli Egitim Bakanligi Teftis Kurulu Yonetmeligi. Milli Egitim Basimevi, Ankara, 1968. . Muessese Teftislerinde Dikkate Alinacak Esaslar. Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Ankara, 1969. . Tebligler Dergisi no. 1631. Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Ankara, 1970. . Technical_and Vocational Education in Turkey. Ministry of Education of Turkey, Serial No. D-45, General No. 203, Ankara, 1965. . Turkey. The Mediterranean Region Project Country Reports. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 1965. Antele, H. "Teachers Appraise Supervision." Journal of Educational Research, vol. 38 (April, 1945), 606-611. Bail, P. M. "Do Teachers Receive the Kind of Supervision They Desire?" Journal of Educational Research, vol. 40 (May, 1947), 713-716. Barr, A. 8., William H. Burton, and Leo J. Brueckner. Supervision: Principles and Practices in the Improve- ment of Instruction. New York: Appleton-Century Company, 1938. Berkheimer, G. D. " An Analysis of the Science Supervisor's Role in the Selection and Use of Science Curriculum Materials." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. Biddle, B. J. and/W4 J. Ellena. Contemporary Research on Teacher Effectiveness. Boston: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1964. 214 215 Bradfield, L. E. Supervision for Modern Elementary Schools. New York: Charles E. Merfill, 1964. Brookover, W. B. and D. Gottlieb. A Sociology of Education. 2d Edition. New York: American Book Company, 1964. Bursalioglu, Ziya. Egitim Idaresi. Kalaba Yayinevi, Ankara, 1967. . '"The Need for Reorganization in the Turkish Educational System." The Turkish Administrator: A Cultural Survey. United States Agency for Inter- national Development, Ankara, 1968. Burton, W. H. and L. J. Brueckner. Supervision, A Social Process. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1955. Cleminson, G. F. "The Major Purposes and Functions of Supervision as Perceived by New Jersey Public School Superintendents, Supervisors and Building Principals." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Fortham University, 1965. Curtin, J. Supervision in Todayfs Elementary Schools. New York: MacMillan, 1964. Damah, M. I. "Supervisory Practices in the United States Suitable for Use in the Secondary Schools of Iraq." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, 1967. Eastmond, J. N. Teacher Characteristics. Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Test ve Arastirma Burosu, Ankara, May, 1964. Ellena, J. W. "Who's A Good Teacher?" Question. American Association of School Administrators, National Education Association, Washington, D. C., 1961. Elsbree, W. S. and E. E. Reutter. Principles of Staff Personnel Administration in Public Schools. Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1959. Erturk, S. On yil Oncesine Kiyasla Ogretmen Davranislari, Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Planlama-Arastirma ve Koordinasyon Dairesi, Ankara, 1970. Foster, L. E. "Perceived Competencies of School Supervisors." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, 1959. 216 Good, Carter V. Dictionary of Education. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company, Inc., 1945. Green, J. D. Implications for Educational Practice in Supervision: Perspective and Propositions. Associa- tion for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association, Washington, D. C., 1967. Gross, Neal C., Ward S. Mason and A. W. McEachern. Explora- tions in Role Analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1958. Grossman, B. "Teachers' Methodological Emphasis and Their Evaluation of Supervisory Practices." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers State University, 1967. Guss, C. "How is Supervision Perceived?" Supervision: Emerging Profession. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, National Education Association, Washington, D. C., 1969. Gwynn, J. M. Theory and Practice of Supervision. New York: Dodd, Mead and Company, 1969. Hallberg, H. I. "Analysis of the Expected and Actual Behaviours of Supervisors in the Role Concept of Four Professional Groups." Unpublished Ph.D. disser- tation, University of Oregon, 1960. Harris, B. Supervieory Behavior in Education. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1963. Heald, J. E. and S. A. Moore. The Teacher and Administrative Relations in School §ystem. New York: MacMillan, 1968. Koizamias, A. M. Education and the guest_for Modernity in Turkey. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966. Landry, T. "Louisiana Supervisors Examine their Practices." Educational Administration and Supervision, vol. 45 (1959), 305-311. Lucio, W. H. and J. D. McNeil. Supervision: A Synthesis pf Thought and Action. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1962. Marks, J. R., E. Stoops, and J. K. Stoops. Handbook of Educational Supervision a Guide for the Practitioner. New‘Yorkr Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971. Neagley, R. L. and N. D. Evans. Handbook for Effective Supervision of Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1964. 217 Ozgunes, Mehmet. Milli Egitim Bakanligiprerkez Teskilati Uzerinde Bir IncelemeL VII. Milli Egitim Surasi Dokumanlari, Milli Egitim Basimevi, Ankara, 1962. Redfern, G. B. How to Appraise Teaching_Performance. Columbus, Ohio: School Management Institute, Inc., 1963. Sarbin, Theodore R. "Role Theory." Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 1. Edited by G. Lindzey. New York: Addison-Werley, 1968. Saunders, O. L. Jack. "Teachers Evaluate Supervisors Too." Educational Administration and Supervision, vol. 41 (November, 1955), 70. Spears, H. Improving the Supervision of Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1953. Su, Kamil. "Milli Egitimle ilgili Eski Bir Teftis Yonetmeligi." Ulkucu Ogretmen. Milli Egitim Bakanligi, Ankara, 1969. Tomkins, E. Turkiye Cumhuriyeti Orta Dereceli Okullarda Or an- izasyon Idare ve Teftis, Maarif BaSimevi, Ankara, 1854. Wallace, M. F. "An Investigation of Supervisor Practices in the Waterbury Public Elementary Schools." Un- published Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, 1964. Wiles, K. Supervision for Better Schools. 2d Edition. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1965. APPENDICIES 218 APPENDIX I RESEARCH DATA QUESTIONS FOR BOTH TEACHERS AND SUPERVISORS QUESTIONS ON IMPORTANCE AND FREQUENCY OF APPLICATION OF 21 SELECTED ACTIVITIES QUESTIONS ONLY FOR TEACHERS QUESTIONS ONLY FOR SUPERVISORS 219 A QUESTIONS FOR BOTH TEACHERS AND SUPERVISORS (T/1-6, S/l-6): What is your age? Teachers Supervisors % N % N Less than 25 11.53 120 Less than 30 0.00 0 25-35 56.87 592 31-45 23.08 24 36-45 20.17 210 46-60 70.19 73 46-55 8.36 87 61 or over 6.73 7 S6 or over 2.79 29 (T/1-7, S/l-7): What is your sex? Teachers Supervisors % N % N Female 35.35 368 10.58 11 Male 62.82 654 86.54 90 (T/l-8, S/1-8): What is your field of study (your major in school)? Teachers Supervisors % N % N Turkish Literature 19.50 203 15.38 16 Mathematics and Science 34.39 358 15.38 16 Social Sciences 9.13 95 22.12 23 Foreign Language 5.76 60 6.73 7 Arts and Handcrafts 9.80 102 8.65 9 Teacher Training Courses 4.03 42 8.65 9 Boys' Vocational and Technical 4.80 50 12.50 13 Girls' Vocational and Technical 4.80 50 4.81 5 Others 6.44 67 5.77 6 (T/l-9, S/l-l3): The school from which you graduated last, or the course or examination which is the basis of your job now? Teachers Supervisors % N % N University 12.39 129 26.92 28 Higher Teachers School 3.94 41 18.27 19 Technical Higher Institution 8.36 87 18.27 19 Educational Institute 65.51 682 28.85 30 Foreign College or a University 0.29 3 4.81 5 Secondary Level Vocational School 2.11 22 0.00 0 Graduate of Courses or Through Exams 3.84 40 0.00 0 Others 2.59 27 2.88 3 220 221 (T/l-lO, S/l-ll): Including administrative positions, how long have you been in the teaching profession? Teachers Supervisors % N % N Less than 2 years 1.92 20 Less than 10 years - 1.92 2 2-4 years 25.46 265 10-14 years 2.88 3 5-9 years 31.99 333 15-19 years 10.58 11 10-19 years 23.63 246 20-24 years 24.04 25 20-29 years 13.16 137 25s29 years 26.92 28 30 or over 3.46 36 30 or over 32.64 34 (T/1-15): During your last supervision, was the supervisor helpful in introducing you to new professional publications in your field? Teachers % N Was very helpful 4.32 45 Not as much as expected 18.83 196 Was not helpful 75.50 786 (S/16): During your supervisory activities do you present the teachers (T/1-14): (S/1-15): with the new publications in their field? Supervisors % N Always 51.92 54 Sometimes 46.15 48 Never 0.96 1 During your last supervision was the supervisor helpful in introducing you to the new teaching materials in your field? Teachers % N Was very helpful 6.82 71 Not as much as expected 28.91 301 Was not helpful 62.54 651 During your supervisory activities do you present the teachers with new teaching materials? Do you recommend them to be used? Supervisors % N Always 62.50 65 Sometimes 36.54 38 Never 0.00 0 (T/1-16): (T/1-17): (S/1-14): 222 During your last supervision did the supervisor make recommendations toward improving your teaching methods? Teachers % N Yes 53.51 555 No 44.76 466 How useful did you find the recommendations for improving your teaching method? Teachers % N Useful 18.64 194 Partly useful 34.58 360 Not necessary and not useful 6.34 66 No opinion 5.19 54 During your supervisory activities do you make recommendations for the improvement of teachers' teaching methods? Supervisors % N Always 93.27 97 Sometimes 5.77 6 Never 0.00 0 223 Responses Choices Teachers Supervisors % N % N (T/l-25, S/l-21): In your opinion is there agreement among supervisors on the recommendations they make to teachers? Total agreement 7.11 74 21.15 22 Some agreement 34.49 359 67.31 70 None 32.66 340 0.00 0 I cannot give any opinion 24.78 258 9.62 10 (T/l-26, S/l-22): Do you believe that school inspections by super- visors help to improve the educational and teaching processes of the school? Very much 36.50 380 75.00 78 Very little 29.88 311 22.12 23 None 24.50 255 0.00 0 Undecided 8.45 88 1.92 2 (T/l-27, S/1-23): If you had to make a generalization, in your opinion, how many of the supervisors believe in the helpfulness of the supervisory activities? All of them 1.54 16 2.88 3 Most of them 23.34 243 66.35 69 Half of them 13.74 143 17.31 18 Few of them 54.76 570 12.50 13 None of them 5.67 59 0.00 0 (T/1-28, S/l-18): In your opinion, how many of the teachers successes are the supervisors able to evaluate accurately during their supervision? All of them Most of them Some of them None of them 1.15 18.25 61.29 18.54 12 190 638 193 12.50 76.92 9.62 0.00 13 8O 10 O (T/l-29, S/l-24): In order to improve the education and the teaching processes, how many of the supervisors are specific "subject field" knowledge? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them equipped adequately with 3.36 31.32 22.67 37.66 3.27 35 326 236 392 34 20.19 68.27 6.73 3.85 0.00 21 71 224 Responses Choices Teachers Supervisors % N % N (T/1-30, S/1-25): In order to improve the education and teaching processes, how many of the supervisors are adequately equipped with educational knowledge (educational methods, educational psychology, educational sociology, educational philosophy)? All of them 3.07 32 5.77 6 Most of them 30.55 318 56.73 59 Half of them 23.05 240 26.92 28 Few of them 38.52 401 7.69 8 None of them 2.88 30 0.96 l (T/1-31, S/1-26): How many of the supervisors know which criteria to use in teacher evaluations? All of them 2.59 27 10.58 11 Most of them 29.97 312 69.23 72 Half of them 24.59 256 13.46 14 Few of them 35.45 369 5.77 6 None of them 5.00 52 0.00 O (T/l-32, S/1-27): How many of the supervisors know professional evaluation techniques in education? All of them ‘ 2.59 27 3.85 4 Most of them 28.15 293 50.96 53 Half of them 25.46 265 23.08 24 Few of them 36.22 377 17.31 18 None of them 5.09 53 0.00 0 (T/1-33, S/l-28): When the teachers' evaluations are being made, is there an agreement among the supervisors as to the criteria to be used? All will agree 1.63 17 6.73 7 Most will agree 36.41 379 84.62 88 None will agree 26.80 279 0.00 0 I cannot give any opinion 34.10 355 7.69 8 225 Responses Choices Teachers Supervisors % N % N (T/1-76, S/l-71): According to the 7th article of the regulations of the Ministry of Education's Board of Supervisors, in order to be appointed as a supervisor one should be a graduate of a University or a higher Institution, have at least 8 years of teaching experience in a secondary or higher institution, in this period also have an administra- tive experience for at least 3 years and finally, to be noted as successful in both of these areas of service. In your opinion, concerning the appointment of the inspectors which of the following should be considered? Present regulations concerning years of service should continue 16.52 172 39.42 41 There should be 8 years of teaching required without any administrative service 14.12 147 0.96 1 Years of administrative service should be increased but teaching period should be limited to 5-8 years 12.30 128 18.27 19 Years of teaching and administrative service should be increased 20.17 210 18.27 19 Teaching and administrative services should be limited 17.58 183 14.42 15 Please, give your proposals other than indicated above 4.03 42 4.81 5 (T/2-23, S/2—22): Would you like the current supervisory system to be changed? Yes 79.73 830 80.76 92 No 6.92 72 17.31 18 (T/2-24, S/2-23): If your answer is "yes", which of the proposals listed below is most beneficial? 1. Current system should continue, but the investigation duties should be taken away from the supervisors, and given to a newly established "Board of Inquiry" and the supervisors should only be responsible for evaluation of educational activities. 8.55 89 29.81 31 226 Choices Responses Teachers Supervisors % N % N There should be two types of supervisors. The first one should work with investi- gations and administrative supervision. The second one should serve as a helper and a counsellor to teachers on educa- tional and teaching matters. There should be regional supervisory directorates, and in these directorates there should be one director and a sufficient number of supervisors. The directors should have the authority to plan and execute a regional supervision program. All the supervisory duties of this region (courses, examinations, administrative supervision and investi- gations), should be given to these supervisors. There whould be two types of super- visors. The first one should deal with investigations and Ankara should be the central office. The second one should work as a "guidance super- visor," who would be attached to the educational director of the district, and they should work as helpers and counsellors to the teachers on educational matters. There should be two kinds of super- visors. The first one should be attached to the Board of Education and the Ministry central organization as "Ministry General Supervisors." Their duties should be to carry on research to help the above offices and evaluate the Turkish educational activities as a whole. The second one as a "Ministry Supervisor" should perform such duties as evaluation, counselling, and super- vision of the administration and teaching personnel. I propose something entirely different than the ones listed above (please, write your proposal in the space available on the back of this page). 31.32 326 22.12 13.16 137 5.77 16.23 169 .96 16.43 171 22.12 1.92 20 2.88 23 23 227 B QUESTIONS ON IMPORTANCE AND FREQUENCY OF APPLICATIONS OF 21 SELECTED ACTIVITIES Teacher N % Supervisor N % Assisting teachers on the improvement of their teaching methods: Importance 1/34 Very important 584 65.10 Important 391 37.56 Lacking importance 33 3.17 'Not important 14 1.34 Undecided 10 0.96 Application 1/55 Always 276 26.51 Sometimes 581 55.81 Never 132 12.68 Undecided 32 3.07 Introducing teachers to new professional publications: Impurtance 1/35 Very important 467 44.86 Important 452 43.42 Lacking importance 56 5.38 Not important 32 3.07 Undecided 15 1.44 Application 1/56 Always 346 33.24 Sometimes 324 31.12 Never 297 28.53 Undecided 43 4.13 1/29 71 68.27 29 27.88 1 0.96 l 0.96 1/50 67 64.42 32 30.77 1 0.96 2 1.92 1/30 55 52.88 43 41.35 1 0.96 2 1.92 1 0.96 1/51 46 44.23 44 42.31 5 4.81 5 4.81 Assisting teachers on student discipline problems and their resolutions: importance 1/36 Very important 457 43.90 Important 398 38.13 Lacking importance 96 9.22 Not important 51 4.90 Undecided 21 2.02 Application 1/57 Always 265 25.46 Sometimes 416 39.96 Never 255 24.50 Undecided 70 6.72 1/31 57 54.81 38 36.54 2 1.92 3 2.88 1/52 58 55.77 39 37.50 1 0.96 4 3.85 228 Holding educational conferences with teachers: Importance Very important Important Lacking importance Not important Undecided Application Always Sometimes Never Undecided Teachers N % 1/37 307 29.49 540 51.87 92 8.84 45 4.32 40 3.84 1/58 108 10.37 497 47.74 345 33.14 58 5.57 Supervisor N % 1/32 29 27.88 59 56.73 8 9.69 l 0.96 5 4.81 1/53 13 12.50 58 55.77 17 16.35 13 12.50 Presenting the teachers with new teaching tools and demonstrating their uses: Importance Very important Important Lacking importance Not important Undecided Application Always Sometimes Never Undecided 1/38 498 47.84 427 41.02 40 3.84 31 2.98 22 2.11 1/59 246 23.63 362 34.72 334 32.08 58 5.57 1/33 70 67.31 30 28.85 1 0.96 1 0.96 1/54 43 41.35 46 44.23 8 7.69 5 4.81 Giving demonstration lessons on how a given subject can be taught best: Importance Very important Important Lacking importance Not important Undecided Application Always Sometimes Never Undecided 1/39 457 43.90 366 35.16 107 10.28 59 5.67 35 3.36 1/60 132 12.68 399 38.33 413 39.67 69 6.63 1/34 33 31.73 54 51.92 11 10.58 3 2.88 1 0.96 1/55 13 12.50 61 58.65 17 16.35 11 10.58 229 Teacher Supervisor N % N % Becoming an educational advisor to teachers on educational problems when they need it: Importance 1/40 1/35 Very important 546 52.45 50 48.08 Important 399 38.33 42 40.38 Lacking importance 44 4.23 7 6.73 Not important 15 1.44 - - Undecided 22 2.11 4 3.85 Application 1/61 1/56 Always 313 30.07 36 34.62 Sometimes 354 34.01 42 40.38 Never 282 27.09 14 13.46 Undecided 61 5.86 11 10.58 To guide the teachers on student achievement evaluation methods: Importance 1/41 1/36 Very important 411 39.48 60 57.69 Important 480 46.11 39 37.50 Lacking importance 68 6.53 l 0.96 Not important 32 3.07 - '- Undecided 34 3.27 2 1.92 Application 1/62 1/57 Always 234 22.48 38 36.54 Sometimes 394 37.85 43 41.35 Never 301 28.91 11 10.58 Undecided 84 8.07 10 9.62 Discussing with the teacher the positive and negative aspects of teaching a course: Importance 1/42 1/37 Very important 472 45.34 57 54.81 Important 508 48.80 44 42.31 Lacking importance 28 2.69 - - Not important 14 1.34 - - Undecided 11 1.06 l 0.96 Application 1/63 1/58 Always 329 31.60 69 66.35 Sometimes 586 56.29 32 30.77 Never 87 8.36 - - Undecided 18 1.73 1 0.96 230 Teacher N % Supervisor N % Discussing with the teachers the positive and negative aspects of the activities of the teachers outside the classroom: Importance Very important Important Lacking importance Not important Undecided Application Always Sometimes Never Undecided To reach a satisfactory evaluation of the teachers' needed, using a variety of evaluation methods: Importance Very important Important Lacking importance Not important Undecided Application Always Sometimes Never Undecided 1/43 330 31.70 551 52.93 83 7.97 31 2.98 28 2.69 1/64 239 22.96 577 55.43 144 13.83 47 4.51 1/44 426 40.92 420 40.35 80 7.68 41 3.94 61 5.86 1/65 222 21.31 333 31.95 328 31.51 133 12.78 success if 1/38 46 44.23 93 50.96 2 1.92 2 1.92 1/59 61 58.65 38 36.54 1 0.96 3 2.88 it is 1/39 42 40.38 54 51.92 2 1.92 4 3.85 1/60 30 28.85 56 53.85 8 7.69 8 7.69 Evaluating the teachers' success as a whole, and not emphasizing minor factors: Importance Very important Important Lacking importance Not important Undecided Application Always Sometimes Never Undecided 1/45 492 47.26 431 41.40 40 3.84 17 1.63 45 4.32 1/66 394 37.85 340 32.66 160 15.37 115 11.05 1/40 47 45.19 48 46.15 3 2.88 3 2.88 1/61 63 60.58 26 25.00 4 3.85 8 7.69 231 Teacher Supervisor N % N % Sincerely helping teachers and administrators with their educational problems: Importance 1/46 1/41 Very important 592 56.87 69 66.35 Important 397 38.14 32 30.77 Lacking importance 20 1.92 - - Not important 8 0.77 - - Undecided 9 0.86 1 0.96 Application 1/67 1/62 Always 439 42.17 67 64.42 Sometimes 349 33.53 29 27.88 Never 179 17.20 2 1.92 Undecided 46 4.42 4 3.85 To inform the teachers what is professionally expected of them and how they will be evaluated: Importance 1/47 1/42 Very important 557 53.51 62 59.62 Important 398 38.23 35 33.65 Lacking importance 47 4.51 3 2.88 Not important 14 1.34 - - Undecided 11 1.06 3 2.88 Application 1/68 1/63 Always 357 33.91 57 54.81 Sometimes 362 34.77 38 36.54 Never 263 25.26 2 1.92 Undecided 39 3.75 6 5.77 Encouraging teachers to publish articles concerning education and teaching: Importance 1/48 1/43 Very important 232 22.29 21 20.19 Important 527 50.62 57 54.81 Lacking importance 152 14.60 9 8.65 Not important 39 3.75 4 3.85 Undecided 78 7.49 10 9.62 Application 1/69 1/64 Always 158 15.18 20 19.23 Sometimes 341 32.76 49 47.12 Never 384 36.89 15 14.44 Undecided 124 11.91 17 16.35 232 Teacher Supervisor N % N % Treating teachers as equal colleagues: Importance 1/49 1/44 Very important 584 56.10 49 47.12 Important 347 33.33 40 38.46 Lacking importance 54 5.19 5 4.81 Not important 14 1.34 2 1.92 Undecided 28 2.69 6 5.77 Application 1/70 1/65 Always 467 44.86 61 58.65 Sometimes 330 31.70 29 27.88 Never 145 13.93 4 3.85 Undecided 70 6.72 8 7.69 Making constructive criticism of teachers: Importance 1/50 1/45 Very important 623 59.85 65 62.50 Important 365 35.06 35 33.65 Lacking importance 23 2.21 l 0.96 Not important 7 0.67 - — Undecided 10 0.96 l 0.96 Application 1/71 1/66 Always 436 41.31 76 73.08 Sometimes 493 47.36 23 22.12 Never 72 6.92 l 0.96 Undecided 20 1.92 2 1.92 Respecting the Opinions of teachers: Importance 1/51 1/46 Very important 680 65.32 63 60.58 Important 329 31.60 38 36.54 Lacking importance 8 0.77 l 0.96 Not important 4 0.38 - - Undecided 10 0.96 - - Application 1/72 1/67 Always 486 46.69 75 72.12 Sometimes 370 35.54 25 24.04 Never 129 12.39 - - Undecided 35 3.36 2 1.92 233 Teacher Supervisor N % N % Accepting teachers' proposals for new approaches to education which are not against teaching laws and regulations: Importance 1/52 1/47 Very important 354 34.01 27 25.96 Important 564 54.18 61 58.65 Lacking importance 36 3.46 6 5.77 Not important 8 0.77 1 0.96 Undecided 65 6.24 7 6.73 Application 1/73 1/68 Always 301 28.91 36 34.62 Sometimes 390 37.46 47 45.19 Never 182 17.48 5 4.81 Undecided 139 13.35 14 13.46 Protecting teachers' rights when they are faced with injustice: Importance 1/53 1/48 Very important 799 76.75 61 58.65 Important 202 19.40 34 32.69 Lacking importance 12 1.15 l 0.96 Not important 7 0.67 l 0.96 Undecided 9 0.86 5 4.81 Application 1/74 1/69 Always 535 51.39 73 70.19 Sometimes 191 18.35 17 16.35 Never 206 19.79 2 1.92 Undecided 83 7.97 10 9.62 Allowing teachers to criticize the supervision system and supervisors: Importance 1/54 1/49 Very important 333 31.99 32 30.77 Important 563 54.08 56 53.85 Lacking importance 67 6.44 5 4.81 Not important 12 1.55 3 2.88 Undecided 51 4.90 6 5.77 Application 1/75 1/70 Always 348 33.43 47 45.19 Sometimes 323 31.03 44 42.31 Never 203 19.50 2 1.92 Undecided 140 13.45 9 8.65 1-11: 1-12: 1 13: 234 C QUESTIONS ONLY FOR TEACHERS For which of the following schools are you a teacher? mark only one) Middle school Lycee Teacher training school Girls' institute Boys' institute Religious training school Commercial lycee Private middle school and lycee Teachers % 36.50 28.72 15.37 5.86 7.40 3.17 2.21 0.10 N 380 299 160 61 77 33 23 1 (please Including administrators, how many teachers are there in your school? Less than 5 5-10 11-20 21—30 31-40 41-50 51 and more 4.51 8.36 22.57 19.60 17.96 11.53 12.20 47 87 235 204 187 120 127 How many times have your classes been supervised since you have become a secondary school teacher? Once 2-4 times 5-7 times 8 or more 35.35 45.15 10.85 7.50 368 470 113 79 In your opinion, how good was the last supervisor's knowledge in education (educational methods, educational psychology, educational sociology and educational philosophy)? Very good Good Fair Very little None 15.75 42.07 27.86 8.74 3.36 164 438 290 91 35 235 Teachers % N 1-19: In your opinion, how good was the last supervisor's knowledge in your specific field? Very good 18.64 194 Good 42.17 439 Fair 20.75 216 Very little 10.09 105 None 6.24 65 1-20: During your last supervision, how was the supervisor's behavior with respect to human relations? (please mark only one) Sincere, friendly, likeable 61.00 635 Showed feelings of being superior-—1ooked down on me 8.65 90 Very serious and follows formalities 20.56 214 Casual and not serious 0.29 3 I cannot give any opinion 8.84 92 1-21: After your meeting with your last supervisor was there any change in your feelings concerning the teaching profession? My attachment to my profession and my desire to work increased 17.77 185 My attachment to my profession and my desire to work decreased 4.13 43 My feelings have not changed 72.14 751 I cannot give any opinion 5.00 52 1-22: During supervisions do you know what supervisors expect or to what they will pay special attention concerning educational matters? I know 60.90 634 I know little 22.09 230 I do not know 15.66 163 1-23: How do you feel when a supervisor enters your classroom? I become very excited 1.92 20 I become a little more excited 28.53 297 I remain especially calm 26.71 278 I do not change my normal behavior 41.98 437 236 Teacher % 1-24: When a supervisor enters your class, do you change your method? I become more organized and I teach my best 10.95 I behave as usual and teach as usual 80.31 Students become excited and I cannot teach normally 7.01 I cannot give any opinion 0.77 N teaching 114 836 73 8 1-9: 1-10: 1-11: 1-12: 237 D QUESTIONS ONLY FOR SUPERVISORS In total, how many years have you been a Supervisor? Less than 2 years 2-4 years 5-9 years 10-19 years 20 years and over In total, how many years were you a teacher or a school administrator before you became a supervisor? Less than 10 years 10-14 years 15-19 years 20-24 years 25-29 years 30 years and over In total, how many years have you been in the education pro- fession (including the years as a supervisor and an administrator)? Less than 10 years 10-14 years 15-19 years 20-24 years 25-29 years 30 and over In total, how many years have you been (including assistant directorship)? None 2 or less 3-6 years 7-10 years 11-14 years 15 and over \ J} Supervisors % 19.23 23.08 40.38 14.42 1.92 6.73 16.35 26.92 29.81 13.46 6.73 1.92 2.88 10.58 24.04 26.92 32.69 an administrator 0.96 0.96 15.38 20.19 25.00 37.50 N 20 24 42 15 2 17 28 31 14 11 25 28 34 16 21 26 39 238 Supervisors % N 1—17: During your supervisory activities did you give any demonstration lesson? Never 43.27 45 Once 4.81 5 2-5 times 25.96 27 6-10 times 13.46 14 More than 10 times 10.58 11 1-19: In your opinion, how many of the other supervisors are able to measure the exact successes of teachers during their inspections? All of them 2.88 3 Most of them 75.96 79 Some of them 13.46 14 None of them 0.00 0 1-20: What is the degree of the inspectors' influence on the improvement of the teachers' teaching methods? Very much 68.27 71 Little 28.85 30 Not at all 0.00 0 Undecided 1.92 2 239 mo.smv iom.smc loo. 1 16m. 1 loo. V . coHumosem mo suuchHz man or mm H H H mo mucmEuummmp pmuMHmH ecu an mHMmom some on cw>Hm GOHumuopHmcoo mo xomq mH\~ 1mm.smc Aom.omc “as.mc imm.mc lmo.mv . mumuums Hmcoflu mm mm o v m Imospm ocm mcHnommu mo usmsm>onmEH wnu co muosommu Scum coHpmuomonoo mo xomq vH\m 1mm.ovc lm~.vsv xms.ov 1mm.mc le.qc mxms swap has“ muonumecmssoomu me we n m m mnu so muomH>Hmmsm an molsoHHom mo Hung mH\m Amo.vmv Amm.mmv Amm.mHv Amm.mv An>.mv HmumEHHo on» 0» uswfiumsnpm .pumon mm em om v o .eoohc mmHuHHmUoH as mmHuHsoHMMHB masons maxm ANH.hvv AHm.mvv ”Hm.vv Amm.mv Hoo.ov prHm m.wco mo mpHmuso me we m v O was coHn3 mmwum poohnsm on» mmH>Hmmsm ou pmuHsgmu on on moosmumssouHo meow sH HH\~ ANH.nvv Amo.vmv “mo.mv Aoo.ov Hw.vv me on m o m spat mflru How swam unseen ucmhoflwmsmcH OH\N Avm.omv Amm.vvv “No.01 AHm.vv Amw.mv muuommu >uomH>Hmmsm mm mv 0H m v mummmum o» omuHsgmu mEHu £055 008 m\m 1mm.ovv Amo.mvv 1mm.mv 1mm.mv 1mm.mc conH>umcsm manage umrommu me om v v m comm ou pmonHm mEHu nmsocw mo xomq m\m Amv.mmv AmH.mev Amo.nc 16m. 1 has.mc mmsuse mcwHHmmcsoo snag Hv hv m H o @cHummuquH mmHHSU coHummHumm>cH h\m xmo.mmc Amo.mvc iss.mc Amanflc lmo.ac soma>ummsm mm 0m 0 N OH mco 0» mumnommu mo uwnsss one m\m ucmuuomEH ucmuuomEH ucmuuomEH ucmuuomEH EmHnoum m muomeuomsm mo meHnoum .oz >um> mmmq uoz Doc mH mHnB EmuH 240 AmH.oev we Anm.mvv mv Ash.0mv Nm Hom.mmv hm Hoo.omv mm Amm.ovv Nv Awo.mvv om Ago.mvv Hm HOOAomV mm Amm.o¢v mg “mm. V Amm.mv Ann.mv Ahh.mv Amm.mv Aoo.ov Hem. V Amm.Hv Amm.Hv Hoo.ov MH Ann.mv Amm.mv Amm.OHV HH Aom.NHV MH AHm.ev » newsmmfiumm no: as H .02 w ”oMHmmHumm an H .mo» “om.NH umm.mm mHmumsmm sH mmHusp anomH>uwmsm H50» £UH3 pmHmmHumm so» can o>onm omumoHosH mEoHnoum moo» muHmme mcoHumoHHnsm Hmconmomoum mcHomou paw usmEm>oumEH MHmm mom oEHu Homoum mcHsoHHm no: meuso >HOmH>Hmm5m mo om0H xuoz mHoou manommu tam msoHHMOHHnsm owocmsfioowu QUHz mHoonom on» msHpH>oum cH anumHCHz on» up cm>Hm mocmumHmmm mo xomq comm amnu was» mEmHnoum gnu mchmwumxm uoc .muwnomma mcHsommu mo usmsm>oumSH on» :H who» umnuchHEpm gnu up coHumnmmouoo mo xomq HmwmmmHm on umn3 mmoo apon>um>mv >Hmumusoom mmoooom .muonomou whammma ou umpuo :H MOmH>Hmmsm on» an poms uoc moonuma coHumsHm>m UHMHusmHom HN\N om\m mH\N mH\N 5H\m ®H\N 241 AGH.mmV me.omc Imo.mc lmo.mo ism.0Hv msmHnoum mom mum om mm OHH mocmezmuum m>Hommu op suHHHnmaH 6H\~ lmo.mmc ism.~mc xvo.ch 1mm.so imm.~Ho muoupms Hmcoflumusem an mumrommu on mom smm mvH mm mmH wocmumflmmm mo xoma .muoumuumflcfisoa mH\m Amo.mHv Amv.mmv AoH.MHV “mo.0Hv AmH.mmv coHumcHsmxm Hmno mso 6cm couuwn3 osu maH som sma moa Hem Bus; mucmenum mcflummu mo ucmsmuflsamm +H\~ Aoo.ch 14m.mmc 1mm.mHv imm.mHv AHH.HNV mama moH Ohm omH mMH omm Hmconmmmoum “Hosp xmm on wuHcsesoo can cH chmuom noumommu mo wuHHHQMHHm>msD mH\N Aom.omv imo.oqc lem.HHc 15H.mv los.mv suacsssoo mam mmv mHH mm HoH mt» cH meHmHm mcfirommu_afl mxoon wousomon OHQMHHm>m mo Hones: ucmHOHmmsmcH NH\N Aos.mqv iso.smc ImH.ov lmH.vV lem.mc mHm mam 46 me mm x663 m muse: mmmHo same 009 HH\~ 15H.mmc 1mm.emc 1mm.ch lsH.mc AmH.OHV mom mmm HmH mm 60H mmflufl>fluom ucmesum to somsemcmcH OH\N lom.omc Aso.mvc me.OHc 1s~.mv 1mm.mv mHm mmv 60H am am sumunHH Hoorum mumswoemaH mxm 1mm.mmc loo.amv 1mm.ov imm.mc Asm.sv mconumamu mos woe Nb mm mm ucmpsum\uw£ommu Homoum mo xomq m\m 140.061 Aqo.omc Amo.mc 156.01 lov.mc mmo mHm mm 5 6m mesa mcsnommp to somsvmemcH sxm loo.mmv Aom.omc 1m6.mc AmH.HV 1mm.ov w awumsm OHG mum mm NH mo 2 sumcflflcflumse wt» to mmmco>fluoommmcH o\m ucmuuomEH ucmuuomEH usmuuomEH ucmuuomEH Eanoum m .02 >um> mqu 002 uoc mH mHne mumnomme mo meHnoum EmuH 242 AHm.mmv 5mm Amo.mvv mew Ahm.Hmv va lsv.ooc moo ism.Hmv Hem Amm.bmv mmm Amo.hmv wmm Amm.mmv vhm imH.~mv Hmm Ho>.Hmv 0mm Amm.bv on 1mm.sv mm AmH.mv vm AHm.NV em AmH.ov v0 Amm.mv Hm AHH.NV mm AmH.HV NH Av¢.Hv mH Amm.mv hm Amm.mv mm Ahm.mv gm Amm.mv hm Amm.vv vv AHo.vv we >>mo£ oou mH Emuooum mcHnomoe mumcHEmm tam momusoo Hmcon Imomoum vacuum 0» mmocmno mo Homq CH 36: mo suumscflz outcfipm soHumospm QOHumEH0mcH pom mcoHHm>occH moHuHHHomm mchHmmH mo xomq mmmmGHO COUgHU H0>O on“ ma omon uoc mH «meEHn Honuusm ou muHmmp m.um£omme HN\N om\m maxm mH\N sH\m APPENDIX II QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE ROLE OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS IN THE PRESENT EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM No. I (FOR TEACHERS) MINISTRY OF EDUCATION PLANNING RESEARCH AND COORDINATION OFFICE RESEARCH DEPARTMENT MARCH 1971, ANKARA 243 Dear Colleagues, Thank you for your time in answering this questionnaire. In my research on "the role of Ministry supervisors in the present educational system," I want to benefit from experiences and Opinions of persons like yourself who have been involved in educational activities. The purpose of this research is to show the "role of the Ministry supervisors in the present educational system." The success of this research depends on your careful and sincere answers. The answers you give will be evaluated without any names and the results will indicate the opinions of Turkish teachers and supervisors in this subject. The results of the research will be published and presented to you by the Ministry of Education, Planning-Research and Coordination Office. Please, give your answers without any influence and according to your thoughts and opinions. Please, do not write your name or sign your name on the questionnaire. When the questionnaire is completed put it into the envelope attached and give it to the directorate of your school to be mailed to: Ministry of Education Directorate of the Planning-Research and Coordination Office (Supervision Research) Technical Schools, Ankara Thank you for your cooperation. Galip Karagozoglu 244 DIRECTIONS: This QUESTIONNAIRE OF "THE ROLE OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS IN EDUCATION" (for the teachers) questionnaire contains questions concerning you. Please read each question carefully, and then from among the alternatives, select the one which best suits your situation and put an (x) in the ( ) box next to it. 1-6 What is mbWNH o AAA/\rs Vvvvv 1-7 What is 1. ( ) 2. ( ) 1-8 What is N A v \omqmmrbw AAAAAAA vvvvvvv Section I Personal Questions your age? less than 25 25—35 36-45 46-55 56 or over your sex? female male your field of study (your major in school) Turkish - Literature Mathematics and Sciences (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, natural sciences) Social Sciences (history, geography, civics) Foreign Language Arts and Handcrafts (drawing, handcrafts, music, gymnastics) Teacher Training Courses and Philosophy Group Boys Vocational and Technical Training Courses Girls Vocational and Technical Training Courses Other (Specify) ................. ..... ......... 1-9. The school from which you graduated last, or the course or examination which is the basis of your job now? mummewmr—a AAAAAAA" vvvvvvvv University Higher Teachers School Technical Higher Institution Educational Institute Foreign College or a University Secondary Level Vocational School Graduate of courses or through examinations Other (Specify) ... 94R 1...: I 12. 1-13. 1—14. 246 Including administrative positions, how long have you been a teacher? less than 2 years 2-4 5-9 10-19 20-29 30 years or over OWU'IbO-JNH . vvvvvv For which of the following schools are you a teacher? (please, mark only one) Middle school Lycee Teacher training school Girls institute and girls secondary school of arts Boys secondary school of arts Religious training school Commerce lycee and secondary school Private secondary school and lycee CD‘JO‘WQWNH . . . . AAAAAAAA vvvvvvvv Including administrators how many teachers are there in your school? 1. ( ) fewer than 5 2. ( ) 5-10 3. ( ) 11-20 4. ( ) 21-30 5. ( ) 31-40 6. ( ) 41-50 7. ( ) 51 or more How many times have your classes been supervised since you have become a secondary school teacher? hWNH Section II Questions Concerning Supervision and Supervisors During your last supervision, was the supervisor helpful in intro- ducing you to the new teaching materials in your field? 1. ( ) Was very helpful 2. ( ) Not as much as I would have expected 3. ( ) Was not helpful 1-16. 1 17. 1-19. 1-20. 247 During your last supervision was the supervisor helpful in introducing you to new professional publications in your field? 1. ( ) Was very helpful 2. ( ) Not as much as I would have expected 3. ( ) Was not helpful During your last supervision did the Supervisors make recommenda- tions toward improving your teaching methods? ( ) yes ( ) no If your answer was "yes" please, answer question No. 1-17. How useful did you find the recommendations for improving your teaching method? Useful Partly useful Not necessary and not useful I cannot give any opinion bWNH AAAA vvvv In your opinion, how good was the last supervisor's knowledge in education (educational methods, educational psychology, educational sociology and educational philosophy)?. 1. ( ) Very good 2. ( ) Good 3. ( ) Fair 4. ( ) Very little 5. ( ) None In your opinion, how good was the last supervisor's knowledge in your specific field? 1. ( ) Very good 2. ( ) Good 3. ( ) Fair 4. ( ) Very little 5. ( ) None During your last supervision how was the supervisor's behavior with respect to human relations (please, mark only one)? Sincere, friendly, likeable Showed feelings of being superior, looked down on me Very serious and follows formalities Casual and not serious I cannot give any opinion £11.5me o AAAAA vvvvv 1-23. 1-25. 1-26. 248 After your meeting with your last supervisor was there any change in your feelings concerning the teaching profession? 1. ( ) My attachment to my profession and my desire to work increased. 2. ( ) My attachment to my profession and my desire for work decreased. 3. ( ) My feelings have not changed 4. ( ) I cannot give any opinion During supervisions do you know what supervisors expect or to what they will pay special attention concerning educational matters? ( ) I know 2. ( ) I know little ( ) I do not know How do you feel when a supervisor enters your class? I become very excited I become a little more excited I remain especially calm I do not change my normal behavior bWNH AAAA VVVV When a supervisor enters your class, do you change your teaching method? ( ) I become more organized and I teach my best ( ) I behave as usual and teach as usual ( ) Students become excited and I cannot teach normally ( ) I cannot give any opinion In your opinion, is there agreement among supervisors on the recommendations they make to teachers? Total agreement Some agreement ubUJNH Z O :3 (D Do you believe that school inspections by supervisors help to improve the educational and teaching processes of the school? 1. ( ) Very much 2. ( ) Very little 3. ( ) None 4 () Undecided 249 1-27. If you had to make a generalization, in your opinion, how many of the supervisors believe in the helpfulness of the supervisory activities? . 1. ( ) All of them 2. ( ) Most of them 3. ( ) Half of them 4. ( ) Few of them 5. ( ) None of them 1-28. In your opinion, how many of the teachers' successes are the supervisors able to evaluate accurately during their supervision? All of them Most of them Some of them None of them lb w N H . . . . A A A A V v V V IF YOU HAD TO MAKE A GENERALIZATION ON THE MINISTRY SUPERVISORS, ACCORDING TO YOUR OPINION: 1-29. In order to improve the education and the teaching processes, how many of the supervisors are equipped adequately with specific "subject field" knowledge? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them U'lubUJNH AAAAA vvvvv 1-30. In order to improve the education and teaching processes, how many of the supervisors adequately are equipped with educational knowledge (educational methods, educational psychology, educa- tional sociology, educational philosophy)? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them U'lnbUJNH AAAAA vvvvv 1-31. How many of the supervisors know which criteria to use in teacher evaluations? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them (fiwaH . AAAAA VVVVV 250 1-32. How many of the supervisors know professional evaluation techniques in education? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them U1 :5 (.10 N l-‘ 0 AA A AA VV v v V 1-33. When the teachers' evaluations are being made, is there an agreement among the supervisors as to the criteria to be used? All will agree Most will agree None will agree I cannot give any opinion waH () () () () Section III In this section there is some information given concerning supervision and supervising. Please read each item carefully, and then make a decision of the degree of its importance. Mark your decision with an (x) in the ( ) box on the left side according to the importance you have given it. Then, on the right side put an (x) in the box according to its frequency of application in the field today. 251 r c vaIHV EooummMHo msu mpHmuso mmHuH>Huom uHmnu mo muoommm m>Humwms can o>HuHmom on» mumnommu mnu zuH3 mchmsumHn AmonHV mmusoo m mcHsommu :H moonuma m.um£owmu gnu mo muommmm m>Hummoc can m>HuHmom on» Moscow» mnu £UH3 mchmaomHQ AmmnHV mponuos soHumon>m ucmsm>oHsom ucmpsum co mumsowmu wchst AHmIHv uH poms amnu cm£3 meHnoum HmcoHumospm so mnwsommu ou MomH>pm HMGOHumosom cm msHEoomm looch ummn preamp an emu pomnnnm cm>Hm m. 30: co chmmmH coHumuumcoSwo msH>Ho Ammqu moms HHwnu mcHumuumsofimp tam mHoou manommv 3o: on mumcommu ms» msHOSpOHpsH Ammqu mumsommu nuH3 moosmummcoo HMGOHumosow msHpHom Anmle mGOHusHOmmH HHmnu pct meHboum mcHHmHomHo ucmtsum so muwnomou msHumHmm4 lom-sc macaumusflnsm Hmconmmmoum on mumzomwu mcHosoonusH AmmuHV meosums mcfisommu uHmsu mo ucwem>oumEH can so mnosommu mcHumHmmm A V A v A V A V mle «V H .HVIH oeufi mmua mmua smua ,omnH .wmrH vMIH A (v V peptoepun A ISABN a: E? semtqemos QmHHmmd zmz3 shanty ,’_,‘ ZOHBmSmOWZH A Ln V papioepun Awe Ame Amt V N I T I 3 o m e m d o d V I o x. o T.m I T. 1 Tie 1 u 3 O 25 e 1 u u 3 3 3. e e u 3 e mUZHBMOAZH mo mmmwmo KJeA " queixodm]; 3 252 Amnuav mHOma>Hmmdm cam Emumwm coflmfl>nmmsm ms» muflofluwuo on mnmnommu mcfl3oHH¢ Awhuav moflumaflcfi nuflz omomm mum awn» cmn3 magma» .muwnommu mcfluomuoum Ampuav mGOwumasmmH can mzma mcwnommu umnflmmm no: mum £UH£3 cofiumuscw on mmsomoummm 30: How mammomoum .mumnommu mcflummood Amhuav mumsommu mo mcoflcflmo may mcwuommmmm Aahlav mnmnommu mo EmHoHUHHo m>Huusuumcoo mcwxmz AonuavmmSUmmHHoo andvm mm muwnummu @Cflummua Amouav mcwnommu cam coflumosom ocacumoqoo mmHOfluum gmwansm 0p mumnommu mcfimmusoocm Amolav vmpmsam>m ma HHfl3 mmsu 30: cam Emsu mo nwuommxm maamcoflm nmmmoum ma 90:3 mumsomwu man Euomcfl OB Ahmnav mEmHQOHm Hmcoflumosom Hamsu Qufl3 muoumuuwflcflecm cam muwsommu acflmawm Amolav muouomm HOGHE mcHNflmmnmEm uoc cam maonz m mm mmmoosm .mumnommu may ocfiumsam>m Amonav moosume coflumsam>m mo >uwwum> m mcflms .cmvmmc ma ufl ma mmmoosm .mumcummu mgu mo coflumsam>m >uouommmflumm m comma OH vaH mmIH NmIH amid omIH avid I H mv thH ovIH vaH vvla 253 IMPORTANT: Please check to see if you have answered all the questions, 34 through 75 in this section. According to the 7th Articles of the Regulations of the Ministry of Education's Board of Supervisors, in order to be appointed as a supervisor one should be a graduate of a University or a higher institution, have at least 8 years of teaching experience in a secondary or higher institution, in this period also have administrative experience for at least 3 years, and finally, to be noted as successful in both of these areas of service. In your opinion, concerning the appointment of the inspectors which of the following should be considered? 1. ( ) Present regulations concerning years of service should continue. 2. ( ) There should be 8 years of teaching required, but not any administrative service needs to be required. 3. ( ) Years of administrative service should be increased but teaching period should be limited to 5-8 years. 4. ( ) Years of teaching and administrative service both should be increased. 5. ( ) Years of both teaching and administrative services required should not be limited. 6. ( ) Please, give your proposals other than indicated above. Below are listed some problems about your teaching job. Please, read each of the problems carefully. If the given problem is not one of the problems you face, please put an (x) in the first ( ) next to it. If otherwise, then please put an (x) in the box that best repre- sents your opinion. 2-21. 254 Ineffectiveness of the disciplinary system Inadequacy of teaching aids Lack of proper teacher-student relations Inadequate school library Inadequacy of student activities Too many class hours a week Insufficient number of available resource books in teaching fields in the community Unavailability of research persons in the community to ask their professional help Requirement of testing students with two written and one oral examination Administrators' lack of assistance to teachers in educational matters Inability to resolve attendance problems Teachers' desire to further educate him- self is not aided by the Ministry Over crowded classes Lack of facilities for learning new innovations and information in education Lack of chances given to attend profes- sional courses and seminars Teaching program is too heavy This is not a Problem A 5.: A ( V ) AAA k: Not im portant VV v A Less A ( Important ) AA portant 5: Im V ery Important A ( AV (fl v V ) 2-23 2-24 ( ) l. ( ) 2. ( ) 3. ( ) 4. ( ) 5. ( ) 6. 255 Would you like the current supervisory system to be changed? ( ) Yes ()No If your answer is "Yes, which of the proposals liSted below is most beneficial? Current system should continue, but the investigation duties should be taken away from the supervisors, and given to a newly established "Board of Inquiry" and the supervisors should only be responsible for evaluation of educational activities. There should be two types of supervisors. The first one should work with investigations and administrative supervision. The second one should serve as a helper and a counsellor to teachers on educational and teaching matters. There should be regional supervisory directorates, and in these directorates there should be one director and a sufficient number of supervisors. The directors should have the authority to plan and execute a regional supervisor program. All the super- visory duties of this region (courses, examinations, administra- tive supervision and investigations), should be given to these supervisors. There should be two types of supervisors. The first one should deal with investigations and Ankara should be the central office. The second one should work as a "guidance supervisor," who would be attached to the educational director of the district, and they should work as helpers and counsellors to the teachers on educational matters. There should be two kinds of Supervisors. The first one should be attached to the Board of Education and the Ministry central organization as "Ministry General Supervisors." Their duties should be to carry on research to help the above offices and evaluate the Turkish educational activities as a whole. The second one as a "Ministry Supervisor" should perform such duties as evaluation, counselling, and supervision of the administration and teaching personnel. I prepose something entirely different than the ones listed above (please, write your proposal in the space available on the back of this page). THE QUESTIONNAIRE IS COMPLETED. PLEASE, CHECK AGAIN IF YOU HAVE ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION. APPENDIX III QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE ROLE OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS IN THE PRESENT EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM No. II (FOR SUPERVISORS) MINISTRY OF EDUCATION PLANNING RESEARCH AND COORDINATION OFFICE RESEARCH DEPARTMENT MARCH 1971, ANKARA 256 Dear Colleagues, Thank you for your time in answering this questionnaire. In my research on "the role of Ministry supervisors in the present educational system," I want to benefit from experiences and opinions of persons like yourself who have been involved in educational activities. The purpose of this research is to show the "role of the Ministry supervisors in the present educational system." The success of this research depends on your careful and sincere answers. The answers you give will be evaluated without any names and the results will indicate the opinions of Turkish teachers and supervisors in this subject. The results of the research will be published and presented to you by the Ministry of Education, Planning-Research and Coordination Office. Please, give your answers without any influence and according to your thoughts and opinions. Please, do not write your name or sign your name on the questionnaire. When the questionnaire is completed put it into the enve10pe attached and give it to the directorate of your school to be mailed to: Ministry of Education Directorate of the Planning-Research and Coordination Office (Supervision Research) Technical Schools, Ankara Thank you for your cooperation. Galip Karagozoglu 257 DIRECTIONS: QUESTIONNAIRE ON "THE ROLE OF MINISTRY SUPERVISORS IN EDUCATION" (for the supervisors) This questionnaire contains questions concerning you. Please read each question carefully, and then, from among the alternatives, select the one which best suits your situation the most and put an (x) in the ( ) box waH 1-7. What is l. 2. AAA“ ( ( vvvv ) ) next to it. Section I Personal Questions your age? 30 and less 31-45 46-60 61 and over your sex? female male 1-8. For which courses are you a supervisor? WNH \OCDxlO‘UTb 1-9. In mprI—a ( ( ( AAAAAA ) Vvvvvv Turkish - Literature Social Sciences (history, geography, civics) Mathematics and Sciences (mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, natural sciences) Foreign Language (English, French, German, etc.) Arts and Handcrafts (drawing, handcrafts, music, gymnastics) Teacher Training Courses and Philosophy Group Boys Vocational and Technical Training Courses Girls Vocational and Technical Training Courses Others (Specify) .............................. total how many years have you been a supervisor? AAAAA VVVVV less than 2 years 2—4 years 5-9 years 10—19 years 20 Years and over 258 1-10. 1-12. 259 In total, how many years were you a teacher or a school administrator before you became a supervisor? l. ( ) Less than 10 years 2. ( ) lO-l4 years 3. ( ) 15-19 years 4. ( ) 20-24 years 5. ( ) 25—29 years 6. ( ) 30 years and over In total, how many years have you been in the education profession (including the years as a supervisor and an administrator)? l. ( ) Less than 10 years 2. ( ) lO—l4 years 3. ( ) 15—19 years 4. ( ) 20-24 years 5. ( ) 25—29 years 6. ( ) 30 and over In total, how many years have you been an administrator (including assistant director)? 1. ( ) None 2. ( ) 2 or less 3. ( ) 3-6 years 4. ( ) 7-10 years 5. ( ) 11-14 years 6. ( ) 15 and over The school from which you graduated last or course or examination which is the basis of your job now? University Higher Teachers School Technical Higher Institution Educational Institute Foreign College or a University Secondary level vocational school Graduate of courses or through examinations Other (Specify) ........................... mummfiwwh‘ AAAAAAAA vvvvvvvv 1-15. 1-18. '1-19. 260 Section II Questions on Performance During your supervisory activities, do you make recommendations for the improvement of teachers' teaching methods? 1. ( ) Always 2. ( ) Sometimes 3. ( ) Never During your supervisory activities do you present the teachers with the new teaching tools in their fields and vocations? Do you recommend them to be used? 1. ( ) Always 2. ( ) Sometimes 3. ( ) Never During your supervisory activities do you present the teachers with the new publications in their fields? 1. ( ) Always 2. ( ) Sometimes 3. ( ) Never During your supervisory activities did you give any demonstration lesson? 1. ( ) Never 2. ( ) Once 3. ( ) 2-5 times 4. ( ) 6-10 times 5. ( ) More than 10 times During your supervisory activities how many of the teachers' successes do you believe you were able to evaluate exactly? All of them Most of them Some of them None of them bWNF‘ AAAA VVVV In your opinion, how many of the other supervisors are able to measure the exact success of teachers during their inspections? All of them Most of them Some of them None of them waH o a o AAA’N vvvv 261 1-20. What is the degree of the supervisors' influence on the improvement of the teachers‘ teaching methods? 1. ( ) Very much 2. ( ) Little 3. ( ) Not at all 4. ( ) Undecided l-Zl. In your opinion, is there an agreement among supervisors on the recommendations they make to teachers? 1. ( ) Total agreement 2. ( ) Some agreement 3. ( ) None 4. ( ) Undecided 1—22. Do you believe that school supervision by the supervisors helps to improve the educational and teaching processes of the schools? 1. ( ) Very much 2. ( ) Very little 3. ( ) None 4. ( ) Undecided 1-23. If you had to make a generalization, in your Opinion, how many of the supervisors believe in the helpful services of the supervisory activities? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them UWDWNH AAA/NA VVVVV IF YOU HAD TO MAKE A GENERALIZATION OF THE MINISTRY SUPERVISORS, ACCORDING TO YOUR OPINION: 1-24. In order to improve the education and the teaching processes, how many of the supervisors are equipped adequately with specific "field" knowledge? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them UlubUJNH “AAA“ Vvvvv 262 l-25. In order to improve the education and teaching process, how many of the supervisors adequately are equipped with education knowledge (educational methods, educational psychology, educa- tional sociology, educational philosophy)? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them UWQWNH “AAA/K VVVVV l-26. How many of the supervisors know which criteria to use in teacher evaluations? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them UlbUJNH AAAAA VVVVV l-27. How many of the supervisors know professional evaluation techniques in education? All of them Most of them Half of them Few of them None of them UlbLAJNH vvvvv 1-28. When teachers' evaluations are being made, is there an agreement among the supervisors as to the criteria to be used? All will agree Most will agree None will agree Undecided .5 b) N H O A A A A V V V V Section III In this section there is some information given concerning supervision and supervising. Please read each item carefully, make a decision on the degree of its importance. Mark your decision with an (x) in the ( ) box on the left side according to the importance you have given it. Then, on the right side put an (x) in the box according to its frequency of application in the field today. 263 A V AmmnHV Eooummmao map mcwmuso mow» Ifi>wuom um: Mo was mo muommmm m>wummmc can. m>fluflmom gnu wumnommu wnu nufl3 mcflmmsomwa AmmIHV wmunoo m mCflzommu no: no man mo muommmm m>flummwc new m>Huflmom msu umnommu mnu Qua; madmmsomwa AhmIHV moonuma COfiumaHm>m ucm8m>mfl£om pawnsum so mnwsommu mcfibwao AmmIHV pa coma away cm£3 mamanoum Hmcoflumoscm co muwsowmu on» on HOmH>©m Hmcoflumoacm cm mcaeoomm AmmuHV ummn unmsmu ma cmo pomflnsm cm>flm. m 30: so mcommma coflumuumcoamo mca>w0 AvmsaV moms Hams» mafiumnumcoswo can mHoou mcwnommu 3m: 0:» zua3 mumsommu.m£u mcflucwmwum AmmnaV mumnommu npfiz mmocmummcoo Hmcofiumosom mcficaom ANmIHV mcofluSHOmmH Mama» 0cm mEmHnoum mcwam Iflomfic ucwcsum so mumnommu on» mcflumwmmd AHmuHV mcofiumowflnsm HchNumosom zufl3 mumnomwu ms» mcflucmmmum AomIHV moosumfi mcfisomwu Hams» mo ucwEw>oumEfi may :0 muwnommu on“ mcwumflmmd A A V A A V A V A V A V A A A A A A V V . V V V v mMIH hMIH ®MIH mMIH ¢MIH MMIH NMIH HMIH om l H mNIH A paprbapun ‘v u A ISASN tn .omHamma zmmz A samrqamos (V V A H V sKemIv ZOHBQZMOQZH m V paptoepun AvV V N I q o .w V I o nmu w e In 1.0 98 u o a mUZ¢BmOmZH Am V ANV I I x .w X. o I. 1 u 3 5 e u 3 ho mmmomo A H uueqzodml KJGA " 264 AObIHV muomfi>umm5m on» cam Emummm >H0ma>umm5m on» wNflofiuwuo on mumsommu mcwsoaaa AmoIHV moAumSncw nufl3 cmomw mum >mnu awn: musmflu .mumzommu gnu mcfluomuoum AmQIHV mcofiumasomn paw m3ma mcflnommu umqflmmm uoa mum gowns coaumoscm on monomoummm so: you mHMmomonm .mumnommu mafiummuod AbouHV mumcommu map mo meoHcfimo may mcfluommmmm AmouHV mumgommu may mo Emflowuwuo m>fluosuumcoo mcwxmz AmeHV mmsmmwaaoo Hmsvw mm muwsommu opp mcflumwua AvoufiV mangommu can coflum0966 mcwcumocou mmaowuum cmflansm ou mumnommu on» mcfimmuaoocm AmeHV vmum5Hm>m on Hafl3 >m£u 30: new Emnu mo wmuommxm aaamconmmmoum we umn3 mumnommp mcflauomcH AmouHV mamanoum Hmc0wumos©w Hams» sues whoumuumflcflfiwm on» can AmoIHV mumsommu may mcwmawm AHwIHV muouomm HOCHE mcwuwmmnmEm no: can maonz m mm mmmoodm .mumzommu on» mcwumsam>m AomIHV muonumfi coflumsam>m mo xuwflnm> m mcfims .vmpmm: me ya me .mmmoosm .mumnomou 0:» mo :oflumsHm>m muouommmfiuwm a zoom“ 09 OVIH mVIH hle owld vaH vvla mv H qua avid ovIH mmuH 265 IMPORTANT: Please check if you have answered all the questions 49 through 70 in this section According to the 7th Article of the Regulations of the Ministry of Education's Board of Supervisors, in order to be appointed as a supervisor one should be a graduate of a University or a higher institution, have at least 8 years of teaching experience in a secondary or higher institution, in this period also have administrative experience for at least 3 years, and finally, to be noted as successful in both of these areas of service. In your opinion, concerning the appointment of the superviSors, which of the following should be considered? 1. ( ) Present regulations concerning years of service should continue. 2. ( ) There should be 8 years of teaching required without any administrative service. 3. ( ) Years of administrative service should be increased but teaching period should be limited to 5-8 years. 4. ( ) Years of teaching and administrative service should be increased. 5. ( ) Years of both teaching and administrative services should not be limited. 6. ( ) Please, give your proposals other than indicated above. Below are listed some problems concerning supervision and supervisors. Please, read each of the problems carefully. If the given problem is not one of the problems you face, please put an (x) in the first ( ) next to it. If otherwise, then please put an (x) in the box that best represents your opinion. 2-10 2-11 266 The number of teachers to one supervisor Investigation duties interfering' with counselling duties Lack of enough time allowed to each teacher during supervision Too much time required to prepare supervisory reports Insufficient amount paid for this duty In some circumstances to be required to supervise subject areas which are outside of one's field Facing difficulties in localities (food, board, adjustment to the climate) Lack of follow-up by supervisors on the recommendations that they make Lack of cooperation from teachers on the improvement of teaching and educational matters Lack of consideration given to proposals by related departments of the Ministry of Education Scientific evaluation methods not used by the supervisor in order to measure teachers‘ success accurately--everybody does what he pleases Lack of cooperation by the administrators in the improvement of teaching activities Teachers' not expressing the problems that they face Lack of assistance given by the Ministry in providing the schools with recommended publications and teaching tools Work load of supervisory duties not allow- ing proper time for self improvement and reading professional publications RAT ( his is not ~' "a Problem 1.: ) 5 Not Important AA v AA V ( 33 Less Important ) AA 5 Important V V EVery Important 267 Despite your problems indicated above are you satisfied with your supervision duties in general? 2-21. 1. Yes, I am satisfied ( ) 2. No, I am not satisfied ( ) If you have problems other than those listed above, please indicate in the space given below and give its degree of importance in a parentheses next to it (less important, important, very important) (In case the space is not enough you can continue onto the next page.) ( ) ( ) ( ) Would you like the current supervisory system to be changed? N I 22 1. Yes ( ) 2. No ( ) If your answer is "Yes" which one of the proposals listed below is most beneficial? 2-23.( )1. Current system should continue but the investigation duties should be taken away from the supervisors, and given to a newly established "Board of Inquiry" and the supervisors should only be responsible for the evaluation of educa— tional activities. ( ) 2. There should be two types of supervisors. The first one should work with investigations and administrative super- vision. The second one should serve as a helper and a counsellor to teachers on educational and teaching metters. ( ) 3. There should be regional supervisory directorates, and in these directorates there should be one director and a sufficient number of supervisors. The directors should have the authority to plan and execute a regional supervision program. All the supervisory duties of this region (courses, examinations, administrative supervision and investigations) should be given to these supervisors. ( ) 4. There should be two types of supervisors. The first one should deal with investigations and Ankara should become a center. The second one should work as a "guidance super- visor" who should be attached to the education director of the district. These should work as helpers and counsellors to the teachers on educational matters. 268 ( ) 5. There should be two kinds of supervisors. The first one should be attached to the Board of Education and the Ministry central organization, as "Ministry's General Supervisors." Their duties should be to carry on researches to help the above offices and evaluate the Turkish educational activities as a whole. The second one as a "Ministry Supervisor" should perform such activities as evaluation, counselling, supervision of the administration and personnel. ( ) 6. I propose something entirely different than the ones listed above (please, write your proposal in the space available on the back of this page). THE QUESTIONNAIRE IS COMPLETED. PLEASE, CHECK AGAIN IF YOU HAVE ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION. APPENDIX IV QUESTIONNAIRES FOR TEACHERS AND SUPERVISORS (in original Turkish form) 269 I BugUn kU Egitim DUzeninde Bakanhk MUfettislerinin ROLL} ile ilgili Anket - PLANLAMA-ARASTIRMA VE KOORDINASYON DAIR ESI MILL! EGITIM BAKANLIGI _ ARASTI‘RMA BOLU’MU MART 1971 ANKARA sayin 2931:;t2;, Ilisikt e size gonderilen anketin cevaplandirilm331na harcaya- Gaziniz zaman 19in simdiden tesekkfir ederim. 7 Bugfinkfingitim Dfizeninde Bakanlik Mfifettislerinin Rolfi " &onusunda yapilan bu arastirmada egitim faaliyetlerinin daima icinde bulunan siz meslektasimin degerli tecrfibelerinden ve fikirlerinden faydalanmak istiyorum. Bu arastirmanin ama01 " BJUJNK£;DEITIJ D3" slifiiNDE BAKANLIK MU?€TTI$LERININ ROLU " nfi ortaya koymaktir. Arastirmanin basariya ulaeabilmesi ancak sizin dikkatle ve samimiyetle vereceginiz cevapla- ra baglidir. Vereceginiz cevaplar isimsiz olarak defierlendirilecek ve elde edilecek sonuglar bu konnda Tfirk Efretmenlerinin ve mfifettis- lerinin neler dfisfindfiklerini yan51tacakt1r. Arastirmanin sonuclari Milli-Egitim Bakanligi, Planlama-Arastirma ve Eoordinasyon Dairesince yayinlanacak‘ve sizlerin hizmetine sunulacaktir. Lfitfen cevaplar1n1z1 hig bir tesir altinda kalmadan tamamen dfisuncelerinize ve kanaatlerinize uygun olarak veriniz. Knketin fize— rine her no sebeple olursa olsun kiqiliginizi belirtecek bir isim yazmayiniz,imza atmayiniz. Anketin cevaplanma51 bittikten sonra ili- $1kteki zarra koyup Sihica kapayiniz ve zarfi Milli Egitim Bakanligi Planlama-Arastirma ve Koordinasyon Dairesi Baskanligi ( Teftis Arastirmasi ) TEKNIK OKULLAR / ANKARA adresine ganderilmek fizere okul mfidfirfine teslim ediniz. Gasterdiginiz iléf icin‘simdiden tesekkfir ederim. Galipfggzzszoglu ng‘il. c— \ mun Miami!!! 3mm mm: In mm mm (Ocrotl-nlor 1m) Md h mutt. 01:10: icin‘mirlnmg has: nor-uln- vu-dir. Bar com-u 111cc chum. and“ com her com 191:: worn-19 clan cavaplar icinden en wan W bir tsunami «9m: vs embin kargumda clan ( D ) mm 191m (1) hi: carpi imati tom. Bowl I. W. 11.41:. Somlar 1-6 Imam? 1 D 25 ten 3: 2 B 25-35 3 B 36—45 4 CI 46—55 5 D 56 n ma run 1,? Gin-110m: num- 7 1-7-1 D um 2 Damn 1-8 Bunyan: nadir ? (lem oldugumn onldaki 63mm].- daliniz ?) 1 Turkco—Bdobiyat 2 latth v0 Pun 311511»: (htmtik, run, Kings, Big/01:31, Tablet 3115191) Sonya]. 3113110: (ruin, County... Yurttagm 3115131) tubule: nu Swat 7. lanai-ct Dmitri (Ruin-I9, Inuit, Baden Egitim) Open-aux Inlet Dex-alert v. 1.1.91. Gram Rrkck Inuit lulu Dar-10:1 n; Tom Inlet Dada-1 moqaupu DDDDDDD DE] ”0101(W) ......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.9.....0.' -2- 1-9 Son lam oldugunuz okul ve'ya gindild. gfirevinizi yapmaniza cans clan turn voyu intihanz -1 [:1 D U 4; 4mm DDDDDD Universito Yukaok dgrotnen Okulu Texnik Ogretim yapan bir yaksek agrenim mfieasesesi Egitim Eastituflfi Yabanci bit kale; veya Universite Orta dorecoli bir mealek okulu Kurslardan nezun olmak veya imtihanla Bunlarin diginda varaa belirtiniz ....... ................ 1~10 Idarecilik dahil Rag yillik ogretmanainiz ? ...: DDDDDD N GNU-FM Iki yildan as 2-4 yil 5-9 :11 10-19 :11 20-29‘111 3O :11 v0 daha fazla 1-11 Callahan“ okul aqagidakilerdon hangisidir ? (Bir tans isaretleyiniz': l N OQOUI-hhl DDDDDDDD Ortaokul Lise Ogretmen Okulu Ki: Enatttusunvo Ki: Sanat drtaoknlu Brkok Sanat'xnstitusu' Inanpnttip Okulu Ticarot Lido v0 Ortuokulu 6201 Ortaokul ve Lino - 3 - . 1912 Idnrocilor duhil clack user. oknlnnnx_fln tag .311 U:rotnen.var ? 1-12-1 E] 5 to; u . 2 D 5-10 3 D 1.1—an, 4 [3 21-36 5 E] 3140 s [:I 41-50 7 [:J 51". Inha.tasla 3'13 Ortn dorocc11 oknl agrotloni oldugunux gflndon bugunn radar dorsleriniz tag dot: unfottiglcrco tottig odildi 2 1-13-1 E] nu- «on 2 C] 2-4 3 1:] 5-7 4 [::l 8 vs duh: foals 36m 11. Teftis ve lfltnttiglor n. ngni aux-um 1-14 in sun toftiqto lutottgq noaloginix vo brnnginis1n 115111 yeni dart araglarini tual-unis icin sis. tural-oi oldu In ? 144-1 E] cox yum-c1 cum. 2 [:]_:Boklodiail.k-dnr’yardi-ni 01-341. 3 l::l 319 yardzlnx all-d1. 1—15 In son.tott1§to .131 donothyon.lfl£ottig noaloginis‘vo brnnginis1a 115111 ’I’lnllrl tans-anis icin I1:- yardilci o1dn In 1 1-15-1 D Col: yam-o1 om. 2 E] Bonanza ndu- yam-o1 om. 3 [:1 319 yardinci o1-ad1. - 4 .. 1—16 En son teftigte dersinizi denetleyen murettig 63:11:13 notodunusun daha basarili olabilmesi icin tavsiyelarde bulundu.ln ? -l D Evet 2 [3 Han: ' Cevabiniz "EVET' ise lutfen 17 numarali soruyu oovaplandirinlx. 1—17 Ogretim metodunuzun daba basarili olabilmesi icin ntifattigce yapiln tavsiyeleri 118.311 buldunuz ? -l [:] .Yerinde ve faydali 2 [:1 Kismen faydall 3 [:1 Luzumsuz vs faydasiz 4 [3 Eu konuda bir fikrim yok. l~13 Kanaetinize gore sizi en son teftis eden mufettigin g31tiq_‘;lyz_1 (agretim metotlari, egitim poikolojisi, egitim sosyolojiei vs agitim felsefssi) maelldl ? “1 D Go): iyi 22 [:J‘ Iyi 3 E] Orta 4 E] on az 5 [:] H19 . l~19 Kanaatinize gore 9121 en son teftis eden mafettigin dersinizle ilgili brans bilgisi naslldi ? .--1 C] Cok iyi 2 Cl Iyi 3 [:J Orta 4 D Cok 32 [3 Hi; 1-20 En son teftigte sizi teftis eden mufettisin davraniglarini insanllk U1 iliskileri bakimindan naail buldunuz ? (Yalniz birini isaretleyiniz) -1 D Samimi, arkadasqa davranan, cans yakin, 2 Col: gururlu ve baskalarini kuguk gbren col: ciddi vo tomlitelarc duskun C Laubali u ciddi chum DUDE] Karansx'znn hirnnv nKv1flnn-m Q5- 1~21 Sizi tertis eden mufettisle yaptiginiz konusma ve gdrusmeler sonunda ogretmenlik meslegi hakkinda sahip oldugunuz duygulerda bir aegisiklik oldu mu ? —l [:3 Meslegime daha 90k baglandim ve galisma iategim artti. 2 [:J Ogretmenlik meslegine duydugum ilgi ve calisma istegbn azaldin 3 E] Duygularimda hggbir degisiklik olmadi. ‘4 [:3 Kararsizim bu konuda birsey sdyleyemen. Lw22 Mfifettislerin teftisler airaSinda ogretmenlerden egitim-bgretin .etkinlikleriyle ilgili olarak neler istediklerini ve en 90k nelero dikkat ettiklerini biliyor musunuz ? --l [:3 Biliyorum 2 i::] A; hiliyorun 3 E] Bilmiyorun. 1°23 Dersinize bir mufettis girdigi zaman, kendinizi nasil hissedersini: ? -1 Cok heyecanlanirin Heyecanlanirin 3 Sogukkanliligimi muhafaza ederin. DUDE] 4 Davranislarimda bir aegisiklik olmaz. 1-24 Dersinize bir mufettis girdigi zaman derainizi islemenis do bir degisiklik olur mu ? ol [:3 Daha duzenli olur ve en iyi sekilde dersimi islemeye calisirim. 2 [:1 Her zamanki gibi hareket eder, her gfin k1 uygulamama devam ederim. - 3 [:3 Gérenciler heyecanlanin normal sekilde ders isleyemem. 4 U Bir fikrim yok. 1‘25 Sizin kaniniza gore; mufettisler ogretmenlere yapmis olduklari tavsiyelerde kendi aralarinda germs binligine eahip midirler ? ml [:1 Tam gerus birligine sahiptirler. 2 C] Biraz gdrus birligine Bahip‘zirler 3 D Hit; gar—11$ birligine sahip degiiierdir, ' 4 [:3 Kar38121m birsey adyleyemal. it l~26 - 5 -' mufettislerce yapilan teftislerin'okullardaki agitim ve ogretim gallgmdlarlnln daha verimli hale gelmeaine yardimci olduguna ,inaniyor musunuz ? -1 [:1 2D 3D 4C] 1-27 Inaniyorum A: inaniyorum Hi; inanmiyorum Birsey soyleyemem Bir genelleme yapmaniz gerekirse; sizin kanaatlniza gore ogrehmuk lerin ne kadari mufettislik mfiesseaesinin faydali olduguna inannakthJ? JD 1-28 ‘Hepai Gesunluéu Yarlai fiek a21 Hiqbiri Sizin kaniniza gore mufettigler yapmis olduklari teftiglerde bgretmenlerin ne kadarinin basari derecesini tan olarak olqobiliyorlar? 4D 2:} 3D 4:] BUTUN BAKANLIK MUFETTIsLERI HAKKINDA BIR GENELLEME YAPMANIZ GERBEEE. Hepainin Qoéunlugunun Bazilarinin Higbirisinin “ I SIZIN KANAATLERINIZE 0633 a 1-29 mufettialerin ne kadari agitim ve 'dgretim faaliyetlerinin dahn verimli hale gatirilmesinde bgratmenlere rehberlik edebilecek brang bilggsine ..1 [:1 2 EDGE] u: -h L» aahiptir ? Hepsi Coéunluéu Yariai Yaridan daha 321 Higbirisi 2,.) q - 7 - 1-30 lufettielerin no kadari agitim ve dgretin taaliyetlerinin daha verimli hale getirilmesinde ogretmenlere rehberlik edebilecek egitim bilggsine (ogretim metotlari, egitim paikolojiai, agitin eas- yolojiai ve egitin felsefeai) aahiptir ? -l Hepsi 2 Gosunluéu 3 Yarisi 4 Yaridan daha ea; 5 Hiqbirisi DECIDE] 1‘31 Hufettislerin ne kadari ogretmenin degerlendirilmesinde hangi alqulerin (kriterlerin) kullanilacagini biliyorlar ? -1 C} Hepai 2 [:I Qoéunluéu ‘3 [:1 Iariai 4 E] rmdan dahn an 5 [j Higbiriai 1'32 lufettiglerin no kadari egitimdeki bilinael degerlendirme tekniklerini bilnektedirler ? -1 D Repel 2 [:1 Cog-unlugu 3 C] rum 4 Cl Yanidan daha am. 5 D Hiqbiriai 1°33 bgretmenlerin degerlendirilmesi yapilirken hangi olqulerin (kriterlerin) kullanilmasi gerektigi konusunda Mfifettisler erasinda bir gfirus birligi var.mid1r ? -1 D Tan bir gar-tag birligi vardir. 2 [:1 Oldukqa yakin gfirfls birligi verdir 3 D an; gdrfis birligi yok‘mr [:1 Kararsizim birsey sb‘ylayemem.~ BOLUL: 1:11. Bu bélmnde tutti; we miifettislikle ilgili bir tam fikirler : veriLuismir. he: iikri dikltatlice okuyunuz. Bu fikrin size gore no hair! ’o‘neamli oldugxma kdl‘dl" veriniz. mambizn. her maddenin sol tarafino‘s :18 derecesim’. bildiren§1klwdan birine (X) isareti koyarak belirtiniz. Sonra. her fibrin bugumn uygulamalarda no kadar 81k got-film“; dusiinarek kanaatinizi sag taraftaki b'o'liimleri isaretliyerek belirtmz. 5x33: nsmczsi _ _ mcummm 5;: .. l l .... to 0 . 3 ...4 «4 E i 2 a a a g E '2 2 S 3 t. 5 7S :1 a D ‘4 . H ...; 'u E E as a ,0 .5 o c c «4 5 . 4. a g Q 'V‘ '9 O 3‘ “ dzwmma == , il)(2)(3)(4)(5) _ ) (1)(2)(3)(.:;- .L-i4‘ lr—. Ogretmenlerin wguladiklari ogretim (1—55 a LJDD DD metotlarinin gelismesinde rehberlik DUE"... etmek; 1;-35 .. :1 S 1:} D D Ogre tmenlere ogretmenlik mesleg‘i 1» (1-56) B D D: le ilgili yayinlari tanitmak: ._ -. . H- . . . . . . 77" '. 0ch D D C] D D Okullardaki ogrencz. disiplinz. 119 (1-57) DD L4, ilgili problemlerin qbzumunde yd- netici ve ogretmenlere rehberlik etmek: (1-37) CID D a D Ogretmenlere egitimle ilgili konfe— (lu58) EDD: ranslar vermek; (1-36) C] DE D [j Ogretmenlere yeni ders araglarixu. (1-59) DDDJ tam tmak ve ders araglarinin naSil kuuamlacagim geetermek; (1-39) B D D D E] drnek dersler vererek bir konunun (1-60) DDS] en iyi settilcie nasxl islenecegini : gostermek: I r'“ (l-43) DC] D :1 E Ogremenin K;I‘§119.$tlg1 her turlu (1"61) DBL] egitim ogretizn problemlerinin go. : zumlenmesmde basvurulacak bir egi- l tin: danlsmani olmak; El [3 C] D C] 3481201 basarilarinin bilimsel mess (1-62) DEC totlarla. deserlendirilmesinde ‘ofg- .. retmenlere rehberlik etmek; uroumwm 8mm! 3: H 3 3 s a a a a a '3 a g 3 g o In S g *‘ '3 g ' 3 :3 s. 3 '3 a 2 a a :3 g a: a a 3 a g a 3 .5 o- :o :o :I: N :1: < a: had (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) (1)(2)(3)(4) Dersin islenmeoindo gbrulan olumlu ve ('1-63) L~42) . D D D E] clumsuz y'dnleri ogretmenin kendiei i- D D [:3 D 16 tartlsmak; 1,43,) DD D [3 D 'Ggretmenin sunf dlalfliaki diger 981’ (1’64) D C] [:1 D tin ’dgrstim faaliyetleri (egitsel kcllar’, yasill yoklama takitlnmnin degerlendirilmesi, eoru ha21r1ama vb.) ila ilgili olumlu vs cirrus-:32 36311911 ogrstmenin kendi £3".le tartismak; 'W '1’“) D [:3 D C] E] 631~etmezzin b8.}':1‘(‘15‘1 hakkinda tam its- (1’65) E] E] D [1 rar vorebilmek icin gatektiginde ge- gitli degerlendirmo usullerine bug- vurmak; 1495) D D D [:1 [:1 dire tmenin base-crisinin degerlendiril- (1—66) I: D D E: mesinde 90k kuquk ayrintilare onem vermemek ve agitimi bir butun olarak degerlendirmek; ,1-46) B [:1 D B D Ogretmenler ve yoneticiler tarafin- (1-67) D D D C: clan ortaya konulan egitim ogretim p- rohlemlerine 951411;: yolu bulunmaeina samimiyetle gayret etmekv‘v (1-47) [:1 E] E] E] [j Egitimfogre‘sim atkirdiklerimlo agret- (la-68) D L] [:1 [:1 menherden neler beklendlgini ve de— gerlendirmede hangi dlqfilerin kulla— nllacagini agik ve 8891K olarak 6g- retmenlere bildirmek; (L41) DE] E] D D Ogretmenleri eéitim—‘cigretimle ilgili x (ls-69‘) D D [:1 E] ya21ler yazmaéa tesvik etmek; \ (1-43,) B D E] D D Ogretmenlere esit arkadaa moleai (1—7‘0) D [3 D D yapmak; '(1-50) DD D E] D Ggretmenler nomads yapiei tenkid- (IL-«71) E] D D C] lords bulumnak; (1-51) B D D D D Ogretmenlerin fikirloringvo dusunco- (1—72) D D D D lorino aaygi g’datmek; b m DBBBCBSI Fl 4! '2 v “ _ 3' v! d. E .§§ ag'i :5 1:55 .s:; a as. .. 3.3 83333 . e5: 1 (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) (1)(2)(3)(U ,. m an helm Inn 4 . (1-73) (1 3) D D U DO may: :: gyzueueNTifu-i sax-31:3 D DUE] agitin-bgz'oti- yoniliklu'm tome. kahullcnnok; (1-53) D D DE] D Ugrctmenlero 13mm “1511313111: (1-74) DUDE} fizz-ammonia banal-mu komucusu cm; (1.54) D D D DD ‘ Ogretmenlerin tutti; sisted. V. In— (1;75) DDDU ~.. fottiglor bathtub yaptmm tun- kidlori hog garnet; 31233-3 : Bu balumdo bulunan 34. vs 75. annual-1n hepoini cmplandanp an? landzrmacugmu lattes: kontrol «nan. .1—16) , nun: Egitim Banana rem; final-um IUnotnolim younci madam gbre x1111 Egitim Bakanllgl unrattigugmo atmbilnnk 1cm bir universito "fl sci: oimldan mezun olmak ve aynca orta voya yuknek dmcou ohdlard: on I! 53‘ agretmenlik yapmg olmak V. In sure 191ml. do on as 3 n1 mlek Wand. 1“ olarak 9313.3ng bulunmak ve her 11d. alanda “stun Hymn. tubit «111-1’ 011‘“ Sizin kanaatinize gdre Mufettiglerin wanna-1m swan :5st hangileri dikkata alxnnahdn' ? UDDDDU Eski blqfiler tullmlmya dam 91113011. Idarecilik men mus-11ml; rant 8 n1 oar-mu yum; all“ gart olnalz. Idarecilik nuddeti "turn-ah tant {Shot-unlit sin-ad. 5-5 ’1“ Ian]: kabul adilnali. . Idarecilik ve agrotxnnnlik aura-1 mm. Gore): agretmenlikte gar-ho yfinoticmkto 309m titular W om. ‘ Immanuel: daha design b11- tomfinis m WI. ao0000.000ocoo...0.0.0...O0.00.000.0.90.0..OOO”OCOOOoo-OOOOOO".. oooo...cocoooooocacao...ono.cocoa-clown...ooocooooooooquO"" oococoa-00000000000000coo00000000coo-coo.oooooooooooooooioooofl" BOLUI Iv. Agag1da figretmenlik gbrevinislo ilgili baz1 problemler verilf nigtir. Her bir problemi dikkatlice oquunuz. Sayet bu problem 3121 ilgi- lendirniyorse 113111 eutnna (X) igareti koyunuz. Eger problem aizi ilgilen-‘ diriyoraa since dngm derecesini eaptey1n1z ve kanaatinizi ilgili yeri iga- retliyerek belirtiniz. (2-6) (2-7) (2-8) (2-9) (2—10) . (2—11) (2-12) (2-13) (2-14) ( 2915 ) Okulyggda disiplin i§1e31n1n 90k bozuk olugu Ders eraglar1n1n yetersiz olusu Cgretmen—dgrenci iligkilerinin iyi olmaz1§1 Okul kitap11g1n1n iyi galx§ma¥1§1 Egitsel kollar1n verimli olmexl§1 Haftal1k ders saatinin an fazla glggg Qevrede ders konular1yla ilgili kaynak kitzp- lar1n1n bulunmaz1§1 Dersleri daha iyi igleyebilmek icin gevrede yol gbsterecek kimeenin olmazl§1 63renciler1 en az iki yaz111 bir sdzlu yap- nak mechuriyitlnin olugu Ybnoticilerin agretmenlero cgitiu—dgretim ctkinliklerinde yin-dune). 0111151131 Bu b1r problem degildir. Onemsiz Az finemli Onemli on‘dnemli ’1)(2)(3)(4)(5) LJDDDU DEBUG DDDDD DDDDD DEBUG DEBUG DDDDD DDDDD DDDBE DDDDD (2-16) (2-17) (2-18) (2-19) (2—20) (2—21) fizz-mounds: deveu1mgzn1n W bareunenin kendi tannin yetigtirobmcei icin scram yin-dun We}: 5%- mamas; 311111132111 90k mama 01m Satin-aground. yoni human. v. my.- leri '6me Wm M Inlet! Invalu- vo ulna-lore hull-k Winn mm Hatredat prom 90k mun olugu . In b1: problun dolilltr. AI ans-11 t 008 One-It Ono-I1: 8 (1)(2)(3)(4)(§) DECIDE] DDDDU DECIDE DECIDE DECIDE EJCIUUE Yukardaki problulorden dab: mu prohlonlorinis var-u latte: agapdald. bogluga yazarak manna anon derocoem (u Mali. fine-11, 90k Bnenli) olmk b1: parents: 191n- (........) tweueyms. Blur agagzdald. bogluk yotnouo an urban bog unite". mohair-ms. O0.......-......COCOOO-‘OOOOOO0......OOOC.00......0..........OCOODOOOOC oOO..30..........OOOOOOOCOOOOO0.0...OOO0.0.0.000...0.3.0.0....00000000 O00.4.......OOCOOOOCOOOOO......OOOOOOOOO...........CCOOOOOOOOHOOC“... 0.00.000...........O0006............OOOOOOOCCO......OOCOOOOOOOCOO”... O.......OOOCOOOOOO0......00......O.....0............OOCCOOOOCOOOOCOOOO OOOO......COOOOOOCOOOOOO00.000.00.000.......OOOOOOQ......OOOOOOOOOOOO‘. -24-1 [:J - 13 - Bugflnku teftis sistemimizin deéigtirilmesini istiyormusunuz? 2513—1 1:] rivet 2 Dflaylr Cevab1n1z "Evet" ise asag1dak1 tekliglerden size gbre hangi— sinin kabulu daha yararl1 olab111r? Bugfinkfi sistem devam etmeli fakat mfifettiglerden sorugturma gérevi al1narak, Bakanl1kta kurulacak'bir "Sorusturma Kurulu” na verilmeli ve mfifettigler sadece egitim-béretim etkinlik- lerinin denetlenmesinde gérevlendirilmeli Iki tfir mhfettis olmal1d1r Birincisi soru$turma 1§ler1yle ve 1dar1 teftiglerle ilgilen- meli; ikincisi e51t1m-dgret1m etkinliklerinde Ogretmenlere yard1mc1 ve rehber olacak bir kaynak kisi olmal1d1r Bdlgesel Bas MUfett1§likler kurulmal1 ve bu bag mfifett1511k- lerde bir ba$ mU1ett1$ ve yeter sa31da meettis bulunmalldlr. Eolgenin teftig pr05ram1n1n haz1rlanmas1nda ve uy5ulanm351nda bag mufettiglere gerekli yetki verilmeli ve o bdlgeye baglanacak Okullarln her tUrlU tertigi (Ders, 1mt1han ve mfiessese tefti$ler1 ile sorugturmalar) bo l5e merkez1n1ek1 bu mufettislerce yapllma- l1d1r. Iki tar mfifettia olmall. Birincisi sadece sorusturma igleriy- le ve muessese teftigleriyle il511enmeli ve Ankara tek merkez olmal1d1r. Ikinci tfir mfifettig ise "Rehber mfifett13" géreviyle M1111 etkinliklerinde d5retmenlere yard1mc1 ve rehber olacak bir kaynak kisi olmal1dlr. / Iki tfir mfifettis olmal1. Birincisi FBakanllk Genel Mfifettisé leri" olarak Tilim ve Terbiye Kurulu 11e Bakanl1k Merkez 6r- gfitfinfin ayd1nlat1c1, onlara yardlm edici inceleme ve aragt1r- ma isleriyle 115ilenmeli, Tfirk egitim faaliyetlerini bir bu- tun olarak deéerlendirmege gal1$mal1d1r. Ikinci tfir mfifettis ise "Bakanl1k Mfifettisi” olarak her'tUr- lfi teftis ve murakabe, deéerlendirme ve rehberlik tahkikat gibi teekilfita ve personele dbnfik faaliyetlerde gérevlendi- rilmelidir Yukardakilerden farkl1 bir teklifim var. (Lfitfen teklifinizi etrafl1 olarak bu sabifenin_arkas1ndaki has k1sma yaz1n1z.) 1133111 CEVAPLANDIRILIASI 311112 ‘ stunt ANKETI BIRDEFA Géznsn GEGIEEREK BUTUN SORULARL CEVAP VERIP vznnnntdinizt KONTROL eniniz; ARASTIRMAYA YAPTIGINIZ 11111113 Ictn rzgzzxvv1' ER ‘J Bugflnkii Egitim Dfizeninde Bakanllk M’u’fettisterinin Rom ile ilgili ‘ ? Anket' IL “‘1 MILL! EGITIM BAKAMJCI PLANLAMA-ARASTTRMA VE KOORDINASYON DAfR Est ARASI‘IRMA BOL.tT*\Ifi 11.131 1971 1111112. A Sey1n.fleslektas~- . Ilisikte size s6nderilen ankatin covqpland1r11mas1na ey1raca— g1n1z zaman icin eindiden teeekkfir ederil. O "Bugfinkl Egitim Diizenindo Bakan11k Wettiqletinin Rolt’i" tonn- sunda yap1lan bu era§t1rmade 931%11 taaliyetlerinin.da1na 1Q1nde bfilunan siz meslektas1m1n degerli tecrfibelerinden vs tikirlerlnden feydalannnk istiyorum. Bu araetmanm emac1 ”3115mm 231m 202111111113 W m TISLERININ ROLU" nfi belirtmektir. Araqt1rman1n baqar1ya ulaeabilmesi en- cak 81211 dikkatle va samimiyetle vereceginiz cavaplara bagl1d1r.‘vere- ' ceginiz cevaplar 1311312 olarak degerlendirilocok ve elde edilocek counc- lar bu konuda Tfirk agretmeninin v0 mfifettiglerinin neler dfisfindfiklerini yans1tacabt1r. Ara§t1rman1n aonuqlar1 lilli Egitim Bakan11g1 Plenlane—: .Lra3t1rma ve Koordinasyon Daireaince yay1nlanacek ve aizlerin hianeb1no aunulacdkt1r. ' _ ‘ ‘ _ Lfitton ceveplnr1n1z1 higbir tesir alt1nda ialmggan tannnen.dfi- sfincelerinizo ve kaneatlorinize uygun olarak ver1n13.Anket1n fizertne her be sebeple oluree clean} kiailiginizi belirtecek b1r.1ein.ynzna31— n12 ve 1mza atnay1n12. 7 V I Anketin cevnplennas1 bittikten aonra iliaiktaki sent: knyup a1k1ca kapay1n1z ve zarr1: 1111i 331:1. Bakan11g1 PlanleIn-Ar3qt1rmn.vu Koordinasyon Daireli Baqkun11g1 (Tertig ‘xngt1rhaez) : TEKHDK OKULLAR / ANKKRL adresine ganderilmek fizere Teftiq lurulu Baekanl1g1na teslin ediniz. Gasterdiginiz 1131 icin teeekkfir edertm. Galip Karagazoglu 1 3mm wnmismmm 26111111311 - ROLLBRI 11.3 mm mm ' (Wettieler 19111) m 8 . Bu enkette aisle): 19111 hasulme ban serum van-hr. Her eoruyu 1,16. ohms. Guam com her earn 191:: verilnie cevaplar iginden en tu- guq W bir taneeini eeginialve cevabm kar§u1nda clan ( U) kera-_ nin 1cm (1) bir, garp1 ieareti koyumus. ' 351“ I. .\ Kendinisle Ilgili Sorular 1-6 teem: nadir ? 1-6-1 D 30 yae1nden a: 2 C] 31-45 I 3 [:1 46-60' 4 D 61‘ve'daha fazle 1-7 cineiyetinis nadir ? 1-7-1 E] am 2 [:1 3.1-1.x 1—8 38.1151 detain mettiqieinis ? ' . 1‘ [j Turkee-Bdebiyat 21:] Sonya 311311.: (Tu-1h, coma. 1W my“) 3 [j late-mm n Pen 311mm (Iateutik, mu, 1mm, 3131:1031. rant 31151.1) [:1 Iebenea. D11. (mace, W finance vb.) E] Sanat n We: Dereleri (Ruin-1g. m. Beden nan-1) D Ugretnenlu Ieelek Dereleri ve Pellet. emu ‘ e 5 6 7 E] Bram: hm Inlet Dereleri 8 D K18 Teknik Ieelek Dereleri 9 D D18.rm (3.1mm) 0O.O0000000103.;o.oooososoooooooo.ooeooeo .1. - 1-9 Toplu claret manna has: by :11 mettiguk‘ yaptnnz 'i ‘1 D In yum u ' 2 [:1 2-4 :11 3 [:1 5-9 m 4 C] 10-19 :11 5 D 20 11.1 v. «b.1131: 1-10 manta; omm fine. by :11 fizz-omnik yaptuns 7 (0mm 1mcomk1» 431111) 1 Baum“ 2 Elm-uni. 3 [315-19111 4 [320-29311 5 [325-29111 6 [339. ynnmtuu 1-11 top]...- omqk hallm- hdar m 1111:1131 Ger-tum]: nulogindo 309111111113 ? (Int-W V. W 5.9m unrela- 6.31111) .1 010m“ 2 Elm-14:11 3 [315-19111 4 [Jae-24:11 5 025-29711 F, 6 D30 gavel-$31131. 1-12 mmmynwmm7(wmu .1} 1 Dmgqu-un. 2 Dzmummm 3 [134311 4 DWI-0:11 5 [311-14:11 6 D15 vodahtuuynwm :13 ~14 1-15 .-16 -€3-» Son nosun oldntunnz okul vqya gindiki strivinisi ysplnn1za a... clan hurt vqyn i-zihnn: 1 E] flaunt-1t. 2 D Intact Oar-tun cum 3‘ D Ioknik 631'91313 yam bi: mu am wuss-ca: 4 C] 3311:1- hunts-u 5 E] tame: bir kale: vm Universit- 6 [j om aux-econ bir mlok olmlu 7 [:1 mar-1m new am an nun-n1. a D Bunlmn (hymns (3W) ..........;............ Bfllfll’IIo Dygnlnla.tln 115111 Borular7 Yupt1¢1n1s dart danctlcnoluri I1rn-1ndn figrotnanlorin aeratin nototlar1n1n ugh: bngur111 halo 3913031 1c1n turntyclcrdo hulnnnr unnunnx ? 1D“ 20mm 3 {:1 Ricki: sauna Yapt1z1n1s darn toftiylcri a1rus1ndn Bgrotnnnlcro noolnk vo brnnglarzyla 115111 yoni dart arnclar1n1 tan1t1r v. tarl1yo odor-ininis ? 1am ammur 3 [:1 Eight: sauna Iapt131n1x darn tottiglnri I1raa1ndu UCrItIIIIOr. Incl-k1. 113111 yqy1nlnr1 tan1t1rl1d1n1s ? 1am ammun- 3 [:1 Hichir sun-n .4... . _ ~ 1-17 Mottigm 36mm: o1ras1nda hie amok-acr- 5:11:11: in t 17 D H19 Brash darn vex-aunt. 2 E] 1 km 3 B 2-5 km 4 [3 6-10 14:4 5 [:1 mm run 1-15 repugnns ternaordo‘umumorm no kadannm began dorecoaini' ta- olarah dlcamdiziniso Wraunuz ? . 1 E] Hopainin . 1. 2 D Goglmlugunnn 3 E] Baum 4 E] mgbirnnnn 1-19 Size gar. diger mflfettialer yhfinklm thftiglcrdo ammonlorin ne kadann1n began. dcrccoaini tan olarak 61921111110r13r ? D Bopainin ... ' 2 E] comm 3 D W 4 D menu-1.1m 1-20 (Sb-cumin 6301:1111 notom duh: vex-inn. halo gene-inch mufettiglorin ctki daroceoi. nadir ? , 1 D ‘Qld‘ukga coktur 2 D mm- 4 3 D 319 yoktur 4 . D tar-r3131- 1-21 , 81:13 kanunsa 35:1; nut-tuglor 6gretncnlcro yam; 01de tavoiyolerdo nun mlmnda guru; hirngm amp mum-1c? 1 U Tan guru; birligino sahiptirlcr 2 [:I am: gm; birligino naiptulor 3 E] 1119 361119 tau-113m. om}; douuérdir. . 4 D turn-I131- 1:1qu 3%!qu“ . .5. 1:22 . Infottiglorcc yap1lan toftiqlorin challnrdnki 03:11:13 n agrotln qnl1glnlnr1n1n,dnhn verinli halo gulnonind yard1nc1 ol- dnennu manner mm 7 '~l [:1 Innndyorul 2 [:1 As innn1yorun 3» [:1 hi; 1n:nn1yorun 4 [:1 lBirgqy ndylcycncn 1-23 Dir genellcno yaplnn1n gurekirae; slain knnnntinizo gar: flgrotlnnlarin nu radar: nflfottiglik nfieoaoaocinin rnydnld olduguna innnlnktnddrlar ? 1 D nap-1 2 [:l comma 3 [:1 Yar1a1 4 E] Pot an ' 5 E] 111qu mm: W lama-1:51.331 81mm 1313 mm nnnuz 5233x1333 stztn murmur. can: : 1.24 lfifottiglerin no hadnr1 agitin.vn agrotin fanliyetlcrinin dnhn voriili halo gotirdlnnulndd figrotnonlaro rchborlik odobilocek 21'“;thng 39.111th 2 [:1 Royal com Inr1n1 DUB Inr1dnn dnhn £81. 5 C] Highlrini 1_25 Infottiglerin no kndnr1 ogitin*vo agrotin tualiyotlcrinin dahn varinli hale satiril-oaindo dgrctlcnlcr‘ rnhbcrlik odobilccok ggitin bilggaine (Ogretil.notodlar1, otitll puiknlojili. deitil soa- yolojisi v0 ogitin fol-efoni) nahiptlr ? ‘ .1 D 3013.1 2 D comm 3 [:J 'Inr131 4 E] Imdnndnhnnnl‘ 5 D Eiqhdrm -5. 1-25 [Mottiglorin no hadnn agromonin dogorlondirilnooindo hang. alculorln (triterlorin) kullmlncagam biliyorlar ? -1 ‘ D Hopoi 2 Beam 3 4 U-Imdandaham 5 1-27 Infottiolorin no kadm ozitindold. bilinsol dogorlondirno tokniklorini bilnoktodirlor ? o l D Hopoi 2 [:1 comm 3 D Ian-1n 4 D Ymdon dnhn on 5 D Higbiriai 1-23 6grotnonlorin dogorlondirilnooi yap1l1rkon hangi Ulcfllorin (kriterlorin) kullan11mao1 goroktigi konuounda Wettiglor aras1nda bir gfirfig birligi var n1d1r 7 -1 E] Tan bir gbrtig bum vard1r. 2 [:1 Oldukcn yam guru; birllgi mm:- 3 C] an; guru, tau-1131 yoktnr 4 D Karm1z1nh1rooy ofiyloyonon max. ‘3. bun-do tottio vo “4441.1111- 11411 nu- ton- nus-1a- torn-tour. nor am ammo. 0W. humuso around" mwmuvorinis.mmn1uhornoddonnoolhntmm WWWWWQ) motions-ohm. omnutmmmgmwwammwmw W unsound“ out mm bald-1m “comm: bolls-tints. bun must 4 MW and}; I . r I O 6 " S a 3 i . 3 r. a . " 2: 3 " u .2: 3: " .. i i . g .. a 2 3 _ unaun’um) (Br-tion]. m mm ( mmmm ‘l or W (1.29) DEBUG. nototlmnn 33.1qu rohborldh 1.50) DUDE otloks u-mDEJDDE] wot—um «em-«m mu 1- u-su DUDE] lo 11511.1 squalor: tant-k: (1-31) DEBUG 0W baronoi claim 11- (1.52; DUDE] 1141.1 promo-lain gun-undo yo— unod to mom rohhorlik “not; (1.32) DDDUD‘ nonunion anti-1- uw wo- (1-53) DUDE] .ronolorvor-ok; (1-33) DECIDE] $335: an mafia-:1 4144101300 ~ W out-nuts ' (1,34) DECIDE outta-murmur“ "(l-53') DUDE (1135) DDUDD- lib-0m W n-L- arm (1-541 DUDE] (1.35) DDDDD w WW: .(1-51) DUDE] Om mass! U 14 3 :8 a (1)(2)(3)(4)(s) DDUDU u-mtllIJDEID 9 duo-11 doul Ina-mun onl1 col: Ono-l1 (1737) wmuauua (1-40)E]DC]C|CI meDDDD (1.42) [I CID UCI (1—43) DECIDE] (1-44) DUDE”: 4145) DUE-IUD " (146) DUDDU __.,.— A'— ‘4 ‘Doroin 1olomoo1ndo gurulon olunln vo (1.5a) ' mom 1- elm yunlori. Wotan.“ lo taunt; darn-onus om! d1g1ndnk1 d1tor ou- (1.59) t1. upon- fooluofilori (out-o]. honor, yu1l1 yon- Madam dolorlond1r1lnoo1. oom hu1rlo- vb.) 11o 115111 ole-In to 01m yhlor1 {Show hondniqlo int-151m Guotunin boon-1oz. m to- h- ror "total-oh 191n son-om 9o- .1tl1 dotorlondn-no "mu-13o ho.- mks Goran-uh boom-1m dogorlond1r1l- (141) nooindo cot monk gunman. onto-oh vo o31t1n1 b11- butuo oloroh dotorlondunok. (1.60) 5mm” vo yanouodlor krona— don mun konulon on“. 3mm )- robl-lormo can 301:: w Mono gut-oi «not. mists-shot“ oth1nliklor1ndo lm- (1.43) nonlordon nolor mm_n [orlonurlodo bond. Blofllorh lull-P W "1k vo noon; our-h MI- "ho-loco yuan-m W1 oath-mm 1141.1 (1.54) mm town “not; Won-o out can. monoloot (1“,) m: Ommnlor hotnndo 1111191 W- lordo mm; ' (142) (14663 amt-«1am nus-14m. vo anon-«- (1-5?) lorino my. gator-oh; moron:- i s; a 5 5. (1)(2)(3)(4) DUDCM ‘L‘JDDD‘ DUDE] CIDCJU. DUDE] DUDE] DUDE] ‘DDDU “Dunn .0000 Gian mars: amuunmn 3111.ch o-I .... :0. b v s _ .. *2 a s 3. .1: 3:": shag; .2: 2 .‘ii. 3.54 33323 _ =1: 1 {1)(2)(3)(4)(5) 4 (1)(2)(3)(4) f lawn an toolm hn d' . (1-6‘ ‘7) D D BUD noyon :: {igrztnonlorcuo‘igri ofirijltn a) D D DD E. o31t1n-63rot1n yonilikloani homes akahullonnokg. :8) D U D D D Ogrotmonlero ynp11an hnko1sl1klardo (1-69) .. D D D D agromonlorin hnklar1n1n kornyucm elm; 39).:3 D D DD Ogrotnodorin toftio o1oton1 vo nil- (1-70) D D D D fottiglor haknndn ynpt1klor1 ton- kidlori hog gdrnok; ~ Dim: :‘Bu bfilundo mammal? . vo 7C. oorular1n hopeini covapland1r1p camp- 4 land1md1¢1n1n lutfon hontml odinix. :-71) ‘ I111! Egitim mg: Iottig Kurulu Ilinotmoliginin yod1nc1 maddesine gar. 1111: 33111:: Banana; Mottig’ngmo 'atontbilnak 19111 bir univmite vo yin:- o‘ok oknldnn nosun olmak n "no; ortn voyn yiflmok dorocoli Okullarda on az 8 y11 agrotnonljJ: yap-I19 olmak vo m euro 191m. do on as 3 :11 noolok buwooindo idareci our“: 4;me mm to ho:- 1k1 nlnndn 11.th Mon-131 toobit odilnig olmak gar-tn 81:111 hamtiniso gbro “rottiglorin sum-1nd. 39.21am bzelliklorden :3 E E E s E 2 D mmcmkmnmmnm Imamunmunmg olmak - pistol-31.1.. tau-oomx mu orttunlnal1 tant spam-n11]: m1 5—8 ’11 o- 3 D um: um «111.411. 4 D Idnrocilik n agrotnonlik oi1roo'1 mmmuzm. 5 El :orok agrotnonlikto goroho yfinoticmkto gocon oilrolor dondurulnug 6 [j Imrdnkilordon dohn 0.931911: h1r toklifms moo holirtinix. O......OOOOOOCOOOOOOO‘...OO...........O.........OOOOOOOOOOOOOO...0 ......OCOOOOOOOOO”......O...‘O....JmOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOO0.000 9 0......COOOOOCCOOOC0.00.00.00.00.........OOOOOOCOOOOOOOOL....OO o ' (2-6) (2-7) (2-8) (2-9) (2—10) (2-11) (2—12) (2-13) (2—14) Bfilfil IV. Agapdn nufotnolih vo tottiglo 110.11 hon prohlonlor «:11- niotir. Her bir problem d1kkntlioo annulus. Swot ha problo- :131 ilgilondirniyoroo ilgili oiitunn b1: (1) 1§orot1 W. Ego: probl- 8181 ilgilond1riyoroa‘ o1zco anon doroooo1n1 ooptmo vo mut1n181 ilgili yor1 1§arotliyerok bol1rt1nis. . Bir nufottigo ddoon mot—on mom fnslolm; ' Samotuno gdrovlorin1n Mottiglorin rohborl1k gfimlormo ongol olnoou [Manon tofuolordo h1r bgrotlono o- y1rnb11oco31 munn 90k no 0111301; Tofu; raporlnrunn mum-”1m 901: am 1111131; ‘ Odomkto clan 991411 garov yon1yoo1n1n yotoroiz alum; 31:1 hollordo morn.“ hronomn d1- gmdaki dorolorin “(1:131:11 yap-1k oo- rundn m1; . 9o§1tl1 gmolordo yap-o (yo-oh, yu- tak, “lino 1nt1hok) sorlnklmnn 01:- m1; Ioffiglordo ynmhn mum tori- no gotirilip got1r1lnod131n1n oyn1 nu- fott1o W1ndan tonhmo 1am 3m; Gonollmo bpotnonlorin,o€1t1n-63rot1n faoliyotlor1n1n doho vor1nl1 hnlo gou- r1lnoo1 19m nufotuglorlo 1913111131041“ koqmnon; 33 U a a 3 I 33 .. ‘0 “.5 'i “d.d§ 3333... 3:83:88. mmmmm DDDUD UDUDD UDDDD DUDDU UUDDD UDDDD UUUUU UDDDD DUUDD ( 2—15) .. (2—16) (2-17) ’ (2—18) ( 2-19) (2—20) Zhézk-l [:1 Boot Ionnnnul Iflfottialorin toftiglor oonncundn I111! Egitim Bakanl1¢1n1n d1gor organlar1nn yapt1g1 tokliflorin dikknto al1nmanao1; Infottiglorin agrotmonlorin bagar1lar1n1 ton olorok dogorlondirohdlnhk 191n bilin— ool dogorlondirmo nototlor1n1 gzgglgg§§§_; (Horkooin b11d1g1n1 chums-1) Gono1l1k1o oknl.ybnot1c1lor1n1n o31t1n- 651-on. faaliqotlorinin dahn vormi ho- 1o gotirilnoo1 191n.mufott191orlo 1§b1r- 1181 ”mt 11mm Ogrotnonlorin.nutottigloro onn1n1 olarak dortlarinilgggggg511 Toftiqlordo Bgrotmonloro tavé1yo odilobi- ' loolk yoy1nlar1n vo doro oraglor1n1n,ton1- n1ndo Baknn1131n gorokl1 yard1ld‘ggg1ggggg311 Intott1q11klo 115111 gbrovlorin;goklu3up unn.noolok£ yoy1nlar1n-1nlonloo1no vo cup tottigin kondini.yot1§t1rnooino‘ggggL M13 1mm. ban-tum; problollor1no rag- {non.lfltott1g11k,gflrov1n1ndon.no-nnn.lnsup an: ? Bu b1? probloo dogildir Ono-o1: As duo-11 Ononl1 90k anonli (1)(2)(3)(4)(5) DDDDD UDDDD UDDDD UDDDD :UDDDD DDDDD W prohlonlordon dahn bookaprob1ol1or1n13 nun lutton W boom yam-u: krona.“ an. dunno-m (a ans-11, m, got mum. aunt) b1r puma 191ndo (.......) mums. (Igor W b03114): yotiqnouo nrko. out“: ‘yogob1liro1n13.) QO0.00.00.00.00.0’0...00.0.0.0...0............OOOOQOOOOOCOO......O0.. O...O.............OOOOOOOOOO'OOO...OO.......OOOQOOOOOQO”OOOOO0.0....0 .— O......OOOOOO....0.000000....000......0............OOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0‘O O C..9..0....O0.0.0....”000000000000.0......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.0...O.OO00 O 2-23-1 C] P... .. - 13 .. Bugtmkfl tettis aisteminizin degigtirilneoini iatiyormounuz? 2122.1 [3 Eyet - 2 D5331? Cevnb1n1z "Evet' 186 ngaé’udaki toklitlordon size gbre hangi- sinin um yararh olabilir? Bugunkfi aiatem dovan otmeli fakat mufettiglordon oomgturma gbrovi al1nnrak, Bakanl1kta kurulacak bir 'Sorugturna Kurulu“ no verilmeli vo wrotfiglor oadoce egitin-égrotin otk1n11k- ler1n1n donetlonnooindo abrovlondirilneli In tur mfifett1§ olmnl1d1r B1r1nc131 oomgturna ialeriylo ve 1dar1 toftiglerle ilgilen- meli; 1k1nc131 agitim-bgrotin otkinliklorindo 6gretnenlere yard1nc1 vo rohbor olacak bir knynak k1§1 olmhdn- Bfilgeael Baa Kufottialiklor kurulmah vo bu has mufottialik- lerde bir bag wrottia vo yetor oay1dn nufottig bulunmahdn'. Bélgenin toftig program hamrlnnmnamdn vo nygulnnmaomda has mfifettialore gerekli yotki vorilme11 vo o bblgeye baglanacak okullann hor turlu toft191 (Doro, 1nt1hnn vo~ mfleoooao toftialeri 119 aorugtumlar) bblgo norkozindeki bu wfettiglorco yap11ma— lldlro 11:1 tur wrung clash. Birincioi aadoce oomgtum ialoriy- lo vo woocooo toftigloriylo 113116nm911 vo Ankara tok norkez olnahd1r. Ikinci tur wrottia 18o 'Rohber mflfotug" gbreviylo [1111 Egitim undurluklormm omrinde cahgmh vo agitin-bgrotin otkinliklorindo bgrotnonloro yard1mc1 vo rohbor olacak b1: kaynak 1:191 olnohdn'. In tux- nut-tug 013311. Birinciai "Bannhk Gonol mutua- 1or1" olnrak 131111 vo Torb1yo Kurulu 11o Bakanlu: Horton 6r— gfltunun ayd1nlat1c1, onlnrn yard1n od1c1 1ncolono vo matu— m iqleriylo 11311onneli, Tar]: 931th tanliyotlorini hir b11- tun olnrnk dogorlondimogo 9311ama11d11’. Ik1nc1 tur wfettig m 'Baknnl1k Mflfottigf‘ 013m hor tur- 1a tottio vo unrnhbo ,1 dogorlondirno vo rohborlik tank-1km; 511:1 tookilfltn vo poroonolo dbnuk fanliyotlordo gbrovlondi- rilnolidir 7 Yuknrdnkilordon farkl1 b1r toklifin var. (Luffon toklifinizi otrafl1 0131-31: he ooh! foqin .arkoomdoki boo hon gonna.) mm mumnmmsx 311m amt mm: 31111321 661m mm W01 m vxmntdmzt my mm: 12151131121 21211111111 um mm W ....- \" "‘111111le6111qu5