School Principals’ Instructional Feedback to Teachers: Teachers’ Views

Authors

  • Aydın Balyer Yıldız Technical University
  • Kenan Özcan Adıyaman University

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to discover school administrators’ principals’ instructional feedback during their supervision tasks regarding classroom observation. The research was carried out with a qualitative research design and a semi-structured interview technique was administered to collect the data. The data were analyzed with content analysis technique. The participants were 23 public school teachers working in Istanbul, Adıyaman and Şanlıurfa provinces in Turkey in 2018-2019 school year. They were determined with purposive sampling technique. Results reveal that school principals show poor competency in supervision work and perform the classroom supervision task once a year as a necessity of the formal procedure. Comparing to educational supervisors, results show that school principals may be more useful because they know the teacher and know the general operation of the school. Results also demonstrate that teachers do not benefit from the feedback given by the school principals, because they are claimed to give general suggestions. It is therefore incumbent on administrators to learn how to supervise teachers to support schoolwide instructional improvement. School principals should recognize how their own position within the supervisory system influences the feedback they provide to teachers. Keywords: Classroom supervision; instructional feedback; school principals; supervision

References

Balcı, A. (2015). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma. Ankara: Pegem.

Bozak, A. Yıldırım, M. C. & Demirtaş, H. (2011). Öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimi için alternatif bir yöntem: meslektaş gözlemi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12 (2). 65-84.

Bailey, K.D. (1994). Methods of social research. A division of Macmillan. New York: The Free Press.

Blase, J., & Blase, J. (2003). Handbook of instructional leadership: How really good principals promote teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Blase, J., & Blase, J. (1999). Principals’ instructional leadership and teacher development:

Teachers’ perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 349-378.

Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (2007) Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and

practice. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry ve research design: Choosing among five approaches.

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria, VA:

Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice.

Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Denner, P. R., Salzman, S. A., & Bangert, A. W. (2001). Teacher evaluation practices in our largest

school districts: Are they measuring up to “state-of-the-art” systems? Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15, 287-307.

DeMarrais, K. (2004). Qualitative interview studies: Learning through experience. In K de

Marrais, & SD Lapan in Foundations for research (pp:51-68). Mahwah: Lawrrence Erlbaum.

Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd Edition,

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ergen, H. ve Eşiyok, İ. (2017). Okul müdürlerinin ders denetimi yapmalarına ilişkin öğretmen

görüşleri. Çağdaş Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(1), 2-19.

Ergün, E,& Memişoğlu, S.P. (2018). Öğretmenlerin gözünden denetim: sorunlar ve beklentiler.

Journal of Social And Humanities Sciences Research (JSHSR), 5(24), 1885-1898.

Feeney, E. J. (2007). Quality feedback: The essential ingredient for teacher success.

Clearinghouse, 4, 191-198.

Glaser, B.G. (1992) Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis. Mill Valley, Ca.: Sociology Press.

Glickman, C. D. (2002). Leadership for learning: How to help teachers succeed. Alexandria, VA:

Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2011). Triangulating principal effectiveness: How perspectives of

parents, teachers, and assistant principals identify the central importance of managerial skills. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 1091-1123.

Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Master, B. (2013). Effective instructional time use for school leaders:

Longitudinal evidence from observations of principals. Educational Researcher, 42, 433-444.

Hallinger, P. (1992). School leadership development: Evaluating a decade of reform. Education

and Urban Society, 24, 300-316.

Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional leadership and the school principal: A passing fancy that

refuses to fade away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4, 1-20.

Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (1996). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A review

of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32, 5-44.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. (1985). Assessing the instructional leadership behavior of principals.

Elementary School Journal, 86, 217-248.

Horng, E., & Loeb, S. (2010). New thinking about instructional leadership. Phi Delta Kappan, 92,

-69.

Karasar, N. (2007). Araştırmalarda rapor hazırlama (14.baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.

Kerkhof vd, M. (2006). The repertory grid technique, (RGT), integrated assessment, Available at

http://www.ivm.vu.nl/en/Images/PT4_tcm234-161509.pdf, 1-7. Accessed August 3, 2018, 10:00.

Kimball, S. M. (2002). Analysis of feedback, enabling conditions and fairness perceptions of

teachers in three school districts with new standards-based evaluation systems. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 16, 241-268.

Koşar, S. (2018). Geçerlik ve güvenirlik. K. Beycioğlu, N. Özer ve Y. Kondakçı (Edt.), Eğitim yönetiminde araştırma içinde (s.169-200). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.

Koşar, S. ve Buran, K. (2019). Okul müdürlerinin ders denetim faaliyetlerinin öğretimsel liderlik bağlamında incelenmesi. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisin – Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 7(3), 1232-1265. doı: 10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.7c.3s.14.m

Kümbetoğlu, B. (2005). Sosyolojide ve antropolojide niteliksel yöntem ve araştırma. İstanbul: Bağlam

Leithwood, K. A., & Louis, K. S. (2012). Linking leadership to student learning. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Lochmiller, C. R. (2016). Examining administrators’ instructional feedback to high school math

and science teachers, Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(1), 75–109.

McMillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research fundamentals for the consumer (3. edition). New York: Longman.

Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal leadership and school performance: Integrating

transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 370-397.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (2006). Designing Qualitative Research (4 th ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Marvasti, B. A. (2004). Qualitative Research in Sociology. SAGE Publications: London Thousand

Oaks New Delhi

Mayring, P. (2000) Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Online Journal Qualitative Social

Research 1(2), 1-10.

Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Applied social research methods series. Qualitative research design: An

interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.

Oakes, W. P., Lane, K. L., Menzies, H. M., & Buckman, M. M. (2018). Instructional feedback: An

effective, efficient, low-intensity strategy to support student success. Beyond Behavior, 27(3), 168–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295618799354

Oğuz, E., Yılmaz, K., & Taşdan, M. (2007). İlköğretim denetmenlerinin ve ilköğretim okulu

yöneticilerinin denetim inançları. Manas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17, 39-51.

Oliva, M., Mathers, C., & Laine, S. (2009, March). Effective evaluation. Principal Leadership, 16-

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. 3rd edition. Sage Publications,

Inc

Punch, K.F. (2005). Introduction to social research–quantitative & qualitative

approaches. London: Sage.

Sergiovanni, T., & Starratt, R. (2007). Supervision: A redefinition (8th ed.). New York, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Stein, M. K., & Nelson, B. S. (2003). Leadership content knowledge. Educational Evaluation and

Policy Analysis, 25, 423-448.

Uçar, R. (2012). İlköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmenlerin sınıflarındaki denetim

uygulamalarına ilişkin görüşleri. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(2), 82-96.

Yeşil, D. & Kış, A. (2015). Okul müdürlerinin ders denetimine ilişkin öğretmen görüşlerinin

incelenmesi. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2(3), 27-45.

Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin.

Wahlstrom, K. L., & Louis, K. S. (2008). How teachers experience principal leadership: The roles

of professional community, trust, efficacy, and shared responsibility. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 458-495.

Zhang, B. (2003). On gazing about with a checklist’ as a method of classroom observation in the

field experience supervision of pre-service teachers: A case study. Paper presented at 2nd S ymposium on Field Experience, HKIed. Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong.

Downloads

Published

2020-02-14