Teachers Accountability Environments: Implications for Turkish Schools

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 18, 2728 - 2759, 30.06.2019

Coşkun Erdağ

https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.559784

Öz

In this study, it is aimed to create
a theoretical framework based on national and international literature on how
the accountability pressures shape employee feelings of accountability and to discuss
its implications for teacher accountability in Turkey. As a result of the
literature review, one of the factors that shape the  accountability beliefs of employees involves
four interacting dimensions: (i) Acountability source, (ii) accountability
purpose or focus, (iii) the intensity felt of the accountability pressures, and
(iv) the importance of the accountability issue perceived by the
employees.  The review summarizes that in
addition to whether bureaucratic, market and professional environment exert
some pressure or not on the employees and the focus of the pressures, if any,
the importance of accountability issues for the employees determines the level
of employee accountability beliefs. From here,  it is suggested that formal and informal
mechanisms should be established and kept functioning in order to increase the felt
accountability of teachers in Turkey. To this end, as a formal way, there
should set up measurable, achievable and consistent behavior and performance
standards on their qualifications, selection, professional development,
professional ethics and proper behavior which clearly reveal what is expected
of teachers and managers at work. In addition, data on teacher and student
performance should be collected from different stakeholders and sources,
especially by Management Information Systems, and teacher performance
evaluation should be performed based on data, and the correction of negative
behaviors should be ensured while rewarding and supporting good work. Informally,
besides, senior management units should develop a control discourse and culture
that encourages the right behaviors and discourages the wrong ones, bring the
need for control to the fore, show the understanding that control is a
necessary and indispensable process, both in words and actions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Accountability felt, Teacher accountability, Accountability environment, Teacher beliefs, Turkey

Öğretmenlerin Hesap Verebilirlik Çevreleri: Teorik Bir Çözümleme

Öz

Bu
araştırmada, örgütsel yaşam içerisinde hesap verebilirlik baskılarının çalışanların
hesap verebilirlik inançlarını nasıl şekillendirdiğine yönelik ulusal ve
uluslararası alanyazın temelli teorik bir çerçeve oluşturulması ve Türkiye’de
öğretmenlerin hesap verebilirliğine ilişkin doğurgalarının ortaya konulması
amaçlanmaktadır. Literatür incelemesi sonucu, çalışanların hesap verebilirlik
inançlarını şekillendiren etkilerden biri olarak hesap verebilirlik ortamlarını
(i) hesap verebilirlik baskılarının kaynağı, (ii) baskıların amacı veya odağı,
(iii) hissedilen yoğunluğu ve (iv) yüklenilen sorumluluğun ehemmiyeti olmak
üzere birbirleriyle etkileşimli dört temel boyuttan oluştuğu sonucuna
ulaşılmıştır. Çalışanlar üzerinde bürokratik, sosyal ve mesleki çevrelerin
hangi amaçla, hangi koularda, ne kadar yoğun baskı uyguladıklarının yanı sıra,
baskı konularının çalışanlar için ne kadar önemli olduğu da çalışanların hesap
verebilirlik inançlarının düzeyini belirlemektedir. Buradan hareketle,
Türkiye’de öğretmenlerin hesap verebilirliklerini yükseltmek amacıyla formal ve
informal mekanizmaların oluşturulması ve işlerlik kazandırılması
önerilmektedir. Bu kapsamda, formal olarak öğretmen ve yöneticilerin
yeterlilikleri, seçimi, mesleki gelişimleri, mesleki etik ve davranışlara
ilişkin kendilerinden neler beklendiğini açık ve net olarak yazılı bir şekilde
ortaya koyan ölçülebilir, ulaşılabilir ve birbirleriyle uyumlu davranış ve
performans standartlarının belirlenerek uygulamaya konulması gerekmektedir.
Ayrıca, yönetim bilgi sistemleri başta oılmak üzere farklı paydaşlardan ve
kaynaklardan öğretmen ve öğrencilerin performanslarına ilişkin veri
toplanılmalı, verilere dayalı olarak öğretmen performans değerlendirmesi yapılmalı,
iyi işler ödülledirilip desteklenirken, olumsuz davranışların düzeltilmesi
sağlanmalıdır. Öte yandan, informal olarak üst yönetim birimleri doğru
davranışları cesaretlendiren ve yanlış olanlardan caydırıcı bir kontrol söylemi
ve kültürü geliştirmeli, kontrole olan ihtiyacı ön plana çıkarmalı, kontrolün
gerekli ve vazgeçilmez bir süreç olduğu anlayışını hem sözleriyle hem de
eylemleriyle herkese göstermelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Öğretmen hesap verebilirliği, Hesap verebilirlik ortamı, Öğretmen inançları, Bireysel hesap verebilirlik

Kaynakça

• Adelberg, S., ve Batson, C. D. (1978). Accountability and helping: When needs exceed resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(4), 343−350.
• Aucoin, P. ve Jarvis, M. D. (2005). Modernizing government: A framework for reform. Ottawa: Canada School of Public Service.
• Balcı, A. (2003). Kamu yönetiminde hesap verebilirlik anlayışı, A. Balcı, A. Nohutçu, N.K. Öztürk ve B. Coşkun (Ed.), Kamu Yönetiminde Çağdaş Yaklaşımlar. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468.
• Bovens, M. (2010). Two concepts of accountability: Accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West European Politics, 33(5), 946-967.
• Bülbül, M. (2011). Türk milli eğitim sisteminde hesap verebilirlik. Doktora tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Carnevale, P. (1985). Accountability of group representatives and intergroup relations. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (2, p. 227–248). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Çiçekli, A. (2016). Kamu yönetiminde hesap verebilirlik ve BİMER'in hesap verebilir yönetime etkisi: Van sağlık hizmetleri örneği. Yüksek lisans tezi, Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Van.
• Cummings, L. L., ve Anton, R. J. (1990). The logical and appreciative dimensions of accountability. In S. Srivastava, D. Cooperrider, & Associates (Eds.), Appreciative management and leadership (p. 257–286). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Davis, W. D., Mero, N., ve Goodman, J. A. (2007). The interactive effects of goal orientation and accountability on task performance. Human Performance, 20, 1–21.
• Day, P. ve Klein, R. (1987). Accountabilities: Five public services. London: Tavistock.
• De Dreu, C. K., ve van Knippenberg, D. (2005). The possessive self as a barrier to conflict resolution: Effects of mere ownership, process accountability, and self-concept clarity on competitive cognitions and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 345–357.
• Du Toit, A. (2003). Knowledge: A sense making process shared through narrative. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7, 27–37.
• Dubnick, M. (2002). Seeking salvation for accountability. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, 01.01.2019 tarihinde http://mjdubnick.dubnick.net/papers/2002/salv2002.pdf adresinden erişildi.
• Enzele, M. E., ve Anderson, S. C. (1993). Surveillant intentions and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(2), 257−266.
• Erdağ, C. (2017). Accountability at schools: A study of path analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 17 (4), 1405-1432.
• Erdağ, C. ve Karadağ, E. (2017). Öğretmenler ve okul müdürleri perspektifinden okul hesap verebilirliği politikaları. OPUS Uluslararası Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7 (13), 459-496.
• Erdağ, C. ve Karadağ, E. (2018). Exploration of Possible Individual and Institutional Effects on School Accountability Pressures and Teacher Responses. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 24 (1), 93-142.
• Erkoşar, N. (2013). Belediyelerde iyi yönetişim açısından hesap verebilirlik: Küçükçekmece Belediyesi, Yüksek lisans tezi, Fatih Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
• Fandt, P. M. ve Ferris, G. R. (1990). The management of information and impressions: When employees behave opportunistically. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 140–158.
• Ferris, G. R., Mitchell, T. R., Canavan, P. J., Frink, D. D. ve Hopper, H. (1995). Accountability in human resource systems. In G. R. Ferris S. D. Rosen ve D. T. Barnum (Eds.), Handbook Of Human Resource Management (pp. 175−196). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
• Frink, D. D. ve Ferris, G. R. (1998). Accountability, impression management, and goal setting in the performance evaluation process. Human Relations, 51, 1259–1283.
• Frink, D. D. ve Klimoski, R. J. (1998). Toward a theory of accountability in organizations and human resource management. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research İn Personnel And Human Resources Management, Vol.16. (p. 1−51). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
• Frink, D. D. ve Klimoski, R. J. (2004), Advancing accountability theory and practice: Introduction to the human resource management review special addition, Human Resource Management Review, 14, 1-17.
• Frink, D. D., Hall, A. T., Perryman, A. A., Ranft, A. L., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R. ve Royle, M. T. (2008). A meso-level theory of accountability in organizations. In J. J. Martocchio (Ed.), Research in Personnel And Human Resources Management (27, p. 177–245). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
• Ganster, D. C. (1989). Worker control and well being: A review of research in the workplace. In S. L. Sauter ve C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Job Control And Worker Health (pp. 3−23). London: John Wiley & Sons.
• Ganster, D. C., ve Schaubroeck, J. (1991). Work stress and employee health. Journal of Management, 17(2), 235−271.
• Hall, A. T., ve Ferris, G. R. (2011). Accountability and extra-role behavior. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 23, 131–144. doi:10.1007/s10672-010-9148-9.
• Hall, A. T., Blass, F. R., Ferris, G. R., ve Massengale, R. (2004). Leader reputation and accountability: Implications for dysfunctional leader behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 15(4), 515−536.
• Hall, A. T., Ferris, G. R., Bowen, M. G., ve Fitzgibbons, D. E. (2007). Accountability as a perceptual lens for framing management education. Business Horizons, 50, 405–413.
• Hall, A. T., Royle, M. T., Brymer, R. A., Perrewé, P. L., Ferris, G. R., ve Hochwarter, W. A. (2006). “Relationships between felt accountability as a stressor and strain reactions: The neutralizing role of autonomy across two studies.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11, 87-99.
• Hall, A. T., Zinko, R., Perryman, A. A., ve Ferris, G. R. (2009). Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Reputation: Mediators in the Relationships Between Accountability and Job Performance and Satisfaction. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(4), 381-392. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051809331504
• Hall, A.T., Frink, D.D., Ferris, G.R., ve Hochwarter, W.A., Kacmar, C.J., & Bowen, M.G. (2003). Accountability in human resources management. In C.A. Schriesheim & L. Neider (Eds.), New directions in human resource management: 29-63 (A volume in the Research in Management series). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
• Hall, A. T., Frink, Dwight, D., ve Buckley, M. R. (2017). An accountability account: A review and synthesis of the theoretical and emprical research on felt accountability. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 38, 204-224.
• Hendricks, M., ve Brickman, P. (1974). Effects of status and knowledgeability of audience on self-presentation. Sociometry, 37, 440–449.
• Ivancevich, J., ve Matteson, M. (1980). stress and work: a managerial perspective. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
• Ivancevich, J. ve Matteson, M. (1988). Stress diagnostic survey (SDS) conmments and psychometric properties of a multidimensional self report inventory. Houston: FD Associates.
• Janis, I. L., ve Mann, L. (1977). Decision making. New York: Free Press
• Jordan, S. R. (2011). Accountability in two non-western contexts. In Melvin J. Dubnick ve H. George Frederickson (Eds.), Accountable Governance: Problems And Promises (p. 241–254), Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
• Kantos, Z. (2010). İlköğretim okulu yönetici ve öğretmenlerinin görüşlerine göre kamu ve özel ilköğretim okulları için bir hesap verebilirlik modeli. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Koppell, J. G. S. (2011). Accountability for Global Governance Organizations. In Melvin J. Dubnick ve H. George Frederickson (Eds.), Accountable governance: Problems and promises (p. 55-77), Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
• Kramer, R. M., Pommerenke, P., ve Newton, E. (1993). The social context of negotiation: Effects of social identity and interpersonal accountability on negotiator decision making. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 37(4), 633-654. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00220027930-37004003
• Kuchapski, R. P. (2001). Reconceptualizing accountability for education. Doctoral dissertation, Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (UMI No. NQ63889).
• Küçükaycan, D.(2018). Hesap verme sorumluluğu çerçevesinde belediyelerde performans raporlamanın performans denetim kriterleri açısından değerlendirilmesi, Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi, Eskişehir.
• Laird, M. D., Perryman, A. A., Hochwarter, W. A., Ferris, G. R., ve Zinko, R. (2009). The moderating effects of personal reputation on accountability-strain relationships. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 70–83.
• Langhe, B. D., van Osselaer, S. M. J., ve Wierenga, B. (2011). The effects of process and outcome accountability on judgment process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115, 238–252.
• Lanivich, S., Brees, J. R., Hochwarter, W. A., ve Ferris, G. R. (2010). P-E fit as a moderator of the accountability-employee reactions relationships. Convergent results across two samples. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 425–436.
• Leithwood, K. ve Earl, L. (2000). Educational accountability effects: An international perspective. Peabody Journal of Education, 75(4), 1-18.
• Lerner, J. S., ve Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 255−275.
• Libby, T., Salterio, S. E., ve Webb, A. (2004). The balanced scorecard: The effects of assurance and process accountability on managerial judgment. The Accounting Review, 79, 1075–1094.
• McCandless, H. E. (2001). A citizen’s guide to public accountability: Changing the relationship between citizens and authorities. Victoria, BC: Trafford.
• Menon, N., ve Akhilesh, K. (1994). Functional dependent stress among managers: A new perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 9, 13–23.
• Mero, N.P. ve Motowildo, S.J. (1995). Effects of rater accountability on the accuracy and the favorability of performance ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 517-524.
• Mitchell, T. R. (1993). Leadership, values, and accountability. In M. M. Chemers, & R. Ayman (Eds.), Leadership theory and research: Perspectives and directions ( p. 109–136). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
• Mitchell, T. R., Hopper, H., Daniels, D., George-Falvy, J., ve Ferris, G. R. (1998). Power, accountability, and inappropriate actions. Applied Psychology, 47(4), 497−517.
• Møller, J. (2009). School leadership in an age of accountability: Tensions between managerial and professional accountability. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 37–46.
• Monks, R. A., ve Minow, N. (1991). Power and accountability. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
• Mulgan, R. (2003). Holding power to account: Accountability in modern democracies. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
• Özcan, E. (2011). Türk kamu yönetiminde ve güvenlik hizmetlerinde hesap verebilirlik. Yüksek lisans tezi, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Aydın.
• Özen, F. (2011). İlköğretim okulu yönetici ve öğretmenlerinin görüşlerine göre okul geliştirme aracı olarak hesap verebilirlik. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Philp, M. (2009). Delimiting democratic accountability. Political Studies, 57(1), 28–53.
• Roberts, K., Stout, S., ve Halpern, J. (1994). Decision Dynamics in Two High Reliability Military Organizations. Management Science, 40, 614-424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.40.5.614
• Romzek, B., ve Dubnick, M. (1998). Accountability. In: J. M. Shafritz (Ed.), The İnternational Encyclopedia Of Public Policy And Administration ( 1, pp. 6–11). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Rosenblatt, Z. (2017). Personal accountability in education: measure development and validation, Journal of Educational Administration, 55(1): 18-32, doi: 10.1108/JEA-10-2015-0093
• Royle, T., Hochwarter, W. A., ve Hall, A. T. (2008). The mediating effect of informal accountability for others. International Journal of Management and Marketing Research, 1, 1–22.
• Salduz, E. (2013). Öğretmenlerin hesap verebilirliklerini öğrencilerin akademik başarısı açısından değerlendirmeleri. Yüksek lisans tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
• Schillemans, T. ve Bovens, M. (2011). The challenges of multiple accountability: Does redundancy lead to overload?. In M. J. Dubnick and H. G. Frederickson (Eds.), Accountable Governance: Problems And Promises (p. 3-21), Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
• Schlenker, B. R., ve Weigold, M. F. (1989). Self-identification and accountability. In R. A. Giacalone ve P. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Impression Management İn The Organization (p. 21−43). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Schlenker, B. R., Britt, T. W., Pennington, J., Murphy, R., ve Doherty, K. (1994). The triangle model of responsibility. Psychological Review, 101, 632–652.
• Scholten, L., van Knippenberg, D., Nijstad, B. A., ve De Dreu, C. K. (2007). Motivated information processing and group decision-making: Effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 539–552.
• Scott, C. (2000). Accountability in the regulatory state. Journal of Law and Society, 27(1), 38–60.
• Scott, M., ve Lyman, M. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33, 46–62.
• Semin, G. R., ve Manstead, A. S. R. (1983). The accountability of conduct. A social psychological analysis. New York: Academic Press.
• Siegel-Jacobs, K., ve Yates, J. F. (1996). Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 1–17.
• Smith, J., Terry, D., ve Hogg, M. (2007). Social identity and the attitude-behavior relationship: Effects of anonymity and accountability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 239–257.
• Staw, B., ve Boettger, R. (1990). Task revision: A neglected form of work performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 534–559.
• Tetlock, P. (1992). The impact of accountability on judgment and choice. Toward a social contingency model. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances İn Experimental Social Psychology (p. 331–377). New York, NY: Academic Press.
• Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: The neglected social context of judgment and choice. In L. L. Cummings, & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research İn Organizational Behavior (7, p. 297–332). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
• Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accountability theory: Mixing properties of human agents with properties of social systems. In: L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine & D. M. Messick (Eds), Shared Cognition İn Organizations: The Management Of Knowledge (p.117–138). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Wagner, R. B. (1989). Accountability in education: A philosophical inquiry. New York: Routledge.
• Yarnold, P. R., Mueser, K. T., ve Lyons, J. S. (1988). Type A behavior, accountability, and work rate in small groups. Journal of Research in Personality, 22(3), 353−360.
• Yıldırım, K. ve Yenipınar, Ş. (2019). Okul yöneticilerine göre öğretimsel hesap verebilirlik olgusunun nitel analizi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 27(1), 151-162.