Education Supervisors' Views regarding Efficiency of Supervision System and In-Service Training Courses.

Abstract The purpose of this study is to gather the educational supervisors' opinions regarding whether the supervision system and in-service training courses reaches its aim and to obtain their suggestions about the restructuring of the supervision system. The sample of the study is composed of 104 supervisors. The qualitative data were collected through the "Supervisors' Opinions and Suggestions regarding the Supervision System Form", which was made up of open-ended questions. The findings were obtained through content analysis. According to the results of the study, 30 % of the supervisors think that the supervision system reaches its aims, and 34% contend that it reaches its targets with regard to certain aspects whereas 36 % of the supervisors believe that the system does not reach its aims. The majority of the supervisors think that the in-service training program does not reach its aims (87 %). The supervisors' suggestions about the improvement of the system tend to focus on restructuring efforts about general system and supervision services. Key Words Education Supervisor, Supervision System, Supervisor, In-service Training, Restructuring. Supervision of education has significant importance in education management in terms of doing analysis on available situation, providing feedback on applications, provision of aids to schools and institutions in order to reach the goal and provision of conditions to reach it, realization of required arrangements and methods for personal development and transformation (Bursalioglu, 1982; Kaya, 1993; Milli Egitim Bakanligi [MEB], 2001). As a matter of fact, subjects such as content, structuring, patterns, re-description of education, and determination of persons who will better perform this work are discussed and there were any hesitations on the necessity and significance of supervision if the field is to be analyzed (Aydin, 1993; Basar, 1998; Beach & Reinhartz, 2000; Calabrese & Zepeda, 1997; Can, 2004; Garubo & Rothstein, 1998; Glickman, Gordon ve Ross-Gordon, 2005; Hoy & Forsyth, 1986; Pajak, 2010; Sergiovanni & Starrat, 1993; Waite, 1995; Zepeda, 2006). In this respect, in order to evaluate and prevent deviations from the goal and to increase quality of result, supervision is required. Supervision process covers processes such as programs, supports that are realized for efficiency of education and learning processes, raising, and provision of self-control, guidance and assessment efforts (Aydin 1993; Beach & Reinhartz, 2000; Calabrese & Zepeda, 1997; Hoy & Forsyth, 1986; Sullivan & Glanz, 2009; Zepeda, 2006). Supervisors transfer innovations that are in the system to the employee in charge, they determine weakness and strength of the institution and they evaluate education and management processes according to pre-specified criteria by observing as per relevant legislation (Milli Egitim Bakanligi [MEB], 2001). Since 1991-1992 school years, branch teachers' supervision started to be realized by education supervisors because of high number of school and teacher while ministry inspectors' number was insufficient. Thus, mass that falls into education supervisor's remit has changed in terms of quality and quantity; supervisors' workload and problems have increased istanbul MillI Egitim Mudurlugu, (2002). However, increased workload of supervisor makes difficult for supervisor to collaborate with teacher, to observe and evaluate objectively (Can, 2004). Supervisors more or less receive education on supervising. However, variety of supervision area, the problem of expertise and discontinuity in inservice education reduce effectiveness of supervisors (Can, 2004). Better education of supervisors than teachers and specific education they will take on their job will increase their professional competency as well as the positive perception of them by the teacher (Aydin, 1993; Basar, 1998). …