Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The use of stakeholder voice through school self-evaluation in Turkish schools

  • Published:
Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract 

School self-evaluation based on multiple data sources has been used to evaluate the quality of education at schools. This study aims to reveal the state of the education process, health, safety, relations and communication, and participation in management at school. The study is conducted with a case study design, in a public secondary school. The researchers developed a School Self-Evaluation Model Supporting School Development and applied it to this study. In this study, two study groups were formed through purposeful sampling. Data was obtained from students, parents, teachers, and school administrators during the quantitative phase of the study, and these stakeholders were interviewed during the qualitative phase. In addition, while directing the implementation of their planned approach at the school, the authors conducted observations. The materials used to support the quantitative and qualitative data were also evaluated, and possible indicators were identified. According to the research findings, the stakeholders had good perceptions of the education processes in the school. Furthermore, the views of the stakeholders based on health, safety, relationships, and communication, participation in school management are also generally positive. However, it has been determined that there are some problems in student nutrition services, student relations, and participation in school management. All told, the stakeholders have generally satisfied with the education process at school. These findings have pointed out that school self-evaluation is very applicable for the constant improvement of schools based on various evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References 

  • Acikalin, A., & Turan, S. (2011). Bir anlam köprüsü inşa etme aracı olarak okullarda etkili iletişim [Effective communication in schools as a means of building a bridge of meaning]. Pegem Akademi

  • Aytekin-Aydogan, F. (2019, June 18). Meslek-liselerindeki-oz-degerlendirme-angaryasini-reddediyoruz-meslegimize-sahip-cikiyoruz [We reject the-self-evaluation-chore-in-vocational-high-schools]. Retrieved December 12, 2020 from https://egitimsen.org.tr/meslek-liselerindeki-oz-degerlendirme-angaryasini-reddediyoruz-meslegimize-sahip-cikiyoruz.

  • Brown, M., McNamara,G., O Hara, J and O’Brien,S (2017) ‘Striking a balance? The continuing evolution of Inspection and school self-evaluation in Ireland’ In: Jacqueline Baxter (eds). School inspectors: Operational challenges in National Policy Contexts. Springer.

  • Brown, M., McNamara, G., O’Brien, S., Skerritt, C., & O’Hara, J. (2020). Policy and practice: Including parents and students in school self-evaluation. Irish Educational Studies, 39(4), 511–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2020.1814839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buyukozturk, S. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Manual of data analysis for social sciences]. (15. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.

  • Can, A. (2013). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde nicel veri analizi [.Quantitative data analysis in the scientific research process with SPSS]. Pegem Akademi

  • Chapman, C., & Sammons, P. (2013). School self-evaluation for school improvement: What works and why? Education Trust Publication

  • Cinkir, S. & Karaman Kepenekci, Y. (2003). Öğrenciler arası zorbalık. [Bullying among students] Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 34(34), 236-253. Retrieved December 15, 2020 from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/108438

  • Cinkir, S. ve Nayir, F. (2017). Okul aile işbirliği standartlarına ilişkin veli görüşlerinin incelenmesi [Examination of parents' views on school-parent cooperation standards]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(1), 245-264. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2016015709

  • Creswell, J. W. (2012), Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson.

  • Demie, F. (2003).Using value-added data for school self-evaluation: a case study of practice in inner-city schools. School Leadership & Management, 23 (4), 445–467. Retrieved from https://lambeth.gov.uk/rsu/sites/lambeth.gov.uk.rsu/files/Using%20Value-added%20Data%20for%20School%20Self-evaluation%202003.pdf.

  • Demirtas, Z., & Alanoglu, M. (2019). Öğretmenlerin karara katılma durumları ve tükenmişlik düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between teachers’ decision-making and burnout levels]. II. Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler ve İnovasyon Kongresi Tammetin Bildiri Kitabı, Fırat Üniversitesi Yayını.

  • Department for Education and Skills. (2016). School self-evaluation guidelines 2016–2020: Post-primary. Dublin: Department of Education and Skills. Retrieved from https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Inspection-Reports-Publications/Evaluation-Reports-Guidelines/School-Self-Evaluation-Guidelines-2016-2020-Post-Primary.pdf

  • Dundar, S. (2013). Students’ participation to the decision-making process as a tool for democratic school. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 867–875. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1017316.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehren, M. C., Altrichter, H., McNamara, G. & O’Hara, J. (2013). Impact of school inspections on improvement of schools-describing assumptions on causal mechanisms in six European countries. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 25(1), 3 43. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11092-012-9156-4.

  • Education Bureau. (2013). School self-evaluation manual. Hong Kong Quality Assurance & School Based Support Division Education Bureau Publication.

  • Education Bureau. (2016). Performance indicators for Hong Kong schools. Education Bureau Publication.

  • Education Review Office. (2016). New Zealand School evaluation indicators. Crown Publication-.

  • Ekiz, D. (2015). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (4. Baskı). Anı Yayıncılık.

  • Erdogan, C., & Demirkasimoglu, N. (2010). Ailelerin eğitim sürecine katılımına ilişkin öğretmen ve yönetici görüşleri [Teachers’ and administrators’ views on families’ participation in the education process]. Kuram Ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 3(3), 399–431. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/108223

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, A. (2005). Stories of meaningful student involvement. Olympia, CommonAction, 19.

  • Glesne, C. (2012). Nitel Araştırmaya Giriş [Introduction to Qualitative Research] (2. Baskı) (A. Ersoy ve P. Yalcinoglu, Trans. Edt.). Anı Yayıncılık.

  • Goksoy, S. (2014). Okul yönetiminde karara katılım [Participation in decisions in school management]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(2), 253–268. Retrieved from https://app.trdizin.gov.tr/publication/paper/detail/TVRZM05ETTRPQT09

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulbaz, L. (2016). Primary school administrators and teachers’ views on school safety [Unpublished Master Thesis]. Ankara University.

  • Gunay, G., & Ozbilen, F. M. (2014). İlköğretim öğretmenlerinin okul nöbet görevleri üzerine bir değerlendirme [An evaluation of primary school teachers’ shift duties]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 64–78. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/mersinefd/issue/17395/181840?publisher=mersin

    Google Scholar 

  • HMIE. (2007). How good is our school? The journey to excellence. HMIE publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofman, R. H., Dijkstra, N. J., & Hofman, W. H. A. (2009). School self-evaluation and student achievement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450802664115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssens, F. J., & van Amelsvoort, G. H. (2008). School self-evaluations and school inspections in Europe: An exploratory study. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34(1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2008.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiziltepe, Z. (2017). İçerik analizi [Content analysis]. F. N. Seggie ve Y. Bayyurt (Edt.). Nitel araştırma yöntem teknik analiz ve yaklaşımlar kitabı içinde (pp. 253–266). Anı Yayıncılık.

  • Kurum, G. (2018). Meslek lisesi öğrencilerinin etik davranışlarına ilişkin öğretmen görüşleri [Teachers' views on ethical behavior of vocational high school students]. 2018 Balkan Eğitim ve Bilim Kongre Tam Metin Bildiri Kitapçığı (ss. 132-137). 6-8 Eylül Trakya Üniversitesi, Edirne, Türkiye.

  • Kurum, G., Erdemli, O. ve Taskin, P. (2018b). Okulda öğrenci sağlığı ve güvenliği üzerine bir medya analizi [A media analysis on student health and safety at school]. X. Uluslararası Eğitim Denetimi Kongresi Tam Metin Bildiri Kitabı. 06-08 Aralık Antalya, Türkiye.

  • Kurum, G. ve Cinkir, S. (2020). Kendi hikâyesini yazan okullar: Okul öz-değerlendirme modeller ve uygulamalar [Schools that write their own story: School self-evaluation models and practices]. Anı Yayıncılık.

  • MacBeath, J. (1999). Schools must speak for themselves: The case for school-self evaluation. Routledge.

  • MacBeath, J. (2006). School inspection and self-evaluation: Working with the new relationship. Routledge.

  • McCormack, O., O’Flaherty, J., & Liddy, M. (2019). Students’ vıews on theır partıcıpatıon ın publıcly managed second level schools ın ıreland: The importance of student-teacher relationships. Educational Studies, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1706041

  • McNamara, G., & O’Hara, J. (2008). The importance of the concept of self-evaluation in the changing landscape of education policy. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 34, 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2008.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (2015). Nitel araştırma: desen ve uygulama için bir rehber [Qualitative research: a guide to design and practice] (3. Baskı). (Trans. Edt. S. Turan). Nobel Yayıncılık.

  • Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Sage Publication.

  • Ministry of Education. (2013). School effectiveness framework. Toronto: Ministry of Education Publication. Retrieved December 15 2020 from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/framework.html

  • MoNE. (2010). İlköğretim kurumları standartları eğitim dokümanı [Primary education standards training document]. MEB İlköğretim Genel Müdürlüğü.

  • MoNE. (2014a). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı İlköğretim Kurumları Yönetmeliği [Ministry of National Education Regulation on Primary Education Institutions]. Retrieved March 8, 2020 from http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/dosyalar/1703.pdf.

  • MoNE. (2014b). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Ortaöğretim Kurumları Yönetmeliği [Ministry of National Education Regulation on Secondary Education Institutions]. Retrieved March 15, 2020 from http://ogm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2016_11/03111224_ooky.pdf.

  • MoNE. (2014c). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Eğitimde Kalite Yönetimi Yönergesi [Ministry of National Education Directive on Quality Management in Education]. Retrieved December 15, 2020 from https://kms.kaysis.gov.tr/Home/Goster/45883?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1.

  • MoNE. (2015a). İlköğretim Kurum Standartları Kılavuzu [Primary education standards.guide]. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları

  • MoNE. (2015b). Performans Yönetim Sistemi Kılavuz Taslağı [The draft of performance management system guide]. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları

  • MoNE. (2016). Kalite Yönetim Standartları Referans ve Rehber Kılavuz [Quality Management Standards Reference and Guide Guide]. MEB-ÇSG Bakanlığı Yayını

  • MoNE. (2018a). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı 2019–2023 Stratejik Plan Hazırlık Programı [Ministry of National Education 2019–2023 Strategic Plan Preparation Program]. Retrieved December 15, 2020 from https://tegm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2020_01/02143748_Stratejik_Plan.pdf.

  • MoNE. (2018b). 2023 Eğitim Vizyonu [2023 Education Vision]. MEB Yayını

  • MoNE. (2018c). Okullarda Güvenlik Önlemlerinin Alınması Genelgesi[Circular on Taking Security Measures in Schools]. Retrieved January 10 2018b from http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/dosyalar/1935.pdf

  • OECD. (2009). School evaluation, teacher appraisal and feedback and the ımpact on schools and teachers. In Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS (137–189). OECD Publishing.

  • OECD. (2013). Synergies for better learning: an international perspective on evaluation and assessment. OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing.

  • Ofsted. (2019). School inspection handbook. No. 190017. Ofsted publication.

  • Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri [Qualitative research and evaluation methods]. (M. Bütün ve S. B. Demir, Trans. Edt.). Pegem Akademi.

  • Robson, C. (2017). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri: gerçek dünya araştırması [Real world research] (2.baskı). (S. Cinkir ve N. Demirkasimoglu, Trans. Edt.). Anı Yayıncılık.

  • Saban, A. (2008). Okula ilişkin metaforlar [Metaphors about school]. Kuram Ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 55, 459–496. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/kuey/issue/10342/126702

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahin, S., & Ceper, B. A. (2013). İlköğretim Kurumları Standartları Etkililiği Üzerine [On the Effectiveness of Primary Education Standards]. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(46), 84–111. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/esosder/issue/6160/82805

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheerens, J., Glas, C., & Thomas, S. M. (2003). Educational evaluation, assessment, and monitoring. Swets & Zeitlinger Publication.

  • Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Muller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Test of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research -Online, 8(2), 23–74. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.509.4258&rep=rep1&type=pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Schildkamp, K., & Visscher, A. (2009). Factors influencing the utilisation of a school self-evaluation instrument. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35(4), 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2009.12.001

  • Schildkamp, K., Visscher, A., & Luyten, H. (2009). The effects of the use of a school self-evaluation instrument. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450802605506

  • Simons, H. (2013). Enhancing the quality of education through school self-evaluation. In A developmental and negotiated approach to school self-evaluation. (pp. 1–18). (Edt. M. Lai ve S. Kushner). United Kingdom: Emerald.

  • Skerritt, C. (2021). Pressure, bureaucracy, accountability, and all for show: Irish perspectives on life inside England’s schools. British Journal of Educational Studies, 69(6), 693–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2020.1839014

  • Skerritt, C., O’Hara, J., Brown, M., McNamara, G., & O’Brien, S. (2021). Enacting school self-evaluation: the policy actors in Irish schools, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2021.1886594

  • Sumer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar [Structural equation models: Basic concepts and best practices]. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3(6), 49–74. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-04302-005

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanriogen, Z., & Ergun, F. (2018, December 6–8). İlköğretim kurum standartlarına ilişkin yönetici ve öğretmen görüşleri: denizli serinhisar ilçe örneği [Administrator and teacher views on primary education institution standards: sample of Denizli Serinhisar district]. X. Uluslararası Eğitim Denetimi Kongresi. Antalya, Türkiye.

  • Tasgin, A., & Sonmez, S. (2013). Evaluation of the general competencies of the teaching profession according to the views of classroom teachers and classroom teacher candidates. Middle Eastern & African Journal of Educational Research, 3, 80–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavsancil, E. (2014). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve spss ile veri analizi [Measuring attitudes and data analysis with SPSS]. (4. Baskı). Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

  • Tulunay Ates, O. (2016). Öğrencilerin öğretmen ve okul metaforları [Teachers and school metaphors of students]. Uluslararası Güncel Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 78–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turhan, M., & Turan, M. (2012). Ortaöğretim kurumlarında güvenlik [Safety in secondary education institutions]. Kuram Ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 18(1), 121–142. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/kuey/issue/10325/126594

    Google Scholar 

  • Unal, A. (2019). Araştıran okulda denetim [Inspection in research school]. M. Yavuz (Edt), Araştıran okul içinde (pp.193–274). Eğitim Yayınevi.

  • Vanhoof, J., Petegem, P. V., & Maeyer, S. D. (2009). Attitudes towards school self-evaluation. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35, 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2009.01.004

  • Yavuz, M. (2019). Araştıran okulun kavramsal inşası [Conceptual construction of the research school]. M. Yavuz (Edt), Araştıran okul içinde (pp.4–11). Eğitim Yayınevi.

  • Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. (9. Baskı). Seçkin Yayıncılık.

  • Yin, R. K. (2017). Durum Çalışması Araştırması Uygulamaları [Applications of case study research]. (İ. Gunbayi, Trans. Edt.). Nobel Yayıncılık.

  • Zingil, G. (2012). School administrators’ views regarding the design of the self-evaluation activity based on primary education standards (Unpublished Master Thesis). Eskişehir Osman Gazi University.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This manuscript has not been published or presented elsewhere in part or in entirety and is not under consideration by another journal. All study participants provided informed consent, and the study design was approved by the appropriate ethics review board. No funding support received for this research. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare about this study. We have read and understood your journal’s policies, and we believe that neither the manuscript nor the study violates any of these. Details about competing interests are provided separately. We confirm we have included a data availability statement in my main manuscript file and data will be made available on reasonable request.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Administration, Faculty of Education, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey

    Gul Kurum

  2. Faculty of Educational Sciences, Ankara University, Cebeci Campus, 06590, Çankaya, Ankara, Turkey

    Sakir Cinkir

Authors
  1. Gul Kurum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sakir Cinkir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gul Kurum.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is produced from the dissertation supervised by Prof. Dr. Sakir Cinkir at the Department of Educational Administration, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Ankara University.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kurum, G., Cinkir, S. The use of stakeholder voice through school self-evaluation in Turkish schools. Educ Asse Eval Acc 34, 361–389 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09385-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09385-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation