Özet:

Background. Supervision process covers processes such as instructional programs, implementation of programs and guidance for teachers to improve effectiveness of learning processes (Aydın, 1993; Beach, Reinhartz, 2000; Calabrese, Zepeda, 1997; Hoy, Forsyth, 1986; Sullivan, Glanz, 2009; Zepeda, 2006). Supervision process also involves the assessment of teacher performance as well as weaknesses and strengths of the schools and management processes according to pre-specified criteria by relevant legislation (Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB], 2001). Increased workload of supervisor makes difficult for supervisor to collaborate with teacher, to observe and evaluate objectively (Can, 2004). Studies consistently show that supervision system is in a real crisis (Açıkgöz, 1990; Akbaba, Memişoğlu, 2010; Karagözoğlu, 1977; Kayıkçı 2004; Söbü, 2005; Şahin, Çek, Zeytin-Akyürek, 2009b; Taşar, 2000). Increased work load and persistent problems of the supervision system provides a sound rationale for examining contentment or discontentment levels of education supervisors to explore causes and effects of their contentment or discontentment. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the contentment and discontentment levels of education supervisors, the causes and effects of their contentment or discontentment. Research questions sought responses are as follows: (1) What are the sources of professional contentment and discontentment of education supervisors? (2) Are education supervisors' contentment and discontentment varies by; (a) income, (b) status, (c) the hierarchical position in the Ministry and (d) working in various institutions? (3) What are the consequences of their discontentment and the issues that they face? Method. Data were obtained through qualitative research method. The study group is composed of 104 supervisors who attended the 4th session of the In-Service Training Course in Aydın, Kuşadası in June 2008. Semi-structured “The Primary Education Supervisors' Professional Contentment and Discontentment Form” was developed and it is composed of six open-ended questions. During the data analysis, two expert researchers were informed on the issue and they were trained on how to follow the procedures. Data were interpreted and evaluated through content analysis. It was conducted following the general framework of qualitative analysis and was analyzed in three parts: Data reduction reasoning with phenomenon presentation and verification, the processes of coding, finding themes, re-arrangement of data according to codes and themes, and interpretation of findings (Miles Huberman, 1994; Yıldırım Şimşek, 2008). Researchers carried out data analysis by following the processes of coding, composing and clarifying themes and presenting validity and reliability. Up to determining the validity and reliability, all responses to questions were read and evaluated independently by two researchers. Data obtained by the two researchers were compared with the participation of the third researcher and “coherence” and “consistency” of the data were analyzed. Three researchers worked in coordination and collaboration. Cohesiveness of two researchers' themes was analyzed by taking into account the principle arguing that qualitative data increases reliability (Yıldırım Şimşek, 2008); the numbers of agreements and disagreements were determined and internal reliability of research was determined by using ”reliability agreement/agreement + disagreement formula” (Miles Huberman, 1994). As a result of reliability calculation, the item agreement percentage of the scale was determined as 0.86. Findings and conclusions. The result of this research revealed that the supervisors are gratified in terms of the nature of the job and their personal contentment. This results mainly from “being able to interact with various people and feeling efficacious”. On the other hand, the supervisors are not gratified with the issues regarding senior management, form of the job, job standards and process of supervision. Whereas the supervisors are not gratified with the salary, status and their hierarchical position in the Ministry of National Education, they get contentment from working in different institutions. Among the major causes of professional discontentment are exhaustion and professional reluctance. The research shows that education supervisors' contentment level is rather low. They stress that they feel the upper management's pressure on them regarding supervision and evaluation, and that the heads of education supervisors discriminate among them. Task variety and work load affect their job contentment negatively. According to education supervisors, their salary and status are not satisfactory in comparison with the salary of teachers, principals and Ministry supervisors. Such perceptions affect their job contentment negatively, and lead to exhaustion and reluctance. It is important that the relevant Ministry units address these issues and take necessary actions. Some improvements that led to contentment on the part of supervisors (such as adjustment of supervisors' personal rights) were made. However, these took place after the present research had been conducted. Yet more improvements should be made to increase the supervisors' self-confidence within the system. It is recommended that in-service training programs that will make supervisors feel more valued while using their expertise should be provided. The work groups should be equally divided, the belief that there is discrimination by the top management should be eliminated, assignments should be well-coordinated, and top management's intervention in investigations should be prevented. Supervisors' salaries should be increased so that they earn more than the staff they supervise and their salaries should be made equal to those who undertake similar duties. The consequences of supervisors' professional discontentment such as exhaustion and professional reluctance could be further analyzed in depth.

Anahtar Kelimeler: