Pısa 2009 Verilerine Göre Türkiye De Liselerin Okul Politika Ve Uygulamaları Ile Bunların Öğrenme Çıktıları Üzerine Etkileri

Abstract

In this study, the question “According to the PISA 2009 data, what is the situation of the school policies and practices and also their effects on the learning outcomes (reading scores) at upper secondary schools in Turkey?” was answered. This research was performed as a descriptive study. The study group of this research consisted of 150 school principals and 4859 students at upper secondary schools. The conclusions can be summarized as follows: 1. When students are admitted to the school, the most considered factor is student‟s academic achievement. 2. More than half of the schools place the students to the different classes in all subjects or some subjects; and a great majority of them use the assessments of students to group students for instructional purposes. 3. The most likely reason for transferring students to another school is behavioral problems. 4. The assessment of student data is mostly used; to provide information to parents of students on their child‟s academic performance relative to other students in terms of declaration/transparency; to inform parents about their child‟s progress in terms of monitoring-developing. 5. The most preferred method for monitoring the practice of teachers is principal observations of lessons. 6. The assessment of student data is mostly used in evaluation of teachers‟ performance rather than principal‟s performance. 7. The most frequent principals‟ activity is to pay attention to disruptive behavior in classrooms; the least frequent activity of them is to take over lessons from teachers WHO are unexpectedly absent. 8. When students are admitted to the school; the high Socio-Economic Degree (SED) schools consider more the student‟s academic achievement and preference given to family members of current or former students than middle and low SED schools do. 9. High SED schools consider more the assessment of student data for declaration/transparency and monitoring-developing dimensions than middle and low SED schools do. 10. High SED schools use more the assessment of student data in evaluation of teachers‟ and the principal‟s performance than middle and low SED schools do. 11. The school principals who work at high SED schools use more student performance results to develop the school‟s educational goals; and more take exam results into account in decisions regarding curriculum development than those who work at low and middle schools do. 12. School policies and practices regarding accountability and school principal‟s leadership accounted for approximately 10 % for low SED schools and 30 % for high SED schools, of the total variance in learning outcomes (reading scores). 13. When comparing the countries with high PISA 2009 achievement: the equity dimension is not taken sufficiently into account for the school policies and practices; and administrative accountability is used predominantly rather than professional accountability at upper secondary schools in Turkey.