Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020

© 2020 INASED

Teachers’ Evaluation on School Principals’ Supervision

Mehmet ÖZCAN1
Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University

Abstract

This study aims to analyze school principles’ supervision practices according to teachers’ opinions.
The study employs phenomenology design out of qualitative research methods. The data of the study
were gathered in 2019-2020 academic year from 16 teachers who had been working in state schools
for 16 or more years through face to face interviews via a semi-structured interview form. The study
attempted to reveal participating teachers’ opinions on school principles’ supervision based on their
experiences with regard to teachers’ professional development, motivation, affectivity and objectivity
of supervision. The first finding of the study reveals that school principals’ sharing experience,
mutual work, being organized, overcoming insufficiencies and satisfaction contribute to teachers’
professional development. Second finding of the study states that support, constructive criticism,
appreciation and communication increase teachers’ motivation. According to the third finding of the
study school principals’ administrator role, supervision knowledge, supervisor role and continuity are
factors of effective supervision. Last finding of the study explains that impartiality, equity, sense of
mission and meticulousness are needed for objectivity of supervision. Results are discussed and
suggestions are provided.

Keywords: Supervision, Lesson, School Principal, Teacher

DOI: 10.29329/epasr.2020.251.17

1
Dr., Faculty of Education, Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University, Nevşehir, Turkey, ORCID: 0000-0002-5451-0773
Correspondence: mehmetozcan79@[Link]

303
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Introduction

Societies establish a management structure in order to maintain their existence on the world,
to prosper and to be able to compete with developed countries. This structure involves a variety of
institutions such as health, politics, education, tourism, industry or technology. Yet, education is one
of the basic institutions on which most emphasis is needed and with which it is possible to leave a
developed country to posterity. The countries which have successful education systems are adept at
teacher training, designing contemporary curricula, assessment of success, guidance and supervision
practices, social activities, physical conditions, educational financing and in many other areas, and
they compete with developed countries.

Education systems are made up of many elements including education, instruction, teacher
training, guidance and supervision, assessment and evaluation, and have a number of tasks such as
cultivate manpower needed in the country, creating a society in line with the country’s founding
purposes, raising individuals qualified in culture, art and academic aspects, enabling individuals to
critical thinking, research and questioning. In this sense, education system is one of the most
significant institutions to ensure a country’s existence and continuity. As in all institutions, education
system also needs supervision and guidance to put forth the level of success, unearth the deficiencies
and needs in the system. Supervision is the process of examining and monitoring whether the tasks in
the state or private institutions are performed in accordance with regulations (Taymaz, 1982).
Supervision is following up practices for the public weal (Bursalıoğlu, 1991). In other words, is a
process of the organization to reach its aims by sticking to its existing values (Senge, 2006).Besides,
supervision aims to ameliorate the instructional system and enhance students’ academic achievement
(Sullivan & Glanz, 2005). An examination of these definitions suggests that supervision can be
defined as the practices aiming overcome the deficiencies seen in the available system and thereby
ameliorating it.

The aims of supervision are to control operation process of education and instruction, ensure
the practices are performed in line with regulations, and guide it in reaching the aims. Different
supervision types have arisen to realize these aims. These types include clinical supervision,
instructional supervision, artistic supervision, differentiated supervision, and developmental
supervision.

Clinical supervision is a logical execution process in order to improve teachers’ professional

competences under the supervision of school administrators primarily targeting improvement of
students’ learning (Cogan, 1973). It is based upon direct observation to advance instruction in the
classroom setting (Tanner & Tanner, 1985). Clinical supervision involves meeting and negotiating of
supervisors and teachers in an instructional setting in order to ensure a more efficient instruction
(Sergiovanni & Starratt, 1979). Definitions of clinical supervision suggest that it is a co-working

304
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

process of the supervisor and teacher in the classroom setting in order to improve instruction. The
main purposes in practicing clinical supervision are improving the process of instruction, identification
and solution of problems, improvement of teachers’ professional development, providing continuity to
these skills, and assessment of teachers according to their professional competencies (Ağaoğlu, 1977).
To realize these purposes, an ideal supervision cycle includes a preliminary negotiation between
teacher and supervisor, observation period, assessment, negotiation after the observation and re-
structuring, guidance and evaluation.

Instructional supervision is a process of advancement of instructional standards, realization of

goals and aims and cooperation with the teachers to these ends. Ensuring teachers’ professional
development and advancement of instructional process are possible with mutual trust and support
(Beach & Reinhartz, 2000). Instructional supervision is the supervision of all curricular or
extracurricular preparation, practice, activity and assessment (Erdem, 2006). Different from other
supervision types, instructional supervision is composed of five phases with regard to improvement of
instructional process which are meeting with the teacher, observation, preparation for the interview,
interview and review of criticisms (Glickman, 1990). The phases in this type reveal that instructional
supervision is practiced in cooperation with teachers and the main aim is to improve instruction.

Artistic supervision includes making detailed analysis based on observations in the classroom and
putting forth teachers’ distinguishing characteristics of teachers (Kapusuzoğlu & Dilekci, 2017). The
aim in artistic supervision is not to find weaknesses of teachers and criticize them but to reveal the
strengths and improve them (Yılmaz, 2004). In artistic supervision, the evaluation of events happened
in the classroom is based on supervisor’s sensitivity, perception and knowledge and this is conveyed
to the teacher in an explanatory, poetic and metaphorical language. Instructional supervision has eight
characteristics, which are (1) paying attention to the hidden and meaningful aspects of events as well
as clear and verbal aspects, (2) a high level of education expertise knowledge and skill of seeing the
significant elements, (3) teachers’ contributing to the rising generation’s education as well as other
contributions, (4) paying attention to time spent in the classroom and observation in a specific time,
(5) providing harmony in order to form a trust and communication relation between supervisor and
teacher, (6) best use of language to explain the observation, (7) skill of interpreting the events
encountered in the observation to the ones who experienced them, and (8) supervisor’s perception and
sense-making of teacher’s strengths, sensitivities and experiences as the most significant tool of
education (Eisner, 1982).

Differentiated supervision was developed by Glatthorn (1997) and was defined as

differentiation of supervision per teacher because teacher has different developmental needs and their
learning styles are also different from each other. Differentiated supervision is supervision model
offering different supervision models based on teachers’ academic improvement and individual needs

305
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

to enable their professional development and enhancing students’ learning skills (İlğan, 2008). In other
words, this model provides different supervision models with respect to teachers’ academic and
individual development and aims to enhance teachers’ professional development so as to enhance
students’ learning. Differentiated supervision model, put forth by Glastthorn (1997), involves four
dimensions which are expertise, organization, supervisor and teacher. Expertise dimension is related
with increase in teachers’ supervision options through diversification of instruction; organization
dimension has to do with teachers’ working in cooperation, being in solidarity, contribution and
support for professional development; supervisor dimension involves supervisors’ focusing on
teachers’ needs and expectations, and teacher dimension includes supervision of teachers based on
their needs and ensuring their professional development in solidarity (Aydın, 2008).

Developmental supervision was put forth by Glickman (1980) and argues that teachers’
supervision should be different since the supervision behaviors needed by each teacher may be
different from each other. Developmental supervision is supervision of aspects needed by the teachers
based on analysis of their developmental levels (Aydın, 2008). The effective aspect of developmental
supervision is the support provided to teachers through selecting a supervision model based on the
areas needed by them (Zellermayer & Margolin, 2005). In developmental supervision, the
appropriateness of the teacher to supervision can be decided through four approaches. These
approaches are “non-directive approach”, in which the teacher is more knowledgeable and responsible
than the supervisor with respect to supervision area or the supervisor does not have sufficient expertise
on the supervision issue, “cooperative approach”, in which the teacher and supervisor have a similar
level of knowledge on the supervision area and they are sharing responsibilities and trying to solve the
problem in cooperation, “ directive informational supervision approach”, in which the teacher does not
have sufficient knowledge on the supervision are and does not have responsibility, and the supervisor
has the directive information on the issue, and “directive control approach”, in which the teacher has
no knowledge on the issue and the authority to decide and responsibility is completely in the
supervisor (Glickman, 2002). So, it can be suggested that the purpose of developmental supervision is
to identify the developmental level of the teacher and directing him/her to a better level.

The first official step in supervision field in Turkey happened in 1923, when supervisors’
duties, authority and responsibilities were defined with the introduction of “Regulation regarding
school supervisors’ duties” (Taymaz, 1997). Since then, a number of revisions and reforms have taken
place in supervision and guidance laws and practices. In 1927, it was decided that a supervisor would
be in each district, in 1929 supervision guide was published, in 1949 the supervisors had training
course, in 1961 supervisors for elementary schools started, in 1971 the practice supervision in groups
was started, in 1981 the supervision of higher education was assigned to Higher Education Council, in
1990 the supervision task started to follow contemporary practices, in 2000 supervision regulation was
reformed, and in 2010 the name of the supervisors for elementary schools was changed to education

306
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

supervisors. Finally, with the regulation in 2014, teachers’ lesson supervisions undertaken by
supervisors were assigned to school principals. Therefore, the teachers are supervised during their
lesson hours by the school principals.

The aim of this study is to identify teachers’ opinions as to the expediency of supervision
practices by the school principals. The research questions to this end are as follows:

1. What are the teachers’ opinion regarding school principals’ supervision practices on teachers’
professional development?

2. What are the teachers’ opinion regarding school principals’ supervision practices on teachers’
motivation?

3. What are teachers’ opinions regarding efficiency of school principals’ supervision practices?

4. What are teachers’ opinions regarding the objectivity of school principals’ supervision practices?

Method

Research design

Aiming to identify teachers’ opinions as to the expediency of supervision practices by the

school principals, this study is a qualitative phenomenological study. Qualitative studies aim to
unearth how people make sense of their experiences (Dey, 1993). Phenomenology is a type of
qualitative research investigating personal meanings out of their experiences (Lester, 1999).
Phenomenological studies focus on how people perceive, describe and make sense of a phenomenon
(Patton, 2007). There are two types of phenomenological studies which are interpretive and
descriptive phenomenology. Descriptive phenomenology focuses on describing individuals’
perceptions and experiences. Interpretive phenomenology focuses on interpreting those perceptions
and experiences (Ersoy, 2016). The phenomenon in this study is supervision practice of school
principals. The current study aims to unearth how teacher perceive school principals’ supervision
practices and their supervision experiences through interpretive phenomenology.

Study Group

The participants in the present study consist of teacher working in state schools in Nevşehir
province of Turkey. The participants were selected through criterion sampling method which is a
purposeful sampling method. Purposeful sampling method aims to reach rich data sources in order to
enhance the depth of the study and ensure its expediency. Criterion sampling method is selection of
appropriate individuals, cases, events or objects that are related to the problem statement (Yıldırım &
Şimşek, 2011). The criteria in this study were defined as experience of school principals’ supervision,
education level, and experience of at least 15 years. To this end, the participants were selected out of
teachers working in secondary school and high schools in Nevşehir who have the experience of school

307
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

principals’ supervision. The participants are 16 teachers nine of whom are female and seven of whom
are male. They have 16 year or more teaching experience. Eight of them are working in secondary
schools and eight of them are working in high schools. The participants voluntarily accepted to share
their experiences and perceptions regarding school principals’ supervision. In addition, they were
informed that their opinions and statements collected in the study would not be used for any other
purposes and in any other platforms.

Table 1. Demographics of the participants

Participants Gender Experience (Year) School level
T1 F 21 and more Secondary School
T2 M 21 and more Secondary School
T3 F 16-20 Secondary School
T4 F 16-20 Secondary School
T5 F 16-20 Secondary School
T6 N 16-20 Secondary School
T7 F 21 and more Secondary School
T8 M 21 and more Secondary School
T9 F 16-20 High School
T10 F 16-20 High School
T11 M 21 and more High School
T12 M 16-20 High School
T13 M 21 and more High School
T14 F 21 and more High School
T15 M 21 and more High School
T16 F 21 and more High School

Instrument and data collection

The data of the study were collected in 2019-2020 academic year based on face to face
interviews with teachers following school principals’ supervision of teachers. Interview is the basic
data collection method in phenomenological research method (Ersoy, 2016). A semi-structured
interview form composed of two parts was used in the study. The first part involves questions as to
participants’ gender, professional experience and school level and the second part involves semi-
structured question so as to reveal participants’ experiences and perceptions regarding school
principals’ supervision practices. A pilot study was carried out with two participants using the draft
form. Following the pilot study, form was re-arranged and sent to two experts to be evaluated in terms
of appropriates to purpose and topic, language, clarity and intelligibility. After expert evaluation, the
instrument was finalized, and it was put into practice. 16 teachers working in a state secondary school
and a high school volunteered to take part in the study. The face to face interviews took 40-45
minutes. Before the interviews, the participants were informed about the research purpose and they
were told that the data would not be used in other sources. The questions in the semi-structured
interview form were addressed to the participants in the interview and their answers were transcribed.
When the participants’ answers were not satisfactory for the questions, additional questions were

308
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

asked, and more detailed information was received. This is a routine practice in semi-structured
interviews (Büyüköztürk, Kılıç-Çakmak, Akgün, Karadeniz & Demirel, 2012).

Data analysis

The data were analyzed through content analysis method. Content analysis is an analysis type
aiming to reveal implicit contents of social realities by looking at explicit content characteristics
(Gökçe, 2006). The analysis of research data was carried out in four steps which are coding of data,
identification of themes, arrangement of codes, and themes and definition and interpretation of data
(Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011). In data coding step, the interview notes gathered in the interviews were
formed into a written document by the researcher, all the answers to questions were written one under
the other, and similar answers were combined with a inductive method and thereby codes were
generated (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). In the identification of themes, themes were formed by
combining similar codes. In the arrangement of codes, the codes and themes formed out of the codes
were provided by the researchers. In the interpretation of the findings, the obtained findings were
interpreted using tables and graphics to make it easy for readers to understand. The reporting phase,
the codes gathered in the data analysis were sent to two specialists and they examined the coherence of
the coding. In this step, the formula [agreement/ (agreement + disagreement) X 100] developed by
Miles and Huberman (1994) was used. A high percentage of agreement among coders reflects high
reliability (Stemler, 2001). The agreement among coders in the current study was calculated as 90%.
This shows that the study and codes are in line with the purpose.

4. Definition and interpretation of

findings

3. Arrangement of codes and themes

2. Identification of themes

1. Coding of data

Figure 1. Steps of the data analysis (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011)

Validity and Reliability

The validity of the study informs about instrument, accuracy of data and procedures while
reliability has to do with the coherence of the study (Creswell, 2013). To ensure validity and reliability
in the study, the criteria of credibility, transferability, coherence and confirmability were employed.
Credibility is related to compatibility of data with reality; transferability is related to adaptability of

309
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

data to other contexts; coherence is related to harmony of data; and confirmability is related to
confirmation of findings by the participants (Shenton, 2004). In this study, the data obtained in the
research were reported in a clear and intelligible language, expert opinion was resorted, all the phases
of the research were explained in detail, the findings were confirmed by the participants and Miles and
Huberman’s (1994) intercoder formula was used.

Results

In this part, the findings are explained in line with research questions. The answers of 16
participants are analyzed and reported into tables and charts.

1. The contribution of supervision practice to teachers’ professional development

The first research question aims to reveal the contribution of supervision practice by school
principals to teachers’ professional development. Figure 2 below demonstrates the percentages of the
participants.

5 Sharing experiences
20
Mutual work
30

Being organized

Overcoming
insufficiencies
20
Satisfaction
25

Figure 2. The contribution of school principals’ supervision practices to teachers’ professional

development (%)

Figure 2 highlights that school principals’ supervision practices contribute to teachers’

professional development in five sub themes. These sub themes are sharing experiences (30%),
mutual work (25%), being organized (20%), overcoming insufficiencies (20%), and satisfaction (5%)
respectively.

Table 2. Contribution of school principals’ supervision practices to teachers’ professional

development
Theme Codes f
Sharing experiences 6
Mutual work 5
Professional Development Being organized 4
Overcoming insufficiencies 4
Satisfaction 1

310
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Table 2 reveals that the contribution of school principals to teachers’ professional

development are related to sharing experiences (six participants), mutual work (five participants),
being organized (four participants), overcoming insufficiencies (four participants) and satisfaction
(one participant). The participants’ views regarding sub themes are provided below.

“As it is hard to find active administrators in the school, this short break is an opportunity for
us to communicate with them. In the meeting with the school principal, he made some
suggestions as to insufficiencies and measures” (T6).

“Transfer of experience is quite positive. Supervision practices are beneficial for the teachers
to see their insufficiencies and overcome them. Effective lesson supervision contributes to
teachers’ professional development. It helps teachers to renew themselves with regard to
classroom management and lecturing.” (T11)

“School principal’s supervision practices lead teachers to be more careful, to resort to different
instructional methods in class and to act in accordance with yearly plan.” (T13)

The findings regarding the first research question reveal that the participating teachers think
that school principals should transfer their experiences to teacher by communicating with them,
supervision helps overcome problems and insufficiencies through mutual work, and helps teacher to
become more organized, which eventually contributes to teachers’ professional development.

2. The contribution of supervision practice to teachers’ motivation

The second research question aims to reveal the contribution of supervision practice by school
principals to teachers’ motivation. Figure 3 below demonstrates the percentages of the participants.

17 Support

Constructive
criticism
41
18 Appreciation

Communication

24

Figure 3. The contribution of school principals’ supervision practices to teachers’ motivation (%)

Figure 3 reveals that school principals’ supervision practices contribute to teachers’

motivation in four sub themes. These sub themes are support (41%), constructive criticism (24%),
appreciation (18%), and communication (17%) respectively.

311
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Table 3. Contribution of school principals’ supervision practices to teachers’ motivation

Theme Codes f
Support 7
Constructive criticism 4
Motivation
Appreciation 3
Communication 3
Table 3 shows that the contribution of school principals to teachers’ motivation are related to
support (seven participants), constructive criticism (four participants), appreciation (three
participants), and communication (three participants). The participants’ views regarding sub themes
are provided below.

“School principals’ language, mode and perspective in communication with teachers affect
motivation in a positive or negative way. Motivation decreases or increases not in the sense of
supervision but in the sense of communication style” (T1)

“School administrators’ supervision of teachers who thoroughly carry out their tasks and duties
increases their will to work and therefore encourage them to practice effective activities when
they are appreciated.” (T5)

“Thanks to school principals’ supervision, teachers can make up for their insufficiencies. In this
sense, I can suggest that supervision is beneficial for teachers. This way, teachers prepare the
official documents more meticulously.” (T4)

The findings regarding the second research question reveal that the participating teachers think
that school principals can increase teachers’ motivation levels through providing support, making
constructive criticisms, appreciating their success and offering an open communication channel.

3. Effectivity of supervision practices

The third research question aims to reveal the effectivity of supervision practices carried out
by school principals. Figure 4 below demonstrates the percentages of the participants.

10

Administrator role
22
Supervision knowledge
42
Supervisor role
Continuity

26

Figure 4. Effectivity of school principals’ supervision practices (%)

312
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Figure 4 reveals that effectivity of school principals’ supervision practices is composed of four
sub themes. These sub themes are administrator role (42%), supervision knowledge (26%), supervisor
role (22%), and continuity (10%) respectively.

Table 4. Effectivity of school principals’ supervision practices

Themes Codes f
Administrator role 8
Supervision knowledge 5
Effectivity
Supervisor role 4
Continuity 2
Table 4 shows that the effectivity of school principals’ supervision practices is related to
administrator role (eight participants), supervision knowledge (five participants), supervisor role (four
participants), and continuity (two participants). The participants’ views regarding sub themes are
provided below.

“During supervision, school principal should abstain from statement and actions disturbing teachers
and students, and supervision can be effective when it is practiced without falling short of the
purpose”. (T8)

“There are sometimes insufficiencies with regard to content knowledge in some courses.
There are also inadequacies in terms of new instructional methods and techniques” (T11)

“School administrators are demonstrating positive attitudes and democratic approaches. This
increases teacher’s trust in school principals’ both administrator and supervisor roles.” (T7)

The findings regarding the third research question unearth that the participating teachers are of
the opinion that effectivity of school principals’ supervision practices can be ensured when they
successfully carry out both their administrator and supervisor roles, they improve their supervision
knowledge and competencies, and employ continuity of supervision.

4. Objectivity of supervision practices

The fourth research question aims to reveal the objectivity of supervision practices carried out
by school principals. Figure 5 below demonstrates the percentages of the participants.

10

15 Impartiality
Equity
45
Sense of mission
Meticulousness

30

Figure 4. Objectivity of school principals’ supervision practices (%)

313
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Figure 4 presents that objectivity of school principals’ supervision practices is composed of

four sub themes. These sub themes are impartiality (45%), equity (30%), sense of mission (15%), and
meticulousness (10%) respectively.

Table 5. Objectivity of school principals’ supervision practices

Theme Codes f
Impartiality 9
Equity 6
Objectivity
Sense of mission 3
Meticulousness 2
Table 5 shows that the objectivity of school principals’ supervision practices is related to
impartiality (nine participants), equity (six participants), sense of mission (three participants), and
meticulousness (two participants). The participants’ views regarding sub themes are provided below.

“Impartiality is highly significant for us since equity is an aim for school administrators. They
are always lucid and objective so that we can serve comfortably and with our heart and soul.”
(T14)

“The supervision practices are carried out impartially, so the feeling of trust among teachers
and administrators increases to higher levels” (T7)

“As principals are very close with some teachers, they may not be able to carry out objective
supervision. The supervisor should be prejudice-free.” (T12)

The findings regarding the fourth research question suggest that the participating teachers
think that objectivity of supervision can be ensured when school principals pay attention to
impartiality, equity, sense of mission and meticulousness.

Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations

Education system has a dynamic structure and updates itself considering the global
developments in terms of many aspects including curricula, teacher training, assessment and
evaluation and supervision (Eryaman & Riedler, 2010). Supervision system, as an important
stakeholder of education system, provides guidance for teacher and helps them improve themselves.
Supervision and guidance services are provided by experts, school administrators, independent
supervisors or academics in the education systems across the world. In Turkey, with the regulation in
2014, supervision in the class time is assigned to school principals. This study, therefore, aims to
unearth teachers’ opinions as to supervision practices carried out by school principals. To this end,
interviews were held with 16 teachers and the findings are discussed with similar studies in the
literature.

The first research question aims to reveal the contribution of supervision practice by school
principals to teachers’ professional development. The findings of the current study suggest that

314
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

teachers’ professional development improves when school principals share their experiences with
teachers and work in cooperation with teachers, teachers work in an organized way, supervision helps
teachers overcome their insufficiencies and supervision is satisfying for teachers. Similar studies posit
that school principals’ supervision of lessons contribute to teachers’ professional development and it is
particularly helpful in overcoming insufficiencies (Yeşil & Kış, 2015). Developed countries aim
professional development of teachers’ by lesson supervision (Teddlie, Stringfield & Burdett, 2003). It
is observed that supervision contributes to teachers’ professional development and making up for
inadequacies (Demir & Tok, 2016). Teachers also want to take part in decision making processes in
school principals’ supervision of lessons (Duykuluoğlu, 2018). School principals and supervisors
support teachers in regard to professional development (Mcfaul & Cooper, 1984). Strict supervision
practices are seen as an important obstacle for teachers’ professional development (Can, 2019). School
principles contribute teachers’ professional development by providing teaching materials (DiPaola &
Hoy, 2013). The current supervision system cannot contribute to teachers’ professional development
adequately (Korkmaz, 2015). Supervision knowledge and skills of supervisors has developmental
effect on teachers profession (Glickman, Gordon & Ross-Gordon, 2015).

The second research question aims to reveal the contribution of supervision practice by school
principals to teachers’ motivation. The findings suggest that teachers’ motivation increases when
school principals support teachers professionally, they make constructive criticisms regarding
teachers’ in-class professional competencies, they appreciate teachers’ knowledge and competencies,
and they provide an open channel for communication. There are studies in the literature arguing that
there is a positive and high-level significant relationship between school principals’ professional
competencies and teachers’ motivation (Yıldırım, 2015). There is a relationship between school
principals’ instructional leadership behavior and teachers professional motivation (Oyewole &
Alonge, 2013). To increase teachers’ motivation, there is need for a strong and successful school
principal, an open communication channel, interactive human relationships and feeling of will for
success (Ada, Akan, Ayık, Yıldırım & Yalçın, 2013). Instructional leadership behaviors of school
administrate is a phase of teachers’ motivation (Sergiovanni & Starratt, 1998). There is a medium
level positive relationship between teachers’ motivation levels and school principals’ distributive
leadership roles including supervision duty (Uçar, 2016). Leadership ability of school principle
influence teachers’ professional performance and motivation (Cholil, 2014). Preparing applied
programs in training teachers, making constructive criticisms, offering suggestions and making
supervision a tool for development are among the duties of school administrators (Çiftçi & Cesur,
2017). Supervisory support is a predictor of teachers’ job demand (Hakanen, Bakker & Schaufeli,
2006).

The third research question aims to reveal the effectivity of supervision practices carried out
by school principals according to teachers’ views. It is identified that school principals’ administrator

315
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

role, supervision knowledge, supervisor role and ensuring continuity are significant factors of
effectivity of supervision. With respect to these findings, other studies also determined that carrying
out supervision through school principals ensured continuity and offered more time for supervision
(Arslanargun & Tarku, 2014). Poor communication and between school principal and teacher reduce
the effectivity of the instructional supervision (Wanzare, 2011) It is more beneficial when supervision
by school principals are practiced continuously throughout the semester (Dönmez & Demirtaş, 2018).
Communications skills, problem solving ability and group working are the factors of supervision
effectivity (Daresh, 2001). School principles overloaded paperwork and out of school duties hinder
instructional leadership behaviors at schools (Shulman, Sullivan & Glanz, 2008). School principal
should approach teachers with a constructive perspective and be a role model for them (Koşar &
Buran, 2019). School principles’ supervision contribute to teachers’ cooperation and creating a team
spirit (Florence, 2005). However, school principals are not adequate personally, professionally and
with regard to supervision (Can & Gündüz, 2016). Supervision reveals teachers’ professional
deficiencies and advantages in the lesson (Veloo, Komuji & Khalid, 2013) which is an important
factor of supervision role of school principles. Teachers do not find school principals adequate
because they did not receive in-service training for supervision and supervision should be practiced in
accordance with each school’s peculiar characteristics (Şanlı, Altun & Tan, 2015). School principals’
professional knowledge and experience have important role on educational supervision of teachers
(Glickman, Gordon & Ross-Gordon, 2015). . School principles need to spend more time for effective
lesson supervision (Williams, 2007). Studies report that school principal’ competencies’ regarding
supervision is at a low level and they need in-service training in this issue (Koç, 2018).

The fourth research question aims to reveal the objectivity of supervision practices carried out
by school principals according to teachers’ views. The findings put forth that objectivity of
supervision can be ensured when school principals are impartial and equal to teachers during
supervision, they have sense of mission and execute the supervision meticulously being aware of the
significance of supervision. In this context, Şanlı, Altun and Tan (2015) argue that school principals
generally practice supervision in line with impartiality principle. Opinions of parents, students and
colleagues on teachers’ performance positively affect the objectivity of the supervision (Zepeda,
2003). School principals’ sticking to the principle of impartiality in supervision increase the effect of
supervision (Yeşil & Kış, 2015). It is suggested that principals with less than 20 years of experience
may not be impartial and principals with more experience tend to be impartial (Ergen, Eşiyok, 2017).
School principles supervision role covers true, correct and proper rules and procedures (Kadushin,
1992). It is identified that supervision carried out by expert school principals may be more objective
particularly when permission is taken from teachers (Köybaşı, Uğurlu, Bakır & Karakuş, 2017).

The current study, all in all, suggests that teachers have a positive stand towards supervision
practices by school principals; however, they have some expectations. Teachers’ trust to supervision

316
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

may increase on the accounts that school principals are trained in terms of supervision; they improve
themselves in this issue and carry out their practices meticulously through abstaining from role
conflict. Building a cooperation relationship to overcome teachers’ insufficiencies by school principals
may improve teachers’ professional development. When school principals practice supervision by
sticking to impartiality and equity principles, supervision system becomes more reliable. School
principals’ constructive criticisms, recommendations for solutions, cooperation with teachers and
communication may increase teachers’ motivation.

References

Ada, Ş., Akan, D., Ayık, A., Yıldırım, İ., & Yalçın, S. (2013). Motivation factors of teachers. Atatürk
University Journal of Social Science Institute, 17(3), 151-166.

Ağaoğlu, E. (1997). Clinical supervision in education. Eskişehir: Anadolu University Faculty of Education
Press.

Aslanargun, E. & Tarku, E. (2014). Teachers’ expectations about supervision and guidance roles of
supervisors. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20(3), 281-306.

Aydın M. (2007). Contemporary educational supervision. Ankara: Hatiboğlu Publishing.

Aydın, İ. (2008). Supervision in education. Case determination, evaluation and improvement. Ankara:
Pegem Academy Publishing.

Beach, D. M. & Reinhartz, J. (2000). Supervisory leadership: Focus on instruction. Boston: Allyn & Bacon

Bursalıoğlu, Z. (1991). New structure and behavior in school management. Ankara: Pegem Publishing.

Büyüköztürk Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2012). Scientific research
methods. Ankara: Pegem Academy.

Can, E. (2019). Professional development of teachers: Obstacles and suggestions. Journal of Qualitative
Research in Education, 7(4), 1618-1650.

Can, E. & Gündüz, Y. (2016). Investigating the level of benefit primary school teachers get from the
guidance of educational supervisors and principals. Educational Administration: Theory and
Practice, 22(1), 1-28.

Cholil, M. (2014). Effects of principal leadership and work motivation on teacher's work performance in
muhammadiyah ngawi middle school. Media Prestasi Jurnal Ilmiah STKIP PGRI Ngawi 13 (1)
92– 101.

Cogan, M. (1973). Clinical supervision. Boston: HoughtonMifflin.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Thounsand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

317
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Çiftçi, N. & Cesur, M. O. (2017). Determination of motivation sources according to their teachers.
Unpublished Master Thesis, Maltepe University, Social Science Institute, Istanbul.

Daresh J. C. (2001). Supervision as Proactive Leadership. Illinois: Waveland Press.

Demir, M. & Tok, T. N. (2016). Education supervision from the point of view of postgraduate
students. Trakya University Journal of Education, 6(2), 102-125.

Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis: A user-friendly guide for social scientists. London: Routledge
Publications.

DiPaola, M. F. & Hoy, W. K. (2013). Principals Improving Instruction: Supervision, Evaluation, and
Professional Development. Boston: Pearson

Dönmez, B. & Demirtaş, Ç. (2018). Opinions of school principals and teachers on the school principals’
duties of lesson supervision (an example of adıyaman province). Adıyaman University Journal
of Social Sciences, 10(29), 454-478.

Duykuluoğlu, A. (2018). The opinions of high school teachers about classroom observations carried out by
principals. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(6), 2081-2090.

Eisner, E. (1982). An Artistic approach to supervision. (Ed. T. J. Sergiovanni,), Supervision of Teaching

(pp. 53-66). Alexandria, VA: Associaiton of Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Erdem, A. R. (2006). New perspective in teaching supervision: Supervision of teaching based on

continuous development. Selçuk University Journal o Social Science Institute, 16, 275-294.

Ergen, H. & Eşiyok, İ. (2017). Teacher opinions on school principals’ instructional supervision
performances. Journal of Contemporary Administrative Science, 4(1), 2-19.

Ersoy, A. F. (2016). Phenomenology. (Ed. A. Saban & A. Ersoy) Qualitative research patterns in education,
(pp.51-104). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.

Eryaman, M. Y., & Riedler, M. (2010). Teacher-Proof Curriculum. In C. Kridel (Ed.). Encyclopedia of
Curriculum Studies. Sage Publications.

Florence, G. W. (2005). Teacher supervision methods in Virginia. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation,

Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.

Glatthorn, A. A. (1997). Differentiated supervision. Wirginia: ASCD.

Glickman, C. D. (1980) The developmental approach to supervision. Educational Leadeship, 38(2), 178-
180.

Glickman, C. D. (2002). Leadership for learning. USA: Assosciation for supervision and curricullum
development (ASCD).

Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S., & Ross-Gordon, J.M. (2015). Supervision and instructional leadership:
Developmental approach. New York: Pearson.

318
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Gökçe, O.(2006). Content analysis - theoretical and practical information. Ankara: Siyasal Publishing

Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Schaufeli,W. B. (2006). Burnout and work engagement among teachers.
Journal of School Psychology, 43, 495-513.

İlgan, A. (2008). Primary school supervisors’ and primary school teachers’ perceptions on receptivity and
applicability of differentiated supervision in primary schools. Educational Administration:
Theory and Practice, 55(55), 389-422.

Kadushin, A. (1992). Supervision in social work. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kapusuzoglu, S. & Dilekci, U. (2017). Development of the artistic supervision model scale
(asms). Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(7), 1192-1200.

Koç, M. H. (2018). Primary school principals’ views on school principals’ activities for the supervision of
teachers. Marmara University Atatürk Faculty o Education Journal of Educational Sciences,
48(48), 91-110.

Korkmaz, İ. (2015). An investigation of school administrators and superintends impact on teachers’

professional development. The Journal of International Educational Sciences, 2 (4), 55-64.

Koşar, S. & Buran, K. (2019). An analysis of school principals’ course supervision activities in regard of
instructional leadership. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 7(3), 1232-1265.

Köybaşı, F., Uğurlu, C. T., Bakır, A. A., & Karakuş, B. (2017). Teacher opinions regarding classroom
supervision in primary schools. Electronic Turkish Studies, 12(4), 327-344.

McFaul S. A. & Cooper J. M. (1984). Clinical supervision: Teory vs. reality. Educational Leadership, 41
(7), 4–9.

MEB, (2014). Ministry of national education regulation on the directorate of guidance and ınspection and
ministry of education ınspectors, Legal Gazette, number: 29009. Retrieved from
[Link] on 17/03/2020.

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A source book of new methods.
London: SAGE Publications

Oyewole, B. K. & Alonge, H. O. (2013). Principals’ instructional supervisory role performance and
teachers’ motivation in Ekiti Central Senatorial District of Ekiti State, Nigeria. Journal of
Educational and Social Research, 3(2), 295.

Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice.
Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Broadway
Business.

Sergiovanni, T. J. & Starratt, R. J. (1998). Supervision: A Redefinition. New York: McGraw-Hill

319
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Sergiovanni, T. J. & Starratt, R. J. (1979). Supervision: human perspectives. New York: McGraw-Hill

Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education
for Information, 22(2), 63-75

Shulman, V., Sullivan, S. & Glanz, J. (2008). The New York City school reform: Consequenes for
supervision of instruction. International Journal of Leadership Training, 11(4), 407-425.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and
techniques. London: Sage.

Sullivan, S. & Glanz, J. (2005). Supervision that ipmroves teaching. Strategies and technics. Foreword by
Jo Blase. California: Corwin Pres.

Şanlı, Ö., Altun, M., & Tan, Ç. (2015). The assesment of satisfoctory level of school administrators on
lesson supervision. Electronic Journal of Education Sciences, 4(7), 82-99

Tanner, D. & Tanner, L. (1985). Supervision in education problems and practicer. New York: Mc Milan
Publishing.

Taymaz, A. H. (1982). Supervision in the education system (Concepts-Principles-Methods) Ankara:

Ankara University, Educational Science Institute Press.

Teddlie, C., Stringfield, S., & Burdett, J. (2003). International comparisons of the relationship among
educational effectiveness, evaluation and improvement variables: An overview. Journal of
Personnel Evaluation in Education, 17(1), 5-20

Uçar, R. (2016). Relationship between distributed leadership behavior of primary school principals and
teachers’ levels of creativity and motivation. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Dicle University,
Educational Science Institute, Diyarbakır.

Veloo, A., Komuji, M. M. A. & Khalid, R. (2013). The effects of clinical supervision on the teaching
performance of secondary school teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 35-
39.

Wanzare, Z. (2012). Instructional supervision in public secondary schools in Kenya. Educational

Management Administration & Leadership, 40(2), 188-216.

Williams, R. (2007). A case study in clinical supervision: Moving from an evaluation to a supervision
model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania.

Yeşil, D., & Kış, A. (2015). Examining the views of teachers on school principals’ classroom
supervision. Inonu University Journal of the Graduate School of Education, 2(3), 27-45.

Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, A. (2011). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin
Publishing.

320
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, V 15, N 2, 2020
© 2020 INASED

Yıldırım, O. (2015). Teachers with head of school motivation relationship between the vocational
qualification. Unpublished Master's Thesis, İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim University, Social
Science Institute, Istanbul.

Yılmaz, K. (2004). Artistic supervision. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 38(38), 292-
311.

Zellermayer, M. & Margolin, I. (2005). Teacher educators' professional learning described through the lens
of complexity theory. Teachers College Record, 107(6), 1275-1304.

321