EĞİTİM MÜFETTİŞLERİNİN ÖĞRETMEN DENETİMİNDE KULLANDIKLARI GÜÇ TÜRLERİ

The study aims to determine perceptions of teachers about power sources used frequently by educational supervisors. The target population of this study consists of teachers employed at the state primary and secondary schools in D u zce. The sample of this re search is composed of 326 teachers who work at public primary and high schools at the city centre and districts of D u zce. In this research, stratified sampling method has been used. Data is obtained by “Power Sources Scale Used in The Supervision of Teache r” developed by Aslanargun, Kılıç ve Eriş (2011). The scale is formed with 26 items and 5 factors and its The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient is 0.92. The study results indicated that coercive power is the most commonly used power source and it is f ollowed by leg itimate power expert power individual and technical power . It is seen that facilitative power is the least preferred power source used by supervisors. Both at the individual and technical power differed significantly in terms of women teacher s and men teachers and at the expert power differed significantly in terms of men teachers and women teachers . Only at the dimension of facilitative power is differed significantly in terms of the educational level of teachers. According to the Post Hoc an alyses at the facilitative power dimension, the a ve rage of teachers who has a post graduate is higher than the a ve rage of teachers who has a n associate degree or undergraduate degree. It is differed at the dimension of coercive power and leg itimate power i n terms of tenure. While at the dimension of legal power, the a ve rage of teachers whose tenure is between 1 ? 5 years is higher than the a ve rage of teachers whose tenure is between 6 ? 10 years at the dimension of coercive power the a ve rage of teachers who se tenure is 26 years and over is bigger than the a ve rage of teachers whose tenure is between 16 ? 20 years It can be said that there isn’t significant differences between power sources used frequently by supervisors and teachers’ ages and field of study. Keywords : Expert power, Leg itimate power, Individual and Technical power, Coercive Power, Facilitative power