Education 3-13

International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education

ISSN: 0300-4279 (Print) 1475-7575 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rett20

Turkish preschool teachers’ beliefs and practices

related to two dimensions of developmentally
appropriate classroom management

İkbal Tuba Şahin-Sak, Feyza Tantekin-Erden & Sharolyn Pollard-Durodola

To cite this article: İkbal Tuba Şahin-Sak, Feyza Tantekin-Erden & Sharolyn Pollard-
Durodola (2018) Turkish preschool teachers’ beliefs and practices related to two dimensions
of developmentally appropriate classroom management, Education 3-13, 46:1, 102-116, DOI:
10.1080/03004279.2016.1194447

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2016.1194447

Published online: 02 Jun 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 235

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rett20
EDUCATION 3-13, 2018
VOL. 46, NO. 1, 102–116
https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2016.1194447

Turkish preschool teachers’ beliefs and practices related to two

dimensions of developmentally appropriate classroom
management*
İkbal Tuba Şahin-Saka, Feyza Tantekin-Erdenb and Sharolyn Pollard-Durodolac
a
Faculty of Education, Department of Elementary Education, Early Childhood Education, Yüzüncü Yıl University, Van,
Turkey; bFaculty of Education, Department of Elementary Education, Early Childhood Education, Middle East
Technical University, Ankara, Turkey; cCollege of Education, Department of Educational & Clinical Studies, University
of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The purpose of this study was to describe to what extent four preschool Received 28 March 2016
teachers in Turkey have developmentally appropriate beliefs and Accepted 22 May 2016
practices related to two dimensions of classroom management. The
KEYWORDS
participants of the study were four female teachers working in Ankara. Developmentally appropriate
The data of this study were collected through a demographic practices; preschool teachers;
information protocol, interviews, classroom observations, and a classroom management;
document review. The findings of the study showed that preschool teachers’ beliefs; teachers’
teachers’ beliefs were closer to developmentally appropriate practices practices
than their self-reported and actual practices. Also, teachers’ actual
practices were mainly influenced by the physical characteristics of the
schools and children’s characteristics.

Introduction
The term classroom management is usually used interchangeably with discipline, that is, observing
and punishing disruptive behaviour (Hardin 2004; Martin and Sass 2010). However, classroom man-
agement can also be an umbrella term for the teacher’s efforts to establish a learning environment
supporting the development of children’s academic and social-emotional skills (Evertson and Wein-
stein 2006). Therefore, it can be considered a multi-dimensional construct (Martin and Sass 2010) with
the following four dimensions:

(1) organising the physical environment;

(2) planning and programming activities;
(3) establishing relationships and communication in the classroom;
(4) managing children’s behaviour (Levin and Nolan 2007; Martin and Sass 2010; Weinstein and
Novodvorsky 2011; Weinstein, Romano, and Mignano 2011).

The first dimension focuses on creating a developmentally responsive environment, large enough
to support social interaction, with a variety of play experience, well-defined learning centres, and
carefully selected materials for exploration of children’s interests, identities, and participation (Gest-
wicki 2011). The second includes the teachers’ use of direct or interactive approaches to instruction,
overseeing seatwork and activities, and organising classroom routines (Martin and Sass 2010), while

CONTACT İkbal Tuba Şahin-Sak ikbalsak@yyu.edu.tr

*
This article was produced from the first author’s doctoral dissertation.
© 2016 ASPE
 EDUCATION 3-13 103

the third involves teacher–child and child–child relationships and includes support of children’s pro-
social behaviour, empathy, self-regulation, and social competence (Tomlinson 2009). Lastly, manage-
ment of children’s behaviour encompasses teachers’ efforts to respond to misbehaviour as well as
pre-planned interventions to prevent it (Martin and Sass 2010).
Managing these dimensions effectively is crucially important, since the preschool years shape chil-
dren’s future lives (Copple and Bredekamp 2009). Many Turkish teachers still manage their class-
rooms through rewards and punishment, and many children endeavour to earn smiley faces,
stickers, or chewing gum for good work (Akar et al. 2010; Kök et al. 2007). However, it is important
that young children should be active in various school processes ranging from instructional activities
to behaviour control to promote their learning and development (Morrison 2011), and preschool tea-
chers are expected to balance child initiation and teacher facilitation (Winsler and Carlton 2003).
Therefore, teachers must be able to manage instructional time and use effective methods to
prevent misbehaviour and affirm acceptable behaviour (Pianta et al. 2005). Without this, children
will not be able to develop the necessary skills.

Developmentally appropriate classroom management practices

Observation of today’s Turkish classrooms suggests that there are still many teachers who try to
manage their classrooms through rewards and punishment, and children who endeavour to earn
smiley faces, stickers or chewing gum for good work, or to avoid time-outs (Akar et al. 2010; Kök
et al. 2007). Regulating children’s behaviour, ensuring that they remain focused on instructional
activities and reducing their disruptive behaviour through rewards and punishment, is a traditional
classroom-management model based on behaviourism, and is teacher-centred (Freiberg and
Lamb 2009; Goss and Ingersoll 1981). In other words, it renders children’s behaviour dependent
on external factors (Fennimore 1995); and the behaviourist model has been further critiqued for
not supporting children’s development of self-discipline (Freiberg 1999). Yet, to promote children’s
learning and development, it is important that young children should be active in all processes of
school learning, from instructional activities to behaviour control, and preschool teachers are
expected to strike a balance between child initiation and teacher facilitation (Winsler and Carlton
2003).
A framework based around educational effectiveness, child development and learning was
adopted by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) in 1986, and
became known as developmentally appropriate practices (DAP) (Copple and Bredekamp 2009). Gest-
wicki (2011, 8) defines DAP as ‘applying child development knowledge in making thoughtful and
appropriate decisions about early childhood program practices’. Copple and Bredekamp (2009, xii)
add that ‘best practice is based on knowledge – not on assumptions – of how children learn and
develop’; and this process must be recognised as different for each child. Table 1 presents examples
of preschool teachers’ DAP related to the four dimensions of classroom management (Copple and
Bredekamp 2009; Gestwicki 2011; Harms, Clifford, and Cryer 2005; Morrison 2011).

Teacher beliefs and classroom management

As early as 1910, Dewey concluded that teachers’ decisions and instructional practices are usually the
consequences of their (mostly unarticulated) beliefs. Teachers’ beliefs and philosophical approaches
also direct their expectations about how children learn, and their own classroom practices (Vartuli
2005), which have been seen as occupying a continuum from behaviourism to constructivism
(Sherry 1998). A great deal of research has focused specifically on teachers’ beliefs and/or practices
related to DAP, in Jordanian kindergartens (Abu-Jaber, Al-Shawareb, and Gheith 2010), Korean pre-
schools (Lee, Baik, and Charlesworth 2006), American kindergartens (Parker and Neuharth-Pritchett
2006), early childhood education (ECE) classrooms in India (Jambunathan 2005; Jambunathan and
Caulfield 2008), and preschools in Beijing (Hu 2012). Caregiver management of children’s stress
104 İ. T. ŞAHIN-SAK ET AL.

Table 1. DAP related to dimensions of classroom management.

Dimension of classroom management
Organisation of physical environment
Management of planning and
programming activities
Management of relations and
communication
Management of children’s behaviours
Developmentally appropriate practices
Teachers provide children with various interest centres and work areas.
Teachers provide children sufficient place to able to use different centres at same time.
Teachers arrange centres conveniently such as art area near to water.
Teachers arrange centres appropriately for children’s independent use.
Teachers create semiprivate areas for children’s playing alone or with a friend.
Teachers use age-appropriate materials and children’s work in displays.
Teachers plan smooth transitions between daily activities.
Teachers set daily routine but the schedule is not rigid.
Teachers use a variety of engaging learning experiences and hands-on materials.
Teachers use a variety of teaching format and modalities throughout the day such as;
whole group setting, small groups, and learning centres.
Teachers use a variety of instructional strategies such as; modelling skills and
scaffolding.
Teachers provide specific feedback.
Teachers encourage mutual respect between child and teacher.
Teachers support positive peer interaction.
Teachers give opportunities to children to talk about their conflicts.
Teachers explain to children what behaviours are unacceptable.
Teachers give children responsibilities and choices.
Teachers coach children to solve their conflicts.
Teachers focus on positive behaviours rather than negative ones.
Teachers give consistent reactions to children’s behaviours.

behaviours in family daycare situations vis-à-vis DAP (Chang, Austin, and Piercy 2006) and the impli-
cations of DAP for preschool music classes (Miranda 2004) have also been explored, and there has
been one comparative study of DAP in the USA and Korea (Clarke-Stewart et al. 2006). The consist-
ency between teachers’ beliefs and DAP has been examined among Greek pre-service preschool tea-
chers (Rentzou and Sakellariou 2011), and preschool teachers in India (Hegde and Cassidy 2009) and
the United States (McMullen et al. 2006).
However, few studies have examined teachers’ beliefs about classroom management, and most of
these focus solely on self-efficacy beliefs (Aloe, Amo, and Shanahan 2014; Brouwers and Tomic 2000;
Egyed and Short 2006; Rimm-Kaufman and Sawyer 2004). Research on the dimensions of classroom
management is only somewhat more common, with some authors focusing on organising the phys-
ical environment (Landrum, Lingo, and Scott 2011; Sterling 2009; Wasik 2008), others on planning and
programming activities (Gatongi 2007; Wolfgang 2009; Wubie 2011), and a few on establishing
relationships and communication in the classroom (Downer, Sabol, and Hamre 2010; Esturgó-Deu
and Sala-Roca 2010), with the largest number addressing the management of children’s behaviour
(Allen 2010; Dobbs-Oates et al. 2011; Kim and Stormont 2012; Rambusch 2010).

In Turkey
There have been various investigations into teachers’ beliefs and DAP around the world as mentioned
above. Without detracting from the importance of such studies, it should be noted that few research-
ers have focused on teachers’ developmentally appropriate or inappropriate beliefs related to the
dimensions of classroom management in preschool classrooms. Of the few studies that have
addressed this issue, almost all were conducted in the United States; however, there have been a
few studies related to DAP in Turkey (Demircan and Tantekin Erden 2015; Erdiller 2008; Erdiller
and McMullen 2003; McMullen et al. 2005).
There have also been some Turkish studies of preschool classroom management, with the
majority focused on misbehaviours and disciplinary strategies (Akar et al. 2010; Akgün, Yarar, and
Dinçer 2011; Güleç, Bağçeli, and Onur 2008; Uysal, Akbaba-Altun, and Akgün 2010). Although class-
room management is a complex topic involving teachers’ ability to create and maintain multiple
dimensions (Evertson and Weinstein 2006), hardly any studies in Turkey have investigated the
 EDUCATION 3-13 105

relationship between the dimensions of classroom management and young children’s misbehaviours
(Akgün, Yarar, and Dinçer 2011; Şahin 2011; Şahin, Tantekin-Erden, and Akar 2011). As such, there is
an important gap in the literature related to developmentally appropriate preschool practices, pre-
school classroom management, and the different dimensions of classroom management.
Since many characteristics of the latest Turkish ECE programme (Ministry of National Education
[MoNE] 2006, 2012c) are parallel to those of DAP (Copple and Bredekamp 2009), it is important to
determine whether teachers’ beliefs are concomitant with their practices. Information collected
about teachers’ practices that are not in agreement with their beliefs will highlight issues that may
need to be resolved if the Turkish ECE programme is to be implemented successfully.

The purpose of this study

This study aims to describe the extent to which a small group of preschool teachers in Turkey held
developmentally appropriate beliefs and practices related to two closely interrelated dimensions of
classroom management: organising the physical environment of the classroom, and planning and
programming activities. Many characteristics of the latest Turkish ECE programme (MoNE 2006,
2012a) are parallel to those of DAP (Copple and Bredekamp 2009), so the study also investigated dis-
crepancies between theory and actual classroom management practices.
In keeping with these aims, this study addressed five research questions:

(1) What are preschool teachers’ beliefs about these two dimensions of classroom management?
(2) What are preschool teachers’ self-reported practices in relation to these two dimensions of class-
room management?
(3) What are preschool teachers’ actual practices in relation to these two dimensions of classroom
management?
(4) In what ways are preschool teachers’ beliefs consistent with their practices in relation to these
two dimensions of classroom management?
(5) What are preschool teachers’ reasons for choosing particular classroom practices?

Methodology
Research design
An ethnographic case study was conducted to describe four Turkish preschool teachers’ develop-
mentally appropriate and inappropriate beliefs and practices related to two dimensions of classroom
management as they were observed and studied in Turkish classrooms for during one semester. The
participants were observed in their classrooms by nonparticipant observers who aimed to maintain
the naturalness of these settings and minimise any influence on the participants’ behaviours.

Context of the study

In Turkey, the aim of preschool education is to enhance the physical, cognitive, and emotional devel-
opment of children, support the acquisition of good habits, prepare children for primary education,
ensure equity between all children and support the proper and correct use of the Turkish language
(MoNE 2006). ECE includes children aged 3–5.5 years and is provided in public and private kindergar-
tens, application classrooms, and nursery classes under the supervision of MoNE as a whole or half-
day programme (MoNE 2012b).
Many preschool teachers in Turkey have completed a four-year university education in child devel-
opment, ECE, or education, including theoretical and practical courses. After graduation, public
school teachers are appointed based on the results of the national public personnel selection
exam, while private schools define their own appointment criteria.
106 İ. T. ŞAHIN-SAK ET AL.

Turkey’s ECE programme was established in 2002, with important alterations in 2006 and 2012,
though the latter has not yet been implemented in all regions of the country, and the participant
schools were using the 2006 programme during our study. The main features of the 2006 programme
were: (1) appropriateness for 36–72-month-old children, (2) child-centred instruction organised by
specific instructional goals and objectives, (3) flexible instructional tasks, (4) encouragement of crea-
tivity and parental involvement, and (5) multi-dimensional evaluation (MoNE 2006). As such, the
characteristics of ECE are in accord with DAP.

Participant schools and teachers

The study was conducted in one public and two private preschools in Ankara. They were selected as
representative of the variety of ECE schools, based on convenience sampling that followed specific
criteria (Merriam 2009).
School 1 is a private school in the Gölbaşı district of Ankara, occupying a four-story building on a
large campus. Each of its six classrooms has two distinct sides, one for cognitive-academic activities
and the other for play. There are several other learning areas in the school including a computer lab,
science area, library, art area, drama area, music and dance area, physical education area, kitchen,
winter garden, playground, and terrace. There are two teachers present in each classroom, and
108 children in the school, with an average class size of 18.
School 2 is a private school located in the Keçiören, an inner district of Ankara. There are different
learning areas in the four-story school building including art, creative activities, science, play and
physical activity classrooms, through which children of varied age groups rotate. There is also a play-
ground. There is one teacher in each classroom, and approximately 50 children in the school; the
average class size is 18.
School 3 is a public school in the Gölbaşı district. The preschool area consists of two classrooms, a
kitchen, toilets, washrooms, and a hall within the elementary school building. However, there is no
separate play area for preschool children either inside or outside the building. All learning areas
are located within classrooms. There is one teacher in each class, and an average class size of 28,
the student population being approximately 120.
Teacher participants were selected based on their availability and the following specific criteria: (a)
voluntary participation and consent; (b) a bachelor’s degree in ECE; (c) employment in Ankara pre-
schools under the supervision of MoNE; and (d) consent for video recording of teaching sessions.

Table 2. Demographic information of participant teachers.

Teaching Age group Pop. of School Course related DAP
Graduation Age experience taught classrooms type to CM knowledge
T1 Faculty of 29 8 years 5.5 19 Private No No
Education
Dep. of
Preschool Educ.
T2 Faculty of 29 7 years 5–5.5 18 Private Yes No
Education
Dep. of
Preschool Educ.
T3 Faculty of 35 12 years 5–6 29 Public No No
Vocational Educ.
Dep. of
Preschool Educ.
T4 Faculty of 32 8 years 5–5.5 27 Public Yes Yes
Education
Dep. of
Preschool Educ.
Note: (CM: Classroom management) (T1: Teacher 1 T2: Teacher 2 T3: Teacher 3 T4: Teacher 4).
 EDUCATION 3-13 107

Two teacher participants worked in the public school and two worked in the private preschools. Table
2 summarises these teachers’ demographics.

Data sources and collection procedures

Data were collected through a demographic information protocol, interviews (pre-interview and
video-stimulated recall interview), classroom observations, and document review.

Demographic information
At the beginning of the study, the researcher asked each teacher to answer seven structured ques-
tions in order to elicit important demographic information (e.g. years of teaching, the department
they graduated from, etc.).

Pre-interview
A semi-structured interview protocol created by the researchers was used to investigate the partici-
pant teachers’ beliefs about developmentally appropriate classroom management practices. The first
draft of the interview protocol was based on a literature review and contained 21 questions. After
obtaining the opinions of two academic experts on ECE and qualitative research, several items
were modified or combined. Then, sub-questions were added to increase clarity.
The final interview protocol contained 5 main and 11 sub-questions. The main questions were
used to elicit specific information on teachers’ beliefs about all four dimensions of classroom manage-
ment, though only data relating to two dimensions (the organisation of the physical environment,
and planning and programming instructional activities) were used in this study. The protocol was
piloted with three preschool teachers. Then, the previously consulted academic experts reviewed
it again and approved it for use in this study.

Observation protocol
An observation protocol was developed with a focus on which of the preschool teachers’ classroom
management practices were developmentally appropriate, based on a literature review (Copple and
Bredekamp 2009; Gestwicki 2011; Harms, Clifford, and Cryer 2005; Morrison 2011; NAEYC 2011). After
obtaining the opinions of the two aforementioned academic experts, certain items of the draft pro-
tocol were modified or rearranged. Then, three academics (includes both of other two experts) spe-
cialising in ECE and qualitative research were asked to review the protocol. This process was followed
by two pilot observations and feedback from preschool teachers who were not participants in the
study. The final observation protocol consisted of all four dimensions of classroom management,
as well as sub-dimensions (e.g. physical environment sub-dimensions – indoor space, furniture, learn-
ing centres/areas, and child-related displays) to allow the observers to more easily correlate their
observations of classroom activity to the main dimensions. However, only the data related to two
dimensions (organisation of the physical environment, and planning and programming instructional
activities) and their related sub-dimensions were used. A second observer, whose role was to confirm
and crosscheck the observation data (Adami and Kiger 2005; Johnson 1997; Krefting 1991), was
trained by the researcher in the use of the observation protocol over a two-day induction using
data from the pilot observation. The second observer had a bachelor’s degree in ECE and a
master’s degree in child development and education.

Video-stimulated recall interviews

Three video-stimulated recall interviews were conducted with each teacher. Video recordings of the
teachers, the researcher’s notes related to documents, and observation notes by both observers were
used as the stimuli to elicit the teachers’ thoughts and perspectives that had informed their decision-
making processes and practices in the classroom. The interviewee and the researcher watched
108 İ. T. ŞAHIN-SAK ET AL.

selected parts of the recordings together to help them remember what actually happened in the
classroom; the following open-ended questions were then asked:

(1) Can you describe your decision-making process about:

(a) How you organised the physical environment for preschool children? Why did you do it this
way?
(b) How you planned and programmed the activities for preschool children? Why did you do it
this way?
(2) What were your goals for the child/children?

Although these questions were used in each interview, the researcher sometimes asked additional
questions about individual classroom-management contexts, and/or combined questions: for
example, with T2: ‘You decided in the classroom what you would do in art time. Why did you do
this? What were your goals for the children?’

Document review
The teachers’ activity books, activity plans and daily schedules, work samples and all other document
types related to their classroom practices were reviewed. The researcher took notes about the docu-
ments that were collected.

Data collection procedure

Data collection occurred from October to December, following the approval of the University
Research Center for Applied Ethics and the MoNE; a meeting to explain the details of the study to
teachers and school administrators; and the volunteer teachers’ execution of their consent forms.
Pre-interviews lasting from 26 to 48 minutes were conducted in one-to-one settings within the
schools. All teachers agreed to audio recording of the pre-interviews. In the first observation
session, the researcher and the second observer were both present the classroom to observe the
physical environment, because lighting, temperature, hygiene, and noise regulation could not be
understood solely from video recording (to which all participant teachers consented). For subsequent
sessions, the researcher alone video recorded the teacher and students. The researcher and the
second observer independently watched each recorded session and made field notes pursuant to
the observation protocol. Then, they discussed their field notes and labels, and inter-rater reliability
was calculated. The duration of the observations was between 670 and 720 minutes. At intervals
of approximately 240 minutes, a video-stimulated recall interview was conducted. These recall
interviews were conducted inside and outside the schools, and varied from 45 to 65 minutes in
length.

Data analysis
The researcher transcribed the recordings of the pre-interviews. Then, the researcher and second
coder read these transcripts several times and created word lists, focusing on key words in
context (Bernard and Ryan 2010). They then listed the determined codes and discussed differences
until agreement was reached. The researcher and second coder separately coded the observations,
final interviews, and document-review data, discussed the emerging codes, and reached 94% agree-
ment in assigning codes. Then, they attempted to determine main themes of the data: comparing
their respective findings obtained from the pre-interviews, observation notes, and documentation
review in order to assess the teachers’ developmentally appropriate and inappropriate classroom
management practices; the basis of these practices; and the level of consistency between the pre-
school teachers’ beliefs and practices related to the dimensions of classroom management. Lastly,
the researcher prepared transcripts of the recordings of the video-stimulated recall interviews.
After the researcher and second coder read these transcripts several times, they coded the data
 EDUCATION 3-13 109

separately. They listed words and found key-words-in-context, word repetitions, and similarities and
differences (Bernard and Ryan 2010). Then, all the codes were listed and discussed.

Findings
Physical environment
All of the teachers in this study agreed that the area available for movement in a preschool
classroom should be large and unencumbered by too much furniture and equipment. For instance,
T1 said:
Movement is a developmental need for young children. Therefore, a safe area where children can run, jump and
move freely should be provided for them.

They also emphasised that preschool classrooms should be safe and furniture should not have sharp
corners. All participants also stressed the necessity of exhibiting children’s work. T1 stated that such
exhibitions gave children the opportunity to compare themselves with their classmates and be
motivated to do their best; however, because a child might feel inadequate upon seeing her
friends’ work, teachers should use these situations as opportunities for the children to recognise
different viewpoints and to improve their creativity. T3 supported the use of such displays, but
thought they should be strictly controlled to avoid overstimulation; while T4 emphasised that chil-
dren’s work should be exhibited on the walls to provide parents with a means of following the devel-
opmental progress of their children.
In terms of self-reported practices related to the physical environment, two participant teachers
stated that their classroom had a large movement area, safe and durable furniture, and a variety
of clearly separated learning areas. T1 said that her classroom was mainly divided into two areas: aca-
demic activity and play. On the academic-activity side, there were chairs, tables, and shelves for chil-
dren’s materials while the play side had a carpet circle in the centre. Active areas such as dramatic
play and blocks were near each other, while quiet areas such as science, art, and books were near
each other and far from the active areas. Manipulative play materials were usually in academic-
activity areas since they developed children’s academic and cognitive skills. A similar situation pre-
vailed in T2’s school, albeit with the active and quiet areas divided by floor rather than by different
zones within the same room.
Two teachers expressed concern that the sizes of their classrooms were inadequate. T3 said:
My classroom is too crowded and there is not sufficient movement area for 29 children. Also, we have piled up
many materials. Therefore, children cannot easily access and use them independently. I always have to be near
them and control what they do.

T4 stated that for active play, she had to lean the tables and chairs against walls and cupboards,
and then rearrange them again for table activities. The time wasted in furniture-moving generally
forced her to eliminate one planned activity per day.
In relation to actual practices, it was observed that there were no semiprivate areas in three tea-
chers’ classrooms, while the semiprivate area in the fourth classroom was not actually designed as
such.

Planning and programming

With regard to planning and programming activities, two of the four teachers stated that daily sche-
dules should be flexible.
While planning instructional activities, objectives of the teacher are important. However, it should not be ignored
that a preschool teacher may not always follow her schedule. For instance, it starts snowing and the focus of all
activities is converted to snow. (T2)
110 İ. T. ŞAHIN-SAK ET AL.

T3 similarly remarked that if it started raining and the children wanted to observe the rain for
15 minutes, the teacher might have to cancel or delay her Turkish-language activity; rather than
being concerned about this, however, the teacher should focus on using the rain as a meaningful
learning tool.
All four teachers emphasised that children’s individual differences should be considered in daily
schedules. For instance, T1 said:
A teacher should plan age-appropriate activities based on their needs, expectations and readiness. You can plan
meticulously but if the children are not ready for it, it may not be successful. Also, when conducting your activity,
something may happen that was not in your plan. Therefore, you have to be flexible and change your plan
according to the children’s needs and readiness.

One of the participants emphasised that schedules should include daily outdoor activities, while
another said that there should be a combination of more and less energetic activities in the schedule.
All four teachers endorsed a variety of teaching methods including singing, demonstrating, brain-
storming, and discussing. T1 stated that several teaching methods should be used because the
teacher had to catch the children’s attention and maintain their motivation; starting an activity
with chatting and finishing with singing was deemed effective. T3 stated that teaching methods
should be topic-appropriate: for instance, they went to wash their hands together and talked
about how they should use water.
In terms of self-reported practices, two teachers stressed that their daily schedules were flexible. T4
stated that class size caused changes to her schedule:
I have in total 4 hours for activities every day and I have to conduct 6 activities in 4 hours: breakfast, free play, art,
music and play, Turkish language and reading/writing activities. I always eliminate Turkish language or reading/
writing activity because my classroom is crowded. If there were 10 children in my classroom, I would finish an art
activity in 30 minutes. However, there are 27 children in my classroom and I have to make a choice.

Three of the four teachers also stated that they considered children’s characteristics while plan-
ning activities. For instance T1 said:
In my classroom, there are children who will start school next year. Therefore, we are following the program for 6
year olds. However, since my children are 5.5 years old, I try to simplify some activities. For instance, I explain the
family tree but they cannot understand some details related to relatives. Therefore, I only focus on the nuclear
family basically talking about grandparents, aunts and uncles. Also, I consider their attention span.

Three teachers also said that free play was included in their schedule, usually just after children’s
arrival at school, or sometimes before their departure. These teachers all used free play for edu-
cational purposes.
In practice, it was observed that all teachers conducted smooth transitions between activities and
combined more and less energetic activities, though none of them had daily outdoor play periods.
With regard to the consistency of teachers’ beliefs and practices, the findings indicated that two
teachers (T1 and T2) usually held beliefs consistent with their practices, while the other two partici-
pants (T3 and T4) were inconsistent with regard to the physical environment. In terms of planning
and programming activities, beliefs, and the self-reported and actual practices of teachers were
much more consistent: with all participants using computers, natural objects, musical instruments,
costumes, and blocks in their classrooms to attract children’s attention.
With regard to the reasons for her practices vis-à-vis the physical environment, T1 usually cited
external factors such as the location of the classroom and the children’s needs and characteristics.
Her practices related to planning and programming activities were also described as largely child-
driven.
T2’s reasons for her practices related to the physical environment usually emphasised her support
for the children’s developmental skills. Her actual practices in the sphere of planning and program-
ming activities usually considered children’s motivation, interests, and physical condition. She also
tried to support their creativity and self-confidence.
 EDUCATION 3-13 111

Asked about the reasons for her actual practices related to the physical environment, T3 cited
movement area, class size, and the school’s lack of certain equipment, though her other reasons
included attracting children’s attention, the daily schedule, reinforcement, and giving feedback for
practices related to planning and programming activities.
According to T4, her practices related to the physical environment resulted from factors including
insufficient movement area, lack of a kitchen or dining room, and the school’s financial problems. As
to reasons behind her actual practices related to planning and programming, she mentioned factors
such as attracting children attention, children’s interest, motivation, readiness, better learning oppor-
tunities, satisfaction, and being a role model for children.

Discussion
Beliefs
All four teachers agreed that the movement area of a preschool classroom should be large, free-
flowing, and unencumbered by furnishings. All also agreed on the necessity of exhibiting children’s
work. Considering the guidelines for DAP (Copple and Bredekamp 2009) and the accreditation report
of NAEYC (2011), it can be said that the common beliefs of the participant teachers were develop-
mentally appropriate. In particular, their beliefs related to movement area and class size paralleled
those found in the literature (Blatchford et al. 2002; Finn and Achilles 1990, 1999; Finn, Suriani,
and Achilles 2007; Yan and Lin 2005).
Other beliefs emphasised by one or more of the teachers such as the need for durable, well-main-
tained equipment, clear separation of learning areas, and independent use of learning centres by the
children were also in keeping with NAEYC criteria (Copple and Bredekamp 2009). Interestingly, given
that all four teachers were aware of how to optimise the physical environment to promote young
children’s learning – in terms that resonated clearly with the ideal preschool setting proposed by
Dinçer, Akgün, and Canarslan (2011) – only one of the participant teachers was aware of the existence
or meaning of DAP.
The teachers’ planning and programming beliefs likewise seemed to show some awareness of the
key points of developmentally appropriate planning (Copple and Bredekamp 2009); but their knowl-
edge of teaching methods – while eclectic – was rather limited when compared with DAP guidelines.
Also, these preschool teachers were not very aware of crucial points of developmentally appropriate
scheduling and teaching methods. The one teacher with any prior knowledge of DAP only commen-
ted that the daily schedule of a preschool teacher should consider the individual differences between
the children and include transition activities. As Sierhuis and Clancey (1997, 142) remind us, ‘knowl-
edge is embodied in the practice of people. Knowledge does not exist without practice’.

Self-reported practices
Two participant teachers reported that their classrooms were sufficient in terms of overall size relative
to class size, movement area, furniture, and separate learning areas, while the other two deemed
these aspects insufficient. Characteristics of the classrooms may be related to school type, as the
two teachers who reported problems were both employed in the public school. Therefore, it can
be said that the physical environment of public schools is not always developmentally appropriate
when in light of the accreditation criteria of NAEYC (2011). This finding is parallels that of Kerem
and Cömert (2005): although some standards related to the physical environment of preschools
are set by the MoNE, these standards and the importance of the physical environment are usually
ignored by institutions. Ignorance of physical environment has been listed as a developmentally inap-
propriate practice by Copple and Bredekamp (2009), and can result in a lack of standardisation
between schools (Arslan-Karaküçük 2008). The physical environment was reported by Turkish pre-
school teachers as the most serious problem in preschool classrooms (Kerem and Cömert 2005).
112 İ. T. ŞAHIN-SAK ET AL.

The respondent teachers’ planning and programming activities seemed developmentally appro-
priate (Hart, Burts, and Charlesworth 1997; Taylor 1995). The role of free play in their schedules was
significant, and may reflect the positive emphasis on such activity in the Turkish curriculum (MoNE
2007). It may also be related to the teachers’ awareness of the paradigmatic relationship between
free play and educational interaction, whereby learning can become a joyful, free and a spontaneous
process (Pramling-Samuelsson and Johansson 2006).

Actual practices
As noted above, only one of the four teachers’ classrooms included semiprivate areas. This may
suggest that the participating preschool teachers were not aware of the importance and necessity
of such areas. On the other hand, the developmental inappropriateness or deficiencies of this and
other aspects of the public school environment are not usually determined by individual teachers,
but by school administrators or the MoNE. According to the Official Gazette of the Republic of
Turkey (2006), an increase in the preschooling rate from 19.9% in 2005–2006 to 50% in 2012–2013
was planned, but no parallel increase occurred in the number of preschool institutions or classrooms,
so it is now common to see 25 or more children with one teacher in public schools.
All the participant teachers conducted transition activities smoothly. This has been deemed devel-
opmentally appropriate because it helps children feel secure (Copple and Bredekamp 2009).
However, Denizel-Güven and Cevher’s (2005) study of 93 preschool teachers found that only one
of them conducted smooth transitions. This discrepancy may be a result of differences in the
meaning of the term ‘smooth transition’ as used by the participant teachers in the current study
and those that Denizel-Güven and Cevher investigated. Respondents in this study used it as an
umbrella term that included discussions, drama, questions, examples from daily life, songs, finger
plays, puppet shows, and nursery rhymes, whereas the earlier study defined it (far from clearly) as
a separate strategy to all of these.
The lack of outdoor play periods in this study may result from deficiencies such as small outdoor
play areas or limited play materials in those spaces – in keeping with the concerns expressed by 180
preschool teachers in a study by Durmuşoğlu (2008). All the participant teachers combined less ener-
getic activities with more energetic ones such as running, jumping, and dancing, which seemed
developmentally appropriate (Copple and Bredekamp 2009), even though none of this occurred out-
doors. This may relate to Göl-Güven’s (2009) finding that both public and private Turkish preschools
often lack playgrounds and/or age-appropriate outdoor play materials.

Consistency/inconsistency
Two participant teachers who worked in private schools usually exhibited consistent beliefs and prac-
tices, while the two public school teachers generally did not. This seems to have been a result of a
mismatch, in the case of the public school teachers, between the developmental appropriateness
of their beliefs – which was similar to that of the private school teachers – and the abovementioned
physical inadequacies of their schools. Similarly, Jambunathan and Caulfield (2008) found that early
childhood teachers in India conducted limited developmentally appropriate activities in their class-
rooms; the authors identified non-use of DAP with a teacher–child ratio of 1:20, lack of materials,
lack of knowledge, and administrative pressure related to exam preparation.
The beliefs and self-reported and actual practices of the participant teachers in terms of the variety
of engaging learning experiences and hands-on materials were all well aligned. Their use of compu-
ters, natural objects, musical instruments, costumes, and so forth were developmentally appropriate
because they engaged the children’s interest, supported their self-regulation and provided them with
opportunities to develop their problem-solving and reasoning skills (Copple and Bredekamp 2009;
see also Elkind 2001; Morrison 2011; Solak 2007; Walsh and Gardner 2005).
 EDUCATION 3-13 113

Reasons
Findings indicate that participant teachers’ beliefs were more developmentally appropriate than their
practices. This finding was parallel with the results of prior studies (Hegde and Cassidy 2009; Rentzou
and Sakellariou 2011). Also, it was found that physical characteristics of the schools and the children’s
characteristics influenced teachers’ practices in relation to both dimensions of classroom manage-
ment being studied. This tends to support Erdiller and McMullen’s (2003) finding that physical con-
ditions and resources prevented teachers from conducting developmentally appropriate activities. In
particular, participant teachers in the present study endorsed several aspects of DAP but were pre-
vented from putting them into practice due to physical environment of their schools.
Despite such difficulties, the characteristics of the children may motivate teachers to conduct
more developmentally appropriate activities. The teachers emphasised that they created activities
to attract the children’s attention, increase their motivation and concentration, encourage their par-
ticipation, prepare them for the next activity, provide them with different experiences, establish
teacher–child and child–child educational interactions, and concretise certain situations for them.
Therefore, the teachers had to plan activities that consider children’s individual differences
(Copple and Bredekamp 2009).

Directions for further research

Confirmation of the results of this study should be undertaken using quantitative methods and a
larger number of participants. Also, the effects of educational background of preschool teachers
on their beliefs and practices could usefully be examined in further comparative studies. In Turkey
in 2012, males constituted 5.28% of preschool teachers (MoNE 2012c), and it would therefore be
interesting to examine these teachers’ developmentally appropriate and inappropriate beliefs and
practices related to these two dimensions of classroom management. Comparing male and female
preschool teachers’ beliefs and practices could offer another perspective on DAP in early education,
as could a comparison of novice, experienced and veteran teachers. Lastly, longitudinal studies could
be conducted to examine how children’s success and/or teachers’ practices change over time in
relation to teachers’ classroom management practices.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
Abu-Jaber, M., A. Al-Shawareb, and E. Gheith. 2010. “Kindergarten Teachers’ Beliefs toward Developmentally Appropriate
Practice in Jordan.” Early Childhood Education Journal 38: 65–74.
Adami, M. F., and A. Kiger. 2005. “The Use of Triangulation for Completeness Purposes.” Nurse Researcher 12 (4): 19–29.
Akar, H., F. Tantekin-Erden, D. Tor, and İ. T. Şahin. 2010. “Öğretmenlerin Sınıf Yönetimi Yaklaşımları ve Deneyimlerinin
İncelenmesi [Study on Teachers’ Classroom Management Approaches and Experiences].” İlköğretim Online
[Elementary Education Online] 9 (2): 792–806. [Online]. http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr.
Akgün, E., M. Yarar, and Ö. Dinçer. 2011. “Okul Öncesi Öğretmenlerinin Sınıf İçi Etkinliklerde Kullandıkları Sınıf Yönetimi
Stratejilerinin İncelenmesi [The Evaluation of Classroom Management Strategies of Preschool Teachers in Classroom
Activities].” Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi [Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction] 1 (3): 1–9.
Allen, K. P. 2010. “Classroom Management, Bullying, and Teacher Practices.” The Professional Educator 34 (1): 1–15.
Aloe, A., L. Amo, and M. Shanahan. 2014. “Classroom Management Self-Efficacy and Burnout: A Multivariate Meta-
Analysis.” Educational Psychology Review 26 (1): 101–126.
Arslan-Karaküçük, S. 2008. “Okul Öncesi Eğitim Kurumlarında Fiziksel/Mekansal Koşulların İncelenmesi: Sivas Örneği [A
Study on Physical/Spatial Conditions of the Preschool Education Centers: In Sivas].” Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Sosyal
Bilimler Dergisi [Cumhuriyet University the Journal of Social Sciences] 32 (2): 307–320.
Bernard, H. R., and G. W. Ryan. 2010. Analyzing Qualitative Data: Systematic Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
114 İ. T. ŞAHIN-SAK ET AL.

Blatchford, P., V. Moriarty, S. Edmonds, and C. Martin. 2002. “Relationships between Class Size and Teaching: A Multi-
Method Analysis of English Infant Schools.” American Educational Research Journal 39 (1): 101–132.
Brouwers, A., & W. Tomic. 2000. “A Longitudinal Study of Teacher Burnout and Perceived Self-Efficacy in Classroom
Management.” Teaching and Teacher Education 16: 239–253.
Chang, C., A. M. B. Austin, and K. W. Piercy. 2006. “Provider Management of Child Stress Behavior in Family Day Care
Facilities: Scaffolding for Learning and Development by Developmentally Appropriate Practice.” The Journal of
Genetic Psychology 167 (2): 159–177.
Clarke-Stewart, K. A., Y. Lee, V. D. Allhusen, M. S. Kim, and D. J. McDowell. 2006. “Observed Differences between Early
Childhood Programs in the US and Korea: Reflections of “Developmentally Appropriate Practices” in Two Cultural
Contexts.” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 27: 427–443.
Copple, C., and S. Bredekamp. 2009. Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs: Serving Children
from Birth through Age 8. Washington, DC: NAEYC.
Demircan, Ö., and F. Tantekin Erden. 2015. “Parental Involvement and Developmentally Appropriate Practices: A
Comparison of Parents and Teacher Beliefs.” Early Child Development and Care 185 (2): 209–225.
Denizel-Güven, E., and N. F. Cevher. 2005. “Okul Öncesi Öğretmenlerinin Sınıf Yönetimi Becerilerinin Çeşitli Değişkenler
Açısından İncelenmesi [The Level of Preschool Teachers’ Classroom Management Skills and Its Relations with
Different Variables].” Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Pamukkale University Journal of Education 2
(18): 1–22.
Dewey, J. 1910. How We Think. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Dinçer, Ç., E. Akgün, and Ö. Canarslan. 2011. “An Alternative to Preschool Education Settings: A Sample Project.” Mehmet
Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi [Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Social Sciences Institute]
3 (5): 36–45.
Dobbs-Oates, J., J. N. Kaderavek, Y. Guo, and L. M. Justice. 2011. “Effective Behavior Management in Preschool Classrooms
and Children’s Task Orientation: Enhancing Emergent Literacy and Language Development.” Early Childhood Research
Quarterly 26: 420–429.
Downer, J., T. J. Sabol, and B. Hamre. 2010. “Teacher-Child Interactions in the Classroom: Toward a Theory Of Within- and
Cross-Domain Links to Children’s Developmental Outcomes.” Early Education and Development 21 (5): 699–723.
Durmuşoğlu, M. C. 2008. “An Examination on the Opinions of Preschool Teachers about the Preschool Learning Settings
in Their Schools.” Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 32: 39–54.
Egyed, C. J., and R. J. Short. 2006. “Teacher Self-Efficacy, Burnout, Experience and Decision to Refer a Disruptive Student.”
School Psychology International 27: 462–474.
Elkind, D. 2001. “Early Childhood Education: Developmental or Academic.” Education Next [Online]. Accessed April 26.
http://media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/documents/ednext20012unabridged_elkind.pdf.
Erdiller, Z. B. 2008. “Profile of Turkish Early Childhood Education Teachers and Their Beliefs regarding DAP.” Paper pre-
sented at the manuscript in the European conference on educational research, Gothenburg, Sweden, September
10–12.
Erdiller, Z. B., and M. B. McMullen. 2003. “Turkish Teachers’ Beliefs about Developmentally Appropriate Practices in Early
Childhood Education.” Hacettepe University Journal of Education 25: 84–93.
Esturgó-Deu, M. E., and J. Sala-Roca. 2010. “Disruptive Behaviour of Students in Primary Education and Emotional
Intelligence.” Teaching and Teacher Education 26: 830–837.
Evertson, C. M., and C. S. Weinstein. 2006. “Classroom Management as a Field of Inquiry.” In Handbook of Classroom
Management: Research, Practice, and Contemporary Issues, edited by C. M. Evertson and C. S. Weinstein, 3–15.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fennimore, B. S. 1995. Student-Centered Classroom Management. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers.
Finn, J. D., and C. M. Achilles. 1990. “Answers and Questions about Class Size: A Statewide Experiment.” American
Educational Research Journal 27 (3): 557–577.
Finn, J. D., and C. M. Achilles. 1999. “Tennessee’s Class Size Study: Findings, Implications, Misconceptions.” Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis 21 (2): 97–109.
Finn, J. D., A. E. Suriani, and C. M. Achilles. 2007. “Small Classes in the Early Grades: One Policy-Multiple Outcomes.” In
Childhood Programs and Practices in the First Decade of Life, edited by A. J. Reynolds, A. J. Rolnick, M. M. Englund,
and J. A. Temple, 287–308. Minneapolis: Cambridge University Press.
Freiberg, H. J. 1999. Beyond Behaviorism: Changing the Classroom Management Paradigm. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Freiberg, H. J., and S. M. Lamb. 2009. “Dimensions of Person-Centered Classroom Management.” Theory Into Practice 48:
99–105.
Gatongi, F. 2007. “Person-Centered Approach in Schools: Is It the Answer to Disruptive Behavior in Our Classrooms?”
Counselling Psychology Quarterly 20 (2): 205–211.
Gestwicki, C. 2011. Developmentally Appropriate Practice: Curriculum and Development In Early Education. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Göl-Güven, M. 2009. “Evaluation of the Quality of Early Childhood Classrooms in Turkey.” Early Child Development and
Care 179 (4): 437–451.
 EDUCATION 3-13 115

Goss, S. S., and G. M. Ingersoll. 1981. Management of disruptive and off-task behaviors: Selected Resources. Bibliographies.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 200 520).
Güleç, S., P. Bağçeli, and G. Onur. 2008. “Öğretmen adaylarının sınıf kurallarının belirlenmesi ve uygulanmasına ilişkin
görüşleri [Pre-service Teachers’ Opinions about Determining and Performing Classroom Rules].” İlköğretim Online
[Elementary Education Online] 7 (2): 333–348. [Online]: http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr.
Hardin, C. J. 2004. Effective Classroom Management: Models and Strategies for Today’s Classrooms. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Harms, T., R. M. Clifford, and D. Cryer. 2005. Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale. Revised ed. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Hart, C. H., D. C. Burts, and R. Charlesworth. 1997. “Integrated Developmentally Appropriate Curriculum.” In Integrated
Curriculum and Developmentally Appropriate Practice: Birth to Age Eight, edited by C. H. Hart, D. C. Burts, and R.
Charlesworth, 1–27. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Hegde, A. V., and D. J. Cassidy. 2009. “Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices regarding Developmentally Appropriate Practices: A
Study Conducted in India.” Early Child Development and Care 179 (7): 837–847.
Hu, B. 2012. Exploring the Cultural Relevance of Developmentally Appropriate Practices from the Point of View of
Preschool Teachers in Beijing. Manuscript in the 2011 Yearbook of the Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi’s Center
for Educational Development, Evaluation, and Research.
Jambunathan, S. 2005. “Beliefs about the Importance of Use of Developmentally Appropriate Practices among Early
Childhood Teachers in India.” Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 26: 275–281.
Jambunathan, S., and M. Caulfield. 2008. “Developmentally Appropriate Practices in Asian Indian Early Childhood
Classrooms.” Early Child Development and Care 178 (3): 251–258.
Johnson, R. B. 1997. “Examining the Validity Structure of Qualitative Research.” Education 118 (2): 282–292.
Kerem, E. A., and D. Cömert. 2005. “Türkiye’de Okul Öncesi Eğitimin Sorunları ve Çözüm Önerileri [Problems of Pre-School
Education in Turkey and Some Suggestions for Solving Those Problems].” Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 21:
155–172.
Kim, Y. H., and M. Stormont. 2012. “Factors Associated with South Korean Early Childhood Educators’ Observed Behavior
Support Strategies.” Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions 14 (2): 78–86.
Kök, M., A. Küçükoğlu, M. N. Tuğluk, and S. Koçyiğit. 2007. “Okul Öncesi Eğitiminin Sorunlarına İlişkin Öğretmen Görüşleri
(Erzurum İli Örneği) [Teacher’s Opinions on the Problems of Early Childhood Education].” Atatürk Üniversitesi Kâzım
Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Journal of Kâzım Karabekir Education Faculty] 16: 160–171.
Krefting, L. 1991. “Rigor in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness.” The American Journal of
Occupational Therapy 45: 214–222.
Landrum, T. J., A. S. Lingo, and T. M. Scott. 2011. “Classroom Misbehavior is Predictable and Preventable.” Phi Delta Kappan
93 (2): 30–34.
Lee, Y. S., J. Baik, and R. Charlesworth. 2006. “Differential Effects of Kindergarten Teacher’s Beliefs about Developmentally
Appropriate Practice on Their Use of Scaffolding Following Inservice Training.” Teaching and Teacher Education 22:
935–945.
Levin, J., and J. F. Nolan. 2007. Principles of Classroom Management: A Professional Decision-Making Model. Boston, MA:
Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Martin, N. K., and D. A. Sass. 2010. “Construct Validation of the Behavior and Instructional Management Scale.” Teaching
and Teacher Education 26: 1124–1135.
McMullen, M. B., J. Elicker, G. Goetze, H. H. Huang, S. M. Lee, C. Mathers, X. Wen, and H. Y. Yang. 2006. “Using Collaborative
Assessment to Examine the Relationship Between Self-Reported Beliefs and the Documentable Practices of Preschool
Teachers.” Early Childhood Education Journal 34 (1): 81–91.
McMullen, M. B., J. Elicker, J. Wang, Z. Erdiller, S. M. Lee, and P. Y. Sun. 2005. “Comparing Beliefs about Appropriate Practice
among Early Childhood Education Professionals from the U.S., China, Taiwan, Korea and Turkey.” Early Childhood
Research Quarterly 20 (4): 451–464.
Merriam, S. B. 2009. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miranda, M. L. 2004. “The Implications of Developmentally Appropriate Practice for the Kindergarten General Music
Classroom.” Journal of Research in Music Education 52 (1): 43–63.
MoNE. 2006. Okul Öncesi Eğitim Programı: 36–72 Aylık Çocuklar İçin [Early Childhood Education Program: For 36–72
Month-Old Children]. Ankara: MEB.
MoNE. 2007. Çocuk Gelişimi ve Eğitimi: Serbest Zaman Etkinlikleri [Child Development and Education: Free Play Activities].
Accessed March 20. http://hbogm.meb.gov.tr/modulerprogramlar/kursprogramlari/cocukgelisim/moduller/
serbestzamanetkinlikleri.pdf.
MoNE. 2012a. Okul Öncesi Eğitim Programı [Early Childhood Education Program]. Ankara: MEB.
MoNE. 2012b. 12 Yıl Zorunlu Eğitim: Sorular-Cevaplar [12-Year Compulsory Education: Questions-Answers]. Ankara:
Ministry of National Education. Accessed February 7. http://www.meb.gov.tr/duyurular/duyurular2012/12yil_soru_
cevaplar.pdf.
MoNE. 2012c. National Education Statistics: Formal Education 2011–2012. Accessed February 7. http://sgb.meb.gov.tr/
meb_iys_dosyalar/2012_12/06021046_meb_istatistikleri_orgun_egitim_2011_2012.pdf.
116 İ. T. ŞAHIN-SAK ET AL.

Morrison, G. S. 2011. Early Childhood Education Today. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
NAEYC. 2011. All Criteria Document. Accessed 11 March. http://www.naeyc.org/files/academy/file/AllCriteriaDocument.
pdf.
Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkey. 2006. 9th Development Plan. Accessed April 15. http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/
main.aspx?home=http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2006/07/20060701m1.htm&main=http://www.resmigazete.
gov.tr/eskiler/2006/07/20060701m1.htm.
Parker, A., and S. Neuharth-Pritchett. 2006. “Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Kindergarten: Factors Shaping
Teacher Beliefs and Practice.” Journal of Research in Childhood Education 21 (1): 65–78.
Pianta, R., C. Howes, M. Burchinal, D. Bryant, R. Clifford, D. Early, and O. Barbarin. 2005. “Features of Pre-Kindergarten
Programs, Classrooms, and Teachers: Do They Predict Observed Classroom Quality and Child-Teacher
Interactions?.” Applied Developmental Science 9 (3): 144–159.
Pramling-Samuelsson, I., and E. Johansson. 2006. “Play and Learning – Inseparable Dimensions in Preschool Practice.”
Early Child Development and Care 176 (1): 47–65.
Rambusch, N. M. 2010. “Freedom, Order, and the Child.” Montessori Life 1: 38–43.
Rentzou, K., and M. Sakellariou. 2011. “Greek Pre-Service Kindergarten Teachers’ Beliefs about and Practices of
Developmentally Appropriate Practices in Early Childhood Education.” Early Child Development and Care 181 (8):
1047–1061.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., and B. E. Sawyer. 2004. “Primary-Grade Teachers’ Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Attitudes toward Teaching,
and Discipline and Teaching Practice Priorities in Relation to the “Responsive Classroom” Approach.” The
Elementary School Journal 104 (4): 321–341.
Şahin, İ. T. 2011. Physical Design for Classroom Management: Perceptions of Early Childhood Teachers. Saarbrücken,
Germany: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
Şahin, İ. T., F. Tantekin-Erden, and H. Akar. 2011. “The Influence of the Physical Environment on Early Childhood Education
Classroom Management.” Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 44: 185–202.
Sherry, A. C. 1998. “Evaluation of Multimedia Authoring Instruction Based in a Behaviorist-Cognitive-Constructivist
Continuum.” International Journal of Instructional Media 25 (2): 201–216.
Sierhuis, M., and W. J. Clancey. 1997. “Knowledge, Practice, Activities and People.” In: Paper presented at the AAAI Spring
symposium on artificial intelligence in knowledge management. Accessed April 15. http://www.aaai.org/Papers/
Symposia/Spring/1997/SS-97-01/SS97-01-027.pdf.
Solak, N. 2007. “Adana İl Merkezinde Bulunan Okulöncesi Eğitim Kurumlarında Kalitenin İncelenmesi [Determining of
Quality Level of the Government Preschools and Private Pre-Schools].” Unpublished Master’s thesis, Çukurova
University.
Sterling, D. R. 2009. “Classroom Management: Setting Up the Classroom for Learning.” Science Scope 32 (9): 29–33.
Taylor, B. J. 1995. A Child Goes Forth: A Curriculum Guide for Preschool Children. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
Tomlinson, H. B. 2009. “Developmentally Appropriate Practice in the Kindergarten Year-Ages 5–6.” In Developmentally
Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs: Serving Children from Birth through Age 8, edited by C. Copple and
S. Bredekamp, 187–253. Washington, DC: NAEYC.
Uysal, H., S. Akbaba-Altun, and E. Akgün. 2010. “Okulöncesi Öğretmenlerinin Çocukların İstenmeyen Davranışları
Karşısında Uyguladıkları Stratejiler [The Strategies Preschool Teachers Use When Confronted with Children’s
Undesired Behaviors].” İlköğretim Online [Elementary Education Online] 9 (3): 971–979. [Online]. http://ilkogretim-
online.org.tr.
Vartuli, S. 2005. “Beliefs: The Heart of Teaching.” YC Young Children 60 (5): 76–86.
Walsh, G., and J. Gardner. 2005. “Assessing the Quality of Early Years Learning Environments.” Early Childhood Research
and Practice 7 (1). Accessed April 8. http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v7n1/walsh.html.
Wasik, B. 2008. “When Fewer is More: Small Groups in Early Childhood Classrooms” Early Childhood Education Journal 35:
515–521.
Weinstein, C. S., and I. Novodvorsky. 2011. Middle and Secondary Classroom Management: Lessons from Research and
Practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Weinstein, C. S., M. Romano, and A. J. Mignano. 2011. Elementary Classroom Management: Lessons from Research and
Practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Winsler, A., and M. P. Carlton. 2003. “Observations of Children’s Task Activities and Social Interactions in Relation to
Teacher Perceptions in a Child-Centered Preschool: Are We Leaving Too Much to Chance?” Early Education and
Development 14 (2): 155–178.
Wolfgang, C. N. 2009. “Managing Inquiry-Based Classrooms.” Science Scope 32 (9): 14–17.
Wubie, B. 2011. “Preschool Children as Co-Curriculum Developers.” National Social Science Journal 37 (1): 120–124.
Yan, W., and Q. Lin. 2005. “Effects of Class Size and Length of Day on Kindergartners’ Academic Achievement: Findings
from Early Childhood Longitudinal Study.” Early Education and Development 16 (1): 49–68.