ISAS Services Page

GŐKER, S.D. (2004). REFLECTIVE MANAGEMENT & SUPERVISION IN EFL SCHOOLS. Mavi Basın Yayın Ltd: Nicosia Cyprus.

Whilst wading through a number of books written on the subject of English Language Teaching, it was nice to come across one written by a Turkish academic at the Eastern Mediterranean University called Dr. Sūleyman.Davut.Gőker.

Books in Turkey and Northern Cyprus on the subject of English Language Teaching tend to be either publications from UK and US publishers such as, Longman and Oxford, or photocopied ‘rip offs’ of the same. Reflective Management & Supervision in EFL Schools is published by a Turkish Cypriot publisher and written by a Turkish academic, who was once Director of the ELT department at EUL, who also taught part time at GAU in the 2005-2006 academic year and is now an academic at EMU.

This book is divided into four chapters plus an introduction and a conclusion. There is also an acknowledgement section at the beginning of the book where the ‘author’ cites his gratitude to his colleagues Dr. Bayram Pekoz[1], Dr.Theresa O’Donnell Thomas[2], Neil McGregor[3], Assoc. Prof. Filiz Secim Tiryakioglu[4] and, someone or something called the precious Nafia which I assume to be a cat or pet of some description. Now it’s around this time that I started to get a little suspicious, not that I have anything against cats that is, but Dr Theresa O’Donnell Thomas who once taught in Dr Gőker’s department at EUL does not exist, there is no Dr Theresa O’Donnell Thomas, she is a PhD fraud!

Having met the author on a couple of occasions I was genuinely surprised at his claimed knowledge of the subject of ELT. He, in my opinion, was unable to hold a natural conversation on any subject yet alone ELT. His answers to questions were vague and seemed to be given parrot fashion as if being quoted from a text book (which upon reflection, they probably were). By bluster, and some might say charm, he had built up a reputation of being the unchallenged voice of English Language Teaching in Turkey. He regularly tells his students that he is approached by academics worldwide for advice on the subject.

If this is true, then this is probably where he got the contents of ‘Reflective Management & Supervision in EFL Schools’ from. The entire book, except for a few confusing linking sentences, is stolen, plagiarized, nicked, lifted- call it what you like and we mean the whole book!

Going through each chapter here would take many pages and weighty tomes are the provinces of dear old Homerfile bless him, not me. However it is important to give a few examples to back up our charges. After all, plagiarism is a serious academic offence according to YŐK (the Turkish Higher Education Authority).Such offences usually result in dismissal or banishment to darkest Van. It will be interesting then to see if that extends to one of their graduates teaching in Northern Cyprus, or perhaps being sent there is a punishment for some earlier transgression. Dr Gőker graduated from a Turkish university and cites his own PhD study, ‘An Instructional Supervision Model to Develop ELT in Turkey’. I guess that would be interesting reading as that was ‘surely’ checked through some sort of anti-plagiarism software and must be his own work?

The evidence is overwhelming and too long to put here in its entirety. Here are just some examples of the author cutting and pasting whole pages, paragraphs and sentences without ANY effort whatsoever to disguise the original authors work. There is a number of PhD and masters’ theses which have been identified as plagiarised in other chapters of Dr Goker’s book, which have yet to be checked.

Academic honesty is the cornerstone of any reputable university, its academics and its research life. An ‘academic’, who blatantly copies another academics work to present them as their own, is not in our opinion, a suitable person to be teaching in any university, and especially in an ELT department.

Unfortunately, plagiarism seems to be an accepted risk by certain academics and post-graduate (MA, MS and PhD) students undertaking studies in North Cyprus universities. This book is but one example. There are a large number of theses and doctoral dissertations ‘stored,’ that are awaiting checking for plagiarism. After randomly checking just one item, we are certain more evidence of plagiarised work will come to light. Unfortunately, such behaviour by certain individuals tars all academics/students in these universities in the same light, which in fact, we are sure is not the case. Dishonest academics will attract those students who are looking to pass their course work as easily as possible, thus perpetuating such behaviour and practices.

These examples ONLY relate to the first 26 or so pages of the first chapter of his book. It would require too much space to provide all the plagiarised examples- Original works are attached.

The success of an EFL school depends on the professionals within that school. Most of school improvement efforts focus on a search for the magic bullet-the new programs and procedures that will transform a school. New curriculum materials, alternative scheduling, new methods of reporting student achievement, for example, are heralded as examples of significant school improvement. Programs and materials do not bring about change, people do. Schools devote the greatest portion of their expenditures to personnel, and it only makes sense that the development of this human resource must be at the very heart of any improvement effort. As Ernest Boyer (in Sparks, 1984) observed:

When you talk about school improvement, you are talking about people improvement. That’s the only way to improve schools unless you mean painting the buildings and fixing the floors. But that’s not the school, that’s the shell. The school is people, so when we talk about excellence or improvement or progress, we’re really talking about the people who make up the building (p. 9).

EFL practitioners mostly complain about their directors or principals as they primarily focus on administrative duties rather than instructional and academic support. Throughout my 16- year teaching experience, I have often seen directors whose priority was to check whether EFL teachers were punctual or what they wear was appropriate for the job, etc.

There is a consensus in the research findings on the fact that directors spend most of their time dealing with managerial issues. Although the role of the directors as instructional leader is widely advocated it is seldom practiced. Stronge (1988) calculated that elementary school principals spent 62 2% of their time on managerial issues and 11% on instructional leadership issues even after undergoing training or in service for the role of instructional leader. Hallinger (1989) attributes this reality to the fact that there has been little or no provision for enhancing or supporting these new skills in the instructional leadership domain. Technical assistance, adjustment in role expectations, and policies designed to support the use of this new knowledge and skills are, for the most part, lacking. Thus, the image of instructional leadership has become entrenched in the professional rhetoric but all too often is lacking m administrative practice.[x1]

Much has been written in the literature (Berlin, Kavanagh & Jenson, 1988; Flath, 1989; Fullan, 1991; McNally, 1992; Stronge, 1988) concerning the importance of the instructional leadership responsibilities of the principal. Evidently, improved education for our children requires improved instructional leadership.[x2]

Gőker (2004): pp 6, Para 6/7; pp 7, whole page; pp 8 whole page; pp 9 Para 1-3.[x3]

Gőker (2004): pp 23, Para 4-7; pp 24 whole page; pp 25 whole page; pp 26, Para 1-2.[x20]

These are just a few examples of where the author has completely cut and pasted articles from the internet without any effort to disguise the original source: quite unbelievable for a PhD lecturer in an EFL department, purporting to be an ‘expert in EFL teaching!

Not content with copying the contents of his book, a simple internet search under his name brought up the following article ‘written’ by him: It seems another plagiarised article which he had published in the Internet EFL Journal below:

Gőker, S.D. A school -based management and supervision model in EFL schools, pp2, [On-Line] The Internet TESL Journal, vol XI, No 1, January 2005 http://iteslj.org/Articles/Goker-Supervision.html , accessed 15/03.2006.

Note: We believe this item has been removed by the journal web site after they were alerted to its copied contents by www.isas-ch.org.

So here the author complains of native English speakers with various TEFL short course qualifications. Well, how many of them have plagiarised a book and published articles? How does that famous English saying go? ‘People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones!’ Virginia Ham, London, UK. August 2006.

[1] Dr Bayram Pekoz is now Head of the ELT department at Girne American University. At the time of publication, he worked at the European University of Lefke.

[2] Theresa O’Donnell Thomas was on the academic staff at the European University of Lefke. At the time of publication of this book, she was employed as a Senior Lecturer in the ELT department. Prior to this, she was employed at the university as Director of the English Preparatory School. Despite her many claims, there is no evidence to support her claim that she holds a PhD, M.A. or B.A. and the universities that she has claimed to have studied at have no record of her having attended at any time in the last 30 years.

[3] Neil Macgregor once worked as a lecturer in the ELT department of the European University of Lefke. He now teaches in China after forming a relationship with one of his Chinese students at EUL.

[4] Dr Filiz Secim Tiryakioglu is an academic employed in the Media and Communications faculty at the European University of Lefke and was responsible for one of the very few non-plagiarised items in the book – namely the front cover art design.

[x1]Copied from Chell. J. section 7.3

[x2]Copied from Chell.J. Section chap 1 2^nd Para.

[x3]All Copied from Chell.J. Section chap 3.

[x4]All Copied from Chell.J. Introduction Section, chap 2.

[x5]All Copied from Chell.J. Educational Philosophy and Beliefs Section, chap 8.3.

[x6]All Copied from Chell.J. Educational Philosophy and Beliefs Section, chap 8.5

[x7]All Copied from Chell.J. Change Teory Section, chap 8.5

[x8]All Copied from Chell.J. Knowledge & Curriculum Section, chap 8.6

[x9]All Copied from Chell.J. Knowledge & Curriculum Section, chap 8.6

[x10]All Copied from Chell.J. Skills Needed Section, chap 10.

[x11]All Copied from Chell.J., chap 10.1.

[x12]All Copied from Chell.J., chap 10.1.1

[x13]All Copied from Chell.J., chap 10.1.0

[x14]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002)

[x15]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002), pp 2-3.

[x16]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002), pp 2-3.

[x17]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002), pp 4-5.

[x18]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002), pp 6-7.

[x19]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002), pp 7.

[x20]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002), pp 8-12.

[x21]All Copied from Vieira & Marques (2002), pp 15.

Last modified: 12/09/09