You are here

Home » Content

ÖĞRENME VE ÖĞRENMEYE KATILIM HAKKINDA SINIF ÖĞRETMENLERİNE DÜŞÜNÜYORLAR?

WHAT DO PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS THINK ABOUT LEARNING PROCESS AND STUDENT’S ENGAGEMENT TO LEARNING

Journal Name:

  • Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The purpose of the present study is to determine the opinions of classroom teachers about learning process and students’ engagement in learning. The study was carried out with eight classroom teachers.In the present study, a semi-structured interview consisting of twelve open-ended questions was administered to the participants to elicit their opinions about students’ engagement inlearning and learning process. The findings obtained from the interviews were grouped under four main themes as engagement, factors affecting engagement, student engagement and teacher influence on student engagement. When the findings of the present study are analyzed, it is seen that the teachers evaluate the engagement and learning process in terms of behavioral dimension yet they do notmake any evaluation related to cognitive and affective dimensions. Based on the results, teachers’ awareness about learning engagement and learning process can be considered to be weak.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu araştırmanın amacı; sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğrenme süreci ve öğrencilerin öğrenmeye katılımı hakkındaki görüşlerini belirlemektir. Araştırma sekiz sınıf öğretmeniyle yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada; katılımcılarla, öğrencilerin öğrenmeye katılımına ve öğrenme sürecine ilişkin görüşlerini belirlemek amacıyla on iki açık uçlu sorudan oluşan yarı yapılandırılmışbir görüşme yapılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda elde edilen bulgular; katılım, katılımı etkileyen faktörler, öğrenci açısından katılım ve öğretmen açısından katılım olmak üzere dört tema altında toplanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda elde edilen bulgular incelendiğinde; öğretmenlerin katılımı ve öğrenme sürecini davranışsal boyutta değerlendirdikleri, bilişsel ve duyuşsal boyuta ilişkin değerlendirmeler yapmadıkları görülmüştür. Buna göre; öğretmenlerin öğrenmeye katılım ve öğrenme süreci hakkında farkındalıklarının zayıf olduğu kanısına varılabilir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-ogrenme-ogrenmeye-katilim-hakkinda-sinif-ogretmenlerine-dusunuyorlar.pdf
  • 35
199-214
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Ainley, M. (1993). Styles of engagement with learning: multidimensional assessment of their relationships with
strategy use and school achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 395-405.
Altenbaugh, R. J. (2003). The American people and their education: A social history. New York: Merrill/Prentice
Hall.
Arı, E. (2011). Öğrenme Öğretme Kuram ve Yaklaşımları. (1. Baskı, Edt: Sevil Büyükalan Filiz). Ankara: Pegem A.
Atkinson, R. L., Atkinson, R. C., Smith, E. E., Bem, D., J., & Hoeksema, S. N. (2010). Hilgard Psikolojiye Giriş.
(5th. Ed) (Çev: Yavuz Alogan). Ankara: Arkadaş.
Armstrong, D. & McMahon, B. (2002). Engaged Pedagogy: valuing the strengths of students on the margins,Journal
of Thought, 37(1), 53-66.
Bacanlı, H. (2011). Eğitim Psikolojisi. (7. Baskı). Ankara: Pegema A.
Balaban-Sarı, J. (2004). Öğrenmede güdülenme. Y. Kuzgun ve D. Deryakulu (Eds.), Eğitimde bireysel farklılıklar
(ss. 167-191). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
Berry, A., & Loughran, J. J. (2005). Teaching about teaching: The role of self-study. In C.Mitchell, S. Weber, & K.
O’Reilly-Scanlon (Eds.), Just who do we think we are? Methodologies for autobiography and self-study in
teaching (pp. 168–180). New York: Routledge Falmer.
Çelikten, M., Şenol, M. & Yeni, Y. (2005). Öğretmen Mesleği ve Özellikleri. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler
Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19(2), 207-237. http://sbe.erciyes.edu.tr/dergi/sayi_19/11-%20(207-237.%20syf.).pdf
adresinden 22.11.2012 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
Cole, A. L., Knowles, J. G. (1998). Reforming teachereducation through self-study. In A. L. Cole, R. Elijah, & J. G.
Knowles (Eds.), The heart of the matter: Teacher educators and teacher education reform (pp. 41–54). San
Francisco, CA: Caddo Gap.
Cothran, D. J., & Ennis, C. D. (2000). Building bridges to student engagement: communicating respect and care for
students in urban high schools. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 33(4), 106-117.
Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. (1991). Competence, autonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis ofself-system processes. In Gunnar, M., Sroufe, L. (Ed.). Self processes in development: Minnesota symposium on
child development (Vol. 23, pp. 43-77). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.
Çelen, N. (1999). Öğrenme Psikolojisi. (1. Baskı). Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
Duman, B. (2008). Öğrenme-Öğretme Kuramları ve Süreç Temelli Öğretim. (2. Baskı). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Midgley, C., Reuman, D., Mac Iver, D., & Feldlaufer, H. (1993). Negative effects of
traditional middle schools on student’s motivation.The Elementary School Journal, 93, 553-574.
Finn, J. D.,& Rock, D. A. (1997). Academic success among students at-risk, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 221-234.
Fraser, B. J., & Walberg, H. J. (Eds.). (1991). Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences.
Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: potential of the concept,state of the
evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1),59-109.
Harris, L., (2011). Secondary teachers’ conceptionsof student engagement: Engagement in learning or in schooling?,
Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 376-386.
Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi – Sayı 35 – Ocak 2013
213
Hunt, D. (1975). Person-environment interaction: A challenge found wanting before it was tried. Review of
Educational Research, 45(2), 209-230.
Greenwood (1991). Longitudinal analysis of time to learn, engagement, and academic achievement in urban versus
suburban schools. Exceptional Children, 57, 521-535.
Greenwood, Horton, & Utley (2002). Academic Engagement: Current perspectives on research and proactive.School
Psychology Review, 31, 328-349.
Jones, D., R., (2008). Strengthening Student Engagement. Creating a Culture of Academic Achievement, published
by the International Center for Leadership in Education.
http://www.leadered.com/msc08/PowerPointsHandouts/Resource/engagement.pdf 22.11.2012 tarihinde
adresinden indirilmiştir.
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and
achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262-273.
Lee, O., & Anderson, C. (1993). Task engagement and conceptual change in middle school science classrooms.
American Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 585-610.
Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1995). Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and
engagement. Sociology of Education, 68, 241-270.
Libbey, H. P. (2004). Measuring student relationships to school: attachment, bonding, connectedness, and
engagement. Journal of School Health, 74, 274-283.
Lingard, B., Ladwig, J., Mills, M., et al (2001) Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study: final report, vol. 1.
Brisbane: Report prepared for Education Queensland bythe School of Education, The University of
Queensland.
Maslak, M. A., Kim, J., & McLoughlin, A. S. (2010).Educational engagement in China: a case from the Northwest.
International Journal of Educational Development, 30 (3), 254-262.
Marks, H. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: patterns in the elementary, middle andhigh school
years. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1),153e184.
McFarland-Fattor, M. (2010). Student Engagement Differences by Ethnicity and Scale for Ninth Grade Students.
Dissertation, University of Denver.
McMahon, B., & Portelli, J. P. (2004). Engagement for what? Beyond popular discourses of student engagement.
Leadership and Policy in Schools, 3(1), 59-76.
McMahon, B. J., & Zyngier, D. (2009). Student engagement: contested concepts in two continents. Researchin
Comparative and International Education, 4(2), 164-181
Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students’ goal orientations and cognitive engagement in
classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 514-523.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook-qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). London:
Sage.
Newmann, F., M., (1986) Priorities for the Future:towards a common agenda. Social Education, 50, 240-250.
Newmann, F., M., (1992). Higher-order thinking andprospects for classroom thoughtfulness. In F. Newmann (Ed.),
Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 11-39). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Newmann, F., M., Wehlage, G. & Lamborn, S. (1992) The Significance and Sources of Student Engagement, in F.
Newmann (Ed.) Student Engagement and Achievement inAmerican Secondary Schools, 11-39. New York:
Teachers’ College Press.
Newmann, F.M. (1996) Authentic Achievement: restructuring schools for intellectual quality, 1st edn. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Newmann, F.M., Bryk, A.S. & Nagaoka, J.K. (2001) Authentic Intellectual Work and Standardized Tests: conflict or
coexistence? Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Rose, D. H. & Meyer, A., (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learnings.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD
Ryan, T. G. & Telfer, L. (2011). A review of (elementary) school self-assessment processes: Ontario and beyond.
Internatıonal Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 3(1), 171-191.
Sharkey, J. D., Sukkyung, Y., & Schnoebelen, K. (2008). Relations among school assets, individual resilience, and
student engagement for youth grouped by level of family functioning. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5),402-418.
Shernoff, D. J., Schneider, B., & Csikzenmihalyi, M.(2001, April). Assessing multiple influences on, student
engagement in high school classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational
214
Research Association, Seattle, WA.
Schunk, D. H. (2009). Öğrenme Teorileri:Eğitimsel Bir Bakışta. (5th. Ed.) (Çev. Muzaffer Şahin). Ankara: Nobel
Yayın Dağıtım.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Sünbül, A. M. (1996). Öğretmen Niteliği ve Öğretimdeki Rolleri. Eğitim Yönetimi, 2(4), 597-607.
Şen, Ş., H. (2011). Öğrenme Öğretme Kuram ve Yaklaşımları. (1. Baskı, Edt: Sevil Büyükalan Filiz). Ankara: Pegem
A.
Şirin, H. (2009). Sivil toplum örgütlerinin Eğitime ilişkin karar alma süreçlerine katılımları üzerine bir araştırma.
Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(153), 169-182.
Yıldırım, A., Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. (5.basım). Ankara: Seçkin
Yayıncılık.
Yıldırım, A., Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. (Geliştirilmiş5. Baskı). Ankara:
Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Yıldırım, K. (2010). İşbirlikli Öğrenme Yönteminin Okumaya İlişkin Bazı Değişkenler Üzerindeki Etkisi ve
Yönteme İlişkin Öğrenci-Veli Görüşleri. YayımlanmamışDoktora Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Gazi Eğitim
Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Zyngier, D. (2007) Listening to Teachers – listening to students: substantive conversations about resistance,
empowerment and engagement, Teachers and Teaching, 13(4), 327-347.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com