Questionnaries and Interviews in Educational Researches

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’de hem teoride ve hem de pratikte çok yaygın kullanılmayan anket ve mülakat metotlarını geniş bir biçimde ele almaktır. Bu bağlamda, eğitimle ilgili araştırmalarda bilimsel ve sosyal bir gerçeği araştırırken mülakat ve anket metotlarının avantajları ve dezavantajları detaylıca sunulmaktadır. Ülkemizde, niteliksel araştırma metotlarından olan mülakat ve anketler eğitim araştırmalarında son dönemlerde azda olsa kullanılmaya başlanmıştır. Bunun sonucunda çok ciddi çalışmalar ortaya çıkmıştır. Ayrıca bu çalışmada ele alınan bir başka konu da şudur: Mülakat ile anket arsında bir karşılaştırma yapılmış ve bu iki metodun hangisinin diğerine göre daha avantajlı ya da dezavantajlı olduğu üzerinde durulmuştur. Eğitim alanında bu metotlar kullanılarak yapılan çok sayıda araştırma burada örnek olarak sunulmaktadır. Sosyal bilimler alanında yapılan aynı çalışmada bu iki metodun farklı sonuçlar vermesi, elde edilen sonuçların geçerliliği açısından özel bir önem taşımaktadır. Bu çalışmanın sosyal ve eğitim bilimleri alanında yürütülecek araştırmalara ışık tutacağı umulmaktadır.

Eğitim Araştırmalarında Anket ve Mülakatlar

The aim of this study is to deal, through a broader explanation, with the methods of questionnaire and interview, which are not so commonly used both in theory and in practice in Turkey. Hence, the advantages and disadvantages of the methods of questionnaire and interview in the investigation of a scientific and social fact in educational researches are presented in detail. In our country, questionnaires and interviews, which are qualitative research methods, have recently began to be rarely used in educational researches; as a result, meticulous studies have come out. One other thing to be focused on in this study through a comparison between a questionnaire and an interview is also the advantages and disadvantages of these methods over each other. A large number of researches conducted through these methods in the field of education are cited here as examples. The use of each method with a different result in the same study in social sciences is of special importance in terms of the validity of the results obtained. This study is expected to guide or highlight the researches to be conducted in the field of social and educational sciences.

PDF

___

Brenner, M., Brown, J., & Canter, D. (1985). The Research Interview: Uses and Approaches. London: Academic Press.
Bryman, A. (1989). Research Methods and Organisation Studies. London: Unwin Hyman.
Cownie, F. & Addison, W. (1996). “International Students and Language Support: a new survey”. Studies in Higher Education, 21, 2, pp.221-231.
Daun, H. (1997). “Teachers Needs, Culturally-Significant Teacher Education and Educational Achievement in an African Context- The Case of Guinea-Bissau”. International Journal o f Educational Development, 17, 1, pp. 59-71.
Donnelly, J., Buchan, A., Jenkins, E., Laws, P., & Welford, G. (1996). “Investigation by Order: Policy, Curriculum and Science Teachers` Work Under the Education Reform Act.” UK: Studies in Education.
Drewer, J. (1962). A Dictionary of Psychology. Middlesex: Penguin.
Gall, M.D., Borg, W.R., & Gall, J.P. (1996). Educational Research: An Introduction, (Sixth Edition). USA: Longman.
Greenfield, T. (1996). Research Methods: Guidance for Postgraduates. London: Arnold..
Griffiths, A.K., & Heath, N.P. (1996). “High School Students` Views about Technology”. Research in Science & Technology Education, 14,2, pp. 153-162.
Haney, J.J., Czerniak, C.M., & Lumpe, A.T. (1996). “Teacher Beliefs and Intentions Regarding the Implementation of Science Education Reform Strands. Journal of “ Research in Science Teaching, 33, 9, 971-933.
Hendley, D. & Lyle S. (1996). “Pupils` Perceptions of Design and Technology: a casestudy of pupils in South Wales”. Research in Science & Technology Education, 14, 2, 141-151.
Kamen, M. (1996). “A Teacher’s Implementation of Authentic Assessment in an Elementary Science Classroom”. Jour. of Res. in Science Teaching, 33, 8, 859-877.
Lewis, J., Leach, J., Wood-Robinson, C., & Driver, R. (1996). “Students` Attitudes to the New Genetics: Prenatal Screening for Cystic Fibrosis”. ERIDOP-96, Germany.
McKernan J. (1996). Curriculum Action Research: A Handbook of Methods and Resources for the Reflective Practitioner, (2nd Edition). London: Kogan Page.
Morais, A.M., & Miranda, C. (1996). “Understanding Teachers` Evaluation Criteria: A Condition for Success in Science Classes”. Jour. of Res. in Science Teaching, 33, 6, 601-624.
Oppenheim, A.N. (1992). Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. London: Pinter Publishers.
Powney, J. & Watts, M. (1987). Interviewing in Educational Research. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Robson, C. (1995). Real World Research: A resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner- Researchers. Oxford: Blackwell.
Smeby, J.C. (1996). “Disciplinary differences in University Teaching”. Studies in Higher Education, 21, 1, pp.5-16.
Wiersma, W. (1991). Research Methods in Education, (Fifth Edition). USA: Allyn & Bacon.