The Investigation of Spatial Skills of Prospective Teachers with Different Cognitive Styles

Bilişsel stillere sahip bireylerin bilgi işleme becerileri ve eğilimleri arasındaki farklılıklar bireysel farklılıklardan doğmaktadır. Bu alanda yapılan araştırmalar hızla artsa da henüz çözüme kavuşturulmamış birçok soru bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışma da, farklı bilişsel stilleri sahip olan öğretmen adayların uzamsal becerileri incelenmiştir. Öğretmen adaylarının bilişsel stillerinin farklılıklarını incelemek için bilişsel test olarak Grup Saklı Şekiller Testi kullanılmıştır. Bu test ile birlikte öğretmen adayları alan bağımlı ve alan bağımsız olarak iki gruba ayrılmıştır. Öğretmen adaylarının uzamsal becerilerini incelemek için ise Uzamsal Görselleştirme Beceri Testi kullanılmıştır. Bilişsel stilleri farklı olan öğretmen adaylarının uzamsal becerileri arasında anlamlı farklılık bulunmuştur. Alan bağımsız bilişsel stile sahip öğretmen adaylarının alan bağımlılara göre uzamsal beceri testinde başarılı oldukları bulunmuştur. Uzamsal görselleştirme testi puanları cinsiyet değişkeni açısından incelendiğinde erkeklerin kızlara göre daha başarılı oldukları bulunmuştur.

Bilişsel Stilleri Farklı Öğretmen Adaylarının Uzamsal Becerilerinin İncelenmesi

The differences between information processing abilities and the tendencies of individuals with different cognitive styles stem from individual differences. Although the number of research studies conducted in this area has been rapidly rising, there are many questions that have not yet been answered. With this aim, the spatial abilities of prospective teachers with different cognitive styles were examined in this study. The Group Embedded Figures Test was used to examine the cognitive style differences of the prospective teachers; and with the help of this test, the prospective teachers were categorized into two groups: field dependent and field independent. The Spatial Visualization Ability Test was used to examine the spatial ability of the prospective teachers, and it was found that there is a statistical significance between the spatial abilities of the prospective teachers with different cognitive styles. Moreover, the prospective teachers with field independent cognitive styles are more successful than the prospective teachers with field dependent cognitive styles on the spatial ability test. When the scores of the spatial visualization test were examined in terms of gender, it was found that the males were more successful than the females.

PDF

___

Bahar, M. & Hansell, M. H. (2000). The relationship between some psychological factors and their effect on the performance of grid questions and word association tests. Educational Psychology, 20(3), 349-364.
Banks, A. S. (2002). The relationship among teachers who are field dependent or field independent in an online course on their perceptions of computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and computer usefulness. Ph.D. Thesis, New York, USA.
Battista, M. (1981). The interaction between two instructional treatments of algebraic structures and spatial-visualization ability. The Journal of Educational Research, 337-341.
Battista, M.T., Wheatley, G.H., & Talsma, G. (1982). The importance of spatial visualization and cognitive development for geometry learning in preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13 (5), 332-340.
Blanton, E.L. (2004). The Influence of Students' Cognitive Style on A Standardized Reading Test Administered In Three Different Formats. Doctoral thesis, Department of Graduate Studies and Research, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida.
Crano, W.D. & Brewer, M.B. (2002). Principles and methods of social research. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Curry, L. (2002). Individual differences in cognitive style, learning style and instructional preference in medical education, International handbook of research in medical education (pp. 263-276): Springer.
Dündar, S. (2013). Öğrencilerin Beyin Dalgalarının Problem Çözme Sürecinde İncelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Guay, R.B. (1980). Spatial Ability Measurement: A Critique and an Alternative. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association, Boston.
Gündoğan, N.Ü., Yazıcı, A.C., & Şimşek, A. (2007). Üniversite öğrencilerinde el tercihi dağılımı ve işlevsel lateralizasyon: Başkent Üniversitesi Örneği. Genel Tıp Dergisi, 17(2), s. 99-103.
Kalaycıoğlu, C. (1995). Görsel Kognitif Testler Sırasında Serebral Lateralizasyonun Kantitatif EEG İle İncelenmesi. Uzmanlık tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Karacam, S. ve Ates, S. (2010). The effect of assessment technique on motion conceptual Understandings of students having different cognitive style. Journal of Abant Izzet Baysal University. 10(1), 21-30.
Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
Kösa, T. (2011). Ortaöğretim Öğrencilerinin Uzamsal Becerilerinin İncelenmesi. Doktora tezi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon.
McLeod, D.B., Carpenter, T.P., McCornack, R.L., & Skvarcius, R. (1978). Cognitive style and mathematics learning: The interaction of field independence and instructional treatment in numeration systems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9 (3), 163-174.
McMahon, F.B. & McMahon, J.W. (1982). Psychology, the hybrid science. Belmont CA: Dorsey Press.
Oldfield, R.C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9(1), 97-113.
Oltman, P. K., Raskin, E., & Witkin, H. A. (1971). The Group Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Reiff, J.C. (1996). At-risk middle level students or field dependent learners? The Clearing House, 69(4), 231-234.
Roberge, J.J. & Flexer, B.K. (1983). Cognitive style, operativity, and mathematics achievement. Journal for research in Mathematics Education, 14 (4), 344-353.
Saracho, O.N. (1998). Editor's introduction cognitive style research and its relationship to various disciplines. International Journal of Educational Research, 29(3), 169-172.
Soysal, A.Ş., Arhan, E., Aktürk, A., & Can, H. (2007). El Tercihi Ve El Tercihini Belirleyen Etkenler. Türkiye Çocuk Hastalıkları Dergisi, 1(2).
Tan, U. (1988). The distribution of hand preference in normal men and women. Int J Neurosci, 41, 35-55.
Thompson, M. E. (1988). Field Articulation and the Design of Information for Microcomputers. In R. A. Braden, D. G. Beauchamp, L. Miller, ve D. M. Moore (Eds.), About Visuals: Research, Teaching and Applications, Corsicana, TX: International Visual Literacy Association, 429-434.
Tinajero, C. & Páramo, M.F. (1998). Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 13(2), 227-251.
Tinajero, C. & Páramo, M.F. (1997). Field dependence-independence and academic achievement: a re-examination of their relationship. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(2), 199- 212.
Witkin, H.A. (1971). A manual for the embedded figures tests: Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Witkin, H.A., Dyk, R.B., Fattuson, H.F., Goodenough, D.R., & Karp, S.A. (1962). Psychological differentiation: Studies of development: Oxford, England: Wiley.
Witkin, H.A., Moore, C.A., Goodenough, D.R., & Cox, P.W. (1977). Field-dependent and field- independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of educational research, 47(1), 1-64.