Maiga CHANG, Xiaobing SU, Chun ZHOU, Xiaorui HUANG

Ortaöğretim Coğrafya Öğretmenleri İçin Bir Teknolojik Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi (TPAB) Ölçeği

Bilişim teknolojisinin okul eğitiminde kapsamlı bir şekilde kullanılmasıyla birlikte,TPAB (Teknolojik Pedagojik İçerik Bilgisi) kuramsal çerçevesi, öğretmenlerin bilişim teknolojisini ders öğretimine entegre etme yeteneklerini incelemek, değerlendirmek ve ilerletmek için giderek artan sayıda araştırmacı tarafından benimsenmektedir. Ancak, şu ana kadar özellikle Çin Anakarasındaki Coğrafya öğretmenlerinin TPAB yeterliliklerini değerlendirmek için tasarlanmış bir ölçüm aracı olmamıştır. Bu çalışmada, hâlihazırda elde bulunan TPAB ölçüm aracını temel alarak ve 7 faktörlü TPAB modelini izleyerek, Çin Anakarasındaki lise Coğrafya öğretmenleri için bir ölçüm ölçeği geliştirmeye çalışmaktayız. Hedef öğretmenlere davet e-postaları gönderilmiş ve 9 Anakara ilinden toplamda 869 geçerli yanıt alınmıştır. Ölçeğin ve ayrıca 7 faktörü TPAB modelinin yakınsak geçerlik ve ayırıcı geçerliğini doğrulamak için toplanan veriler üzerinde doğrulayıcı faktör analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma bulgularımızda da gösterildiği üzere, Çin Anakarasındaki lise Coğrafya öğretmenlerinin TPAB bilgi yapıları 7 faktörlü modelle uyum göstermektedir ve ölçülen 37 değişkenin faktör yüklemelerinin tamamı 0,57 ila 0,94 arasında dağılmakta ve her bir faktörün kompozit geçerlik değerleri de 0,87 ila 0,93 arasında dağılım göstermektedir. Bu da ölçeğin iyi bir yakınsak geçerliliğe sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. Yedi faktörün birbiriyle çiftlenmesi sonrasında, kısıtlı ve kısıtsız modeller arasındaki ki-kare değer farklarının tamamı anlamlı 0,05 düzeyine ulaşmaktadır ve bu da ölçeğin iyi ayırıcı geçerliliğe sahip olduğunu göstermektedir.

A Different Perspective to the Early Intervention Applications during Preschool Period: Early Enrichment for Gifted Children *

The goal of this research is to identify the views of preschool teachers with gifted students in their classes on the use of enrichment methods as a tool for early intervention. In this context, differences teachers observed in these gifted children following the application of Renzulli's Type I Enrichment Method to preschool science activities were determined. The study has been conducted using the phenomenological approach as a qualitative research method. The benefits of enrichment methods on the education of gifted children and the need for their use as an early intervention method are well-recognized by the scientific community in this area. On the other hand, there are few research based results on the application of these Type-I Enrichment methods to preschool children. During the early childhood period, awareness related to this topic is particularly important due to both the support needs of parents for their children with special needs as well as the role of teachers in the entire educational-behavioral development process of the children. The study group in this study consists of four preschool teachers from four different classes in a private preschool within the 2015-2016 education year. In the beginning of the study, preschool teachers with gifted children in their classrooms received training courses with applied content on both gifted children and enrichment methods. Teachers who participated in the study subsequently used Renzulli's Type I enrichment methods to modify and enrich science activities within their classrooms throughout an entire semester. The teachers were then asked to evaluate the effects of enrichment activities on the children based on their own observations. The resulting findings were collected by the researcher through semi-structured interviews with these teachers. As a result, it was found that preschool teachers with gifted children in their classrooms indicate that early intervention is necessary for preschool gifted children, that the use of enrichment methods in this period is highly compatible with preschool pedagogy and curriculum and hence promises to be practical and sustainable and that enriched activities, in addition to their benefits for gifted children, may also offer benefits for children exhibiting normal development patterns under certain conditions. The results are then discussed in the context of enrichment, parent education, professionalization of teachers and preschool education providing richer benefits that are more sensitive to individual differences.

PDF

___

Akman, Ö. ve Güven, C. (2015). TPACK survey development study for social sciences teachers and teacher candidates. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(1), 1-10.
Anderson, J. C. ve Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423.
Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 Structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.
Mart 2016 tarihinde http://www.econ.upf.edu/~satorra/CourseSEMVienna2010/EQSManual.pdf adresinden erişildi.
Bingimlas, K. A. (2009). Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(3), 235-245.
Cai, J. X. ve Deng, F. (2015). Study on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): The Latest Development and Trend. Modern Distance Education Research, 3, 9-18.
Canbazoğlu Bilici, S., Yamak, H., Kavak, N. ve Guzey, S. S. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge self-efficacy scale (TPACK-SeS) for pre-service science teachers: Construction, validation, and reliability. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 52, 37-60.
Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L. ve Tsai, C. C. (2011). Exploring the factor structure of the constructs of technological, pedagogical, content knowledge (TPACK). The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, (3), 595-603.
Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., Tsai, C. C. ve Tan, L. L. W. (2011). Modeling primary school pre-service teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education, 57, 1184-1193.
Chai, C. S., Ng, E. M. W., Li, W., Hong, H. Y. ve Koh, J. H. L. (2013). Validating and modelling technological pedagogical content knowledge framework among Asian preservice teachers.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(1), 41-53. Chen, C. ve Fan, J. (2002). Interpretation of Geography Curriculum Standards (Taslak Sürüm). Wuhan,
Hubei, Çin: Hubei Education Press. Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2013). To Implement the Project of Enhancing Primary and Middle
School Teachers' Ability to Apply Information Technology on a National Scale. http://www.moe.edu.cn/publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/moe/s7034/201311/159042.html adresinden erişildi.
Daly, C., Pachler, N., Mor, Y. ve Mellar, H. (2010). Exploring formative e-assessment: using case stories and design patterns. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 619-636.
Doering, A., Scharber, C., Miller, C. ve Veletsianos, G. (2009). GeoThentic: Designing and assessing with technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(3), 316-336.
Dong, Y., Chai, C. S., Sang, G. Y., Koh, J. H. L. ve Tsai, C. C. (2015). Exploring the profiles and interplays of pre-service and in-service teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in
China. Education Technology & Society, 18(1), 158-169. Edelson, D. C., Shavelson, R. J. ve Wertheim, J. A. (Ed.). (2013). A road map for 21st century Geography education: Assessment. Washington, DC: National Geographic Society. 14 Mart 2016 tarihinde http://www.informalscienceevaluation.org/uploads/2/6/4/1/26418110/ngs_roadmapconcept_asses smentreport_06_1.pdf adresinden erişildi.
Fornell, C. ve Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
Graham, C. R. (2011). Theoretical considerations for understanding technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers & Education, 57, 1953-1960.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective
(7. bs.). Upper Sadder River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hong, J. E. ve Stonier, F. (2015). GIS in-service teacher training based on TPACK. Journal of Geography, (3), 108-117.
Hou, J. T., Wen, Z. L. ve Cheng, Z. J. (2004). Structural Equation Model and its application. Pekin: Science Education Press.
Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology- integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 277-302.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling (3. bs.). New York: The Guilford Press.
Koehler, M. J. ve Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131-152.
Koehler, M. J. ve Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge?. Contemporary
Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S. ve Tsai, C. C. (2010). Examining the technological pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore pre-service teachers with a large-scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 563-573.
Lee, M. H. ve Tsai, C. C. (2010). Exploring teachers' perceived self-efficacy and technological pedagogical content knowledge with respect to educational use of the World Wide Web.
Instructional Science, 38(1), 1-21. Lin, T. C., Tsai, C. C., Chai, C. S. ve Lee, M. H. (2013). Identifying science teachers' perceptions of technological pedagogical and content Knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(3), 325-336.
Margerum-Leys, J. ve Marx, R. W. (2002). Teacher knowledge of educational technology: A case study of student teacher/mentor teacher pairs. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(4), 427-462.
Mishra, P. ve Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(5), 509-523.
Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J. ve Shin, T. S. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, (2), 4-14.
Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structure model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach.
Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(2), 173-180. Stratejik Eğitim Bilgileştirme Araştırma Tabanı (Merkez Çin). (2015). Eğitim Bilgileri Geliştirme Raporu
(2013). Pekin: People's Education Press.
Wu, M. L. (2013). Structural Equation Model - Advanced Practice of Amos. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press.
Xu, P., Liu, Y. H., Wang, Y. N. ve Zhang, H. (2013). The Status Quo and Enlightenment of Overseas