ÖZ YETERLİK VE GERİBİLDİRİM ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: FEN ALANLARI ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARI ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Bu çalışma öğretmen adaylarının öz yeterlik inançları ile geribildirim arasındaki ilişkiyi tespit etmeyi ve oluşabilecek davranış değişikliğini anlayabilmede öz yeterlik inançlarının geribildirim türü, sıklığı, ders deneyim saati gibi çeşitli değişkenlerle olan ilişkilerini belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmanın örneklemini, bir devlet üniversitesinin 2014-2015 ve 2015-2016 öğretim yılları Bahar dönemlerinde Matematik ve Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Bölümü’nde Fizik, Kimya ve Biyoloji Eğitimi Anabilim Dalları'nda öğrenim gören son sınıf öğretmen adayları (N=102) oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmada kullanılan veri toplama araçları kişisel bilgi formu,  Fen Alanları (Fizik, Kimya, Biyoloji) Öğretimi Öz yeterlik İnanç Ölçeği ve Geribildirim Ölçeği’dir. Verilerin analizinde ortalama, standart sapma, ANOVA, korelasyon analizleri kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları; öğretmen adaylarının fen alanları öğretimi öz yeterlikleri bakımından yüksek düzeyde öz yeterlik inancına sahip olduklarını ortaya koymaktadır. Geribildirim ölçeğinde ise mesleki gelişim boyutunda yüksek puanların ortaya çıkması geribildirimin öğretmen adaylarının mesleki yeterliliklerini ve performanslarını değerlendirmede önem taşıdığını göstermektedir.  Ayrıca, öğretmen adaylarının öz yeterlik puanları geribildirim türü, sıklığı ve ders deneyim saatlerindeki değişimlerde anlamlı fark göstermektedir.

___

  • Akkuzu, N. (2012). Kimya öğretmen adaylarının mesleki yeterlilik düzeylerinin belirlenmesi. Doktora Tezi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir.
  • Akkuzu, N. (2014). The role of different types of feedback in the reciprocal interaction of teaching performance and self-efficacy belief. Australian Journal of Teacher Education. 39(3), 36-66.
  • Akkuzu, N., & Uyulgan, M. A. (2014). Toward making the invisible visible using a scale: Prospective teachers' thoughts and affective reactions to feedback. Irish Educational Studies, 33(3), 287-305.
  • Azar, A. (2003). Okul deneyimi ve öğretmenlik uygulaması derslerine ilişkin görüşlerinin yansımaları. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 159.
  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freedman and Company.
  • Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology 5(4), 323–370.
  • Bezzina, C. (2006). Views from the trenches: Beginning teachers’ perceptions about their professional development. Journal of In-Service Education, 32(2), 411-30.
  • Boudourides, M. A. (1998, July). Constructivism and education: A shopper's guide. Paper presented at the International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics, Samos, Greece.
  • Brand, B. R., & Wilkins, J. L. M.(2007). Using self-efficacy as a construct for evaluating science and mathematics methods courses. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(2), 297-317.
  • Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
  • Brinko, K. T. (1993). The practice of giving feedback to improve teaching: What is effective? Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 574-593.
  • Bryan, L. A. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective teacher’s belief system about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 835-868.
  • Bulunuz, N., Bulunuz, M., Gürsoy, E., Göktalay, Ş. B., Özteke H. Ç., Uzun A., & Salihoğlu, U. (2012). İyi öğretmenlik uygulamaları "klinik danışmanlık modeli. TÜBİTAK 111K162 Nolu EVRANA Projesi, Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi, Bursa.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (8. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
  • Cervone, D., Artistico, D., & Berry, J. M. (2006). Self-efficacy and adult development. In C. Hoare (Ed.), Handbook of adult development and learning (pp. 169-195). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
  • Coladarci, T. (1992). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and commitment to teaching. Journal of Experimental Education, 60(4), 323-337.
  • Cole, A. L., & Knowles, J. G. (1993). Teacher development partnership research: A focus on methods and issues. American Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 473-495.
  • Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Dohrenwend, A. (2002). Serving up the feedback sandwich. Family Practice Management, 9(10), 43–49.
  • Ekşi, G. (2012). Implementing an observation and feedback form for more effective feedback in microteaching. Education and Science, 37(164), 267-282.
  • Elliot, E., Issacs, M., & Chugani, C. (2010). Promoting self-efficacy in early career teachers: A principal’s guide for differentiated mentoring and supervision. Florida Journal of Educational Administration & Policy, 4(1), 131–146.
  • Evers, W. J. G., Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2002). Burnout and self-efficacy: A study on teachers' beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in the Netherlands. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(2), 227-243.
  • Fettahlıoğlu, P., Matyar, F., & Ekici, G. (2015). Öğretmen adaylarının fen öğretimi öz-yeterlik inançları ile tutumlarının öğrenme stillerine göre analizi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 205, 125- 149.
  • Gilles, C., Cramer, M., & Hwang, S. (2001). Beginning teacher perceptions of concerns: A longitudinal look at teacher development. Action in Teacher Education, 23(3),92-98.
  • Goker, S. D. (2006). Impact of peer coaching on self-efficacy and instructional skills in TEFL teacher education. System, 34(2), 239–254.Gunning, A. M. (2010). Exploring the development of science self-efficacy in pre-service elementary school teachers participating in a science education methods course. PhD diss.,Columbia University.
  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
  • Howey, K. R. (2010). This is not your grandfather’s student teaching: Kenji’s clinically driven teacher education. Briefing Papers Commissioned for Blue Ribbon Panel Report. Washington, DC: NCATE.
  • Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi (15. baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Kazu, İ. Y., & Yenen, E. T. (2014). Öğretmen yetiştirmede yeni bir yaklaşım: Klinik uygulama. İlköğretim Online, 13(3), 796-805.
  • Kim, D. H., Wang, C., Ahn, H. S., & Bong, M. (2015). English language learners' self-efficacy profiles and relationship with self-regulated learning strategies. Learning and Individual Differences, 38, 136-142.
  • Kim, M. (2005). The effects of the assessor and assessee's roles on preservice teachers’metacognitive awareness, performance, and attitude in a technology-related design task. PhD diss., Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.
  • Kouritzin, S. G., & C. Vizard. (1999) . Feedback on feedback: Preservice ESL teachers respond to evaluation practices. TESL Canada Journal, 17(1), 16–39.
  • Kyriakides, L., Demetriou, D., & Charalambous, C. (2006). Generating criteria for evaluating teachers through teacher effectiveness research. Educational Research, 48(1), 1-20.
  • Levine, M. (2010). Developing principles for clinically based teacher education. Briefing Papers Commissioned for Blue Ribbon Panel Report. Washington, DC: NCATE.
  • Lockman, A. S. (2006). Changes in teacher efficacy and beliefs during a one-year preparation program. PhD. Diss., The Ohio State University.
  • Martínez Agudo, J. (2016). What type of feedback do student teachers expect from their school mentors during practicum experience? the case of spanish EFL student teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(5),36-51.
  • Maynard, T. (2000). Learning to teach or learning to manage mentors? Experiences of school-based teacher training. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 8(1), 17-30.
  • OYEGM (2017). Öğretmenlik mesleği genel yeterlilikleri. 15.12.2018 tarihinde http://oygm.meb.gov.tr/www/ogretmenlik-meslegi-genel-yeterlikleri/icerik/39 adresinden alınmıştır.
  • Özkılıç, R., Bilgin, A., & Kartal, H. (2008). Öğretmenlik uygulaması dersinin öğretmen adaylarının görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi. İlköğretim Online, 7(3), 726-737.
  • Özmen, H. (2008). Okul deneyimi-I ve okul deneyimi-II derslerine ilişkin öğretmen adaylarının görüşleri. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25, 25–37.
  • Paccapaniccia, D. (2002). Making the most of assessment feedback. Health Executive, 17(1), 60-61.
  • Pajares, F. (2002). Gender and perceived self-efficacy in self-regulated learning. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 116–125.
  • Raftery, S. (2001). The supervision experiences and needs of post-registration student nurses: an action research study. Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Dublin.
  • Sarıkaya, H. (2004). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının bilgi düzeyleri fen öğretimine yönelik tutum ve öz-yeterlik inançları. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ortadoğu Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Schunk, D. (2008). Attributions as motivators of self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp.245–266). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153- 189.
  • Şeker, H. (Ed.). (2012). Eğitimde program geliştirme kavramlar yaklaşımlar. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Tang, S. Y. F. (2006). Professional learning in initial teacher education: The construction of the teaching self in the professional artistry of teaching. In Mary B. Klein (Ed.), New teaching and teacher issues (pp. 51-72). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
  • Tosun, T. (2000). The beliefs of preservice elementary teachers toward science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 100(7), 374–379.
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248.
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 944- 956.
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., & McMaster, P. (2009). Sources of self-efficacy: Four professional development formats and their relationship to self-efficacy and implementation of a new teaching strategy. The Elementary School Journal, 110(2), 228-245.
  • Van Beuningen, C. G. (2011). The effectiveness of comprehensive corrective feedback in second language writing. Oisterwijk: Boxpress.
  • Williams, M., & Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Wright, T. (2010). Second language teacher education: Review of recent research on practice. Language Teaching, 43(3), 259 – 296.
  • Wubbels, T. (1992). Taking account of student teachers' preconceptions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(2), 137-149.
  • Zanting, A., Verloop, N., & Vermunt, J. D. (2001). Student teachers’ beliefs about mentoring and learning to teach during teaching practice. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 57-80.