Eğitim Felsefesi Eğilimleri ve Öğrenme Ortamı Algıları: Lisans Öğrencileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, çocuk gelişimi ve okul öncesi öğretmenliği bölümü lisans öğrencilerinin eğitim felsefesi eğilimleri ile öğrenme ortamı algıları arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Araştırma, ilişkisel tarama modeline dayanan nicel bir yöntem kullanmaktadır. Araştırmaya toplam 445 lisans öğrencisi katılmıştır. Veri analizinde betimleyici istatistikler (ortalama ve standart sapma), korelasyon analizi ve Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi (YEM) uygulanmıştır. Bulgulara göre, uygulamalı bilimler fakültesi öğrencileri (2,59), eğitim felsefesi olarak essentializme daha az eğilim gösterirken, eğitim fakültesi öğrencileri (2,67) bu felsefeyi daha fazla benimsemiştir. Öğrenciler arasında en yaygın olarak benimsenen felsefi yaklaşımın progresif felsefe (4,50; 4,52) olduğu, perennialist (3,68; 3,63) ve essentialist (2,59; 2,67) felsefelerin ise daha az tercih edildiği belirlenmiştir. Felsefe dersleri alan öğrencilerin öğrenme ortamı algılarının daha yüksek olduğu (x=3,65, sd=,78, t=2,897) ve bu algının eğitim felsefesi eğilimleri ile yakından ilişkili olduğu anlaşılmıştır. Essentialist eğiliminin öğrenme etkinlikleri (r: 0,25) ve değerlendirme (r: 0,28) üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi (p < 0,001) olduğu, bunun temel bilgi ve becerilere vurgu yapan yapılandırılmış öğrenme süreçlerine odaklanmasından kaynaklanabileceği düşünülmektedir. Perennialist eğilimin öğrenme etkinlikleri (r: 0,29) ve değerlendirme (r: 0,20) üzerindeki anlamlı etkisi (p < 0,001), evrensel değerlere dayanan klasik öğretim yöntemlerini benimseyen öğretmenlerin varlığına işaret edebilir. Rekonstrüktivist eğilimin öğrenme etkinlikleri ve değerlendirme üzerindeki (r: 0,19; p < 0,001) anlamlı etkisi, bu yaklaşımın eleştirel düşünmeyi ve toplumsal dönüşüme odaklanan öğrenme süreçlerini benimsediğini göstermektedir. Progresif eğilimin öğrenme etkinlikleri üzerindeki (r: 0,14; p < 0,001) etkisi, bu yaklaşımın öğrenci merkezli, deneyimsel ve problem çözme temelli öğrenme süreçlerini benimsediğini ifade etmektedir.

Keywords

• Öğrenme Ortamı
• Perennializm
• İlerlemecilik
• Yeniden Yapılanmacılık
• Özcülük

Tendencies in Educational Philosophy and Perceptions of Learning Environment: A Research on Undergraduate Students

Abstract

The aim of this research is to examine the relationship between educational philosophy tendencies and learning environment perceptions of undergraduate students of child development and preschool education departments. This cross-sectional study applied a correlational research model to address the research questions at hand. A total of 445 undergraduate students participated in the current study. Descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation, correlation analysis, and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) have been utilized in data analysis. It has been observed that students in the faculty of applied sciences (2,59) show less inclination towards essentialist philosophy, whereas students in the faculty of education (2,67) are more likely to adopt it. Among students, progressive philosophy (4,50; 4,52) is found to be the most commonly adopted philosophical approach, while perennial (3,68; 3,63) and essentialist (2,59; 2,67) philosophies are less frequently adopted. Those students who take philosophy courses have higher perceptions of their learning environment (x=3,65, sd=,78, t=2,897), and it is understood that their perception is closely related to their educational philosophical tendencies. The significant effect (p < 0.001) of the Essentialist tendency on learning activities (r: 0.25) and evaluation (r: 0.28) may be due to this approach's focus on structured learning processes that emphasize fundamental knowledge and skills. The significant effect (p < 0.001) of the perennialist tendency on learning activities (r: 0.29) and evaluation (r: 0.20) may be an indication of teachers who adopt classical teaching methods and learning processes based on universal values. The significant effect (r: 0.19; p < 0.001) of the reconstructivist tendency on learning activities and evaluation shows that this approach embraces critical thinking and learning processes focused on social transformation. The progressive tendency (r: 0.14; p < 0.001) on learning activities indicates that this approach adopts student-centered, experiential, and problem-solving learning processes.

Keywords

• Essentialism
• Learning environment
• Perennialism
• Progressivism
• Reconstructionism

References

1. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275-314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
2. Aytaç, A., & Uyangör, N. (2020). Eğitim felsefesi eğilimleri ölçeği’nin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. A. Doğanay ve O. Kutlu (Editörler). Güncel Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları II içinde (s. 147-161). Ankara: Akademisyen Kitabevi.
3. Bagley, W. C. (1938). An Essentialist’s Platform for the Advancement of American Education. Educational Administration, 24(4) 241-256.
4. Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1999). Conceptualizing Critical Thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 285-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202799183133
5. Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27 (6), 12–25.
6. Barrett, P., Zhang, Y., Moffat, J., & Kobbacy, K. (2013). A holistic, multi-level analysis identifying the impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning. Building & Environment, 59, 678–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.09.016
7. Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
8. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen and J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

9. Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural Equation Modelling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
11. Counts, G. S. (1965). "Classics Revisited: Dare the Schools Build the Great Society?". The Phi Delta Kappan. 47 (1): 27–30.
12. Çüçen, B. (2018). Eğitim Felsefesi, Eğitim Teorileri, Eğitim Sosyolojisi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
13. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York, Macmillan.
14. Doğan, İ. (2011). Eğitim felsefesi ve düşünce tarihi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
15. Ekinci, N. (2008). Üniversite öğrencilerinin öğrenme yaklaşımlarının belirlenmesi ve öğretme-öğrenme süreci değişkenleri ile ilişkileri (Doktora tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
16. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update (10a ed.). Boston: Pearson.
17. Grossman, P. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge & teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
18. Gutek, G. (2010). Historical and philosophical foundations of education: A biographical introduction (5th ed.). Pearson.
19. Hargreaves, A. (2000). Mixed emotions: Teachers' perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(8), 811–826. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00028-7
20. Hirsch Jr., E. D. (1987). Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
21. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53-60.
22. Jarvis, P. (2006). The theory and practice of teaching (2nd ed.). Routledge.
23. Jonassen, D. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. Reigeluth, (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 215-239). University Park: Pennsylvania State University.
24. Kember, D. (1997) A Reconceptualisation of the Research into University Academics Conceptions of Teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7, 255-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00028-X
25. Kilpatrick, W. H. (1918). The Project Method: The Use of the Purposeful Act in the Education Process. Teachers College Record, 19, 319-335.
26. Kim, T., & Axelrod, S. (2005). Direct instruction: An educators' guide and a plea for action. The Behavior Analyst Today, 6(2), 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100061
27. Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships Matter: Linking Teacher Support to Student Engagement and Achievement. Journal of School Health, 74, 262-273.
28. Kliebard, H. M. (2004). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958. Routledge.
29. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
30. Komarraju M., Karau S. J., Schmeck R. R. (2009). Role of the big five personality traits in predicting college students' academic motivation and achievement. Learning and Individual Differences. 19(1), 47–52.
31. Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Pihlajamäki, H., & Kotkas, T. (2006). Self-, peer- and teacher-assessment of student essays. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787406061148
32. Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington DC: US Department of Education.
33. Noddings, N. (1986). Caring, a feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley : University of California Press. Parker, W. (2009). Social studies in elementary education. New York: Pearson
34. Trigwell, K., Ellis, R.A. & Han, F. (2012). Relations between students’ approaches to learning, experienced emotions and outcomes of learning, Studies in Higher Education, 37, 811-824.
35. Tsai, C. C., & Huang, C.-M. (2002). Exploring students’ cognitive structures in learning science: A review of relevant methods. Journal of Biological Education, 36, 163-169.
36. Ulubey, O., & Alpaslan, M. M. (2022). Examination of the relationship between educational philosophy, critical thinking, classroom engagement and academic achievement. PsychoEducational Research Reviews, 11(3), 462-479.
37. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38. Youngs, H. (2001). Teaching philosophy and critical thinking in schools in England. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(1), 115-132.