BibTex RIS Cite

Fenomenografik Araştırma Yöntemi

Year 2012, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 77 - 102, 01.12.2012

Abstract

Fenomenografi, nitel bir araştırma yaklaşımı olarak 1970'lerin başında İsveç’in Göteborg Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi’nde görevli Ference Marton liderliğindeki bir grup araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilmiştir. Fenomenografi, insanların yaşadıkları evren içinde karşılaştıkları fenomenlerle ilgili olarak ne algıladıkları, ne anladıkları ve deneyimlerinin neler olduğu ile ilgilenen bir araştırma yöntemidir. Bu araştırma yöntemi, ülkemizde yapılan araştırmalarda sık kullanılan bir yöntem olmadığı gibi, araştırma kitaplarında da bu araştırma yöntemine detaylı yer verilmemektedir. Bu çalışmayla, fenomenografik araştırma yönteminin tanımına, amacına, özelliklerine, tarihsel gelişimine, nasıl yapıldığına, genellenebilirliğinin, geçerliliğinin ve güvenirliğinin nasıl sağlandığına ve bu yöntem kullanılarak yapılan çalışmalara değinilmiştir. Ayrıca bu yöntemin fenomenoloji gibi diğer araştırma yöntemleriyle benzer ve farklı yönleri ortaya koyulmuştur.

References

  • Akarsu, B. (1975). Felsefe terimleri sözlüğü. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  • Akerlind, S.G. (2002). Principles and practice in phenomenographic research. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Current Issues in Phenomenography. Canberra, Australia.
  • Asworth, P., & Lucas, U. (1998). What is ‘world’ of phenomenography? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 415-431.
  • Balcı, A. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
  • Booth, S. (1992). Learning to program: A phenomenographic perspective. (Göteborg studies in educational sciences 89). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
  • Boulton-Lewis, G. M., Smith, D. J. H., McCrindle, A. R., Burnett, P. C., & Campbell, K. J. (2001). Secondary teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning. Learning and Instruction, 11(1), 35-51.
  • Bradbeer, J., Healey, M., & Kneale, P. (2004). Undergraduate geographers’ understandings of geography, learning and teaching: A phenomenographic study. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 28(1), 17-34
  • Çepni, S. (2007). Araştırma ve proje çalışmalarına giriş. Trabzon: Celepler Matbaacılık.
  • Dahlin, B. (1999). Ways of coming to understand: Metacognitive awareness among first year university students. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 43(2), 191-208.
  • Dahlin, B. (2007). Enriching the theoretical horizons of phenomenography, variation theory and learning studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51(4), 327-346.
  • Didiş, N., Özcan, Ö, & Abak, M. (2008). Öğrencilerin bakış açısıyla kuantum fiziği: Nitel çalışma. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34, 86-94.
  • Ebenezer, J., Chacko, S., Kaya, O. N., Koya, S. K., & Ebenezer, D. L. (2009). The effects of common knowledge construction model sequence of lessons on science achievement and relational conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(1), 25-46.
  • Entwistle, N. J., & Entwistle, A. C. (1991). Contrasting forms of understanding for degree examinations: The student experience and its implications. Higher Education, 22, 205-227.
  • Gullberg, A., Kellner, E., Attorps, I., Thoren, I, & Tarneberg, R. (2008). Prospective teachers’ initial conceptions about pupils’ understanding of science and mathematics. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), 257-278.
  • Hasselgren, B., & Beach, D. (1997). Phenomenography: A good for nothing brother of phenomenology? Outline of an analysis. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 191-202.
  • Koballa, T., Graber, W., Coleman, C., & Kemp, C. (2000). Prospective gymnasium teachers conceptions of chemistry learning and teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 209-224.
  • Kuş, E. (2007). Nicel-nitel araştırma teknikleri. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, California.
  • Marshall, D., & Linder, C. (2005). Students’ expectations of teaching in undergraduate physics. International Journal of Science Education, 27(10), 1255-1268.
  • Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understanding of reality. Journal of Tought, 21(3), 28-49.
  • Marton, F., Dall’alba, G., & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(3), 277-300.
  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.: Hillsdale, NJ.
  • Neuman, D. (1998). Phenomenography: Exploring the roots of numeracy. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9, 63-78.
  • Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2002). Students’ conceptions of statistics: A phenomenographic study. Journal of Statistics Education, 10(2), 1-18.
  • Richardson, J.T.E. (1999). The concept and methods of phenomenographic research. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 53-83.
  • Saljö, R. (1994). Minding action: Conceiving of the world versus participating in culturalpractices. Nordisk Pedagogik, 14(2), 71-80.
  • Saljö, R (1997). Talk as data and practice: A critical look at phenomenographic inquiry and the appeal to experience. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 73-190.
  • Saljö, R. (1988). Learning in educational settings: Methods of inquiry. In P. Ramsden (Ed.), Improving learning. New perspectives, (pp. 32-48), London: Kogan Page.
  • Sandberg, J. (1994). Human competence at work: An interpretative approach. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
  • Sandberg, J. (1996). Are phenomenographic results reliable? In G. Dall'Alba, & B. Hasselgren (Eds), Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Goteborg Studies in Educational Sciences 109). Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis: Göteborg, Sweden.
  • Sandberg, J. (1997). Are phenomenographic results reliable? Higher Education Research and Development, 16(2), 203-212.
  • Tözluyurt, E. (2008). Sayılar öğrenme alanıileilgili matematik tarihindenseçilen etkinliklerle yapılan dersler hakkında lise son sınıf öğrencilerinin görüşleri. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Trigwell, K. (2000). Phenomenography: Variation and discernment. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning. Proceedings of the 1999 7th International Symposium (pp. 75-85). Oxford, UK: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
  • Trigwell, K. (2006). Phenomenography: An approach to researh into geography education. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30(2), 367-372.
  • Türkeli Şandır, Y. (2006). Fonksiyon kavramı hakkında öğretmen adaylarınıngörüşleri üzerine bir fenomenografik çalışma. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • URL-1, ttp://www.najah.edu/sites/default/files/PhenomenographicMethodology.pdf, Phenomenographic research methodology, 23 Nisan 2012.
  • Vallee, C. J. (2007). A phenomenographical approach to understanding students conceptions of an online learning program. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Fielding Graduate University.
  • Webb, G. (1997). Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography. Higher Education, 33(2), 195-212.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Year 2012, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 77 - 102, 01.12.2012

Abstract

References

  • Akarsu, B. (1975). Felsefe terimleri sözlüğü. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
  • Akerlind, S.G. (2002). Principles and practice in phenomenographic research. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Current Issues in Phenomenography. Canberra, Australia.
  • Asworth, P., & Lucas, U. (1998). What is ‘world’ of phenomenography? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 415-431.
  • Balcı, A. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
  • Booth, S. (1992). Learning to program: A phenomenographic perspective. (Göteborg studies in educational sciences 89). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
  • Boulton-Lewis, G. M., Smith, D. J. H., McCrindle, A. R., Burnett, P. C., & Campbell, K. J. (2001). Secondary teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning. Learning and Instruction, 11(1), 35-51.
  • Bradbeer, J., Healey, M., & Kneale, P. (2004). Undergraduate geographers’ understandings of geography, learning and teaching: A phenomenographic study. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 28(1), 17-34
  • Çepni, S. (2007). Araştırma ve proje çalışmalarına giriş. Trabzon: Celepler Matbaacılık.
  • Dahlin, B. (1999). Ways of coming to understand: Metacognitive awareness among first year university students. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 43(2), 191-208.
  • Dahlin, B. (2007). Enriching the theoretical horizons of phenomenography, variation theory and learning studies. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51(4), 327-346.
  • Didiş, N., Özcan, Ö, & Abak, M. (2008). Öğrencilerin bakış açısıyla kuantum fiziği: Nitel çalışma. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34, 86-94.
  • Ebenezer, J., Chacko, S., Kaya, O. N., Koya, S. K., & Ebenezer, D. L. (2009). The effects of common knowledge construction model sequence of lessons on science achievement and relational conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(1), 25-46.
  • Entwistle, N. J., & Entwistle, A. C. (1991). Contrasting forms of understanding for degree examinations: The student experience and its implications. Higher Education, 22, 205-227.
  • Gullberg, A., Kellner, E., Attorps, I., Thoren, I, & Tarneberg, R. (2008). Prospective teachers’ initial conceptions about pupils’ understanding of science and mathematics. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(3), 257-278.
  • Hasselgren, B., & Beach, D. (1997). Phenomenography: A good for nothing brother of phenomenology? Outline of an analysis. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 191-202.
  • Koballa, T., Graber, W., Coleman, C., & Kemp, C. (2000). Prospective gymnasium teachers conceptions of chemistry learning and teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 209-224.
  • Kuş, E. (2007). Nicel-nitel araştırma teknikleri. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, California.
  • Marshall, D., & Linder, C. (2005). Students’ expectations of teaching in undergraduate physics. International Journal of Science Education, 27(10), 1255-1268.
  • Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understanding of reality. Journal of Tought, 21(3), 28-49.
  • Marton, F., Dall’alba, G., & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(3), 277-300.
  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.: Hillsdale, NJ.
  • Neuman, D. (1998). Phenomenography: Exploring the roots of numeracy. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9, 63-78.
  • Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2002). Students’ conceptions of statistics: A phenomenographic study. Journal of Statistics Education, 10(2), 1-18.
  • Richardson, J.T.E. (1999). The concept and methods of phenomenographic research. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 53-83.
  • Saljö, R. (1994). Minding action: Conceiving of the world versus participating in culturalpractices. Nordisk Pedagogik, 14(2), 71-80.
  • Saljö, R (1997). Talk as data and practice: A critical look at phenomenographic inquiry and the appeal to experience. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 73-190.
  • Saljö, R. (1988). Learning in educational settings: Methods of inquiry. In P. Ramsden (Ed.), Improving learning. New perspectives, (pp. 32-48), London: Kogan Page.
  • Sandberg, J. (1994). Human competence at work: An interpretative approach. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
  • Sandberg, J. (1996). Are phenomenographic results reliable? In G. Dall'Alba, & B. Hasselgren (Eds), Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Goteborg Studies in Educational Sciences 109). Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis: Göteborg, Sweden.
  • Sandberg, J. (1997). Are phenomenographic results reliable? Higher Education Research and Development, 16(2), 203-212.
  • Tözluyurt, E. (2008). Sayılar öğrenme alanıileilgili matematik tarihindenseçilen etkinliklerle yapılan dersler hakkında lise son sınıf öğrencilerinin görüşleri. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Trigwell, K. (2000). Phenomenography: Variation and discernment. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning. Proceedings of the 1999 7th International Symposium (pp. 75-85). Oxford, UK: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
  • Trigwell, K. (2006). Phenomenography: An approach to researh into geography education. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30(2), 367-372.
  • Türkeli Şandır, Y. (2006). Fonksiyon kavramı hakkında öğretmen adaylarınıngörüşleri üzerine bir fenomenografik çalışma. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • URL-1, ttp://www.najah.edu/sites/default/files/PhenomenographicMethodology.pdf, Phenomenographic research methodology, 23 Nisan 2012.
  • Vallee, C. J. (2007). A phenomenographical approach to understanding students conceptions of an online learning program. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Fielding Graduate University.
  • Webb, G. (1997). Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography. Higher Education, 33(2), 195-212.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
There are 39 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Cemalettin Yıldız This is me

Erdem Çekmez This is me

Suphi Önder Bütüner This is me

Publication Date December 1, 2012
Submission Date January 2, 2015
Published in Issue Year 2012 Volume: 6 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Yıldız, C., Çekmez, E., & Bütüner, S. Ö. (2012). Fenomenografik Araştırma Yöntemi. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(2), 77-102.