Öğrenme Kuramlarının Çevrimiçi Öğretim Ortamlarında ve Materyallerinde Uygulanması: Bir Ölçütler Takımı Geliştirme Çalışması

Abstract

Bu çalışma, çevrimiçi öğretim ortamlarının ve materyallerinin öğrenme kuramları perspektifinden incelenmesini ya da oluşturulmasını olanaklı kılacak, üzerinde uzlaşılmış bir ölçütler takımı oluşturmak üzere gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bir öğretim tasarım sürecinin, planlanmasından uygulanıp geliştirilmesine kadar geçen tüm aşamalarında öğrenme kuramlarının rehberliğine gereksinim olduğu anlayışıyla gerçekleştirilen çalışmada; öncelikle davranışçı, bilişsel ve yapılandırmacı öğrenme kuramlarının öğrenmeye ilişkin açıklamaları incelenmiştir. Daha sonra, bu açıklamaların öğretim ortam ya da materyallerinde nasıl karşılık bulacağı, öğretimsel uygulamalar türünden belirlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Uzman görüşleri doğrultusunda gözden geçirilen bu ilk ifadeler, 5’li likert tipinde bir ölçek formunda düzenlenmiştir. Ölçek yeniden uzman görüşüne sunulmuş ve alınan görüşler doğrultusunda düzenlenmiştir. 70 maddeden oluşan yeni form kullanılarak; EBA(Eğitim Bilişim Ağı)’dan herkese açık 6 farklı öğretim materyali incelenmiştir. 3 değerlendirici tarafından gerçekleştirilen inceleme 4 araştırmacının da katılımıyla gözden geçirilmiş ve 10 madde ölçekten çıkarılmıştır. 60 maddelik ölçek üzerinden değerlendiriciler arası uyum düzeyleri hesaplanmıştır. Kabul edilebilir uyum düzeyleri belirlenen 60 maddelik ölçek, 26 kişilik bir uzman grubun görüşüne sunularak kapsam geçerlik indeksleri hesaplanmıştır. Ölçeğin alt boyutlarına göre kapsam geçerlik indeksleri; kurama uygunluk açısından davranışçılıkta 0.78 (p<.05), bilişsel anlayışta 0.87 (p<.05) ve yapılandırmacılıkta 0.85 (p<.05)’tir. Bu son inceleme ile 60 maddelik bir ölçütler takımına erişilmiştir.

Keywords

• öğrenme kuramı,çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamı,ölçek geliştirme

Application of Learning Theories in Online Instructional Environments and Materials: A Study for Developing a Set of Criteria

Abstract

The aim of this study was to develop a set of agreed criteria for the examination or formation of online instructional environments and materials from the viewpoint of learning theories. Based on the understanding that the guidance of learning theories is needed in all stages of an instructional design process from planning to implementation, this study first examined the behaviourist, cognitive, and constructivist learning theories about learning. Instructional practice examples were then examined to determine statements showing how these explanations reflect on the instructional environments or materials. The first statements revised in line with the expert opinions were turned into a 5-point Likert type scale. The opinions of the experts were received on the scale and the necessary revisions were made. Using the 70-item scale, six different open access instructional materials from the Educational Informatics Network (EBA) were examined. The examination was carried out by three reviewers and revised with the participation of four researchers. Ten items were excluded from the scale. The levels of conformity among the reviewers were calculated for the 60-item scale. Content validity indices were calculated based on the opinions of 26 experts for the final scale, for which the acceptable levels of conformity were determined. Content validity indices of the sub-dimensions of the scale were 0.78 (p<.05), 0.87 (p<.05), and 0.85 (p<.05) in behaviourism, cognitive understanding, and constructivism, respectively, in terms of compliance with theory. At the end of the final review, a set of criteria consisting of 60 items was developed.

Keywords

• Learning theory,online learning environment,scale develoment

References

1. Akgün, M., & Akgün, İ.H. (2011). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de bilgisayar destekli öğretimin tarihi gelişimi. 2nd International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 27-29 Aralık 2011, Antalya-Türkiye.
2. Aliakbari, F., Parvin, N., Heidari, M., & Haghani, F. (2015). Learning theories application in nursing education. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 4(2), 3-11. doi: 10.4103/2277-9531.151867
3. Alzaghoul, A. F. (2012). The implication of the learning theories on implementing e-learning courses. The Research Bulletin of Jordan ACM, 11(11), 27-30.
4. Aqda, M. F., Hamidi, F., & Ghorbandordinejad, F. (2011). The impact of constructivist and cognitive distance instructional design on the learner’s creativity. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 260-265. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2010.12.044
5. Aydın. C.H. (2000). Öğrenme ve öğretme kuramlarının eğitim iletişimine katkısı. Kurgu Dergisi, 17, 183-197.
6. Bay, E., Kaya, H. İ., & Gündoğdu, K. (2010). Demokratik yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamı ölçeği geliştirilmesi. E-Journal of New World Science Academy Educational Sciences, 5(2), 646-664.
7. Boghossian, P.(2006). Behaviorism, constructivism, and socratic pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(6), 713-722.
8. Bognar, B. (2016). Theoretical backgrounds of e-learning. Hrvatski časopis za odgoj i obrazovanje, 18(1), 225-256.

9. Burton, J. K., Moore, D. M., & Magliaro, S. G. (2004). Behaviorism and instructional technology. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.) Handbook of Research For Educational Communications and Technology, (2nd ed. pp. 3-36). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Cennamo, K. S., Abell, S.K., & Chung, M-L. (1996). A" Layers of Negotiation" Model for Designing Constructivist Learning Materials. Educational Technology, 36(4), 39-48.
11. Clemons, S. A. (2006). Constructivism pedagogy drives redevelopment of CAD course: a case study: Rather than feeding information to the student through direct instruction, the teacher is maintaining the role of facilitator in the learning process. The Technology Teacher, 65(5), 19-22.
12. Cognitive Approaches to Learning, (2008). Definition. http://www.sparkplug9.com/etec512/sparkplug9.com/etec512/2008/09/28/definition/index.html adresinden 08.05.2016 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
13. Cunningham, D., & Duffy, T. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology, 170-198.
14. Deubel, P. (2003). An investigation of behaviorist and cognitive approaches to instructional multimedia design. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia, 12(1), 63-90.
15. Dobozy, E., & Dalziel, J. (2016). Transdisciplinary pedagogical templates and their potential for adaptive reuse. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8(1), 1-11. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/jime.402
16. Edgar, D. W. (2012). Learning Theories and Historical Events Affecting Instructional Design in Education. Sage Open, 2(4), 1-9.
17. Erdem, M. & Ekici, M. (2016). Yapılandırmacı Değerlendirme ve Çevrimiçi Öğrenme Ortamları. A. İşman, H. F., Odabaşı, B. Akkoyunlu (Ed.) Eğitim Teknolojileri Okumaları 2016. (32. Bölüm s: 575-592). TOJET-The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology.
18. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.
19. Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (2016). Learning theory and technology. In The Wiley Handbook of Learning Technology (Eds. N. Rushby & D.W. Surry)(p. 58-76). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
20. Gagne, R. M. (1965). The analysis of instructional objectives for the design of instruction. Teaching machines and programmed learning II: Data and directions, 21-65.
21. Ghani, N. A., Hamim, N., & Ishak, N. I. (2006). Applying mastery learning model in developing e-tuition science for primary school students. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology, 3(2), 43-49.
22. Hassan, O. A.(2011). Learning theories and assessment methodologies–an engineering educational perspective. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(4), 327-339.
23. Hean, S., Craddock, D., & O’Halloran, C. (2009). Learning theories and interprofessional education: A user’s guide. Learning in Health and Social Care, 8(4), 250-262. doi: 10.1111/j.1473-6861.2009.00227.x.
24. Hung, D. (2001). Theories of learning and computer-mediated instructional technologies. Educational Media International, 38(4), 281-287.
25. Johnson, G. M. (2014). The ecology of interactive learning environments: Situating traditional theory. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(3), 298-308. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2011.649768
26. Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology: Toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34-37.
27. Kanjug, I., & Chaijaroen, S. (2012). The design of web-based learning environments enhancing mental model construction. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3134-3140.
28. Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2005). Translating constructivism into instructional design: Potential and limitations. Educational Technology ve Society, 8(1), 17-27.
29. Kay, D., ve Kibble, J. (2016). Learning theories 101: Application to everyday teaching and scholarship. Advances in Physiology Education, 40, 17-25.
30. Khalil, M.K., & Elkhider, I.A. (2016). Applying learning theories and instructional design models for effective instruction. Advances in Psysiology Education, 40, 147-156. doi: 10.1152/advan.00138.2015.
31. Krause, K. L., Bochner, S., & Duchesne, S. (2003). Educational psychology for learning and teaching. Victoria: Thompson.
32. Lainema, T., & Makkonen, P. (2003). Applying constructivist approach to educational business games: Case REALGAME. Simulation ve gaming, 34(1), 131-149.
33. Lawshe, C.H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575.
34. McKenna, P., & Laycock, B. (2004). Constructivist or instructivist: Pedagogical concepts practically applied to a computer learning environment. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(3), 166-170.
35. Mechlova, E., & Malcik, M. (2012, November). ICT in changes of learning theories. 2012 IEEE 10th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies ve Applications (ICETA), 253-262.
36. Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional design ve learning theory. http://etad.usask.ca/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm adresinden 1 Mayıs 2017 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
37. Mishra, S.(2002). A design framework for online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 493-496.
38. Mödritscher, F. (2006). E-learning theories in practice: A comparison of three methods. Journal of Universal Science and Technology of Learning, 28, 3-18.Özbek, R. (2005). Eğitim programlarının bireyselleştirilmesinin sebepleri. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(11), 66-83.
39. Reed, C. S. (2012). Learning theories applied to teaching technology: constructivism versus behavioral theory for instructing multimedia software programs.
40. Dissertation of Doctoral of Philosophy. Capella University, Harold Abel School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Minneapolis.
41. Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing. Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, 2, 5-29.
42. Romero, V.L., Berger, D.E., Healy, M.R., & Aberson, C.L. (2000). Using cognitive learning yheory to design effective on-line statistics tutorials. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32(2), 246-249.
43. Schunk, D. H.(2014). Öğrenme teorileri: Eğitimsel bir bakışla (M. Şahin, Çev.). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
44. Seels, B., & Glasgow, Z. (1990). Exercises in instructional design. Columbus: Merrill Publishing Company..
45. Semerci, Ç.(2001). Oluşturmacılık kuramına göre ölçme ve değerlendirme. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 1(2), 429-440.
46. Sen, A. (2011). Examining the evolution of instructional technology from the perspective of its foundational literature. Doctoral Dissertation. Northern Illinois University, Department of Educational Technology, Research and Assesment. DeKalb, Illinois, U.S.
47. Skinner, B. F.(1986). Programmed instruction revisited. Phi Delta Kappan, 68(2), 10-103.
48. Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (1993). Instructional Design. New York: Macmillan.
49. Tamim, S. R., & Grant, M. M. (2016). Exploring Instructional Strategies and Learning Theoretical Foundations of eHealth and mHealth Education Interventions. Health promotion practice, 1524839916646715.
50. Tennyson, R.D. (2010). Historical reflection on learning theories and instructional design. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 1-16.
51. Tinker, R. (1997). Thinking About Science. (Elektronik Sürüm).Concord: The Concord Consortium Educational Technology Lab, M.A.
52. Vural, M. (2005). İlköğretim okulu ders programları ve öğretim kılavuzları (1-5. sınıflar). Erzurum: Yakutiye Yayıncılık.
53. Wong, B. S., & Kang, L. (2012). Mastery learning in the context of university education. The Journal of the NUS Teaching Academy, 2, 206-22.
54. Wu, W.-H.,Hsiao, H.-C., Wu, P.-L., Lin, C.-H., & Huang, S.-H. (2012). Investigating the learning-theory foundations of game-based learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28, 265-279.
55. Yaşar, Ş.(1989). Yabancı dil öğretiminde çağdaş bir eğitim teknolojisi yaklaşımı:Programlı öğretim. Eğitim ve Bilim, 13(74), 19-26.
56. Zhou, L. (2004). Influence of learning theories on research about computer technology applications in elementary classrooms. Doctoral Dissertation. Indiana University, The School of Graduate Studies and Research Professional Studies in Education, Pennsylvania, U.S.