Ters-yüz Edilmiş Sınıf Modelinin Öğretmenlik Meslek Bilgisi Dersinde Kullanılması: Tutum ve Öz-yeterlik İnançları Üzerindeki Etkileri

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Ters-yüz Edilmiş Sınıf Modeli’nin Öğretim İlke ve Yöntemleri dersine yönelik öğretmen adaylarının tutum ve öz-yeterlikleri üzerindeki etkisini incelemektir. Ayrıca öğretmen adaylarının modele ilişkin görüşlerinin alınması da amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada, ön test-son test kontrol gruplu yarı deneysel araştırma modeli kullanılmıştır. Çalışma grubu, Batı Karadeniz’de yer alan bir devlet üniversitesinde 78 öğretmen adayından oluşmaktadır. 14 haftalık uygulama aşaması Öğretim İlke ve Yöntemleri dersinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Deney grubunda Ters-yüz Edilmiş Sınıf Modeli, kontrol grubunda geleneksel öğretim yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, modelin öğretmen adaylarının derse yönelik tutum ve öz-yeterlik inançlarını olumlu yönde etkilediği saptanmıştır. Ayrıca öğretmen adayları modele ilişkin genel anlamda olumlu görüşlere sahipken özellikle eğitsel avantajlarına dikkat çekmişlerdir. Modele yönelik olumsuz görüşler ve uygulama süresince yaşanan sorunlar ise ağırlıklı olarak teknik meselelerle ilgilidir.

Keywords

• Ters-yüz edilmiş sınıf
• Öğretmen eğitimi
• Harmanlanmış öğrenme

The Use of Flipped Classroom Model in Teaching Profession Knowledge Course: Its Effects on Attitudes and Self-Efficacy Beliefs

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the Flipped Classroom Model on preservice teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs about Teaching Principles and Methods course. It was also aimed to consider the opinions of preservice teachers about the model. A quasi-experimental research model with pre-test and post-test control groups was used in the study. The study sample consisted of 78 preservice teachers at a state university in the Western Black Sea Region in Turkey. The Teaching Principles and Methods course was carried out in a 14-week implementation process. The Flipped Classroom model was applied in the experimental group while the traditional teaching methods were applied in the control group. According to the results, it was determined that the model positively affected the preservice teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs about Teaching Principles and Methods course. Besides having positive opinions about the model, the preservice teachers also pointed out the educational advantages of the model. The negative opinions about the model and the problems encountered during the implementation process were mostly related to the technical matters.

Keywords

• Flipped classroom
• Teacher education
• Blended learning

References

1. Admiraal, W., Vugt, F. V., Kranenburg, F., Koster, B., Smit, B., Weijers, S., & Lockhorst, D. (2017). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology into K-12 instruction: Evaluation of a technology-infused approach. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26, 105-120.
2. Akçay, N. O., Akçay, A., & Kurt, M. (2016). Ortaokul öğretmenlerinin öğretim yöntem ve tekniklerine yönelik görüş ve yeterliklerinin incelenmesi [Investigation of the secondary school teachers’ view and competency to teaching methods and techniques]. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(1), 333-342.
3. Andujar, A., Salaberri-Ramiro, M. S., & Martínez, M. S. C. (2020). Integrating Flipped Foreign Language Learning through Mobile Devices: Technology Acceptance and Flipped Learning Experience. Sustainability, 12(3), 1110. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031110
4. Aykaç, N. (2011). Hayat bilgisi dersi öğretim programında kullanılan yöntem ve tekniklerin öğretmen görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi (Sinop ili örneği) [Evaluation of the methods and techniques used in knowledge of life course teaching pro (Sinop case study) gram according to teacher opinions]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 19(1), 113-126.
5. Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.013
6. Aziz, Z., & Hossain, A. (2010). A comparison of cooperative learning and conventional teaching on students’ achievement in secondary mathematics. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 53-62.
7. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist,37(2), 122-47.
8. Başaran, S. (2019). Investigating university students' views on flipped classroom approach. Proceedings of INTED2019, 13th International Technology, Education and Development Conference, 8050-8059. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2019.1998

9. Beins, B. C., & McCarthy, M. A. (2012). Research Methods and Statistics. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
10. Bergmann J., &Sams A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
11. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: a survey of the research. In 120th ASEE National Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA (Paper ID 6219). Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education.
12. Brown, A. L. (2014). Implementing active learning in an online teacher education course. American Journal of Distance Education, 28(3), 170-182.
13. Buldu, M. (2014). Öğretmen yeterlik düzeyi değerlendirmesi ve mesleki gelişim eğitimleri planlanması üzerine bir öneri [A system level proposal on teacher competency assessment and teacher professional development]. Millî Eğitim, 204, 114-134.
14. Butt, A. (2014). Student views on the use of a flipped classroom approach: Evidence from Australia. Business Education & Accreditation, 6(1), 33-43.
15. Büyüköztürk, S. (2013). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Data analysis handbook for social sciences]. (18. Edition). Ankara: Pegem AkademiYayıncılık.
16. Can, E. (2019). Öğretmenlerin meslekî gelişimleri: Engeller ve öneriler [Professional development of teachers: obstacles and suggestions]. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi [Journal of Qualitative Research in Education], 7(4), 1618-1650. https://doi.org/10.14689/Issn.2148-2624.1.7c.4s.14m
17. Chan, S. C. H., Wan, C. L. J., & Ko, S. (2019). Interactivity, active collaborative learning, and learning performance: The moderating role of perceived fun by using personal response systems. The International Journal of Management Education, 17(1), 94-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2018.12.004
18. Cheng, L., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Antonenko, P. (2018). Effects of the flipped classroom instructional strategy on students’ learning outcomes: a meta-analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 4, 793-824. doi:10.1007/s11423-018-9633-7
19. Cheng, Y., & Weng, C. (2017). Factors influence the digital media teaching of primary school teachers in a flipped class: A Taiwan case study. South African Journal of Education, 37(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v37n1a1293.
20. Chuang, H., Weng, C., & Chen, C. (2018). Which students benefit most from a flipped classroom approach to language learning?. Br J Educ Technol, 49, 56-68. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12530
21. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Palo, Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
22. Demir, S., & Özden, S. (2013). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğretimsel stratejilere yöntemlere ve tekniklere ilişkin görüşleri: hayat bilgisi dersine yönelik tanılayıcı bir çalışma [Primary school teachers’ opinions of instructıonal strategies, methods and techniques: a descriptıve study for scince of life class]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi,14, 59-75.
23. Dunn, T. J., & Kennedy, M. (2019). Technology enhanced learning in higher education; motivations, engagement and academic achievement. Computers & Education, 137, 104-113.
24. Effield, J. (2013). Looking at the impact of the flipped classroom model of instruction on undergraduate multimedia students at CSUN. TechTrends, 57(6), 14-27.
25. Elmaadaway, M. A. N. (2018). The effects of aflipped classroom approach on class engagement and skill performance in a blackboard course. British Journal ofEducational Technology, 49(3), 479–491
26. Fook, C. Y., Dalim, S. F., Narasuman, S., Sidhu, G. K., Fong, L. L., & Keang, K. M. (2015). Relationship between active learning and self-efficacy among students in higher education. International Academic Research Journal of Social Science, 1 (2), 139-149.
27. Fulton, K. (2012). 10 reasons to flip. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 20-24.
28. Greene, C. M. (2016). Exploring the flipped classroom: Possibilities and limitations. Unpublished Master Dissertation. Lisbon University, Institute of Education, Portugal.
29. Goedhart, N. S., Blignaut-van Westrhenen, N., Moser, C., & Zweekhorst, M. B. M. (2019). The flipped classroom: supporting a diverse group of students in their learning. Learning Environments Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-019-09281-2
30. Gür Erdoğan. D. (2011). Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri dersi tutum ölçeği’nin geliştirilmesi [Development of teaching principles and methods course attitude scale]. Uluslarası Eğitim Teknolojileri Konferansı Bildiri Kitabı (ss.1858-1862). İstanbul Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
31. Güven, B. (2008). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin öğrenme stilleri, tutumları ve akademik başarıları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [An investigation of the relationships among the learning styles of the primary school students, their attitudes and their academic success]. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 12(1), 35- 54.
32. Güven, E. (2011). Kaynaştırma uygulamasının yapıldığı sınıflarda işbirlikli öğrenmenin müzik öğretimi üzerindeki etkileri [The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Music Teaching in the Classrooms where Inclusive Practice is Performed]. Unpublished Doctorate Dissertation, Gazi University, Ankara.
33. Ha, A. S., O’Reilly, J., Ng, J. Y. Y., & Zhang, J. H. (2019). Evaluating the flipped classroom approach in Asian higher education: Perspectives from students and teachers. Cogent Education, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2019.1638147
34. Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 62-66.
35. İnceoğlu, M. (2004). Tutum, algı, iletişim [Attitude, perception, communication]. Ankara: Kesit Tanıtım Ltd. Şti.
36. Kara, A. (2010). Öğrenmeye ilişkin tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi [The development of the scale of attitudes toward learning]. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(32), 49-62.
37. Kardaş, M. N., & Öztürk, Y. (2015). Aktif öğrenme tekniklerinin Türkçe öğretiminde başarı, tutum ve uygulamalara yönelik öğrenci görüşleriyle ilişkisi: Bir meta-analiz çalışması [Relationship between active learning techniques and students' views on success, attitude and practices in Turkish teaching: a meta-analysis study]. International Journal of Languages' Education and Teaching UDES Özel Sayısı, 1682-1692.
38. Kardaş, M. N., & Uca, N. (2016). Aktif öğrenme yönteminin kullanildiği çalışmaların öğrenci başarısı, tutumu ve görüşleri açısından incelenmesi: Bir meta-analiz çalışması [The relationship between active learning method and theviews of students on achievement; attitudeand applications: astudy of meta-analysis]. Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(7), 118-130.
39. Kavas, A. B., & Bugay, A. (2009). Öğretmen adaylarının hizmet öncesi eğitimlerinde gördükleri eksiklikler ve çözüm önerileri [Perceptions of Prospective Teachers about Deficiencies of Pre-ServiceTeacher Education and Suggestions]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1 (25), 13-21.
40. Kaya, A., & Büyükkasap, E. (2005). Fizik öğretmenliği programi öğrencilerinin profilleri, öğretmenlik mesleğine yönelik tutum ve endişeleri: Erzurum Örneği [Hysisc student teachers’ profiles, attitudes and anxiety toward teaching profession: case for Erzurum]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi,13(2), 367-380.
41. Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009
42. Kumral, O., & Saracaloğlu S. (2011). Eğitsel eleştiri modeli ile sınıf öğretmenliği meslek bilgisi dersleri programının değerlendirilmesi [Teaching profession courses evaluation with educational criticism: a case study]. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(1), 106-118.
43. Kuzu, S., & Demir, S. (2015). Öğretmen adayları için öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri dersi öz yeterlilik ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi [Developing “teaching principles and methods cors self-efficacy scale” for pre-service teachers]. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32), 401-415.
44. Küçükahmet, L. (2003). Bir meslek olarak öğretmenlik [Teaching as a profession]. L. Küçükahmet, Ş.Ö. Külahoğlu, T. Çalık, G. Topses, A. F. Öksüzoğlu, & A. Korkmaz (Eds.), Öğretmenlik mesleğine giriş [Introduction to teaching profession] (ss.1–25) Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
45. Küçükahmet, L. (2008). Öğretimde planlama ve değerlendirme [Planning and evaluation in instruction]. (17. Edition). Ankara: Nobel yayın dağıtım.
46. LaFee, S. (2013). Flipped learning. Education Digest, 79(3), 13-18.
47. Lalima, & Dangwal, K. L. (2017). Blended learning: an innovative approach. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5, 129-136. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050116.
48. Milman, N. (2012). The flipped classroom strategy: What is it and how can it be used? Distance Learning, 9(3), 85-87.
49. Mitroka, J. G., Harrington, C., & DellaVecchia, M. J. (2020). A multiyear comparison of flipped- vs. lecture-based teaching on student success in a pharmaceutical science class. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 12 (1), 84-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.10.014
50. Murillo-Zamorano, L. R., López Sánchez, J. Á., & Godoy-Caballero, A. L. (2019). How the flipped classroom affects knowledge, skills, and engagement in higher education: Effects on students’ satisfaction. Computers & Education, 103608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103608
51. Niemi, H., & Nevgi, A. (2014). Research studies and active learning promoting professional competences in Finnish teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 43, 131-142.
52. Priporas, C., Stylos, N., & Fotiadis, A. K. (2017). Generation Z consumers' expectations of interactions in smart retailing: A future agenda. Computers in Human Behavior,77, 374-381
53. Rawas, H., Bano, N., & Alaidarous, S. (2019). Comparing the effects of individual versus group face-to-face class activities in flipped classroom onstudent's test performances. Health Professions Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2019.06.002
54. Richardson, J. T. (2011). Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 135-147.
55. Rivera, E. (2015). Using the flipped classroom model in your library instruction course. The Reference Librarian, 56(1), 34-41.
56. Sams, A., & Bergmann, J. (2013). Flip your students' learning. Educational Leadership, 70(6), 16-20.
57. Sandholtz, J. H. & Ringstaff, C. (2013). Assessing the impact of teacher professional development on science instruction in the early elementary grades in rural US schools. Professional Development in Education, 39(5), 678-697.
58. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231.
59. Sharp, C. (2002). Study support and the development of self-regulated learner. Educational Research, 44(1), 29-42.
60. Soylu Y. (2009). Sınıf öğretmen adaylarının matematik derslerinde öğretim yöntem ve teknikleri kullanabilme konusundaki yeterlilikleri üzerine bir çalışma [A study on primary school teacher candidates’ ability of using teaching methods and techniques in mathematics courses]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 1-16.
61. Şallı-Çopur, D. (2008). Teacher effectiveness in initial years of service: a case study on the graduates of METU Foreign Language Education Program. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
62. Şen, A. İ., & Özgün-Koca, S. A. (2005). Orta öğretim öğrencilerinin matematik ve fen derslerine yönelik olan olumlu tutumları ve nedenleri [Causes of negative attitudes of secondary school students towards mathematics and science classes]. Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 18, 186-201.
63. Taşkın, Ç. Ş., & Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2010). Meslek bilgisi derslerinin öğretmen adaylarının profesyonel gelişimindeki önemi [Importance of pedagogy courses on preservice teachers’ professional development]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28, 165-174.
64. Thai, N. T. T., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2017). The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: Looking for the best “blend” of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Computers & Education, 107, 113-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.01.003
65. Tomas, L., Evans, N., Doyle, T., & Skamp, K. (2019). Are first year students ready for a flipped classroom? A case for a flipped learning continuum. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0135-4
66. Tütüncü, N., & Aksu, M. (2018). A systematic review of flipped classroom studies in Turkish education. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 4(2), 207-229. https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.405647
67. Van Alten, D. C. D., Phielix, C., Janssen, J., & Kester, L. (2019). Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 28(2019), 100281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.003
68. Varış, F. (1996). Eğitimde program geliştirme: teori ve teknikler [Program development in education: theory and techniques]. (6th edition). Ankara: Alkım Yayınları.
69. Wilson, J. A., Waghel, R. C., & Dinkins, M. M. (2019). Flipped classroom versus a didactic method with active learning in a modified team-based learning self-care pharmacotherapy course. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 11(12), 1287-1295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2019.09.017
70. Yazlık, D. Ö., & Erdoğan, A. (2016). İşbirlikli öğrenme ile birlikte kullanılan problem çözme stratejilerinin öğrenci başarısı üzerine etkisi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD) ,17, 1-16.
71. Yeşilyurt, E. (2013). Öğretmenlerin öğretim yöntemlerini kullanma amaçları ve karşılaştıkları sorunlar [Teachers' aim in using teaching methods and problems they encounter]. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(1), 163-188. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. (8. Edition). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
72. Yıldırım E. G., Köklükaya, A., & Aydoğdu, M. (2016). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının öğretim yöntem-teknik tercihleri ve bu tercihlerinin nedenleri [Teaching methods-technical preferences of science teacher candidates and the reasons for these preferences]. e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 15-25.
73. HEI (Higher Education Institution). (2007). Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Eğitim Fakülteleri [Teacher Training and Education Faculties] (1982–2007). Ankara: Yükseköğretim Kurulu.
74. Yünkül, E. (2014). Çoklu ortam tasarım ilkelerine göre hazırlanan öğretim yazılımının başarı ve tutuma etkisi [The effect of instructional software prepared according to multimedia design principles on success and attitude]. Unpublished Doctorate Dissertation, Balıkesir University, Balıkesir.
75. Yüksel, S. (2011). Türk üniversitelerinde eğitim fakülteleri ve öğretmen yetiştirme [Education faculties and teacher training at Turkish universities]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
76. Zainuddin, Z. (2018). Students’ learning performance and perceived motivation in gamified flipped-class instruction. Computers & Education, 126, 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.003
77. Zainuddin, Z., & Halili, S. H. (2016). Flipped classroom research and trends from different fields of study. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3), 313-340. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2274.
78. Zheng, M., Chu, C.-C., Wu, Y., & Gou, W. (2018). The Mapping of On-Line Learning to Flipped Classroom: Small Private Online Course. Sustainability, 10(3), 748. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030748
79. Zimmerman, B. J., & Cleary, T. J. (2006). Adolescents’ Development of Personal Agency. In F. Pajares, & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and Education (Vol. 5): Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents (pp. 45-69). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
80. Zhu, L., Lian, Z., & Engström, M. (2019). Use of a flipped classroom in ophthalmology courses for nursing, dental and medical students: A quasi-experimental study using a mixed-methods approach. Nurse Education Today, 104262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2019.104262