Yaşam Temelli Senaryolarla Desteklenmiş Tam Öğrenme Modelinin Ortaokul Matematik Dersi Öğrencilerinin Öğrenme Ürünleri Üzerine Etkisi
Year 2018,
Issue: 46, 154 - 175, 28.12.2018
Hünkar Korkmaz
,
Ayşegül Kocayusuf
Abstract
Bu
araştırmanın amacı; ortaokul matematik dersinde yaşam temelli senaryolarla
desteklenmiş tam öğrenme modelinin öğrenci başarısı ve tutumları üzerindeki
etkisini araştırmaktır. Araştırmanın yöntemi eşleştirilmemiş öntest-sontest
kontrol gruplu deneysel desendir. Çalışma grubu üst düzey sosyo-ekonomik
düzeyde yer alan özel bir ortaokulun altıncı sınıfında öğrenim gören toplam 84
öğrenciden oluşmaktadır. Veriler, Akademik Başarı Testi ve Matematik Tutum
Ölçeği kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda yaşam temelli senaryolarla
desteklenmiş tam öğrenme modelinin uygulandığı deney grubunda öğrenim gören
öğrenciler ile ders kitabında yer alan etkinliklere dayalı öğrenim gören
öğrencilerin sürecin başında akademik başarı testi ve tutum testi puanlarının
aritmetik ortalamaları arasında anlamlı bir fark gözlenmezken deneysel işlem
sonrasında akademik başarı testi açısından bu fark deney grubu lehine
anlamlıdır. Bu çalışmanın sonuçlarının matematik eğitimcilerine, program
geliştirme uzmanlarına, politika
yapıcılara katkı getirmesi beklenmektedir.
References
- Acar, B., ve Yaman, M. (2011). The effects of context-based learning on students‟ levels of knowledge and interest. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 40, 1-10.Alparslan, C., Tekkaya, C., & Geban, Ö. (2003). Using the conceptual change instruction to improve learning. Journal of Biological Education, 37(3), 133-137.Anderson, Douglas R. (1986). “The evolution of Peirce’s concept of abduction”. Transactions of the C.S.Peirce Society 26: 465-497.Amir, R., & Tamir, P. (1994). In-depth analysis of misconceptions as a basis for developing research-based remedial instruction: the Case of Photosynthesis. The American Biology Teacher, 56(2), 94–100.Arlin, M. & Webster, J. (1983). Time cost of mastery learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75 (2), 187-195. Aydın, E. (1995). “The Effects of Mastery Learning Method of Instruction and learning Environment Organization on Mathematics Achievement Levels and Mathematics Attiude Scores of Second Year Junior High School Students in a Private High School”, (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Boğaziçi Üniversitesi. İstanbul.Bennet, J., Hogarth, S. & Lubben, F. (2005). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and science-technology-society (STS) approaches to the teaching of secondary science. Department of Educational Studies: Research Paper 2005/02, the Department of Educational Studies University of York.Block, J. H., (1971), Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Block, J. H., & Burns, R. B. (1976). 1: Mastery learning. Review of Research in Education, 4(1), 3-49Bloom, Benjamin (1998). İnsan Nitelikleri ve Okulda Öğrenme. (Çev. Durmuş Ali Özçelik, İstanbul: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.Braynt, D.N.; Fayne, H.K., & Gettinger, M., (1982), Applying the mastery learning model to sight word instruction for disabled readers. Journal of Experimental Education, 50 (3), 116-121.Brooks, J.G. & Brooks, M.G. (1993). In search of understanding: the case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Burrows, C.; Okey, J.R., (1979). The effects of a mastery learning strategy on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16 (1), 33-37.Clark, C. R., Guskey T.R., & Benniga, J.S., (1983). The effectiveness of mastery learning strategies in undergraduate education courses. Journal of Educational Research, 76 (4), 210-214.Çetin, A. (2014). Bağlam temelli öğrenme ile lise fizik derslerinde kullanılabilecek günlük hayattan konular. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4 (1), 45-62.Duatepe A. Çilesiz Ş. (1999). Matematik tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16 (17); 45-52. Gilbert, J. K. Osborne, R. J., & Fensham, P. J. (1982). Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623-633.Greenwood, J. (1984). Soundoff: my anxieties about math anxiety. The Mathematics Teacher, 77, 662-63.Griffiths, A. K., & Preston, A. K. (1992). Grade-12 students’ misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 611-628. doi:10.1002/tea.3660290609Gutwill-Wise, J. P. (2001). The impact of active and context-based learning in introductory chemistry courses: An early evaluation of the modular approach. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 684–690.Haidar, A. H., & Abraham, M. R. (1991). Comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 919-938.Heberlein, T. A. (2012). Navigating Environmental Attitudes. Oxford University Press. Newyork.Heller, P. & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 637-644.Heller, P., Keith, R. & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 627-636.Holloway, J.H. (1999). Constructivist classrooms. Washington: University of Washington. Kırkıç, K.A. (2000). Tam Öğrenme Metodunun Kimya Öğrencilerinin Başarı ve Hatırlama Düzeylerine Etkisi. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kimya Öğretmenliği Ana Bilim Dalı, İstanbul.Kulik, J.A. & Kulik, C.C. (1989). Meta analysis in education. International Journal of Educational Research, 13 (2), 221-340.Kulik, J.A., Kulik, C.C., & Bangert-Drowns, R.L. (1990). Is there better evidence on mastery learning - a response. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 303-307Kulik, C. C. L., Kulik, J. A. & Drowns, R. L. B (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, Summer, 60(2), 265-299.Kutu, H., & Sözbilir, M. (2011). Yaşam temelli ARCS öğretim modeliyle 9. sınıf kimya dersi “Hayatımızda Kimya” ünitesinin öğretimi. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 29-62.Lye, H., Fry, M., & Hart, C. (2001). What does it mean to teach physics ‘in context’: A first case study. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 48(1), 16-22.Lynn S. Fuchs, Douglas Fuchs & Gerald Tindal (2015) Effects of Mastery Learning Procedures on Student Achievement, The Journal of Educational Research,79:5, 286-291, DOI: 10.1080/00220671.1986.10885693Mann M, & Treagust DF. 1998. A pencil and paper instrument to diagnose students’ conceptions of breathing, gas exchange and respiration. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 44 (2), 55–59Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2005). Ortaöğretim Matematik (9-12.sınıflar) Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara.Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2015). Ortaokul Matematik (5-8.sınıflar) Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara.Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2017). Ortaokul Matematik (5-8.sınıflar) Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara.Marlowe, B. & Page, M. (2005). Creating and sustaining the constructivist classroom. (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press Inc.Mevarech, Z. R., (1985). The effects of cooperative mastery learning strategies on mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 78 (6), 372-377.Murphy, P., Lunn, S., & Jones, H. (2006). The impact of authentic learning on students’ engagement with physics. The Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 229-246.National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2007). Mathematics teaching today: Improving practice, improving student learning. Reston, VA: AuthorNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Nwabueze, B. (1984). The effects of mastery learning and improved teaching on mathematics achievement for seventh grade Turkish students at a private secondary school. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, İstanbul.Özay, E., & Öztaş, H. (2003). Secondary students’ interpretations of photosyn and plant nutrition. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 68-70.Palmer, D. (1997). The effect of context on students’ reasoning about forces. International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 681-696.Park, J. And Lee, L. (2004). Analysing cognitive or non-cognitive factors involved in the process of physics problem-solving in an everyday context. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1577-1595.Ramsden, J. (1997). How does a context-based approach influence understanding of key chemical ideas at 16+? International Journal of Science Education, 19, 697-710.Sever, S., (1993). Türkçe öğretiminde uygulanan tam öğrenme kuram ve ilkelerinin, öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama ve yazılı anlatım becerilerindeki erişiye etkisi. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Ana Bilim Dalı, Ankara.Song, J. And Black, P. (1991). The effects of task contexts on pupils’ performance on science process skills. International Journal of Science Education, 13(1), 49-58.Sönmez, İsmail (1998). Birleştirilmiş ve normal sınıflı köy ilkokullarında tam öğrenme uygulamasının öğrenme ürünlerine etkisi. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi) Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. AnkaraŞen, T. (1996). Çocukların matematiği nasıl öğrendiğini anlama. Çağdaş Eğitim, Sayı 224, 38-40.Vacc, N. N. (1993). Implementing the professional standards for teaching mathematics: questioning in the mathematics classroom. Arithmetic Teacher, 41(2), 88-91 Whitelegg, E. (1996). The Supported Learning in Physics Project. Physics Education, 31(5), 291-296.Wilson, B., & Ryder, M. (1996). Dynamic Learning Communities: An Alternative to Designed Instruction.” In M. Simonson (ed.), Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations (pp. 800–809). Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.Wilkinson, J. W. (1999). Teachers’ perceptions of the contextual approach to teaching VCE physics. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45(2), 58-65.Yaşar, Ş. (1998). Yapısalcı kuram ve öğrenme-öğretme süreci, Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8 (1-2), 68-75.Yıldıran, G., (1982), Öğrenme düzeyi ve ürünleri. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul.Zemira R. Mevarech (2015) The Effects of Cooperative Mastery Learning Strategies on Mathematics Achievement, The Journal of Educational Research, 78:6,372-377, DOI: 10.1080/00220671.1985.10885633Zoller, U., (1990). Students’ misunderstandings and alternative conceptions in college freshman chemistry (General and organic), Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1053–1065.
Year 2018,
Issue: 46, 154 - 175, 28.12.2018
Hünkar Korkmaz
,
Ayşegül Kocayusuf
References
- Acar, B., ve Yaman, M. (2011). The effects of context-based learning on students‟ levels of knowledge and interest. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 40, 1-10.Alparslan, C., Tekkaya, C., & Geban, Ö. (2003). Using the conceptual change instruction to improve learning. Journal of Biological Education, 37(3), 133-137.Anderson, Douglas R. (1986). “The evolution of Peirce’s concept of abduction”. Transactions of the C.S.Peirce Society 26: 465-497.Amir, R., & Tamir, P. (1994). In-depth analysis of misconceptions as a basis for developing research-based remedial instruction: the Case of Photosynthesis. The American Biology Teacher, 56(2), 94–100.Arlin, M. & Webster, J. (1983). Time cost of mastery learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75 (2), 187-195. Aydın, E. (1995). “The Effects of Mastery Learning Method of Instruction and learning Environment Organization on Mathematics Achievement Levels and Mathematics Attiude Scores of Second Year Junior High School Students in a Private High School”, (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Boğaziçi Üniversitesi. İstanbul.Bennet, J., Hogarth, S. & Lubben, F. (2005). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and science-technology-society (STS) approaches to the teaching of secondary science. Department of Educational Studies: Research Paper 2005/02, the Department of Educational Studies University of York.Block, J. H., (1971), Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Block, J. H., & Burns, R. B. (1976). 1: Mastery learning. Review of Research in Education, 4(1), 3-49Bloom, Benjamin (1998). İnsan Nitelikleri ve Okulda Öğrenme. (Çev. Durmuş Ali Özçelik, İstanbul: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.Braynt, D.N.; Fayne, H.K., & Gettinger, M., (1982), Applying the mastery learning model to sight word instruction for disabled readers. Journal of Experimental Education, 50 (3), 116-121.Brooks, J.G. & Brooks, M.G. (1993). In search of understanding: the case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Burrows, C.; Okey, J.R., (1979). The effects of a mastery learning strategy on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16 (1), 33-37.Clark, C. R., Guskey T.R., & Benniga, J.S., (1983). The effectiveness of mastery learning strategies in undergraduate education courses. Journal of Educational Research, 76 (4), 210-214.Çetin, A. (2014). Bağlam temelli öğrenme ile lise fizik derslerinde kullanılabilecek günlük hayattan konular. Eğitim Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4 (1), 45-62.Duatepe A. Çilesiz Ş. (1999). Matematik tutum ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16 (17); 45-52. Gilbert, J. K. Osborne, R. J., & Fensham, P. J. (1982). Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623-633.Greenwood, J. (1984). Soundoff: my anxieties about math anxiety. The Mathematics Teacher, 77, 662-63.Griffiths, A. K., & Preston, A. K. (1992). Grade-12 students’ misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 611-628. doi:10.1002/tea.3660290609Gutwill-Wise, J. P. (2001). The impact of active and context-based learning in introductory chemistry courses: An early evaluation of the modular approach. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 684–690.Haidar, A. H., & Abraham, M. R. (1991). Comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 919-938.Heberlein, T. A. (2012). Navigating Environmental Attitudes. Oxford University Press. Newyork.Heller, P. & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 637-644.Heller, P., Keith, R. & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 627-636.Holloway, J.H. (1999). Constructivist classrooms. Washington: University of Washington. Kırkıç, K.A. (2000). Tam Öğrenme Metodunun Kimya Öğrencilerinin Başarı ve Hatırlama Düzeylerine Etkisi. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kimya Öğretmenliği Ana Bilim Dalı, İstanbul.Kulik, J.A. & Kulik, C.C. (1989). Meta analysis in education. International Journal of Educational Research, 13 (2), 221-340.Kulik, J.A., Kulik, C.C., & Bangert-Drowns, R.L. (1990). Is there better evidence on mastery learning - a response. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 303-307Kulik, C. C. L., Kulik, J. A. & Drowns, R. L. B (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A metaanalysis. Review of Educational Research, Summer, 60(2), 265-299.Kutu, H., & Sözbilir, M. (2011). Yaşam temelli ARCS öğretim modeliyle 9. sınıf kimya dersi “Hayatımızda Kimya” ünitesinin öğretimi. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 29-62.Lye, H., Fry, M., & Hart, C. (2001). What does it mean to teach physics ‘in context’: A first case study. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 48(1), 16-22.Lynn S. Fuchs, Douglas Fuchs & Gerald Tindal (2015) Effects of Mastery Learning Procedures on Student Achievement, The Journal of Educational Research,79:5, 286-291, DOI: 10.1080/00220671.1986.10885693Mann M, & Treagust DF. 1998. A pencil and paper instrument to diagnose students’ conceptions of breathing, gas exchange and respiration. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 44 (2), 55–59Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2005). Ortaöğretim Matematik (9-12.sınıflar) Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara.Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2015). Ortaokul Matematik (5-8.sınıflar) Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara.Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2017). Ortaokul Matematik (5-8.sınıflar) Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara.Marlowe, B. & Page, M. (2005). Creating and sustaining the constructivist classroom. (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press Inc.Mevarech, Z. R., (1985). The effects of cooperative mastery learning strategies on mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 78 (6), 372-377.Murphy, P., Lunn, S., & Jones, H. (2006). The impact of authentic learning on students’ engagement with physics. The Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 229-246.National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2007). Mathematics teaching today: Improving practice, improving student learning. Reston, VA: AuthorNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Nwabueze, B. (1984). The effects of mastery learning and improved teaching on mathematics achievement for seventh grade Turkish students at a private secondary school. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, İstanbul.Özay, E., & Öztaş, H. (2003). Secondary students’ interpretations of photosyn and plant nutrition. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 68-70.Palmer, D. (1997). The effect of context on students’ reasoning about forces. International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 681-696.Park, J. And Lee, L. (2004). Analysing cognitive or non-cognitive factors involved in the process of physics problem-solving in an everyday context. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1577-1595.Ramsden, J. (1997). How does a context-based approach influence understanding of key chemical ideas at 16+? International Journal of Science Education, 19, 697-710.Sever, S., (1993). Türkçe öğretiminde uygulanan tam öğrenme kuram ve ilkelerinin, öğrencilerin okuduğunu anlama ve yazılı anlatım becerilerindeki erişiye etkisi. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Ana Bilim Dalı, Ankara.Song, J. And Black, P. (1991). The effects of task contexts on pupils’ performance on science process skills. International Journal of Science Education, 13(1), 49-58.Sönmez, İsmail (1998). Birleştirilmiş ve normal sınıflı köy ilkokullarında tam öğrenme uygulamasının öğrenme ürünlerine etkisi. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi) Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. AnkaraŞen, T. (1996). Çocukların matematiği nasıl öğrendiğini anlama. Çağdaş Eğitim, Sayı 224, 38-40.Vacc, N. N. (1993). Implementing the professional standards for teaching mathematics: questioning in the mathematics classroom. Arithmetic Teacher, 41(2), 88-91 Whitelegg, E. (1996). The Supported Learning in Physics Project. Physics Education, 31(5), 291-296.Wilson, B., & Ryder, M. (1996). Dynamic Learning Communities: An Alternative to Designed Instruction.” In M. Simonson (ed.), Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations (pp. 800–809). Washington, D.C.: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.Wilkinson, J. W. (1999). Teachers’ perceptions of the contextual approach to teaching VCE physics. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45(2), 58-65.Yaşar, Ş. (1998). Yapısalcı kuram ve öğrenme-öğretme süreci, Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8 (1-2), 68-75.Yıldıran, G., (1982), Öğrenme düzeyi ve ürünleri. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul.Zemira R. Mevarech (2015) The Effects of Cooperative Mastery Learning Strategies on Mathematics Achievement, The Journal of Educational Research, 78:6,372-377, DOI: 10.1080/00220671.1985.10885633Zoller, U., (1990). Students’ misunderstandings and alternative conceptions in college freshman chemistry (General and organic), Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1053–1065.