Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables

Year 2019, Volume: 19 Issue: 81, 79 - 98, 31.05.2019

Abstract

Purpose: Many teachers make assessment
and evaluation without taking into account the preferences of the students.
However, for a qualified assessment and evaluation activity, it is very
important to take into account the individual differences, individual needs,
and choice of exam types when determining the type of exam. This study seekeds
to determine examination-type preferences of 4th grade primary school students
and whether these differed depending on gender, and the location of the school,
and to reveal the reasons of students’ preferences related to examination
types.


Methods:
The
study group of this relational research model was composed of 208 4th grade
students. Convenience sampling was used to determine the study group. In this
study, “Examination-Type Preference Questionnaire” was used to determine the
examination types preferred by students while “Interview Form” was employed to
find out the causes of their examination-type preferences. To collect the data
of the study, quantitative and qualitative research methods were applied.


Findings:
It was determined that students
preferred multiple choice tests most whereas they preferred written
examinations least. It was also determined that there was no significant
relationship between examination types preferred and gender of students, and
location of the school.






Implications for
Research and Practice: Studies that will make use of other
variables should be carried out related to examination-type preferences. In
addition, a similar study on a larger sample can be used to determine
alternative assessment and assessment competencies of classroom teachers.
 

References

  • Acar, T. (2018). The impact of scoring method in written examinations on test and item statistics. Elementary Education Online, 17(2), 500-509.
  • Akpinar, M., & Canturk, A. (2018). Pre-service social studies teachers’ views on choice of exam type and reasons and method of preparation for exams about learning. Amasya Education Journal, 7(2), 413-458.
  • Anil, D., & Acar, M. (2008). Elementary school theachers’ views on issues they experience Through measurement and evaluation processes. Yuzuncu Yil University Journal of Education, 5(2),44-61.
  • Atilgan, H. (2017). Evaluation and grading. H. Atilgan (Ed.), Measurement and evaluation in education (pp.349-395). Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.
  • Bal, A. P. (2009). The evaluation of measurement and evaluation approaches used in fifth grade mathematics instruction in terms of students and teachers’ opinions. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Çukurova University, Adana.
  • Bal, A. P. (2012). Assessment preferences of pre-service teachers about mathematics course. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 10(3), 459-479.
  • Baltaci, A. (2018). A conceptual review of sampling methods and sample size problems in qualitative research. Journal of Bitlis Eren University Institute of Social Sciences, 7(1), 231-274.
  • Bayrak, R. (2007). The influence of assessment method on students' learning approaches. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon.
  • Birenbaum, M., & Feldman, R. A. (1998). Relationships between learning patterns and attitudes towards two assessment formats. Educational Research, 40(1), 90-98.
  • Birenbaum, M., & Rosenau, S. (2006). Assessment preferences, learning orientations, and learning strategies of pre-service and in-service teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 32(2), 213-225.
  • Birenbaum, M. (1997). Assessment preferences and their relationship to learning strategies and orientations. Higher Education, 33, 71-84.
  • Birgin, O. (2010). Teachers’ implementation level of assessment and evaluation approaches suggested by 4-5th grade mathematics curricula. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon.
  • Boyatsiz, R. E. (1998). Thematic analysis and code development: transforming qualitative information. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Brown, G. T. L., & Wang, Z. (2014). Illustrating assessment: How Hong Kong university students conceive of assessment’s purposes. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 1-20.
  • Cakan, M. (2004). Comparison of elementary and secondary school teachers in terms of their assessment practices and perceptions toward their qualification levels. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Science, 37(2), 99-114.
  • Candur, F. (2007). Determining teachers' views about science and technology education, used student evaluation and assessment methods and their importance in the educational processes. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Cresswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Cetin, M.O., & Cakan, M. (2010). Different approaches to science and technology course achievements measurements and student opinions about these approaches. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 1(2), 93-99.
  • Demir, M. K. (2012). The study of primary school teacher candidates’ opinions towards midterm and final examinations. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Journal of Faculty of Educational Science, 31(2), 193-21.
  • Dogan, C. D., & Kutlu, Ö. (2011). Factors related learning which effect preservice teachers’ preference on alternative assessment methods. Kastamonu Education Journal, 19(2), 459-474.
  • Eser, M. T. (2011). Examination of causes of some of the factors which affect students’ exam type preference. (Unpublished masters dissertation). Hacettepe University, Ankara.
  • Gelbal, S., & Kellecioğlu, H. (2007). Teachers’ proficiency perceptions of about the measurement and evaluation techniques and the problems they confront. H. U. Journal of Education, (33), 135-145.
  • Gharib, A., & Phillips, W. (2013). Test anxiety, student preferences and performance on different exam types in introductory psychology. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 3(1), 1-6.
  • Gocer, A. (2018). Measurement and evaluation in Turkish education. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
  • Gok, B., & Sahin, A. E. (2009). The multiple uses of assessment methods in 4th and 5th grades and the competency levels of teachers. Education and Science, 34(153), 127-143.
  • Gray, P. S., Williamson, J. B., Karp, D. A., & Dalphin, J. R. (2007). The research imagination: An introduction to qualitative and quantitative methods. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Gultekin, S. (2011). The evaluation based on Item Response Theory of the psychometric characteristics in multiple choice, constructed response and mixed format tests. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Ankara University, Ankara.
  • Gundogdu, Y. B. (2012). Measurement tools religious culture and moral knowledge teachers preferred. Journal of Faculty of Theology Istanbul University, (27), 85-112.
  • Karasar, N. (2016). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayincilik.
  • Kaya, B. (2004). The measurement tools that are used by the social studies teachers of secondary level of primary education and the factors, which are effective on choosing these tools. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Kilic, Z. (2016). The relationship between students' examination type preferences and some variables. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Hacettepe University, Ankara.
  • Kilic, Z., & Cetin, S. (2018). Investigation of students’ examination type preferences in terms of some variables. Elementary Education Online, 17(2), 1051-1065.
  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Metin, M., & Ozmen, H. (2010). Prospective teachers’ views about formative assessment. Journal of National Education, (187), 293-310.
  • Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Ministry of National Education. (2014). Ministry of National Education Regulation on Pre-School Education and Primary Education Institutions. Official Newspaper, 26 July 2014 date and 29072 number.
  • Ministry of National Education. (2015). Social studies curriculum (4, 5, 6, 7 grades). Ankara: Publications of Ministry of National Education.
  • Ministry of National Education. (2017). Social studies curriculum (Primary and secondary 4, 5, 6 and 7 grades). Ankara: Publications of Ministry of National Education.
  • Onder, O. (2008). Influence of exam preparation with multiple choice and essay type questions on mathematics achievement and test anxiety levels. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Marmara University, İstanbul.
  • Orhan, A. T. (2007). Exploring the alternative assessment strategies by considering primary school pre-service teachers and students dimensions. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Ozcelik, D. A. (2016). Measurement and evaluation. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik
  • Ozdemir, B., & Beyaztas, D. İ. (2018). Prospective teachers` opinions about the reasons behind adopted learning approaches according to exam types. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, (46), 363-385.
  • Ozenc, M., & Cakir, M. (2015). Exploring primary school teachers’ competencies of alternative assessment and evaluation. Elementary Education Online, 14(3), 914-933.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Pehlivan, E. B. (2011). Investigation of answering behaviours to the items of multiple-choice Turkish test. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Ankara University, Ankara.
  • Sahin, M. G., Ozturk, N. B., & Teker, G. T. (2015). Determining the pre-service teachers’ measurement tool preferences for evaluation of their achievement. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 6(1), 95-106.
  • Tan, S. (2019). Measurement and evaluation in teaching. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
  • Tezbasaran, E. (2017). Scaling types of test with the method of absolute judgement and assessing them with the students’ views. HAYEF: Journal of Education, 14(27), 143-162.
  • Turgut, M. F., & Baykul, Y. (2015). Measurement and evaluation in education. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
  • Unlu, S., Ozturk, H., & Taga, T. (2014). An evaluation on exams applied in Turkish course. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, (28), 513-523.
  • Watering, G., & Rijt, J. (2006). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of assessments: A review and a study into the ability and accuracy of estimating the difficulty levels of assessment items. Educational Research Review, 1(2), 133-147.
  • Watt, H. M. G. (2005). Attitudes to the use of alternative assessment methods in mathematics: A study with secondary mathematics teachers in Sydney, Australia. Educational Studies in Mathematics, (58), 21–44.
  • Weber, R.P. (1990). Basic content analysis. London: Sage Publications
  • Yesilyurt, E. (2012). Measurement and assessment methods used at science and technology lesson and the difficulties encountered. Turkish Studies, 7(2), 1183-1205
  • Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2018). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seckin Yayinlari.
  • Zoller, U., & Ben-Chaim, D. (1988). Interaction between examination type, anxiety state, and academic achievement in college science: An action-oriented research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(1), 65-77.

İlkokul Öğrencilerinin Sınav Türü Tercihlerinin Çeşitli Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi

Year 2019, Volume: 19 Issue: 81, 79 - 98, 31.05.2019

Abstract

Problem
Durumu:
Çağdaş eğitim
sistemleri, öğretim ile değerlendirme süreçlerinin yakınlaştırarak öğrencilerin
öğrenme özelliklerini, değerlendirme algılarını ve sınav türü tercihlerini
dikkate alır. Her öğretmenin uygulamasının kolay olduğunu ve kendisinin yeterli
olduğunu düşündüğü sınav türü mutlaka vardır. Ancak değerlendirme, bir sınavı
hazırlayıp uygulamaktan çok öte bir kavramdır. Bu nedenle öğretmenin,
öğrencilerinin sınav türü tercihleri arkasında yatan sebepleri bilerek
değerlendirme yapmaları önemlidir. Ancak öğretmenlerin öğrencilerinin sınav
türü tercihlerinin farkında olmalarına rağmen öğrencilerine kendi tercih
ettikleri test türlerini uyguladıkları söylenebilir. Halbuki nitelikli bir
ölçme-değerlendirme etkinliği için, sınav türü belirlenirken öğrenenlerin
bireysel farklılıklarının, deneyimlerinin, bireysel gereksinimlerinin ve sınav
türü tercihlerinin dikkate alınması çok önemlidir. Öğretmenlerin tek sınav
türüne odaklanmak yerine, birden fazla sınav türünü birlikte kullanarak,
öğrenciler üzerindeki sınav kaygısının olumsuz etkilerini azaltmaları ve
öğrencilerin gerçek performanslarını ölçmeleri daha doğru bir eğitimsel
davranış olarak değerlendirilebilir.

Araştırmanın
Amacı:
Bu araştırma, ilkokul
öğrencilerinin sınav türü tercihlerini ve bu tercihlerinin cinsiyet ve okulun
bulunduğu yerleşim yeri değişkenine göre farklılık gösterip göstermediğini
belirlemeyi ve öğrencilerin sınav türlerine ilişkin tercihlerinin nedenlerini
ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Araştırmanın
Yöntemi:
İlkokul
öğrencilerinin sınav türü tercihlerini ve bu tercihlerinin cinsiyet ve okulun
bulunduğu yerleşim yeri değişkenine göre farklılık gösterip göstermediğini
belirlemeyi ve öğrencilerin sınav türlerine ilişkin tercihlerinin nedenlerini
ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlayan bu çalışma ilişkisel araştırma türünden bir
araştırmadır. Bu araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, ilkokulda öğrenim gören 208
dördüncü sınıf öğrencisi oluşturmaktadır. Çalışma grubunun belirlenmesinde
kolay ulaşılabilir durum örneklemesi yöntemi tercih edilmiştir. Ayrıca,
araştırmada çalışma grubu belirlenirken hem il merkezindeki hem ilçe
merkezindeki hem de köylerdeki okullarda öğrenim gören kız ve erkek öğrenciler
tercih edilerek çeşitleme-yer örneklemesi yapılmıştır.
Bu çalışmada, öğrencilerin sınav türü tercihlerini
belirlemek için "Sınav Türü Tercih Anketi” ve öğrencilerin sınav türlerine
ilişkin tercihlerinin nedenlerini ortaya çıkarmak için “Görüşme Formu”
kullAnilmıştır. Veri toplama araçları araştırmacılar tarafından
geliştirilmiştir.
Araştırmada, verilerin toplanmasında nicel ve
nitel araştırma teknikleri kullAnilmıştır. Nicel veri toplama aracı olan
"Sınav Türü Tercih Anketi” katılımcılara dağıtılarak araştırmacının
gözetiminde cevaplanması sağlanmıştır. Öğrencilerin en çok ve en az tercih
ettikleri sınav türlerine ilişkin görüşlerini belirlemek için katılımcılara “Bu
sınav türünü neden daha çok tercih ediyorsunuz?” ve “Bu sınav türünü neden daha
az tercih ediyorsunuz?” soruları sorularak verilen cevaplar kayıt altına
alınmıştır. Araştırmada elde edilen verilerin analizinde karma yöntem
kullAnilmıştır. Araştırmada, ulaşılan verileri analiz etmek için frekans,
t-testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) testi kullAnilmıştır. Öğrencilerle
yapılan görüşmeden elde edilen nitel verilerin analizinde içerik analizi
tekniği kullAnilmıştır.

Araştırmanın
Bulguları:
Araştırmada, öğrencilerin %70,67’sinin çoktan seçmeli
test türünde yapılan sınavları, %13,46’sının doğru-yanlış test türündeki
sınavları, %8,17’sinin kısa cevaplı test türündeki sınavları, %4,81’inin
eşleştirmeli test türündeki sınavları ve %2,88’inin ise yazılı yoklama türünden
sınavları tercih ettikleri tespit edilmiştir. Araştırma bulgularına göre
öğrenciler tarafından en çok tercih edilen sınav türünün çoktan seçmeli testler
olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Öğrencilerle yapılan görüşmelerde, öğrencilerin
çoktan seçmeli testleri tercih etme eğiliminde oldukları belirlenmiştir.
Araştırmada, öğrenciler tarafından tercih edilen sınav türü ile öğrencilerin
cinsiyetleri ve okulun bulunduğu yerleşim yeri değişkenleri arasında anlamlı
bir ilişki bulunmadığı belirlenmiştir.
Yapılan
görüşmelerden, öğrencilerin çoktan seçmeli testleri daha çok kolay
olmalarından, cevapları tahmin etmeye olanak sağlamalarından, cevaplarının kesin
olmasından, değerlendirmenin öğretmen müdahalesine kapalı olmasından, ülkede
yapılan yerel ve merkezi sınavlarda çok sık kullAnilıyor olmasından dolayı
tercih ettikleri; yazılı yoklamaların ise çok yazma gerektirmesinden,
cevapların kesin olmamasından, değerlendirme aşamasında öğretmen etkisine açık
olmasından, yaygın olarak kullAnilmıyor olmasından dolayı öğrenciler tarafından
fazla tercih edilmediği tespit edilmiştir.









Araştırmanın
Sonuçları ve Önerileri
:
Araştırmada, öğrencilerin en fazla çoktan seçmeli test türündeki sınavları, en
az ise yazılı yoklama türündeki sınavları tercih ettikleri; tercih edilen sınav
türü ile öğrencilerin cinsiyetleri ve okulun bulunduğu yerleşim yeri arasında
anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmadığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Yapılan çalışmada,
öğrencilerin sınav türü tercihleri üzerinde öğretmenlerin ve merkezi sınavların
önemli oranda etkili olduğu söylenebilir. Öğretmenlerin portfolyo, performans
değerlendirme, proje, öz değerlendirme, akran değerlendirme, gözlem, görüşme,
kavram haritaları, yapılandırılmış grid, tAnilayıcı dallanmış ağaç gibi ölçme
ve değerlendirme tekniklerini az kullanmalarının ve buna karşın çoktan seçmeli
test, doğru-yanlış test, kısa cevaplı test, eşleştirmeli test ve yazılı yoklama
gibi geleneksel ölçme ve değerlendirme tekniklerini çok sık kullanmalarının
öğrencilerin sınav türü tercihleri üzerinde etkili olduğu sonucuna
ulaşılmıştır. Nitelikli bir ölçme-değerlendirme etkinliği için, sınav türü
belirlenirken öğrenenler bireysel farklılıkları, deneyimleri, bireysel
gereksinimleri ve tercihleri de dikkate alınmalıdır. Ulusal ve uluslararası
düzeyde yapılan sınavların şekli ve önemi göz ardı edilmeden, öğrencilerin
bireysel farklılıkları da dikkate alınarak sınav çeşitliliği sağlanmalıdır.
Sınavlar öğrencileri yargılamak için değil; akademik, sosyal ve kültürel
gelişimlerini destekleyerek öğrencilere, velilere ve öğretmenlere yol
gösterecek bir faaliyet olarak yapılmalıdır. Sınavlar, sadece iyi bir okul
kazanmak için değil; bireyde var olan gizil güçlerin, yeteneklerin, kapasitenin
ortaya çıkarılması, kullAnilması ve geliştirilmesi amacıyla da yapılmalıdır.
Okullarda sadece akademik başarıyı ölçen sınavlar değil; hem öğrencilerin öz
güvenlerini ve öz denetimlerini geliştirecek hem de onlara öğrenmeyi öğrenmenin
yollarını açacak öz değerlendirme, akran değerlendirme ve grup
değerlendirmeleri de yapılmalıdır. Sınav türü tercihleriyle ilgili olarak,
farklı değişkenlerin kullAnildığı başka çalışmalar da yapılmalıdır.

References

  • Acar, T. (2018). The impact of scoring method in written examinations on test and item statistics. Elementary Education Online, 17(2), 500-509.
  • Akpinar, M., & Canturk, A. (2018). Pre-service social studies teachers’ views on choice of exam type and reasons and method of preparation for exams about learning. Amasya Education Journal, 7(2), 413-458.
  • Anil, D., & Acar, M. (2008). Elementary school theachers’ views on issues they experience Through measurement and evaluation processes. Yuzuncu Yil University Journal of Education, 5(2),44-61.
  • Atilgan, H. (2017). Evaluation and grading. H. Atilgan (Ed.), Measurement and evaluation in education (pp.349-395). Ankara: Ani Yayincilik.
  • Bal, A. P. (2009). The evaluation of measurement and evaluation approaches used in fifth grade mathematics instruction in terms of students and teachers’ opinions. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Çukurova University, Adana.
  • Bal, A. P. (2012). Assessment preferences of pre-service teachers about mathematics course. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 10(3), 459-479.
  • Baltaci, A. (2018). A conceptual review of sampling methods and sample size problems in qualitative research. Journal of Bitlis Eren University Institute of Social Sciences, 7(1), 231-274.
  • Bayrak, R. (2007). The influence of assessment method on students' learning approaches. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon.
  • Birenbaum, M., & Feldman, R. A. (1998). Relationships between learning patterns and attitudes towards two assessment formats. Educational Research, 40(1), 90-98.
  • Birenbaum, M., & Rosenau, S. (2006). Assessment preferences, learning orientations, and learning strategies of pre-service and in-service teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 32(2), 213-225.
  • Birenbaum, M. (1997). Assessment preferences and their relationship to learning strategies and orientations. Higher Education, 33, 71-84.
  • Birgin, O. (2010). Teachers’ implementation level of assessment and evaluation approaches suggested by 4-5th grade mathematics curricula. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon.
  • Boyatsiz, R. E. (1998). Thematic analysis and code development: transforming qualitative information. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Brown, G. T. L., & Wang, Z. (2014). Illustrating assessment: How Hong Kong university students conceive of assessment’s purposes. Studies in Higher Education, 39(2), 1-20.
  • Cakan, M. (2004). Comparison of elementary and secondary school teachers in terms of their assessment practices and perceptions toward their qualification levels. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Science, 37(2), 99-114.
  • Candur, F. (2007). Determining teachers' views about science and technology education, used student evaluation and assessment methods and their importance in the educational processes. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Cresswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Cetin, M.O., & Cakan, M. (2010). Different approaches to science and technology course achievements measurements and student opinions about these approaches. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 1(2), 93-99.
  • Demir, M. K. (2012). The study of primary school teacher candidates’ opinions towards midterm and final examinations. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Journal of Faculty of Educational Science, 31(2), 193-21.
  • Dogan, C. D., & Kutlu, Ö. (2011). Factors related learning which effect preservice teachers’ preference on alternative assessment methods. Kastamonu Education Journal, 19(2), 459-474.
  • Eser, M. T. (2011). Examination of causes of some of the factors which affect students’ exam type preference. (Unpublished masters dissertation). Hacettepe University, Ankara.
  • Gelbal, S., & Kellecioğlu, H. (2007). Teachers’ proficiency perceptions of about the measurement and evaluation techniques and the problems they confront. H. U. Journal of Education, (33), 135-145.
  • Gharib, A., & Phillips, W. (2013). Test anxiety, student preferences and performance on different exam types in introductory psychology. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 3(1), 1-6.
  • Gocer, A. (2018). Measurement and evaluation in Turkish education. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
  • Gok, B., & Sahin, A. E. (2009). The multiple uses of assessment methods in 4th and 5th grades and the competency levels of teachers. Education and Science, 34(153), 127-143.
  • Gray, P. S., Williamson, J. B., Karp, D. A., & Dalphin, J. R. (2007). The research imagination: An introduction to qualitative and quantitative methods. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Gultekin, S. (2011). The evaluation based on Item Response Theory of the psychometric characteristics in multiple choice, constructed response and mixed format tests. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Ankara University, Ankara.
  • Gundogdu, Y. B. (2012). Measurement tools religious culture and moral knowledge teachers preferred. Journal of Faculty of Theology Istanbul University, (27), 85-112.
  • Karasar, N. (2016). Scientific research method. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayincilik.
  • Kaya, B. (2004). The measurement tools that are used by the social studies teachers of secondary level of primary education and the factors, which are effective on choosing these tools. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Kilic, Z. (2016). The relationship between students' examination type preferences and some variables. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Hacettepe University, Ankara.
  • Kilic, Z., & Cetin, S. (2018). Investigation of students’ examination type preferences in terms of some variables. Elementary Education Online, 17(2), 1051-1065.
  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Metin, M., & Ozmen, H. (2010). Prospective teachers’ views about formative assessment. Journal of National Education, (187), 293-310.
  • Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Ministry of National Education. (2014). Ministry of National Education Regulation on Pre-School Education and Primary Education Institutions. Official Newspaper, 26 July 2014 date and 29072 number.
  • Ministry of National Education. (2015). Social studies curriculum (4, 5, 6, 7 grades). Ankara: Publications of Ministry of National Education.
  • Ministry of National Education. (2017). Social studies curriculum (Primary and secondary 4, 5, 6 and 7 grades). Ankara: Publications of Ministry of National Education.
  • Onder, O. (2008). Influence of exam preparation with multiple choice and essay type questions on mathematics achievement and test anxiety levels. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Marmara University, İstanbul.
  • Orhan, A. T. (2007). Exploring the alternative assessment strategies by considering primary school pre-service teachers and students dimensions. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Ozcelik, D. A. (2016). Measurement and evaluation. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik
  • Ozdemir, B., & Beyaztas, D. İ. (2018). Prospective teachers` opinions about the reasons behind adopted learning approaches according to exam types. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, (46), 363-385.
  • Ozenc, M., & Cakir, M. (2015). Exploring primary school teachers’ competencies of alternative assessment and evaluation. Elementary Education Online, 14(3), 914-933.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Pehlivan, E. B. (2011). Investigation of answering behaviours to the items of multiple-choice Turkish test. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Ankara University, Ankara.
  • Sahin, M. G., Ozturk, N. B., & Teker, G. T. (2015). Determining the pre-service teachers’ measurement tool preferences for evaluation of their achievement. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 6(1), 95-106.
  • Tan, S. (2019). Measurement and evaluation in teaching. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
  • Tezbasaran, E. (2017). Scaling types of test with the method of absolute judgement and assessing them with the students’ views. HAYEF: Journal of Education, 14(27), 143-162.
  • Turgut, M. F., & Baykul, Y. (2015). Measurement and evaluation in education. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayincilik.
  • Unlu, S., Ozturk, H., & Taga, T. (2014). An evaluation on exams applied in Turkish course. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, (28), 513-523.
  • Watering, G., & Rijt, J. (2006). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of assessments: A review and a study into the ability and accuracy of estimating the difficulty levels of assessment items. Educational Research Review, 1(2), 133-147.
  • Watt, H. M. G. (2005). Attitudes to the use of alternative assessment methods in mathematics: A study with secondary mathematics teachers in Sydney, Australia. Educational Studies in Mathematics, (58), 21–44.
  • Weber, R.P. (1990). Basic content analysis. London: Sage Publications
  • Yesilyurt, E. (2012). Measurement and assessment methods used at science and technology lesson and the difficulties encountered. Turkish Studies, 7(2), 1183-1205
  • Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2018). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seckin Yayinlari.
  • Zoller, U., & Ben-Chaim, D. (1988). Interaction between examination type, anxiety state, and academic achievement in college science: An action-oriented research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(1), 65-77.
There are 55 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Halil Tas

Muhammet Baki Mınaz

Publication Date May 31, 2019
Published in Issue Year 2019 Volume: 19 Issue: 81

Cite

APA Tas, H., & Mınaz, M. B. (2019). An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 19(81), 79-98.
AMA Tas H, Mınaz MB. An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. May 2019;19(81):79-98.
Chicago Tas, Halil, and Muhammet Baki Mınaz. “An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables”. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 19, no. 81 (May 2019): 79-98.
EndNote Tas H, Mınaz MB (May 1, 2019) An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 19 81 79–98.
IEEE H. Tas and M. B. Mınaz, “An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables”, Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 19, no. 81, pp. 79–98, 2019.
ISNAD Tas, Halil - Mınaz, Muhammet Baki. “An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables”. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research 19/81 (May 2019), 79-98.
JAMA Tas H, Mınaz MB. An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 2019;19:79–98.
MLA Tas, Halil and Muhammet Baki Mınaz. “An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables”. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 19, no. 81, 2019, pp. 79-98.
Vancouver Tas H, Mınaz MB. An Investigation into Examination-Type Preferences of Primary School Students in Relation to Various Variables. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 2019;19(81):79-98.