BibTex RIS Cite

-

Year 2015, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 630 - 652, 27.04.2015

Rüştü Yeşil

Abstract

The aim of this research is to evaluate the quality and quantity of responsibility education applications of high school teachers. The research is a quantitative study in survey model. The sample group of the research consists of 310 teachers working in 13 high schools. The data of the research was collected using “Responsibility Education Applications Scale” developed by the researcher. It is a likert scale which has three factors and 38 items. The KMO value of it is 0.914; Bartlett’s test results of it are x2=4991.743; sd=703; p<.001. Item-total correlation values of Pearson’s r test are significant at the level of p<.01. Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of the research was determined as 0.93. At the end of the research, it was found that; (1) teachers use informative-directive responsibility education applications at most and they use applied responsibility education applications the least; (2) the quality and quantity of responsibility education applications do not differentiate according to gender, branches, and high school types, while they differentiate according to professional seniority; (3) there are positive and significant relationship between professional seniority and frequency of using responsibility education applications

Keywords

Responsibility education high school teacher strategy training applications

References

  • Belton, V. &, Scott, J.L. (1998). Independent learning and operational research in the classroom. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49, 899-910.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. (12. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınevi.
  • Carnell, E. (2005). Understanding and enriching young people's learning: issues, complexities and challenges. Improving Schools, 8(3), 269–284.
  • Clouder, L. (2009).‘Being responsible’: students’ perspectives on trust, risk and work-based learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), 289-301.
  • Coeckelbergh, M. (2006).Regulation or responsibility? Autonomy, moral imagination, and engineering. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31(3), 237-260.
  • Davis, T.M., & Murrell, P.H. (1994).Turning teaching into learning: The role of student responsibility in the collegiate experience. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report: 8. ERIC Identifier: ED372702. [Available online at: http://www.ntlf.com/html/lib/bib/93-8dig.htm], Erişim tarihi: 02 Şubat 2011.
  • Gosselin C. (2003). On the learning of responsibility: A conversation between Carol Gilligan and John Dewey, In Kal Alston (Ed), Philosophy of education. 308- 315. http://ojs.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/pes/article/view/1751/468], Erişim tarihi: 10 Ocak 2012. [Available online at:
  • Gynnilda, V., Anders, H., & Myrhaug, D. (2008). Identifying and promoting self- regulated learning in higher education: Roles and responsibilities of student tutors. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(2), 147-161. DOI: 10.1080/13611260801916317. ISSN 1361-1267.
  • Hoekstra, A., & Korthagen, F. (2011). Teacher learning in a context of educational change: informal learning versus systematically supported learning. Journal of Teacher Education. 62(1), 76–92
  • Macready, T. (2009).Learning social responsibility in schools: A restorative practice. Educational Psychology in Practice, 25(3), 211–220.
  • MEM [Milli Eğitim Müdürlüğü].(2013). 2011-2012 öğretim yılı istatistikleri. Kırşehir: http://www.arge40.com/girisarge.asp?sayfa=detay&id=180 27.05.2013’de indirilmiştir. Eğitim Müdürlüğü. [Online]: adresinden
  • Ramos, R.C., & Tolentino-Anonuevo, M.J. (2011). Engagement-promoting aspects of teacher’s instructional style and academic self regulated learning. The International Journal of Research and Review, 7(2), 51-61.
  • Romi S, Lewis R., & Katz YJ.(2009). Student responsibility and classroom discipline in Australia, China, and Israel. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39, 439-452.
  • Sierra, J.J. (2009). Shared responsibility and student learning: Ensuring a favorable educational experience. Journal of Marketing Education, 32, 104-111. DOI: 10.1177/0273475309344802. http://jmd.sagepub.com/content/32/1/104], Erişim tarihi: 15 Kasım 2011.
  • Stockdale, S.L., & Brockett, R.G. (2010). Development of the PROSDLS: A measure of self-direction in learning based on the personal responsibility orientation model, Adult Education Quarterly, 200(10), 1–20.
  • Töremen, F. (2011).The responsibility education of teacher candidates. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri-Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice-, 11(1), 273-277.
  • White, L.F. (1998). Motivating students to become more responsible for learning.College Student Journal, 32(2), 190-196.
  • Yeşil, R. (2012). Primary education I. and II. level senior students’ levels of fulfilling their learning responsibilities. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 4(SI-1), 470-475. http://www.silascience.com/journals_detail.aspx?j_id=3&v_no=85.
  • Yeşil, R. (2013). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin okul öğrenmelerindeki öğrenme sorumluluklarını yerine getirme düzeyleri. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(1), 1214-1237.
  • Yeşil, R. (2014). İlköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmenlerin sorumluluk eğitimi stratejilerinin incelenmesi. H.Ü. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(2), 282- 294.
  • Yontar, A., & Yurtal, F. (2009). Sorumluluk kazandırmada ögretmenler tarafından kullanılan yaptırımların incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(153), 144-156.
  • Young, M.R. (2005). The motivational effects of the classroom environment in facilitating self-regulated learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 27(1), 25-40. DOI: 10.1177/0273475304273346.

The evaluation of responsibility education applications of high school teachers / Lise öğretmenlerinin sorumluluk eğitimi uygulamalarının değerlendirilmesi

Year 2015, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 630 - 652, 27.04.2015

Rüştü Yeşil

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, lise öğretmenlerinin sorumluluk eğitimi uygulamalarının niteliğini ve niceliğini değerlendirmektir. Araştırma, tarama modelinde yürütülen nicel bir çalışmadır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu 13 Lisede görev yapan 310 öğretmen oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmanın verileri, araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilen “Sorumluluk Eğitimi Uygulamaları Ölçeği ile toplanmıştır. Ölçek, 3 faktörlü ve 38 maddelik likert tipi bir ölçektir. Ölçeğin KMO değeri 0,914; Bartlett Testi değerleri ise x2=4991,743; sd=703; p<,001'dir. Pearson's r testi ile yapılan madde-toplam korelasyonu değerleri p<,01 düzeyinde anlamlıdır. Ölçeğin Cronbach alpha güvenirlik katsayısı 0,93 olarak belirlenmiştir. Araştırma sonunda öğretmenlerin; (1) en fazla bilgilendirici-yönlendirici, en az ise uygulamalı sorumluluk eğitimi uygulamalarına yer verdikleri; (2) sorumluluk eğitimi uygulamalarının nitelik ve niceliği cinsiyet, branş ve lise türüne göre farklılaşmazken mesleki kıdeme göre farklılaştığı;(3) mesleki kıdem ile sorumluluk eğitimi uygulamalarına yer verme sıklıkları arasında pozitif ve anlamlı bir ilişkinin bulunduğu belirlenmiştir. 

Anahtar Sözcükler: Sorumluluk eğitimi; ortaöğretim; öğretmen; strateji; öğretim uygulamaları.

Keywords

Sorumluluk eğitimi ortaöğretim öğretmen strateji öğretim uygulamaları

References

  • Belton, V. &, Scott, J.L. (1998). Independent learning and operational research in the classroom. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49, 899-910.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. (12. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınevi.
  • Carnell, E. (2005). Understanding and enriching young people's learning: issues, complexities and challenges. Improving Schools, 8(3), 269–284.
  • Clouder, L. (2009).‘Being responsible’: students’ perspectives on trust, risk and work-based learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 14(3), 289-301.
  • Coeckelbergh, M. (2006).Regulation or responsibility? Autonomy, moral imagination, and engineering. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 31(3), 237-260.
  • Davis, T.M., & Murrell, P.H. (1994).Turning teaching into learning: The role of student responsibility in the collegiate experience. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report: 8. ERIC Identifier: ED372702. [Available online at: http://www.ntlf.com/html/lib/bib/93-8dig.htm], Erişim tarihi: 02 Şubat 2011.
  • Gosselin C. (2003). On the learning of responsibility: A conversation between Carol Gilligan and John Dewey, In Kal Alston (Ed), Philosophy of education. 308- 315. http://ojs.ed.uiuc.edu/index.php/pes/article/view/1751/468], Erişim tarihi: 10 Ocak 2012. [Available online at:
  • Gynnilda, V., Anders, H., & Myrhaug, D. (2008). Identifying and promoting self- regulated learning in higher education: Roles and responsibilities of student tutors. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(2), 147-161. DOI: 10.1080/13611260801916317. ISSN 1361-1267.
  • Hoekstra, A., & Korthagen, F. (2011). Teacher learning in a context of educational change: informal learning versus systematically supported learning. Journal of Teacher Education. 62(1), 76–92
  • Macready, T. (2009).Learning social responsibility in schools: A restorative practice. Educational Psychology in Practice, 25(3), 211–220.
  • MEM [Milli Eğitim Müdürlüğü].(2013). 2011-2012 öğretim yılı istatistikleri. Kırşehir: http://www.arge40.com/girisarge.asp?sayfa=detay&id=180 27.05.2013’de indirilmiştir. Eğitim Müdürlüğü. [Online]: adresinden
  • Ramos, R.C., & Tolentino-Anonuevo, M.J. (2011). Engagement-promoting aspects of teacher’s instructional style and academic self regulated learning. The International Journal of Research and Review, 7(2), 51-61.
  • Romi S, Lewis R., & Katz YJ.(2009). Student responsibility and classroom discipline in Australia, China, and Israel. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39, 439-452.
  • Sierra, J.J. (2009). Shared responsibility and student learning: Ensuring a favorable educational experience. Journal of Marketing Education, 32, 104-111. DOI: 10.1177/0273475309344802. http://jmd.sagepub.com/content/32/1/104], Erişim tarihi: 15 Kasım 2011.
  • Stockdale, S.L., & Brockett, R.G. (2010). Development of the PROSDLS: A measure of self-direction in learning based on the personal responsibility orientation model, Adult Education Quarterly, 200(10), 1–20.
  • Töremen, F. (2011).The responsibility education of teacher candidates. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri-Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice-, 11(1), 273-277.
  • White, L.F. (1998). Motivating students to become more responsible for learning.College Student Journal, 32(2), 190-196.
  • Yeşil, R. (2012). Primary education I. and II. level senior students’ levels of fulfilling their learning responsibilities. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 4(SI-1), 470-475. http://www.silascience.com/journals_detail.aspx?j_id=3&v_no=85.
  • Yeşil, R. (2013). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin okul öğrenmelerindeki öğrenme sorumluluklarını yerine getirme düzeyleri. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(1), 1214-1237.
  • Yeşil, R. (2014). İlköğretim okullarında görev yapan öğretmenlerin sorumluluk eğitimi stratejilerinin incelenmesi. H.Ü. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(2), 282- 294.
  • Yontar, A., & Yurtal, F. (2009). Sorumluluk kazandırmada ögretmenler tarafından kullanılan yaptırımların incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(153), 144-156.
  • Young, M.R. (2005). The motivational effects of the classroom environment in facilitating self-regulated learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 27(1), 25-40. DOI: 10.1177/0273475304273346.
There are 22 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Rüştü Yeşil

Publication Date April 27, 2015
Submission Date May 30, 2014
Published in Issue Year 2015 Volume: 11 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Yeşil, R. (2015). The evaluation of responsibility education applications of high school teachers / Lise öğretmenlerinin sorumluluk eğitimi uygulamalarının değerlendirilmesi. Eğitimde Kuram Ve Uygulama, 11(2), 630-652. https://doi.org/10.17244/eku.21019
 Download Cover Image