STUDENT VIEWS ON A FLIPPED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT SUPPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY OF INQUIRY MODEL: A CASE STUDY

Abstract

SORGULAMA TOPLULUĞU MODELİ İLE DESTEKLENMİŞ BİR DÖNÜŞTÜRÜLMÜŞ ÖĞRENME ORTAMINA İLİŞKİN ÖĞRENCİ GÖRÜŞLERİ BİR DURUM ÇALIŞMASI

Öz

Dönüştürülmüş öğrenmenin çevrimiçi boyutunu etkili bir şekilde yapılandırmak üzere ele alınabilecek modellerden birisi, Sorgulama Topluluğu’dur. Sorgulama Topluluğu Modeli, etkili bir çevrimiçi eğitim çerçevesi sunar ve sosyal yapılandırmacı yaklaşımlar temelinde kuramsal olarak açıklar. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Sorgulama Topluluğu Modeliyle desteklenmiş bir dönüştürülmüş öğrenme ortamı geliştirmek ve bu ortamda öğrenim gören farklı temel motivasyon kaynaklarına sahip öğrencilerin görüşlerini incelemektir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda bir öğrenme ortamı geliştirilmiş ve bu ortamda öğrenmeyi deneyimleyen dört lisans öğrencisinin görüşleri alınmıştır. Farklı temel motivasyon kaynaklarına (başarı, güç, düşünme ve bağlanma ihtiyacı) sahip olan katılımcılar seçkisiz atama yoluyla çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. Öğrencilerin görüşleri, çalışma kapsamında oluşturulan görüşme formu aracılığıyla toplanmış ve betimsel analiz yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçlarına göre öğrenciler kendilerini öğrenmeye güdüleyen ihtiyaçlarına paralel olarak öğrenme sürecini farklı şekillerde değerlendirmiştir. Bununla birlikte öğrencilerin bütün görüşleri göz önünde bulundurulduğunda öğrenme ortamını ve süreci etkili buldukları, bu çalışmada oluşturulan öğrenme ortamının ve kullanılan öğrenme yaklaşımının farklı temel motivasyon kaynaklarına sahip öğrencilerin öğrenme ihtiyaçlarını karşıladığı anlaşılmıştır. Çalışmanın bulguları doğrultusunda gelecek çalışmalar için öneriler sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• dönüştürülmüş öğrenme
• sorgulama topluluğu modeli
• temel motivasyon kaynakları
• harmanlanmış öğrenme
• durum çalışması

References

1. Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
2. Akbaba, S. (2006). Eğitimde motivasyon. Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13, 343-361.
3. Akyol, Z. (2009). Examining teaching presence, social presence, cognitive presence, satisfaction and learning ın online and blended course contexts (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü: Ankara.
4. Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2008). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: Understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12, 3-22.
5. Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in an online and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes and processes for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233-250. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01029.x
6. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875
7. Antalyalı, Ö. L. ve Bolat, Ö. (2017). Öğrenilmiş ihtiyaçlar bağlamında temel motivasyon kaynakları (TMK) ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi, güvenilirlik ve geçerlik analizi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(1), 83–114.
8. Ash, K. (2012). Educators view “flipped” model with a more critical eye. Education Week, 32(2), 6-7.

9. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International society for technology in education.
10. Enfield, J. (2013). Looking at the impact of the flipped classroom model of instruction on undergraduate multimedia students at CSUN. Techtrends, 57(6), 14-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0698-1
11. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
12. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.
13. Fiske, D. W. (1949). Consistency of the factorial structures of personality ratings from different sources. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 44, 329-344. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0057198
14. Fulton, K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your classroom to improve student learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(8), 12-17.
15. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGram-Hill Companies.
16. Gallagher, V. C. (2012). Managing resources and need for cognition: Impact on depressed mood at work. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(4), 534-537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.025
17. Garrison, D. R. (2009). Communities of inquiry in online learning. In P. L. Rogers et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distance learning (2nd edn.) (pp. 352–355). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
18. Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. Routledge.
19. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The internet and higher education, 2(2-3), 87-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
20. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
21. Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.04.001
22. Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002
23. George, J. M., Jones, G. R., & Sharbrough, W. C. (2012). Understanding and managing organizational behavior (6 b.). Prentice Hall.
24. Gündüz, A. Y., & Akkoyunlu, B. (2020). Effectiveness of gamification in flipped learning. SAGE Open, 10(4), 2158244020979837. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020979837
25. Halili, S. H., & Zainuddin, Z. (2015). Flipping the classroom: What we know and what we don’t. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e‐Learning, 3(1), 28-35.
26. Hawks, S. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: Now or never?. AANA Journal, 82(4).
27. Heintz Jr, P., & Steele-Johnson, D. (2004). Clarifying the conceptual definitions of goal orientation dimensions: Competence, control and evaluation. Organizational Analysis, 12, 5-19. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028983
28. Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 62-66.
29. Hilliard, L. P., & Stewart, M. K. (2019). Time well spent: Creating a community of inquiry in blended first-year writing courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 41, 11-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.11.002
30. Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
31. Ilgaz, G., & Eskici, M. (2019). Examination of teacher candidates’ lifelong learning competence and basic motivation resources as parts of sustainability. Sustainability, 11(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010023
32. Karaoğlan Yılmaz, F. G. (2017). Predictors of community of inquiry in a flipped classroom model. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(1), 87-102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516686047
33. Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43. https://doi.org/10.2307/1183338
34. McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
35. McClelland, D. C. (1971). Assessing human motivation. General Learning Press.
36. McClelland, D. C. (1975). Power: The inner experience. Irvington.
37. McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Glenview, Scott Foresman.
38. McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2010). Organizational behavior (5th Ed.). McGraw-Hill.
39. Mok, H. N. (2014). Teaching tip: The flipped classroom. Journal of Information Systems Education, 25(1), 7.
40. Polat, A. (2013). Uzaktan eğitim öğrencilerinin sorgulama topluluğu algılarının akademik güdülenme ve çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi: Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi örneği. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Sakarya.
41. Raths, D. (2014). Nine video tips for a better flipped classroom. The Education Digest, 79(6), 15.
42. Rivera, E. (2015). Using the flipped classroom model in your library instruction course. The Reference Librarian, 56(1), 34-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2015.977671
43. Sams, A., & Bergmann, J. (2013). Flip Your Students’ Learning. Educational Leadership, 3, 16-20.
44. See, S., & Conry, J. M. (2014). Flip My Class! A faculty development demonstration of a flipped-classroom. Currents In Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 6(4), 585-588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2014.03.003
45. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2009). Community of inquiry as a theoretical framework to foster “epistemic engagement” and “cognitive presence” in online education. Computers & Education, 52(3), 543-553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.10.007
46. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1721-1731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.017
47. Shea, P., Li, C. S., Swan, K., & Pickett, A. (2005). Developing learning community in online asynchronous college courses: The role of teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(4), 59-82. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v9i4.1779
48. Steen-Utheim, A. T., & Foldnes, N. (2018). A qualitative investigation of student engagement in a flipped classroom. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(3), 307-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1379481
49. Strayer, J. (2007). The effects of the classroom flip on the learning environment: A comparison of learning activity in a traditional classroom and a flip classroom that used an intelligent tutoring system. Graduate School of The Ohio State University: Columbus, OH.
50. Solimani, E., Ameri-Golestan, A., & Lotfi, A. (2019). Flipped vs. unplugged instructions: Sailing EFL learners' oral proficiency through virtual and real learning communities. International Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 459-480. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12328a
51. Thoms, C. L. (2012). Enhancing the blended learning curriculum by using the “flipped classroom” approach to produce a dynamic learning environment. ICERI2012 Proceedings, 2150-2157.
52. Wiiliams, B. (2013). How I flipped my classroom. NNNC Conference, Norfolk, NE.
53. Veroff, J. (1992). Power motivation. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis (s. 278-285). Cambridge University Press.
54. Yamaguchi, I. (2003). The relationships among individual differences, needs and equity sensitivity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 18(4), 324-344. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940310473082
55. Yıldırım, K. (2010). Nitel araştırmalarda niteliği artırma. İlköğretim Online, 9(1), 79-92. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ilkonline/issue/8596/106955
56. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9. Baskı). Seçkin Yayıncılık.
57. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.