Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Yansıtıcı Düşünme Yeteneklerine Göre Günlüklerininin İncelenmesi

Year 2009, Volume: 36 Issue: 36, - , 01.06.2009

Çiğdem Şahin

Abstract

Bu çalışmamn amacı, fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarınm yansıtıcı düşünme yeteneklerini, öğretmenlik uygulaması dosyalan ıçin yazdıkları güıılüklerindeki ifadelerine göre incelemektir. Bu çahşmamn evrenini Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Fatih Eğitim Fakültesinde okuyan öğretmen adayları, ömeklemini ise İlköğretim Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenliği anabilim dalında dördüncü sınıfa devam eden toplam 20 öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Çalışma 2005- 2006 eğitim öğretim yılı bahar yarıyılında yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada 20 fen bilgisi öğretmen adayının öğretmenlik uygulaması dosyasına altı hafta boyunca yazdıkları toplam 120 adet günlük, doküman inceleme tekniği ile incelenmiştir. Günlüklerdeki ifadeler betimsel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Öğretmen adaylarımn yazdıkları günlüklerdeki ifadeler incelendiğinde öğretmen adaylarmm daha çok tamnılayıcı yansıtıcı düşünme yeteneklerinin ön planda olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Eleştirel yansıtıcı düşünme yeteneklerinin ise daha az olduğu hatta bazı öğretmen adaylarımn eleştirel yansıtıcı düşünme yeteneklerini sergileyemedikleri dikkat çekmektedir. Çahşma öğretmen adaylarımn yansıtıcı düşünme yeteneklerinin geliştirilmesine yönelik öneriler ile tamamlanmıştır

Keywords

yansıtıcı düşünme, tanımlayıcı yansıtıcı düşünme, eleştirel yansıtıcı düşünme, öğretmen eğitimi, yansıtıcı günlük yazma

References

• Abell, S. K., Bryan, L. A. & Anderson, M. A. (1998). Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reşective thinking using integrated media case-based instruction in elementary science teacher preparation. Science Teacher Education, 82(4), 491- 509.
• Artzt, A. F. (1999). A structure to enable preservice teachers of mathematics to reşect on their teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(2), 143-166.
• Berg, M. H., Woody, R. H. & Bauer. W. I. (2002). Cognitive processes of preservice music teachers during observation of music instruction. Music Education Research, 4(2), 275- 287.
• Çepni, S. (2007). Araştırma ve proje çalışmalarına giriş (Genişletilmiş Üçüncü Baskı, s. 76- 112). Trabzon: Celepler Matbaacıhk.
• Comford, Ian, R. (2002). Reşective teaching: empirical research Şndings and some implications for teacher education. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 54(2), 219- 236.
• Desouza, J. M. S. & Czerniak, C. M. (2003). Study of science teacher’s attitudes toward and belief about collaborative reşective practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14(2), 75- 96.
• Ebenezer, J. V., Lugo, F., Beirnacka, B. & Puvirajah A. (2003). Community building through electronic discussion boards: Pre-service teachers’ reşective dialogues on science teaching. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(4), 397- 411.
• Farrell, T. S. C. (1999). Reşective practice in an EFL teacher development group. System, 27, 157—172.
• Gimenez, T. (1999). Reşective teaching and teacher education contribution from teacher training. Linguagem & Ensino, 2(2), 129- 143.
• GrifŞn, M. L. (2003). Using critical incidents to promote and assess reşective thinking in preservice teachers. Reşective Practice, 4(2), 207- 220.
• Jay, J. K. & Johnson, K. L. (2002). Capturing complexity: a typology of reşective practice for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 73—85.
• Kember, D., Jones, A., Loke, A. Y., Mckay, J., Sinclair, K., Tse, H., Webb, C., Wong, F. K. Y., Wong, M. & Yeung, E. (1999). Determining the level of reşective thinking from students’ written journals using a coding scheme based on the work of Mezirow. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(1), 18- 30.
• Larrivee, B. (2000). Transforming teaching practice: Becoming the critically reflective teacher. Reşective Practice, 1(3), 293- 307.
• Larson, B. E. (2000). Classroom discussion: A method of instruction and a curriculum outcome. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 661- 677.
• Lim, S. W., Chan Cheng, P. W., Lam, M. S. & Ngan, S. F. (2003). Developing reşective and thinking skills by means of semantic mapping strategies in kindergarten teacher education. Early Child Development and Care, 173(1), 55—72. Liou, H. C. (2001). Reflective practice in a pre-service teacher education program for high school English teachers in Taiwan. System, 29(2), 197—208.
• Maclellarr, E. (1999). Reşective commentaries: what do they say about learning?. Educational Action Research, 7(3), 433- 449.
• McGrath, D. & Higgins, A. (2006). Implementing and evaluating reşective practice group sessions. Nurse Education in Practice, 6(3), 175—181.
• Orland-Barak, L. (2005). Portfolios as evidence of reşective practice: what remains ‘untold’. Educational Research, 47(1), 25 — 44.
• Parsons, M. & Stephenson, M. (2005). Developing reflective practice in student teachers: Collaboration and critical partnerships. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 95—116.
• Schön, D. A. (1983). The reşective practitioner: How professionals think in action New York: Basic Books.
• Stoddard, S. S. (2002). Reşective thinking within an art methods class for preservice elementary teachers curriculum research and development reşective thinking] methods class. Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on Education, Hawaii, Retrieved May 3 1 , 2006, from http:/lwww.hiceducation.org/Edu_Proceedings/Shari%208.%208toddard2.pdf
• Taşçı, G., Altun, A. ve Soran, H. (2008). Biyoloji öğretmen adaylarının öğrenme stratejilerinin belirlenmesi üzerine nitel bir çalışma. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35, 284- 296.
• Tillema, H. H. (2000). Belief change towards self-directed learning in student teachers: irnmersion in practice or reflection on action. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5- 6), 575- 591.
• Vanhulle, S. (2005). How future teachers develop professional knowledge through reşective writing in a dialogical frame. L- ] Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 5(3), 287—314.
• Yeh, Y. C. (2004). Nurturing reşective teaching during critical-thinking instruction in a computer simulation program. Computers and Education, 42(2), 181—194.
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (5. Baskı, s.224). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncıhk. EXTENTED ABSTRACT
• The aim of this study is to determine reflective thinking skills of the prospective science teachers (PSTs) according to the data gathered from the journals in teacher training portfolios. In line with this main aim, the sub problems below were investigated:
• How are the descriptive reşective thinking skills of prospective teachers?
• How are the critical reşective thinking skills of prospective teachers?
• What is the outcome of a comparison between descriptive and critical reşective thinking skills of prospective teachers?
• Concerning DRT nineteen PSTs (95%) deŞned the form of their interaction with students. Seventeen PSTs described their feelings during practice phase and defined learning environment. Eighteen PSTs (90%) stated which approach they employed in teaching practice. Sixteen PSTs (80%) indicated which teaching approach they employed most frequently.
• In the light of comments and discussions gained from this research, it was deduced that most of the PSTs’ DRT skills were better than CRT skills. In their journals prospective teachers identically described the situations they met in teaching practices. However, it was determined that not all joumals contained answers for DRT questions. Thus it was concluded that in their teaching practice journals, prospective teachers could not fully exhibit their DRT skills.
• While in many PST joumals DRT questions were answered, CRT answers were not adequate. In their joumals PSTs could not fully exhibit their CRT skills. In the journals they wrote every week, the PSTs who wrote statements that might be possible answers to CRT questions were unable to present their CRT and DRT skills together. This could be interpreted as the lack of CRT skills in prospective teachers or that they lacked detailed information on how to write journal by employing their reşective thinking skills.