Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Middle School Mathematics Teachers' Opinions on Feedback

Year 2018, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 33 - 49, 01.01.2018
https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.339410

Abstract

During
instruction, providing feedbacks improves students’ academic achievements as
well as motivates them to actively engage in lesson activities. Feedback is
very important for teaching. Feedback is not only a functional tool to provide
active involvement of the students to the learning process but also affects the
academic success of the student. In this study, it is important to analyze
in-service mathematics teachers' opinions on feedback. This study is
conceptualized as a qualitative study. The data of this study included
in-service teachers’ responses to a semi-structured questionnaire, which
created by the researchers. In-service teachers’ responses to the interview
questions were audio taped and later transcribed verbatim to conduct a content
analysis. Twelve mathematics teachers working in 12 different schools in a
central district of Kırşehir voluntarily participated in the study during the
2015-2016 academic year. The data of the study were obtained conducting
face-to-face interviews with the mathematics teachers. Teachers’ responses to
the questionnaire items were analyzed thematically and classified under the
following seven headings: style of the feedback, scope of the feedback,
principles of providing the feedback, difficulties experienced when providing
the feedback, reasons for providing insufficient feedback, the benefits of the
feedback, and the significance of the feedback in learning. The results are
presented in relation to the literature in the area.
Teachers agree that it is not possible to complete students’ gaps in
Mathematics with the courses offered in the collective education system.
Based on the findings some suggestions about
the usage of feedback were provided.

References

  • Akyol, H. (2007). Vygotsky, Piaget ve Yapılandırmacı Okuma Eğitimi. VI. Ulusal Sınıf Öğretmenliği Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı, Eskişehir.
  • Black, P. & William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment Education, 5 (1), pp.7-74.
  • Brookhart, S.M. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 3(1), pp. 3-12.
  • Clark, K., & Dwyer, F. M. (1998). Effect of different types of computer-assisted feedbacks strategies on achievement and response confidence. International Journal of Instructional Media, 25(1), pp.55-63.
  • Carvalhoa, C., Santosa J., Conboya, J. & Martinsa D. (2014). Teachers´ feedback: Exploring differences in students´ perceptions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, pp. 169-173.
  • Crooks, T.J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation on students. Review of Educational Research, 5, pp.438-481.
  • Dempsey J.V., Litchfield B.C., & Driscoll M.P., (1993). Feedback, Retention, Discrimination Error, and Feedback Study Time, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25: 3, pp. 303-326.
  • Duhon, G., House, S., Hastings, K., Poncy, B., & Solomon, B. (2015). Adding immediate feedback to explicit timing: An option for enhancing treatment ıntensity to ımprove mathematics fluency. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24(1), pp. 74-87.
  • Eraz, G., & Öksüz, C. (2015). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğrencilerin ders dışı matematik etkinliklerine ilişkin uyguladıkları geribildirimlerin etkisi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36, ss. 105-119.
  • Erişen, Y. (1997). Öğretim elemanlarının dönüt ve düzeltme davranışlarını yerine getirme dereceleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 3(1), ss. 45-62.
  • Foote, C.J. (1999). Attribution feedback in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 13(2), 155-166.
  • Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback, Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), pp. 81-112.
  • Kluger, A.N. & Denisi, A. (1996). The Effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 2(2), pp. 254-284.
  • Köğce, D. & Baki, A. (2012). İlköğretim matematik öğretmenlerinin geribildirim kavramına ilişkin inanışları, X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, 27-30 Haziran, Niğde.
  • Labuhn, A.S., Zimmerman, B.J., & Hasselhorn, M. (2010). Enhancing students’ self-regulation and mathematics performance: The influence of feedback and self-evaluative standards. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), pp. 173-194.
  • Mory, E.H. (2004). Feedback research revisited. In D. Jonassen, (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Education Communications and Technology (pp. 745-783). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Manouchehri, A. (2007). Inquiry-discourse mathematics instruction. Mathematics Teacher, 101 (4), pp. 290–300.
  • Manouchehri, A. & St. John, D. (2006). From classroom discussions to group discourse. Mathematics Teacher, 99 (8), pp. 544–551.
  • Naroth, C. (2010). Constructive teacher feedback for enhancing learner performance in mathematics.[serial online]. n.d.; Available from: Networked Digital Library of Theses & Dissertations, Ipswich, MA. 21 Ağustos 2016 da ulaşılmıştır.
  • Nordstrom, C.R., Wendland, D. & Williams, K.B. (1998). “To err is human”: An examination of the effectiveness of error management training, Journal of Business and Pschology, 12, 3, pp. 269-282.
  • Kahl, S. (2005). Where in the world are formative tests? Right under your nose! Education Week, 25 (4), 38.
  • Looney, J. (Ed.). (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
  • Peker, R. (1992). Geri bildirimin üniversite öğrencilerinin ölçme ve değerlendirme dersindeki başarısına etkisi. UludağÜniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), ss. 31-39.
  • Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A. & Harks, B. (2008). The interplay between student evaluation and instruction. grading and feedback in mathematics classrooms. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216, pp. 110-123.
  • Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Klieme, E., Blum, W. & Hochweber, J. (2013). Written feedback in mathematics: Mediated by students´ perception, moderated by goal orientation. Learning and Instruction, 27, pp. 63-73.
  • Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhanot, R., Estrella, G., Penuel, B., Nussbaum, M., & Claro, S. (2010). Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students' mathematics learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, (4), pp. 399-404.
  • Sadler, D.R. (1998). Formative assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5(1), pp. 77-84.
  • Saracaloğlu, A.S., Gencel, İ.E. & Çengel, M. (2011). Öğrenci ve öğretmen görüşleri açısından lise öğretmenlerinin öğretme sürecindeki yeterlikleri, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Aralık, 2 (2), ss. 77-99.
  • Stevenson, C.E., Heiser, W. J. & Resing, W. C. M. (2013). Working memory as a moderator of training and transfer of analogical reasoning in children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(3), pp. 159-169.
  • Stone, N.J. (2000). Exploring the relationship between calibration and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 12, pp. 437-475.
  • Şahin, M. (2015). Öğrenme ve öğretme sürecinde uygulanan dönüt etkinliği ile ilgili öğretmen adaylarının görüşlerinin incelenmesi, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), ss. 247-264.
  • Santagata, R. (2002). When student make mistake: Socialization practices in Italy and the United States, Doctoral Dissertation, Los Angeles: University of California, Philosophy in Psychology.
  • Turkdoğan, A. Baki, A. (2012). İlköğretim ikinci kademe matematik öğretmenlerinin yanlışlara dönüt vermede kullandıkları dönüt teknikleri, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 45, (2), ss. 157-182.
  • Warden, C.A. (2000). EFL business writing behaviors in differing feedback environments. Language Learning, 50 (4), pp. 573–616.
  • Wigfield, A., Klauda, S.L., & Cambria, J. (2008). Influences on the development of academic self-regulatory processes. In B.J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 33-48). New York: Routledge.
  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Perceptions of efficacy and strategy use in the self-regulation of learning. In D. H. Schuck & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ortaokul Matematik Öğretmenlerinin Dönütün Kullanımına İlişkin Görüşleri

Year 2018, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 33 - 49, 01.01.2018
https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.339410

Abstract

Öğretim
sürecinde dönüt, öğrencilerin akademik başarısını arttıran ve öğrencileri derse
motive eden uyaranlardır. Dönütün öğretim sürecinde önemli bir yeri vardır.
Dönüt öğrencilerin sadece öğrenme sürecine aktif katılımın sağlayan işlevsel
bir uyaran değil; aynı zamanda akademik başarılarını da etkileyen bir araçtır.
Bu araştırmada matematik öğretmenlerinin dönüt verme konusundaki görüşleri
incelenmiştir. Çalışmada içerik analizi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın
verileri araştırmacılar tarafından oluşturulan yarı yapılandırılmış sorular ile
yapılan görüşme tekniği ile elde edilmiştir. Görüşme sorularına öğretmenlerin
verdikleri yanıtlar kaydedilip, içerik analizi yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın
çalışma grubunu 2015–2016 öğretim yılında merkez ilçede 12 ayrı okulda görev
yapan 12 matematik öğretmeni oluşturmuştur. Veriler matematik öğretmenleriyle
yüz yüze görüşülerek elde edilmiştir. Tematik olarak incelenen öğretmen
görüşleri, dönütte tarz, dönütte kapsam, dönütte ilke, dönütte yaşanan
güçlükler, dönütte yetersizliğin kaynakları, dönütün faydaları, dönütün
öğrenmedeki yeri temaları altında toplanmıştır. Sonuçlar öğretmenlerin, toplu
öğretim sistemi içinde sunulan derslerde öğrencilerin matematik alanındaki
boşluklarını doldurmanın mümkün olamayacağı şeklindedir. Elde edilen sonuçlar
alan yazındaki verilerle ilişkilendirilerek tartışılmıştır.  Elde edilen bulgular çerçevesinde bazı
öneriler getirilmiştir.

References

  • Akyol, H. (2007). Vygotsky, Piaget ve Yapılandırmacı Okuma Eğitimi. VI. Ulusal Sınıf Öğretmenliği Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı, Eskişehir.
  • Black, P. & William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment Education, 5 (1), pp.7-74.
  • Brookhart, S.M. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 3(1), pp. 3-12.
  • Clark, K., & Dwyer, F. M. (1998). Effect of different types of computer-assisted feedbacks strategies on achievement and response confidence. International Journal of Instructional Media, 25(1), pp.55-63.
  • Carvalhoa, C., Santosa J., Conboya, J. & Martinsa D. (2014). Teachers´ feedback: Exploring differences in students´ perceptions. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, pp. 169-173.
  • Crooks, T.J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation on students. Review of Educational Research, 5, pp.438-481.
  • Dempsey J.V., Litchfield B.C., & Driscoll M.P., (1993). Feedback, Retention, Discrimination Error, and Feedback Study Time, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25: 3, pp. 303-326.
  • Duhon, G., House, S., Hastings, K., Poncy, B., & Solomon, B. (2015). Adding immediate feedback to explicit timing: An option for enhancing treatment ıntensity to ımprove mathematics fluency. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24(1), pp. 74-87.
  • Eraz, G., & Öksüz, C. (2015). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin öğrencilerin ders dışı matematik etkinliklerine ilişkin uyguladıkları geribildirimlerin etkisi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36, ss. 105-119.
  • Erişen, Y. (1997). Öğretim elemanlarının dönüt ve düzeltme davranışlarını yerine getirme dereceleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 3(1), ss. 45-62.
  • Foote, C.J. (1999). Attribution feedback in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 13(2), 155-166.
  • Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback, Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), pp. 81-112.
  • Kluger, A.N. & Denisi, A. (1996). The Effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 2(2), pp. 254-284.
  • Köğce, D. & Baki, A. (2012). İlköğretim matematik öğretmenlerinin geribildirim kavramına ilişkin inanışları, X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, 27-30 Haziran, Niğde.
  • Labuhn, A.S., Zimmerman, B.J., & Hasselhorn, M. (2010). Enhancing students’ self-regulation and mathematics performance: The influence of feedback and self-evaluative standards. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), pp. 173-194.
  • Mory, E.H. (2004). Feedback research revisited. In D. Jonassen, (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Education Communications and Technology (pp. 745-783). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Manouchehri, A. (2007). Inquiry-discourse mathematics instruction. Mathematics Teacher, 101 (4), pp. 290–300.
  • Manouchehri, A. & St. John, D. (2006). From classroom discussions to group discourse. Mathematics Teacher, 99 (8), pp. 544–551.
  • Naroth, C. (2010). Constructive teacher feedback for enhancing learner performance in mathematics.[serial online]. n.d.; Available from: Networked Digital Library of Theses & Dissertations, Ipswich, MA. 21 Ağustos 2016 da ulaşılmıştır.
  • Nordstrom, C.R., Wendland, D. & Williams, K.B. (1998). “To err is human”: An examination of the effectiveness of error management training, Journal of Business and Pschology, 12, 3, pp. 269-282.
  • Kahl, S. (2005). Where in the world are formative tests? Right under your nose! Education Week, 25 (4), 38.
  • Looney, J. (Ed.). (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
  • Peker, R. (1992). Geri bildirimin üniversite öğrencilerinin ölçme ve değerlendirme dersindeki başarısına etkisi. UludağÜniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), ss. 31-39.
  • Rakoczy, K., Klieme, E., Bürgermeister, A. & Harks, B. (2008). The interplay between student evaluation and instruction. grading and feedback in mathematics classrooms. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216, pp. 110-123.
  • Rakoczy, K., Harks, B., Klieme, E., Blum, W. & Hochweber, J. (2013). Written feedback in mathematics: Mediated by students´ perception, moderated by goal orientation. Learning and Instruction, 27, pp. 63-73.
  • Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhanot, R., Estrella, G., Penuel, B., Nussbaum, M., & Claro, S. (2010). Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students' mathematics learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, (4), pp. 399-404.
  • Sadler, D.R. (1998). Formative assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education, 5(1), pp. 77-84.
  • Saracaloğlu, A.S., Gencel, İ.E. & Çengel, M. (2011). Öğrenci ve öğretmen görüşleri açısından lise öğretmenlerinin öğretme sürecindeki yeterlikleri, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Aralık, 2 (2), ss. 77-99.
  • Stevenson, C.E., Heiser, W. J. & Resing, W. C. M. (2013). Working memory as a moderator of training and transfer of analogical reasoning in children. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(3), pp. 159-169.
  • Stone, N.J. (2000). Exploring the relationship between calibration and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 12, pp. 437-475.
  • Şahin, M. (2015). Öğrenme ve öğretme sürecinde uygulanan dönüt etkinliği ile ilgili öğretmen adaylarının görüşlerinin incelenmesi, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(1), ss. 247-264.
  • Santagata, R. (2002). When student make mistake: Socialization practices in Italy and the United States, Doctoral Dissertation, Los Angeles: University of California, Philosophy in Psychology.
  • Turkdoğan, A. Baki, A. (2012). İlköğretim ikinci kademe matematik öğretmenlerinin yanlışlara dönüt vermede kullandıkları dönüt teknikleri, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 45, (2), ss. 157-182.
  • Warden, C.A. (2000). EFL business writing behaviors in differing feedback environments. Language Learning, 50 (4), pp. 573–616.
  • Wigfield, A., Klauda, S.L., & Cambria, J. (2008). Influences on the development of academic self-regulatory processes. In B.J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 33-48). New York: Routledge.
  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Perceptions of efficacy and strategy use in the self-regulation of learning. In D. H. Schuck & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
There are 36 citations in total.

Details

Subjects Studies on Education
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Hacı Ömer Beydoğan This is me

Publication Date January 1, 2018
Submission Date March 21, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 5 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Beydoğan, H. Ö. (2018). Middle School Mathematics Teachers’ Opinions on Feedback. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 5(1), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.339410

23823             23825             23824