Beden Eğitimi Mesleki Gelişim Programı Kapsamında Öğretmenlerin Yansıtıcı Günlük Kullanımları

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Beden Eğitimi (BE) öğretmenleri için hazırlanmış bir mesleki gelişim programında öğretmenlerin yansıtıcı tutumlarını raporlayan bir araştırma aracı olarak günlük yazmanın kullanımını incelemektir. Araştırmaya üç kadın BE öğretmeni katılmıştır ve öğretmenlere yapılandırmacılık temelli “Anlamak için Öğretim Oyunları (AiÖO)” öğretimsel modelini nasıl kullanacakları konusunda eğitim verilmiştir. İki aylık bir süreçte, her öğretmen kendi sınıfında toplamda 24 AiÖO ünitesi uygulamıştır ve her ünitenin tamamlanmasının ardından birer yansıtıcı günlük yazmıştır. Günlük yazıları, her öğretmenin yansıtma düzeyinin sınırlarını belirlemek için van Manen’in kuramsal çerçevesi kapsamında analiz edilmiştir. Günlük yazıları teknik bir odaktan eleştirel bir odağa doğru geçiş göstermiştir. Bu eğilim her bir öğretmenin mesleki profili ve inançları ile uyum göstermiştir. AiÖO’nun yapısını benimsemev k zorlu bir bağlılık olabileceği için mesleki program geliştiren kişiler, bu geliştirme sürecine öğretmenler için yansıtıcı yazma etkinliklerini de dâhil etmeyi göz önünde bulundurmalıdır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yansıtma, günlük yazma, Anlamak için Öğretim Oyunları (AiÖO), mesleki gelişim, beden eğitimi

Teachers’ use of Reflective Journal Writing Within a Physical Education Professional Development Program

Abstract

The aim of the present research is to explore the use of journal writing as a research tool documenting teachers’ reflective attitudes within a Physical Education (PE) professional development program. Three female PE teachers participated in the research and were trained to use the constructivist oriented “Teaching Games for Understanding” (TGfU) instructional model. During a period of two months, each teacher implemented in her class 24 TGfU units and completed her own daily reflective journal. Journal entries were analyzed according to van Manen’s theoretical framework, to determine the extent of reflection achieved by the three teachers. Journal entries moved from a technical to a more critical focus and this trend was accordant with each teacher’s professional profile and beliefs. Since the adoption of the TGfU framework can be a demanding commitment, professional program designers should consider the inclusion of teacher reflective writing as a supportive means to this direction

Keywords

• Reflection, journal writing, Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU), professional development, physical education

References

1. Attard, K. (2007). Habitual practice vs. the struggle for change: can informal teacher learning promote ongoing change to professional practice? International Studies in Sociology of Education, 17(1-2), 147-162.
2. Ballard, K.K. (2006). Using van Manen’s model to assess levels of reflectivity among preservice physical education teachers. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tex- as A&M University, Texas.
3. Ballard, K. K., & McBride, R. (2010). Promoting preservice teacher reflectivity: Van Manen may represent a viable model. Physical Educator, 67, 58-73.
4. Blair, R., & Capel, S. (2011). Primary physical education, coaches and continuing pro- fessional development. Sport, Education and Society, 16(4), 485-505.
5. Brooks, J.G., & Brooks, M.G. (1999). In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms. ASCD.
6. Bunker D. & Thorpe R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education, 18(1), 5-8.
7. Butler, J.I. (2005). TGfU pet-agogy: old dogs, new tricks and puppy school. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10(3), 225-240.
8. Calderhead, J. (1989). Reflective teaching and teacher education. Teachers and Teac- her Education, 5(1), 43-51.

9. Crawford, S., O’Reilly, R., & Luttrell, S. (2012). Assessing the effects of integrating the reflective framework for teaching in physical education (RFTPE) on the teach- ing and learning of undergraduate sport studies and physical education students. Reflective Practice, 13(1), 115-129.
10. Cushion, C.J. (2009). Modeling the complexity of the coaching process. Soccer Jour- nal, 54(1), 8-12.
11. Deglau, D., Ward P., O’Sullivan, M., & Bush, K. (2006). Professional dialogue as pro- fessional development. Journal of Teaching Physical Education, 25(4), 413-427.
12. Dewey, J. (1933). How we Think: A Restatement of Reflective Thinking to the Educa- tive Process. Boston: D. C. Heath.
13. Gore, J.M., & Zeichner, K.M. (1991). Action research and reflective teaching in pre- service teacher education: A case study from the United States. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(2), 119-136.
14. Griffin, L., & Butler, J. (2005). Teaching Games for Understanding. Theory, Research and Practice. Illinois. Human Kinetics.
15. Ha, A.S., Wong, A.C., Sum, R.K., & Chan, D.W. (2008). Understanding teachers’ will and capacity to accomplish physical education curriculum reform: The implica- tions for teacher development. Sport, Education and Society, 13(1), 77-96.
16. Howarth, K. (2005). Introducing the TGfU model in teacher education programs. In L. Griffin, & J. Butler (Ed.), Teaching Games for Understanding: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 91-105). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
17. Keay, J. (2006). Collaborative learning in physical education teachers’ early-career professional development. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 11(3), 285- 305.
18. Kirk, D. (2009). Physical Education Futures. London: Routledge.
19. Kirk, D., & Tinning, R. (1992, April). Physical education pedagogical work as praxis. Paper presented at the AERA Annual Meeting, Physical Education SIG, San Fran- cisco, 20-24 April.
20. Kise, J.A. (2006). Differentiated Coaching: A Framework for Helping Teachers Change. Corwin Press.
21. Light, R. (2008). Complex learning theory- Its epistemology and its assumptions about learning: Implications for physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27, 21-37
22. MacPhail, A., Kirk, D., & Griffin, L. (2008). Throwing and catching as relational skills in game play: situated learning in a modified game unit. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 27(1), 100-115.
23. Mandigo, J.L. (2003). Using problem-based learning to enhance tactical awareness in target games. In J. Butler, L. Griffin, B. Lombardo & R. Natasi (Ed.), Teaching Games for Understanding in Physical Education and Sport: An International Per- spective (pp. 15-28). Oxon Hill, MD: National Association for Sport and Physical Education.
24. McCormack, A. (2001). Using reflective practice in teaching dance to preservice phys- ical education teachers. European Journal of Physical Education, 6(1), 5-15
25. Mezirow, J. (1990). How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood, 1-20.
26. Nisbet, J. (2005). What is educational research? Changing perspectives through the 20th century. Research Papers in Education, 20(1), 25-44.
27. O’Connell, T.S., & Dyment, J.E. (2011). Health and physical education pre-service teacher perceptions of journals as a reflective tool in experience-based learning. European Physical Education Review, 17(2), 135-151.
28. O’Leary, N., (2012). The Influence of occupational socialization on physical educa- tion teachers’ interpretation and delivery of teaching games for understanding. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Bath.
29. Pinkstaff, E. (1985). An experience in narrative writing to improve public health prac- tice by students. Journal of Nursery Education, 24, 5–28.
30. Pultorak, E. (1993). Facilitating reflective thought in novice teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 288-295.
31. Pultorak, E. (1996). Following the developmental process of reflection in novice teach- ers: Three years of investigation. Journal of Teacher Education, 47(4), 283-291.
32. Reid, J.B. (1982). Observer training in naturalistic research. In: D.P Hartmann (Ed.), Using Observers to Study Behavior. New Directions for Methodology of Social and Behavioral Science (pp. 37-51). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
33. Roberts, S. J. (2011). Teaching games for understanding: The difficulties and challeng- es experienced by participation cricket coaches. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 16(1), 33-48.
34. Rovegno, I., Nevett, M., Brock, S., & Barbiaz, M. (2001). Teaching and learning of basic invasion game tactics in fourth grade: A descriptive study from a situated theoretical perspective. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 20, 370-388.
35. Standal, Ø. F., & Moe, V. F. (2013). Reflective practice in physical education and phys- ical education teacher education: A Review of the literature since 1995. Quest, 65(2), 220-240.
36. Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
37. Schön, D. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38. Sweeney, M., Everitt, A., & Carifio, J. (2003). Teaching games for understanding: a change in paradigm for undergraduate students. In J. Butler, L. Griffin, B. Lom- bardo, & R. Nastasi (Ed.), Teaching Games for Understanding in Physical Edu- cation and Sport: An International Perspective (pp. 113-121). Oxon Hill, MD: National Association for Sport and Physical Education.
39. Thomas, D.R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evalua- tion data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237-246.
40. Tsangaridou, N. (2008). Trainee primary teachers’ beliefs and practices about physi- cal education during student teaching. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 13(2), 131-152.
41. Tsangaridou, N., & O’Sullivan, M. (1997). The role of reflection in shaping physi- cal education teachers’ educational values and practices. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 17, 2-25.
42. van der Mars, H. (1989). Observer reliability: Issues and procedures. In P.W. Darst, D.B. Zakrajsek & V.H. Mancini (Ed.), Analyzing Physical Education and Sport Instruction (pp. 53-81). Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics.
43. van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Cur- riculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205-228.
44. van Manen M. (1995). On the epistemology of reflective practice. Teachers and Teach- ing: Theory and Practice, 1(1), 33-50.
45. Walker, S.E. (2006). Journal writing as a teaching technique to promote reflection. Journal of Athletic Training, 41(2), 216-221.
46. Williams, R., & Wessel, J. (2004). Reflective journal writing to obtain student feed- back about their learning during the study of chronic musculoskeletal conditions. Journal of Allied Health, 33, 17–23.
47. Williams, R., Wessel, J., Gemus, M. & Foster-Sargeant, E. (2002). Journal writing to promote reflection by physical therapy students during clinical placements. Physi- otherapy Theory and Practice, 18, 5-15.
48. Yin, R.K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Zeichner, K.M., & Liston, D.P. (2013). Reflective Teaching: An Introduction. Rout- ledge.