9.Sınıf İngilizce Öğretim Programının CIPP ve Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi Kullanılarak Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2020, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 1 - 9, 25.06.2020

Özgür Murat Çolakoğlu Cevat Eker Birsen Günerı Mümine Akçaalan

Abstract

Dünya çapında bir araştırma ağı olan EF EPI 2018 , Türkiye'nin İngilizce Yeterlilik Endeksi'nde 88 ülke arasında 73. sırada yer aldığını yayınladı. Bu sonuç, mevcut İngilizce öğrtim programlarının beklenen seviyede Türkiye'deki sosyal ihtiyaçları karşılamadığını göstermiştir. Bu bağlamda, mevcut İngilizce öğretim programlarını değerlendirmek ve bu çalışmaların sonuçlarını program geliştirme çalışmalarına yansıtmak gerekliliğini ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu açıdan bakıldığında, bu çalışmanın amacı, öğrencilerin mevcut 9. sınıf İngilizce dersi müfredatına ilişkin görüşlerini BGSÜ Bağlam-Girdi-Süreç-Ürün modeline göre değerlendirmektir. Araştırmanın yöntemi anket modelidir. BGSÜ modelinin boyutları arasındaki dinamik ilişkileri analiz etmek için yapısal eşitlik modellemesi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada veri toplama aracı olarak “İngilizce Dersi Öğretim Programı Öğrenci Değerlendirme Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Üç devlet okuluna devam eden toplam 434 dokuzuncu sınıf öğrencisi çalışma grubu olarak belirlenmiştir. Araştırmanın sonuçları bağlamın boyutunun girdi boyutu üzerindeki doğrudan etkisinin r = .93; p

Keywords

Program Değerlendirme, CIPP Model. Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleme

Evaluation of English 9th Curriculum with CIPP Model and Structural Equation Modeling

Abstract

EF EPI 2018 , which is a worldwide research network, published that Turkey ranked 73 among the 88 countries in the English Proficiency Index. This result demonstrated that the expected levels of present English curriculum do not meet the social needs in Turkey. In this respect, it is necessary to evaluate the existing English education curriculums and to reflect the results of these studies to the curriculum development studies. From this perspective, the aim of this study is to evaluate the views of students to the current 9th grade English course curriculum in Turkey according to the CIPP model. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the dynamic relationships between the dimensions of the CIPP model. Method of the research was survey model. In the study, “English Course Teaching Program Student Evaluation Scale” was used as an instrument to collect data. Totally 434 students attending 9th graders in three public schools were determined for the sample. Results of the research revealed that the direct effect of context on input r=.93; p

Keywords

Curriculum Evaluation, CIPP Model, Structural Equation Modeling

References

• Aktı Aslan, S. & İzci, E. (2017). Evaluation of secondary school english teaching program according to the remarks of teachers with context, ınput, process and product (CIPP) model, İnönü University Journal of the Faculty of Education 18(2), 33-44.
• Asfaroh, J.A., Rosana, D. & Supahar, (2017). Developmen of CIPP model of evaluaion instrument on the implementation of Project assessment in science learning. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 12(9), 1999-2010.
• Aslan, M. & Uygun, N. (2019). Evaluation of preschool curriculum by stufflebeam’s context, ınput, process and product (CIPP) evaluation model. Education and Science. 44(200), 229-251.
• Bentler, P. M. (2005). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
• Browne, M. W. & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005
• Byrne, B. M. (2010). Multivariate applications series. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
• Crystal, D. (2012). English as a global language. Cambridge university press.
• Darama, E., Karaduman, F., Kahraman, K. & Gündoğdu, K. (2018). Evaluation of 5th grade english curriculum according to stufflebeam’s context, ınput, process, product (CIPP) model. International Journal of PsychoEducational Sciences, 7(2), 73
• Dehkordi, M. E. & Talebinezhad, M. R. (2018). A CIPP Approach to evaluation of grammar teaching program at a high school in iran. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 5(2), 241-260.
• EF EPI (Education First English Proficiency Index) (2018). The world’s largest ranking of countries by english skills. http://www.ef.co.uk/epi/, Erişim tarihi: 28 Mayıs 2015.
• Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 6(1), 53-60.
• Karataş, H. & Fer, S. (2009). Evaluation of english curriculum at yildiz technical university using CIPP model. Egitim ve Bilim, 34(153), 47.
• Karataş, H., & Fer, S. (2011). CIPP evaluation model scale: development, reliability and validity. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences - WCES-2011, 15, 592–599.
• Kavgaoglu, D. & Alci, B. (2016). Application of context ınput process and product model in curriculum evaluation: case study of a call centre. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(17), 1659-1669.
• Kaya, S. & Ok, A. (2016). The second grade English language curriculum: Theory-practice congruence. Pegem Egitim ve Ögretim Dergisi, 6(4), 491-512.
• Kurt, A. (2017). 4. Sınıf İngilizce dersi öğretim programının bağlam, girdi, süreç, ürün modeline göre değerlendirilmesi. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (30), 508-524 . DOI: 10.14582/DUZGEF.1801
• Onyefulu, C. N. (2001). An evaluation study of the business education programs in the university of technology in Jamaica. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Alberta, Canada.
• Öner, G. & Mede, E. (2016). Evaluation of A1 level program at an english preparatory school in a turkish university: a case study. ELT Research Journal, 4.
• Özüdoğru, F. (2017). Evaluation of the voluntary english preparatory program at a turkish state university. Journal of International Social Research, 10(48), 501-509.
• Özüdoğru, F. (2018). Analysis of curriculum evaluation studies conducted in foreign language education: 2005-2016. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(2), 113-134.
• Sidani, S. & Sechrest, L. (1999). Putting program theory into operation. American Journal of Evaluation, 20(2), 227- 238.
• Stufflebeam, Daniel L. (1971). The relevance of the CIPP evaluation model for educational accountability. [Washington, D.C.] : Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED062385.
• Stufflebeam, D. L. (1983). The CIPP model for program evaluation. In Evaluation models. Springer, Dordrecht.
• Stufflebeam, D. L. & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007). Evaluation theory, models, & applications. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Rezaei, K. (2016). Evaluating of an English Language Teaching Program at High School in Iran. 5th International Conference on Research in Science and Technology (5RST), which will be held on November 15, 2016 in London, England.
• Ulum, Ö. G. (2016). Evaluation of english as a foreign language program-using CIPP (context, input, process and product) model. Online Submission, 1(2), 114-137.
• Yaman Akkuzu, D. & Şen, Ü. S. (2017). 12. sınıf müzik dersi öğretim programının CIPP “bağlam, girdi, süreç, ürün" modeline göre değerlendirilmesi. Journal of International Social Research, 10(49), 508-520.