Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices

Sibel Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı

EN TR

Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices

Abstract

This study aimed to determine, characteristics affecting the peer review in micro-teaching practices. Sequential exploratory design, in mixed method was used. The study group on the qualitative dimension has been comprised of 16 preservice Science teachers of in Kafkas University Faculty of Education in the academic year 2014-2015. The sample size of the quantitative dimension has been comprised of 222 preservice teachers in different departments has realized the micro teaching practice. Criterion sampling was used in the study. Data were collected from interviews form the qualitative dimension and Data on quantitative dimension were collected from “Factors in Microteaching Peer Assessment Scale (FMPAS)” prepared in the light of data obtained from the literature. Content analysis was used and frequency calculations were performed for data analysis.at the end of this study was observed that the close friendship relations is one of the important factors that influence the peer review.

Keywords

micro-teaching,peer review,peer bias,teacher candidates.

References

Allen, D. W. (1980). Micro-teaching: Personal review. Britisch Journal of Teacher Education, 6(2), 147-151.
Akiyama, T. (2012, Ağustos). A close look at english teacher employment examinations: how do raters assess? Paper presented at the 8th International Symposium on Teaching English at Tertiary Level And The 17th Conference of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, Beijing, Chine. Abstract retrieved March 12, 2015, from: http://paal.kr/download/PAAL2012_Proceedings.pdf
Azarnoosh, M. (2013). Peer assessment in an EFL context: attitudes and friendship bias. Language Testing in Asia, 3(1), 1-10.
Bellmore, A. D., Nishina, A., Witkow, M. R., Graham, S., & Juvonen, J. (2007). The influence of classroom ethnic composition on same‐and other‐ethnicity peer nominations in middle school. Social Development, 16(4), 720-740.
Bozkurt, E., ve Demir, R. (2012). Öğrenci görüşleriyle akran değerlendirme: Bir örnek uygulama. İlköğretim Online, 11(4), 966-978.
Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2011). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (8. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akedemi.
Chou, C., ve Tsai, C. C. (2002). Developing web-based curricula: Issues and challenges. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(6), 623-636
Ellington, H., Earl, S., & Cowan, J. (1997). Making effective use of peer and self assessment. The Robert Gordon University.
Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 175–187
Falchikov, N., ve Magin, D. (1997). Detecting gender bias in peer marking of students’ group process work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 385-396.

Fernandez, M. L. (2005). Learning through microteaching lesson study in teacher preparation. Action in Teacher Education, 26(4), 37-47.
Fernandez, M. L., ve Robinson, M. (2006). Prospective teachers' perspectives on microteaching lesson study. Education, 127(2), 203.
Fiedler, K., Semin, G. R., Finkenauer, C., & Berkel, I. (1995). Actor-observer bias in close relationships: the role of self-knowledge and self-related language. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 525-538.
Floyd, K., ve Voloudakis, M. (1999). Attributions for expectancy violating changes in affectionate behavior in platonic friendships. Journal of Psychology, 133(1), 32-48.
Freire, A., Lee, K., Williamson, K. S., Stuart, S. J., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2004). Lineup identification by children: effects of clothing bias. Law and Human Behavior, 28(3), 339.
Friedman, B. A., Cox, P. L., & Maher, L. E. (2008). An expectancy theory motivation approach to peer assessment. Journal of Management Education, 32(5), 580-612.
Gelbal, S. ve Kelecioğlu, H. (2007). Öğretmenlerin ölçme ve değerlendirme yöntemleri hakkındaki yeterlilik algıları ve karşılaştıkları sorunlar. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33, 135-145.
Gömleksiz, M. N., ve Koç. A (2012). Bilgisayar kullanımı öğretiminde akran değerlendirme. NWSA: Education Sciences, 7(1), 148-154.
Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı, S., ve Aydın, S. (2014). Öğretmen adaylarının mikro öğretim uygulamalarına yönelik görüşleri. Turkish Journal of Education, 3(4), 4-14.
Harris, J. C. (2006). Should humor be a desired disposition for teacher candidates?. Teacher Education Journal of South Carolina, 67-74.
Kayış, A. (2005). Güvenirlik analizi. Şeref Kalaycı (Ed.) içinde, SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri (ss. 404-409). Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
Kozak, N. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde süreli yayıncılık. 1. Ulusal kurultay bildirileri. K. Karakütük (Ed.) içinde, Türkiye'de ve dünyada dergi editörlüğü ve hakemlik sistemi, (ss. 53-63). Ankara. ISBN: 975 - 403 - 404 – 4.
Kupper, J. B. (2001). The microteaching experience: student perspectives. Education, 121 (4), 830-835.
Küçükahmet, L. (2008). Öğretimde planlama ve değerlendirme. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
Langan, A. M., Wheater, C. P., Shaw, E. M., Haines, B. J., Cullen, W. R., Boyle, J. C., ... & Preziosi, R. F. (2005). Peer assessment of oral presentations: effects of student gender, university affiliation and participation in the development of assessment criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), 21-34.
Love, K. G. (1981). Comparison of peer assessment methods: Reliability, validity, friendship bias, and user reaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66(4), 451.
McMillan, J.H. ve Schumacher, S. (2006). Evidence-based ınquiry. Research in education. United States of America: Pearson Education.
Morahan-Martin, J. (1996). Should peers’ evaluations be used in class projects? Questions regarding reliability, leniency, and acceptance. Psychological Reports, 78(3), 1243–1250.
Popovich, N. G. ve Katz, N. L. (2009). Instructional design and assessment. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(4), 1-8.
Semerci Ç. (2011). Mikro öğretim uygulamalarinin çok yüzeyli rasch ölçme modeli ile analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 36(161),14-25.
Semerci, Ç., Semerci, N., & Duman, B. (2013). Yüksek lisans öğrencilerinin seminer sunu performanslarının çok-yüzeyli rasch modeli ile analizi. Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (25).
Sevim, S. (2013). Mikro-öğretim uygulamasının öğretmen adayları gözüyle değerlendirilmesi. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21, 303-313.
Sluijsmans, D., ve Prins, F. (2006). A conceptual framework for integrating peer assessment in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(1), 6-22.
Tavşancıl, E. (2005). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile veri analizi. (İkinci Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in college and university. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276.
Townsend, J. S., ve Boone, W. J. (3-6 April 2011). Using many facet rasch measurement to evaluate judges, examinees, and ıtems: an example using the ESTAM. Paper presented at National Association for Research in Science Teaching International Conference (NARST), Orlando, FL, U.S.A.
Yüksek Öğretim Kurumu (YÖK). (2012). Ders gözlem uygulaması değerlendirme formu.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Studies on Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Sibel Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı This is me

Publication Date

September 15, 2016

Submission Date

July 11, 2017

Acceptance Date

January 4, 2016

Published in Issue

Year 2016 Volume: 24 Number: 4

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF

APA

Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı, S. (2016). Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices. Kastamonu Education Journal, 24(4), 2005-2020. https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF

AMA

1.Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı S. Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices. Kastamonu Education Journal. 2016;24(4):2005-2020. https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF

Chicago

Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı, Sibel. 2016. “Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices”. Kastamonu Education Journal 24 (4): 2005-20. https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF.

EndNote

Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı S (September 1, 2016) Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices. Kastamonu Education Journal 24 4 2005–2020.

IEEE

[1]S. Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı, “Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices”, Kastamonu Education Journal, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 2005–2020, Sept. 2016, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF

ISNAD

Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı, Sibel. “Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices”. Kastamonu Education Journal 24/4 (September 1, 2016): 2005-2020. https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF.

JAMA

1.Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı S. Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices. Kastamonu Education Journal. 2016;24:2005–2020.

MLA

Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı, Sibel. “Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices”. Kastamonu Education Journal, vol. 24, no. 4, Sept. 2016, pp. 2005-20, https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF.

Vancouver

1.Sibel Gürbüzoğlu Yalmancı. Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices. Kastamonu Education Journal [Internet]. 2016 Sep. 1;24(4):2005-20. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA39BG67PF

Kastamonu Education Journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.

Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices

Determining The Factors That Influence Peer Asessment in Microteaching Practices

Abstract

Keywords

Mikroöğretim Uygulamalarında Akran Değerlendirmelerini Etkileyen Niteliklerin Belirlenmesi

Abstract

Keywords

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

IZ

Cite