High School Students’ Views and Attitudes towards Geography Courses in Turkey

Abstract

Geography, which is very important in understanding the place we live on, should be an area of interest for students rather than just a course. Geography education is an important subject in Turkey that has been offered in various institutions from pre-school to post-graduate education. The first geography course curriculum began to be implemented in 1924 in the history of the Republic. Geography course curricula (GCC), as in other courses, have also been changed since 1924.With the amendment of 2005, the GCC has reached a very different structure than the previous curricula and has entered into the application with many changes and innovations. The Geography Curriculum had new revisions and innovations in 2018 as well. Despite these changes, the curriculum’s structure has not been changed. Students centered instruction, construvtivist approach, and active learning strategies were the heart of the curriculum. The aim of this study was to determine the views of high school students studying in Düzce province about in-class learning-teaching activities, material use in geography courses and their attitudes towards geography courses based on these, and to examine this subject in terms of various variables (gender of student, gender of the geography teacher, whether the course is liked, school location, class level and school type). Survey model was used in this study. For this purpose, a scale was developed for the study. A 25-item “learning process in geography course, material use and student attitude” scale consisting of three factors including developed. The study group consists of 568 students studying in various high schools in Düzce during the 2018-2019 academic year. Statistical analyzes were performed using SPSS 22.0 (Statistical Package for Social Science for Personal Computers) software. The results indicated that even though the 2018 revised curriculum implemented active learning, constructivist approach, and student centered program, teachers utilize traditional instructional methods according to students. Teachers mainly use textbooks and they hardly use instructional materials. Results also indicated that teachers only use traditional assessment methods. The use of student portfolios, group work, and student projects hardly exist in classrooms.

Keywords

• geography curricula,student viewpoints,material use,in-class activities

References

1. Akkuş, M. (2008). Assessment of geography class teaching program (2005) based on teachers? views. (Unpublished postgraduate thesis). Gazi Uni. Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
2. Aksoy, B. (2004). Problem based learning approach in geography teaching. (Unpublished doctorate thesis). Gazi Uni. Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
3. Aksoy, B., & Koç, H. (2010). The Evaluation Of The Views Of Teachers Concerning The Teaching Program Of 2005 Geography Course. Giresun Uni. Institute of Social Sciences The Black Sea Journal of Social Sciences, 2, 17-52.
4. Alım, M. (2003). Evaluation of ninth class geography teaching curriculum according to the opinions of teachers and students. (Unpublished doctorate thesis). Atatürk Uni. Erzurum.
5. Alım, M. (2008). The Attitude of High School Students Towards Geography Course. Eastern Geographical Review, 13(19), 25-32.
6. Arı, Y. (2003). Amerika Birleşik Devletlerinde Coğrafya Eğitimi Reformu: Türkiye İçin Dersler, Ankara: Türk Coğrafya Kurumu, Coğrafya Kurultayı Bildirileri.
7. Arseven A, D. (2001). Alan araştırma yöntemi (ilkeler teknikler örnekler). Ankara: Gündüz.
8. Artvinli, E. (2007). 9. grade geography curriculum in 2005: practıcabılıty level in point of the teachers. (Unpublished doctorate thesis). Atatürk Uni. Erzurum

9. Artvinli, E. (2010). Teaching styles of geography teachers. Electronik Journal of Social Sciences, 9(33), 387-408.
10. Aydın F., Coşkun M., & Kara H. (2010) The attıtudes of commercıal vocatıonal hıgh school students towards geography lesson (elbistan example) Çankırı Karatekin Uni. Journal of Institute of Social Sciences , 1, 183‐203.
11. Aydın, F., & Güngördü, E. (2015). Coğrafya eğitiminde özel öğretim yöntemleri. Ankara, PegemA
12. Bednarz, S., Mark H. B., & Fred H. W. (2005). Mentoring: a new approach to geography teacher preparation. Journal of Geography, National Council for Geographic Education, 104, 105–112.
13. Borg, W.R., & Gall, M. D. (1971). Educational, research. New York: David McKay Company.
14. Büyüköztürk Ş., Çakmak E. K., Akgün E. A., Karadeniz Ş., & Demirel F., (2018) Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara, PegemA.
15. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018) Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Pegem Akademi. Ankara.
16. Doğanay, H. (1989). Geography and geography curriculum in our high schools, Ankara: Coğrafya Araştırmaları, Atatürk Kültür Dil ve Tarih Kurumu, Coğrafya Bilim ve Uygulama Kolu, 9(1), 7–24.
17. Doğanay, H. (1993). Coğrafya’da metodoloji. Ankara: M.E.B.
18. Ekiz, D. (2015). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Anı.
19. Ertürk, M., & Girgin, M. (2005), Comporation geography curriculum in terms of standards. Eastern Geographical Review, Sayı:13, 219-233
20. Ertürk, S. (1984). Egitimde program geliştirme. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi.
21. Geçit, Y. (2008), A work deals with on the programmes of republic term lycee geography education. Journal of Marmara Geography, 18, 149-173.
22. Gülersoy, A. E. (2007). An evaluation of the new and former 9th and 10th grade geography curriculum. Dokuz Eylül Uni.The Journal of Buca Faculty of Education, 21, 163-173.
23. İncekara, S. (2006), A comparative evaluation of secondary geographic education in Turkey and Canada: Curriculum, methods and technologies (Unpublished doctorate thesis). Marmara Uni. İstanbul.
24. Karabağ, S., & Şahin, S. (Ed.) (2007). Kuram ve uygulamada coğrafya eğitimi. Ankara: Gazi.
25. Karasar, N. (2016). Bilimsel irade algı çerçevesi ile bilimsel araştırma yöntemi kavramlar ilkeler teknikler. Ankara: Nobel.
26. Kerski, J.J. (2000). The implementation and effectiveness of Geographic Information Systems Technology and Methods in Secondary Education, Colorado: University of Colorado, Department of Geography.
27. MEB. (1942). MEB Tebliğler Dergisi, 4, 168.
28. National Academy Press; Rediscovering Geography; National Academy Pres, Washington, 1997, USA.
29. Oruç, Ş, Tokcan, H., & Demirkaya, H. (2017). Yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma bir örnek: Osmanli dönemi coğrafya ve coğrafya öğretimi 2. Baskı (Kişiler, Eserler, Kitaplar, Makaleler, Ders Örnekleri). Ankara: PegemA.
30. Öztürk, M., & Eroğlu, E. (2013). Geography Teacher competencies and an evaluation of practices. Journal of Marmara Geography, 27, 630-659. Şahin, C. (2001). Türkiye’de coğrafya öğretimi, sorunlar-çözüm önerileri. Ankara: Gündüz.
31. Sakaoğlu, N. (1992). Cumhuriyet dönemi eğitim tarihi. İstanbul: İletişim.
32. Şanlı, Ö. Altun, M. Tan, Ç. (2015) Problems and solution offers of the teachers about smart boards and the tablets delivered to the students. Turkish Studies.10 (3), 833-850
33. Sezer, A., & Tokcan, H. (2003). The effect of cooperative learning on academic achievement in geography course. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Uni. Journal of Gazi Edu. Faculty, 23(3), 227-242.
34. Sözen, E. (2011). Assessment of geography 10th grade geography curriculum teaching program based on teachers views. (Unpublished postgraduate thesis). Gazi Uni. Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
35. Sözen, E. (2018). Teachers’ views about the terms acquisition, teaching-learning, and assessment-evaluation processesbased on the 10th grade geography curriculum (2005). Turkish Studies. 13(27), 1305-1322.
36. Sözen, E. (2019). Development of the scale of towards geography lesson attitude and in-class learning process and material use validity and reliability study. Anatolian Journal of Educational Leadership and Instruction, 7(1), 1-14.
37. Sözen, E., & Coşkun, M. (2017). Evaluation of some school applications in Turkish national education according to students’ viewpoints. Journal of Education and Training Studies. 5(3), 201-210.
38. Sözer, E. (1998). Kurumdan uygulama sosyal bilgilerin öğretimi. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi.
39. Tanoba, S. (2002). Evaluation of the geography curriculum for 9 th grade in secondary education. (Unpublished postgraduate thesis). Gazi Uni. Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
40. Taş, H. İ. (2002). A comparative study of geographic educatıon between the unıted states and turkısh hıgh schools. Journal of Marmara Geography, 6, 53-72
41. Tomal, N. (2004). Problems and solution suggestions of geography curriculum applied in high schools. Journal of Burdur Edu. Faculty, 5(8), 174-188.
42. Varış, F. (1998). Egitimde program geliştirme. Ankara: Alkım Kitapçılık.
43. Yılmaz, C., & Zeyrek, H. (1997). For passing and credit system the place of geography teaching in our high schools according to the system and some problems. OMU Journal of Edu. Faculty, 10(1), 287-307.