The Effect of Cooperative Letters and Cooperative Posters on the Academic Achievements of Social Studies Teacher Candidates

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of cooperative letter and cooperative poster studies on the academic achievement of social studies teacher candidates in contemporary world history course and the relationship between learning writing and course success. In the research, quantitative model was adopted and quasi-experimental design with pretest-posttest comparison groups was used. The study group of the research consists of 78 social studies teacher candidates studying at Atatürk University in the spring semester of 2019-2020. In the research, academic achievement test, letter and poster evaluation rubrics were used as data collection tools. Independent groups t-test and dependent groups t-test were used in the analyzes. As a result of the research, it was determined that cooperative poster and cooperative letter applications are significantly effective in improving the academic achievement of teacher candidates. It was determined that there are no significant difference between the academic achievements of teacher candidates who do different types of writing, but their letter writing skills are significantly higher than their poster preparation skills.

Keywords

• Writing to learn
• academic achievement
• Cooperative learning
• Letter
• Poster

References

1. Akcanca, N. and Özsevgec, L. C. (2019). Preschool teacher candidates' views on the evaluation of reflective diaries. Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 13 (28), 214-233.
2. Akçay, H., & Baltacı, A. (2017). Evaluation of multiple writing activities for learning in astronomy teaching. Mersin University Journal of Education Faculty, 13 (1), 138-151.
3. Akçay, H., Özyurt, B.B. and Bezir Akçay, B. (2014). The effect of using multiple writing activities in science and technology lesson teaching on student achievement and concept learning. Bayburt University Journal of Education Faculty, 10 (2), 15-31.
4. Aktaş, Ş. and Gündüz, O. (2009). Written and oral expression, reading - listening - speaking - writing. Akcay Publishing. Ankara.
5. Alharbi, F. (2015). Writing for learning to improve students’ comprehension at the college level. English Language Teaching, 8(5), 222–234.
6. Arı, A. A., & Yıldırım, Z. (2017). The effect of writing activities on the academic success of middle school students in algebraic expressions. Social Sciences Studies Journal, 3 (12), 2011-2019.
7. Ashworth, T. E. (1992). Using writing-to-learn strategies in community college associated degree-nursing programs (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu (osu LD5655.V856_1992.A849).
8. Atasoy, Ş. (2013). Effect of writing-to-learn strategy on undergraduates’ conceptual understanding of electrostatics effect of writing-to-learn strategy on undergraduates’ conceptual understanding of electrostatics. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 593-602.

9. Atila, M. E. (2008). The effects of the use of different description modes in learning writing activities on academic achievement in science teaching. Unpublished Master Thesis. Atatürk University, Institute of Science Erzurum.
10. Atila, M. E., Günel, M., Büyükkasap, E. (2010). The effect of variations on the use of description modes in learning writing activities on the learning of elementary force and motion subjects. Turkish Journal of Science Education. 7, 113-127.
11. Ay, A. (2018). The effect of the use of letters and poetry among learning writing activities on student achievement in social studies curriculum. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Erzincan University, Institute of Social Sciences Erzincan.
12. Ay, A., & Başıbüyük, A. (2018). The opinions of social studies teacher candidates about writing activities for learning purposes. Erzincan University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 11 (1), 33-42.
13. Bal, M. S. (2011). A comparison of teachers and teacher discuss problems and solutions to the teaching of history in Turkey. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8 (15), 371-387.
14. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
15. Boscolo, P., & Carotti, L. (2003). Does writing contribute to improving high school students’ approach to literature? Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 3, 197–224.
16. Boscolo, P., & Mason, L. (2001). Writing to learn, writing to transfer. G. Rijlaarsdarn (Series Ed.) &
17. Bozat, Ö. (2014). 5. The effect of the letter on the success of writing activities for learning purposes in the electrical unit in our classroom life. Unpublished Master Thesis. Atatürk University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Erzurum.
18. Bozat, Ö. and Yıldız, A. (2015). 5. The effect of the letter on the success of writing activities for learning purposes in the electrical unit in our classroom life. Education Sciences, 10 (4), 291-304.
19. Britton, J. N. (1972). Writing to learn and learning to write. Document Resume, 200(145), 31.
20. Burton, L., Morgan, C. (2000). Mathematicians writing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 31, 429-453.
21. Çalışkan, H. (2008). Educators' perceptions about the inquiry-based learning approach. Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 28 (1), 153-170.
22. Calp, M. (2005). Teaching Turkish as a special education area. Education Bookstore Publications. Konya.
23. Cavkaytar, S. (2010). Using the writing process model in developing written expression skills in primary education. International Journal of Social Research, 3-10.
24. Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J., and Hand, B. (2010). Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms. Res Sci Educ, 40,149–169.
25. Çontay, E. G. (2012). The effect of writing activities on surface areas and volumes of geometric objects on the success of 8th grade students and their self-efficacy towards geometry. Unpublished Master Thesis. Pamukkale University, Institute of Educational Sciences Denizli.
26. Daşdemir, İ. (2014). The effect of letter-writing activities for learning purposes on them students’ learning of the science course and scientific attitude, Educational Research and Reviews 9 (19), 786-791.
27. Davis, B. H. (1990). The effects of expressive writing on the social studies achievement, writing fluency, and learning retention of fourth-grade students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (UMI No. 9104761)
28. Doğan, Y. and İlhan, N. (2016). Prospective Teachers’ Views Related to Using Writing to Learn Activities in “Science and Technology Teaching” Course. Adıyaman University Journal of Educational Sciences, 6 (1), 1-22.
29. Duymaz, N. (2011). The use of learning writing activities and analogy in learning the cell subject. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences Ankara.
30. Eker, C. and Coşkun, İ. (2012). The effect of writing a course diary on the academic success of primary school 4th grade students in social studies course. Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 29, 110-120.
31. Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122-28.
32. Erseven, E. (2011). Evaluation of the 12th grade “Contemporary Turkish and World History” textbook in the light of teachers and students' opinions. Unpublished Master Thesis. Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences Ankara.
33. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS (4th ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. Friedman, V. S., and Patterson, L. M. (2011). Writing in geography: student attitudes and assessment. Journal of Geography in Higher Deducation, 36(2), 179-195.
35. Fry, W. S., and Villagomez, A. (2012). Writing to learn: benefits and limitations. College Teaching, 60(4), 170-175.
36. Gammill, D. M. (2006). Learning the write way. The Reading Teacher, 59(8), 754–762.
37. Gündüz, O., and Şimşek, T. (2011). Applied writing education. Graphic Publications. Ankara.
38. Günel, M., Hand, B. and Gündüz, Ş. (2006). Comparing student understanding of quantum physics when embedding multimodal representations into two different writing formats: presentation format versus summary report format. Science Education, 90, 1092– 1112.
39. Günel, M., Uzoğlu, and M., Büyükkasap, E. (2009). The effect of the use of learning writing activities on learning the subject of force at primary education level. Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 29 (1) 379-399.
40. Hammer, D. (1996). How many alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions? Journal of Learning Sciences. 5, (2), 97-127
41. Hand, B. and Choi, A. (2010). Examining the impact of student use of multiple modal representations in constructing arguments in organic chemistry laboratory classes. Research in Science Education, 40, 29–44.
42. Hand, B., Hohenshell, L. and Prain, V. (2007). Examining the effect of multiple writing tasks on year 10 biology students’ understanding of cell and molecular biology concepts. Instructional Science, 35, 343–373.
43. İncirci, A., and Parmaksız, R. Ş. (2016). The effects of writing to learn (WTL) on academic achievement and attitude to lesson in English classes. Universal Journal of Educational Research 4(9), 2163-2173.
44. Karaçağıl, C. (2014). The effect of using writing activities for learning in social studies lessons on academic achievement of students. Unpublished Master Thesis. Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Institute of Educational Sciences Muğla.
45. Karaçağıl, C. and Kiriş Avaroğulları, A. (2017). The effect of using writing activities for learning in social studies lessons on students' academic success. International Journal of Innovative Research in Education, 4 (2), 54-59.
46. Kaul, M. V. (1998). The effects of the use of writing as a teaching and learning tool on the achievement of freshman economics students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI No. 9901340)
47. Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review,11 (3), 203-270.
48. Koçak, G. (2013). The effect levels on the academic success and permanence of 1st grade students in science teaching by applying writing activities for learning in one dimension about movement. Unpublished Master Thesis. Atatürk University, Institute of Educational Sciences. Erzurum.
49. Koçak, G., and Seven, S. (2016). The opinions of pre-service science teachers about writing activities for learning purposes: example of movement in one dimension. Ekev Academy Journal, 20 (65), 253-268.
50. Landis J.R., and Koch G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-74.
51. Langer, J. A. and Applebee, A. N. (1987). How writing shapes thinking. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.
52. Mcmillan, J. H. and Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-Based inquiry. (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
53. Öğdük, A. (2011). The effect of modal descriptions used in learning writing activities in science and technology lesson in the second level of primary education on academic achievement. Unpublished Master Thesis. Atatürk University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Erzurum.
54. Oktaylar, H. C. (2012). Quantification and consideration. Yargı Publishing House,Ankara.
55. Pepper, B. (2012). Science and technology teachers' perceptions of writing and their level of application of learning writing activities. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Atatürk University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Erzurum.
56. Prain, V. (2006). Learning from writing in secondary science: some theoretical and practical implications. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 179-201.
57. Reaves, R. R. (1991). The effects of writing to learn activities on the content knowledge, retention of information and attitudes toward writing of selected vocational agriculture education students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (UMI No. 9130824)
58. Rouse, A. G., Graham, S. and Compton, D. (2017). Writing to learn in science: Effects on grade 4 students' understanding of balance. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(4), 366-379.
59. Shapiro, S.S., and Wilk, M.B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52(3/4), 591-611.
60. Stewart, T. L., Myers, A. C. and Culley, M. R. (2010). Enhanced learning and retention through “writing to learn” in the psychology classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 37(1), 46-49.
61. Tynjala, P. (1998). Writing as a tool for constructive learning: Students' learning experiences during an experiment. Higher Education, 36(2), 209-230.
62. Tynjala, P. L. (1998). Studies in Writing, Writing as a Learning Tool: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 83 - 104). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
63. Tynjälä, P., Mason, L., & Lonka, K. (Ed.). (2012). Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (7th ed.). New York: Springer.
64. Uzoğlu, M. (2010) Investigation of the effect of using writing activities for learning purposes on learning force and matter unit at primary education level. Unpublished Doctorate Thesis, Atatürk University Institute of Science Erzurum.
65. Uzoğlu, M., (2014). Determining the effects of using different writing activities on the academic Achievements, secondary school 7th grade students and their attitudes towards the course. Eucational Research and Reviews, 9 (20), 1065-1070.
66. Uzun, S. (2011). The effect of learning environments enriched with literacy activities on physics learning: a 98 application in energy unit. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Karadeniz Technical University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Trabzon.
67. Uzun, S. and Alev, N. (2013). The effect of learning environments enriched with literacy activities on student achievement. Turkish Journal of Science Education, 10 (2), 138-154.
68. Yazıcı, Ş. (2018). Contribution of Contemporary Turkish and World History achievements to critical thinking skills according to teachers' views. Unpublished Master Thesis. Sivas Cumhuriyet University, Institute of Educational Sciences Sivas.
69. Yıldız, A. (2014). Letter and its effective use as a learning writing activity. Journal Turkish Studies, 9 (5), 2097-2097.
70. Yıldız, A., and Büyükkasap, E. (2011). Pre-service teachers' levels of understanding of photo electricity and the effect of writing to learn on success. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11 (4), 2259-2274.
71. Yıldız, E. (2021a). The effects of cooperative story and poster applications on academic success of pre-service science teachers. Marmara University Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal of Educational Sciences, 53 (53), 342-362.
72. Yıldız, E. (2021b). Comparison of the effects of cooperative story and comic writing on the academic success of pre-service teachers. Journal of Ahi Evran University Institute of Social Sciences, 7 (1), 32-49.
73. Yıldız, E., Koçak, G., Ürün Arıcı, N. and Şimşek, Ü. (2018). The effects of cooperative learning and writing activities for learning purposes on prospective teachers' achievement in physics laboratory and writing skills for learning. 27th Educational Sciences Congress.
74. Yıldız, Ö. (2003). Contemporary problems and suggest solutions to the teaching of history in Turkey. Erciyes University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 1 (15), 181-190.
75. Yıldız, Ö. (2009). Understanding of quantum physics topics of university students and the effect of learning writing activities on academic success. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Atatürk University, Institute of Science, Erzurum.