How do Middle School Students Perceive the Sociocultural Dialectic Method?

Year 2024, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 105 - 115, 31.12.2024

Yılmaz Saglam , Nevzat Güneş

https://doi.org/10.52134/ueader.1484709

Abstract

Abstract: The present study sought to explore how students perceive the Sociocultural Dialectic Method (SDM). A phenomenological case study approach was employed in gathering and analyzing the data. The study focused on the students' lived experiences of two classroom settings: one representing the teacher's regular classroom, and the other representing the classroom where the SDM is implemented. A total of 20 middle school students volunteered and participated in the study. Individual interviews were conducted, recorded, and later transcribed. The transcriptions were then analyzed inductively to discover patterns in the data. The results indicated all students found the class conducted with the SDM to be superior in terms of comprehension, retention, experience, participation, and enjoyment. To specify further, all students stated that they learned better in the class where the SDM was in use. In other words, without exception, the students found the SDM to be a superior method for learning. Further to that, 90% of the students claimed that they had the opportunity to observe the phenomenon in the class where the SDM was used and stated that their participation in this class was higher. 20% of the students found the class with the SDM more enjoyable. Also, a similar number of students (20%) expressed that what they learned in this class was more unforgettable.
Keywords: Sociocultural Dialectic Method, SDM, Phenomenology, Hands-on activity.

Keywords

Sociocultural Dialectic Method, SDM, Phenomenology

References

• Chalmers, A. F. (1999). What is this thing called Science (3rd Ed). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company Bingolbali, E. & Monaghan, J. (2007). Cognition and institutional setting. In A. Watson & P. Winbourne (Eds.), New directions for situated cognition in mathematics education (pp. 233–260). New York: Springer.
• Cassirer, E. (1957). The philosophy of symbolic forms (Vol. 3): The Phenomenology of Knowledge. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.
• David, M. M. & Watson, A. (2007). Participating in what? Using situated cognition theory to illuminate differences in classroom practices. In A. Watson & P. Winbourne (Eds.), New directions for situated cognition in mathematics education (pp. 31–58). New York: Springer.
• Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Lemke, J. L. (1997). Cognition, context, and learning: A social semiotic perspective. In D. Kirshner & J. A. Whitson (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives (pp. 37–55). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Lewis, C. I. (1933). Experience and meaning, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 7, 125-146.
• Lombardi, D., Shipley, T. F. et al. (2021). The Curious Construct of Active Learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 22, 8-43.
• Miles, M.B. &Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oak, CA: Sage.
• Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research& Evaluation Methods (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oak: SAGE Publications.
• Saglam, Y. (2013). Nasil ogretebilirim? Sosyokulturel diyalektik yöntem. (I. Baskı) Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Saglam, Y. (2014). Nasil ogretebilirim? Sosyokulturel diyalektik yöntem. (II. Baskı) Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Saglam, Y. (2019). Bir öğretim sanatı: Sosyokulturel diyalektik yöntem. Ankara: Pegem Academy.
• Saglam, Y. & Goksu, P. (2021). The impact of Sociocultural Dialectic Model on student’s engagement. Journal of Muallim Rifat Faculty of Education. 3(2), 18-34.
• Samarapungavan, A., Westby, E. & Bodner, G. M. (2006). Contextual epistemic development in science: A comparison of chemistry students and research chemists. Science & Education, 90(3), 468–495.
• van Oers, B. (2001). Contextualisation for abstraction. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 1, 279-305.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1930). Mind and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (2016). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. International Research in Early Childhood Education, 7(2), 3-25.
• Wertsch, J.V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.