Çevrimiçi ortamlarda motivasyonel geribildirimin öğrenenlerin öz-düzenleme, öz-yeterlilik, kaygı ve başarı puanlarına etkisi

Öz

The aim of this study is to determine the effects of written feedback given in accordance with motivation principles to student homework on their self-regulation skills, academic self-efficacy perceptions, anxiety levels and homework scores in online education. In line with this aim, the sample for this study consists of graduate students who took the main statistical course which was held online in the 2018-2019 fall semester of the Institute of Educational Sciences of Atatürk University. In the study, semiexperimental research method with pre-test and post-test control group was used. Data collection consists of the following different scales; in order to determine the existing problems of students against statistics course “Statistical Course Anxiety Scale was used. To determine existing academic self-efficacy perceptions against statistics course “Academic Self-Efficacy Perception Scale was used, for existing self-regulation skills against statistics course “Self-Regulation Skills Scale was used. In addition to those scales; academic achievement scores, evaluation scores given to weekly assignments and visa grades were also included. For data analysis Independent groups t-test and Mann Whitney U test were used. As a result of the study, While a significant relationship was observed between confirmatory feedback and self-regulation skills and similarly a significant relationship between homework notes and detailed feedback, there was no significant relationship between detailed feedback and self-efficacy perceptions and anxiety levels.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Feedback
• Self-efficacy
• Self-regulation
• Academicachievement
• Anxiety
• Motivation

Çevrimiçi ortamlarda motivasyonel geribildirimin öğrenenlerin öz-düzenleme, öz-yeterlilik, kaygı ve başarı puanlarına etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı; Uzaktan eğitimde öğrenci ödevlerine verilen yazılı geribildirimlerin motivasyon ilkeleri doğrultusunda tasarlanmasının öğrencilerin öz-düzenleme becerileri, akademik öz-yeterlilik algıları ve ödev puanları üzerine etkilerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda çalışma grubu olarak Atatürk üniversitesi eğitim bilimleri enstitüsü 2018-2019 güz yarıyılında uzaktan gerçekleştirilen temel istatistik dersi lisansüstü öğrencilerinden oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmada ön test-son test kontrol gruplu yarı deneysel araştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Veri toplama aracı olarak öğrencilerin istatistik dersine karşı var olan problemlerini belirlemek amacıyla “İstatistik Dersi Kaygı Ölçeği”, istatistik dersine karşı var olan akademik öz-yeterlilik algılarının belirlenmesi amacıyla “Akademik Öz-yeterlilik Algı Ölçeği” istatistik dersine karşı var olan özdüzenleme becerilerinin belirlenmesi amacıyla “Öz-Düzenleme Becerileri Ölçeği” , akademik başarı puanları, haftalık ödevlere verilen değerlendirme puanları ve vize notları kullanılarak elde edilmiştir. Araştırmada verilerin analizi için bağımsız gruplar t–testi ve Mann Whitney U testi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda ayrıntılı geri bildirim ile öz yeterlilik algıları ve kaygı düzeyleri arasında anlamlı bir ilişki görülememiştir. Doğrulayıcı geri bildirim ile öz düzenleme becerileri arasında anlamlı bir ilişki gözlemlenirken benzer ilişki ödev notları ile ayrıntılı geribildirim arasında gözlemlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Geri bildirim
• Öz yeterlik
• Öz-düzenleme
• Akademik Başarı
• Kaygı
• Motivasyon

Kaynakça

1. Aktaş, O. (2009). Ortalama Yükseltme Sınavına Giren 9. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Okul Motivasyonunu Etkileyen Faktörler (Beykoz Örneği), Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Beykent Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
2. Akçakin, V., Cebesoy, Ü. B., & Yusuf, İ. N. E. L. (2015). İki boyutlu matematik kaygısı ölçeğinin türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35(2).
3. Arslan, S.,& Gelişli, Y. (2015). Algılanan Öz-Düzenleme Ölçeği: Bir Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması. Sakarya UniversityJournal of Education, 5(3), 67-74.
4. Balaban Salı, J. (2003). Çevrimiçi eğitimde güdüleyici öğrenme sistemlerinin tasarımı.
5. Bai, H.,Wang, L., Pan, W., &Frey, M. (2009). Measuringmathematicsanxiety: Psychometricanalysis of a bidimensionalaffectivescale. Journal of InstructionalPsychology, 36(3).
6. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The Flipped Classroom: A survey of the Research. In 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 1–18). https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2013.6684807
7. Bixler, B. (2006). Motivation and its relationship to the design of educational games. NMC. Cleveland, Ohio. Retrieved, 10(07).
8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050106

9. Bozkurt, N. (2004). Bir grup üniversite öğrencisinin depresyon ve kaygı düzeyleri ile çeşitli değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiler. Eğitim ve Bilim, 29(133).
10. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2001). Deneysel desenler: Öntest sontest kontrol gruplu desen ve veri analizi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
11. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Data analysis handbook for social sciences. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
12. Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572132
13. Carless, D., Salter, D., Yang, M., & Lam, J. (2011). Developing sustainable feedback practices. Studies in Higher Education, 36(4), 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075071003642449
14. Dökmen, Ü. (1982). Farklı Tür Geribildirimlerin (Feedback) Öğrenmeye Etkisi. AÜ EBF Dergisi.
15. Finney, S., & Schraw, G. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs in college statistics courses.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 161–186.
16. Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students’ Learning. Learning in Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.512631
17. Guilloteaux, M. J., & Dörnyei, Z. (2008). Motivating language learners: A classroom‐oriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategies on student motivation. TESOL quarterly, 42(1), 55-77.
18. Hattie, J. A. (1987). Identifying the Salient Facets of a Model of Student Learning: A Synthesis of Meta Analyses. International Journal of Educational Research, 11(2), 187–212. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ374471%5Cnhttp://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/recordDetails.jsp?ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ374471&searchtype=keyword&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&_pageLabel=RecordDetails&accno=EJ374471&_nfls
19. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of feedback. Review of Educational Research. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
20. Heckhausen H. (1991).Motivation and Action.Springer-Verlag: Berlin.
21. Holder, D. (2005). Examining the impact of learning communities on motivation.
22. Hounsell, D. (2003). Student feedback, learning and development. In Higher Education and the Lifecourse (p. 209). Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jh46BmzuKikC&pgis=1
23. Karasar, N. (2003). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. (12. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık
24. Keller, J. M. (1979). Motivation and instructional design: A theoretical perspective. Journal of instructional development, 2(4), 26.
25. Kift, S., Nelson, K., & Clarke, J. (2010). Transition pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE - A case study of policy and practice for the higher education sector. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), 1–20.
26. Knight, N. (2003). Teacher feedback to students in numeracy lessons: Are students getting good value. SET Research Information for Teachers, (3).
27. Kulhavy, R. W., White, M. T., Topp, B. W., Chan, A. L., & Adams, J. (1985). Feedback complexity and corrective efficiency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10(3), 285–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(85)90025-6
28. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. Rethinking university teaching A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies (Vol. 2nd). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203304846
29. Lee, S. H., & Boling, E. (1999). Screen design guidelines for motivation in interactive multimedia instruction: A survey and framework for designers. Educational technology, 19-26.
30. Maclellan, E. (2001). Assessment for learning: The differing perceptions of tutors and students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 307–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930120063466
31. Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive science, 5(4), 333-369.
32. Mayfield, J., Mayfield, M., & Kopf, J. (1995). Motivating language: Exploring theory with scale development. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 32(4), 329-344.
33. Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003786559
34. Özyürek, M. (2010). Olumlu sınıf yönetimi. Kök Yayıncılık.
35. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
36. Reigeluth, C. M., and Stein, F. S. (1983). The elaboration theory of instruction. In Reigeluth, C. M. (ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 335-381.
37. Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117714
38. Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative Assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050104
39. Balaban-Salı, J. (2002). Uzaktan öğretimde güdüleyici öğrenme sistemlerinin tasarımı. Uluslararası Açık ve Uzaktan Eğitim Sempozyumunda.
40. Seiler, S., Lent, B., Pinkowska, M., & Pinazza, M. (2012). An integrated model of factors influencing project managers' motivation—Findings from a Swiss Survey. International Journal of Project Management, 30(1), 60-72.
41. Small, R. V. (1997). Motivation in instructional design. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.
42. Watters, J. J., & Ginns, I. S. (2000). Developing motivation to teach elementary science: Effect of collaborative and authentic learning practices in preservice education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(4), 301-321.
43. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological review, 92(4), 548.
44. Wilde, S., Wright, S., Hayward, G., Johnson, J., Skerrett, R., Jill, M., … Nuffield, G. H. (2006). Nuffield Review Higher Education Focus Groups Preliminary Report Nuffield Review Higher Education Focus Groups Preliminary Report Emerging issues. Retrieved from http://docstore.mch-net.info/nuffield.pdf