Özel Gereksinimli Öğrenciler ile Çalışan Öğretmenlerin Yenilikçi Pedagoji Uygulamalarına Yönelik Görüşlerinin İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, özel gereksinimli öğrencilerie çalışan öğretmenlerin, yenilikçi pedagoji uygulamalarına yönelik görüşlerini incelemektir. Bu kapsamda öğretmenlerin yenilikçi pedagojik uygulamaları ne amaçla kullandıklarını belirlerken yine öğretmenlerin yenilikçi uygulamalara yer verdikleri sınıfta veya okulda karşılaştıkları çeşitli problemlerin neler olduğunu belirlemek de araştırmanın amaçları arasındadır. Nitel verilerin toplandığı bu çalışmada betimsel araştırma türlerinden biri olan tarama yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada maksimum çeşitlilik örnekleme yönteminden yaralanılmış ve özel gereksinimli bireylerle çalışan 34 öğretmenden veri toplanmıştır. Araştırma verileri, “Yenilikçi Pedagoji Görüşme Formu” aracılığıyla toplanmış olup betimsel analiz tekniğiyle çözümlenmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında elde edilen bulgular, özel gereksinimli bireylere çalışan öğretmenlerin çoğunlukla kendilerini yenilikçi olarak tanımladığı, öğrenci ilgi ve gereksinimlerini göz önünde tutarak çeşitli materyaller ile ders işlemeyi tercih ettiklerini göstermektedir. Ancak öğretmenlerin materyal eksikliği, öğrenme ortamının ve okulun fiziki yetersizliği, ekonomik sorunlar, öğrenen ve öğretmen hazırbulunuşluk düzeyinin istenilen düzeyde olmayışı gibi çeşitli sorunlarla karşılaştıkları belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yenilikçi pedagoji
• yenilikçi uygulamalar
• özel gereksinimli bireyler
• özel eğitim, öğretmenler

Investigating the Teachers’ Innovative Pedagogical Practices towards Students with Special Needs

Öz

This study aims to investigate the views of teachers working with students with special needs towards innovative pedagogy practices. In this context, the purpose of teachers’ using of innovative pedagogical practices and various problems faced by teachers when they use innovative practices, were also handled in this study. The study was based on the descriptive survey method and qualitative data was collected. The study was conducted with 34 teachers working with individuals with special needs who were selected for the study with the maximum variation sampling method. The data were collected through the "Innovative Pedagogy Interview Form" and analyzed with descriptive analysis technique. Findings showed that teachers working with individuals with special needs mostly define themselves as innovative and design their teaching process with various materials considering the students’ interests and needs. However, it was determined that they faced various problems such as inadequate equipment and materials, insufficient learning environment, and inadequate level of teacher readiness and quality.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• : Innovative pedagogy
• ; Innovative practices
• Students with special needs
• Special education teachers

Kaynakça

1. Addis, S. (2009). Creativity and innovation. Rough Notes, 152(4), 78-80.
2. Al-Shammari, Z. (2008). The benefits of technology use in teaching students with special needs. The 5th Congress of Scientific Research Outlook in the Arab World, Scientific Innovation and Sustained Development, October 2008, Morrocco. Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/.
3. Blackhurst, E. (2005). Perspectives on applications of technology in the field of learning. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 175-178. doi: 10.2307/1593622.
4. Boyle, J. R. (2013). Specialized innovations for students with disabilities. In M. Murphy, S. Redding & J. Twyman (Eds.), Handbook on innovations in learning (pp. 93-112). Philadelphia, PA: Center on Innovations in Learning, Temple University; Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Retrieved from: http://www.centeril.org/.
5. Braun, S., & Schmidt, A. (2006). Socially aware informal learning support: Potentials and challenges of the social dimension. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Technology-Enhanced Learning (EC-TEL 06), October 2006, Heraklion. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.220.9835&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=137.
6. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E. K., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2013). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri . Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
7. Cagiltay, K., Cicek, F., Karasu, N., Cakir, H., & Akilli, G. K. (2014, June). Innovative educational technology for special education and usability issues. In International Conference of Design, User Experience, and Usability (pp. 155-163). Springer, Cham.
8. Can, S., & Çava, S. (2018). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin görüşlerine göre ilkokulda uygulanan oyun ve fiziki etkinlikler dersinin değerlendirilmesi. Trakya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(2), 261-273. doi: 10.24315/trkefd.318132.

9. Choi, J. N. (2004). Individual and contextual dynamics of innovation-use behavior in organizations. Human Performance, 17(4), 397-414. doi: 10.1207/s15327043hup1704_3.
10. Creswell, J. W. (2017). Nitel araştırmacılar için 30 temel beceri [30 basic skills for qualitative researchs]. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
11. Deppeler, J. (2010). Professional learning as collaborative inquiry: Working together for impact. (Ed: Forlin, C.). Teacher education for inclusion: changing paradigms and innovative approaches. (First Edition). New York: Routledge.
12. Dillon, T. (2006). Hail to the thief: The appropriation of in music in the digital age. In K. O’Hara & B. Brown (Eds.), Consuming music together: Social and collaborative aspects of music consumption technologies. (pp. 289-306). Dordrecht: Springer.
13. Edwards, A. (2001). Researching pedagogy: A sociocultural agenda. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 9(2),161-186. doi: 10.1080/14681360100200111.
14. Edwards, S., & Bone, J. (2012). Integrating peer-assisted learning and e-learning: Using innovative pedagogies to support learning and teaching in higher education settings. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(5), 1-12. doi: 10.14221/ajte.2012v37n5.4.
15. Ekiz. D. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
16. Erdoğan, D. G., & Güneş, D. Z. (2013). The relationship between individual innovativeness and change readiness conditions of students attending faculty of education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106(2), 3033–3040. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.349.
17. Furst-Bowe, J. A., & Bauer, R. A. (2007, Spring). Application of the Baldrige model for innovation in higher education. New Directions for Higher Education, 137, 5-14.
18. García, L. M. (2011). Encouraging teachers' and students' innovation with the support of teacher learning communities. CEPS Journal: Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 1(1), 133-152.
19. Güner Yıldız, N., & Sazak Pınar, E. (2012). Examining teacher’s behavior related to students with special needs in inclusive classrooms. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(2), 475-488.
20. Hasselbring, T. S., & Glaser, C. H. W. (2000). Use of computer technology to help students with special needs. The Future of Children, 10(2), 102-122. doi: 10.2307/1602691
21. Henniger, M. L. (2004). The teaching experience: An introduction to reflective practice. New Jersey: Upper Saddle Revier.
22. Kert, S. B., & Tekdal, M. (2012). Comparison of individual innovativeness perception of students attending different education faculties. University of Gaziantep Journal of Social Sciences, 11(4), 1150–1161.
23. Kocasaraç, H. (2018). Fen ve sosyal bilimler lisesi öğretmenlerinin yenilikçilik durumlarının değerlendirilmesi (Doktora Tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 511297)
24. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., & Cain, W. (2013). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)?. Journal of Education, 193(3), 13-19. doi: 10.1177/002205741319300303.
25. Kovacs, H. (2017). Learning and teaching in innovation: Why it is important for education in 21st century. Neveléstudomány, 2, 45-60. doi: 10.21549/NTNY.18.2017.2.4.
26. Meyen, E., Poggio, J., Seok, S., & Smith, S. (2006). Equity for students with high-incidence disabilities in statewide assessments: A technology-based solution. Focus on Exceptional Children, 38(7), 1-8. doi: 10.17161/fec.v38i7.6821.
27. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A method sourcebook. (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks: CA: SAGE.
28. Murphy, P. (2008) Defining pedagogy. In K. Hall. P. Murphy and J. Soler (Eds.), Pedagogy and practice: Culture and identities. The Open University, SAGE.
29. Murphy, M., Redding, S., & Twyman, J. (2014). Handbook on innovations in learning. Philadelphia: Information Age Publishing.
30. Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the net generation: An educause e-book publication. Retrieved from: http://www.educause.edu/ir/ library/pdf/pub7101.pdf [20/04/07].
31. OECD, (2020). What does innovation in pedagogy look like? Retrieved from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/what-does-innovation-in-pedagogy-look-like_cca19081-.
32. Öztürk, Z. Y., & Summak, M. S. (2014). İlköğretim okulu öğretmenlerinin bireysel yenilikçiliklerinin incelenmesi. International Journal of Science Culture and Sport, 1(1), 844–853. doi: 10.14486/IJSCS158.
33. Parlar, H., & Cansoy, R. (2017). Examining the relationship between teachers’ individual innovativeness and professionalism. International Education Studies, 10(8), 1–11. doi: 10.5539/ies.v10n8p1.
34. Polat, S., & Özcan, A. (2014). Akilli tahta kullanimiyla ilgili sinif öğretmenlerinin görüşleri [The opinions of elementary school teachers on the use of smart board]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 22(2), 439-455.
35. Pratt, B. (1999). Making it work: Using technology in a classroom for young children with multiple disabilities. Computing Teacher, 26(8), 28-31.
36. Rawlins, P., & Kehrwald, B. (2013). Integrating educational technologies into teacher education: A case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51,207-217
37. Redding, S., Twyman, J. S., & Murphy, M. (2013). What is an innovation in learning. Handbook on Innovations in Learning, (pp. 3-14). Temple University, Philadelphia, USA: Center on Innovations in Learning.
38. Ritchhart, R. (2004). Creative teaching in the shadow of the standards. Independent School, 63(2), 32-41.
39. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of Innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press. Retrieved from: https://books.google.com.tr/.
40. Salaria, N. (2012). Meaning of the term descriptive survey research method. International journal of transformations in business management, 1(6), 1-7.
41. Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research. A practical handbook. London: Sage Publications Inc.
42. Smith, D. (2007). Introduction to special education making a difference. Merrill: Person Education.
43. Smith, M. K. (2012). What is pedagogy? The encyclopaedia of informal education. Retrieved from: http://infed.org/mobi/what-is-pedagogy/.
44. Süer, S. (2019). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin yenilikçi pedagoji uygulamalarına ilişkin görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi (Doktora tezi). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezinden edinilmiştir. (Tez Numarası: 582578). Taşdemir, M., Şahin, B. U. C., Taşdemir, Ö. G. F., Kılıç, B. U. E., Dağıstan, B. U. A., & Dağdelen, B. U. S. (2018). İlkokul İngilizce öğretim programlarına ilişkin öğretmen görüşleri. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(3), 121-130.
45. Tella, S., & Tirri, K. (1999). Educational innovations in Finnish and European contexts. An analysis of the Aims and Outcomes of the European Observatory of the European Commission. (1994–1998). Opettajankoulutuslaitoksen tutkimusraportti, 200.
46. Tıdd J., & J. Bessant (2009) Managing innovation. (4th Ed). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
47. Tournaki, N., & Lyublinskaya, I. (2014). Preparing special education teachers for teaching mathematics and science with technology by integrating TPACK framework into the curriculum: A study of teachers’ perceptions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 22(2), 243-259.
48. Tutkun, Ö. F., & Aksoyalp, Y. (2010). 21. yüzyılda öğretmen yetiştirme eğitim programının boyutları. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (24), 361-371.
49. Usluel, Y. K., & Mazman, S. G. (2010). Eğitimde yeniliklerin yayılımı, kabulü ve benimsenmesi sürecinde yer alan ögeler: Bir içerik analizi çalışması. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(3), 60-74.
50. White, S. C., & Glickman, T. S. (2007, Spring). Innovation in higher education: Implications for the future. New Directions for Higher Education, 137, 97-105.
51. Will, M. C. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility. Exceptional Children, 52(5), 411-415. doi: org/10.1177/001440298605200502.
52. Wolfberg, P., LePage, P., & Cook, E. (2009). Innovations in ınclusive education: Two teacher preparation programs at the San Francisco State University. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 5(2), 16-36.
53. Yorulmaz, A., Çokçalışkan, H., & Önal, H. (2017). Determination of classroom pre-service teachers' state of personal innovativeness. Journal of Education and Training Studies.5(1), 28-34. doi:10.11114/jets.v5i1.1947.
54. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
55. Yurtseven, R., & Ergün, M. (2018). İlkokul öğrencilerinin girişimcilik becerilerinin geliştirilmesine yönelik öğretmen görüşleri. International Journal of Social Science Research, 7(1), 118-140.