Yıl 2019, Cilt 10 , Sayı 20, Sayfalar 84 - 129 2019-12-31

Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Tufan İNALTEKİN [1] , Mehpare SAKA [2]


Bu çalışmanın amacı, fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının öğrenciyi anlama öz yeterliliklerini belirlemek için bir ölçme aracı geliştirmektir. Araştırma iki grup örneklem üzerinden yürütülmüştür. Birinci grup örneklem Türkiye’nin farklı bölgelerinden 11 üniversitenin eğitim fakültesi fen bilimleri öğretmenliği programı 4. sınıfında öğrenim gören 502 (360’ı kadın, 142’si erkek), ikinci grup örneklem ise 8 üniversiteden 454 (289’u kadın, 165’i erkek) öğretmen adayından oluşmaktadır. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliliğini belirlemek amacıyla açımlayıcı ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri yapılmıştır. Ölçeğin güvenirliği için Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayısı, Sperman Brown iki yarı test korelasyon katsayısı ve test-tekrar test korelasyon katsayısı hesaplanmıştır. Açımlayıcı faktör analizi (AFA) sonucunda ölçeğin 35 maddeye sahip 5 faktörlü bir yapı sergilediği ve bu faktörlerin toplam varyansın % 58’ini açıkladığı tespit edilmiştir. Belirlenen bu beş faktörlü yapının model uyumunun değerlendirilmesi için yapılan doğrulayıcı faktör analizi (DFA) sonucunda elde edilen uyum değerleri şöyledir: χ2/sd= 2.44, RMSEA= 0.06, NFI= 0.97, CFI= 0.98, IFI= 0.98, SRMR= 0.04, GFI= 0.85 ve AGFI= 0.83’tür. FÖAY’ın güvenirlik hesaplamaları sonucu, Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayısının ölçeğin bütünü için .95, Sperman Brown iki yarı test korelasyon katsayısı .88 ve test-tekrar test korelasyon katsayısı ise .86 olarak bulunmuştur. Bu sonuçlar, fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının öğrenciyi anlamaya yönelik öz yeterliliklerini ölçemede, FÖAYÖ’nün 35 madde ve 5 faktörden oluşan beşli derecelendirmeye sahip geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermektedir.
Fen bilimlerinde öğrenciyi anlama, öz yeterlilik, fen bilimleri öğretmen adayı, ölçek geliştirme
  • Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Ahmar, D. S., Ramlawati, M. M., & Ahmar, A. S. (2017). The relationship between prior knowledge and creative thinking ability in chemistry. Educational Process: International Journal, 6(3), 18–25.
  • Ainiyah, M., Ibrahim, M., & Hidayat, M. T. (2018, January). The Profile of Student Misconceptions on The Human and Plant Transport Systems. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (947, 1, p. 012064). IOP Publishing
  • Anderson, D., & Clark, M. (2012). Development of syntactic subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge for science by a generalist elementary teacher. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 18(3), 315-330.
  • Anılan, B., Atalay, N., & Kılıç, Z. (2018). Teacher candidates’ levels of relating the scientific knowledge to their daily lives. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 733-748.
  • Avery, L., & Meyer, D. (2012). Teaching science as science is practiced: Opportunities and limits for enhancing preservice elementary teachers’ self-efficacy for science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 395–409.
  • Azvedo, R. (2015). Defining and measuring engagement and learning in science: Conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and analytical issues. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 84–94
  • Baldwin, J. A., Ebert-May, D., & Burns, D. J. (1999). The Development of a college biology self-efficacy ınstrument for nonmajors. Science Education, 83(4), 397-408.
  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Co.
  • Baxter, J. A. & Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and measurement of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 147–161). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Bektas, O. (2015). Pre-service science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in the physics, chemistry, and biology topics. European Journal of Physics Education, 6(2), 41–53.
  • Bergman, D. J., & Morphew, J. (2015). Effects of a science content course on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy of teaching science. Research and Teaching, 44, 73–81.
  • Bergqvist, A., & Chang Rundgren, S. N. (2017). The influence of textbooks on teachers’ knowledge of chemical bonding representations relative to students’ difficulties understanding. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(2), 215–237.
  • Berry, A., Friedrichsen, P., & Loughran, J. (2015). Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education. New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Van Driel, J. H. (2008). Revisiting the roots of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1271-1279.
  • Bolyard, J. J & Moyer-Packenham, P. S. (2008). A review of the literature on mathematics and science teacher quality. Peabody Journal of Education, 83(4), 509-535.
  • Bradbury, L. U., Wilson, R. E., & Brookshire, L. E. (2018). Developing elementary science pck for teacher education: Lessons learned from a second grade partnership. Research in Science Education,48(6), 1387-1408.
  • Brown, T. A. (2014). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Brown, A. L., Lee, J., & Collins, D. (2015). Does student teaching matter? Investigating pre-service teachers’ sense of efficacy and preparedness. Teaching Education, 26(1), 77-93.
  • Brown, P., Friedrichsen, P., & Abell, S. K. (2013). The development of prospective secondary biology teachers’ PCK. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 133–155.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2013). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı. Ankara: Pegema Yayıncılık
  • Cakiroglu, J., Capa-Aydin, Y., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2012). Science teaching efficacy beliefs. In Fraser, B.J., Tobin, K.G., & McRobbie, C.J., (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 449-461). Springer Science+Business Media.
  • Cetinkaya-Aydin, G. & Çakiroğlu, J. (2017). Learner characteristics and understanding nature of science: Is there an association? Science Education, 26, 919–951.
  • Chan, K. H., & Yung, B. H. W. (2017). Developing pedagogical content knowledge for teaching a new topic: More than teaching experience and subject matter knowledge. Research in Science Education, 1–33.
  • Chen, J. A., & Usher, E. L. (2013). Profiles of the sources of science self-efficacy. Learning and Individual Differences, 24, 11 –21.
  • Cheng, S.-C,. She, H.-C. & Huang, L.-Y. (2017). The impact of problem solving instruction on middle school students’ physical science learning: Interplays of knowledge, reasoning, and problem solving. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(3), 731–743.
  • Cinici, A. (2016). Preservice teachers’ science teaching self-efficacy beliefs: The influence of a collaborative peer microteaching program. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 24(3), 228-249.
  • Clark, S., & Newberry, M. (2019). Are we building preservice teacher self-efficacy? A large- scale study examining teacher education experiences. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 47(1), 32–47.
  • Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 263–272.
  • Coenders, F., & Verhoef, N. (2018). Lesson study: Professional development (PD) for beginning and experienced teachers. Professional Development in Education, 45(2), 217-230.
  • Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve Lisrel uygulamaları, Ankara: Pegem.
  • Demirci, F., & Ozyurek, C. (2018). Astronomy teaching self-efficacy belief scale: The validity and reliability study. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(1), 258-271.
  • Depaepe, F., & König, J. (2018). General pedagogical knowledge, self-efficacy and instructional practice: Disentangling their relationship in pre-service teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 69, 177-190.
  • Donovan, M. V., & Bransford, J. D. (2005). How students learn: Science in the classroom. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
  • Drewes, A., Henderson, J., & Mouza, C. (2018). Professional development design considerations in climate change education: Teacher enactment and student learning. International Journal of Science Education 40(1), 67–89.
  • Erkuş, A. (2014). Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme-ı: Temel kavramlar ve işlemler (2. Baskı), Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
  • Evens, M., Elen, J., Larmuseau, C., & Depaepe, F. (2018). Promoting the development of teacher professional knowledge: Integrating content and pedagogy in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 244–258.
  • Fahlman, M. M., Hall, H. L., & Gutuskey, L. (2013). The impact of a health methods class on pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and intent to teach health. American Journal of Health Education, 44(6), 316-323.
  • Fives, H., Lacatena, N., & Gerard, L. (2015). Teachers’ beliefs about teaching (and learning). In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 37-54). New York, USA: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
  • Ford, D. J., Fifield, S., Madsen, J., & Qian, X. (2013). The science semester: Crossdisciplinary inquiry for prospective primary teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 1049-1072. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
  • Friedrichsen, P., Van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95, 358–376.
  • Geddis, A. N. (1993). Transforming content knowledge: Learning to teach about isotopes. Science Education, 77, 575-591.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. In J. Gess- Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 3–17). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen , & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). London: Routledge Press.
  • Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (1995). Biology teachers perceptions of subject matter structure and its relationship to classroom practice. Journal of research in science teaching, 32(3), 301-325.
  • Gess-Newsome, J., Taylor, J. A., Carlson, J., Gardner, A. L., Wilson, C. D., & Stuhlsatz, M. A. M. (2017). Teacher pedagogical content knowledge, practice, and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 39, 1–20.
  • Gomez, S. (2008). Elementary teachers’ understanding of students’ science misconceptions: Implications for practice and teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19, 437–454.
  • Grangeat, M., & Hudson, B. (2015). A new model for understanding the growth of science teacher professional knowledge. In M. Grangeat (Ed.), Understanding science teachers’ professional knowledge growth (pp. 205–228). Rótterdam: Sense.
  • Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Gullberg, A., Kellner, E., Attorps, I., Thor ́en, I., & Tarneberg, R. (2008). Prospective teachers’ initial conceptionsabout pupils’ understanding of science and mathematics. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31, 257–278.
  • Gunckel, K. L. (2013). Teacher knowledge for using learning progressions in classroom instruction and assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
  • Gunning, A. M., & Mensah, F. M. (2011). Preservice elementary teachers’ development of self-efficacy and confidence to teach science: A case study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 171–185.
  • Han, I., Shin, W.S., & Ko, Y. (2017). The effect of student teaching experience and teacher beliefs on pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and intention to use technology in teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(7), 829–842.
  • Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(3), 273-292.
  • Hechter, R. P. (2011). Changes in pre-service elementary teachers’ personal science teaching efficacy and science teaching outcome expectancies: The influence of context. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 187-202.
  • Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods 6(1), 53-60.
  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  • Hume, A., & Berry, A. (2010). Constructing CoRe–a strategy for building PCK in pre-service science teacher education. Research in Science Education, 41, 341–355.
  • Jang, S. J., Guan, S. Y., & Hsieh, H. F. (2009). Developing an instrument for assessing college students’ perceptions of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 596–606.
  • Jegede, O., Taplin, M., & Chan, S. L. (2000). Trainee teachers’ perception of their knowledge about expert teaching. Educational Research, 42(3), 287-308.
  • Joshi, A. Kale, S. Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396-403.
  • Juang, Y. R., Liu, T. C., & Chan, T. W. (2008). Computer-Supported teacher development of pedagogical content knowledge through developing schoolbased curriculum. Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 149-170.
  • Jüttner, M., Boone, W., Park, S., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2013). Development and use of a test instrument to measure biology teachers’ content knowledge (CK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 25, 45–67.
  • Jüttner, M., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2012). Development of items for a pedagogical content knowledge- test based on empirical analysis of pupils’ errors. International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 1125–1143
  • Kazempour, M., & Sadler, T. D. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and self-efficacy: A multi-case study. Teaching Education, 26, 247-271.
  • Kellner, E., Gullberg, A., Attorps, I., Thoren, I., & Tarneberg, R. (2011). Prospective teachers’ initial conceptions about pupils’ difficulties in science and mathematics: A potential resource in teacher education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 843–866.
  • Kelly, J. (2000). Rethinking the elementary science methods course: A case for content, pedagogy, and informal science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 755-777.
  • Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2016). Prior knowledge: Acquisition and revision. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of individual differences in reading: Text and context (pp. 151–163). New York, NY: Routledge Publishing.
  • Kind, V. (2009). A conflict in your head: An exploration of trainee science teachers’ subject matter knowledge development and its impact on teacher selfconfidence. International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1529–1562.
  • Kind, V. (2019). Development of evidence-based, student-learningoriented rubrics for pre-service science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 41(7), 911-943.
  • Klassen, R. M., & Usher, E. L. (2010). Self-efficacy in educational settings: Recent research and emerging directions. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 16,1–33.
  • Klassen, R. M., V. Tze, S. M. Betts., & K. A. Gordon (2011). Teacher efficacy research 1998–2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise?. Educational Psychology Review 23(1), 21–43.
  • Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. New York: Routledge
  • Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
  • Knaggs, C. M., & Sondergeld, T. A. (2017). Science self - efficacy of preservice teachers in face - to - face versus blended environments. School Science and Mathematics, 117(1-2), 27-33.
  • Kola, A. J., & Sunday, O. S. (2015). A review of teachers’ qualifications and its implication on students’ academic achievement in Nigerian schools. International Journal of Educational Research and Information Science, 2(2), 10–15.
  • Kooken, J., Welsh, M. E., McCoach, D. B., Johnston-Wilder, S., & Lee, C. (2016). Development and validation of the mathematical resilience scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 49(3), 217-242.
  • Kristyasari, M., Yamtinah, S., & Utomo, S. (2018). Gender differences in students’ science literacy towards learning on integrated science subject. Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1, 1-7.
  • Lallé, S., Taub, M., Mudrick, N. V., Conati, C., & Azevedo, R. (2017). The impact of student individual differences and visual attention to pedagogical agents during learning with MetaTutor. In E. André, R. Baker, X. Hu, M. M. T. Rodrigo, & B. du Boulay (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18 th international conference on artificial intelligence in education (AIED 2017)—Lecture notes in computer science (pp. 149–161). The Netherlands: Springer.
  • Lee, E., & Luft, J. A. (2008). Experienced secondary science teachers’ representation of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1343-1363.
  • Liang, L. L., & Richardson, G. M. (2009). Enhancing prospective teachers’ science teaching efficacy beliefs through scaffolded, student-directed inquiry. Journal of Primary Science Education, 21(1), 51-66.
  • Loughran, J., Berry, A. & Mullhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
  • Loughran, J. J. Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370-391.
  • Ma, K., & Cavanagh, M. S. (2018). Classroom ready? Pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy for their first professional experience placement. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(7), 134-151.
  • McCall, M. (2017). Elementary preservice science teaching efficacy and attitude toward science: Can a college science course make a difference? Electronic Journal of Science Education, 21(6), 1-11.
  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
  • McDaniel, M. A., Cahill, M. J., Frey, R. F., Rauch, M., Doele, J., Ruvolo, D., & Daschbach, M. M. (2018). Individual differences in learning exemplars versus abstracting rules: Associations with exam performance in college science. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7(2), 241-251.
  • Menon, D., & Sadler, T. D. (2018). Sources of science teaching self-efficacy for preservice elementary teachers in science content courses. International Journal Science & Mathematics Education, 16(5), 835–855.
  • Miller, A. D., Ramirez, E. M., & Murdock, T. B. (2017). The influence of teachers’ self-efficacy on perceptions: Perceived teacher competence and respect and student effort and achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64(1), 260-269.
  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
  • Moodley, K., & Gaigher, E. (2017). Teaching electric circuits: Teachers’ perceptions and learners’ misconceptions. Research in Science Education, 49, 73–89.
  • Moseley, C., Utley, J., Angle, J., & Mwavita, M. (2016). Development of the environmental education teaching efficacy belief ınstrument. School Science and Mathematics, 116(7), 389-398.
  • Naah, B. M. (2015). Enhancing pre-service teachers’ understanding of students’ misconceptions in learning chemistry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 45(2), 41–47.
  • Nelson, M. M., & Davis, E. A. (2012). Preservice elementary teachers’ evaluations of elementary students’ scientific models: An aspect of pedagogical content knowledge for scientific modeling. International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1931-1959.
  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • Nilsson, P., & Karlsson, G. (2019). Capturing student teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) using CoRes and digital technology. International Journal of Science Education, 41(4), 419-447.
  • Nilsson, P., & Loughran, J. (2012). Exploring the development of pre-service science elementary teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 699–721.
  • Nilsson, P., & Vikstrm, A. (2015). Making pck explicit capturing science teachers pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 37(17), 2836-2857.
  • O’Rourke, N., Psych, R., & Hatcher, L. (2013). A step-by-step approach to using SAS for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
  • Osman, E., BouJaoude, S., & Hamdan, H. (2016). An investigation of Lebanese G7-12 students’ misconceptions and difficulties in genetics and their genetics literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(7), 1257–1280.
  • Padilla, K., Ponce-De-León, A. M., Mabel, F., & Garritz, A. (2008). Undergraduate professors’ pedagogical content knowledge: The case of ‘amount of substance. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1389–1404.
  • Palmer, D. H. (2011). Sources of efficacy information in an inservice program for elementary teachers. Science Education, 95, 577–600.
  • Park, S., Jang, J-Y., Chen, Y-C., & Jung, J. (2011). Is pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) necessary for reformed science teaching?: Evidence from an empirical study. Research in Science Education, 41, 245-260.
  • Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284.
  • Park, S., Suh, J., & Seo, K. (2018). Development and validation of measures of secondary science teachers’ pck for teaching photosynthesis. Research in Science Education, 48, 549-573.
  • Phelps, G., & Schilling, S. (2004). Developing measures of content knowledge for teaching reading. Elementary School Journal, 105, 31-48.
  • Putman, S. M. (2012). Investigating teacher efficacy: Comparing preservice and inservice teachers with different levels of experience. Action in Teacher Education, 34, 26–40.
  • Rajput, M. (2018). Dynamic learning spaces in education. Veena Kapur & Sudipta Ghose (Eds.), PCK: A key to meaningful learning in science classrooms (pp.141-159). Springer.
  • Riggs, I., & Enoch, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625-638.
  • Russ, R. S. (2018). Characterizing teacher attention to student thinking: A role for epistemological messages. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 94–120.
  • Sabel, J. L., Forbes, C. T., & Flynn, L. (2016). Elementary teachers’ use of content knowledge to evaluate students’ thinking in the life sciences. International Journal of Science Education, 38(7), 1077-1099.
  • Sánchez-Matamoros, G., Fernández, C., & Llinares, S. (2014). Developing pre-service teachers’ noticing of students’ understanding of the derivative concept. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(6), 1305–1329.
  • Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8, 23–74.
  • Schmelzing, S., van Driel, J. H., Jüttner, M., Brandenbusch, S., Sandmann, A., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2013). Development, evaluation, and validation of a paper-and-pencil test for measuring two components of biology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge concerning the ‘cardiovascular system’. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11, 1369–1390.
  • Schneider, R. M., & Plasman, K. (2011). Science teacher learning progressions. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 530–565.
  • Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Psychology Press
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
  • Sorge, S., Kröger, J., Petersen, S., & Neumann, K. (2019). Structure and development of pre-service physics teachers’ professional knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 41(7), 862-889.
  • Stevenson, H. H., & Jarillo, J. C. (1990). A paradigm of entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 17–27.
  • Suh, J., & Park, S. (2017). Exploring the relationship between pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and sustainability of an innovative science teaching approach. Teaching and Teacher Education, 64, 246–259
  • Suma K., Sadia, I. W., & Pujani, N. M. (2018). Investigating 12th grade students’ prior knowledge of static electricity concepts. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 9(2), 47-53.
  • Şeker, H., & Gençdoğan, B. (2014). Psikolojide ve eğitimde ölçme aracı geliştirme (2. Baskı) Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5. Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2015). Çok değişkenli istatistiklerin kullanımı (Çev. Ed. M. Baloğlu). Ankara: Nobel.
  • Tairab, H. H. (2012). Empowering bıology teachers through development of content and pedagogical content knowledge. Mijung Kim And C. H. Diong (Eds.), Biology Education For Social And Sustainable Development, (pp.393–402). Rotterdam: SensePublishers.
  • Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and releated pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4(2), 99-110.
  • Tatar, N., Yildiz, E., Akpinar, E., & Ergin, Ö. (2009). A study on developing a self efficacy scale towards science and technology. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 36, 263-280.
  • Tavşancıl, E. (2010). Tutumların ölçülmesi ve spss ile veri analizi (4. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy Woolfolk, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202-248.
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing and elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783 –805.
  • Usher, E. L. (2009). Sources of middle school students’self-efficacy in mathematics: a qualitative investigation. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1), 275–314.
  • Van Der Werf, G., Creeemers, B., De Jong, R., & Klaver, E. (2000). Evaluation of school improvement through an educational effectiveness model: The case of Indonesia’s PEQIP Project. Comparative Education Review, 44, 329–355.
  • Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.
  • Van Rooij, E.C.M., Fokkens-Bruinsma, M., & Goedhart, M. (2019). Preparing science undergraduates for a teaching career: Sources of their teacher selfefficacy. The Teacher Educator, 54(3), 270-294.
  • Wallace, J.,& Loughran, J. (2011). Science teacher learning. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 295– 306). New York, NY: Springer.
  • Webb-Williams, J. (2018). Science self-efficacy in the primary classroom: Using mixed methods to investigate sources of self-efficacy. Research in Science Education, 48(5), 939–961.
  • Whitworth, B. A., & Chiu, J. L. (2015). Professional development and teacher change: The missing leadership link. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(2), 121–137.
  • Wigfield, A., Muenks, K., & Rosenzweig, E. Q. (2015). Children’s achievement motivation in school. In C. M. Rubie-Davies, J. M. Stephens, & P. Watson (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of social psychology of the classroom (pp.9–20). London: Routledge.
  • Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., Braaten, M., & Stroupe, D. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96(5), 878–903.
  • Woolfolk, A. E., Winne, P. H., Perry, N. E., & Shapka, J. (2009). Educational psychology (4th Canadian ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
  • Worthington, R. L., & Whittaker, T. A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806-838.
  • Wyatt, M. (2015). Using qualitative research methods to assess the degree of fit between teachers’ reported self-efficacy beliefs and their practical knowledge during teacher education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1), 1–30.
  • Yangin, S., & Sidekli, S. (2016). Self-Efficacy for science teaching scale development: Construct validation with elementary school teachers. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(10), 54-69.
  • Ying, G., Connor, C. M., Yanyun, Y. Roehrig, A. D., & Morrison, F. J. (2012). The effects of teacher qualification, teacher self-efficacy, and classroom practices on fifth graders’ literacy outcomes. Elementary School Journal, 113(1), 3-24.
  • Zeldin, A. L., & Pajares, F. (2000). Against the odds: self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific, and technological careers. American Educational Research, 37, 215–246.
  • Zhou, S., Wang, Y., & Zhang, C. (2016). Pre-service science teachers’ PCK: Inconsistency of pre-service teachers’ predictions and student learning difficulties in Newton’s Third Law. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(3), 373- 385.
  • Zhou, S. - N., & Xiao, H. (2018). Pre-service science teachers’ predictions on student learning difficulties in the domain of mechanics. Journal Of Baltic Science Education, 17(4), 649-661.
  • Zimmerman, B. j. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.
Birincil Dil tr
Konular Eğitim, Bilimsel Disiplinler
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Orcid: 0000-0002-3843-7393
Yazar: Tufan İNALTEKİN (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kurum: KAFKAS ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Ülke: Turkey


Orcid: 0000-0001-9730-8607
Yazar: Mehpare SAKA
Kurum: TRAKYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Ülke: Turkey


Tarihler

Yayımlanma Tarihi : 31 Aralık 2019

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { eibd668372, journal = {Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama}, issn = {1309-8659}, eissn = {2667-4645}, address = {EĞİTİM-BİR-SEN}, publisher = {Eğitim-Bir-Sen}, year = {2019}, volume = {10}, pages = {84 - 129}, doi = {}, title = {Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması}, key = {cite}, author = {İNALTEKİN, Tufan and SAKA, Mehpare} }
APA İNALTEKİN, T , SAKA, M . (2019). Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama , 10 (20) , 84-129 . Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/eibd/issue/51497/668372
MLA İNALTEKİN, T , SAKA, M . "Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması". Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama 10 (2019 ): 84-129 <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/eibd/issue/51497/668372>
Chicago İNALTEKİN, T , SAKA, M . "Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması". Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama 10 (2019 ): 84-129
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması AU - Tufan İNALTEKİN , Mehpare SAKA Y1 - 2019 PY - 2019 N1 - DO - T2 - Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 84 EP - 129 VL - 10 IS - 20 SN - 1309-8659-2667-4645 M3 - UR - Y2 - 2019 ER -
EndNote %0 Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması %A Tufan İNALTEKİN , Mehpare SAKA %T Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması %D 2019 %J Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama %P 1309-8659-2667-4645 %V 10 %N 20 %R %U
ISNAD İNALTEKİN, Tufan , SAKA, Mehpare . "Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması". Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama 10 / 20 (Aralık 2020): 84-129 .
AMA İNALTEKİN T , SAKA M . Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama. 2019; 10(20): 84-129.
Vancouver İNALTEKİN T , SAKA M . Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenciyi Anlama Öz - Yeterlilik Ölçeği’nin Geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması. Eğitim Ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori Ve Uygulama. 2019; 10(20): 129-84.