Awareness of the Measurement and Evaluation Course of the Participating Students in the Formation Program
Öz
In the current study, pedagogical formation students’
awareness of measurement and evaluation and their views on the topics in the
course were determined. The study aims to provide researchers with an careful
into the process of restructuring of both pedagogical formation program and
this course as part of the program. The research group of this descriptive
research consists of 180 pedagogical formation program students from the
departments of Turkish Language and Literature and Sociology in the 2014-2015
academic year. When the
research group was determined, appropriate sampling method was used for
non-arbitrary sampling methods. In the study, students’ awareness on
the various variables of the course in measurement and evaluation were collected through constructed responsequestions. The scope of the questions; basic
concepts in measurement and evaluation (measurement-criterion-evaluation),
ıtem types (true-false, long-responded, short-responded, paired and
multiple-choice), problems in the course. To analyze the data,
descriptive analysis methods were used. The reliability ratio between the
researchers was found to be .85. At the end of the study, it was concluded
that most students had some concern over this course at the beginning of the
term. However, these worries decreased and the students started to consider
the course beneficial to their own career development as they gain different
points of view during the term. It is believed that the results and
suggestions will increase effectiveness of the course and help researchers and
program development specialists in the process of restructuring of the course
in the scope of the program.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Aydın, A. (1998). “Eğitim Fakültelerinin Yeniden Yapılandırılması ve Öğretmen Yetiştirme Sorunu”. Eğitim Yönetimi. 15, 275-286.
- Azar, A. (2011). “Türkiye’de Öğretmen Eğitimi Üzerine Bir Söylem: Nitelik mi? Nicelik mi?”Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi (Journal of Higher Education and Science), (1), 36-38.
- Bilir, A. (2011). “Türkiye’de Öğretmen Yetiştirmenin Tarihsel Evrimi ve İstihdam Politikaları”. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 44 (2), 223-246.
- Büyüköztürk,Ş., Çakmak, E., Akgün,Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel,F.(2010). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. 7. Baskı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
- Ceyhan, A. A. (2003). “Tezsiz Yüksek Lisans Programındaki Öğretmen Adaylarının Devam Ettikleri Programa ve Öğretmenlik Mesleğine İlişkin Görüşleri”. Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13 (2), 43-58.
- Cobb, V.L. (1999). An International Comparison of Teacher Education. ERIC DigestNo: ED436486.
- Haris, A. (2000). “What Works İn School İmprovement? Lesson from The Field and Future Directions”. Educational Research, 42 (1).
- İftar, G. K. & Tekin, E. (1997). Tek Denekli Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
Ayrıntılar
Birincil Dil
Türkçe
Konular
Eğitim Üzerine Çalışmalar
Bölüm
Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar
D. Bahar Şahin Sarkın
OKAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0002-1155-6114
Türkiye
Fazilet Taşdemir
Bu kişi benim
RECEP TAYYİP ERDOĞAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0002-0430-9094
Yayımlanma Tarihi
26 Kasım 2017
Gönderilme Tarihi
31 Ekim 2017
Kabul Tarihi
25 Kasım 2017
Yayımlandığı Sayı
Yıl 2017 Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1