Teori ve Uygulama Arasındaki Boşluğu Gidermek: Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretmenlerinin Değerlendirme Kimlikleri Üzerine Bir Eylem Araştırması

Öz

Bu araştırma, sosyal bilgiler öğretmenlerinin sınıf içi ölçme-değerlendirme uygulamalarını incelemeyi ve alternatif değerlendirme yöntemlerinin uygulanabilirliğini eylem araştırması yaklaşımıyla ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışma, farklı sosyoekonomik bölgelerden seçilen altı öğretmenle yürütülmüş; sınıf içi gözlemler, odak grup görüşmeleri ve mesleki gelişimi destekleyen “mesleki paylaşım grubu” uygulamalarını içeren nitel bir desen benimsenmiştir. Bulgular, öğretmenlerin biçimlendirici değerlendirmeye yönelik pedagojik farkındalıklarının yüksek olmasına rağmen uygulamada çoğunlukla sözlü soru ve yazılı yoklama gibi geleneksel araçları tercih ettiklerini göstermektedir. Öğretmenlerin değerlendirme kimliklerinin, öğrenci merkezli pedagojik idealler ile müfredat yoğunluğu ve zaman kısıtı gibi sistem temelli hesap verebilirlik baskıları arasında sıkıştığı görülmüştür. Bu durum, literatürde sıklıkla vurgulanan “tutum–davranış boşluğunu” desteklemektedir. Bununla birlikte, eylem araştırması sürecinde öğretmenlerin geri bildirim stratejileri ve öğrenci katılımı konusunda olumlu bir mesleki dönüşüm yaşadıkları belirlenmiştir. Araştırma, biçimlendirici değerlendirmenin eğitim ortamlarında sürdürülebilir bir kültür hâline gelebilmesi için öğretmenlerin yalnızca teknik bilgi ve becerilerinin değil, aynı zamanda değerlendirme kimliklerinin de güçlendirilmesine yönelik uygulama temelli ve sürdürülebilir mesleki gelişim modellerine ihtiyaç duyulduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Action research
• assessment identity
• formative assessment
• social studies education

Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Practice: An Action Research on Social Studies Teachers' Assessment Identities

Öz

This study examines the classroom assessment practices of social studies teachers and explores the feasibility of alternative methods through an action research approach. Conducted with six teachers selected from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, the research utilizes a qualitative design incorporating classroom observations, focus group interviews, and a "professional sharing group" to support professional development. The findings indicate that while teachers possess high pedagogical awareness regarding formative assessment, they predominantly prefer traditional tools (e.g., oral questioning, written exams) in practice. Teachers' assessment identities are caught between student-centered ideals and systemic "accountability" pressures, such as curriculum density and time constraints. This aligns with the "attitude-practice gap" in the literature. However, the action research process fostered a positive professional transformation, particularly in teachers’ feedback strategies and support for student engagement. The study concludes that for formative assessment to become a cultural practice, there is a need for sustainable, practice-based professional development models that strengthen teachers' assessment identities beyond mere technical knowledge.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Action research
• assessment identity
• formative assessment
• social studies education

Kaynakça

1. Abalı Öztürk, Y., & Şahin, F. (2022). Alternatif ölçme ve değerlendirme yaklaşımlarının yapılandırmacı öğretim bağlamında incelenmesi [Investigation of alternative measurement and evaluation approaches in the context of constructivist teaching]. PegemAkademi.
2. Adedoyin, O.B. (2021). Assessment literacy and teacher professional development in contemporary education. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(2), 15–32. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.2.2
3. Akşit, N. (2007). Educational reform in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Development, 27(2), 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2006.10.011
4. Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007
5. Banitalebi, Z., Estaji, M., & Brown, G.T.L. (2025). Measuring teacher assessment literacy in digital environments: Development and validation of a scenario-based instrument. Educational Technology & Society, 28(2), 169–215. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202504_28(2).0012
6. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
7. Brookhart, S.M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. ASCD.
8. Brookhart, S.M. (2017). How to give effective feedback to your students (2nd ed.). ASCD.

9. Brown, G.T.L. (2019). Is assessment for learning really assessment? Frontiers in Education, 4, 64. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00064
10. Çalışkan, H., &Yiğittir, S. (2015). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde ölçme ve değerlendirme yaklaşımları [Measurement and assessment approaches in social studies teaching]. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 6(1), 23–45.
11. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.
12. Creswell, J.W., & Poth, C.N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
13. DeLuca, C., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy: A review of international standards and measures. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28(3), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-015-9233-6
14. Dönmez, C., & Yazıcı, H. (2015). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in social studies teaching]. In C. Dönmez (Ed.), Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretimi [Social studies teaching] (pp. 389–414). PegemAkademi.
15. DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6–11.
16. Gelbal, S., &Kelecioğlu, H. (2007). Öğretmenlerin ölçme ve değerlendirme yöntemleri hakkındaki yeterlik algıları ve karşılaştıkları sorunlar [Teachers' proficiency perceptions and problems encountered regarding measurement and assessment methods]. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33, 135–145.
17. Gronlund, N.E., & Brookhart, S.M. (2009). Grading and reporting student learning. Pearson.
18. Harlen, W. (2005). Teachers’ summative practices and assessment for learning – tensions and synergies. Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 207–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170500136093
19. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
20. Heritage, M. (2019). Formative assessment in practice: A process of inquiry and action. Harvard Education Press.
21. Kabapınar, Y. (2019). Kuramdan uygulamaya sosyal bilgiler öğretimi [Social studies teaching from theory to practice]. PegemAkademi.
22. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Deakin University Press.
23. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
24. Looney, J., Cumming, J., van der Kleij, F., & Harris, K. (2017). Reconceptualising the role of teachers as assessors: Teacher assessment identity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(5), 442–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1268090
25. McHugh, M.L. (2012). Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2012.031
26. McMillan, J.H. (2018). Classroom assessment: Principles and practice for effective standards-based instruction (7th ed.). Pearson.
27. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldaña, J. (2019). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE.
28. Ministry of National Education. (2018). Sosyal bilgiler dersi öğretim programı [Social studies curriculum]. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr
29. Morgan, D.L. (2019). Basic and advanced focus groups. SAGE.
30. OECD. (2013). Synergies for better learning: An international perspective on evaluation and assessment. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190658-en
31. Opesemowo, T.R. (2024). Systemic challenges in assessment and instruction that hinder engagement. Education Sciences, 14(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030268
32. Patton, M.Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE.
33. Popham, W.J. (2018). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (8th ed.). Pearson.
34. Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
35. Sheikh, A., & Manap, M. (2024). Classroom assessment practices: Challenges in pedagogical integration. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 12, 239–258. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2024.124017
36. Shepard, L.A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X029007004
37. Tomlinson, C.A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.
38. Türkben, T. (2022). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmenlerinin alternative ölçme-değerlendirme yaklaşımlarına ilişkin görüşleri [Opinions of social studies teachers on alternative measurement-evaluation approaches]. Gazi Journal of Education Sciences, 8(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.30855/gjb.2022.8.1.004
39. Vigh, T., Svidró, Á., Fóris-Ferenczi, R., & Molnár, G. (2024). Teachers’ assessment literacy: A descriptive literature review. Hungarian Educational Research Journal, 15(2), 210–225. https://doi.org/10.1556/063.2024.00277
40. Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Solution Tree Press.
41. Xu, Y., & Brown, G.T.L. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy in practice: A reconceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.010
42. Yan, Z., Li, Z., Pan, K., & Hui, S.K.F. (2021). A multilevel analysis of the effects of school and teacher variables on teacher assessment literacy: Evidence from China. Teaching and Teacher Education, 101, 103310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103310