Fen Bilimleri Eğitiminde Biçimlendirici Değerlendirme: Literatür Taraması

Yıl 2018, , 567 - 612, 01.08.2018

Hüseyin İnaltun , Salih Ateş

https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.353975

Cited By: 5

Öz

Çalışmanın birinci amacı, biçimlendirici değerlendirme
ile ilgili bilgi vermektir. Bu amaçla çalışmanın ilk kısmında biçimlendirici
değerlendirme tanıtılmış ve diğer değerlendirme türlerinden ayrılan özelliklerinden
bahsedilmiştir. Çalışmanın ikinci amacı, fen bilimleri eğitimi alanında
biçimlendirici değerlendirme ile ilgili yapılan araştırmaların incelenmesidir.
Bu amaçla, 2001-2017 yılları arasında Web of Science veri tabanında kayıtlı konu
ile ilgili çalışmalar taranmıştır. Tarama sonucunda çeşitli kriterlere göre yapılan
değerlendirme sonucunda 31 makaleye ulaşılmıştır. Bu çalışmalar içerik analizi
teknikleri kullanılarak dört başlık altında incelenmiştir. Çalışmanın
sonucunda, araştırmaların büyük kısmının öğretmen/öğretmen adaylarının biçimlendirici
değerlendirme becerilerini geliştirmeye değil betimlemeye odaklandıkları ve öğretmenlerin
bu uygulamaları nadiren doğru bir şekilde uyguladığı ortaya çıkmıştır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Biçimlendirici değerlendirme, Literatür taraması, Geri bildirim, Dönüt

Kaynakça

• Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261.
• Andrade, H. L. (2010). Summing up and moving forward: key challenges and future directions for research and development in formative assessment. Andrade, H. L. & Cizek, G. J. (Editörler), Handbook of formative assessment (344-351). New York, NY: Routlage.
• Atkin, J. M., Coffey, J. E., Moorthy, S., Sato, M. & Thibeault, M. (2005). Designing everyday assessment in the science classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Avrupa Birliği Komisyonu (2011).Science education in Europe: National policies, practices and research. Brüksel.
• Bennett, R. (2011). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25.
• Black, P. & Harrison, C. (2001). Feedback in questioning and marking: The science teacher’s role in formative assessment. School Science Review, 82(301), 55–61.
• Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74.
• Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability (formerly: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education), 21(1), 5.
• Buck, G. A. & Trauth-Nare, A. E. (2009). Preparing teachers to make the formative assessment process integral to science teaching and learning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(5), 475-494.
• Buck, G. A., Trauth‐Nare, A. & Kaftan, J. (2010). Making formative assessment discernable to pre‐service teachers of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 402-421.
• Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843.
• Cowie, B. & Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education, 6(1), 101–116.
• Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Department of Education-Australia. (2012). http://www.teacherstandards.aitsl.edu.au/OrganisationStandards/Organisation adresinden elde edilmiştir.
• Garrouste, C. (2010). 100 Years of Educational Reforms in Europe: A Contextual Database. Avrupa Komisyonu.
• Güngör, B. ve Özgür, S. (2009). İlköğretim beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin sindirim sistemi konusundaki didaktik kökenli kavram yanılgılarının nedenleri. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 3(2).
• Harrison, C. (2013). Collaborative action research as a tool for generating formative feedback on teachers’ classroom assessment practice: the KREST project. Teachers and Teaching, 19(2), 202-213.
• Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
• Lee, H. J. (2005). Developing a professional development program model based on teachers' needs, Professional Educator, 27, 39-49.
• Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J. & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, Sources, and Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Science Teaching. Examining pedagogical content knowledge (95-132). Springer Netherlands.
• Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., Foy, P. & Stanco, G. M. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in science.iınternational association for the evaluation of educational achievement. Herengracht 487, Amsterdam, 1017 BT, The Netherlands.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2006). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programı, Ankara: Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
• Moss, C. M. & Brookhart, S. M. (2010). Advancing formative assessment in every classroom: A guide for ınstructional leaders. ASCD.
• National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades k-8. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
• New Zealand Teachers Council. (2008). Graduating teacher standards. <http://www.teacherscouncil.co.nz/.> adresinden elde edildi.
• Nolen, S. B. (2011). The role of educational systems in the link between formative assessment and motivation. Theory Into Practice, 50(4), 319-326.
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). Formative assessment: Improving learning in secondary classrooms. OECD publishing.
• Otero, V. K. (2006). Moving beyond the “get ıt or don’t” conception of formative assessment. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 247-255.
• Sabel, J. L., Forbes, C. T. ve Zangori, L. (2015). Promoting prospective elementary teachers’ learning to use formative assessment for life science ınstruction. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(4), 419-445.
• Schneider, M. C. & Randel, B. (2010). Research on characteristics of effective professional development programs for enhancing educators’ skills in formative assessment. Andrade, H. L. & Cizek, G. J. (Editörler), Handbook of formative assessment (251- 276). New York, NY: Routlage.
• Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14.
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
• Smith, E. & Gorard, S. (2005). 'They don't give us our marks': the role of formative feedback in student progress. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 12(1), 21-38.
• Stigler, J. W., Gallimore, R. & Hiebert, J. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 87–100.
• Talanquer, V., Bolger, M. & Tomanek, D. (2015). Exploring prospective teachers' assessment practices: noticing and ınterpreting student understanding in the assessment of written work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(5), 585-609.
• Torrance, H. & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing formative assessment in the classroom: using action research to explore and modify theory. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 615-631.
• Wiliam, D. & Thompson, M. (2007). Integrating assessment with ınstruction: What will ıt take to make ıt work? C. A. Dwyer (Editör), The future of assessment: shaping teaching and learning (53-82). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.