Research Article

Evaluation of the Special Education Course Curriculum According to the Opinions of Teacher Candidates: A Qualitative Study

Volume: 12 Number: 2 July 29, 2024
EN TR

Evaluation of the Special Education Course Curriculum According to the Opinions of Teacher Candidates: A Qualitative Study

Abstract

Changes are made in education programs from time to time to perform the teaching profession more efficiently. In this context, special education courses have become taught in all teaching branches. Our research is important in that it can be a source for program development studies on the goals, content, process, and evaluation dimensions of the special education course curriculum and the development of in-service training programs within the scope of special education. In this research, it is aimed to examine the special education course curriculum according to the opinions of teacher candidates and to reveal the performance and functionality of the goals, content, process and evaluation elements of the curriculum in providing the necessary professional knowledge and competencies, and to provide a source for program development studies in the field of special education. The conduct of the research was inspired by the goal-based program evaluation model and the Stufflebeam context, input-process and product model. This research, which was conducted using a qualitative method, was conducted at a university with a faculty of education in Northern Cyprus in the 2023-2024 academic year. With the maximum diversity sampling method, 56 teacher candidates from various branches voluntarily participated in the research. The data were analyzed by applying content analysis. Research findings are reported under 4 main themes: goals, content, process and evaluation. As a result of the research, it was concluded that the special education course curriculum under the theme of goals increased the communication skills, classroom management skills, and knowledge and skills of preparing individualized education programs of the teacher candidates, that the acquired knowledge and skills could be applied in real school environments, and that positive attitude changes occurred in the teacher candidates towards the course. In the content theme, it is stated that the content achieves the goals, but the subjects that need to be applied are missing, internships and observations are wanted to be carried out in real schools within the scope of special education course, and face-to-face applications are requested to be increased; In the process theme, it is stated that the lesson hours should be longer, the lessons should be face-to-face education rather than distance education, and the use of materials should be increased; In the evaluation theme, results were obtained that teachers candidates' thoughts about performance evaluation practice were more dominant.

Keywords

Special Education , Curriculum Evaluation , Program Development

References

  1. Akıncı, M., & Dübüş, M. (2022). Ortaokul matematik öğretmenlerinin ilköğretim matematik öğretmenliği lisans programı hakkındaki görüşleri. [Middle school mathematics teachers' views on elementary mathematics education undergraduate program]. Karaelmas Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(1), 1-14.
  2. Altıntaş, E., & Şengül, S. (2014). Özel eğitim dersinin kaynaştırmaya yönelik tutumlar ve kazanımlar bakımından değerlendirilmesi. [The evaluation of special education lesson in terms of attitudes towards mainstreaming and attaintments]. e-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 1(3), 1-12.
  3. Altıntaş, E., İlgün, Ş., & Uygun, S. (2021). İlköğretim matematik öğretmenlerinin özel eğitim dersi ve kaynaştırma yoluyla matematik eğitimi hakkındaki görüşleri. [Opinions of elementary school mathematics teachers on special educatıon lesson and mathematics education through inclusion]. Uşak Üniversitesi Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(3), 21-38. https://doi.org/10.29065/usakead.1020053
  4. Atasay, M. (2020). Görme engelli öğrenciler için matematik materyalleri tasarımı. [Designing mathematics materials for visually impaired students]. Anadolu University Journal of Education Faculty, 4(2), 14-121. https://doi.org/10.34056/aujef.662203
  5. Atman, B. Y., Altun, N., Elçi, A. N., & Karaahmetoğlu, B. (2023). Sınıfa girmeden öğretmenliği deneyimlemek: özel eğitim öğretmen adayları ve uygulama öğretim elemanları neler söylüyor? [The special education student teacher’s experience of teaching without entering the classroom: What do teaching supervisors and special education student teachers think]. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 21(3), 1257-1287. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1217143
  6. Avramidis, E., & Kalyva, E. (2007). The influence of teaching experience and professional development on Greek teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22(4), 367-389. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250701649989
  7. Babaoğlan, E., & Yılmaz, Ş. (2010). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin kaynaştırma eğitimindeki yeterlikleri. [Competency of classroom teachers in the inclusive education]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 18(2), 345-354.
  8. Baştürk, S. (2011). Matematik öğretmen adaylarının eğitim fakültesindeki eğitim-öğretim sürecini değerlendirmeleri. [Mathematics teacher candidates’ evaluations of teaching and learning process in faculty of education]. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(1). 58-94.
  9. Bozarslan, B., & Batu, E. S. (2014). Özel anaokullarında çalışan eğiticilerin okulöncesi dönemde kaynaştırma ile ilgili görüş ve önerileri. [Examining the opinions of teachers working in private preschools about inclusion]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(2), 86-108. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2014.14.2-5000091529
  10. Bozkurt, S. S. (2017). Özel eğitimde dijital destek: Yardımcı teknolojiler. [Digital support in special education: Assistive technologies]. Açıköğretim Uygulamaları ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 37-60.
APA
Özden, C. (2024). Evaluation of the Special Education Course Curriculum According to the Opinions of Teacher Candidates: A Qualitative Study. International Journal of Turkish Education Sciences, 12(2), 761-804. https://doi.org/10.46778/goputeb.1430995