UbD Implementations in Preschool Teaching: Reflections from the Teacher and Student Perspective

Öz

The purpose of this study is to examine the reflections of UbD implementations on teachers’ professional development and students’ recipient language age. The research was carried out via mixed method. The participants of the study consisted of a teacher and 38 students, 19 of which were in the experiment and 19 of which were in the control group. As data collection tools, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, reflection notes and one-to-one interview were used. To analyze quantitative data, non-parametric tests of Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon Marked Ranks Test were administered. The qualitative data were analyzed via content analysis. The quantitative findings of the study revealed that there was no significant difference in favor of the control group, although there was a significant difference between the pre-test and post-test scores of the experiment group students in the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test in favor of the post-test. Findings from the qualitative data of the study indicated that UbD was an innovative and developmental approach in the professional development of the teacher and that the teacher had the possibility to work in a more systematical and planned way during the UbD implementations. Findings also indicated that UbD facilitated the teacher's work and that the UbD design process led teachers to investigate, use new methods of teaching and improve themselves.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• UbD (understanding by design),preschool teaching,teacher education,recipient language age

Okul Öncesi Öğretimde UbD Uygulamaları: Öğretmen ve Öğrenci Perspektifinden Yansımalar

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı okul öncesi öğretimde UbD uygulamalarının öğretmenlerin profesyonel gelişimi ve öğrencilerin alıcı dil yaşı üzerindeki yansımalarının incelenmesidir. Araştırma karma desenle yürütülmüştür. Araştırmanın katılımcılarını bir öğretmen, 19’u deney ve 19’u kontrol grubunda olmak üzere toplam 38 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmada veri toplama aracı olarak Peabody Resim Kelime Testi, yansıtma notları ve birebir görüşme kullanılmıştır. Toplanan nicel verilerin analizinde non-parametrik testlerden Mann-Whitney U ve Wilcoxon İşaretli Sıralar Testi, nitel verilerin analizinde ise içerik analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmadan elde edilen nicel bulgular, deney grubu öğrencilerinin Peabody Resim Kelime Testi’nden aldıkları deney öncesi ve deney sonrası puanlar arasında, sontest lehine anlamlı bir fark olduğunu, fakat kontrol grubu lehine anlamlı bir fark olmadığını ortaya koymuştur. Araştırmanın nitel verilerinden elde edilen bulgular, öğretmenin profesyonel gelişiminde UbD’nin yenilikçi ve öğretmeni geliştirici bir yaklaşım olduğunu, UbD uygulamaları süresince öğretmenin daha planlı ve daha sistematik çalışma imkanı bulduğunu, UbD’nin öğretmenin işini kolaylaştırdığını ve UbD tasarım sürecinin öğretmeni araştırmaya, yeni yöntemler kullanmaya, kendini geliştirmeye yönlendirdiğini ortaya koymuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• UbD (anlamaya dayalı tasarım),okul öncesi öğretim,öğretmen eğitimi,alıcı dil yaşı

Kaynakça

1. Anderson, A. R. (2012). Implementing literature circles: An experimental study in an English language learners’ classroom (Doctoral dissertation). Capella University, Minneapolis.
2. Andrews, S. A. (2011). Development and use of essential learning goals and their impact on student reading achievement in grades two through (Doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri, St. Louis.
3. Auerbach, C. F. & Silverstein, L. B. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. ABD: New York University Press.
4. Aybat, B. & Doğan, S. (2017). Öğretmen 2.0: Tasarımcı. İstanbul: Abaküs.
5. Baird, S. A. (2006). Evaluation of the impact of Alabama’s technology integration professional development model for pre-service faculty (Doctoral dissertation). University of Alabama, Birmingham.
6. Beck, C. & Kosnik, C. (2006). Innovations in teacher education: A social constructivist approach (1. bs.) ABD: State University of Newyork Press.
7. Bertram, K. B. (2011). Preparing culturally responsive teachers of science, technology, engineering, and math using the geophysical institute framework for professional development in Alaska (Doctoral dissertation). University of Alaska, Fairbanks.
8. Boehler, K. R. (2008). Historical inquiry and epiphany: A bridge for elementary education majors learning to design elementary art curriculum (Doctoral dissertation). Montana State University, Montana.

9. Boozer, A. (2014). Planning backwards to go forward: Examining pre-service teachers’ use of backward design to plan and deliver instruction (Doctoral dissertation). Arizona State University, Arizona.
10. Brown, J. L. (2004). Making the most of understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
11. Brown, M, & Edelson, D. C. (2003). Teaching as Design: Can we better understand the ways in which teachers use materials so we can better design materials to support their changes in practice? LeTUS Report. http://www.inquirium.net/people/matt/teaching_as_design-Final.pdf
12. Burson, T. (2011). The effects of backward-designed curriculum and instruction on classroom management. (Doctoral dissertation). Lindenwood University, Missouri.
13. Caena, F. (2011). Literature review quality in teachers’ continuing professional development. [Çevrim-içi: http://ec.europa.eu/education/policy/strategic- framework/doc/teacher-development_en.pdf]. Erişim Tarihi: 18.12.2014.
14. Carl, A. E. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory into practice (3. bs.) Güney Afrika: Juta and Company Ltd.
15. Craig, C. (2012). Professional development through a teacher-as-curriculum-maker Lens. In M. Kooy ve K. v. Veen (Eds.). Teacher learning that matters (ss. 22-43). ABD: Routledge.
16. Corvo, A. F. (2014). Utilizing the national research council’s (NRC) conceptual framework for the next generation science standards (NGSS): A self-study in my science, engineering, and mathematics classroom (Doctoral dissertation). Columbia University, New York.
17. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Massachusetts, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
18. Duke, J. E. (2011). The accelerated reader program in conjunction with best-practice reading instruction: The effects on elementary-school reading scores (Doctoral dissertation). Capella University, Minessota.
19. Dunn, L. M. (1959). The Peabody picture vocabulary test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
20. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test (3. bs.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
21. Edmunds, L. K. (2011). The planning processes of teachers in high-achieving schools: Case studies of six tenth grade English teachers (Doctoral dissertation). Azusa Pacific University, California.
22. Erbay, F. & Öztürk Samur, A. (2010). Anne ve babaların çocuk kitapları hakkındaki genel görüşleri ile çocukların alıcı dil gelişim düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. International Periodical For the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic Volume 5/4, 1063-1073
23. Ersan, C. (2015). The effect of father’s language training program on the receptive language development of children. Education and Science, 40, 51-71.
24. Fer, S. (2009). Öğretim tasarımı (1. bs.) Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
25. Finlay, L. (2002). Negotiating the swamp: The opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice. Qualitative Research, 2(2), 209-230.
26. Glesne, C. (2012). Nitel araştırmaya giriş. (A. Ersoy & P. Yalçınoğlu, çev.). 1.bs. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
27. Graff, N. (2011). An effective and agonizing way to learn: Preparation for planning curriculum. Teacher Education Quarterly, 151-168.
28. Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2010). The teacher as designer: pedagogy in the new media age. E-Learning and Digital Media, 7(3), 200-222.
29. Kelting-Gibson, L. M. (2003). Preservice teachers’planning and preparation practices: A comparison of lesson and unit plans developed using the backward design model and a traditional model (Doctoral dissertation). Montana State University, Montana.
30. Koçyiğit S., Kayılı G. & Erbay F. (2010). Montessori yönteminin beş-altı yaş çocuklarının dikkat toplama becerilerine etkisinin incelenmesi. Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi, 372, 16–21.
31. Kotaman, H. (2008). Impacts of dialogical storybook reading on young children’s reading attitudes and vocabulary development. Reading Improvement, 45(2), 55–61.
32. Meyer, C. L. (2006). Learning to teach conceptually: Four preservice teachers’ journeys (Doctoral dissertation). University of Kansas, Kansas.
33. Molina, W. (2013). Teachers’ views of backwards planning in a suburban elementary school in Hawaii (Doctoral dissertation). Walden University, Minessota.
34. Noble, C. (2011). How does understanding by design in uence student achievement in eight grade social studies? (Doctoral dissertation). Capella University, Minessota.
35. McTighe, J. (2008). Making the most of professional learning communities. The Learning Principal, 3(8), 3-7.
36. McTighe, J. & Seif, E. (2003). A Summary of Underlying Theory and Research Base for Understanding by Design. [Çevrim-içi: http://jaymctighe.com/wordpress/wp- content/uploads/2011/04/UbD-Research-Base.pdf.] Erişim tarihi: 24.05.2017
37. McTighe, J., Seif, E., & Wiggins, G. (2004). You can teach for meaning. Teaching for Meaning, 62(1), 26–31.
38. Özekes, M. (2013). Peabody resim kelime testi 3.01-3.12 yaş aralığı İzmir bölgesi standardizasyonu çalışması. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 14(1), 90-107.
39. Penuel, W. R. & Gallagher, L. P. (2009). Preparing teachers to design instruction in middle school earth science: Comparing the impacts of three professional development programs on teaching and learning. Annual meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness Second Annual Conference, 1-3 March 2009, Virginia, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri.
40. Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 1.bs. ABD: Sage Publications Ltd.
41. Schoellhorn, L. (2012). “Bringing history to life” exploring the historic cemetery as a primary classroom resource (Master’s thesis). Webster University, Missouri.
42. Stotter, D. E. (2004). Assessment of the learning and attitude modi cation of technology education students who complete an instructional unit on agriculture and biotechnology (Doctoral dissertation). North Carolina State University, North Carolina.
43. Şafak, N. E. (2016). Okul öncesi dönemdeki çocukların mizaç özellikleri, alıcı dil ve dikkat becerileri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Beykent Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Türkiye.
44. Şimsek, Z. C., & Işıkoğlu Erdogan, N. (2015). Effects of the dialogic and traditional reading techniques on children’s language development. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 754-758
45. Takacs, J. A. (2010). Using formative assessment in professional learning communities to advance teaching and learning (Doctoral dissertation). Walden University, Minessota.
46. Tepeli, Y. & Karadeniz, H. K. (2013). Otizmli ve normal gelişim gösteren çocukların alıcı dil becerilerinin farklı değişkenler açısından ı̇ncelenmesi. Dil ve Edebiyat Eğitimi Dergisi, 2(6), 73-89.
47. Tetik, G. & Işıkoğlu Erdoğan, N. (2017). Diyaloğa dayalı okumanın 48-60 aylık çocukların dil gelişimine etkisi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 25(2).
48. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (2. bs.). ABD: Harvard University Press.
49. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
50. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
51. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by design: Mission, action, and achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
52. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). The understanding by design guide to creating high-quality units. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
53. Yıldırım Doğru, S. S., Alabay, E., & Kayılı, G. (2010). Normal gelişim gösteren ve öğrenme güçlüğü olan çocukların sözcük dağarcığı ile dili anlama düzeylerinin belirlenmesi. İlköğretim Online, 9(3), 828-840.
54. Yıldırım Doğru, S. S. & Çetingöz, D. (2017). Duyu Eğitiminin otistik çocukların alıcı dil gelişimine etkileri. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 25(5), 1819-1834.
55. Yoshikawa, H., Weiland, C., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2016). When does preschool matter? Future of Children, 26 (2), 21-35.
56. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. 7. bs. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
57. Yurtseven, N. (2016). Yabancı dı̇l öğretı̇mı̇nde eylem araştırmasına dayalı UbD (Anlamaya Dayalı Tasarım) uygulamalarının öğretmenler ve öğrencı̇ler üzerı̇ndekı̇ yansımalarının ı̇ncelenmesı̇ (Doktora tezi). Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Türkiye.