Mental Images and Method-Technique Approaches of Teacher Candidates of Preschool Teaching towards Science Education

Öz

The aim of this study is to reveal the mental images and adopted methods and techniques of the pre-school teacher candidates towards science teaching and learning. A total of 44 teacher candidates from Preschool Teaching Department of Amasya University participated in the study. The data were collected through Draw-A-Science-Teacher-Test Checklist (DASTT-C) developed by Thomas, Pedersen and Finson (2001) and an application sheet which investigated the method-techniques. The obtained data were examined by document analysis. According to findings, candidate teachers have traditional approach. Candidate teachers who have traditional approach consider themselves sufficient on science teaching. However, there is no similarity between the adopted approach and the used teaching methods and techniques. A set of suggestions are presented based on the findings of the study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Pre-school teacher candidate,mental image,method-technique

Okul Öncesi Öğretmenliği Öğretmen Adaylarının Fen Öğretimine Yönelik Zihinsel İmajları ve Yöntem-Teknik Yaklaşımları

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı okul deneyimi dersi alan aday okul öncesi öğretmenlerinin fen öğretimi ve öğrenimine yönelik zihinsel imajlarını ve benimsedikleri yöntem ve teknikleri ortaya çıkarmaktır. Çalışmaya Amasya Üniversitesi Okul Öncesi Öğretmenliği Bölümünden toplam 44 öğretmen adayı katılmıştır. Veriler Thomas, Pedersen ve Finson (2001) tarafından geliştirilen Fen öğretmeni Çizim Testi (DASTT-C) ve yöntem-tekniklerin sorgulandığı bir uygulama kağıdı yoluyla toplanmıştır. Elde edilen veriler dokuman analizi yoluyla incelenmiştir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre aday öğretmenler geleneksel yaklaşıma sahiptir. Geleneksel yaklaşıma sahip aday öğretmenler kendilerini fen öğretimi konusunda yeterli görmektedir. Ancak benimsenen yaklaşım ile kullanılan öğretim yöntem ve teknikler arasında bir benzerlik bulunmamaktadır. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulgulara dayanarak bir takım öneriler sunulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Okul öncesi öğretmenliği,zihinsel imaj,yöntem-teknik

Kaynakça

1. Ahmad Al-Amoush, S.(2012). Jordanian chemistry (student) teachers’ beliefs about chemistry teaching and their views on educational reform. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Bremen, Germany.
2. Akkuş, H.(2013). Pre-service secondary science teachers’ images about themselves as science teachers. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(2), 249-260.
3. Aksit, N. (2007). Educational reform in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 129–137.
4. Al-Amoush, S. A., Markic, S., Abu-Hola, I., & Eilks, I. (2011). Jordanian prospective and experienced chemistry teach-ers’ beliefs about teaching and learning and their potential role for educational reform. Science Education International, 22 (3), 185-201.
5. Ambusaidi, A. K., & Al-Balushi, S. M. (2012). A longitudinal study to identify prospective science teachers’ beliefs about science teaching using the draw-a-science-teacher-test checklist. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 7 (2), 291-311.
6. Anderson, L. M. & Holt-Reynolts, D. (1995). Prospective Teachers’ Beliefs and Teacher Education Pedagogy: Research Based on a Teacher Educator’s Practical Theory. http://scholar.google.com.tr/scholar?q=Anderson%2C+L.+M.+%26+Holt-Reynolds%2C+D.+%281995%29.+Prospective+Teachers%E2%80%99+Beliefs+and+Teacher+Education+Pedagogy%3A+Research&btnG=&hl=tr&as_sdt=0%2C5&as_vis=1 sitesinden 01.06.2017 tarihinde erişildi.
7. Aydogdu, B. & Selanik-Ay, T. (2016). Determination of teacher characteristics which support constructivist learning environments. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 63, 293-310, http://dx.doi.org/ 10.14689/ejer.2016.63.17.
8. Billig, M., S. Connor, D. Edwards, M. Gane, D. Middleton,& E. Rad. (1988). Ideological dilemmas: a social psychology of everyday thinking. London: Sage.

9. Buldur, S.(2017). A longitudinal investigation of the preservice science teachers’ beliefs about science teaching during a science teacher training programme. International Journal of Science Education, 39(1), 1-19.
10. Chambers, D.W. (1983). Stereotypical images of the scientist: The draw-a-scientist test. Science Education, 67, 255–265.
11. Chudgar, A., & Sankar, V. (2008). The relationship between teacher gender and student achievement: evidence from five Indian states. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 38 (5), 627-642.
12. Demirel, Ö. (2004). Öğretimi planlama ve değerlendirme öğretme sanatı (7.Baskı) Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
13. Deng, Z. (2004). Beyond teacher training: singaporean teacher preparation in the era of new educational initiatives. Teaching Education, 15, 159–173.
14. Duban, N.Y. (2013). Pre-service science and technology teachers’ mental images of science teaching. Eğitim Arastırmaları–Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 50, 107-126.
15. El-Deghaidy, H. (2006). An investigation of pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy and self-image as a science teacher in Egypt. Asia Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 7 (2), 1-22.
16. Fenstermacher, G. D. (1978). A philosophical consideration of recent research on teacher effectiveness. Review of Research in Education, 6, 157–185.
17. Finson, K. D., Pedersen, J., & Thomas, J. (2006). Comparing science teaching styles to students’ perceptions of scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 106(1), 8-15.
18. Finson, K.D., Beaver, J.B., & Cramond, B.L. (1995). Development of and field-test of a checklist for the draw-a-scientist test. School Science and Mathematics, 95(4), 195-205.
19. Fischler, H. (1999). The impact of teaching experiences on student teachers’ and beginning teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning science. In Loughran, J.J. (Edt.) Researching Teaching: Methodologies and practices for understandinf pedagogoy (p.172-197). London: Falmer Press.
20. Go, Y., & Kang, J.(2015). Early childhood pre-service teachers’ self-images of science teaching in constructivism science education courses. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 16 (2), 1-25.
21. Hirrschfeld, L.A. & Gelman, S.A.(1994). Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture. Cambridge University Press.
22. Lumpe, A. T., J. J. Haney, & C. M. Czerniak.(2000). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37 (3), 275–292.
23. Markic, S., &. Eilks. I. (2008). A case study on german first year chemistry student teachers beliefs about chemistry teaching, and their comparison with student teachers from other science teaching domains. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9 (1), 25–34.
24. Markic, S., & Eilks, I. (2010). First-year science education student teachers’ beliefs about student- and teacher-centeredness: parallels and differences between chemistry and other science teaching domains. Journal of Chemical Education, 87 (3), 335-339.
25. Markic, S., I. Eilks, & N. Valanides. (2008). Developing a tool to evaluate differences in beliefs about science teaching and learning among freshman science student teachers from different science teaching domains: A case study Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 4 (2), 109–120.
26. McCarty, D. (2015). Teacher candidates’ perceptions of scientists: images and attributes. Educational Review,67(4), 389-413.
27. MEB (2006). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi (6. - 7. - 8. Sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara.
28. MEB (2013).İlköğretim kurumları fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı. Ankara.
29. Minogue, J. (2010). What is the teacher doing? What are the students doing? An application of the draw-a-science-teacher-test. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 767–781.
30. Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317-328.
31. Norman, D.A.(1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner, & Stevens, A. (Edt). Mental Models, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Özden, M.(2007). Problems with Science and Technology Education in Turkey. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3, 157–161.
32. Pajares, M. F. (1992).Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–332.
33. Putnam, R., & H. Borko.(1997).Teacher learning: Implications of new views of cognition. In International Handbook of Teachers and Teaching, (Edt) B. J. Biddle, T. L. Good & I. F. Goodson, 1223–1296. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
34. Schon, D.A.(1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
35. Shen, J. (1997). Structure of the theoretical concept of educational goals: A test of factorial validity. Journal of Experimental Education, 65 (4), 342–352.
36. Skamp, K., & Mueller, A. (2001). Student teachers’ conceptions about effective primary science teaching: a longitudinal study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(4), 331-351.
37. Skoumios, M.(2012). Investigating pupils’ images of science teaching using drawings. The International Journal of Science in Society, 3(2), 179-190.
38. Swanborn, P. G. (1996). A common base for quality control criteria in quantitative and qualitative research. Quality and Quantity, 30 (1), 19–35.
39. Taşdere, A. ve Özsevgeç, T.(2012). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının pedagojik alan bilgisi bağlamında strateji-yöntem-teknik ve ölçme-değerlendirme bilgilerinin incelenmesi. http://kongre.nigde.edu.tr/xufbmek/dosyalar/tam_metin/pdf/2408-30_05_2012-16_22_18.pdf adresinden 10.05.2015 tarihinde ulaşılmıştır.
40. Thomas, J. A., & Pedersen, J. E. (2003). Reforming elementary science teacher preparation: What about extant teaching beliefs? School Science and Mathematics, 103(7), 319-330.
41. Thomas, J.A., Pedersen, J.E., & Finson K. (2001). Validating the draw-a-science-teacher-test checklist (DAST-C): Exploring mental models and teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 295-310.
42. Tobin, K., D. J. Tippins, & A. J. Gallard.( 1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science.In Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning, (Edt) D. L. Gabel, 45–93. New York: MacMillan.
43. Van Driel, J., A. Bulte, & N. Verloop.( 2007). The relationships between teachers’ general beliefs about teaching and learning and their domain specific curricular beliefs. Learning and Instruction, 17 (2), 156–171.