The effects of teaching and learning with and about intangible cultural heritage on supportive learning outcomes

Yıl 2025, Sayı: 56, 207 - 245, 29.09.2025

Abdurrahman Kansızoğlu , Merve Görkem Zeren-akbulut

https://doi.org/10.32003/igge.1697146

Öz

Learning through intangible cultural heritage represents a significant component of contemporary educational transformation efforts. This approach, grounded in the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage, aims to adapt both the heritage itself and its transmission methods to current educational contexts while enhancing its visibility and impact across various life domains and educational settings. Based on the Convention's framework, this article examines the nature of intangible cultural heritage and explores how learning through cultural heritage contributes to enhanced educational outcomes. The study employs current situation analysis and case studies within an intercultural research framework, involving teachers and school administrators as participants. The findings indicate that intangible cultural heritage functions as a social-emotional competency that maintains its vitality through adaptive transformation in relation to contemporary daily life. This heritage is transmitted through experiential learning methods observation, auditory engagement, and hands-on practice and demonstrates increased effectiveness through active application. The research reveals that intangible cultural heritage can survive and thrive when it successfully integrates with modern life contexts. Furthermore, the study suggests that the learning contexts identified through cultural heritage education possess significant potential to complement neurocognitive development and may inform future educational neuroscience research initiatives. These findings contribute to understanding how traditional cultural knowledge systems can be effectively integrated into contemporary educational frameworks.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Educational Neuroscience , UNESCO 2003 Convention , Social Learning , Emotional Self-Regulation

Etik Beyan

ETHICS STATEMENT This research was conducted according to the guidelines of Ondokuz Mayis University Samsun Social and Human Sciences Research Ethics Committee (decision number 2024-852) and research implementation permit was approved by Trabzon Provincial Directorate of National Education. The proposal to adapt the survey titled Teaching and Learning With and About Intangible Cultural Heritage in Asia and the Pacific (2021) into Turkish within the scope of this research was approved by Duong Bich Hanh, the editor, and the authors, who developed the survey.

Destekleyen Kurum

FUNDING INFORMATION Authors declare that no funding was received for this research.

Proje Numarası

-

Teşekkür

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are grateful for the comments and suggestions of Duong Bich Hanh, Programme Specialist for Culture in Multisectoral Regional Office for East Asia, Demet ÖZOĞLU, Coordinator of the Life is Colored with New Information Project (2020-1-TR01-KA229-093087_1) carried out within the ERASMUS School Education Strategic Partnerships Program and Söğütlü Primary School Principal İlhan SELÇUK, as well as the support of those who participated in this research.

Somut olmayan kültürel mirasla beraber ve miras yoluyla öğretme ve öğrenmenin destekleyici öğrenme ürünlerinin edinimine etkileri

Öz

Referans noktası 2003 tarihli UNESCO Somut Olmayan Kültürel Mirasın Korunması Sözleşmesi olan somut olmayan kültürel miras aracılığıyla öğrenme yaklaşımı, mirasın kendisi kadar onu aktarma yollarının da güncel koşullara göre dönüştürülmesiyle yaşamın ve okulun çeşitli alanlarında görünürlük ve etki gücü kazanmasına yönelik çabaların önemli bir bileşenidir. Sözleşme’deki söz konusu özgün çerçeve temelinde makalede somut olmayan kültürel mirasın ne olduğu sorusunun ötesinde bu mirasın ne ile ilişkili olduğu, destekleyici öğrenme ürünlerinin edinilmesinde kültürel miras aracılığıyla öğrenme perspektifinin nasıl bir role sahip olduğu incelenmektedir. Öğretmen ve okul yöneticilerinin katılımıyla yürütülen kültürlerarası anket uyarlama araştırması kapsamında gerçekleştirilen güncel durum ve vaka analizlerinden elde edilen bulgular, somut olmayan kültürel mirasın günlük yaşamla ilişkisi ölçüsünde dönüşerek yaşayabilen, görme, duyma ve uygulama yoluyla aktarılan ve kullanıldığı oranda etkinliği artan sosyal-duygusal yeterlilikler ve pratikler olduğuna işaret etmektedir. Ek olarak, kültürel miras aracılığıyla öğrenmenin doğası açısından taşıdığı potansiyele ilişkin olarak makalede gündeme getirilen etkili düşünme ve öğrenme bağlamlarının nörobilişsel açılımları tamamlayabileceği ve eğitimsel sinirbilim projelerine esin kaynağı olabileceği düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

UNESCO 2003 Sözleşmesi , Sosyal Öğrenme , Duygusal Öz-Düzenleme , Eğitimsel Sinirbilim

Proje Numarası

-

Kaynakça

• Açıkgöz, K. Ü. (2014). Aktif öğrenme. Biliş Yayıncılık.
• Alpaydın, Y. (2024). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığının müfredat değişimi ve Türkiye yüzyılı maarif modeli. Seta Perspektif, 397, 1-4. https://www.setav.org/perspektif-milli-egitim-bakanliginin-mufredat-degisimi-ve- turkiye-yuzyili-maarif-modeli
• Antons, C. & Logan, W. (2017). (Eds.). (2017). Intellectual property, cultural property and intangible cultural heritage. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315714288
• Aral, A. E. (2020). Somut olmayan kültürel miras: Örgün, yaygın ve sargın eğitim. Geleneksel Publishing.
• Aral, A. E. (2020). Somut olmayan kültürel mirasın eğitimi ve kültürün aktarımı: Türkiye Örneği (PhD Thesis, Hacı Bayram Veli University, Ankara). https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp? id=Znf25pMjxOe4Nybz2b6C7A&no=rMzQsFmgC9dwjLgfarUi0w
• Ateh, C. M. &Wyngowski, A. J. (2015). The common core state standards: An opportunity to enhance formative assessment in history/social studies classrooms. The Clearing House: A Journal of educational Strategies, Issues & Ideas, 88(3), 85-90. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1062985
• Balsters, J. H., Whelan C. D., Robertson I. H. & Ramnani, N. (2013). Cerebellum and cognition: Evidence for the encoding of higher rules. Cereb Cortex, 23(6), 1433-1443. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs127
• Banks, J. (2008). An introduction to multicultural education. Pearson.
• Blake, J. (2008). UNESCO’s 2003 Convention on intangible cultural heritage: The implications of community involvement in ‘safeguarding’. In L. Smith & N. Akagawa (Eds.), Intangible heritage (pp. 45-74). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203884973
• Bradshaw, A. C. (2017). Critical pedagogy and educational technology. In A. D. Benson, R. Joseph & J. L. Moore (Eds.), Culture, learning, and technology (pp. 8-27). Routledge.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2024). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi.
• Caine, R. N. & Caine, R. (2002). Beyin temelli öğrenme. In G. Ülgen (Trans.). Nobel.
• Cominelli, F. (2020). Innovation Power: The Strength of Weak Ties and The Liquid Museum. In C. Dunkley & G. Van der Hallen (Eds.), Museums and intangible cultural heritage/towards a third space in the heritage sector. (pp. 65-68). Stevens Print nv. https://www.ichandmuseums.eu/en/toolbox/book-museums-and-intangible- cultural-heritage
• Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. Sage Publications.
• Demir, Ö. (2023). Eğitimde program dışı etkinlikler. N. Köksal & Z. Ayvaz Tuncel (Ed.), Eğitimde program dışı etkinlikler (s. 19-40) içinde. Pegem Akademi.
• Dervent, F., Devrilmez, E. &İnan, M. (2024). (Eds.). Etkili öğretim tasarımı: Takım sporları. Pegem Akademi.
• Erden Başaran, Ö. & Uğurel Kamışlı, M. (2023). Eğitimde kültürlerarası iletişim. Nobel.
• Fan, W. (2020). Research on the industrialization inheritance of intangible cultural heritage in Guizhou: A case study of ethnic songs, dances and operas. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Social Science, Economics and Education Research (SSEER 2020) (pp. 291-294). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200801.069
• Fedakar, P. & Kuzay Demir, G. (2018). Yaşayan insan hazineleri programının somut olmayan kültürel mirasın sürdürülebilirliği bağlamında değerlendirilmesi. Milli Folklor, 120(Winter), 90-101. https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/296767
• Gerring, J. (2007). Case study research: Principles and practices. Cambridge University Press.
• Gindis, B. (1999). Vygotsky’s vision: Reshaping the practice of special education for the 21st century. Remedial and Special Education, 20(6), 333-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259902000606
• Gosavi, R. S. & Toomarian, E. Y. (2024). Impacts of involving young learners in mind, brain, and education research. Mind, Brain, and Education, 18(2), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12412
• Günbaş, N. (2024). Okul dışı öğretim materyalleri. In A. Küçükoğlu & H. İ. Kaya (Eds.), Kuramdan uygulamaya okul dışı öğrenme ortamları (s. 55-85) içinde. Pegem Akademi.
• Gürbüz, S. & Şahin, F. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin.
• Gürel, D. & Çetin, T. (2020). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının somut olmayan kültürel mirasa yönelik tutum ve farkındalıklarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından İncelenmesi. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 55(4), 2190-2205. https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.20.10.1432
• Hanh, D. B. (Ed.). (2021). Teaching and learning with and about intangible cultural heritage in Asia and the
• Pasific, Survey report. UNESCO and ICHCAP. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000375485
• Huang, M. C. (2023). Anthropological dimensions of modern educational culture: Theoretical analysis. Journal of Contemporary Philosophical and Anthropological Studies 1(1), 29-42. https://journals.eikipub.com/index.php/jcpas/article/view/58
• Ingold, T. (1996). (Ed.). Key debates in anthropology (Debate: Is the past a foreign country?). Routledge.
• International Test Commission. (2017). The ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests. https://www.intestcom.org/page/14
• Janssen, T. W., & van Atteveldt, N. (2022). Explore your brain: A randomized controlled trial into the effectiveness of a growth mindset intervention with psychosocial and psychophysiological components. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12572
• Jones, S. R., Rowan-Kenyon, H. T., Ireland, S. M., Niehaus, E., & Skendall, K. C. (2012). The meaning students make as participants in short-term immersion programs. Journal of College Student Development, 53(2), 201–230. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2012.0026
• Koyuncu, B. (2022). Nörobilim temelinde sosyal ve duygusal gelişim. Pegem Akademi.
• Kurin, R. (2004). Safeguarding intangible cultural heritage in the 2003 UNESCO Convention: A critical appraisal. Museum International, 56, 66-77. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000135859
• Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
• Mackey, A. P., Finn, A. S., Leonard, J. A., Jacoby-Senghor, D. S., West, M. R., Gabrieli, C. F. O., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2015). Neuroanatomical correlates of the income achievement gap. Psychological Science, 26, 925–933. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615572233
• McCowan, T. (2013). Education is a human right: Principles for a universal entitlement to learning. Bloomsbury Academic.
• Melis, C. & Chambers, D. (2021). The construction of intangible cultural heritage: A Foucauldian critique. Annals of Tourism Research 89, 103206, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103206
• Metin Basat, E. (2013). Somut ve somut olmayan kültürel mirası birlikte koruyabilmek. Milli Folklor, 25(100), 61- 71. https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/163711
• Ministry of National Education (MOE). (2025). Türkiye yüzyılı maarif modeli. https://tymm.meb.gov.tr/
• Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Pearson Education Limited.
• Newell, W. H. (2010). Educating for a complex world. Liberal Education 96(4), 6-11. https://eric.ed.gov/? id=EJ923876
• Ozernov-Palchik, O., Pollack, C., Bonawitz, E., Christodoulou, J. A., Gaab N., Gaabrieli, J. D.E., Monticello Kievlan, P., Kirby, C., Lin, G., Luk, G. & Nelson, C. A. (2024). Reflections on the past two decades of Mind, Brain, and Education. Mind, Brain, and Education 18(1), 6-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12407
• Rethinking Education: Towards a Common Goal. (2015). https://inruled.bnu.edu.cn/informationservice/publications/ExternalPublications/129152.html
• Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. Teachers College Press.
• Sharma, S., El-Atwani, K., Rahatzad, J., Ware, J., Phillion, J., & Malewski, E. (2012). How disorienting experiences in informal learning contexts promote crosscultural awareness in preservice teachers: Findings from a study abroad program. Learning Landscapes, 5(2), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v5i2.566
• Sousa, D. (2021). Neuroscience research: Support for social-emotional and cognitive learning. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 57(1), 6-10. https://eric.ed.gov/?q=learning+AND+brain&ff1=subNeurosciences&pg=18&id=EJ1283428
• Stojanović, M. (2024). Intangible cultural heritage and tourism- Sketches on identity. Etnoantropološki Problemi Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 19 (1):217–236. https://doi.org/10.21301/eap.v19i1.9
• Survey Research Center. (2016). Guidelines for best practice in cross-cultural surveys. Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan. https://ccsg.isr.umich.edu
• Sustainable Future: Guidelines for Educators in the Asia-Pacific Region. (2015). https://ocm.iccrom.org/documents/learning-intangible-heritage-sustainable-future-guidelines- educators-asia-pacific-region
• UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention
• UNESCO-IBE. (2017). In focus education and the future. International Bureau of Education, UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000366753
• Urbinati, S. (2018). Communities, groups and individuals: The bearers of the intangible cultural heritage. What is role attributed to these subjects in the Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Heritage? In T. Yıldız &
• M. Özdemir (Trans.), SOKÜM Sözleşmesi, yönelimler, eğilimler ve eleştiriler (pp. 87-107). Geleneksel Publishing.
• Volante, L. & Beckett, D. (2011). Formative assessment and the contemporary classroom: Synergies and tensions between research and practice. Canadian Journal of Education 34, 239-255. https://eric.ed.gov/? id=EJ936752
• Weiss, R. P. (2000). Brain-based learning. Training & Development 54(7), 20-24. https://eric.ed.gov/? id=EJ609255
• Yazıcı, N. & Kaygısız, Ç. (2020). Dil öğretiminde kültürel yaklaşımlar. G. Aydın (Ed.), Yabancı/ikinci dil öğretiminde kültür ve kültürel etkileşim (s. 155-172) içinde. Pegem Akademi.
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin.
• Zeren Akbulut, M. G. (2019a). Öğrenmenin yeni paradigması: Coğrafya ve tarih temelli konuların disiplinlerarası yaklaşımla öğretimi. Pegem Akademi.
• Zeren Akbulut, M. G. (2019b). Ders sonu öğretmen gözlem formu ve program amaçlarına göre ders sonu değerlendirme. Ü. Eser Ünaldı (Ed.), Coğrafya Öğretimi I (s. 179-195) içinde. Pegem Akademi.
• Zeren Akbulut, M. G. (2021). Somut olmayan kültürel mirasın öğretim uygulamalarıyla aktarımı kapsamında korunması: Geleneksel Türk Okçuluğu örneği. Milli Folklor, 131(Autumn), 176-189. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/millifolklor/issue/66180/771541
• Zeren Akbulut, M. G. (2022). Teaching and learning through and about intangible cultural heritage. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction 14(3), 2723- 2749. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1364461