Determination of cyber accessibility of teacher made tests/exams

Öz

This study aims at determining the cyber accessibility of teacher-made exams by analyzing the teachers’, students’, and parents’ views on this subject. To fulfill this purpose, 60 exam papers in 4 different courses, including Turkish, Mathematics, Science, Social Studies/Atatürk’s Principles and Revolutions, were examined through the technique of document analysis. Also, nine teachers, nine students, and nine parents were interviewed through semi-structured interview forms. According to the results, the level of cyber accessibility of secondary school teacher-made exams were; 87% for Turkish, 51% for mathematics, 99% for Science, and 88% for Social Studies/Atatürk's Principles and Revolutions courses. The highest level of cyber accessibility was found in multiple-choice and open-ended questions for Turkish courses, true-false questions for mathematics courses, open-ended, true-false, matching, and gap-filling questions for the Science courses and open-ended questions for Social Studies/Atatürk’s Principles and Revolutions courses. Students and parents stated that they make use of cyber accessible websites while preparing for teacher-made exams. On the other hand, teachers indicated that they perceived themselves incompetent in assessment and evaluation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Teacher-made exams
• Cyber accessibility
• Exam reliability
• Teacher made tests/exams
• Assessment

References

1. AERA, APA, & NCME (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Educational Research Association.
2. Akar, Z. (2019). Sekizinci sınıf Türkçe dersi yazılı sorularının merkezî sınav Türkçe soruları ile karşılaştırılması [Comparison of eighth grade Turkish course written questions with central exam Turkish questions] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ataturk University.
3. Anteneh, M. M., & Silesh, B. D. (2018). Assessment practices and factors for the disparity between students’ academic scores at teacher-made and regional exams: The case of Bench Maji zone grade 8 students. Educational Research and Reviews, 14(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2018.3581
4. Ardahanlı, Ö. (2018). TEOG sınavı matematik soruları ile 8. sınıf matematik yazılı sınav sorularının yenilenmiş bloom taksonomisi'ne göre incelenmesi [Analysis of questions in the TEOG examination and questions in the mathematics written exam of 8th grade mathematics courses according to the revised bloom's taxonomy] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Eskisehir Osmangazi University.
5. Ateş, D. (2016). Possibilities of democracy transformation in cyberworld: the case of legislation assemblies. Cyberpolitik Journal, 1(1), 170-177.
6. Aytaç, K. (1999). Federal Almanya Cumhuriyeti’nde okul sistemi [School system in the Federak Republic of Germany]. Engin Yayınevi.
7. Bakırcı, G. (2019). Ortaokul matematik öğretmenlerinin veri öğrenme alanına dair yazılı sınav soruları ile pisa sorularının karşılaştırmalı incelemesi [Comparative investigation of the secondary school mathematics teachers written exam questions and PISA questions in the field of data handling] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gaziantep University.
8. Bal, B., & Başar, E. (2014, Ocak). Finlandiya, Almanya, Singapur ve Türkiye’nin eğitim sistemleri açısından kademeler arası geçiş sistemlerinin karşılaştırılması [The comparison the systems of passing among educational levels of Finland, Germany, Singapore and Turkey]. Çukurova Üniversitesi Türkoloji Makale Bilgi Sistemi, 18776, 1-24.

9. Baykul, Y. (2010). Eğitimde ve psikolojide ölçme: Klasik test teorisi ve uygulaması [Measurement in education and psychology: Classical test theory and practice]. (2. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
10. Bogdan, R.C., & Biklen, S.K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: A introduction to theory and methods. Allyn and Bacon.
11. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2016). Sınavlar üzerine düşünceler – Türkiye’de ki ölçme değerlendirme sistemi üzerine güncel durum hakkında uzman değerlendirmesi [Thoughts on exams - expert assessment on the current situation on the assessment system in Turkey]. Kalem Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 345-356.
12. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, Pearson Education, Inc.
13. Demircioğlu, G., & Demircioğlu, H. (2009). Kimya öğretmenlerinin sınavlarda sordukları soruların hedef davranışlar açısından değerlendirilmesi [An evaluation of the questions chemistry teachers asked in exams in terms of the target behaviors]. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(1), 80-98.
14. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical orientation to sociological methods. McGraw-Hill.
15. Göçkan, A. (2019). Türk eğitim sistemi ile Alman eğitim sisteminde kademeler arası geçişlerin karşılaştırılması [Comparison between the Turkish education system and the levels in the German education system] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University.
16. Gökçe, O. (2006). İçerik analizi: kuramsal ve pratik bilgiler [Content analysis: theoretical and practical information]. Siyasal Kitabevi.
17. Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 29(2), 75- 91.
18. Kılıç, A. F. (2015). Temel eğitimden ortaöğretime geçiş ortak ve mazeret sınavındaki Türkçe ve matematik alt testlerinin psikometrik özelliklerinin karşılaştırılması [The comparison of psychrometric properties of standardised and make up maths and Turkish subtest questions in the exam of transition from basic to secondary education] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Hacettepe University.
19. Kilmen, S. (2014). Ölçme ve değerlendirmede temel kavramlar, R. N. Demirtaşlı (Ed.), Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme içinde [Basic concepts in measurement and evaluation, R. N. Demirtaşlı (Ed.), in Measurement and evaluation in education] (s. 30-64). Edge Akademi.
20. MEB (2019). Ortaöğretime geçiş tercih ve yerleştirme kılavuzu [The Guidelines for Transition to Secondary Education]. http://www.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosylar/2019_06/25104443_evrak8071216911865128306.pdf
21. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2015). Nitel veri analizi [Qualitative data analysis] (2. baskıdan çeviri) (S. Akbaba Altun, & A. Ersoy Çev. Eds). Pegem Akademi.
22. Önder, R. (2016). 2014-2015 TEOG sınavına ilişkin paydaş görüşleri ile öğretmen yapımı testlerle olan ilişkisi [Relationship between basis of stakeholders opinion about TEOG with teachers making test in 2014-2015] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Akdeniz University.
23. Özdemir, A., & Gelbal, S. (2016). Predictive power of primary and secondary school success criterion on transition to higher education examination scores. Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 7(2), 309-334.
24. Özdemir, S., & Şahin, Ş. (2005). Siberuzay nerede? [Where is the cyberspace?]. Pivolka, 4(19), 1-14.
25. Patton, M. Q. (2005). Qualitative research. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
26. Shariff, S., & Gouin, R. (2005, November). Cyber-dilemmas: Gendered hierarchies, free expression and cyber-safety in schools. In Oxford Internet Institute conference at Oxford University.
27. Sınacı, B. (2019). Temel eğitimden ortaöğretime geçiş (teog) sisteminde uygulanan sınavların puanları ile diğer puanların karşılaştırılması [The comparison of scores in transition from basic education to secondary education (TEOG) and other scores] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Hacettepe University.
28. Turan, S. D. (2017). Ortaokul 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıf fen bilimleri dersi yazılı sınav sorularının ölçme ve değerlendirmeye uygunluğu açısından incelenmesi [An investigation on the written examinations of the science courses of 5, 6, 7 and 8 th grade with regard to the appropriateness of measurement and evaluation] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Mustafa Kemal University.
29. Uymaz, M., & Çalışkan, H. (2019). Öğretmen yapımı sosyal bilgiler dersi sınav sorularının yenilenmiş bloom taksonomisine göre incelenmesi [An investigation on the teacher-made social studies course exam questions in terms of revised Bloom’s taxonomy]. Kastamonu Education Journal, 27(1), 331-346. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.2637
30. Wang J, Iannotti RJ, & Nansel TR. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United States: physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45(4), 368-75.
31. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Seçkin Yayınevi.
32. Zorbaz, K. Z. (2005). İlköğretim okulları ikinci kademe türkçe öğretmenlerinin ölçme ve değerlendirmeye ilişkin görüşleri ve yazılı sınavlarda sordukları sorular üzerine bir değerlendirme [An evaluation on the views of primary school Turkish teachers on measurement and evaluation and the questions they ask in written examinations] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Mustafa Kemal University.