Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Examination of Action Research Articles in the Field of Mathematics Education in Türkiye

Year 2024, , 300 - 325, 31.12.2024
https://doi.org/10.52911/itall.1544320

Abstract

This study aims to analyze articles containing action research in the field of mathematics education in Türkiye and present them from a holistic perspective. For this purpose, action research articles published between 2007 and 2022 were reviewed in ERIC, Google Scholar, and ULAKBİM databases. Fifty-seven articles were reached due to the review and constitute the research sample. Document review, one of the qualitative research methods, was used. Articles are classified according to the year of publication, publication language, research model, subject, action research type, whether the cycle is specified or not, application period, researcher role, learning areas, study group and size, sampling method, data collection tools, validity and reliability, and data analysis methods. As a result of the research, it was seen that the qualitative research model was mainly used. The studies were primarily conducted with undergraduate students. While geometry is the most preferred learning area, it has mainly been studied in technology-supported learning environments. Interviews and observations were mainly used in data collection, expert evaluation was taken to ensure validity and reliability, and coder agreement was checked. Content analysis, one of the most qualitative techniques, was used to analyze the data obtained. Based on the research results, it is recommended that mixed-pattern action research be conducted and that the number of studies involving students at different education levels and learning areas be increased.

References

  • Altrichter, H., Gstettner, P. (1993) Action research: A closed chapter in the history of German social science? Educational Action Research, 1(3), 329-360.
  • Beverly, J. (1993). Teacher as Researcher. ERIC Digest, ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education, Washington DC.
  • Çalışkan, M., & Serçe, H. (2018). Action research articles on education in Turkey: A content analysis. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 19(1), 57-79.
  • Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.
  • Corey, S. M. (1949). Action research, fundamental research, and educational practices. Teachers College Record, 50(8), 509-514.
  • Dağ, Ş., & Horzum, T. (2022). Examination of graduate theses about misconceptions in mathematics education: A systematic review. e-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 434-465.
  • Dickens, L., & Watkins, K. (1999). Action research: rethinking Lewin. Management Learning, 30(2), 127-140.
  • Ertane Baş, Ö., & Özturan Sağırlı, M. (2021). A content analysis related to the problem themed articles on mathematics education in Türkiye. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 50(2), 778-832.
  • Ferrance, E. (2000). Action research: themes in education. USA: Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory at Brown University.
  • Göktaş, Y., Küçük, S., Aydemir, M., Telli, E., Arpacık, Ö., Yıldırım, G., & Reisoğlu, İ. (2012). Educational technology research trends in Turkey: A content analysis of the 2000–2009 decade. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 177-179.
  • Gunz, J. (1996). Jacob L. Moreno and the origins of action research. Educational Action Research, 4(1), 145-158.
  • Hendricks, C. (2006). Improving school’s trough action research: a comprehensive guide for educators. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2015). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty (2nd ed.). USA: Sage Publications.
  • Johnson, B. M. (1995). Why conduct action research? Teaching and Change, 3(1), 90-104.
  • Karaoğlu, H., & Çoban Esen, A. (2019). Investigation of graduate theses on the language development in pre-school education in Turkey. Erzincan University Faculty of Education Journal, 21(1), 211-229.
  • Karatay, M., & Taş, M. (2021). The use and importance of action research in education. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 17(38), 5545-5568.
  • Kemmis, S. (1980). Action Research in Retrospect and Prospect, ERIC database, 1-22.
  • Kemmis, S. (2009). Action research as a practice‐based practice. Educational Action Research, 17(3), 463-474.
  • Kuzu, A. (2009). Action research in teacher training and professional development. The Journal of International Social Research, 2(6), 425-433.
  • Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34-46.
  • McKernan, J. (1991). Action inquiry: Studied enactment. In E. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry. (2nd ed., pp. 309-326). Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.
  • McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2010). You and your action research project. (3rd Edition). Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Mertler, C. A. (2021). Action research as teacher inquiry: A viable strategy for resolving problems of practice. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 26(19), 1-12.
  • Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a qualitative document analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64-77.
  • O'Brien, R. (2001). An overview of the methodological approach of action research. In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Action Research. João Pessoa, Brazil: Universidade Federal da Paraíba. http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html (Accessed 20/1/2024)
  • Özey, K. (2019). Cebir öğrenme alanında yapılan lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi: 2010-2018 yılları arası Türkiye örneği. (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M., & Dündar, H. (2014). Tendencies of the researches published in education and science journal: Content analysis. Education and Science, 39(173), 430-453.
  • Şimşek, N., & Yaşar, A. (2019). A thematic and methodological review of theses related to GeoGebra: A content analysis. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 10(2), 290-313.
  • Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London, UK: Heinemann Publishing.
  • Toptaş, B., & Kuşdemir, Y. (2021). Analysis of the graduate theses in the field of teaching mathematics education in Turkey. International Primary Education Research Journal, 5(2), 171-179.
  • Topuz, F., & Cantürk Günhan, B. (2021). What is the Trend of Argumentation Studies in Mathematics Education in Turkey? Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 15 (36), 55-80.
  • Turhan Türkkan, B., Yolcu, E., & Karataş, T. (2019). Analysis of doctoral theses including action research in the field of educational sciences in Turkey. Bayburt Faculty of Education Journal, 14(28), 501-524.
  • Ültay, E., Akyurt, H., & Ültay, N. (2021). Descriptive content analysis in social sciences. IBAD Journal of Social Sciences, (10), 188- 201.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9. bs.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (10. bs.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. Yücedağ, T. (2010). 2000-2009 yılları arasında matematik eğitimi alanında Türkiye'de yapılan çalışmaların bazı değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Selçuk Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya.

Türkiye’de Matematik Eğitimi Alanında Yapılan Eylem Araştırması Makalelerinin İncelenmesi

Year 2024, , 300 - 325, 31.12.2024
https://doi.org/10.52911/itall.1544320

Abstract

Bu araştırmada Türkiye’de matematik eğitimi alanında eylem araştırmalarını içeren makaleleri analiz etmek ve bütüncül bir bakış açısı ile sunmak amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda 2007-2022 yılları arasında yayınlanan eylem araştırması makaleleri ERIC, Google Akademik ve ULAKBİM veri tabanlarında taranmıştır. Yapılan tarama sonucunda ulaşılan 57 makale araştırmanın örneklemini oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan doküman incelemesi kullanılmıştır. Makaleler yayınlandığı yıl, yayın dili, araştırma modeli, konusu, eylem araştırması türü, döngünün belirtilip belirtilmemesi, uygulama süresi, araştırmacı rolü, öğrenme alanları, çalışma grubu ve büyüklüğü, örnekleme yöntemi, veri toplama araçları, geçerlik ve güvenirlik, veri analiz yöntemleri çerçevesinde sınıflandırılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda en çok nitel araştırma modelinin kullanıldığı görülmüştür. Çalışmalar en fazla lisans öğrencileri ile yürütülmüştür. Geometri en çok tercih edilen öğrenme alanı iken çoğunlukla teknoloji destekli öğrenme ortamları konusunda çalışılmıştır. Verilerin toplanmasında en çok görüşme ve gözlemlerden faydalanılmış, geçerlik ve güvenirliği sağlamak için uzman değerlendirmesi alınmış ve kodlayıcılar arası uyuşuma bakılmıştır. Elde edilen verilerin analizinde en çok nitel analiz tekniklerinden içerik analizi kullanılmıştır. Yapılan araştırmanın sonuçlarından yola çıkarak karma desenli eylem araştırmalarının yapılması, farklı öğretim kademesindeki öğrenciler ile farklı öğrenme alanlarını içeren çalışma sayısının arttırılması önerilmektedir.

References

  • Altrichter, H., Gstettner, P. (1993) Action research: A closed chapter in the history of German social science? Educational Action Research, 1(3), 329-360.
  • Beverly, J. (1993). Teacher as Researcher. ERIC Digest, ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education, Washington DC.
  • Çalışkan, M., & Serçe, H. (2018). Action research articles on education in Turkey: A content analysis. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 19(1), 57-79.
  • Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.
  • Corey, S. M. (1949). Action research, fundamental research, and educational practices. Teachers College Record, 50(8), 509-514.
  • Dağ, Ş., & Horzum, T. (2022). Examination of graduate theses about misconceptions in mathematics education: A systematic review. e-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 434-465.
  • Dickens, L., & Watkins, K. (1999). Action research: rethinking Lewin. Management Learning, 30(2), 127-140.
  • Ertane Baş, Ö., & Özturan Sağırlı, M. (2021). A content analysis related to the problem themed articles on mathematics education in Türkiye. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 50(2), 778-832.
  • Ferrance, E. (2000). Action research: themes in education. USA: Northeast and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory at Brown University.
  • Göktaş, Y., Küçük, S., Aydemir, M., Telli, E., Arpacık, Ö., Yıldırım, G., & Reisoğlu, İ. (2012). Educational technology research trends in Turkey: A content analysis of the 2000–2009 decade. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 177-179.
  • Gunz, J. (1996). Jacob L. Moreno and the origins of action research. Educational Action Research, 4(1), 145-158.
  • Hendricks, C. (2006). Improving school’s trough action research: a comprehensive guide for educators. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2015). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty (2nd ed.). USA: Sage Publications.
  • Johnson, B. M. (1995). Why conduct action research? Teaching and Change, 3(1), 90-104.
  • Karaoğlu, H., & Çoban Esen, A. (2019). Investigation of graduate theses on the language development in pre-school education in Turkey. Erzincan University Faculty of Education Journal, 21(1), 211-229.
  • Karatay, M., & Taş, M. (2021). The use and importance of action research in education. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 17(38), 5545-5568.
  • Kemmis, S. (1980). Action Research in Retrospect and Prospect, ERIC database, 1-22.
  • Kemmis, S. (2009). Action research as a practice‐based practice. Educational Action Research, 17(3), 463-474.
  • Kuzu, A. (2009). Action research in teacher training and professional development. The Journal of International Social Research, 2(6), 425-433.
  • Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34-46.
  • McKernan, J. (1991). Action inquiry: Studied enactment. In E. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry. (2nd ed., pp. 309-326). Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.
  • McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2010). You and your action research project. (3rd Edition). Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Mertler, C. A. (2021). Action research as teacher inquiry: A viable strategy for resolving problems of practice. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 26(19), 1-12.
  • Morgan, H. (2022). Conducting a qualitative document analysis. The Qualitative Report, 27(1), 64-77.
  • O'Brien, R. (2001). An overview of the methodological approach of action research. In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Action Research. João Pessoa, Brazil: Universidade Federal da Paraíba. http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html (Accessed 20/1/2024)
  • Özey, K. (2019). Cebir öğrenme alanında yapılan lisansüstü tezlerin incelenmesi: 2010-2018 yılları arası Türkiye örneği. (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  • Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M., & Dündar, H. (2014). Tendencies of the researches published in education and science journal: Content analysis. Education and Science, 39(173), 430-453.
  • Şimşek, N., & Yaşar, A. (2019). A thematic and methodological review of theses related to GeoGebra: A content analysis. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 10(2), 290-313.
  • Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London, UK: Heinemann Publishing.
  • Toptaş, B., & Kuşdemir, Y. (2021). Analysis of the graduate theses in the field of teaching mathematics education in Turkey. International Primary Education Research Journal, 5(2), 171-179.
  • Topuz, F., & Cantürk Günhan, B. (2021). What is the Trend of Argumentation Studies in Mathematics Education in Turkey? Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 15 (36), 55-80.
  • Turhan Türkkan, B., Yolcu, E., & Karataş, T. (2019). Analysis of doctoral theses including action research in the field of educational sciences in Turkey. Bayburt Faculty of Education Journal, 14(28), 501-524.
  • Ültay, E., Akyurt, H., & Ültay, N. (2021). Descriptive content analysis in social sciences. IBAD Journal of Social Sciences, (10), 188- 201.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (9. bs.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (10. bs.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. Yücedağ, T. (2010). 2000-2009 yılları arasında matematik eğitimi alanında Türkiye'de yapılan çalışmaların bazı değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Selçuk Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya.
There are 35 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Other Fields of Education (Other)
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Ülkü Özturan Ecemiş 0000-0003-1466-1662

Zeynep Filiz Aramış Barış 0000-0002-6644-6764

Semiha Kula Ünver 0000-0003-0365-1936

Early Pub Date December 23, 2024
Publication Date December 31, 2024
Submission Date September 5, 2024
Acceptance Date December 5, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024

Cite

APA Özturan Ecemiş, Ü., Aramış Barış, Z. F., & Kula Ünver, S. (2024). Examination of Action Research Articles in the Field of Mathematics Education in Türkiye. Instructional Technology and Lifelong Learning, 5(2), 300-325. https://doi.org/10.52911/itall.1544320

88x31.png

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.