Lisansüstü eğitimde geri bildirime ilişkin öğretim üyesi görüşleri

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 370 - 396, 31.08.2021

Ebru Bozpolat Esin Hazar Hatice Yıldız

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine the opinions of academics on the phenomenon of feedback in postgraduate education. Phenomenology design which is one of the qualitative research designs was used in the study. The study group consists of 31 academics who provide post-graduate education in the basic field of Educational Sciences at different universities in Turkey in 2020-2021 academic year. In the research, a semi-structured interview form was used as data collection tool. In the interview form, there were 8 open-ended questions aiming to determine the opinions of the academics on the concept of feedback, its purpose, effective and ineffective feedback, lucidity of their feedback, the positive aspects of the feedback given, the negative situations they encounter in the feedback process and their competence in giving feedback. The data obtained in the study were analyzed by content analysis technique. According to the findings, academics defined the feedback as "Information, guidance, evaluation, the element that ensures learning and motivates person”. The purpose of feedback is defined as “Providing improvement and guidance, showing the objectives achieved, one’s weaknesses only and strengths and weaknesses together, communicating effectively, informing about the performance criteria, pursuing the process efficiently and sharing knowledge and experience”. Effective feedback should provide information, explanation, evaluation, development, awareness of one’s deficiencies, encourage research, be constructive, delivered timely, motivating, face to face, written, in cooperation with stakeholders, appropriate for the purpose, individual and not contain prejudice”. Academics also emphasized that the feedback is not effective especially when the student's motivation and level of knowledge is low, feedback is given without correction, not given in an appropriate style, and on time. In addition to the positive aspects of feedback, negative situations while giving feedback were defined by the academics as well. Finally, the vast majority of academics asserted that the feedback they give is sufficiently lucid and that they are competent in giving feedback.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Geri bildirim, lisansüstü eğitim, öğretim üyesi

The opinions of academics on the feedback in postgraduate education

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine the opinions of academics on the phenomenon of feedback in postgraduate education. Phenomenology design which is one of the qualitative research designs was used in the study. The study group consists of 31 academics who provide post-graduate education in the basic field of Educational Sciences at different universities in Turkey in 2020-2021 academic year. In the research, a semi-structured interview form was used as data collection tool. In the interview form, there were 8 open-ended questions aiming to determine the opinions of the academics on the concept of feedback, its purpose, effective and ineffective feedback, lucidity of their feedback, the positive aspects of the feedback given, the negative situations they encounter in the feedback process and their competence in giving feedback. The data obtained in the study were analyzed by content analysis technique. According to the findings, academics defined the feedback as "Information, guidance, evaluation, the element that ensures learning and motivates person”. The purpose of feedback is defined as “Providing improvement and guidance, showing the objectives achieved, one’s weaknesses only and strengths and weaknesses together, communicating effectively, informing about the performance criteria, pursuing the process efficiently and sharing knowledge and experience”. Effective feedback should provide information, explanation, evaluation, development, awareness of one’s deficiencies, encourage research, be constructive, delivered timely, motivating, face to face, written, in cooperation with stakeholders, appropriate for the purpose, individual and not contain prejudice”. Academics also emphasized that the feedback is not effective especially when the student's motivation and level of knowledge is low, feedback is given without correction, not given in an appropriate style, and on time. In addition to the positive aspects of feedback, negative situations while giving feedback were defined by the academics as well. Finally, the vast majority of academics asserted that the feedback they give is sufficiently lucid and that they are competent in giving feedback.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Feedback, post-graduate education, academic

Kaynakça

• Adams, G. (2019). A narrative study of the experience of feedback on a professional doctorate: ‘a kind of flowing conversation’. Studies in Continuing Education, 41(2), 191-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2018.1526782
• Al-Hattami, A. (2019). The perception of students and faculty staff on the role of constructive feedback. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 885-894. http://dx.doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12157a
• Balcı, A. (2015). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntem teknik ve ilkeler. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
• Beaumont, C., O’Doherty, M. ve Shannon, L. (2011). Reconceptualising assessment feedback: a key to improving student learning?. Studies in Higher Education, 36(6), 671-687.
• Bolker, J. (1998). Writing your dissertation in fifteen minutes a day: A guide to starting, revising, and finishing your doctoral thesis. Henry Holt and Company, New York.
• Boud, D. ve Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: the challenge of design. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698-712, doi: 10.1080/02602938.2012.691462
• Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2018). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
• Caffarella, R. S. ve Barnett, B. G. (2000). Teaching doctoral students to become scholarly writers: The importance of giving and receiving critiques. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 39-52.
• Can, G. (2009). A model for doctoral students’ perceptions and attitudes towards written feedback (Unpublished master thesis). Utah State University, Logan. Carless, D. (2006). Differing perceptions in the feedback process. Studies in higher education, 31(2), 219-233.
• Cohen, V. B. (1985). A reexamination of feedback in computer-based instruction: Implications for instructional design. Educational Technology, 25(1), 33-37
• Creswell, J. W. (2017). Eğitim araştırmaları: Nicel ve nitel araştırmanın planlanması, yürütülmesi ve değerlendirilmesi. Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
• Çimen, O. (2017). Öğretmen adaylarına uygulanan geri bildirim modelinin motivasyon ve yansıtıcı düşünme eğilimlerine etkisi (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Dawson, P., Henderson, M., Mahoney, P., Phillips, M., Ryan, T., Boud, D. ve Molloy, E. (2019). What makes for effective feedback: Staff and student perspectives. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1467877
• Demirel, Ö. (2015). Kuramdan uygulamaya eğitimde program geliştirme. (24. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
• Dökmen, Ü. (1982). Farklı tür geri bildirimlerin öğrenmeye etkisi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 15(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000893
• Eraut, M. (2007). Learning from other people in the workplace. Oxford Review of Education, 33(4), 403-422.
• Erdem, A. (2010). İletişim sürecinde geri bildirimin önemi ve iletişime katkısı. Erciyes İletişim Dergisi, 1(3), 125-132.
• Ferguson, P. (2011). Student perceptions of quality feedback in teacher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(1), 51-62.
• Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning. New York: CBS College.
• Gibbs, G. ve Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3–31. http://resources.glos.ac.uk/tli/lets/journals/lathe/index.cfm adresinden alınmıştır.
• Güneş, E. ve Bülbül, H. İ. (2014). Web ortamında problem temelli öğrenmede farklı geri bildirim stratejilerinin ve internet kullanımına yönelik tutumun öğrenme üzerindeki etkisi, Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(2), 109-125.
• Güven, İ. (2004). Etkili bir öğretim için öğretmenden beklenenler. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 164, 127-141.
• Hardavella, G., Aamli-Gaagnat, A., Saad, N., Rousalova, I. ve Sreter, K. B. (2017). How to give and receive feedback effectively. Breathe, 13, 327–333.
• Hattie, J. A. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.
• Hattie, J. ve Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03542.x
• Higgins, R. (2000, 7-10 September). ‘Be more critical’: rethinking assessment feedback, British Educational Research Association Conference, Cardiff, UK. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001548.htm adresinden alınmıştır.
• Higgins, R., Hartley, P. ve Skelton, A. (2001). Getting the Message Across: The problem of communicating assessment feedback, Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 269-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562510120045230
• Hounsell, D. (2003). Student feedback, learning and development. M. Slowey and D. Watson, (Eds.), In Higher education and the lifecourse (s. 67-78). Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
• Hyland, F. ve Hyland, K. (2001). Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of second language writing, 10(3), 185-212.
• Kantarcı, S. (2014). Çalışma ortamında geri bildirim ve sonuçları (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
• Karim, Z. M. ve Ivy, I. T. 2011. The nature of teacher feedback in second language (l2) writing classroom: a study on some private universities in Bangladesh. Journal of the Bangladesh Association of Young Researcher (JBAYR), 1(1), 31-48.
• Kaya, S. (2019). Üniversite İngilizce hazırlık öğrencilerinin yazma becerisi geri bildirim sürecinin incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Düzce Üniversitesi, Düzce.
• Kayalı, B., Balat, Ş., Kurşun, E. ve Karaman, S. (2019). Lisansüstü eğitimde etkili ve nitelikli geri bildirim. Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 8(1), 10-20.
• Kielty, L.(2004). Feedback in distance learning:Do student perceptions of corrective feedback affect retention in distance learning (Unpublished master thesis). University of South Florida, Florida.
• Köğce, D. (2012). İlköğretim matematik öğretmenlerinin geri bildirim verme biçimlerinin incelenmesi (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Trabzon.
• Kulik, J. A. ve Kulik, C. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58, 79-97.
• Lee, I. (2007). Understanding teacher’s written feedback practices in Hong Kong secondary classrooms. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 69-85.
• Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide. California: Sage Publications Inc.
• McKimm, J. (2009). Giving effective feedback. British Journal of Hospital Medicine, 70(3), 158-161.
• Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32(1),99-113.
• Mulliner, E. ve Tucker, M. (2017). Feedback on feedback practice: perceptions of students and academics. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(2), 266-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1103365
• Mutch, A. (2003). Exploring the practice of feedback to students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 4(1), 24-38.
• Pitts, S. E. (2005) ‘Testing, testing…’ How do students use written feedback? Active Learning in Higher Education, 6(3), 218–229.
• Sadler, D. R. (1987). Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education, 13, 191-209.
• Senemoğlu, N. (2020). Gelişim öğrenme ve öğretim kuramdan uygulamaya. (27. Baskı). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
• Shrivastava, S. R., Shrivastava, P. S. ve Ramasamy, J. (2014). Effective feedback: An indispensable tool for improvement in quality of medical education. Journal of Pedagogic Development, 4(1), 12-20.
• Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on Formative Feedback, Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795
• Tang, J. ve Harrison, C. (2011). Investigating university tutor perceptions of assessment feedback: three types of tutor beliefs. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(5), 583-604.
• Weaver, M. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31, 379-394.
• Wiggins, G. P. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and limits of testing, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Wiggins, G. (2012). Seven keys to effective feedback. Educational Leadership, 70(1), 10-16.
• Wu, R. (2014). Feedback in distance education: A content analysis of Distance Education: An International Journal, 1980-2013 (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Virginia State University.
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık