A Holistic Understanding of Teacher Attitudes Towards Curriculum Change: Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory Perspective

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 33 Sayı: 2, 322 - 343, 25.04.2025

Sibel Akın-sabuncu , Başak Çalık

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.1683465

Öz

Purpose: This study aimed to explore the underlying factors behind teachers’ self-efficacy for teaching, beliefs about teaching, and their readiness for change in understanding their attitudes towards the constructivist curriculum change in Türkiye through the lens of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of education.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The study employed a phenomenological approach to uncover teachers’ lived experiences concerning the factors influencing their attitudes towards the 2005 curriculum change in the Turkish education system. Twenty-one teachers from elementary, middle, and high schools were selected through maximum variation sampling. The data were collected through semi-structured, in-depth interviews, and analyzed using content analysis.
Findings: Concerning Bronfenbrenner’s ecological framework, the findings resulted in the following themes: a) Teacher-related factors: Teacher characteristics, including their educational background, teaching experience, professional knowledge, skills, motivation, and emotional readiness. b) Micro-system and meso-system-related factors: K-12 school curricula, the involvement of students and parents, the physical and technological infrastructure of schools, the influence of school principals and colleagues in creating a supportive learning environment towards implementing the constructivist curriculum. c) Exo-system-related factors: Socio-cultural environment and mass media. d) Macro-system-related factors: The structural and operational challenges within the education system, the design and quality of professional development activities, the financial status of teachers and the inadequacy of the pre-service teacher education programs and practices, suggesting a pathway for enhancing overall teacher preparedness and support.
Highlights: The study provides the key stakeholders, especially education policymakers, curriculum development experts, school principals, and teacher educators, with essential insights for developing an understanding of the ecology of curriculum change and adopting a non-linear, holistic, and comprehensive view of curriculum change implementation. More specifically, the in-depth exploration of the factors influencing teachers’ self-efficacy, general beliefs about teaching, and readiness for change call for those stakeholders to work collaboratively and develop effective strategies to support teachers, who are the curriculum makers and the agents of change, for a successful and sustainable curriculum change.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Curriculum change , Ecological theory , Teacher self-efficacy , Teaching beliefs , Readiness for change

Kaynakça

• Akin-Sabuncu, S., & Calik, B. (2023). A structural equation model of teachers’ attitudes towards constructivist curriculum change. International Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 13(1), 123-157. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
• Akdeniz, A. R., & Paniç, G. (2012). Yeni fizik öğretim programına ve uygulamasına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri [Teachers’ opinions about new physics education program and its implementation]. Milli Eğitim, 196, 290-307.
• Akinoglu, O. (2008). The curricular reform initiatives of Turkey in the fields of life science and social studies in the process of accession to the European Union. World Applied Sciences Journal, 3(2), 168-183.
• Anılan, H., & Sarıer, Y. (2008). Altıncı sınıf matematik öğretmenlerinin matematik dersi öğretim programlarının uygulanabilirliğine ilişkin görüşleri[The opinions of the sixth grade mathematics teachers’ about applicability of mathematics curriculum]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniverstesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 128-141.
• Altun, T., & Şahin, M. (2009). Değişen ilköğretim programının sınıf öğretmenleri üzerindeki psikolojik etkilerinin incelenmesi üzerine nitel bir araştırma [A qualitative study on psychological effects of change of curriculum on classroom teachers]. Kastamonu Education Journal, 17(1), 15-32. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefdergi/issue/49070/626127
• Arslan, M. M. (2017). Türkiye ve İtalya’da öğretmenlik mesleği: Karşılaştırmalı bir analiz [Teaching profession in Turkey and Italy: A comparative analysis]. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 3(3), 761-771.
• Atmaca, T. (2020). Öğretmenlerin toplumsal saygınlık ve imajlarına olumsuz etki eden faktörlerin incelenmesi [Examining factors that negatively affect teachers' social dignity and image]. Yaşadıkça Eğitim, 34(1), 152-167.
• Bal, A. P., & Doğanay, A. (2009). İlköğretim beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin matematik dersinde yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamına bakış açıları. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18(2), 156-171.
• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
• Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
• Bayar, A., & Bayar, M. (2022). Medyada öğretmenler hakkında yapılan konuşmaların öğretmenlerin mesleki mutluluklarına yansımaları[Reflections of the conversations about teachers in the media on teachers' professional happiness]. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(3), 367-383. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.1128218
• Biesta, G. (2015). What is education for? On good education, teacher judgement, and educational professionalism. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 75–87.
• Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (5th ed.). The USA: Pearson Education.
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1976). The experimental ecology of education. Educational Researcher, 5(9), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X005009005
• Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513
• Bronfenbrenner, U., & Evans, G. W. (2000). Developmental science in the 21st century: Emerging questions, theoretical models, research designs and empirical findings. Social Development, 9(1), 112–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9507.00114
• Buehl, M. M., & Fives, H. (2009). Exploring teachers’ beliefs about teaching knowledge: Where does it come from? Does it change? The Journal of Experimental Education, 77(4), 367-407.
• Bulut, M. (2007). Curriculum reform in Turkey: A case of primary school mathematics curriculum. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(3), 203-212. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75399
• Buluş Kırıkkaya, E. (2009). İlköğretim okullarındaki fen öğretmenlerinin fen ve teknoloji programına ilişkin görüşleri [Opinions of science teachers in primary schools related to science and technology program]. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 6(1), 133-148.
• Bümen, N. T. (2005). Öğretmenlerin yeni ilköğretim 1-5. sınıf programlarıyla ilgili görüşleri ve programı uygulamayı hazırlayıcı bir hizmetiçi eğitim çalışması örneği [Teachers’ opinions about the new primary education curricula and the example of a prepatory workshop for practice]. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 6(2), 21-57.
• Carless, D. (2013). Innovation in language teaching and learning. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Blackwell Publishing.
• Carse, N. (2015). Primary teachers as physical education curriculum change agents. European Physical Education Review, 21(3), 309-324.
• Cerit, Y. (2013). Relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and their willingness to implement curriculum reform. International Journal of Educational Reform, 22(3), 252-270. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F105678791302200304
• Chen, J. (2015). Teachers’ conceptions of approaches to teaching: A Chinese perspective. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(2), 341-351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-014-0184-3
• Cheung, H. Y. (2008). Teacher efficacy: A comparative study of Hong Kong and Shanghai primary in-service teachers. The Australian Educational Researcher, 35(1), 103-123.
• Clasquin-Johnson, M. G. (2016). Now and then: Revisiting early childhood teachers’ reactions to curriculum change. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 6(1), 1-9.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
• Cobanoglu, R., & Capa-Aydin, Y. (2015). When early childhood teachers close the door: Self-reported fidelity to a mandated curriculum and teacher beliefs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 33(4), 77-86.
• Çayak, M. (2014). İlkokul öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı yaklaşımı uygulamaya yönelik tutumları ile özyeterlikleri arasındaki ilişki [Primary school teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and attitudes about the implementation of the constructivist approach]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31, 88–110.
• Çobanoğlu, R. (2015). A review of research in Turkey on beliefs about teaching. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(3), 48-59.
• Dindar, H. & Yangın, S. (2007). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programına geçiş sürecinde öğretmenlerin bakış açılarının değerlendirilmesi [Teachers’ perceptions about the transition process to elementary school science and technology teaching curriculum]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 15(1), 185-198.
• Doğanay, A., & Sarı, M. (2008). The new social studies curriculum from the teachers’ point of view: A study in the Adana province of Turkey. Elementary Education Online, 7(2), 468-484.
• Dönmez, B., & Akar Vural, R. (2014). 6. sınıf Türkçe öğretim programının ve sınıf-içi uygulamaların yapılandırmacı öğrenme-öğretme çevresi açısından öğretmen görüşlerine göre değerlendirilmesi [The examination of teachers’ views on 6th grade Turkish curriculum and clasroom practises context of constructivist learning-teaching environment]. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1), 35-56.
• Du, X., & Chaaban, Y. (2020). Teachers’ readiness for a statewide change to PjBL in primary education in Qatar. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28591
• Elmas, R., Ozturk, N., Irmak, M., & Cobern, W. W. (2014). An investigation of teacher response to national science curriculum reforms in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 6(1), 2-33. https://www.ijpce.org/index.php/IJPCE/article/view/53/59
• Eraslan, A. (2013). Teachers’ reflections on the implementation of the new elementary school mathematics curriculum in Turkey. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 152-165.
• Ersen Yanık, A. (2008). Primary school English teachers’ perceptions of the English language curriculum of 6th, 7th and 8th grades. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35, 123-134.
• Eskici, M. & Özen, R. (2018). Öğetmenlerin yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma ilişkin öz yeterlik algıları ile tutumları [Teachers’ self efficacy perceptions and attitudes about the constructivist approach]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(4), 2050-2070. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018.18.41844-437148
• Fleurette Nelson, A. (2017). Constructivist instructional practices and teacher beliefs related to secondary science teaching and learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, College of Saint Elizabeth, New Jersey.
• Fullan, M. (1985). Change processes and strategies at the local level. Elementary School Journal, 85(3), 390–421. https://doi.org/10.1086/461411
• Fullan, M. (1991). Curriculum implementation. In A. Lewy (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of curriculum (pp. 378-384). Pergamon Press.
• Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces. The Falmer Press.
• Fullan, M. (2013). Educational change: Implementation and continuation. In C. Wise, P. Bradshaw, & M. Cartwright (Eds.), Leading professional practice in education (pp. 111-123). Sage Publications Ltd.
• Fullan, M. (2016). The new meaning of educational change. Teachers College Press.
• Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, M. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 451-458. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(96)00045-5
• Goodson, I. F. (2000). Professional knowledge, professional lives: Studies in education and change. Open University Press.
• Gömleksiz, M. N., & Öner, Ü. (2013). Sosyal bilgiler dersinde yapılandırmacı öğrenme-öğretme sürecine ilişkin öğrenci görüşlerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından değerlendirilmesi [An assessment of students’ perceptions of constructivist learning-teaching process in social studies course in terms of several variables]. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (14), 281-313.
• Han, Ç. (2013). Öğretmenlerin işlevsel paradigmaları ve eğitim reform [Teachers’ functional paradigms and educational reform]. Trakya University Journal of Education, 3(1), 59-79. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/trkefd/issue/21475/230181
• Harris, R., & Graham, S. (2019). Engaging with curriculum reform: Insights from English history teachers’ willingness to support curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51(1), 43-61.
• Haser, C., & Star, J. (2009). Change in beliefs after first-year of teaching: The case of Turkish national curriculum context. International Journal of Educational Development, 29(3), 293-302.
• Hazır-Bıkmaz, F. (2006). Yeni ilköğretim programları ve öğretmenler [New elementary curricula and teachers]. Ankara University Journal of Faculty Educational Sciences, 39(1), 97–116.
• Isikoglu, N., Basturk, R., & Karaca, F. (2009). Assessing in-service teachers’ instructional beliefs about student-centered education: A Turkish perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 350-356.
• Isler, I., & Cakiroglu, E. (2010). Teachers’ efficacy beliefs and perceptions regarding the implementation of new primary mathematics curriculum. Proceedings of CERME 6, Lyon France.
• Jenkins, G. (2020). Teacher agency: The effects of active and passive responses to curriculum change. The Australian Educational Researcher, 47, 167-181.
• Karacaoğlu, Ö. C. (2018). Eğitimde program geliştirme (1st ed.). Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
• Karadağ, E., Deniz, S., Korkmaz, T., & Deniz, G. (2008). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme yaklaşımı: Sınıf öğretmenleri görüşleri kapsamında bir araştırma [Constructivist learning approach: A research on the scope of views of class teachers]. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(2), 383-402.
• Kasapoğlu, K., & Duban, N. (2012). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının yapılandırmacı yaklaşımı uygulamaya yönelik öz yeterlik inançlarını yordayan bir faktör olarak yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma yönelik tutumları (Afyonkarahisar ili örneği). Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 8 (2), 85-96. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/mersinefd/issue/17380/181507
• Koc, Y., Isiksal, M., & Bulut, S. (2007). Elementary school curriculum reform in Turkey. International Education Journal, 8(1), 30-39.
• Korkmaz, İ. (2008). Evaluation of teachers for restructured elementary curriculum (Grades 1 to 5). Education, 129(2), 250-258.
• Kosar-Altinyelken, H.K. (2011). Student-centred pedagogy in Turkey: conceptualisations, interpretations and practices. Journal of Education Policy, 26(2), 137-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2010.504886
• Kosar-Altinyelken, H. (2013). Teachers’ principled resistance to curriculum change: A compelling case from Turkey. In A. Verger, H. Altinyelken, & M. De Koning (Eds.), Global managerial education reforms and teachers: Emerging policies, controversies and issues in developing contexts (pp. 109-126). Education International.
• Kurtdede Fidan, N., & Duman, T. (2014). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı yaklaşımın gerektirdiği niteliklere sahip olma dzüeyleri [Classroom teachers’ possession level of characteristics required by the constructivist approach]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 143-159.
• Kyriakides, L. (1997). Influences on primary teachers’ practice: Some problems for curriculum change theory. British Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192970230104
• Levin, B. (1998). An epidemic of education policy: (What) can we learn from each other? Comparative Education, 34(2), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050069828234
• Levin, B. (2010). Governments and education reform: Some lessons from the last 50 years. Journal of Education Policy, 25(6), 739–747.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications, Inc.
• Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). Designing qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
• Merriam, S. B. (2014). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications, Inc.
• Murphy, P. K., Delli, L. A., & Edwards, M. N. (2004). The good teacher and good teaching: Comparing beliefs of second-grade students, preservice teachers, and in-service teacher. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(2), 69-92.
• Navarro, J. L., & Tudge, J. R. (2023). Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: neo-ecological theory. Current Psychology, 42(22), 19338-19354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02738-3
• Nie, Y., Tan, G. H., Liau, A. K., Lau, S. & Chua, B. L. (2013). The roles of teacher efficacy in instructional innovation: its predictive relations to constructivist and didactic instruction. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 12, 67-77.
• Nohl, A. M., & Somel, R. N. (2016). Curricular change in Turkey: Time, sequentiality, and differential power of actors in establishing a new knowledge path. Journal of Educational Change, 17(3), 303-318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-015-9265-1
• Ocak, G., Ocak, İ., & Kutlu Kalender, M. D. (2017). Öğretmenlerin öz-yeterlik algıları ile öğretme-öğrenme anlayışları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Correlation between teachers’ self-efficacy and their teaching-learning conceptions]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 25(5), 1851-1864.
• Ogan-Bekiroğlu, F., & Akkoç, H. (2009). Preservice teachers’ instructional beliefs and examination of consistency between beliefs and practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 1173-1199.
• Özgün-Koca, A. S., & Şen, A. İ. (2006). The beliefs and perceptions of pre-service teachers enrolled in a subject-area dominant teacher education program about “effective education”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(7), 946- 960.
• Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543062003307
• Pan, Y. H., Chou, H. S., Hsu, W. T., Li, C.H., &Hu, Y. L. (2013). Teacher self-efficacy and teaching practices in the health and physical education curriculum in Taiwan. Social Behavior and Personality, 4(2), 241-250.
• Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.
• Park, M., & Sung, Y. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of the resent curriculum reforms and their implementation: what can we learn from the case of Korean elementary teachers? Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 33(1), 15-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2012.756391
• Priestley, M. (2011). Schools, teachers, and curriculum change: A balancing act?. Journal of Educational Change, 12(1), 1-23.
• Rahimi, M., & Alavi, J. (2017). The role of teaching experience in language teachers’ perceptions of a top-down curriculum change. The Curriculum Journal, 28(4), 479-503.
• Roehrig, G.H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers’ beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 412-422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18061.x
• Roehrig, G.H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883-907. https://doi.org/10.1002/TEA.20180
• Tobin, K. G., Tippins, D. J., & Hook, K. (1994). Referents for changing a science curriculum: A case study of one teacher’s change in beliefs. Science and Education, 3(3), 245-264.
• Toluk Uçar, Z., & Demirsoy, N. H. (2010). Eski-yeni ikilemi matematik öğretmenlerinin matematiksel inançlar ve uygulamaları [Tension between old and new mathematics teachers’ beliefs and practices]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 39, 321-332.
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfok-Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
• Tudge, J. R., Mokrova, I., Hatfield, B. E., & Karnik, R. B. (2009). Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory of human development. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 1(4), 198-210.
• Savasci, F. (2006). Science teacher beliefs and classroom practices related to constructivist teaching and learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
• Şahin, E., Işıksal, M., & Ertepınar, H. (2010). In-service elementary school teachers’ beliefs in science teaching practices. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 39, 296-306.
• Uzuntiryaki, E., Boz, Y., Kirbulut, D., & Bektas, O. (2010). Do pre-service chemistry teachers reflect their beliefs about constructivism in their teaching practices? Research in Science Education, 40(3), 403-423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9127-z
• Ünsal, S. (2018). Türkiye’de öğretmenlik mesleğinin statüsüne ilişkin bir pareto analizi [A pareto analysis of status of teaching profession in Turkey]. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(2), 11-130.
• van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2%3C137::AID-TEA1001%3E3.0.CO;2-U
• Veyis, F. (2020). Investigation of the self-efficacy beliefs of Turkish language and literature teachers in practicing constructivist approach in terms of various variables. International Educational Studies, 13(7), 47-56.
• Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4, 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
• Wolters, C. A., & Daugherty, S. G. (2007). Goal structures and teachers’ sense of efficacy: Their relation and association to teaching experience and academic level. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1, 181-193.
• Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Burke-Spero, R. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: a comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 343-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.007
• Yapıcı, M., & Leblebiciler, N. H. (2007). Öğretmenlerin yeni ilköğretim programına ilişkin görüşleri [Teachers’ views with regard to new primary school curriculum]. İlköğretim Online, 6(3), 480-490.
• Yaşar, M. D., & Sözbilir, M. (2019). Investigating teachers’ fidelity to constructivist chemistry curriculum in Turkey: Congruence between intended, perceived and observed curriculum in Turkey. International Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 11(4), 93-104.
• Yates, S. M. (2006). Elementary teachers’ mathematics beliefs and teaching practices after a curriculum reform. Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
• Yıldırım, A. (2011). Öğretmen eğitiminde çatışma alanları ve yeniden yapılanma [Competing agendas and reform in teacher education]. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 1-17.
• Yigit, N., Alpaslan, M. M., Cinemre, Y., & Balcin, B. (2017). Examine middle school students' constructivist environment perceptions in Turkey: School location and class size. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(1), 23-34. https://doi.org/10.36681/
• Yildirim, A., & Kasapoglu, K. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions of constructivist curriculum change as a predictor of their perceptions of the implementation of constructivist teaching–learning activities. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(4), 565-577.