Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretmenlerinin Politik Okuryazarlık Eğitimi Özyeterliklerinin Bazı Değişkenlere Göre İncelenmesi

Öz

Politik okuryazarlık, demokratik toplumların sürdürülebilirliği ve bireylerin etkin yurttaşlık rolleri üstlenebilmeleri açısından merkezi bir öneme sahiptir. Bireylerin politik okuryazarlık yeterliklerinin geliştirilmesi amacıyla eğitim ortamlarında sistematik ve yapılandırılmış uygulamalara ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Bu bağlamda okullar, öğrencilerin politik okuryazarlık becerilerini kazanabilecekleri, eleştirel ve katılımcı bir öğrenme ortamı sunacak şekilde kurgulanmalı; öğretmenler ise pedagojik yeterlikleri doğrultusunda bu sürece yön vererek öğrencilerin teorik bilgilerini pratikle ilişkilendirmelerine katkı sağlamalıdır. Bu araştırmanın amacı, sosyal bilgiler öğretmenlerinin politik okuryazarlık eğitimi özyeterlik düzeylerini belirlemek ve bu düzeylerin çeşitli demografik ve mesleki değişkenler bağlamında farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığını incelemektir. Çalışma, tarama modeli kapsamında desenlenmiş olup araştırmanın örneklemini 2022-2023 eğitim-öğretim yılında Türkiye genelinde görev yapmakta olan 690 sosyal bilgiler öğretmeni oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilen “Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretmenlerinin Politik Okuryazarlık Eğitimi Özyeterlik Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın nicel verileri bağımsız örneklem t testi ve tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) teknikleriyle değerlendirilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, öğretmenlerin genel olarak yüksek düzeyde politik okuryazarlık eğitimi özyeterliğine sahip olduklarını ve cinsiyet, siyaset bilimine ilişkin ders alma, Türkiye’yi ilgilendiren politik konuları konuşma sıklığı, uluslararası politik konuları konuşma sıklığı durumları gibi bazı değişkenler açısından anlamlı farklılıklar gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur. Araştırma sonuçları, öğretmenlerin politik okuryazarlık eğitimi konusundaki özyeterlik algılarının öğrencilerin demokratik bilinç ve siyasal katılım becerilerinin gelişiminde belirleyici bir unsur olduğu söylenebilir. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulgular doğrultusunda, öğretmen yetiştirme programlarında politik okuryazarlık odaklı içeriklerin güçlendirilmesi ve öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişim süreçlerinde bu yeterliklerin desteklenmesine yönelik uygulamalara yer verilmesi önerilmektedir. Ayrıca, daha geniş örneklem gruplarında gerçekleştirilecek benzer araştırmalar, bulguların genellenebilirliğini artırma açısından önem arz etmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Politik Okuryazarlık
• Özyeterlik
• Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretmenleri

An Examination of Social Studies Teachers' Self-Efficacy in Political Literacy Education According to Various Variables

Öz

Political literacy is of paramount importance for the sustainability of democratic societies and for individuals to engage in active citizenship. To enhance individuals' political literacy competencies, systematic and structured practices must be implemented within educational settings. In this context, schools should be designed as environments where students can develop political literacy skills in a critical and participatory learning atmosphere. Teachers, in turn, should facilitate this process through their pedagogical expertise, helping students bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application. The aim of this study is to assess the self-efficacy levels of social studies teachers regarding political literacy education and to investigate whether these levels vary based on various demographic and professional factors. The study employed a survey model, with a sample comprising 690 social studies teachers from across Turkey during the 2022–2023 academic year. The data collection instrument utilized was the “Political Literacy Education Self-Efficacy Scale for Social Studies Teachers,” developed by the researcher. The quantitative data were analyzed using independent samples t-tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) techniques. The findings revealed that teachers generally possessed high levels of self-efficacy in political literacy education, with significant differences observed in relation to variables such as gender, completion of political science-related courses, and the frequency of discussions on national and international political issues. The results of the study indicate that teachers’ perceptions of self-efficacy regarding political literacy education could play a crucial role in developing students’ democratic awareness and political participation skills. Based on these findings, it is recommended that political literacy-focused content be strengthened in teacher education programs and that practices supporting these competencies be incorporated into teachers’ professional development processes. Furthermore, conducting similar studies with larger sample sizes is essential for enhancing the generalizability of the findings.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Political Literacy
• Self-Efficacy
• Social Studies Teachers

Kaynakça

1. Advisory Group on Citizenship. Education for Citizenship and Teaching of Democracy in Schools. London, 1998.
2. Bandura, Albert. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, NY, US: W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co, 1997.
3. Banks, James A. “Diversity, Group Identity, and Citizenship Education in a Global Age.” Educational Researcher 37/3 (April 1, 2008), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08317501
4. Barton, Keith C- Levstik, Linda S. Teaching History for the Common Good. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1st ed., 2004.
5. Beaumont, E. “Political Agency and Empowerment: Pathways for Developing a Sense of Political Efficacy in Young Adults.” Handbook of Research on Civic Engagement in Youth. ed. L. R. Sherrod et al. 525–558, 2010.
6. Bennett, Linda L M- Bennett, Stephen Earl. “Enduring Gender Differences in Political Interest: The Impact of Socialization and Political Dispositions.” American Politics Quarterly 17/1 (1989), 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X8901700106
7. Boone, Harry- Boone, Deborah. “Analyzing Likert Data.” Journal of Extension 50/2 (2012). https://doi.org/10.34068/joe.50.02.48
8. Bourdieu, Pierre. “The Forms of Capital.” Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. ed. J. G. Richardson. 241–258. Greenwood Press., 1986.

9. Burns, Nancy et al. The Private Roots of Public Action: Gender, Equality, and Political Participation. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2001.
10. Campbell, David E.. et al. Making Civics Count: Citizenship Education for a New Generation. Cambridge, MA. Harvard Education Press, 2012.
11. Campbell, David E.- Wolbrecht, Christina. “See Jane Run: Women Politicians as Role Models for Adolescents.” The Journal of Politics 68/2 (May 2006), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00402.x
12. Caprara, Gian Vittorio et al. “Efficacy Beliefs as Determinants of Teachers’ Job Satisfaction.” Journal of Educational Psychology 95/4 (December 2003), 821–832. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.821
13. Castillo, Juan Carlos et al. “Mitigating the Political Participation Gap from the School: The Roles of Civic Knowledge and Classroom Climate.” Journal of Youth Studies 18/1 (January 2, 2015), 16–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2014.933199
14. Çilek, Adem. Türkiye’de Eğitim Sendikalarının Etkiliği. Ankara: Gazi Üniversitesi, Doktora Tezi, 2016.
15. Claes, Ellen- Hooghe, Marc. “The Effect of Political Science Education on Political Trust and Interest: Results from a 5-Year Panel Study.” Journal of Political Science Education 13/1 (January 2, 2017), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2016.1171153
16. Cochran-Smith, Marilyn. - Zeichner, Kenneth M.. Studying Teacher Education: The Report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006.
17. Colby, Anne. Educating Citizens: Preparing America’s Undergraduates for Lives of Moral and Civic Responsibility. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1st ed., 2003.
18. Creswell, John W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, 4th ed., 2014.
19. Crick, Bernard. Essays on Citizenship. Continuum, 2000.
20. Çokluk, Omay. et al. Sosyal Bilimler Için Çok Değişkenli Istatistik : SPSS ve LISREL Uygulamaları. Ankara. Pegem Akademi, 2014.
21. Darling-Hammond, Linda. “Teacher Quality and Student Achievement.” Education Policy Analysis Archives 8 (January 1, 2000), 1. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
22. Demirtaş, Çağrı. “Teachers’ Views on Policy Issues in the Social Studies Curriculum.” Pedagogical Perspective 1/2 (December 29, 2022), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.29329/pedper.2022.493.4
23. DeVellis, Robert F.. et al. Ölçek Geliştirme: Kuram ve Uygulamalar. İstanbul. Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, 2014.
24. Doğanay, Ahmet et al. “Öğretmen Adaylarının Siyasal Katılımcılık Düzeylerine Çeşitli Etmenlerin Etkisinin Demokratik Vatandaşlık Eğitimi Bağlamında İncelenmesi.” Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi 13/50 (2007), 213–246.
25. Dostie-Goulet, Eugénie. “Social Networks and the Development of Political Interest.” Journal of Youth Studies 12/4 (August 8, 2009), 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676260902866512
26. Durmuş, Gülcan. Öğretmenlerin Sendikal Örgütlenmelerinin Okulda Karar Verme ve Iletişim Süreçleriyle Ilişkisinin Analizi. Malatya: İnönü Üniversitesi, Doktora Tezi, 2018.
27. Eagly, Alice H.- Karau, Steven J. “Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice toward Female Leaders.” Psychological Review 109/3 (2002), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573
28. Eidhof, Bram - Ruyter, Doret de. “Citizenship, Self-Efficacy and Education: A Conceptual Review.” Theory and Research in Education 20/1 (March 3, 2022), 64–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/14778785221093313
29. Eraslan, Levent. “Günümüz Öğretmen Sendikacılığının Değerlendirilmesi.” 21. Yüzyılda Eğitim ve Toplum 1/1 (2014), 59–72. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/egitimvetoplum/issue//69871
30. Field, Andy. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. London ; SAGE, 6th edition., 2024.
31. Field, John. Lifelong Learning and the New Educational Order. Stoke-on-Trent ; Trentham Books, 2nd rev. ed., 2006.
32. Flanagan, Constance et al. “Schools and Social Trust.” Handbook of Research on Civic Engagement in Youth. 307–329. Hoboken, NJ. Wiley, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470767603.ch12
33. Fowler, Floyd J.. Survey Research Methods. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2014.
34. Geçit, Yılmaz - Avcı, Rabia Cemre. “Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretiminde Politik Okuryazarlık Becerisinin Yeri ve Bu Beceriyeye Yönelik Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretmenlerinin Görüşleri.” Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 9/2 (December 29, 2022), 290–313. https://doi.org/10.34086/rteusbe.1210548
35. Geller, Rebecca Cooper. “Teacher Political Disclosure in the Trump Era.” Annals of Social Studies Education Research for Teachers 1/1 (September 24, 2020), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.29173/assert11
36. Gindi, Shahar - Erlich, Rakefet Ron. “High School Teachers’ Attitudes and Reported Behaviors towards Controversial Issues.” Teaching and Teacher Education 70 (February 2018), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.006
37. Groves, Robert M. et al. Survey Methodology. Hoboken, NJ: J. Wiley, 2004.
38. Hess, Diana E.. Controversy in the Classroom : The Democratic Power of Discussion. New York: Routledge, 2009.
39. Hess, Diana E. “Discussing Controversial Public Issues in Secondary Social Studies Classrooms: Learning from Skilled Teachers.” Theory & Research in Social Education 30/1 (January 2002), 10–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2002.10473177
40. Hess, Diana E - McAvoy, Paula. “Should Teachers Help Students Develop Partisan Identities?” Social Education 78/6 (2014), 293–297.
41. Hofstede, Geert. Culture’s Consequences : Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 2001.
42. Hoover-Dempsey, Kathleen V. - Sandler, Howard M. “Why Do Parents Become Involved in Their Children’s Education?” Review of Educational Research 67/1 (March 1, 1997), 3–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067001003
43. Hoy, Anita Woolfolk - Spero, Rhonda Burke. “Changes in Teacher Efficacy during the Early Years of Teaching: A Comparison of Four Measures.” Teaching and Teacher Education 21/4 (May 2005), 343–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.007
44. Johnson, Jerry D et al. Why Rural Matters, 2007 : The Realities of Rural Education Growth. Arlington, VA: Rural School and Community Trust, 2007.
45. Kabapınar, Yücel. Kuramdan Uygulamaya Hayat Bilgisi ve Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık, 2019. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786053643234
46. Kahne, Joseph E. - Sporte, Susan E. “Developing Citizens: The Impact of Civic Learning Opportunities on Students’ Commitment to Civic Participation.” American Educational Research Journal 45/3 (September 1, 2008), 738–766. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208316951
47. Kaka, Sarah et al. “Digital Simulations as Approximations of Practice: Preparing Preservice Teachers to Facilitate Whole-Group Discussions of Controversial Issues.” Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 29/1 (March 15, 2021), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/95gyd
48. Karagöz, Yalçın. SPSS - AMOS - META Uygulamalı İstatistiksel Analizler. İstanbul: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık, 2nd Ed., 2019.
49. Karasar, Niyazi. Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. İstanbul: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, 2012.
50. Karpowitz, Christopher F.. - Mendelberg, Tali. The Silent Sex : Gender, Deliberation, and Institutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014.
51. Kellner, Douglas - Share, Jeff. “Critical Media Literacy Is Not an Option.” Learning Inquiry 1/1 (May 2, 2007), 59– 69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11519-007-0004-2
52. Kindlinger, Marcus - Hahn-Laudenberg, Katrin. “German Preservice Teachers’ Stances on Criteria for Discussing Controversial Issues in the Classroom.” The Journal of Social Studies Research 47/3–4 (July 18, 2023), 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/23522798231206194
53. Klassen, Robert M. - Chiu, Ming Ming. “Effects on Teachers’ Self-Efficacy and Job Satisfaction: Teacher Gender, Years of Experience, and Job Stress.” Journal of Educational Psychology 102/3 (August 2010), 741–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019237
54. Klofstad, Casey A. Civic Talk: Peers, Politics, and the Future of Democracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2011.
55. Kuş, Zafer- Öztürk, Durdane. “Social Studies Teachers’ Opinions and Practices Regarding Teaching Controversial Issues.” Australian Journal of Teacher Education 44/8 (August 2019), 15–37. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2019v44n8.2
56. Kus, Zafer - Tarhan, Özge. “Political Education in Social Studies Classrooms: A Perspective from Turkey.” Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama 12/3 (2016), 464–483.
57. Lawless, Jennifer L.- Fox, Richard L. It Still Takes A Candidate It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511778797
58. Logtenberg, Albert et al. “Teaching Sensitive Topics: Training History Teachers in Collaboration with the Museum.” Historical Encounters: A Journal of Historical Consciousness, Historical Cultures, and History Education 11/1 (January 10, 2024), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.52289/hej11.104
59. MEB. Sosyal Bilgiler Dersi Öğretim Programı: İlkokul ve Ortaokul 4, 5, 6 ve 7. Sınıflar. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı, 2018.
60. Merryfield, Merry M. “Global Education: Responding to a Changing World.” Contemporary Social Studies. ed. William B Russell. Charlotte, N.C: Emerald Publishing, 2012.
61. Merryfield, Merry M. “Pedagogy for Global Perspectives in Education: Studies of Teachers’ Thinking and Practice.” Theory & Research in Social Education 26/3 (June 1998), 342–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.1998.10505855
62. Merryfield, Merry M. “Why Aren’t Teachers Being Prepared to Teach for Diversity, Equity, and Global Interconnectedness? A Study of Lived Experiences in the Making of Multicultural and Global Educators.” Teaching and Teacher Education 16/4 (May 2000), 429–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00004-4
63. Mertens, Donna M. Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2010.
64. Neuman, W. Lawrence. Toplumsal Araştırma Yöntemleri : Nitel ve Nicelik Yaklaşımlar. İstanbul: Yayın Odası Yayınları, 2008.
65. Niemi, Richard G. - Junn, Jane. Civic Education: What Makes Students Learn. New Haven: Yale University Press., 2005.
66. Pajares, Frank - Urdan, Tim. “Guide For Constructing Self-Efficacy.” Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents. United States: Emerald Publishing, 2009.
67. Parker, Walter. Teaching Democracy : Unity and Diversity in Public Life. New York: Teacher’s College Press, 2003.
68. Payne, Katherina A. - Journell, Wayne. “‘We Have Those Kinds of Conversations Here …’: Addressing Contentious Politics with Elementary Students.” Teaching and Teacher Education 79 (March 2019), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.008
69. Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York, NY, US: Touchstone Books/Simon & Schuster, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1145/358916.361990
70. Quintelier, Ellen. “The Effect of Schools on Political Participation: A Multilevel Logistic Analysis.” Research Papers in Education 25/2 (June 2010), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520802524810
71. Sharer, Wendy B.. Vote and Voice : Women’s Organizations and Political Literacy, 1915-1930. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2007.
72. Sherrod, Lonnie R. et al. “Introduction: Research on the Development of Citizenship: A Field Comes of Age.” Handbook of Research on Civic Engagement in Youth. 1–20. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470767603.ch0
73. Shulman, Lee. “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform.” Harvard Educational Review, 1–22.
74. Tabachnick, Barbara G - Fidell, Linda S. Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston: Pearson Education, 5th ed., 2007.
75. Torney-Purta, Judith et al. Citizenship and Education in Twenty-Eight Countries : Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen . Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, 2001.
76. Torney-Purta, Judith. “The School’s Role in Developing Civic Engagement: A Study of Adolescents in Twenty- Eight Countries.” Applied Developmental Science 6/4 (October 1, 2002), 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532480XADS0604_7
77. Tschannen-Moran, Megan - Hoy, Anita Woolfolk. “Teacher Efficacy: Capturing an Elusive Construct.” Teaching and Teacher Education 17/7 (October 2001), 783–805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
78. Turner, B. S. Citizenship and Social Theory. London: Sage, 1993.
79. Versfeld, Ruth. Teaching Controversial Issues. Cape Town: New Africa Books, 2005.
80. Waller, Melanie. “Teaching Controversial Topics in the Politically Polarized Suburbs.” Social Studies Research and Practice, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/SSRP-10-2024-0048
81. Weisberg, H. F.. et al. An Introduction to Survey Research, Polling, and Data Analysis. 3rd Ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 1996.
82. Wentzel, Kathryn R. “Social Relationships and Motivation in Middle School: The Role of Parents, Teachers, and Peers.” Journal of Educational Psychology 90/2 (June 1998), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 0663.90.2.202
83. Yavaş, Mehmet et al. “Sosyal Bilgiler Dersinde Politik Konuların Öğretimi: Öğretmen Görüşleri.” Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International 14/1 (January 29, 2024), 114–146. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1337186
84. Zukin, Cliff et al. A New Engagement? Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing American Citizen. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195183177.001.0001