Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 48 Sayı: 224, 353 - 380, 22.11.2019

Hatice Belge Can

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Aydın, S., & Boz, Y. (2012). Fen öğretmen eğitiminde pedagojik alan bilgisi araştırmalarının derlenmesi: Türkiye örneği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(1), 479-505.
  • Aydın, S., Demirdöğen, B., Tarkın, A., Kutucu, S., Ekiz, B., Akın, F. N., Tuysuz, M., & Uzuntiryaki, S. (2013). Providing a set of research-based practices to support preservice teachers’ longterm Professional development as learners of science teaching. Science Education, 97, 903-935.
  • Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 1105-1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty years later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea?International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1405-1416.
  • Bahcivan, E., & Cobern, W. W. (2016). Investigating coherence among Turkish elementary science teachers’ teaching belief systems, pedagogical content knowledge and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(10), 62-86.
  • Borko, H., Cone, R., Russo, N. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (1979). Teachers’ decision making. In P. Peter- son & H. Walberg (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings and implications (pp. 136-160). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
  • Chan, K. K. H., & Hume, A. (2019). Towards a consensus model: Review of how science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge is investigated in empirical studies. In A. Hume, R. Coo- per & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers’ knowledge for teachng science (pp. 3-76). Singapore: Springer.
  • Davis, E. A. (2003). Knowledge integration in science teaching: analysing teachers’ knowledge development. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 21-53.
  • De Jong, O., & van Driel, J. (2001). The development of prospective teachers’ concerns about teaching chemistry topics at a macro-micro-symbolic interface. In H. Behrednt, H. Dahncke,R. Duit, W. Graber, M. Komorek, A. Kross, & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education: past, present and future (pp. 271-276). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  • Demirdöğen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakçı, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2016). Development and natüre of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for nature of science. Research in Science Education, 46, 575-612.
  • Friedrichsen, P., van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95, 358-376.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. InJ. GessNewsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95-132). Boston: Kluwer.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK Summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen,& J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28-42). New York, NY Routledge.
  • Grossman, P. (1990). The Making of a Teacher. New York: Teachers College Press.Hart, C. (2001). Doing a literature search: A comprehensive guide for the social sciences. London: Sage. Hume, A., Cooper, R., & Borowski, A. (2019). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers’knowledge for teachng science. Singapore: Springer.
  • Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169-204.
  • Loughran, J. J. (2007). Science teacher as learner. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp.1043-1065). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. GessNewsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp.95-132). Boston: Kluwer.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.).Tousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB). (2018). İlköğretim Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programları. Ankara.
  • National Research Council (1996). Nationals Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: Natio- nal Academy Press.
  • Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and training: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-2
  • Şimşek, N. & Boz, N. (2016). Analysis of pedagogical content knowledge studies in the context of mathematics education in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 16(3), 799-826.
  • Yıldırım, A., Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları .

PEDAGOJİK ALAN BİLGİSİ ÇALIŞMALARININ DERLENMESİ: FEN BİLİMLERİ EĞİTİMİ ÖRNEĞİ

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 48 Sayı: 224, 353 - 380, 22.11.2019

Hatice Belge Can

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı; Türkiye’de fen bilimleri eğitiminde gerçekleştirilen
pedagojik alan bilgisi çalışmalarının genel özelliklerini tematik ve metodolojik
açıdan incelemek ve araştırmacıların bu bağlamda ulaştıkları sonuçları derlemektir.
Bu amaç doğrultusunda, 2012-2017 yılları arasında Türkiye‘de yayımlanmış
fen bilimleri eğitimi ile ilgili pedagojik alan bilgisi çalışmaları alan yazın
taraması ile derlenmiştir. Bu çalışma kapsamında, Ulakbim, Ulusal Tez Tarama
Merkezi ve Google Akademik erişim sistemleri taranmıştır. Araştırmacıların en
çok pedagojik alan bilgisi gelişimi/belirlenmesine, en az pedagojik alan bilgisi
teorik çerçevesine yönelik çalışmalar yürüttükleri, sıklıkla tercih ettikleri teorik
çerçevenin Magnusson, Krajcik & Borko (1999)’nun önerdiği pedagojik alan bilgisi
modeli olduğu, ağırlıklı olarak öğretim yöntemleri bilgisini araştırdıkları, oryantasyon
bileşenini ise nadiren çalışmalarına dahil ettikleri gibi pek çok önemli
sonuca ulaşılmıştır. Pedagojik alan bilgisi araştırmacıları için önemli araştırma
alanları önerilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Alan Yazın Taraması

Kaynakça

  • Aydın, S., & Boz, Y. (2012). Fen öğretmen eğitiminde pedagojik alan bilgisi araştırmalarının derlenmesi: Türkiye örneği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(1), 479-505.
  • Aydın, S., Demirdöğen, B., Tarkın, A., Kutucu, S., Ekiz, B., Akın, F. N., Tuysuz, M., & Uzuntiryaki, S. (2013). Providing a set of research-based practices to support preservice teachers’ longterm Professional development as learners of science teaching. Science Education, 97, 903-935.
  • Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 1105-1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty years later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea?International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1405-1416.
  • Bahcivan, E., & Cobern, W. W. (2016). Investigating coherence among Turkish elementary science teachers’ teaching belief systems, pedagogical content knowledge and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(10), 62-86.
  • Borko, H., Cone, R., Russo, N. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (1979). Teachers’ decision making. In P. Peter- son & H. Walberg (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings and implications (pp. 136-160). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
  • Chan, K. K. H., & Hume, A. (2019). Towards a consensus model: Review of how science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge is investigated in empirical studies. In A. Hume, R. Coo- per & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers’ knowledge for teachng science (pp. 3-76). Singapore: Springer.
  • Davis, E. A. (2003). Knowledge integration in science teaching: analysing teachers’ knowledge development. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 21-53.
  • De Jong, O., & van Driel, J. (2001). The development of prospective teachers’ concerns about teaching chemistry topics at a macro-micro-symbolic interface. In H. Behrednt, H. Dahncke,R. Duit, W. Graber, M. Komorek, A. Kross, & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education: past, present and future (pp. 271-276). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  • Demirdöğen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakçı, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2016). Development and natüre of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for nature of science. Research in Science Education, 46, 575-612.
  • Friedrichsen, P., van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science teaching orientations. Science Education, 95, 358-376.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. InJ. GessNewsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95-132). Boston: Kluwer.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK Summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen,& J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28-42). New York, NY Routledge.
  • Grossman, P. (1990). The Making of a Teacher. New York: Teachers College Press.Hart, C. (2001). Doing a literature search: A comprehensive guide for the social sciences. London: Sage. Hume, A., Cooper, R., & Borowski, A. (2019). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers’knowledge for teachng science. Singapore: Springer.
  • Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169-204.
  • Loughran, J. J. (2007). Science teacher as learner. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp.1043-1065). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. GessNewsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp.95-132). Boston: Kluwer.
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.).Tousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB). (2018). İlköğretim Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programları. Ankara.
  • National Research Council (1996). Nationals Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: Natio- nal Academy Press.
  • Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and training: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-2
  • Şimşek, N. & Boz, N. (2016). Analysis of pedagogical content knowledge studies in the context of mathematics education in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 16(3), 799-826.
  • Yıldırım, A., Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları .
Toplam 24 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Hatice Belge Can 0000-0003-2329-3419

Yayımlanma Tarihi 22 Kasım 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019 Cilt: 48 Sayı: 224

Kaynak Göster

APA Belge Can, H. (2019). PEDAGOJİK ALAN BİLGİSİ ÇALIŞMALARININ DERLENMESİ: FEN BİLİMLERİ EĞİTİMİ ÖRNEĞİ. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 48(224), 353-380.
 Kapak Resmi İndir