Classroom teacher candidates’ views on in-class practices in life science teaching course

Öz

The aim of this study is to determine the opinions of pre-service teachers studying in the primary school teaching program about the in-class practices in the Life Science Teaching course. The research is an action research in terms of its design, research questions, data collection process and analysis method. The study was conducted with third-year pre-service teachers taking the Life Science Teaching course in the Department of Classroom Education of a state university. Participants were determined by convenience sampling method. In the first stage of the study, a questionnaire consisting of three open-ended questions was applied to reveal the expectations of the participants regarding the Life Science Teaching course. In the first nine weeks of the 14-week education process, theory and practical applications were carried out together, and micro-teaching applications were started in the tenth week. In the last stage, after all pre-service teachers completed the micro-teaching process, the open-ended questionnaire was applied. Content analysis method was used to analyze the research data. In line with the findings, it was concluded that the participants expected the teaching process of the course to be carried out in a pleasant and practice-based manner. When the opinions of the pre-service teachers regarding the evaluation of the implementation at the end of the course were examined, it was determined that their lesson planning skills, classroom management skills, material preparation and effective use of teaching methods improved.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Life Science Teaching
• Teacher Education
• Microteaching
• Action Research

Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının hayat bilgisi öğretimi dersindeki sınıf içi uygulamalara ilişkin görüşleri

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, sınıf öğretmenliği programında öğrenim gören öğretmen adaylarının Hayat Bilgisi Öğretimi dersindeki sınıf içi uygulamalara ilişkin görüşlerini belirlemektir. Araştırma tasarımı, ele aldığı araştırma soruları, veri toplama süreci ve analiz yöntemi açısından eylem araştırması niteliğindedir. Çalışma, bir devlet üniversitesinin Sınıf Eğitimi Anabilim Dalı bünyesinde Hayat Bilgisi Öğretimi dersini alan üçüncü sınıf öğretmen adayları ile yürütülmüştür. Katılımcılar, uygun örnekleme yöntemi ile belirlenmiştir. Araştırmanın ilk aşamasında, katılımcıların Hayat Bilgisi Öğretimi dersine ilişkin beklentilerini ortaya koymak amacıyla üç açık uçlu sorudan oluşan bir anket uygulanmıştır. 14 haftalık eğitim-öğretim sürecinin ilk dokuz haftasında teori ve pratik uygulamalar birlikte yürütülmüş, onuncu haftadan itibaren ise mikro öğretim uygulamalarına geçilmiştir. Son aşamada, tüm öğretmen adaylarının mikro öğretim sürecini tamamlamalarının ardından açık uçlu anket uygulanmıştır. Araştırma verilerinin analizinde içerik analizi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular doğrultusunda, katılımcıların dersin öğretim sürecinin keyifli ve uygulamaya dayalı bir şekilde yürütülmesini bekledikleri sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Ders sonunda gerçekleştirilen uygulamanın değerlendirilmesine ilişkin öğretmen adaylarının görüşleri incelendiğinde, ders planlama becerisi, sınıf yönetimi becerisi, materyal hazırlama ve öğretim yöntemlerini etkili kullanma becerilerinin geliştiği belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Hayat Bilgisi Öğretimi
• Öğretmen Eğitimi
• Mikro Öğretim
• Eylem Araştırması

Kaynakça

1. Akan, R. (2022). The Effect of philosophy for children (p4c) creative thinking skill activities in life science instruction on the creative thinking skills of students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Bursa Uludağ University.
2. Akhan, O. (2020). An Examination of history topics in life science and social science textbooks in primary education. The Journal of Social Science, 4(8), 658–670. https://doi.org/10.30520/tjsosci.789155
3. Akgün, Y. (2022). An Investigation of the attitudes of form teachers toward life science instruction and their views on life skills [Unpublished master’s thesis]. İnönü University.
4. Aykaç, N. (2011). Evaluation of the methods and techniques used in the life science curriculum based on teacher opinions: A Sample from Sinop province. Kastamonu Education Journal, 19(1), 113–126. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefdergi/issue/49053/625825
5. Aktepe, V. & Yalçınkaya, E. (2016). Value education and sample practices in the life science course. In S. Güven & S. Kaymakçı (Eds.), Life science Instruction (pp. 134–176). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
6. Arı, S. (2024). Elements of intangible cultural heritage in life science textbooks. Korkut Ata Journal of Turkic Studies, (14), 1194–1207. https://doi.org/10.51531/korkutatat urkiyat.1429502
7. Baş, M. (2021). The effect of integrated mathematics and life science instruction on academic achievement, attitudes, and acquisition of the value of tolerance among third-grade students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gazi University.
8. Baltacı, A. (2018). A conceptual review of sampling methods and sample size issues in qualitative research. Bitlis Eren University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 7(1), 231–274. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/bitlissos/issue/38061/399955

9. Batmaz, O., Batmaz, M., & Kılıç, A. (2021). Views of classroom teachers on life science instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic. Manas Journal of Life Science, 10(3), 1665–1677. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.844717
10. Bayır, H. & Köksal, H. (2022). Development of a Life science Achievement Test for Grade 3: A Validity and Reliability Study. PESA International Journal of Life science, 8(2), 86–99. https://doi.org/10.25272/j.2149-8385.2022.8.2.03
11. Çalışır, S. (2024). The effect of life science instruction based on the flipped classroom model on student achievement [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Kastamonu University.
12. Çelenk, S. (2003). Teacher opinions on the primary school life science course. Journal of Milli Egitim 160, 24–36.
13. Dadaş, A. (2021). Evaluation of the attitudes and opinions of form teachers working in combined and stand-alone classrooms regarding life science instruction [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Fırat University.
14. Demir, S. (2007). Examination of the primary school life science curriculum based on teacher opinions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. İnönü University.
15. Düzgün, E. (2020). Investigation of the relationship between the attitudes of prospective form teachers toward life science instruction and their attitudes toward multiple intelligence theory practices [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Bursa Uludağ University.
16. Erbaş, A. & Başkurt, İ. (2021). Reflection of values in the life science curriculum in life science textbooks. Erzincan University Journal of Faculty, 23(3), 785–813. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.841337
17. Erbaş, A. A. & Başkurt, İ. (2022). Views of form teachers on value education in life science lessons. Western Journal of Educational Sciences, 13(1), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.51460/baebd.977669
18. Ersoy, A. (2015). Examination of the first qualitative research experiences of doctoral students through journals. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 5(5), 549–568. http://dx.doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2015.030
19. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books.
20. Gülcü, A. & Küçükkaragöz, H. (2021). Views of form teachers on structured drama integrated with children’s literature in life science instruction. Western Anatolia Journal of Educational Sciences, 12(2), 742–768. https://doi.org/10.51460/baebd.1018312
21. Kalender, B., Kabapınar, Y., & Urfalıoğlu, K. (2023). An investigation into 2005 and 2018 life studies textbooks in the context of learning approaches: how do classroom teachers interpret the change? Education and Science, 48(214), 149–175. https://doi.org/10.15390/eb.2023.10976
22. Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for Character: How Our Schools Can Teach Respect and Responsibility. Bantam Books.
23. Marzano, R. J. (2003). What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action. ASCD.
24. MoNE [Ministry of National Education]. (2024). Maarif Model Life science Curriculum. Ankara.
25. Oker, D. & Tay, B. (2019). Views of primary school students on the life science course and topics they want to learn. Journal of Educational Theory and Practice Research, 5(3), 409–425. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/907219
26. Saydam, N. & Batmaz, O. (2025). The life science course according to generation x, y, z form teachers. Uşak University Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.29065/usakead.1632682
27. Temiz, N. (2021). An examination of the life science course during remote education in the covid-19 pandemic at a well-equipped school: Methods and material use. E-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 738–769. https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.960271
28. Tilbury, D. (1995). Environmental education for sustainability: Defining the new focus of environmental education in the 1990s. Environmental Education Research, 1(2), 195–212.
29. Topcubaşı, G. & Yorulmaz, B. (2023). Examination of the acquisition of justice, responsibility, and friendship values by grade 3 students through life science lessons. İnönü University Journal of Education Faculty, 24(1), 508–536. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.1139903
30. Ütkür, N. (2018). What do prospective form teachers think about life science instruction? İnönü University Journal of Education Faculty, 19(2), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.340146
31. Yaşaroğlu, C. (2018). Values in instructional curricula: The case of life science. Anemon Muş Alparslan University Journal of Social Sciences, 6(5), 725–733. https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.394551
32. Yıldırım, G. (2021a). Views of prospective form teachers on the life science course: the case of gazi university. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research, 10(1), 568–589. http://www.itobiad.com/tr/pub/issue/60435/790414
33. Yıldırım, G. (2021b). Reflection of intangible cultural heritage in educational curricula: life science instruction. International Journal of Social and Educational Sciences, 0(16), 231–247. https://doi.org/10.20860/ijoses.974198
34. Yurtbakan, E. & Altun, T. (2019). A comparison of classroom teachers’ attitudes toward life science instruction with their practices. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education Faculty, 19(3), 1160–1176. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2019.19.49440-524876