Investigation of Reasoning Styles and Causal Attributions for Success of Teacher Candidates
Abstract
The aim of this research is to investigate reasoning styles and causal attributions for success of university students. The study is a quantitative study based on correlational survey model. The population of the study consists from 267 teacher candidates in Ondokuz Mayıs University. The sample was selected in terms of convenience sampling technique. The result shows that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles except the metaphorical-deductive style of reasoning in terms of gender. Besides, the results show that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles in terms of departments. The result shows that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles in terms of students’ most liked courses. The result of the test statistics about whether causal attributions and reasoning styles differ according to the object of their causal attributions shows that there is no significant difference among the sub-dimensions of causal attributions and reasoning styles except personal control and external control dimension in the causal attribution scale. According to test results, some dimensions of reasoning styles are correlated with causal attributions at a low level. Importance level of reasoning styles for causal attributions show that metaphorical-deductive reasoning style is the most important factor for causality focus, emprical dimension is the most significant dimension for external control, analogical inductive and hypothetical dimensions are the most important factors for personal control and hypothetical dimension is the most important factor for persistance dimension.
Keywords
Reasoning Styles , Causal Attributions for success , Reasoning skills
Kaynakça
- Altun, E. Bağ, H., and Paliç, G. (2011). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin öğrenme stilleri ile tartışma eğilimleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. 2 nd International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications. 1917-1924.
- Brown, J.D. (2007). Neural network prediction of math and reading proficiency as reported in the educational longitudinal study: 2002 based on non-curricular variables. Doctoral Thesis, Duquesne University, Pennsylvania, ABD. (ProQuest Digital Document ID: 1467886041).
- Çelik, D. (2016). 11. sınıf öğrencilerinin düşünme stilleri, öğrenme stratejileri ve düşünme stilleri ile öğrenme stratejileri arasındaki ilişki, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp retrieved from 07.07.20
- Duran, V. and Mertol, H. (2019). Investigation of the reasoning styles of the teacher candidates in terms of decision making styles, learning modalities and gender: Süleyman Demirel University Education Faculty Case. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 8(3), 489-505 2019.
- Duran.V., Barut. Y., and Bayram. A. (2017). Öğretmen adaylarının mekan algılarının akıl yürütme stilleri açısından incelenmesi. Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Kent-MekanSempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı. İçinde (s.510). TMMOB Şehir Plancıları Odası. Kadın Komisyonu.
- Duran, V. (2019). Investigations of reasoning styles, cognitive distortions and critical thinking tendencies of teacher candidates: Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education sample. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, https://tez.yok.gov.tr/ retrieved from 08.07.2020
- Gonzalez, J.M.B. and DesJardins, S.L. (2002). Artificial neural networks: A new approach to predicting application behavior. Research in Higher Education, 43(2), 235-258.
- Güneri, N. and Apaydın, A. (2004). Öğrenci başarılarının sınıflandırılmasında lojistik regresyon analizi ve sinir ağları yaklaşımı. Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 170-188.
- Feshbach, S., Weiner, B. (1991). Personality (3. Baskı ). Heath and Company Psychology Bulletin 18 (5), 566- 573. A.B.D.: D. C
- Ickes, W., and Layden, M. (1976). Attributional styles. In J. Harvey (Eds.), New directions in attribution research, (p. 119-152). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum