Evaluation of Introduction to Education Course Through Student Achievement Scores and SWOT Analysis

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the academic achievement of education faculty students in the "Introduction to Education" course through midterm, final and average scores and to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of the course in line with the students' views. In the mixed-method design study in which quantitative and qualitative data were used together, quantitative data were obtained from students' midterm and final exam scores, and qualitative data were obtained through semi-structured interview forms consisting of open-ended questions. According to the quantitative findings of the study, female students showed higher academic achievement than male students in the 'Introduction to Education' course. In addition, significant differences were found between the academic achievement of the students, and the departments they studied in the faculty of education. This suggests that the course can be associated with different levels of achievement according to departments. According to the SWOT analysis obtained from the qualitative data, the strengths and opportunities of the course include that it provides basic knowledge and skills related to education, prepares students for the profession, and teaches the education system. Among the weaknesses and threats to the course, the theoretical intensity, the lack of practical studies, and the failure to address current problems were emphasized. The findings indicate that the Introduction to Education course should be restructured regarding content and methodology to make it more effective and functional.

Keywords

• Academic achievement
• Curriculum assessment
• SWOT analysis

References

1. Akçöltekin, A., Özdemı̇z, B., Genç, S. Z., & Şevgin, H. (2022). Fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin Covid 19 pandemi dönemi fen bilimleri dersi uzaktan eğitim uygulamalarına yönelik ihtiyaçlarının SWOT analizi ile incelenmesi [Examining the needs of science teachers for covid 19 pandemic period science course distance education applications with SWOT analysis]. International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Education, 6(1), 50-62. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijiape.2022.437.5
2. Alacapınar, F. G. (2018). Bir meslek olarak öğretmenlik [Teaching as a profession]. In M. Yavuz (Ed.), Eğitim Bilimine Giriş (pp.168-196). Anı Publishing.
3. Alanka, D. (2024). Nitel Bir Araştırma Yöntemi Olarak İçerik Analizi: Teorik Bir Çerçeve [Content analysis as a qualitative research method: A theoretical framework]. Kronotop İletişim Dergisi, 1(1), 64-84.
4. Budak Durmuş, F. (2024). SWOT analysis of the use of ChatGPT in education. Journal of Educational Studies and Multidisciplinary Approaches, 4(2), 121-137. https://doi.org/10.51383/jesma.2024.102
5. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2018). Eğitimde bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods in education] (4. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
6. Callahan, R. E. (1996). Foreword. Peabody Journal of Education, 71(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327930pje7102_1
7. Cebecioğlu, C. (2006). SWOT analizi ve bir işletme üzerine uygulama [SWOT analysis and its application on a business]. [Unpublished master's thesis]. Gebze Teknoloji Enstitüsü.
8. Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Understanding mixed methods research. In J. Cresswell (Ed.), Designing and conducting mixed methods research, 1-19. Sage Publishing.

9. Corey, G. (2013). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy (9th ed.). Cengage Learning.
10. Çakır, H., & Baş, H. (2018). Cinsiyetler ve cinsiyetlerle özdeşleşen davranışların sosyolojik ve biyolojik açıdan değerlendirilmesi [Sociological and biological evaluation of genders and gender-identified behaviors]. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(5), 176-191.
11. Çalık, T., & Arslan, M. M. (2023). Eğitime giriş [Introduction to education] (3. baskı). Pegem Akademi.
12. Çolak, F. G., & Efeoğlu, G. (2021). Yeni normalleşme sürecinde öğretmenlik uygulamasi dersine yönelik ihtiyaç analizi: SWOT analizi örneği [Needs analysis for teaching practice course in the new normalization process: SWOT analysis example. Kesit Akademi Dergisi, 7(27), 176-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/kesit.51140
13. Dilekli, Y., Rüzgâr, M. E., Karagöz, S., & Sözcü, İ. (2024). kavramsal zenginlik ve standardizasyon arasında: eğitime giriş ders kitaplarının analizi [Between conceptual richness and standardization: An analysis of introductory education textbooks]. Edutech Research, 2(1), 17-37.
14. Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. (2006). Self-discipline gives girls the edge: gender in self-discipline, grades, and achievement test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 198. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.198
15. Eisner, E. W. (2003). The arts and the creation of mind. Language Arts, 80(5), 340-344.
16. Emek, M. (2021). Covid-19 salgını sürecinde uygulanan Türkçe öğretmenliği acil uzaktan öğretim programının SWOT analizi [SWOT analysis of the Turkish language teaching emergency distance education program implemented during the Covid-19 pandemic]. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (Ö10), 308-324. https://doi.org/10.29000/rumelide.1011429
17. Erginer, A. (2006). Eğitim bilimine giriş dersi [Introduction to educational science], İlköğretmen Eğitimci Dergisi, 1, 50-52.
18. Ezin, Y. (2021). COVİD 19 sürecinde üniversitelerde uzaktan muhasebe eğitiminin SWOT analiz tekniği ile değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of distance accounting education in universities in the COVID-19 process with SWOT analysis technique]. Muhasebe ve Finansman Dergisi (92), 73-90. https://doi.org/10.25095/mufad.937725
19. Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2024). A SWOT analysis of ChatGPT: Implications for educational practice and research. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(3), 460-474. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2023.2195846
20. Fernandes, S., Araújo, A. M., Miguel, I., & Abelha, M. (2023). Teacher professional development in higher education: The impact of pedagogical training perceived by teachers. Education Sciences, 13(3), 309. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13030309
21. Freidson, E. (1986). Professional powers: A study of the instituonalization of formal knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22. Gal, A. (2024). Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats: a SWOT analysis of a long-term outdoor environmental education program in Israel. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education 27, 321-339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-023-00125-5
23. Humble, N. (2024) . Risk management strategy for generative AI in computing education: how to handle the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(61). 21-61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00494-x
24. Ingersol, R. (1997). The status of teaching as a profession:1990-91. US. Department of Education. Washington, DC:1996.
25. Kaptan, S. (1998). Bilimsel araştırma teknikleri ve istatistik [Scientific research techniques and statistics] (11. baskı). Tek Işık Web Ofset.
26. Karasar, N. (2014). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods] (27. baskı). Nobel Publishing.
27. Kösterelioğlu, İ. (2008). Eğitim bilimine giriş dersinin bilişsel alan hedeflerinin gerçekleşme düzeyi [The level of realization of cognitive domain objectives of introduction to educational science course]. Sakarya Üniversitesi eğitim Fakültesi dergisi, (15), 61-74.
28. Krisnawati, D., Dhistianti Mei, R. T., & Puspitaningtyas, A. (2019). Development strategy of study programs in higher education to respond the fourth industrial revolution: SWOT analysis. RJOAS, 1(85), 53-61.
29. Kurtdaş, E. M. (2021). Eğitimde cinsiyet temelli fırsat eşitsizliği [Gender-based inequality of opportunity in education]. Sosyolojik Düşün, 6(2), 112-144. https://doi.org/10.37991/sosdus.102022
30. Küçükahmet, L. (2017). Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri [Teaching principles and methods] (27. baskı). Nobel Publishing.
31. Legewie, J., & DiPrete, T.A. (2012). School context and the gender gap in educational achievement. American Sociological Review, 77 (3), 463-485. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412440802
32. Maqruf, A. (2022). SWOT Analysis in Entrepreneurship Based Mathematics Learning Planning. In P. Dankers, M. Koc, & M.L. Ciddi (Eds.), Proceedings of ICEMST 2022-- International Conference on Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 22-32.
33. Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. Harper & Row Publishing.
34. Osita, I. C., Onyebuchi R. I., & Justina, N. (2014). Organization’s stability and productivity: the role of SWOT analysis an acronym for strength, weakness, opportunities and threat. International Journal of Innovative and Applied Research, 2(9), 23-32.
35. Önen, A. S., & Koçak, C. (2011). Öğretmenlik mesleğinde ilk adım. Eğitim bilimine giriş dersine yönelik öğrenci tutumlarının belirlenmesi [The first step towards the teaching profession... Determination of student attitudes towards the introduction to educational science course]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(1), 59-72.
36. Özan, M. B., Polat, H., Gündüzalp, S., & Yaraş, Z. (2015). Eğitim kurumlarında SWOT analizi [SWOT analysis in educational organizations]. Journal of Turkish Educational Studies, 2(1), 1-28.
37. Penner, A. M. (2008). Gender differences in extreme mathematical achievement: An international perspective on biological and social factors. American Journal of Sociology, 114(S1), 138-S170.
38. Polya, G. (2004). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press.
39. Reiger, B. J. (1993). Strategic planing and public schools: An Evolving Practice. Educational Planning, 9 (4), 14-22.
40. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
41. Rodrigues, A. L., Cerdeira, L., Machado-Taylor, M. D. L., & Alves, H. (2021). Technological skills in higher education—different needs and different uses. Education Sciences, 11(7), 326.
42. Rutherford, G. (2009). Curriculum matters for all students? Understanding curriculum from the perspectives of disabled students and teacher aides. Curriculum Matters, 5, 90-108.
43. Sever, S. (2011). Türkçe öğretimi ve tam öğrenme [Turkish language teaching and full learning] (6. baskı). Anı Publishing.
44. Slavit, D., Lesseig, K., & Simpson, A. (2022). An analytic framework for understanding student thinking in STEM contexts. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(2), 132-148.
45. Som, İ., Türkan, A., & Altun, S. (2016). UbD modeline göre Eğitim Bilimlerine Giriş dersinin tasarlanması: Öğretmen adaylarının başarı, tutum ve derse ilişkin görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi [Designing an introduction to educational sciences course according to UbD model: Evaluation of pre-service teachers' achievement, attitudes and opinions about the course]. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 2(4), 1341-1351.
46. Sönmez, V., & Alacapınar, F. G. (2015). Örnekleriyle eğitimde program değerlendirme [Curriculum evaluation in education with examples]. Anı Publishing.
47. Sönmez, V., & Alacapınar, F. G. (2019). Örneklendirilmiş bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Exemplified scientific research methods] (Genişletilmiş 7. Baskı). Anı Publishing.
48. Şimşek, M. C., & Özgür, S. D. (2023). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenlik meslek bilgisi derslerini mesleki gelişimleri açısından değerlendirmeleri [Pre-service teachers' evaluation of teaching professional knowledge courses in terms of their professional development] . Millî Eğitim Dergisi, 52(239), 1543-1574. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.1134973
49. Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu [TTK] (1980). Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Tebliğler Dergisi. 43, 2064.
50. Tekin, M. M., & Yanpar Yelken, T. (2022). Pedagojik formasyon eğitimi sertifika programına yönelik SWOT analizi [SWOT analysis for pedagogical formation education certificate program]. Kesit Akademi Dergisi, 8 (32), 517-542. http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/kesit.63052
51. Uşun, S. (2012). Eğitimde program değerlendirme: süreçler-yaklaşımlar ve modeler [Curriculum evaluation in education: Processes, approaches and models]. Anı Publishing.
52. Voyer, D., & Voyer, S. D. (2014). Gender differences in scholastic achievement: a meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 140(4), 1174–1204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036620
53. Yapucuoğlu, M. D., Ballı, F. E., & Kara, E. (2024). Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğretmenlik Meslek Bilgisi Derslerine Yönelik Değerlendirmeleri [Evaluations of pre-service teachers on teaching profession knowledge]. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 15(2), 888-910. https://doi.org/10.51460/baebd.1454815
54. Yenilmez, K., & Özbey, N. (2007). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin ders çalışma alışkanlıklarının bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [Investigation of primary school students' study habits in terms of some variables]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 1-16.
55. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences] (Genişletilmiş 9. baskı). Seçkin Publishing.
56. Yiğit, B., & Kaçire, İ. (2015). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin ders çalışma alışkanlıklarının incelenmesine yönelik bir araştırma [A survey about examination of secondary school students’ study habits]. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(31), 309-319.