İlköğretim 6. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Değer Yönelimleri

Yıl 2010, Sayı: 24, 407 - 416, 01.08.2010

Süleyman Yiğittir Adem Öcal

Öz

Öğretim programlarında öğrencilere birtakım değerlerin kazandırılmasıhedeflenmektedir. Birçok ülkede olduğu gibi, ülkemizde de, öğrencilere kazandırılacak değerler konusunda ciddi tartışmalar yapılmaktadır. Bu bakımdan bireylere kazandırılmasıgereken değerler ve insanların değer yönelimlerinin tespit edilmesi önemlidir. Bu çalışmada, Avrupa Birliği’ne girişsürecinde değerler eğitiminin hedef kitlesi olan öğrencilerin görüşlerine değer yönelimlerinin belirlenmesi amacıyla müracaat edilmiştir. Çalışma, Ankara iline bağlıAltındağ, Mamak, Keçiören, Çankaya, Yenimahalle, Sincan ilçelerinden rastgele seçilen 9 farklıilköğretim okulunda gerçekleştirilmiştir. Öğrencilerin çevrelerindeki insanlarda görmek istedikleri değerlerin belirlenmesinde, uzman görüşleri doğrultusunda hazırlanan görüşme formu kullanılmıştır. Öğrencilerden elde edilen yazılıdönütler içerik analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Çalışma kapsamında 6.sınıf öğrencilerine ait 1232 adet form değerlendirilmiştir. Öğrencilerin 97 farklıdeğeri tercih ettikleri ancak bunlar içinden sırasıyla çevre temizliği, saygı, güzel söz ve davranış, dürüstlük, çalışkanlık, çevre duyarlılığı, yardımseverlik, iyi insan olma, hoşgörü, doğa sevgisi, temizlik, sevgi ve güvenilirlik değerlerini daha çok tercih ettikleri tespit edilmiştir. Bu değerler, Akbaşve Rokeach tarafından geliştirilen değer sınıflandırmalarıile karşılaştırılmıştır. Çalışmada en fazla tercih edilen yukarıdaki 13 değerden, Rokeach’ın sınıflandırmasındaki değerlerden sadece 5 değerin dürüstlük, yardımseverlik, hoşgörülü olma, temizlik ve sevgi olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

değer eğitimi, değer yönelimleri, ilköğretim, sosyal bilgiler

Value Tendency of 6th Grade Elementary School Students

Öz

Value education enables individuals to gain their own social and cultural judgments together with the universal values, and it also makes individuals be ready for the problems that may occur. In order to prevent value crises, researches are being made throughout the world, especially in Europe and America. Value education consists of fields such as citizenship education, character education, moral education, law education, sex education, addiction education, religion education and has a special impact on formal education. There may be various views towards values in society, because there are superiority and priority relationships between values. For instance, dominant values have become values that concerns not only individuals but also societies. Values are beyond-situation goals which are desired, guided light to the individuals that having different importance levels. They reflect the preferences and wishes, that is, values are beliefs about something/somebody can be desired or not. Individuals’ value tendencies represent thoughts that managing society and home life, effecting human activities in long time periods. There are lots of classifications on values. Rokeach’s classification 1973 is considerably comprehensive and shed light on following researchers. To this categorization, values are handled as terminal values and instrumental values necessary qualifications to reach terminal values . The researches have shown that value tendencies differ from society to society. Until the revision of elementary school program in 2004, values existed as “latent acquisitions” in the curriculum. However, in new curriculum they are stated directly and students were aimed to gain these values. As in many countries, also in Turkey, it is not clear which values should be taught to the students. For this reason, it is of great importance to determine individuals’ value tendencies in elementary education period. The aim of this study is to determine sixth grade students value tendencies. In this study, students’ values stated and the value classification of Rokeach 1973 and Akbaş 2004 were also compared. Survey method was used in the study to determine value preferences of students. Study was conducted in nine elementary schools which were randomly selected from districts of Ankara which are Altındağ, Mamak, Keçiören, Çankaya, Yenimahalle, Sincan. In order to identify students’ value judgments the question of “Which features should exist in the people around you?” were asked. The question was controlled by the academicians who are experienced in the field of social studies education and educational sciences. Students responded the question by writing the answer on a paper. They stated their preferences with only one or more than one value statement. Interview forms were distributed to 1315 students in the scope of the study; however, 83 forms were eliminated due to not being concerned with values or because of emptiness. In total, a number of 1232 student interview forms 651 males and 664 males were evaluated. The statements recorded by the students were put through to content analyses. Firstly data were organized for each individual separately and were documented. Later, they were compared according to value classifications used by Akbaş traditional, democratic, job related, scientific and basic and Rokeach terminal and instrumental . The results were depicted via using frequency tables and percentages. Vital findings were obtained as a result of determining the value tendencies of students. The students expressed the features they wanted to see in the people around and they were able to prefer more than one value. While these statements were determined students words recorded to forms were taken into consideration. They totally mentioned about 97 value statements. The number of statements existing in the interview forms differed from 1 to 414. It has been found out that students especially gave more importance to values concerning environment environment cleanup, environmental sensity and nature love and values that takes an important role in interpersonal relationships love, respecting, tolerance, helpfulness, honesty . The tendencies towards refraining from bad words and behaviors and the value of wanting to be a good person showed that students were against the concepts such as violence, being immoral and being unqualified. It is interesting to see that sixth grade students emphasize national values very little. In the view of this, students should be also made to gain values that reinforce national, democratic and social unity except for the objectives of the curriculum. In this study, it was seen that preferred statements differed from Rokeach’s classification. It was found that students’ most favorite values didn’t exist in Rokeach’s classification. Of 13 value statements which preferred in this study, only 5 value statements honesty, charity, having tolerance, cleanliness and love are compatible with Rokeach’s classification terminal and instrumental values . According to obtained findings, it was understood that students paid to instrumental values more importance than terminal values. While students preferred honesty value mostly %22, 6 , imaginativeness value was stated in minimal proportions. The most preferred %11,7 terminal value is love. These findings can be interpreted that Rokeach’s classification is not compatible with the structure of Turkish contemporary society and inter-societal cultural differences may be effective on value tendencies. In this study, it was clarified that value classifications were not functional enough. Findings depicted that values were disjoint that is, a value finding in one classification didn’t exist in another classification. Because, students may tend to different values and they may express values differently due to the effects of media, school and their family. With these types of studies it may be decided which values to teach to students and new generations. When student tendencies are examined, if it is taken into consideration that students emphasized values concerning environment, it can be concluded that textbooks and media are effective in environmental values. Accordingly, this idea should be more comprehensive and it is inevitable to conduct these types of studies in different socio-economical settlements. As it can be understood from student tendencies, it should be given importance that values aimed to have students learn will not be sufficient when they learn values with their own selves. For this there should be collaboration among families, schools and society. In these activities media institutions should take an active role and contribute positively to the process

Anahtar Kelimeler

value education, tendency of value, elementary education, social studies

Kaynakça

• Afdal, Geir (2007). Ahlak Eğitiminin Analizi: Bir Tipoloji. Değerler ve Eğitimi. Kaymakcan, R., Hökelekli, H., Arslan, Ş., Zengin, M. (Ed). İstanbul: Dem yay., ss. 333-334
• Akbaş, Oktay (2004). Türk Milli Eğitim Sisteminin Duyuşsal Amaçlarının (Değerlerinin) İlköğretim 8.Sınıf Öğrencilerinde Gerçekleşme Derecesinin Değerlendirilmesi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Bilim Dalı.
• ------------- (2006). MEB İlköğretim Sosyal Bilgiler Dersi 6.Sınıf Öğretim Programı ve Kılavuzu. Değer Öğretiminde Yeni Yaklaşımlar. Ankara. Milli Eğitim Basımevi. ss. 55-60.
• Aydın, Mustafa (2003). Gençliğin Değer Algısı: Konya Örneği, Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi, 1 (3), 121-144
• Blackman, Alan - Hurd, Tony - Tima, Nils (2000). Entrepreneurs : More Honest than We think? A preliminary Investigation into the Characteristic and Values of Owner-Manager .http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/icsb/2000/pdf/121.PDF (25/12/2005 tarihinde internet adresinden alınmıştır).
• Brynildssen, Shawna (2002). Character Education though Children’s Literature. ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading English and Communication. ED 469929. http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-3/character.htm (24/8/2006 tarihinde internet adresinden alınmıştır.)
• Dilmaç, Bülent (2002). İnsanca Değerler Eğitimi. Nobel yay. Ankara
• Doğan, İsmail (2007). Türk Eğitim Sisteminde Değer Sorunu. Değerler ve Eğitimi. Kaymakcan, R., Hökelekli, H., Arslan, Ş., Zengin, M. (Eds). İstanbul: Dem yay. 615–634
• Güngör, E. (1993). Değerler Psikolojisi. Amsterdam: Hollanda Türk Akademisyenler Birliği Vakfı Yay. No:8
• Halstead, J.Mark - Taylor, Monica J. (1996). Values in Education and Education in Values. BristolEngland: Falmer Pres
• Halstead, J.Mark - Taylor, Monica J. (2000). Learning and Teaching about Values : a review of recent research. Cambridge Journal of Education. 30 (2). 169-202.
• Haydon, Graham (2004). Values education: sustaining the ethical environment. Journal of Moral Education. 33 (2). 115-129.
• Hossain, Amzad - Marinova, Dora (2004). Values education: A foundation for sustainability. Murdoch University: 13th Annual Teaching and Learning Forum. 9-10 February. www.lsn.curtin.edu.au/TL/Forum/2004/Hossain/and/Marinova-val.html
• Kirschenbaum, Howard (1995). 100 Ways to enhance values and moralıty in schools and youth settings. Massachusetts: A Longwood Professional Book. Pearson Education.
• Marcus, M. & Fritzer, P. (1999). Moral Education as Public Issue. Contemporary Education. 70 (3). 44-45
• MEB (Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı). (2004). Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretimi Program Kılavuz Kitabı 4-5.sınıf. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Yayınevi.
• Poyraz, Hakan (2007). Değerlerin Kuruluşu ve Yapısı. Değerler ve Eğitimi. Kaymakcan, R., Hökelekli, H., Arslan, Ş., Zengin, M. (Eds). İstanbul: Dem yay. 81-88
• An International Gallup Poll. (1997). Global Study of Family Values. New Jersey: International Gallup Poll. Report 7 Kasım 1997. www.hi-ho.ne.jp/taku77/refer/valupoll.htm ( 25/12/2005).
• Rosenfeld, Lawrence - Wynns, Scarlet (2003). Perceived Values and Social Support in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The online international Journal of Buffy Studies. http://www.slayage.tv/essays/slayage10/Rosenfeld_&_Wynns.htm (08/10/2005).
• Sağnak, Mesut (2007). Orta Öğretim Okullarında Öğrenim Gören Öğrencilerin Okulun Örgütsel Değerlerine İlişkin Algıları İle Kişisel Değerleri Arasındaki Uyum Düzeyleri. Değerler ve Eğitimi. Kaymakcan, R., Hökelekli, H., Arslan, Ş., Zengin, M. (Eds). İstanbul: Dem yay. 715-726
• Sarı, Enver (2005). Öğretmen Adaylarının Değer Tercihleri: Giresun Eğitim Fakültesi Örneği, Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi, 3 (10), 73-88
• Stanley, William B. (1983). Training Teachers to Deal with Values Education : A Critical Look at Social Studies Methods Texts. Social Studies. 74 (6). 242-246.
• Tillman, Diane (2000). Living Values Activities for Young Adults. USA-Florida: Health Communications Inc.
• Yiğittir, Süleyman (2010). İlköğretim Öğrenci Velilerinin Okullarda Kazandırılmasını Arzuladığı Değerler, Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi, 8 (19) 207-223
• Whitney, Iris Bomar (1986). The Status of Values Education in The Middle and Junior High Schools of Tennesse. Ph.D Thesis , Tennesse State University
• Ziebert, H.-G. (2007). Çokkültürlü Bir Toplumda Değerler Eğitimi Modelleri. Değerler ve Eğitimi. Kaymakcan, R., Hökelekli, H., Arslan, Ş., Zengin, M. (Eds). İstanbul: Dem yay. 445-466