PROJE TEMELLİ VE BİLGİSAYAR DESTEKLİ ÖĞRETİM TASARIMLARININ; BAĞIMLI, BAĞIMSIZ VE İŞ BİRLİKLİ ÖĞRENME STİLLERİNE SAHİP ÖĞRENCİLERİN AKADEMİK BAŞARILARINA VE ÖĞRENME KALICILIĞINA ETKİSİ

Öz

Araştırmanın amacı, proje temelli ve bilgisayar destekli öğretim tasarımlarının; bağımlı, bağımsız ve iş birlikli öğrenme stillerine sahip sınıf öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin, Gelişim ve Öğrenme dersindeki akademik başarılarına ve öğrenme kalıcılığına etkisini incelemektir. Araştırma modeli 2x3’lük gruplar arası faktöryel desen olarak belirlenmiştir. Araştırmada birinci faktör olan öğrenme stillerinin düzey sayısı, bağımlı, bağımsız ve iş birlikli olmak üzere üç; ikinci faktör olan öğretim tasarımların düzey sayısı da bilgisayar destekli ve proje temelli olmak üzere ikidir. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Sınıf Öğretmenliği Bölümü, Gelişim ve Öğrenme dersini alan ikinci sınıf öğrencileri oluşturmuştur. Deney grubu olarak belirlenen 50’şer kişilik 2 şube, 4 şube içerisinden tesadüfi yöntemle belirlenmiştir. Deney gruplarından birinde proje temelli, diğerinde ise bilgisayar destekli öğretim tasarımı uygulanmıştır. Araştırmada, öğrenme stili ölçeği, akademik başarı testi, proje temelli öğretim tasarımı ve bilgisayar destekli öğretim için kullanılan özel öğretici program yazılımı olmak üzere 4 materyal kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda; bağımlı ve bağımsız öğrenme stiline sahip öğrencilerin bilgisayar destekli, iş birlikli öğrenme stiline sahip öğrencilerin ise proje temelli öğretim tasarımlarında daha başarılı ve öğrenmelerinin daha kalıcı olduğu belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, öğrenme stilleri göz önüne alınarak hazırlanmış öğretim tasarımlarının akademik başarıyı ve öğrenme kalıcılığını olumlu yönde etkilediği savını destekler niteliktedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öğrenme stili
• bilgisayar destekli öğretim tasarımı
• proje temelli öğretim tasarımı

THE EFFECTS OF PROJECT BASED AND COMPUTER ASSISTED INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNS ON THOSE STUDENTS’ WHO HAVE DEPENDED, INDEPENDED AND COOPERATIVE LEARNING STYLES, ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AND LEARNING RETENTION

Öz

The focus of this study is to investigate the effects of computer-assisted and project-based instructional designs on the academic achievement and long-term retention of elementary prospective teachers who attend development and learning course and whose learning styles are dependent, independent and collaborative. Therefore the study was designed as 2x3 between groups factorial model where the learning styles and instructional designs formed the primary and secondary factors respectively. The level number of both learning styles (dependent, independent and collaborative) and instructional designs (computer-assisted and project-based) were two. Subject of the study was consisted of Department of Prospective Teacher of Atatürk Education Faculty second class students who have taken Learning and Development Courses. Two classes which were consisted of 50 students were randomly selected from 4 classes as subject group. One of these subject groups project-based learning was used and computer assisted learning was used in the other class. Learning Style Scale, Academic Success Test, project-based instructional design and tutorial for computer assisted learning were used in this study. As a result it is obtained that students who have depended and independent learning styles were successful in computer assisted learning and students who have colloborative learning style were successful in project based learning and learning retention of these students were higher then others. These results supported the hypotheses. Hypotheses were proposed that instructional designs which were designed according to the learning styles positively affects academic achievement and learning retention of students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Learning style
• computer-assisted instructional design
• project-based instructional design

Kaynakça

1. Au, K. ve Carroll, J. H. (1997). Improving Literacy Achievement Through a Constructivist Approach: The KEEP Demonstration Classroom Project, Elementary School Journal, 97(3), 203-221.
2. Bajraktarevic, N.; Hall, W. ve Fullick, P. (2003). Incorporating Learning Styles in Hypermedia Environment: Empirical Evaluation. http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/ ah2003/proceedings/paper4.pSd adresinden 15.04.2005 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
3. Bilgin, İ. ve Durmuş, S. (2003). Öğrenme Stilleri İle Öğrenci Başarısı Arasındaki İlişki Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir Araştırma, Kuramdan Uygulamaya Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(2), 381-393.
4. Blumenfeld, P.C.; Soloway, E.; Marx, R.W.; Krajicik, J.S.; Guzdial, M. ve Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning, Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398.
5. Cano-García, F. ve Hewitt H. E. (2000). Learning and Thinking Styles: An Analysis Of Their Interrelationship And Influence On Academic Achievement, Educational Psychology, 20(4), 413-431.
6. Chou, H.W. ve Wang, T.B. (2000). The Influence of Learning Style and Training Method on Self-Efficacy and Learning Performance in WWW Home Page Design Training, International Journal of Information Management, 20(6), 455-472.
7. Chuang, Y. (1999). Teaching in a Multimedia Computer Environment: A Study of the Effects of Learning Style, Gender, and Math Achievement, Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 1(1). 06.04.2005 tarihinde http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/1999/1/10/#4 adresinden indirilmiştir.
8. Demirbaş, O. ve Demirkan, H. (2003). Focus on Architectural Design Process Through Learning Style, Design Studies, 24 (5).

9. Dunn, R. ve Griggs, S. (1996). Hispanic-American Students and Learning Style, ERIC http://www.ericfacility.net/ericdigests/ed393607.html adresinden 07.01.2004 tarihinde indirilmiştir. Identifier: ED393607,
10. Ellison, J. (1998). Computer-Assisted Instruction & Programmed Learning, http://pages.towson.edu/mhofer/istc707/cai.rtf adresinden 12.02.2004 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
11. Erökten, S.; Morgil, İ.; Yavuz, S. ve Oskay, Ö. (2004). Computerized Applications On Complexation in Chemical Education, The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology –TOJET, 3(4). http://www.tojet.net/articles/ 341.htm adresinden 15.04.2005 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
12. Felder, R. M. (1996). Matters of Style, ASEE Prism, 6 (4), 18-23.
13. Grasha, A. F. (2002). Teaching With Style, A Practical Guide to Enhancing Learning by Understanding Teaching and Learning Style, U.S.A.
14. Handal, B.; Handal, P. ve Herrington, A. (2003). Training Teachers to Evaluate Educational Tutorial Software: A Model of Intra-School Professional Development, Electronic Journal for the Integration Technology in Education, 2(1), http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume2No1/Handal.htm adresinden 04.03.2004 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
15. Ingham, J.; Meza, R.; Miriam, P. ve Price, G. (1998). A Comparison of the Learning Style and Creative Talents of Mexican and American Undergraduate Engineering adresinden 12.01.2004 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
16. http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie98/papers/1352.pSd
17. İpek, İ. (2001). Bilgisayarla Öğretim Tasarım, Geliştirme ve Yöntemler, Tıp Teknik, Ankara.
18. June, L.; Chun-Sheng, Y. ve Chang, L. (2003). Learning Style, Learning Patterns and Information&Management, 40(6), 497-507. in a WebCI-based MIS Course,
19. Kettanurak, V.; Ramamurthy , K. ve Haseman, W. D. (2001). User Attitude As A Mediator Of Learning Performance Improvement In An Interactive Multimedia Environment: An Empirical Investigation Of The Degree Of Interactivity And Learning Styles, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 54(4). 541-583.
20. Kılıç, E. (2002). Baskın Öğrenme Stilinin Öğrenme Etkinlikleri Tercihi ve Akademik Başarıya Etkisi, Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama Dergisi, 1(1), 3-15.
21. Kraus, L. A.; Reed, W. M. ve Fitzgerald, G. E. (2001). The Effects Of Learning Style And Hypermedia Prior Experience On Behavioral Disorders Knowledge And Time On Task: A Case-Based Hypermedia Environment, Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 124-140.
22. Kvan, T. ve Yunyan, J. Students' Learning Styles and Their Correlation With Performance in Architectural Design Studio, Design Studies, 26(1), 19-34.
23. Lua, J.; Yua, C. S. ve Liub, C. (2003). Learning Style, Learning Patterns, and Learning Performance in a WebCT-based MIS Course, Journal of Information & Management 40(1), 497–507.
24. McGrath, D. (2003). Launching a Project Based Learning, Learning & Leading with Technology, Artifacts and Understanding, 30(4), 36-39.
25. Meyer, D. K. ve Turner, J. C. (1997). Challange in a Mathematics Classroom: Students’ Motivation and Strategies in Project-based Learning, Elementary School Journal, 97(5), 501-522.
26. Morgil, İ., Yavuz, S., Oskay, Ö. ve Arda, S. (2005). “Traditional And Computer- Assisted Learning İn Teaching Acids And Bases”, Journal of Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(1), 52-63.
27. Özdener, N. ve Özçoban, T. (2004). Bilgisayar Eğitiminde Çoklu Zeka Kuramına Göre Proje Tabanlı Öğrenme Modelinin Öğrenci Başarısına Etkisi, Kuram Ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(1), 147-170.
28. Pat, A. F. (2000). Learning Styles And Student Attitudes Toward Various Aspects Of Network-Based Instruction, Computers in Human Behavior, 16(4), 359- 379.
29. Patterson, J. G. (2002). Understanding and Promoting Effective Online Student Learning Styles: An Action Research Study, Journal of Action Research Exchange, 1(1), 212-225.
30. Peterson, S. E. ve Myer, R. A. (1995). The Use Of Collaborative Project-Based Learning In Counselor Education, Counselor Education & Supervision, 35(2), 150-159.
31. Railsback, J. (2002). Project-Based Instruction: Creating Excitement for Learning Planning and Program Development, North West Regional Educational Laboratory. adresinden 04.03.2004 tarihinde indirilmiştir. project based.pSd
32. Reed, W. M. (1994). The Relationship Between The Learning Strategies And Learning Styles İn A Hypermedia Environment, Computers in Human Behavior, 10(4), 419-434.
33. Rourke, L. ve Lysynchuk, L. (2000). The Influence of Learning Style on Achievement in Hypertext, ERIC document ED446102
34. Rusell, J. (2000). The Roles of the Student in a Project-Based Engineering Curriculum, International Conference on Engineering Education, 13-17 August, Oslo-Norwey, http://www.wku.edu/engineering/rolestud.pSd web adresinden 11.04.2005 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
35. Sage, S. M. (2005). Problem-Based Learning and Psychological Type: Results From Three Sixth-Grade Clasrooms, AERA Annual Meeting, April 14, Montreal.
36. Seels, B. ve Glasgow, Z. (1998). Making Instructional Design Decisions, Second Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
37. Smith, P.L. ve Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional Design. Second Edition, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
38. Soykurt, M. (2003). Effect of the Project-Based Learning Approach on the Overall Success of Intermediate Students Learning English, http://elt.emu.edu.tr/Ma- Phd/Mutlusoykurt.doc web adresinden 19.03.2004 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
39. Stanchev, I. ve Mileva, N. (1997). Instructional Design Principles in Multimedia Training Environment, Workshop Multimedia System for Higher Education, 27 May, ISBN 954-90244-1-5, Sozopol-Bulgaria. http://mulmedp.vmei.acad.bg/ Sozopol/Idpimte. pSd adresinden 27.02.2004 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
40. Şimşek, N. (1998). Öğretim Amaçlı Bilgisayar Yazılımlarının Değerlendirilmesi Kavramlar, Teknikleri Araçlar ve Uygulama, Ankara: Siyasal Yayınevi.
41. Terrell, S. R. (2002). The Effect Of Learning Style On Doctoral Course Completion İn A Web-Based Learning Environment, Journal Of The Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 345-352.
42. Uzuntiryaki, E.; Bilgin, İ. ve Geban, Ö. (2003). The Effect of Learning Styles on High School Student’ Achievement and Attitudes in Chemistry, Annual Meeting of the National Association For Research in Science Teaching, March 23-2, Philadelphia.
43. Yanpar Ş. ve Yıldırım, S. (1999). Öğretim Teknolojileri ve Materyal Geliştirme, Anı Yayıncılık, Ankara.
44. Zywno, M. S. ve Waalen, J. K. (2002). The Effect of Individual Learning Styles on Student Outcomes in Technology-enabled Education, UICEE Global Journal of Engineer Education, 6(1), 35-44.