TÜRKİYE’DE SINIF EĞİTİMİ ALANINDA YAPILAN EYLEM ARAŞTIRMALARINA GENEL BAKIŞ: BİR META-SENTEZ ÇALIŞMASI

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 2017-2023 yılları arasında Türkiye’de Sınıf Eğitimi alanında yapılan eylem araştırmalarını meta- sentez yöntemi ile analiz ederek araştırmaların eğilimlerini ortaya koymaktır. Araştırmalar yayın türleri ve yayın yılları, konu alanları, çalışma grubu, veri toplama yöntemleri ve veri analiz yöntemleri, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmaları, sonuçları ve önerileri bakımından incelenmiştir. İncelenen araştırmaların büyük bir bölümünün yüksek lisans tezi türünde olduğu, araştırmaların çoğunlukla 2019 yılında yapıldığı ve yoğun olarak Türkçe Öğretimi konu alanında yürütüldüğü ortaya çıkarılmıştır. Çalışma gruplarının çoğunlukla 4. sınıf öğrencilerinden oluşturulduğu; veri toplama aracı olarak ise görüşme, gözlem ve bilgi formlarının kullanıldığı belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca araştırmalarda ağırlıklı olarak nitel veri toplama yöntemlerine başvurulmuş, elde edilen veriler nitel analiz teknikleri ile çözümlenmiştir. Geçerliği sağlamak için sıklıkla veri çeşitlemesine başvurulduğu ve güvenirlik çalışmalarına ilişkin bilgilerin belirtilmediği çalışmaların olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Araştırmaların sonuçları incelendiğinde eylem planlarının öğrenciler açısından çoğunlukla olumlu çok az da olsa olumsuz ve etkisiz olduğu görülmüştür. Öğrencilerde derse yönelik tutum, beceri kazanma, akademik başarı gibi birçok açıdan olumlu sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Bununla birlikte öğretmen, öğretmen adayı ve veliler için olumlu etkilerinin olduğu belirlenmiştir. Araştırma önerilerine bakıldığında araştırmacılar için en çok araştırma yöntemi, uygulayıcılar için ise eğitim programı ile ilgili öneriler getirildiği görülmüştür. Bu sonuçlar dikkate alınarak mevcut araştırmada sınıf eğitimi alanında yapılan eylem araştırmalarının eğilimleri ortaya çıkarılarak alandaki boşluklara vurgu yapılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sınıf Eğitimi
• Nitel
• Meta-Sentez
• Eylem Araştırması

A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF ACTION RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN TURKEY: A META-SYNTHESIS STUDY

Öz

The aim of this study is to analyse action research conducted in the field of Primary Education in Turkey between 2017 and 2023 using the meta-synthesis method, thereby revealing the trends in these studies. The studies were examined in terms of publication types and years, subject areas, study groups, data collection and analysis methods, validity and reliability studies, results, and recommendations. It was found that the majority of the studies examined were master's theses, most were conducted in 2019, and they were predominantly carried out in the field of Turkish Language Teaching. It was determined that the study groups were mostly composed of fourth-year students and that interviews, observations, and information forms were used as data collection tools. Furthermore, qualitative data collection methods were predominantly used in the studies, and the data obtained were analysed using qualitative analysis techniques. It was found that data diversification was frequently used to ensure validity and that some studies did not provide information on reliability studies. An examination of the research results revealed that the action plans were mostly positive for students, with very few negative or ineffective ones. Positive results were obtained in many aspects, such as students' attitudes towards the course, skill acquisition, and academic achievement. Furthermore, positive effects were determined for teachers, teacher candidates, and parents. Looking at the research recommendations, it was seen that the most recommendations were made regarding research methods for researchers and regarding the training programme for practitioners. Taking these results into account, the trends in action research conducted in the field of primary education were revealed in the present study, and the gaps in the field were highlighted.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Primary Education
• Qualitative
• Meta-Synthesis
• Action Research

Kaynakça

1. Aksoy, N. (2003). Action research: Amethod for improving and changing educational practices. Educational Administration Theory and Practice, 36, 474-489. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kuey/issue/10361/126837
2. Amalia, N., & Wilis, F. (2021). Improving teacher quality through classroom action research. Journal of Community Service and Empowerment, 2(3), 133-139. https://doi.org/10.22219/jcse.v2i3.17934
3. Ayanoğlu, Ç., & Akbaşlı, S. (2023). Turkish education system problems: A meta-synthesis study. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 24(1), 371-425. https://doi.org/10.29299/kefad.938154
4. Balantekin, Y. (2021). Analysis of studies on problems experienced in Turkish lesson at primary school level: A meta-synthesis study. Journal of Mother Tongue Education 9(1), 242- 261. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.791365
5. Bekiroğlu, D., & Ütkür-Güllühan, N. (2022). Trends of life skills in life sciences and social studies courses: A meta-synthesis study. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Education, 19(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.33711/yyuefd.1059300
6. Beyhan, A. (2013). Action research in educational organizations. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 1(2), 65-89. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jcer/issue/18614/196496
7. Bowman, R.L, Davis D.L., Ferguson, S., & Taylor, J. (2018). Women's motivation perception and experience of complementary and alternative medicine in pregnancy: A meta-synthesis. Midwifery, 59, 81-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2017.11.007
8. Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). Parameters of content analysis. Education and Science, 39(174), 33-38. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3412

9. Çalışkan, M., & Serçe, H. (2018). Türkiye’de Eğitim Alanındaki Eylem Araştırması Makaleleri: Bir İçerik Analizi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 57–79. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefad/issue/59094/850510.
10. Çevik, A., & Kaya, H. (2021). Analysis of graduate theses containing scientific process skills in science education: Meta-synthesis study. The Journal of International Educational Sciences, , 5(2), 143-166. https://doi.org/10.46762/mamulebd.985454
11. Deveci, Ö., & Aykaç, N. (2019). Evaluation of studies examining the problems experienced in basic: A metasynthesis study. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 7(1), 277-301. https://doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.7c1s.13m
12. Ecevit, T., Balcı, N., Yıldız, M., & Sayan, B. S. (2021). Thematic content analysis of inquiry, argumentation and STEM-based applications at primary school level. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University of Journal Education, 18 (1), 1100-1129. https://doi.org/10.33711/yyuefd.957395
13. Esfijani, A. (2018). Measuring quality in online education: A metasynthesis. American Journal of Distance Education, 32(1), 57-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2018.1417658
14. Finfgeld, D. L. (2003). Metasynthesis: The state of the art—so far. Qualitative Health Research, 13(7), 893– 904. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303253462
15. Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2007). Meta-synthesis of caring in nursing. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 17, 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01824.x
16. Finlayson, K. W., & Dixon, A. (2008). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A guide for the novice. Nurse Researcher. 15(2), 59-71. https://journals.rcni.com/doi/abs/10.7748/nr2008.01.15.2.82.c6323
17. Göktaş, Y, Hasançebi, F., Varışoğlu, B., Akçay, A., Bayrak, N., Baran, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2012). Trends in educational research in Turkey: A content analysis. Educational sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(1), 443-460.
18. Güler, T., Demir, S., Kılıç, L., & Demir, B. (2020). Problems faced by classroom teachers and practices that teachers do to overcome these problems. YILDIZ Journal of Educational Research, 5(2), 51-83. https://doi.org/10.51280/yjer.2020.008
19. Hammer, K., Mogensen, O., & Hall, E.O.C. (2009). The meaning of hope in nursing research: a metasynthesis. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 23(3), 549–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471- 6712.2008.00635.x
20. Izzati, N., Antika, R., & Dwinata, A. (2023). Classroom Action Research: What Are Mathematics Teachers’ Problems in the Implementation?. Jurnal Gantang, 8(1) https://doi.org/10.31629/jg.v8i1.5673.
21. İspir, B., & Yıldız, A. (2021). An analysis of the researches on writing to learn in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. OPUS Journal of Society Research, 18(41), 3396-3447. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.906264
22. Kaptan, N., & Dinç, E. (2023). Investigating action research studies carried out in the field of early childhood education. Anadolu University Journal of Education, 7(2), 453-478. https://doi.org/10.34056/aujef.1245667
23. Kartal, A., & Çelik, S. (2022). Montessori model in primary education: A metasynthesis study. Gazi University of Journal Education, 42(2), 1109-1142. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.976284
24. Kartal, A. (2020). An overview of social studies in primary education: A meta synthesis study. Journal of Education and Science, 45(203), 123-151. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2020.8678
25. Kayır, G. (2021). Türkiye’de yapılan eylem araştırmalarının niteliksel olarak incelenmesi ve bir eylem araştırması örneği (Doktora tezi, [Eskişehir Osman Gazi Üniversitesi]). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
26. Kodan, H., & Kara, K. (2021). Overview of graduate studies on children's literature in the science of classroom education: A meta-synthesis study. OPUS Journal of Society, 18. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.888446
27. Korkmaz, E., & Morali, H. S. (2022). A meta-synthesis of studies on the use of augmented reality in mathematics education. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12269
28. Koshy, V. (2005). Action research for improving educational practice: A step-by-step guide. Paul Chapman Publishing.
29. Koyuncu, M.K. (2023). Examining the philosophy of mathematics studies in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study.
30. Journal of Education Science, 57, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.15285/maruaebd.1170299
31. Kuru, O. (2017). The effect of microteaching technique on fluent speaking skill. Kırşehir Ahi Evran University Journal of Education, 18(3), 792 – 810. https://izlik.org/JA58WW79HJ
32. Kuzu, A. (2009). Action research in teacher training and professional development. The Journal of International Social Research, 2(6). 425-433.
33. Manfra, M. (2019). Action Research and Systematic, Intentional Change in Teaching Practice. Review of Research in Education, 43, 163 - 196. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821132.
34. Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. SAGE Publications.
35. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE Publications.
36. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2018). Öğretmen Strateji Belgesi 2018-2023. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
37. Munn, Z., Aromataris, E., Tufanaru, C., Stern, C., Porritt, K., Farrow, J., & Jordan, Z. (2014). Establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis: The ConQual approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14(1), 108.
38. Newman, M., & Gough, D. (2020). Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application. In O. Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerres, S. Bedenlier, M. Bond, & K. Buntins (Eds.), Systematic reviews in educational research (pp. 3–22). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3- 658-27602-7_1
39. Noblit GW, Hare RD. (1988). Meta-ethnography: synthesizing qualitative studies. SAGE. Nouri, N., Saberi, M., McComas, W.F., & Mohammadi, M. (2021) Proposed teacher competencies to support effective nature of science instruction: A meta-synthesis of the literature. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(6), 601-624. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1871206
40. O’ Brien, R. (1998). An overview of the methodological approach of action research. In Roberto Richardson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Action Research. http://www.web.ca/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html
41. Ocak, G. (Ed.). (2021). Eğitimde eylem araştırması ve örnek araştırmalar. Pegem Akademi.
42. OECD. (2020). What students learn matters: Towards a 21st century curriculum. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/d86d4d9a-en.
43. Oğuztekin, E., Bektaş, O., Karaca, M., & Kızılay, E. (2022). An analysis of studies on entrepreneurship in science education in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 20(1), 86-106. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.993543
44. Özerdinç, F., Kızılay, E., & Hamalosmanoğlu, M. (2022). Analysis of studies on sustainable development in education: A Meta-Synthesis Study. Aksaray University Social Sciences Institute Journal, 6(1), 33-51. https://doi.org/10.38122/ased.976188
45. Öztürk, Y., & Özer, Z. (2022). Outdoor play activities and outdoor environment of early childhood education in Turkey: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Early Child Development and Care, 192(11), 1752-1767. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2021.1932865
46. Polat, S., & Ay, O. (2016). Meta-synthesis: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 4(1), 52-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.4c2s3m
47. Sağlamgöncü, A. (2023). A meta-synthesis study for research on museum education in social studies education in Turkey. Anadolu University Journal of Education, (AUJEF), 7(1), 308- 334. https://doi.org/10.34056/aujef.1160176
48. Sandelowski, M., Docherty, S., & Emden, C. (1997). Focus on qualitative methods qualitative metasynthesis: Issues and techniques. Research in Nursing & Health, 20, 365–371. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199708)20:4<365::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-e. PMID: 9256882.
49. Saro, M. J.& Taray, J.D. (2024). Teachers as Researchers: Practices, Perspectives, Problems, and a Plan of Action (4Ps) for Public School Teachers in Writing Action Research. American Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation (AJIRI), 3(3), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajiri.v3i3.3344
50. Semathong, S. (2023). Participatory Action Research to Develop the Teachers on Classroom Action Research. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v11i3.6118.
51. Sertoğlu, G. (2020). An action research based on the pedagogies of the object for improving students’ skills of change and continuity in social studies. Journal of Language Education and Research, 6(2), 410-427. https://doi.org/10.31464/jlere.698288
52. Sığnaktekin, C. (2022). Türkiye’de sosyal bilgiler eğitimi hakkında tarih öğretiminde yapılan makaleler üzerine bir araştırma: Bir meta-sentez çalışması (Yüksek lisans tezi, [Ordu Üniversitesi]). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi
53. Steele, B. (2006). What teachers want to know: A systematic review of action research theses related to K–8 mathematics and science (Electronic theses and dissertations, No. 985).
54. Stomski, N.J., & Morrison, P. (2017). Participation in mental healthcare: a qualitative meta-synthesis. International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 11(67). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-017-0174-y
55. Stringer, E. T. (2014). Action research: A Handbook for Practitioners (4th ed.). SAGE.
56. Şahin, A., Asal Özkan, R., & Turan, B. N. (2022). Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Karşılaştıkları Sorunlara İlişkin Yapılmış Bilimsel Çalışmaların İncelenmesi. Educational Academic Research, 45, 83-91. https://doi.org/10.54614/AUJKKEF.2022.861151
57. Tombalak, K & Tekindal, M. (2021). The scope of meta-synthesis in qualitative research and examples of meta-synthesis in aging. Beyond the Horizon of Scientific Journal, 21(2), 235-268. https://doi.org/10.54961/uobild.1036670
58. Türkan, B. T., Yolcu, E., & Karataş, T. (2019). Türkiye’de eğitim bilimleri alanında eylem araştırması içeren doktora tezlerinin incelenmesi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(28), 501–524. https://doi.org/10.35675/befdergi.471731
59. Uslu, G. (2019). Hayat bilgisi konularında yapılan nitel çalışmaların incelenmesi: Bir meta-sentez çalışması (Yüksek lisans tezi, [Niğde Halis Demir Üniversitesi]). Yükseköğretim Kurulu Ulusal Tez Merkezi Van Lier, L. (1994). Action research. Universitat de Lleida 6, 31-37. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/39053322.pdf
60. Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2005). Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: A literature review. Methodological Issues in Nursing Research, 50(2), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365- 2648.2005.03380.x
61. Wang, S.-H. (2019). The difficulties and solutions of primary school teachers' action research. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Contemporary Education, Social Sciences and Ecological Studies (CESSES 2019) (Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, Vol. 267, pp. 267–271). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/cesses-19.2019.62
62. Willig, C., & Wirth, L. (2018). A meta-synthesis of studies of patients’ experience of living with terminal cancer. Health Psychology, 37(3), 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0000581
63. Winter, R., & Munn-Giddings, C. (2001). A handbook for action research in health and social care. Routledge
64. Yaraş, Z., & Turan, M. (2021). Teaching profession in the context of problems and solutions. National Education Journal, 50 (232) , 383-405. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.763393
65. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.