A Mixed-Meta Method Study on the Effect of Constructivist Approach on Retention and the Evaluation of Learners’ Views

Öz

The aim of this research is to determine the effect of the constructivist approach on retention scores and to reveal its effectiveness in the learning environment within the framework of participant views. In this context, a quantitative and qualitative research was conducted within the framework of the mixed-meta method. The mixed-meta method can be explained as the use of meta-analysis and meta-thematic analysis together based on document review. Within the scope of meta-analysis, studies examining the effect of constructivism on retention were evaluated by scanning different databases between the years 2005 and 2021. The data obtained in the studies were analysed with the CMA program and the effect size value was calculated as g = 1.02. In the meta-thematic analysis process, studies containing participant views on the use of the constructivist approach were examined according to content analysis and some themes and codes were obtained. Requirements for a constructivist learning environment, the cognitive and affective effectiveness of the relevant approach, and the problems encountered in practice have emerged. As a result of the research, it was appeared that the effect of the constructivist approach on the retention scores of the learners was high and positive. Accordingly, it can be stated that the constructivist approach is quite effective on the retention of learning. As a result of the meta-thematic analysis data in the qualitative dimension, it was come out that the related approach facilitated the learning by supporting the learners in the cognitive and affective dimensions in the learning process. In addition, it has been determined that many aspects such as materials, technological support, physical condition of the environment, class size are required in the learning environment. From the participant views, it was stated that in some cases, problems such as time, material, teacher training, and learner motivation can be encountered in the constructivist approach. When these results are evaluated in the general framework, it is understood that the constructivist approach is effective on the retention of learning and in creating positive learning environments, provided that appropriate environment and conditions are provided.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• retention
• mixed-meta method
• learning environment
• constructivist approach

Kaynakça

1. (* Studies included into the meta-thematic analysis) (** Studies included into the meta-analysis)
2. **Akın, M. F. (2007). The effects of a constructive learning approach on learning success in the teaching of identities. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Diyarbakır: Dicle University.
3. **Andaç, K. (2007). The effects of constructivist learning approach supported by reviewing strategy on students’ attainment and retention of their knowledge about pressure. (Unpublished master thesis). Diyarbakır: Dicle University.
4. Arslan, A. (2009). Constructivist learning approach and Turkish language teaching. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 13(1), 143-154. Arslan, M. (2007). Constructivist approaches in education. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi 40(1), 41-61.
5. Aykan, A., & Tatar, M. (2017). Competency level of secondary school teachers about the constructivist approach. Journal of Social Sciences of Muş Alparslan University 5(2), 381-395. https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.287791
6. Bada, M., & Kırpık, C. (2021). Self-efficacy perception of social studies teachers about constructivism and their opinion about the factors affecting it. IBAD Journal of Social Sciences 9, 462-480.
7. Baki, A., & Gökçek, T. (2012). A general overview of mixed method researches. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences 11(42), 1-21.
8. Bal, P. (2008). The evaluation of new mathematic curriculum in term of teachers’ perspectives. Ç.Ü. Journal of the Social Sciences Institute 17(1), 53-68.

9. Batdı, V. (2019). Meta-thematic analysis. In V. Batdı (Ed.), Meta-thematic analysis: Sample applications (pp. 10–76). Anı Publication.
10. Batdı, V. (2021). The use of technology in language teaching to foreigners: a mixed-meta method. Milli Eğitim Dergis, 50(1), 1213-1244. http://dx.doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.942631
11. Batdı, V., & Anıl, Ö. (2021). Learning by computer-based education: A meta-thematic analysis. J. BAUN Inst. Sci. Technol. 23(1), 111-127.
12. **Bayrak, N. (2008). Examining of the effect on students’ success, the lasting of data and attitudes science of course software and worksheets developed according to five gradual model of constructivist learning approach. (Unpublished master thesis). Erzurum: Atatürk University.
13. Bayraktaroğlu, C. E. (2011). Constructivist approach in education and a critical view. (Unpublished master thesis). İstanbul: Maltepe University.
14. *Çandar, H., & Şahin, A. E. (2013). Teachers’ views about effects of constructivist approach on classroom management. Hacettepe University Journal of Education 44, 109-119.
15. **Çiftçi, E. (2010). The effect of teaching based on constructivist learning approach to student success and attitude in the field of learning geometry in primary education grade 6. (Unpublished master thesis). Ankara: Gazi University.
16. Demirel, Ö. (2004). Curriculum development in education from theory to practice. Pegem Publication.
17. Dinçer, S. (2015). Effects of computer-assisted learning on students’ achievements in Turkey: A meta-analysis. Journal of Turkish Science Education 12(1), 99-118.
18. Ekşi, H., Ulusoy, M. A., & Toprak, M. (2018). Village stakeholders participation values education: an action research. The Journal of Humanity and Society, 8(4), 125-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.12658/M0260
19. Erdem, E. & Demirel, Ö. (2002). Constructivism in curriculum development. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Education 23, 81-87. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/hunefd/issue/7815/102628
20. Fer, S. & Cırık İ. (2007). Constructivist learning, from theory to practice. Morpa Publication.
21. Genç Ersoy, B. (2021). The use of educational games in teaching Turkish: A meta-thematic analysis. Journal of Mother Tongue Education 9(2), 510-530. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.887902
22. Güneş, F. (2007). Classroom management with a constructivist approach. Nobel Publication.
23. **Hançer, A. H. (2005). An investigation of the effects of computer aided instruction in a constructivist learning environment on learning outcomes in science education. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ankara: Gazi University.
24. Kaşarcı, İ. (2013). The effectiveness of project based learning on students’ academic achievements and attitude: A meta-analysis. (Unpublished master thesis). Eskişehir: Eskişehir Osmangazi University.
25. *Kaya A. (2008). A comparison of the classroom management approaches of the class teachers implementing constructivist learning approach and those of the branch teachers not implementing this approach (A case study in Gaziantep). (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Malatya: Inönü University.
26. **Kerimgil, S. (2008). The effect of curriculum based upon constructivist learning on pre-service teachers’ reflective thinking and democratic attitudes. (Unpublished master thesis). Elazığ: Fırat University.
27. **Kızıl Abdullah, Y. (2008). The effect of constructivist approach on realization of aims of culture of religion and ethics course for primary schools. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ankara: Ankara University.
28. **Kirişçioğlu, S. (2007). The effect of constructivist learning approach based instruction in elementary school seventh (7th) class science lesson “pressure” subject on academic achievement. (Unpublished master thesis). Denizli: Pamukkale University.
29. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
30. Ocak, G. (2010). Teacher attitudes towards constructivist learning practices. Journal of Gazi Education Faculty 30(3), 835-857.
31. *Ocak, G., & Çimenci A. F. (2015). Evaluating the applicability of constructivist approach in mathematics classes based on the views of secondary school math’s teacher. International Journal of Field Education 1(2), 1-23.
32. Özbay, A. F. (2009). English teachers’ opinions on teaching English upon constructivist approach in English lessons. (Unpublished master thesis). Afyon: Afyon Kocatepe University.
33. *Özdemir, İ., & Köksal, N. (2015). Attitudes of elementary school teachers towards constructivism. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 19(2), 221-244.
34. Özel, A., & Bayındır, N. (2008). Classroom management according to constructivist approach (1st ed.). Pegem Publication.
35. **Sakallı, A. F. (2011). The influence of constructive 5E model about teaching complex numbers subject on students’ academic achievement and attitudes. (Unpublished master thesis). Kahramanmaraş: Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University.
36. Selçuklu, O. (2019). Analysis of teachers’ constructive learning approaches. (Unpublished master thesis). Konya: Necmettin Erbakan University.
37. Thalheimer, W., & Cook, S. (2002). How to calculate effect sizes from published research articles: A simplified methodology. Work-Learning Research Publication.
38. Yenice, E. (2014). Researching the effect of 7E learning model of consructivist approach on students’ academic success on the topic of “Mitosis and Meiosis Division” at 8th grade science and technology class. (Unpublished master thesis). Kars: Kafkas University.
39. **Yıldız, M. (2012). Determining effectiveness of the materials based on consructivist learning in geometrical optic teaching. (Unpublished master thesis). Trabzon: Karadeniz Technical University.
40. **Yılmaz Kaya, S. (2008). The effect of consructivist approach on the success of primary school second level students in science teaching. (Unpublished master thesis). Konya: Selçuk University.