Farklı Akademik Başarıya Sahip Matematik Öğretmeni Adaylarının Gerçekleştirdikleri Klinik Mülakatların Karşılaştırılması

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 1, 1 - 29, 25.12.2020

Aytuğ Özaltun Çelik , Esra Bukova Güzel

https://doi.org/10.33711/yyuefd.671175

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı akademik başarıya sahip matematik öğretmeni adaylarının gerçekleştirdikleri klinik mülakatları karşılaştırmaktır. İç içe geçmiş çoklu durum çalışması desenine dayandırılan çalışmanın katılımcılarını tabakalı amaçlı örneklemeye dayalı olarak seçilen on lise matematik öğretmeni adayı oluşturmuştur. Öğretmen adaylarının seçiminde altı döneme ait akademik not ortalamalarından yararlanılmıştır. On öğretmen adayından beşi sınıftaki en yüksek akademik ortalamaya sahip iken diğer beşi en düşük akademik ortalamaya sahiptir. Çalışmanın verileri öğretmen adaylarının gerçekleştirdiği klinik mülakat uygulamalarının video kayıtlarından derlenmiştir. Her bir klinik mülakat transkript edilmiş ve transkript metinleri öğretmen adaylarının sordukları sorular doğrultusunda analiz edilmiştir. Düşük akademik başarı ortalamasına sahip matematik öğretmeni adayları klinik mülakatları boyunca genellikle yönlendirici sorulardan yararlanırken, yüksek akademik başarı düzeyindeki öğretmen adayları düşüncelere odaklı sorular sormuşlardır. Sonuçlara dayalı olarak, öğretmen adaylarının klinik mülakat öncesinde kavramsal analiz yapmalarının ve bu kavramsal analizlerine dayalı klinik mülakatlar gerçekleştirmelerinin matematik öğretimi için önemli olduğu düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Akademik başarı, klinik mülakat

Comparing the Clinical Interviews Conducted by the Prospective Mathematics Teachers Having Different Academic Achievement

Öz

he purpose of this study is to compare the
clinical interviews conducted by the prospective mathematics teachers with
different academic achievements. The participants of this embedded multiple
case study were ten prospective mathematics teachers selected by stratified
purposeful sample. The participants' selection was based on their six semester
grade averages. Five had the highest academic averages while the others had the
lowest academic averages. The data were compiled from the video recordings of
the clinical interview applications performed by the student teachers. Each
clinical interview was transcribed and the transcripts were analyzed in the
context of questions asked by the prospective teachers. During clinical
interviews, while the prospective mathematics teachers with low academic
averages used funneling questions, the participants with high academic averages
asked the questions focusing on students thinking. Based on the results, it is
thought that it is of significant for the prospective teachers to be asked to
make conceptual analysis related to the concepts prior to the clinical
interview and conduct clinical interviews based on their conceptual analysis.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Academic achievement, clinical interview

Kaynakça

• Adams, T. L. (1998). Alternative assessment in elementary school mathematics. Childhood Education, 74(4), 220-224. An, S., & Wu, Z. (2012). Enhancing mathematics teachers' knowledge of students' thinking from accessing and analyzing misconceptions in homework. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(3), 717-753. Ashlock, R. B. (2006). Error patterns in computation: Using error patterns to improve instruction (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Bowman, B. T., Donovan, S., & Burns, M. S. (2000). Eager to learn: Educating our preschoolers. Washington, DC: National Academies Press Carpenter, T.P., Fennema, E., & Franke, M.L. (1996). Cognitively guided instruction: A knowledge base for reform in primary mathematics instruction. Elementary School Journal, 97(1), 3-20. Clement, J. (2000). Analysis of clinical interviews: Foundation and model viability. In A. E. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 547–589). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Common Core State Standards Initiative [CCSSI]. (2010). The common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. Confrey, J. (2006). The evolution of design studies as methodology. R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp.135-152). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Creswell, J. (2013). Araştırma deseni: Nicel, nitel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları (Çev. S. B. Demir) Ankara: Eğiten Kitap Yayınları. (Orijinal yayın tarihi, 2013) Engelhardt, P. V., Corpuz, E. G., Ozimek D. J. & Rebello, N. S. (2004). The teaching Experiment –What it is and what it isn’t? Proceedings of Physics Education Conference-AIP Conference (pp. 157-160). Madison, WI. Ernest, P. (1993). Constructivism, the psychology of learning, and the nature of mathematics: Some critical issues. Science & Education, 2(1), 87-93. Fuchs, E., & Czarnocha, B. (2016). Teaching research interviews. In B. Czarnocha, W. Baker, O. Dias, & V. Prabhu (Eds.) The creative enterprise of mathematics teaching research: Elements of methodology and practice–from teachers to teachers (pp.179-198). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Ginsburg, H. (1981). The clinical interview in psychological research on mathematical thinking: Aims, rationales, techniques. For the learning of mathematics, 1(3), 4-11. Ginsburg, H. (1997). Entering the child’s mind: The clinical interview in psychological research and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ginsburg, H. P., Jacobs, S. F., & Lopez, L. S. (1993). Assessing mathematical thinking and learning potential. In R. B. Davis & C. S. Maher (Eds.), Schools, mathematics, and the world of reality (pp. 237–262). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Haydar (2017). Elementary teachers and students talking algebra: The clinical interview and children’s algebraic reasoning. In Proceedings of ICERI2017, November 2017, Seville, Spain. Heirdsfield, A. (2002). The interview in mathematics education: The case of mental computation. In Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, December 2002, Brisbane, Australia. Hunting, R. P. (1997). Clinical interview methods in mathematics education research and practice. Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 16(2), 145-165. Jenkins, O. F. (2010). Developing teachers’ knowledge of students as learners of mathematics through structured interviews. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13, 141-154. Kazemi, E., Gibbons, L. K., Lomax, K., & Franke, M. L. (2016). Listening to and learning from student thinking. Teaching Children Mathematics, 23(3), 182-190. Ginsburg, H. P., Jacobs, S. F., & Lopez, L. S. (1993). Assessing mathematical thinking and learning potential in primary grade children In M. Niss (Ed.), Investigations into assessment in mathematics education: An ICMI study (pp. 157–167). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Koichu, B., & Harel, G. (2007). Triadic interaction in clinical task-based interviews with mathematics teachers. Educational Studies in Mathematics 65(3), 349-365. Mojica, G. (2010). Preparing pre-service elementary teachers to teach mathematics with learning trajectories. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. North Carolina State University, USA. Moyer, P.S. & Milewicz, E. (2002). Learning to question: Categories of questioning used by preservice teachers during diagnostic mathematics interviews. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 293–315. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. Pablopulos, A. & Carolina, C. (2015). Investigating the use of the clinical interview method in an elementary mathematics methods course, Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Rutgers University, Graduate School of Education, New Jersey, USA. Son, J., & Sinclair, N. (2010). How preservice teachers interpret and respond to student geometric errors. School Science and Mathematics, 110(1), 31-46. Taylan, R. D. (2018). Exploring prospective teachers' reflections in the context of conducting clinical ınterviews. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(2), 349-358. van den Kieboom, L., Magiera, M. T., & Moyer, J. (2017). Learning to notice student thinking about the equal sign: K-8 pre-service teachers’ experiences in a teacher preparation program. In E. O. Schack, M. H. Fisher, & J. Wilhelm, (Eds.), Teacher noticing – Bridging and broadening perspectives, contexts, and frameworks, (pp. 141-159). New York, NY: Springer. Weiland, I. S., Hudson, R. A., & Amador, J. M. (2014). Preservice formative assessment interviews: The development of competent questioning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 329-352.