Determination of pre-service science teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions and efficacy levels about the diagnostic branched tree technique

Ayşe Nesibe Köklükaya; Aysun Öztuna Kaplan; Vahdettin Sevinç

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Ayşe Nesibe Köklükaya Gazi University, Gazi Education Faculty, Ankara-TURKEY
Aysun Öztuna Kaplan Sakarya University, Education Faculty, Sakarya-TURKEY
Vahdettin Sevinç Sakarya University, Faculty of Engineering, Sakarya-TURKEY

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Alternative Measurement and Assessment Techniques, Diagnostic Branched Tree

Abstract

This research is aimed at identifying self- efficacy perceptions of the pre-service science teachers on the one of the alternative measurement and assessment techniques called diagnostic branched tree. The research is carried out 66 pre-service science teachers in 2009- 2010. Perception of Competencies on the Self efficacy perceptions of pre-service teachers on Alternative Measurement and Assessment Techniques scale’s second subscale and the documents which prepared by pre-service science teachers are used for data collection. According to the result of the research, pre-service science teachers perceive themselves efficiency about preparing the diagnostic branched tree, but the documents when evaluated with control list, it is precipitated that pre-service science teachers’ proficiency about preparing diagnostic branched tree is low level.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arslan S. A., Avcı N. & İyibil Ü. (2008). Preservice physic teachers’ perception levels about alternative assessment and measurement techniques. D.Ü. Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education Journals, 11, 115-128.

Arslan Sağlam, A., Kaymakçı Devecioğlu, Y. & Arslan S. (2009). The Problems about alternative measurements and assessment techniques: Sample of Science and Technology Teachers, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Faculty of Education Journals, 28, 1- 2.

Atılgan H. (2009). Assessment and Evaluation in Education. Anı Publishing: Ankara.

Ayas, A. P. (2005). Concept Learning, S. Çepni (Ed). Science and Technology Teaching in Theory and Practice (65-91), PegemA Publishing: Ankara.

Aydoğdu, M. & Kesercioğlu, T. (2005). Science and Technology Teaching in Primary School. Anı Publishing: Ankara.

Bağcı- Kılıç, G. (2001). Constructivist science education. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 1(1), 9-22.

Bahar, M., Nartgün, Z., Durmuş S. & Bıçak, B. (2008). Traditional- Assessment and Evaluation. Teacher Handbook. PegemA Publishing: Ankara.

Baki, A. & Birgin, O. (2004). Reflections of using computer-based portfolios as an alternative assessment tools: a case study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – (TOJET), 3(3), 79-99.

Bednar, A. K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. M. & Pery, J. D. (1992). Theory into Practice. In David H. Jonassen and Thomas M. Duffy, eds. Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. (17-34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bekiroğlu- Ogan F. (2004). Traditional and Alternative Assessment and Evaluation Techniques and Practice in Physics. Nobel Yayıncılık: Ankara.

Bong, M. (2001). Role of self-efficacy and task-value in predicting college students’ course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 26(4), 553–570.

Birgin, O., & Gürbüz, R. (2008). Eliciting pre-service primary teachers’ knowledge level about assessment- evaluation. Selçuk University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 20, 163- 179.

Campbell, C. & Evans, A. J. (2000). Investigation of preservice teachers’ classroom assessment practice during student teaching. The Journal of Educational Research, 93,6.

Corconan, A. C., Dershimer, L. E. & Tickhenor S. M.. (2004). A teacher’s guide to alternative assessment, taking the first steps, The Clearing House, 77 (5), 213–216.

Çakan, M. (2004). Teacher’s measurement and assessment practices and levels of competences: Primary and secondary education, Ankara University Faculty of Education Journals, 37(2), 99-114.

Çoruhlu, T. S., Er Nas, S. & Çepni, S. (2009). The Problems faced by science and technology teachers about usage alternative measurements and assessment techniques: Sample of Trabzon, Yüzüncü Yıl University, Faculty of Education Journals, 4(1), 122-141.

Doğan, B. A. (2005). Teachers’ perceptions about assessmen techniques in science education (Sample of Van) Master’s thesis, Yüzüncü Yıl University, Institute of Science, Van.

Eroğlu, M.G. & Kelecioğlu, H. (2011). An analysis on the validity and reliability of concept map and structural communicatıon grid scores, Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 40, 210-220.

Flowers, C., Delzell L. A., Browder, D. & Spooner, F.(2005). Teachers’ perceptions of alternate assessments, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, 30(2), 81–92.

Fourie, I. & Van Niekerk, D. (2001). Follow-up on the portfolio assessment a module in research information skills; an analysis of its value. Education for Information, 19, 107- 126.

Gömleksiz, M., N. (2005). An assessment of the implementation of new science and technology curriculum. educational sciences: Theory and Practice.5(2), 339-384.

Gürdal, A., Şahin, F., & Çağlar, A. (2001). Principles, Strategies and Methods in Science Education, Marmara University Publishing, 668: İstanbul.

Hackett, G., Betz, N. E., Casas, J. M., and Rocha-Singh, I. A. (1992). Gender, ethnicity, and social cognitive factors predicting the academic achievement of students in engineering. Journal of Counseling Psychology 39(4): 527–538.

Hamayan, V. (1995). Approaches to alternative assessment, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 212-26.

Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., & Schmidt, M. (2002). Perspectives on alternative assessment reform, American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 69-95.

Johnson, B. R. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2006). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher. 33(7), 14-26.

Jonson, J. L. (1999). Understanding Barriers to Teachers’ Use of Alternative Classroom Assessment. (Master’s thesis). Universty Of Nebreska.

Kan, A. (2007). Portfolio assessment, Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 32, 133- 144.

Kanatlı, F. (2008). Reviewing classroom teachers’ perceptions about alternative assessment and mesaurement techniques. Master’s Thesis, Mustafa Kemal University, Institute of Social Sciences, Hatay.

Karasar, N.(2006). Scientific Research Method. Nobel Publishing: Ankara.

Kaya, S. (2013). Effects of cooperative learning and peer assessment on academic success, metacognitive awareness and helping behaviors. Master’s Thesis, Cumhuriyet University, Instute of Educational Sciences, Sivas.

Kilmen, S., Kösterelioğlu Akın, M., & Kösterelioğlu, İ. (2007). Pre-service Teachers’ Efficacy about Alternative Assessment and Measurement. AİBU Journal of Education Faculty 7(1), 129-140.

Kolomuç, A. & Açışlı, S. (2013). Perspective of Prospective Primary School Teachers on Alternative Evaluation, International Journal of Social Science, 6(1), 1657-1667.

Law, B. & Eckes, M. (1995). Assessment and ESL. Peguis publishers: Manitoba, Canada.

Law, S., D., Letts, L., Pollock, N., Bosch, J., & Westmorland, M. (1998). Guidelines for Critical Review of Qualitative Studies. Accessed:10.11.2012 http://www.musallamusf.com/resources/Qualitative-Lit-Analysis-pdf.pdf.

MEB, (2006). Science and Technology Curriculum (6.7.8. classes), Ankara.

Nitko, A. J. (2004). Educational Assessments of Students, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice

Hall.

Özden, Y. (2005). Learning and Teaching. PegemA Publishing: Ankara.

Perkins, D.N. (1991). Educating for Insight. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 4-8.

Pierce, L. V. & O’Malley, J. M. (1992). Performance and Portfolio Assessment for Language Minority Students. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. Washington: DC.

Piburn, M. D. & Baker, D. R. (1997). Constructing Science in Middle and Secondary School Classroom. Needham Heights: Allyn &Bacon.

Punch, K. F. (2005). Introduction to Social Researchs: Qualitative and Quantitative Approach, Ankara: Siyasal Publishing.

Semerci, Ç. (2001). Assessment and measurement according to constructivist theory. educational sciences: Theory and Practice. 2(1), 429-440.

Sırkıntı, A. (2007). Primary school teachers’ perceptions about Portfolios in Math Lesson.Master’s thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Education Sciences, Ankara.

Slater, T. F. (1996). Portfolio Assessment Strategies for Grading First-Year University Physics Students in the USA. Physics Education, 31, 82–86.

Tay, B. (2013). The views of social studies teachers about alternative assessment, International Journal of Social Science, 6(3), 661-683.

Torrance, H. & Pryor, J. (2001). Developing formative assessment in the classroom: using action research to explore and modify theory, British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 615-631.

Turgut, M. F. (1990). Assessment and Measurement Methods in Education. Saydam Publishing: Ankara.

Volante, L. & Fazio, X. (2007). Exploring teacher candidates’ assessment literacy: implications for teacher education reform and professional development, Canadian Journal of Education, 30 (3), 749–770.

Yurdabakan, İ. & Uzun, A. (2011). Comparative analysis of primary school 4’th and 7’th grade students’ opinions on self-assessment, 2nd International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, Antalya.

Zulkosky, K. (2009). Self-Efficacy: A concept analysis, Journal Compilation, 44(2), 93-102.