Journals / Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri / 2016 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4

Analysis of High School English Curriculum Materials through Rasch Measurement Model and Maxqda

Pages
1325–1347
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It is suggested that the balanced distribution of four language skills in ECM should be improved to achieve the objectives of the curriculum.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of the study is to analyze high school English curriculum materials (ECM) through FACETS analysis and MAXQDA-11 programs.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The mixed methods approach, both quantitative and qualitative methods, were used in three samples including English teachers in Elazig during the 2014-2015 academic year.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is suggested that the balanced distribution of four language skills in ECM should be improved to achieve the objectives of the curriculum.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2014-2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to analyze high school English curriculum materials (ECM) through FACETS analysis and MAXQDA-11 programs. The mixed methods approach, both quantitative and qualitative methods, were used in three samples including English teachers in Elazig during the 2014-2015 academic year. While the quantitative phase of the study involved the Rasch model and SPSS analysis, the qualitative phase included a case study research method. The quantitative data collection tool was the "High School English Curriculum Material Evaluation Form" developed by the researchers. Qualitative data were collected through an interview. According to the Rasch analysis results, while the material Headway coded as HEA has the highest quality, the materials coded A1.2 and A2.1 have the poorest quality. In terms of items, the most difficult item was G-M28 and for judges, J3 has the most severe while J13 has the most lenient behavior. The qualitative analysis indicated that among the themes, "deficiencies" had the most dominant dispersing of teacher comments while the theme "what to do" was not notable to every teacher. It is suggested that the balanced distribution of four language skills in ECM should be improved to achieve the objectives of the curriculum.

🔖

Cite This Article

BATDI, V., ELALDI, Ş. (2016). Analysis of High School English Curriculum Materials through Rasch Measurement Model and Maxqda. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4, 1325–1347. https://ajindex.com/articles/346046

References (15)

  1. Arıkan, A. (2008). Topics of reading passages in ELT coursebooks: What do our students really read? Reading Matrix, 8(2), 70-85.
  2. Arıkan, A. (2009). Problems with coursebooks in EFL classrooms: Prospective teachers' opinions. EKEV Academic Review, 38, 309-317.
  3. Arıkan, A., Saraç, S., Köse, N., Tekir, S., & Köse, Ö. (2011). English break A2 (Z. Brooks & E. Wolfson, Eds.). Ankara, Turkey: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık. Baştürk, R. (2010). Bilimsel araştırma ödevlerinin çok yüzeyli Rasch ölçme modeli ile değerlendirilmesi. Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi, 1(1), 51-57.
  4. Batdı, V. (2010). An assessment of teachers' opinions about the effectiveness of English coursebooks used in foreign language high schools (case of Elazig and Diyarbakir cities) (Master's thesis, University of Firat, Elazıg, Turkey). Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/
  5. Baydar Ertopcu, F., İnci, H., & Özbıçakcı Samur, S. (2014).
  6. Yes you can. Ankara, Turkey: MEB Komisyon. Baydar Ertopcu, F., İnci, H., Özbıçakcı Samur, S., & Yalçın, A. (2014).
  7. Yes you can. Ankara, Turkey: MEB Komisyon. Bektaş, M., & Tekir, S. Ç. (2014). English Break A1 (R. E. Grammer, Ed.). Ankara, Turkey: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. (2nd ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Inc. Publishers.
  8. Boone, W., & Scantlebury, K. (2006). The role of Rash analysis when conducting science education research utilizing multiple-choice tests. Science Education, 90, 253-269.
  9. Byrd, P. (1995).
  10. Materials writers guide. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Cunningsworth, A. (1995).
  12. Choosing your coursebook. Oxford, UK: Heinemann. D'Andrea, L., Waters, C., & Rudd, R. (2011). Using computer assisted qualitative software (CAQDAS) to evaluate a novel teaching method for introductory statistics. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 7(1), 48-60.
  13. Davey, L. (1991). The application of case study evaluations. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 2(9). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=2&n=9
  14. Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5, 194-197.
  15. Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. (1998)