Journals / Eurasian Journal of Educational Research / 2018 / Cilt: 78 - Sayı: 78

Teacher Views on the Applicability of Mastery Learning Model in Teaching Learning Process

Pages
203–218
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

Besides, this study demonstrates that bothinterdisciplinary and interinstitutional cooperations, trainings and support activities shouldbe carried out in order to eliminate the negativities in teachers’ perceptions towards students’learning levels and in their self-efficacy levels about their teaching skills.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose of the study: The purpose of thesudy wasto determine teacher views onteaching and learning in terms of the aspectsof mastery learning method.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consistedof 15 volunteer teachers who worked in various educational stages in 2016-2017 academic yearin Duzce province.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Besides, this study demonstrates that bothinterdisciplinary and interinstitutional cooperations, trainings and support activities shouldbe carried out in order to eliminate the negativities in teachers’ perceptions towards students’learning levels and in their self-efficacy levels about their teaching skills.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016-2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Purpose of the study: The purpose of thesudy wasto determine teacher views onteaching and learning in terms of the aspectsof mastery learning method. To this aim, thefollowing questions were examined: Doteachers believe that all students can learn allthe course subjects, why? Do teachers believethat they can teach all the subjects of a course,why? Method: In the research,phenomenology (phenomenological method)was used as a qualitative research method.The phenomena investigated in the study wasthe views of teachers on whether they couldteach mastery and whetherstudents couldlearn mastery. Interview method was used in data collection, and the data were analyzed using content analysis techniques. Purposefulsampling method was carried out in determining the study group. The study group consistedof 15 volunteer teachers who worked in various educational stages in 2016-2017 academic yearin Duzce province. Findings and results: Expectation perceptions of participant teacherstowards teaching all subjects and students’ learning levels were frequently low due to theirown beliefs, environmental conditions, school facilities, and individual differences amongstudents. Conclusions and recommendations: The results of the current study are worrisomein terms of qualified and effective school principles. Besides, this study demonstrates that bothinterdisciplinary and interinstitutional cooperations, trainings and support activities shouldbe carried out in order to eliminate the negativities in teachers’ perceptions towards students’learning levels and in their self-efficacy levels about their teaching skills.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖKSOY, S. (2022). Teacher Views on the Applicability of Mastery Learning Model in Teaching Learning Process. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, Cilt: 78 - Sayı: 78, 203–218. https://ajindex.com/articles/507162

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (23)

  1. Balci, A. (2001). Etkili okul ve okul geliştirme [effective school and school development]. Pegem Yayınları,
  2. Ankara.
  3. Bloom, B. S. (1995). Human characteristics and school learning (insan nitelikleri ve okulda öğretim). D.A. Özçelik (Translate). İstanbul: MEB Öğretmen Kitapları Dizisi. Borich, D. G. (2014). Effective teaching methods (etkili öğretim yöntemleri). B. Acat (Çev. Ed.). (8.baskı). Ankara:
  4. Nobel Yayınları.
  5. Duncan, A. (2009).
  6. Education secretary, Arne Duncan: The importance of board and mayor partnerships. American School Board Journal, 30-31.
  7. Edmonds, R. E. (1986). Programs of school improvement. Educational Leadership, 4-11,
  8. Erlbaum. Fidan, N. (1985). Okulda öğrenme ve öğretim [learning and teaching in school]. Ankara:
  9. Kadıoğlu Matbaası. Hill, P. (2000). Good schools for big-city children. Research Paper. Washington: Brookings Institution. Holt, R., & Sanderg, J. (2013). Fenomenoloji ve örgüt teorisi. In I. Anıl (Translate Eds.). Felsefe ve örgüt teorisi (1. Baskı) (pp. 215-251). Ankara:
  10. Nobel Yayınları.
  11. Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C.G. (2012). Educational administration (eğitim yönetimi). S. Turan (Translate Eds.). Ankara:
  12. Nobel Yayıncılık. Karasar, N. (2011). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi –kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler [scientific research method – concepts, principles, techniques]. (22. Baskı). Ankara:
  13. Nobel Yayınevi.
  14. Lunenburg, F. C. (1992).The urban superintendent’s role in school reform. Education and Urban Society, 37-38.
  15. Lunenburg, F. C., & Ornstein, A, C (2013). Educational administration (eğitim yönetimi). G. Arastaman (Translate Eds.). Ankara:
  16. Nobel Yayıncılık. Patton, M., Q. (2004). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (nitel araştırma ve değerlendirme yöntemleri). M. Bütün & S. Beşir Demir (Translate Eds.). Ankara Pegem Akademi. Robbins S, P., & Judge, T.A. (2012). Organizational behavior (örgütsel davranış). I. Erdem (Translate Eds.). Ankara:
  17. Nobel Yayıncılık. Robbins, S. P., Decenzo, D. A., & Coulter, M. (2013). Fundamentals of management (yönetimin esasları). A. Öğüt (Translate Eds.). Ankara:
  18. Nobel Yayınları.
  19. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Schlechty, P. C. (2005). Shaking up the school house [okulu yeniden kurmak]. Y. Özden (Translate). Ankara:
  20. Nobel Yayınları.
  21. Schunk, D. H. (2014). Learning theories [öğrenme teorileri]. M. Şahin (Translate Eds.). Ankara:
  22. Nobel Yayınları.
  23. Senemoğlu, N. (1997). Gelişim öğrenme ve öğretim: kuramdan uygulamaya [developmental lear