SavedAdd your journal

Journals / IOJET / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3

STRUCTURING PROCESS AND EVALUATION OF GROUP WORK BY PROSPECTIVE PRE-SCHOOL TEACHERS

Sema ONGOREN
Tuba ACAR ERDOL
Journal
IOJET
Pages
722–742
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)

As to assessment of the performance within the group, it was determinedthat the group members found themselves competent and that the majority could prefer groupwork in future studies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, it was aimed to examine the prospective teachers' preferences regarding groupwork, the process of structuring the group work, and assessment of their performance withinthe group.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participants of the study consistedof 62 prospective teachers studying in the Department of Early Childhood Education at a stateuniversity in 2017-2018 Spring Term.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As to assessment of the performance within the group, it was determinedthat the group members found themselves competent and that the majority could prefer groupwork in future studies.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2017-2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to examine the prospective teachers' preferences regarding groupwork, the process of structuring the group work, and assessment of their performance withinthe group. In the research, case study design was used. The participants of the study consistedof 62 prospective teachers studying in the Department of Early Childhood Education at a stateuniversity in 2017-2018 Spring Term. The data of the study were collected with the "GroupWork Questionnaire". While frequency analysis of descriptive statistics was used in theanalysis of the quantitative data obtained from the questionnaire, descriptive analysis was usedin the analysis of the qualitative data. As a result of the research, it was seen that the internalreasons were determinant in deciding the groupmate and tasks were shared by taking equaldistribution of responsibilities and skills of the members into consideration. During the groupwork, problems such as time management, disagreements among members and social loafingwere encountered. As to assessment of the performance within the group, it was determinedthat the group members found themselves competent and that the majority could prefer groupwork in future studies.

🔖

Cite This Article

ONGOREN, S., ERDOL, T. A. (2022). STRUCTURING PROCESS AND EVALUATION OF GROUP WORK BY PROSPECTIVE PRE-SCHOOL TEACHERS. IOJET, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3, 722–742. https://ajindex.com/articles/542223

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Adams, D. M., & Hamm, M. (1994). New designs for teaching and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Akgün, A., & Aydın, M. (2009). Erime ve çözünme konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının ve bilgi eksikliklerinin giderilmesinde yapılandırmacı öğrenme yaklaşımına dayalı grup çalışmalarının kullanılması. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(27), 190-201.
  2. Arslan, S., Taşkın, D., & Kirman-Bilgin, A. (2015). Adidaktik öğrenme ortamlarında bireysel ve grup çalışması uygulamalarının öğrenci başarısına etkisi. Türk Bilgisayar ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 6(1), 47-67.
  3. Baker, D. F. (2008). Peer assessment in small groups: A comparison of methods. Journal of Management Education, 32(2), 183-209.
  4. Brooks, C. M. & Ammons, J. L. (2003) Free riding in group projects and the effects of timing, frequency,and specificity of criteria in peer assessments. Journal of Education for Business, 78(5), 268–272.
  5. Butt, A. (2018). Quantification of influences on student perceptions of group work. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 15(5), 1-15.
  6. Büyükgöze, H., & Demirkasımoğlu, N. (2018). Üniversite öğrencilerinin grup çalışmalarında sosyal kaytarma davranışlarına ilişkin görüşleri: Nedenler ve olası çözümler. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 8(2), 172–187.
  7. Cartney, P. & Rouse, A. (2006). The emotional impact of learning in small groups: highlighting the impact on student progression and retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(1), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510500400180.
  8. Chang, Y., & Brickman, P. (2018). When group work doesn’t work: Insights from students. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(52), 1-17.
  9. Chapman, K. J. & Van Auken, S. (2001) Creating positive group project experiences: An examination of the role of the instructor on students’ perceptions of group projects. Journal of Marketing Education, 23(2), 117–127.
  10. Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M., Toy, D., & Wright, L. (2006). Can’t we pick our own groups? The influence of group selection method on group dynamics and outcomes. Journal of Management Education, 30(4), 557-569.
  11. Cheng, W. & Warren, M. (2000) Making a difference: Using peers to assess individual students’ contributions to a group project. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(2), 243– 255. Chidambaram, L., & Tung, L. L. (2005). Is out of sight, out of mind? An empirical study of social loafing in technology-supported groups. Information Systems Research, 16(2), 149-168.
  12. Chiriac, E. H., & Granström, K. (2012) Teachers’ leadership and students’ experience of group work