SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitim ve Bilim / 2014 / Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 174

Constraints of Curriculum Implementation as Perceived by Turkish Biology Teacher *

Türk Biyoloji Öğretmenlerinin Eğitim Programı Uygulamasında Yaşadıkları Kısıtlılıklarla İlgili Algıları *

Ebru AKAR ÖZTÜRK
Pages
388–401
Publication Date
2022-11-03
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)

The study discusses the implications of the results concerning policy, practice and further research.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this cross-sectional descriptive study is to identify the constraints perceived by teachers in the implementation process of secondary school biology curriculum in Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Sample of the study consists of 128 biology teachers working in 119 public schools in 12 provinces of Turkey.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study discusses the implications of the results concerning policy, practice and further research.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of this cross-sectional descriptive study is to identify the constraints perceived by teachers in the implementation process of secondary school biology curriculum in Turkey. Sample of the study consists of 128 biology teachers working in 119 public schools in 12 provinces of Turkey. Data were collected through a survey questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and qualitative data analysis techniques were used to examine teachers' beliefs and to make additional inferences about the constraints they experience. The results highlighted lack of alignments between curriculum change, teacher development, assessment practices, availability of the resources and the intended curriculum. The study discusses the implications of the results concerning policy, practice and further research.

Özet

Bu çalışma biyoloji dersi eğitim programı uygulaması sürecinde öğretmenlerin karşılaştıkları sorunların belirlenmesi amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmanın örneklemini 12 ilde 119 genel lisede çalışmakta olan 128 biyoloji öğretmeni oluşturmaktadır. Veriler çözümlenmesinde betimleyici ve yordayıcı istatistikler ile nitel veri analizi yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Bulgular program değişikliği, öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişimi, değerlendirme uygulamaları, kaynakların mevcudiyeti ve hedeflenen program arasındaki uyumsuzluğa işaret etmektedir. Bulgular eğitim politika ve uygulamaları ile gelecekte yapılacak bilimsel araştırmalara ışık tutması amacıyla tartışılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZTÜRK, E. A. (2022). Constraints of Curriculum Implementation as Perceived by Turkish Biology Teacher *. Eğitim ve Bilim, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 174, 388–401. https://ajindex.com/articles/649950

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Akşit, N. (2007). Educational reform in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Research, 27(2), 129- 137. Altunoğlu, B. D., Atav, E. (2005). Daha etkili biyoloji öğretimi için öğretmen beklentileri. HU Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 28, 19-28.
  2. Anderson, R.D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: what research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12.
  3. Anderson, R.D., Helms, J.V. (2001). The ideal of standards and the reality of schools: needed research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 38(1), 3-16.
  4. Atav, E. (2005). A study about certain demographical characteristics of high school biology teachers' of Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research. 21, 49-61.
  5. Atav, E., Erdem, E., Yılmaz, A. ve Gücüm, B. (2004). The effect of developing analogies for meaningful learning of the subject of enzymes. HU Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 27, 21-29.
  6. Ayaş, A., Çepni, S., Akdeniz, A.R. (1993). Development of the Turkish secondary science curriculum. Science Education, 77(4), 433-440.
  7. Barab, S. A., Luehman, A. L. (2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education, 87(4), 454-467.
  8. Black, P., Atkin, M. (1996). Changing the subject. Innovations in science, mathematics and technology. London: Routledge. Boote, D. N. (2006). Teachers' professional discretion and the curricula. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 12(4), 461-478.
  9. Carter, L. (2005). Globalisation in science education: rethinking science education reforms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 561-580.
  10. Cross, M., Mungadi, R., Rouhani, S. (2002). From policy to practice: curriculum reform in South African education. Comparative Education. 38(2), 171-187.
  11. Datnow, A. (2002). Can we transplant educational reform, and does it last? Journal of Educational Change. 3, 215-239.
  12. Davis, K.S. (2003). Change is hard: What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education, 87(1), 3-30.
  13. Dello-Iacovo, B. (2008). Curriculum reform and 'Quality Education in China: an overview. International Journal of Educational Development. 29, 241-249.
  14. Eisner, E.W. (2000). Those who ignore the past.: 12 'easy' lessons fort he next millennium. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 32(2), 343-357.
  15. Ensari, S., Kete, R. (2010). Lise 1. Sınıf biyoloji derslerinde ders materyali kullanımına ait öğrenci tutumları. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 18(1), 131-146.
  16. Ernest, P. (1988). The impact