KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Yükseköğretim Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2

Öğrenmede Farkındalık: Yükseköğrenimde Bulmacaların Bir Öz-Düzenleme Yöntemi Olarak Kullanılması

Learning Awareness: Using Puzzles as a Self-Regulation Method in Higher Education

Müge Yurtsever Kılıçgün(Erzincan Binali Yıldırım Üniversitesi)0000-0002-4035-6875
Sayfa
165–187
Yayın Tarihi
2026-08-31
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bulgular: Araştırma bulguları genel olarak ele alındığında, yükseköğretim öğrencilerinin ders başarı durumlarının arttırılmasında bulmaca uygulamalarına yer verilmesinin etkili olduğuna ve öğrenme süreçlerinde farkındalık sağladığına dair anlamlı kanıtlara ulaşılmıştır.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Amaç: Bu araştırmada yükseköğretim düzeyinde öğrencilerin kendi öğrenme süreçlerine ilişkin farkındalıklarını artırmada etkili bir araç olarak bulmacaları kullanmaları amaçlanmıştır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Bu amaç doğrultusunda öğretim faaliyetleri içerisine bulmacalar dahil edilmiş, bulmacaların öğrencilerin ders başarısı üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiş ve öğrencilerin deneyimledikleri bulmaca faaliyetlerinin kendi öğrenme deneyimlerindeki etkisine ilişkin farkındalık durumları betimlenmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bulgular: Araştırma bulguları genel olarak ele alındığında, yükseköğretim öğrencilerinin ders başarı durumlarının arttırılmasında bulmaca uygulamalarına yer verilmesinin etkili olduğuna ve öğrenme süreçlerinde farkındalık sağladığına dair anlamlı kanıtlara ulaşılmıştır.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Bulmaca · Okul Öncesi Öğretmen Adayları · Öğrenme

Özet

Amaç: Bu araştırmada yükseköğretim düzeyinde öğrencilerin kendi öğrenme süreçlerine ilişkin farkındalıklarını artırmada etkili bir araç olarak bulmacaları kullanmaları amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda öğretim faaliyetleri içerisine bulmacalar dahil edilmiş, bulmacaların öğrencilerin ders başarısı üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiş ve öğrencilerin deneyimledikleri bulmaca faaliyetlerinin kendi öğrenme deneyimlerindeki etkisine ilişkin farkındalık durumları betimlenmiştir. Yöntem: Araştırmanın çalışma grubunda 55 okul öncesi öğretmenliği lisans programı öğrencisi yer almıştır. Karma yöntem yapısında tasarlanan araştırma sürecinde; açıklayıcı sıralı desen yapısı tercih edilmiştir. Araştırma verileri, Bulmaca İlgi Anketi, Öğrenme Farkındalık Anketi, bulmaca uygulamaları ile ara ve yarıyıl sonu sınav sonuçlarından elde edilmiştir. Durum ve tek grup son test yöntemlerinin birlikte kullanıldığı araştırma sürecinde nitel ve nicel veriler birlikte toplanmış, ayrı ayrı analiz edilmiş ve her iki veri setinin analiz sonuçlarının birbirleriyle uyumlu olup olmadığına bakılarak yorumlamalar gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular: Araştırma bulguları genel olarak ele alındığında, yükseköğretim öğrencilerinin ders başarı durumlarının arttırılmasında bulmaca uygulamalarına yer verilmesinin etkili olduğuna ve öğrenme süreçlerinde farkındalık sağladığına dair anlamlı kanıtlara ulaşılmıştır. Sonuç ve Öneriler: Öğretim tasarımında bulmacaların sistematik olarak kullanılmasının, öğrencilerin öğrenmelerini planlama, uygulama ve değerlendirme kapasitelerini geliştirmede önemli bir katkı sağlayabileceği düşünülmektedir. Ayrıca araştırmanın kurgulanmasında öz-düzenleme ve bulmaca mekanizmasındaki benzerliğe dikkat çekilmesinin de alan literatürüne katkı sağlayacak bir diğer unsur olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Araştırmanın sınırlılığı olarak değerlendirilebilecek ama gelecekteki araştırmalara ilham olabilmek amacıyla; (1) Farklı bireysel, çevresel ve öğrenme-öğretim bağlamlarına sahip öğrencilerin bulmaca aktivitelerine verdikleri tepkiler ile akademik başarı ve öz-düzenleme becerileri üzerindeki etkilerinin karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmesi ve (2) Öğrencilerin bulmaca deneyimlerinin akademik başarı ve öz-düzenleme becerilerindeki etkisinin incelenmesinde farklı araştırma tasarımı yaklaşımlarına yer verilmesi önerilmektedir.

Abstract

Objective: This research aims to examine the use of puzzles as an effective tool for increasing students’ awareness of their own learning processes at the higher education level. To this end, puzzles were integrated into teaching activities, the effect of puzzles on students’ academic achievement was examined, and students’ awareness of the impact of their puzzle-related activities on their learning experiences was described. Method: The study group consisted of 55 undergraduate students in preschool teacher training. In the research process, which was designed using a mixed methods approach, an explanatory sequential design structure was preferred. Data were collected from the Puzzle Interest Questionnaire, the Learning Awareness Questionnaire, puzzle applications, and midterm and final exam results. Using both case and single-group post-test methods, qualitative and quantitative data were collected together, analyzed separately, and interpretations were made by examining whether the analysis results of both data sets were consistent with each other. Results: Overall, the research findings indicate that the integration of puzzle-based activities is effective in enhancing higher education students’ academic achievement and increasing their awareness of their learning processes. Conclusion and Recommendations: It is believed that the systematic use of puzzles in instructional design can significantly contribute to improving students’ capabilities to plan, implement, and evaluate their learning processes. Furthermore, highlighting the similarity between self-regulation and puzzle mechanisms in the research design is considered another element that will contribute to the literature in the field. As a limitation of the research, but in order to inspire future research, it is recommended that (1) the responses of students with different individual, environmental and learning-teaching contexts to puzzle activities and their effects on academic achievement and self-regulation skills be examined comparatively and (2) different research design approaches be included in examining the effect of students’ puzzle experiences on academic achievement and self-regulation skills.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Kılıçgün, M. Y. (2026). Öğrenmede Farkındalık: Yükseköğrenimde Bulmacaların Bir Öz-Düzenleme Yöntemi Olarak Kullanılması. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2, 165–187. https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1603740

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (68)

  1. Abuelo, A., Castillo, C., & May, S. A. (2016). Usefulness of crossword puzzles in helping first-year bvsc students learn veterinary terminology. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 43(3), 255-262. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.0915-149R
  2. Agarwal, A., & Rao, S. (2017). Creative pathology teaching with word puzzles until students learn: A study in a medical university. Asian Journal of Research in Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2(3), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJRIMPS/2017/38416
  3. Agarwal, H. K., Singhal, A., & Yadav, A. K. (2020). Crossword puzzle: An innovative assessment tool to improve learning of students in forensic medicine. Medico Legal Update, 20(1), 18-22. https://doi.org/10.37506/v20/i1/2020/mlu/194286
  4. Almond, N. M., & Morrison, C. M. (2015). The art of self-testing by attempting cryptic crosswords in later life: The effect of cryptic crosswords on memory self-efficacy, metacognition and memory functioning. Healthy Aging Research, 4(3), 1-16. http://hdl.handle.net/10454/13163
  5. Anderson, L. W. (2005). Objectives, evaluation, and the improvement of education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(2-3), 102-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.05.004
  6. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Ed.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
  7. Artelt, C., Baumert, J., Julius-McElvany, N., & Peschar, J. (2003). Learners for life: Student approaches to learning: results from PISA 2000. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264103917-en
  8. Aydemir, E. (2012). Çevrimiçi bulmaca kullanımının öğrencilerin akademik başarısına ve öğrenmenin kalıcılığına etkisi [Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi]. Fırat Üniversitesi.
  9. Ayre, C., & Scally, A. J. (2014). Critical values for Lawshe’s content validity ratio: Revisiting the original methods of calculation. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 47(1), 79-86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175613513808
  10. Bawazeer, G., Sales, I., Albogami, H., Aldemerdash, A., Mahmoud, M., Aljohani, M. A., & Alhammad, A. (2022). Crossword puzzle as a learning tool to enhance learning about anticoagulant therapeutics. BMC Medical Education, 22(1), 267. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03348-0
  11. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7(2), 161-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00015-1
  12. Bordeos, M. L., Mangana, G. R., Lamadrid, J. B., & Ligan, J. E. (2023). Students’ perceptions of crossword puzzles to enhance learning in social studies 10. American Journal of Education and Technology, 2(3), 147-153. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajet.v2i3.1920
  13. Bordovskaia, N. V., & Koshkina, E. A. (2016). Structural-functional model of terminological competence of the professionals. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Psychology, 6(4), 97-109. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2016.408
  14. Brenner, C. A. (2022). Self-regulated learning, self-determination theory and teacher candidates’ development of competency-based teaching practices. Smart Learning Environments, 9(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-021-00184-5
  15. Cardozo, L. T., Miranda, A. S., Moura, M. J., & Marcondes, F. K. (2016). Effect of a puzzle on the process of students’ learning about cardiac physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(3), 425-431. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00043.2016
  16. Childers, C. D. (1996). Using crossword puzzles as an aid to studying sociological concepts. Teaching Sociology, 24(2), 231-235. https://doi.org/10.2307/1318816
  17. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, W. L. (2020). Karma yöntem araştırmaları, tasarımı ve yürütülmesi (Y. Dede & S. B. Demir, Çev. Ed.; 4. baskı). Anı Yayıncılık.
  18. de la Fuente, J., Sander, P., Kauffman, D. F., & Yilmaz Soylu, M. (2020). Differential effects of self-vs. external-regulation on learning approaches, academic achievement, and satisfaction in undergraduate students. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 543884. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.543884
  19. Efklides, A. (2011). Interactions of metacognition with motivation and affect in self-regulated learning: The MASRL model. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 6-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538645
  20. Faber, P. (2003). Terminological competence and enhanced knowledge acquisition. Research in Language, 1, 95-117
  21. Falkner, N., Sooriamurthi, R., & Michalewicz, Z. (2012). Teaching puzzle-based learning: Development of basic concepts. Teaching Mathematics and Computer Science, 10(1), 183-204. https://doi.org/10.5485/TMCS.2012.0303
  22. Fontes, M. M., Morgado, L. C., Pestana, P., Pedrosa, D., & Cravino, J. P. (2024). Viewing puzzles as two-faced: Theoretical and practical implications for Puzzle-based Learning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 52, 101470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101470
  23. Franklin, S., Peat, M., & Lewis, A. (2003). Non-traditional interventions to stimulate discussion: The use of games and puzzles. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 79-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2003.9655856
  24. Gaikwad, N., & Tankhiwale, S. (2012). Crossword puzzles: Self-learning tool in pharmacology. Perspectives on Medical Education, 1, 237-248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-012-0033-0
  25. Griffin, P., & Care, E. (2015). The ATC21S method. P. Griffin & E. Care (Ed.), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills: Methods and Approach (s. 3-33) içinde. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9395-7_1
  26. Haun, M. W. (1985). Parliamentary puzzles as a teaching methodology. Parliamentary Journal, 26(3), 95-99.
  27. Korthagen, F. A. J. (2010). How teacher education can make a difference. Journal of Education for Teaching, 36(4), 407-423. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2010.513854
  28. Kurtz, B. E., & Weinert, F. E. (1989). Metamemory, memory performance, and causal attributions in gifted and average children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48(1), 45-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(89)90040-4
  29. Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
  30. Lottering, R., Hans, R., & Lall, M. (2018). The impact of crossword puzzles on students’ performance: Does pre-exposure to puzzles matter? 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (s. 545–550) içinde. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2018.8615414
  31. Martínez-Serna, M. I., & Parra-Azor, J. F. (2011). Active learning: Creating interactive crossword puzzles. Congreso Internacional de Innovación Docente (CIID 2011) (s. 1731–1738) içinde. Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena. https://repositorio.upct.es/server/api/core/bitstreams/774eac0b-3696-4d14-b2ac-75d301494d94/content
  32. Mohan, B. S., Nambiar, V., Gowda, S., & Arvindakshan, R. (2018). Crossword puzzle: A tool for enhancing medical students’ learning in microbiology and immunology. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 6(3), 756-759. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20180591
  33. Mshayisa, V. V. (2020). Students’ perceptions of Plickers and crossword puzzles in undergraduate studies. Journal of Food Science Education, 19(2), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4329.12179
  34. Murphy, M., & Cunningham, R. K. (2012). A crossword a day improves verbal fluency: A report of an intervention study. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 33(4), 193-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/03033910.2012.714709
  35. Murphy, M., Spillane, K., Cully, J., Navarro-Pardo, E., & Moret-Tatay, C. (2016). Can word puzzles be tailored to improve different dimensions of verbal fluency? A report of an intervention study. The Journal of Psychology, 150(6), 743-754. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2016.1182887
  36. OECD. (2005). Problem Solving for Tomorrow’s World: First Measures of Cross-Curricular Competencies from PISA 2003 (PISA). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264006430-en
  37. OECD. (2013). Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment (OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190658-en
  38. OECD (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume II): Policies and Practices for Successful Schools. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264267510-en
  39. OECD (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Education Policy Perspectives. No. 98, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/54ac7020-en
  40. OECD (2021). Embedding Values and Attitudes in Curriculum: Shaping a Better Future. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/aee2adcd-en
  41. OECD (2023). Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en
  42. OECD (2024). Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en
  43. Pachón-Basallo, M., de la Fuente, J., González-Torres, M. C., Martínez-Vicente, J. M., Peralta-Sánchez, F. J., & Vera-Martínez, M. M. (2022). Effects of factors of self-regulation vs. factors of external regulation of learning in self-regulated study. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 968733. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.968733
  44. Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 422. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
  45. Paris, S. G., & Byrnes, J. P. (1989). The constructivist approach to self-regulation and learning in the classroom. B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Ed.), Self-Regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theory, Research, and Practice (s. 169-200) içinde. Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3618-4_7
  46. Patrick, S., Vishwakarma, K., Giri, V. P., Datta, D., Kumawat, P., Singh, P., & Matreja, P. S. (2018). The usefulness of crossword puzzle as a self-learning tool in pharmacology. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, 6(4), 181-185.
  47. Pellegrino, J. (2017). Teaching, learning and assessing 21st century skills. S. Guerriero (Ed.), Pedagogical Knowledge and the Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession (s. 223-251) içinde. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270695-12-en
  48. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Chapter 14 - The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Ed.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (s, 451-502) içinde. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50043-3
  49. Puspita, N., & Sabiqoh, N. (2017). Teaching vocabulary by using crossword puzzle. English Education: Journal Tadris Bahasa Inggris, 10(2), 308-325. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/177939-EN-teaching-vocabulary-by-using-crossword-p.pdf
  50. Raffaelli, M., Crockett, L. J., & Shen, Y. L. (2005). Developmental stability and change in self-regulation from childhood to adolescence. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 166(1), 54-76. https://doi.org/10.3200/GNTP.166.1.54-76
  51. Raines, D. A. (2010). An innovation to facilitate student engagement and learning: Crossword puzzles in the classroom. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 5(2), 85-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2008.08.003
  52. Saxena, A., Nesbitt, R., Pahwa, P., & Mills, S. (2009). Crossword puzzles: active learning in undergraduate pathology and medical education. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 133(9), 1457-1462. https://doi.org/10.5858/133.9.1457
  53. Stanciu, I.-D., & Bal, C. (2015). Utilizing crossword creation software to deepen learning in undergraduate students. Conference proceedings of eLearning and Software for Education (eLSE) (s. 487–494) içinde. Carol I National Defence University Publishing House. https://doi.org/10.12753/2066-026X-15-218
  54. Stetzik, L., Deeter, A., Parker, J., & Yukech, C. (2015). Puzzle-based versus traditional lecture: Comparing the effects of pedagogy on academic performance in an undergraduate human anatomy and physiology II lab. BMC Medical Education, 15, 107. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0390-6
  55. Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.019.
  56. Torre, D., & Daley, B. J. (2023). Cyclical phases and processes of self-regulated learning. Medical Teacher, 45(5), 464–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2023.2186342
  57. Torres, E. R., Williams, P. R., Kassahun-Yimer, W., & Gordy, X. Z. (2022). Crossword puzzles and knowledge retention. Journal of Effective Teaching in Higher Education, 5(1), 18-29. https://doi.org/10.36021/jethe.v5i1.244
  58. Urgo, K., Arguello, J., & Capra, R. (2019). Anderson and Krathwohl’s two-dimensional taxonomy applied to task creation and learning assessment. Y. Fang & Y. Zhang (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGIR International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval the (ICTIR ‘19) (s. 117-124) içinde. Association for Computing Machinery https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3341981.3344226
  59. Verpoorten, D., Westera, W., & Specht, M. (2012). Using reflection triggers while learning in an online course: Using reflection triggers while learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43, 1030-1040. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01257.x
  60. Vosniadou, S. (2020). Bridging secondary and higher education. The importance of self-regulated learning. European Review, 28(S1), 94-103. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798720000939
  61. Weinert, F. E., Schrader, F. W., & Helmke, A. (1989). Quality of instruction and achievement outcomes. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(8), 895-914. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90072-4
  62. Whisenand, T. G., & Dunphy, S. M. (2010). Accelerating student learning of technology terms: The crossword puzzle exercise. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(2), 141-148. https://aisel.aisnet.org/jise/vol21/iss2/1
  63. Winne, P. H. (2011). A cognitive and metacognitive analysis of self-regulated learning. B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Ed.), Handbook of Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance (s. 15-32) içinde. Routledge.
  64. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Ed.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (s. 531-566) içinde. Academic Press.
  65. Zimmerman, B. J. (1999). Discussion (Chapter 8, Commentary: Towar a cyclically interactive view of self-regulated learning). International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 545–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00021-X
  66. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
  67. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Comparing students’ self-discipline and self-regulation measures and their prediction of academic achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(2), 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.03.004
  68. Zumbrunn, S., Tadlock, J., & Roberts, E. D. (2011). Encouraging self-regulated learning in the classroom: A review of the literature. Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium, Virginia Commonwealth University. https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/merc_pubs/18/