KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Journal of Interdisciplinary Education: Theory and Practice / 2026 / Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1

Middle School Students’ Views on Common Heritage

Cemil Cahit Yeşibursa(GAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-8568-6061
Esra Üçarkuş(Gazı University)0000-0001-6786-4805
Sayfa
20–31
Yayın Tarihi
2021-06-01
🏛️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)

When students’ recognition level of the pictures of common heritage elements evaluated, it was seen that the least known common heritage element is Divriği Ulu Mosque, and the most known common heritage elements are Leaning Tower of Pisa and Statue of Liberty.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In this study 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grade middle school students’ views on common heritage was examined.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Within this scope, there are 127 5th grades, 59 6th grades, 59 7th grades and 85 8th grades, in total 330 middle school students in the study group.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:When students’ recognition level of the pictures of common heritage elements evaluated, it was seen that the least known common heritage element is Divriği Ulu Mosque, and the most known common heritage elements are Leaning Tower of Pisa and Statue of Liberty.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Social studies · Common heritage · students’ viewes

Abstract

In this study 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th grade middle school students’ views on common heritage was examined. This study was conducted in descriptive survey design. As generalization was not aimed one of the purposive sampling methods, convenient sampling was used. Within this scope, there are 127 5th grades, 59 6th grades, 59 7th grades and 85 8th grades, in total 330 middle school students in the study group. Data was collected in written by a data collection tool that consisted of open ended questions about their opinions and information questions with pictures of common heritage. Descriptive statistics what is used for data analysis. Besides, simple frequency and percentage calculations used to digitalize qualitative findings. According to the results obtained in the study, students’ common heritage descriptions and literal descriptions show similarity. Students described the importance of the protection of the common heritage as cultural, historical and universal values, to hand down to the next generations, contribution to tourism and development social relations. The students described common heritage’s contribution to humanity as tourism, economy, social relations, knowledge acquisition and cultural. The students stated that the factors that cause common heritage to extend are human, reckless behaviours of people, environmental pollution, wars, and urban architecture planning. They stated that the precautions that must be taken are security, awareness raising activities, legal protection and non-governmental organizations. Students specified individual precautions as security and non-governmental organizations. When students’ recognition level of the pictures of common heritage elements evaluated, it was seen that the least known common heritage element is Divriği Ulu Mosque, and the most known common heritage elements are Leaning Tower of Pisa and Statue of Liberty.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Yeşibursa, C. C., Üçarkuş, E. (2021). Middle School Students’ Views on Common Heritage. Journal of Interdisciplinary Education: Theory and Practice, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1, 20–31. https://doi.org/10.47157/jietp.866835

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (23)

  1. Ahunbay, Z. (2007). Tarihi çevre koruma ve restorasyon. (4. bs). İstanbul: Yapı.
  2. Akpınar, E. (2007). Place of Turkey in the world heritage list and a new candidate proposal. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 9(1), 81-106. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/erziefd/issue/6006/80082
  3. Ashworth, G. J. (1994). From history to heritage – from heritage to identity: Insearch of concepts and models. In G.J. Ashworth and P.J. Larkham (Eds.), Building a new heritage: Tourism, culture and identity in the new Europe (pp. 13-30). New York: Routledge.
  4. Aslan, Z. & Ardemagni, M. (2006). Introducing young people to the protection of heritage sites and historic cities, (2nd Ed.). UNESCO ICCROM. Erişim adresi: https://www.iccrom.org/sites/default/files/ICCROM_09_ManualSchoolTeachers_en.pdf
  5. Avcı, M., & Memişoğlu, H. (2016). Views of social studies teachers about the cultural heritage education. Elementary Education Online, 15(1), 104-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.17051/io.2016.42123
  6. Erder, C. (1999). Tarihi çevre kaygısı. Ankara: ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Yayınları.
  7. Göğebakan, Y. (2009). The reflection of two ideas according to the income distribution in the world; culture existence is the common heritage of the humanity culture existence belongs to a nation Journal of Art and Human, 1(2), 22-30. Erişim adresi: http://sanatveinsan.com/yil-2009-cilt-1-sayi-2/
  8. Güner, S. (2009). Savaşlar ve kültürel miras: Kültürel miras; savaşların silahlı çatışmaların masum kurbanları olmaya devam ediyor. II. Uluslararası strateji ve güvenlik çalışmaları sempozyumu. İstanbul: Beykent Üniversitesi. Erişim adresi: https://kumid.net/storage/UNwI9pucX1yVD7Kc5jtffAPdMmVvVid.pdf
  9. Gürdoğan Bayır, Ö., & Çengelci Köse, T. (2019). Secondary school students’ views about cultural heritage and preserving cultural heritage. Kastamonu Education Journal, 27(4), 1827-1840. doi: 10.24106/kefdergi.3393
  10. Işık, E., & Semerci, Ç. (2019). Focus group interviews, individual interviews and observations as data triangulation in qualitative studies in education. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies, 6(3), 53-66. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/837751
  11. Karpuz, H. (1990). Eski eser ve anıtların korunmasında halkın eğitimi. Ankara University the Journal of the Faculty of Languages and History-Geography, 34 (1.2), 405-408. Erişim adresi: http://dtcfdergisi.ankara.edu.tr/index.php/dtcf/article/view/3382/2944
  12. Kemper, E., Stringfield. S., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Mixed methods sampling strategies in social science research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 273-296). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  13. Kiper, H. P. (2004). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Kentlerin Tarihsel-Kültürel Değerinin Korunması-Türkiye-Bodrum Örneği (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  14. Madran, E., & Özgönül, N. (2005). Kültürel ve doğal değerlerin korunması. Ankara: TMMOB Mimarlar Odası.
  15. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education evidence-based inquiry. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Inc.
  16. Ministiry of National Education [MoNE] Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2005). İlköğretim Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretim Programı (4-5. Sınıflar). Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
  17. Ministiry of National Education [MoNE] Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2005). İlköğretim Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretim Programı (6-7. Sınıflar). Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
  18. Pearson, M., & Sullivan, S. (1995). Looking after heritage places: The basic of heritage planning for managers, landowners and administrators. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
  19. Sey, Y. (2003). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma / tarihi kültürel mirasın korunması. Çevre ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma tematik paneli, vizyon 2023: bilim ve teknoloji stratejileri teknoloji öngörü projesi. Erişim adresi: https://tubitak.gov.tr/tubitak_content_files/vizyon2023/csk/CSK_son_surum.pdf
  20. Şakacı, B. K. (2015). Natural and cultural heritage’s vital problem: Outstanding universal value (UNESCO World Heritage List, Cankiri Karatekin University Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, 6(1): 455-472. Erişim adresi: 472. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jiss/issue/25890/272815
  21. Uçar, M. (2014). The effectiveness of cultural property and conservation learning in elementary education and evaluation of the contribution of non-governmental organizations. MEGARON, 9(2), 85-102. doi: 10.5505/MEGARON.2014.02996
  22. Yeşilbursa, C. C. (2011). Sosyal bilgilerde miras eğitiminin öğrencilerin somut kültürel mirasa karşı tutumlarına ve akademik başarılarına etkisi (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  23. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin.