Buradasınız

SINIF ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN GÖZLEM GEZİLERİNE YÖNELİK TUTUM VE GÖRÜŞLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ

THE STUDY OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS’ ATTITUDE AND OPINION TOWARDS FIELD TRIPS

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The purpose of this study is finding out the attitude and opinion of the classroom teachers about applying the actual and virtual field trip. For this purpose, two hundred sixty- eight (268) classroom teachers have participated a survey and twenty- eight (28) teachers have participated an interview in Ankara. As a result,it is approved that all of the classroom teachers (268) have never applied a virtual field trip, twenty-eight of the classroom teachers have never applied an actual field trip and the classroom teachers have average attitude about field trip method and although this attitude has no significant difference with the gender of the teachers, seniority of them and the level of the classroom; it has significant difference according to the school type and number of the students in the class.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmanın amacı, sınıf öğretmenlerinin gerçek ve sanal gözlem gezisi yöntemini uygulamaya yönelik tutumlarını ve görüşlerini ortaya çıkartmaktır. Bu amaçla Ankara ilinde 268 sınıf öğretmenine anket uygulanmış ve 28 sınıf öğretmeniyle görüşme yapılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, sınıf öğretmenlerinin tamamının sanal gözlem gezisini hiç uygulamadıkları, 28’ inin gerçek gözlem gezisini hiç uygulamadıkları, sınıf öğretmenlerinin gözlem gezisi yöntemine yönelik tutumlarının orta düzeyde olduğu ortaya çıkmış ve bu tutumların genel olarak öğretmen cinsiyetiyle, kıdem durumuyla ve sınıf düzeyiyle anlamlı bir ilişkisi yokken okul türüne ve sınıf mevcuduna göre anlamlı farklılıkların söz konusu olduğu görülmüştür
467-478

REFERENCES

References: 

Karasar, Ş. (1999). İnternet Ortamında Eğitim1. . Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi. (18), 145-168.
Duman, A. (1998). İnternet, Öğrenme ve Eğitim üzerine Bir Deneme2. . http://inettr97.metu.edu.tr/bildiriler/deneme.htm
Özden, Y. (1999). 3. Öğrenme ve Öğretme. Ankara: Pegem A Yayınları.
Schellhammer, F. (1935). The Field Trip in Biology. 4. School Science and Mathematics. 35: 170-173.
Evans, H. G. (1958). 5. An Experiment in the Development and Use of Educational Field Trips. The University of Tennessee.Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
Kuhnen, S. M. (1959). 6. The Effectiveness of Field Trips in the Teaching of General Botany. New York University.Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Benz, G. (1962). An Experimental Evaluation of Field Trips for Achieving Informational 7. Gains in a Unit on Earth Science. Science Education 46: 43-49.
Hosley, E. W. (1974). 8. A Comparison of Two Methods of Instruction in Environmental Education. University of Maryland, Ph.D. dissertation. ED 106 098.
DeLuca, Frederick P., Luther L. Kiser & Kenneth F. Frazer. (1978). 9. Environmental Education and the Interrelationships Among Attitudes, Knowledge, Achievement, and Piagetian Levels. In Current Issues in Environmental Education IV, Edited by Arthur B. Sacks and others. ED 167 407.
Gennaro, E. D. (1981). The Effectiveness of Using Previsit Instructional Materials on 10. Learning for a Museum Field Trip Experience. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 18: 275-281.
Lockett, D. W. (1982). 11. The Relationship of Classificatory Behavior in Fourth Grade Students to Performance in a Science Education Program at a Museum. Washington, DC: Creative Associates, Inc. A paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY, ED 236 871.
Stronck, D. R. (1983). The Comparative Effects of Different Museum Tours on Children’s 12. Attitudes and Learning. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching 20: 283-290.
Churukian, G. A. (1993). The Policies and Models of Teacher Training in the Council of 13. European Countries, SV. Paris.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com