Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Öz, Akran, Grup ve Öğretim Üyesi Değerlendirmesi: Öğretmen Yeterlikleri Penceresinden Bir Bakış

Year 2021, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 949 - 973, 26.09.2021

İlknur Özpınar

https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.754885
Cited By: 1

Abstract

Bu araştırmada, mikroöğretim ile öz, akran, grup ve öğretim üyesi değerlendirme uygulamalarının ilköğretim matematik öğretmen adaylarının mesleki yeterlik ve yeterlik inançlarının üzerindeki etkisini incelemek ve uygulama süreci ile kullanılan değerlendirme yöntemlerine yönelik görüşlerini belirlemek amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmada karma yöntem kullanılmıştır. Çalışma grubunu bir üniversitenin Eğitim Fakültesi üçüncü sınıfında öğrenim görmekte olan 62 ilköğretim matematik öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Verilerin toplanmasında Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğretim Sürecine İlişkin Öz-Yeterlik İnanç Ölçeği, Matematik Öğretimine Yönelik Yeterlik İnancı Ölçeği, gözlem formu ve yazılı görüş formu kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın nicel verilerinin analiz sürecinde açımlayıcı ve betimsel istatistik tekniklerinden; nitel verilerin analizinde ise içerik analizi tekniğinden yararlanılmıştır. Mikroöğretim ile öz, akran, grup ve öğretim üyesi değerlendirmesi uygulamalarının, öğretmen adaylarının öğretim sürecine ilişkin öz-yeterlik inançlarını ve matematik öğretimine yönelik yeterlik inançlarını artırdığı ve mesleki yeterliklerinin gelişimine de olumlu yönde etkisi olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Bununla birlikte, öğretmen adaylarının ilgili değerlendirme yöntemlerine yönelik olumlu düşünceler geliştirdikleri tespit edilmiştir. Öz, akran ve grup değerlendirmelerinin öğretmen adaylarını meslek yaşamlarına da hazırladığı göz önünde bulundurulduğunda, diğer alanlardaki öğretmen adayları ile de benzer uygulamalar gerçekleştirilerek karşılaştırmalar yapılabilir.

Keywords

Öz değerlendirme akran değerlendirme grup değerlendirme öğretim üyesi değerlendirmesi öğretmen yetiştirme

References

  • Acar, M. ve Anıl, D. (2009). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin performans değerlendirme sürecindeki değerlendirme yöntemlerini kullanabilme yeterlilikleri ve karşılaştıkları sorunlara çözüm önerileri. Türk Bilim Araştırma Vakfı Bilim Dergisi, 2(3), 354-363.
  • Alqassab, M., Strijbos, J. W., and Ufer, S. (2018). Training peer-feedback skills on geometric construction tasks: Role of domain knowledge and peer-feedback levels. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(1), 11-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-017-0342-0
  • Andrade, H., and Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577544
  • ArchMiller, A., Fieberg, J., Walker, J. D., and Holm, N. (2017). Group peer assessment for summative evaluation in a graduate-level statistics course for ecologists. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1208-1220. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1243219
  • Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., and Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427-441. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009302
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentiee Hall.
  • Bay, E. (2011). The opinions of prospective teachers about peer assessment. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 10(2), 909 -925.
  • Beydoğan, Ö. (2017, October). Öğretmen adayı öğrencilerin ve öğretmenlerin ölçme değerlendirme anlayışlarının incelenmesi. Presented at the 2nd International Congress on Political, Economic and Social Studies (ICPESS), BOSNIA.
  • Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
  • Boud, D., and Falchikov, N. (1989). Quantitative studies of self-assessment in higher education: A critical analysis of findings, Higher Education, 18, 529-549. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138746
  • Bozkurt, F. (2020). Teachers candidates’ views on self and peer assessment as a tool for student development. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 45(1), 4. DOI:10.14221/ajte.2020v45n1.4
  • Charalambous, Ch., Philippou, G. N., and Kyriakides, L. (2008). Tracing the development of pre-service teachers’ efficacy beliefs in teaching mathematics during fieldwork. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67, 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9084-2
  • Cheng, W., and Warren, M. (1997). Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 233-239.
  • Cho, K., and MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
  • Darling-Hammond, L., and Baratz-Snowden, J. (2007). A good teacher in every classroom: Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. Educational Horizons, 85(2), 111-132.
  • Dochy F., Segers M., and Sluijsmans D.(1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079912331379935
  • Dochy, F., and McDowell, L. (1997) Assessment as a tool for learning, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 279-298.
  • Dochy, F., and Moerkerke, G. (1997). The present, the past and the future of achievement testing and performance assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 27, 415–432.
  • Esterly, E. (2003). A multi-method exploration of the mathematics teaching efficacy and epistemological beliefs of elementary pre-service and novice teachers. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Ohio: The Ohio State University.
  • European Trade Union Committee for Education [ETUCE] (2008). Teacher education in Europe/An ETUCE policy paper. Retrieved June 19, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu
  • Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11(2), 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293860110206
  • Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293950200305
  • Ghanaguru, S., Nair, P., and Yong, C. (2017). Teacher trainers’beliefs in microteaching and lesson planning in a teacher training institution. The English Teacher, 42 (2), 216-228.
  • Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., and Hoy, A. W. (2004). Collective efficacy beliefs: Theoretical developments, empirical evidence, and future directions. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 3-13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033003003
  • Karaman, P. ve Şahin, Ç. (2014). Öğretmen adaylarının ölçme değerlendirme okuryazarlıklarının belirlenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(2), 175-189.
  • Karataş, F. Ö. ve Cengiz, C. (2016). Özel Öğretim Yöntemleri II dersinde gerçekleştirilen mikro-öğretim uygulamalarının kimya öğretmen adayları tarafından değerlendirilmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 24(2), 565-584.
  • Kavas, A. B. ve Bugay, A. (2009). Öğretmen adaylarının hizmet öncesi eğitimlerinde gördükleri eksiklikler ve çözüm önerileri. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(25), 13-21.
  • Koç, C. (2011). The views of prospective class teachers about peer assessment in teaching practice. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(4), 1979-1989.
  • Leech, N.L., and Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2007). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Qual Quant. 43, 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3
  • Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB], (2008). Matematik öğretmeni özel alan yeterlikleri. Ankara: MEB Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Eğitimi Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2017). Öğretmenlik mesleği genel yeterlikleri. Ankara: Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Geliştirme Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Nalbantoğlu Yılmaz, F. (2017). Reliability of scores obtained from self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments on teaching materials prepared by teacher candidates. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 17(2), 395-409.
  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  • Orsmond, P., Merry, S., and Reiling, K. (1997). A study in self-assessment: Tutor and students’ perceptions of performance criteria. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293970220401
  • Ozogul, G., and Sullivan, H. (2009). Student performance and attitudes under formative evaluation by teacher, self and peer evaluators. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(3), 393-410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9052-7
  • Ozogul, G., Olina, Z., and Sullivan, H. (2008). Teacher, self and peer evaluation of lesson plans written by preservice teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 181. DOI 10.1007/s11423-006-9012-7
  • Özdemir, S. M. (2008). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının öğretim sürecine ilişkin öz-yeterlik inançlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 14(2), 277-306.
  • Özkan, H. H., Albayrak, M. ve Berber, K. (2005). Öğretmen adaylarının ilköğretim okullarında yaptıkları öğretmenlik uygulamasının yetişmelerindeki rolü. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 33, 168.
  • Peker, M. (2009). Pre-service mathematics teacher perspectives about the expanded microteaching experiences. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 353-376.
  • Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., and Krischner, P. A. (2010). Awareness of group performance in a CSCL-environment: Effects of peer feedback and reflection. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.011
  • Quesada, V., Gómez Ruiz, M. Á., Gallego Noche, M. B., and Cubero-Ibáñez, J. (2019). Should I use co-assessment in higher education? Pros and cons from teachers and students’ perspectives. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(7), 987-1002. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1531970
  • Ratminingsih, N. M., Artini, L. P., and Padmadewi, N. N. (2017). Incorporating self and peer assessment in reflective teaching practices. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 165-184. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10410a
  • Sambell, K., and Mcdowell, L. (1997) The value of self and peer assessment to the developing lifelong learner, In: G. GIBBS (Ed.) Improving student learning: Improving students as learners (Oxford, Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development), pp. 56-66.
  • Shahzadi, U., and Hussain, B. (2019). Perceptions of prospective teachers about peer assessment as a tool for reflective practices. Review of Economics and Development Studies, 5(2), 373-380. https://doi.org/10.26710/reads.v5i2.623
  • Sluijsmans, D., and Prins, F. (2006). A conceptual framework for integrating peer assessment in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(1), 6-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2006.01.005
  • Stefani, L. A. (1992). Comparison of collaborative self, peer and tutor assessment in a biochemistry practical. Biochemical Education, 20(3), 148-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/0307-4412(92)90057-S
  • Şahin, Ö., ve Soylu, Y. (2019). Matematik öğretmeni adaylarının ölçme ve değerlendirme bilgi gelişimleri. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 12(1), 47-76. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.335187
  • Şahinkaya, N. (2008). Türkiye – Finlandiya sınıf öğretmenliği matematik öğretimi programları, sınıf öğretmeni adayları ile öğretmenlerin öz-yetkinlik ve öğrenme–öğretme süreçleri açısından karşılaştırılması (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Terhart, E. (2003). Constructivism and teaching: A new paradigm in general didactics?. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(1), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270210163653
  • Tertemiz, N. ve Şahinkaya, N. (2010). Proje ve etkinlik destekli öğretimin sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının matematik öğretimine yönelik yeterlik inançlarına etkisi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Dergisi, 10(1), 87-98.
  • The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership Limited (2011). Australian professional standards for teachers. Retrieved June 19, 2018, from http:// www.aitsl.edu.au
  • Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48 (1), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., and Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
  • Wanner, T., and Palmer, E. (2018). Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: The crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1032-1047. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1427698
  • Williams, S. E., Pickett, A. C., and McGill, C. M. (2019). Examining the perceived needs of teacher education students for facilitating play. Action in Teacher Education, 41(4), 379-393. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2019.1609621
  • Woolfolk, A. (2005). Educational psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Pearson Education.
  • Yaman, S. ve Yalçın, N. (2005). Fen eğitiminde probleme dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımının problem çözme ve öz-yeterlik inanç düzeylerinin gelişimine etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(29), 229-236.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H.(2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yurdabakan, İ. (2011). Yapılandırmacı kuramın değerlendirmeye bakışı: Eğitimde alternatif değerlendirme yöntemleri Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 44(1), 51-77.

Self, Peer, Group and Faculty Member Assessment: From the Perspective of Teacher Competencies

Year 2021, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 949 - 973, 26.09.2021

İlknur Özpınar

https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.754885
Cited By: 1

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to examine the effects of microteaching together with self-assessment, peer, group and faculty member assessment practices on pre-service primary mathematics teachers’ professional competency and competency beliefs and to determine their views on the application process and assessment techniques used. Mixed methods research design was used in the study. The study group consists of 62 pre-service primary mathematics teachers studying in third year of the education faculty of a university. The data collection instruments used in this study were the Instructional Self-Efficacy Belief Scale for Pre-service Teachers, the Proficiency Scale for Mathematics Instruction, observation forms, and written interview forms. In the analysis of the quantitative data of the research, exploratory and descriptive statistics techniques were used, and in the analysis of qualitative data, content analysis technique was used. It has been revealed that microteaching together with self-assessment, peer, group and faculty member assessment practices improve preservice teachers' self-efficacy beliefs toward instruction process and toward mathematics teaching efficacy; and have a positive effect on the development of their professional competencies. In addition, it was found that pre-service teachers developed positive thoughts toward these assessment techniques. Based on the findings that self, peer, and group assessments prepare pre-service teachers for their professional careers, similar studies can be conducted with pre-service teachers of other content areas that can then be compared with the results of this study.

Keywords

Self assessment peer assessment group assessment tutor assessment teacher training self-efficacy beliefs

References

  • Acar, M. ve Anıl, D. (2009). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin performans değerlendirme sürecindeki değerlendirme yöntemlerini kullanabilme yeterlilikleri ve karşılaştıkları sorunlara çözüm önerileri. Türk Bilim Araştırma Vakfı Bilim Dergisi, 2(3), 354-363.
  • Alqassab, M., Strijbos, J. W., and Ufer, S. (2018). Training peer-feedback skills on geometric construction tasks: Role of domain knowledge and peer-feedback levels. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(1), 11-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-017-0342-0
  • Andrade, H., and Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577544
  • ArchMiller, A., Fieberg, J., Walker, J. D., and Holm, N. (2017). Group peer assessment for summative evaluation in a graduate-level statistics course for ecologists. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1208-1220. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1243219
  • Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., and Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427-441. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000009302
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentiee Hall.
  • Bay, E. (2011). The opinions of prospective teachers about peer assessment. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 10(2), 909 -925.
  • Beydoğan, Ö. (2017, October). Öğretmen adayı öğrencilerin ve öğretmenlerin ölçme değerlendirme anlayışlarının incelenmesi. Presented at the 2nd International Congress on Political, Economic and Social Studies (ICPESS), BOSNIA.
  • Black, P., and Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
  • Boud, D., and Falchikov, N. (1989). Quantitative studies of self-assessment in higher education: A critical analysis of findings, Higher Education, 18, 529-549. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138746
  • Bozkurt, F. (2020). Teachers candidates’ views on self and peer assessment as a tool for student development. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 45(1), 4. DOI:10.14221/ajte.2020v45n1.4
  • Charalambous, Ch., Philippou, G. N., and Kyriakides, L. (2008). Tracing the development of pre-service teachers’ efficacy beliefs in teaching mathematics during fieldwork. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67, 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9084-2
  • Cheng, W., and Warren, M. (1997). Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 233-239.
  • Cho, K., and MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
  • Darling-Hammond, L., and Baratz-Snowden, J. (2007). A good teacher in every classroom: Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. Educational Horizons, 85(2), 111-132.
  • Dochy F., Segers M., and Sluijsmans D.(1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079912331379935
  • Dochy, F., and McDowell, L. (1997) Assessment as a tool for learning, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 279-298.
  • Dochy, F., and Moerkerke, G. (1997). The present, the past and the future of achievement testing and performance assessment. International Journal of Educational Research, 27, 415–432.
  • Esterly, E. (2003). A multi-method exploration of the mathematics teaching efficacy and epistemological beliefs of elementary pre-service and novice teachers. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Ohio: The Ohio State University.
  • European Trade Union Committee for Education [ETUCE] (2008). Teacher education in Europe/An ETUCE policy paper. Retrieved June 19, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu
  • Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11(2), 146-166. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293860110206
  • Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work, Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293950200305
  • Ghanaguru, S., Nair, P., and Yong, C. (2017). Teacher trainers’beliefs in microteaching and lesson planning in a teacher training institution. The English Teacher, 42 (2), 216-228.
  • Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., and Hoy, A. W. (2004). Collective efficacy beliefs: Theoretical developments, empirical evidence, and future directions. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 3-13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033003003
  • Karaman, P. ve Şahin, Ç. (2014). Öğretmen adaylarının ölçme değerlendirme okuryazarlıklarının belirlenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(2), 175-189.
  • Karataş, F. Ö. ve Cengiz, C. (2016). Özel Öğretim Yöntemleri II dersinde gerçekleştirilen mikro-öğretim uygulamalarının kimya öğretmen adayları tarafından değerlendirilmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 24(2), 565-584.
  • Kavas, A. B. ve Bugay, A. (2009). Öğretmen adaylarının hizmet öncesi eğitimlerinde gördükleri eksiklikler ve çözüm önerileri. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(25), 13-21.
  • Koç, C. (2011). The views of prospective class teachers about peer assessment in teaching practice. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(4), 1979-1989.
  • Leech, N.L., and Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2007). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Qual Quant. 43, 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3
  • Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB], (2008). Matematik öğretmeni özel alan yeterlikleri. Ankara: MEB Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Eğitimi Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2017). Öğretmenlik mesleği genel yeterlikleri. Ankara: Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Geliştirme Genel Müdürlüğü.
  • Nalbantoğlu Yılmaz, F. (2017). Reliability of scores obtained from self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments on teaching materials prepared by teacher candidates. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 17(2), 395-409.
  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  • Orsmond, P., Merry, S., and Reiling, K. (1997). A study in self-assessment: Tutor and students’ perceptions of performance criteria. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293970220401
  • Ozogul, G., and Sullivan, H. (2009). Student performance and attitudes under formative evaluation by teacher, self and peer evaluators. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(3), 393-410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9052-7
  • Ozogul, G., Olina, Z., and Sullivan, H. (2008). Teacher, self and peer evaluation of lesson plans written by preservice teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 181. DOI 10.1007/s11423-006-9012-7
  • Özdemir, S. M. (2008). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının öğretim sürecine ilişkin öz-yeterlik inançlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 14(2), 277-306.
  • Özkan, H. H., Albayrak, M. ve Berber, K. (2005). Öğretmen adaylarının ilköğretim okullarında yaptıkları öğretmenlik uygulamasının yetişmelerindeki rolü. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 33, 168.
  • Peker, M. (2009). Pre-service mathematics teacher perspectives about the expanded microteaching experiences. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(2), 353-376.
  • Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., and Krischner, P. A. (2010). Awareness of group performance in a CSCL-environment: Effects of peer feedback and reflection. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.011
  • Quesada, V., Gómez Ruiz, M. Á., Gallego Noche, M. B., and Cubero-Ibáñez, J. (2019). Should I use co-assessment in higher education? Pros and cons from teachers and students’ perspectives. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(7), 987-1002. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1531970
  • Ratminingsih, N. M., Artini, L. P., and Padmadewi, N. N. (2017). Incorporating self and peer assessment in reflective teaching practices. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 165-184. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10410a
  • Sambell, K., and Mcdowell, L. (1997) The value of self and peer assessment to the developing lifelong learner, In: G. GIBBS (Ed.) Improving student learning: Improving students as learners (Oxford, Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development), pp. 56-66.
  • Shahzadi, U., and Hussain, B. (2019). Perceptions of prospective teachers about peer assessment as a tool for reflective practices. Review of Economics and Development Studies, 5(2), 373-380. https://doi.org/10.26710/reads.v5i2.623
  • Sluijsmans, D., and Prins, F. (2006). A conceptual framework for integrating peer assessment in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(1), 6-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2006.01.005
  • Stefani, L. A. (1992). Comparison of collaborative self, peer and tutor assessment in a biochemistry practical. Biochemical Education, 20(3), 148-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/0307-4412(92)90057-S
  • Şahin, Ö., ve Soylu, Y. (2019). Matematik öğretmeni adaylarının ölçme ve değerlendirme bilgi gelişimleri. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 12(1), 47-76. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.335187
  • Şahinkaya, N. (2008). Türkiye – Finlandiya sınıf öğretmenliği matematik öğretimi programları, sınıf öğretmeni adayları ile öğretmenlerin öz-yetkinlik ve öğrenme–öğretme süreçleri açısından karşılaştırılması (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Terhart, E. (2003). Constructivism and teaching: A new paradigm in general didactics?. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(1), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270210163653
  • Tertemiz, N. ve Şahinkaya, N. (2010). Proje ve etkinlik destekli öğretimin sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının matematik öğretimine yönelik yeterlik inançlarına etkisi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Dergisi, 10(1), 87-98.
  • The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership Limited (2011). Australian professional standards for teachers. Retrieved June 19, 2018, from http:// www.aitsl.edu.au
  • Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48 (1), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., and Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
  • Wanner, T., and Palmer, E. (2018). Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: The crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1032-1047. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1427698
  • Williams, S. E., Pickett, A. C., and McGill, C. M. (2019). Examining the perceived needs of teacher education students for facilitating play. Action in Teacher Education, 41(4), 379-393. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2019.1609621
  • Woolfolk, A. (2005). Educational psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Pearson Education.
  • Yaman, S. ve Yalçın, N. (2005). Fen eğitiminde probleme dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımının problem çözme ve öz-yeterlik inanç düzeylerinin gelişimine etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(29), 229-236.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H.(2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yurdabakan, İ. (2011). Yapılandırmacı kuramın değerlendirmeye bakışı: Eğitimde alternatif değerlendirme yöntemleri Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 44(1), 51-77.
There are 60 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

İlknur Özpınar

Publication Date September 26, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021Volume: 10 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Özpınar, İ. (2021). Öz, Akran, Grup ve Öğretim Üyesi Değerlendirmesi: Öğretmen Yeterlikleri Penceresinden Bir Bakış. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, 10(3), 949-973. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.754885

Cited By

The Role of Time on Performance Assessment (Self, Peer and Teacher) in Higher Education: Rater Drift
Participatory Educational Research
https://doi.org/10.17275/per.23.77.10.5
 Download Cover Image

14550                 

© Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Education