Öz
Recent changes in teacher education program which approved by the Higher Education Council of Turkey required students of education programs in higher education to take special education course. Also, the regulation about education of the students with special needs has been changed. All students with certain disabilities are considered as subjects to be involved in inclusive education settings. Therefore, early childhood department students are offered a course titled as inclusion. However, only limited number of education colleges can provide experts on inclusion even though there are considerable amount of early childhood education departments all over the country. Thus, a need to design a course for all education colleges appeared as necessity. Since inclusion course is offered in the last semester of senior year, a course design to teach inclusion must have special features to work on. Ziegenfuss (2007) determined five major course design approaches. One of the highly preferred methods is named as needs-based course design. What makes that design is its focus on practical needs for professional future of the students. Therefore, lying on that approach to design a course seemed preferable to the researcher. In order to construct the course, the researcher started to learn about what the needs, knowledge, and expectations of the senior students of the early childhood education department. Method Participants were students at early childhood education program in a major teacher education college in Ankara. Twenty female participants volunteered to be in the study. The age varied from 21-25. The study continued for more than 2 years. The study was based on qualitative research methodology. As data gathering method, a set of structured interview questions were prepared. In the first year 10 questions were directed to teacher candidates. Two questions from original form were dropped due to the responses giving by first participant group. Those 2 questions failed in gathering targeted data. All those students were provided a form consisted of 8 structured questions to determine the level of students’ knowledge level about special education and inclusion. Also, how they perceive their ability for working with students with disabilities. In addition to those questions, their expectations and requests from inclusion course was gathered. Results Based on the candidates’ responses, it appears that they lack in basic special education and inclusion knowledge. Even though they have some confidence in them on working with the students with disabilities, they also admit the difficulty of the work. The results also provided some evidence for the expectations of teacher candidates for their future professional life. They strongly believe that they will need practical info, even practice to able to work with their students with disabilities in future. Gazi University, Gazi Faculty of Education, Department of Special Education, necdetkarasu@gazi.edu.tr Discussion In order to design a course to teach about inclusion to early childhood education department students, it appears that needs-based course design approach would be the one that meet the needs of teacher candidates. A course with rather practical information is more likely expected by the candidates than only information based course. Provided insight can help to pin out the important features for teacher candidates.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Akerlind, C. (2003). Growing and developing as an academic: Implications for academic development, academia and academic work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Sydney, Australia.
- Fink, L. D. Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.
- Gow, L. & Kember, D. (1993). „Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning‟. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 20–33.
- Knewstubb, B., & Bond, C. (2009). What‟s he talking about? The communicative alignment between a teacher‟s intentions and students‟ understandings. Higher Education Research & Development, 28, 179-193.
- Martin, E., Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., Ramsden, P., & Benjamin J. (2000). What university teachers teach and how they teach it. Instructional Science, 28, 347-412.
- Nicoll-Senft, J.M. (2009). An “Extreme Makeover” of a course in special education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 119, 81-88.
- Norton, L., Richardson J.T.E., Hartley, J., Newstead, S., & Mayes, J. Teachers‟ beliefs and intentions concerning teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 50, 537- 571.
- Toohey, S. (1999). Designing course for higher education Buckingham, UK: SRHE Open University Press.
- Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., Martin, E., & Ramsden, P. (2005). University teachers‟ experience of change in their understanding of the subject matter they have taught. Teaching in Higher Education, 10 (2) 251-264.
- Ziegenfuss, D.H. (2007). A phenomenogrphic analysis of course design in the academy. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 2, 70-79.
Kaynaştırma Dersi Planlamasında Öğrenci İhtiyaçlarının Belirlenmesi: İhtiyaç Temelli Ders Desenleme Hazırlığı
Öz
Yükseköğretimde ders desenlemesi gerçekleştirilirken dersin amaçları olarak, dersi veren öğretim elemanının amaçlarının mı yoksa dikkat alınması gereken başka etmenler mi olduğu tartışması bir süredir devam edegelmektedir. Ders desenlemesini etkileyen etmenler arasında dersin uygulamayı etkileme düzeyine bağlı olarak öğrenci beklentilerinin de karşılanacak bir planlama yapılması uygun görünmektedir. Bu nedenle bir niteliksel çalışma olarak planlanan bu çalışmada, öğrencilerden dersin sonunda ne kazanmak istedikleri ile ilgili olarak veri toplanmıştır. Çalışma iki sene üst üste tekrarlanarak görüşme formu elden geçirilmiş ve ikinci senenin verileri sonuç bulgusu olarak esas alınmıştır. Bunun için okul öncesi öğretmenliği öğrencilerinden görüşme yoluyla veri toplanmıştır. Sonuçların analizi öğrencilerin, hedef dersin sonunda öğrencilerle çalışırken sahip olmaları gereken pratik bilgilere olan ihtiyaçlarını öne çıkarmışlardır.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Akerlind, C. (2003). Growing and developing as an academic: Implications for academic development, academia and academic work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Sydney, Australia.
- Fink, L. D. Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003.
- Gow, L. & Kember, D. (1993). „Conceptions of teaching and their relationship to student learning‟. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 20–33.
- Knewstubb, B., & Bond, C. (2009). What‟s he talking about? The communicative alignment between a teacher‟s intentions and students‟ understandings. Higher Education Research & Development, 28, 179-193.
- Martin, E., Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., Ramsden, P., & Benjamin J. (2000). What university teachers teach and how they teach it. Instructional Science, 28, 347-412.
- Nicoll-Senft, J.M. (2009). An “Extreme Makeover” of a course in special education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 119, 81-88.
- Norton, L., Richardson J.T.E., Hartley, J., Newstead, S., & Mayes, J. Teachers‟ beliefs and intentions concerning teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 50, 537- 571.
- Toohey, S. (1999). Designing course for higher education Buckingham, UK: SRHE Open University Press.
- Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., Martin, E., & Ramsden, P. (2005). University teachers‟ experience of change in their understanding of the subject matter they have taught. Teaching in Higher Education, 10 (2) 251-264.
- Ziegenfuss, D.H. (2007). A phenomenogrphic analysis of course design in the academy. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 2, 70-79.
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | Türkçe |
|---|---|
| Bölüm | Articles |
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 19 Mart 2016 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2013Cilt: 2 Sayı: 1 |
e-ISSN: 2147-1606