Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Öğretmen Adaylarının STEM Eğitimine Yönelik Öz-Yeterlik ve Endişe Düzeylerinin İncelenmesi

Year 2023, Volume: 21 Issue: 1, 478 - 504, 28.04.2023

Hüseyin Ateş Kibar Sungur Gül

https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1211730
Cited By: 1

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı öğretmen adaylarının STEM eğitimine yönelik öz-yeterlik ve endişe düzeylerinin belirlenmesidir. Çalışmada, nicel araştırma desenlerinden tarama araştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini, iki devlet üniversitesinde eğitim alan ve araştırmaya gönüllülük esasına dayalı katılan 390 fen bilgisi ve matematik öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak STEM Eğitimi Hakkında Öz-yeterlik ve Endişe Ölçekleri kullanılmıştır. Analiz sonucunda, öğretmen adaylarının STEM eğitimine yönelik öz-yeterlik inanç düzeylerinin ortalamanın üzerinde ve “katılıyorum” düzeyine karşılık geldiği belirlenmiştir. Araştırmanın bulgularına göre öğretmen adaylarının STEM eğitimine yönelik endişe düzeylerinin ortalamanın üzerinde olduğu ve “katılıyorum” düzeyine karşılık geldiği tespit edilmiştir. Öğretmen adaylarının STEM eğitimi hakkında öz-yeterlik ve endişe düzeyleri, fen bilgisi öğretmen adayları lehine anlamlı bir farklılık göstermiştir. Öğretmen adaylarının STEM eğitimi hakkında öz-yeterlik inançları ve endişelerinin cinsiyet ve sınıf seviyesi değişkenleri açısından bir farklılık göstermediği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Fen bilgisi ve matematik öğretmen adaylarının STEM öz-yeterlik ve STEM endişelerinin pozitif yönde ve anlamlı bir ilişkiye sahip olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Araştırmada, öğretmen adaylarının STEM öz-yeterlik düzeylerinin STEM endişe seviyelerinin %32’sini açıkladığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu sonuçlardan hareketle öğretmen adaylarının STEM eğitimi konularında bilgi ve beceriler kazanmalarını hedefleyen derslerin lisans programlarında yer alması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

STEM Öz-yeterlik Endişe Öğretmen Adayları

References

  • Abacı, B. (2020). Bütünleştirilmiş FeTeMM etkinliklerinin fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının FeTeMM ile ilgili tutum ve öz-yeterliklerine etkisinin incelenmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J. & De Miranda, M. A. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 63-88.
  • Bagiati, A. & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher's experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1), 112-128.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Brown, R., Brown, J., Reardon, K. & Merrill, C. (2011). Understanding STEM: current perceptions. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(6), 5.
  • Chen, Y. L., Huang, L. F. & Wu, P. C. (2021). Pre-service preschool teachers’ self-efficacy in and need for STEM education professional development: STEM pedagogical belief as a mediator. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(2), 137-147.
  • Cheung, D. (2002). Refining a stage model for studying teacher concerns about educational innovations. Australian Journal of Education, 46(3), 305-322.
  • Cheung, D., Hattie, J. & Ng, D. (2001). Reexamining the stages of Concern Questionnaire: A test of alternative models. Journal of Educational Research, 94(4), 226-236.
  • Cohen, L., Manion. L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge.
  • Cocca, M., Cocca, A. & Castro, J. L. D. (2017). Physical Education teachers’ concerns and their relation with self-efficacy. International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education’da sunulmuş bildiri, República Checa, Praga.
  • Çakıroğlu, E. & Işıksal, M. (2009). Pre-service elementary teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs toward mathematics. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(151), 132-139.
  • Dadacan, G. (2021). Öğretmen adaylarının STEM öğretimiyle ilgili öz-yeterlik farkındalık ve yönelimlerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • EL-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M. & Alhammad, K. (2017). Context of STEM integration in schools: views from in-service science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2459-2484.
  • Er, K. O. & Acar-Başeğmez, D. A. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının STEM farkındalıkları ile STEM uygulamalarına ilişkin özyeterlik inançları arasındaki ilişki. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 14(2), 941-987.
  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.
  • Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8. b.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Friday Institute for Educational Innovation. (2012). Teacher efficacy and attitudes toward STEM survey-science teachers. Raleigh, NC: Author.
  • Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207-226.
  • Fulton, K. & Britton, T. (2011). STEM teachers in professional learning communities: from good teachers to great teaching. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/1098-executive-summary.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Gabriele, A. J. & Joram, E. (2007). Teachers’ reflection on their own reform-based teaching in mathematics: Implications for the development of teacher self-efficacy. Action in Teacher Education, 29(3), 60–74.
  • Gelen, B., Akçay, B., Tiryaki, A. & Benek, İ. (2019). Fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının Fen-Teknoloji-Mühendislik-Matematik (FeTeMM)’e Yönelik Özyeterlik Ölçeği: Türkçe’ye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 15(1), 88-107.
  • Gene, H. E., George, A. A. & Stiegelbauer, S. M. (2013). Measuring implementation in schools: The stages of Concern Questionnaire. Austin, TX: SEDL.
  • Geng, J., Jong, M. S. Y. & Chai, C. S. (2019). Hong Kong teachers’ self-efficacy and concerns about STEM education. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(1), 35-45.
  • George, A. A., Hall, G. E. & Stiegelbauer, S. M. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: The stages of concern questionnaire. Washington, DC: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
  • Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2020). Öğretmen adayları için FeTeMM Eğitimi Hakkında Öz-yeterlik ve Endişe Ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlama çalışması. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 16(2), 165-177.
  • Hall, G. E., George, A. A. & Rutherford, W. L. (1977). Measuring stages of concern about the innovation: A manual for use of the SoC questionnaire. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
  • Herro, D. & Quigley, C. (2017). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of STEAM teaching through professional development: implications for teacher educators. Professional Development in Education, 43(3), 416-438.
  • Holzberger, D., Philipp, A. & Kunter, M. (2013). How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 774-786.
  • Hoy, A. W. & Spero, R. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: a comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 343–356.
  • Jaipal-Jamani, K. & Angeli, C. (2017). Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175-192.
  • Jong, M. S. & Tsai, C. (2016). Understanding the concerns of teachers about leveraging mobile technology to facilitate outdoor social ınquiry learning: the EduVenture experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(2), 328-344.
  • Kendaloğlu, E. (2021). STEM etkinliği geliştirme sürecinin fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının girişimcilik ve STEM öz-Yeterlilikleri üzerine etkilerinin incelenmesi. (Doktora Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Klassen, R. M. & Chiu, M. M. (2011). The occupational commitment and intention to quit of practicing and pre-service teachers. Influence of self-efficacy, job stress, and teaching context. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 114–129.
  • Kurup, P. M., Li, X., Powell, G. & Brown, M. (2019). Building future primary teachers’ capacity in STEM: Based on a platform of beliefs, understandings and intentions. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1-14.
  • Lantz, H. B. (2009). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: What form? What function. http://www.currtechintegrations.com/pdf/STEMEducationArticle.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. H., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W. & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices içinde (s. 35-60). West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
  • Montgomery, A., & Mirenda, P. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, sentiments, attitudes, and concerns about the inclusion of students with developmental disabilities. Exceptionality Education International, 24(1), 18–32.
  • Nadelson, L. S. & Seifert, A. L. (2017). Integrated STEM defined: Contexts, challenges, and the future. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 221-223.
  • Newman, C., Moss, B., Lenarz, M. & Newman, I. (1998). The impact of a PDS internship/student teaching program on the self-efficacy, stages of concern and role perceptions of preservice teaching: The evaluation of a goals 2000 project. The Annual Meeting of the Midwestern Educational Research Association’da sunulmuş bildiri, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Nunnally, J. O. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • OECD. (2019). PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations. Paris: OECD Publications.
  • Öztürk, N., Yılmaz-Tüzün, Ö. & Çakır-Yıldırım, B. (2019). Öğretmen adaylarının fen eğitiminde STEM uygulamalarına yönelik öz-yeterlik inanç ve görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Trakya Eğitim Dergisi, 9(4), 649-665.
  • Ring, E. A., Dare, E. A., Crotty, E. A. & Roehrig, G. H. (2017). The evolution of teacher conceptions of STEM education throughout an intensive professional development experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(5), 444-467.
  • Ross, J. A. & Bruce, C. (2007). Professional development effects on teacher efficacy: results of randomized field trial. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(1), 50–60.
  • Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M. & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 1-16.
  • Stanton, K., Cawthon, S. & Dawson, K. (2018). Self-efficacy, teacher concerns, and levels of implementation among teachers participating in drama-based instruction professional development. Teacher Development, 22(1), 51–77.
  • Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J. & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching ıntegrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 28-34.
  • Sungur-Gül, K. & Ateş, H. (2021). Fen bilimleri ve matematik öğretmeni adaylarının STEM alanlarına ve kariyerlerine yönelik semantik (anlamsal) algıları. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 11(4), 2035-2047.
  • Sungur-Gül, K., Saylan-Kırmızıgül, A. & Ateş, H. (2022). Temel eğitim ve ortaöğretimde STEM eğitimi üzerine alan yazın incelemesi: Türkiye örneği. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 13(1), 544-568.
  • Taktat-Ateş, Y., Saraçoğlu, S. & Ateş, H. (2022). Fen eğitimi alanındaki akademisyenlerin STEM eğitimi inançları. Araştırma ve Deneyim Dergisi, 7(1), 1–18.
  • Taşdemir, M. (2003). Eğitimde planlama ve değerlendirme (2. b.). Ankara: Ocak Yayınevi.
  • Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W. & Depaepe, F. (2018). The influence of teachers’ attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 190-205.
  • Thompson, K. & Kanasa, H. (2016). Designing and analyzing STEM studios for pre-service teacher education. S. Barker, S. Dawson, A. Pardo & C. Colvin (Ed.), Show me the learning: Proceedings ASCILITE 2016 içinde (s. 566-570). Adelaide.
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W. & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measurement. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202–248.
  • Wang, H. H. (2012). A new era of science education: Science teachers' perceptions and classroom practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration. (Doktora Tezi). https://www.proquest.com/docview/922637122?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H. & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 1(2), 1-13.
  • Wei, Y. & Tse, A. W. C. (2021). Teachers' stages of concern on STEM education in a rural secondary school in Guangzhou. IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology & Education (TALE)’de sunulmuş bildiri. Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
  • Wood, R. & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 361–384.
  • Woolfolk, A. E., Winne, P. H., Perry, N. E. & Shapka, J. (2009). Educational psychology (4. b.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
  • Yaman, C., Özdemir, A. & Vural, R. A. (2018). STEM uygulamaları öğretmen öz-yeterlik ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Bir geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 93-104.
  • Yan, T. & Deng, M. (2019). Regular education teachers’ concerns on inclusive education in China from the perspective of concerns-based adoption model. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(4), 384-404.
  • Yıldırım, H. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının fen, teknoloji, mühendislik, matematik (FeTeMM) entegrasyonuna yönelik özyeterlik algılarının incelenmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Zakariya, Y. F. (2020). Effects of school climate and teacher self-efficacy on job satisfaction of mostly STEM teachers: A structural multi group invariance approach. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–12.

Investigation of Self-Efficacy and Concern Levels of Pre-service Teachers about STEM Education

Year 2023, Volume: 21 Issue: 1, 478 - 504, 28.04.2023

Hüseyin Ateş Kibar Sungur Gül

https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1211730
Cited By: 1

Abstract

The aim of the study is to determine the self-efficacy and concern levels of pre-service teachers about STEM education. In the study, survey method, one of the quantitative research designs, was used. The sample of the research consists of 390 pre-service science and mathematics teachers who studied at two state universities and participated in the research on a voluntary basis. Self-efficacy and concern scales about STEM education were used as data collection tools. As a result of the analysis, it was determined that the levels of pre-service teachers' self-efficacy belief about STEM education were above the average and correspond to the level of agree. Based on the findings of the study, it was determined that the concern levels of the pre-service teachers about STEM education were above the average and corresponded to the level of agreement. Pre-service teachers' self-efficacy and concern levels about STEM education showed a significant difference in favor of pre-service science teachers. It was concluded that pre-service teachers' self-efficacy beliefs and concerns about STEM education did not differ in terms of gender and grade level variables. It was determined that pre-service science and mathematics teachers' STEM self-efficacy and concerns had a positive and significant relationship. In the study, it was concluded that pre-service teachers' STEM self-efficacy levels explained 32% of their STEM concern levels. Based on these results, it is recommended to include courses which aim to improve pre-service teachers’ knowledge and skills on STEM education subjects in undergraduate programs.

Keywords

STEM Self-efficacy Concern Pre-service Teachers

References

  • Abacı, B. (2020). Bütünleştirilmiş FeTeMM etkinliklerinin fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının FeTeMM ile ilgili tutum ve öz-yeterliklerine etkisinin incelenmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J. & De Miranda, M. A. (2017). Assessing changes in teachers’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 63-88.
  • Bagiati, A. & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher's experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1), 112-128.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Brown, R., Brown, J., Reardon, K. & Merrill, C. (2011). Understanding STEM: current perceptions. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(6), 5.
  • Chen, Y. L., Huang, L. F. & Wu, P. C. (2021). Pre-service preschool teachers’ self-efficacy in and need for STEM education professional development: STEM pedagogical belief as a mediator. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(2), 137-147.
  • Cheung, D. (2002). Refining a stage model for studying teacher concerns about educational innovations. Australian Journal of Education, 46(3), 305-322.
  • Cheung, D., Hattie, J. & Ng, D. (2001). Reexamining the stages of Concern Questionnaire: A test of alternative models. Journal of Educational Research, 94(4), 226-236.
  • Cohen, L., Manion. L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge.
  • Cocca, M., Cocca, A. & Castro, J. L. D. (2017). Physical Education teachers’ concerns and their relation with self-efficacy. International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education’da sunulmuş bildiri, República Checa, Praga.
  • Çakıroğlu, E. & Işıksal, M. (2009). Pre-service elementary teachers' attitudes and self-efficacy beliefs toward mathematics. Eğitim ve Bilim, 34(151), 132-139.
  • Dadacan, G. (2021). Öğretmen adaylarının STEM öğretimiyle ilgili öz-yeterlik farkındalık ve yönelimlerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • EL-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M. & Alhammad, K. (2017). Context of STEM integration in schools: views from in-service science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2459-2484.
  • Er, K. O. & Acar-Başeğmez, D. A. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının STEM farkındalıkları ile STEM uygulamalarına ilişkin özyeterlik inançları arasındaki ilişki. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 14(2), 941-987.
  • Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.
  • Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8. b.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Friday Institute for Educational Innovation. (2012). Teacher efficacy and attitudes toward STEM survey-science teachers. Raleigh, NC: Author.
  • Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207-226.
  • Fulton, K. & Britton, T. (2011). STEM teachers in professional learning communities: from good teachers to great teaching. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/1098-executive-summary.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Gabriele, A. J. & Joram, E. (2007). Teachers’ reflection on their own reform-based teaching in mathematics: Implications for the development of teacher self-efficacy. Action in Teacher Education, 29(3), 60–74.
  • Gelen, B., Akçay, B., Tiryaki, A. & Benek, İ. (2019). Fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının Fen-Teknoloji-Mühendislik-Matematik (FeTeMM)’e Yönelik Özyeterlik Ölçeği: Türkçe’ye uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 15(1), 88-107.
  • Gene, H. E., George, A. A. & Stiegelbauer, S. M. (2013). Measuring implementation in schools: The stages of Concern Questionnaire. Austin, TX: SEDL.
  • Geng, J., Jong, M. S. Y. & Chai, C. S. (2019). Hong Kong teachers’ self-efficacy and concerns about STEM education. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(1), 35-45.
  • George, A. A., Hall, G. E. & Stiegelbauer, S. M. (2006). Measuring implementation in schools: The stages of concern questionnaire. Washington, DC: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
  • Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2020). Öğretmen adayları için FeTeMM Eğitimi Hakkında Öz-yeterlik ve Endişe Ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlama çalışması. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 16(2), 165-177.
  • Hall, G. E., George, A. A. & Rutherford, W. L. (1977). Measuring stages of concern about the innovation: A manual for use of the SoC questionnaire. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
  • Herro, D. & Quigley, C. (2017). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of STEAM teaching through professional development: implications for teacher educators. Professional Development in Education, 43(3), 416-438.
  • Holzberger, D., Philipp, A. & Kunter, M. (2013). How teachers’ self-efficacy is related to instructional quality: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 774-786.
  • Hoy, A. W. & Spero, R. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: a comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 343–356.
  • Jaipal-Jamani, K. & Angeli, C. (2017). Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175-192.
  • Jong, M. S. & Tsai, C. (2016). Understanding the concerns of teachers about leveraging mobile technology to facilitate outdoor social ınquiry learning: the EduVenture experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(2), 328-344.
  • Kendaloğlu, E. (2021). STEM etkinliği geliştirme sürecinin fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının girişimcilik ve STEM öz-Yeterlilikleri üzerine etkilerinin incelenmesi. (Doktora Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Klassen, R. M. & Chiu, M. M. (2011). The occupational commitment and intention to quit of practicing and pre-service teachers. Influence of self-efficacy, job stress, and teaching context. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 114–129.
  • Kurup, P. M., Li, X., Powell, G. & Brown, M. (2019). Building future primary teachers’ capacity in STEM: Based on a platform of beliefs, understandings and intentions. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1-14.
  • Lantz, H. B. (2009). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: What form? What function. http://www.currtechintegrations.com/pdf/STEMEducationArticle.pdf sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. H., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W. & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices içinde (s. 35-60). West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
  • Montgomery, A., & Mirenda, P. (2014). Teachers’ self-efficacy, sentiments, attitudes, and concerns about the inclusion of students with developmental disabilities. Exceptionality Education International, 24(1), 18–32.
  • Nadelson, L. S. & Seifert, A. L. (2017). Integrated STEM defined: Contexts, challenges, and the future. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 221-223.
  • Newman, C., Moss, B., Lenarz, M. & Newman, I. (1998). The impact of a PDS internship/student teaching program on the self-efficacy, stages of concern and role perceptions of preservice teaching: The evaluation of a goals 2000 project. The Annual Meeting of the Midwestern Educational Research Association’da sunulmuş bildiri, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Nunnally, J. O. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • OECD. (2019). PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations. Paris: OECD Publications.
  • Öztürk, N., Yılmaz-Tüzün, Ö. & Çakır-Yıldırım, B. (2019). Öğretmen adaylarının fen eğitiminde STEM uygulamalarına yönelik öz-yeterlik inanç ve görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Trakya Eğitim Dergisi, 9(4), 649-665.
  • Ring, E. A., Dare, E. A., Crotty, E. A. & Roehrig, G. H. (2017). The evolution of teacher conceptions of STEM education throughout an intensive professional development experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(5), 444-467.
  • Ross, J. A. & Bruce, C. (2007). Professional development effects on teacher efficacy: results of randomized field trial. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(1), 50–60.
  • Shernoff, D. J., Sinha, S., Bressler, D. M. & Ginsburg, L. (2017). Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(1), 1-16.
  • Stanton, K., Cawthon, S. & Dawson, K. (2018). Self-efficacy, teacher concerns, and levels of implementation among teachers participating in drama-based instruction professional development. Teacher Development, 22(1), 51–77.
  • Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J. & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching ıntegrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), 28-34.
  • Sungur-Gül, K. & Ateş, H. (2021). Fen bilimleri ve matematik öğretmeni adaylarının STEM alanlarına ve kariyerlerine yönelik semantik (anlamsal) algıları. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 11(4), 2035-2047.
  • Sungur-Gül, K., Saylan-Kırmızıgül, A. & Ateş, H. (2022). Temel eğitim ve ortaöğretimde STEM eğitimi üzerine alan yazın incelemesi: Türkiye örneği. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 13(1), 544-568.
  • Taktat-Ateş, Y., Saraçoğlu, S. & Ateş, H. (2022). Fen eğitimi alanındaki akademisyenlerin STEM eğitimi inançları. Araştırma ve Deneyim Dergisi, 7(1), 1–18.
  • Taşdemir, M. (2003). Eğitimde planlama ve değerlendirme (2. b.). Ankara: Ocak Yayınevi.
  • Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W. & Depaepe, F. (2018). The influence of teachers’ attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 190-205.
  • Thompson, K. & Kanasa, H. (2016). Designing and analyzing STEM studios for pre-service teacher education. S. Barker, S. Dawson, A. Pardo & C. Colvin (Ed.), Show me the learning: Proceedings ASCILITE 2016 içinde (s. 566-570). Adelaide.
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W. & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measurement. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202–248.
  • Wang, H. H. (2012). A new era of science education: Science teachers' perceptions and classroom practices of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) integration. (Doktora Tezi). https://www.proquest.com/docview/922637122?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Wang, H. H., Moore, T. J., Roehrig, G. H. & Park, M. S. (2011). STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 1(2), 1-13.
  • Wei, Y. & Tse, A. W. C. (2021). Teachers' stages of concern on STEM education in a rural secondary school in Guangzhou. IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology & Education (TALE)’de sunulmuş bildiri. Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
  • Wood, R. & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 361–384.
  • Woolfolk, A. E., Winne, P. H., Perry, N. E. & Shapka, J. (2009). Educational psychology (4. b.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
  • Yaman, C., Özdemir, A. & Vural, R. A. (2018). STEM uygulamaları öğretmen öz-yeterlik ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Bir geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 93-104.
  • Yan, T. & Deng, M. (2019). Regular education teachers’ concerns on inclusive education in China from the perspective of concerns-based adoption model. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(4), 384-404.
  • Yıldırım, H. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının fen, teknoloji, mühendislik, matematik (FeTeMM) entegrasyonuna yönelik özyeterlik algılarının incelenmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). http://tez.yok.gov.tr/ sayfasından erişilmiştir.
  • Zakariya, Y. F. (2020). Effects of school climate and teacher self-efficacy on job satisfaction of mostly STEM teachers: A structural multi group invariance approach. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1–12.
There are 63 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Studies on Education
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Hüseyin Ateş 0000-0003-0031-8994

Kibar Sungur Gül 0000-0002-9590-1439

Publication Date April 28, 2023
Submission Date November 29, 2022
Acceptance Date March 2, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 21 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Ateş, H., & Sungur Gül, K. (2023). Öğretmen Adaylarının STEM Eğitimine Yönelik Öz-Yeterlik ve Endişe Düzeylerinin İncelenmesi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 21(1), 478-504. https://doi.org/10.37217/tebd.1211730

Cited By

Dini Başa Çıkma, Şükür, Takdir Etme, Endişe ve Anksiyete İlişkisi
Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.51702/esoguifd.1305224
 Download Cover Image

The Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences is published by Gazi University.