Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Thematic and Methodological Analysis of National and International Theses on Curriculum Implementation

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 2, 391 - 416, 30.08.2023
https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1191536

Öz

The current study aims to conduct a thematic and methodological analysis of national and international theses on curriculum implementation. The theses to be included in this study, which was designed as descriptive content analysis, were determined by criterion sampling, one of the purposive sampling methods. A total of 363 theses, 21 national and 342 international, were included in the study. Research data were collected with the "Thesis Evaluation Form" developed by the researchers. In the content analysis of the data, categorical analysis and frequency analysis were used. The results of the research showed that the implementation of the curriculum in national theses was mostly discussed under the theme of curriculum development and curriculum evaluation, while in international theses, the themes studied on the curriculum implementation were more diverse and specific to the implementation process of the curriculum. While mixed methods and quantitative research methods were preferred in national theses, qualitative research methods were mostly used in international theses. In accordance with the selected research method, mixed method research designs, maximum diversity and convenience sampling methods, use of interviews and scales, descriptive statistics and content analysis were utilized in national theses. On the other hand, in international theses, qualitative case study design, purposeful sampling method, data collection through interviews, observations and documents, and data analysis with coding technique were frequently employed. The sample group of both national and international theses is mostly teachers. It is thought that the findings obtained within the scope of this research will be useful in terms of understanding the studies on the implementation of the curricula and guiding future studies to be carried out in the field.

Kaynakça

  • Akkaş- Baysal, E., & Kırat, K. (2022). A meta-evaluation study on master's theses in curriculum and instruction (2019- 2021). International Journal of Science and Education, 5(2), 113-132. https://doi.org/10.47477/ubed.1059232
  • Al-Kathiri, S. N. (2002). The characteristics of master's theses conducted in the department of curriculum and teaching methods from 1983 through 2002 at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Arkansas.
  • Alkan-Şahin, S., & Tunca, N. (2016). What is the purpose of the theses addressing the issue of program evaluation in Turkey? (The case of curriculum and instruction: 1997-2015). Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i1.1040
  • Arcagök, S. (2021). An analysis of the postgraduate theses focusing on the social studies curriculum. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 13(2), 1444-1463. http://ijci.wcci-international.org/index.php/IJCI/article/view/632/317
  • Aslan, M., & Saglam, M. (2017). Methodological Investigation of the curriculum evaluation theses completed between the years 2006-2015 in Turkey. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 1468-1478. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050904
  • Avcı, B., & Güven, M. (2022). Analysis of graduate theses in curriculum development in Turkey (1993-2020). Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 23(2), 870-891. https://doi.org/10.17679
  • Aykan, A., & Çalışkan, E.F. (2022). An Overview of Postgraduate Dissertations Written on Primary School Programs in Turkey. Bingöl University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 24, 156-168. https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.1120067
  • Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus open, 2, 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001
  • Bümen, N. T., Çakar, E. & Yıldız, D. G. (2014). Curriculum fidelity and factors affecting fidelity in the Turkish context. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(1), 203-228. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.2020
  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. C. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publication.
  • Creswell, J., W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches, (4th edition). Sage Publications.
  • Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinin parametreleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 33-38. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3412
  • Demirel, Ö. (2007). Eğitimde program geliştirme (10. Baskı). Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Demirel, Ö. (2015). Eğitimde program geliştirme kuramdan uygulamaya (23. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
  • Dinçer, S. (2018). Content Analysis in Scientific Research: Meta-Analysis, Meta-Synthesis, and Descriptive Content Analysis. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(1), 176-190. doi: 10.14686/buefad.363159
  • Downe‐Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: method, applications, and issues. Health care for women international, 13(3), 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399339209516006
  • Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, R., Falco, M., & Hansen, W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18(2), 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/18.2.237
  • Erden, M. (1998). Eğitimde program değerlendirme (3.Baskı). Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Fisher, M. J., & Marshall, A. P. (2009). Understanding descriptive statistics. Australian critical care, 22(2), 93-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2008.11.003
  • Gez Çinpolat, A. (2022). Academic dissertations on the social studies course curriculum in Turkey: A review of the literature (2006-2021). Pedagogical Perspective, 1(1), 55-67. http://www.pedagogicalperspective.com
  • Gömleksiz, M. N. ve Bozpolat, E. (2013). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanındaki lisansüstü tezlerin değerlendirilmesi. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(7), 457-472. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS1769
  • Hazır-Bıkmaz, F., Aksoy, E., Tatar, Ö., & Atak Altınyüzük, C. (2013). Eğitimde program geliştirme alanında yapılan doktora tezlerine ait içerik çözümlemesi (1974-2009). Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(168). 288-303. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/1627
  • Karadağ, E. (2009b). Eğitim bilimleri alanında yapılmış doktora tezlerinin tematik açıdan incelenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 75-87. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefad/issue/59508/855693
  • Karakuş, G. (2021). A literary review on curriculum implementation problems. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(3), 201-220. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v9i3.3983
  • Kozikoğlu, İ., & Senemoğlu, N. (2015). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanında yapılan doktora tezlerinin içerik analizi (2009-2014). Eğitim ve Bilim 40(182), 29-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4784
  • Lee, M. H., Wu, Y. T. ve Tsai, C. C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: a content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15). 1999-2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802314876
  • Mcmillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. Addison Wesley Longman Inc.
  • Merriam, S. B. (2013). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber (S. Turan, Çeviri Editörü). Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. (Eserin orjinali 2009’da yayınlandı).
  • Nevenglosky, E., A., Cale, C., & Aguilar, S., P. (2019). Barriers to effective curriculum implementation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 36. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1203958
  • Ozan, C., & Köse, E. (2014). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanındaki araştırma eğilimleri. Sakarya Üniversitesi Journal of Education, 4(1), 116-136. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.76547
  • Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M. & Dündar, H. (2014). Eğitim ve bilim dergisinde yayınlanan araştırmaların eğilimleri: İçerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(173), 430-453. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/3278/721
  • Süer, S. (2022). A content analysis of English curriculum evaluation studies in Turkey (between 2005-2021). E-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 528-544. https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.963984
  • Şimşek, A., Özdamar, N., Becit, G., Kılıçer, K., Akbulut, Y., & Yıldırım, Y. (2008). Türkiye’deki eğitim teknolojisi araştırmalarında güncel eğilimler. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (19), 439-458. http://dergisosyalbil.selcuk.edu.tr/susbed/article/view/427/409
  • Taş, İ. D., & Duman, S. N. (2021). A Systematic review of postgraduate theses on curriculum evaluation. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 43-64. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2021.003
  • Tosuntaş Ş.B., Emirtekin E., & Süral İ., (2019). Eğitim ve öğretim teknolojileri konusunda yapılan tezlerin incelenmesi (2013-2018). Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi/Journal of Higher Education and Science, 9(2), 277-286. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2019.330
  • Turan, S., Karadağ, E., Bektaş, F., & Yalçın, M. (2014). Knowledge production in educational administration in Turkey: An overview of research in journal of educational administration: Theory and practice -2003 to 2013. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 93-119. https://doi.org/10.14527/kuey.2014.005
  • Virgilio, S. J., & Virgilio, I. R. (1984). The role of the principal in curriculum implementation. Education, 104(4), 346-50. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ308910
  • Wiles, J. W., & Bondi, J. C. (2014). Curriculum development: A guide to practice (9th ed.). Pearson.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Seckin.
  • Yin, R. K. (2012). Case study methods. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 141–155). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-009

Thematic and Methodological Analysis of National and International Theses on Curriculum Implementation

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 2, 391 - 416, 30.08.2023
https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1191536

Öz

The current study aims to conduct a thematic and methodological analysis of national and international theses on curriculum implementation. The theses to be included in this study, which was designed as descriptive content analysis, were determined by criterion sampling, one of the purposive sampling methods. A total of 363 theses, 21 national and 342 international, were included in the study. Research data were collected with the "Thesis Evaluation Form" developed by the researchers. In the content analysis of the data, categorical analysis and frequency analysis were used. The results of the research showed that the implementation of the curriculum in national theses was mostly discussed under the theme of curriculum development and curriculum evaluation, while in international theses, the themes studied on the curriculum implementation were more diverse and specific to the implementation process of the curriculum. While mixed methods and quantitative research methods were preferred in national theses, qualitative research methods were mostly used in international theses. In accordance with the selected research method, mixed method research designs, maximum diversity and convenience sampling methods, use of interviews and scales, descriptive statistics and content analysis were utilized in national theses. On the other hand, in international theses, qualitative case study design, purposeful sampling method, data collection through interviews, observations and documents, and data analysis with coding technique were frequently employed. The sample group of both national and international theses is mostly teachers. It is thought that the findings obtained within the scope of this research will be useful in terms of understanding the studies on the implementation of the curricula and guiding future studies to be carried out in the field.

Kaynakça

  • Akkaş- Baysal, E., & Kırat, K. (2022). A meta-evaluation study on master's theses in curriculum and instruction (2019- 2021). International Journal of Science and Education, 5(2), 113-132. https://doi.org/10.47477/ubed.1059232
  • Al-Kathiri, S. N. (2002). The characteristics of master's theses conducted in the department of curriculum and teaching methods from 1983 through 2002 at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Arkansas.
  • Alkan-Şahin, S., & Tunca, N. (2016). What is the purpose of the theses addressing the issue of program evaluation in Turkey? (The case of curriculum and instruction: 1997-2015). Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i1.1040
  • Arcagök, S. (2021). An analysis of the postgraduate theses focusing on the social studies curriculum. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 13(2), 1444-1463. http://ijci.wcci-international.org/index.php/IJCI/article/view/632/317
  • Aslan, M., & Saglam, M. (2017). Methodological Investigation of the curriculum evaluation theses completed between the years 2006-2015 in Turkey. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 1468-1478. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050904
  • Avcı, B., & Güven, M. (2022). Analysis of graduate theses in curriculum development in Turkey (1993-2020). Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 23(2), 870-891. https://doi.org/10.17679
  • Aykan, A., & Çalışkan, E.F. (2022). An Overview of Postgraduate Dissertations Written on Primary School Programs in Turkey. Bingöl University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 24, 156-168. https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.1120067
  • Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus open, 2, 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001
  • Bümen, N. T., Çakar, E. & Yıldız, D. G. (2014). Curriculum fidelity and factors affecting fidelity in the Turkish context. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(1), 203-228. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.2020
  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. C. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publication.
  • Creswell, J., W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches, (4th edition). Sage Publications.
  • Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinin parametreleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 33-38. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3412
  • Demirel, Ö. (2007). Eğitimde program geliştirme (10. Baskı). Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Demirel, Ö. (2015). Eğitimde program geliştirme kuramdan uygulamaya (23. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
  • Dinçer, S. (2018). Content Analysis in Scientific Research: Meta-Analysis, Meta-Synthesis, and Descriptive Content Analysis. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(1), 176-190. doi: 10.14686/buefad.363159
  • Downe‐Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: method, applications, and issues. Health care for women international, 13(3), 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399339209516006
  • Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, R., Falco, M., & Hansen, W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18(2), 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/18.2.237
  • Erden, M. (1998). Eğitimde program değerlendirme (3.Baskı). Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Fisher, M. J., & Marshall, A. P. (2009). Understanding descriptive statistics. Australian critical care, 22(2), 93-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2008.11.003
  • Gez Çinpolat, A. (2022). Academic dissertations on the social studies course curriculum in Turkey: A review of the literature (2006-2021). Pedagogical Perspective, 1(1), 55-67. http://www.pedagogicalperspective.com
  • Gömleksiz, M. N. ve Bozpolat, E. (2013). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanındaki lisansüstü tezlerin değerlendirilmesi. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(7), 457-472. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS1769
  • Hazır-Bıkmaz, F., Aksoy, E., Tatar, Ö., & Atak Altınyüzük, C. (2013). Eğitimde program geliştirme alanında yapılan doktora tezlerine ait içerik çözümlemesi (1974-2009). Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(168). 288-303. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/1627
  • Karadağ, E. (2009b). Eğitim bilimleri alanında yapılmış doktora tezlerinin tematik açıdan incelenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 75-87. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefad/issue/59508/855693
  • Karakuş, G. (2021). A literary review on curriculum implementation problems. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(3), 201-220. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v9i3.3983
  • Kozikoğlu, İ., & Senemoğlu, N. (2015). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanında yapılan doktora tezlerinin içerik analizi (2009-2014). Eğitim ve Bilim 40(182), 29-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4784
  • Lee, M. H., Wu, Y. T. ve Tsai, C. C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: a content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15). 1999-2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802314876
  • Mcmillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. Addison Wesley Longman Inc.
  • Merriam, S. B. (2013). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber (S. Turan, Çeviri Editörü). Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. (Eserin orjinali 2009’da yayınlandı).
  • Nevenglosky, E., A., Cale, C., & Aguilar, S., P. (2019). Barriers to effective curriculum implementation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 36. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1203958
  • Ozan, C., & Köse, E. (2014). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanındaki araştırma eğilimleri. Sakarya Üniversitesi Journal of Education, 4(1), 116-136. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.76547
  • Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M. & Dündar, H. (2014). Eğitim ve bilim dergisinde yayınlanan araştırmaların eğilimleri: İçerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(173), 430-453. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/3278/721
  • Süer, S. (2022). A content analysis of English curriculum evaluation studies in Turkey (between 2005-2021). E-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 528-544. https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.963984
  • Şimşek, A., Özdamar, N., Becit, G., Kılıçer, K., Akbulut, Y., & Yıldırım, Y. (2008). Türkiye’deki eğitim teknolojisi araştırmalarında güncel eğilimler. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (19), 439-458. http://dergisosyalbil.selcuk.edu.tr/susbed/article/view/427/409
  • Taş, İ. D., & Duman, S. N. (2021). A Systematic review of postgraduate theses on curriculum evaluation. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 43-64. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2021.003
  • Tosuntaş Ş.B., Emirtekin E., & Süral İ., (2019). Eğitim ve öğretim teknolojileri konusunda yapılan tezlerin incelenmesi (2013-2018). Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi/Journal of Higher Education and Science, 9(2), 277-286. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2019.330
  • Turan, S., Karadağ, E., Bektaş, F., & Yalçın, M. (2014). Knowledge production in educational administration in Turkey: An overview of research in journal of educational administration: Theory and practice -2003 to 2013. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 93-119. https://doi.org/10.14527/kuey.2014.005
  • Virgilio, S. J., & Virgilio, I. R. (1984). The role of the principal in curriculum implementation. Education, 104(4), 346-50. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ308910
  • Wiles, J. W., & Bondi, J. C. (2014). Curriculum development: A guide to practice (9th ed.). Pearson.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Seckin.
  • Yin, R. K. (2012). Case study methods. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 141–155). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-009

Programın Uygulanması ile İlgili Ulusal ve Uluslararası Tezlerin Tematik ve Metodolojik Analizi

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 2, 391 - 416, 30.08.2023
https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1191536

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı programın uygulanması ile ilgili yapılmış ulusal ve uluslararası tezleri tematik ve metodolojik olarak analiz etmektir. Betimsel içerik analizi olarak desenlenen bu çalışmaya dâhil edilecek tezler amaçlı örnekleme yöntemlerinden ölçüt örnekleme yoluyla belirlenmiştir. 21’i ulusal ve 342’si uluslararası olmak üzere toplam 363 tez araştırmaya dâhil edilmiştir. Araştırma verileri, araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen “Tez Değerlendirme Formu” ile toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde içerik analizi türlerinden kategorisel analiz ve frekans analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları, ulusal tezlerde programın uygulanmasının çoğunlukla program geliştirme ve program değerlendirme konuları altında ele alındığını, uluslararası tezlerde ise programın uygulanmasına ilişkin çalışılan temaların daha çeşitli ve programın uygulanma sürecine özgü olduğunu göstermiştir. Ulusal tezlerde daha çok karma yöntem ile nicel araştırma yöntemleri tercih edilirken uluslararası tezlerde daha çok nitel araştırma yöntemleri uygulanmaktadır. Seçilen araştırma yöntemine uygun olarak ulusal tezlerde daha çok karma yöntem araştırma desenleri, maksimum çeşitlilik ve uygun örnekleme yöntemleri, görüşme ve ölçek kullanımı, betimsel istatistikler ve içerik analizi tercih edilirken; uluslararası tezlerde nitel durum çalışması deseni, amaçlı örnekleme yöntemi, görüşme, gözlem ve dokümanlar aracılığıyla veri toplama ve kodlama tekniği ile veri analizi sıklıkla tercih edilmiştir. Hem ulusal hem de uluslararası tezlerin örneklem grubunu çoğunlukla öğretmenler oluşturmaktadır. Bu araştırma kapsamında elde edilen bulguların, programın uygulanması ile ilgili yapılan çalışmaları anlama ve alanda yürütülecek yeni çalışmalara yön verme açısından faydalı olacağı düşünülmektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Akkaş- Baysal, E., & Kırat, K. (2022). A meta-evaluation study on master's theses in curriculum and instruction (2019- 2021). International Journal of Science and Education, 5(2), 113-132. https://doi.org/10.47477/ubed.1059232
  • Al-Kathiri, S. N. (2002). The characteristics of master's theses conducted in the department of curriculum and teaching methods from 1983 through 2002 at King Saud University, Saudi Arabia [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Arkansas.
  • Alkan-Şahin, S., & Tunca, N. (2016). What is the purpose of the theses addressing the issue of program evaluation in Turkey? (The case of curriculum and instruction: 1997-2015). Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(1), 11-22. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i1.1040
  • Arcagök, S. (2021). An analysis of the postgraduate theses focusing on the social studies curriculum. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 13(2), 1444-1463. http://ijci.wcci-international.org/index.php/IJCI/article/view/632/317
  • Aslan, M., & Saglam, M. (2017). Methodological Investigation of the curriculum evaluation theses completed between the years 2006-2015 in Turkey. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 1468-1478. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050904
  • Avcı, B., & Güven, M. (2022). Analysis of graduate theses in curriculum development in Turkey (1993-2020). Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 23(2), 870-891. https://doi.org/10.17679
  • Aykan, A., & Çalışkan, E.F. (2022). An Overview of Postgraduate Dissertations Written on Primary School Programs in Turkey. Bingöl University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 24, 156-168. https://doi.org/10.29029/busbed.1120067
  • Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus open, 2, 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001
  • Bümen, N. T., Çakar, E. & Yıldız, D. G. (2014). Curriculum fidelity and factors affecting fidelity in the Turkish context. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(1), 203-228. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.2020
  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. C. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publication.
  • Creswell, J., W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches, (4th edition). Sage Publications.
  • Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). İçerik analizinin parametreleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174), 33-38. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3412
  • Demirel, Ö. (2007). Eğitimde program geliştirme (10. Baskı). Pegem A Yayıncılık.
  • Demirel, Ö. (2015). Eğitimde program geliştirme kuramdan uygulamaya (23. Baskı). Pegem Akademi.
  • Dinçer, S. (2018). Content Analysis in Scientific Research: Meta-Analysis, Meta-Synthesis, and Descriptive Content Analysis. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 7(1), 176-190. doi: 10.14686/buefad.363159
  • Downe‐Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: method, applications, and issues. Health care for women international, 13(3), 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399339209516006
  • Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, R., Falco, M., & Hansen, W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18(2), 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/18.2.237
  • Erden, M. (1998). Eğitimde program değerlendirme (3.Baskı). Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Fisher, M. J., & Marshall, A. P. (2009). Understanding descriptive statistics. Australian critical care, 22(2), 93-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aucc.2008.11.003
  • Gez Çinpolat, A. (2022). Academic dissertations on the social studies course curriculum in Turkey: A review of the literature (2006-2021). Pedagogical Perspective, 1(1), 55-67. http://www.pedagogicalperspective.com
  • Gömleksiz, M. N. ve Bozpolat, E. (2013). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanındaki lisansüstü tezlerin değerlendirilmesi. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 6(7), 457-472. https://doi.org/10.9761/JASSS1769
  • Hazır-Bıkmaz, F., Aksoy, E., Tatar, Ö., & Atak Altınyüzük, C. (2013). Eğitimde program geliştirme alanında yapılan doktora tezlerine ait içerik çözümlemesi (1974-2009). Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(168). 288-303. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/1627
  • Karadağ, E. (2009b). Eğitim bilimleri alanında yapılmış doktora tezlerinin tematik açıdan incelenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 75-87. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefad/issue/59508/855693
  • Karakuş, G. (2021). A literary review on curriculum implementation problems. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(3), 201-220. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v9i3.3983
  • Kozikoğlu, İ., & Senemoğlu, N. (2015). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanında yapılan doktora tezlerinin içerik analizi (2009-2014). Eğitim ve Bilim 40(182), 29-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4784
  • Lee, M. H., Wu, Y. T. ve Tsai, C. C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: a content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15). 1999-2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802314876
  • Mcmillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. Addison Wesley Longman Inc.
  • Merriam, S. B. (2013). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber (S. Turan, Çeviri Editörü). Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. (Eserin orjinali 2009’da yayınlandı).
  • Nevenglosky, E., A., Cale, C., & Aguilar, S., P. (2019). Barriers to effective curriculum implementation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 36. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1203958
  • Ozan, C., & Köse, E. (2014). Eğitim programları ve öğretim alanındaki araştırma eğilimleri. Sakarya Üniversitesi Journal of Education, 4(1), 116-136. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.76547
  • Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M. & Dündar, H. (2014). Eğitim ve bilim dergisinde yayınlanan araştırmaların eğilimleri: İçerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(173), 430-453. http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/3278/721
  • Süer, S. (2022). A content analysis of English curriculum evaluation studies in Turkey (between 2005-2021). E-Kafkas Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 528-544. https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.963984
  • Şimşek, A., Özdamar, N., Becit, G., Kılıçer, K., Akbulut, Y., & Yıldırım, Y. (2008). Türkiye’deki eğitim teknolojisi araştırmalarında güncel eğilimler. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (19), 439-458. http://dergisosyalbil.selcuk.edu.tr/susbed/article/view/427/409
  • Taş, İ. D., & Duman, S. N. (2021). A Systematic review of postgraduate theses on curriculum evaluation. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 43-64. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2021.003
  • Tosuntaş Ş.B., Emirtekin E., & Süral İ., (2019). Eğitim ve öğretim teknolojileri konusunda yapılan tezlerin incelenmesi (2013-2018). Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi/Journal of Higher Education and Science, 9(2), 277-286. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2019.330
  • Turan, S., Karadağ, E., Bektaş, F., & Yalçın, M. (2014). Knowledge production in educational administration in Turkey: An overview of research in journal of educational administration: Theory and practice -2003 to 2013. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 20(1), 93-119. https://doi.org/10.14527/kuey.2014.005
  • Virgilio, S. J., & Virgilio, I. R. (1984). The role of the principal in curriculum implementation. Education, 104(4), 346-50. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ308910
  • Wiles, J. W., & Bondi, J. C. (2014). Curriculum development: A guide to practice (9th ed.). Pearson.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Seckin.
  • Yin, R. K. (2012). Case study methods. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 141–155). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-009
Toplam 40 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Alan Eğitimleri
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Gülçin Çeliker Ercan 0000-0003-2501-9392

Zühal Cubukcu 0000-0002-7612-7759

Erken Görünüm Tarihi 19 Haziran 2023
Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Ağustos 2023
Gönderilme Tarihi 19 Ekim 2022
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2023 Cilt: 36 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Çeliker Ercan, G., & Cubukcu, Z. (2023). Thematic and Methodological Analysis of National and International Theses on Curriculum Implementation. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(2), 391-416. https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1191536