Identfying the Needs of Pre-Service Classroom Teachers About Science Teaching Methodology Courses in terms of Parlettas Illuminative Program Evaluation Model
Full Text:PDF (Türkçe)
Akerlind, G. S. (2005). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research &Development, 24(4), 321–334
Akerlind, G.S. (2012). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research & Development. 31(1), 115-127
Abell, S.K.& Lederman, N.G. (2013). Handbook of research on science education. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group: Newyork/London.
Bloor, M. & Wood, F. (2006). Keywords in qualitative methods. NY: Sage Publications.
Bickman, L. (1997). Evaluating evaluation: Where do we go from here? Evaluation Practice. 18, 1–16.
Brinkerhoff, R.O. (1983). Program evaluation: A practitioner’s guide for trainers and educators. Boston: Klumer-Nijhoff.
Bronwen, C. (2005). Student commentary on classroom assessment in science: a socioculturalinterpretation, 27 (2), 199-214. Retrieved May 1 2006 from http://web117.epnet.com/externalframe.asp
Buaraphan, K. (2011). The impact of the standard-based science teacher preparation program on pre-service science teachers’ attitudes toward science teaching. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8 (1): 61
Chankook, K.,& Fortner, R. (2007). Educators’ views of collaboration with scientists. Secondary Education, 35 (3): 29-53.
Çalışkan, İ. & Kaptan, F. (2012). Reflections of performance assessment on science process skills, attitude and retention in science education. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 43, 117-129.
Didiş, N., Özcan, Ö. & Abak, M. (2008). Qunatum physics from students’ perspective: A qualitative study. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 34: 86-94.
Finkenflügel, H., Cornielje, H. & Velema, J. (2008). The use of classification models in the evaluation of CBR programs. Disability and Rehabilitation, 30 (5), 348-354.
Fitzpatrick, J.L., Sanders, J.R. & Worthen, B.R. (2004). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Pearson, US.
Gredler, M.E. (1996). Program Evaluation. Pearson: US.
Kaufman, R., & English, F. W. (1979). Needs assessment: Concept and application. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2009). A comparative analysis of the models of teacher education in terms of teaching practices in the USA, England and Turkey. Models of Teacher Education. 130 (2), 172-183.
Kaya, M. & Bacanak, A. (2013). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının düşünceleri: Fen okur-yazarı birey yetiştirmede öğretmenin yeri. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21 (2013): 2092
Kesal, F. & Aksu, M. (2006). The perceptions of ELT students about constructivist learning activities and assessment strategies. Educational Research, 134-142.
Larson, M. &Cindy, S. (2011). Changing perceptions of science in undergraduate students: A mixed methods case study. Unpublished PhD dissertation, The University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 127pp. (ED533738). Lehesvouri, S., Jouni, V., Rasku-Puttonen, H., Moate, J. & Helaakoski, J. (2013). Visualizing communication structures in science classrooms: Tracing cumulativity in teacher-led whole class discussions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 50 (8): 912-939.
Ornstein, A.C. & Hunkins, F.P. (1998). Curriculum: Foundations, principles and issues. Allyn &Bacon, US.
Önal, İ. (2005). İlköğretim fen eğitiminde performans dayanaklı değerlendirme üzerine bir çalışma Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Bölümü Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Bilim Dalı.
Özer, D.Z. & Özkan, M. (2013). The effect of project based learning method on science process skills of prospective teachers of science education in biology lessons. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences. 5(3), 635-645.
Parlett, M. & Hamilton, D. (1988). ‘Evaluation as illumination: a new approach to the study of innovatory programs.’ In Murphy, R. & Torrance, H. (eds.).Evaluating education: issues and methods. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Payne, D.A. (1994). Designing educational project and program evaluations: A practical overview based on research and experience. Kluwer Academic Publishers/Boston/Dordrecht/London.
Proctor, R.W. & Capaldi, E.J. (2001). Improving the science education of psychology students: Better Teaching of methodology. Teaching of Psychology, 28 (3): 173-181.
Roth, W.F. (2008). Authentic science for all and the search for the ideal biology curriculum: A personal perspective. Journal of Biological Education (Society of Biology), 43 (1):3-5.
Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, C. (2009). Foundations of mixed method research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences.
Wen, M.L. & Tsai, C. (2008). Online peer assessment in an inservice science and mathematics teacher education course. Teaching In Higher Education. (1), 55-67.
Woltering, V., Herler, A., Spitzer, K. & Spreckelsen, C. (2009). Blended learning positively affects students’ satisfaction and the role of the tutor in the problem-based learing process: Results of a mixed-method evaluation. Adv. in Health Sci. Educ. 14:725-738.
Yasar, S., M. Gültekin, N. Köse, P. Girmen & Anagün, S. (2005). The meta- evaluation of teacher training programs for elementary education in Turkey, Conference Proceedings, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. pp.498-504, 06/07/2005
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.