TARİH ALAN YETERLİK ALGISI ÖLÇEĞİ: BİR ÖLÇEK GELİŞTİRME ÇALIŞMASI
MetadataShow full item record
Öğretmen nitelikleri üzerine yapılan birçok araştırma, tarih öğretmenlerinin kendi disiplinleri hakkında derin bilgi sahibi olmaları gerektiğini ileri sürmektedir. Böyle bir tarihsel bilgiye sahip olmak, tarih öğretmeni için bir tür ön koşul niteliğindedir. Nitekim tarihsel alan bilgisinde mevcut olan bir kısım eksiklikler bile, öğrenmenin niteliğini olumsuz yönde etkilemekte ve öğretilecek konuların yüzeysel bir şekilde aktarılmasına neden olmaktadır. Tarih öğretiminde alan bilgisinin önemine karşın, bu anlamda kullanılacak bir ölçme aracının bulunmaması önemli bir eksikliktir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, tarih öğretmenlerinin ve öğretmen adaylarının alan bilgileri konusundaki yeterlik algılarını ölçmede kullanılabilecek geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmektir. Bu kapsamda 21 madde ve 4 boyuttan oluşan Tarih Alan Yeterlik Algısı Ölçeği (TAYAÖ), 343 tarih ve sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adayı üzerinde uygulanmış ve elde edilen veriler geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Yapılan açıklayıcı faktör analizine göre TAYAÖ, toplam varyansın % 62.84'ünü açıklamaktadır. Açıklayıcı faktör analizi sonuçları incelendiğinde TAYAÖ'de yer alan 21 maddenin faktör yüklerinin .43-.83 arasında değiştiği görülmektedir. Ayrıca TAYAÖ'nün faktör yapısı doğrulayıcı faktör analiziyle de sınanmış, elde edilen sonuçlar 4 faktörlü yapıyı doğrulamıştır. Elde edilen uyum indeksleri ise; RMSEA = .060, GFI = .90, CFI = .98, NFI =.96, RFI = .96, AGFI = .87, IFI = .98 ve NNFI = .98 şeklindedir. Ölçeğin Cronbach alfa iç tutarlılık katsayısı ise .92 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Bununla birlikte ölçekte yer alan boyutların kendileriyle ve ölçek toplam puanıyla korelasyon içinde oldukları görülmektedir. Bütün bu sonuçlar TAYAÖ'nün tarih öğretmenlerinin alan yeterliklerini ölçmede geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı olduğunu göstermektedirFrom the perspective of history teaching, it is widely accepted that history teachers have to know the subjects they are teaching. As a matter of fact, even some apparently small deficiencies in subject matter knowledge negatively affect the quality of learning and cause just a superficial understanding of the subjects being taught. Despite the importance of subject matter knowledge for history teaching, the Turkish literature in this matter contains no study dealing with history teachers’ competence in subject matter knowledge. The purpose of this study is to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used for measuring in-service and pre-service history teachers’ perceived competence in subject matter knowledge. Scale of Perceived Competence in History as a Subject Matter (SPCHSM) consisting of 21 items and 4 dimensions was administered to 343 pre-service history and social studies teachers, and the obtained data were subjected to validity and reliability analysis. According to the results of the explanatory factor analysis, SPCHSM explains 62.84% of the total variance. They also indicate that the factor loadings of 21 items in SPCHSM vary from .43 to .83. The factor structure of SPCHSM was tested through confirmatory factor analysis. The obtained results confirmed the 4-factor structure. The fit indices acquired are as follows: RMSEA = .060, GFI = .90, CFI = .98, NFI = .96, RFI = .96, AGFI = .87, IFI = .98, and NNFI = .98. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of internal consistency of the scale was found to be .92. The dimensions of the scale were seen to be correlated with each other and the total scale score. All these results indicate that SPCHSM is a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used for measuring history teachers’ perceived competency in their field Competence refers to “knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values that an individual has to have in order to perform the teaching profession in an effective and productive way” (MEB, 2008a). Having such competence constitutes the basis of a teacher’s qualification. In addition to professional knowledge and ability, another important thing in the teacher training process is subject matter knowledge. It is widely accepted in the literature that effective teaching requires in-depth subject matter knowledge and it cannot be replaced by anything (Kıylık, 2016). Even if a teacher closely follows every innovation in methodology, technique, or pedagogy, he/she has to build it on subject matter knowledge. According to Shulman (1986: 9), who made one of the first studies in the literature, teachers have to know the basic phenomena, concepts, theories, and ideas about the subject matter; be able to organize them; be capable of evaluating and explaining the subjects to be taught within their contexts; and understand and know such subjects well enough to prove them. A teacher is required to master the knowledge and skills related to the subject matter and internalize the point of view of the field. A teacher who does not understand the basic subjects of the field and the relations between them cannot be expected to plan and maintain an effective teaching process (Kıncal, 1999: 35-39; Özdemir, Yalın, and Sezgin, 2004: 78). As the nature of the subject being transferred and subject matter knowledge are directly related, developments and innovations in the field need to be followed closely (Doğru, 2016). This is because; in the recent studies, the cognitive skills and the subject matter knowledge teachers have are seen as the basis of an effective teaching process (Kitson, Husband, and Steward, 2011). In other words, a teacher has to understand the conceptual structure and principles of his field and be capable of transferring the ideas related to his field to students in a meaningful way (Barton and Levstik, 2004). Teachers with this kind of competence are able to master the concepts of the discipline that they intend to teach and know what they teach in detail. This also increases the quality of any kind of teaching practice in the class (Kitson, Husband, and Steward, 2011). From the perspective of history teaching, it is widely accepted that history teachers have to know the subjects they are teaching (Husband, 2011). As a matter of fact, even some apparently small deficiencies in subject matter knowledge negatively affect the quality of learning and cause just a superficial understanding of the subjects being taught (Smith, 2010). Unless teachers achieve a perfect understanding of the nature of historical knowledge, it is very difficult for them to design a meaningful learning process because they, personally, may not know the things that their students have to learn (Barton and Levstik, 2004). The positive effect of subject matter knowledge is clear, considering the tasks of history teachers such as checking the answers given by students to question-answer activities based on knowledge in the classroom environment, detecting misunderstanding, and correcting it (Husband, 2011). Despite the importance of subject matter knowledge for history teaching, the Turkish literature in this matter contains no study dealing with history teachers’ competence in subject matter knowledge. It can be considered as an important gap that there is no measurement tool developed for determining history teachers’ perceived competence in subject matter knowledge. In this regard, the present study aims to develop a measurement tool for measuring history teachers’ perceived competence in subject matter knowledge. Method This is a scale development study aiming to develop a measurement tool that can be used for describing pre-service history teachers’ perceived competence in subject matter knowledge. In the scale development process, a 50-item item pool was created based on “History Teachers’ Competences in Their Field”, which entered into force in 2011 following its preparation by a commission formed by the Ministry of National Education of Turkey and the Directorate General for Teacher Training and Development. The answer options of 5-point Likert-type SPCHSM are as follows: “Incompetent”, “Slightly competent”, “Somewhat competent”, “Quite competent”, and “Very competent”. The measurement tool prepared was administered to 343 pre-service history and social studies teachers receiving pedagogical formation education in 3 different universities in Turkey in the 2016-2017 academic year.According to the results of the explanatory factor analysis, SPCHSM explains 62.84% of the variance in four factors. In research conducted within social sciences, rates of variance that are not less than 40% are considered sufficient (Tavşancıl, 2006). Accordingly, the rate of variance explained by SPCHSM in 4 factors is acceptable. The results of the explanatory factor analysis indicate that the factor loadings of 21 items in SPCHSM vary from .55 to .79 in the dimension of Historiography; from .66 to .77 in the dimension of Pre-Ottoman Turkish History; from .64 to .79 in the dimension of Post-Ottoman Turkish History; and from .43 to .83 in the dimension of World History. In the related literature, factor loadings are expected to be not less than .30 (Hair et al. 2016; Büyüköztürk, 2008; Tavşancıl, 2006). Thus, the factor loadings in the range of .43 to .83 are acceptable. In addition to the explanatory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis was also made to ensure the validity of 4-factor SPCHSM. The most applied fit indices in confirmatory factor analysis studies are chisquare (?²), ?²/sd, GFI, CFI, NFI, RFI, AGFI, IFI, and RMSEA. According to the related literature, for the created model to be accepted suitable, fit indices have to be as follows: GFI > .90, CFI > .95, NFI > .90, RFI > .90, AGFI > .85, IFI > .95, NNFI > .95, and RMSEA < .08 (Kline, 2011; Şimşek, 2007). The fit indices obtained in the present study are RMSEA = .060, GFI = .90, CFI = .98, NFI =.96, RFI = .96, AGFI = .87, IFI = .98, and NNFI = .98. The consistency of the fit indices with the related literature and the significance of the chi-square value (?² = 410.94, df = 183, p = .00, ?²/df = 2.24) show the construct validity of SPCHSM, consisting of 21 items and 4 factors. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of internal consistency was checked to assure the reliability of SPCHSM. This value was found to be .92 for the entire SPCHSM; .87 for the dimension of Historiography; .80 for the dimension of Pre-Ottoman Turkish History; .87 for the dimension of PostOttoman Turkish History; and .84 for the dimension of World History. Considering the Cronbach’s alpha value that a reliable measurement tool is required to have (? ? .70), it can be said that SPCHSM is a reliable measurement tool (Hair et al., 2016; Büyüköztürk, 2008). All the statistical analyses used in the present study showed that SPCHSM is a valid and reliable scale for measuring history teachers’ perceived competence in subject matter knowledge. As to the factor structure of the scale based on the participants’ perceived competence in history subject matter knowledge, Historiography and World History stood as a factor each, whereas Turkish History was divided into two dimensions: Pre-Ottoman Turkish History and Post-Ottoman Turkish History, involving subjects about the Ottoman history and the Republic history. It is considered that SPCHSM will make an important contribution to the related literature as it does not contain any measurement tool dealing with competence in subject matter knowledge in the field of history, which is an important gap. SPCHSM can also be used as a measurement tool for determining the qualifications and deficiencies of undergraduate programs of history and history teaching in Turkey and revealing different factors influential on perceptions regarding subject matter knowledge in history. It can also contribute to identifying teachers’ competences in interdisciplinary fields such as social studies teaching, which also incorporates history, besides the programs of history and history teaching.