Palavras-chave
Individual Innovation
Teaching Techniques
Como Citar
Resumo
This study was conducted to reveal the attitudes of physical education and sports teacher candidates towards individual innovativeness and using student-centered teaching methods and techniques according to dependent and independent variables. The scale of attitude towards using student-centered teaching methods and techniques (SAUSCTMT), which consists of 27 items and 4 sub-dimensions, developed by Koç (2014), and the individual innovativeness scale (IIS), which consists of 20 items and 4 sub-dimensions, developed by Hurt et al., (1977) and adapted to Turkish by Kılıçer and Odabaşı (2010) were used in the study. The necessary permissions were obtained for the scale method used in this study, with the decision of the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Mardin Artuklu University, dated 08.06.2022 and numbered 2022/6-3. The sample of the study was composed of 132 students and the data obtained were analyzed with the SPSS 25.0 software. Unpaired T-Test and One Way ANOVA tests were used in the analysis of the data obtained from the participants. Also, a "Pearson correlation analysis" was conducted to determine the level and the direction of the relationship between dependent variables. In the correlation analysis, it was seen that the strongest relationship was positive between the “SAUSCTMT” and the valuing sub-dimension (r= .859; p<0.05). In the study, it was determined that national athlete teacher candidates and those who had education in the sports management department had more positive ideas. As a result of the study, it was determined that physical education and sports teacher candidates' attitudes towards individual innovation and using student-centered teaching methods and techniques were nearly at a moderate level.
Referências
Adigüzel, A.; Kaya, A.; Balay, R.; Göçen, A. (2014). The relatinship between teacher candidates’ individual innovativeness and their learning attitudes. Milli Eğitim, 43(204): 135-154.
Atilgan, D.; Tükel, Y. (2021). Examination of coaches and physical education teachers' perceptions of individual innovativenes. Ekev Akademi Dergisi, (86): 171-208. http://dx.doi.org/10.17753/Ekev1869
Arkhipova, M. Y.; Kuchmaeva, O. V. (2018). Social demand of Russians for innovation (according to a sample survey). Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 11(2): 69-83. doi:10.15838/esc.2018.2.56.5
Akçöltekin, A. (2017). Investigation of the relationship between high school teachers' individual innovativeness perceptions and their attitudes towards educational research. Eğitim Kuram ve Uygulama Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1): 23-37.
Aslaner, E. (2010). Organizational change and innovation: a case of private school [Unpublished master’s dissertation]. University of Ankara.
Bitkin, A. (2012). The relationship between individual innovativeness levels and information acquisition competencies of prospective teachers [Unpublished master’s dissertation]. University of Harran.
Çiğdem, Ö. (2019). Investigation of Individual innovativeness of young adult male athletes in terms of individual development initiative. Ulusal Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(1): 25-40. https://doi.org/10.30769/usbd.567314
ÇETIN, A. (2020). Investigating the Relationship between Teachers’ Individual Innovativeness and their Attitudes towards Using Student-Centered Teaching Methods and Techniques. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 17(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.33437/ksusbd.648747
Göksel, A. G.; Yildiz, L. (2021). Examining individual innovativeness levels of university students: sample of the faculty of sports sciences. International Social Sciences Studies Journal, 7(76), 107-117.
Caena, F. (2014). Teacher Competence Frameworks in E urope: policy as discourse and policy as practice. European Journal of Education, 49(3), 311-331.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12088
Demir, B. S.; Keleş, S. (2015). Who is innovative? Examination of teachers’ innovativeness level. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(4), 106-118.
DEMIRALAY, R.; BAYIR, E A.; GELIBOLU, M. F. (2016). İnvestigation of relationship between students’ personal innovativeness and readiness for online learning. Journal of Research in Education and Teaching, 5(1), 161-168.
Ertuğ, N.; Kaya, H. (2017). Investigating the individual innovativeness profiles and barriers to innovativeness in undergraduate nursing students. Hemşirelikte Eğitim ve Araştırma Dergisi, 14(3): 192-197.
Gür-Erdoğan D.; Zafer-Güneş D. (2013). The relationship between individual innovatiness and change readiness conditions of students attending faculty of education. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106: 3033-3040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.349
Tabachnick, B. G.; Fidell, L S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Kalayci, Ş. (2016). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri (trans.: SPSS applied multivariate statistical techniques), Asil Yayıncılık, Ankara.
Klecker, B. M.; Loadman, W. E. (1999). Measuring principals’ openness to change on three dimensions: Affective, cognitive and behavioral. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26(4): 213-225.
Kösterelioğlu, M A.; Demir, F. (2014). The impact of teachers’ individual innovativeness levels on teacher leadership. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 26(1): 247-255. http://dx.doi.org/10.9761/JASSS2271
George, D.; Mallery, P. (2016). IBM SPSS statistics 23 step by step: A simple guide and reference. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315545899
Genç, S. Z. (2000). Bilgi toplumunda öğretmen eğitimi (Translation: Teacher education in the Information society). Kuram ve uygulamada eğitim yönetimi, 23(23): 375-386.
Genç, S. Z.; Eryaman, Y. M. (2008). Changing values and new education paradigm. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(1): 89-102.
Koç, C. (2014). Scale of attitudes towards using student centered teaching methods and techniques: validity and reliability study. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(49): 150-170. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.00089
Fraenkel, J. R., And Wallen, N. E. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (Seventh ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Fidan, N. K.; Duman, T. (2014). Classroom Teachers’ Possession Level of Characteristics Required by the Constructivist Approach. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174). http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.2027
Gravetter, J. F.; Forzano, L. B. (2012). Research methods for the behavioral sciences (4. Baskı). Linda Schreiber-Ganster.
Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (Translation: Scientific Research Methods). 24th Edition, Nobel Yayıncılık.
KILIÇER, K.; ODABAŞI, H. F. (2012). İndividual innovativeness scale (is): the study of adaptation to turkish, validity and reliability. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 38: 150-164.
Ocak, G. (2010). Teacher attitudes towards constructivist learning practices. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(3): 835-857.
Özdemir, S. (2000). Eğitimde Örgütsel Yenileşme (Translation: Organizational Innovation in Education). Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
Polat, S. (2018). İnvestigation of social studies teachers’ attitude toward student centered teaching methods and techniques. Doğu coğrafya dergisi, 23(39): 83-94.
Rogers, E. M. (2013). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
Rogers, R; K.; Wallace, J. D. (2011). Predictors of technology integration in education: a study of anxiety and innovativeness in teacher preparation. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 12(2): 29-61.
Surry, D W., & Brennan, J P. (1998). Diffusion of Instructional Innovations: Five Important, Unexplored Questions. http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED422892.pdf.
Voogt, J.; Pelgrum, H. (2005). ICT and curriculum change. Human Technology; An Inter Disciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 1(2): 157-175.
Yağan, S. A. (2022). The effect of student-centered methods, techniques and strategies on student attitude: a meta-analysis study. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(33): 294-323. https://doi.org/10.35675/befdergi.730782
Yilmaz, A.; Aslan, E.; Ayan, S. (2020). Teachers' self-efficacy beliefs of sport science faculty students and competence to choose teaching techniques. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(1): 435-448. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.502659
Jacobsen, D A.; Eggen, P.; Kauchak, D. (2019). Methods for teaching: promoting student learning in k–12 classrooms. Pearson Education.
Yalçin, V.; Halil, U. (2018). Examination of Pre-school Teachers' Levels of Teaching Methods and Techniques According to Some Variables (Kilis and Gaziantep Example). Uluslararası Erken Çocukluk Eğitimi Çalışmaları Dergisi, 3(2): 42-54.
Yapici, Ü. İ.; Kaya, S. (2020). Examination of individual innovativeness levels of biology teachers (case of Diyarbakir). Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(73): 348-362.
Yeğin, H. İ. (2017). İndividual innovativeness levels of divınity faculty students. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(4): 239-262. https://doi.org/10.11616/basbed.vi.459398
Yildirim, F. S. (2011). The views of science and techonology teachers in primary school about the environment of constructivist learning [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Selçuk.
Yilmaz, O. (2019). Relationships among teachers' ICT integration approaches, self-efficacy towards technology integration and individual innovativeness features. [Unpublished master’s dissertation]. University of Necmettin Erbakan.
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Synesis (ISSN 1984-6754)