INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES AND MATERIAL DESIGN COURSE EVALUATION THROUGH LECTURER’S AND STUDENTS’ RESPONSES
Abstract
“Instructional Technologies and Material Design” (ITMD) is one of the compulsory courses with both theoretical and practice hours in most of the programs of Turkish educational faculties. In order to help improving this course, this study aims to reveal one of the course lecturer’s and his students’ opinions related to course objectives, content, teaching and learning process with measurement and assessment activities. By applying one of the mixed designs -concurrent nested design-, a survey was conducted on 50 sophomores of preschool education program and their ITMD lecturer was interviewed in 2009-2010 academic year. The findings indicated that both the lecturer and the students complained overcrowded class and lack of time. Besides, they implied the need for a larger learning environment as a workplace for practice and the need for testing their materials at real schools. The students claimed that assessment must rely heavily on their efforts for instructional material development and presentation activities instead of written exam scores and the lecturer should not only have an expertise in instructional material development but also in their own subject area. Whilst the sample was limited with one teacher education program of a faculty, the findings were considered to contribute curriculum development efforts for instructional material development courses at other teacher education programs as well.
Keywords: Instructional technologies and material design; responsive evaluation; course evaluation; teacher education.
REFERENCES
Erden, M. (1998). Eğitimde Program Değerlendirme [Curriculum Evaluation in Education]. 3rd Edition. Ankara: Anı Publishing.
Fitzpatrick, J.L., Sanders, J.R. & Worthen, B.R. (2004). Program Evaluation Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines. USA: Pearson Education.
Gunduz, Ş. & Odabaşı H. F. (2004). The Importance of Teaching Technologies and
Material Design Course in Preservice Teacher’ Education at Information Age. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, 3(1), Retrieved on:
May 18, 2011 from: http://www.tojet.net/ articles/317.htm.
Güven, S. (2006). The evaluation of teaching technologies and materials development course in terms of competencies it provides (A sample of İnönü Unıversity Faculty of Education). Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 4(2), 165-179.
Retrieved on: November 18, 2011 from:
http://www.tebd.gazi.edu.tr/arsiv/2006_cilt4/sayi_2/165-179.pdfİmer, G. (2000). Eğitim Fakültelerinde Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilgisayara ve Bilgisayarı
Eğitimde Kullanmaya Yönelik Nitelikleri. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Yayınları.
Karataş, S. & Yapıcı, M. (2006). The process and application samples of teaching technologies and material development. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences, 8(2), 311-325. Retrieved on: November 16, 2011 from: http://www.aku.edu.tr/AKU/DosyaYonetimi/SOSYALBILENS/dergi/VIII2/myapici
Mert-Uyangör, S. & Karaca-Ece, D. (2010). The attitudes of the prospective mathematics teachers towards instructional technologies and material development course.
TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(1), 213-220.
Stake, R.E. (2000). Program evaluation, particularly responsive evaluation. In Evaluation
Models: Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation (D.L. Stufflebeam, G.E. Madaus and T. Kellaghan Eds.).Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. USA: Sage Publications.
Yekin-Özdemir, İ.E. (2008). Prospective elementary teachers’ cognitive skills on using manipulatives in teaching mathematics. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 35: 362-373.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2012 International Journal of New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Education (IJTASE)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.