Internet-Zeitschrift für Kulturwissenschaften	17. Nr.	März 2010
Sektion 8.15.	New Approaches, Innovations and Research in Education | Neuigkeiten, Innovationen und Forschungen in der Erziehung SektionsleiterInnen | Section Chairs: Leyla Esentürk-Ercan and Melek Çakmak (Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey) Dokumentation | Documentation | Documentation

Investigating preservice Teachers’ University
teaching beliefs considering different Variables

  Neşe (Işık) Tertemiz (Gazi University, Ankara / Turkiye) [BIO]

Email: tertemiz@gazi.edu.tr

“Teachers, future generations will be your articraft.”

 M. Kemal Atatürk

Abstract

This study focuses on the university teaching beliefs of students studying at Primary Education Department, Faculty of Education in Turkiye and Finland. Teaching staff and classroom communication practices, the roles of teaching staff and students, and their attitudes toward the important regulations of institutional and educational culture at universities were tried to be determined in both of the countries. University Teaching Beliefs Questionnaire, developed by Greta J. Gorsuch from Texas Tech University, is used, with her permission, to determine the students’ attitudes. The questionnaire adapted into Turkish through applying factor analysis. After omitting some items, the questionnaire was applied as its original form in Finland.

Relational survey method was used in the study. Since it includes limited number of students and universities, no generalization related to the results was stated. Convenient sampling method was used in selecting the schools. Data were recorded in SPSS 10 software program. Frequency (f), percentage (%), and independent sample t-test were analyzed. Results were tested at the level of p<.05. The findings from the data obtained in this study indicate that there are differences between the university teaching beliefs of the students in Turkiye and those in Finland in some respects.

 

Introduction

Education has gained an international nature in the present age. Turkiye, just as other countries, is taking gradually joining various international associations and is forced to reach certain standards regarding social, economic and cultural structures (Korkut, 1999: 280). From a universal perspective, conducting empirical research to investigate the field of education regarding the needs and deficiencies in other countries and cultures is a necessity in the education sector. For teachers   and experts, comparative studies have the highest potential to leverage education to its best state and to provide the possibility of international distribution, as stipulated in the decisions stated by UNESCO (November 1945), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, and Children’s Rights Treaty signed in 1989 (cited in Türkoğlu, 1998: 19).

One of the issues emphasized in the process of Turkiye’s inclusion into the European Union is the establishment of a platform of research and cooperation among the member countries of the European Union. For this reason, comparative studies are particularly important for collaboration to be established. In addition, the notion of “Eurpeanizing of our citizens” is not possible to grasp without the contribution of comparative education (Türkoğlu, 1998: 19).

Educational systems are institutions which endeavor to form planned behavior change in individuals brought about with a suitable plan, program and methodology. The role of qualified educational staff in a quality educational system cannot be denied. Teachers are the active agents who implement educational and instructional activities. Teachers come first, after the families, to play the most important role in positively developing individuals’ personalities, which is one of the most vital functions of education. Individuals acquire the culture of the society in which they live from the family, which continues in the pre-school and primary school periods. Education is also a purposeful enculturation stage. Teachers are the representatives of culture during this stage. Individuals are affected by their teachers’ thoughts, emotional responses, values and habits as they are equipped with knowledge and skills along with their learning experience (Gözütok , 2006: 5).

In traditional terms, teachers were the sole sources in the transmission of knowledge, while today their role has transformed to  being a source to foster the methods of learning. Educational programs and university instructors play significant roles in developing the roles and competencies of teachers.

Quality in education is directly related to the quality of training that teachers have  received. Trainee teachers construct their competiences in the period of cognitive apprenticeship within the framework of their growing responsibilities. Discussions and sharing with expert teachers form the scaffolding of this structure (Baykal, 2005: 270). For this reason, to provide training for high quality teachers, there must be qualified and competent instructors. Based on this fact, we can draw implications about the future by examining the institutions and staff who will train the individuals to raise the future members of society.

Since the foundation of the republic, Turkiye has taken developed countries as an example in teacher training programs. Foremost among these countries are the USA, England, Germany, and France. When the countries that this research have focused on (Turkiye and Finland) are compared regarding primary teacher training programs, the following can be stated (Table 1).

Table 1: A comparison between primary school teachers inTurkiye and Finland

A comparative examination of Table 1 above illustrates that students are placed in primary teacher education departments in the universities in Turkiye through attainment a certain score from the centrally administered multiple-choice one-stage examination by the Council of Higher Education, after which they need to fall within the determined quota. On the other hand, in Finland, the applicants to the department of primary teacher education at university need to successfully pass the university entrance examination. Acceptance to primary teacher education requires that applicants take a written test, an apptitude test and an interview  (Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı, 2005).

The duration of university education in Turkiye is four years, at the end of which students graduate with a primary school teaching degree. The main areas in the curriculum of primary school teacher education can be classified as field knowledge,  professional knowledge and general culture. Although there are certain complications in the curricula implemented in teacher training courses in Turkiye, it can be stated that, in general, they encompass the following: “field knowledge courses are those which provide broad and in-depth information related to the field of teaching. Teaching profession knowledge courses answer the questions of “who”, “why”, “where”, and “how” of teaching. General culture courses have a larger structure ” (Küçükahmet, 2007: 207). In contrast, in Finland, undergraduate degree courses take three years to complete, after which students pursue a two-year master degree. When they graduate, they earn a minor degree besides the major degree of primary school teaching. Legal documents state the requirement that a master degree (160 credits = 240 ECTS) needs to combine teachers’ pedagogic study (35 credits = 52.5 ECTS) in one or two subjects taught in different schools. Pedagodical studies focus on didactic method and teaching practices (Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı,2005).

  The 78 teacher training educational faculties in Turkiye have insufficient amount of academic staff. Compared to Finland, the number of students per university instructor is 35 while it is 16 in Finland (Pehlivanoğlu, 2005).

Ministry of National Education employs teachers from among those who have completed the four years of education based on the quota calculated from the state personnel selection examination scores and from among those who have earned a higher score than the minimum. Private schools and courses are the other institutions which employ teachers (Gökçakan, 2005). Primary school teachers teach from 1st to 5th years of the compulsory 8-year basic education. Teachers generally teach all the subject areas.

It is more and more crucial to grasp what constitutes high quality education in teacher training, which has started to be associated with more accountability. There is an increased need to indicate how academic standards and processes are evaluated. Student evaluation of academic instructors may encourage instructors to be more competitive, and thus beter educators, since students are in the perfect position to inform about the quality of education or the classroom conditions  (Fisher W. et al.).

This study focuses on the educational culture the academicians in universities of primary school trainee teachers in Turkiye and Finland. The study was conducted to find out the beliefs of trainee teachers at universities in different countries regarding the educational and classroom communication procedures, teacher and student roles, and the important institutional regulations and mores as well as educational culture at universities. The findings were studied  to determine and to compare the views of teacher trainees from different countries.

Aim

This study aimed to identify the “University Teaching Beliefs” of the students at the primary teacher education departments in Turkiye and Finland from different variables. To this end, answers will be sought for the following question:

1. Is there a significant difference between the views of the students in Turkiye and those in Finland regarding sociolinguistic competence, textual competence, and significant mores of universitiy educational culture subdimensions of the instrument?

Assumptions

1. The students in the sampling were assumed to have responded to the items in the questionnaire honestly and truthfully.  

Limitations

1. The evaluation dimensions used as the basis of the research questionnaire are limited to the areas of Sociolinguistic competence, Textual competence ve Significant mores of universitiy educational culture.
2.  The qualities that the items measured in this study are limited to the areas related to the above stated areas.

Method

Research model

This study is of the relational survey model, which aim to determine the existence of or degree of common changes between two or more number of variables (Karasar, 1999: 81).

Study group

 No generalization will be drawn from the results as the study covers a limited number of universities and students. The schools were selected through convenience sampling method. In other words, the researcher selected the convenient universities that she could easily access. The participants of the study comprised the 1st and 4th grade students at the Gazi University Faculty of Education Primary Teacher Education Department in Turkiye, and the students at Finland Tampere University at the same department attending the same grades in Finland. Because of the high number of student population at the university in Turkiye, the participants in this university were selected ramdomly. All of the students at the universıty of Finland were included in the study. The distribution of students’ personal information based on their gender, country and year are displayed below. The research was carried out on 139 student from Turkiye and 47 students from Finland.

Data collection instruments

In this study, the “University Teaching Beliefs Questionnaire”, which was originally developed by Gorsuch (2003) was utilized. The researcher’s permission was taken for he use of the questionnaire. The instrument comprises four dimensions, which are Sociolinguistic competence, Textual competence,  Nonverbal communication skills, and Significant mores of university educational culture.

 The items in the instrument were administered in its original to the students in Finland as the level of their English language was sufficient. However, since the language level of those in Turkiye was not not adequate, the instrument was translated into Turkish. In the process of translating the instrument into Turkish, three language experts were consulted. The translation was examined by the experts in the field to give its final form in order to prevent change of meaning and to be able to adapt items to the Turkish culture. A 5-scale likert  type instrument was used to measure the items in the questionnaire. The items were analyzed in the SPSS 11 software by coding totally disagree  (1), disagree (2), not sure (3), agree (4) and totally agree (5). Since there are a total of 37 items in the “Teachers’ beliefs instrument”, a pilot was administered on students who were equivalent to the students in the study, who were in the elementary school teacher education department, totalling 250, which was more than 3 times higher a number than the number of items.

As can be seen above, there are three dimensions in the instrument as implemented in Turkiye by the researcher. As stated in Gorusch’s (2003) original research, the sociolinguistic competence  dimension encompasses the skills of teacher-student interaction (informal interaction norms, sense of humor, equal treatment of female and male students) and a speaker’s skill of language use in classroom environment within a specific social context. Textual competence encompasses pedagogy and oral communication (use of professional language by the teacher, emphasis on significant points, interactive questioning, etc.) and content presentation methods. The significant mores of universitiy educational culture  dimension covers administrative and ethical issues (confidentiality of grades, etc.), pedagogy (active participation, collaborative learning, audio-visual materials, and role plays, etc.) awareness of the teacher during the lesson (adapting instruction to fit the level of learner), assigning homework,  materials, standard tests, student roles, teachers as role models, and teacher and student classroom behaviors related to pedagogy.

Data Analysis

The data were recorded to SPSS 10 software package. Frequency (f), percentage (%) and the number of groups in each country were not equal; therefore, an independent sample t-test was administered. The results were tested at p<.05.

Fındıngs

This section presents the findings of the study in light of the question sought in this research.

Is there a significant difference between the views of the students in Turkiye and those in Finland regarding sociolinguistic competence, textual competence, and significant mores of universitiy educational   culture subdimensions of the instrument?

The findings related to this question as found from the items from the questionnaire have been presented in Table 2.

Table 2. t-test distribution of the students in general in Turkiye and those in Finland related to the University Teaching Beliefs instrument subdimensions

The distribution of the students in Turkiye and in Finland related to the University Teaching Beliefs instrument subdimensions are presented in Table 10. The views towards the first dimension shows that the students in Turkiye stated their views at the level of  =3,36 and those in Finland stated at =2,51. The students in Turkiye stated their views for the second dimension at the level of =4,23, and for the third dimension this level was at the level of  =3,88, while the students in Finland stated their views for the second dimension at the level of  =4,42 and for the third  dimension the level was at  =3,77.
A significant difference was found between the views of students in Turkiye and those of Finland towards the first [t (179) = 6,46, p<.05], second [t (174) = 2,23, p<.05], and third [t (160) = 2,20, p<.05] dimensions. In other words, for the students in Turkiye and those in Finland, the first, second and third dimensions show a significant difference based on countries. 

Conclusions and Discussion

Most of the recent discussion about quality has focused on teachers rather than on teaching (Kennedy,2006:14). Kennedy(1997) attributed this state of affairs in part to the beliefs that candidates and teacher bring to teacher education. It is not clear what the source of those beliefs might be-aproduct of their upbringing a reflection of their life experiences, or a result of socialization processes in schools ( cited in Raths, 2001: 2).

In light of the findings, the following results can briefly be stated considering the question posed in this study.

An examination of the student group in general, for the students attending university in Turkiye and in Finland, the first, music and third dimensions show a significant difference based on the country variable. In other words, the university teaching beliefs of the students of different countries change from one country to another.

The findings from the data obtained in this study indicate that there are differences between the university teaching beliefs of the students in Turkiye and those in Finland in some respects. The data indicate that learning experiences are important tools in enculturation. It can be stated that the instructional experiences of trainee teachers within their culture are influential in their enculturation throughout their educational process.
The items in the sociolinguistic competence dimension are mainly related to the teacher-learner interactions in the classroom environment. The items are mainly related to the views tending towards students standing up before they answer a teacher’s question, entering the classroom by permission when they are late, feeling the power of the teacher in the classroom, and the academician being approachable. It can be said that the students in Turkiye agree more to the procedures of academic instructor control and authority. These findings support the conclusions of Fisher et al.’s work and Gözütok’s statements (2006). Students are greatly affected by the treatment of their teachers, embrace these easily and they adopt them. Moreover, the nature of communication in the classroom can be thought of among the hidden agenda issues.  

Textual competence dimension comprises items related to pedagogy and special communication (teacher’s use of spesific language, emphasis of important points,  interactional questioning, etc.) ,  and content presentation method. The whole group in general, there can be said to be a difference in the student views related to this item. There are findings indicating that teacher’s knowledge contributes to education. More important is the skill of the teacher in integrating own knowledge related to the subject area with those of the students to realize education. Teachers do not present subject matter as they are but they add their feelings, thoughts and beliefs to it. The differences between student views may arise from this condition.

The items related to the significant mores of university educational  culture dimension are administrative and ethical issues (discretion of grades etc.), pedagogy (active participation, collaborative learning, audio-visual materials, role plays, etc), teachers’ awareness of learning (adapting instruction to student level), assigning homework, materials, standard tests, student roles, teachers as role models,  and teacher and student classroom behaviors related to pedagogy. Related to this dimension, there are differences between the beliefs of students in Turkiye and Finland.

Teachers value learning and are models to the students with their words and behaviors. Considering that instructional experiences are important tools in enculturation, it can be said that instructional experiences influence enlculturation. Teachers realize instruction by equal teaching of knowledge to all students. Teachers organize the classroom and instruction based on the determined objectives. They focus facilitating more learning. They plan, implement and adapt instruction. The reason for the difference among student views may be the difference in the expectations of students. This supports the work of Fisher et al.  Moreover, the teacher praising certain values, views and beliefs may unintentionally send own messages to students related to own views, thoughts and belief systems. This may have caused students to have different beliefs.

It can be said that the students in Turkiye agree more to the procedures of academic instructor control and authority. These findings support the conclusions of Fisher et al.’s work Wilson & Corbett (2002) and Gözütok’s statements (2006). Students are greatly affected by the treatment of their teachers, embrace these easily and they adopt them. Moreover, the nature of communication in the classroom can be thought of among the hidden agenda issues. 

The school and classroom are places that most of students spend their time in their school life. Students achieve many learnings that have or have not been determined in the programs during their classroom atmosphere and life (Gözütok, 2006). This reminds of hidden agenda. According to Snyder’s (1971) research at university level, students display suitable behaviors after realize what they want at university (cited by Gözütok, 2006). Teachers present their subject matter not as they are but by adding their own views, thoughts and beliefes.

As a result of the university teaching beliefs responses students at university at the department of primary school teaching, the perceptions of students in different countries are indicates that student views are sometimes based on countries. The cause of the differences may be related to being in student experiences as well as being in different educational systems in different countries. If we can understand how students perceive, we can understand how we can improve instruction. Moreover, firstly, the teacher should be the model to indicate that instruction that is delivered affect students’ educational cultural beliefs. Even if students attend similar programs in different countries, the social class that they belong to may be among the reasons of differences in views.

 Based on the findings, the causes of differences in the University Teaching Beliefs of students in different countries may be examined. Comparative studies among students should be taken into considreation in the currently globalizing world. Teachers should raise individuals in a way to be a part of a universal culture while instilling their own cultrural values in their teaching.

REFERENCES

• Baykal, A. (2005, Eylül). Öğretmenlik Nasıl Öğrenilir? [How is teaching learned?]. Eğitim Fakültelerinde Yeniden Yapılandırmanın Sonuçları ve Öğretmen Yetiştirme Sempozyumu, G.Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi, Ankara. 
• Fisher W. Et al.,An Investigation into the concept of a “good” teacher – based on the views of students and lecturers at a University Business School. Retrieved December 14,2007, Web site: w.fisher@herts.ac.uk     
• Gorsuch (2003). The Educational Cultures of International Teaching Assistants and U.S. Universities.
• Tels-Ej Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Retrieved Jenuary, 2007, from Berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ Web site: http:/www-writting
• Gökçakan, Z.  (2005). Öğretmenlik Mesleğinin Geleceği ve İstihdam Sorunu [The future of teaching profession and the problem of employment]. Eğitim Fakültelerinde Yeniden Yapılandırmanın Sonuçları ve Öğretmen Yetiştirme       Sempozyumu, G.Ü.Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi, Ankara
• Gözütok, D. (2006). Öğretim İlke ve Yöntemleri. [Principles and methods of instruction]  Ankara: Siyasal Basın Yayın Dağıtım.
• Karasar, N. (1999). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi.[Scientific Research Method] Ankara: Hacettepe-Taş Kitapçılık.
• Kennedy, M. M. (2006). From Teacher Quality to Quality Teaching. Educational Leadership, March , 14-19.  
• Korkut, H. (1999). Öğretim Üyelerinin Pedagojik Formasyon Gereksinimleri [The Pedagogical Needs of Academic Instructors] 21.Yüzyılın Eşiğinde Türk Eğitim Sistemi Ulusal Sempozyumu. Ankara.
• Küçükahmet, L. (2007). 2006-2007 Öğretim Yılında Uygulanmaya Başlayan Öğretmen Yetiştirme Lisans Programlarının Değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of Teacher Education Undergraduate Programs implemented in 2006-2007 academic year]. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi,  Ankara.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.(2005). Avrupa’da Eğitim Sistemleri ve Sürdürülmekte Olan Reformlar Üzerine ulusal özel belgeleri [Educational Systems in Europe and National Private Documents on Continuing Reforms Educational Systems in Europe]. Socrates Programi. Web site: http://mete.meb.gov.tr.
• Raths, J. (2001). Teachers’ Belief and Teaching Beliefs. Retrieved Jebruary 26,2008, from University of Delaware Web site: http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v3n1/raths.html
• Pehlivanoğlu, S. (2005). Eğitim Fakültelerinin Yeniden Yapılandırılması Sürecinde  Öğretmen Yetiştirme [Teacher Training in the process of restructuring of faculties of education] Eğitim Fakültelerinde Yeniden Yapılandırmanın Sonuçları ve Öğretmen Yetiştirme Sempozyumu, G.Ü.Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi, Ankara.
• Türkoğlu, A. (1998).  Karşılaştırmalı Eğitim “Dünya Ülkelerinden Örneklerle” [Contrastive education with examples from the countries in the world] Adana: Baki     Kitabevi.
• Wilson, B. & Corbett, D. (2002). What Urban Students Say About Good Teacher. Educational Leadership , September. P:18-22.

Acknowledgement

The author is deeply grateful to Dr.Jorma Joutsenlahti from University of Tampere for his help during the data collection in Finland.
The author thanks Greta J. Gorsuch for using her “University Teaching Beliefs Questionnaire”.

8.15. New Approaches, Innovations and Research in Education | Neuigkeiten, Innovationen und Forschungen in der Erziehung

Sektionsgruppen | Section Groups | Groupes de sections

Inhalt | Table of Contents | Contenu  17 Nr.

Webmeister: Gerald Mach     last change: 2010-03-16