International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1949-4270   |  e-ISSN: 1949-4289

Original article | Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2021, Vol. 16(2) 7-24

Development of Curriculum Changes Perception Scale and Teachers’ Perceptions of Curriculum Changes

Gökhan Kayır & Çetin Toraman

pp. 7 - 24   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2020.345.1   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2102-08-0003.R1

Published online: May 27, 2021  |   Number of Views: 90  |  Number of Download: 209


Abstract

This study aims to develop a scale to measure teachers' perceptions of curriculum changes. The experimental form created for this purpose was presented to the experts for their opinions. The content validity rates of the items were determined in line with the feedback from experts. Items with a content validity rate of less than .80 were excluded from the study. The 11-item trial form was applied to 162 Turkish teachers from different branches. Sampling was selected through convenient sampling method. With the Exploratory Factor Analyses (EFA), a two-dimensional structure consisting of 11 items, namely “Resistance to Program Changes” and “The Effect of Program Changes on Learning Environments”, was reached. The relationship between the subscales of the scale was examined in the analyzes and it was found that the factors were in a significant relationship with each other. It has been verified as a result of the analysis that the sub-dimensions are components of a structure that includes positive and negative perceptions called teacher perceptions against curriculum changes and that they together form a superstructure. It was determined that the model's goodness of fit indexes were quite high. Confirmatory factor analysis also confirmed the EFA results. The internal consistency coefficient obtained for the whole scale was determined as .95.

Keywords: Program Changes, Teacher Perceptions, Scale Development


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Kayir, G. & Toraman, C. (2021). Development of Curriculum Changes Perception Scale and Teachers’ Perceptions of Curriculum Changes . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(2), 7-24. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2020.345.1

Harvard
Kayir, G. and Toraman, C. (2021). Development of Curriculum Changes Perception Scale and Teachers’ Perceptions of Curriculum Changes . Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(2), pp. 7-24.

Chicago 16th edition
Kayir, Gokhan and Cetin Toraman (2021). "Development of Curriculum Changes Perception Scale and Teachers’ Perceptions of Curriculum Changes ". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 16 (2):7-24. doi:10.29329/epasr.2020.345.1.

References
  1. Ashour, R., Khasawneh, S., Abu-Alruz, J., & Alsharqawi, S. (2012). Curriculum orientations of pre-service teachers in Jordan: A required reform initiative for professional development. Teacher Development, 16(3), 345-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2012.722322  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  2. Aygören, F., & Saracaoğlu, A. S. (2015). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamlarına ilişkin görüşleri (Views of the teachers about constructivist learning environments) Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(34), 194-223. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bal, A. P. (2008). Yeni ilköğretim matematik öğretim programının öğretmen görüşleri açısından değerlendirilmesi (THE evaluation of new mathematic curriculum in term of teachers’ perspectives).  Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(1), 53-68. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull, 107(2), 238-246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  5. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indexes for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 4(24), 445-55. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2404_4  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2013). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (Data analysis handbook for social sciences). Pegema Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  7. Cohen, R. J., & Swerdlik, M. E. (2013). Psikolojik test ve değerlendirme, testler ve ölçmeye giriş (Psychological testing and assessment, an introduction of test and measurement) (Çev.Ed. Ezel Tavşancıl). Nobel Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  8. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introductıon to classical and modern test theory. CBS Collage Publishers Canpany. [Google Scholar]
  9. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik (Multivariate statistics for social sciences). Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  10. Demirel, Ö. (1992). Türkiye’de program geliştirme uygulamaları (Curriculum development applications in Turkey). H.Ü. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(27), 27-43.  [Google Scholar]
  11. DeVellis, R. F. (2014). Ölçek geliştirme, kuram ve uygulamalar (Scale development, theory and practices). (Çev.Ed. Tarık Totan). Nobel Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  12. Duffee, L., & Aikenhead, G. (1992). Curriculum change, student evaluation and teacher practical knowledge. Science Teacher Education, 76(5). 493-506. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760504  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  13. Eryaman, M. Y. (2010). Frameworks in curriculum development. In C. Kridel (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Curriculum Studies. Sage Publications. [Google Scholar]
  14. Handal, B., & Herrington, A. (2003). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and curriculum reform. [Google Scholar]
  15.                 Math Education Res Journal, 15(59). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217369  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  16. Hu L. T., & Bentler P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. [Google Scholar]
  17. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). Lisrel 8: structural equation modeling with the simplis command language. Erlbaum Associates Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  18. Karadağ, E., Deniz, S., Korkmaz, T. & Deniz, G. (2008). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme yaklaşımı: Sınıf öğretmenleri görüşleri kapsamında bir araştırma (Constructivist learning approach: An evaluation within the scope of classroom teachers’ views). Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 383-402. [Google Scholar]
  19. Karaman, P., & Bakaç, E. (2018). Öğretmenlerin eğitim programı yaklaşımı tercihlerinin çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi (Invastigating the teachers’ curriculum orientations in terms of various variables). Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(1), 304-320. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018..-364651  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Kirk, D., & MacDonald, D. (2001). Teacher voice and ownership of curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(5), 551-567. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270010016874  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar]
  22. Korkmaz, İ. (2006). Yeni ilköğretim birinci sınıf programının öğretmenler tarafından değerlendirilmesi (The evaluation of primary school 1st grade curriculum by the teachers). Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16, 419-431.  [Google Scholar]
  23. Lüleci, C. & Çoruk, A. (2018). The relationship between morale and job satisfaction of teachers in elementary and secondary schools. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 13 (1), 54-70. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2018.137.3  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  24. OECD. (2009). Teaching practices, teachers’ beliefs and attitudes. in creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from talis. OECD. [Google Scholar]
  25. Olson, J. (1980). Teacher constructs and curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 12, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027800120102  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  26. Özdamar, K. (2013). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi (Statistical data analysis with package software).  Nisan Kitabevi. [Google Scholar]
  27. Özdemir, S. M. (2009). Eğitimde program değerlendirme ve Türkiye’de eğitim programlarını değerlendirme çalışmalarının incelenmesi (Curriculum evaluation in education and examination of the curriculum evaluation studies in Turkey). Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(2), 126-149. [Google Scholar]
  28. Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar (Structional Equitation Models: Basic Concepts and Sample Applications). Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, (3)6, 49-73. [Google Scholar]
  29. Şahin, Ü. (2020). Curriculum design approaches of pre-service teachers receiving pedagogical formation training. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(4), 192-204. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.12  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  30. Şeker, H., & Gençdoğan, B. (2014). Psikolojide ve eğitimde ölçme aracı geliştirme (Scale development in psychology and education). Nobel Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  31. Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. Ekinoks Yayınları. [Google Scholar]
  32. Tanrıverdi, B., & Apak, Ö. (2016). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about curriculum orientations. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 842-848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.308  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  33. Varış, F. (1976). Eğitimde program geliştirme, teori ve teknikler (Program development in education, theory and technics). A.Ü. Eğitim Fakültesi Yayınları  [Google Scholar]
  34. Vieira, A. L. (2011). Preparation of the analysis. Interactive LISREL in practice. Springer. [Google Scholar]
  35. Yalçın İncik, E. (2018). The Relationship between teachers’ educational beliefs and teaching-learning conceptions: a mixed method study. Journal of Education and Future, 14, 149-167. https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.414487  [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. Yaşar, M. D. (2012). 9. Sınıf kimya öğretim programındaki yapılandırmacılığa dayalı öğelerin öğretmenler tarafından algılanışı ve uygulamasına yönelik bir inceleme: Erzurum örneği (An investigation of chemistry teachers? Perceptions and implementation of constructivist principles in 9th grade chemistry curriculum: The case of Erzurum). (Doktora Tezi), Atatürk Üniversitesi, Erzurum. [Google Scholar]