International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2023, Vol. 19(5) 41-58

Development of the Inventory of Orientations in Curriculum Theories (IOCT) for Pre-Service Teachers

Ersin Türe

pp. 41 - 58   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2023.603.4   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2308-28-0001

Published online: October 16, 2023  |   Number of Views: 27  |  Number of Download: 117


Abstract

It is known that pre-service teacher training has an impact on orientations, beliefs, and views on teaching and teaching practices. In addition, it was determined that the curriculum theory orientations scale for teachers developed by Türe & Bıkmaz (2023) was not suitable for the sample of undergraduate students of the faculty of education. Because there are structural differences between the teacher sample and the undergraduate student sample. Faculty of Education undergraduate students are individuals who continue to be trained with the aim of training teachers. On the other hand, the pre-service teachers of the sample in which the scale could be developed and applied was selected from third and fourth-year undergraduate students who had completed the course on “Curriculum”. Therefore, the aim of this study is to develop a measurement tool that will determine the curriculum theory orientations of undergraduate students studying in education faculties. In this study, a measurement tool was developed to determine the orientations of pre-service teachers regarding curriculum theories. The IOCT for prospective teachers consists of three scales: OSPCT, OSDCT and OSCECT. OSPCT for pre-service teachers consists of two factors 19 items; OSDCT for pre-service teachers consists of two factors 12 items and OSCECT for pre-service teachers consists of three factors, 19 items. It has been revealed that the structure and items of the scales in the IOCT developed for pre-service teachers differ from the structure and items of the scales in the IOCT developed for teachers by Türe & Bıkmaz (2023).

Keywords: Development of the Inventory of Orientations in Curriculum Theories (IOCT) for Pre-Service Teachers


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Ture, E. (2023). Development of the Inventory of Orientations in Curriculum Theories (IOCT) for Pre-Service Teachers . International Journal of Progressive Education, 19(5), 41-58. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2023.603.4

Harvard
Ture, E. (2023). Development of the Inventory of Orientations in Curriculum Theories (IOCT) for Pre-Service Teachers . International Journal of Progressive Education, 19(5), pp. 41-58.

Chicago 16th edition
Ture, Ersin (2023). "Development of the Inventory of Orientations in Curriculum Theories (IOCT) for Pre-Service Teachers ". International Journal of Progressive Education 19 (5):41-58. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2023.603.4.

References
  1. Abakay, U., Şebin, K. ve Şahin, M.Y. (2013). Curriculum Orientation of Pre-Service Physical Education Teachers. Life Sci J, 10 (3): 2161-2166. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bay E, Gündoğdu K, Ozan C, Dilekçi D. ve Özdemir D., (2012). İlköğretim Öğretmen Adaylarının Program Yaklaşımlarının Analizi. Uluslararası Eğitim    Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi; 2(3), 15-28. [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown, G. T. L., Lake, R. and Matters, G. (2011). New Zealand and Queensland teachers’ conceptions of curriculum: Potential jurisdictional effects of curriculum policy and implementation. Curriculum Perspectives, 31(3), 33-48. [Google Scholar]
  4. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2003). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı istatistik, araştırma deseni spss uygulamaları ve yorum, Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  5. Chant, R. H. (2002). The impact of personal theorizing on beginning teaching: Experiences of three social studies teachers. Theory and Research in Social Education, 30 (4), 516-540. [Google Scholar]
  6. Cheung, D. (2000). Measuring teachers’ meta-orientations to curriculum: application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Experimental Education, 68, 149–165. [Google Scholar]
  7. Cheung, D. and Ng, P. H. (2000). Science teachers’ beliefs about curriculum design.Research in Science Education (30), 357–75. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cheung, D. ve Wong, H. W. (2002). Measuring teacher beliefs about alternative curriculum designs. Curriculum Journal, 13 (2), 225–248.  [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark, M. C. ve Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (255-298). New York: Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  10. Cornett, J. W. (1990). Teacher thinking about curriculum and instruction: A casestudy of a secondarysocialstudiesteacher. Theory and Research in Social Education, 18 (3), 248-273. [Google Scholar]
  11. Crummey, M. (2007). Curriculum orientations of alternative education teachers. University of Kansas. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/-304860138?accountid=8403 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dommoyer, R. (1989). Theory, practice and the double-edged problem of idiosyncrasy. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 4, 257-270. [Google Scholar]
  13. Eren, A., (2010). Öğretmen adaylarının program inançlarının görünüm analizi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 18(2), 379-388. [Google Scholar]
  14. Erkuş, A. (2011). Davranış bilimleri için bilimsel araştırma süreci. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  15. Harste, J., Leland, C., Schmidt, K., Vasquez, V. and Ociepka, A. (2002). Practice makes practice, or does it? The relationship between theory and practice in teacher education.(An educology of teacher education.). International Journal of Educology, 16, (2), 116-191. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hasweh, M. Z. (2003). Teacher accommodative change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 421-434. [Google Scholar]
  17. Henson, K. (1995). Curriculum development for education reform. New York: Harper Collins College. [Google Scholar]
  18. Hu L. T. and 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]
  19. Jackson, P. W. (1992). Conceptions of Curriculum and Curriculum Specialists in: P.W.Jackson, (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Curriculum: A project of the American Educational Research Association, Part 1, Macmillan: New York. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jenkins, S. B. (2009). Measuring teacher beliefs about curriculum orientations using the modified-curriculum orientations inventory. Curriculum Journal, 2 (20), 103-120. [Google Scholar]
  21. Klein, F. (1992). A Perspective on the gap between curriculum theory and practice. Theory Into Practice, 31 (3), 191-197. [Google Scholar]
  22. Killion, J. P. and Guy R. T. (1991). A process for personal theory building. Educational Leadership, 48 (6), 14-16. [Google Scholar]
  23. Macdonald, J. B. (1971). Curriculum theory.  The Journal of Educational Research, 64, 196-200. [Google Scholar]
  24. Marsh, J. C. and Willis, G. (2003). Curriculum: Alternative approaches, ongoing issues. Prentice Hall: New Jersey. [Google Scholar]
  25. McNeil, J. D. (1977). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction. New York, NY: Harper-Collins. [Google Scholar]
  26. McCutcheon, G. (1985). Curriculum theory/curiculum practice: A gap or the Grand Canyon? In A. Molnar (Ed.), Curent thought on curiculum (45-52). Alexandria, VA. [Google Scholar]
  27. Miller, D. L. (2011). Curriculum theory and practice: What's your style? Phi Delta Kapan, 92, 32-39. [Google Scholar]
  28. Ornstein, A. C. and Hunkins, F. P. (1998). Curriculum: Foundation, principles, and issues. Pearson Education Inc.: Boston [Google Scholar]
  29. Özdamar, K. (2013). Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi (9. Baskı). Nisan Kitabevi: Eskişehir. [Google Scholar]
  30. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy pro-duct. Review of Educational Research, 62, (3), 307-332. [Google Scholar]
  31. Peacock, M. (2001). Pre-service ESL teachers‟ beliefs about second language learning: A longitudinal study. System, 29 (2), 177-195. [Google Scholar]
  32. Peercy, M. M. (2012). Problematizing the theory-practice gap: How ESL teachers make sense of their preservice education. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 8 (1), 20-40. [Google Scholar]
  33. Reding, C. (2008). Curricular orientations of catholic school teachers and administrators. University of Kansas. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/-304616634?accountid=8403 [Google Scholar]
  34. Rice, S., & Mahlios, M.C., (2004). Teachers’ Views of Curriculum Orientations: The Hedgehog V. the Fox. Paper presented at the American Educational Studies Association Annual Meeting. Kansas City [Google Scholar]
  35. Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M. and MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). Teachers beliefs and practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 7 (2), 213-226. [Google Scholar]
  36. Sümbüloğlu K. ve Akdağ B. (2009). İleri biyoistatistiksel yöntemler. Ankara: Hatipoğlu [Google Scholar]
  37. Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, (3)6, 49-73 [Google Scholar]
  38. Şimşek, Ö.F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: Temel ilkeler ve LISREL uygulamaları. İstanbul: Ekinoks Yayınları [Google Scholar]
  39. Tanrıverdi, B. ve Apak, Ö. (2014).Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about curriculum orientations. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 842 – 848. [Google Scholar]
  40. Türe, E. (2017). Öğretmenlerin eğitim programı teorilerine ilişkin yönelimleri ve öğrenme-öğretme sürecine yansımaları. (Unpublished doctorate dissertation). Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye. [Google Scholar]
  41. Ture, E. & Bikmaz, F. (2023). Development Study of The Inventory of Orientations in Curriculum Theories (IOCT) (From Qualitative Cluster Analysis to Quantitative Confirmatory Factor Analysis). Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 18(2), 107-132. doi: 10.29329/epasr.2023.548.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  42. Vallance, E. (1982). The practical uses of curriculum theory. Theory into Practice, 21 (1), 4-10. [Google Scholar]
  43. Vieira A.L. (2011). Preparation of the analysis. Interactive LISREL in practice. London: Springer  [Google Scholar]
  44. Yeşilyurt, E. (2013). Program Geliştirme Dersinin Öğretmen Adaylarının Program Geliştirmeye İlişkin Bilişsel Farkındalık Düzeyine Etkisi. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 6 (3), 316-342. [Google Scholar]