International Journal of Progressive Education
ISSN (Print): 2834-7919 - ISSN (Online): 1554-5210

Research article    |    Open Access
International Journal of Progressive Education 2019, Vol. 15(2) 140-156

Professional Knowledge Courses in Teacher Education: Lecturer and Student Views (The Case of Gazi Education Faculty)

Gülgün Bangir Alpan & Gürcü Koç-Erdamar

pp. 140 - 156   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.189.10

Publish Date: April 06, 2019  |   Single/Total View: 242/1.047   |   Single/Total Download: 323/1.871

PDF Download

Abstract

Professional knowledge courses (PKC) at education faculties are designed to educate high quality teachers. This study aims to examine the views of education faculty lecturers, graduates and senior year students about the place and implementation of PKC in teacher education. The study group of the qualitative study included lecturers (20), senior year (22) and graduate (12) students who agreed to take part in the study. Data were collected by using semi structured interview forms. Focus group interviews of 30-45 minutes were held with individual lecturers and graduates, and with groups of 3-5 senior year students. For data analysis, a list of codes was made. Relavant codes were brought together for thematic coding. Analyses of lecturer and student views on PKC revealed the following themes: General perceptions, content, implementation, quality of lecturers, measurement and evaluation in PKC, teaching practice, educational environments, educational system - policies, and recommendations. The study concludes with teacher education recommendations based on the findings.

Keywords: Teacher education, Professional knowledge for teachers, Lecturer views, Teacher candidate views

How to Cite this Article?

APA 7th edition
Alpan, G.B., & Koc-Erdamar, G. (2019). Professional Knowledge Courses in Teacher Education: Lecturer and Student Views (The Case of Gazi Education Faculty). International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(2), 140-156. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.189.10

Harvard
Alpan, G. and Koc-Erdamar, G. (2019). Professional Knowledge Courses in Teacher Education: Lecturer and Student Views (The Case of Gazi Education Faculty). International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(2), pp. 140-156.

Chicago 16th edition
Alpan, Gulgun Bangir and Gurcu Koc-Erdamar (2019). "Professional Knowledge Courses in Teacher Education: Lecturer and Student Views (The Case of Gazi Education Faculty)". International Journal of Progressive Education 15 (2):140-156. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.189.10

References
  1. Alpan, G. B. (2013). A critical view on Powerpoint based classes: Student comments. Hacettepe University Education Faculty Journal, 44(44), 61-72. [Google Scholar]
  2. Alpan, G., & Erdamar, G. (2011). Teaching practices prior and subsequent to 1998 in Turkey: Gazi University Vocational Education Faculty case. Educational Studies, 37(3), 289-301. [Google Scholar]
  3. Altıntaş, S., & Görgen, İ. (2014). The views of elementary teacher candidates on teaching practice (The Case of Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University), Turkish Studies- International Periodical for Turkish or Turkic Languages, Literature and History, 9(8), 197-208. [Google Scholar]
  4. Anıl, D. & Acar, M.(2008). Views of elementary teachers on the problems they face during measurement and evaluation. Yüzüncü Yıl University Education Faculty Journal, 5(2), 44-61. [Google Scholar]
  5. Baskan, G. A. (2001). The teaching profession and restructuring of teacher education. Hacettepe University Education Faculty Journal, 20(20), 16-25. [Google Scholar]
  6. Başçı, Z., & Gündoğdu, K. (2011). Teacher candidate views and attitudes towards the drama course: The case of Atatürk University. Elementary Education Online, 10(2), 454-467. [Google Scholar]
  7. Birgin, O., & Gürbüz, R. (2008). A study on elementary teacher candidates’ measurement and evaluation nowledge levels. Selçuk University Journal of the School of Social Sciences, 20, 163-179. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cansaran, A., İdil. Ö, & Kalkan, M. (2006). Evaluation of school experience practices in science education branches. Gazi Education Faculty Journal, 26(1), 83-99. [Google Scholar]
  9. Çağlar, E. ve Acar, O. (2013). An evaluation of the 10th development plan. TEPAV Publication N, 201330, 1-28. [Google Scholar]
  10. Çakan, M. (2004). Teachers’ measurement and evaluation practices and competence levels: Elementary and secondary education. Ankara University Educational Sciences Faculty Journal, 37(2), 99-114. [Google Scholar]
  11. Çelik F. & Önal, A. S. (2005). An evaluation of the instructional planning and evaluation course curriculum [Electronic version]. Pamukkale University Education Faculty Journal, 18,b31-49. [Google Scholar]
  12. Çelikkaya, T., Karakuş, U., & Demirbaş, Ç. Ö. (2010). Measurement and evaluation tools usage levels of social studies teachers and the problems they face. Ahi Evran UniversitynKırşehir Education Faculty Journal, 11(1), 57-76. [Google Scholar]
  13. Çelikten, M., Şanal, M., & Yeni, Y. (2005). The qualities of the teaching profession. Erciyes University School of Social Sciences Journal, 19(2), 207-237. [Google Scholar]
  14. Çetintaş, B., & Genç, A. (2005). Views and experiences of German teacher candidates about teaching practice courses. Hacettepe University Education Faculty Journal, 29(29), 75-84. [Google Scholar]
  15. Dallmer, D. (2004). Collaborative relationships in teacher education: A personal narrative of conflicting roles. Curriculum Inquiry. 34(1), 29-45. [Google Scholar]
  16. Demir, S. (2012). An evaluation of the instructional principles and methods course among the teaching profession courses included in education faculty curricula. Unpuplished MA thesis. Gazi University, School of Social Sciences, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  17. Demirbaş, M., & Yağbasan, R. (2004). An analysis of the function of evaluating affective factors and of teacher practices in the instructional process of science education. Ahi Evran University Kırşehir Education Faculty Journal, 5(2), 177-193. [Google Scholar]
  18. Demircan, C. (2007). A study on student views about the School Experience II course (The case of Mersin University). Mersin University Education Faculty Journal, 3(2), 119-132. [Google Scholar]
  19. Education Reform Initiative (ERG).(2015). Evaluation of the 19th National Education Summit. http://erg.sabanciuniv.edu/sites/erg.sabanciuniv.edu/files/19.Milli.Egitim.Surasina.Iliskin.Degerlendirme_BN_28012015.pdf [Google Scholar]
  20. Ekici, G. (2008). Evaluation of teacher candidate attitudes towards professional knowledge courses and their learning styles. Yüzüncü Yıl University Education Faculty Journal, 5(1), 111-132. [Google Scholar]
  21. Eraslan, A. (2009). Views of elementary mathematics teacher candidates on "Teaching Practice”. Necatibey Education Faculty Electronic Science and Mathematics Education Journal, 3(1), 207-221. [Google Scholar]
  22. Erden, M. (1999). Introduction to the teaching profession, Ankara: Alkım Publications. [Google Scholar]
  23. Furlong, V. J. & Edwards, A. D. (1993). Language in classroom interaction.In M. Hammersley (Eds.) Controversies in classroom research. Buckingham, Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
  24. Gelbal, S., & Kelecioğlu, H. (2007). Teachers’ competence perceptions of and problems with measurement and evaluation methods. Hacettepe University Education Faculty Journal, 33(33), 135-145. [Google Scholar]
  25. Gündüz, Ş. & Odabaşı, F. (2004). The importance of the Instructional Technologies and Materials Development course in the education of teacher candidates in the information age. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1), 43-48. [Google Scholar]
  26. Güven, S. (2006). Evaluation of the Instructional Technologies and Materials Development course with a view to its gains (The Case of İnönü University Education Faculty). Türk Education Sciences Journal, 4(2), 165-179. [Google Scholar]
  27. Gökçe, E. & Demirhan, C. (2005). The views of teacher candidates and practice teachers at elementary schools about teaching practice activities“. Ankara University Education Sciencesi Faculty Journal, 38 (1), 43-71. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hasher, T., Cocard, Y. & Moser, P. (2004). Forget about theory-practice is all? Student teachers’ learning in practicum. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice. 10(6): 623-637. [Google Scholar]
  29. Kavcar, C. (2002). Branch teacher education in the Republic era. Ankara University Education Sciences Faculty Journal,35(1-2),1-14. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kahramanoğlu, R. (2010). Evaluation of the professional knowledge courses offered at education faculties according to teacher views. Unpublished MA thesis. Mustafa Kemal University School of Social Sciences. Hatay. [Google Scholar]
  31. Kılıç, D. (2004). Evaluation of the effects of the Teaching Practice course on teacher candidates. Atatürk University Kazım Karabekir Education Faculty Journal, (10), 172-184. [Google Scholar]
  32. Kılınç, A. & Altuk, G. Y. (2010). Attitudes of elementary teacher candidates towards school experience courses. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Education Faculty Journal, (19), 41-70. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kumral, O. & Saracaloğlu S. (2011). Evaluation of elementary teaching Professional knowledge courses through the educational criticism model [Electronic version]. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(1), 106-118. [Google Scholar]
  34. Küçükahmet, L. (2003). Teaching as a profession. L. Küçükahmet, Ş.Ö. Külahoğlu, T. Çalık, G. Topses, A. F. Öksüzoğlu, & A. Korkmaz (Eds.), Introduction to the teaching profession (pp.1– 25) Ankara: Nobel Publications. [Google Scholar]
  35. McGinn, N.F., & F. Schiefelbein. 2010. Learning how teachers learn in underdeveloped countries. Prospects 40: 431-45. [Google Scholar]
  36. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage. [Google Scholar]
  37. Okçabol, R. (2004). Teacher education through the eyes of students, teachers, teacher candidates and instructors, XIII. National Education Sciences Summit, İnönü University, Education Faculty, Malatya. [Google Scholar]
  38. Özer, B. (1990). Turkish teacher education–problems and solutions-in the early 1990’s. Anadolu University Education Faculty Journal, 32(27), 27-35. [Google Scholar]
  39. Özkılıç, R., Bilgin, A., & Kartal, H. (2008). Evaluation of teaching practice course according to opinions of teacher candidates. Elementary Education Online, 7(3), 726-737. [Google Scholar]
  40. Öztürk, C. (2005). Teacher education institutions within history in Turkey. Istanbul: Ministry of Education Publications no:3744. [Google Scholar]
  41. Öztürk, Ç. (2004). Secondary school geography teachers’ competencies in using instructional methods and techniques. Ahi Evran University Kırşehir Education Faculty Journal, 5(2), 75-83. [Google Scholar]
  42. Özyürek, M. (2008). Problems and solutions in quality teacher education: The case of special education. Turkish Educational Sciences Journal, 6(2), 189-226. [Google Scholar]
  43. Peker, M. (2009). The views of mathematics teacher candidates about extended micro teaching experiences. Turkish Educational Sciences Journal, 7(2), 353-376. [Google Scholar]
  44. Riedler, M. & Eryaman M.Y. (2016). Complexity, Diversity and Ambiguity in Teaching and Teacher Education: Practical Wisdom, Pedagogical Fitness and Tact of Teaching. International Journal of Progressive Education. 12(3): 172-186 [Google Scholar]
  45. Saban, A. (2003) A Turkish profile of prospective elementary school teachers and their views of teaching, Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(8), 829-846. [Google Scholar]
  46. Sarıtaş, M. (2007). An evaluation of the views on the benefits of School Experience I for teacher candidates. Uludağ University Education Faculty Journal, 20(1), 121-143. [Google Scholar]
  47. Saylan, N. (2014). Continously changing teacher education system Journal of Curriculum and Instructional Studies, 3(6), 9-19. [Google Scholar]
  48. Soylu, Y. (2009). A study on elementary teacher candidates’ instructional method and technique use competence levels in mathematics courses. Mersin University Education Faculty Journal, 5(1), 1-16. [Google Scholar]
  49. Şahin, H.(2007). A comparative study on education the attitudes and views of education faculty students about Instructional Planning and Evaluation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Dokuz Eylül University School of Educational Sciences. İzmir. [Google Scholar]
  50. Şen, H. Ş., & Erişen, Y. (2002). Qualities of effective instructors at teacher education institutions. Gazi University Gazi Education Faculty Journal, 22(1), 99-116. [Google Scholar]
  51. Şirin, E. F., & Cesur, K. (2008). Physical education teacher adaylarının alan bilgisi ve teaching meslek dersleri ile teaching uygulaması dersi başarıları arasındaki ilişki. Selçuk University Physical Education and Sports Science Journal, 10(1), 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  52. Şişman, M. (2001). Introduction to teaching. Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  53. Şimsek, H., & Yıldırım, A. (2001). The reform of pre-service teacher education in Turkey. In R. G. Sultana (ed.) Challenge and Change in the Euro-Mediterranean Region. New York: Peter Lang. [Google Scholar]
  54. Şişman, M. (2009). Teacher competencies: A modern discourse and rhetoric. İnönü University Education Faculty Journal, 10(3), 63-82. [Google Scholar]
  55. Taşkın, Ç. Ş., & Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2010). The importance of professional knowledge courses in the professional development of teacher candidates. Pamukkale University Education Faculty Journal, 28(28), 165-174. [Google Scholar]
  56. Tercanlioglu, L. (2004). Perceptions on school-based English teacher education: a qualitative study, The Qualitative Report, Vol. 9(4), pp. 673-705. Available online at: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR9-4/tercanlioglu.pdf [Google Scholar]
  57. Üstüner, M. (2004). Teacher education problems in the history of the Turkish education system [Electronic version]. İnönü University Education Faculty Journal, 5(7), 63-82. [Google Scholar]
  58. Walker, R.J. 2008. Twelve characteristics of an effective teacher: A longitudinal, qualitative, Quasi- Research Study of in-service and pre-service teachers’ opinions. Educational Horizons 87, no. 1: 61-8. [Google Scholar]
  59. Yanpar-Yelken, T., Çelikkaleli, Ö., & Çapri, B. (2007). teacher candidate views about identifying education faculty quality standards (The case of Mersin University). Mersin University Education Faculty Journal, 3(2), 191-215. [Google Scholar]
  60. Yıldırım, A. (2011). Conflict areas and restructuring in teacher education. International Curriculum and Instruction Studies Journal,1(1), 1-17. [Google Scholar]
  61. Yıldırım, & Şimşek, H. (2006). Qualitative research in the social sciences. Seçkin Publications. [Google Scholar]
  62. Yılmaz, K. &Kab, İ. (2013). Views and evaluations of social studies teacher candidates about 'school experience' and ‘teaching practice'. HUMANITAS. Issue:1 [Google Scholar]
  63. Higher Education Council (HEC). (2007a). Education faculty teacher education undergraduate programs. Ankara: Higher Education Council Publications. [Google Scholar]
  64. Higher Education Council (HEC).(2007b). Teacher education and education faculties – evaluation of teacher education at universities (1982-2007). Ankara: Higher Education Council Publications. [Google Scholar]
  65. Higher Planning Board (HPB). (2013). 10th development plan (2014-2018). [Google Scholar]
  66. Yüksel, S. (2004). Education faculty students’ resistance behaviors towards teaching profession courses [Electronic version]. Educational Sciences in Theory and Practice, 4(1), 171-200. [Google Scholar]
  67. Yüksel, S. (2009). Education faculty student views on teaching profession courses, Ankara University Education Faculty Journal, 42(1), 435–455. [Google Scholar]
  68. Yüksel, S. (2011). Education faculties and teacher education in Turkish universities. PEGEM Academy. [Google Scholar]
Meta
Vol. 15 (2)
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 15 Issue 2

April 2019

All Manuscript

International Journal of Progressive Education

Copyright © 2025 International Journal of Progressive Education.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. CC BY
All elements of this website were created using the BOQ™ - Intelligent Webverse System.