Liselere Geçiş Sistemi (LGS) matematik sorularının matematik dersi öğretim programına ve yenilenmiş bloom taksonomisine göre incelenmesi
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2022
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Bu çalışma 2018-2021 yılları arasında uygulanan LGS’de sorulan matematik sorularını 8. sınıf
Matematik Dersi Öğretim Programı ve Yenilenmiş Bloom Taksonomisi(YBT) kapsamında değerlendirmek
amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada nitel araştırmanın durum çalışması deseni kullanılmış ve veriler
doküman incelemesi yöntemi kullanılarak elde edilmiştir. Bu amaçla 80 matematik sorusu ve 50 kazanım
incelenmiştir. Soruların YBT’ye sınıflandırılması öncelikle araştırmacı tarafından literatürde bulunan önceki
çalışmalar ve YBT’ye göre hazırlanan ölçütler göz önüne alınarak yapılmış daha sonra uzman görüşü alınarak
yeniden düzenlenmiştir. Yapılan sınıflandırmanın güvenilir ve kabul edilebilir olduğu uzman görüşleriyle
sağlanmıştır. Anderson ve Krathwohl önderliğinde tek boyutlu olan orijinal taksonomideki eksiklikleri gidermek ve
onu modernize etmek için gerçekleştirilen çalışmalar neticesinde ortaya çıkan Yenilenmiş Bloom Taksonomisi
yatay ve dikey olmak üzere iki boyuttan oluşmaktadır. Dikey boyutunun bilgi, yatay boyutunun bilişsel süreç
olarak adlandırıldığı yeni taksonomide basamaklar arasındaki hiyerarşi çok katı değildir. Dikey boyut
öğrencilerin ne bildiğine yatay boyut ise öğrencilerin nasıl düşündüğüne cevap aramaktadır. Araştırma bulgularına göre 2018 LGS matematik sorularının 1’i kavramsal bilginin uygulama, 1’i
kavramsal bilginin çözümleme, 10’u işlemsel bilginin uygulama ve 8’i işlemsel bilginin çözümleme
basamaklarında yer almaktadır. 2019 LGS matematik sorularının 1’i kavramsal bilginin anlama, 1’si işlemsel
bilginin anlama 7’si işlemsel bilginin uygulama, 8’i işlemsel bilginin çözümleme ve 3’ü işlemsel bilginin
değerlendirme basamaklarında yer almaktadır. 2020 LGS matematik sorularının 1’i kavramsal bilginin anlama,
2’si işlemsel bilginin anlama, 7’si işlemsel bilginin uygulama, 7’si işlemsel bilginin çözümleme ve 3’ü işlemsel
bilginin değerlendirme basamaklarında yer almaktadır. 2021 LGS matematik sorularının 2’si işlemsel bilginin
anlama, 6’sı işlemsel bilginin uygulama, 7’si işlemsel bilginin çözümleme ve 5’i işlemsel bilginin değerlendirme
basamaklarında yer almaktadır. Tüm yıllar bir arada değerlendirildiğinde bilgi boyutuna göre olgusal ve
üstbilişsel bilgi basamaklarında, bilişsel süreç boyutuna göre ise hatırlama ve yaratma basamaklarında yer alan
soru bulunmamaktadır. Sorular genellikle bilgi boyutuna göre işlemsel, bilişsel süreç boyutuna göre ise
uygulama ve çözümleme basamağında yer almaktadır. LGS matematik soruları Matematik Dersi Öğretim Programına göre değerlendirildiğinde öğrencilerin
12 alt öğrenme alanından sorumlu tutulduğu 2019 yılı hariç soru sorulmayan alt öğrenme alanları olduğu tespit
edilmiştir. 2018 yılında en çok Kareköklü İfadeler ve Doğrusal Denklemler, 2019 yılında Doğrusal Denklemler,
2020 yılında Üslü İfadeler ile Cebirsel İfadeler ve Özdeşlikler ve 2021 yılında Çarpanlar ve Katlar, Üslü İfadeler
ile Kareköklü İfadeler alt öğrenme alanlarından soru sorulmuştur. Ayrıca öğrenciler 50 kazanımdan sorumlu
tutulmalarına rağmen 2018 ve 2021’de 23, 2019’da 21 ve 2020’de 17 kazanımı ölçmeye yönelik soru sorulduğu
tespit edilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında sınav sorularının YBT’ye ve kazanımlara göre dağılımında heterojenlik
gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir. LGS sorularının üst düzey bilişsel süreçleri ölçmede yeterli olduğu sonucuna
varılmıştır. Sınav soruları kazanımlara göre dengeli dağılım göstermediği için sınavın öğretim programında yer
alan kazanımları ölçmede yetersiz kaldığı sonucuna varılmıştır.
This study was carried out to evaluate the mathematics questions asked in LGS applied between 2018-2021 within the scope of the 8th grade Mathematics Curriculum and the Renewed Bloom's Taxonomy (RBT). In the study, the data were used in the case study design of the qualitative research and the data were obtained by using document analysis. For this purpose, 80 mathematics questions and 50 learning outcomes were examined. The classification of the questions into RBT was first made by the researcher by taking into account the previous studies in the literature and the criteria prepared according to the RBT, and then it was rearranged by taking the expert's opinion. It has been provided by expert opinions that the classification made is reliable and acceptable. RBT, which emerged as a result of the studies carried out to eliminate the deficiencies and modernize the one-dimensional original taxonomy under the leadership of Anderson and Krathwohl, consists of two dimensions, horizontal and vertical. The hierarchy between the levels is not very rigorous in the new taxonomy, where the horizontal dimension is known as the cognitive process and the vertical dimension is known as knowledge. The vertical dimension seeks answers to what students know, and the horizontal dimension seeks to answer how students think. According to the findings of the studies, 1 of 2018 LGS mathematics questions are in the application of conceptual knowledge, 1 in the analysis of conceptual knowledge, 10 in the application of procedural knowledge and 8 in the analysis of procedural knowledge. 1 of 2019 LGS math questions are in the understanding of conceptual knowledge, 1 understanding procedural knowledge, 7 in the application of procedural knowledge, 8 in the analysis of procedural knowledge and 3 in the evaluation of procedural knowledge. 1 of the 2020 LGS math questions are in the stages of understanding conceptual knowledge, 2 understanding procedural knowledge, 7 applying procedural knowledge, 7 analyzing procedural knowledge and 3 evaluating procedural knowledge. 2 of the 2021 LGS math questions are in the stages of understanding procedural knowledge, 6 are in the application of procedural knowledge, 7 are in the analysis of procedural knowledge and 5 are in the evaluation stages of procedural knowledge. When all years are evaluated together, there are no questions in the factual and metacognitive knowledge levels according to the knowledge dimension, and in the remembering and creating steps according to the cognitive process dimension. The questions are generally in the operational step according to the knowledge dimension, in the application and analysis step according to the cognitive process dimension. When the LGS mathematics questions were evaluated according to the Mathematics Curriculum, it was determined that there were sub-learning areas where no questions were asked, except for the year 2019, when the students were held responsible for 12 sub-learning areas. In 2018, most questions were asked from the sub-learning areas of Square Root Expressions and Linear Equations, Linear Equations in 2019, Exponents and Algebraic Expressions and Identities in 2020, and Factors and Multiples, Exponential Expressions and Square Root Expressions in 2021. In addition, although the students were held responsible for 50 achievements, it was determined that 23 questions were asked in 2018 and 2021, 21 in 2019 and 17 in 2020. Within the scope of the research, it has been determined that there is heterogeneity in the distribution of exam questions according to RBT and achievements. It was concluded that LGS questions were sufficient to measure high-level cognitive processes. Since the exam questions did not show a balanced distribution according to the learning outcomes, it was concluded that the exam was insufficient to measure the learning outcomes in the curriculum.
This study was carried out to evaluate the mathematics questions asked in LGS applied between 2018-2021 within the scope of the 8th grade Mathematics Curriculum and the Renewed Bloom's Taxonomy (RBT). In the study, the data were used in the case study design of the qualitative research and the data were obtained by using document analysis. For this purpose, 80 mathematics questions and 50 learning outcomes were examined. The classification of the questions into RBT was first made by the researcher by taking into account the previous studies in the literature and the criteria prepared according to the RBT, and then it was rearranged by taking the expert's opinion. It has been provided by expert opinions that the classification made is reliable and acceptable. RBT, which emerged as a result of the studies carried out to eliminate the deficiencies and modernize the one-dimensional original taxonomy under the leadership of Anderson and Krathwohl, consists of two dimensions, horizontal and vertical. The hierarchy between the levels is not very rigorous in the new taxonomy, where the horizontal dimension is known as the cognitive process and the vertical dimension is known as knowledge. The vertical dimension seeks answers to what students know, and the horizontal dimension seeks to answer how students think. According to the findings of the studies, 1 of 2018 LGS mathematics questions are in the application of conceptual knowledge, 1 in the analysis of conceptual knowledge, 10 in the application of procedural knowledge and 8 in the analysis of procedural knowledge. 1 of 2019 LGS math questions are in the understanding of conceptual knowledge, 1 understanding procedural knowledge, 7 in the application of procedural knowledge, 8 in the analysis of procedural knowledge and 3 in the evaluation of procedural knowledge. 1 of the 2020 LGS math questions are in the stages of understanding conceptual knowledge, 2 understanding procedural knowledge, 7 applying procedural knowledge, 7 analyzing procedural knowledge and 3 evaluating procedural knowledge. 2 of the 2021 LGS math questions are in the stages of understanding procedural knowledge, 6 are in the application of procedural knowledge, 7 are in the analysis of procedural knowledge and 5 are in the evaluation stages of procedural knowledge. When all years are evaluated together, there are no questions in the factual and metacognitive knowledge levels according to the knowledge dimension, and in the remembering and creating steps according to the cognitive process dimension. The questions are generally in the operational step according to the knowledge dimension, in the application and analysis step according to the cognitive process dimension. When the LGS mathematics questions were evaluated according to the Mathematics Curriculum, it was determined that there were sub-learning areas where no questions were asked, except for the year 2019, when the students were held responsible for 12 sub-learning areas. In 2018, most questions were asked from the sub-learning areas of Square Root Expressions and Linear Equations, Linear Equations in 2019, Exponents and Algebraic Expressions and Identities in 2020, and Factors and Multiples, Exponential Expressions and Square Root Expressions in 2021. In addition, although the students were held responsible for 50 achievements, it was determined that 23 questions were asked in 2018 and 2021, 21 in 2019 and 17 in 2020. Within the scope of the research, it has been determined that there is heterogeneity in the distribution of exam questions according to RBT and achievements. It was concluded that LGS questions were sufficient to measure high-level cognitive processes. Since the exam questions did not show a balanced distribution according to the learning outcomes, it was concluded that the exam was insufficient to measure the learning outcomes in the curriculum.
Açıklama
Yüksek Lisans Tezi
Anahtar Kelimeler
Matematik Dersi, Matematik Dersi Öğretim Programı, LGS, Yenilenmiş Bloom Taksonomisi, Math Class, Mathematics Curriculum, LGS, Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy
Kaynak
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
Sayı
Künye
Şahin, M. (2022). Liselere Geçiş Sistemi (LGS) matematik sorularının matematik dersi öğretim programına ve yenilenmiş bloom taksonomisine göre incelenmesi. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eğitim Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı, Konya.
