Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Examining Primary School Teachers' Readiness Levels for Authentic Learning: A Mixed Methods Study

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2, 114 - 136, 01.03.2025

Vedat Aktepe , Abdullah Behriz , Aydın Bulut

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.25.22.12.2

Öz

The objective of this study is to ascertain the preparedness levels of primary school educators for authentic learning and to evaluate this preparedness in relation to a range of variables. The study employed a mixed-methods design, integrating both quantitative and qualitative research techniques. In the quantitative dimension of the study, a survey method was employed, and the sample group consisted of 204 teachers selected through a non-probability sampling technique. The 'Authentic Learning Readiness Scale for Teachers' was employed as the instrument for the collection of data. The data were analysed using the statistical software package SPSS. Frequencies and mean values were examined, and an independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to determine any significant differences. The quantitative results of the study indicated that primary school teachers exhibited a high level of readiness for authentic learning, with no significant differences observed across gender, age, professional seniority, education level, class size, or place of duty variables. In the qualitative dimension of the study, the phenomenological method was employed, and the study group was determined using criterion sampling. A semi-structured interview format was employed as the primary data collection instrument. The data were collected from 13 teachers who participated in focus group interviews and subsequently analysed using MAXQDA content analysis software. The qualitative results of the study indicated that primary school teachers associated authentic learning with activities that were related to students' lives and learning through doing and experiencing.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Authentic learning classrom teacher readiness levels mixed methods

Kaynakça

  • Aina, J. K., Aboyeji, O. O., & Aboyeji, D. O. (2015). An investigation of authentic learning experience of pre-service teachers in a Nigerian college of education. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences, 3(4), 54-63.
  • Aynas, N. & Aslan, M. (2021). The effects of authentic learning practices on problem-solving skills and attitude towards science courses. Journal of Learning for Development-JL4D, 8(1), 146-161. https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v8i1.482
  • Ballard, A. (2019). Authentic learning in a middle school classroom: A case study (Unpublished master's theses). Northern Michigan University, Michigan.
  • Baştürk, G. (2021). Otantik öğrenme uygulamalarının öğrencilerin eleştirel düşünme becerileri ve sosyal bilgiler dersine yönelik tutumlarına etkisi [Impact of authentic learning practices on students ' critical thinking skills and attitudes towards social studies] (Unpublished doctoral theses). Sakarya Üniversity, Sakarya
  • Belet Boyacı, Ş. D., & Güner, M. (2017). Views of students and teachers about use of technological authentic environment in Turkish language course. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International (AJESI), 7(1), 35-71.
  • Bordoh, A., Eshun, I., Quarshie, A.M., Bassaw, T.K., & Kwarteng, P. (2015). Social studies teachers’ knowledge base in authentic assessment in selected senior high schools in the central region of Ghana. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 1(3), 249-257.
  • Borthwick, F., Bennett, S., Lefoe, G.E., & Huber, E. (2007). Applying authentic learning to social science: A learning design for an inter-disciplinary sociology subject. Journal of Learning Design, Designing for Effective Learning, 2(1), 14-24.
  • Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods, 4. Edition, Oxford University Press.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2020). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. Pegem Academy.
  • Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R. B., & Turner, L. A. (2015). Nitel ve karma yöntem araştırmaları [Qualitative and mixed methods research ] (M. Sever, Çev., A. Alpay, Çev. Ed.). Araştırma yöntemleri desen ve analiz [Research methods, design and analysis] (s.400-433). Anı Publishing.
  • Cholewinski, M. (2009). An Introduction to constructivism and authentic activity. Journal of The School of Contemporary International Studies Nagoya University of Foreign Studies 5, 283-316.
  • Cranton, P., & Carusetta, E. (2004). Perspectives on authenticity in teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713604268894
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Araştırma deseni, nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları [Research design, qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches] (S.B. Demir, 4.Baskıdan Çev. Ed.), 2.baskı, Eğiten Book Publishing House.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2021). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: Beş yaklaşıma göre nitel araştırma ve araştırma Deseni [Qualitative research methods: Qualitative research and research design according to five approaches] (S.B. Demir ve M. Bütün, (Çev. Edt.). Siyasal Bookstore.
  • Dennis, J. D., & O’Hair, M. J. (2010). Overcoming obstacles in using authentic instruction: A comparative case study of high school math & science teachers. American Secondary Education, 38(2), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/41406158
  • Doğan Dolapçıoğlu, S. (2015). Matematik dersinde otantik öğrenme yoluyla eleştirel düşünme becerisinin geliştirilmesi: Bir eylem araştırması [Developing critical thinking skills through authentic learning in mathematics course: Action research]. (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Çukurova University, Adana.
  • Dolanbay, H. (2021). Etkinlik örnekleriyle sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde alternatif eğitim modelleri ve yaklaşımları [Alternative education models and approaches in social studies teaching with activity examples] (T. Çelikkaya, Ed.), Etkinlik örnekleriyle sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde alternatif eğitim modelleri ve yaklaşımları[Alternative education models and approaches in social studies teaching with activity examples] (s.313-341). Nobel Publishing.
  • Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. National Academy Press.
  • Edwards, A., & Skinner, J. (2009). Qualitative research in sport management. Elsevier.
  • Firdaus, F., Kailani, I., Bakar, M. N. B., & Bakry, B. (2015). Developing critical thinking skills of students in mathematics learning. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(3), 226-236. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v9i3.1830
  • Gündoğan, A., & Gültekin, M. (2018). Hayat bilgisi dersinde otantik görev temelli öğrenme ortamlarının öğrencilerin tutumlarına ve öğrenme süreçlerine yansıması [The reflection of authentic task-based learning environments on students' attitudes and learning processes in life science course]. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 8(4), 771-832. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2018.030
  • Herrington, J. (2006). Authentic e-learning in higher education: Design principles for authentic learning environments and tasks. In T. Reeves & S. Yamashita (Eds.), In world conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (ELEARN) (3164-3173). Honolulu, Hawaii.
  • Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02319856
  • Herrington, J., Parker, J., & Boase-Jelinek, D. (2014). Connected authentic learning: Reflection and intentional learning. Australian Journal of Education, 58(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944113517830
  • Horzum, M. B., & Bektaş, M. (2012). The effect of authentic learning on preservice teachers’ attitude and satisfaction towards service learning. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 20(1), 341-360.
  • Horzum, M. B., Bektaş, M., Can, A. A., Üngören, Y. and Sellüm, F. S. (2019). Öğretmenler için otantik öğrenme hazırbulunuşluk ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması[Authentic learning readiness scale for teachers: Validity and reliability study]. International Journal of Field Education, 5(2), 94-10. https://doi.org/10.32570/ijofe.645859
  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
  • Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi [Scientific research method]. Nobel Publishing.
  • Kılıç, R. (2014). İlköğretim I. kademe öğretmenlerinin otantik ölçme ve değerlendirme yöntemleri ile ilgili bilgi, tutum ve görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of primary school teachers' knowledge, attitudes and opinions about authentic assessment and evaluation methods] (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Marmara University, Istanbul.
  • Köksal, H. (2019). An exercise regarding values education with an authentic learning approach. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(4), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2019.04.021
  • Knobloch, N. A. (2003). Is experiential learning authentic? Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(4), 22-34. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2003.04022
  • Krueger, R. A. (1998). Moderating focus groups. Sage Publication.
  • Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Sage Publication.
  • Kvale, S. (1994). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage Publication.
  • Laur, D. (2013). Authentic learning experiences: A real-world approach to project-based learning. Routledge. Taylor & Francis.
  • Lee, S., & Goh, G. (2012). Action research to address the transition from kindergarten to primary school: Children's authentic learning, construction play, and pretend play. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 14(1), 1-16.
  • Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf accessed from.
  • Merriam, S. B. (2023). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber [Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation] (S. Turan Çev. Ed.) Nobel Publishing.
  • Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage Publication.
  • Metin, A. and Kulakaç, Ö. (2021). Nursing education and authentic learning. Journal of Samsun Health Sciences, 6(1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.47115/jshs.898818
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, second edition. Sage Publication.
  • Mims, C. (2003). Authentic learning: A practical introduction and guide for implementation. Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal. 6(1), 1-3.
  • Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage Publication.
  • Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 104(4), 280-312.
  • Nyumba, T. O., Wilson, K., Derrick, J. C. & Mukherjee, N. (2017). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12860
  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Dickinson, W. B., Leech, N. L. & Zoran, A. G. (2009). A Qualitative framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800301
  • Pala, F. K., Arslan, H. and Özdinç, F. (2017). Investigation the usability of education information network (EIN) web site by eye tracking and authentic tasks. Ihlara Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 24-38.
  • Sabet, M. K., & Mahsefat, H. (2012). The impact of authentic listening materials on elementary EFL learners’ listening skills. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(4), 216-229. https://doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.4p.216
  • Santrock, J. W. (2016). Educational psychology: Theory and application to fitness and performance. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Serbo, R. S., & Ancho, I. V. (2019). Authentic learning in teaching economics. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers, 9(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.37134/jrpptte.vol9.no1.1.2019
  • Sutarto, H. P. & Jaedun, M. P. D (2018). Authentic assessment competence of building construction teachers in indonesian vocational schools. Journal of Technical Education and Training (JTET), 10(1), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2018.10.01.008
  • Şahin-Kölemen, C. (2023). Research for the readiness of the faculty members towards the authentic learning approach through distance learning. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 11(22), 508-526. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1275690
  • Şahin, Ş., Suher, H. K., and Bir, A. A. (2009). Odak grup yönetimi: Uygulamacılar açısından bir değerlendirme[Focus group management: An evaluation for practitioners], Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi, 11, 51-74.
  • Şekerci, H. (2021). İlkokul sosyal bilgiler dersinde otantik öğrenme yaklaşımı kapsamında kanıt temelli etkinliklerin kullanımı [Use of evidence-based activities within the scope of authentic learning approach in primary school social studies lesson]. Education and Science, 46(207), 85-125. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2021.9726
  • TDK (2011). Turkish Language Institution Dictionary, Turkish Language Association Publications.
  • Yeen-Ju, H. T., Mai, N., & Selvaretnam, B. (2015). Enhancing problem-solving skills in an authentic blended learning environment: A Malaysian context. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(11), 841-846. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2015.V5.623
  • Yıldırım, R. (2020). Otantik öğrenme yaklaşımının sosyal bilgiler dersinde uygulanması: bir karma yöntem araştırması[Application of authentic learning approach in social studies course: a mixed method research] (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyonkarahisar.
  • Yıldırım, R. and Ortak, Ş. (2021). The effect of authentic learning approach on the development of 21st century learning and ınnovation skills in social studies course. International Journal of Social and Educational Sciences, 15(2021), 69-90. https://doi.org/10.20860/ijoses.943513
  • Yıldırım, A. and Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri[Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Seçkin Publishing.

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2, 114 - 136, 01.03.2025

Vedat Aktepe , Abdullah Behriz , Aydın Bulut

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.25.22.12.2

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Aina, J. K., Aboyeji, O. O., & Aboyeji, D. O. (2015). An investigation of authentic learning experience of pre-service teachers in a Nigerian college of education. European Journal of Research and Reflection in Educational Sciences, 3(4), 54-63.
  • Aynas, N. & Aslan, M. (2021). The effects of authentic learning practices on problem-solving skills and attitude towards science courses. Journal of Learning for Development-JL4D, 8(1), 146-161. https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v8i1.482
  • Ballard, A. (2019). Authentic learning in a middle school classroom: A case study (Unpublished master's theses). Northern Michigan University, Michigan.
  • Baştürk, G. (2021). Otantik öğrenme uygulamalarının öğrencilerin eleştirel düşünme becerileri ve sosyal bilgiler dersine yönelik tutumlarına etkisi [Impact of authentic learning practices on students ' critical thinking skills and attitudes towards social studies] (Unpublished doctoral theses). Sakarya Üniversity, Sakarya
  • Belet Boyacı, Ş. D., & Güner, M. (2017). Views of students and teachers about use of technological authentic environment in Turkish language course. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International (AJESI), 7(1), 35-71.
  • Bordoh, A., Eshun, I., Quarshie, A.M., Bassaw, T.K., & Kwarteng, P. (2015). Social studies teachers’ knowledge base in authentic assessment in selected senior high schools in the central region of Ghana. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 1(3), 249-257.
  • Borthwick, F., Bennett, S., Lefoe, G.E., & Huber, E. (2007). Applying authentic learning to social science: A learning design for an inter-disciplinary sociology subject. Journal of Learning Design, Designing for Effective Learning, 2(1), 14-24.
  • Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods, 4. Edition, Oxford University Press.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2020). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. Pegem Academy.
  • Christensen, L. B., Johnson, R. B., & Turner, L. A. (2015). Nitel ve karma yöntem araştırmaları [Qualitative and mixed methods research ] (M. Sever, Çev., A. Alpay, Çev. Ed.). Araştırma yöntemleri desen ve analiz [Research methods, design and analysis] (s.400-433). Anı Publishing.
  • Cholewinski, M. (2009). An Introduction to constructivism and authentic activity. Journal of The School of Contemporary International Studies Nagoya University of Foreign Studies 5, 283-316.
  • Cranton, P., & Carusetta, E. (2004). Perspectives on authenticity in teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, 55(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713604268894
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Araştırma deseni, nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları [Research design, qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches] (S.B. Demir, 4.Baskıdan Çev. Ed.), 2.baskı, Eğiten Book Publishing House.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2021). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: Beş yaklaşıma göre nitel araştırma ve araştırma Deseni [Qualitative research methods: Qualitative research and research design according to five approaches] (S.B. Demir ve M. Bütün, (Çev. Edt.). Siyasal Bookstore.
  • Dennis, J. D., & O’Hair, M. J. (2010). Overcoming obstacles in using authentic instruction: A comparative case study of high school math & science teachers. American Secondary Education, 38(2), 4–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/41406158
  • Doğan Dolapçıoğlu, S. (2015). Matematik dersinde otantik öğrenme yoluyla eleştirel düşünme becerisinin geliştirilmesi: Bir eylem araştırması [Developing critical thinking skills through authentic learning in mathematics course: Action research]. (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Çukurova University, Adana.
  • Dolanbay, H. (2021). Etkinlik örnekleriyle sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde alternatif eğitim modelleri ve yaklaşımları [Alternative education models and approaches in social studies teaching with activity examples] (T. Çelikkaya, Ed.), Etkinlik örnekleriyle sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde alternatif eğitim modelleri ve yaklaşımları[Alternative education models and approaches in social studies teaching with activity examples] (s.313-341). Nobel Publishing.
  • Donovan, M. S., Bransford, J. D., & Pellegrino, J. W. (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. National Academy Press.
  • Edwards, A., & Skinner, J. (2009). Qualitative research in sport management. Elsevier.
  • Firdaus, F., Kailani, I., Bakar, M. N. B., & Bakry, B. (2015). Developing critical thinking skills of students in mathematics learning. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(3), 226-236. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v9i3.1830
  • Gündoğan, A., & Gültekin, M. (2018). Hayat bilgisi dersinde otantik görev temelli öğrenme ortamlarının öğrencilerin tutumlarına ve öğrenme süreçlerine yansıması [The reflection of authentic task-based learning environments on students' attitudes and learning processes in life science course]. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi, 8(4), 771-832. https://doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2018.030
  • Herrington, J. (2006). Authentic e-learning in higher education: Design principles for authentic learning environments and tasks. In T. Reeves & S. Yamashita (Eds.), In world conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (ELEARN) (3164-3173). Honolulu, Hawaii.
  • Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02319856
  • Herrington, J., Parker, J., & Boase-Jelinek, D. (2014). Connected authentic learning: Reflection and intentional learning. Australian Journal of Education, 58(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944113517830
  • Horzum, M. B., & Bektaş, M. (2012). The effect of authentic learning on preservice teachers’ attitude and satisfaction towards service learning. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 20(1), 341-360.
  • Horzum, M. B., Bektaş, M., Can, A. A., Üngören, Y. and Sellüm, F. S. (2019). Öğretmenler için otantik öğrenme hazırbulunuşluk ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması[Authentic learning readiness scale for teachers: Validity and reliability study]. International Journal of Field Education, 5(2), 94-10. https://doi.org/10.32570/ijofe.645859
  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
  • Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi [Scientific research method]. Nobel Publishing.
  • Kılıç, R. (2014). İlköğretim I. kademe öğretmenlerinin otantik ölçme ve değerlendirme yöntemleri ile ilgili bilgi, tutum ve görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of primary school teachers' knowledge, attitudes and opinions about authentic assessment and evaluation methods] (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Marmara University, Istanbul.
  • Köksal, H. (2019). An exercise regarding values education with an authentic learning approach. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(4), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2019.04.021
  • Knobloch, N. A. (2003). Is experiential learning authentic? Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(4), 22-34. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2003.04022
  • Krueger, R. A. (1998). Moderating focus groups. Sage Publication.
  • Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Sage Publication.
  • Kvale, S. (1994). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage Publication.
  • Laur, D. (2013). Authentic learning experiences: A real-world approach to project-based learning. Routledge. Taylor & Francis.
  • Lee, S., & Goh, G. (2012). Action research to address the transition from kindergarten to primary school: Children's authentic learning, construction play, and pretend play. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 14(1), 1-16.
  • Lombardi, M. M. (2007). Authentic learning for the 21st century: An overview. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI3009.pdf accessed from.
  • Merriam, S. B. (2023). Nitel araştırma: Desen ve uygulama için bir rehber [Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation] (S. Turan Çev. Ed.) Nobel Publishing.
  • Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage Publication.
  • Metin, A. and Kulakaç, Ö. (2021). Nursing education and authentic learning. Journal of Samsun Health Sciences, 6(1), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.47115/jshs.898818
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, second edition. Sage Publication.
  • Mims, C. (2003). Authentic learning: A practical introduction and guide for implementation. Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal. 6(1), 1-3.
  • Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage Publication.
  • Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 104(4), 280-312.
  • Nyumba, T. O., Wilson, K., Derrick, J. C. & Mukherjee, N. (2017). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12860
  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Dickinson, W. B., Leech, N. L. & Zoran, A. G. (2009). A Qualitative framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(3), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800301
  • Pala, F. K., Arslan, H. and Özdinç, F. (2017). Investigation the usability of education information network (EIN) web site by eye tracking and authentic tasks. Ihlara Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 24-38.
  • Sabet, M. K., & Mahsefat, H. (2012). The impact of authentic listening materials on elementary EFL learners’ listening skills. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 1(4), 216-229. https://doi.org/10.7575/ijalel.v.1n.4p.216
  • Santrock, J. W. (2016). Educational psychology: Theory and application to fitness and performance. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Serbo, R. S., & Ancho, I. V. (2019). Authentic learning in teaching economics. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers, 9(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.37134/jrpptte.vol9.no1.1.2019
  • Sutarto, H. P. & Jaedun, M. P. D (2018). Authentic assessment competence of building construction teachers in indonesian vocational schools. Journal of Technical Education and Training (JTET), 10(1), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2018.10.01.008
  • Şahin-Kölemen, C. (2023). Research for the readiness of the faculty members towards the authentic learning approach through distance learning. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 11(22), 508-526. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1275690
  • Şahin, Ş., Suher, H. K., and Bir, A. A. (2009). Odak grup yönetimi: Uygulamacılar açısından bir değerlendirme[Focus group management: An evaluation for practitioners], Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi, 11, 51-74.
  • Şekerci, H. (2021). İlkokul sosyal bilgiler dersinde otantik öğrenme yaklaşımı kapsamında kanıt temelli etkinliklerin kullanımı [Use of evidence-based activities within the scope of authentic learning approach in primary school social studies lesson]. Education and Science, 46(207), 85-125. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2021.9726
  • TDK (2011). Turkish Language Institution Dictionary, Turkish Language Association Publications.
  • Yeen-Ju, H. T., Mai, N., & Selvaretnam, B. (2015). Enhancing problem-solving skills in an authentic blended learning environment: A Malaysian context. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 5(11), 841-846. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2015.V5.623
  • Yıldırım, R. (2020). Otantik öğrenme yaklaşımının sosyal bilgiler dersinde uygulanması: bir karma yöntem araştırması[Application of authentic learning approach in social studies course: a mixed method research] (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Afyon Kocatepe University, Afyonkarahisar.
  • Yıldırım, R. and Ortak, Ş. (2021). The effect of authentic learning approach on the development of 21st century learning and ınnovation skills in social studies course. International Journal of Social and Educational Sciences, 15(2021), 69-90. https://doi.org/10.20860/ijoses.943513
  • Yıldırım, A. and Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri[Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Seçkin Publishing.
Toplam 59 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Yükseköğretimde Program Geliştirme ve Yeterlilikler
Bölüm Research Articles
Yazarlar

Vedat Aktepe 0000-0001-5259-9340

Abdullah Behriz 0000-0002-5320-1354

Aydın Bulut 0000-0003-3139-4367

Erken Görünüm Tarihi 4 Mart 2025
Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Mart 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi 19 Ağustos 2024
Kabul Tarihi 20 Aralık 2024
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Aktepe, V., Behriz, A., & Bulut, A. (2025). Examining Primary School Teachers’ Readiness Levels for Authentic Learning: A Mixed Methods Study. Participatory Educational Research, 12(2), 114-136. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.25.22.12.2
 Kapak Resmi İndir

27707 15007  14998  150021500015005 1516417153

150621500415006   Creative Commons Lisansı  Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 International Lisance