Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi

KANGALGIL, MURAT

Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi

Murat KANGALGİL (Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi, Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Yüksek Okulu, Sivas, Türkiye)

Eğitim ve Bilim

11 2

Yıl: 2013 Cilt: 38 Sayı: 170 Sayfa Aralığı: 384 - 400 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi

Öz:

Araştırma Beden Eğitimi ve Spor Öğretmenlerinin (BEÖ) dönüt kullanım oranları ve dönüt kullanımının bazı değişkenlere göre nasıl etkilendiğinin tespiti amacıyla yapılmıştır. Araştırma 2011-2012 öğretim yılında toplam 2827 BEÖ’ne yapılmıştır. Veri analizinde, frekans, yüzde, “t” testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) kullanmıştır. Bulgularda; BEÖ’nin sıklıkla (%43,1) sözel dönüt, arasıra (%39,2) görsel dönüt, yine arasıra (%40) hem sözel hem görsel dönüt kullandıkları görülmüştür. BEÖ’nin dönüt verirken sıklıkla sonuç bilgisi (%41,6), herzaman süreç bilgisi (%56,1), sıklıkla açıklayıcı dönüt (%41,3), her zaman düzeltici dönüt (%62) ve hareketten sonra dönüt (%40,2) kullandıkları görülmüştür. BEÖ’nin sıklıkla özet dönüt (%48,4), ortalama dönüt (%48,2), program dönüt (%47,9), parametre dönüt (%45,5) ve anında dönüt (%47,4)) kullandığı; arasıra geciktirilmiş dönüt (%33,8) kullanıldığı görülmüştür. BEÖ’nin dönüt verirken her zaman değer ifadeleri (%54.3), sıklıkla yansız ifadeler (%38.9) ve nadiren belirsiz ifadeler (%36.5), sıklıkla niteliksel (%50.1) ve niceliksel ifadeler (%33.5) kullandığı; pozitif ifadeleri her zaman (%54.5), negatif ifadeleri sıklıkla (34.2) kullandığı görülmektedir. Araştırmada, cinsiyet, yaş (dönüt veriliş şekilleri, dönüt ifadeleri ve dönüt özellikleri alt boyutlarında) ve hizmet yılına (dönüt veriliş şekilleri ve dönüt ifadeleri alt boyutlarında) göre dönüt kullanımında farklar anlamlı bulunmuştur (p<0.05).

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

The evaluation of feedback usage in physical education and sports lessons in terms of teacher’s dimension

Öz:

This research was conducted to determine Physical Education and Sports Teachers (PEST)’ feedback usage ratio and how are effected according to some variables. The research was conducted with 2827 PEST’s in school year 2011-12. Frequency, percentage, “t” test and ANOVA were used in data analysis. The findings showed that PEST’s frequently (43.1%) use verbal feedback, sometimes (39.2 %) use visual feedback and (40%) use both verbal and visual feedback. It was shown that PEST’s frequently (41.6%) use knowledge of result, always (56.1%) use knowledge of performance, frequently (41.3%) use explanatory feedback, always (62%) use corrective feedback and use post-motion feedback (40.2%) when they give feedback. It was also shown that PEST’s use summary feedback (48.4%), average feedback (48.2%), program feedback (47.9%), parameter feedback (45.5%) and immediately feedback frequently; delayed feedback (33.8%) occasionally. It appears that PEST’s always (54.3%) use value statements, frequently (38.9%) use neutral statements and rarely use ambiguous statements (36.5%), frequently use qualitative (50.1%) and quantitative (33.5%) statements; always (54.5%) use positive statements and frequently (34.2%) use negative statements when they give feedback. Differences among feedback usages according to gender, age (feedback form, feedback statements, feedback feature) and service year (feedback form, feedback statements) variables was significant in the research (p<0.05).

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

Abrahamson, E. (2010). Assessment through video-feedback on an undergraduate sports rehabilitation programme. Higher Education Academy [HEA] Case Study. Retrieved from. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/hlst/documents/case_studies/147_abrahamson_ video-feedback.
Adams, E., & Rollings, A. (2007). Fundamentals of Game Design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Amorose, A. J. & Weiss, M. R. (1998). Coaching feedback as a source of information about perceptions of ability: A Developmental Examination. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 20: 395–420.
Badami, R., Vaez Mousavi, M., Wulf, G., & Namazizadeh, M. (2011). Feedback after good versus poor trials affects intrinsic motivation. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 82, 360e364.
Biesinger, K., & Crippen, K. (2010). The effects of feedback protocol on self-regulated learning in a web-based worked example learning environment. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1470–1482.
Biggs, J. B. (2003). Teaching For Quality Learning At University: What The Student Does. Maidenhead, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice 5, no. 1: 7–68.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standarts through classroom assesment. Phi Delta Kappan 80 (2): 139–147.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee C. & Marshall, B. (2003). Assessment for Learning: Putting It into Practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Brookhart, S. M. (2011) Tailoring feedback. Effective feedback should be adjusted depending on the needs of the learner. Education Digest Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 76 (9), 33-36
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2003). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı: İstatistik, Araştırma Deseni, SPSS Uygulamaları ve Yorum. Geliştirilmiş 3. Baskı Ankara: Pegem A Yayıcılık.
Cann, A. J. (2007). Podcasting is dead. Long live video! Bioscience Education, 10 (C1). www. bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol10/beej-10-C1.pdf
Chen, D. D. (2001). Trends in augmented feedback research and tips for the practitioner. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 72(1), 32–36.
Chiviacowsky, S., & Wulf, G. (2007). Feedback after good trials enhances learning. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 78, 40-47.
Coulter, G. A., & Grossen, B. (1997). The effectiveness of in-class instructive feedback versus afterclass instructive feedback for teachers learning direct instruction teaching behaviors. Effective School Practices, 16, 21–35.
Crook , A., Mauchline, A., Maw, S., Lawson C., Drinkwater R., Lundqvist, K., Orsmond, P., Gomez S., & Park, J. (2012) The use of video technology for providing feedback to students: Can it enhance the feedback experience for staff and students? Computers & Education (58) 386–396.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (2000). Beyond Boredom And Anxiety: [Experiencing Flow İn Work And Play] (25th anniversary ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Çimer, S. O., Bütüner, S. Ö., Yiğit, N. (2010). Öğretmenlerin öğrencilerine verdikleri dönütlerin tiplerinin ve niteliklerinin incelenmesi. Uludağ Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 23 (2), 2010, 517-538
Delgado AR, & Prieto G. (2003). The effect of item feedback on multiple-choice test responses.British Journal of Psychology, Vol. 94, pp. 73-85.
Demircioğlu, G. (2011). Geçerlik ve güvenirlik (Editör; Emin Karip). Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Denton, P., Madden, J., Roberts, M., & Rowe, P. (2008). Students responses to traditional and computer-assisted formative feedback: a comparative case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(3), 486–500.
Desuvire, H., Caplan, M., & Toght, J. A. (2004). Using heuristics to evaluate the playability of games. Paper presented at the SIGCHI Conference on human factors in computing systems.
Dillon, S., R., & Dempsey, K. (2008) Time-delayed video feedback in physical education: A pilot study. AAHPERD National Convention and Exposition. http://aahperd.confex.com/ aahperd/2008/finalprogram/paper_11673.htm
Ergin, A. (1995). Öğretim Teknolojisi İletişim (1. baskı). Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
Fredenburg, K. B., Lee, A. M., & Solmon, M. (2001). The effects of augmented feedback on students’ perception and performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 72(3), 232–242.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J. E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model. Simulation Gaming, 33(4), 441–467.
Geister, S., Konradt, U., & Hertel, G. (2006). Effects of process feedback on motivation, satisfaction and performance in virtual teams. Small Group Research, 37(5), 449–489.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena P., & Struyven, K. (2010) Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, (20) 304-315.
Gordijn, J., & Nijhof, W. J. (2002). Effects of complex feedback on computer-assisted modular instruction. Computers & Education, 39, 183–200.
Goudas, M., Minardou, K. & Kotis, I. (2000) feedback regarding goal achievement and intrinsic motivation, Perceptual and Motor Skills 90: 810–12.
Groen, Y., Wijers, A. A., Mulder Lambertus, J. M., Minderaa, R. B., & Althau, M. (2007). Physiological correlates of learning by performance feedback in children: a study of EEG event-related potentials and evoked heart rate. Biological Psychology, 76, 174–187.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81.
Heward, W. (1997). Four validated instructional strategies. Behavior and Social Issues, 7, 43–48.
Higgins, R., Hartley, P., & Skelton, A. (2002). The conscientious consumer: reconsidering the role of assessment feedback in student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 27(1), 53–64.
Irons, A. (2008). Enhancing Learning Through Formative Assessment And Feedback. Key Guides For Effective Teaching İn Higher Education. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Juwah, D., Macfarlane-Dick, B., Matthew, D., Nicol, D., & Smith, B. (2004). Enhancing Student Learning Through Effective Formative Feedback. York, UK: The Higher Education Academy.
Kangalgil M., & Demirhan G. (2008). The effects of different types of feedback on success in physical education lessons. FIEP World Congress. Sport Institute of Finland Vierumäki, Finland. p. 48.
Koka A., & Hein, V. (2006). Perceptions of teachers’ positive feedback and perceived threat to sense of self in physical education: a longitudinal Study. European Physical Education Review [DOI: 10.1177/1356336X06065180] Volume12(2):165–179:065180.
Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: an experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 1–14.
London, M. (2003). Job Feedback: Giving, Seeking, And Using Feedback for Performance Improvement (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
London, M., & Sessa, V. I. (2006). Group feedback for continuous learning. Human Ressource Development Review, 5(3), 1–27.
London, M., Larsen, H. H., & Thisted, L. N. (1999). Relationships between feedback and self- development. Group and Organizational Management, 24(1), 5–27.
Magill, R. A. (1994). The influence of augmented feedback on skill learning depends on characteristics of the skill and the learner. Quest, 46, 314–327.
Mory, E. H. (2003). Feedback research revisited. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook Of Research For Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 745e783). New York: Macmillan.
Moston, M., & Ashworth,S. (2002) Teaching Physical Education (5th ed.) San Francisco: Benjamin Cummings Publish.
O’Reilly, M. F., Renzaglia, A., & Lee, S. (1994). An analysis of acquisition, generalization and maintenance of systematic instruction competencies by preservice teachers using behavioral supervision techniques. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 29, 22–33.
Owen, J. L., & Dudley, J. E. (2007). A content analysis of the treatment of informative and reinforcing feedback in Contemporary communication Theory Textbooks. American Communication Journal, 9(4). http://www.acjournal.org/holdings/vol9/winter/articles/ treatment.html Retrieved on April 4, 2008 from.
Rodway-Dyer, S., & Dunne, E. (2009). Technology enhanced feed-forward for learning. HEA Final Report. Retrieved from. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/EvidenceNet/Exeter.doc.
Rucci, J., & Tomparowski, P. (2010). Three types of kinematic feedback and the execution of the hang power clean. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24, 771–778.
Scheeler, M.C., Ruhl, K. L., & McAfee, M. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27, (4) 59–70.
Schelfhout, W., Dochy, F., & Janssens, S. (2004). The use of self, peer, and teacher assessment as a feedback system in a learning environment aimed at fostering skills of cooperation in an entrepreneurial context. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 29, (2) 177–1201.
Schmidt, R. A., & Wrisberg, C. A. (2004). Motor Learning and Performance. (3rd ed.) Champaign IL: Human Kinetics Publishers.
Sharpe, T., Lounsbery, M., & Bahls, V. (1997). Description and effects of sequential behavior practice in teacher education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sports, 68. 222–232.
Silverman, S., Tyson, L., & Krampitz, J. (1993). Teacher feedback and achievement: Mediating effects of ınitial skill level and sex. Journal of Human Movement Studies. 24, 91–98.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional Design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Taylor, S. L. (2006). A study of the effectiveness of modern digital ımaging techniques with middle school physical education students during the development and acquisition of motor skılls. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The Florida State University College of Education.
Thelwall, M. (2000). Computer-based assessment: a versatile educational tool. Computers & Education, 34 (1), 37–49.
Tittelbach D., Fields, L., & Alvero, A. M. (2008) Effects of performance feedback on typing speed and accuracy, Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 27: 4, 29-52 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1300/J075v27n04_02 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J075v27n04_02
Tunstall, P., & Gipps, C. (1996). Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: a typology. British Educational Research Journal, 22 (4), 389.
Türnüklü, E. B., 2003. Türkiye ve İngiltere’deki Matematik Öğretmenlerinin Değerlendirme Biçimleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24: 108-118
Tzetzis, G., & Votsis, E. (2006). Three Feedback Methods in Acquisition and Retention of Badminton Skills. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 102, 275–284.
Ülper, H. (2012) Taslak Metinlere Öğretmenler Tarafından Sunulan Geribildirimlerin Özellikleri. Eğitim ve Bilim, Cilt 37, Sayı 165.
Van Dijk, W. W., Zeelenberg, M., & Van der Pligt, J. (1999). Not having what you want versus having what you do not want: the impact of type of negative outcome on the experience of disappointment and related emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 13(2), 129–148.
Van Houten, R. (1980). Learning Through Feedback. New York, NY: Human Sciences Press, Inc.
Voight, M., & Callaghan, J. (2002). A team building intervention program: Application and evaluation with two university soccer teams. Journal of Sports Behavior, 24, 420–431.
Watts, S. A. (2007). Evaluative feedback: perspectives on media effects. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 12, 384–411.
Weaver, M. R. (2006). Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 31, (3) 379–94.
White, S. (2007). Investigating effective feedback practices for pre-service teacher education students on practicum. Teaching Education. Vol. 18, (4), 299–311.
Yun, S., Miller, P. C., Baek, Y., Jung, J., & Ko, M. (2008). Improving recall and transfer skills through vocabulary building in web-based second language learning: an examination by item and feedback type. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 158–172.
Zacharias, N., T. (2007) Teacher and student attitudes toward teacher feedback. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 38, No. 1, 38-52.

APA	KANGALGIL M (2013). Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. , 384 - 400.
Chicago	KANGALGIL MURAT Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. (2013): 384 - 400.
MLA	KANGALGIL MURAT Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. , 2013, ss.384 - 400.
AMA	KANGALGIL M Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. . 2013; 384 - 400.
Vancouver	KANGALGIL M Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. . 2013; 384 - 400.
IEEE	KANGALGIL M "Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi." , ss.384 - 400, 2013.
ISNAD	KANGALGIL, MURAT. "Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi". (2013), 384-400.

APA	KANGALGIL M (2013). Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(170), 384 - 400.
Chicago	KANGALGIL MURAT Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim 38, no.170 (2013): 384 - 400.
MLA	KANGALGIL MURAT Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, vol.38, no.170, 2013, ss.384 - 400.
AMA	KANGALGIL M Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim. 2013; 38(170): 384 - 400.
Vancouver	KANGALGIL M Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim. 2013; 38(170): 384 - 400.
IEEE	KANGALGIL M "Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi." Eğitim ve Bilim, 38, ss.384 - 400, 2013.
ISNAD	KANGALGIL, MURAT. "Beden eğitimi ve spor derslerinde dönüt kullanımının öğretmen boyutuyla değerlendirilmesi". Eğitim ve Bilim 38/170 (2013), 384-400.