Examining the Information Packages of “Teaching Principles and Methods” and “Intructional Technologies” in the Context of Accreditation

Funda Uysal
{"title":"Examining the Information Packages of “Teaching Principles and Methods” and “Intructional Technologies” in the Context of Accreditation","authors":"Funda Uysal","doi":"10.24106/kefdergi.1273379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This study aims to examine the information packages of compulsory professional pedagogical courses in elementary mathematics programs of the Faculty of Education, for which only the field of curriculum and instruction is responsible within educational sciences, according to accreditation. \nMethodology: Content analysis was performed within the study designed in line with the document analysis method. Frequency was used in analysis of the data collected through the packages of \"Teaching Principles and Methods\" and \"Instructional Technologies\" courses in 89 programs for training elementary education mathematics teachers. The study also includes categories and citations for reasons for incompatibility with accreditation. \nFindings: It is concluded that approximately two-thirds of packages are incompatible. Almost all packages include the necessary parts. The activities and measurement&evaluation methods in private universities or accredited programs precede in terms of compatibility with accreditation. In general, the order of the elements from the most to the least compatible with the accreditation program are; activities, learning outcomes, course objective, and measurement&evaluation methods. \nHighlights: It is noted that course packages are still not viewable. In terms of being compatible for certification, while certified programs are likely to have advantages over others, it is also probable that they may face comparable challenges.","PeriodicalId":33167,"journal":{"name":"Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.1273379","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to examine the information packages of compulsory professional pedagogical courses in elementary mathematics programs of the Faculty of Education, for which only the field of curriculum and instruction is responsible within educational sciences, according to accreditation. Methodology: Content analysis was performed within the study designed in line with the document analysis method. Frequency was used in analysis of the data collected through the packages of "Teaching Principles and Methods" and "Instructional Technologies" courses in 89 programs for training elementary education mathematics teachers. The study also includes categories and citations for reasons for incompatibility with accreditation. Findings: It is concluded that approximately two-thirds of packages are incompatible. Almost all packages include the necessary parts. The activities and measurement&evaluation methods in private universities or accredited programs precede in terms of compatibility with accreditation. In general, the order of the elements from the most to the least compatible with the accreditation program are; activities, learning outcomes, course objective, and measurement&evaluation methods. Highlights: It is noted that course packages are still not viewable. In terms of being compatible for certification, while certified programs are likely to have advantages over others, it is also probable that they may face comparable challenges.
认证背景下“教学原则与方法”和“教学技术”信息包的研究
目的:本研究的目的是研究教育学院基础数学专业必修教学课程的信息包,这些课程在教育科学中只负责课程和教学领域,根据认证。方法学:在本研究设计范围内,按照文献分析法进行内容分析。采用频率分析法对89个小学数学教师培训项目“教学原理与方法”和“教学技术”课程包收集的数据进行分析。该研究还包括与认证不一致的原因的类别和引用。结论:大约三分之二的包装是不兼容的。几乎所有的包都包含必要的部分。私立大学或认证项目的活动和测量与评估方法在与认证的兼容性方面领先。一般来说,与认证方案从最相容到最不相容的要素顺序是;活动,学习成果,课程目标,以及测量和评估方法。亮点:值得注意的是,课程包仍然不可见。就认证的兼容性而言,虽然认证程序可能比其他程序有优势,但它们也可能面临类似的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
50 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信