ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR KALKINMAYA YÖNELİK GÖRÜŞLERİ

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 87 - 104, 28.06.2018

Meryem Selvi , Mahmut Selvi , Ezgi Güven Yıldırım , Ayşe Nesibe Köklükaya

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı öğretmen adaylarının sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya ilişkin görüşlerini almak ve bu görüşleri değerlendirmektir. Bu araştırmada araştırmanın amacına uygun verileri toplamak için nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden biri olan fenomenolojik (olgu bilim) yöntem kullanılmıştır. Verilerin toplandığı katılımcılar amaçlı örnekleme ile toplanmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu devlet üniversitelerinin çeşitli öğretmenlik lisans programlarında öğrenim gören 22’si kız ve 13’ü erkek olmak üzere toplam 35 öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmanın verileri yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme soruları ile toplanmıştır. Elde edilen nitel verilerin çözümlenmesi için nitel veri analiz yöntemlerinden içerik analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda öğretmen adaylarının sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın ne olduğuna ve önemine ilişkin yeteri kadar bilgi sahibi olmadıkları, sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya yönelik çok fazla faaliyette bulunmadıkları sonucu ortaya çıkmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Çevre, sürdürülebilir kalkınma

TEACHER CANDIDATES’ VIEWS ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Öz

The
purpose of this research is to evaluate teacher
candidates’ views about sustainable development. In this study,
phenomenological method, one of the qualitative research methods, was used to
gather data appropriate for the aim of the research. A total of 35
participants, chosen by purposive sampling among teacher candidates who were
students in various teaching programs in an education faculty of a public
university, form the study group of this research. The research data were
gathered by means of semi-structured interviews and content analysis was used
to analyze the obtained qualitative data. The research reveals that teacher
candidates are not knowledgeable enough about sustainable development and its
importance, and that they do not have enough activities regarding sustainable development. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Environment, sustainable development, Teacher candidates

Kaynakça

• Akturan, U. & Esen, A. (2008). Phenomenology. T. Baş & U. Akturan (Ed.), In Qualitative research methods. (pp. 27-37). Ankara: Seçkin.
• America, C. (2014). Understanding economic and management sciences teachers’ conceptions of sustainable development. Perspectives in Education, 32(3), 159-171.
• Berglund, T., Gericke, N. & Rundgren S.C. (2014). The implementation of education for sustainable development in Sweden: investigating the sustainability consciousness among upper secondary students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32(3), 318-339. DOI: 10.1080/02635143.2014.944493
• Birdsall, S. (2006). Sharing wisdom for our future. environmental education in action. Proceedings of the 2006 Conference of the Australian Association of Environmental Education, 261-264.
• Borg, C., Gericke, N., Höglund, H.O. & Bergman, E. (2014) Subject and experience-bound differences in teachers’ conceptual understanding of sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 20(4), 526-551.
• Burmeister, M. & Eilks, I. (2013). An understanding of sustainability and education for sustainable development among German student teachers and trainee teachers of chemistry. Science Education International, 24(2), 167-194.
• Christensen, B.L., Johnson, R.B., & Turner L.A. (2011). Research methods, design and analysis. Boston: Pearson.
• Cohen L, Manion L, & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
• Corney, G. (2006). Education for sustainable development: an empirical study of the tensions and challenges faced by geography student teachers. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 15(3), 224-240.
• Cotton, D. R. E., Warren, M. F., Maiboroda, O. & Bailey, I. (2007). Sustainable development, higher education and pedagogy: a study of lectures’ beliefs and attitudes. Environmental Education Research, 13(5), 579–597.
• Dyment, J. E., & Hill, A. (2015). You mean I have to teach sustainability too? Initial teacher education students’ perspectives on the sustainability cross-curriculum priority. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 21-35.
• Eilks, I. (2015) Science education and education for sustainable development-justifications, models, practices and perspectives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 149-158.
• Eroğlu, A. L. (2007). Sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitim programı. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Strateji Geliştirme Başkanlığı Toplantı Katılımı Bilgi Notu, 06-10 Ağustos. Ankara.
• European Commission (2014). Living well, within the limits of our planet. Retrived from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/pubs/pdf/factsheets/7eap/en.pdf
• Hudson, P. (2006). Exploring a four-step science teaching and learning sequence for sustainable living. Teaching Science, 52 (1), 39-41.
• IUCN, UNEP & WWF (1991) Caring for the Earth: A strategy for sustainable living. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
• Jucker, R. (2002). Sustainability? Never heard of it. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 3(1), 8-18.
• Karpudewan, M., Ismail, Z. & Mohamed, N. (2013). Pre-service teachers' understanding and awareness of sustainable development concepts and traditional environmental concepts. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 28, 117–130.
• Keleş, R., & Hamamcı, C. (2002). Çevrebilim. (4th ed.). Ankara.
• Kışlalıoğlu, M. & Berkes, F. (2007). Çevre ve ekoloji. Ankara: Remzi.
• Kılınç, A., & Aydin, A. (2013). Turkish student science teachers’ conceptions of sustainable development: A phenomenography. International Journal of Science Education, 35(5), 731-752.
• Kühtz, S. (2007). Adoption of sustainable development schemes and behaviours in Italy: barriers and solutions-what can educators do? International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8(2), 155-169.
• Liarakou, G., Gavrilakis, C. & Flouri, E. (2009). Secondary school teachers, knowledge and attitudes towards renewable energy sources. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 120–129.
• Lourdel, N., Gondran, N., Laforest, V., Debray, B, & Brodgah, C. (2007). Sustainable development cognitive map: a new method of evaluating student understanding. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8(2), 170 – 182.
• Lundegard, I. & Wickman, P.O. (2007). Conflicts of interest: an indispensable element of education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 13(1), 1-15.
• Maxwell, J. A. & Loomis, D. M. (2003). Mixed methods design: An alternative approach. A.Tashakkori& C.Teddlie (Eds.).In Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 241–272), California: Sage.
• Mogensen, F. & Schnack, K. (2010). The action competence approach and the ‘new’ discourse of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research, 16, 59-76.
• Moore, J. (2005). Seven recommendations for creating sustainability education at the university level: a guide for change agents. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 6(4), 326-339.
• Nasir, Z.M., Yaacob, M., & Hashim, H.S. (2012). Lecturers’ perspectives on integrating sustainable development into social science courses. The International Journal of Learning, 18(6), 383-397.
• Neuman, W. L. (2012). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches I and II. İstanbul: Yayın Odası.
• Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3rd ed.). USA: Sage.
• Pepper, C., & Wildy, H. (2008). Leading for sustainability: Is surface understanding enough? Journal of Educational Administration, 46(5), 613–629.
• Qablan, A. (2005). Education for sustainable development at the university level: interactions of the need for community, fear of ındoctrination, and the demands of work. PhD Thesis, The Florida State University College of Education, Florida.
• Scott, W. & S. Gough. (2003). Sustainable development and learning: Framing the issues. London: Routledge.
• Spiropoulou, D., Antonakaki, T., Kontaxaki, S., & Bouras, S. (2007). Primary teachers’ literacy and attitudes on education for sustainable development. Journal of Science and Technology, 16, 443–450.
• Summers, M. & Childs, A. (2007). Student science teachers’ conceptions of sustainable development: An empirical study of three postgraduate training cohorts. Research in Science & Technological Education, 25(3), 307–327.
• Summers, M., Childs, A., & Corney, G. (2005). Education for sustainable development in initial teacher training: issues for interdisciplinary collaboration. Environmental Education Research, 11(5), 623–647.
• Summers, M., Corney, G. & Childs, A. (2003). Teaching sustainable development in primary schools: An empirical study of issues for teachers. Environmental Education Research, 9(3), 327–346.
• Summers, M., Corney, G., & Childs, A. (2004). Student teacher’s conceptions of sustainable development: The starting points of geographers and scientists. Educational Research, 46(2), 163–182.
• Terlevıć, M., Istenıč-Starčıč, A., & Šubıc-Kovač, M. (2015). Sustainable spatial development in higher education. Urbaniizziv, 26(1), 105-120.
• Tombul, F. (2006). Türkiye’de çevre için eğitime verilen önem. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Tuncer, G., & Erdoğan, M. (2006). Sürdürülebilirlik için eğitim: Bir ders değerlendirilmesi. VII. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Kongresi’nde sunulmuş bildiri. 6-8 Eylül. Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
• Tuncer, G., Tekkaya, C., & Sungur, S., (2006). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs about sustainable development: Effects of gender and enrollment. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 31, 179-188.
• Tuncer, G., Tekkaya, C., Sungur, S., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Kaplowitz, M. (2009). Assessing pre-service teachers’ environmental literacy in Turkey as a mean to develop teacher education programs. International Journal of Educational Development, 29, 426–436.
• United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2002). Education for Sustainability from Rio to Johannesburg: Lessons learnt from a Decade of Commitment. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001271/ 127100e.pdf
• UNESCO (2005). World decade of education for sustainable development. Retrived from www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leadingthe-international-agenda/education-for-sustainabledevelopment/.
• UNESCO. (2009, March-April). Bonn declaration on education for sustainable development. UNESCO World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development, Bonn, Germany. Bonn: German Commission for UNESCO.
• United Nation Conference on Education and Development [UNCED] (1992). The global partnership for environment and development: A guide to Agenda 21 / United Nations conference on education and development. Geneva.
• Uzun, N. & Sağlam, N. (2005). Sosyo-ekonomik durumun çevre bilinci ve çevre akademik başarısı üzerindeki etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 29, 194-202.
• Wehrmeyer, W., & Chenoweth, J. (2006). The role and effectiveness of continuing education training courses offered by higher education ınstitutions in furthering the implementation of sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 7(2), 129-141.
• Winter, C. & R. Firth. 2007. Knowledge about education for sustainable development: Four case studies of student teachers in English secondary schools.” Journal of Education for Teaching, 33(3), 341–385.
• World Commission on Environment and Development [WCED]. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University.
• Yavetz, B., Goldman, D., & Pe’er, S. (2013). How do preservice teachers perceive 'environment' and its relevance to their area of teaching? Environmental Education Research, 20(3), 354-371.
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2008). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin.
• Zachariou, A., & Kadji- Beltran, C. (2009). Cypriot primary school principals’ understanding of education for sustainable development key terms and their opinions about factors affecting its implementation. Environmental Education Research, 15, 315-342.