Show simple item record

Öğretmenler İçin Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünmeye Özelleşmiş Bir Çevrimiçi Öğrenme Ortamının Tasarımı

dc.contributor.advisorErdem, Mukaddes
dc.contributor.authorSayın, Zehra
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-11T11:58:38Z
dc.date.issued2020-12-28
dc.date.submitted2020-11-30
dc.identifier.citationAckermann, E. (2001). Piaget’s Constructivism, Papert’s Constructionism: What’s the difference? Ağustos Tebliğler Dergisi, T. (2018). Ağustos Tebli̇ğler Dergi̇si̇. 2731. Akgül, A., Uçar, M. K., Öztürk, M. M., ve Ekşi̇, Z. (2013). Mühendislik Eğitiminin İyileştirilmesine Yönelik Öneriler, Geleceğin Mühendisleri ve İşgücü Analizi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(1), 14–18. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sdufenbed/222065 Akker, J. van den, Bannan, B., Kelly, A. E., Nieveen, N., ve Plomp, T. (2007). An Introduction to Educational Design Research (T. Plomp ve N. Nieveen (eds.); 3rd ed.). SLO. Alaybeyoğlu, A., ve Morkaya, Ö. (2006). Ülkemizdeki Bilgisayar Mühendisliği Lisans Eğitimi İle Yazılım Mühendisliği Lisans Eğitiminin Karşılaştırılması. https://www.emo.org.tr/ekler/1f4fd6d0118b7b0_ek.pdf Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., ve Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017 Anderson, T., ve Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813 Angeli, C., Voogt, J., Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Malyn-Smith, J., ve Zagami, J. (2016a). A K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: Implications for teacher knowledge. Educational Technology and Society, 19(3), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/jeductechsoci.19.3.47 Angeli, C., Voogt, J., Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Malyn-Smith, J., ve Zagami, J. (2016b). A K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: Implications for teacher knowledge. Educational Technology and Society, 19(3), 47–57. Armoni, M., ve Gal-Ezer, J. (2014). High school computer science education paves the way for higher education: the Israeli case. Computer Science Education, 24(2–3), 101–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2014.936655 Bailey, C. J., ve Card, K. A. (2009). Effective pedagogical practices for online teaching: Perception of experienced instructors. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3–4), 152–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.002 Balanskat, A., ve Engelhardt, K. (2015). Computing our future Computer programming and coding Priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The Role of Design in Research: The Integrative Learning Design Framework. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001021 Barr, D., Harrison, J., ve Conery, L. (2011). Computational Thinking: A Digital Age Skill for Everyone. Learning and Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23. Barr, V., ve Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: what is Involved and what is the role of the computer science education community?. ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905 Barret, M., Byram, M., De Bivar Black, L., Faltyn, J., Lenz, C., Mompoint_Gaillard, P., Natriashvili, K., Popovic, M., Rus, C., Sala, S., Van´t Land, H., Voskresenkaya, N., ve Zgaga, P. (2016). Competences for Democratic Culture. Living together as equals in culturally diverse democratic societies. Council of Europe. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/education/Source/competences/CDC_en.pdf Baumgartner, E., Bell, P., Brophy, S., Hoadley, C., Hsi, S., Joseph, D., Orrill, C., Puntambekar, S., Sandoval, W., ve Tabak, I. (2003). Design-Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005 Bayar, A. (2014). The Components of Effective Professional Development Activities in terms of Teachers’ Perspective. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(2), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2014.02.006 BB Ortaöğretim Programı. (2018). Bilgisayar Bilimleri Dersi (Kur 1, Kur 2). Öğretim programı. https://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=335 BBC News Educatin, B. (2018). Thinking computationally - Introduction to computational thinking - KS3 Computer Science Revision - BBC Bitesize. BBC Education. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zp92mp3/revision/2 Belford, G. G. (2020). Computer science. Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/computer-science Berland, M., ve Wilensky, U. (2015). Comparing Virtual and Physical Robotics Environments for Supporting Complex Systems and Computational Thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(5), 628–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9552-x Berry, M. (2014). Computational Thinking in Primary Schools. http://milesberry.net/2014/03/computational-thinking-in-primary-schools/ Blum, L., ve Cortina, T. J. (2007). CS4HS: An outreach program for high school CS teachers. SIGCSE 2007: 38th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/1227310.1227320 Blurton, C. (1999). New Directions of ICT-Use in Education. UNESCO’s World Communication and Information Report, 1–51. http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/lwf/dl/edict.pdf Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Kou, X., Xu, S., ve Sheu, F. R. (2015). Understanding the self-directed online learning preferences, goals, achievements, and challenges of MIT opencourseware subscribers. Educational Technology and Society, 18(2), 349–365. Boone, Jr, H. N., ve Bonee, D. A. (2012). Analyzing Likert Data. 50(2), 1–5. Borba, M., ve Villarreal, M. (2006). Humans-with-media and the reorganization of mathematical thinking: Information and communication technologies, modeling, visualization and experimentation (Vol. 39). Springer Science ve Business Media. Bower, M., ve Falkner, K. (2015). Computational thinking, the notional machine, pre-service teachers, and research opportunities. Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology Series, 160, 37–46. Brennan, Karen, ve Resnick, M. (2012). Using artifact-based interviews to study the development of computational thinking in interactive media design. American Educational Research Association Meeting, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64051-8_9 Brown, A. L. (1992). Design Experiments: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Creating Complex Interventions in Classroom Settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2 Bruner, J. (1961). The Act of Discovery. In Harvard Educational Review (Vol. 31, pp. 21–32). BTY Ortaokul Öğretim Programı (5 ve 6. sınıflar). (2018). Bi̇li̇şi̇m Teknoloji̇leri̇ ve Yazilim Dersi̇ Öğreti̇m Programi (Ortaokul 5 ve 6. Sınıflar). 22. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/2018124103559587-Bilişim Teknolojileri ve Yazılım 5-6. Sınıflar.pdf BTY Ortaokul Öğretim Programı (7 ve 8. sınıflar). (2018). Bi̇li̇şi̇m teknoloji̇leri̇ ve yazilim dersi̇ öğreti̇m programı. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/2018124103559587 - Bilişim Teknolojileri ve Yazılım 5-6. Sınıflar.pdf Bundy, A. (2007). Computational Thinking is Pervasive. Journal of Scientific and Practical Computing, 1(2), 67–69. Burke, K.-J., ve Lia, S. (2015). Teacher resources. Metaphor, 4, 58–59. https://cdn.iste.org/www-root/ct-documents/ct-teacher-resources_2ed-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=2 Butterworth, J., ve Thwaites, G. (2013). Thinking skills: Critical thinking and problem solving. Cambridge University Press. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2020). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (28th ed.). Pegem. https://doi.org/10.14527/9789944919289 Chickering, A. W., ve Gamson, Z. F. (1989). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. Biochemical Education, 17(3), 140–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/0307-4412(89)90094-0 Chunngam, B., Chanchalor, S., ve Murphy, E. (2014). Membership, participation and knowledge building in virtual communities for informal learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 863–879. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12114 Clabaugh, G. K. (2010). The Educational Theory of Jerome Bruner: a multi-dimensional analysis. New Foundations, 395–396. Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., ve Ecclestone, K. (2004). LSRC reference. Learning, 84. http://www.voced.edu.au/td/tnc_79.72 Coglan, D., ve Brannick, T. (2011). Doing Action Research in Your Organization. (4th ed.). Collins, A., Joseph, D., ve Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design Research: Theoretical and Methodological Issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_2 Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Dorling, M., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., ve Woollard, J. (2015). Computational thinking a guide for teachers. Curzon, P., Black, J., Meagher, L., ve Mcowan, P. (2009). cs4fn.org: Enthusing Students about Computer Science. Informatics Education Europe IV, 5–12. Czerniewicz, L., Deacon, A., Small, J., ve Walji, S. (2014). Developing world MOOCs: A curriculum view of the MOOC landscape. Journal of Global Literacies, Technologies, and Emerging Pedagogies, 2(3), 122–139. Dağhan, G., Nuhoğlu Kibar, P., Menzi Çetin, N., Telli, E., ve Akkoyunlu, B. (2017). Bilişim Teknolojileri Öğretmen Adaylarının Bakış Açısından 21.yüzyıl Öğrenen ve Öğretmen Özellikleri. Eğitim Teknoloji Kuram ve Uygulama, 7(2). Davies, A., Fidler, D., ve Gorbis, M. (2011). Future work skills 2020. In Institute for the Future for University of Phoenix Research Institute. Institute for the Future for University of Phoenix Research Institute. Dede, C., Nelson, B., Ketelhut, D. J., Clarke, J., ve Bowman, C. (2004). Design-based research strategies for studying situated learning in a multi-user virtual environment. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Sciences. International Society of the Learning, 3839, 158–165. DeDonno, M. A. (2016). The influence of IQ on pure discovery and guided discovery learning of a complex real-world task. Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.05.023 Demir, Ö., ve Seferoğlu, S. S. (2017). Yeni kavramlar, farklı kullanımlar: Bilgi-işlemsel düşünmeyle ilgili bir değerlendirme. In H. F. Odabaşı, B.Akkoyunlu, ve A. İşman (Eds.), Eğitim Teknolojisi Okumaları 2017 (pp. 801–830). TOJET ve Sakarya Üniversitesi. Department for Education. (2013). National curriculum in England: computing programmes of study . https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-computing-programmes-of-study Deuze, M. (2006). Participation, remediation, bricolage: Considering principal components of a digital culture. Information Society, 22(2), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240600567170 EBA. (2020). Eğitim Bilişim Ağı. https://www.eba.gov.tr/#/anasayfa Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1101_4 Erlingsson, C., ve Brysiewicz, P. (2017). A hands-on guide to doing content analysis. In African Journal of Emergency Medicine (Vol. 7, Issue 3, pp. 93–99). African Federation for Emergency Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001 Fernandez-Duque, D., Baird, J. A., ve Posner, M. I. (2000). Awareness and Metacognition. In Consciousness and Cognition (Vol. 9, Issue 2, pp. 324–326). https://doi.org/10.1006/ccog.2000.0449 Firend, A. R. (2014). The Problem Solving Model “ PSM ” The International Journal of. An International Journal of Global Business and Management, 7(1), 5–8. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., ve N, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed., Vol. 4, Issue 1). McGraw-Hill. Furber, S. (2012). Shut down or restart? In British Journal of Educational Technology (Issue January). Gadanidis, G. (2017). Five affordances of computational thinking to support elementary mathematics education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 36(2), 143–151. Ghost Bear, A. A. (2012). Technology, Learning, and Individual Differences. In Journal of Adult Education (Vol. 41, Issue 2). Gleason, B. (2013). #Occupy Wall Street: Exploring informal learning about a social movement on twitter. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(7), 966–982. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479372 Goodwin, K. (2012). Use of Tablet Technology in the Classroom. Google. (2015). Google for Education: Computational Thinking. Exploring Computational Thinking. https://edu.google.com/resources/programs/exploring-computational-thinking/ Grimson, E., ve Guttag, J. (2008). Introduction to Electrical Engineering and Computer Science I | Electrical Engineering and Computer Science | MIT OpenCourseWare. Grover, S., ve Pea, R. (2013). Computational Thinking in K-12: A Review of the State of the Field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051 Güler, Z., Baykara, M., ve Türkoglu, İ. (2011). Teknoloji mühendisliği: Yazılım mühendisliği eğitimi. Elektrik-Elektronik ve Bilgisayar Sempozyumu, Fırat Üniversitesi, 186–192. Guzdial, M. (2008). Education: Paving the way for computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 51(8), 25–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/1378704.1378713 Hemmendinger, D. (2010). A plea for modesty. ACM Inroads, 1(2), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/1805724.1805725 Hogan, R. L., ve McKnight, M. A. (2007). Exploring burnout among university online instructors: An initial investigation. Internet and Higher Education, 10(2), 117–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.03.001 Hsu, T. C., Chang, S. C., ve Hung, Y. T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers and Education, 126, 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004 Israel, M., Pearson, J. N., Tapia, T., Wherfel, Q. M., ve Reese, G. (2015). Supporting all learners in school-wide computational thinking: A cross-case qualitative analysis. Computers and Education, 82, 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.022 ISTE. (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for k-12 education. The International Society for Technology in Education. https://cdn.iste.org/www-root/ct-documents/computational-thinking-operational-definition-flyer.pdf ISTE. (2016). ISTE Standart for students. The International Society for Technology in Education. https://www.iste.org/standards/for-students Jaokar, A. (2013, July 21). Evolving the definition of Computational thinking. Open Gardens. Johnson, S., ve Siegal, H. (2010). Teaching Thinking Skills. In C. Winch (Ed.), Continuum (2nd ed.). Contınuum. Jovanova-Mitkovska, S. (2010). The need of continuous professional teacher development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2921–2926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.441 Kelly, A., Baek, J., Lesh, R., ve Bannan-Ritland, B. (2008). Enabling Innovations in Education and Systematizing their Impact. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh, ve J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of Design Research Methods in Education (1st ed., pp. 3–18). http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=envebtnG=Searchveq=intitle:Enabling+Innovations+in+Education+and+Systematizing+their+Impact#0 Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1995). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. In Human Resource Development Quarterly (2nd ed., Vol. 6, Issue 3). Berrett‐Koehler. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.3920060310 Knuth, D. E. (1981). Algorithms in modern mathematics and computer science. In A. P. Ershov ve D. E. Knuth (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics): Vol. 122 LNCS (pp. 82–99). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-11157-3_26 Küçük, S., ve Şişman, B. (2017). Birebir Robotik Öğretiminde Öğreticilerin Deneyimleri. Elementary Education Online, 16(1), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2017.12092 Laubsch, P. (2006). Online and In­person Evaluations: A Literature Review and Exploratory Comparison. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 62–73. Levin, J. R., ve O’Donnell, A. M. (1999). What to do about educational research’s credibility gaps? Issues in Education, 5(2), 177–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1080-9724(00)00025-2 Levy, P. (1998). Becoming Virtual. Basic Books. Lisbôa, E. S., ve Coutinho, C. P. (2011). Informal learning in social networks: A study of the orkut social network. Issues in Educational Research, 21(2), 162–174. Lohr, S. (2012, December 29). Big Data Is Great, but Don’t Forget Intuition - The New York Times. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/30/technology/big-data-is-great-but-dont-forget-intuition.html Lu, J. J., ve Fletcher, G. H. L. (2009). Thinking about Computational Thinking. SIGCSE’09 - Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 260–264. https://doi.org/10.1145/1508865.1508959 Mart Tebliğler Dergisi, T. (2018). Mart Tebli̇ğler Dergi̇si̇. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı, Mart(2726). Matthews, R., ve Lally, J. (2010). The Thinking Teacher’s Toolkit: Critical Thinking, Thinking Skills and Global Perspectives. Continuum İnternational Publishing Grup. Menekse, M. (2015). Computer science teacher professional development in the United States: a review of studies published between 2004 and 2014. Computer Science Education, 25(4), 325–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2015.1111645 Mıhcı Türker, P., ve Pala, F. K. (2020). The Effect of Algorithm Education on Students’ Computer Programming Self-Efficacy Perceptions and Computational Thinking Skills. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 3(3), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v3i3.69 Mohaghegh, M., ve McCauley, M. (2016). Computational Thinking: The Skill Set Set of the 21st Century. (IJCSIT) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 7(3), 1524–1530. Morris, L. V., ve Finnegan, C. L. (2008). Best practices in predicting and encouraging student persistence and achievement online. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 10(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.2190/CS.10.1.e Nash, J. (2017). Turn coders into computational thinkers | ISTE. ISTE. https://www.iste.org/explore/Innovator-solutions/Turn-coders-into-computational-thinkers OYGM. (2020). OYGM. http://oygm.meb.gov.tr/www/turk-egitim-tarihinin-en-buyuk-uzaktan-egitim-mesleki-gelisim-programini-baslatiyoruz/icerik/804 Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas (1st ed.). BasicBooks. https://doi.org/10.2307/816450 Papert, S. (1996). An exploration in the space of mathematics educations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1(1), 95–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00191473 Papert, S. (1999). Papert on Piaget. Time Magazine, 105. http://www.papert.org/articles/Papertonpiaget.html Pasterk, S., Sabitzer, B., Demarle-Meusel, H., ve Bollin, A. (2016). Informatics-Lab: Attracting Primary School Pupils for Computer Science. 14th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: “Engineering Innovations for Global Sustainability.” https://doi.org/10.18687/laccei2016.1.1.242 Paul, R., ve Elder, L. (2013). Kritik Düşünce: Yaşamınızın ve Öğrenmenizin Sorumluluğunu Üstlenmek İçin Araçlar THINKING (Çeviri:, A. E. Aslan, ve G. Sart (eds.); 3rd ed.). Nobel Akademik. www.nobelyayin.com Piaget, J. (1974). To Understand is to Invent: The Future of Education. Basic Books. https://www.amazon.com/Understand-Invent-Future-Education/dp/0670720348 Prieto-rodriguez, E., ve Berretta, R. (2014). Computer Science : It is not all about programming. 14–18. Psycharis, S., Botsari, E., Mantas, P., ve Loukeris, D. (2014). The impact of the computational inquiry based experiment on metacognitive experiences, modelling indicators and learning performance. Computers and Education, 72, 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.001 Reeves, T. C. (2000). Enhancing the Worth of Instructional Technology Research through “Design Experiments” and Other Development Research Strategies. International Perspectives on Instructional Technology Research for the 21st Century, April. Richey, R. C., ve Klein, J. D. (2014). Design and Development Research. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, ve Bishop M.J. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (4th ed., pp. 89–100). Springer. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/5962 Riggs, K. J., ve Peterson, D. M. (2000). Counterfactual thinking in preschool children: mental state and causal inferences. In P. Mitchrll ve K. J. Riggs (Eds.), Children’s Reasoning and the Mind (pp. 87–100). Psychology Press. Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Toison, H., Huang, T. Y., ve Lee, Y. H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 1436–1460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20212 Selby C., C., ve Woollard, J. (2013). Computational Thinking : The Developing Definition. ITiCSE Conference 2013, 5–8. https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/356481/1/Selby_Woollard_bg_soton_eprints.pdf Selwyn, N., Gorard, S., ve Williams, S. (2002). ‘We are guinea pigs really’: Examining the realities of ICT-based adult learning. Studies in the Education of Adults, 34(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2002.11661459 Sentance, S., ve Csizmadia, A. (2015). Teachers ’ perspectives on successful strategies for teaching Computing in school. Ifip Tc3, June, 1–11. http://community.computingatschool.org.uk/files/6303/original.pdf Shute, V. J., Sun, C., ve Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003 Sneider, C., Stephenson, C., Schafer, B., ve Flick, L. (2014). Exploring the science framework and NGSS: Computational thinking in high school classrooms. The Science Teacher, 81(5), 53–59. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst14 Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., ve Coulson, R. L. (1991). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Educational Technology, 31(5), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203461976 Spurgin, K. M., ve Wildemuth, B. M. (2018). Content Analysis. In B. M. Wildemuth (Ed.), pplications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science (2nd ed.). Libraries Unlimited. TBMM. (2013). Onuncu Kalkınma Planı (2014-2018). https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Onuncu-Kalkınma-Planı-2014-2018.pdf Toksik Gün, E., ve Güyer, T. (2019). Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünme Becerisinin Değerlendirilmesine İlişkin Sistematik Alanyazın Taraması. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (AKEF) Journal of Ahmet Kelesoglu Education Faculty (JAKEF) Cilt.1; Sayı, 1(2), 99–120. Tüzün, H., ve çinar, M. (2016). Guidelines for transferring residential courses into web. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 17(4), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i4.2323 Tyler-Smith, K. (2006). Early attrition among first time eLearners: A review of factors that contribute to drop-out, withdrawal and non-completion rates of adult learners undertaking eLearning programmes. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 73–85. UNESCO. (2020). Education: From disruption to recovery. Unesco. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse Wang, F., ve Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682 Wang, F., Kinzie, M. B., McGuire, P., ve Pan, E. (2010). Applying technology to inquiry-based learning in early childhood education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(5), 381–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0364-6 Wang, P. S. (2015). From Computing to Computational Thinking. CRS Press. Weibell, C. J. (2011). Principles of Learning | 7 principles to guide personalized, student-centered learning in the technology-enhanced blended learning environment. Wordpress. https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com/ Weiser, M. (1993). Some computer science issues in ubiquitous computing. Communications of the ACM, 36(7), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1145/159544.159617 Whittle, R. J., Telford, A., ve Benson, A. C. (2015). The “perfect” senior (VCE) secondary physical education teacher: Student perceptions of teacher-related factors that influence academic performance. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(8), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n8.1 Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118 Wing, J. M. (2010). Computational Thinking: What and Why? The Link -The Magazine of Carnegie Mellon University’s School of Computer Science. https://doi.org/10.1109/MED.2008.4602144 Wing, J. M. (2017). Computational thinking’s influence on research and education for all Influenza del pensiero computazionale nella ricerca e nell’educazione per tutti. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/922 Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1999747.1999811 Wolz, U., Stone, M., Pearson, K., Pulimood, S. M., ve Switzer, M. (2011). Computational thinking and expository writing in the middle school. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 11(2), 9.1-9.22. https://doi.org/10.1145/1993069.1993073 Yadav, A., Gretter, S., Good, J., ve Mclean, T. (2017). Computational Thinking in Teacher Education. In P. J. Rich ve C. B. Hodges (Eds.), Emerging Research, Practice, and Policy on Computational Thinking (pp. 205–220). Springer International Publishing AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52691-1 Yadav, A., Hong, H., ve Stephenson, C. (2016). Computational Thinking for All: Pedagogical Approaches to Embedding 21st Century Problem Solving in K-12 Classrooms. TechTrends, 60(6), 565–568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0087-7 Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., ve Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1145/2576872 Yadav, A., Stephenson, C., ve Hong, H. (2017). Computational thinking for teacher education. Communications of the ACM, 60(4), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.1145/2994591 Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research (Volume 5, 159 pages). In Organization Studies (4th ed., Vol. 7, Issue 1). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084068600700114 Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.tr_TR
dc.identifier.otherDR-43957
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11655/23257
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study is to design an online learning environment which has been specialized for computational thinking of teachers. An opportunity has been provided related to experiencing a process with the development of computational thinking skills in online learning environment with specialized computational thinking activities for teachers from different areas with the developed environment. Two working groups as design and testing have been studied with in this research. Design group consists of individuals from the occupational groups stated as having computational thinking in literature (n=10), testing group consists of science and technology, mathematics, social sciences and computer sciences (n=8) teachers The application of the study has been realized in 6 weeks period. In the direction of the first sub problem in the content of the study, the definition of computational thinking and components of computational thinking in the direction of this definition have been given. In the second sub-problem, the features of online learning environment which has been designed for teaching of computational thinking have been presented. In the third sub-problem, the development of environment’s participant teachers’ computational thinking skills has been looked over. In the fourth sub-problem, the ideas of the teachers related to their experiences they had and the environment they had developed have been examined. In the last sub-problem, the ideas of the teachers related to the quality of the developed environment have been taken into account. Findings have been reached stating that the environment in which design based research method has been used and has been developed online learning activities and has been tested with application may be functional in developing the skill of computational thinking. Also, some principles related to the teaching of computational thinking have been identified. According to the findings, computational thinking is not a set of skills developing itself. It should be developed by aimed and significant activities. It mostly requires forcing and time taking educational process for the users. As change in thinking processes of individuals does not realize in a short time, it requires learner support with long period.tr_TR
dc.language.isoturtr_TR
dc.publisherEğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsütr_TR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesstr_TR
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectBilgi işlemsel düşünmetr_TR
dc.subjectAyrıştırma
dc.subjectSoyutlama
dc.subjectÖrüntü tanıma
dc.subjectAlgoritma tasarımı
dc.subjectDeğerlendirme
dc.subject.lcshEğitim kuramı. Eğitim uygulamaları.tr_TR
dc.subject.lcshT- Teknoloji. Mühendisliktr_TR
dc.titleÖğretmenler İçin Bilgi İşlemsel Düşünmeye Özelleşmiş Bir Çevrimiçi Öğrenme Ortamının Tasarımıtr_TR
dc.title.alternativeDesıgn of An Onlıne Learnıng Envıronment for Teachers Specıalızed for Computatıonal Thınkıng
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesistr_TR
dc.description.ozetBu çalışmanın amacı, öğretmenler için bilgi işlemsel düşünmeye özelleşmiş bir çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamının tasarlanmasıdır. Geliştirilen ortam ile farklı alanlardan gelen öğretmenlerin bilgi işlemsel düşünmeye özelleşmiş etkinliklerle çevrimiçi öğrenim ortamında bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerilerini geliştirmeye yönelik bir süreç deneyimlemelerine imkân sağlanmıştır. Araştırmada tasarım ve sınama olmak üzere iki çalışma grubuyla çalışılmıştır. Tasarım grubu, alan yazında bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerisine sahip olduğu belirtilen meslek gruplarında çalışan kişilerden (n=10), sınama grubu ise fen ve teknoloji, matematik, sosyal bilgiler ve bilgisayar bilimleri öğretmenlerinden (n=8) oluşmaktadır. Çalışmanın uygulaması 6 haftalık dönemde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışma kapsamındaki ilk alt problem doğrultusunda bilgi işlemsel düşünmenin tanımı ile bu tanım doğrultusunda bilgi işlemsel düşünmenin bileşenleri verilmiştir. İkinci alt problemde, bilgi işlemsel düşünmenin öğretimi için tasarlanan çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamının özellikleri sunulmuştur. Üçüncü alt problemde, ortamın katılımcı öğretmenlerinin bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerilerindeki gelişimine bakılmıştır. Dördüncü alt problemde, öğretmenlerin geliştirilen ortama ve geçirdikleri deneyime ilişkin görüşleri incelenmiştir. Son alt problemde ise öğretmenlerin geliştirilen ortamın niteliğine ilişkin görüşleri ele alınmıştır. Tasarım tabanlı araştırma yöntemi kullanılan, çevrimiçi öğrenme etkinlikleri geliştirilen ve uygulanarak sınanan ortamın, bilgi işlemsel düşünme becerisinin geliştirilmesinde işlevsel olabileceğine dair bulgular elde edilmiştir. Ayrıca, bilgi işlemsel düşünmenin öğretimine yönelik bazı ilkeler belirlenmiştir. Bulgulara göre; bilgi işlemsel düşünme, kendiliğinden gelişen bir beceri seti değildir. Amaçlı ve belirgin etkinlikler ile geliştirilmesi gerekmektedir. Kullanıcılar için çoğu zaman zorlayıcı ve zaman alıcı bir öğretim süreci gerektirebilmektedir. Bireylerin düşünme süreçlerindeki değişim kısa sürede gerçekleşmediği için uzun süreli öğretici desteği gerekebilmektedir.tr_TR
dc.contributor.departmentBilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileritr_TR
dc.embargo.terms2 yiltr_TR
dc.embargo.lift2023-01-13T11:58:38Z
dc.fundingYoktr_TR


Files in this item

Name:
Tez_acıkErişim_Zehra_Sayın.pdf
Size:
3.807Mb
Format:
PDF
View/Open
Name:
license_rdf
Size:
811bytes
Format:
application/rdf+xml
View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess