Mevlana Intenational Journal of Education (MIJE)

Transcription

1

2 Mevlana Intenational Journal of Education (MIJE) Volume 2, Issue 2 December 2012 MIJE is indexed in Turkish Educational Index, ASOS index, Index Copernicus, EBSCO Pub, Educational Research Abstracts (ERA), Aniji and DOAJ.

3 OWNER ADAM, Bahattin (Rector of Mevlana University) EDITOR IN CHIEF ÇELİK, Vehbi (Dean of Education Faculty) EDITOR KORKMAZ, Özgen ASSOCIATE EDITORS HALAI, Nelofer KUMARAN, Duraikkannu LEMMER, Eleanor ASSISTANT EDITORS USTA, Ertuğrul YEŞİLYURT, Etem PROOF READING FARRIS, Aundreta FARRIS, Michael THIRSK, Joanne COMPOSITION TURAN, Bülent Ahmet BULDUK, Sabiha DUYAR, Aysel ABADIANO, Helen R. (Central Connecticut State University, USA) AGAYEV, Ejder (Qafqaz University, Azerbaijan) AKBAŞ, Oktay (Kırıkkale University, Turkey) AKKOYUNLU, Buket (Hacettepe University, Turkey) AKMAN, Berrin Hacettepe University, Turkey AKPINAR, Burhan (Fırat University, Turkey) AKPINAR, Yavuz (Boğaziçi University, Turkey) AKTÜMEN, Muharrem (Ahi Evran University, Turkey) AKYOL, Hayati (Gazi University, Turkey) ALACACI, Cengiz (Florida International University, USA) AL-MABUK, Rathi (University of NorthernIowa, USA) Anastasiadou, Sofia D. (University of West Macedonia, Greece) ARICIOĞLU, Ahu (Pamukkale University, Turkey) BAEZZAT, Fereshteh (University of Mazandaran, Iran) BAYRAM, Servet (Marmara University, Turkey) BECK, Mitchell (Central Connecticut State University, USA) BİLGİN, İbrahim (Mustafa Kemal University, Turkey) BİRGİN, Osman (Uşak University, Turkey) BOOYSE, Johan (University of South Africa, South Africa) BOZDOĞAN, Aykut Emre (Giresun University, Turkey) BOZOĞLAN, Bahadır (Mevlana University, Turkey) BÜYÜKÖZTÜRK, Şener (Gazi University, Turkey) ÇAKIR, Abdulkadir (Mevlana University, Turkey) ÇAKIR, Recep (Amasya University, Turkey) EDITORIAL BOARD ÇANKAYA, İbrahim (Uşak University, Turkey) ÇELİK, Vehbi (Mevlana University, Turkey) CHUANG, Hsueh-hua (National Sun Yat-sen University, Tayvan) ÇOŞKUN, Eyyup (Mustafa Kemal University, Turkey) DANIŞMAN, Yusuf (Mevlana University, Turkey) DEMİREAY, Uğur (Anadolu University, Turkey) DEMİREL, Şener (Fırat University, Turkey) DEMİRLİ, Cihat (İstanbul Ticaret University, Turkey) DEREVENSKY, Jeffrey L. (McGill University, Canada) DIBOLL, Mike (University of Sussex, UK) DOĞRU, S. Sunay Yıldırım(Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey) ECIRLI, Ahmet (Universiteti Bedër, Albania ERBAY, Filiz (Mevlana University, Turkey) ERGÜN, Mustafa (Afyon Kocatepe University, Turkey) FALLAHI, Vida (Shiraz University, Iran ) GAO, Ping (University of Northern Iowa, USA) GÖMLEKSİZ, Mehmet Nuri (Fırat University, Turkey) GÜNDÜZ, Mustafa (Yıldız Teknik University, Turkey) GÜNEL, Murat (Ahi Evran University, Turkey) GÜROL, Mehmet (Yıldız Technical University, Turkey) GÜZELLER, Cem Oktay (Akdeniz University, Turkey) HALAT, Erdoğan (Afyon Kocatepe University, Turkey) HALAI, Nelofer(Aga Khan University, Pakistan) HAMMOND, John (University of Canberra, Australia)

4 HARPUTLU, Leyla (Ahi Evran University, Turkey ) HERRING, Mary C. (University of Northern Iowa, USA) HOSSEINCHARI, Massound (Shiraz University, Iran ) HUANG, Chi-Jen (National Chiayi University, Taiwan) HUTSON, Bryant (The University of North Carolina a, USA) İŞÇİOĞLU, Ersin (Eastern Mediterranean University, TRNC) IŞIK, Erkan (Mevlana University, Turkey) İŞMAN, Aytekin (Sakarya University, Turkey) KARA, Ahmet (Adıyaman University, Turkey) KARADAĞ, Ruhan (Adıyaman University, Turkey) KARADENİZ, Şirin (Bahçeşehir University, Turkey) KARAMI, Morteza(University of Mazandaran, Iran) KARAKUŞ, Mehmet (Zirve University, Turkey) KARAMI, Morteza (University of Mazandaran, Iran) KARATAŞ, Serçin (Gazi University, Turkey) KARIM, Rezaul (Leading University, Bangladesh) KAUR, Kirandeep (Punjabi university, India) KAYA, Osman Nafiz (Fırat University, Turkey) KESER, Hafize (Ankara University, Turkey) KOCABAŞ, İbrahim (Fırat University, Turkey) KOÇAK, Recep (Gazi Osman Paşa University, Turkey) KUMARAN, Duraikkannu (University of Madras, India) LAVICZA, Zsolt (Cambridge University, UK) LEBLANC, Raymond (University of Ottawa, Canada) LEMMER, Eleanor (University of South Africa, South Africa) LOUW, Gabriel (North-West University, South Africa) MCKEOWN, John A. G. (Mevlana University, Turkey) MEMMEDOV, Behmen (Qafqaz University, Azerbaijan) MICHAIL, Kalogiannakis (University of Crete, Greece) MITTAL, Shree Ram (University of Delhi, India) MOONSAMY, Sharon (University of the Witwatersrand, S.Africa) MSILA, Vuyisile (University of South Africa, South Africa) NAM, Jeonghee (Pusan National University, Korea) NEL, Norma (University of South Africa, South Africa) ODABAŞI, H. Ferhan (Anadolu University, Turkey) OKUYUCU, Cihan (Yıldız Technical University University, Turkey) ÖMEROĞLU, Esra (Gazi University, Turkey) OMRAN, Ebrahim Salehi (University of Mazandaran, Iran) ORAL, Behçet (Dicle University, Turkey) ÖZDEMİR, M. Soner (Kırıkkale University, Turkey) ÖZDEMİR, Selçuk (Gazi University, Turkey) ÖZER, Bayram (Mustafa Kemal University, Turkey) PANDAY, Shefali (University of Mumbai, India) PAPE, Stephen J.(University of Florida, USA) PEKER, Murat (Afyon Kocatepe, Turkey) GIJON PUERTA, José (Universidad de Granada, Spain) PHASHA, Tlakale Nareadi (University of South Africa, South Africa) PING-KWAN, Fok (The Chinese University of Hong Kong) POTGIETER, Calvyn (University of South Africa, South Africa) QUADIR, Tarik (Mevlana University, Turkey) RANA, Rizwan Akram (University of the Punjab, Pakistan) SADEGHI, Abbas (University of Guilan Iran) SAMUEL, Michael (University of Kwazulu-Nata, South Africa) ŞAHİN, İsmail (Selçuk University, Turkey) ŞAHİN, Sami (Gazi University, Turkey) SAMANI, Siamak (Islamic Azad University, Iran) SARI, Mustafa (Mevlana University, Turkey) SEMERCİ, Çetin (Fırat University, Turkey) ŞENAY, Hasan (Mevlana University, Turkey) SHAHIM, Sima (Shiraz University, Iran ) SHARRA, Steve(Michigan State University, USA) SHELLEY, Mack (Iowa State University, USA) SÜNBÜL, Ali Murat(Selçuk University, Turkey) TABAKU, Elida (Universiteti Bedër, Albania) TAŞPINAR, Mehmet (Gazi University, Turkey) THOMPSON, Ann D. (Iowa State University, USA) TÖREMEN, Fatih (Zirve University, Turkey) Trotman, Wayne (Izmir Katip Çelebi University) TÜYSÜZ, Cengiz (Mustafa Kemal University, Turkey) UZUNBOYLU, Hüseyin (Near East University, TRNC) YALÇIN, Paşa (Erzincan University, Turkey) YALIN, H. İbrahim (Gazi University, Turkey) YAMAN, Süleyman (Zonguldak Karaelmas University, Turkey) YILMAZ, Ercan (Selçuk University, Turkey) YÖRÜK, Sinan (Afyon Kocatepe University, Turkey) REVIEWER OF THE ISSUE Ahmet Bedel (Mevlana University) Alpaslan Durmuş (Mevlana University) Aykut Emre Bozdoğan (Giresun University) Erkan Işık (Mevlana University) Ertuğrul USTA (Mevlana University) Etem Yeşilyurt (Mevlana University) Filiz Erbay (Mevlana University) İbrahim Kurt (Mevlana University) İrfan Emre (Fırat University) Kerim GÜNDOĞDU (Adnan Menderes University) Neslihan Saltalı (Mevlana University) Ömer Üre (Mevlana University) Rüştü YEŞİL (Ahi Evran University) Serçin Karataş (Gazi University) Sinan KAYA (Mevlana University) Şirin Karadeniz (Bahçeşehir University) Abdullah Şahin (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University)

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter as a Writing to Learn Activity and the Addressee Ali Yıldız Instructors practice level of Chickering and Gamson learning principles Sedat Aydoğdu, Kemal Doymu, Ufuk Şimşek Impact of Blended Learning Environments Based on Algo-Heuristic Theory on Some Variables Mustafa Aygün, Özgen Korkmaz Understanding a Primary School Teacher's Life and Her School Context Kh. Atikur Rahman Achievement Gaps between Different School Types and Regions in Turkey: Have They Changed Over Time? Sedat Gumus, Erkan Hasan Atalmis The Examination of Pre-school Teacher Candidates Academic Locus of Control Levels According to Gender and Grade Hakan Sarıçam, Ayşe Duran, Mehmet Çardak, Medera Halmatov Who helps an online facilitator to learn with students in a day? Simon B Khoza The development of a scale of attitudes toward tablet pc Aykut Emre Bozdoğan, Mustafa Uzoğlu LEADERSHIP ROLE of TURKEY for ICDEEEWA. Leadership Role of Turkey among Distance Education Institutions From the Balkans (Southeastern Europe) to the Baltic, Turkic and Caucasian Republics, to the Middle East and North Africa (Invited Article) Ugur Demiray Teaching Methods and Techniques Used By Teaching Staff during Lectures As Seen By Candidate Teachers (The Example of Bayburt) Sema ALTUN YALÇIN, Sinan YALÇIN, Sakıp KAHRAMAN, Sibel AÇIŞLI, Zeynel Abidin YILMAZ

6 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE) Vol. 2(2), pp. 1-10, 30 December, 2012 Available online at Article history Received: Received in revised form: Accepted: Key words: Writing to learn, Letter, Addressee Letter as a Writing to Learn Activity and the Addressee Ali Yıldız * Kazim Karabekir Faculty of Education, Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey The main purpose of this research was to study how the instructiveness of the letter, one of the writing to learn activities; changes according to the person to whom it is written (the addressee). The document analysis method was used in this qualitative study. Since documents are very important information sources used effectively in qualitative studies, their authenticity is important. The book named Letters from Father Inönü to Erdal Inönü published by Bilgi Publishing in 1988 and prepared for printing by Sevgi Özel with the permission of the Inönü Foundation and the letters published under the title The letters of Erdal Inönü to his father by Can Dündar in his column in the Milliyet on 17, June, 2007 were analysed using the qualitative analysis method. It was analysed in the study that how the instructiveness of the letters ( ) whose content was only related to physics and written from father to son and from son to father changed according to the addressee. The documents analysed in this study provide the first three stages of document analysis, which has five stages namely; access to the documents, control of their authenticity, understanding the documents, analysis of the data and the use of the data. The findings of the research support the views of the students, who stated that they had written more clearly to students who were younger than they were or studying in the subclasses than they had written to their teachers in the studies conducted previously. Introduction It is observed that the researches in the science education domain are under the effect of two paradigms and in the discussions about research approaches, the purpose and the result of the researches become important rather than deciding whether to use the qualitative or quantitative approach (Sözbilir & Canpolat, 2006). The USA Research Council determine that science education requires more than studying the known principles and theories and science must be taught differently from the psychology, philosophy, sociology and history courses (National Research Council [NRC], 1996). There are important instruments in science courses that are believed to develop higher level cognitive process skills. Writing to learn activities are the primary activities among the others. Writing activities help the students to become individuals who communicate better and help them to get used to the writing genres that are required in various academic disciplines and professional fields. In the twentieth century, two writing movements drew interest in the curriculum. The first emerged as a result of Dewey s progressive education, which started in the 1930s and lasted until the 1950s. The second is the movement that began in the 1970s and has lasted until now. In this process, writing became the teaching method that was used worldwide in many education levels and the science field (Anson, Schwiebert & Williamson, 1993; Bazerman & Russel 1994; Fulwiler, 1986; Martin, D'Arcy, Newton & Parker, 1994; McLeod, 1992; Pearce, 1984; Russell, 1991). Klein (1999) states that writing activities (diary, summary, letter, article and so on) help the students to become individuals who communicate better, think critically, and form a new * Correspondence: Atatürk University, Kazım Karabekir Faculty of Education, Department of Primary Education, , Erzurum-Turkey, ayildiz@atauni.edu.tr

7 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 2(2); 1-10, 32, December, 2012 knowledge repertory. Klein (1999) draws attention to the four hypotheses about writing depending on certain studies (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987; Britton, 1982; Flower & Hayes, 1980, 1981; Newell, 1984; Young & Sullivan, 1984). The first hypothesis is that the writers form knowledge while telling it. In other words, it (spontaneous) is to form with telling without planning and controlling. The second hypothesis known as forward search claims that the writers materialise their ideas in their writings and then reread the writing and make new inferences depending on it. The third hypothesis (genre structures) argues that the writers use genres to form a relation between the elements of the text and the components with which the knowledge are associated. The last hypothesis called back-ward search states that the researchers have chosen scientific purposes that are expressed effectively, they obtain sub-purposes from them that are satisfying and they change their own knowledge to finalise it. Torrance, Thomas and Robinson (1994, 1999, 2000) investigated the individual differences in the writing behaviours of university students. They determined in their studies that because of the methods the students used while writing their thesis, they were divided into three groups as those who plan, those who revise, and mixed strategy writers. Those who plan want their ideas to be intelligible and they have a tendency to write less drafts than those who revise. At the beginning of the writing process, they decide on the content of the text, think and then write. Those who revise benefit from their corrections to develop the content. Writing makes their ideas more comprehensible and helps them to understand the discussions betters. While they are writing, they have a tendency to develop the content; they think while writing. The third group is mixed strategy writers who plan the text without forming it. They are similar to those who plan, but they change the content during their subsequent corrections. The ideas of the writers can change during the writing process. Because of this, the ideas arise during the writing process. While rethinking and expressing again, the ideas are shaped as fully developed ideas in the end. The knowledge change model is the quality of expert writers rather than novices (Tynjälä, 1998). The difference between the knowledge telling model and the knowledge change model only explains why answering research questions is not as effective a study strategy as writing an article. While research questions can be answered with the knowledge transfer strategy, writing an article consists of strategies that require knowledge change and a higher thinking process such as writing, organisation, and completion (Tynjälä, 1998). Numerous researches were conducted regarding the use of writing as a tool that develops learning and thinking (Mason & Boscolo, 2000). Langer and Applebee (1987) stated in their study about writing to learn that writing about a topic help the writer to enhance their knowledge, organise the ideas to be written, and experience learning. Writing activity urges the writer to express their views more openly and clearly. The use of writing as a cognitive activity is an important step in learning with a plan (Bereiter, 1990, 1994; Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1989). Yıldız and Büyükkasap (2011a, b, c) in their studies in which work groups were comprised of science teacher candidates concluded that the achievement percentages of the experiment groups who wrote letters as a writing to learn activity to the high school students in their final years about a photoelectric event, Compton event, and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle scored higher than the control groups. In the same studies, the experiment group students determined that they understood the topics that they wrote letters about and the writing to learn activity was effective in learning these topics. In the study called the effect of a writing activity in learning science subjects in an informal learning environment by Doğan and Çavuş (2008), the students stated that they learned to summarise by gathering information through the writing activity, sort the scientific knowledge by expressing it in their own words, associate the main ideas about a subject, and shortly present the information by organising it. In a study conducted by Özer Keskin, Doğan and Keskin Samancı (2008), the students were asked to write an explanatory text by taking into consideration the question asked in the pre-test. Most of the students stated that they had revised their ideas and organised their information while -2-

8 Letter as a Writing to Learn Activity and the Addressee. A. Yıldız writing the explanatory text. Akçay and Hand (2008) stated that the written and verbal expressions of the students gave information about what they learnt, how they interpreted what they learnt, and how they associated it with the knowledge they already had. The same researchers asserted that having students do different writing activities in science courses such as drawing pictures, writing poems and letters enhanced their motivation towards the science course. In the studies conducted about writing to learn activities (Hohenshell, Hand & Staker, 2004; Hand, Yang & Bruxvoort, 2007; Günel, Uzoğlu & Büyükkasap, 2009), the students writing letters stated that writing to younger addressees compelled them to use a different language than they used while writing to their teachers and the reason for this was that they wanted to write it more clearly. In short, the subjects determined that they thought more when writing to juniors and this condition caused them to structure the scientific concepts related to the subject that they had written successfully. In a study conducted by Yıldız (2009), the science teacher candidates determined that they thought more to write more explanatorily in the letters that they wrote about the subjects of quantum physics to the senior high school students as their addressees and this condition helped them to understand the subject as they explained it better in their letters. In the same study, in the section where the views of the science teacher candidates (positive or negative) were investigated, the teacher candidates stating views such as I tried to be more explanatory for the person to understand some conditions better reveal that the instructiveness of the letter written can change according to the addressee. The purpose of the study The aim of the study was to analyse how the instructiveness of the letter, one of the writing to learn activities; change according to the person to whom it is written (the addressee). Method Document analysis was used in this qualitative study. Document analysis can be used separately as a data collection method in qualitative researches (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011). Document analysis involves the systematic examination of written materials, which include information about the target events or phenomenon for analysis. Since documents are important information sources used in qualitative research studies, their authenticity is important. A theme, a word, a character, a sentence or paragraph, an item or a content related to the research topic is researched and the data obtained may not require quantification. The researcher can easily report the results obtained after the analysis in prose (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011).Since it is not proper for the researcher to make judgements without looking up the meanings of the words used in a sentence or sentences, content analysis, frequently used in social sciences researches, has been used. In this study, the book named Letters from Father Inönü to Erdal Inönü published by Bilgi Publishing in 1988 and prepared for printing by Sevgi Özel with the permission of the Inönü Foundation and the letters published under the title The letters of Erdal Inönü to his father by Can Dündar in his column in the Milliyet on 17, June, 2007 were analysed using the qualitative analysis method. The letters in the book include the two periods of time when Erdal Inönü went to the USA to complete his postgraduate studies ( , ). The letters analysed in both documents cover the first period ( ). How the instructiveness of the letters written only about physics from father to son and from son to father changed according to the addressee was analysed in the study. As it was determined by the researchers (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011), many documents (newspaper columns, course books, organisational documents, annual reports and so on) revised, controlled for authenticity, arranged and organised by the experts in the field can be a data source and the use of such documents can increase the reliability and validity of the qualitative study. The documents examined in this study (a book and a newspaper article) automatically provide the first three stages of document analysis, which has five stages (Forster, 1995; Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2011) such as -3-

9 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 2(2); 1-10, 32, December, 2012 access to the documents, control of their authenticity, understanding the documents, analysis of the data and the use of the data. This condition is an important advantage for this study. Findings and Interpretation The data of the study was obtained by analysing the book named Letters from Father Inönü to Erdal Inönü, which was reorganised with an intelligible language and expertise without damaging the authenticity by Sevgi Özel with the permission of the Inönü Foundation and published by Bilgi Publishing in 1988 and the letters which had the content related to physics and published under the title The letters of Erdal Inönü to his father by Can Dündar in his column in the Milliyet (Dündar, 2007) on 17, June, The suitable letters were scanned and presented below, and necessary explanations and interpretations were made. 7, December, 1947, Monday Erdal, my dear son Let me ask you while it is on my mind. Will you need the physics tools in my physics laboratory in the future? If they can be beneficial to you, I will keep them. If not, they will stay in the Villa as the property of the state. Inform me in your first letter. The expression of Will you need the physics tools in my physics laboratory in the future? reveals that the father is interested in and curious about learning physics, he thinks about physical events, he might have knowledge about the fundamental concepts of physics, and correspondences can be made with him about this topic, he may have some questions and he may ask for the answers to be written. In the studies conducted (Dündar, 2009; Özel, 1988), these views were verified with the statements that Ismet Pasha conducted physics experiments in the physics laboratory in Presidential House with accomplished physicians of the period such as Hayri Dener. 28 January 1950, Saturday My dear Erdal, We received your letter dated the 18 th as we had expected at noon. You give details of smog. Ömer had told me the term. But the possibility of formation of S 1 H 2 So 4 in the eye made my eyes ache. I learned something. Nowadays, the newspapers mention the hydrogen bomb by referring to the USA. According to the news today, its effect was a hundred times more powerful than the atom bomb. Can you write a few lines to me about the (H) composition of this bomb? The interpretations made about the letters of Ismet Pasha dated 7 December, 1947 greatly verify some statements presented in the letter above. Pasha s desire to be given information about the comparison between the devastating effect of the atom bomb and the hydrogen bomb and the composition of the hydrogen bomb reveals that Ismet Pasha paid great attention to the topic, followed the hot agenda, and most of all, he did all this warmly. Ismet Inönü s following the current agenda (from Illustrated London News), reading the relevant books, being interested in the -4-

10 Letter as a Writing to Learn Activity and the Addressee. A. Yıldız relativity theory of Einstein and even trying to understand it and writing to his son (the letter dated 28 January, 1950) is surprising and interesting. While analysing the letters, do the letters that he is going to write to his son have an effect on these? In other words, can the letters that he is going to write to his son encourage him to follow the events about current physics and read books and journals about them? The occurrence of such a possibility is very important, although it is very small. It makes letter as a writing to learn activity very useful, beneficial and effective. 5 January, 1950, Sunday Erdal, my dear son, We received your letter dated the 28 th of January yesterday; in other words, after a week. It may be a record in this season. Don t inquire about our health. It is exceptionally cold and snowy here. Thank God, we are all well. We walked on the farm road for nearly half an hour. The wind was not very strong. We enjoyed it very much. When we went back home, we were exhausted from the heat. In one of my recent letters, I asked you for information about the hydrogen bomb. You talk about it politically, but not scientifically. You may also write about it. According to your letter, its scientific aspect seems to be hidden. The statement In one of my recent letters, I asked you for information about the hydrogen bomb and the subsequent sentences reveal that the addressee personally demanded information before, but what was written was not what he expected. It is an important advantage for the addressee to ask for information about the hydrogen bomb personally. It can indicate that he had the desire to learn, thought about the topic before and he would make more effort to understand what was written. 5 February, 1950 / Sunday Dear father, As you know, Truman made a decision about the production of the hydrogen bomb. In general, the first hydrogen bomb was said to have been produced in a year. Its cost is predicted to be million dollars. ( ) Many famous atom physicists came to Columbia University to join a meeting published a statement. They say, The hydrogen bomb is not a weapon, but it is a means to wipe out all the population. However right it may be, nothing can excuse such mass destruction. The expressions given in the letter below and written by his father (9 February, 1950) as a reply to the letter written by Erdal Inönü reveals that the letter dated 5 February, 1950 like the other letters written to father from son was not explanatory enough and did not include the information that he wanted at a level that he would understand. -5-

11 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 2(2); 1-10, 32, December, February, 1950, Thursday Erdal, my dear son, I received your letter dated the 5 th of February today. A speed record. Thanks a lot. You are giving me very valuable information about the hydrogen bomb. I could not understand it very well. I am going to read it with Ömer. The statement You are giving me very valuable information about the hydrogen bomb. I could not understand it very well. I am going to read it with Ömer. reveals that the writer wrote it without thinking about the condition of the addressee. The addressee s statement that he could not understand it and even despite the help of another person, he could not understand it as he had desired indicates that the person who wrote it did not write explicitly enough to consider the addressee. After all, the addressee was his father and couldn t the person who taught him all throughout out his life as a teacher understand it? The research studies (Yıldız, 2009; Günel et al., 2009) determine that the writers experience some cognitive processes during the stage of how I can express my views in order to help the young addressees (junior) understand them more easily and clearly and this condition causes them to learn better. This finding supports the views stated in the previous studies (Hohenshell, Hand & Staker, 2004; Hand, Yang & Bruxvoort, 2007; Günel et al., 2009) that the student wrote more clearly while writing to their junior or studying in sub-classes than to their teachers and they thought more because of this. 10 February, 1950, Friday My dearest Erdal, I asked Ömer a question today He said, When four H atoms fuse, they make one helium atom. But the weight of helium is found to be less than 4H. The mass loss in between goes into the energy. This means that this is 8 times the energy consumed. Have I got it right? The statement I asked Ömer a question today. Is it understood correctly? reveals that the addressee is uncertain and wants approval. If Erdal Inönü had written these letters to a family member younger than him, rather than his father, he would have probably written them more clearly. The writers who write letters to a person who is younger in age and low in status think more about how to express themselves in order to be understood more easily and they use different expressions, similes, and examples. All of these points reveal that the age and status of the addressee can affect the instructiveness of the letter. 15 March, 1950, Wednesday My Dearest Erdal, Ömer and I are going to the Faculty of Letters and Science to listen to the conference of Heisenberg about the philosophy of atom physics. Regards, yours affectionately. The letter dated 15 th of March, 1950 points out that Ismet Pasha not only followed the developments in modern physics through reading books or journals, but he also went to conferences of scientists such as Werner Heisenberg, the winner of 1932 Nobel Prize in Physics. The individual who is very much interested in modern physics states that he could not understand the content of the -6-

12 Letter as a Writing to Learn Activity and the Addressee. A. Yıldız letter written to him by someone who is younger than him (his son), where the scientific explanation of the hydrogen bomb is made. It is an important finding that Ismet Inönü, a great commander and a politician who left a mark in the recent history of Turkey, mentioned the important developments in modern physics in his letters written to his son, who was completing his post studies on physics in the USA. These findings reveal that Ismet Inönü, the president of the republic from 1938 to 1950, was interested in modern physics and he read, conducted research, and most importantly thought about the subject. He might have read and examined the books and the journals relating fascinating developments in physics in order to motivate his son in his field of study with the letters that he wrote. What is important is that all these must have been provided with the letters that he wrote to his son. This possibility highlights the fact that writing activities contribute to learning. Conclusion Ismet Inönü conducted physics experiments with the accomplished physicists of the period in the physics laboratories in the Presidential House. He followed the fascinating developments in modern physics by reading books and journals, and joining the conferences of the European Physicists who were honoured with the Nobel Prize. He tried to compare and contrast the hydrogen bomb and the atom bomb. Furthermore, he wanted to learn the structure of the hydrogen bomb. He asked his son to write to him about this matter. Although he was very willing, equipped, and prepared on this matter, his inability to understand the explanation about the structure of the hydrogen bomb stated in the letters written to him by someone who was younger than him is an important finding of this study. It is an important finding of the studies conducted previously (Hohenshell et al., 2004; Günel & Hand, 2005; Hand, Prain, Lawranence & Yore, 1999; Akar, Günel & Büyükkasap, 2008; Günel, Uzoğlu & Büyükkasap, 2008; Günel et al., 2009; Yıldız, 2009) that people who are younger and low in status could not write explanatorily enough when they wrote to their elders. If Erdal Inönü had written these letters to a family member who was his junior or to another individual such a high school student like a student writing to his teacher, but not to his father, he would have probably written more explanatorily. The letters written to someone who is younger and low in status are more understandable because the writers think more about how to express them to be understood more easily and they use different expressions, similes and examples (Hohenshell et al., 2004; Yıldız, 2009; Günel et al., 2009). All these findings reveal that the instructiveness of the letter can change according to the addressee. Ismet Inönü must have read the journals that explain the fascinating developments in modern physics in order to motivate and support his son in his letters, maybe just to write or he was interested in modern physics so he read and analysed the books and went to conferences of the wellknown scientists of the period. Who knows? However, the important thing is the possibility of the letters that he wrote to his son having provided all these things. This possibility points out that writing activities serve and contribute to learning. Furthermore, it can be stated that the father and son revised their ideas due to the letters that they wrote, reorganised them by expressing them in their own words (Yıldız, 2009; Yıldız & Büyükkasap, 2011b) and most importantly, the letters encouraged them to think. This study supports the results of the experimental studies by revealing that the instructiveness of the letter and the condition in which the letters were written years ago, experienced and made history in real life would change according to the addressee. It might be suggested to instructors and teachers within the context of the findings of the study that writing to learn activities or the teaching strategies that include these activities is used in teaching physical concepts in general physics, modern physics and other science courses and realising the conceptual change of the students by simplifying it (Mason & Boscolo, 2000), as well as bringing the student to the position of the discoverer and the constructivist of the knowledge by placing them -7-

13 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 2(2); 1-10, 32, December, 2012 in the centre (Yıldız & Büyükkasap, 2011a,b,c). It is thought that conducting studies about the other genres of writing to learn activities that were grounded on the constructivist theory and helped the students to come out of a conceptual change process such as summary and poster and the examination of whether or not the instructiveness of the written summary or a poster of a topic changed according to the addressee will make important contributions to the field. References Akar, M. S., Günel, M. & Büyükkasap, E. (2008, Ağustos). Laboratuar dersinde yazma metinleri oluşturmanın ve analoji kullanımının akademik başarıya etkisi. VIII. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Egitimi Kongresi nde sunulan bildiri, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu. Akçay, H. & Hand, B. (2008, Ağustos). Farklı şekillerde uygulanan yaparak ve yazarak öğrenme metotlarının ilköğretim öğrencilerinin fen öğrenimine katkısı. VIII. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Egitimi Kongresi nde sunulan bildiri, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu. Anson, C. M., Schwiebert, J. E. & Williamson, M. M. (1993). Writing across the curriculum: An annotated bibliography. Westport, C. T.: Greenwood Press. Bazerman, C. & Russell, D. (1994). Introduction: The rhetorical tradition and specialized discourses. In Bazerman, C. & Russell, D. (eds.), Landmark essays on writing across the curriculum (17-38). Davis, C. A.: Hennagoras Press. Bereiter, C. (1990). Aspects of an educational learning theory. Review of Educational Researcher, 60 (4), Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Popper s World 3. Educational Researcher, 23(7), Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In Resnick, L. B. (ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honour of Robert Glaser ( ). Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Britton, J. (1982). Shaping at the point of utterance. In Pradl, G. M. (ed.), Prospect and retrospect: Selected essays of James Britton, Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc. Montclair, NJ, pp (Reprinted from Reinventing the rhetorical tradition, by Freedman, A., & Pringle, I. (eds.), (1980). Conway, A. R., L and S Books., for the Canadian Council of Teachers of English) Doğan, N. & Çavuş, S. (2008, Ağustos). İnformal öğrenme ortamlarında fen konularının öğrenilmesine yazma etkinliğinin etkisi. VIII. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi nde sunulan bildiri, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu. Dündar, C. (2009). Anka kuşu. Ankara: İmge Yayınevi. Dündar, C. (2007, 17 Haziran). Erdal İnönü'nün babasına mektupları. Milliyet (Milliyet Pazar). Flower, L. S. & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, Flower, L. & Hayes, J. R. (1980) The cognition of discovery: Defining a rhetorical problem. College Composition and Communication, 31, Forster. N. (1995) The analysis of company documentation. C. Casell & G. Symon (Eds.), Qualitative methods in organizational research: Apratical goide. London: sage. Fulwiler, T. (1986). The argument for writing across the curriculum. In Young, A., and Fulwiler, T. (eds.), Writing across the disciplines: Research into practice (21-32). Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc. Günel, M., Uzoğlu, M. & Büyükkasap, E. (2009). Öğrenme amaçlı yazma aktivitelerinin kullanımının ilköğretim seviyesinde kuvvet konusunu öğrenmeye etkisi. Gazi Üniersitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 29(2), Günel, M., Uzoğlu, M. & Büyükkasap, E. (2008, Ağustos). Öğrenme amaçlı yazma aktivitelerindeki varyasyonun ilköğretim seviyesinde fen konularını ögrenmeye etkisi. VIII. -8-

14 Letter as a Writing to Learn Activity and the Addressee. A. Yıldız Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Egitimi Kongresi nde sunulan bildiri, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu. Günel, M. & Hand, B. (2005) The Effects of non-traditional writing and audiences in learning science. Paper Presented at The National for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Dallas, Texas, USA. Hand, B., Prain, V., Lawranence, C. & Yore, L. D. (1999). A Writing in the science framework designed to enhance science literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 21, Hand, B., Yang, O. E. M., & Bruxvoort, C. (2007). Using writing-to-learn science strategiesto improve year 11 students understandings of stoichiometry. İnternational Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5, Hohensell, L., Hand B. & Staker J. (2004). Promoting Conceptual Understanding of Biotechnology: Writing to a Younger Audience. American Biology Teacher, 66(5), Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening Inquiry into Cognitive Processes in Writing-To-Learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11 ( 3), Langer, J. A. & Applebee, A. N. (1987). How writing shapes thinking: A study of teaching and learning, National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, IL.: National Council of Teachers of English. Martin, N., D'Arcy, P., Newton, B. & Parker, R. (1994). The development of writing abilities. In Bazerman, C. & Russell, D. (eds.), Landmark essays in writing across the curriculum, Davis, CA, Hermagoras Press, (Reprinted from Writing and learning across the curriculum, (1976), Ward Lock Educational UK). Mashhadi, A. & Woolnough, B. (1999). Insights into students understanding of quantum physics: visualizing quantum entities. European Journal of Physics, 20, Mason, L. & Boscolo, P. (2000). Writing and conceptual change. What changes? Instructional Science, 28, , Printed in the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. McLeod, S. H. (1992). Writing across the curriculum: An introduction. In McLeod, S. H. & Soven, M. (eds.), Writing across the curriculum: A guide to developing programs, CA, 1-11, Newbury Park: Sage Publications, Inc. National Research Council (Ed.) (1996). National science education standards. DC , Washington: National Academy Press. Newell, G. E. (1984). Learning from writing in two content areas: A case study/protocol analysis. Research in the Teaching of English, 18, Özel, S. (1988). Baba İnönü den Erdal İnönü ye mektuplar. Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi. Özer Keskin, M., Doğan, N. & Keskin Samancı, N. (2008, Ağustos). Bioetik konularının öğrenilmesinde örnek bir uygulama: eşli tartışma ve yazma. VIII. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi nde sunulan bildiri, Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu. Pearce, D. L., (1984). Writing in content area classrooms. Reading World, 23, Russell, D. R., (1991). Writing in the academic disciplines: : A curricular history. Carbondale, IL.: Southern Illinois University Press. Sözbilir, M. & Canpolat, N. (2006). Fen eğitiminde son otuz yıldaki uluslararası değişimler. M. Bahar (Ed.) Fen ve teknoloji öğretimi ( ), Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık. Torrance, M., Thomas, G. V. & Robinson, E. J. (1994). The writing strategies of graduate research students in the social sciences. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 27, Torrance, M., Thomas, G. V. & Robinson, E. J. (1999). Individual differences in the writing behaviour of undergraduate students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, Torrance, M., Thomas, G. V. & Robinson, E. J. (2000). Individual differences in undergraduate essay-writing strategies: A longitudinal study. Higher Education, 39, Tynjälä, P. (1998). Writing as a tool for constructive learning: Students' learning experiences during an experiment. Higher Education, 36(2),

15 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 2(2); 1-10, 32, December, 2012 Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. Yıldız, A. (2009). College students understanding level of quantum physics and the effect of using writing to learn activities on academic achievement. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Ataturk University, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Erzurum. Yıldız, A. & Büyükkasap, E. (2011a). Prospective teachers levels of understanding Compton Effect and the impact of writing activities for learning purposes on academic success. International Journal of Human Sciences, 8 (1), Yıldız, A. & Büyükkasap, E. (2011b). The Level of understanding of the photoelectric phenomenon in prospective teachers and the effects of writing with learning on their success rates. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice,11(4), Yıldız, A. & Büyükkasap, E. (2011c). Prospective teachers levels of understanding Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the impact of writing activities for learning purposes on academic success. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8 (4), Young, R. & Sullivan, P. (1984). Why write? A reconsideration. In R. J. Conners, L.S. Ede & A. A. Lunsford (Eds.), Essays on classical rhetoric and modern discourse, , Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press -10-

16 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE) Vol. 2(2), pp , 30 December, 2012 Available online at Article history Received: Instructors practice level of Chickering and Gamson learning principles Received in revised form: Accepted: Key words: Education Faculty, Seven Principle for Good Practice, Active Learning Sedat AYDOĞDU * Department of Primary Education, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey Kemal DOYMUŞ Department of Primary Education, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey Ufuk ŞİMŞEK Department of Primary Education, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey The aim of this study is to determine the level of practice and utilization of the seven principles for good practice developed by Chickering and Gamson of the instructors of science department in faculty of education. In this study, descriptive method but not experimental, which is one of the quantitative research was used as appropriate for this aim the samples of this study consist of 52 instructors studying in universities. In this study, the seven principles for good practice by Chickering and Gamson, interaction of faculty-student, corporation among student, active learning, giving profit feedback, emphasizing time on task, communicating high expectations and respecting diverse talents and ways of learning styles were defined as Standard and this study focused on to what extent the instructors utilize from the principles. A scale or measure consists of 70 questions was used as data collection tool, which involves 7 principles, and in which there were 10 items. The total internal reliability coefficient of scale was calculated as Results show that scale items in terms of total item correlation changed between and Results indicate that factor values also changed between and The data were evaluated with ANOVA, which is descriptive, statistic and unidirectional, within the instructors answers given to scale items/questions. The findings of this study as a result of the implementation of the principles, they entered the classroom lessons teaching staff is more than the number of students was seen as the most important problem. 6 the most common teaching staff principle, and then 5 principle behind the 3 and 2 determined that principle. Introduction In recent years, the process of education has passed through many changes. The arrival of assessment, accountability, and focus on teaching have required faculty to examine how they are teaching. Primary, Secondary and Higher education is undergoing a paradigm shift: the focus of colleges and universities is shifting from teaching to learning. The type of learner is self-directed, creative, and innovative. Most teachers maintain a strong sense of commitment to teaching and learning, despite often unwelcome external requirements and workload pressures. Many work hard to improve the effectiveness of their practices, for example through undertaking classroom inquiry and other reflective activities. From this perspective, the role of education policy is to provide guidance, resource and accountability to support high quality teaching and learning. Educational research complements it by using careful description and analysis to offer insights and new knowledge about educational processes and outcomes (Johnson & Kardos, 2002). The constructivist model of learning is premised on the notion that learners actively construct their * Correspondence: Atatürk University, Kazım Karabekir Education Faculty, Department of Primary Education, Erzurum, Turkey

17 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 2(2); 11-24, December, 2012 own meaning and knowledge from their experiences (Svinicki, 1999). This learning paradigm views teaching as a process which involves helping learners to create knowledge through interactive and authentic learning experiences (Partlow & Gibbs, 2003). The teacher s role is to guide students toward experiences that will facilitate meaningful learning. Direct instructional activities where students passively assimilate knowledge are minimized (Chickering & Gamson, 1999). Key features of constructivist learning environments include active learning, authentic instructional tasks, collaboration among students, and diverse and multiple learning formats (Partlow & Gibbs, 2003). If it is seen at the definition of education, it can say that the purpose in education is to become creative and innovative through analysis, conceptualizations, and synthesis of prior experience to create new knowledge. The educator s role is to mentor the learner during heuristic problem solving of ill-defined problems by enabling quested learning that may modify existing knowledge and allow for creation of new knowledge in the teaching and learning process. The learning goal is the highest order of learning: heuristic problem solving, metacognitive knowledge, creativity, and originality (Lombardi, 2011; Meyer, 2009). Chickering and Gamson recognized this in 1987 when they developed the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. Primary, Secondary and Higher education school and faculty must encourage active learning, teacher-student-school contact, and cooperation among students, give prompt feedback, emphasize time on task, communicate high expectations, and respect diverse talents and ways of learning (Gamson, 1991; Bangert, 2004). The majority of the student-centered instructional practices that comprise the Seven Principles Frameworks are clearly focused on constructivist-based teaching practices. For example the principle of active learning suggests that effective teaching engages students in authentic learning activities that require them to select, organize, and integrate their experiences with existing knowledge to create new cognitive schema (Gamson, 1995; Chickering & Gamson 1999; Hacker & Niederhauser, 2000). The Seven Principles framework offers solid, research-based guidance for the design and delivery of science courses (Bangert, 2004; Chickering & Gamson 1987). However, feedback specific to the effectiveness of science laboratory teaching practice would be of even more value to faculty. This study explored the use of a student evaluation of teaching questionnaire specifically constructed to assess the quality of science and technology teaching. The items for this instrument were written to reflect the constructivist-based teaching practices recommended by the Seven Principles of Effective Teaching (Jonassen, 2003; Shea, Pickett, & Pelz, 2003; Sherry, 2003). Student faculty contact has been shown to have positive effects on student retention and success in a variety of ways. The interaction outside of the classroom has been noted to be of particular importance (Alderman, 2008). Studies at institutions of higher education have documented this importance of school-student and teacher interaction outside the classroom (Cordell 2011; Berger & Millem, 1999; Kuh, 2001). On the other side, Positive student teacher relationships serve as a resource for students at risk of school failure, whereas conflict or disconnection between students and adults may compound that risk (Stipek, 2006). Although the nature of these relationships changes as students mature, the need for connection between students and adults in the school setting remains strong from preschool to 12th grade (Treslan, 2006; Crosnoe, Johnson, & Elder, 2004; Cordell, 2011). Furthermore, even as schools place increasing attention on accountability and standardized testing, the social quality of student-teacher relationships contributes to both academic and social emotional development (Gregory & Weinstein, 2004). As such, student teacher relationships provide a unique entry point for educators and others working to improve the social and learning environments of schools and classrooms. These relationships may be a direct focus of -12-

18 Instructors practice level of chickering S.Aydoğdu, K.Doymuş & U.Şimşek intervention or may be viewed as one important feature of successful implementation of many of the other interventions described in this volume. The main purpose of the relation of education is to improve student academic achievement and social skills. Cooperation among students, increases student achievement, creates more positive relationships among students, and generally improves students' psychological well-being. Learning is enhanced when it is more like a team effort than a solo race. Good learning, like good work, is collaborative and social, not competitive and isolated. Working with others often increases involvement in learning. Sharing one s ideas and responding to others improves thinking and deepens understanding. Cooperative learning is also the prerequisite and foundation for most other instructional innovations, including thematic curriculum, whole language, critical thinking, active reading, process writing, materials-based (problem-solving) mathematics, and learning communities. In addition, cooperative learning affects teachers' attitudes and competencies regarding working collaboratively because what is promoted during instructional time tends to dominate relationships among staff members (Ebrahim, 2012; Hsiung, 2012; Yesilyurt, 2010). Active learning is one of the key principles highlighted in Chickering and Gamson s (1991) hallmark study on good practices in undergraduate education. Active learning requires multitude of teaching practices, such as lively debates between instructor and students, peer-to-peer discussions, reflective writing and team work, all of them make possible students to discover, process, and apply knowledge through engagement (Kassens-Noor, 2012; McKinney & Heyl, 2008). While students actively participate in multiple learning contexts, their learning evolves within formal and informal settings (Greenhow, Robelia, & Hughes, 2009). Informal learning is a course-related activity outside the classroom that centers on students self-directed and independent learning activities including peer-to-peer interactions (Kassens-Noor, 2012; Aspden & Thorpe, 2009; Jamieson, 2009). In particular, networking is considered an informal learning strategy (Marsick & Watkins, 1990). Based on empirical evidence from MBA students, Yang and Lu (2001) suggest that informal learning ought to be an essential component in education, because it enhances academic performance. Chickering and Gamson (1987) outlined Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, stating that the most effective teaching strategies are indeed that encourage active learning. This approach certainly promotes successful learning. However, can students-center education allow this technique to be practiced more and more, web-based teaching is being used in various forms to enhance or replace traditional teaching methods (Lewis & Harrison, 2012; Wright & Lawson, 2005). Prompt feedback as one of the motivational strategies can be regarded as the information available to the students which makes possible the comparison of their actual performance with some standard performance of a skill at an appointed time without delay (Oche, 2012). On the other hand, it is the process of informing students, parents and administrators regarding students progress under shortest possible period. For learners to change their responses they must be furnished with some kind of awareness of their consequences, this process is called feedback (Oche, 2012). Prompt feedback could facilitate the existence of interaction between the teachers and the students as well as the flow and exchange of information between them (Beard, 2008). However, Annet (2009) thinks that besides acting as reinforcement, prompt feedbacks provide information and if there is greater learning when there is interaction between teachers and students then feedbacks will go a long way to helping students because while giving out the scores, the teacher will also explain the areas where students have difficulties. Pickup and Anthony (2005) see feedback as an essential ingredient by which the teacher can evaluate the success and failure of his teaching. They further stressed that the importance of the employment of feedbacks by the teacher for the achievement of instructional objectives is immense (Oche, 2012). Time-on-task has typically been applied as a measure of the time students engage in academic -13-

19 Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 2(2); 11-24, December, 2012 activities. There are several reasons to believe that time-on-task could be an important indicator of academic growth and development (Taraban, 2012). Chickering and Gamsom (1987) list time-ontask as one of the seven principles of effective teaching and learning. In research involving learning, it has been shown that increasing the number of practice trials results in greater learning. At a neurological level, a chemically-based process of long-term potentiation is responsible for changing synaptic connections in the brain due to persistent chemical and electrical stimulation over time arising from the experience of the individual (Taraban, 2012). Long-term potentiation is associated with learning. There is ample evidence for the importance of time-on task to college learning (Babcock & Marks, 2010; Taraban, 2012). High expectations are gaining more attention as the assessment movement progresses. The successful schools share absolute characteristics: clear expectations and regulations, an emphasis on academics, high levels of student participation, and alternative resources such as vocational work opportunities, library facilities, music, art, and extracurricular activities. Schools also communicate expectations in the way they structure and organize learning (McVay, Murphy, & Yoon, 2008; Weinstein, Soule, Collins, Cone, Mehlorn, & Stimmonacchi, 1991). Researchers have studied the ways in which teachers' beliefs about students affect their behavior toward students. Some kinds of differential behavior toward students who vary in their mastery of the curriculum are appropriate and productive (Spitek, 2006). Giving some students more advanced material than others is clearly necessary when there is variability in student skill level, and students need different amounts and kinds of teacher assistance and attention (Conceicao, 2007). Nevertheless, most of the teacher behaviors described below, which have been shown to be associated with high versus low expectations, cannot be defended as appropriate accommodations to individual student needs (Spitek, 2006). Teachers who teach to a broad range of learning styles and multiple intelligences communicate that the school values the unique strengths and intelligences of each individual (Gardner, 1985). Schools that encourage critical thinking and inquiry and the development of a critical consciousness are not only able to engage youth but are especially effective at common. Another view of curriculum that leads to high expectations and flexibility is the need for schools to inoculate multicultural content throughout the curriculum. This honors students' home cultures, gives them the opportunity to study their own and other cultures, and to develop cultural sensitivity (Wilson, 2004; Kohl, 1994; Mehan, Hubbard, & Villanueva, 1994). Respect for diverse talents and ways of learning; Learning styles refer to the way students concentrate on, process, internalize, and recall new and difficult information (Rochford, 2003, p. 665). People bring different talents and styles of learning to primary school, high school and college. Students in the classroom may be all thumbs in the lab or art studio (Chickering & Gamsom, 1987). Students rich in hands-on experience may not do so well with theory. Students need the opportunity to show their talents and learn in ways that work for them (Chickering & Ehrmann, 1996). Then they can be pushed to learn in new ways that do not come so easily. Shi and Morrow (2006) discovered that instructors felt the audio tool (which allows for voice interaction with online students) was an effective tool for reinforcing diverse learning styles. One effective way to use this tool is to explain visuals you're presenting on the whiteboard: instead of overloading working memory with visual graphics along with text, allow students to "see" the visual content you're presenting and "hear" your explanation. Similarly, allowing students who may be slow or reluctant typists to interact orally gives them options to communicate (Milshtein, 2003). There are a few researches (Henninger & Hurlbert, 2006; Armstorn, Tucker & Massa; 2009) on community college chemistry courses and the degree to which instructors utilize the Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. With the increasing number of studentcenter and non- student-center students choosing community colleges for introductory course work, it is vital that an examination be done on how science course is taught. -14-

20 Instructors practice level of chickering S.Aydoğdu, K.Doymuş & U.Şimşek In this study, the seven principles for good practice by Chickering and Gamson, interaction of faculty-student, corporation among student, active learning, giving profit feedback, emphasizing time on task, communicating high expectations and respecting diverse talents and ways of learning styles were defined as Standard and this study focused on to what extent the instructors utilize from the principles Method Research model, participants, data collection tools and data analysis of the research have been explained in this section. Research model; in this study, descriptive method but not experimental, which is one of the quantitative research was used as appropriate. The quantitative survey that guides this study served as the research design. In this study, the seven principles for good practice by Chickering and Gamson, interaction of faculty-student, corporation among student, active learning, giving profit feedback, emphasizing time on task, communicating high expectations and respecting diverse talents and ways of learning styles were defined as Standard and this study focused on to what extent the instructors utilize from the principles. A group of researchers met to choose items according to the following criteria: applicable to a range of disciplines, institutions, and class settings; short and jargon free; and focused on behavior or practices that could be changed (Gamson, 1991). After the committee chose the items, a draft of the inventory was sent to a wide range of institutions. After 250 respondents reacted to the inventory, the committee revised the survey as appropriate. The current version of the survey consists of seven sets of ten questions, each set concerned with one of the seven principles. Participants, in this study consisted of 52 instructors studying in Education faculties of six different university of Eastern Anatolia Region. Data collection tool; In this study, developed by Chickering and Gamson in 1987, an instrument used which was prepared to determine how much of these principles realized by candidates participating the study in their learning environment and based on seven principles that should be in a good learning environment to realize learning. The instrument was prepared by utilizing another instrument that consist of seven different sections in which the seven basic principles classified separately and used for the same purpose, developed by Bishoff (2010). Instrument questions are examined and integrated into Turkish Grammar in terms of meaning and structure by a lecturer of Ataturk University Kazım Karabekir Education Faculty Turkish Language Department. In addition, the latest status of instrument realized by examining and revising according to English grammar by two lecturers of Ataturk University Kazım Karabekir Education Faculty Science and English Education Department. Instrument consists of 70 questions was used as data collection tool, which involves 7 principles, and in which there were 10 items. The total internal reliability coefficient of scale was calculated as Results show that scale items in terms of total item correlation changed between and Results indicate that factor values also changed between and The data were analyzed by SPSS 18 software and were evaluated with ANOVA, which is descriptive, statistic and unidirectional, within the instructors answers given to scale items/questions. -15-