DETERMINING OF VISUAL ART TEACHER CANDIDATES’ ATTITUDES CONCERNING DESIGN COURSES – THE CASE OF TURKEY

Oğuz Dilmaç, Sehran Dilmaç

Abstract


This study was conducted to determine the attitudes of visual arts teacher candidates regarding design courses (Basic Design-I, Basic Design-II, Graphic Design, Industrial Design, Writing, etc.) in Turkey. This study employed an exploratory sequential mixed method design. This design involves the process that the researcher initially carries out a quantitative study and uses the results of the quantitative study in order to generate a more detailed structure of the study by means of qualitative research. Quantitative data were collected through a Likert type measurement called "Design Lessons Attitude Scale" developed by researchers with a descriptive screening method and qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interview forms. The universe of the research consists of 142 Visual Arts teacher candidates studying in the Department of Art Education at Ağrı İbrahim Çeçen, Atatürk, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart, Dokuz Eylül, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım, Uludağ, Van Yüzüncü Yıl Universities in the fall semester of the 2019-2020 academic year. In the study, quantitative data obtained with personal information form were presented by taking their frequency and percentages. Descriptive statistical analyzes were performed in the analysis of the data and the data were determined as percentage, frequency, mean and standard deviation. One-way analysis of variance was used to test whether there was a significant difference in terms of points between the groups created. Analysis results were tested at p <0.05 significance level. In order to analyze the data found after applying the semi-structured interview form, it was classified into categories by examining the qualitative data regularly and classifying by providing data coding. According to the data obtained as a result of the practice, they stated that the practices that the pre-service teachers made in the design courses enable them to think more creatively and differently, that these courses highlight the concepts of innovation, original and aesthetics for them, and also increase their problem-solving skills as well as design.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

DOI

Keywords


visual arts, design education, art education

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alp, Ö. K. (2009). Uygulamalı sanatlar eğitiminde tasarım, yapı, işlev, estetik ve algı sorunu. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 1(1), 48-59. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yyuefd/issue/13711/165994, Accessed 4 April 2020.

Ananiadou, K., & Claro, M. (2009). 21st century skills and competences for new millennium learners in OECD countries. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 41, OECD Publishing Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/218525261154

Atalayer, F. (1994). Temel sanat öğeleri. Eskişehir, Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları.

Aydınlı, S. (2015). Tasarım Eğitiminde Yapılandırıcı Paradigma: ‘Öğrenmeyi Öğrenme’, Tasarım ve Kuram Dergisi, Aralık, 20, 1- 18. doı: 10.23835/tasarimkuram.239579

Ayvacı, H. Ş., Ayaydın, A. (2018). Bilim, teknoloji, mühendislik, sanat ve matematik (steam). Edt. Salih ÇEPNİ. Kuramdan uygulamaya stem+a eğitimi içinde pp.115-133. Ankara, Pegem Yayıncılık.

Beşgen, A., Kuloğlu, N. & Fathalizadehalemdari, S. (2015). Teaching/learning strategies through art: Art and basic design education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 182,428-432. doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.813

Berkant, H. G. (2013). Öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayara yönelik tutumlarının ve öz-yeterlik algılarının ve bilgisayar destekli eğitim yapmaya yönelik tutumlarının bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. The Journal of Instructional Technologies Teacher Education (JITTE), 1(3), 11-22. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/231304, Accessed 19 March 2020.

Bequette, J., W. & Bequette, M., B. (2012). A place for art and design education in the stem conversation. Art Education. 65 (2), 40-47. doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2012.11519167

Black, J. & Browning, K. (2015). Creativity in digital art education teaching practices. Art Education. 64 (5), 19-34. doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2011.11519140

Copland, M.A. (2000). Problem based learning and prospective principals’ problem framing ability. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36 (4), 585-607. doi.org/10.1177/00131610021969119

Creswell, J. W.(2016). Araştırma deseni. (Çev. Demir, S. B.). Ankara, Eğiten Kitap.

Çetinkaya, Ç. (2011). Tasarım ve kavram ilişkisinin iç mimarlık temel tasarım eğitimi kapsamındakı̇ yerı̇: Farklı iki üniversite örneği üzerinden temel tasarım eğitimi üzerine bir araştırma. Master’s Thesis. Hacettepe University.

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. & Warshaw, P. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003. doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982

Delacruz, E. (2009). Art education aims in the age of new media: Moving toward global civil society. Art Education, 62(5), 13-17. doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2009.11519032

Dilara, O. (2016). Tasarım eğitiminde farkındalık ve yaratıcılık gelişimine yönelik bir öneri. PhD Thesis, Karadeniz Technical University.

Dolunay, A. (2016). Teknolojinin görsel sanatlar ve sanat eğitimine katkısı. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 9 (42). 1208-1213. http://www.sosyalarastirmalar.com/cilt9/sayi42_pdf/5egitim/dolunay_ahmet.pdf, Accessed 23 March 2020.

Erinç, S. ( 2005). Kültür-sanat, sanat-kültür. Ankara, Ütopya Yayınları.

Ermiş, Y. (2019). Yaşam temelli tasarım eğitimininöğrencilerin uygulama becerisine etkisi. PhD Thesis, Necmettin Erbakan University.

Fitzsimmons, C. (2011). How education at the nexus of art and science can change the world. Retrieved July 17, 2011 from http://www.artofscience-learning.org/conferences/san-diego/admin/108-admin.html

Gallace, A. & Spence, C. (2014). In touch with the future. The sense of touch from cognitive neuroscience to virtual reality. UK, Oxford University Press.

Harland, T. (2002). Zoology students’ experiences collaborative enquiry in problem based learning. Teaching in Higher Education,7(1), 3-15. doi: 10.1080/13562510120100355

Hetland, L., Winner, E. Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of visual arts education. New York, Teachers College Press.

James W. Bequette & Marjorie Bullitt Bequette (2012) A Place for Art and Design Education in the STEM Conversation, Art Education, 65:2, 40-47, https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2012.

Kaptan, F, Korkmaz, H. (2001). Fen eğitiminde probleme dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımı. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20:185-192. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/87967, Accessed 30 March 2020.

Kavuran, T. (2007). Türkiye’de resim-iş öğretmenliği anabilim dalında okutulan temel tasarım derslerinin sorunları. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi, 24, (2), 49-59. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/43754, Accessed 01 April 2020.

Kuloğlu, N.& Asasoğlu, A., O. (2010). Indirect expression as an approach to improving creativity in design education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 1674–1686. doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.384

Makaklı, E. S. & Özker, S. (2015). Basic design in architectural education in Turkey. Paper presented at the ERPA International Congresses on Education, Athens, Greece.

Mercin, A., Alakuş, A. (2007). Birey ve toplum için sanat eğitiminin gerekliliği. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 9 (1). 14-20. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/787186, Accessed February 2020.

Miles M. B. and Huberman A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.), London, Sage Publication.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.

President & Fellows Harvard College (2003). Artist habits of mind.Cambridge, MA, Harvard University.

Salama, A. M. & Wilkinson, N. (2007). Design studio pedagogy: horizons for the future. United Kingdom, The Urban International Press.

Stepien, W. J., Gallagher S. A. & Workman, D. (1993). Problem-based learning for traditional and interdisciplinary classrooms. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16 (4), 338-357. doi.org/10.1177/016235329301600402

Usta, E., Korkmaz, Ö. (2010). Öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayar yeterlikleri ve teknoloji kullanımına ilişkin algıları ile öğretmenlik mesleğine yönelik tutumları. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 7 (10),1335-1349. https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/download/1281/561, Accessed February 2020.

Vande, Z., R. (2010). Teaching design education for cultural, pedagogical, and economic aims. Studies in Art Education 51(3), 248-261. doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2010.11518806

Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11 (4), 342-365. doi.:10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872

Yıldırım, A.ve Şimşek, H. (2003), Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri, Ankara, Seçkin Yayıncılık.

Yılmaz, M., Üredi, L., ve Akbaşlı, S. (2015). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının bilgisayar yeterlilik düzeylerinin ve eğitimde teknoloji kullanımına yönelik algılarının belirlenmesi. Uluslararası Beşeri Bilimler ve Eğitim Dergisi. 1(1), 105-121. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ijhe/issue/31784/348365, Accessed February 2020.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.3024

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2020 Oğuz Dilmaç, Sehran Dilmaç

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2023. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).