Volume 4 Issue 3 (October 2012) - Ozean Publications

More documents

Recommendations

Info

European Journal of Educational Studies 4(3), 2012 present study, who, principally, should be taught democracy and why was evaluated on the basis of elementary students‟ opinions. METHOD A descriptive scanning model was used in the present study. Descriptive research studies attempt to describe and explain cases, objects, creatures, groups and various fields. Thus, it becomes possible to understand and group them; and to determine the relation between them (Kaptan, 1998). Descriptive scanning models include observation, registration, determining the relations between cases and generalizing the controlled invariable principles. That is to say, the description function of science is at the forefront (Yıldırım&Simsek, 2006). The present study will try to explain who, principally, should be taught democracy and why they should be taught it. Study Group The study group of this research is composed of 120 students studying in 2 elementary schools at the 5 th and 6 th grades in the Kecioren district of Ankara and 110 students studying in 2 elementary schools at the 5 th and 6 th grades in the Fatih district of Istanbul in the 2011-2012 academic year. Data were collected via an easily accessible sampling method and 230 students were finally accessed for the study. Fifty five per cent of the students are female and 45% are male. The easy-accessible sample method provides speed and practicality because the researcher chooses an accessible situation (Yıldırım&Simsek, 2006). Data Collecting In the present study, elementary 5 th and 6 th grade students were asked to answer the question, “Who, principally, should be taught democracy” and to give their reasons. A blank sheet of paper was distributed to each student for each of them to give their answers to this question. The question “Why” was also written on the paper to make students give a reason. The students were issued with the blank paper and given 20 minutes to answer. The permission of the district directorates of national education and school management was obtained for collecting the data. Student names and personal information were not taken. The data collected for the research were not used outside of the research. Data Analysis For the purposes of the present study, content analysis technique was used for assessing the data obtained. The main purpose of content analysis is to access concepts and the relations, which can explain the data collected. The data which are summarized and interpreted in descriptive analysis are exposed to a more profound process. Concepts and themes which are not detected with a descriptive approach can be discovered as a result of content analysis. In content analysis, basically, similar data are collected together around certain concepts and themes. Then they are interpreted and organized in a way that the readers can understand (Yıldırım&Simsek, 2006). The participants‟ explanations and reasons were analyzed and interpreted in the following steps: (1) naming process (2) electing process (3) category development process (4) validity and reliability providing process (5) frequency calculating and interpreting process. Naming process: The individuals and groups that students named in response to the question “Who, principally, should be taught democracy” were determined and listed by the researcher. Electing process: The statements of the students were reviewed. Statements which did not include a consistent relation between the reasons and the target individuals and groups were excluded from the list. It was decided to exclude some codes which were in the initial listing. A total of 230 students were accessed in this study. However the data of only 200 students who stated a valid target audience and reasons were assessed in this study after electing these data. 385
European Journal of Educational Studies 4(3), 2012 Category development process: The codes obtained based on the data which are received from students were grouped under conceptual categories. Validity and reliability of the research: Reporting the collected data in detail and explaining how the researcher reached the results are the important criteria for validity in qualitative research (Yıldırım&Simsek, 2006). In the present research, the data analysis process was explained to provide the validity of results. The codes which represent the categories formed in the research are mentioned in the “findings” part. The opinions of experts were ascertained in order to confirm whether the codes given under the conceptual categories represented the mentioned conceptual categories or not. Accordingly, two experts were asked their opinions. They were given the code lists related to the democracy concept and the lists of their conceptual categories. The experts were asked to match the codes in the lists to conceptual categories. Then the criticisms of experts were compared to those of the researcher. In line with the experts‟ suggestions, the codes in the sub-groups in two themes were modified. FINDINGS This part of the study includes the themes which were formed in the light of data obtained from the students and the sub-groups of these themes. The individuals and groups who principally should be taught democracy according to the students were collected under six themes. Thirteen sub-dimensions related to these six themes were determined. These themes and their sub-dimensions are presented in Table 2 based on the repeated frequency numbers from the highest participation towards the lower levels. Table 1: Themes based on the findings THEMES (To Whom, Principally, Democracy Should Be Taught POLITICIANS PARENTS THE WHOLE OF SOCIETY CHILDREN SCHOOL MANAGEMENT AND TEACHERS UNFAIR PEOPLE AND THIEVES SUB-DIMENSIONS Decision making Tolerance and Communication Decision making Role Models Consensus/Values Claiming rights A livable society Consensus Living democracy Equality Instruction process and activities Democracy education Values The themes obtained by content analysis, which was made on the basis of data received from the students, and their sub-dimensions, are presented in Table 1. Students pointed out six individuals and groups in response to the question, “Who, principally, should be taught democracy” The reasons they argued for teaching democracy to 386
Page 1 and 2:
European Journal Educational of Stu
Page 3 and 4:
European Journal of Educational Sci
Page 5 and 6:
European Journal of Educational Stu
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18: European Journal of Educational Stu
Page 67: European Journal of Educational Stu
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133:
show all

Volume 4 Issue 3 (October 2012) - Ozean Publications

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?