Using the Mixed-Meta Method to Assess Portfolios in Science Teaching
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published
Sep 30, 2024
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to assess portfolio studies in science education in Turkey. The mixed-meta method, which comprises meta-analysis and meta-thematic analysis methods, was used to assess quantitative and qualitative data through document analysis. Studies retrieved from certain databases within the scope of specific criteria were examined with the CMA and MetaWin tools for meta-analysis, and the effect size was found to be as great as g = 1.005 among the 17 studies included in the analysis. It was concluded that the usage of portfolios in science teaching has a good effect. 13 studies based on document analysis within the framework of the determined criteria were assessed with the Maxqda program using content analysis in the meta-thematic analysis. Themes were created, and certain codes were obtained according to these themes. These are the following themes: the effect of portfolios on academic achievement, classroom environment, and 21st-century skills; negative aspects of using portfolios; and recommendations for using portfolios in science education. It has been concluded that the research findings are consistent, and the usage of portfolios in science education has a favorable impact in a variety of ways.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
Meta-Thematic, Portfolio, Science Education, Meta-Analysis
Supporting Agencies
No funding source declared.
References
References marked with an asterisk (*) indicate studies included in in the meta-analysis and meta-thematic analysis process.
*Akdoğan Yeşilova, E.P. (2011). How the 7th grade students perceive the electronic portfols according to their learning styles. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University, Eskişehir.
*Aktay, S. (2011). Web-based portfolio (webfolio) application in elementary. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University, Eskişehir.
*Alan, S. (2014). Evaluating e-portfolio use by 4th and 5th grade students in primary schools. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya.
Alkan, V., Şimşek, S. & Armağan Erbil, B. (2019). Mixed methods design: a narrative literature review. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 7(2):559-582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.7c.2s.5m
Avan, Y. & Şahin, S. (2020). Peer coaching and portfolio usage: two methods in effective ınstructional supervision. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 16(28): 1028-1053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.676497
Ayaydın, Y. & Yıldız-Ayaydın, H. Y. (2016, April 28-30). A survey on parents and students view on forming portfolio at social science courses. [Paper presentation]. International Symposium on Social Studies Education: Proceedings V, Denizli, Turkey.
Bahçeci, D., & Kuru, M. (2008). The effect of portfolio assessment on university students’ self efficacy and life skills. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1):97-111.
*Bahçeci, D. (2009). The effects of portfolio assessment on test anxiety, study habit and attitude. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(1):169-182.
Baki, A. & Birgin, O. (2004). Reflections of using computer-based portfolios as an alternative assessment tools: a case study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3:79-98.
*Balaban, M. (2016). Portfolio applications and proper course plans for science candidates’ learning styles towards general biology laboratory course. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun.
*Balaban, M. (2010). Teachers, students, parents cooperation in ensuring portfolio assessment in elementary school for science and technology lesson. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun.
Başkale, H. (2016). Determination of validity, reliability and sample size in qualitative studies. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 9(1): 23-28.
Batdı, V. (2020). Introduction to meta-thematic analysis. V. Batdı (Ed.), Meta-thematic analysis in research process. (pp. 1-38). Anı Publishing. ISBN: 9786051704623
Batdı, V. (2021). The use of technology in language teaching to foreigners: a mixed-meta method. Millî Eğitim Dergisi, 50(1):1213-1244.DOI: https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.942631
Batdı, V., Öztaş, C. & Talan, T. (2021). Analysis of constructive approach applications in science lesson through mixed-meta method. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(40):33-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14582/DUZGEF.2021.175
Bedir, A., Polat, M., & Sakacı, T. (2009). Performance application of the 7th grade science and technology course: portfolio. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1):45-58.
*Bedir, A. (2009). Analysis of elementary school science and technology teachers’ views and attitudes towards portfolio (file of student’s product) one of alternative assessment methods (example of elementary schools in the center of manisa). [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Celal Bayar University, Manisa.
Betty, M. (2012). Portfolio assessment: direct from the classroom. Assesment & Evalation in Higher Education, 3:335-347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.534763
Birgin, O. (2008). Students’ views about the applicatıon of portfolio assessment as an alternative assessment method. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1):1-24.
Borenstein, M., Higgins, J. P., Hedges, L. V. & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta- analysis. John Wiley and Sons. ISBN:9780470057247
Büyüköztürk, Çakmak, Erkan Akgün, Karadeniz & Demirel. (2018). Scientific research methods. Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara. ISBN 9789944919289
Challis, M. (2001). Portfolios and assessment: Meeting the challenge. Medical Teacher, 23:437-440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120075643
Cheung, A. C. & Slavin, R. E. (2016). How methodological features affect effect sizes in education. Educational Researcher, 45(5):283-292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16656615
Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V. & Valentine, J. C., (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and metaanalysis (2nd Edition). Russell Sage Publication: New York. ISBN: 9780871541635
*Çayırcı, Ç. (2007). Web-based portfolio application in primary school 7th grade: samples of sciences and social sciences. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
Demirören, M., Aytuğ Koşan, A. M. & Paloğlu, Ö. (2009). Portfolio as a learning and assessment method. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası, 62(1):19-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1501/Tipfak_0000000707
Deniz Kan, Ü. (2007). Portfolio as an assessment tool at preschool education. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1):169-178
Duschl, R. A. & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4:37-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea0401_2
Göçmen, G. (2013). An overview of the meta-analysis [Meta-analizin genel bir değerlendirmesi]. Sakarya University Journal of Faculty of Education, [Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi], 2013(7): 186-192.
*Gökçen Ayva, F. (2010). Primary school class teachers views regarding portfolio (the products file) technique. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu.
*Gözde, M. (2013). The opinions of the preservice teachers about portfolio as as alternative assessment method in the primary school science and technology class. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Çukurova University, Adana.
Gülbahar-Güven, G. & Köse, F. (2006). Perceptions of preservice teachers about the use of electronic portfolios for evaluation. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(2):75-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak/0000000139
*Gürel, H. (2013). The effect of using portfolio over students’ acedemic success and rebembering level for 7th and 8 th grades for science and technology lesson at primary schools. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale.
Güven, E., & Aydoğdu, M. (2009). The effectiveness of the portfolio on achievement and permanence in the “systems of body structures” unit in the sixth grade science and technology lesson. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(2):115-128.
*Güven, E. (2007). The effectiveness of the portfolio on the students’ achievement in “the systems of body structures” unıt in sixth grade science and technology lesson in elementary school. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gazi University, Ankara.
*İzgi, Ü. & Gücüm, B. E. (2012). The effect of portfolio assessment on exam anxiety and level of retention of learning in science education. Education and Science, 37(164):71-80
Kaptan, F. & Korkmaz, H. (2000). Portfolio assessment in science teaching. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 19:212-219.
*Karamanoğlu, S. S. (2006). Assesing primary students success in science courses via primary years programme: Portfolio. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Marmara University, İstanbul.
*Kır, M. (2015). The effect of portfolio on improving the self regulated learning of student teachers with different learning approaches. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Kutlu, Ö., Doğan, C. D. & Karakaya, İ. (2008). Öğrenci başarısının belirlenmesi: Performansa ve portfolyaya dayalı durum belirleme [Determining student success: Determining status based on performance and portfolio]. Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara.
Merriam, S.B., (2013). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implemantation. (Trans. S. Turan). Nobel Publishing: Ankara
Minister of National Education [MoNE] (2006). İlköğretim Kurumlarındaki Ölçme ve Değerlendirme” konulu Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı İlköğretim Kurumları Yönetmeliği, 2006/95 nolu genelge [Ministry of National Education Primary Education Institutions Regulation on “Measurement and Evaluation in Primary Education Institutions”, circular numbered 2006/95]. December 14, 2006. Available at: http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/ttkb
*Mıhladız, G. (2007). The effect of application of portfolio in primary school science teaching on the students’ academic achievements and attitudes towards the lesson. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Muğla University, Muğla.
*Mutlu-Karanfil, B. (2022). Investigation of the effect of portfolio-based environmental education with family participation on environmental awareness of 5th grade students. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Trakya University, Edirne.
Oğan-Bekiroğlu, F. (2004). Ne kadar başarılı? Klasik ve alternatif ölçme-değerlendirme yöntemleri ve fizikte uygulamalar [How successful is it? Classical and alternative measurement-evaluation methods and applications in physics]. Nobel Publishing: Ankara.
*Okan, N. (2005). Evaluation of portfolio application in seventh grade science lessons. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ankara University, Ankara.
Öncü, H. (2009). A new approach to measurement and assessment: Portfolio assessment. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2009(1):103-130.
Özen, Y. (2011). Personal responsibility for increasing an approach to teaching and learning: Portfolio assessment. Eğitim ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi, Teori ve Uygulama, 2011(4):109-132.
Özkan, V.B. (2021). Eğitim bilimleri araştırmaları için doküman inceleme yöntemi [Document analysis method for educational sciences research]. Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara.
Rosenthal, R., (1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3):638-641.
*Saylan, A., Yanar, S. & Kaya, H. (2019). Investigation of the effects of using portfolio as an alternative assessment and evaluation approach on students’ academic achievement and permanence of learning in science course. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(2):21-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.428865
Soland, J., Hamilton, L. S. & Stecher, B. M. (2013). Measuring 21st century competencies guidance for educators. RAND Corporation. February 28. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brian-Stecher/publication/267269458_Measuring_21-century-competencies_Guidance_for_educators.pdf
Somuncuoğlu Y. & Yıldırım A. (1998). Learning strategies: Theoretical dimensions, research findings and implications for practice. Education and Science, 22(10):31-38.
*Sünbül, D. (2011). Investigation of the thoughts of teachers, students and parents about portfolio applications. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Yüzüncü Yıl University, Van.
Şahinkarakaş Ş. (1998). Portfolyo assesment in writing classes: Implementation and assessment. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Çukurova University, Çukurova.
Şenol, Y. & Güzeller, C. O. (2007). A method of assessment: Portfolio. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası Dergisi, 26(26):41-49.
Tatar, N. & Ören, F. Ş. (2009). The opinions of classroom teachers about alternative assessment approaches. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 17(3):781-798.
Thalheimer, W. & Cook, S., (2002). How to calculate effect sizes from published research articles: A simplified methodology. Work-Learning Research, 1(9):1-9.
Tunca, N., Akın-Şahin, S, & Aydın, Ö. (2015). Life-long learning tendencies of pre-service teachers. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2):432-446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.92694
*Turan, M. A. (2013). The effectiveness of the portfolio method on the students’ academic success and retention outcomes in fifth-grade science classrooms. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Marmara University, İstanbul.
*Turan, M. & Sakız, G. (2014). The İnfluence of portfolios on student success and retention level in science and technology class. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3):48-63.DOI: https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.10879
Turgut, M. F. & Baykul, Y. (2011). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in education]. 1. Baskı [1st edition] Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara. ISBN 978-605-364-087-5
Ülker, F. T., Ünlü, S., & Usta, E. (2021). Review of the views of science teacher candidates on the use of e-portfolio: action research. Turkish Journal of Primary Education, 6(1):1-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52797/tujped.747510
Ünal, M. (2019). Investigate the character of PISA science questions with teacher questions for exams: A model proposal for expansion of PISA culture. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Uludağ University, Bursa.
Yalçın, S. (2018). 21st century skills and tools and approaches that are used to measure these skills. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 51(1):183-201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30964/auebfd.405860
*Yanar, S. (2018). Investigation of the effects of using portfolio in science course on students academic achievement and retention. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Erciyes University, Kayseri.
*Akdoğan Yeşilova, E.P. (2011). How the 7th grade students perceive the electronic portfols according to their learning styles. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University, Eskişehir.
*Aktay, S. (2011). Web-based portfolio (webfolio) application in elementary. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University, Eskişehir.
*Alan, S. (2014). Evaluating e-portfolio use by 4th and 5th grade students in primary schools. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya.
Alkan, V., Şimşek, S. & Armağan Erbil, B. (2019). Mixed methods design: a narrative literature review. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 7(2):559-582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.7c.2s.5m
Avan, Y. & Şahin, S. (2020). Peer coaching and portfolio usage: two methods in effective ınstructional supervision. OPUS International Journal of Society Researches, 16(28): 1028-1053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.676497
Ayaydın, Y. & Yıldız-Ayaydın, H. Y. (2016, April 28-30). A survey on parents and students view on forming portfolio at social science courses. [Paper presentation]. International Symposium on Social Studies Education: Proceedings V, Denizli, Turkey.
Bahçeci, D., & Kuru, M. (2008). The effect of portfolio assessment on university students’ self efficacy and life skills. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1):97-111.
*Bahçeci, D. (2009). The effects of portfolio assessment on test anxiety, study habit and attitude. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(1):169-182.
Baki, A. & Birgin, O. (2004). Reflections of using computer-based portfolios as an alternative assessment tools: a case study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3:79-98.
*Balaban, M. (2016). Portfolio applications and proper course plans for science candidates’ learning styles towards general biology laboratory course. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun.
*Balaban, M. (2010). Teachers, students, parents cooperation in ensuring portfolio assessment in elementary school for science and technology lesson. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun.
Başkale, H. (2016). Determination of validity, reliability and sample size in qualitative studies. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Elektronik Dergisi, 9(1): 23-28.
Batdı, V. (2020). Introduction to meta-thematic analysis. V. Batdı (Ed.), Meta-thematic analysis in research process. (pp. 1-38). Anı Publishing. ISBN: 9786051704623
Batdı, V. (2021). The use of technology in language teaching to foreigners: a mixed-meta method. Millî Eğitim Dergisi, 50(1):1213-1244.DOI: https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.942631
Batdı, V., Öztaş, C. & Talan, T. (2021). Analysis of constructive approach applications in science lesson through mixed-meta method. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(40):33-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14582/DUZGEF.2021.175
Bedir, A., Polat, M., & Sakacı, T. (2009). Performance application of the 7th grade science and technology course: portfolio. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1):45-58.
*Bedir, A. (2009). Analysis of elementary school science and technology teachers’ views and attitudes towards portfolio (file of student’s product) one of alternative assessment methods (example of elementary schools in the center of manisa). [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Celal Bayar University, Manisa.
Betty, M. (2012). Portfolio assessment: direct from the classroom. Assesment & Evalation in Higher Education, 3:335-347. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.534763
Birgin, O. (2008). Students’ views about the applicatıon of portfolio assessment as an alternative assessment method. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(1):1-24.
Borenstein, M., Higgins, J. P., Hedges, L. V. & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta- analysis. John Wiley and Sons. ISBN:9780470057247
Büyüköztürk, Çakmak, Erkan Akgün, Karadeniz & Demirel. (2018). Scientific research methods. Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara. ISBN 9789944919289
Challis, M. (2001). Portfolios and assessment: Meeting the challenge. Medical Teacher, 23:437-440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590120075643
Cheung, A. C. & Slavin, R. E. (2016). How methodological features affect effect sizes in education. Educational Researcher, 45(5):283-292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16656615
Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V. & Valentine, J. C., (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and metaanalysis (2nd Edition). Russell Sage Publication: New York. ISBN: 9780871541635
*Çayırcı, Ç. (2007). Web-based portfolio application in primary school 7th grade: samples of sciences and social sciences. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
Demirören, M., Aytuğ Koşan, A. M. & Paloğlu, Ö. (2009). Portfolio as a learning and assessment method. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası, 62(1):19-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1501/Tipfak_0000000707
Deniz Kan, Ü. (2007). Portfolio as an assessment tool at preschool education. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1):169-178
Duschl, R. A. & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, 4:37-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea0401_2
Göçmen, G. (2013). An overview of the meta-analysis [Meta-analizin genel bir değerlendirmesi]. Sakarya University Journal of Faculty of Education, [Sakarya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi], 2013(7): 186-192.
*Gökçen Ayva, F. (2010). Primary school class teachers views regarding portfolio (the products file) technique. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu.
*Gözde, M. (2013). The opinions of the preservice teachers about portfolio as as alternative assessment method in the primary school science and technology class. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Çukurova University, Adana.
Gülbahar-Güven, G. & Köse, F. (2006). Perceptions of preservice teachers about the use of electronic portfolios for evaluation. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(2):75-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak/0000000139
*Gürel, H. (2013). The effect of using portfolio over students’ acedemic success and rebembering level for 7th and 8 th grades for science and technology lesson at primary schools. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale.
Güven, E., & Aydoğdu, M. (2009). The effectiveness of the portfolio on achievement and permanence in the “systems of body structures” unit in the sixth grade science and technology lesson. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(2):115-128.
*Güven, E. (2007). The effectiveness of the portfolio on the students’ achievement in “the systems of body structures” unıt in sixth grade science and technology lesson in elementary school. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gazi University, Ankara.
*İzgi, Ü. & Gücüm, B. E. (2012). The effect of portfolio assessment on exam anxiety and level of retention of learning in science education. Education and Science, 37(164):71-80
Kaptan, F. & Korkmaz, H. (2000). Portfolio assessment in science teaching. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 19:212-219.
*Karamanoğlu, S. S. (2006). Assesing primary students success in science courses via primary years programme: Portfolio. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Marmara University, İstanbul.
*Kır, M. (2015). The effect of portfolio on improving the self regulated learning of student teachers with different learning approaches. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Karadeniz Teknik University, Trabzon.
Kutlu, Ö., Doğan, C. D. & Karakaya, İ. (2008). Öğrenci başarısının belirlenmesi: Performansa ve portfolyaya dayalı durum belirleme [Determining student success: Determining status based on performance and portfolio]. Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara.
Merriam, S.B., (2013). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implemantation. (Trans. S. Turan). Nobel Publishing: Ankara
Minister of National Education [MoNE] (2006). İlköğretim Kurumlarındaki Ölçme ve Değerlendirme” konulu Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı İlköğretim Kurumları Yönetmeliği, 2006/95 nolu genelge [Ministry of National Education Primary Education Institutions Regulation on “Measurement and Evaluation in Primary Education Institutions”, circular numbered 2006/95]. December 14, 2006. Available at: http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/ttkb
*Mıhladız, G. (2007). The effect of application of portfolio in primary school science teaching on the students’ academic achievements and attitudes towards the lesson. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Muğla University, Muğla.
*Mutlu-Karanfil, B. (2022). Investigation of the effect of portfolio-based environmental education with family participation on environmental awareness of 5th grade students. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Trakya University, Edirne.
Oğan-Bekiroğlu, F. (2004). Ne kadar başarılı? Klasik ve alternatif ölçme-değerlendirme yöntemleri ve fizikte uygulamalar [How successful is it? Classical and alternative measurement-evaluation methods and applications in physics]. Nobel Publishing: Ankara.
*Okan, N. (2005). Evaluation of portfolio application in seventh grade science lessons. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Ankara University, Ankara.
Öncü, H. (2009). A new approach to measurement and assessment: Portfolio assessment. Türkiye Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2009(1):103-130.
Özen, Y. (2011). Personal responsibility for increasing an approach to teaching and learning: Portfolio assessment. Eğitim ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi, Teori ve Uygulama, 2011(4):109-132.
Özkan, V.B. (2021). Eğitim bilimleri araştırmaları için doküman inceleme yöntemi [Document analysis method for educational sciences research]. Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara.
Rosenthal, R., (1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3):638-641.
*Saylan, A., Yanar, S. & Kaya, H. (2019). Investigation of the effects of using portfolio as an alternative assessment and evaluation approach on students’ academic achievement and permanence of learning in science course. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(2):21-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.428865
Soland, J., Hamilton, L. S. & Stecher, B. M. (2013). Measuring 21st century competencies guidance for educators. RAND Corporation. February 28. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Brian-Stecher/publication/267269458_Measuring_21-century-competencies_Guidance_for_educators.pdf
Somuncuoğlu Y. & Yıldırım A. (1998). Learning strategies: Theoretical dimensions, research findings and implications for practice. Education and Science, 22(10):31-38.
*Sünbül, D. (2011). Investigation of the thoughts of teachers, students and parents about portfolio applications. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Yüzüncü Yıl University, Van.
Şahinkarakaş Ş. (1998). Portfolyo assesment in writing classes: Implementation and assessment. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Çukurova University, Çukurova.
Şenol, Y. & Güzeller, C. O. (2007). A method of assessment: Portfolio. Tıp Eğitimi Dünyası Dergisi, 26(26):41-49.
Tatar, N. & Ören, F. Ş. (2009). The opinions of classroom teachers about alternative assessment approaches. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 17(3):781-798.
Thalheimer, W. & Cook, S., (2002). How to calculate effect sizes from published research articles: A simplified methodology. Work-Learning Research, 1(9):1-9.
Tunca, N., Akın-Şahin, S, & Aydın, Ö. (2015). Life-long learning tendencies of pre-service teachers. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2):432-446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.92694
*Turan, M. A. (2013). The effectiveness of the portfolio method on the students’ academic success and retention outcomes in fifth-grade science classrooms. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Marmara University, İstanbul.
*Turan, M. & Sakız, G. (2014). The İnfluence of portfolios on student success and retention level in science and technology class. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3):48-63.DOI: https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.10879
Turgut, M. F. & Baykul, Y. (2011). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme [Measurement and evaluation in education]. 1. Baskı [1st edition] Pegem Akademi Publishing: Ankara. ISBN 978-605-364-087-5
Ülker, F. T., Ünlü, S., & Usta, E. (2021). Review of the views of science teacher candidates on the use of e-portfolio: action research. Turkish Journal of Primary Education, 6(1):1-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52797/tujped.747510
Ünal, M. (2019). Investigate the character of PISA science questions with teacher questions for exams: A model proposal for expansion of PISA culture. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Uludağ University, Bursa.
Yalçın, S. (2018). 21st century skills and tools and approaches that are used to measure these skills. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 51(1):183-201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30964/auebfd.405860
*Yanar, S. (2018). Investigation of the effects of using portfolio in science course on students academic achievement and retention. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Erciyes University, Kayseri.
How to Cite
Yaşar, M. D., Batdi, V., Kilinc, B., & Kilic, A. N. (2024). Using the Mixed-Meta Method to Assess Portfolios in Science Teaching. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 24(1), 3895–3918. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.24.re399
Issue
Section
Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.