An Analysis of Preservice Geography Teachers’ Scientific Research Self-Efficacy


Creative Commons License

Öztura E.

Base for Electronic Educational Sciences, vol.3, no.2, pp.22-31, 2022 (Peer-Reviewed Journal)

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 3 Issue: 2
  • Publication Date: 2022
  • Journal Name: Base for Electronic Educational Sciences
  • Journal Indexes: MLA - Modern Language Association Database
  • Page Numbers: pp.22-31
  • Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Affiliated: Yes

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to examine the scientific research self-efficacy of preservice geography teachers studying at COMU Faculty of Education. To this end, a scientific research self-efficacy scale consisting of six factors and 37 items was used. The sample group of the study was the teacher candidates studying in the Department of Geography Education, Turkish and Social Sciences Education, at a Faculty of Education of a state university in Marmara region of Turkey. The sample of the research consists of 72 teacher candidates who continue their education in the same department (1,2,3 and 4th grades). The results show that male geography teacher candidates' opinions on scientific self-efficacy were more positive than their female peers. It was also determined that they had high self-efficacy in continuing investigation, but that their self-efficacy was low in identifying the problem situation. While the candidates had high self-efficacy in examining the literature in the context of the problem situation, they had low self-efficacy in accessing national and international databases for literature review. It was also observed that the geography teacher candidates had high self-efficacy in determining the appropriate method for testing hypotheses, but had low self-efficacy in performing validity and reliability analyses of the data collection tools. It was further observed that they had high self-efficacy in discussing and presenting study findings to the reader in the reporting process, and low self-efficacy in writing the reporting process according to the testing of the hypotheses.