Yıl: 2023 Cilt: 13 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 123 - 157 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006 İndeks Tarihi: 24-07-2023

A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change

Öz:
This study explores the relationships between teachers’ beliefs about teaching, self-efficacy beliefs for teaching and their attitude towards the implementation of curriculum change through the mediating role of their readiness for change. In so doing, the study seeks to suggest an advanced approach to manifest the complex relations among the investigated variables. Designed as correlational research, the study included 422 teachers selected through cluster random sampling from elementary, middle, and high schools. The data were collected through four scales and a demographic information form. Structural equation modeling was performed to investigate the relationships between latent variables. The findings indicated that teachers’ beliefs about teaching, self-efficacy beliefs, and readiness for change are significant predictors of teachers’ attitudes towards the constructivist curriculum change. However, the contribution of each component differed on the two sub-dimensions: getting information about and implementation of constructivist curriculum. In addition, a mediation effect of teachers’ emotional and intentional readiness was found for constructivist teaching beliefs. The findings imply that teachers’ self-efficacy and general beliefs about teaching are critical in acknowledging the curriculum reform and thereby, teachers should be given a voice in curriculum development. This might encourage them to be the agents of change rather than the deliverers of the curriculum, which, in turn, might strengthen their beliefs and attitudes regarding the curriculum change. Given the significant role of teachers’ emotional and intentional readiness for change, the findings further offer insights to policymakers to provide teachers with professional development opportunities for the success and sustainability of curriculum reforms.
Anahtar Kelime: Constructivist curriculum change Readiness for change Structural equation modeling Beliefs about teaching Self-efficacy beliefs for teaching

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Akdeniz, A. R., & Paniç, G. (2012). Yeni fizik öğretim programına ve uygulamasına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri [Teachers’ opinions about new physics education program and its implementation]. Milli Eğitim, 196, 290-307.
  • Allinder, R. M. (1994). The relationship between efficacy and the instructional practices of special education teachers and consultants. Teacher Education and Special Education, 17, 86-95. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F088840649401700203
  • Altun, T., & Şahin, M. (2009). Değişen ilköğretim programının sınıf öğretmenleri üzerindeki psikolojik etkilerinin incelenmesi üzerine nitel bir araştırma [A qualitative study on psychological effects of change of curriculum on classroom teachers]. Kastamonu Education Journal, 17(1), 15-32.
  • Anagün, Ş. S., Yalçınoğlu, P., & Ersoy, A. (2013). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretme-öğrenme sürecine ilişkin inançlarının yapılandırmacılık açısından incelenmesi [An investigation of primary school teachers’ beliefs on teaching-learning processes in science and technology courses in terms of constructivism]. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 5(1), 1-16.
  • Armenakis, A. A., Harris, S. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1993). Creating readiness for organizational change. Human Relations, 4(1), 681–703. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F001872679304600601
  • Bailey, B. (2000). The impact of mandated change on teachers. In N. Bascia & A. Hargreaves (Eds). The sharp edge of educational change: teaching, leading and the realities of reform (pp. 112-128). Routledge Falmer.
  • Ball, S. J. (1990). Politics and policy making in education: Explanations in policy sociology. Routledge.
  • Bandalos, D. L. (2002). The effects of item parceling on goodness-of-fit and parameter estimate bias in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 78–102. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0901_5
  • Bandalos, D. L., & Finney, S. J. (2001). Item parceling issues in structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides, & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), New developments and techniques in structural equation modelling (pp. 269–296). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
  • Beck, J., Czerniak, C. H., & Lumpe, A. (2000). An exploratory study of teachers’ beliefs regarding the implementation of constructivism in their classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(4), 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009481115135
  • Bozbayındır, F., & Alev, S. (2018). Öğretmenlerin özyeterlilik, proaktif kişilik ve değişime açıklık algıları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [The analysis of the relationship between self-efficacy, proactive personality and openness to change perceptions teachers]. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 293-311. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.346666
  • Bray-Clark, N. & Bates, R. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications for professional development. Professional Educator, 26(1), 13-22.
  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford Press.
  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Sage.
  • Bulut, M. (2007). Curriculum reform in Turkey: A case of primary school mathematics curriculum. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(3), 203-212. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75399
  • Bümen, N. T., Çakar, E., & Yıldız, D. G. (2014). Curriculum fidelity and factors affecting fidelity in the Turkish context. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(1), 219-228. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.2020
  • Carless, D. (2013). Innovation in language teaching and learning. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1-4). Blackwell Publishing.
  • Carney, S. (2008). Learner-centred pedagogy in Tibet: International education reform in a local context. Comparative Education, 44 (1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050060701809417
  • Carse, N. (2015). Primary teachers as physical education curriculum change agents. European Physical Education Review, 21(3), 309-324. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1356336X14567691
  • Cerit, Y. (2013). Relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and their willingness to implement curriculum reform. International Journal of Educational Reform, 22(3), 252-270. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F105678791302200304
  • Chen, J. (2015). Teachers’ conceptions of approaches to teaching: A Chinese perspective. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(2), 341-351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-014-0184-3
  • Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables bootsrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 296-325. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1094428107300343
  • Chi-Kin Lee, J. (2000). Teacher receptivity to curriculum change in the implementation stage: The case of environmental education in Hong Kong. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(1), 95-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202700182871
  • Clasquin-Johnson, M. G. (2011). Responses of early childhood teachers to curriculum change in South Africa [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Pretoria.
  • Cobanoglu, R., & Capa-Aydin, Y. (2015). When early childhood teachers close the door: Self-reported fidelity to a mandated curriculum and teacher beliefs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 33(4), 77-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.07.001
  • Crawley, F.E. (1990). Intentions of science teachers to use investigative teaching methods: A test of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 685-697. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660270708
  • Cronin-Jones, L. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: Two case studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(3), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280305
  • Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Relationship between teacher beliefs and science education reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7(4), 247-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00058659
  • Çapa, Y., Çakıroğlu, J., & Sarıkaya, H. (2005). The development and validation of a Turkish version of the teachers’ sense of efficacy scale. Education and Science, 30(137), 74-81.
  • Çayak, M. (2014). İlkokul öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı yaklaşımı uygulamaya yönelik tutumları ile özyeterlikleri arasındaki ilişki [Primary school teachers’ self efficacy beliefs and attitudes about the implementation of the constructivist approach]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31, 88–110. https://doi.org/10.21764/efd.32007
  • Çelik, O. T., & Atik, S. (2020). Preparing teachers to change: The effect of psychological empowerment on being ready for individual change. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 49(1), 73-97. https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.635770
  • Çolak, E., & Yabaş, D. (2017). Investigating lesson plans of teacher candidates according to their self-efficacy levels towards implementation of constructivist approach. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 18(2), 86-103. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.323420
  • Davis, K. (2002). Change is hard: What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education, 87(1), 3-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10037
  • De Mesquita, P. B., & Drake J. C. (1994). Educational reform and the self-efficacy beliefs of teachers implementing nongraded primary school programs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(3), 291–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(95)97311-9
  • Dharmasada, J. (2000, April 17-20). Teachers’ perspectives on constructivist teaching and learning [Paper presentation]. The Annual Conference of the Association for Childhood Education International, Baltimore, MD, United States.
  • Du, X., & Chaaban, Y. (2020). Teachers’ readiness for a statewide change to PjBL in primary education in Qatar. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28591
  • Duru, S. (2006). Pre-service elementary education teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning in Turkey [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Indiana University.
  • Ekiz, D. (2004). Teacher professionalism and curriculum change: Primary school teachers’ views of the new science curriculum. Kastamonu Education Journal, 12(2), 339-350.
  • Elliott, J. (1994). The teacher’s role in curriculum development: An unresolved issue in English attempts at curriculum reform. Curriculum Studies, 2(1), 43–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965975940020103
  • Elkind, D. (2004). The problem with constructivism. The Educational Forum, 68(4), 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131720408984646
  • Elmas, R., Ozturk, N., Irmak, M., & Cobern, W. W. (2014). An investigation of teacher response to national science curriculum reforms in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 6(1), 2-33.
  • Emsza, B., Eliyana, A., & Istyarini, W. (2016). The relationship between self-efficacy and readiness for change: The mediator roles of employee empowerment. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7(3), 201-206. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n3s1p20
  • Eraslan, A. (2013). Teachers’ reflections on the implementation of the new elementary school mathematics curriculum in Turkey. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 28(2), 152-165.
  • Ersel Kaymakamoğlu, S. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs, perceived practice and actual classroom practice in relation to traditional (teacher-centered) and constructivist (learner-centered] teaching. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(1), 29-37. http://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v7n1p29
  • Eskici, M. & Özen, R. (2018). Öğretmenlerin yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma ilişkin öz yeterlik algıları ile tutumları [Teachers’ self efficacy perceptions and attitudes about the constructivist approach]. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(4), 2050-2070. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2018.18.41844-437148
  • Ersen Yanık, A. (2008). Primary school English teachers’ perceptions of the English language curriculum of 6th, 7th and 8th grades. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 35, 123-134.
  • Eskici, M. (2013). İlköğretim Öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma ilişkin öz yeterlik algıları ile tutumları [Primary school teachers’ self efficacy perceptions and attitudes about the constructivist approach] (Thesis No: 336313) [Doctoral Dissertation, Abant Izzet Baysal University]. Turkish Council of Higher Education Theses Center.
  • Evers, W. J. G., Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2002). Burnout and self-efficacy: A study on teachers’ beliefs when implementing an innovative educational system in the Netherlands. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 227–243. https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1348/000709902158865
  • Evrekli, E., İnel, D., Balım, A. G., & Kesercioğlu, T. (2009). Fen öğretmen adaylarına yönelik yapılandırmacı yaklaşım tutum ölçeği: Geçerlilik ve güvenirlik çalışması [The attitude scale of constructivist approach for prospective science teachers: A study of validity and reliability]. Turkish Science Education, 6(2), 134-152.
  • Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38(1), 47-65. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1080/0013188960380104
  • Fang, X., & Garland, P. (2014). Teacher orientations to ELT curriculum reform: An ethnographic study in a chinese secondary school. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(2), 311-319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0106-9
  • Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS. Sage Publications.
  • Fletcher, S. (1990, August). The relationship of the school environment for teacher efficacy [Paper presentation]. The Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Boston, MA.
  • Fleurette Nelson, A. (2017). Constructivist instructional practices and teacher beliefs related to secondary science teaching and learning [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. College of Saint Elizabeth.
  • Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
  • Fullan, M. (1985). Change processes and strategies at the local level. Elementary School Journal, 85(3), 390–421. https://doi.org/10.1086/461411
  • Fullan, M. (1991). Curriculum implementation. In A. Lewih (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of curriculum (pp. 378-384). Pergamon Press.
  • Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. The Falmer Press.
  • Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. Jossey-Bass.
  • Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. Teachers College Press.
  • Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Pearson.
  • Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, M. (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher efficacy, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 451-458. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(96)00045-5
  • Goodson, I. F. (2000). Professional knowledge, professional lives: Studies in education and change. Open University Press.
  • Gouëdard, P., Pont, B., Hyttinen, S., & Huang, P. (2020). Curriculum reform: A literature review to support effective implementation. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=EDU/WKP(2020)27&docLanguage=En
  • Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 63-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(88)90025-X
  • Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381-391. https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000512
  • Ha, A., Lee, J., Chan, D., & Sum, R. (2004). Teachers’ perceptions of in-service teacher training to support curriculum change in physical education: The Hong Kong experience. Sport, Education and Society, 9(3), 421-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573320412331302467
  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education.
  • Han, Ç. (2013). Öğretmenlerin işlevsel paradigmaları ve eğitim reform [Teachers’ functional paradigms and educational reform]. Trakya University Journal of Education, 3(1), 59-79.
  • Haney, J. J., Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 971–993.
  • Handal, B., & Herrington, A. (2003). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and curriculum reform. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(1), 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217369
  • Hargreaves, A., & Evans, R. (1998). Beyond educational reform: Bringing teachers back in. Open University Press.
  • Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 3–41. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013161X05277975
  • Harris, A. (2011). Reforming systems: Realizing the fourth way. Journal of Educational Change, 12(2), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-011-9156-z
  • Harris, R., & Graham, S. (2019). Engaging with curriculum reform: Insights from English history teachers’ willingness to support curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51(1), 43-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-011-9156-z
  • Hazır-Bıkmaz, F. (2006). Yeni ilköğretim programları ve öğretmenler [New elementary curricula and teachers]. Ankara University Journal of Faculty Educational Sciences, 39(1), 97–116.
  • Herold, D. M., Fedor, D. B., Caldwell, S. D. (2007). Beyond change management: A multilevel investigation of contextual and personal influences on employees’ commitment to change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 942-951. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.942
  • Hsiao, H. C., Chang, J. C., Tu. Y. L., & Chen, S. C. (2011). The impacts of self-efficacy in innovative work behavior for teachers. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(1), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJSSH.2011.V1.6
  • Hu, L. H., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  • IBM SPPS Corp. (2013). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, Version 22.0 [Computer Software]. IBM Corp.
  • Irez, S., & Han, Ç. (2011). Educational reforms as paradigm shifts: Utilizing Kuhnian lenses for a better understanding of the meaning of, and resistance to, educational change. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 6(3), 251-266.
  • Isikoglu, N., Basturk, R., & Karaca, F. (2009). Assessing in-service teachers’ instructional beliefs about student-centered education: A Turkish perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 350-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.08.004
  • Isler, I., & Cakiroglu, E. (2010). Teachers’ efficacy beliefs and perceptions regarding the implementation of new primary mathematics curriculum. Proceedings of CERME 6, Lyon France.
  • Ittner, D., Hagenauer, G., & Hascher, T. (2019). Swiss principals’ emotions, basic needs satisfaction and readiness for change during curriculum reform. Journal of Educational Change, 20, 165-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09339-1
  • İnal, K., Akkaymak, G., & Yıldırım, D. (2016). The Constructivist curriculum reform in Turkey in 2004: In fact what is constructed? In A. Darder, P. Mayo, & J. Paraskeva (Eds.), International critical pedagogy reader (pp. 163-168). Routledge.
  • İnandı, Y., Yeşil, H., Karatepe, R., & Uzun, A. (2015). Öğretmenlerin ve okul müdürlerinin öz yeterlikleri ile değişime gösterdikleri direnç arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [The study of relationship between teachers’ and principals’ self-efficacy and resistance to change]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 563-581. https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.08526
  • Janik,T., Janko, T., Peskova, K., Knecht, P., & Spurna, M. (2018). Czech teachers’ attitudes towards curriculum reform implementation. Human Affairs, 28, 54-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2018-0006
  • Jenkins, G. (2020). Teacher agency: The effects of active and passive responses to curriculum change. The Australian Educational Researcher, 47, 167-181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00334-2
  • Kagan, D. M. (1992). Implication of research on teacher belief. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 65-90. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2701_6
  • Kasapoğlu, K., & Duban, N. (2012). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının yapılandırmacı yaklaşımı uygulamaya yönelik öz yeterlik inançlarını yordayan bir faktör olarak yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma yönelik tutumları (Afyonkarahisar ili örneği). Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 8 (2), 85-96.
  • Kirk, D., & Macdonald, D. (2001). Teacher voice and ownership of curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(5), 551–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270010016874 Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. The Guilford Press.
  • Koç, C. (2013). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin öz yeterlik algıları ve yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamı oluşturma becerilerinin incelenmesi [An investigation into elementary school teachers' self-efficacy beliefs and skills for creatıng constructivist learning environments]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Özel Sayı (1), 240-255.
  • Kondakci, Y., Beycioglu, K., Sincar, M., & Ugurlu, C. T. (2017). Readiness of teachers for change in schools. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(2), 176-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2015.1023361
  • Kondakçı, Y., Zayim, M., & Çalışkan, Ö. (2013). Development and validation of readiness for change scale. Elementary Education Online, 12(1), 23 35. https://hdl.handle.net/11511/75548 Korkmaz, İ. (2008). Evaluation of teachers for restructured elementary curriculum (Grades 1 to 5). Education, 129(2), 250-258.
  • Kosar Altinyelken, H. (2010). Curriculum change in Uganda: Teacher perspectives on the new thematic curriculum. International Journal of Educational Development, 30(2),151–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2009.03.004
  • Kosar Altinyelken, H.K. (2011). Student-centred pedagogy in Turkey: conceptualizations, interpretations and practices. Journal of Education Policy, 26(2), 137-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2010.504886
  • Kosar Altinyelken, H. (2013). Teachers’ principled resistance to curriculum change: A compelling case from Turkey. In A. Verger, H. Altinyelken, & M. De Koning (Eds.), Global managerial education reforms and teachers: Emerging policies, controversies and issues in developing contexts (pp. 109-126). Education International.
  • Kosar Altinyelken, H. (2015). Democratizing Turkey through student-centred pedagogy: Opportunities and pitfalls. Comparative Education, 51(4), 484-501. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2015.1081794
  • Kyriakides, L. (1997). Influences on primary teachers’ practice: Some problems for curriculum change theory. British Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192970230104
  • Levin, B. (1998). An epidemic of education policy: (What) can we learn from each other? Comparative Education, 34(2), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050069828234
  • Lieberman, A. (1997). Navigating the four C’s: Building a bridge over troubled waters. In D. J. Flinders, & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (pp. 350–354). Routledge.
  • Liu, W., & Wang, Q. (2020). Walking with bound feet: teachers’ lived experiences in China’s English curriculum change. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 33(3), 242-257.
  • MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. Taylor & Francis Group/Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mellegård, I., & Pettersen, K. D. (2016). Teachers’ response to curriculum change: Balancing external and internal change forces. Teacher Development, 20(2), 181-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2016.1143871
  • Muofhe, L.T. (2008) The interpretation and implementation of reform: A case of Simon. Equity & Excellence in Education, 41(4), 417-432. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680802414205
  • Murphy, P. K., Delli, L. A., & Edwards, M. N. (2004). The good teacher and good teaching: Comparing beliefs of second-grade students, preservice teachers, and in-service teacher. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(2), 69-92. https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.72.2.69-92
  • Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2010). MPlus6 [Computer Software]. Muthen & Muthen.
  • Nie, Y., Tan, G. H., Liau, A. K., Lau, S., & Chua, B. L. (2013). The roles of teacher efficacy in instructional innovation: Its predictive relations to constructivist and didactic instruction. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 12, 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-012-9128-y
  • Nohl, A. M., & Somel, R. N. (2016). Curricular change in Turkey: Time, sequentiality, and differential power of actors in establishing a new knowledge path. Journal of Educational Change, 17(3), 303-318.
  • Ocak, G. (2010). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme uygulamalarına yönelik öğretmen tutumları [Teacher attitudes towards constructivist learning practices]. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(3), 835-857.
  • Ogan-Bekiroğlu, F., & Akkoç, H. (2009). Preservice teachers’ instructional beliefs and examination of consistency between beliefs and practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 1173-1199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9157-z
  • Olibie, E. (2013). Emergent global curriculum trends: Implications for teachers as facilitators of curriculum change. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(5), 161-167.
  • Oreg, S., Vakola, M., & Armenakis, A. (2011). Change recipients’ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(4), 461-524. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0021886310396550
  • Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543062003307
  • Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in mathematical problem- solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20, 426–443. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1995.1029
  • Pan, Y. H., Chou, H. S., Hsu, W. T., Li, C. H., & Hu, Y. L. (2013). Teacher self-efficacy and teaching practices in the health and physical education curriculum in Taiwan. Social Behavior and Personality, 4(2), 241-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.2.241
  • Park, M., & Sung, Y. (2013). Teachers’ perceptions of the resent curriculum reforms and their implementation: What can we learn from the case of Korean elementary teachers? Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 33(1), 15-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2012.756391
  • Petko, D., Prasse, D., & Cantieni, A. (2018). The interplay of school readiness and teacher readiness for educational technology integration: A structural equation model. Computers in the Schools, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2018.1428007
  • Prawat, R. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning: A constructivist perspective. American Journal of Education, 100(3), 354-395. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1086/444021
  • Priestley, M. (2011). Schools, teachers, and curriculum change: A balancing act?. Journal of Educational Change, 12(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-010-9140-z
  • Raymond, A. M. (1997). Inconsistency between a beginning elementary school teacher’s mathematics beliefs and teaching practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 550-76. https://doi.org/10.2307/749691
  • Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543075002211
  • Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers’ beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 412-422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18061.x
  • Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883-907. https://doi.org/10.1002/TEA.20180
  • Simmons, J., & MacLean, J. (2018). Physical education teachers’ perceptions of factors that inhibit and facilitate the enactment of curriculum change in a high-stakes exam climate. Sport, Education and Society, 23(2), 186-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2016.1155444
  • Shin, K. (2020). Examining Korean teachers’ experiences teaching the centrally developed integrated curriculum. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-020-00537-7
  • So, K., & Kang, J. (2014). Curriculum reform in Korea: Issues and challenges for twenty-first century learning. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(4), 795-803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0161-2
  • Stokes, E. W. (2018). The development of the school reform model and reform readiness survey. Research Issues in Contemporary Education, 3(1), 4-18.
  • Şeker, H. (2010). Applicability of the approaches-related beliefs of prospective teachers. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 25, 138-150.
  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics. Allyn and Bacon.
  • Tafrova-Grigorova, A., Boiadjieva, E., Emilov, I., & Kirova, M. (2012). Science teachers’ attitudes towards constructivist environment: A Bulgarian case. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 11(2), 184-192.
  • Troudi, S., & Alwan, F. (2010). Teachers’ feelings during curriculum change in the United Arab Emirates: Opening Pandora’s box. Teacher Development, 14(1), 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664531003696659
  • Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfok-Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00036-1
  • Tuğtekin, U., Barut Tuğtekin, E., & Dursun, Ö. Ö. (2018). Analysis of readiness for change and self-efficacy perceptions of IT teachers and pre-service teachers. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education,14(3),1200-1221. https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.354881
  • Uslu, Ö., & Çakar Özkan, E. (2018). Öğretmenlerin değişim eğilimlerinin yordanmasında özyeterlik inançlarının ve tükenmişlik düzeylerinin rolü [The role of self-efficacy beliefs and burnout in predicting teachers’ change tendencies]. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 48, 278-300. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.387459
  • Utomo, E. (2005). Challenges of curriculum reform in the context of decentralization: The response of teachers to a competency based curriculum (CBC) and its implementation in schools [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Leeds.
  • Uzuntiryaki, E., Boz, Y., Kirbulut, D., & Bektas, O. (2010). Do pre-service chemistry teachers reflect their beliefs about constructivism in their teaching practices? Research in Science Education, 40(3), 403-423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9127-z
  • van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2%3C137::AID-TEA1001%3E3.0.CO;2-U
  • von Oppell, M. A., & Aldridge, S.M. (2020). The development and validation of a teacher belief survey for the constructivist classroom. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1056787920939896
  • Walsh, G., & Gardner, J. (2006). Teachers’ readiness to embrace change in the early years of schooling: A Northern Ireland perspective. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 14(2), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502930285209961
  • Wang, L. (2022). English language teacher agency in response to curriculum reform in China: An ecological approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.935038
  • Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4, 67–75. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
  • Webb, P. T. (2002). Teacher power: The exercise of professional autonomy in an era of strict accountability. Teacher Development, 6(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530200200156
  • Woolley, S. L., Benjamin, W. J., & Woolley, A. W. (2004). Construct validity of a self-report measure of teacher beliefs related to constructivist and traditional approaches to teaching and learning. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(2), 319-331. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013164403261189
  • Yapıcı, M., & Demirdelen, C. (2007). Teachers’ views with regard to the primary 4th grade social sciences curriculum. Elementary Education Online, 6(2), 204-212.
  • Yaşar, M.D., & Sözbilir, M. (2019). Investigating teachers’ fidelity to constructivist chemistry curriculum in Turkey: Congruence between intended, perceived and observed curriculum in Turkey. International Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 11(4), 93-104. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijpce/84519
  • Yates, S. M. (2006). Elementary teachers’ mathematics beliefs and teaching practices after a curriculum reform. Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Kasapoğlu, K. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions of constructivist curriculum change as a predictor of their perceptions of the implementation of constructivist teaching–learning activities. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(4), 565-577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9394-5
  • Zayim, M., & Kondakci, Y. (2015). An exploration of the relationship between readiness for change and organizational trust in Turkish public schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43(4), 610-625. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1741143214523009
  • Zhang, F., & Liu, Y. (2014). A study of secondary school English teachers’ beliefs in the context of curriculum reform in China. Language Teaching Research, 18(2), 187-204. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1362168813505940
APA Akin-Sabuncu S, Çalık B (2023). A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. , 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
Chicago Akin-Sabuncu Sibel,Çalık Başak A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. (2023): 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
MLA Akin-Sabuncu Sibel,Çalık Başak A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. , 2023, ss.123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
AMA Akin-Sabuncu S,Çalık B A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. . 2023; 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
Vancouver Akin-Sabuncu S,Çalık B A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. . 2023; 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
IEEE Akin-Sabuncu S,Çalık B "A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change." , ss.123 - 157, 2023. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
ISNAD Akin-Sabuncu, Sibel - Çalık, Başak. "A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change". (2023), 123-157. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
APA Akin-Sabuncu S, Çalık B (2023). A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 13(1), 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
Chicago Akin-Sabuncu Sibel,Çalık Başak A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi 13, no.1 (2023): 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
MLA Akin-Sabuncu Sibel,Çalık Başak A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, vol.13, no.1, 2023, ss.123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
AMA Akin-Sabuncu S,Çalık B A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi. 2023; 13(1): 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
Vancouver Akin-Sabuncu S,Çalık B A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi. 2023; 13(1): 123 - 157. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
IEEE Akin-Sabuncu S,Çalık B "A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change." Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 13, ss.123 - 157, 2023. 10.31704/ijocis.2023.006
ISNAD Akin-Sabuncu, Sibel - Çalık, Başak. "A Structural Equation Model of Teachers’ Attitudes Towards Constructivist Curriculum Change". Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi 13/1 (2023), 123-157. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2023.006