Handbook preparation as a tool for self- directed learning process: A case study on endocrine topic

The results of pre-test of the study showed that student teachers had incorrect and limited knowledge about the endocrine glands, their hormones and functions and feedback. It can be said that most of these problems are results of the traditional teaching strategies (Dikmenli and Çardak, 2004). Teachers and students are agree that the endocrine topic is difficult because of Latin words, gland functions and microscopic and abstract concepts (Bahar et all., 1999). On the other hand, in all grades of education, from elementary to university, teaching strategies used to teach the endocrine system couples didactic lecturing with questioning. Students’ responsibilities are listening and taking notes. But this traditional instruction does not support students' self-study. They do not take the responsibility for their own learning. This causes surface and rote learning; hence, the students forget what they learned in a short period of time (Cerrah, et all., 2006; Chi, 2005).

The results of the study showed that 60% of student teachers neither drew the endocrine glands nor wrote about hormones in the pre-test. Forty percent of the student teachers who drew the endocrine glands wrote very limited information about their hormones and functions. Student teachers mostly drew the thyroid gland without writing its function. Since, having goitre is a common sickness in the study region, they knew the gland-sickness relation, but they did not know the hormones or functions of it. The sickness is a reality of their life. They have experiences related with it, but the function of the thyroid is just boring details for them. They also mentioned this situation verbally during the class discussion. A minority of the student teachers held misconceptions about the functions of the adrenal gland, pancreas and sexual glands. Like endocrine glands, they had misunderstandings about the concept of feedback. The incorrect explanations may be result of the “back” word in this concept. They may have interpreted this word as “absorption of the matters for reuse.”

After the handbook preparation process, it was seen that there was a significant difference between student teachers’ responses on pre and post-tests. The ratios of the correct answers increased (Table 2 and 3) after the intervention. These results may be interpreted as the handbook preparation process is effective to overcome the deficiency of knowledge and to remove misconceptions of the student teachers. They mentioned that they spent a lot of time to prepare educative, interesting and attractive handbooks. They summarized what they learned by using less word, but more visual elements such as illustrations or pictures, etc. This process may have forced them to keep mentally active (A1).

Student teachers’ comments indicated that the handbook preparation process increased their level of enjoyment and deep learning. The endocrine topic is a difficult and threatening subject for the student, but student teachers indicated that they took pleasure in learning this subject, and this may have been lead to higher motivation and higher achievement.

Their searches from different sources such as books, journals and the Internet may have been helped them to be aware of their incorrect ideas and to fill the gaps in their knowledge (A2).

Being involved in such a teaching/learning strategy changed perceptions of the student teachers about the traditional teaching methods (A4). They also said that they felt more confident to teach this subject because of the active involvement in their learning (A3). It can be said that this material preparation process has some advantages such as activating mentally, directing to researching, motivating learning, providing social communication and promoting creativity.

These results suggest that handbook preparation may be used effectively as a SDL tool; however, it may not be a case for all students. A minority of the student teachers commented that they did not learn effectively because of their learning habits, which supports the findings of Bhat et al. (2007). As they stated, the students are not familiar with homework or projects or researching because of the teacher-oriented teaching. If a learner comprehends the handbook preparation as homework, and does not derive enjoyment from the activity or search for meaning in the information, the results will be surface process activities (URL-2, 2009). It seems that handbook preparation could be a direct copy of the information from the related resources directly without internalizing it. The student teachers' handbooks were not evaluated with a grade, and this situation might be encouraged the student teachers to act this way. This is a disadvantage for the student for continuation of existing misunderstandings. This undesirable situation may be prevented by the aid of feedback or control of the teacher.

In summary, the results of the study totally represent the effectiveness of the handbook. Teacher-centered teaching is dominant in our education system and the students rely on memorization; hence the students in any levels may have a bias against the new teaching methods. To overcome this bias is an achievement of the study, moreover, this activity promoted changes in beliefs and the learning of the student teachers.