Curriculum is one of the elements that play an important role in determining the various dimensions of a course (Çakmak et al., 2023) and is a structure that includes all activities related to the teaching of a course (Demirel, 2013). Curricula that reflect the constructivist approach to learning have been implemented in Turkey since 2005 (Ambarlı, 2010; Aydın, 2016; Çakmak et al., 2017; Yeşilyurt, 2011). Constructivism, which is applied in the educational systems of many countries, is an approach that applies student-centered teaching and is concerned with the mental skills of students rather than improving their behavior (Güneş, 2014).

Social studies is a course in social sciences that consists of different disciplines and includes different approaches to social studies education (Öztürk & Otluoğlu, 2003). Social studies curriculum (SSC), on the other hand, applies content from social sciences and humanities with an interdisciplinary approach to develop active citizens who solve problems and make informed decisions under the changing conditions of the world and countries (Öztürk, 2015). In the development of an individual's personality, SSC, which is indisputably important for growing up as a productive and harmonious person in society, should be continuously developed with a scientific approach, taking into account socio-cultural transformations, changes in science and technology, political, social and economic evolutions, and the needs of individuals and society (Aykaç, 2007).

The purpose of this research is to examine the opinions of pre-service social studies teachers studying at Gaziantep University Nizip Faculty of Education in Turkey towards SSC using Q method analysis. In reviewing the literature, no research on this topic was found in Turkey. In the light of these explanations, in this research, the opinions of pre-service social studies teachers regarding SSC were examined with an analysis that is not widely used in Turkey, that is, Q-methodology. In this regard, examining the views on SSC with a different analysis is important in terms of shedding light on research at both national and international levels in Turkey's accession process to the European Union. As a matter of fact, one of the common aims of the European Union’s educational program is to ensure the exchange of educational programs (Ertl, 2003; Jones, 2001).

The Q method determines the extent to which people's values, ideas, or beliefs about an issue converge or diverge. While it is seen that the number of studies adopting the Q method in the international literature is increasing day by day, the number of studies based on the Q method in the literature in Turkey is quite low (Polat, 2022). This research is original and important because no research on the evaluation of SSC based on the opinions of pre-service social studies teachers and through Q method analysis was found in the literature review. It is believed that this research will make significant contributions to social studies education by making some determinations about SSC by taking into account the opinions of pre-service social studies teachers. In this regard, answers to the following research questions were sought within the scope of this research.

• Do pre-service social studies teachers have a common opinion regarding the SSC?
• What do pre-service social studies teachers think about the Q statements in the SSC?
• What are the opinions of pre-service social studies teachers regarding the dimensions of the SSC?
• How is there a difference in terms of gender variable regarding the SSC?

In this study, which was conducted using a mixed research method, the Q method technique was used. In research conducted using the Q method, the qualitative data is collected after the quantitative data is obtained from the group of participants. In this respect, this research is suitable for the nested mixed research design. The nested mixed design is applied in research where data are collected and analyzed in quantitative and qualitative designs (Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2015). The Q method is a mixed research method that organizes people's perceptions and opinions about a subject in order of priority (Karasu & Peker, 2019; Rodl et al., 2020; Stone, 2015). Since the Q method is created by combining the strengths of quantitative and qualitative research, it provides a holistic evaluation of the subject under investigation (Watts & Stenner, 2012). The Q method aims to reconcile the statistical aspects of quantitative research with the clarity of qualitative research (Demir & Kul, 2011). In this regard, the Q methodology was preferred in this study. The study group consisted of 3rd and 4th year students (48 participants) who are studying in the Social Studies Teaching Department and taking the SSC course in the 2023-2024 academic year at Gaziantep University, Nizip Faculty of Education, where the researchers work. The study group was selected on a voluntary basis using the appropriate sampling method. However, 43 out of 48 participants were included in meaningful groups according to their answers. In this research, the Q method form developed by the researchers in line with the literature and expert opinions was used as a data collection tool. Q method technique was used in the development of this form. This form; the research instructions consist of participant characteristics, Q string, Q statements and open-ended questions. One of the researchers applied the Q method form in the participants' classroom in 40 minutes. Before the application, the necessary permission was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Gaziantep University. Within the scope of this research, the data in the Q string filled out by the participants were analyzed with the statistical program PQMethod 2.35, and the qualitative data were analyzed with content analysis.

The participants were concentrated in three groups regarding the SSC. There are 31 people in the first group, 10 in the second and two in the third. Of the 22 statements regarding SSC, 11 are positive and 11 are negative. The fact that the first group has a positive approach to all the positive statements and the positive Z values of these statements shows that the attitude towards SSC is positive. The second group was positive about 7 of the 11 items, and the third group was positive about 4 of the 11 items. Groups 1 and 2 are those who have a "positive approachers" to SSC; group 3 can be called “negative approachers”. These findings show that the participants had significantly similar views. The first group's SSC stated, "The values stated in the SSC are necessary for today." When the Z scores including all the participants were examined, the participants had positive attitudes towards all 12 dimensions. According to the weighted average scores, while the most positive dimensions of the SSC are the learning domain, value and learning outcome; the least positive dimensions are explanation, individual differences and context. While the percentage of women in the first group is 87%, the percentage of men is 55%. There was no significant difference in opinions about SSC based on gender. Women generally had similar opinions, while men had varying opinions as they were concentrated in two groups. According to the qualitative findings, the participants had a generally positive view of the SSC. According to the participants, the least positive dimensions of SSC are learning domain and values, while the most negative dimensions are explanation and individual differences. It can be said that the positive attitude towards SSC is a result of the teaching programs implemented in line with the contemporary approaches in Turkey's harmonization process with the European Union.

Ambarlı, A. (2010). Türkiye’de cumhuriyetten günümüze sosyal bilgiler programları (değişiklikler, düzenlemeler, güncellemeler) [Unpublished master's thesis]. Selçuk University, Turkey. Aydın, M. (2016). Tarihsel empatiyle sosyal bilgiler öğretimi. R.Sever, M.Aydın and E.Koçoğlu (Eds.), In Alternatif yaklaşımlarla sosyal bilgiler eğitimi (1th ed., p.15-27). Pegem Akademi. Aykaç, N. (2007). The teachers’ opinions about the elementary social science lesson programme. Electronic Journal Social Sciences, 6(22), 46-73. Creswell, J.W., & Plano-Clark, V.L. (2015). Karma yöntem araştırmaları tasarımı ve yürütülmesi (2th ed.) (Trans. Y.Dede ve S.B.Demir). Anı. Çakmak, Z., Kaçar, T., & Arıkan, İ. (2017). Social studies teachers' views about the draft middle school social studies course curriculum. The Journal of Academic Social Science, 5(54), 576-597. Çakmak, Z., Kaçar, T., & Akgün, İ. H. (2023). Opinions of social studies educators on the social studies curriculum: A q method analysis. Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Education, 20(2), 666-689. Demir, F., & Kul, M. (2011). Modern bir araştırma yöntemi: Q metodu. Adalet. Demirel, Ö. (2013). Eğitimde program geliştirme kuramdan uygulamaya (20th ed.). Pegem Akademi. Ertl, H. (2003). European union and education policies: An overview of policies and ınitiatives, D.Phillips and H.Ertl (Eds.)., In implementing European Union Education and training policy: A comparative study of issues in four member states (p.13-39). Kluwer Academic. Güneş, F. (2014). Eğitim yaklaşım ve modelleri. F.Güneş (Ed.), In Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri (1th ed., p.23-39). Pegem Akademi. Jones, R. (2001). The politics and economics of european union (2th ed.). Edward Elgar. Karasu, M., & Peker, M. (2019). Q yöntemi: Tarihi, kuramı ve uygulaması. Turkish Psychology Articles, 22(43), 28-39. Öztürk, C., & Otluoğlu, R. (2003). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde edebi ürünler ve yazılı materyaller (2th ed.). Pegem Akademi. Öztürk, C. (2015). Sosyal bilgiler: Toplumsal yaşama disiplinler arası bir yaklaşım. C.Öztürk (Ed.), In Sosyal bilgiler öğretimi demokratik vatandaşlık eğitimi (p.2-28). Pegem Akademi. Polat, M. (2022). Q-methodology as a qualiquantalogical approach and reflections on its usability in educational researches. Pamukkale University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 51, 481-489. Rodl, J. E., Cruz, R. A., & Knollman, G. A. (2020). Applying Q methodology to teacher evaluation research. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 65, 1-10. Stone, T. E. (2015). Q Methodology: An introduction. Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research, 19(3), 183-186. Watts, S., & Stenner, P. (2012). Doing Q methodological research: Theory, method ve interpretation. Sage. Yeşilyurt, E. (2011). An evaluation of the views of teacher candidates on the development of a constructivist learning based curriculum. Turkish Studies, 6(4), 865-885.