Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2019, Sayı: 16, 65 - 78, 25.07.2019

Şenol Şen Lütfiye Varoğlu Ayhan Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.466415

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Atabek Yigit, E. (2016). Investigating cognitive structures in some basic chemistry concepts via word association test. Elementary Education Online, 15(4), 1385-1398.
  • Atasoy, B., Kadayıfçı, H., & Akkuş, H. (2003). Lise 3. sınıftaki öğrencilerin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki yanlış kavramaları ve bunların giderilmesi üzerine yapılandırmacı yaklaşımın etkisi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(1), 61-79.
  • Bahar, M., Johnstone, A. H., & Sutcliffe, R. G. (1999). Investigation of students' cognitive structure in elementary genetics through word association tests. Journal of Biological Education, 33(3), 134-141.
  • Bahar, M; & Özatlı, N.S. (2003). Kelime iletişim test yöntemi ile lise 1. sınıf öğrencilerinin canlıların temel bileşenleri konusundaki bilişsel yapılarının araştırılması. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 75-85.
  • Banerjee, A. C. (1991). Misconceptions of students and teachers in chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 487-494.
  • Bingol, H. (2017). Evaluation of the Cognitive Structures of the Middle School Students about the Concept of" Water Pollution" by Using Free Word Association Test. Online Submission, 8(27), 249-258.
  • Birk, J. P., & Kurtz, M. J. (1999). Effect of experience on retention and elimination of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical education, 76(1), 124-128.
  • Boo, H. K. (1998). Students' understandings of chemical bonds and the energetics of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 569-581.
  • Bradley, J. D., & Mosimege, M. D. (1998). Misconceptions in acids and bases: A comparative study of student teachers with different chemistry backgrounds. South African Journal of Chemistry, 51, 137-145.
  • Burrows, N. L., & Mooring, S. R. (2015). Using concept mapping to uncover students' knowledge structures of chemical bonding concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 53-66.
  • Cachapuz, A. F. C., & Maskill, R. (1987). Detecting changes with learning in the organization of knowledge: use of word association tests to follow the learning of collision theory. International Journal of Science Education, 9(4), 491-504.
  • Case, J. M., & Fraser, D. M. (1999). An investigation into chemical engineering students' understanding of the mole and the use of concrete activities to promote conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 21(12), 1237-1249.
  • Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 293-307.
  • Coll, R. K., & Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding held by upper secondary and tertiary students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19(2), 171-191.
  • Demircioğlu, H., Vural, S., & Demircioğlu, G. (2012). “REACT” stratejisine uygun hazırlanan materyalin üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin başarısı üzerinde etkisi. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(2), 101-144.
  • Derman, A., & Eilks, I. (2016). Using a word association test for the assessment of high school students' cognitive structures on dissolution. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 902-913.
  • Dhindsa, H. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2014). Prospective pedagogy for teaching chemical bonding for smart and sustainable learning. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(4), 435-446.
  • Driver, R. (1989). Students’ conceptions and the learning of science. International journal of science education, 11(5), 481-490.Ercan, F., Taşdere, A., & Ercan, N. (2010). Kelime ilişkilendirme testi aracılığıyla bilişsel yapının ve kavramsal değişimin gözlenmesi. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(2), 136-154.
  • Erdogan, A. (2017). Examining Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers' Conceptual Structures about" Geometry". Online Submission, 8(27), 65-74.
  • Fensham, P. (1987). Descriptions and frameworks of solutions and reactions in solutions. Research in Science Education, 17(1), 139-148.
  • Garskof, B. E., & Houston, J. P. (1963). Measurement of verbal relatedness: An idiographic approach. Psychological review, 70(3), 277-288.
  • Geban, Ö., & Bayır, G. (2000). Effect of conceptual change approach on students understanding of chemical change and conservation of matter. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(19), 79-84.
  • Ghalkhani, M., & Mirzaei, A. (2018). Usıng two-tıer test to assess the fourth year students′ learnıng and alternatıve conceptıons ın acıd-base. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 8(2), 122-128.
  • Gilbert, J., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10(1), 61-98.
  • Gok Colak, F., & Tugluk, M. N. (2017). Investigation of the cognitive structures of prospective preschool teachers on the concepts of circle, disk and annulus with the word association test. Online Submission, 8(29), 152-157.
  • Griffiths, A. K., & Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade-12 students' misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 611-628.
  • Hackling, M. W., & Garnett, P. J. (1985). Misconceptions of chemical equilibrium. The European Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 205-214.
  • Hand, B. (1989). Student understandings of acids and bases: A two-year study. Research in Science Education, 19(1), 133-144.
  • Hanson, R. (2017). Unearthing conceptions about types of chemical bonding through the use of tiered worksheets – A case study. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education (IJCDSE), 8(2), 3112-3122.
  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352-381.
  • Hastürk, H. G. (2017). Teoriden pratiğe fen bilimleri öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Johnstone, A. H., & Moynihan, T. F. (1985). The relationship between performances in word association tests and achievement in chemistry. The European Journal of Science Education, 7(1), 57-66.
  • Joki, J., & Aksela, M. (2018). The challenges of learning and teaching chemical bonding at different school levels using electrostatic interactions instead of the octet rule as a teaching model. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 3(19), 932-953.
  • Karakuş, M., & Karakuş, F. (2017). Examining teaching of professional concepts in teacher training and investigating students’ cognitive structures regarding professional concepts. Educational Research and Reviews, 12(24), 1230-1241.
  • Köseoğlu, F. & Tümay, H. (2015). Fen eğitiminde yapılandırıcılık ve yeni öğretim yöntemleri. Ankara: Palme Yayıncılık.
  • Lee, O., Eichinger, D. C., Anderson, C. W., Berkheimer, G. D., & Blakeslee, T. D. (1993). Changing middle school students' conceptions of matter and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(3), 249-270.
  • Lin, H. S., Cheng, H. J., & Lawrenz, F. (2000). The assessment of students and teachers' understanding of gas laws. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(2), 235-238.
  • Luxford, C. J., & Bretz, S. L. (2014). Development of the bonding representations inventory to identify student misconceptions about covalent and ionic bonding representations. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(3), 312-320.
  • Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of chemical Education, 69(3), 191-196.
  • Nakiboglu, C. (2008). Using word associations for assessing non major science students’ knowledge structure before and after general chemistry instruction: the case of atomic structure. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(4), 309-322.
  • Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates' bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 707-730.
  • Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.
  • Osborne, R. J., & Cosgrove, M. M. (1983). Children's conceptions of the changes of state of water. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 20(9), 825-838.
  • Önal, N. (2017). Bilişim teknolojileri öğretmen adaylarının bölümlerine yönelik bilişsel algılarının KİT aracılığıyla incelenmesi. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 18(2), 255-272.
  • Özcan, Ö., & Tavukçuoğlu, E. (2018). Investigating the high school students’ cognitive structures about the light concept through word association test. Journal of Education and Future, 13, 121-132.
  • Pabuçcu, A., & Geban, Ö. (2006). Kimyasal bağlarla ilgili kavram yanılgılarının kavramsal değişim metinleri kullanılarak düzeltilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(30), 184-192.
  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. SAGE Publications, inc.
  • Pérez, J. B., Pérez, M. B., Calatayud, M. L., García-Lopera, R., & Sabater, J. V. (2017). Students’ misconceptions on chemical bonding: a comparative study between high school and first year university students. Asian Journal of Education and e Learning (ISSN: 2321–2454), 5(01), 1-15.
  • Peterson, R. F., & Treagust, D. F. (1989). Grade-12 students' misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(6), 459-460.
  • Preece, P. E. (1976). Mapping cognitive structure: A comparison of methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(1), 1-8.
  • Sadoglu, G. P., & Durukan, U. G. (2018). Determination of Elementary Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions of Some Basic Physics Concepts by Word Association Test. European Journal of Physics Education, 8(2), 44-57.
  • Shavelson, R. J. (1973). What is the basic teaching skill? Journal of teacher education, 24(2), 144-151.
  • Shavelson, R. J. (1974). Methods for examining representations of a subject‐matter structure in a student's memory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(3), 231-249.
  • Smith, K. C., & Villarreal, S. (2015). Using animations in identifying general chemistry students' misconceptions and evaluating their knowledge transfer relating to particle position in physical changes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), 273-282.
  • Staver, J. R., & Lumpe, A. T. (1995). Two investigations of students' understanding of the mole concept and its use in problem solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(2), 177-193.
  • Stavy, R. (1991a). Children's ideas about matter. School Science and Mathematics, 91(6), 240-244.
  • Stavy, R. (1991b). Using analogy to overcome misconceptions about conservation of matter. Journal of research in science teaching, 28(4), 305-313.
  • Stewart, J. (1979). Content and cognitive structure: Critique of assessment and representation techniques used by science education researchers. Science Education, 63(3), 395-405.
  • Şen, Ş. & Yılmaz, A. (2017). The development of a three-tier chemical bonding concept test. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(1), 110-126.
  • Şen, Ş., & Yılmaz, A. (2013). Kimyasal bağlarla ilgili fenomenografik bir çalışma. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi (EFMED), 7(2), 144-177.
  • Taber, K. (1994). Misunderstanding the ionic bond. Education in Chemistry, 31, 100–102.
  • Taber, K. S. (1997). Student understanding of ionic bonding: Molecular versus electrostatic thinking. School Science Review, 78(285), 85-95.
  • Taber, K. S., Tsaparlis, G., & Nakiboğlu, C. (2012). Student conceptions of ionic bonding: Patterns of thinking across three European contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2843-2873.
  • Tan, D. K. C., & Treagust, D. F. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 81(294), 75-84.
  • Thompson, F., & Logue, S. (2006). An exploration of common student misconceptions in science. International Education Journal, 7(4), 553-559.
  • Tokcan, H. (2017). Determining the Turkish World Perceptions of Candidate Social Studies Teachers through Word Association Test. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(8), 1386-1395.
  • Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. International journal of science education, 10(2), 159-169.
  • Tsaparlis, G., Pappa, E., & Byers, B. (2018). Teaching and learning chemical bonding: Research-based evidence for misconceptions and conceptual difficulties experienced by students in upper secondary schools and the effect of an enriched text. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, DOI: 10.1039/c8rp00035b
  • Ültay, N. (2014). 12. sınıf öğrencilerinin atomlar arası bağlar ve moleküller arası çekim kuvvetleri hakkındaki kavram yapılarının belirlenmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(32), 1-21.
  • White, R. & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing Understanding. London and New York: The Falmer Pres.
  • Widarti, H. R., Permanasari, A., & Mulyani, S. (2017). Undergraduate students’ misconception on acid-base and argentometric titrations: A challenge to implement multiple representation-learning model with cognitive dissonance strategy. International Journal of Education, 9(2), 105-112.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (8. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yılmaz, A., & Morgil, F. İ. (2001). Üniversite öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının belirlenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(20), 172-178.
  • Yücel, E. O., & Özkan, M. (2015). Determination of secondary school students’ cognitive structure, and misconception in ecological concepts through word association test. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(5), 660-674.

Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions with a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding

Yıl 2019, Sayı: 16, 65 - 78, 25.07.2019

Şenol Şen Lütfiye Varoğlu Ayhan Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.466415

Öz

This study aims to investigate undergraduate
students’ cognitive structures and determinate misconceptions about chemical
bonding phenomena. On the other hand, the study achieves to recommend an
alternative technique for the evaluation of Word Associations Tests (WAT). The
study was carried out with the participation of first year studens; 141 from
engineering faculty and 73 from medical sciences faculty of a foundation
university in the spring semester of 2017-2018 academic year. WAT about
chemical bonds prepared by the researchers was used as a data collection tool.
Content analysis were used to analyze the data. The students’ responds to the
key words given to them were divided into themes and cut-off technique was used
according to the themes distinguished. In this context, students' cognitive
structures related to chemical bonds were determined within the framework of
themes. It has been determined that the students’ WAT results regarding to
chemical bonding, which supported with concept maps within the framework of the
themes, provides convenience in determining the misconceptions because of
reflects the concepts and the relationships between the concepts more clearly.
In consequence, it is suggested that the new technique of evaluation
recommended could be used in prospective studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

chemical bonds misconceptions undergraduate students word association test

Kaynakça

  • Atabek Yigit, E. (2016). Investigating cognitive structures in some basic chemistry concepts via word association test. Elementary Education Online, 15(4), 1385-1398.
  • Atasoy, B., Kadayıfçı, H., & Akkuş, H. (2003). Lise 3. sınıftaki öğrencilerin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki yanlış kavramaları ve bunların giderilmesi üzerine yapılandırmacı yaklaşımın etkisi. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1(1), 61-79.
  • Bahar, M., Johnstone, A. H., & Sutcliffe, R. G. (1999). Investigation of students' cognitive structure in elementary genetics through word association tests. Journal of Biological Education, 33(3), 134-141.
  • Bahar, M; & Özatlı, N.S. (2003). Kelime iletişim test yöntemi ile lise 1. sınıf öğrencilerinin canlıların temel bileşenleri konusundaki bilişsel yapılarının araştırılması. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 75-85.
  • Banerjee, A. C. (1991). Misconceptions of students and teachers in chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 487-494.
  • Bingol, H. (2017). Evaluation of the Cognitive Structures of the Middle School Students about the Concept of" Water Pollution" by Using Free Word Association Test. Online Submission, 8(27), 249-258.
  • Birk, J. P., & Kurtz, M. J. (1999). Effect of experience on retention and elimination of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical education, 76(1), 124-128.
  • Boo, H. K. (1998). Students' understandings of chemical bonds and the energetics of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 569-581.
  • Bradley, J. D., & Mosimege, M. D. (1998). Misconceptions in acids and bases: A comparative study of student teachers with different chemistry backgrounds. South African Journal of Chemistry, 51, 137-145.
  • Burrows, N. L., & Mooring, S. R. (2015). Using concept mapping to uncover students' knowledge structures of chemical bonding concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 53-66.
  • Cachapuz, A. F. C., & Maskill, R. (1987). Detecting changes with learning in the organization of knowledge: use of word association tests to follow the learning of collision theory. International Journal of Science Education, 9(4), 491-504.
  • Case, J. M., & Fraser, D. M. (1999). An investigation into chemical engineering students' understanding of the mole and the use of concrete activities to promote conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 21(12), 1237-1249.
  • Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 293-307.
  • Coll, R. K., & Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding held by upper secondary and tertiary students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19(2), 171-191.
  • Demircioğlu, H., Vural, S., & Demircioğlu, G. (2012). “REACT” stratejisine uygun hazırlanan materyalin üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin başarısı üzerinde etkisi. Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(2), 101-144.
  • Derman, A., & Eilks, I. (2016). Using a word association test for the assessment of high school students' cognitive structures on dissolution. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 902-913.
  • Dhindsa, H. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2014). Prospective pedagogy for teaching chemical bonding for smart and sustainable learning. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(4), 435-446.
  • Driver, R. (1989). Students’ conceptions and the learning of science. International journal of science education, 11(5), 481-490.Ercan, F., Taşdere, A., & Ercan, N. (2010). Kelime ilişkilendirme testi aracılığıyla bilişsel yapının ve kavramsal değişimin gözlenmesi. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(2), 136-154.
  • Erdogan, A. (2017). Examining Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers' Conceptual Structures about" Geometry". Online Submission, 8(27), 65-74.
  • Fensham, P. (1987). Descriptions and frameworks of solutions and reactions in solutions. Research in Science Education, 17(1), 139-148.
  • Garskof, B. E., & Houston, J. P. (1963). Measurement of verbal relatedness: An idiographic approach. Psychological review, 70(3), 277-288.
  • Geban, Ö., & Bayır, G. (2000). Effect of conceptual change approach on students understanding of chemical change and conservation of matter. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(19), 79-84.
  • Ghalkhani, M., & Mirzaei, A. (2018). Usıng two-tıer test to assess the fourth year students′ learnıng and alternatıve conceptıons ın acıd-base. The Online Journal of New Horizons in Education, 8(2), 122-128.
  • Gilbert, J., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10(1), 61-98.
  • Gok Colak, F., & Tugluk, M. N. (2017). Investigation of the cognitive structures of prospective preschool teachers on the concepts of circle, disk and annulus with the word association test. Online Submission, 8(29), 152-157.
  • Griffiths, A. K., & Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade-12 students' misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 611-628.
  • Hackling, M. W., & Garnett, P. J. (1985). Misconceptions of chemical equilibrium. The European Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 205-214.
  • Hand, B. (1989). Student understandings of acids and bases: A two-year study. Research in Science Education, 19(1), 133-144.
  • Hanson, R. (2017). Unearthing conceptions about types of chemical bonding through the use of tiered worksheets – A case study. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education (IJCDSE), 8(2), 3112-3122.
  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352-381.
  • Hastürk, H. G. (2017). Teoriden pratiğe fen bilimleri öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Johnstone, A. H., & Moynihan, T. F. (1985). The relationship between performances in word association tests and achievement in chemistry. The European Journal of Science Education, 7(1), 57-66.
  • Joki, J., & Aksela, M. (2018). The challenges of learning and teaching chemical bonding at different school levels using electrostatic interactions instead of the octet rule as a teaching model. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 3(19), 932-953.
  • Karakuş, M., & Karakuş, F. (2017). Examining teaching of professional concepts in teacher training and investigating students’ cognitive structures regarding professional concepts. Educational Research and Reviews, 12(24), 1230-1241.
  • Köseoğlu, F. & Tümay, H. (2015). Fen eğitiminde yapılandırıcılık ve yeni öğretim yöntemleri. Ankara: Palme Yayıncılık.
  • Lee, O., Eichinger, D. C., Anderson, C. W., Berkheimer, G. D., & Blakeslee, T. D. (1993). Changing middle school students' conceptions of matter and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(3), 249-270.
  • Lin, H. S., Cheng, H. J., & Lawrenz, F. (2000). The assessment of students and teachers' understanding of gas laws. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(2), 235-238.
  • Luxford, C. J., & Bretz, S. L. (2014). Development of the bonding representations inventory to identify student misconceptions about covalent and ionic bonding representations. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(3), 312-320.
  • Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of chemical Education, 69(3), 191-196.
  • Nakiboglu, C. (2008). Using word associations for assessing non major science students’ knowledge structure before and after general chemistry instruction: the case of atomic structure. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(4), 309-322.
  • Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates' bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 707-730.
  • Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.
  • Osborne, R. J., & Cosgrove, M. M. (1983). Children's conceptions of the changes of state of water. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 20(9), 825-838.
  • Önal, N. (2017). Bilişim teknolojileri öğretmen adaylarının bölümlerine yönelik bilişsel algılarının KİT aracılığıyla incelenmesi. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 18(2), 255-272.
  • Özcan, Ö., & Tavukçuoğlu, E. (2018). Investigating the high school students’ cognitive structures about the light concept through word association test. Journal of Education and Future, 13, 121-132.
  • Pabuçcu, A., & Geban, Ö. (2006). Kimyasal bağlarla ilgili kavram yanılgılarının kavramsal değişim metinleri kullanılarak düzeltilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(30), 184-192.
  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. SAGE Publications, inc.
  • Pérez, J. B., Pérez, M. B., Calatayud, M. L., García-Lopera, R., & Sabater, J. V. (2017). Students’ misconceptions on chemical bonding: a comparative study between high school and first year university students. Asian Journal of Education and e Learning (ISSN: 2321–2454), 5(01), 1-15.
  • Peterson, R. F., & Treagust, D. F. (1989). Grade-12 students' misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(6), 459-460.
  • Preece, P. E. (1976). Mapping cognitive structure: A comparison of methods. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(1), 1-8.
  • Sadoglu, G. P., & Durukan, U. G. (2018). Determination of Elementary Prospective Teachers’ Perceptions of Some Basic Physics Concepts by Word Association Test. European Journal of Physics Education, 8(2), 44-57.
  • Shavelson, R. J. (1973). What is the basic teaching skill? Journal of teacher education, 24(2), 144-151.
  • Shavelson, R. J. (1974). Methods for examining representations of a subject‐matter structure in a student's memory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(3), 231-249.
  • Smith, K. C., & Villarreal, S. (2015). Using animations in identifying general chemistry students' misconceptions and evaluating their knowledge transfer relating to particle position in physical changes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), 273-282.
  • Staver, J. R., & Lumpe, A. T. (1995). Two investigations of students' understanding of the mole concept and its use in problem solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(2), 177-193.
  • Stavy, R. (1991a). Children's ideas about matter. School Science and Mathematics, 91(6), 240-244.
  • Stavy, R. (1991b). Using analogy to overcome misconceptions about conservation of matter. Journal of research in science teaching, 28(4), 305-313.
  • Stewart, J. (1979). Content and cognitive structure: Critique of assessment and representation techniques used by science education researchers. Science Education, 63(3), 395-405.
  • Şen, Ş. & Yılmaz, A. (2017). The development of a three-tier chemical bonding concept test. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(1), 110-126.
  • Şen, Ş., & Yılmaz, A. (2013). Kimyasal bağlarla ilgili fenomenografik bir çalışma. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi (EFMED), 7(2), 144-177.
  • Taber, K. (1994). Misunderstanding the ionic bond. Education in Chemistry, 31, 100–102.
  • Taber, K. S. (1997). Student understanding of ionic bonding: Molecular versus electrostatic thinking. School Science Review, 78(285), 85-95.
  • Taber, K. S., Tsaparlis, G., & Nakiboğlu, C. (2012). Student conceptions of ionic bonding: Patterns of thinking across three European contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2843-2873.
  • Tan, D. K. C., & Treagust, D. F. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 81(294), 75-84.
  • Thompson, F., & Logue, S. (2006). An exploration of common student misconceptions in science. International Education Journal, 7(4), 553-559.
  • Tokcan, H. (2017). Determining the Turkish World Perceptions of Candidate Social Studies Teachers through Word Association Test. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(8), 1386-1395.
  • Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. International journal of science education, 10(2), 159-169.
  • Tsaparlis, G., Pappa, E., & Byers, B. (2018). Teaching and learning chemical bonding: Research-based evidence for misconceptions and conceptual difficulties experienced by students in upper secondary schools and the effect of an enriched text. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, DOI: 10.1039/c8rp00035b
  • Ültay, N. (2014). 12. sınıf öğrencilerinin atomlar arası bağlar ve moleküller arası çekim kuvvetleri hakkındaki kavram yapılarının belirlenmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(32), 1-21.
  • White, R. & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing Understanding. London and New York: The Falmer Pres.
  • Widarti, H. R., Permanasari, A., & Mulyani, S. (2017). Undergraduate students’ misconception on acid-base and argentometric titrations: A challenge to implement multiple representation-learning model with cognitive dissonance strategy. International Journal of Education, 9(2), 105-112.
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri (8. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yılmaz, A., & Morgil, F. İ. (2001). Üniversite öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının belirlenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(20), 172-178.
  • Yücel, E. O., & Özkan, M. (2015). Determination of secondary school students’ cognitive structure, and misconception in ecological concepts through word association test. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(5), 660-674.
Toplam 74 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Şenol Şen 0000-0003-3831-3953

Lütfiye Varoğlu Bu kişi benim 0000-0003-2595-5746

Ayhan Yılmaz Bu kişi benim 0000-0003-4252-5510

Yayımlanma Tarihi 25 Temmuz 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019 Sayı: 16

Kaynak Göster

APA Şen, Ş., Varoğlu, L., & Yılmaz, A. (2019). Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions with a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding. Journal of Education and Future(16), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.466415
AMA Şen Ş, Varoğlu L, Yılmaz A. Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions with a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding. JEF. Temmuz 2019;(16):65-78. doi:10.30786/jef.466415
Chicago Şen, Şenol, Lütfiye Varoğlu, ve Ayhan Yılmaz. “Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions With a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding”. Journal of Education and Future, sy. 16 (Temmuz 2019): 65-78. https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.466415.
EndNote Şen Ş, Varoğlu L, Yılmaz A (01 Temmuz 2019) Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions with a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding. Journal of Education and Future 16 65–78.
IEEE Ş. Şen, L. Varoğlu, ve A. Yılmaz, “Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions with a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding”, JEF, sy. 16, ss. 65–78, Temmuz 2019, doi: 10.30786/jef.466415.
ISNAD Şen, Şenol vd. “Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions With a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding”. Journal of Education and Future 16 (Temmuz 2019), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.466415.
JAMA Şen Ş, Varoğlu L, Yılmaz A. Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions with a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding. JEF. 2019;:65–78.
MLA Şen, Şenol vd. “Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions With a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding”. Journal of Education and Future, sy. 16, 2019, ss. 65-78, doi:10.30786/jef.466415.
Vancouver Şen Ş, Varoğlu L, Yılmaz A. Cognitive Structures and Misconceptions with a Thematic Framework: The Case of Chemical Bonding. JEF. 2019(16):65-78.
 Kapak Resmi İndir