Teaching Science in Collaborative Groups in Online Environments

Year 2024, Volume: 59 Issue: 59, 113 - 141, 31.01.2024

Ahmet Kumaş

Abstract

The rapid development of information and communication technology has revealed new approaches in education as well as in all fields. Intense studies are carried out to ensure that online learning, which is the most common use of technology supported outside the classroom, in today's teaching practices, can be provided in the same qualifications as science teaching in face-to-face cooperative groups in classrooms. The main purpose of this study is to identify the problems encountered in the process of providing science teaching in mentoring-based collaborative groups in online learning environments and to develop solutions. Within the scope of the qualitative research method, the application-collaboration-oriented action research model was used. The research was carried out with 31 students in a high school where the researcher taught physics for 12 years. The data obtained with the help of open-ended questions, rubrics, and semi-structured interview forms were evaluated with content analysis and descriptive analysis. In online science teaching, high school students exhibit high levels of cooperation in experiments and simulations, medium in solving life-based problems, and low levels in life-based deepening research and analogy map processes. Under the guidance of action researchers, there is a need to develop new teacher guide materials suitable for cooperative teaching in online environments, taking into account students' needs and the curriculum's achievements.

Keywords

Online learning, science teaching, cooperative learning, mentoring

Çevrimiçi Ortamlarda İşbirlikli Gruplarda Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi

Abstract

Bilgi iletişim teknolojisinin hızlı gelişimi tüm alanlarda olduğu gibi eğitimde de yeni yaklaşımlar ortaya koymuştur. Günümüz öğretim uygulamalarında sınıf dışı teknoloji destekli en yaygın kullanım olan çevrimiçi öğrenmenin, sınıflardaki yüz yüze işbirlikli gruplarda fen bilimleri öğretimi ile aynı niteliklerde sağlanabilmesi için yoğun çalışmalar yürütülmektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamlarında mentorluk temelli işbirlikli gruplarda fen bilimleri öğretimi sağlanması sürecinde karşılaşılan problemler belirlenerek çözüm önerileri geliştirmektir. Nitel araştırma yöntemi kapsamında uygulama-işbirliği temelli eylem araştırması modeli kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini, araştırmacının 12 yıl fizik öğretmenliği yaptığı bir lisedeki 31 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Açık uçlu sorular, dereceli puanlama anahtarı ve yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formları yardımı ile elde edilen veriler içerik analizi ve betimsel analiz ile değerlendirilmiştir. Çevrimiçi fen öğretiminde lise öğrencileri deney ve simülasyonlarda yüksek, yaşam temelli problemlerin çözümlerinde orta ve yaşam temelli derinleştirme araştırmaları ve analoji haritası süreçlerinde düşük düzeylerde işbirliği sergilemektedirler. Eylem araştırmacıları rehberliğinde öğrencilerin ihtiyaçları ve öğretim programlarındaki kazanımlar da dikkate alınarak çevrimiçi ortamlarda işbirlikli öğretime uygun yeni öğretmen rehber materyallerinin geliştirilmesi ihtiyaç olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır.

Keywords

Çevrimiçi öğrenme, fen öğretimi, işbirlikli öğrenme, mentorluk.

Thanks

Çalışmalarım sürecinde bana destek olan meslektaşlarım ve sevgili öğrencilerime teşekkürü bir borç bilirim.

References

• Altun, S. (2015). The effect of cooperative learning on students’ achievement and views on the science and technology course. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(3), 451-468. https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/91
• Andersen, C. L., & West, R. E. (2020). Improving mentoring in higher education in undergraduate education and exploring implications for online learning. Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED), 20(64), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.6018/red.408671
• Andrade, H.G. (2001). The effects of instructional rubrics on learning to write. Current Issues in Education, 4(4), 2-22. http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1630.
• Aspers, P. & Corte, U. (2019). What is qualitative in qualitative research. Qualitative sociology, 42(2), 139-160.
• Bergin, S. D., Murphy, C., & Shuilleabhain, A. N. (2018). Exploring problem-based cooperative learning in undergraduate physics labs: student perspectives. European Journal of Physics, 39(2), 025703. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/aa9585
• Bishnoi, N. (2017). Collaborative learning: A learning tool advantages and disadvantages. Indian Journal of Health & Wellbeing, 8(8), 850-852.
• Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.
• Budi, A. S., Sumardani, D., Muliyati, D., Bakri, F., Chiu, P. S., Mutoharoh, M., & Siahaan, M. (2021). Virtual reality technology in physics learning: Possibility, trend, and tools. Jurnal Penelitian & Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika, 7(1), 23-34. https://doi.org/10.21009/1.07103
• Cai, S., Liu, C., Wang, T., Liu, E., & Liang, J. C. (2021). Effects of learning physics using Augmented Reality on students’ self‐efficacy and conceptions of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(1), 235-251. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13020
• Çelik, E., ve Karaman, S. (2021). Uzaktan Eğitimde Online Akran Değerlendirme Uygulaması. Efe Akademi Yayınları.
• Celik, S., Aytın, K., & Bayram, E. (2013). Implementing cooperative learning in the language classroom: opinions of Turkish teachers of English. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1852-1859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.263
• Cohen, A. (1994). Assessing language ability in the classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
• Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37-46.
• Crawford, M.L. (2001). Teaching contextually: Research, rationale, and techniques for improving student motivation and achievement in mathematics and science. CCI Publishing.
• De Felice, F., Petrillo, A., Iovine, G., Salzano, C., & Baffo, I. (2023). How Does the Metaverse Shape Education? A Systematic Literature Review. Applied Sciences, 13(9), 5682. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13095682
• Diri, E. & Açıkgül, K. (2021). Lise öğrencilerinin matematik öğrenmede mobil teknoloji kabul düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 11(2), 494-516. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.943357
• Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of science Education and Technology, 18, 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1
• Duran, A. M. (2023). The unforgotten pre-service teachers [participants]: Did the pandemic affect learning while on practicum? What uncompleted pre-service teachers’ mentoring experiences [data] can tell us. In Research and Teaching in a Pandemic World: The Challenges of Establishing Academic Identities During Times of Crisis (pp. 423-434). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
• Gümüş, E. & Gök, E. (2016). Eğitim fakültelerinde akademik mentorluk ve göreve yeni başlayan öğretim üyelerinin mentorluk ihtiyaçları. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, (2), 268-276. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2016.163
• Hahn, L., & Klein, P. (2022). Eye tracking in physics education research: A systematic literature review. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18(1), 013102. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.013102
• Haningsih, S., & Rohmi, P. (2022). The pattern of hybrid learning to maintain learning effectiveness at the higher education level post-COVID-19 pandemic. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 243-257. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.243
• Howell, D.C. (2002). Statistical methods for psychology (5th ed.). Duxbury.
• Ivone, F. M., Jacobs, G. M., & Renandya, W. A. (2020). Far apart, yet close together: Cooperative learning in online education. Studies in English language and education, 7(2), 271-289. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.17285
• Javaherbashsh, M. R. (2010). The impact of self-assessment on Iranian EFL learners’ writing skill. English Language Teaching, 3(2), 213-218. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n2p213
• Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2000). Cooperative learning. Minneapolis, MN, 88.
• Jovanović, A., & Milosavljević, A. (2022). VoRtex Metaverse platform for gamified collaborative learning. Electronics, 11(3), 317. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11030317
• Kalmar, E., Aarts, T., Bosman, E., Ford, C., de Kluijver, L., Beets, J., ... & van der Sanden, M. (2022). The COVID-19 paradox of online collaborative education: when you cannot physically meet, you need more social interactions. Heliyon, 8(1), 343-378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08823
• Kawuri, M., Ishafit, I., & Fayanto, S. (2019). Efforts to improve the learning activity and learning outcomes of physics students with using a problem-based learning model. IJIS Edu: Indonesian Journal of Integrated Science Education, 1(2), 105-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.29300/ijisedu.v1i2.1957
• Kim, D. (2018). A Study on the Influence of Korean Middle School Students' Relationship through Science Class Applying STAD Cooperative Learning. Journal of technology and Science Education, 8(4), 291-309. http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.407
• Knoch, U. (2009). Diagnostic assessment of writing: A comparison of two rating scales. Language Testing, 26(20), 275-304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532208101008
• Korsacılar, S., ve Çalışkan, S. (2015). Yaşam temelli öğretim ve öğrenme istasyonları yönteminin 9. sınıf fizik ders başarısı ve kalıcılığa etkileri. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.47476
• Kumas, A., & Kan, S. (2022). The comparison of distance physics education applications and practices and determining the problems. Science Education International, 33(3), 296-305. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v33.i3.5
• Kumaş, A., & Kan, S. (2023). Infographic applications in cooperative groups in physics teaching. Canadian Journal of Physics, 101(1), 30-42. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjp-2022-0135
• Kumaş, A., (2022). Measurement-evaluation applications of context-based activities in hybrid learning environments. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 9(Special Issue), 197-217. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1111886
• Kye, B., Han, N., Kim, E., Park, Y., & Jo, S. (2021). Educational applications of metaverse: possibilities and limitations. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 18(1), 32-32. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2021.18.32
• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics, 363-374.
• Lecce, A., Lucia, C., & Di Tore, S. (2023). A research-action experience with future teachers: Reflectıveness to encourage the use of technologies in an inclusive key. In UBIQ, 2022-Metawelt: Corpi, Interazioni, Educazioni. (pp. 1-8). EUR Edizioni Universitarie Romane.
• McNiff, J., Lomax, P., & Whitehead, J. (2004). You and your action research project. Education Review.
• Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-97407-000
• Ören, F. S. (2009). Öğretmen adaylarının kavram karikatürü oluşturma becerilerinin dereceli puanlama anahtarıyla değerlendirilmesi. Education Sciences, 4 (3), 994-1016.
• Ramirez, H. J. M., & Monterola, S. L. C. (2022). Co-creating scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning and its effects on students’ logical thinking in earth science. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(5), 908-921. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1702063
• Raviv, A., Cohen, S., & Aflalo, E. (2019). How should students learn in the school science laboratory? The benefits of cooperative learning. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 331-345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9618-2
• Richardson, J., Ashby, I., Alshammari, A., Cheng, Z., Johnson, B., Krausse, T., Lee, D., … Wang, H. (2019). Faculty and instructional designers on building successful collaborative relationships. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(1), 855–880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9636-4
• Saka, A. Z., & Kumaş, A. (2009). Implementation of problem based learning in cooperative learning groups: An example of movement of vertical shooting. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 1327-1336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.234
• Santos, J. C., Goulart, L. F., Giansante, L., Lin, Y. H., Sirico, A. C. A., Ng, A. H., ... & Ng, K. H. (2020). Leadership and mentoring in medical physics: The experience of a medical physics international mentoring program. Physica Medica, 76, 337-344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.07.023
• Shea, P., Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2022). Building bridges to advance the community of inquiry framework for online learning. Educational Psychologist, 57(3), 148-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2022.2089989
• Sholikh, M. N., Sulisworo, D., & Maruto, G. (2019, October). Effects of Cooperative blended learning using Google Classroom on critical thinking skills. In 6th International Conference on Community Development (ICCD 2019) (pp. 326-330). Atlantis Press.
• Tanner, K., Chatman, L. S., & Allen, D. (2003). Approaches to cell biology teaching: cooperative learning in the science classroom—beyond students working in groups. Cell Biology Education, 2(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.03-03-0010
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (10. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.