BibTex RIS Cite

-

Year 2013, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 29 - 43, 31.12.2013

Eylem Bayır Fitnat Köseoğlu

Abstract

Inquiry, value of which has been emphasized by science educators for many years, has become one of the most important notions in the vision of new science curriculum in many countries, including Turkey, around the world. Inquiry refers to the activities of students in which they develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas, as well as an understanding of how scientists study the natural world. Given that teachers have the central role in success of reform efforts, it is possible to state that science teacher must have pedagogical knowledge and skills which are necessary to enact inquiry-based science teaching. However, research indicates that preservice and in-service teachers of science are not qualified enough for successful implementation of inquiry pedagogy in their future classrooms. The aim of the study is to develop an inquirybased professional development workshop for the pre-service and inservice teachers of chemistry, and to examine their understandings about inquiry-based teaching after the participation to the workshop. The sample of the study was 20 pre-service chemistry teachers. The workshop was composed of seven sections (Activities Based-on Inquiry, What is Inquiry?, Models and Strategies Supporting Inquiry, Scientific Process Skills in Inquiry, Asking Questions in Inquiry, Misconceptions About Administration of Inquiry, Experience and Opinion Sharing About Inquiry). The administration of the workshop lasted 10 weeks in 3-hour sections. In order to examine the participants’ understandings about inquiry-based teaching, interviews and written documents were utulized as qualitative data sources. The data were analyzed by using content analysis methodology. The findings of the quantitative analysis indicated that the understandings of participants about inquiry-based teaching focus on attainments of students and structure of the methodology. It seems that the professional development intervention provided for the participants understandings related to capability for enactment of inquiry-based teaching in their future classrooms

Keywords

Inquiry-Based Teaching Teacher Education Professional Development Chemistry Education Science Education

References

  • Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13: 1-12.
  • Bayır, E. (2008). Fen müfredatlarındaki yeni yönelimler ışığında öğretmen eğitimi: Sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı kimya öğretimi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, GÜ Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Budak, E. & Köseoğlu, F. (2007). Preparing prospective chemistry teachers for future in undergraduate analytical chemistry laboratory course through inquiry. ESERA Conference, Malmö-SWEDEN.
  • Carin, A.A., Bass, J.E. & Contant, T.L. (2001). Teaching science as inquiry. 9th Edition, USA: Merill Prentice Hall.
  • Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23 (6): 42-44.
  • Corcoran, T.B. (1995). Helping teachers teach well: Transforming professional development. Consortium for policy research in education, http://www.ed.gov/pubs/CPRE/t61, January 24, 2004.
  • Crawford, B.A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 35: 811-834.
  • Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the Essence of Inquiry: New Roles for Science Teachers. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 37 (9): 916-937.
  • Darling-Hammond, L., McLaughlin, L & Milbrey, W. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (8): 597-604.
  • Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. 4th Edition, Boston: McGraw-Hill.
  • Haefner, L. A. & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). Learning by doing? Prospective elementary teachers’ developing understandings of scientific inquiry and science and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (13): 1653-1674.
  • Haury, D.L. (1993). Teaching science through inquiry. ERIC CSMEE Digest, ERIC Document No: ED 359048.
  • Holloway, J.H. (2006). Connecting professional development to student learning gains. Science Educator, 15 (1): 37-43.
  • Jeanpierre, B., Oberhauser, K. & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers’ classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42 (6),: 668-690.
  • Keys, C. Hand, B., Prain, V. & Collins, S. (1999). Using the scientific writing heuistic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (10): 1065-1084.
  • Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. CA: Sage, Baverly Hills.
  • Little, J.W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15 (2): 129-151.
  • Llewellyn, D. (2002). Inquire within implementing inquiry-based science standards. USA: Corwin Press.
  • Llewellyn, D. (2005). Teaching high school science through inquiry-A case study approach, USA: Corwin Press-NSTA Press.
  • Lotter, C., Harwood, W.S. & Bonner, J.J. (2006). Overcoming a learning bottleneck: Inquiry profesional development for secondary science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17: 185-216.
  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., & Stiles, K. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  • Luft, J.A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: Impact of an inquiry based Professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (5): 517-534.
  • Matthews, M.R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York:Routledge.
  • National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science educational standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
  • O’Brien, T. (1992). Science in-service workshops that work for elementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 92: 422-426.
  • Radford, D.L. (1998). Tranferring theory into practice : A model for professional development for science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35 (1): 73-88.
  • Roth, K. J. (1992). Science education: It’s not enough to ‘do’ or ‘relate’. In Pearsall, M. K. (Ed.), Scope, sequence, and coordination of secondary school science, Volume II Relevant Research 151-164. Washington, D.C: National Science Teachers’ Association.
  • Roth, W.M. (1998). How prepared are preservice teachers to teach scientific inquiry? Levels of performance in scientific representation practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9: 25–48.
  • Shapiro, B.L. (1996).A case study of change in elementary student teacher thinking during an independent investigation in science: Learning about the ‘‘Face of science that does not yet know.’’ Science Education, 80: 535–560.
  • Sparks, D., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1989). Five models of staff development for teachers. Journal of Staff Development, 10 (4): 40–57.
  • Wellch, W. W., Klopfer, L. E., Aikenhead, G. S. & Robinson, J. T. (1981). The role of inquiry in science education: Analysis and recommedations. Science Education, 65 (1): 33-50.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. 6. Baskı, Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.
  • Windschitl, M. (2002). Inquiry project in science teacher education: What can investigate experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87: 112-143.
  • Foundations: Inquiry: Thoughts, views, and strategies for the K-5 classroom, National Science Foundation, March 21, 2006. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsf999148.htm adresinden elde edildi.
  • Teacher professional development: an international review of the literature, Eleonora Reimers-Villegas, UNESCO, June 5, 2006. http://www.uneco.org/iiep adresinden elde edildi.
  • Fundamentals of inquiry, April 10, 2006. http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/ adresinden elde edildi.
  • Teacher professional development and classroom resources across the curriculum, Teacher resources, Annenberg, December 20, 2005. http://www.learner.org adresinden elde edildi.

KiMYA ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARINDA SORGULAYICI-ARAŞTIRMA ODAKLI ÖĞRETİME İLİŞKİN ANLAYIŞ OLUŞTURMA

Year 2013, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 29 - 43, 31.12.2013

Eylem Bayır Fitnat Köseoğlu

Abstract

Bilimsel bilginin oluşumunu yansıtan sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretim (inquiry-based teaching) son yıllarda birçok fen müfredatında köşe taşı olarak gösterilmektedir. Ülkemizde 2004 yılından itibaren ilk ve orta öğretimde yürütülen müfredat reform hareketlerinde fen alanı derslerinde yapılandırıcı yaklaşım altında sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretimin ön plana çıktığı bilinmektedir. Sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretimin sınıflarda başarılı bir şekilde uygulanabilmesinde esas sorumluluğun öğretmende olduğu yadsınamaz bir gerçektir. Ancak yapılan araştırmalar fen öğretmen ve öğretmen adaylarının sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretimi derslerinde uygulayabilmeleri için yeterli deneyime sahip olmadıklarını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çalışmada, kimya öğretmeni ve öğretmen adaylarının sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretimi, sınıflarında uygulamalarını desteklemek üzere sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı kimya öğretimi çalıştayı geliştirilmesi ve bu çalıştaya katılımları sonrasında kimya öğretmen adaylarının sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretime ilişkin geliştirdikleri anlayışların incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmanın örneklemini kimya öğretmenliği programı son sınıfta öğrenim gören 20 öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Yedi bölümden (Aktivitelerle Sorgulayıcı-Araştırma, Sorgulayıcı-Araştırma Nedir?, Sorgulayıcı-Araştırmayı Destekleyen Model ve Stratejiler, Sorgulayıcı-Araştırmada Bilimsel Süreç Becerileri, Sorgulayıcı-Araştırmada Soru Sorma, Sorgulayıcı-Araştırmanın Uygulanmasına Yönelik Yanlış Anlayışlar, Sorgulayıcı-Araştırmaya İlişkin Deneyim ve Görüş Paylaşımı) oluşturulan sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı çalıştayın uygulanması haftada 3 saatlik oturumlar halinde 10 hafta süreyle yürütülmüştür. Nitel veri kaynağı olarak mülakat ve yazılı dokümanlar kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizi içerik analizi metoduyla yapılmıştır. Nitel analizlerden elde edilen bulgularda ise öğretmen adaylarının sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretim hakkındaki anlayışlarının yöntemin yapısına ve öğrencinin kazanımlarına odaklandığı görülmüştür. Öğretmen adaylarının gelecekteki sınıflarında sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı öğretimi kullanabileceklerine dair umut verici anlayışların yanı sıra yöntemin uygulanmasına yönelik niteliklerin de farkına vardıkları tespit edilmiştir.

 

Anahtar Kelimeler: Sorgulayıcı-Araştırma Odaklı Öğretim, Öğretmen Eğitimi, Mesleki Gelişim, Kimya Eğitimi, Fen Eğitimi

Keywords

Sorgulayıcı-Araştırma Odaklı Öğretim Öğretmen Eğitimi Mesleki Gelişim Kimya

References

  • Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13: 1-12.
  • Bayır, E. (2008). Fen müfredatlarındaki yeni yönelimler ışığında öğretmen eğitimi: Sorgulayıcı-araştırma odaklı kimya öğretimi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, GÜ Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Budak, E. & Köseoğlu, F. (2007). Preparing prospective chemistry teachers for future in undergraduate analytical chemistry laboratory course through inquiry. ESERA Conference, Malmö-SWEDEN.
  • Carin, A.A., Bass, J.E. & Contant, T.L. (2001). Teaching science as inquiry. 9th Edition, USA: Merill Prentice Hall.
  • Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23 (6): 42-44.
  • Corcoran, T.B. (1995). Helping teachers teach well: Transforming professional development. Consortium for policy research in education, http://www.ed.gov/pubs/CPRE/t61, January 24, 2004.
  • Crawford, B.A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 35: 811-834.
  • Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the Essence of Inquiry: New Roles for Science Teachers. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 37 (9): 916-937.
  • Darling-Hammond, L., McLaughlin, L & Milbrey, W. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (8): 597-604.
  • Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. 4th Edition, Boston: McGraw-Hill.
  • Haefner, L. A. & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). Learning by doing? Prospective elementary teachers’ developing understandings of scientific inquiry and science and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (13): 1653-1674.
  • Haury, D.L. (1993). Teaching science through inquiry. ERIC CSMEE Digest, ERIC Document No: ED 359048.
  • Holloway, J.H. (2006). Connecting professional development to student learning gains. Science Educator, 15 (1): 37-43.
  • Jeanpierre, B., Oberhauser, K. & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers’ classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42 (6),: 668-690.
  • Keys, C. Hand, B., Prain, V. & Collins, S. (1999). Using the scientific writing heuistic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (10): 1065-1084.
  • Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. CA: Sage, Baverly Hills.
  • Little, J.W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15 (2): 129-151.
  • Llewellyn, D. (2002). Inquire within implementing inquiry-based science standards. USA: Corwin Press.
  • Llewellyn, D. (2005). Teaching high school science through inquiry-A case study approach, USA: Corwin Press-NSTA Press.
  • Lotter, C., Harwood, W.S. & Bonner, J.J. (2006). Overcoming a learning bottleneck: Inquiry profesional development for secondary science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17: 185-216.
  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., & Stiles, K. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  • Luft, J.A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: Impact of an inquiry based Professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (5): 517-534.
  • Matthews, M.R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York:Routledge.
  • National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science educational standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
  • O’Brien, T. (1992). Science in-service workshops that work for elementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 92: 422-426.
  • Radford, D.L. (1998). Tranferring theory into practice : A model for professional development for science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35 (1): 73-88.
  • Roth, K. J. (1992). Science education: It’s not enough to ‘do’ or ‘relate’. In Pearsall, M. K. (Ed.), Scope, sequence, and coordination of secondary school science, Volume II Relevant Research 151-164. Washington, D.C: National Science Teachers’ Association.
  • Roth, W.M. (1998). How prepared are preservice teachers to teach scientific inquiry? Levels of performance in scientific representation practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9: 25–48.
  • Shapiro, B.L. (1996).A case study of change in elementary student teacher thinking during an independent investigation in science: Learning about the ‘‘Face of science that does not yet know.’’ Science Education, 80: 535–560.
  • Sparks, D., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1989). Five models of staff development for teachers. Journal of Staff Development, 10 (4): 40–57.
  • Wellch, W. W., Klopfer, L. E., Aikenhead, G. S. & Robinson, J. T. (1981). The role of inquiry in science education: Analysis and recommedations. Science Education, 65 (1): 33-50.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. 6. Baskı, Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.
  • Windschitl, M. (2002). Inquiry project in science teacher education: What can investigate experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87: 112-143.
  • Foundations: Inquiry: Thoughts, views, and strategies for the K-5 classroom, National Science Foundation, March 21, 2006. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsf999148.htm adresinden elde edildi.
  • Teacher professional development: an international review of the literature, Eleonora Reimers-Villegas, UNESCO, June 5, 2006. http://www.uneco.org/iiep adresinden elde edildi.
  • Fundamentals of inquiry, April 10, 2006. http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/ adresinden elde edildi.
  • Teacher professional development and classroom resources across the curriculum, Teacher resources, Annenberg, December 20, 2005. http://www.learner.org adresinden elde edildi.
There are 37 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Eylem Bayır This is me

Fitnat Köseoğlu This is me

Publication Date December 31, 2013
Published in Issue Year 2013 Volume: 1 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Bayır, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2013). KiMYA ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARINDA SORGULAYICI-ARAŞTIRMA ODAKLI ÖĞRETİME İLİŞKİN ANLAYIŞ OLUŞTURMA. Asian Journal of Instruction (E-AJI), 1(2), 29-43.
 Download Cover Image

ASIAN JOURNAL OF INSTRUCTION

Creative Commons License  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.