Bilimin Doğası Bileşenlerinin Fen Bilimleri Ders Kitaplarında Temsil Edilme Durumu

Year 2020, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 196 - 229, 07.12.2020

Ümit Duruk Abuzer Akgün

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı öğretim programları reformu sonrasında kullanılmakta olan ortaokul fen bilimleri ders kitaplarının bilimin doğası bileşenlerini temsil etme düzeyinin belirlenmesidir. Bu amaçla 3 fen bilimleri ders kitabı doküman analizi yöntemiyle incelenmiştir. Analizler sırasında toplam 14 bilimin doğası bileşeni temel analiz birimi olarak kabul edilmiştir. Kitapların analizinde her bir bileşen -3 ila +3 aralığında puanlandırılmıştır. Bu puanlamada doğrudan olma, doğru olma ve eksiksiz olma özelliklerinin varlığına dikkat edilmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda, en yüksek puanın +42 olduğu analizde her bir kitaba ait birikimli puanın +6 ila +8 arasında değiştiği tespit edilmiştir. Her üç sınıf düzeyinde kitapların kanıta dayalı olma, çıkarımlara dayalı olma, bilimsel yasaların doğası ve şans eseri keşifler bileşenlerinde dolaylı mesajlar taşıdığı; teori kökenli olma, bilimsel teorilerin yapısı, sosyokültürel etkiye dayalı olma, bilim ve teknoloji farklılığı ve bilim/sözdebilim ayrımı bileşenleri yönünden ise herhangi bir aktarım yapmadığı görülmüştür. Son olarak, bileşenlerin temsilinin konu alanlarına göre farklılaştığı ve sınıf düzeyi arttıkça kitapların temsil girişimlerinin de artış gösterdiği anlaşılmıştır. Bununla birlikte, bu temsillerin hiçbiri güncel fen eğitimi reform belgelerinde ele alınan bilimin doğası ölçütlerinin karşılanmasını sağlayabilecek doğrudan temsil becerisine sahip değildir. Elde edilen bulgulardan hareketle, bazı bileşenler adına daha fazla temsil girişiminde bulunulmuş olmasına karşın, ortaokul fen bilimleri ders kitaplarının bilimin doğası bileşenlerinin doğrudan temsili konusunda yetersiz oldukları sonucuna varılmıştır. Bu yetersizliğin aşılması adına, kitapların giriş kısımlarına bileşenleri tanıtmak üzere konu içeriğinden bağımsız bölümlerin konulması, kitap yazarlarının bileşenlerin doğrudan temsilinin önemi konusunda bilgilendirilmeleri veya bu konuda öğretim almalarının sağlanması önerilebilir.

Keywords

bilimin doğası, ders kitabı analizi

References

• Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. (2009). The influence of metacognitive training on preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2161-2184.
• Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701.
• Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Myers, J. Y., Summers, R., Brunner, J., Waight, N., Wahbeh, N., ... & Belarmino, J. (2017). A longitudinal analysis of the extent and manner of representations of nature of science in US high school biology and physics textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(1), 82-120.
• Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Waters, M., & Le, A. P. (2008). Representations of nature of science in high school chemistry textbooks over the past four decades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(7), 835-855.
• Akerson, V. L., & Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A yearlong case study of a fourth‐grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1025-1049.
• Akerson, V. L., Buzzelli, C. A., & Donnelly, L. A. (2008). Early childhood teachers' views of nature of science: The influence of intellectual levels, cultural values, and explicit reflective teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 748-770.
• Ayar, M. C., Aydeniz, M., & Yalvac, B. (2015). Analyzing science activities in force and motion concepts: A design of an immersion unit. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1), 95–121.
• Aydin, S., & Tortumlu, S. (2015). The analysis of the changes in integration of nature of science into Turkish high school chemistry textbooks: is there any development?. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(4), 786-796.
• Bell, R. L., Matkins, J. J., & Gansneder, B. M. (2011). Impacts of contextual and explicit instruction on preservice elementary teachers' understandings of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(4), 414-436.
• Bell, R. L., Mulvey, B. K., & Maeng, J. L. (2016). Outcomes of nature of science instruction along a context continuum: preservice secondary science teachers’ conceptions and instructional intentions. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 493-520.
• Binns, I. C., & Bell, R. L. (2015). Representation of scientific methodology in secondary science textbooks. Science & Education, 24(7-8), 913-936.
• Brito, A., Rodríguez, M. A., & Niaz, M. (2005). A reconstruction of development of the periodic table based on history and philosophy of science and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 84-111.
• Campanile, M. F., Lederman, N. G., & Kampourakis, K. (2015). Mendelian genetics as a platform for teaching about Nature of Science and Scientific Inquiry: The value of textbooks. Science & Education, 24(1-2), 205-225.
• Chiang‐Soong, B., & Yager, R. E. (1993). The inclusion of STS material in the most frequently used secondary science textbooks in the US. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(4), 339-349.
• Chiappetta, E. L., Fillman, D. A., & Sethna, G. H. (1991). A method to quantify major themes of scientific literacy in science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 713-725.
• Chiappetta, E. L., & Fillman, D. A. (2007). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(15), 1847-1868.
• Chiappetta, E. L., Ganesh, T. G., Lee, Y. H., & Phillips, M. C. (2006). Examination of science textbook analysis research conducted on textbooks published over the past 100 years in the United States. In annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
• Chua, J. X., Tan, A. L., & Ramnarain, U. (2019). Representation of NOS aspects across chapters in Singapore Grade 9 and 10 Biology textbooks: insights for improving NOS representation. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-20.
• Demirdöğen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2016). Development and nature of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for nature of science. Research in Science Education, 46(4), 575-612.
• Deniz, H., & Adibelli, E. (2015). Exploring how second grade elementary teachers translate their nature of science views into classroom practice after a graduate level nature of science course. Research in Science Education, 45(6), 867-888.
• Donnelly, L. A., & Argyle, S. (2011). Teachers’ willingness to adopt nature of science activities following a physical science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(6), 475-490.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages.
• Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2010). Conceptual variation in the depiction of gene function in upper secondary school textbooks. Science & Education, 19(10), 963-994.
• Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). Elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Science education, 95(1), 145-167.
• Herman, B. C., & Clough, M. P. (2016). Teachers’ longitudinal NOS understanding after having completed a science teacher education program. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(1), 207-227.
• Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks. Science Education, 93(3), 422-447.
• Kampourakis, K. (2017). Nature of science representations in Greek secondary school biology textbooks. In Representations of Nature of Science in School Science Textbooks (pp. 118-134). Routledge.
• Khishfe, R., & Lederman, N. (2007). Relationship between instructional context and views of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(8), 939-961.
• Leden, L., Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Ideland, M. (2015). Teachers’ ways of talking about nature of science and its teaching. Science & Education, 24(9-10), 1141-1172.
• Li, X., Tan, Z., Shen, J., Hu, W., Chen, Y., & Wang, J. (2018). Analysis of five junior high school physics textbooks used in China for representations of nature of science. Research in Science Education, 1-12.
• Marniok, K., & Reiners, C. S. (2017). Representations of nature of science in German school chemistry textbooks. In Representations of Nature of Science in School Science Textbooks (pp. 201-214). Routledge.
• McDonald, C. V., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2017). Representations of nature of science in school science textbooks. In Representations of Nature of Science in School Science Textbooks (pp. 1-19). Routledge.
• Mulvey, B. K., & Bell, R. L. (2017). Making learning last: teachers’ long-term retention of improved nature of science conceptions and instructional rationales. International Journal of Science Education, 39(1), 62-85.
• NGSS (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
• NRC (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
• Niaz, M., Klassen, S., McMillan, B., & Metz, D. (2010). Reconstruction of the history of the photoelectric effect and its implications for general physics textbooks. Science Education, 94(5), 903-931.
• Niaz, M., & Maza, A. (2011). Nature of science in general chemistry textbooks. In Nature of science in general chemistry textbooks (pp. 1-37). Springer, Dordrecht.
• Park, W., Yang, S., & Song, J. (2020). Eliciting students’ understanding of nature of science with text-based tasks: insights from new Korean high school textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 42(3), 426-450.
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks. Cal.: Sage Publications.
• Ramnarain, U. D., & Chanetsa, T. (2016). An analysis of South African Grade 9 natural sciences textbooks for their representation of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(6), 922-933.
• Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246.
• Şardağ, M., Aydın, S., Kalender, N., Tortumlu, S., Çiftçi, M., & Perihanoğlu, Ş. (2014). Bilimin doğası’nın ortaöğretim fizik, kimya ve biyoloji yeni öğretim programlarında yansıtılması. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(174).
• Upahi, J. E., Ramnarain, U., & Ishola, I. S. (2018). The nature of science as represented in chemistry textbooks used in Nigeria. Research in Science Education, 1-19.
• Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). Revisiting the translation of nature of science understandings into instructional practice: Teachers' nature of science pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 36(3), 425-466.
• Wei, B., Li, Y., & Chen, B. (2013). Representations of nature of science in selected histories of science in the integrated science textbooks in China. School Science and Mathematics, 113(4), 170-179.
• Valverde, G. A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R. G., Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2002). According to the book: Using TIMSS to investigate the translation of policy into practice through the world of textbooks. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Vesterinen, V. M., Aksela, M., & Lavonen, J. (2013). Quantitative analysis of representations of nature of science in Nordic upper secondary school textbooks using framework of analysis based on philosophy of chemistry. Science & Education, 22(7), 1839-1855.