BibTex RIS Cite

-

Year 2014, , 143 - 163, 01.12.2014

Pinar Seda Çetin Ebru Kaya Ömer Geban

https://doi.org/10.17522/nefefmed.47650

Abstract

– This study aimed to examine an implementation of constructivism in elementary school science lessons from the view points of pre-service teachers, in-service teachers, and students. A qualitative research method specifically case study was employed in this study. The participants were 3 in-service science teachers working in 3 different public high schools, 3 pre-service elementary school science teachers and 9 7th grade elementary school students. The data were collected through semi-structured interviews. The individually conducted interviews were lasted about 30 minutes. In order to analyze the data, first, the data gathered from the interview of participants were transcribed. Then, the categories were assigned to meaningful data segments in line with the purpose of the study. Pre-service teachers’, in-service teachers’, and students’ views about the constructivist instruction were examined in terms of five categories which are presentation of content, role of teacher, role of student, decision about objectives, and learning environment

Keywords

views about constructivism pre-service teachers in-service teachers elementary science education

References

  • Baviskar, S. N., Hartle, R. T., & Whitney, T. (2009) Essential criteria to characterize constructivist teaching: Derived from a review of the literature and applied to five constructivist-teaching method articles. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 541-550.
  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC). (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes K to 12: Pan-Canadian protocol for collaboration on school curriculum for use by curriculum developers. Toronto, ON, Canada: Author.
  • Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 613–642.
  • Fisher, D. L., Henderson, D., Fraser, B. J. (1995). Interpersonal behaviour in senior high school biology classes. Research in Science Education, 25, 125-133.
  • Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research, 1, 7-33.
  • Jenkins, E. W. (2000). Constructivism in school science education: Powerful model or the most dangerous intellectual tendency? Science & Education, 9, 599–610.
  • Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–359
  • Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative Approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
  • Munby, H., Cunningham, M., & Lock, C. (2000). School science culture: A case study of barriers to developing professional knowledge. Science Education, 84, 193–211.
  • Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guide book. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  • Ocak, G.(2012). An Evaluation of Teachers’ Success in Building Constructivist Learning Environments by Pre-service and In-service Teachers. Education and Science, 37(66). 25-40
  • Ozkal, K., Tekkaya, C. and Cakiroglu, J(2009). Investigating 8th Grade Students Perceptions of Constructivist Science Learning Environment Education and Science 34, 38-46.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage
  • QCA. (2005). Science. Changes to the curriculum from 2006 for Key Stage 4 [Electronic version]. Retrieved March 4, 2012, from http://www.eriding.net/resources/science/follow_up/subleaddevmeet/051025_mhodg_sci_ks4 _qca-05-1645-sc-ks4-changes.pdf
  • Richmond, G., & Anderson, C. (2003). The nature of tensions between educator and teacher candidate beliefs about science teaching practice. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, March.
  • Sampson, V., Enderle, P., & Grooms, J. (2013). The development and initial validation of the beliefs about reformed science teaching and learning (BARSTL) questionnaire. School Science and Mathematics, 113(1), 3-15.
  • Tenenbaum, G., Naidu, S., Jegede, O., & Austin, J. (2001). Constructivist pedagogy in conventional on-campus and distance learning practice: An exploratory investigation. Learning and Instruction 11, 87 – 111
  • Uzuntiryaki, E., Boz, Y., Kirbulut, D. and Bektas, O. (2010). Do Pre-service Chemistry Teachers Reflect their Beliefs about Constructivism to their Teaching Practice? Research in Science Education, 40, 403-424.
  • Wilson, B. G. (Ed.). (1996). Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Pub. Inc.

Öğrencilerin, Öğretmen Adaylarının ve Öğretmenlerin Yapılandırmacı Uygulamalar Hakkındaki Görüşleri

Year 2014, , 143 - 163, 01.12.2014

Pinar Seda Çetin Ebru Kaya Ömer Geban

https://doi.org/10.17522/nefefmed.47650

Abstract

Bu çalışma, ilköğretim fen dersindeki yapılandırmacılığa dayalı uygulamaları öğretmen adayları, öğretmenler ve öğrencilerin bakış açılarından incelemeyi hedeflemiştir. Bunun için nitel araştırma yöntemi ve özellikle durum çalışması kullanılmıştır. Katılımcılar 3 farklı devlet okulunda çalışan 3 öğretmen, 3 ilköğretim fen bilgisi öğretmen adayı ve her bir öğretmenin sınıfından 3’er kişi olmak üzere toplam 9 yedinci sınıf öğrencisidir. Veriler yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmelerle toplanmıştır. Her bir görüşme yaklaşık 30 dakika sürmüştür. Verileri analiz etmek için öncelikle katılımcıların görüşmeleri çözümlenmiştir. Öğretmen adayları, öğretmenler ve öğrencilerin yapılandırmacılığa dayalı uygulama hakkındaki görüşleri 5 kategori açısından incelenmiştir. Bu kategoriler içeriğin sunumu, öğretmenin rolü, öğrencinin rolü, hedeflere karar verme ve öğrenme ortamıdır. Elde edilen sonuçlar katılımcıların uygulamaları farklı şekillerde değerlendirdiğini göstermektedir.

Keywords

yapılandırmacılık hakkında görüşler öğretmen adayları öğretmenler ilköğretim fen öğretimi

References

  • Baviskar, S. N., Hartle, R. T., & Whitney, T. (2009) Essential criteria to characterize constructivist teaching: Derived from a review of the literature and applied to five constructivist-teaching method articles. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 541-550.
  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Council of Ministers of Education, Canada (CMEC). (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes K to 12: Pan-Canadian protocol for collaboration on school curriculum for use by curriculum developers. Toronto, ON, Canada: Author.
  • Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 613–642.
  • Fisher, D. L., Henderson, D., Fraser, B. J. (1995). Interpersonal behaviour in senior high school biology classes. Research in Science Education, 25, 125-133.
  • Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research, 1, 7-33.
  • Jenkins, E. W. (2000). Constructivism in school science education: Powerful model or the most dangerous intellectual tendency? Science & Education, 9, 599–610.
  • Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–359
  • Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case Study Research in Education: A Qualitative Approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
  • Munby, H., Cunningham, M., & Lock, C. (2000). School science culture: A case study of barriers to developing professional knowledge. Science Education, 84, 193–211.
  • Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guide book. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  • Ocak, G.(2012). An Evaluation of Teachers’ Success in Building Constructivist Learning Environments by Pre-service and In-service Teachers. Education and Science, 37(66). 25-40
  • Ozkal, K., Tekkaya, C. and Cakiroglu, J(2009). Investigating 8th Grade Students Perceptions of Constructivist Science Learning Environment Education and Science 34, 38-46.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage
  • QCA. (2005). Science. Changes to the curriculum from 2006 for Key Stage 4 [Electronic version]. Retrieved March 4, 2012, from http://www.eriding.net/resources/science/follow_up/subleaddevmeet/051025_mhodg_sci_ks4 _qca-05-1645-sc-ks4-changes.pdf
  • Richmond, G., & Anderson, C. (2003). The nature of tensions between educator and teacher candidate beliefs about science teaching practice. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, March.
  • Sampson, V., Enderle, P., & Grooms, J. (2013). The development and initial validation of the beliefs about reformed science teaching and learning (BARSTL) questionnaire. School Science and Mathematics, 113(1), 3-15.
  • Tenenbaum, G., Naidu, S., Jegede, O., & Austin, J. (2001). Constructivist pedagogy in conventional on-campus and distance learning practice: An exploratory investigation. Learning and Instruction 11, 87 – 111
  • Uzuntiryaki, E., Boz, Y., Kirbulut, D. and Bektas, O. (2010). Do Pre-service Chemistry Teachers Reflect their Beliefs about Constructivism to their Teaching Practice? Research in Science Education, 40, 403-424.
  • Wilson, B. G. (Ed.). (1996). Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Pub. Inc.
There are 20 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Pinar Seda Çetin This is me

Ebru Kaya This is me

Ömer Geban This is me

Publication Date December 1, 2014
Submission Date January 2, 2015
Published in Issue Year 2014

Cite

APA Çetin, P. S., Kaya, E., & Geban, Ö. (2014). Öğrencilerin, Öğretmen Adaylarının ve Öğretmenlerin Yapılandırmacı Uygulamalar Hakkındaki Görüşleri. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(2), 143-163. https://doi.org/10.17522/nefefmed.47650