Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Biyoloji Öğretmenlerinin Biyolojide Açık Alan Çalışmalarına İlişkin Görüşleri

Year 2018, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, 336 - 349, 31.12.2018
https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.506448

Abstract

Bu çalışma,
biyoloji öğretmenlerinin biyoloji eğitiminde uygulanabilecek açık alan
çalışmalarına yönelik görüşlerini ortaya koymayı amaçlayan nitel bir
araştırmadır. Çalışma grubu, 30 biyoloji öğretmeninin katılımı ile
oluşturulmuştur. Veri toplama aracı olarak yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme formu
kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada elde edilen verilerin analizinde betimsel ve içerik
analizleri kullanılmıştır. Yapılan analizler sonucunda biyoloji öğretmenlerinin
açık alan çalışmaları hakkında fikir sahibi olduğu, avantajlarını ve
zorluklarını bildiği ancak bu çalışmaları ders işleyişine yeterince dâhil
etmediği, bu durumun ağırlıklı nedeninin ise müfredattaki konu yoğunluğu olduğu
belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışma sonuçlarına dayanarak, açık alan çalışmaları ile
ilgili biyoloji öğretim programlarına ve öğretmen eğitimine ilişkin öneriler
ortaya konulmuştur. 

References

  • Behrendt, M. & Franklin, T. (2014). A review of research on school field trips and their value in education. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 9, 235-245.
  • Bitgood, S. (1989). School fieldtrips: An overview. Visitor Behavior, 4, 3–6.
  • Chuang, H.F. & Cheng, Y.J. (2003). A study on attitudes toward biology and learning environment of the seventh grade students. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 171-194.
  • Erdoğan, M. (2007). Yeni geliştirilen dördüncü ve beşinci sınıf fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programının analizi: Nitel bir çalışma. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(2), 221-254.
  • Falk, J. H. & Balling, J. D. (1982). The field trip milieu: Learning and behavior as a function of contextual events. Journal of Educational Research, 76, 22–28.
  • Ferry, B. (1993). Science centers and outdoor education centers provide valuable experience for pre-service teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 4(3), 85-88.
  • Ford, P. (1986). Outdoor Education: Definition and Philosophy. ERIC Digest. Las Cruces, NM: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Number: ED267941), 1-15.
  • Katırcıoğlu, H. & Kazancı, M. (2002). Biyoloji öğretiminde bilgisayar kullanımının öğrenci tutumuna etkisi. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 1(2), 225-233.
  • Knapp, D. H. & Barrie, E. (2001). Content evaluation of an environmental science field trip. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4), 351–357.
  • Krepel, W. J. & Durral, C. R. (1981). Field trips: A guide line for planning and conducting educational experience. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
  • Lappin, E. (1984). Outdoor Education for Behavior Disordered Students, ERIC Digest. Las Cruces, NM: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Number: ED261811), 1-4.
  • Lei, S.A. (2010). Assessment practices of advanced field ecology courses. Education, 130(3), 404-415.
  • Louv, R. (2012). Doğadaki son çocuk. Tubitak: Popüler Bilim Kitapları.
  • National Research Council (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • Nundy, S. (1999). The fieldwork effect: the role and impact of fieldwork in the upper primary school, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 8(2), 190–198.
  • Orion, N. (1993). A model for the development and implementation of fieldtrips as an integral part to the science curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 93, 325–331.
  • Rennie, L.J. (2007). Learning outside of school. In S.K. Abelland N.G. Lederman (eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
  • Rudmann, C. L. (1994). A review of the use and implementation of science field trips. School Science and Mathematics, 94,138–141.
  • Smith, D. (2004). Issues and trends in higher education biology fieldwork. Journal of Biological Education, 39(1), 6-10.
  • Tatar, N. & Bağrıyanık, E. (2012). Fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretmenlerinin okul dışı eğitime yönelik görüşleri. İlköğretim Online, 11(4), 883-896.
  • Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (8. tıpkı basım). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.

Biology Teachers' Opinions on Open Field Studies in Biology

Year 2018, Volume: 12 Issue: 2, 336 - 349, 31.12.2018
https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.506448

Abstract

The
purpose of this study is to present the opinions of biology teachers on open
field studies which can be applied in biology education. In accordance with
this purpose, this study was designed by qualitative research method. The
research group of the study is composed of 30 biology teachers working in
secondary schools. In this study, the data was obtained from semi-structured
interview by researchers were devoloped. In the direction of the data obtained
from the study, it was determined that biology teachers had an idea about open
field studies, knew their advantages and difficulties; however,  they did not use these studies sufficiently
in biology lessons.  Based on the results
of this study, suggestions on biology curricula and teacher education on open
field studies are offered.

References

  • Behrendt, M. & Franklin, T. (2014). A review of research on school field trips and their value in education. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 9, 235-245.
  • Bitgood, S. (1989). School fieldtrips: An overview. Visitor Behavior, 4, 3–6.
  • Chuang, H.F. & Cheng, Y.J. (2003). A study on attitudes toward biology and learning environment of the seventh grade students. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 171-194.
  • Erdoğan, M. (2007). Yeni geliştirilen dördüncü ve beşinci sınıf fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programının analizi: Nitel bir çalışma. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(2), 221-254.
  • Falk, J. H. & Balling, J. D. (1982). The field trip milieu: Learning and behavior as a function of contextual events. Journal of Educational Research, 76, 22–28.
  • Ferry, B. (1993). Science centers and outdoor education centers provide valuable experience for pre-service teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 4(3), 85-88.
  • Ford, P. (1986). Outdoor Education: Definition and Philosophy. ERIC Digest. Las Cruces, NM: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Number: ED267941), 1-15.
  • Katırcıoğlu, H. & Kazancı, M. (2002). Biyoloji öğretiminde bilgisayar kullanımının öğrenci tutumuna etkisi. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama, 1(2), 225-233.
  • Knapp, D. H. & Barrie, E. (2001). Content evaluation of an environmental science field trip. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(4), 351–357.
  • Krepel, W. J. & Durral, C. R. (1981). Field trips: A guide line for planning and conducting educational experience. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
  • Lappin, E. (1984). Outdoor Education for Behavior Disordered Students, ERIC Digest. Las Cruces, NM: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Number: ED261811), 1-4.
  • Lei, S.A. (2010). Assessment practices of advanced field ecology courses. Education, 130(3), 404-415.
  • Louv, R. (2012). Doğadaki son çocuk. Tubitak: Popüler Bilim Kitapları.
  • National Research Council (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  • Nundy, S. (1999). The fieldwork effect: the role and impact of fieldwork in the upper primary school, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 8(2), 190–198.
  • Orion, N. (1993). A model for the development and implementation of fieldtrips as an integral part to the science curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 93, 325–331.
  • Rennie, L.J. (2007). Learning outside of school. In S.K. Abelland N.G. Lederman (eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
  • Rudmann, C. L. (1994). A review of the use and implementation of science field trips. School Science and Mathematics, 94,138–141.
  • Smith, D. (2004). Issues and trends in higher education biology fieldwork. Journal of Biological Education, 39(1), 6-10.
  • Tatar, N. & Bağrıyanık, E. (2012). Fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretmenlerinin okul dışı eğitime yönelik görüşleri. İlköğretim Online, 11(4), 883-896.
  • Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (8. tıpkı basım). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
There are 21 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Esra Çakırlar Altuntaş This is me 0000-0002-3566-8655

Salih Levent Turan 0000-0002-8006-9731

Publication Date December 31, 2018
Submission Date June 6, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 12 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Çakırlar Altuntaş, E., & Turan, S. L. (2018). Biyoloji Öğretmenlerinin Biyolojide Açık Alan Çalışmalarına İlişkin Görüşleri. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen Ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 12(2), 336-349. https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.506448