Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Lisans Öğrencilerinin Kuram (Teori) Kavramını Algılayışları

Year 2008, Volume: 25 Issue: 2, 35 - 51, 02.09.2015

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı lisans öğrencilerinin kuram kavramını nasıl algıladıklarını ortaya çıkarmak ve bu algılayışların nedenlerini sorgulamaktır. Araştırma 2004 Eylül ayında başlamış olup 2 yıl boyunca 4 farklı öğretim döneminde Karadeniz Bölgesindeki bir üniversitede yürütülmüştür. Çalışmanın örneklemini Eğitim Fakültesinde bilim dersleri alan fen bilgisi, okul öncesi ve sınıf öğretmenliği bölümü ile Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi biyoloji bölümündeki 2. ve 3. sınıf lisans öğrencileri oluşturmaktadır. Çalışma nitel ve nicel araştırma yöntemlerinin birlikte kullanılmasına dayalı olup 4 aşamadan oluşmaktadır. Nitel analiz sonuçlarına dayalı olarak, öğrencilerin kuram ile yasa kavramı arasında bir ayırıma gidemedikleri, gitseler bile bu farklılığı tam olarak kavrayamadıkları belirlenmiştir. Nicel analiz sonuçlarına göre ise cinsiyet, ailenin sosyo-ekonomik durumu, ebeveynlerin politik görüşleri ve yaşam çevreleri öğrencilerin kuram kavramını algılayışlarını etkilememektedir. Ancak öğrencilerin kişisel politik görüşleri istatistiki olarak anlamlı fark göstermektedir.

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., ve Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057–1095.
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., ve Akerson, V. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88, 785-810.
  • Akerson, V. L., ve Volrich, M. L. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first-grade internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377-394.
  • Alles, D. (2001). Using evolution as the framework for teaching biology. American Biology Teacher, 63(1), 20-24.
  • Alters, B. J., ve Nelson, C. E. (2002). Perspective: Teaching evolution in higher education. Evolution, 56(10), 1891-1901.
  • AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1989). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. Newyork: Oxford University Press.
  • AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. Newyork: Oxford University Press.
  • Apaydın, Z., ve Sürmeli, H. (2006). Üniversite öğrencilerinin evrim teorisiyle ilgili tutumları. Ö. Genç, (Ed.), Evrim, bilim ve eğitim (1. Baskı) içinde (219-247). İstanbul : Nazım Kitaplığı.
  • Apaydın, Z., Taş, E., ve Özsevgen, T. (2006, Eylül). İlköğretim 4. sınıf fen ve teknoloji programının içerik açısından değerlendirmesi. XV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi ’nde sunulan bildiri. Muğla Üniversitesi, Muğla.
  • Bağcı Kılıç, G. (2003). Üçüncü uluslararası matematik ve fen araştırması (TIMSS): Fen öğretimi, bilimsel araştırma ve bilimin doğası. 08.08.2006 tarihinde http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr/vol2say1/v02s01f.htm adresinden alınmıştır.
  • Bağcı Kılıç, G., Haymana, F., ve Bozyılmaz, B. (2006, Eylül). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji öğretim programının bilim okuryazarlığı ve bilimsel süreç becerileri açısından analizi. XV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi ’nde sunulan bildiri. Muğla Üniversitesi, Muğla.
  • Baker, D. R., ve Piburn, M. D. (1997). Constructing science in middle and secondary school classrooms. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn ve Bacon A Viacom Company.
  • Balkı, N., Çoban, A. K., ve Aktaş, M. (2003). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin bilim ve bilim insanına yönelik düşünceleri. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 11-17.
  • Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., ve Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one’s conception of the nature of science: A follow up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563-581.
  • Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., ve Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students’ understandings of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 487-509.
  • Bianchini, J. A., ve Coulborn, A. (2000). Teaching the nature of science through inquiry to prospective elementary teachers: A tale of two researchers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 177-209.
  • Brickhouse, N. W., Dagher, Z. R., Letts W. J., ve Shipman, H. L. (2000). Diversity of students’ views about evidence, theory, and the interface between science and religion in an astronomy course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 340-362.
  • Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five tranditions. London: Sage.
  • Dagher, Z. R., ve BouJaoude, S. (1997). Scientific views and religious beliefs of college students: The case of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 583-590.
  • Dagher, Z. R., Brickhouse, N., Shipman, H., ve Letts, W. (2004). How some college students represent their understanding of scientific theories. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 735-755.
  • Dagher, Z. R., ve BouJaoude, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions of the nature of evolutionary theory. Science Education, 89, 378-391.
  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., ve Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Duveen, J., Scott, L., ve Solomon, J. (1993). Pupils’ understanding of science: Description of experiments or “A passion to explain?”. School Science Review, 75(271), 19-27.
  • Ezzy, D. (2002). Qualitative analysis: Practice and innovation. London: Routledge.
  • Genç, Ö. (2006). Evrim, bilim ve eğitim. Ankara: Nazım Kitaplığı.
  • Griffiths, A. K., ve Barry, M. (1993). High school students’ views about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 93(1), 35-37.
  • Gürses, A., Doğar, Ç., ve Yalçın, M. (2005). Bilimin doğası ve yükseköğrenim öğrencilerinin bilimin doğasına dair düşünceleri. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 33(166).
  • Hanuscin, D. L., Akerson, V. L., ve Phillipson-Mower, T. (2006). Integrating nature of science instruction into a physical science content course for preservice elementary teachers: NOS views of teaching assistants. Science Education, 90, 912-935.
  • Harty, M., Samuel, J. V., ve Andersen, H. O. (1991). Understanding the nature of science and attitudes toward science and science teaching of pre-service elementary teachers in three preparation sequences. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 3(1), 13-21.
  • Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. New York: State University of New York Press.
  • Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education, 84, 51-70.
  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., ve Noh, T. (2004). Examining students’ views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314-334.
  • Khishfe, R., ve Lederman, N. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 395-418.
  • Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching of the development thinking. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
  • Lawson, A. E. (1999). A scientific approach to teaching about evolution and special creation. American Biology Teacher, 61, 266-274.
  • Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick F., Bell R. L., ve Schwartz R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
  • Macaroğlu, E., Taşar, M. F., ve Çataloğlu, E. (1998). Turkish pre-service elementary teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science. Basılmış bildiri metni. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego.
  • Macaroğlu, E., Baysal, Z. N., ve Şahin, F. (1999). İlköğretim öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşleri üzerine bir araştırma. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Özel Sayı(10), 55-62.
  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. California: Josey-Bass Publishers.
  • Meyling, H. (1997). How to change students’ conceptions of the epistemology of science. Science ve Education, 6, 397-416.
  • NRC (National Research Council). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • NRC (National Research Council). (1998). Teaching about evolution and the nature of science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Nelson, C. E., ve Skehan, J. W. (2000). Effective strategies for teaching evolution and other controversial topics. In The creation controversy and the science classroom. (pp. 19-50). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
  • Norris, S., ve Phillips, L. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 947-967.
  • Özlem, D. (2003). Bilim felsefesi ders notları. İstanbul: İnkılâp Kitabevi.
  • Ryder, J., Leach, J., ve Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate science students’ images of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 201-219.
  • Rudolph, J. L., ve Stewart, J. (1998). Evolution and the nature of science: On the historical discord and its implications for education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1069-1089.
  • Sandoval, W. A., ve Morrison, K. (2003). High school students’ ideas about theories and theory change after a biological inquiry unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 369-392.
  • Smith, C. L., ve Wenk, L. (2006). Relations among three aspects of first-year college students’ epistemologies of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(8), 747-785.
  • Smith, M. U., Siegel, H., ve McInerney, J. D. (1995). Foundational issues in evolution education. Science ve Education, 4, 23-46.
  • Smith, M. U., ve Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Science Education, 83, 493-509.
  • Solomon, J., Scott, L., ve Duveen, J. (1996). Large-scale exploration of pupils’ understanding of the nature of science. Science Education, 80, 493–508.
  • Southerland, S. A. (2000). Epistemic universalism and the shortcomings of curricular multicultural science education. Science Education, 9, 289-307.
  • Suppe, F. (1977). The structure of scientific theories (2nd ed.) Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
  • Ströker, E. (1995). Bilim kuramına giriş (2. Baskı). (D. Özlem, Çev.). Ankara: Gündoğan Yayınları.
  • Taşar, M. (2002). Bilim hakkında görüşler anketi. V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi’ nde sunulan bildiri. ODTÜ, Ankara. 10.08.2006 tarihinde www.Fedu.metu.edu.tr/ufbmek/b_kitabı/PDF/OgretmenYetistirme/Bildiri/+307d.pdf adresinden alınmıştır.
  • Taşkın, Ö. (2006). Fen bilgisi eğitiminde özel öğretim yöntemleri. Samsun, Türkiye: Deniz Kültür.
  • Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., ve Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86, 343-367.

Lisans Öğrencilerinin Kuram (Teori) Kavramını Algılayışları

Year 2008, Volume: 25 Issue: 2, 35 - 51, 02.09.2015

Abstract

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., ve Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057–1095.
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., ve Akerson, V. (2004). Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88, 785-810.
  • Akerson, V. L., ve Volrich, M. L. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first-grade internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377-394.
  • Alles, D. (2001). Using evolution as the framework for teaching biology. American Biology Teacher, 63(1), 20-24.
  • Alters, B. J., ve Nelson, C. E. (2002). Perspective: Teaching evolution in higher education. Evolution, 56(10), 1891-1901.
  • AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1989). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. Newyork: Oxford University Press.
  • AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. Newyork: Oxford University Press.
  • Apaydın, Z., ve Sürmeli, H. (2006). Üniversite öğrencilerinin evrim teorisiyle ilgili tutumları. Ö. Genç, (Ed.), Evrim, bilim ve eğitim (1. Baskı) içinde (219-247). İstanbul : Nazım Kitaplığı.
  • Apaydın, Z., Taş, E., ve Özsevgen, T. (2006, Eylül). İlköğretim 4. sınıf fen ve teknoloji programının içerik açısından değerlendirmesi. XV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi ’nde sunulan bildiri. Muğla Üniversitesi, Muğla.
  • Bağcı Kılıç, G. (2003). Üçüncü uluslararası matematik ve fen araştırması (TIMSS): Fen öğretimi, bilimsel araştırma ve bilimin doğası. 08.08.2006 tarihinde http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr/vol2say1/v02s01f.htm adresinden alınmıştır.
  • Bağcı Kılıç, G., Haymana, F., ve Bozyılmaz, B. (2006, Eylül). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji öğretim programının bilim okuryazarlığı ve bilimsel süreç becerileri açısından analizi. XV. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi ’nde sunulan bildiri. Muğla Üniversitesi, Muğla.
  • Baker, D. R., ve Piburn, M. D. (1997). Constructing science in middle and secondary school classrooms. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn ve Bacon A Viacom Company.
  • Balkı, N., Çoban, A. K., ve Aktaş, M. (2003). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin bilim ve bilim insanına yönelik düşünceleri. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 11-17.
  • Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., ve Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one’s conception of the nature of science: A follow up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563-581.
  • Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., ve Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students’ understandings of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 487-509.
  • Bianchini, J. A., ve Coulborn, A. (2000). Teaching the nature of science through inquiry to prospective elementary teachers: A tale of two researchers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 177-209.
  • Brickhouse, N. W., Dagher, Z. R., Letts W. J., ve Shipman, H. L. (2000). Diversity of students’ views about evidence, theory, and the interface between science and religion in an astronomy course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 340-362.
  • Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five tranditions. London: Sage.
  • Dagher, Z. R., ve BouJaoude, S. (1997). Scientific views and religious beliefs of college students: The case of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 583-590.
  • Dagher, Z. R., Brickhouse, N., Shipman, H., ve Letts, W. (2004). How some college students represent their understanding of scientific theories. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 735-755.
  • Dagher, Z. R., ve BouJaoude, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions of the nature of evolutionary theory. Science Education, 89, 378-391.
  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., ve Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Duveen, J., Scott, L., ve Solomon, J. (1993). Pupils’ understanding of science: Description of experiments or “A passion to explain?”. School Science Review, 75(271), 19-27.
  • Ezzy, D. (2002). Qualitative analysis: Practice and innovation. London: Routledge.
  • Genç, Ö. (2006). Evrim, bilim ve eğitim. Ankara: Nazım Kitaplığı.
  • Griffiths, A. K., ve Barry, M. (1993). High school students’ views about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 93(1), 35-37.
  • Gürses, A., Doğar, Ç., ve Yalçın, M. (2005). Bilimin doğası ve yükseköğrenim öğrencilerinin bilimin doğasına dair düşünceleri. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 33(166).
  • Hanuscin, D. L., Akerson, V. L., ve Phillipson-Mower, T. (2006). Integrating nature of science instruction into a physical science content course for preservice elementary teachers: NOS views of teaching assistants. Science Education, 90, 912-935.
  • Harty, M., Samuel, J. V., ve Andersen, H. O. (1991). Understanding the nature of science and attitudes toward science and science teaching of pre-service elementary teachers in three preparation sequences. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 3(1), 13-21.
  • Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. New York: State University of New York Press.
  • Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education, 84, 51-70.
  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., ve Noh, T. (2004). Examining students’ views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314-334.
  • Khishfe, R., ve Lederman, N. (2006). Teaching nature of science within a controversial topic integrated versus nonintegrated. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 395-418.
  • Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching of the development thinking. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
  • Lawson, A. E. (1999). A scientific approach to teaching about evolution and special creation. American Biology Teacher, 61, 266-274.
  • Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick F., Bell R. L., ve Schwartz R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
  • Macaroğlu, E., Taşar, M. F., ve Çataloğlu, E. (1998). Turkish pre-service elementary teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science. Basılmış bildiri metni. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego.
  • Macaroğlu, E., Baysal, Z. N., ve Şahin, F. (1999). İlköğretim öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşleri üzerine bir araştırma. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Özel Sayı(10), 55-62.
  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. California: Josey-Bass Publishers.
  • Meyling, H. (1997). How to change students’ conceptions of the epistemology of science. Science ve Education, 6, 397-416.
  • NRC (National Research Council). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • NRC (National Research Council). (1998). Teaching about evolution and the nature of science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Nelson, C. E., ve Skehan, J. W. (2000). Effective strategies for teaching evolution and other controversial topics. In The creation controversy and the science classroom. (pp. 19-50). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
  • Norris, S., ve Phillips, L. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 947-967.
  • Özlem, D. (2003). Bilim felsefesi ders notları. İstanbul: İnkılâp Kitabevi.
  • Ryder, J., Leach, J., ve Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate science students’ images of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 201-219.
  • Rudolph, J. L., ve Stewart, J. (1998). Evolution and the nature of science: On the historical discord and its implications for education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1069-1089.
  • Sandoval, W. A., ve Morrison, K. (2003). High school students’ ideas about theories and theory change after a biological inquiry unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 369-392.
  • Smith, C. L., ve Wenk, L. (2006). Relations among three aspects of first-year college students’ epistemologies of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(8), 747-785.
  • Smith, M. U., Siegel, H., ve McInerney, J. D. (1995). Foundational issues in evolution education. Science ve Education, 4, 23-46.
  • Smith, M. U., ve Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Science Education, 83, 493-509.
  • Solomon, J., Scott, L., ve Duveen, J. (1996). Large-scale exploration of pupils’ understanding of the nature of science. Science Education, 80, 493–508.
  • Southerland, S. A. (2000). Epistemic universalism and the shortcomings of curricular multicultural science education. Science Education, 9, 289-307.
  • Suppe, F. (1977). The structure of scientific theories (2nd ed.) Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
  • Ströker, E. (1995). Bilim kuramına giriş (2. Baskı). (D. Özlem, Çev.). Ankara: Gündoğan Yayınları.
  • Taşar, M. (2002). Bilim hakkında görüşler anketi. V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi’ nde sunulan bildiri. ODTÜ, Ankara. 10.08.2006 tarihinde www.Fedu.metu.edu.tr/ufbmek/b_kitabı/PDF/OgretmenYetistirme/Bildiri/+307d.pdf adresinden alınmıştır.
  • Taşkın, Ö. (2006). Fen bilgisi eğitiminde özel öğretim yöntemleri. Samsun, Türkiye: Deniz Kültür.
  • Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., ve Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86, 343-367.
There are 58 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Original Articles
Authors

Özgür Taşkın

Elif Omca Çobanoğlu

Zeki Apaydın This is me

Hakan Çobanoğlu

Bahar Yılmaz This is me

Birgül Şahin This is me

Publication Date September 2, 2015
Published in Issue Year 2008 Volume: 25 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Taşkın, Ö., Omca Çobanoğlu, E., Apaydın, Z., Çobanoğlu, H., et al. (2015). Lisans Öğrencilerinin Kuram (Teori) Kavramını Algılayışları. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 25(2), 35-51.