Öğrencilerin Özel Görelilik Konularında Zorlanma Nedenlerinin Araştırılması

Year 2017, Volume: 46 Issue: 2, 399 - 426, 15.10.2017

Hasan Şahin Kızılcık , Pervin Ünlü Yavaş

https://doi.org/10.14812/cuefd.297883

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Özel görelilik, son yıllarda üniversite seviyesine
ek olarak lisede de öğretilmeye başlanan bir konudur. Ayrıca fen okur-yazarı
bireyler tarafından da ilgi görmektedir. Bu araştırmanın amacı lise ve üniversite
öğrencilerinin özel görelilik konusunda daha önceden belirlenmiş olan zorlanma
nedenlerine katılma derecelerini belirlemektir. Ayrıca zorlanma nedenlerine
katılımın eğitim düzeyi ve cinsiyete göre farklılık oluşturup oluşturmadığı
araştırılmıştır. Bu araştırmaya temel oluşturan önceki çalışmada, öğrenciler
ile görüşmeler yoluyla, özel görelilikte zorlanma sebepleri hakkında görüşleri
belirlenmişti. Önceki araştırmadan elde edilen görüşler derlenerek 5 dereceli
Likert bir ölçek hazırlanmıştır. Bu ölçek, özel görelilik konularını içeren
ders almış olan 446 fen bilgisi öğretmen adayına ve 245 lise öğrencisine olmak
üzere, toplam 691 kişiye uygulanmıştır. Uygulanan 23 maddelik ölçeğin verileri
analiz edildiğinde üç faktörden oluştuğu belirlenmiştir. Bunlar, konuya yönelik
algı, matematiksel nedenlerden kaynaklanan zorluklar ve öğretim yönteminden
kaynaklanan zorluklardır. Araştırmanın genel sonuçlarına göre, öğrenciler bu
konuyu zor olduğu kadar kolay olduğunu da düşünmektedir. Ölçek maddelerinin faktörlere
göre ayrıntılı incelenmesi zorluklara katılım hakkında daha ayrıntılı bilgiler
vermektedir. Her bir maddede yer alan ifadenin zor veya kolay olarak öğrenciler
tarafından nitelendirilmesi; cinsiyete, öğrenim düzeyine bağlı olabileceği
gibi, bunlardan bağımsız olarak da değişebilmektedir. Lise öğrencileri,
üniversite öğrencilerine göre, kadınlar ise erkeklere göre bazı açılardan daha
çok zorlandıklarını belirtmişlerdir.

Keywords

Özel görelilik, Likert ölçek, Anlama zorlukları

Investigating the Reasons of Difficulty Understanding of Students in Special Relativity Topics

Abstract

Special relativity has been started to be taught in
high schools in addition to universities. Moreover, it attracts the attention
of scientifically literate individuals. The purpose of this study is to
determine high school and university students’ levels of difficulty
understanding of special relativity. Furthermore, if it made a difference
according to gender or educational level was also searched. In our previous
study, which formed a basis for this research, the students’ opinions about
difficulty understanding were determined by the interviews. The opinions
obtained from the previous research were compiled and a Likert test with 5
option was prepared. This scale was applied to 691 student (446 science teacher
candidates and 245 high school students). When the data obtained from the scale
with 23 items applied was analyzed, it consisted of three factors. These
factors are the perception of the topic, mathematical difficulties and the
teaching methods difficulties. According to the general results, the students
think that this topic is easy as much as they think it is difficult. High
school students remarked that they had more difficulties than the university
students and women remarked that they had more difficulties than men from some
points of view.

Keywords

Special relativity, Likert test, Difficulty understanding

References

• Al-Khalili, J. (2003). Time travel: separating science fact from science fiction. Physics Education, 38(1), 14-19.
• Angell, C., Guttersrud, Ø., Henriksen, E. K. ve Isnes, A. (2004). Physics: Frightful, but fun pupils’ and teachers’ views of physics and physics teaching. Science Education, 88(5), 683-706.
• Arriassecq, I. ve Greca, I. M. (2007). Approaches to the Teaching of Special Relativity Theory in High School and University Textbooks of Argentina. Science & Education, 16, 65-86.
• Arriassecq, I. ve Greca, I. M. (2012). A teaching–learning sequence for the special relativity theory at high school level historically and epistemologically contextualized. Science & Education, 21, 827-851.
• Belloni, M., Christian, W. ve Dancy, M.H. (2004). Teaching Special Relativity Using Physlets. The Physics Teacher, 42, 284-290.
• Burke, J. R. ve Strode, F. J. (1991). Classroom exercises with the Terrell. American Journal of Physics, 59(10), 912-915.
• Cacioppo, R. ve Gangopadhyaya, A. (2012). Barn and pole paradox: revisited. Physics Education, 47(5), 563-567.
• Carr, D. ve Bossomaier, T. (2011). Relativity in a rock field: A study of physics learning with a computer game. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(6), 1042-1067.
• Cornier, S. ve Steinberg, R. (2010). The Twin Twin Paradox: Exploring Student Approaches to Understanding Relativistic Concepts. The Physics Teacher, 48, 598-601.
• Demir, N. ve Akarsu, B. (2014). Modern Fizik Konuları ile İlgili Kavram Testi Geliştirilmesi ve Uygulanması: Modern Fizik Kavram Testi (MKFT). Journal of European Education, 4(2), 39-51.
• Didiş Körhasan, N. ve Özcan, Ö. (2015). Examination of the variation in students' problem solving approaches due to the use of mathematical models in Doppler Effect. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (H. U. Journal of Education), 30(3), 87-101.
• Diessler, R. J. (2005). The appearance, apparent speed, and removal of optical effects for relativistically moving objects. American Journal of Physics, 73, 663-669.
• Dimitriadi, K. ve Halkia, K. (2012). Secondary students’ understanding of basic ideas of special relativity. International Journal of Science Education, 34(16), 2565-2582.
• Gim, J. (2016). Special Theory of Relativity in South Korean High School Textbooks and New Teaching Guidelines. Sciecne & Education, 25, 575-610.
• Guisasola, J., Solbes, J., Barragues, J., Morentin, M. ve Moreno, A. (2009). Students’ Understanding of the Special Theory of Relativity and Design for a Guided Visit to a Science Museum. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 2085-2104.
• Ireson, G. (1996). Relativity at A-level: A looking glass approach. Physics Education, 31(65), 356–361.
• Korkmaz, S.D., Aybek, E.C. ve Örücü, M. (2016). Special relativity theorem and Pythagoras’s magic. Physics Education, 51, 1-8.
• Kortemeyer, G., Fish, J., Hacker, J., Kienle, J., Kobylarek, A., Sigler, M., Wierenga, B., Cheu, R., Kim, E., Sherin, Z., Sidhu, S. ve Tan, P. (2013). Seeing and experiencing relativity — A new tool for teaching? The Physics Teacher, 51, 460-461.
• Kraus, U. (2008). First-person visualizations of the special and general theory of relativity. European Journal of Physics, 29, 1-13.
• MEB (2007). Ortaöğretim Fizik Dersi Öğretim Programı, <http://www.modernfizikyayinlari.com/uploads/downloads/1322910156.pdf> Erişim tarihi: 10.03.2017.
• MEB (2013). Ortaöğretim Fizik Dersi Öğretim Programı, <http://mebk12.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/31/01/972850/dosyalar/2013_07/05032334_fizik_912.pdf> Erişim tarihi: 10.03.2017.
• Ogborn, J. (2005). Introducing relativity: less may be more. Physics Education, 40(3), 213-222.
• Özcan, Ö. (2011). Fizik öğretmen adaylarının özel görelilik kuramı ile ilgili problem çözme yaklaşımları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40, 310-320.
• Penrose, R. (1959). The apparent shape of a relativistically moving sphere. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 55, 137–139.
• Pietrocola, M. ve Zylberztajn, A. (1999). The use of the Principle of Relativity in the interpretation of phenomena by undergraduate physics students. International Journal of Science Education, 21(3), 261-276.
• Savage, C.M., Searle, A. ve McCalman, L. (2007). Real Time Relativity: Exploratory learning of special relativity. American Journal of Physics, 75, 791-798.
• Scherr, R.E., Shaffer, P.S. ve Vokos, S. (2001). Student understanding of time in special relativity: Simultaneity and reference frames. American Journal of Physics, 69, S24-S35.
• Scherr, R.E., Shaffer, P.S. ve Vokos, S. (2002). The challenge of changing deeply held student beliefs about the relativity of simultaneity. American Journal of Physics, 70(12), 1238-1248.
• Seçkin Kapucu, M. (2016). An Examination of the Documentary Film “Einstein and Eddington” in terms of Nature of Science Themes, Philosophical Movements, and Concepts. International Journal of Progressive Education, 12(2), 34-46.
• Selçuk, G.S. (2011). Addressing pre-service teachers' understandings and difficulties with some core concepts in the special theory of relativity. European Journal of Physics, 32, 1–13.
• Sherin, Z.W., Cheu, R. Tan, P. ve Kortemeyer, G. (2016). Visualizing relativity: The OpenRelativity Project. American Journal of Physics, 84, 369-374.
• Sherr, R. (2007). Modeling student thinking: An example from special relativity. American Journal of Physics, 75, 272.
• Singh, P. ve Hedgeland, H. (2015). Special relativity in the school laboratory: a simple apparatus for cosmic-ray muon detection. Physics Education, 50(3), 317-323.
• Smith, G. S. (2011). Visualizing special relativity: the field of an electric dipole moving at relativistic speed. European Journal of Physics, 32, 695-710.
• Terrell, J. (1959). ‘‘The invisibility of the Lorentz contraction,’’ Phys. Rev. 116, 1041–1045.
• Turgut, U., Gurbuz, F., Salar, R. ve Toman, U. (2013). The viewpoints of physics teacher candidates towards the concepts in special theory of relativity and their evaluation designs. International Journal of Academic Research, 5(4), 481-489.
• Ünlü Yavaş, P. & Kızılcık, H. Ş. (2016). Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Difficulties in Understanding Special Relativity Topics. European Journal of Physics Education, 7(1), 1309-7202.
• Velentzas, A. ve Halkia, K. (2013). The use of thought experiments in teaching physics to upper secondary-level students: Two examples from the theory of relativity. International Journal of Science Education, 35(18), 3026-3049.
• Villani, A. ve Arruda, S.M. (1998). Special theory of relativity, conceptual change and history of science. Science & Education, 7, 85-100.
• Wegener, M., McIntyre, T. J., McGrath, D., Savage, C. M. ve Williamson, M. (2012). Developing a virtual physics World. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(special issue, 3), 504-521.
• Weisskopf, V. F. (1960). The visual appearance of rapidly moving objects, Phys. Today 13(9), 24–27.
• Yıldız, A. (2012). Prospective Teachers' Comprehension Levels of Special Relativity Theory and the Effect of Writing for Learning on Achievement. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(12), 15-28.