DETERMINATION OF STUDENT TEACHERS’ VIEWS ABOUT REACT STRATEGY

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine student teachers’ views about REACT strategy. In the study, data gathered quantitatively by the clinical interviews in the academic year of 2012-2013 at the spring term. The clinical interviews were carried out with 11 student teachers from two different classes in elementary education department. In both classes, REACT strategy was used as a teaching method by the same researcher in General Chemistry Course. In the clinical interviews, students were asked that “What are your favorite aspects of the teaching method?”, “What are the aspects that you do not like about the teaching method?”, “What stage of the teaching method do you like most?”, “What conveniences does the teaching method provide for your understanding of the topic?”, and “What do you suggest about the teaching method?”. The findings suggest that student teachers liked performing experiments at most, facilitating learning and making the topic concrete. Most of student teachers did not suggest anything for REACT strategy as a pitfall, a small number of student teachers complained about an increase in students responsibility, e.g. early class preparation and overcrowding classes. As a conclusion, it can be said that student teachers liked REACT strategy because it facilitates learning by providing science experiments. 

Keywords

• REACT strategy,student teachers,context-based approach

References

1. Acar, B. & Yaman, M. (2011). Bağlam Temelli Öğrenmenin Öğrencilerin İlgi ve Bilgi Düzeylerine Etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40, 1-10. Barker ,V. & Millar, R. (2000). Students’ Reasoning about Basic Chemical Thermodynamics and Chemical Bonding: What Changes Occur During a Context-Based Post-16 Chemistry Course? International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1171- 1200. Belt, S. T., Leisvik, M. J., Hyde, A. J. & Overton, T. L. (2005). Using a Context-Based Approach to Undergraduate Chemistry Teaching – A Case Study for Introductory Physical Chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(3), 166-179. Bennett, J., Gräsel, C., Parchmann, I. & Waddington, D. (2005). Context-based and Conventional Approaches to Teaching Chemistry: Comparing teachers’ views. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1521-1547. Bennett, J. & Lubben, F. (2006). Context-based Chemistry: The Salters approach. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 999-1015. Campbell, B., Lubben, F., & Dlamini, Z. (2000). Learning Science through Contexts: Helping Pupils Make Sense of Everyday Situations. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 239-252. CORD, (1999). Teaching Science Contextually, CORD Communications, Inc., Waco, Texas, USA. Coştu, S. (2009). Matematik Öğretiminde Bağlamsal Öğrenme ve Öğretme Yaklaşımına Göre Tasarlanan Öğrenme Ortamlarında Öğretmen Deneyimleri. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon. Crawford, M. L. (2001). Teaching Contextually: Research, Rationale, and Techniques for Improving Student Motivation and Achievement in Mathematics and Science, CCI Publishing, Waco, Texas. Demircioğlu, H. (2008). İçeriğe Dayalı Yaklaşımın Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Maddenin Halleri Konusuna Yönelik Başarıları Üzerine Etkisi, Doktora Tezi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon. Demircioğlu, H., Demircioğlu, G. & Çalik, M. (2009). Investigating the effectiveness of storylines embedded within a context-based approach: the case for the Periodic Table. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 241-249. Dlamini, B. & Lubben, F. (1996). Liked and Disliked Learning Activities: Responses of Swazi Students to Science Materials with a Technological Approach. Research in Science and Technological Education, 14(2), 221–236. Fensham, P. (2009). Real world contexts in PISA science: implications for context-based science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 884-896. Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the Nature of “Context” in Chemical Education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957-976. Ingram, S. J. (2003). The effects of contextual learning instruction on science achievement male and female tenth grade students, Ph.D., University, South of Alabama, USA. King, D. (2007). Teacher beliefs and constraints in implementing a context-based approach in chemistry. Teaching Science, 53(1), 14-18. King, D., Bellocchi, A. & Ritchie, S. M. (2008). Making Connections: Learning and Teaching Chemistry in Context, Research Science in Education, 38, 365-384. Pilling, G. M. & Waddington, D. J. (2005). Implementation of Large-Scale Science Curricula: A Study in Seven European Countries. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(4), 393-407. Pilot, A. & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006). Why do you ‘‘need to know’’? Context-based education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 953–956. Ramsden, J. (1992). If it’s Enjoyable, Is It Science? School Science Review, 73, 65–71. Saka, A. Z. (2011). Investigation of Student-Centered Teaching Applications of Physics Student Teachers. Eurasian J. Phys. Chem. Educ., Jan (Special Issue), 51-58 retrieved April 10, 2014. Schwartz-Bloom, R.D. & Halpin, M.J. (2003). Integration of pharmacology topics into high school biology and chemistry classes improves student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 922-938. Stolk, M.J., Bulte, A. M. W., de Jong, O. & Pilot, A. (2009). Towards a framework for a professional development programme: empowering teachers for context-based chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 164–175. The Physical Sciences Initiative (TPSI) (1991). Social and applied aspects; what is meant by ‘‘social and applied’’? www.psi-net.org/chemistry/s1/socialandapplied.pdf Ültay, E. (2012). Implementing REACT Strategy in a Context-Based Physics Class: Impulse and Momentum Example. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 4(1), 233-240. Ültay, N. (2012). Designing, Implementing and comparing “acids and bases” instructional tasks based on REACT strategy and 5E model. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, TURKEY. Ültay, N. & Çalık, M. (2012). A Thematic Review of Studies into the Effectiveness of Context-Based Chemistry Curricula. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 686-701. Ültay, E. & Ültay, N. (2012). Designing, implementing and evaluating a context-based instructional materials on buoyancy force. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, Special issue-1, 385-394.