Öğretmen Adaylarının “Bilgisayar” Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi

Gülay Ekici; Ahmet Gökmen; Hakan Kurt

doi:10.17152/gefad.43887

EN TR

Öğretmen Adaylarının “Bilgisayar” Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayarla ilgili bilişsel yapılarını tespit etmektir. Nitel araştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Veriler 119 öğretmen adayının katılımıyla toplanmıştır. Verilerin toplanmasında bağımsız kelime ilişkilendirme testi ve çizme-yazma tekniği kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler içerik analizine göre değerlendirilerek kategorilere ayrılmıştır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayarla ilgili kavramsal yapılarında bağımsız kelime ilişkilendirme testinden 12 kategori belirlenirken, çizme-yazma tekniğinde ise 11 kategori belirlenmiştir. Her iki ölçme aracıyla birbirini destekler, detaylandırır ve açıklar nitelikte zengin veri elde edilmiştir. Bu kapsamda her iki ölçme aracıyla öğretmen adaylarının bilişsel yapılarının “dış teknik kısımlar ve sosyal hayattaki katkısı” kategorilerinde yoğunlaştığı tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca belirlenen kategorilerde her iki ölçme aracıyla toplanan verilerde öğretmen adaylarının bilgisayar kavramı konusunda alternatif kavramlara sahip oldukları tespit edilmiştir.
Anahtar Sözcükler: Bilgisayar, Bağımsız kelime ilişkilendirme testi, Çizme-yazma tekniği, Alternatif kavramlar, Bilişsel yapı

Keywords

Bilgisayar, Bağımsız kelime ilişkilendirme testi, Çizme-yazma tekniği, Alternatif kavramlar, Bilişsel yapı

References

Ad, V.N.K., & Demirci, N. (2012). Prospective teachers’ levels of associating environmental problems with science fields and thermodynamics laws. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kirsehir Educatioan Faculty, 13 (3), 19-46.
Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science Education, 333, 1096-1097.
Albanese, A., & Vicentini, M. (1997). Why do we believe that an atom is colorless? Reflections about the teaching of the particle model. Science & Education, 6, 251-261.
Atasoy, B. (2004). Fen öğrenimi ve öğretimi. Ankara: Asil Yayınevi.
Backett-Milburn, K., & McKie, L.(1999). A critical appraisal of the draw and write technique. Health Education Research Theory & Practice, 14 (3), 387-398.
Borthwick, A. (2011). Children’s perceptions and attitudes towards their mathematics lessons. In C. Smith, (Ed.), British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 31, 37-42.
Bahar, M. & Kılıçlı, F. (2001).Kelime ilişkilendirme testi yöntemi ile atatürk ilkeleri arasındaki bağların araştırılması. X. Ulusal Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu.
Bahar, M., Johnstone, A. H. & Hansell, M. H. (1999). Revisiting learning difficulties in biology. Journal of Biological Education, 33, 84-86.
Bahar, M. (2003). Biyoloji eğitiminde kavram yanılgıları ve kavram değişim stratejileri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 3(1), 55-64.
Bahar, M. & Özatlı, N.S. (2003). Kelime iletişim test yöntemi ile lise 1. sınıf öğrencilerinin canlıların temel bileşenleri konusundaki bilişsel yapılarının araştırılması.Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5 (1), 75- 85.

Bahar, M., Nartgun, Z., Durmus, S., & Bicak, B. (2006).Traditional and alternative assessment and evaluation of teachers’ manual. Ankara: Pegem A Publishing.
Bahar, M., Ozel, M., Prokop, P., & Usak, M. (2008). Science student teachers’ ideas of the heart. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 7 (2), 1648-3898.
Bartoszeck, A.B., Machado, D.Z., & Amann-Gainotti, M. (2008). Representations of internal body image: A study of preadolescents and adolescent students in Araucaria, Paraná, Brazil. Ciências & Cognição, 13 (2), 139-159.
Bilgin, N. (2006). Content analysis techniques and case studies in social sciences. Ankara: Siyasal Publication.
Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. (2007). Qualitative research for education (5th ed). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Cardellini, L. & Bahar, M. (2000). Monitoring the learning of chemistry through word association tests. Australian Chemistry Research Book, 19, 59- 69.
Cetin, G., Ozarslan, M., Isik, E., & Eser, H. (2013). Students’ views about health concept by drawing and writing technique. Energy Education Science and Technology, Part B, 5 (1), 597-606.
Cinici, A. (2013). From caterpillar to butterfly: A window for looking into students’ ideas about life cycle and life forms of insects. Journal of Biological Education, DOI:10.1080/00219266.2013.773361.
Chi, M. T., Slotta, J. D., & Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43.
Christensen, P., & James, A. (2000). Research with Children. London: Falmer Press.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1997). Research methods in education. London: Routledge.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Coyne, I. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling: Merging or clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(3), 623-630.
Çiftçi, S. (2009). Kelime Çağrışımlarının Cinsiyet Değişkenine Göre Gösterdiği Temel Nitelikler Üzerine Bir Deneme. Turkish Studies, 4(3), 633-654.
CUSE (Committee on Undergraduate Science Education) (1997). Misconceptions as barriers to understanding science. Science Teaching Reconsidered: A Handbook. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
Dagher, Z. R. (1994). Does the use of analogies contribute to conceptual change? Science Education, 78(6), 601-614.
Daskolia, M., Flogaitis, E., & Papageorgiou, E. (2006). Kindergarten teachers' conceptual framework on the ozone layer depletion. Exploring the associative meanings of a global environmental issue. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 168-178.
Daymon, C., & Holloway, I. (2003). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications. London: Rout ledge.
diSessa, A., & Sherin, B. L. (1998). What change in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 2(10), 1155-1198.
Doran, R. L. (1972). Misconception of selected science concepts held by elementary school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 9 (2), 127-137.
Dove, J. E., Everett, L. A., & Preece, P. F. W. (1999). Exploring a hydrological concept though children’s drawings. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 485-497.
Driver, R. (1989). Students’ conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481-490.
Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: a review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84.
Duit, R., Roth, W.-M., Komarek, M., & Wilbers, T. (1998). Conceptual change cum discourse analysis to understand cognition in a unit on chaotic systems: Towards an integrative perspective on learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 20 (9), 1059-1073.
Ekiz, D. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Ercan, F., Tasdere, A., & Ercan, N. (2010). Observation of cognitive structure and conceptual changes through word associations tests. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(2), 138-154.
Erdemir, E. (2009).The meanings attributed to computer concept of the fifth grade students: Study of a concept map. Unpublished Master thesis, Gaziosmanpaşa University, Tokat.
Erdoğan, T., & Gök, B. (2008). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının teknoloji kavramına ilişkin algılarının metafor çözümlenmesi yoluyla incelenmesi. 8th International Educational Technology Conference, Turkey, s.1071-1077
Esgi, N., & Cevik, V. (2010). Images of the internet concept general by primary school students through their paintings. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(3), 221-232.
Franco, C., Lins, H., Colinvaux, D., Krapas, S., Queiroz, G., & Alves, F. (1999). From scientist’s and inventors’ minds to some scientific and technological products: Relationships among theories, models, mental models and conceptions. International Journal Science Education, 21(3), 277-281.
Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C., & Rutherford, M. (1998a). Models in explanations, part 1, Horses for courses? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 83-97.
Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C., & Rutherford, M. (1998b). Models in explanations, part 2, Whose voice? Whose ears? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 187-203.
Gilbert, J. K., & Boulter, C. J. (2000) Learning science through models and modeling. In K Tobin and B Frazer (Eds). The international handbook of science education (pp. 53-66). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Given, L.M. (Ed.) (2008). The sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, Vol.2, pp.697‐698.
Gök, B., & Erdoğan, T. (2010). Investigation of pre-service teachers’ perceptions about concept of technology though metaphor analysis. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9 (2), 145-160.
Guichard, J. (1995). Designing tools to develop the conception of learners. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 243-253.
Guneyli, A., & Ozkul, A. (2013).Turkish language and history candidate teachers’ use of metaphors in their perception of computer. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 53/A, 185-204.
Gussarsky, E., & Gorodetsky, M. (1990). On the concept “Chemical equilibrium: the associative framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27 (3), 197-204.
Hill, C.E., Thompson, B. J. & Williams, E. N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. The Counseling Psychologist, 25, 517-572.
Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K.J. (2006). Word Associations as a Tool for Assessing Conceptual Change in Science Education. Learning and Instruction, 16, 416-432.
Hruschka, D. J., Schwartz, D., St.John, D.C., Picone-Decaro, E., Jenkins, R.A., & Carey, J.W. (2004). Reliability in coding open-ended data: Lessons learned from HIV behavioral research. Field Methods, 16 (3), 307-331.
Isikli, M., Tasdere, A., & Goz, N.L. (2011). Investigation teacher candidates’ cognitive structure about principles of Ataturk through word association test. Usak University Journal of Social Science, 4 (1), 50-72.
Kaya, H. E. (2013). İnternet temelli öğrenimde metaforlar ve modeller. Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 170-193.
Kaya, S., & Durmuş, A. (2009). Öğretmen adaylarının internet ve bilgisayar hakkındaki metaforlarının incelenmesi. 3th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium 07-09 October 2009, Trabzon, Turkey.
Knippels, M. C. P. J., Waarlo A. J., & Boersma, K.T. (2005). Design criteria for learning and teaching genetics. Journal of Biological Education, 39(3), 108-112.
Knight, S.L., Nolan, J., Lloyd, G., Arbaugh, F., Edmondson, J., & Whitney, A. (2013). Quality teacher education research: How do we know it when we see it? Journal of Teacher Education, 64(2), 114-116.
Knippels, M. C. P. J., Waarlo A. J., & Boersma, K.T. (2005). Design criteria for learning and teaching genetics. Journal of Biological Education, 39(3), 108-112.
Kose, S. (2008). Diagnosing student misconceptions: Using drawings as a research method. World Applied Sciences Journal, 3 (2), 283-293.
Koseoglu, F., & Bayir, E. (2011). Examining cognitive structures of chemistry teacher candidates about gravimetric analysis through word association test method. Trakya University Educational Faculty Journal, 1(1), 107-125.
Kostova, Z., & Radoynovska, B. (2008). Word association test for studying conceptual structures of teachers and students. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy, 2 (2), 209-231.
Kostova, Z., & Radoynovska, B. (2010). Motivating students’ learning using word association test and concept maps. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy, 4 (1), 62-98.
Krawczyk, T. D. (2007). Using problem-based learning and hands on activities to teach meiosis and heredity in a high school biology classroom. Master of science, Michigan State University, Umi number: 1448491.
Kurt, H. (2013). Biology student teachers’ cognitive structure about “Living thing". Educational Research and Reviews, 8 (12), 871-880.
Kuş, E. (2003). Nicel-nitel araştırma teknikleri. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Leblebici, D.N., & Kılıç, M. (2004). İçerik analizi. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Lichtman, M. (2010).Qualitative research in education. Los Angeles:Sage Publications, Inc.
Liew, C.W., & Treagust, D.F. (1998). The effectiveness of predict-observe-explain tasks in diagnosing students’ understanding of science and in ıdentifying their levels of achievement. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of The American. Educational Research Association, San Diego.
McMillan, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer. New York: Longman.
Mike, M., & Treagust, D.F. (1998). A Pencil and paper instrument to diagnose students’ conceptions of breathing, gas exchange and respiration. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 44 (2), 55-60.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Nyachwayaa, J. M., Mohameda, A-R., Roehriga, G. H. Woodb, N. B., Kernc, A. L., & Schneiderd, J.L. (2011). The development of an open-ended drawing tool: An alternative diagnostic tool for assessing students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(2), 121-132.
Nakiboğlu, C. (2008).Using word associations for assessing nonmajor science students’ knowledge structure before and after general chemistry ınstructions: The case of atomic structure. Chemical Educational Research Practice, 9, 309-322.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1993). Learning how to learn. New York:Cambridge University Press.
Odom, A. L., & Barrow, L. H. (1995). Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students’ understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 45-61.
Ozden, M. (2009). Primary student teachers’ ideas of atoms and molecules: Using drawings. Education, 129(4), 635-642.
Özatlı, N. S. & Bahar, M. (2010).Öğrencilerin boşaltım sistemi konusundaki bilişsel yapılarının yeni teknikler ile ortaya konulması. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Dergisi, 10 (2), 9-26.
Quinn, F., Pegg, J., & Panizzon, D. (2009). First-year biology students' understandings of meiosis: An investigation using a structural theoretical framework. International Journal of Science Education, 31 (10), 1279-1305.
Patrick, P. G., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2010). Science Teachers’ drawings of what is inside the human body. Journal of Biological Education, 44 (2), 81-87.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. USA: Sage.
Pines, A., & West, L. (1986). Conceptual understanding and science learning: An interpretation of research within sources-of knowledge framework. Science Education, 70 (5), 583-604.
Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception. toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.
Pridmore, P., & Bendelow, G. (1995). Images of health: Exploring beliefs of children using the ‘draw-and-write’ technique. Health Education Journal, 54 (4), 473-88.
Pluhar, Z. F., Piko, B. F., Kovacs, S., & Uzzoli, A. (2009). Air pollution is bad for my health: hungarian children’s knowledge of the role of environment in health and disease. Health & Place, 15, 239-246.
Prokop, P., Fancόvicόva, J., & Tunnicliffe, S.D. (2009). The effect of type of instruction on expression of children’s knowledge: How do children see the endocrine and urinary system? International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4 (1), 75-93.
Prokop, P., Prokop, M., & Tunnicliffe, S.D. (2007). Effects of keeping animals as pets on children’s concepts of vertebrates and invertebrates. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (4), 431-449.
Punch, K.F. (2005). Introduction to social research–quantitative & qualitative approaches. London: Sage.
Ratcliff, D. (1995). Validity and reliability in qualitative research. http://qualitativeresearch.ratcliffs.net/Validity.pdf adresinden 07.01.2013 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
Reiss, M. J., & Tunnicliffe, S.D. (2001). Students’ understandings of human organs and organ systems. Research in Science Education, 31, 383-399.
Reiss, M. J., Tunnicliffe, S. D., Andersen, A. M., Bartoszeck, A., Carvalho, G. S., Chen, S.-Y., Jarman, R., et al. (2002). An international study of young peoples’ drawings of what is inside themselves. Journal of Biological Education, 36 (2), 58-64.
Roberts, P., & Priest, H. (2006). Reliability and validity in research. Nursing Standard, 20, 41-45.
Sato, M., & James, P. (1999). "Nature" and "Environment" as perceived by university students and their supervisors. International Journal of Environmental Education and Information, 18 (2), 165-172.
Senyuva, E., & Kaya, H. (2013). Metaphors for the internet used by nursing students in Turkey: A qualitative research. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 50, 87-106.
Shavelson, R. J. (1974). Methods for examining representations of a subject-matter structure in a student’s memory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11, 231-249.
She, H-C. (2004). Facilitating changes in ninth grade students’ understanding of dissolution and diffusion through DSLM instruction. Research in Science Education, 34, 503-525.
Shepardson, D. P., Wee, B., Priddy, M., & Harbor, J. (2007). Students’ mental models of the environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 (2), 327-348.
Siegler, R. J. (1995). How does change occur: A micro genetic study on number conservation? Cognitive Psychology, 28, 225-273.
Skelly, K.M., & Hall, D. (1993). The development and validation of a categorization of sources of misconceptions in chemistry. Paper presented at the Third International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in science and Mathematics, Ithaca.
Smith, M. (1991).Teaching cell division: Student difficulties and teaching recommendations. Journal of College Science Teaching, 21, 28-33.
Smith, E.L., Blakeslee, T.D., & Anderson, C.W. (1993). Teaching strategies associated with conceptual change learning in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(2), 111-126.
Stafstrom, C, E., Rostasy, K., & Minster, A. (2002). The usefulness of children's drawings in the diagnosis of headache. Pediatrics, 109 (3), 460-472.
Stavridou, H., & Solomonidou, C. (1998). Conceptual reorganization and construction of the chemical reaction concept during secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 205-221.
Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical assessment. Research & Evaluation, 7(17), 1-8.
Strommen, E. (1995). Lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Children’s conceptions of forests and their inhabitants. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 683-698.
Sünkür, M. Ö., İlhan, M & Sünkür, M. (2013). Sınıf öğretmenliği öğrencilerinin ısı ve sıcaklık konularındaki kavram yanılgılarının giderilmesine tahmin et-gözle-açıkla (TGA) yönteminin etkisi. International Journal of Social Science, 6 (4), 519-534.
Şahin, Ş., & Baturay, M.H. (2013). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin internet kavramına ilişkin algılarının değerlendirilmesi: Bir metafor analizi çalışması. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 21(1), 177-192.
Şimşek, M. (2013). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının coğrafi bilgi sistemleri (CBS) konusundaki bilişsel yapılarının ve alternatif kavramlarının kelime ilişkilendirmesi testi ile belirlenmesi. 4. Ulusal İlköğretim Bölümleri Öğrenci Kongresi, 8-9 Kasım 2013 Nevşehir Üniversitesi, Nevşehir.
Tavşancıl, E., & Aslan, E. (2001). Sözel, yazılı ve diğer materyaller için içerik analizi ve uygulama örnekleri. İstanbul: Epsilon Yayınları.
Tekkaya, C. (2003). Remediating high school students' misconceptions concerning diffusion and osmosis through concept mapping and conceptual change text. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21(1), 5-16.
Timur, B., & Taşar, M.F. (2011).Developing pre-service science teachers’ cognitive structures about technology: Word association test (WAT). Western Anatolia Journal of Educational Sciences, 2011, 131-138.
Torkar, G., & Bajd, B. (2006).Trainee teachers’ ideas about endangered birds. Journal of Biological Education, 41(1), 5-8.
Tsai, C.-C. (1999). Overcoming junior high school students’ misconceptions about microscopic views of phase change: A study of an analogy activity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8 (1), 83-91.
Tsai, C. C., & Huang, C. M. (2002). Exploring students’ cognitive structures in learning science: A review of relevant methods. Journal of Biological Education, 36, 163-169.
Tyson, L. M., Venville, G. J., Harrison, G., & Treagust, D. F. (1997). A multidimensional framework for interpreting conceptual change events in the classroom. Science Education, 81, 387-404.
Verma, G.K., & Mallick, K. (1999). Researching education: Perspectives and techniques. London: Falmer Press.
Vosniadou, S. (1996). Towards a revised cognitive psychology for new advances in learning and instruction. Learning and Instruction, 6, 95-109.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of the conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535-585.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. (1994a). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18, 123-183.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. (1994b). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.
Vural, L. Yüksel, İ., & Çoklar, A. N. (2008). Bilgisayar mühendisliği ile bilgisayar ve öğretim teknolojileri eğitimi son sınıf öğrencilerinin bilgisayar kavramına ilişkin geliştirdikleri mecazlar. 8th International Educational Technology Conference (IETC 2008).http://ietc2008.home.anadolu.edu.tr/ietc2008/114.doc adresinden 18.07.2009 tarihinde ulaşılmıştır.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1995). Obras escogidas. Madrid, Spain: Visor.
Wandersee J. H., Mintzes J. J., & Novak J.D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In: Gabel DL (Eds.). Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 177-210). Simon & Schuster and Prentice Hall International, New York.
Wagner, W., Valencia, J., & Elejabarrieta, F. (1996). Relevance, discourse and the hot stable core of social representation-A structural analysis of word association. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 331-351.
Weber, P.W. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd Edition).California: Sage Publications.
White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (2000). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.
Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S.G. (2005). Research methods in education: An introduction. Boston: Ally and Bacon.
Wimmer, R.D., & Dominick, J.R. (2000). Mass media research: An introduction. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Yayla, R. G., & Eyceyurt, G. (2011). Mental models of pre-service science teachers about basic concepts in chemistry. Western Anatolia Journal of Educational Sciences, 2011, 285-294.
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011).Soysal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Yorek, N., Sahin, M., & Ugulu, I. (2010). Students’ representations of the cell concept from 6 to 11 grades: Persistence of the “Fried-Egg Model”. International Journal of Physical Sciences, 5 (1), 15-24.
Zoldosova, K., & Prokop, P. (2007). Primary pupils” preconceptions about child prenatal development. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(3), 239-246.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

-

Authors

Gülay Ekici

Ahmet Gökmen

Hakan Kurt

Publication Date

March 5, 2015

Submission Date

March 5, 2015

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2014 Volume: 34 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.43887

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA72PX94EZ

APA

Ekici, G., Gökmen, A., & Kurt, H. (2015). Öğretmen Adaylarının “Bilgisayar” Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(3), 357-401. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.43887

AMA

1.Ekici G, Gökmen A, Kurt H. Öğretmen Adaylarının “Bilgisayar” Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi. GUJGEF. 2015;34(3):357-401. doi:10.17152/gefad.43887

Chicago

Ekici, Gülay, Ahmet Gökmen, and Hakan Kurt. 2015. “Öğretmen Adaylarının ‘Bilgisayar’ Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi”. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 34 (3): 357-401. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.43887.

EndNote

Ekici G, Gökmen A, Kurt H (April 1, 2015) Öğretmen Adaylarının “Bilgisayar” Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 34 3 357–401.

IEEE

[1]G. Ekici, A. Gökmen, and H. Kurt, “Öğretmen Adaylarının ‘Bilgisayar’ Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi”, GUJGEF, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 357–401, Apr. 2015, doi: 10.17152/gefad.43887.

ISNAD

Ekici, Gülay - Gökmen, Ahmet - Kurt, Hakan. “Öğretmen Adaylarının ‘Bilgisayar’ Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi”. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 34/3 (April 1, 2015): 357-401. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.43887.

JAMA

1.Ekici G, Gökmen A, Kurt H. Öğretmen Adaylarının “Bilgisayar” Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi. GUJGEF. 2015;34:357–401.

MLA

Ekici, Gülay, et al. “Öğretmen Adaylarının ‘Bilgisayar’ Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi”. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 34, no. 3, Apr. 2015, pp. 357-01, doi:10.17152/gefad.43887.

Vancouver

1.Gülay Ekici, Ahmet Gökmen, Hakan Kurt. Öğretmen Adaylarının “Bilgisayar” Kavramı Konusundaki Bilişsel Yapılarının Belirlenmesi. GUJGEF. 2015 Apr. 1;34(3):357-401. doi:10.17152/gefad.43887