The Effect of Supported Science Education to the Science Achievement, the Permanence of Knowledge and the Attitudes toward Science of 7th Grade Students

Year 2012, Volume: 32 Issue: 3, 733 - 760, 01.09.2012

Esra Benli Yücel Kayabaşı Mustafa Sarıkaya

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate of the effect of the technology supported science education in the unit “light” on the academic achievement, the permanence of knowledge and attitudes toward science of the 7th grade students. It is an research which is pre and post-test with control group design and it was performed in the fall term of 2010-2011 academic year. The participants for this study consisted of 37 (Experimental, n=20 and Control, n=17). The data of the research was collected by the Science Academic Achievement Test (SAAT) and the Attitude toward Science Test (ATST). “Technology Supported Learning Method” (Computer, Internet, video, DVD, slide shows, posters, three-dimensional images, graphics...) was applied to the experimental group and “Traditional Teaching Method” was used for control group. The results indicated that there was a significant difference between experimental and control group. Technology Supported Learning had a positive impact on students\' attitudes toward science and increased science academic achievement.

Keywords

Technology Supported Science Education, Academic Achievement, Permanence, Attitudes toward Science

İlköğretim 7. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi "Işık" Ünitesinde Teknoloji Destekli Öğret

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, ilköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin fen ve teknoloji dersi “ışık” ünitesinde; fen akademik başarılarına, kalıcılığa ve fene karşı tutumları üzerine teknoloji destekli öğretimin (TDÖ) etkilerinin araştırılmasıdır. Araştırma, 2010 – 2011 eğitim-öğretim yılı bahar döneminde 37 öğrenci ile (Deney, n = 20 ve Kontrol, n = 17) gerçekleştirilmiştir Çalışma, öntest-sontest kontrol gruplu deneysel bir çalışma olup, Araştırmanın verileri Fen Akademik Başarı Testi (FABT) ile Fene Karşı Tutum Testi (FKTT) ile toplanmıştır.. Uygulamada ders, kontrol grubunda MEB Fen ve Teknoloji dersi öğretim programına göre sınıf içinde önerilen ve ders öğretmeninin kullandığı öğretim ile deney grubunda ise Teknoloji Destekli Öğretim (Bilgisayar, internet, video, VCD, slayt gösterileri, poster, üç boyutlu resimler, grafikler…) ile ders işlenmiştir. Deney ve kontrol grubunda yer alan öğrencilerin başarı, kalıcılık ve tutum testi puanları arasında anlamlı bir farklılık vardır. TDÖ, öğrencilerin fen başarıları, bilgilerinin kalıcılığı ve fene karşı tutumları üzerine olumlu etkide bulunmuştur.

Keywords

Teknoloji Destekli Öğretim, Fen Başarısı, Kalıcılık, Fene Karşı Tutum

References

• Alkan, C., Deryakulu, D. &Şimşek, N. (1995).Eğitim Teknolojisine Giriş. Ankara: Önder Matbaacılık.
• Aşkar, P. &Orçan, H. (1987).The Development of an Attitude Scale toward Computers. METU Journal of Human Sciences, 1(2), 19-23.
• Ateş, A., Altunay, U. &Altun, E. (2006). The Effects of Computer Assisted English Instruction on High School Preparatory Students’ Attitudes Towards Computers and English. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 2(2), 97-112.
• Bal, H., Keleş, M. ve Erbil, O.(2002). Eğitim Teknolojisi Kılavuzu, Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
• Benli, E., Dökme, İ. veSarıkaya, M. (2011).The effects of technology teaching materials on students’ image of scientists. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences Journal (Elsevier), 15 (2011) 2371–2376.
• Benli, E. veDökme, İ. (2011).The effect of the technology supported science education on achievement and attitudes of students. International Journal of Education Administration and Policy Studies, 3(12), 219-221.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007).Sosyal bilimler için very analizi el kitabı.(8. basım). Ankara: Pegem A Yayınevi.
• Collier, K. G., Paula, F.J. & Goff, R.J. (1971).Colleges of Education Learning Programmes: A proposal (Working Paper No.5). Washington, DC: Commission on Instructional Technology.
• Çağıltay, K., Çakıroğlu, J., Çağıltay, N. ve Çakıroğlu, E. (2001). Öğretimde Bilgisayar Kullanımına İlişkin Öğretmen Görüşleri. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21: 19-28.
• Demirel, Ö. (1993). Eğitim Terimleri Sözlüğü. Ankara: Usem yayınları.
• Downs, E., Clark, & Bennett, J. (1995).New directions for teacher education in the information age. In D.A. Willis, B. Robin &J.Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, 6, 247-249.
• Fisher, M. (2000). Computer skills of initial teacher education students. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(1), 109–123.
• Geban, Ö. (1995). The Effect of Microcomputer Use In Chemistry Course. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültes iDergisi, 11, 25-28.
• Gentry, C.G. (1991). Educational technology: A question of meaning. In G. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional Technology, l-10. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
• Goetsch, D.L. (1984). Impact of Technology on Curriculumand Delivery Strategies in Vocational Education. Adults and the Changing Workplace. Shulman, Carol Herrnstadt (Ed.). Adults and the Changing Workplace. American Vocational Association, Inc., 191-200.
• Jonassen, D., ve Reeves, T. (1996). Leaming with Technology: Using Computers as Cognitiye Tools. In D. l-I.Jonassen (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 693-719.
• Komis, V., Ergazakia, M, &Zogzaa, V. (2007).Comparing computer-supported dynamic modeling and “paper & pencil” concept mapping technique in students’ collaborative activity. Computers&Education, 49(4), 991-1017.
• McCannon, M., & Crews, T. B. (2000).Assessing the technology needs of elementary school teachers.Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 111-121.
• Means, B. (1994). Using Technology to Advance Educational Goals. In B. Means (Ed.). Technology and Education Reform: The Reality Behind the Promise: 1-22. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
• Middlehurst, R. (1999). New realities for leadership and governance in higher education? Tertiary Education and Management. 5, 307-329.
• Nakhlek, M. B. &Kjarcik, J. S. (1993). A Protocol Analysis of The influence of Technology on Students’ Actions, Verbal Commentary, and Thought Processes During the Performance of Acid-Base Titrations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1149–1168.
• Padrón, Y.N., & Waxman, H.C. (1996). Improving the teaching and learning of English language learners through instructional technology. International Journal of Instructional Media, 23(4), 341-354.
• Rugayah, H., Hashim, H. & Wan, N. M. (2004).Attitudes toward learning about and working with computers of students at unit. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (TOJET), 3(2).24-35.
• Simon, Y. R. (1983). Pursuit Of Happiness And Lust For Power in Technological Society. Philosophy and Technology. Free Pres, New York.
• Strudler, N. B. & Wetzel, K. (1999). Lessons From Exemplary Colleges of Education: Factors Affecting Technology Integration in Preservice Programs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 63-81.
• Tekin, H. (1996). Eğitimde Ölçme ve Değerlendirme. Yargı Kitap ve Yayın Evi, 9.baskı, Ankara.
• Tekindal, S. (2009). Okullarda Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Yöntemleri, Nobel Yayınları, 2.baskı, Ankara.
• Uluğ, F. (2000).İlköğretimde Teknoloji Eğitimi, Milli Eğitim Dergisi, Sayı 146. Ankara: MilliEğitimBasımevi.
• Williams, H. S. &Kingham, M. (2003). Infusion of technology into the curriculum. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30(3), 178-184.