University Students Attitudes towards Chemistry Laboratory Effects of Argumentative Discourse Accompanied by Concept Mapping

Year 2005, Volume: 25 Issue: 2, 201 - 213, 01.06.2005

Osman Nafiz Kaya Alev Doğan Ziya Kılıç

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of argumentation based on student-constructed ‘pre\' and ‘post\' laboratory concept maps on students\' attitudes towards chemistry laboratory in a university general chemistry course. Concept mapping has been used as a tool to carry out the argumentations about chemical concepts involved in general chemistry laboratory experiments between instructors and students, and among students. In the experimental group, students (N=41) performed their general chemistry laboratory experiments using individual, small and large group discussions based on students\' pre- and post- laboratory concept maps, whereas the control group students (N=43) performed their laboratory investigations using traditional approaches. A questionnaire to test the attitudes of students towards chemistry laboratory (QATCL) has been administrated to both groups as pre- and post-tests. The statistical anaTartışma, kavram haritası, kimya laboratuvarına karşı tutumArgumentation, concept maps, attitudes towards chemistry laboratory Tam Metin

Keywords

Argumentation, concept maps, attitudes towards chemistry laboratory

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Kimya Laboratuvarına Karşı Tutumları: Kavram Haritasına Dayalı Tartışmacı Söylevin Etkisi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, öğrencilerin üniversite genel kimya laboratuvarlarında hazırladıkları laboratuvar öncesi ve sonrası kavram haritalarına dayalı gerçekleştirilen tartışmaların derse karşı tutumları üzerine etkinliğini araştırmaktır. Kavram haritaları, öğrencilerin genel kimya laboratuvarı deneyleri kapsamındaki kavramlarla ilgili kendi aralarında ve araştırmacılarla tartışmalar yapmaları için bir araç olarak kullanılmıştır. Deney grubu öğrencileri (N=41) deneylerini laboratuvar öncesi ve sonrası hazırladıkları kavram haritalarına dayalı yaptıkları bireysel, küçük ve büyük grup tartışmalarıyla yürütürken, kontrol grubu öğrencileri (N=43) laboratuvar deneylerini geleneksel yaklaşımlara dayalı gerçekleştirmişlerdir. Kimya laboratuvarına karşı tutum anketi her iki grubun öğrencilerine hem ön ve hem de son test olarak uygulanmıştır.The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of argumentation based on student-constructed ‘pre\' and ‘post\' laboratory concept maps on students\' attitudes towards chemistry laboratory in a university general chemistry course. Concept mapping has been used as a tool to carry out the argumentations about chemical concepts involved in general chemistry laboratory experiments between instructors and students, and among students. In the experimental group, students (N=41) performed their general chemistry laboratory experiments using individual, small and large group discussions based on students\' pre- and post- laboratory concept maps, whereas the control group students (N=43) performed their laboratory investigations using traditional approaches. A questionnaire to test the attitudes of students towards chemistry laboratory (QATCL) has been administrated to both groups as pre- and post-tests. The statistical anaTartışma, kavram haritası, kimya laboratuvarına karşı tutumArgumentation, concept maps, attitudes towards chemistry laboratory Tam Metin

Keywords

Tartışma, kavram haritası, kimya laboratuvarına karşı tutum

References

• Chiappetta, E. L., Waxman, H. C., & Sethna, G. H. (1990). Students’ attitudes and perceptions. Science Teacher, 4, 52-55.
• Domin, D.S. (1999a). A review of laboratory instruction styles. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 543-547.
• Domin, D. S. (1999b). A content analysis of general chemistry laboratory manuals for evidence of higher-order cognitive tasks. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 109-112.
• Driver, R., Newton, P. ve Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
• Erduran, S., Simon, S., and Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. . Science Education, 88, 915-933.
• Esiobu, G.O., & Soyibo, K (1995). Effects of concept and Vee mappings under three learning modes on students’ cognitive achievement in ecology and genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 971-995.
• Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Bugallo-Rodriguez, A., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “Doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
• Kuhn, D. (1993). Science argument. Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
• Markow, P.G., & Lonning, R.A. (1998). Usefulness of concept maps in college chemistry laboratories: Students’ perceptions and effects on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 1015-1029.
• Novak. J.D. & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge Press. Lehman, J. D., Carter, C., and Kahle, J. B (1985). Concept mapping, vee mapping, and achievement: Results of a field study with black high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22 (7), 663-673.
• Okebukola, P. A. (1990). Attaining meaningful learning of concepts in genetics and ecology: an examination of the potency of the concept-mapping technique. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 5, 493-504.
• Osborne, J., Erduran, S., and Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 10, 994- 1020.
• Roth, W.M., and Roychoudhury, A. (1993). Using vee and concept maps in collaborative settings: Elementary education majors construct meaning in physical science courses. School Science and Mathematics, 93, 237-244.
• Tobin, K.; Tippins, D. J.; Gallard, A. J. In Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning, Gabel, D., Ed.; Macmillan: New York, 1994; pp 45-93.