Argümantasyonla Desteklenmiş PDÖ Yaklaşımında HDR Modeli Kullanılarak Geliştirilen Senaryolarla İlgili Öğrenci Görüşleri Nelerdir?: Nöroendokrin

Year 2024, Volume: 14 Issue: 2, 366 - 385, 30.08.2024

Tuğçe Günter

https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1468160

Abstract

Bu çalışmada temel biyokimya dersi endokrin ve sinir sistemi konusunda argumantasyona dayalı probleme-dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımında varsayımsal- tümdengelimli akıl yürütme modeline göre geliştirilen senaryolar ile ilgili bir devlet üniversitesi sağlık bilimleri fakültesi birinci sınıf hemşirelik öğrencilerinin görüşlerinin alınması amaçlanmıştır (N=189). Betimsel nitelikteki bu araştırmada tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Öğrencilerin senaryolar ile ilgili görüşlerinin alınmasında eğitim yönlendiricisi tarafından kimya eğitimi alanında iki uzmanın görüşü alınarak hazırlanan ‘Yapılandırılmış Görüşme Formu’ kullanılmıştır. Formdan elde edilen veriler, NVivo programıyla içerik analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Çalışmanın sonucu, öğrencilerin çoğunluğunun tüm senaryolarla ilgili olumlu görüş frekanslarının olumsuz görüş frekanslarından yüksek olduğunu göstermiştir. Araştırmada öğrencilerin senaryolara eklenmesi gereken kısımlarla ilgili yaratıcı önerilerine değinilmiştir.

Keywords

Argumantasyon, Endokrin-Sinir Sistemi, Probleme-Dayalı Öğrenme, Varsayımsal-tümdengelimli akıl yürütme modeli, Görüşme

What are the Students’ Views Concerning the Scenarios Applied in Accordance with HDR Model in PBL Supported with Argumentation?: Neuroendocrine

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to obtain the opinions of first-year nursing students of the faculty of health sciences at a state university regarding the scenarios developed according to the hypothetical-deductive reasoning model in the problem-based learning approach supported with argumentation about the endocrine and nervous system in the basic biochemistry course (N = 189). In this descriptive research, scanning model was used. The 'Structured Interview Form', prepared by the education facilitator by taking the opinions of two experts in the field of chemistry education, was used to obtain the students' opinions about the scenarios. The data obtained from the form was subjected to content analysis with the NVivo program. The result of the study showed that the positive opinion frequencies of the majority of the students regarding all scenarios were higher than the negative opinion frequencies. Students' creative suggestions regarding the parts that should be added to the scenarios were mentioned in this research.

Keywords

Argumentation, Endocrine-Nervous System, Problem-Based Learning, Hypothetical-Deductive Reasoning Model, Interview

References

• Arı, A. A., & Katrancı, Y. (2014). The opinions of primary mathematics student-teachers on problem-based learning method. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1826-1831. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.478
• Barrow, J., Hurst, W., Edman, J., Ariesen, N., & Krampe, C. (2024). Virtual reality for biochemistry education: the cellular factory. Education and Information Technologies, 29(2), 1647-1672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11826-1
• Barrows, H. S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York, NY: Springer.
• Barrows, H. S. (1994). Practice-based learning: Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University.
• Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York, NY: Springer.
• Boye, E. S., & Agyei, D. D. (2023). Effectiveness of problembased learning strategy in improving teaching and learning of mathematics for pre-service teachers in Ghana. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ssaho.2023.100453
• Drisko, J. W.,&Maschi, T. (2016). Content analysis. Oxford University Press
• Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. doi:10.1080/03057260208560187.
• Eyceyurt Türk, G., & Kılıç, Z. (2020). The effect of argumentationsupported problem based learning on the achievements of science teacher candidates regarding the subjects of gases and acids-bases. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 9(2), 440-463
• Groves M. (2012). Understanding clinical reasoning: the next step in working out how it really works. Medical Education, 46 (5),444– 446. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04244.x
• Günter, T. (2023). What are the students’ argumentation levels and the effect of argumentation, during HDR process in PBL, on their academic achievements in biochemistry education?, Journal of Biological Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2022.21 57859
• Günter, T., & Kılınç Alpat, S. (2018). Students’ Opinions about Problem-Based Learning PBL and Scenario Applied in Teaching ‘Electrochemistry’. Karaelmas Science and Engineering Journal, 8(1), 346-358. doi: 10.7212%2Fzkufbd.v8i1.1171
• Higgs, J., & Jones, M. A. (Eds.). (1995). Clinical reasoning in the health professions. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinermann.
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (1998). Problem-based learning: Effects on the early acquisition of cognitive skill in medicine. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(2), 173–208. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0702_2
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 48–94. doi:10.180/07370000701798495
• Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Rodriguez, A. B. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “Doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792.
• Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Ju, H.J. (2016). Enhancing medical students’ argumentation during hypothetico-deductive reasoning (HDR) in Problem-based learning (PBL). The University of Georgia, PhD thesis, Athens, Georgia.
• Ju, H. (2017). Effect of Argumentation Instruction on Medical Student Experiences with Problem-Based Learning. Korean Medical Education Review, 19 (2), 101-108. https://doi.org/10.17496/ kmer.2017.19.2.101
• Ju, H., Choi, I., & Yoon, B. Y. (2017). Do medical students generate sound arguments during small group discussions in problembased learning?: an analysis of preclinical medical students’ argumentation according to a framework of hypotheticodeductive reasoning. Korean journal of medical education, 29(2), 101-109. doi: 10.3946/kjme.2017.57
• Kempainen RR, Migeon MB & Wolf FM. (2003). Understanding our mistakes: a primer on errors in clinical reasoning. Medical Teacher, 25 (2), 177-181. doi: 10.1080/0142159031000092580
• Korkmaz, N. S., & Özçelik, S. (2020). Evaluation of the opinions of the first, second and third term medical students about problem based learning sessions in Bezmialem Vakıf University. Bezmialem Science, 8(2):144-149. doi: 10.14235/bas.galenos.2019.3471
• Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review, 62(2), 155–178. doi:10.4324/9780203435854_chapter_7
• Kulak, V. & Newton, G. (2014). A guide to using case-based learning in biochemistry education. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 42 (6), 457-473. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20823
• Miles, M, B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed). Sage Publications.
• Nargundkar, S., Samaddar, S., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2014). A guided problem‐based learning (PBL) approach: Impact on critical thinking. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 12(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12030
• Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553–576. doi:10.1080/095006999290570
• Norman, G. R., Brooks, L. R., Colle, C. L., & Hatala, R. M. (1999). The benefit of diagnostic hypotheses in clinical reasoning: Experimental study of an instructional intervention for forward and backward reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 433– 448. doi:10.2307/3233841
• Nussbaum, E. M. (2011). Argumentation, dialogue theory, and probability modeling: Alternative frameworks for argumentation research in education. Educational Psychologist, 46(2), 84–106. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.558816
• Nussbaum, E., & Edwards, O. V. (2011). Critical questions and argument stratagems: A framework for enhancing and analyzing students’ reasoning practices. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(3), 443–488. doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.564567
• Orozco, J. A., & Yangco, R. T. (2016). Problem-based learning: effects on critical and creative thinking skills in biology. The Asian Journal of Biology Education, 9, 2-10. https://doi.org/10.57443/ajbe.9.0_2
• Patel, V. L., Arocha, J. F., & Zhang, J. (2005). Thinking and reasoning in medicine. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 727–750). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
• Saiful, A. M. I. N., Utaya, S., Bachri, S., Sumarmi, S., & Susilo, S. (2020). Effect of problem based learning on critical thinking skill and enviromental attitude. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(2), 743-755. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.650344
• Si, J. , Kong, H. , & Lee, S. (2019). Developing Clinical Reasoning Skills Through Argumentation With the Concept Map Method in Medical Problem-Based Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem- Based Learning, 13(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541- 5015.1776
• Solomon, P.E., Berg, R.L., Martin, W.D. & Villee, C. (1993). Biology. (3rd ed.). USA: Saunders Collage Publishers.
• Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Walton, D. (2007). Dialog theory for critical argumentation. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins
• Widiawati, L., Joyoatmojo, S., & Sudiyanto, S. (2018). Higher order thinking skills as effect of problem based learning in the 21st century learning. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 5(3), 96-105.