Fizik Öğretmen Adaylarının Özel Görelilik Kuramı ile İlgili Problem Çözme Yaklaşımları

Abstract

Bu çal ma, fizik ö retmen adaylarn, özel görelilik kuram ile ilgili problemlerin çözümüne yönelik, problemçözme yakla mlarproblemler sonucunda elde edilen veriler nitel araadaylarkm

Keywords

• Fizik

References

1. Bernstein, J., Fishbane, P.M., & Gasiorowicz, S. (2000). Modern Physics, Prentice-Hall, USA.
2. Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J. & Roning, R.R. (1995). Cognitive Physchology and Instruction (2ndEd.). Prentice Hall:New Jersey
3. Davies, S.P. (2000). Memory and planning processes in solutions to well-structured problems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A(3), 896-927.
4. Hammouri, H. A. M. (2003). An Investigation of Undergraduates’ Transformational Problem Solving Strategies: cognitive/metacognitive processes as predictors of holistic/analytic strategies. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(6).
5. Heler, P. & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics, 60, 637-644.
6. Heller, P., Keith, R. & Anderson, S. (1991).Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics 60, 627-636.
7. Heron, P. & Meltzer, D. (2005) The future of physics education research: Intellectual challenges and practical concerns. American Journal of Physics, 73, 390-394.
8. Hoellwarth, C., Moelter, M. J. & Knight, R. D. (2005). A direct comparison of conceptual learning and problem solving ability in traditional and studio style classrooms. American Journal of Physics 73, 459-462.

9. Hsu, L., Brewe, E., Foster, T. M. & Harper, K. A. (2004). Resource Letter RPS-1: Research in problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 12, 1147-1156.
10. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional Design Models for Well-Structured and Ill-Structured Problem-Solving Learning Outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45, 1, 65-94.
11. Kim E. & Pak, S. J. (2001). Students do not overcome conceptual difficulties after solving 1000 traditional problems. American Journal of Physics, 70, 759-765.
12. Leonard, W. J., Dufresne, R. J. & Mestre, J. P. (1996). Using qualitative strategies to highlight the role of conceptual knowledge in solving problems. American Journal of Physics, 64, 1495-1503.
13. Malloy, C. & Jones, M. (1998). An investigation of African American students’ mathematical problem solving, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(2), 143-164.
14. Maloney, D. P. (1994). Research on problem solving: Physics. In D. L. Gabel (eds). Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York, NY, USA: Macmillan.
15. Maxwell, J.A.(1996). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. London: Sage Publications.
16. Mazur, E. (1992). Qualitative vs. quantitative thinking: Are we teaching the right thing? Opt. Photonics News 3, 38-39.
17. Meltzer, D. (2005). Relation between students problem solving performance and representational format. American Journal of Physics, 73, 463-478.
18. Nunokawa, K. (2006). Using drawings and generating information in mathematical Problem solving processes. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(3), 33-54.
19. Özcan, Ö., (2009). Kuantum mekaniği ve görelilik öğreniminde karşılaşılan kavramsal ve matematiksel zorlukların araştırılması. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
20. Panse, S., Ramadas, J., & Kumar, A. (1994). Alternative conceptions in Galilean relativity: Frames of reference. International Journal of Science Education,16(1), 63-82.
21. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods, Sage Publication: USA
22. Pöyla, G.(1997). Nasıl Çözmeli?. (Çev. F. Halatçı). İstanbul: Sistem Yayıncılık. (Özgün kitap 1945’de yayımlanmıştır.)
23. Ramadas, J., Barve, S. & Kumar, A.(1996). Alternative conceptions in Galilean relativity: Inertial and non - inertial observers. International Journal of Science Education, 18(5), 615-630.
24. Reed, S. K. (2007). Cognition: Theory and application. USA: Thomson Wadsworth
25. Reif F. & Heller, J. I. (1982). Knowledge structure and problem solving in physics. Educ. Psychol. 17, 102-127.
26. Rosengrant, D., Heuvelen, A. V. & Etkina, E. (2006). “Case Study: Students’ Use of Multiple Representations in Problem Solving.” Paper presented at Physic Education Research Conference.
27. Scherr, R. E., Shaffer P. S., & Vokos, S. (2001). Student understanding of time in special relativity: Simultaneity and reference frames. American Journal of Physics, 69 (S1), 24-35.
28. Scherr, R., Schaffer, P. & Vokos, S., (2002). The challenge of changing deeply held student beliefs about the relativity of simultaneity. American Journal of Physics, 70, 1238-48.
29. Scherr, R. E., (2001). An investigation of student understanding of basic concepts in special relativity, PhD Thesis University of Washington
30. Sezgin Selçuk, G., (2011). Addressing pre-service teachers' understandings and difficulties with some core concepts in the special theory of relativity. European Journal of Physics, 32(1), 1-13.
31. Strauss, A. L & Corbin, J. (1990). Basic of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and tecniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
32. Stylianou, D. A. & Silver, E. A. (2004). The role of visual representations in advanced mathematical problem solving: An examination of expert- novice similarities and differences. Mahtematical Thinking and Learning, 6(4), 353-387.
33. Thacker, B., Kim, E., Trefz, K. & Lea, S. M. (1994). Comparing problem solving performance of physics students in inquiry-based and traditional introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 62, 627-633.
34. Ünlü P, İngec, S K, Budak M G ve Avcı D. E. ( 2006). Fizik 4 (Modern Fizik), Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
35. Van Heuvelen, A. (1991). Learning to think like a physicist: A review of research-based instructional strategies. American Journal of Physcics, 59, 891-897.
36. Walsh, L. N., Howard, R. G., & Bowe, B. (2007). Phenomenographic study of students’ problem solving approaches in physics. Phys. Rev. Spec.Top. Phys. Educ. Res. 3, 1-12.
37. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri, (6.Baskı), Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.