BibTex RIS Cite

-

Year 2013, Volume: 44 Issue: 44, 308 - 318, 01.06.2013

Şafak Uluçinar Sağır Ziya Kılıç

Abstract

Researches showes that primary school students have insufficient understanding of the nature of science. Recent studies emphasise the importance of scientific argumentation. The aim of this research is to investigate the effect of argumentation on the levels of understanding of nature of science of primary school students in science lessons. Quasi experimental design was applied in this research which was studied with eighth grade students in primary school. Nature of science survey and pre-knowledge test were used for data gathering in this research which has been planned for two years. Data were analyzed with SPSS 12,0. Meaningful differences were found between argumentation based learning class and traditional learning class with respect to understanding levels of the nature of science (first practice F=8,032; p=0,007; second practice F=10,422; p=0,003). Scientific argumentation method is suggested as a usable method to teach the nature of science.

Keywords

nature of science scientific argumentation science education

References

  • Abd-El-Khalıck, F. & Lederman, N.G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal Of Science Education, 22, 7, 665–701.
  • Aikenhead, G & Ryan, A.G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on Science-Technology-Society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477-491.
  • Akerson, V. & Donnelly, L.A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K-2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal Of Science Education, 32, 1, 97–124.
  • Balkı, N., Çoban, A. K. ve Aktaş, M. (2003). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin bilim ve bilim insanına yönelik düşünceleri. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 1, 11–17.
  • Bülbül, K. ve Küçük, M. (2007). İlköğretim birinci kademe öğrencilerinin bilimsel bilgiye bakış açılarının incelenmesi. 1. Ulusal İlköğretim Kongresi, 15–17 Kasım 2007, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design. California: Sage Publication.
  • Çelikdemir, M. (2006). Examining middle school students’ understandıng of the nature of science. Unpublished master’s thesis. Middle East Technical University The Graduate School Of Natural And Applied Sciences: Ankara.
  • Drıver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 3, 287–312.
  • Eıchınger D.C., Anderson C.W., Palıncsar A.S. & Davıd Y.M. (1991). An illustration of the roles of content knowledge, scientific argument and social norm in collaborative problem solving. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting Of Area, Chicago. Gılbert, J.K., Boulter, C.J. & Elmer. R. (2000). Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education, (3-17). In J. K. Gilbert, and C.J. Boulter, (Eds). Developing models in science education. Netherlands: Kluweracademic Publisher.
  • Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: toward a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies In Science Education, 22, 85-142.
  • Irwın, A,R. (2000). Historical case studies: teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84, 5-26.
  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C. & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students’ views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314–334.
  • Kaptan, F. ve Korkmaz, H. (1999). İlköğretimde fen bilgisi öğretimi. MEB, İlköğretimde etkili öğretme ve öğrenme öğretmen el kitabı, Modül 7, Ankara.
  • Kaya, O.N. (2005). Tartışma teorisine dayalı öğretim yaklaşımının öğrencilerin maddenin tanecikli yapısı konusundaki başarılarına ve bilimin doğası hakkındaki kavramalarına etkisi. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü: Ankara.
  • Kınık, A., Muşlu, G. ve Macaroğlu-Akgül, E. (2004). Çocuk gözüyle bilim ve bilim adamı. VI. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri Ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, 9–11 Eylül 2004, Marmara Üniversitesi, Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi: İstanbul.
  • Khıshfe, R. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). The influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 39, 7, 551–578.
  • Khıshfe, R. & Lederman, N. (2007). Relationship between instructional context and views of nature of science. International Journal Of Science Education, 29, 8, 939–961.
  • Küçük, M. (2006). Bilimin doğasını ilköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerine öğretmeye yönelik bir çalışma. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Karadeniz Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü: Trabzon.
  • Lederman, N.G. & Zeidler, D.L. (1987). Science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: Do they really influence teacher behavior? Science Education, 71, 5, 721– 734.
  • Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 29, 4, 331– 359.
  • Lederman, N. & Abd-El-Khalick (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W.F. McComas, (Ed.), The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies (pp. 83-126). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Lederman, N.G., Abd-El-Khalıck, F., Bell, R.L. & Schwartz, R.S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 39, 497–521.
  • Lederman, N.G., Lederman, J.S., Khıshfe, R. & Matthews, L. (2003). Inquiry and nature of science: providing a context for science subject matter. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting Of The American Educational Research Association (Aera). April 21-25, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Lederman, N.G. (2007). Nature of science: past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell and N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook Of Research On Science Education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P. & Almozroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. Mccomas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. (pp. 3 – 39). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • MEB (2005). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji öğretim programı. TTKB, Ankara.
  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S. & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 41, 10, 994-1020.
  • Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Rubba, P.A. & Andersen H.O. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary students’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62, 4, 449-458.
  • Schwartz, R. S. & Lederman, N.G. (2002). “It’s the nature of the beast”: the influence of knowledge an intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 39, 3, 205-236.
  • Smıth, C., Maclin, D., Houghton, C. & Hennessey, M. (2000). Sixth-grade students’ epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition And Instruction, 18, 3, 349-422.
  • Sımon, S., Erduran, S. & Osborne J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal Of Science Education, 28, 2–3, 235–260.
  • Solomon, J., Scott, L. & Duveen J. (1996). Large-scale exploration of pupils’ understandig of the nature of science. Science Education, 80, 5, 493-508.
  • Yeşiloğlu, N.S. (2007). Gazlar konusunun l i se öğrenc i ler i ne bilimsel tartışma (argümantasyon) odaklı yöntem ile öğretimi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü: Ankara.
  • Warren, D. (2001). The nature of science. London: Royal Society of Chemistry.

İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Bilimin Doğasını Anlama Düzeylerine Bilimsel Tartışma Odaklı Öğretimin Etkisi

Year 2013, Volume: 44 Issue: 44, 308 - 318, 01.06.2013

Şafak Uluçinar Sağır Ziya Kılıç

Abstract

Araştırmalar bilimin doğasını anlama konusunda ilköğretim öğrencilerinin yetersiz olduğunu göstermektedir. Son yıllarda yapılan çalışmalarda, bilimsel tartışmanın önemi üzerinde durulmaktadır. Bu araştırmanın amacı, fen ve teknoloji derslerinde ilköğretim öğrencilerinin bilimin doğasıyla ilgili kavramları anlama düzeylerine bilimsel tartışma yönteminin etkisini incelemektir. İlköğretimde sekizinci sınıf öğrencileriyle yapılan bu araştırmada yarı deneysel desen uygulanmıştır. İki yıl olarak planlanan çalışmada veri toplamak amacıyla bilimin doğası anketi ve önbilgi testi kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde SPSS 12.0 programından yararlanılmıştır. Bilimsel tartışma yönteminin uygulandığı gruplarla geleneksel yöntemin uygulandığı gruplar arasında öğrencilerin bilimin doğası ile ilgili kavramları anlama düzeyleri bakımından anlamlı fark olduğu belirlenmiştir (ilk uygulama F=8,032; p=0,007; ikinci uygulama F=10,422; p=0,003). Bilimsel tartışma yöntemi, bilimin doğasının öğretimi için uygulanabilir bir yöntem olarak değerlendirilebilir.

Keywords

bilimin doğası bilimsel tartışma fen eğitimi

References

  • Abd-El-Khalıck, F. & Lederman, N.G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International Journal Of Science Education, 22, 7, 665–701.
  • Aikenhead, G & Ryan, A.G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: “Views on Science-Technology-Society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477-491.
  • Akerson, V. & Donnelly, L.A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K-2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal Of Science Education, 32, 1, 97–124.
  • Balkı, N., Çoban, A. K. ve Aktaş, M. (2003). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin bilim ve bilim insanına yönelik düşünceleri. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 1, 11–17.
  • Bülbül, K. ve Küçük, M. (2007). İlköğretim birinci kademe öğrencilerinin bilimsel bilgiye bakış açılarının incelenmesi. 1. Ulusal İlköğretim Kongresi, 15–17 Kasım 2007, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design. California: Sage Publication.
  • Çelikdemir, M. (2006). Examining middle school students’ understandıng of the nature of science. Unpublished master’s thesis. Middle East Technical University The Graduate School Of Natural And Applied Sciences: Ankara.
  • Drıver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 3, 287–312.
  • Eıchınger D.C., Anderson C.W., Palıncsar A.S. & Davıd Y.M. (1991). An illustration of the roles of content knowledge, scientific argument and social norm in collaborative problem solving. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting Of Area, Chicago. Gılbert, J.K., Boulter, C.J. & Elmer. R. (2000). Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education, (3-17). In J. K. Gilbert, and C.J. Boulter, (Eds). Developing models in science education. Netherlands: Kluweracademic Publisher.
  • Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: toward a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies In Science Education, 22, 85-142.
  • Irwın, A,R. (2000). Historical case studies: teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84, 5-26.
  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C. & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students’ views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th and 10th graders. Science Education, 89, 314–334.
  • Kaptan, F. ve Korkmaz, H. (1999). İlköğretimde fen bilgisi öğretimi. MEB, İlköğretimde etkili öğretme ve öğrenme öğretmen el kitabı, Modül 7, Ankara.
  • Kaya, O.N. (2005). Tartışma teorisine dayalı öğretim yaklaşımının öğrencilerin maddenin tanecikli yapısı konusundaki başarılarına ve bilimin doğası hakkındaki kavramalarına etkisi. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü: Ankara.
  • Kınık, A., Muşlu, G. ve Macaroğlu-Akgül, E. (2004). Çocuk gözüyle bilim ve bilim adamı. VI. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri Ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, 9–11 Eylül 2004, Marmara Üniversitesi, Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi: İstanbul.
  • Khıshfe, R. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). The influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 39, 7, 551–578.
  • Khıshfe, R. & Lederman, N. (2007). Relationship between instructional context and views of nature of science. International Journal Of Science Education, 29, 8, 939–961.
  • Küçük, M. (2006). Bilimin doğasını ilköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerine öğretmeye yönelik bir çalışma. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, Karadeniz Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü: Trabzon.
  • Lederman, N.G. & Zeidler, D.L. (1987). Science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: Do they really influence teacher behavior? Science Education, 71, 5, 721– 734.
  • Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 29, 4, 331– 359.
  • Lederman, N. & Abd-El-Khalick (1998). Avoiding de-natured science: activities that promote understandings of the nature of science. In W.F. McComas, (Ed.), The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies (pp. 83-126). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Lederman, N.G., Abd-El-Khalıck, F., Bell, R.L. & Schwartz, R.S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 39, 497–521.
  • Lederman, N.G., Lederman, J.S., Khıshfe, R. & Matthews, L. (2003). Inquiry and nature of science: providing a context for science subject matter. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting Of The American Educational Research Association (Aera). April 21-25, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Lederman, N.G. (2007). Nature of science: past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell and N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook Of Research On Science Education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P. & Almozroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. In W. F. Mccomas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. (pp. 3 – 39). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • MEB (2005). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji öğretim programı. TTKB, Ankara.
  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S. & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 41, 10, 994-1020.
  • Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Rubba, P.A. & Andersen H.O. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary students’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62, 4, 449-458.
  • Schwartz, R. S. & Lederman, N.G. (2002). “It’s the nature of the beast”: the influence of knowledge an intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 39, 3, 205-236.
  • Smıth, C., Maclin, D., Houghton, C. & Hennessey, M. (2000). Sixth-grade students’ epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition And Instruction, 18, 3, 349-422.
  • Sımon, S., Erduran, S. & Osborne J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal Of Science Education, 28, 2–3, 235–260.
  • Solomon, J., Scott, L. & Duveen J. (1996). Large-scale exploration of pupils’ understandig of the nature of science. Science Education, 80, 5, 493-508.
  • Yeşiloğlu, N.S. (2007). Gazlar konusunun l i se öğrenc i ler i ne bilimsel tartışma (argümantasyon) odaklı yöntem ile öğretimi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü: Ankara.
  • Warren, D. (2001). The nature of science. London: Royal Society of Chemistry.
There are 34 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Şafak Uluçinar Sağır This is me

Ziya Kılıç This is me

Publication Date June 1, 2013
Published in Issue Year 2013 Volume: 44 Issue: 44

Cite

APA Sağır, Ş. U., & Kılıç, Z. (2013). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Bilimin Doğasını Anlama Düzeylerine Bilimsel Tartışma Odaklı Öğretimin Etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 44(44), 308-318.