BibTex RIS Cite

Elektrik devreleri konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının giderilmesinde öğrenme evreleri metodunun etkisi

Year 2005, Volume: 28 Issue: 28, 39 - 47, 01.06.2005

Abstract

Bu çalışmada iki sorunun cevabı araştırılmıştır. 1) Fen bilgisi öğretmenliği ana bilim dalı birinci sınıfta okuyan öğrenciler elektrik devreleri konusunda hangi kavram yanılgılarına ve kavramları anlama sürecinde ne tür güçlüklere sahiptirler? 2) Elektrik devreleri konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının ve kavramsal anlama düzeyindeki güçlüklerin giderilmesinde öğrenme evreleri yaklaşımının etkileri nelerdir? Çalışmaya iki şubeye kayıtlı 76 öğrenci katılmıştır. Şubeler rastgele Deney ve Kontrol grubu olarak ikiye ayrılmıştır. Elektrik devreleri konusundaki kavram bilgisini ölçmek için geliştirilen ‘Elektrik Devreleri Kavram Testi’ (EDKT) gruplara ön test olarak uygulanmıştır. Devreler konusunu öğretmek için deney grubunda (n= 38) öğrenme evreleri metodu kullanılırken kontrol grubunda ise (n= 38) geleneksel öğretim metodu kullanılmıştır. Son olarak EDKT gruplara son test olarak tekrar uygulanmıştır. Ön test sonuçlarının analizi öğrencilerin elektrik devreleri konusunda üç kavram yanılgısına ve devrelerinin fiziksel yönlerini anlama düzeyinde de üç probleme sahip olduklarını göstermiştir. Son test puanlarının varyans analizi öğrenme evreleri metodunun ‘güç kaynağını sabit akım kaynağı olarak algılama’ yanılgısını gidermede geleneksel öğretim modeline göre daha etkili olduğunu fakat ‘bölgesel düşünme’ ve ‘paylaşılan akım’ yanılgılarını gidermede etkisiz kaldığını göstermiştir. Sonuçlarının analizi öğrenme evreleri modelinin elektrik devrelerinin fiziksel yönlerini anlama düzeyinde öğrencilerin karşılaştıkları güçlüklerin tamamını gidermede geleneksel öğretim modeline göre daha etkili olduğunu göstermiştir

References

  • Arnold, M. & Miller, R. (1987). Being constructive: an alternative approach to the teaching of introductory ideas in electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 9(3), 553-563.
  • Beisenherz, P. & Dantonio, M. (1996). Using The Learning Cycle To Teach Physical Science: A Hands-On Approach For Middle Grades. Portsmouth, USA: Heinemann.
  • Borges, A. T. & Gilbert, J. K. (1999). Mental models of electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 95- 117.
  • Cavallo, A. M. L. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability, and students’ understanding and problem solving in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 625-656.
  • Chambers, S. K & Andre, T. (1997). Gender, prior knowledge, interest, and experience in electricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 107-123.
  • Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 66-71.
  • Cosgrove, M. (1995). A study of science-in-the-making as students generate an analogy for electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 17(3), 295-310.
  • Driver, R. (1985). Children’s Ideas in Science. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
  • Engelhardt, P. V. & Beichner, R. J. (2004). Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits. American Journal of Physics, 72, 98-115.
  • Eylon, B. S. & Ganiel, (1990). Macro-Micro relationship: The missing link between electrostatics and electrodynamics in students’ reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 12 , 79-94.
  • Guzzetti, B., Taylor, T. E., Glass G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 117-159.
  • Kärrqvist, C. (1985). The development of concepts by means of dialogues centered on experiments. In Duit, R., Jung, W., & Rhöneck, C. von. (eds), Aspects of Understanding Electricity (pp.215-226). Kiel, Germany: IPN.
  • Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science Teaching and Development of Thinking. Belmont, USA: Wadsworth.
  • Lawson, A. E. (2001). Using the learning cycle to teach biology concepts and reasoning patterns. Journal of Biological Education, 35, 165-168.
  • Marshall, J. A. & Dorward, J. T. (2000). Inquiry experiences as a lecture supplement for preservice elementary teachers and general education students. American Journal of Physics Supply, 68, 27-36.
  • McDermott, L. C. & van Zee, E. H. (1985). Identifying and addressing student difficulties with electric circuits. In Duit, R., Jung, W., & Rhöneck, C. von. (Eds), Aspects of Understanding Electricity (pp.39-48). Kiel, Germany: IPN.
  • McDermott, L. C. (1991). Millikan lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned-closing the gap. American Journal of Physics, 59, 301-315.
  • Osborne, R. (1981). Children’s ideas about electric circuits. New Zealand Science Teacher, 29, 12-19.
  • Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Research in Science and Technological Education, 1, 73-82.
  • Osborne, R. & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in Science: The implications of children’s science. Auckland, NZ: Heinemann Publishing.
  • Shipstone, D. M. (1985). Electricity in simple dc circuits. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, and A. Tiberghein (eds), Children’s Ideas in Science (pp. 33-51). Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
  • Shipstone, D. M., Rhöneck, C. von, Jung, W., Kärrqvist, C., Dupin, J. J., Joshua, S., & Licht, P. (1988). A study of students’ understanding of electricity in five European countries. International Journal of Science Education, 10(3), 303-316.
  • Wang, T. & Andre, T. (1991). Conceptual change text versus traditional text and application questions versus no question in learning about electricity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 103-116.
Year 2005, Volume: 28 Issue: 28, 39 - 47, 01.06.2005

Abstract

References

  • Arnold, M. & Miller, R. (1987). Being constructive: an alternative approach to the teaching of introductory ideas in electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 9(3), 553-563.
  • Beisenherz, P. & Dantonio, M. (1996). Using The Learning Cycle To Teach Physical Science: A Hands-On Approach For Middle Grades. Portsmouth, USA: Heinemann.
  • Borges, A. T. & Gilbert, J. K. (1999). Mental models of electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 95- 117.
  • Cavallo, A. M. L. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability, and students’ understanding and problem solving in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 625-656.
  • Chambers, S. K & Andre, T. (1997). Gender, prior knowledge, interest, and experience in electricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 107-123.
  • Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 66-71.
  • Cosgrove, M. (1995). A study of science-in-the-making as students generate an analogy for electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 17(3), 295-310.
  • Driver, R. (1985). Children’s Ideas in Science. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
  • Engelhardt, P. V. & Beichner, R. J. (2004). Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits. American Journal of Physics, 72, 98-115.
  • Eylon, B. S. & Ganiel, (1990). Macro-Micro relationship: The missing link between electrostatics and electrodynamics in students’ reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 12 , 79-94.
  • Guzzetti, B., Taylor, T. E., Glass G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 117-159.
  • Kärrqvist, C. (1985). The development of concepts by means of dialogues centered on experiments. In Duit, R., Jung, W., & Rhöneck, C. von. (eds), Aspects of Understanding Electricity (pp.215-226). Kiel, Germany: IPN.
  • Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science Teaching and Development of Thinking. Belmont, USA: Wadsworth.
  • Lawson, A. E. (2001). Using the learning cycle to teach biology concepts and reasoning patterns. Journal of Biological Education, 35, 165-168.
  • Marshall, J. A. & Dorward, J. T. (2000). Inquiry experiences as a lecture supplement for preservice elementary teachers and general education students. American Journal of Physics Supply, 68, 27-36.
  • McDermott, L. C. & van Zee, E. H. (1985). Identifying and addressing student difficulties with electric circuits. In Duit, R., Jung, W., & Rhöneck, C. von. (Eds), Aspects of Understanding Electricity (pp.39-48). Kiel, Germany: IPN.
  • McDermott, L. C. (1991). Millikan lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned-closing the gap. American Journal of Physics, 59, 301-315.
  • Osborne, R. (1981). Children’s ideas about electric circuits. New Zealand Science Teacher, 29, 12-19.
  • Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Research in Science and Technological Education, 1, 73-82.
  • Osborne, R. & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in Science: The implications of children’s science. Auckland, NZ: Heinemann Publishing.
  • Shipstone, D. M. (1985). Electricity in simple dc circuits. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, and A. Tiberghein (eds), Children’s Ideas in Science (pp. 33-51). Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
  • Shipstone, D. M., Rhöneck, C. von, Jung, W., Kärrqvist, C., Dupin, J. J., Joshua, S., & Licht, P. (1988). A study of students’ understanding of electricity in five European countries. International Journal of Science Education, 10(3), 303-316.
  • Wang, T. & Andre, T. (1991). Conceptual change text versus traditional text and application questions versus no question in learning about electricity. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 103-116.
There are 23 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Salih Ateş This is me

Mahmut Polat This is me

Publication Date June 1, 2005
Published in Issue Year 2005 Volume: 28 Issue: 28

Cite

APA Ateş, S., & Polat, M. (2005). Elektrik devreleri konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının giderilmesinde öğrenme evreleri metodunun etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(28), 39-47.