Atomic Theories That Preservice Science Teachers Confuse and Underlying Reasons

Year 2018, Volume: 19 Issue: 1, 212 - 220, 30.04.2018

Volkan Bilir Azize Digilli Baran Sedat Karaçam

https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.331368

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Students come across with the notion of atom almost
every year during their education life. Higher conceptual understandings of
atomic theories among science teachers is of crucial importance in their
understanding of physics and chemistry courses. In this sense, the purpose of
the present study is to investigate which of the atomic theories science
teachers often confuse and to discuss the possible reasons behind the confusion
of one theory with the other. This study used the phenomenology method of
qualitative research. Participants of the study were comprised of 55 first and
second year university students attending the Department of Science Teaching
during the 2015-2016 academic year. In order to discover the most confusing
atomic theories and the reasons of this confusion, students were asked to write
down the atomic theories that they often confuse with one another and the
reasons why they do so. Using content analysis, two independent coders analyzed
the collected data. The result of the analyses revealed that students mostly
got confused between Bohr’s Atomic Theory and Modern Atomic Theory. It was also
found that the underlying reasons of this confusion were that “In both theory,
the protons and neutrons are found together at the center of the atom (the
nucleus) surrounded by electrons spinning around it” and “students cannot
differentiate between the concepts of layer, orbit and shell”, and some
recommendations were offered concerning the instruction of these subjects.

Keywords

Atom, Atomic theories, Science education

References

• Arık, A. & Polat, R., (2002). Lise Kimya 1 Ders Kitabı. İstanbul: Oran Yayıncılık.
• Albenese, A. & Vicentini, M. (1997). Why do we belive that an atom is colourless? Reflections About the Teaching of the Particle Model, Science & Education, 6, 251-261.
• Bahar, M., Gündüz, S. ve Doğan, S., (2006). Bilim Tarihine Kısa Bir Bakış (Editör: Mehmet Bahar) Fen ve Teknoloji Öğretimi içinde 1–32, Ankara: PEGEMA Yayıncılık.
• Bilir, V., Digilli Baran, A., &. Karaçam, S., (2016). “The science teacher candidates’ images related to atom models”, International Congresses on Education. Sarajevo/Bosnia and Herzegovina (2-4 June).
• Creswell, J.W. (2013). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri (Çev.ed. Bütün, M. ve Demir, S.B.). Ankara:Siyasal Yayıncılık.
• Çökelez, A. & Yalçın, S., (2012). İlköğretim 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin atom kavramı ile ilgili zihinsel modellerinin incelenmesi, İlköğretim Online, 11(2), 452-471, 2012.
• Demirci, S. & Yılmaz, A ve diğ. (2016). Lise ve üniversite öğrencilerinin atomun yapısı ile ilgili zihinsel modellerine genel bir bakış. Journal of the Turkish Chemical Society Chemical Education, Cilt 1, Sayı 1, 2016
• Demircioğlu, G. & Diğ., (2012). Kavramsal değişim metninin ve üç boyutlu modelin 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin atomun yapısını anlamalarına etkisi, Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 7, Sayı 2, 2012
• Entwistle, N. (1997). Introduction: Phenomenography in higher education. Higher Educ. Res. Dev. 16, 127.
• Erduran, S. (2014). A holistic approach to the atom in school chemistry. Educació Química EduQ número 19 , p. 39-42
• Gilbert, J.K. & Watts, D.M., 1983. Concepts, Misconceptions and Alternative Conceptions: Changing Perspectives in Science Education, Studies in Science Education, 10, 61-98.
• Griffiths, A.K. & Preston, K.R., 1992. Grade-12 Students’ Misconceptions Relating to Fundamentel Charecteristics of Atoms and Molecules, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 6, 611-628.
• Harrison, A.G. & Treagust, D.F., (1996). Secondary students’ mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry, Science Education, 80, 5, 509-534.
• Jong, O.D. (2009), How to teach scientific models and modelling: A study of prospective chemistry teachers’ knowledge base, International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 829-850.
• Kahraman, S. (2010). Atomun yapısı ve orbitaller konusunda geliştirilen üç boyutlu bilgisayar destekli öğretim materyallerinin öğretmen adaylarının başarısı ve tutumlarına etkisi, Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Ortaöğretim Fen ve Matematik Öğretmenliği Anabilim Dalı Doktora tezi
• Kaya, A. (2010). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının ışık ve atom kavramlarını anlama seviyelerinin tespiti. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12 (1), 15-37, 2010
• Kılıç, F. (2010). Ortaöğretim kimya ders kitaplarında atom teorilerinin sunumunun bilim tarihi ve felsefesi açısından incelenmesi ve öğretmen görüşleri, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Ortaöğretim Fen ve Matematik Öğretmenliği Anabilim Dalı Yüksek Lisans Tezi.
• Kranz, W., (1994). Antik Felsefe, (cev) Suad Y. Baydur, İstanbul: Sosyal Yayınlar.
• Maloney, J. (2007). Children’s roles and use of evidence in science: an analysis of decision-making in small groups. British Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 371–401.
• Marks,K. H., (2002). Demokritos ile Epikuros’un Doğa Felsefelerindeki Ayırım. (cev) Saffet Babur, Ankara: Ayrac Yayınları.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). An expanded source book qualitative data analysis. London: Sage.
• Mortimer, C.E. (2004). Modern Üniversite Kimyası, Cilt 1, Çev. Altınata, T., Beşinci Baskı, Çağlayan Kitabevi, 2004, İstanbul.
• Oruncak, B., (2005). Ortaöğretim ve Yüksek Öğretimde Öğrencilerin Atom Kavramı ile İlgili Algıları ve Bunun Eğitim Kesiti İçerisindeki Değişimi, Doktora Tezi, S.D.Ü. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Fizik Eğitimi), Isparta.
• Unver Oguz, A. & Arabacioglu, S., (2015). Helping pre-service science teachers to understand atomism through observations and experiments, Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2015
• Prosser, M. & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching. The Experience in Higher Education, Buckingham, U.K.
• Patton, J. E. (1997). A life skills approach to mathematics instruction: Preparing students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(2), 178.
• Podolefsky, N.S. & Finkelstein, N.D. (2006). The use of analogy in learning physics: The role of representations.Phys. Rev. ST - Phys. Educ. Res. 2, 020101.
• Ronan, C. A. (1983). Bilim Tarihi- Dünya Kültürlerinde Bilimin Tarihi ve Gelişmesi.( Çev: E. İhsanoğlu, F. Günergun) Tübitak yayınları/ Akademik Dizi I.
• Saruhan, Ş. C. & Özdemirci, A. (2005). Bilim, Felsefe ve Metodoloji. İstanbul: Alkım Yayınevi
• Wihlborg, M. (2004). Student nurses’ conceptions of internationalism in general and as an essential part of Swedish nurses’education. Higher Educ. Res. Dev. 23, 433.