Farklı Kavramsal Değişim Yöntemleri İle Alternatif Kavramları Gidermek ve Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerini Geliştirmek Mümkün Müdür? Elektrokimyasal Piller Örneği

Year 2013, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 1 - 26, 01.03.2013

Fethiye Karslı Alipaşa Ayas

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Fen Öğretimi Laboratuvar Uygulamaları dersi kapsamında “Elektrokimyasal Piller” konusundaki kavramlara yönelik, öğrencilerin hem Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerini (BSB) geliştirmelerine hem de olumlu yönde kavramsal değişim sağlamalarına fırsat sunan laboratuvar rehber materyali geliştirmek ve etkililiğini incelemektir. Araştırmanın örneklemi, Giresun Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenliği Programının 2 şubesinde öğrenim gören toplam “49” 3. sınıf öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Araştırmada ön test-son test dizaynlı yarı deneysel yöntem kullanılmıştır. Deney grubunda, 5E’nin aşamalarına çalışma yaprağı (ÇY), bilgisayar animasyonları (BA), kavramsal değişim metni (KDM) ve deney gibi farklı kavramsal değişim yöntem/tekniklerinin adapte edilmesiyle zenginleştirilmiş laboratuvar rehber materyali; kontrol grubunda ise geleneksel öğretim yöntemi (teorik bilgi, soru-cevap ve deney) kullanılarak uygulamalar yürütülmüştür. Araştırmada veriler, Karslı ve Ayas (2013) tarafından geliştirilen Çoklu Formda Bilimsel Süreç Becerileri Testi (BİSBET) ve İki Aşamalı Elektrokimyasal Piller Kavram Testi (EPKT) kullanılarak toplanmıştır. BİSBET ve iki aşamalı EPKT’den elde edilen verilerin istatistiksel analizleri, deney ve kontrol grupları arasında hem BSB hem de kavramsal değişim başarıları yönünden deney grubu lehine anlamlı farklılıkların olduğunu (p< .05) göstermektedir. Araştırmada, 5E öğretim modeline dayandırılarak farklı öğretim yöntem ve tekniklerle zenginleştirilmiş laboratuvar rehber materyallerinin, öğrencilerin BSB’lerini geliştirmede ve onların ele alınan konularda alternatif kavramlarını gidererek olumlu yönde kavramsal değişim gerçekleştirmelerinde geleneksel yöntemlere göre daha başarılı olduğu sonuçlarına ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

Bilimsel Süreç Becerileri, Kavramsal Değişim, Laboratuvar Rehber Materyalleri, Farklı Öğretim Yöntem ve Teknikleri, Elektrokimyasal Piller.

Is it Possible to Eliminate Alternative Conceptions and to Improve Scientific Process Skills with Different Conceptual Change Methods? ‘An Example of Electrochemical Cells’

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop a laboratory guided material offering the opportunity on both improving Scientific Process Skills (SPS) and conceptual change of prospective science teachers about the concepts of “Electrochemical Cells” at the course of laboratory practices in science education and investigate the effectiveness of the material on them. The sample of the study consisted of 49 third-year students enrolled in two different classes of Department of Science Teaching Programmed in Faculty of Education in Giresun University. A quasi-experimental approach with a pre-test−post-test design was used in this study. Experimental group was instructed with enriched laboratory guide materials embedded different teaching methods and techniques such as worksheet, computer animations, conceptual change text, hands-on activities, and experiment within 5E model. Control group was instructed with traditional methods (theoretical knowledge, question-answer, and experiment). The data were gathered by means of Multiple Form of Scientific Process Skills Test (MSPST) developed by Karslı and Ayas (2013) and two- tier Electrochemical Cells Concept Tests (ECCT). The statistical analysis of the data obtained from the MSPST and two- tier ECCT indicated that there were significant differences in favor of the experimental group in terms of the prospective science teachers’ achievement both their SPS and conceptual change (p< 0.5). The results obtained from quantitative and qualitative data indicated that laboratory guide materials based on the 5E instructional model and enriched with different teaching methods and techniques helped the prospective science teachers both to improve their SPSs and achieve conceptual change together with removing their alternative conceptions.

Keywords

Scientific Process Skills, Conceptual Change, Laboratory Guided Materials, Different Teaching Methods and Techniques, Electrochemical Cells.

References

• Acar, B. & Tarhan, L. (2007). Effect of Cooperative Learning Strategies on Students’ Understanding of Concepts in Electrochemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5, 349-373.
• Aktamış, H. & Ergin, Ö. (2007). Bilimsel Süreç Becerileri ile Bilimsel Yaratıcılık Arasındaki İlişkinin Belirlenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33, 11-23.
• Altun Yalçın, S., Açışlı, S. & Turgut, Ü. (2010). 5E Öğretim Modelinin Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimsel İşlem Becerilerine ve Fizik Laboratuarlarına Karşı Tutumlarına Etkisi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 18, 1, 147-158
• Anagün, Ş. & Yaşar, Ş. (2009). İlköğretim Beşinci Sınıf Fen ve Teknoloji Dersinde Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerinin Geliştirilmesi. İlköğretim Online, 8, 3, 843-865.
• Ayas, A. & Demirbaş, A. (1997). Turkish Secondary Students’ Conception of Introductory Chemistry Concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 74, 5, 518-521.
• Ayas, A., Özmen, H. & Çalık, M. (2010). Students’ Conceptions of the Particulate Nature of Matter at Secondary and Tertiary Level. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 1, 165-184.
• Aydoğan, S., Güneş, B. & Gülçiçek, Ç. (2003). Isı ve Sıcaklık Konusunda Kavram Yanılgıları. G. Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23, 2, 111-124.
• Beaumont Walters, Y. & Soyibo, K. (2001). An Analysis of High School Students’ Performance on Five Integrated Science Process Skills. Journal of Research in Science & Technological Education, 19, 2, 133-143.
• Bodner, G. M. (1990). Why Good Teaching Fails and Hard-Working Students Do Not Always Succeed. Spectrum, 28, 1, 27-32.
• Canpolat, N., Pınarbaşı, T., Bayrakçeken, S. & Geban, Ö. (2004). Kimyadaki Bazı Yaygın Yanlış Kavramalar. Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24, 1, 135-146.
• Carey S., Evans, R., Honda M., Jay, E. & Unger, C. (1989). An Experiment is When You Try it and See if it Works‛: A Study of Grade 7 Students’ Understanding of the Construction of Scientific Knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 514-529.
• Carin, A. A. & Bass, J. E. (2001). Teaching Science As Inquiry, Ninth Edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
• Colley, K. E. (2006). Understandig Ecology Content Knowledge and Acquiring Science Process Skills Through Project-Based Science Instruction. Science Activities, 43, 1, 26-33.
• Coştu, B. & Ünal, S. (2005). Le-Chatelier Prensibinin Çalışma Yaprakları İle Öğretimi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Elektronik Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 1-10.
• Dawson, C. C. (1999). The Effect of Explicit Instruction in Science Process Skills on Conceptual Change: A Case Study of Photosynthesis, PhD Thesis, University of Northern Colorado. Dole, J. A. (2000). Readers, Texts and Conceptual Change Learning. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 16, 99-118.
• Doymus, K., Karacop, A. & Simsek, U. (2010). Effects of Jigsaw and Animation Techniques on Students’ Understanding of Concepts and Subjects in Electrochemistry. Education Technology Research Development, 5 6, 671-691.
• Driver, R. & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and Paradigms: A Review of Literature Related to Concept Development in Adolescent Science Students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84.
• Ekici, F. (2007). Yapılandırmacı Yaklaşıma Uygun 5E Öğrenme Döngüsüne Göre Hazırlanan Ders Materyalinin Lise 3. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Yükseltgenme-İndirgenme Tepkimeleri ve Elektrokimya Konuları Anlamalarına Etkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Fensham, P. J. (1988). Approaches to the Teaching of STS in Science Education. International Journal of Science Education, 10, 4, 346-356.
• Finley, F. N., Stewart, J. & Yarroch, W. L. (1982). Teachers' Perceptions of Important and Difficult Science Content. Science Education, 66, 4, 531-538.
• Garnett, P. L. & Treagust D. F. (1992a). Conceptual Difficulties by Senior High School Students of Electrochemistry: Electric Circuits and Oxidation-Reduction Equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 2, 121-142.
• Garnett, P. L. & Treagust, D. F. (1992b). Conceptua1 Difficulties Experienced by Senior High School Students of Electrochemistry: Electrochemical (Ga1vanic) and Electrolytic Cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 10, 1079-1099.
• Gonzalez, F. M. (1997). Diagnosis of Spanish Primary School Students’ Common Alternative Science Concepts. School Science and Mathematics, 97, 2, 68-74.
• Guzzetti, B. J., Williams, W. O., Skeels, S. A. & Wu, S. M. (1997). Influence of Text Structure on Learning Counterintuitive Physics Concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 701-7
• Huddle, P. A., White, M. W. & Rogers, F. (2000). Simulations for Teaching Chemical Equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 7, 920-926.
• Kanlı, U. (2007). 7E Modeli Merkezli Laboratuvar Yaklaşımı ile Doğrulama Laboratuvar Yaklaşımlarının Öğrencilerin Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerinin Gelişimine ve Kavramsal Başarılarına Etkisi, Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara. Karslı, F. (2011). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerini Geliştirmesinde ve Kavramsal Değişim Sağlamasında Zenginleştirilmiş Laboratuar Rehber Materyallerinin Etkisi. Doktora Tezi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon. Karslı, F. & Ayas, A. (2013). Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerinin Ölçülmesine İlişkin Bir Test Geliştirme Çalışması. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi(TÜFED), 10 (2), 67-84.
• Karslı, F. & Çalık, M. (2012). Can Freshman Science Student Teachers’ Alternative Conceptions of ‘Electrochemical Cells’ Be Fully Diminished? Asian Journal of Chemistry, 23, 12, 4854
• Kayalı, H. A. & Tarhan, L. (2004). İyonik Bağlar Konusunda Kavram Yanılgılarının Giderilmesi Amacıyla Yapılandırmacı Aktif Öğrenmeye Dayalı Bir Rehber Materyal Uygulaması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 145-154.
• Koray, Ö., Köksal, M. S., Özdemir, M. & Presley, A. İ. (2007). The Effect of Creative and Critical Thinking Based Laboratory Applications on Academic Achievement and Science Process Skills. Elementary Education Online, 6, 3, 377-389.
• Kula, Ş. G. (2009). Araştırmaya Dayalı Fen Öğrenmenin Öğrencilerin Bilimsel Süreç Becerileri, Başarıları, Kavram Öğrenmeleri ve Tutumlarına Etkisi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
• Lee, A. T., Hairston, R. V., Thames, R., Lawrence, T. & Herron, S. S. (2002). Using a Computer Simulation to Teach Science Process Skills to College Biology and Elementary Education Majors. Computer Simulations Bioscene, 28, 4, 35- 42.
• Nakhleh, M. B. & Krajcik, J. S. (1994). Influence of Levels of Information as Presented by Different Technologies on Students’ Understanding of Acid, Base, and pH Concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 10, 1077-1096.
• Niaz, M. (2002). Facilitating Conceptual Change in Students’ Understanding of Electrochemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 425-439.
• Niaz, M. & Chacon, E. (2003). A Conceptual Change Teaching Strategy to Facilitate High School Students’ Understanding of Electrochemistry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 2, 129-134.
• Nicosia, A. M. L., Mineo, S. R. M. & Valenza, M. A. (1984). The Relationship Between Science Process Abilities of Teachers and Science Achievement of Students: An Experimental Study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 853-858.
• Nieswandt, M. (2001). Problems and Possibilities for Learning in an Introductory Chemistry Course From a Conceptual Change Perspective. Science Education, 85, 158-179.
• Ogude, A. N. & Bradley, J. D. (1994). Ionic Conduction and Electrical Neutrality in Operating Electrochemical Cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 71, 1, 29-34.
• Orgill, M. & Bodner, G. (2004). What Research Tells Us About Using Analogies to Teach Chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 5, 1, 15-32.
• Özkaya, A. R. (2002). Conceptual Difficulties Experienced by Prospective Teachers in Electrochemistry: Half-Cell Potential, Cell Potential, and Chemical and Electrochemical Equilibrium in Galvanic Cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 79, 6, 735-738.
• Özkaya, A. R., Üce, M., Sarıçayır, H. & Şahin, M. (2006). Effectiveness of a Conceptual ChangeOriented Teaching Strategy to Improve Students’ Understanding of Galvanic Cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 83, 11, 1719-1723.
• Özmen, H. & Kolomuç, A. (2004). Bilgisayarlı Öğretimin Çözeltiler Konusundaki Öğrenci Başarısına Etkisi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 12, 1, 57-68.
• Pınarbaşı, T. (2002). Çözünürlük ile İlgili Kavramların Anlaşılmasında Kavramsal Değişim Yaklaşımının Etkinliğinin İncelenmesi, Doktora Tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzurum.
• Rollnick, M., Zwane, S., Staskun, M., Lotz, S. & Gren, G. (2001). Improving Pre-laboratory Preparation of First Year University Chemistry Students. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 10, 1053-1071.
• Sanger, M. J. & Greenbowe T. J. (1999). An Ana1ysis of College Chemistry Textbooks as Sources of Misconceptions and Errors in Electrochemistry: Galvanic, Electrolytic and Concentration Cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 6, 853-860.
• Sanger, M. J. & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997). Students' Misconceptions in E1ectrochemistry: Current Flow in Electrolytc Solutions and the Salt Bridge. Research, Science & Education, 7, 74, 8198
• Sanger, M. J. & Greenbowe, T. J. (2000). Addressing Student Misconceptions Concerning Electron Flow in Aqueous Solutions with Instruction Including Computer Animations and Conceptual Change Strategies. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 5, 5215
• Schmidt, H. J., Marohn, A. & Harrison, A. G. (2007). Factors That Prevent Learning in Electrochemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 2, 258-283.
• Şahin, Ç., Çalık, M. & Çepni, S. (2009). Using Different Conceptual Change Methods Embedded Within 5E Model: A Sample Teaching of Liquid Pressure. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 1, 3, 115-125.
• Talib, O., Matthews, R. & Secombe, M. (2005). Computer-Animated Instruction and Students’ Conceptual Change in Electrochemistry: Preliminary Qualitative Analysis. International Education Journal, 5, 5, 29-42.
• Tan, M. & Temiz, B. K. (2003). Fen Öğretiminde Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerinin Yeri ve Önemi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 13, 89-101.
• Temiz, B. K. (2007). Fizik Öğretiminde Öğrencilerin Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerinin Ölçülmesi, Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and Use of Diagnostic Tests to Evaluate Students’ Misconceptions in Science. International Journal of Science Education, 10, 2, 159-169.
• URL-1, http://group.chem.iastate.edu/Greenbowe/sections/projectfolder/simDownload/index4.h tml#electrochem Electrochemistry Animations. 28 Nisan 2011.
• Ünal, S. & Coştu, B. (2005). Problematic Issue for Students: Does It Sink or Float? Asia Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 6, 1, 3.
• Yang, E., Andre, T. & Greenbowe, T. (2003). Spatial Ability and the Impact of Visualization/Animation on Learning Electrochemistry. Journal of Science Education, 25, 3, 329-3
• Yılmaz, A., Erdem, E. & Morgil, İ. (2002). Students' Misconceptions Concerning Electrochemistry. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 23, 234-242.
• Yürük, N. (2007). The Effect of Supplementing Instruction with Conceptual Change Texts on Students’ Conceptions of Electrochemical Cells. Journal of Science Technology, 16, 515-523. Yürük, N. & Geban, Ö. (2001). Conceptual Change Text: A supplementary Material to Facilitate Conceptual Change in Electrochemical Cell Concepts, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, March, St. Louis, MO.
• Ayas, A. & Demirbaş, A. (1997). Turkish Secondary Students’ Conception of Introductory Chemistry Concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 74, 5, 518-521.
• Beaumont Walters, Y. & Soyibo, K. (2001). An Analysis of High School Students’ Performance on Five Integrated Science Process Skills. Journal of Research in Science & Technological Education, 19, 2, 133-143.
• Bodner, G. M. (1990). Why Good Teaching Fails and Hard-Working Students Do Not Always Succeed. Spectrum, 28, 1, 27-32.
• Huddle, P. A., White, M. W. & Rogers, F. (2000). Simulations for Teaching Chemical Equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 7, 920-926.
• Karslı, F. & Ayas, A. (2013). Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerinin Ölçülmesine İlişkin Bir Test Geliştirme Çalışması. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi(TÜFED), 10 (2), 67-84.
• Karslı, F. & Çalık, M. (2012). Can Freshman Science Student Teachers’ Alternative Conceptions of ‘Electrochemical Cells’ Be Fully Diminished? Asian Journal of Chemistry, 23, 12, 4854
• Nieswandt, M. (2001). Problems and Possibilities for Learning in an Introductory Chemistry Course From a Conceptual Change Perspective. Science Education, 85, 158-179.
• Ogude, A. N. & Bradley, J. D. (1994). Ionic Conduction and Electrical Neutrality in Operating Electrochemical Cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 71, 1, 29-34.
• Orgill, M. & Bodner, G. (2004). What Research Tells Us About Using Analogies to Teach Chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 5, 1, 15-32.
• Orgill, M. & Bodner, G. (2004). What Research Tells Us About Using Analogies to Teach Chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 5, 1, 15-32.
• Sanger, M. J. & Greenbowe T. J. (1999). An Ana1ysis of College Chemistry Textbooks as Sources of Misconceptions and Errors in Electrochemistry: Galvanic, Electrolytic and Concentration Cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 6, 853-860.
• Sanger, M. J. & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997). Students' Misconceptions in E1ectrochemistry: Current Flow in Electrolytc Solutions and the Salt Bridge. Research, Science & Education, 7, 74, 8198
• Schmidt, H. J., Marohn, A. & Harrison, A. G. (2007). Factors That Prevent Learning in Electrochemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 2, 258-283.