BibTex RIS Cite

Ortaöğretim 10. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kovalent Bağlanma ile ilgili Algıları, Metaforları ve Benzeşimleri

Year 2020, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 198 - 213, 25.06.2020

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, onuncu sınıf öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusu ile ilgili öğretim sonrasında kovalent bağlanmayı nasıl tanımladıkları ve tanımlamalarında kovalent bağ ile ilgili hangi metaforları kullandıkları araştırılmıştır. Bunun yanı sıra kovalent bağı neye benzettiklerine yönelik öğrencilerin benzeşimleri de incelenmiştir. Bu çalışma kimyasal bağlanma ile ilgili kapsamlı bir araştırmadan alınan bir kesiti içermektedir. Bu kapsamlı araştırma için geliştirilen iki aşamalı bir ölçme aracı ile toplanan verilerden burada sadece kovalent bağ ile ilgili analiz sonuçları sunulmuştur. Çalışmanın örneklemi 184’ü kız ve 113’ü erkek olmak üzere toplam 297 onuncu sınıf öğrencisinden oluşmuştur. Kullanılan ölçek iki aşamalı olup ilk aşamada öğrencilerin algı ve metaforlarını belirlemek için kovalent bağı tanımları istenmiştir. İkinci aşamada kovalent bağ ile ilgili benzeşimlerini belirlemek amacıyla üzerinde “kovalent bağ……. Benzer. Çünkü…..” yazılı ifadeler öğrencilere yöneltilmiş ve ilgili boşlukları doldurmaları istenmiştir. Çalışmada öğrencilerin algılarının belirlenmesinde fenomenografik yöntem benimsenmiş olup öğrencilerin kovalent bağ ile ilgili algılarının yedi tema altında toplandığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Benzeşim ve metaforların analizi içerik analizi ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Öğrencilerin metaforlarının 9 kavramsal kategoride ve benzeşimlerinin de 6 tema altında toplandığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonunda kovalent bağ öğretimi sırasında neler yapılmasına yönelik önerilere yer verilmiştir

References

  • Akkuş, H., Tüzün, Ü. N. & Eyceyurt, G. (2013). Kovalent bağlar konusunda öğrenci imaj ve yanlış kavramalarının belirlenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD), 14(1), 287-303.
  • Ashworth, P. & Lucas, U. (1998). What is ‘world’ of phenomenography? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 415-431.
  • Arslan, M. M. & Bayrakçı, M. (2006). Metaforik düşünme ve öğrenme yaklaşımının eğitim öğretim açısından incelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 171, 100-108.
  • Bakan İ. & Kefe, İ. (2012). Kurumsal açıdan algı ve algı yönetimi. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 19-34.
  • Birk, H. P. & Kurtz, M. J. (1999). Effect of experience on retention and elimination of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 124-128.
  • Burrows, N. L. & Mooring, S. R. (2015). Using concept mapping to uncover students’ knowledge structures of chemical bonding concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 53–66. doi:10.1039/c4rp00180j
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. (21. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Coll, R. K. & Treagust, D. F. (2002). Exploring tertiary students’ understanding of covalent bonding. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 241-267.
  • Erman, E. (2017). Factors contributing to students’ misconceptions in learning covalent bond. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(4), 520-537.
  • Furio, C. & Calatayud, M. (1996). Difficulties with the geometry and polarity of molecules. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(1), 36-41.
  • Köseoğlu, P. (2017). An analysis of university students’ perceptions of the concepts of “water” and “water pollution” through metaphors. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 13(8), 4343-4350.
  • Lancor, L. (2015). An analysis of metaphors used by students to describe energy in an ınterdisciplinary general science course. International Journal of Science Education, 37(5-6), 876-902.
  • Luxford, C. Y., & Bretz, S.L. (2014). Development of the bonding representations ınventory to ıdentify student misconceptions about covalent and ıonic bonding representations. Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 312−320.
  • Marton F. (1981). Phenomenography – describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177- 200.
  • Marton F. (2005). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. In R. R. Sherman & R. B. Webb (eds), Qualitative Research in Education: Focus and Methods. London and New York.
  • Mirzalar Kabapınar, F. & Adik, B. (2006). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin kovalent bağda elektronların konum ve hareketlerini anlama biçimleri. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 23, 205-228.
  • Nakiboğlu C. (2003). Instructional misconceptions of Turkish prospective chemistry teachers about atomic orbitals and hybridization. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4, 171-188.
  • Nakiboğlu, C. & Yıldırım, Ş. (2019) 10. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kimyasal Bağ ile ilgili Algıları, Kimyasal Bağı Tanımlamada Kullandıkları Metaforlar ve Yaptıkları Benzeşimler. Journal of Turkish Chemical Society: Section C. 4(2), 61-80.
  • Niaz, M. (2001). A rational reconstruction of the origin of the covalent bond and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 623-641.
  • Pesen, A., Oral, B., & Epçaçan, U. (2020). Science High School Students’ Perceptions of Science High Schools in Turkey. Journal of Education and Future, 17, 39-52.
  • Peterson, R.F., & Treagust, D.F. (1989) Grade-12 students’ misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(6), 459–460.
  • Peterson, R.F., Treagust, D.F. & Garnett, P. (1989) Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade-11 and grade-12 students’ concepts of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4), 301–314.
  • Şendur, G. (2014). Are creative comparisons developed by prospectıve chemistry teachers evidendce of their conceptual understanding? The case of inter- and intramolecular forces. Chemistry Education Research and Pratice, 15, 689-719.
  • Taber, K. S. (1998). An alternative conceptual framework from chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 597–608.
  • Taber, K. S., Tsaparlis, G. & Nakiboğlu, C. (2012). Student conceptions of ionic bonding: Patterns of thinking across three European contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2843–2873.
  • Tsaparlis, G. & Pappa, E. T. (2012). Types of intra- and inter-molecular bonding: the case of general chemistry textbooks, in Proceedings of the ESERA 2011 Conference, C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien, and P. Clément (eds.), Strand 3. Lyon, France. http://www.esera.org/publications/esera-conference-proceedings/
  • Yılmaz, A. & Morgil, İ. (2001). Üniversite öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının belirlenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 20, 172 -178.

10th Grade Secondary School Students' Perceptions, Metaphors and Analogies related to the Covalent Bonding

Year 2020, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 198 - 213, 25.06.2020

Abstract

In this study, how 10th grade secondary school students describe the covalent bonding after learning covalent bonding topic, and which metaphors they use during their definitions were investigated. Also, the analogies of the students about the covalent bonding were examined. The present study includes a part from a comprehensive research on chemical bonding. From the data collected with a two-stage instrument developed for the comprehensive research, only analysis results related to covalent bond are presented in the present study. The sample of the study consisted of 297 tenth grade students 184 female and 113 male . The instrument used was two-stage, and in the first stage, the students were asked to describe the covalent bond in order to determine the students' perceptions and metaphors. In the second stage, a question containing the statement “covalent bond is like…….. Because ……” was given to the students to obtain their analogies about the covalent bond. Phenomenographic method was used to determine the students’ perceptions about covalent bonding and it was determined that students' perceptions about covalent bond were collected under seven themes. Content analysis was employed in the analysis of the students’ metaphors and analogies, and metaphors were collected in nine conceptual categories. After the analogies written by the students were analysed, it was decided that the analogies of the students were collected under six themes. At the end of the study, the recommendations were made about what should be considered in teaching covalent bonding

References

  • Akkuş, H., Tüzün, Ü. N. & Eyceyurt, G. (2013). Kovalent bağlar konusunda öğrenci imaj ve yanlış kavramalarının belirlenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD), 14(1), 287-303.
  • Ashworth, P. & Lucas, U. (1998). What is ‘world’ of phenomenography? Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 42(4), 415-431.
  • Arslan, M. M. & Bayrakçı, M. (2006). Metaforik düşünme ve öğrenme yaklaşımının eğitim öğretim açısından incelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 171, 100-108.
  • Bakan İ. & Kefe, İ. (2012). Kurumsal açıdan algı ve algı yönetimi. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 19-34.
  • Birk, H. P. & Kurtz, M. J. (1999). Effect of experience on retention and elimination of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 124-128.
  • Burrows, N. L. & Mooring, S. R. (2015). Using concept mapping to uncover students’ knowledge structures of chemical bonding concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 53–66. doi:10.1039/c4rp00180j
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2009). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. (21. Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Coll, R. K. & Treagust, D. F. (2002). Exploring tertiary students’ understanding of covalent bonding. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 241-267.
  • Erman, E. (2017). Factors contributing to students’ misconceptions in learning covalent bond. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(4), 520-537.
  • Furio, C. & Calatayud, M. (1996). Difficulties with the geometry and polarity of molecules. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(1), 36-41.
  • Köseoğlu, P. (2017). An analysis of university students’ perceptions of the concepts of “water” and “water pollution” through metaphors. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 13(8), 4343-4350.
  • Lancor, L. (2015). An analysis of metaphors used by students to describe energy in an ınterdisciplinary general science course. International Journal of Science Education, 37(5-6), 876-902.
  • Luxford, C. Y., & Bretz, S.L. (2014). Development of the bonding representations ınventory to ıdentify student misconceptions about covalent and ıonic bonding representations. Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 312−320.
  • Marton F. (1981). Phenomenography – describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177- 200.
  • Marton F. (2005). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. In R. R. Sherman & R. B. Webb (eds), Qualitative Research in Education: Focus and Methods. London and New York.
  • Mirzalar Kabapınar, F. & Adik, B. (2006). Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin kovalent bağda elektronların konum ve hareketlerini anlama biçimleri. M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 23, 205-228.
  • Nakiboğlu C. (2003). Instructional misconceptions of Turkish prospective chemistry teachers about atomic orbitals and hybridization. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4, 171-188.
  • Nakiboğlu, C. & Yıldırım, Ş. (2019) 10. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kimyasal Bağ ile ilgili Algıları, Kimyasal Bağı Tanımlamada Kullandıkları Metaforlar ve Yaptıkları Benzeşimler. Journal of Turkish Chemical Society: Section C. 4(2), 61-80.
  • Niaz, M. (2001). A rational reconstruction of the origin of the covalent bond and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 623-641.
  • Pesen, A., Oral, B., & Epçaçan, U. (2020). Science High School Students’ Perceptions of Science High Schools in Turkey. Journal of Education and Future, 17, 39-52.
  • Peterson, R.F., & Treagust, D.F. (1989) Grade-12 students’ misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(6), 459–460.
  • Peterson, R.F., Treagust, D.F. & Garnett, P. (1989) Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade-11 and grade-12 students’ concepts of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4), 301–314.
  • Şendur, G. (2014). Are creative comparisons developed by prospectıve chemistry teachers evidendce of their conceptual understanding? The case of inter- and intramolecular forces. Chemistry Education Research and Pratice, 15, 689-719.
  • Taber, K. S. (1998). An alternative conceptual framework from chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 597–608.
  • Taber, K. S., Tsaparlis, G. & Nakiboğlu, C. (2012). Student conceptions of ionic bonding: Patterns of thinking across three European contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2843–2873.
  • Tsaparlis, G. & Pappa, E. T. (2012). Types of intra- and inter-molecular bonding: the case of general chemistry textbooks, in Proceedings of the ESERA 2011 Conference, C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien, and P. Clément (eds.), Strand 3. Lyon, France. http://www.esera.org/publications/esera-conference-proceedings/
  • Yılmaz, A. & Morgil, İ. (2001). Üniversite öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının belirlenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 20, 172 -178.
There are 27 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Canan Nakiboğlu This is me

Şafak Yıldırım This is me

Publication Date June 25, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 8 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Nakiboğlu, C., & Yıldırım, Ş. (2020). Ortaöğretim 10. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kovalent Bağlanma ile ilgili Algıları, Metaforları ve Benzeşimleri. Karaelmas Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(1), 198-213.