FEN BİLGİSİ DERSLERİNDE BENZEŞİMLERİN ANALOJİ KULLANILABİLİRLİĞİNE İLİŞKİN ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ GÖRÜŞLERİ VE ÖRNEKLERİ

Öz

Fen eğitiminde analojinin öğrenmedeki rolü geniş ve yaygın bir şekilde araştırılmıştır. Bu araştırmalarda fen eğitiminde analoji yöntemini çeşitli yaklaşımlarla kullanmanın avantajları ve dezavantajları vurgulanmıştır. Önemli bir öğrenme ve öğretme aracı da olan analojiler, bilimsel fikir ve kavramların öğrenilmesi ve geliştirilmesinde önemli rol oynamaktadırlar. Analoji kullanımının en önemli amacı somut örneklerden yararlanarak soyut olayları olguları anlamayı geliştirmektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Analoji,Fen Eğitimi,Öğretmen Adayı,Fen Dersleri,Ders Planları

PRESERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS’ VIEWS ON USABILITY OF ANALOGIES IN SCIENCE COURSES AND THEIR EXAMPLES

Abstract

The role of analogy in learning has been extensively investigated in science education. In these researches, using of the strategy in the several approaches has been emphasized with advantages and disadvantages. The analogies that to be an important learning and teaching tool, play important role on learning and developing of scientific ideas and concepts. The most important purpose of the using analogy is to be developed the understanding of abstract cases phenomenon by utilizing from concrete examples. This study, includes pre-service science teachers’ views on usability of analogies in science courses and preparation analogy based syllabus in pre-study and post-study and the investigation of analogy examples which is exactly generated by themselves on the based of context and characteristic and category during the 8 weeks period

Keywords

• Analogy, Science Education, Pre-service Science Teachers, Science Courses, Syllabus

References

1. Bilalo lu, R. G. (2006). Altı Ya Çocuklarına Ba ı ıklık Sisteminin Analoji le Ö retiminin Ba arı ve Kalıcılı a Etkisi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Yayımlanmamı Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Adana
2. Brown, D. E. & Clement, J. (1987). Overcoming Misconceptions in Mechanics: A Comparison of Two Example-Based Teaching Strategies. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Assocation, Washington, DC.
3. Brown, D. E. & Clement, J. (1989). Overcoming Misconceptions via Analogical Reasoning: Abstract Transfer Versus Explanatory Model Construction. Instructional Science. 18, 237–261
4. Clement, J. (1987). Overcoming Students’ Misconceptions in Physics: The Role of Anchoring Intuitions and Analogical Validity. In J. Novak (Ed.) Proceedings of The 2nd International Seminar Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, v.3, 84-97
5. Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students preconceptions in physics, Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 30 (10), 1241–1257.
6. Çimen, S. (1999). Okulöncesi E itimde Analoji. Yayımlanmamı Seminer Raporu, A. Ü. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara
7. Dagher, Z. R. (1995). Review of studies on the effectiveness of instructional analogies in science education. Science Education, 79, 295–312.
8. Dagher, Z. R. (1998). The Case for Analogies in Teaching Science for Understanding, in Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H, Novak J. D., (Eds.) Teaching Science for Understanding; A Constructivist View, Academic Pres.

9. Driver, R. and Bell, B. (1986). Students’ Thinking and the Learning of Science: A Constructivist View. School Science Review, 67, 443 – 456.
10. Duit, R. (1991). On the Role of Analogies and Metaphors in Learning Science. Science Education. 75 (6), 649– 672.
11. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-Mappind: A Theoretical Analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, for 155–170.
12. Gentner, D. & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Reasoning and Learning by Analogy. American Psychologist. 52 (1), 32–34.
13. Glynn, S. M. (1989). The Teaching with Analogies Concepts in Expository Texts. In K. Explaining D. Muth (Ed.), Children’s Comprehension of Narrative and Expository Text: Research into Practice. Neward, DE: International Reading Association, 185–204.
14. Glynn, S. M. (1991). Explaining Science Concepts: A Teaching-With- Analogies-Model. In S. Glynn, R. Yeany, & B. Britton (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning Science, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 219–240.
15. Glynn, S. M., Britton, B. K., Semrud, M. & Muth, K. D. (1989). Analogical Reasoning and Problem Solving in Science Textbooks, In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), A Handbook of Creativity: Assessment, Research and Theory, New York: Plenum.
16. Glynn, S. M. & Duit, R. (1995). Learning science meaningfully: Constructing conceptual models. In S.M. Glynn and R. Duit (Eds.), Learning science in the schools: Research reforming practice (pp. 3–33). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
17. Heywood, D. (2002). The Place of Analogies in Science Education, Campridge Journal of Education, 32 (2), 64-75.
18. Karasar, N. (2001). Bilimsel Ara tırma Yöntemi: Kavramlar, lkeler, Teknikler. 11. Basım, Ankara, Nobel Yayınevi.
19. Rumelhart, D. E. & Normann, D. A. (1981). Analogical Processes in Learning. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 335–359.
20. Senemo lu, N. (2003). Geli im Ö renme ve Ö retim: Kuramdan Uygulamaya. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi
21. Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Coulson, R. L. & Anderson, D. K. (1989). Multiple Analogies for Complex Concepts: Antidotes for Analogy-Induced Misconception in Advanced Knowledge Acquisition. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortoni (Eds.). Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. Cambridge: Campridge University Pres, 498–531.
22. Wong, E. D. (1993). Understanding the Generative Capacity of Analogies as a Tool for Explanation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30 (10) 1259–1272.
23. Zeitoun, H. H. (1984). Teaching Scientific Analogies: A Proposed Model. Research in Science and Technology Education, 2, 107–125.