BibTex RIS Cite

FARKLI BRANŞLARDAKİ ALAN ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN SOSYAL YAPILANDIRICI YAKLAŞIMLA BİLİM ANLAYIŞLARININ GELİŞTİRİLMESİ

Year 2010, Volume: 11 Issue: 4, 263 - 292, 01.11.2010

Abstract

Bu çalıGmanın amacı Bilim ve Sanat Merkezi’nde görev yapmakta olan ve gökbilim kampı kapsamında mesleki geliGim sürecine dahil olan öğretmenlerin 1 süreç boyunca bilimin doğası ile ilgili görüGlerinde oluGan değiGiklikleri ve 2 etkinliklerin uygulanma yöntemleri ve verimliliği ile ilgili görüGlerini incelemektir. Farklı branGlarda görev yapmakta olan 26 öğretmen astronomi kavramları ile birlikte bilimin doğasının belli boyutlarının açık düGündürücü bir Gekilde kazandırıldığı ve farklı öğretim stratejilerinin kullanılanıldığı mesleki geliGim sürecine dahil olmuGlardır. Süreçte anket, alan notları, video kaydı ve yazılı dokümanlar kullanılarak elde dilen veriler nitel-yorumlayıcı yaklaGım kullanılarak analiz edilmiGtir. Analiz sonuçları farklı branGlardaki öğretmenlerin katılımıyla oluGturulan ve bilimin doğasının astronomi kavramları ile entegre bir biçimde farklı öğretim yöntemleri kullanarak öğretildiği mesleki geliGim sürecinin öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası ile ilgli kendilerinde olan görüGleri sorguladıkları, bilimin doğası ie ilgili farklı paradigmaların varlığını gördükleri ve aGina olmadıkları etkili diğer öğretim yöntemleriyle tanıGtıkları sosyal-yapılandırmacı bir ortam olduğunu göstermiGtir.

References

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy: A Project 2061 Report. NewYork: Oxford University Press
  • Atatürk, M. K. (1924). Samsun Öğretmenleriyle Konuşma. Atatürk'ün Söylev ve Demeçleri I-III. Bugünkü dille yayına hazırlayanlar: A. Sevim, M.A. Tural, İ. Öztoprak, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, Ankara.
  • Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El Khalick, F.(2000). Developing and acting upon one’s conception of yhe nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563-581.
  • BouJaoude, S. (2002). Balance of scientific literacy themes in science curricula: The case of Lebanon. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 139-156.
  • Bogdan, R. ve Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An Introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). London: Pearson Education Inc.
  • Demirbaş, M. & Yağbasan, R. (2005). Sosyal öğrenme teorisine dayalı öğretim etkinliklerinin, öğrencilerin bilimsel tutumlarının kalıcılığına olan etkisinin incelenmesi. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi, 18(2), 363-382.
  • Doğan, N. ve Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students’ and science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A National study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083–1112.
  • Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E. and Marion, S. (1996) Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: a re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261– 295.
  • ETS (Educational Testing Service) (1988) Science Learning Matters: The Science Report Card Interpretive Review (Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service).
  • Fensham, P.J. (1997). School science and its problems with scientific literacy. In R. Levinson, & J. Thomas (Eds.), Science today: Problem or crisis? London: Routledge.
  • Fensham, P.J (2002). Time to change drivers for scientific literacy. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2 (1), 9-24
  • Halloun, I. (1993) Lebanese public understanding of science. A survey (Junieh, Lebanon: CREST).
  • King, B. (1991). Begining teachers’ knowledge of and attitude toward history and philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 135-141.
  • Köseoğlu, F., Tümay, H. ve Üstün, U. (2010) Bilimin Doğası Öğretimi Mesleki Gelişim Paketinin Geliştirilmesi ve Öğretmen Adaylarına Uygulanması ile ilgili Tartışmalar. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,11(4), 129-163
  • Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
  • Lawson, A. E. (2002). Sound and faulty arguments generated by preservice biology teachers when testing hypothesis involving unobservable entities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39(3), 237-252.
  • Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–359.
  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002).Views of The nature of science Questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman içinde (derl.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (sayfa. 95- 132). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  • Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. Great Britain: Routledge Academic Publisher.
  • McComas, W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. W. F. McComas (derl.) the Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • MEB Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (2006). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi (4.-5. Sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara.
  • Miller, J. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112(2), 29-48.
  • Miller, J. (1989) Scientific literacy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, January, San Francisco, CA.
  • National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Shamos, M. (1995) The Myth of Scientific Literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.
  • Tobin, K. (2000). Interpretive research in science education. A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.) Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 487-512). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. M. Cole, V. JohnSteiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin yayıncılık.

Development of Science Views Held By Teachers in Different Disciplines through Social Constructivist Approach

Year 2010, Volume: 11 Issue: 4, 263 - 292, 01.11.2010

Abstract

The purposes of this study are to investigate 1 how teachers’ nature of science views have changed during professional development process as a part of astronomy camp and 2 teachers’ views on teaching strategies used throughout professional development process and effectiveness of those strategies. 26 teachers from different disciplines participated to the professional development process in which they learned basic astronomy and nature of science concepts using different teaching strategies based on integrated-explicit-reflective approach. Questionnaire, field notes, video records and written documents were used as data collection sources and were analyzed using qualitative-interpretive approach. Analysis of the data revealed that the professional development process, teachers learned astronomy and nature of science concepts using different teaching strategies based on explicit-reflective approach, created a social constructivist context for teachers where they question their own nature of science views, realize different paradigms about nature of science, and introduce with new teaching strategies they are not familiar with

References

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy: A Project 2061 Report. NewYork: Oxford University Press
  • Atatürk, M. K. (1924). Samsun Öğretmenleriyle Konuşma. Atatürk'ün Söylev ve Demeçleri I-III. Bugünkü dille yayına hazırlayanlar: A. Sevim, M.A. Tural, İ. Öztoprak, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, Ankara.
  • Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-El Khalick, F.(2000). Developing and acting upon one’s conception of yhe nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563-581.
  • BouJaoude, S. (2002). Balance of scientific literacy themes in science curricula: The case of Lebanon. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 139-156.
  • Bogdan, R. ve Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An Introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). London: Pearson Education Inc.
  • Demirbaş, M. & Yağbasan, R. (2005). Sosyal öğrenme teorisine dayalı öğretim etkinliklerinin, öğrencilerin bilimsel tutumlarının kalıcılığına olan etkisinin incelenmesi. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi, 18(2), 363-382.
  • Doğan, N. ve Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students’ and science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A National study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083–1112.
  • Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E. and Marion, S. (1996) Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: a re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261– 295.
  • ETS (Educational Testing Service) (1988) Science Learning Matters: The Science Report Card Interpretive Review (Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service).
  • Fensham, P.J. (1997). School science and its problems with scientific literacy. In R. Levinson, & J. Thomas (Eds.), Science today: Problem or crisis? London: Routledge.
  • Fensham, P.J (2002). Time to change drivers for scientific literacy. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2 (1), 9-24
  • Halloun, I. (1993) Lebanese public understanding of science. A survey (Junieh, Lebanon: CREST).
  • King, B. (1991). Begining teachers’ knowledge of and attitude toward history and philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 135-141.
  • Köseoğlu, F., Tümay, H. ve Üstün, U. (2010) Bilimin Doğası Öğretimi Mesleki Gelişim Paketinin Geliştirilmesi ve Öğretmen Adaylarına Uygulanması ile ilgili Tartışmalar. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,11(4), 129-163
  • Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
  • Lawson, A. E. (2002). Sound and faulty arguments generated by preservice biology teachers when testing hypothesis involving unobservable entities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39(3), 237-252.
  • Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331–359.
  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002).Views of The nature of science Questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman içinde (derl.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (sayfa. 95- 132). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  • Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. Great Britain: Routledge Academic Publisher.
  • McComas, W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. W. F. McComas (derl.) the Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • MEB Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (2006). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi (4.-5. Sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara.
  • Miller, J. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112(2), 29-48.
  • Miller, J. (1989) Scientific literacy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, January, San Francisco, CA.
  • National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Shamos, M. (1995) The Myth of Scientific Literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4–14.
  • Tobin, K. (2000). Interpretive research in science education. A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.) Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 487-512). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. M. Cole, V. JohnSteiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin yayıncılık.
There are 30 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Yasemin Özdem This is me

Betül Demirdöğen This is me

Sevinç Nihal Yeşiloğlu This is me

Mustafa Kurt This is me

Publication Date November 1, 2010
Published in Issue Year 2010 Volume: 11 Issue: 4

Cite

APA Özdem, Y., Demirdöğen, B., Yeşiloğlu, S. N., Kurt, M. (2010). FARKLI BRANŞLARDAKİ ALAN ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN SOSYAL YAPILANDIRICI YAKLAŞIMLA BİLİM ANLAYIŞLARININ GELİŞTİRİLMESİ. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(4), 263-292.

2562219122   19121   19116   19117     19118       19119       19120     19124