FEN SINIFLARINDA MEYDANA GELEN DİYALOGLAR VE ÖĞRENME ÜZERİNE ETKİLERİ

Osman Nafiz Kaya; Ziya Kılıç

TYPES OF DIALOGS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON LEARNING IN SCIENCE CLASSROOMS

Year 2010, Volume: 18 Issue: 1, 115 - 130, 01.01.2010

Abstract

The role of dialogs among students and between students and teachers in science classrooms on students’ learning of science is very important. Students should involve in dialogs that support dialogic argumentations in classrooms for the effective teaching of science. In this study, the characteristics of dialogs with relevant examples that often happen in science classrooms and effects of these dialogs on students’ learning are first presented. Then, definitions and types of argumentation, including shared and different aspects of argumentation, are elaborated. Recommendations for teachers about how classroom dialogs could be done better in order to promote meaningful learning in science classrooms are discussed.

Keywords

Science Education, Dialogs in Science Classrooms, Argumentation

References

4. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
6. Lemke, J. L. (1988) Games, semantics and classroom education. Linguistics and Education, 1, 81–99.
7. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E. and Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12.
8. Driver, R., Newton, P. and Osborne J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
9. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B. and Duschl, R. (2000). “Doing the Lesson” or “Doing Science”: Argument in High School Genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
10. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. and Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1171- 1190.
11. Newton, P., Driver, R. and Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553–576.
12. Mehan, H. (1979). “Learning lessons.” Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Kaya. O. N. (2005). Tartışma Teorisine Dayalı Öğretim Yaklaşımının Öğrencilerin Maddenin Tanecikli Yapısı Konusundaki Başarılarına ve Bilimin Doğası Hakkındaki Kavramalarına Etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Ankara.
14. Van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F.S., Blair, J.A., Johnson, R.H., Krabbe, E.C.W., Plantin, C., Walton, D.N., Willard, C.A., Woods, J. and Zarefsky, D. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory: a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Steinkuehler, C. A., Derry, S. J., Levin, J. R. and Kim, J-B. (2000). Argumentative reasoning in online discussion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 24-28. ED 443 401.
16. Krummheuer, G. (1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In P. Cobb ve H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), Emergence of mathematical meaning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Keefer, M. W., Zeitz, C. M. and Resnick, L. B. (2000). Judging the Quality of Peer-Led Student Dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 53-81.
18. Osborne, J. F., Erduran, S. and Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.
19. Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Walton, D.N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Reed Elsevier.

FEN SINIFLARINDA MEYDANA GELEN DİYALOGLAR VE ÖĞRENME ÜZERİNE ETKİLERİ

Year 2010, Volume: 18 Issue: 1, 115 - 130, 01.01.2010

Osman Nafiz Kaya Ziya Kılıç

Abstract

Fen sınıflarında öğrenciler ve öğretmen-öğrenci arasında meydana gelen diyalogların, öğrencilerin öğrenmeleri üzerindeki rolü büyüktür. Etkin bir fen öğretimi için, öğrencilerin sınıflarda tartışma ortamını destekleyen veya geliştiren diyaloglar içerisinde olmaları gerekir. Bu çalışmada, ilk olarak fen sınıflarında sıkça meydana gelen diyalogların özellikleri ilgili örneklerle açıklanmış ve bu diyalogların öğrencilerin feni öğrenmeleri üzerine etkileri ele alınmıştır. Daha sonra, tartışmanın ne olduğu, türleri ve bu türler arasındaki ortak ve farklı yönler üzerinde durulmuştur. Fen sınıflarında anlamlı öğrenmeyi artırmak amacıyla, öğretmenlere, nasıl daha etkin sınıf içi diyaloglar kurabilecekleri ile ilgili çeşitli öneriler sunulmuştur.

Keywords

Fen Eğitimi, Fen Sınıflarındaki Diyaloglar, Tartışma

References

4. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
6. Lemke, J. L. (1988) Games, semantics and classroom education. Linguistics and Education, 1, 81–99.
7. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E. and Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12.
8. Driver, R., Newton, P. and Osborne J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
9. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B. and Duschl, R. (2000). “Doing the Lesson” or “Doing Science”: Argument in High School Genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
10. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. and Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1171- 1190.
11. Newton, P., Driver, R. and Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553–576.
12. Mehan, H. (1979). “Learning lessons.” Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Kaya. O. N. (2005). Tartışma Teorisine Dayalı Öğretim Yaklaşımının Öğrencilerin Maddenin Tanecikli Yapısı Konusundaki Başarılarına ve Bilimin Doğası Hakkındaki Kavramalarına Etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), Ankara.
14. Van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F.S., Blair, J.A., Johnson, R.H., Krabbe, E.C.W., Plantin, C., Walton, D.N., Willard, C.A., Woods, J. and Zarefsky, D. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory: a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Steinkuehler, C. A., Derry, S. J., Levin, J. R. and Kim, J-B. (2000). Argumentative reasoning in online discussion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 24-28. ED 443 401.
16. Krummheuer, G. (1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In P. Cobb ve H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), Emergence of mathematical meaning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Keefer, M. W., Zeitz, C. M. and Resnick, L. B. (2000). Judging the Quality of Peer-Led Student Dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 53-81.
18. Osborne, J. F., Erduran, S. and Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.
19. Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Walton, D.N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Reed Elsevier.

There are 18 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language	Turkish
Journal Section	Research Article
Authors	Osman Nafiz Kaya This is me Ziya Kılıç This is me
Publication Date	January 1, 2010
Published in Issue	Year 2010 Volume: 18 Issue: 1

Cite

APA	Kaya, O. N., & Kılıç, Z. (2010). FEN SINIFLARINDA MEYDANA GELEN DİYALOGLAR VE ÖĞRENME ÜZERİNE ETKİLERİ. Kastamonu Education Journal, 18(1), 115-130.