Kültürel-Tekno Bağlamsal Yaklaşım: Sosyobilimsel Konuların Öğretilmesine Yönelik Örnek Uygulama Adımları

Öz

Bu çalışma, fen eğitiminde kültür-temelli konuların öğretilmesinde yeni bir yaklaşım olan kültürel-tekno bağlamsal yaklaşımın (KTBY) sosyobilimsel bir konu olarak yapay zekâ odağında değerlendirilmesi, kavramsallaştırılması ve uygulama basamaklarına yönelik bir örneğin sunulmasını içermektedir. KTBY henüz on yıllık bir kavramsal geçmişe sahip olan, kültür, teknoloji ve bağlamın bir potada ele alındığı yeni bir yaklaşımdır. Yerel özelliği bakımından sosyobilimsel konular (SBKlar) için uygun olabilecek bu yaklaşıma dair örnek bir uygulama süreci oluşturulmuştur. Bu örneğin fen eğitiminde önemli bir yer tutan SBKların öğretilmesinde araştırmacılara yol gösterici bir çerçeve çizmesi umulmaktadır. Çalışmada uygulama basamakları araştırmacılar için daha kullanılır hale getirmek amacıyla isimlendirilmiştir. KTBY henüz oldukça yeni bir yaklaşım olduğundan, okuyucuların bu basamak isimlendirmeleri veya verilen uygulama örneğinde olası eksiklikleri eleştirel bir gözle okumaları ve varsa eksiklikleri düzeltmek için yeni çalışmalarda tartışmaları önerilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kültürel-tekno bağlamsal yaklaşım
• sosyobilimsel konular
• yapay zekâ
• uygulama örneği

Culturo-Techno-Contextual Approach: Sample Implementation Steps for Teaching Socioscientific Issues

Abstract

The current study aims to evaluate, conceptualize, and provide a sample implementation of the culturo-techno-contextual approach (CTCA) on the basis of artificial intelligence as a socioscientific issue in teaching culture-based issues in science education. CTCA is a new approach with a conceptual history of ten years in which culture, technology, and context are handled together. A sample implementation process was created for this approach, which may be suitable for the teaching of other socioscientific issues (SSIs). It is hoped that this sample implementation will provide a guiding framework for researchers in the teaching of SSIs, which have an important place in science education. In the study, the implementation steps are named to make it more usable for researchers. As CTCA is still a relatively new approach, it is recommended that readers critically read these steps and detect possible shortcomings in the given sample implementation and address them in new studies, if any.

Keywords

• Culturo-techno-contextual approach
• socioscientific issues
• artificial intelligence
• sample implementation

References

1. Adebayo, I., Oladejo, A. I., & Okebukola, P. A. (2022 March 27-30). Examining the relative effectiveness of CTCA in improving secondary school students' achievement in genetics. [Conference presentation]. NARST 95th Annual International Conference: Unity and Inclusion for Global Scientific Literacy: Invite as a Community. Unite as a Community, Vancouver, British Columbia.
2. Ademola, I., Okebukola, P. A., Oladejo, A. I., Gbeleyi, O., Onawugbeda, F., Awaah, F. Agbanimu, D., & Peter, E. (2022 March 27-30). Improving the achievement of secondary school students: How can CTCA help in ecology? [Conference presentation]. NARST 95th Annual International Conference: Unity and Inclusion for Global Scientific Literacy: Invite as a Community. Unite as a Community, Vancouver, British Columbia.
3. Adeosun, G., Oladejo, A. I., & Okebukola, P. A. (2022 March 27-30). Exploring the role of culture on students’ learning of difficult concepts in biology: CTCA in action. [Conference presentation]. NARST 95th Annual International Conference: Unity and Inclusion for Global Scientific Literacy: Invite as a Community. Unite as a Community, Vancouver, British Columbia.
4. Akçöltekin, A., Özdemı̇z, B., Genç, S. Z., & Şevgin, H. (2022). Fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin Covid 19 pandemi dönemi fen bilimleri dersi uzaktan eğitim uygulamalarına yönelik ihtiyaçlarının SWOT analizi ile incelenmesi [The investigation of science teachers' needs for distance education applications during the Covid 19 pandemic period through SWOT analysis]. International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Education, 6(1), 50–62. doi: 10.29329/ijiape.2022.437.5
5. Aldahmash, A. H., Alshamrani, S. M., Alshaya, F. S., & Alsarrani, N. A. (2019). Research trends in in-service science teacher professional development from 2012 to 2016. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 163–178. doi: 10.29333/iji.2019.12211a
6. Altmeyer, S., & Dreesmann, D. (2020). “The tree was there first”– using an everyday ecological dilemma to explore the personal orientations of secondary school students in environmental decision-making. Environmental Education Research, 27(1), 67–87. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2020.1853062
7. Awaah, F. (2023). In the classroom I enhance students understanding of entrepreneurship development –the culturo–techno-contextual approach. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, doi: 10.1108/JRIT-08-2022-0047
8. Bakioğlu, B., & Çevik, M. (2020). COVID-19 pandemisi sürecinde fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin uzaktan eğitime ilişkin görüşleri. Turkish Studies, 15(4), 109–129. doi: 10.7827/TurkishStudies.43502

9. Balgopal, M. M., Wallace, A. M., & Dahlberg, S. (2017). Writing from different cultural contexts: How college students frame an environmental SSI through written arguments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(2), 195–218. doi: 10.1002/tea.21342
10. Chang Rundgren, S. N., & Rundgren, C. J. (2010). SEE-SEP: From a separate to a holistic view of socioscientific issues. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 1–24. Retrieved from https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/download/v11_issue1_files/changsn.pdf
11. Chu, H.-E., Martin, S. N., & Park, J. (2019). A theoretical framework for developing an intercultural STEAM program for Australian and Korean students to enhance science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(7), 1251–1266. doi: 10.1007/s10763-018-9922-y
12. Çapkınoğlu, E., Yılmaz, S., & Leblebicioğlu, G. (2020). Quality of argumentation by seventh-graders in local socioscientific issues. J Res Sci Teach, 57, 827–855. doi: 10.1002/tea.21609
13. Çiftçi, A., Topçu, M. S., & Foulk, J. A. (2022). Pre-service early childhood teachers’ views on STEM education and their STEM teaching practices. Research in Science & Technological Education, 40(2), 207–233, doi: 10.1080/02635143.2020.1784125
14. Çilekrenkli, A., & Kaya, E. (2022). Learning science in context: Integrating a holistic approach to nature of science in the lower secondary classroom. Science & Education, doi: 10.1007/s11191-022-00336-0
15. EL-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M., & Alhammad, K. (2017). Context of STEM integration in chools: Views from in-service science teachers. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2459–2484, doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2017.01235a
16. Eş, H., & Öztürk, N. (2021). An activity for transferring the multidimensional structure of SSI to middle school science courses: I discover myself in the decision-making process with SEE-STEP! Research in Science Education, 51, 889–910. doi: 10.1007/s11165-019-09865-1
17. Falloon, G., Hatzigianni, M., Bower, M., Forbes, A., & Stevenson, M. (2020). Understanding K-12 STEM education: A framework for developing STEM literacy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(3), 369–385. doi: 10.1007/s10956-020-09823-x
18. Herman, B. C., Owens, D. C., Oertli, R. T., Zangori, L. A., & Newton, M. H. (2019). Exploring the complexity of students’ scientific explanations and associated nature of science views within a place-based socioscientific issue context. Science & Education, 28, 329–366. doi: 10.1007/s11191-019-00034-4
19. Hodson, D. (2020). Going beyond STS education: Building a curriculum for sociopolitical activism. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 20, 592–622. doi: 10.1007/s42330-020-00114-6
20. Karahan, E., & Roehrig, G. H. (2019). Case studies of science teachers designing socioscientific issues-based instruction. Hacettepe University Journal of Education. 34(1), 71–89. doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2018044772
21. Klaver, L. T., Walma van der Molen, J. H., Sins, P. H. M., & Guérin, L. J. F. (2022). Students' engagement with socioscientific issues: Use of sources of knowledge and attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1125-1161. doi: 10.1002/tea.21828
22. Kotluk, N., & Kocakaya, S. (2018). Türkiye için alternatif bir anlayış: Kültürel değerlere duyarlı eğitim [An alternative approach for Turkey: Culturally relevant/responsive education]. YYU Journal of Education Faculty, 15(1), 749–789 doi: 10.23891/efdyyu.2018.86
23. Ladachart, L., & Ladachart, L. (2021). Preservice biology teachers’ decision-making and informal reasoning about culture-based socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 43(5), 641–671 doi: 10.1080/09500693.2021.1876958
24. Ladson-Billings, G. (2021). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Asking a different question. New York: Teachers College Press.
25. Ladson-Billings, G. (2022). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. California: John Wiley & Sons.
26. Li, Y., Wang, K., Xiao, Y., & Froyd, J. E. (2020). Research and trends in STEM education: a systematic review of journal publications. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(11), doi: 10.1186/s40594-020-00207-6
27. Lin, T. J., Lin, T. C., Potvin, P., & Tsai, C. C. (2019). Research trends in science education from 2013 to 2017: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 41(3), 367–387. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2018.1550274
28. Martins, M., & Macagno, F. (2022). An analytical instrument for coding and assessing argumentative dialogues in science teaching contexts. Science Education, 106, 573–609. doi: 10.1002/sce.21708
29. Mashoko, D. (2022). Indigenous artefacts and physics curriculum: teaching science as a cultural way of knowing. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 17, 863–874. doi: 10.1007/s11422-021-10085-1
30. Nugroho, O. F., Permanasari, A., Firman, Riandi, H. (2019, July 26-28). STEM approach based on local wisdom to enhance sustainability literacy. [Conference presentation]. AIP The 2nd International Conference on Science, Mathematics, Environment, and Education, Surakarta, Indonesia doi: 10.1063/1.5139804
31. Okebukola, P. A. (2020). Breaking barriers to learning: The culture-techno-contextual approach (CTCA). Delhi: Sterling Publishers.
32. Oladejo, A. I., & Ebisin, A. F. (2021). Virtual laboratory: An alternative laboratory for science teaching and learning. Federal Polytechnic Ilaro Journal of Pure and Applied Science, 3(1), 82–90. https://fepi-jopas.federalpolyilaro.edu.ng/index.php/journal/article/view/16
33. Oladejo, A. I., Okebukola, P. A., Adebayo, I., Adeosun G., Agbanimu, D. O., Ademola, I., Onawugbeda, F. I., Peter, E., Gbeleyi, O. & Awaah, F. (2022, March 27-30). I am CTCA, and this is my first attempt in the physics class - How will I perform? [Conference presentation]. NARST 95th Annual International Conference: Unity and Inclusion for Global Scientific Literacy: Invite as a Community. Unite as a Community, Vancouver, British Columbia.
34. Oladejo, A. I., Okebukola, P. A., Akinola, V. O., Amusa, J. O., Akintoye, H., Owolabi, T., Shabani, J., & Olateju, T. T. (2023). Changing the narratives of physics-learning in secondary schools: The role of culture, technology, and locational context. Education Sciences, 13, 146. doi: 10.3390/educsci13020146
35. Onowugbeda, F. U., Okebukola, P. A., Agbanimu, D. O., Ajayi, O. A., Oladejo, A. I., Awaah, F., Ademola, I. A., Gbeleyi, O. A., Peter, E. O., & Ige, A. M. (2022). Can the culturo-techno-contextual approach (CTCA) promote students’ meaningful learning of concepts in variation and evolution?. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-17. doi: 10.1080/02635143.2022.2084060
36. Onowugbeda, F. U., Agbanimu, D. O., Okebukola, P. A., Ibukunolu, A. A., Odekeye, O. T., & Olori, O. E. (2023). Reducing anxiety and promoting meaningful learning of biology concepts through a culturally sensitive and context-specific instructional method. International Journal of Science Education, 1-18. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2023.2202799
37. Ortiz-Revilla, J., Greca, I. M., & Arriassecq, I. A (2022). Theoretical framework for integrated STEM education. Science & Education, 31, 383–404 (2022). doi: 10.1007/s11191-021-00242-x
38. Patel, F. (1997). Culture in science education. European Journal of Intercultural Studies, 8(3), 213–230. doi: 10.1080/0952391970080301
39. Perin, D. (2011). Facilitating student learning through contextualization: A review of evidence. Community College Review, 39(3), 268–295 doi: 10.1177/0091552111416227
40. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. doi: 10.1002/tea.20009
41. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112–138. doi: 10.1002/tea.20042
42. Sadler, T. D., Foulk, J. A., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2017). Evolution of a model for socio-scientific issue teachingand learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology,5(2), 75–87 doi: 10.18404/ijemst.55999
43. Silber-Varod, V., Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Geri, N. (2019), Tracing research trends of 21st-century learning skills. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3099–3118. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12753
44. Smith, T., Avraamidou, L. & Adams, J. D. (2022). Culturally relevant/responsive and sustaining pedagogies in science education: Theoretical perspectives and curriculum implications. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 17, 637–660. doi: 10.1007/s11422-021-10082-4
45. Tekin, N., & Aslan, O. (2023 June 8-11). Kültürel-tekno bağlamsal yaklaşım: Fen eğitiminde kültür temelli yeni bir yaklaşım ve sosyobilimsel konular bağlamında uygulama örneği [Conference presentation]. 10th Eurasian Educational Research Congress, Ankara.
46. Terenko, O., & Ogienko, O. (2020). How to teach pedagogy courses online at university in COVID-19 pandemic: Search for answers. Revista Romaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 12(1), 173–179. doi: 10.18662/rrem/12.1sup2/261
47. Topçu, M. S. (2015). Sosyobilimsel konular ve öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
48. Türer, C. (2020). Ahlak ve bilişim teknolojileri [Ethics and information Technologies]. In M. Şeker, Y. Bulduklu, C. Korkut & M. Doğrul (Eds.), Bilişim teknolojileri ve iletişim: Birey ve toplum güvenliği [Information technologies and communication: Individual and community safety] (pp. 265–278). Turkish Academy of Sciences.
49. Wan, D., Zhang, H., & Wei, B. (2018). Impact of Chinese culture on pre-service cience Tteachers’ views of the nature of science. Science & Education, 27, 321–355. doi: 10.1007/s11191-018-9968-9
50. Xie, Y., Fang, M., & Shauman, K. (2015). STEM education. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 331–357. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145659
51. Yuecheng, W. (2023). How to integrate traditional culture into STEM teaching. Frontiers in Educational Research, 6(7), 26–31, doi: 10.25236/FER.2023.060705
52. Zeide, E. (2019). Artificial intelligence in higher education: Applications, promise and perils, and ethical questions. EDUCAUSE Review, 54(3), 31–39.
53. Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., Ruzek, M., Linder, A., & Lin, S.-S. (2013). Cross-cultural epistemological orientations to socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 50, 251–283. doi: 10.1002/tea.21077
54. Zeidler, D. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2017). Science education research thrives in an open, global community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54, 437–438. doi: 10.1002/tea.21393
55. Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New directions in socioscientific issues research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(11). doi: 10.1186/s43031-019-0008-7