Teaching of Magnetism Unit Topics Via Active Learning Applications

Year 2022, Volume: 9 Issue: 6, 286 - 311, 01.11.2022

Fatma Nur Büyükbayraktar , Refik Dilber

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.140.9.6

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of active learning on students’ achievement in the unit of magnetism. It is important to create proper teaching environments in order to ensure the active participation of students in learning processes. Many different methods and techniques may be used for active participation. Detailed information should be provided for the teachers on how these methods and techniques can be implemented. For this reason, an active learning environment was created in the present study by way of using worksheets accompanied by experiments, simulations, modelling, garden activity and games. It was explained how these activities are implemented for each of the acquisitions related with the magnetism unit topics. The study employed sequential explanatory mixed design. The subject of this study consisted of 98 eleventh grade students in a high school in Türkiye. The data were acquired via an open ended and multiple-choice conceptual achievement test, observation forms and interviews. The findings obtained illustrated that active learning applications increase academic achievements of students at a statistically significant level. In addition, it was concluded that active learning applications make a positive impact on the interest, attitude and motivations of the students towards the physics course. The results show that magnetism unit topics are effective in providing a conceptual change. It is suggested to use the applications shared in the present study for the teaching of abstract subjects such as magnetism. In this way, it may be possible to create learning environments that will enable instructors to reach the desired goals.

Keywords

Physics education, Active learning applications, Magnetism, Electromagnetism, Conceptual change

References

• Acar, B. (2008). “Acid and bases” in high school chemistry lesson. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
• Açıkgöz, K. Ü. (2003). Active Learning. İzmir: Eğitim Dünyası.
• Aksu, Ş. (2010). The effect of active learning method on preventing misconceptions in the subject of “mole” in Chemistry-1 Programme in high school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir. Anlı Akyıldız, R. (2008). Application of active learning methods in class management (in chemistry education). Unpublished master’s thesis, Yeditepe University, İstanbul.
• Avinç Akpınar, İ. (2010). The preparation,implementation and evaluation of active learning activities based on constructivist approach in teaching solutions in chemistry course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Atatürk University, Erzurum.
• Baki, A., & Gökçek, T. (2012). A general overview of mixed method researches. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 11(42), 1-21. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/70397
• Canpolat, N., Pınarbaşı, T., Bayrakçeken, S., & Geban, Ö. (2004). Some Common Misconceptions in Chemistry. Journal of Gazi Faculty of Education, 24(1), 135-146. http://www.gefad.gazi.edu.tr/en/download/article-file/77339
• Demirci, C. (2000). Application of active learning approach in primary education. Retrieved from www.epo.hacettepe.edu.tr
• Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science, 332, 862-864. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1201783
• Dick, W. (1992). An instructional designer’s view of constructivism. In Duffy T. and Jonassen D. (Ed.). Constructivism and The Technology of İnstruction: A Conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44427519
• Ersoy, F. N. B., & Dilber, R. (2016). The opinions of technical and vocational high school students and teachers about learning environment which are formed by active learning method. Journal of National Education, 45(212), 45-59. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/441230
• Fei, V. L., & Hung, D. (2016). Teachers as learning designers: What technology has to do with learning: A view from Singapore. Educational Technology, 26-29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44430473
• Fensham, P. J. (1992). Science and Technology. In P. W. Jackson (Ed). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 789-829). New York: Macmillan Publushing Company.
• Fisher, K. (2010). Technology-enabled active learning environments: An appraisal. Retrieved from https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kmbjxzrmc0p-en
• Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Procceding of the National Academy of Science, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2014/05/08/1319030111.full.pdf?utm_so
• Glasersfeld, E. V. (1989). Constructivism in Education. Oxford: Pergamon.
• Glasersfeld, E., V. (1995). A Constructivist Approach Teaching. In Steffe P. L.and Gale J. (Ed.). Construtivism in Education (pp. 3-15). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand student survey of mechanics teat data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED441679.pdf
• Hand, B., & Treagust, D. F. (1991). Student achievement and science curriculum development using a constructivist framework. School Science and Mathematics, 91(4), 172-176. https://www.academia.edu/26222624/Student_Achievement_and_Science_Curriculum_Development_Using_a_Constructive_Framework?from=cover_page
• Hyun, J., Ediger, R., & Lee, D. (2017). Students' satisfaction on their learning process in active learning and traditional classrooms. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(1), 108-118. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1135821.pdf
• Kalem, S., & Fer, S. (2003). The effects of active learning model on students’ learning, teaching and communication. Educational Sciences Theory & Practise, 3(2), 433-461. https://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=0813439f-26a0-4796-b044-b1675718096b%40sdc-v-sessmgr02
• Luckin, R., Bligh, B., Manches, A., Ainsworth, S., Crook, C., & Noss, R. (2012). Decoding learning: The proof, promise and potential of digital education. Retrieved from https://apo.org.au/node/32254
• Meltzer, D. E., & Thornton, R. K. (2012). Resource letter ALIP–1: Active-learning instruction in physics citation. American Journal of Physics, 80, 478. http://physicseducation.net/docs/Meltzer_and_Thornton_2012.pdf
• Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. Sage Publications.
• Nakamura, C. M. (2012). The pathway active learning environment: An interactive web-based tool for physics education. Doctor of philosophy dissertation. Kansas State University, College of Education.
• Naron, C. (2011). Active learning in the physics classroom. Doctor of philosophy dissertation. Walden University, College of Education.
• National Research Council (NRC) (2012). Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and İmproving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13362
• Nelson, L. P., & Crow, M. L. (2014). Do active-learning strategies improve students’ critical thinking? Higher Education Studies, 4(2), 77-90. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1076485.pdf
• Oblinger, D. (2005). Leading the transition from classrooms to learning spaces. Educause Quarterly, 1(7-12). http://www.fisica.uniud.it/~stefanel/PerMarisa/InformalLearning/Articoli/Oblingereqm0512Oblinger.pdf
• OECD (2015). Students, Computers and Learning. Making the Connection. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en
• Park, E. L., & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: Traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education, 68(5), 749-771. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0.pdf
• Parvin, F. N. (1989). Integration of communication skills with active learning techniques in Science. (Doctoral dissertation, Dissertation Abstract International).
• Patton, M. Q. (2014). Nitel Araştırma ve Değerlendirme Yöntemleri. (M. Bütün ve S. B. Demir, çev.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Situational interest and academic achievement in the active-learning classroom. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 58-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.11.001
• Sauricki, J. L. (1989). Shall women vote? An active-learning curriculum unit for college student. (Doctoral dissertation, Dissertation Abstract International).
• Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational psychology review, 13(1), 23-52. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1009004801455.pdf
• Seferoğlu, S. S. (2015). Technology use and applications in schools: Observations, problems and solutions. Artı Eğitim, 123, 90-91. http://www.egitimtercihi.com/okulgazetesi/17207-okullarda-teknoloji-kullan-m-ve-uygulamalar.html
• Sökmen, N. (2000). Active education methods practiced in undergradute chemistry courses. Education and Science, 25(117), 29-34. http://eb.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/5288
• Wulandari, S. (2013). Inquiry-based active learning: the enhancement of attitude and understanding of the concept of experimental design in biostatics course. Asian Social Science, 9(12), 212-219. https://scholar.google.com.tr/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=tr&user=jQCQ2PYAAAAJ&citation_for_view=jQCQ2PYAAAAJ:9yKSN-GCB0IC
• Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., ..., & Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476-6483. https://www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1916903117/-/DCSupplemental.
• Thornton, R. K., Kuhl, D., Cummings, K., & Marx, J. (2009). Comparing the force and motion conceptual evaluation and the force concept İnventory. Physical Review ST Physics Education Research, 5(1). https://journals.aps.org/prper/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.010105
• Uysal, Ö. F. (1996). The effect of active student participation on learning outcomes in the learning process. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.
• Yılmaz, A. (1995). The effect of active method on student success in high school 2nd grade physics course. Unpublished master’s thesis, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir.