Investigation of Prospective Science Teachers’ Understandings on Ergastic Substances with the Semantic Mappings

Abstract

The aim of this study was investigated of prospective science teachers’ understandings on ergastic substances with the semantic mappings. This study was phenomenological research method. 38 prospective science teachers in the science teaching department of a public university participated in the research. The prospective science teachers were asked to prepare the semantic mappings about Ergastic Substances. In this study, student products are 36 semantic mappings prepared by the prospective science teachers. The semantic mappings were analyzed content analysis method. According to the findings obtained from the research, it can be said that in the semantic mapping, the prospective science teachers used most of concepts related to Ergastic Substances in the experiments. Additionally, it can be said that conducting experiments and preparing the semantic mappings have important contributions to the teaching, researching and associating of concepts. In order to eliminate the difficulties, intervals applications at different times will contribute to the literature instead of one-off applications. According to the results of 36 semantic mapping prepared by the prospective science teachers, a semantic mapping containing 6 groups and 140 concepts was formed.

Keywords

• Conceptual investigation,
• ergastic substances,
• science education,
• semantic mappings

References

1. Aktepe, V., Cepheci, E., Irmak, S., & Palaz, Ş. (2017). Concept teaching in social studies and a theoretical study on techniques suitable in concept teaching. Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler EğitimiDergisi, 3(1), 33-50.
2. Algan, G., & Toker, M. C. (2004). Bitki hücresi ve bitki morfolojisi laboratuvar kitabı [Plant cell and plant morphology laboratory book] (IV. ed.). A.Ü. Fen Fakültesi Döner Sermaye İşletmesi.
3. Alkan, G. (2013). How to effect using different types of experiments in academic achievement, attitudes on laboratory and science anxiety levels on primary school sixth grade students in science and technology lessons [Unpublished master dissertation]. Institute of Educational Science and Akdeniz University.
4. Antonacci, P. A. (1991). Students search for meaning in the text through semantic mapping. Social Education, 55(3), 174-175.
5. Arslan, E. (2008). Erken çocukluk döneminde bilişsel gelişim. In M. Engin Deniz (Ed.). Erken çocukluk döneminde gelişim (pp. 2-25). Maya.
6. Artun, (2018). Fen eğitiminde kavram öğretimi. In O. Karamustafaoğlu, Ö. Temel and Sarı (Eds.). Güncel yaklaşım ve yöntemlerle etkinlik destekli fen öğretimi (pp. 52-69). Pegem.
7. Avery, P. G., Baker, J., & Gross, S. H. (1997). “Mapping” learning at the secondary level. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 70(5), 279-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.1997.10543936
8. Berck, K. H. (1999). Biologiedidaktik: Grundlagen und Methoden. Wiebelsheim: Quelle & Meyer Verlag & Co.

9. Candan, A. S. (1998). Teaching history based on concepts [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Institute of Social Science and Gazi University.
10. Çelik, L. (2017). Öğretim materyallerinin hazırlanması ve seçimi (9th ed.). In Ö. Demirel & E. Altun (Eds.). Öğretim teknolojileri ve material tasarımı (pp. 27-66). Pegem.
11. Çepni, S., & Ayvacı, S. (2006). Kuramdan uygulamaya fen veteknoloji ögretimi. Pegem.
12. Clements, D. H. (1999). ‘Concrete’ manipulatives, concrete ideas. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1(1), 45–60.
13. Dilek, Y., & Yürük, N. (2013). Using semantic mapping technique in vocabulary teaching at pre-intermediate level. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1531-1544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.221
14. Efe, N. (2000). Genel biyoloji laboratuvarı. Bakanlar Media.
15. Fidan, N. K. (2008). Teachers' views with regard to the use of tools and materials in the primary level. Kuramsal Eğitim Bilim Dergisi, 1(1), 48-61.
16. Fitzgerald, W. J., Elmore, J., Kung, M., & Stennen, A. J. (2017). The conceptual complexity of vocabulary in elementary‐grades core science program textbooks. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(4), 417-442. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.184
17. Gill, L. S., Nyawuame, H. G. K., Aibangbee, M. I., & Agho, D. A. (1991). Nature of ergastic substances in some Mediterranean angiospermous seeds—vi. FeddesRepertorium, 102(7‐8), 613-628.
18. Gödek, Y., Polat, D., & Kaya, V. H. (2018). Fen bilgisi öğretiminde kavram yanılgıları, kavram yanılgılarının tespiti-giderilmesi ve uygulamalı örnekler. Pegem.
19. Güneş, F. (2007). Türkçe öğretimi ve zihinsel yapılandırma. Nobel.
20. Güneş, T., Dilek, N. Ş., Demir, E. S., Hoplan, M., & Çelikoğlu, M. (2010). A qualitative research on teachers' concept teaching, misconceptions and elimination of misconceptions. International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 11-13 Kasım, Antalya, Türkiye.
21. Idu, M., & Onyibe, H. I. (2011). Nature of ergastic substances in some Poaceae seeds. African Journal of Biotechnology, 10(48), 9800-9803.
22. İnel-Ekici, D. (2014). Kavram öğretimi. Ş. S. Anagün ve N. Duban (Eds.). Fen bilimleri öğretimi içinde (pp. 381-424). Pegem.
23. Karakaş, S. (2000). Bilgi işlemede entegratif model. In S. Karakaş, H. Aydın, C. Erdemir, & Ç. Özemsi (Eds.). Multi disipliner yaklaşımla beyin ve kognisyon (pp. 140-148). Çizgi Tıp.
24. Kaya, F. (2010). The effects of computer assisted conceptual change texts instructions on overcoming pre-service science teachers? Misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Pamukkale University, Denizli.
25. Kaya, Z. (2006). Öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal geliştirme. Pegem.
26. Kelly, A. C. (2006). Using manipulatives in mathematical problem solving: a performance- based analysis. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 3(2), 184-193.
27. Kesercioğlu, T., Balım, A.G., Öztürk, İ., & Çavaş, B. (2004). Biyoloji uygulamaları-I. Gema Gelişim Basım Yayın.
28. Köksal, O., & Atalay, B. (2016). Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri çağdaş uygulamalarla yöntem ve teknikler. Eğitim.
29. Kolovrat, M. (2016). Ergastične tvorevine biljne stanice [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Polytechnic of Slavonski Brod Agricultural Department.
30. Koponen, I. T., & Pehkonen, M. (2010). Coherent knowledge structures of physics represented as concept networks in teacher education. Science & Education, 19(3), 259-282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9200-z
31. Lowe, D., Newcombe, P., & Stumpers, B. (2012). Evaluation of the use of remote laboratories for secondary school science education. Research Science Education, 43(3), 1197-1219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9304-3
32. Nalçacı, A., & Ercoşkun, M. H. (2005). İlköğretim sosyal bilgiler derslerinde kullanılan materyaller. Atatürk Üniversitesi Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 141-154.
33. Nayagam, J. R. (2015). Ergastic crystals in identification of costuspictus: A medicinal spiral ginger in herbal medicine. Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences, 3(4), 378-383. http://dx.doi.org/10.18006/2015.3(4).378.383
34. Nwachukwu, C. U., & Edeoga, H.O. (2006). Tannins, starch grains and crystals in some species of indigofera L. (Leguminosae-Papilionoideae). International Journal of Botany, 2, 159-162. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijb.2006.159.162
35. Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students' conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96(1), 21-47. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20463
36. Omoigui, I. D., & Aromose, O. S. A. (2012). Nature of ergastic substances in some Nigeria nasteraceae. Bayero Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 5(2), 160-167. https://doi.org/10.4314/bajopas.v5i2.31
37. Omonhinmin, C. A., Daramola, F. Y., & Idu, M. (2015). Seed ergastic substances profiling and its implications for the amaranthaceae-chenopodiaceae complex. Research Journal of Botany, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/rjb.2015
38. Onan, B. (2012). Türkçenin ana dili olarak öğretiminde bilgi işleme süreci. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 96-113.
39. Ornstein, A. C., & Lasley, T. J. (2000). Strategies for effective teaching (3rd ed.). The McGraw-Hill.
40. Patrizi, C., Ice, P., & Burgess, M. (2013). Semantic mapping of learning assets to align curriculum and evidence learning effectiveness in business education. Business Education & Accreditation, 5(1), 117-228.
41. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage.
42. Reza, N. A., & Azizah, N. A. (2019). Semantic mapping strategy on students’ vocabulary learning result. Lingua Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, 15(2), 27-34. https://doi.org/10.34005/lingua.v15i2.357
43. Schwab, P. N., & Cable, C. R. (1982). Semantic webbing in science. National Science Teachers Association Baltimore Area Convention.
44. Scott, F. M. (1941). Distribution of calcium oxalate crystals in ricinus communis in relation to the tissue differentiation and presence of other ergastic substances. Bot. Gaz, 103, 225-246.
45. Seferoğlu, S. S. (2015). Öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal tasarımı (9. ed.). Pegem.
46. Selvi, K. (Ed.) (2008). Öğretim teknolojileri ve materyal tasarımı. Anı.
47. Senemoğlu, N. (2001). Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim. Gazi.
48. Senemoğlu, N. (2007). Development, learning, and teaching: From theory to practice. Gönül.
49. Simon, T. K., & Nayyagam, J. R. (2018). Ergastic crystal studies for raw drug analysis. In P. F. Builders Herbal Medicine (pp. 31-40). Intech Open.
50. Tuna, F. (2013). The impact of concept network method on students’ academic achievement in secondary school geography education and students’ perceptions of implementation. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 21(3), 985-996.
51. Yazıcı, M., & Kurt, A. (2018). Investigation of the effect of using the laboratory in secondary school science teaching to the academic achievements of the students in line with the opinions of teachers and students. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(25), 295-320.
52. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin.