Research Article
PDF Zotero Mendeley EndNote BibTex Cite

Development of students’ views on the demarcation between science and pseudoscience

Year 2021, Volume 10, Issue 3, 211 - 236, 31.07.2021
https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.907117

Abstract

This research aimed to determine and develop 8th grade students’ views on the demarcation between science and pseudoscience. In this context, the study was designed with convergent parallel design which is a mixed research method. The study group for the quantitative dimension was composed of 32 8th graders in a secondary school in Akdeniz district of Mersin province. The study group for the qualitative dimension consisted of six students selected from among these 32 students by purposeful sampling method. As data collection tools, Pseudoscience Belief Scale which consisted of 21 questions and a semi-structured interview form composed of nine questions were used. During the data analysis, statistical calculations were done by using the SPSS package program for the quantitative dimension. Content analysis method was used to categorize qualitative as codes and themes. Based on the study results, it was observed that the pseudoscientific beliefs were not based on gender and it was found that students’ pseudoscientific beliefs decreased with the implementation in which the argumentation method was used.

References

  • Afonso, A. S. & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). Pseudo-science: A meaningful context for assessing nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 329-348. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903055758
  • Ağlarcı, O. & Kabapınar, F. (2016). Sınıf öğretmen adaylarının bilime ve sözde bilime ilişkin görüşlerinin geliştirilmesi [Developing prospective chemistry teachers’ views of science and pseudoscience]. Amasya Education Journal, 5(1), 248-286. https://doi.org/10.17539/aej.33301
  • Arık, M. (2016). Argümantasyon tabanlı öğrenme yönteminin yedinci sınıf öğrencilerinin bilim sözde-bilim ayrım farkındalığının geliştirilmesi üzerine etkisi [Effectiveness of argumentation-based learning on seventh grade students' awareness about demarcation of science]. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Istanbul University.
  • Arık, M. & Akçay, B. (2018). Argümantasyonun öğrencilerin bilimin sözde-bilimden ayırma becerilerinin geliştirilmesi üzerine etkisi [An effectiveness on engaging in argumentation on students' ability to demarcate science from pseudoscience]. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(1), 41-60. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.338919
  • Ayvacı, H. Ş. & Bağ, H. (2016). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının bilim sözde-bilim ayrımına ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi [Investigating the views of primary school teacher candidates’ for science pseudo-science distinction]. Amasya Education Journal, 5(2), 539-566. https://doi.org/10.17539/aej.62204
  • Berkant, H. G. & Ermeydan, Z. (2017). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin bilim-sözde bilim ayrımlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [An investigation of faculty of education students’ distinctions between science and pseudoscience in terms of various variables]. Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University Journal of Education, 1(1), 12-25.
  • Bunge, M. (2011). Knowledge: Genuine and bogus. Science & Education, 20(5-6), 411-438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9225-3
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Research design. Sage Publications.
  • Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed method research. Sage Publications.
  • Çekbaş, Y. (2017). Argümantasyon tabanlı astronomi öğretiminin fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğasına, sözde-bilim ve epistemolojik inançlarına etkisinin değerlendirilmesi [The evaluation of the effect of an astronomy course based on argumentation on pre-service science teachers' nature of science, pseudo-science and epistemological beliefs]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pamukkale University.
  • Çetinkaya, E. & Taşar, M. F. (2018). Sözde-Bilim inanış ölçeğinin (SİÖ) geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Development of pseudoscience belief scale (PBS): Validity and reliability study]. Trakya Journal of Education, 8(3), 497-512. https://doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.336650
  • Çetinkaya, E., Turgut, H. & Duru, M. K. (2015). Bilim, sözde-bilim ayrımı bağlamının ortaokul öğrencilerinin bilim algılarına etkisi: İridoloji vakası [The effect of the context of science, pseudoscience demarcation on the science perceptions of secondary school students: The case of Iridology]. Education and Science, 40(181), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.3127
  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage Publications.
  • Efthimiou, C. J. & Liewellyn, R. A. (2006). Is pseudoscience the solution to science literacy?. http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0608061v1.pdf
  • Einstein, A. (1940). Considerations Concerning the Fundamentals of Theoretical Physics. Science, 91(2369), 487-492.
  • Eş, H. & Turgut, H. (2018). Candidate classroom teachers‟ perceptions about being scientific in the context of pseudoscience. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health (JESEH), 4(2), 142-154. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.409497
  • Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30(4), 233-252.
  • Gül, S. (2016). Biyoloji, fizik ve kimya öğretmen adaylarının bilim-sözde bilim ayrımı anlayışları [Prospective Biology, physics and chemistry teachers’ conceptions towards science-pseudoscience distinction]. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 9(2), 177-197. https://doi.org/10.5578/keg.10871
  • Impey, C., Buxner, S. & Antonellis, J. (2012). Non-scientific beliefs among undergraduate students. Astronomy Education Review, 11(1), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2012016
  • Johnson, M. & Pigliucci, M. (2004). Is knowledge of science associated with higher skepticism of pseudoscientific claims? The American Biology Teacher, 66(8), 536-548. https://doi.org/10.2307/4451737
  • Kallery, M. (2001). Early-Years educators' attitudes to science and pseudo-science: The case of astronomy and astrology. European Journal of Teacher Education, 24(3), 329-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760220128888
  • Kaplan, A. O. (2014). Research on the pseudo-scientific beliefs of pre-service science teachers: A sample from astronomy-astrology. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(3), 381-393.
  • Kaya, M. & Bacanak, A. (2013). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının düşünceleri: Fen okuryazarı birey yetiştirmede öğretmenin yeri [Science and technology teacher candidates’ views: The role of teachers to educate ındividuals as scientific literate]. Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, 21, 209-228.
  • Kaya, O. N. & Kılıç, Z. (2008). Etkin bir fen öğretimi için tartışmacı söylev [Argumentative discourse for the effective teaching of science]. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 9(3), 89-100.
  • Kirman Çetinkaya, E., Laçin Şimşek, C. & Çalışkan, H. (2013). Bilim ve sözde-bilim ayrımı için bir ölçek uyarlama çalışması [The Adaptation study of science and pseudoscience distinction]. Trakya Journal of Education, 3(2), 31-43.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakatos, I. (2014). The methodology of scientific research programmes. Cambridge University Press.
  • Lambert, K. & Brittan, G. G. (2011). An introduction to the philosophy of science. Ridgeview Publishing.
  • Liu, X. (2009). Beyond science literacy: Science and the public. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 301-311.
  • Losh, S. C. & Nzekwe, B. (2011). Creatures in the classroom: Preservice teacher beliefs about fantastic beasts, magic, extraterrestrials, evolution and creationism. Science & Education, 20(6), 473-489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9268-5
  • Lundström, M. (2007). Students’ beliefs in pseudoscience. http://muep.mau.se/handle/2043/4701.
  • Martin, M. (1994). Pseudoscience, the paranormal, and science education. Science & Education, 3(4), 357-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00488452
  • McComas, W. F (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. (53- 70). Kluwer.
  • McLean, C. P. & Miller, N. A. (2010). Changes in critical thinking skills following a course on science and pseudoscience: A quasi-experimental study. Teaching of Psychology, 37(2), 85-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986281003626714.
  • Metin, D. (2015). Middle school students' reasoning patterns and comprehensions about pseudoscientific applications related to crystals. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Middle East Technical University, AnkaraMinistry of National Education (MoNE) (2005). Elementary and secondary science curriculum. National Education Press.
  • Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis. Sage Publications Ltd.
  • Norris, S. P. & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in ıts fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240. DOI: 10.1002/sce.10066
  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S. & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
  • Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge Publishing.
  • Russell, B. (1997). Religion and science. Oxford University Press.
  • Saka, M. & Sürmeli, H. (2017). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının sözde bilimsel senaryolarda bilimin doğasını kullanımı [Preservice Science teachers’ use of NOS in pseudoscientific scenarios]. Trakya Journal of Education, 7(2), 504-525. https://doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.305999
  • Shein, P. P., Li, Y. Y. & Huang, T. C. (2014). Relationship between scientific knowledge and fortune-telling. Public Understanding of Science, 23(7), 780-796. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514522169
  • Soslu, O. (2014). Fen eğitiminde bilimin doğasını anlama üzerine bir değerlendirme [An evalation about understanding the nature of science in science education]. Bayburt University Faculty of Education, 9(1), 90-100Sönmez, V. (2008). Bilim felsefesi [Philosophy of science]. Anı.
  • Sugarman, H., Impey, C., Buxner, S. & Antonellis, J. (2011). Astrology beliefs among undergraduate students. Astronomy Education Review, 10(1), 10-21. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2010040
  • Şahin, E. & Uçar, M. B. (2018). Pre-service science teachers’ discrimination level of science and pseudoscience. Science Education International, 29(4), 267-273.
  • Şahin, T. E. (2006). Bilim, bilimler ve bilgi alanları [Science, sciences and fields of knowledge]. Dikey Publishing.
  • Şenler, B. & İrven, Ö. (2016). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının epistemolojik inançları ile sözde-bilimsel inançları [Primary pre-service teachers’ epistemological beliefs and pseudoscientific beliefs]. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 12(2), 659-671. https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.25364
  • Tatar, E., Karakuyu, Y. & Tüysüz, C. (2011). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının bilimin doğası kavramları: teori, yasa ve hipotez [Prospective primary school teachers’ concepts of the nature of science: theory, law and hypothesis]. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8(15), 363-370.
  • Topdemir, H. G. (2002). Kuhn ve bilimsel devrimlerin yapısı üzerine bir değerlendirme [An assessment of Kuhn and the nature of scientific revolutions]. World of Philosophy, 36(2), 45-62.
  • Tsai, C. Y., Lin, C. Y., Shih, W. L. & Wu, P. L. (2015). The effect of online argumentation upon students’ pseudoscientific beliefs. Computers & Education, 80, 187-197.
  • Tseng, Y. C., Tsai, C. Y., Hsieh, P. Y., Hung, J. F. & Huang, T. C. (2014). The relationship between exposure to pseudoscientific television programmes and pseudoscientific beliefs among Taiwanese University students. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 4(2), 107-122.
  • Turgut, H. (2009). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel sözde-bilimsel ayrımına yönelik algıları [Pre-service science teachers' perceptions about demarcation of science from pseudoscience]. Education and Science, 30(154), 50-68.
  • Turgut, H., Akçay, H. & İrez, S. (2010). Bilim sözde-bilim ayrımı tartışmasının öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası inanışlarına etkisi [The impact of the issue of demarcation on pre-service teachers’ beliefs on the nature of science]. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 10(4), 2621-2663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9250-2
  • Turgut, H., Eş, H., Bozkurt Altan, E. & Öztürk Geren, N. (2016). Pre-service pre-school teachers’ perceptions of science and pseudoscience. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(1), 150-169. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2016.01.013
  • Tutar, H. (2014). Bilim ve sözdebilim [Science and pseudoscience]. Seçkin.
  • Williams, E., Francis, L. & Robbins, M. (2007). Personality and paranormal belief: a study among adolescents. Pastoral Psychology, 56(1), 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-007-0094-x
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırmalar [Qualitative researches in social sciences]. Seçkin.
  • Yıldırım, C. (2010). Bilim felsefesi [Philosophy of science]. Remzi.

Öğrencilerinin bilim sözde-bilim ayrımına ilişkin görüşlerinin geliştirilmesi

Year 2021, Volume 10, Issue 3, 211 - 236, 31.07.2021
https://doi.org/10.19128/turje.907117

Abstract

Bu çalışmada sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin bilim ve sözde-bilim ayrımına ilişkin görüşlerinin tespit edilmesi ve bu görüşlerinin geliştirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda çalışma, karma araştırma yöntemlerinden yakınsayan paralel desene göre düzenlenmiştir. Araştırmanın nicel boyutunun çalışma grubunu Mersin ili Akdeniz ilçesinde yer alan bir ortaokuldaki sekizinci sınıf düzeyinde öğrenim gören 32 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Araştırmanın nitel boyutunun çalışma grubu ise 32 öğrenci arasından amaçlı örneklem yöntemiyle seçilen altı öğrenciden oluşmaktadır. Veri toplama araçları olarak 21 sorudan oluşan Sözde-Bilim İnanış Ölçeği ve dokuz sorudan oluşan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu kullanılmıştır. Veri analizinde nicel boyut için SPSS paket programı kullanılarak istatistiksel hesaplamalar yapılmıştır. Nitel veriler ise içerik analizi yöntemiyle kodlar ve temalara ayrılmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda sözde-bilimsel inanışların cinsiyet faktörüne bağlı olmadığı ve argümantasyon yönteminin kullanıldığı uygulama ile öğrencilerin sözde-bilimsel inanışlarında azalma meydana geldiği görülmüştür. Ayrıca cinsiyet faktörüne bağlı olmaksızın uygulama öncesi öğrencilerin bilim ve sözde-bilime yönelik fikir ve bilgilerinin, uygulama sonrasında kısmen değiştiği ve geliştiği görülmüştür.

References

  • Afonso, A. S. & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). Pseudo-science: A meaningful context for assessing nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 329-348. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903055758
  • Ağlarcı, O. & Kabapınar, F. (2016). Sınıf öğretmen adaylarının bilime ve sözde bilime ilişkin görüşlerinin geliştirilmesi [Developing prospective chemistry teachers’ views of science and pseudoscience]. Amasya Education Journal, 5(1), 248-286. https://doi.org/10.17539/aej.33301
  • Arık, M. (2016). Argümantasyon tabanlı öğrenme yönteminin yedinci sınıf öğrencilerinin bilim sözde-bilim ayrım farkındalığının geliştirilmesi üzerine etkisi [Effectiveness of argumentation-based learning on seventh grade students' awareness about demarcation of science]. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Istanbul University.
  • Arık, M. & Akçay, B. (2018). Argümantasyonun öğrencilerin bilimin sözde-bilimden ayırma becerilerinin geliştirilmesi üzerine etkisi [An effectiveness on engaging in argumentation on students' ability to demarcate science from pseudoscience]. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(1), 41-60. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.338919
  • Ayvacı, H. Ş. & Bağ, H. (2016). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının bilim sözde-bilim ayrımına ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi [Investigating the views of primary school teacher candidates’ for science pseudo-science distinction]. Amasya Education Journal, 5(2), 539-566. https://doi.org/10.17539/aej.62204
  • Berkant, H. G. & Ermeydan, Z. (2017). Eğitim fakültesi öğrencilerinin bilim-sözde bilim ayrımlarının çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [An investigation of faculty of education students’ distinctions between science and pseudoscience in terms of various variables]. Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University Journal of Education, 1(1), 12-25.
  • Bunge, M. (2011). Knowledge: Genuine and bogus. Science & Education, 20(5-6), 411-438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9225-3
  • Creswell, J. W. (2017). Research design. Sage Publications.
  • Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed method research. Sage Publications.
  • Çekbaş, Y. (2017). Argümantasyon tabanlı astronomi öğretiminin fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğasına, sözde-bilim ve epistemolojik inançlarına etkisinin değerlendirilmesi [The evaluation of the effect of an astronomy course based on argumentation on pre-service science teachers' nature of science, pseudo-science and epistemological beliefs]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Pamukkale University.
  • Çetinkaya, E. & Taşar, M. F. (2018). Sözde-Bilim inanış ölçeğinin (SİÖ) geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [Development of pseudoscience belief scale (PBS): Validity and reliability study]. Trakya Journal of Education, 8(3), 497-512. https://doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.336650
  • Çetinkaya, E., Turgut, H. & Duru, M. K. (2015). Bilim, sözde-bilim ayrımı bağlamının ortaokul öğrencilerinin bilim algılarına etkisi: İridoloji vakası [The effect of the context of science, pseudoscience demarcation on the science perceptions of secondary school students: The case of Iridology]. Education and Science, 40(181), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.3127
  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage Publications.
  • Efthimiou, C. J. & Liewellyn, R. A. (2006). Is pseudoscience the solution to science literacy?. http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0608061v1.pdf
  • Einstein, A. (1940). Considerations Concerning the Fundamentals of Theoretical Physics. Science, 91(2369), 487-492.
  • Eş, H. & Turgut, H. (2018). Candidate classroom teachers‟ perceptions about being scientific in the context of pseudoscience. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health (JESEH), 4(2), 142-154. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.409497
  • Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30(4), 233-252.
  • Gül, S. (2016). Biyoloji, fizik ve kimya öğretmen adaylarının bilim-sözde bilim ayrımı anlayışları [Prospective Biology, physics and chemistry teachers’ conceptions towards science-pseudoscience distinction]. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 9(2), 177-197. https://doi.org/10.5578/keg.10871
  • Impey, C., Buxner, S. & Antonellis, J. (2012). Non-scientific beliefs among undergraduate students. Astronomy Education Review, 11(1), 101-111. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2012016
  • Johnson, M. & Pigliucci, M. (2004). Is knowledge of science associated with higher skepticism of pseudoscientific claims? The American Biology Teacher, 66(8), 536-548. https://doi.org/10.2307/4451737
  • Kallery, M. (2001). Early-Years educators' attitudes to science and pseudo-science: The case of astronomy and astrology. European Journal of Teacher Education, 24(3), 329-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619760220128888
  • Kaplan, A. O. (2014). Research on the pseudo-scientific beliefs of pre-service science teachers: A sample from astronomy-astrology. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(3), 381-393.
  • Kaya, M. & Bacanak, A. (2013). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının düşünceleri: Fen okuryazarı birey yetiştirmede öğretmenin yeri [Science and technology teacher candidates’ views: The role of teachers to educate ındividuals as scientific literate]. Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, 21, 209-228.
  • Kaya, O. N. & Kılıç, Z. (2008). Etkin bir fen öğretimi için tartışmacı söylev [Argumentative discourse for the effective teaching of science]. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 9(3), 89-100.
  • Kirman Çetinkaya, E., Laçin Şimşek, C. & Çalışkan, H. (2013). Bilim ve sözde-bilim ayrımı için bir ölçek uyarlama çalışması [The Adaptation study of science and pseudoscience distinction]. Trakya Journal of Education, 3(2), 31-43.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakatos, I. (2014). The methodology of scientific research programmes. Cambridge University Press.
  • Lambert, K. & Brittan, G. G. (2011). An introduction to the philosophy of science. Ridgeview Publishing.
  • Liu, X. (2009). Beyond science literacy: Science and the public. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 301-311.
  • Losh, S. C. & Nzekwe, B. (2011). Creatures in the classroom: Preservice teacher beliefs about fantastic beasts, magic, extraterrestrials, evolution and creationism. Science & Education, 20(6), 473-489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9268-5
  • Lundström, M. (2007). Students’ beliefs in pseudoscience. http://muep.mau.se/handle/2043/4701.
  • Martin, M. (1994). Pseudoscience, the paranormal, and science education. Science & Education, 3(4), 357-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00488452
  • McComas, W. F (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. (53- 70). Kluwer.
  • McLean, C. P. & Miller, N. A. (2010). Changes in critical thinking skills following a course on science and pseudoscience: A quasi-experimental study. Teaching of Psychology, 37(2), 85-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986281003626714.
  • Metin, D. (2015). Middle school students' reasoning patterns and comprehensions about pseudoscientific applications related to crystals. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Middle East Technical University, AnkaraMinistry of National Education (MoNE) (2005). Elementary and secondary science curriculum. National Education Press.
  • Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis. Sage Publications Ltd.
  • Norris, S. P. & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in ıts fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240. DOI: 10.1002/sce.10066
  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S. & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
  • Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge Publishing.
  • Russell, B. (1997). Religion and science. Oxford University Press.
  • Saka, M. & Sürmeli, H. (2017). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının sözde bilimsel senaryolarda bilimin doğasını kullanımı [Preservice Science teachers’ use of NOS in pseudoscientific scenarios]. Trakya Journal of Education, 7(2), 504-525. https://doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.305999
  • Shein, P. P., Li, Y. Y. & Huang, T. C. (2014). Relationship between scientific knowledge and fortune-telling. Public Understanding of Science, 23(7), 780-796. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514522169
  • Soslu, O. (2014). Fen eğitiminde bilimin doğasını anlama üzerine bir değerlendirme [An evalation about understanding the nature of science in science education]. Bayburt University Faculty of Education, 9(1), 90-100Sönmez, V. (2008). Bilim felsefesi [Philosophy of science]. Anı.
  • Sugarman, H., Impey, C., Buxner, S. & Antonellis, J. (2011). Astrology beliefs among undergraduate students. Astronomy Education Review, 10(1), 10-21. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2010040
  • Şahin, E. & Uçar, M. B. (2018). Pre-service science teachers’ discrimination level of science and pseudoscience. Science Education International, 29(4), 267-273.
  • Şahin, T. E. (2006). Bilim, bilimler ve bilgi alanları [Science, sciences and fields of knowledge]. Dikey Publishing.
  • Şenler, B. & İrven, Ö. (2016). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının epistemolojik inançları ile sözde-bilimsel inançları [Primary pre-service teachers’ epistemological beliefs and pseudoscientific beliefs]. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 12(2), 659-671. https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.25364
  • Tatar, E., Karakuyu, Y. & Tüysüz, C. (2011). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının bilimin doğası kavramları: teori, yasa ve hipotez [Prospective primary school teachers’ concepts of the nature of science: theory, law and hypothesis]. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8(15), 363-370.
  • Topdemir, H. G. (2002). Kuhn ve bilimsel devrimlerin yapısı üzerine bir değerlendirme [An assessment of Kuhn and the nature of scientific revolutions]. World of Philosophy, 36(2), 45-62.
  • Tsai, C. Y., Lin, C. Y., Shih, W. L. & Wu, P. L. (2015). The effect of online argumentation upon students’ pseudoscientific beliefs. Computers & Education, 80, 187-197.
  • Tseng, Y. C., Tsai, C. Y., Hsieh, P. Y., Hung, J. F. & Huang, T. C. (2014). The relationship between exposure to pseudoscientific television programmes and pseudoscientific beliefs among Taiwanese University students. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 4(2), 107-122.
  • Turgut, H. (2009). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel sözde-bilimsel ayrımına yönelik algıları [Pre-service science teachers' perceptions about demarcation of science from pseudoscience]. Education and Science, 30(154), 50-68.
  • Turgut, H., Akçay, H. & İrez, S. (2010). Bilim sözde-bilim ayrımı tartışmasının öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası inanışlarına etkisi [The impact of the issue of demarcation on pre-service teachers’ beliefs on the nature of science]. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 10(4), 2621-2663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9250-2
  • Turgut, H., Eş, H., Bozkurt Altan, E. & Öztürk Geren, N. (2016). Pre-service pre-school teachers’ perceptions of science and pseudoscience. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(1), 150-169. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2016.01.013
  • Tutar, H. (2014). Bilim ve sözdebilim [Science and pseudoscience]. Seçkin.
  • Williams, E., Francis, L. & Robbins, M. (2007). Personality and paranormal belief: a study among adolescents. Pastoral Psychology, 56(1), 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11089-007-0094-x
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırmalar [Qualitative researches in social sciences]. Seçkin.
  • Yıldırım, C. (2010). Bilim felsefesi [Philosophy of science]. Remzi.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Education and Educational Research
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Ali BİÇER This is me
KAZANLI BELEDİYESİ ORTAOKULU
0000-0002-2586-9701
Türkiye


Feride ERCAN YALMAN (Primary Author)
MERSİN ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ
0000-0003-1037-1473
Türkiye

Publication Date July 31, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021, Volume 10, Issue 3

Cite

APA Biçer, A. & Ercan Yalman, F. (2021). Development of students’ views on the demarcation between science and pseudoscience . Turkish Journal of Education , 10 (3) , 211-236 . DOI: 10.19128/turje.907117

Creative Commons License TURJE is licensed to the public under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license.