Fen Öğretmenlerinin TPAB temelli Argümantasyon Uygulamalarıyla Jeoloji Dersi Planlama Performanslarının İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu çalışma jeoloji öğretiminde TPAB temelli argümantasyon uygulamaları tasarlama konusunda fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin performanslarını ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Katılımcılarını mesleki gelişim programına katılan 32 fen bilimleri öğretmeninin oluşturduğu çalışmada bütüncül tekli durum çalışması deseni kullanılmıştır. Öğretmenler tarafından kullanılan video vb. tüm materyaller ile Pedagojik Akıl Yürütme Değerlendirme Formu (PADF) veri toplama aracı olarak kullanılmıştır. Ders planları için puanlama rubriği aracılığıyla betimsel analiz, PDAF için içerik analizi yapılmıştır. Bulgular öğretmenlerin TPAB göstergelerini derslerinde kullanma konusunda başarılı olduklarını göstermiştir. Bulgular ayrıca öğretmenlerin mesleki gelişim programında öğrendikleri ile süreç değerlendirmenin iyileştirilebileceğini düşündüklerini ancak ders planlarında değerlendirme için teknoloji kullanmadıklarını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Argümantasyon süreciyle ilgili olarak, öğretmenlerin argümanlarını tek bir çürütücü ile oluşturmaya eğilimli oldukları ve gerekçe kullanamadıkları bulunmuştur. Bununla birlikte, öğretmenler iddia, çürütücü ve destekleyici kaliteleri bakımından yüksek puanlara sahip olmalarına rağmen, veri sunma ve iddiayı gerekçelendirme konusunda bazı problemler yaşamaktadırlar. PADF bulguları, TPAB temelli argümantasyon uygulamalarının bazı açılardan ders planlarını zenginleştirdiğini göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Argümantasyon
• pedagojik akıl yürütme
• teknolojik pedagojik alan bilgisi (TPAB)

Examining Science Teachers’ Performances at Planning Geology Lesson through TPACK-based Argumentation Practices

Abstract

This study aims to reveal science teachers’ performances in designing TPACK-based argumentation practices for teaching geology. This study used a holistic single case study design where thirty-two science teachers participated in a professional development program. All materials such as videos, etc. used by the teachers and the Pedagogical Reasoning Assessment Form (PRAF) were used as data collection tools. Descriptive analysis was conducted through the scoring rubric for lesson plans and content analysis for PRAF. Findings indicated that teachers successfully used TPACK indicators in their lessons. Findings also revealed that although teachers thought that formative assessment could be improved by learning from professional development programs, they did not use technology for assessment in their lesson plans. Related to the argumentation process, teachers tended to construct their arguments with one rebuttal, and they could not use warrants. Moreover, although teachers had high scores in the quality of claim, rebuttal, and backing respectively, they had some problems in presenting data and warrant for the claim. PRAF findings indicated that the TPACK-based Argumentation Practices Professional Development Program (TPACK-bAP PDP) enriched their lesson plans in some aspects.

Keywords

• argumentation
• pedagogical reasoning
• technological pedagogical content knowledge

Kaynakça

1. Ahadi, A., Bower, M., Lai, J., Singh, A. & Garret, M. (2021). Evaluation of teacher professional learning workshops on the use of technology-a systematic review. Professional Development in Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.2011773
2. Akman, O. & Guven, C. (2015). TPACK survey development study for social sciences teachers and teacher candidates. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 1(1), 1-10. https://www.ijres.net/index.php/ijres/article/view/12
3. Aktas, I. & Ozmen, H. (2020). Investigating the impact of TPACK development course on pre-service science teachers’ performances. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21, 667-682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-020-09653-x
4. Akyuz, D. (2018). Measuring technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) through performance assessment. Computers & Education, 125(2018), 212-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.012
5. Aldağ, H. (2006). Toulmin tartışma modeli. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15(1), 13-33. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cusosbil/issue/4373/59852
6. Anderson, O. R. & Contino, J. (2010). A study of teacher-mediated enhancement of students’ organization of earth science knowledge using web diagrams as a teaching device. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(6), 683-701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9211-2
7. Angeli, C. & Valanides, N. (2008, March 24-28). TPCK in pre-service teacher education: Preparing primary education students to teach with technology [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.476.5467&rep=rep1&type=pdf
8. Apedoe, X. S., Walker, S. E. & Reeves, T. C. (2006). Integrating inquiry-based learning into undergraduate geology. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54(3), 414-421. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-54.3.414

9. Archambault, L., & Crippen, K. (2009). Examining TPACK among K-12 online distance educators in the United States. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 71-88. http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/general/article2.cfm
10. Aslan, S. (2014). Analysis of students’ written scientific argument generate and evaluation skills. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 10(1), 41-74. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/eku/issue/5459/74005
11. Ault, C. R. (1998). Criteria of excellence for geological inquiry: The necessity of ambiguity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199802)35:2<189::AID-TEA8>3.0.CO;2-O
12. Bag, H. & Calik, M. (2017). A thematic review of argumentation studies at the K-8 level. Education and Science, 42(190), 281-303. https://doi.org/10.15390/eb.2017.6845
13. Bell, P. (1997). Using argument representations to make thinking visible for individuals and groups. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyedy (Eds.). Proceedings of CSCL ‘97: The Second International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (pp. 10–19). University of Toronto Press
14. Bell, P. (2004). Promoting students’ argument construction and collaborative debate in the science classroom. In M. Linn, E. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.). Internet environments for science education (pp. 115–143). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://www.routledge.com/Internet-Environments-for-Science-Education/Linn-Davis-Bell/p/book/9780805843033
15. Buzan, T., & Buzan, B. (2000). The concept map book. BBC Worldwide Ltd.
16. Chai, C. S., Chin, C. K., Koh, J. H. L. & Tan, C. L. (2013). Exploring Singaporean Chinese language teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and its relationship to the teachers’ pedagogical beliefs. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 657-666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0071-3
17. Chai, C. S. & Koh, J. H. L. (2017). Changing teachers’ TPACK and design beliefs through the Scaffolded TPACK lesson design model (STDLM). Learning: Research and Practice, 3(2), 114-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1360506
18. Clark, D., & Sampson, V. (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253 – 277. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560944
19. Clayton, D. S. & Gautier, C. (2006). Scientific argumentation in earth system science education. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54(3), 374-382. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-54.3.374
20. Dietrich, L. (2018). Technology integration models and barriers: Unpack TPACK in your classroom. In R. Power (Ed.). Technology and the Curriculum: Summer 2018. https://techandcurriculum.pressbooks.com/ Dobush, T., Burns, C. & Millis, T. (2004). Optimizing earth science decision-making through technology integration. ASEG Extended Abstracts, 1, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1071/ASEG2004ab034
21. Doering, A., Koseoglu, S., Scharber, C., Henrickson, J. & Lanegran, D. (2014). Technology integration in K-12 geography education using TPACK as a conceptual model. Journal of Geography, 113(6), 223-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2014.896393
22. Dolphin, G., Dutchak, A., Karchewski, B. & Cooper, J. (2019). Virtual field experiences in introductory geology: Addressing a capacity problem, but finding a pedagogical one. Journal of Geoscience Education, 67(2), 114-130. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2018.1547034
23. Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.