Lise Öğrencilerinin Onuncu Sınıf Fizik Dersi Elektrik Konusundaki Ön Bilgilerinin Tespit Edilmesi

Yıl 2020, , 217 - 239, 30.06.2020

Rıza Salar , Erkan Uğurel

https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.630221

Cited By: 1

Öz

Öğrencilerin öğretim öncesinde sahip oldukları ön
bilgi öğretmenin ilgilenmesi gereken hususlardan birisidir. Birçok kavram
yanılgısını ve yanlış anlamayı barındıran elektrik konusunda da öğrencilerin ön
bilgilerini tespit etmek önem arz etmektedir. Bu araştırmada, lise onuncu sınıf
öğrencilerinin ön bilgilerini belirmeyebilmek adına çoktan seçmeli bir başarı
testi geliştirmek ve öğrencilerin daha çok hangi kavramlarda eksik bilgilere
sahip olduklarını belirlemek amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada, tarama modellerinin
bir çeşidi olan kesitsel tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Beş seçenekli 15 çoktan
seçmeli sorudan oluşan bir başarı testi geliştirilmiş ve bu test 373 onuncu
sınıf öğrencisine uygulanmıştır. Elde edilen verilerin analizinde ortalama ve
faktör analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın sonucunda öğrencilerin ön bilgi
bakımından elektrik devre elemanlarının sembollerinde başarılı oldukları tespit
edilmiştir. Öğrencilerin elektrik devresi kurma, ampulün direnci, seri ve
paralel bağlama ile Ohm yasası alt başlıklarında ön bilgi bakımından daha zayıf
olduğu söylenebilir. Liselerde görev yapan fizik öğretmenlerine, elektrik
konusunda öğretime başlamadan önce elektrik devresi kurma, ampulün direnci,
seri ve paralel bağlama kavramlarını hatırlatmaları önerilebilir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

fizik, elektrik, ön bilgi

Developing a Measurement Tool for the Tenth Class Physics Course Electricity Unit and Determining the Prior Knowledge of the Students

Öz

Prior knowledge of the students before the teaching is one of the issues that the teacher should deal with. It is also important to identify students' prior knowledge about electricity, which contains many misconceptions and misunderstandings. In this study, it is aimed to develop a multiple choice achievement test in order to determine the prior knowledge of tenth grade students and to identify in which concepts the students have incomplete information. In this research, cross-sectional survey model, which is a kind of survey methods, was used. An achievement test consisting of 15 multiple-choice questions with five options was developed and applied to 373 tenth grade students. Mean and factor analysis were used in the analysis of the obtained data. As a result of the research, it was determined that students were successful in symbols of electrical circuit elements in terms of prior knowledge. It can be said that the students are weak in terms of building electrical circuit, resistance of the bulb, serial and parallel connection and Ohm's law. It may be suggested to physics teachers working in high schools to remind them about the concepts of building electrical circuit, resistance of the bulb, serial and parallel connection before starting the teaching of electricity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

physics, electricity, prior knowledge

Kaynakça

• Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
• Bayrakçeken, S. (2011).Test geliştirme. E. Karip(Ed.). Ölçme ve değerlendirme içinde (ss. 293-324). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Biemans, H. J., & Simons, P. R. J. (1996). Contact-2: A computer-assisted instructional strategy for promoting conceptual change. Instructional Science, 24(2), 157-176.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı (24. Baskı), Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• Campbell, L. & Campbell, B. (2008). Beginning with what students know: The role of prior knowledge in learning, in L. Campbell & B. Campbell (eds.), Mindful learning: 101 proven strategies for student and teacher success, pp 7-27, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CA.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.
• Demircioğlu, G. (2011). Geçerlik ve güvenirlik. E. Karip (Ed.). Ölçme ve değerlendirme (89- 122). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Dolezal, S. E., Welsh, L. M., Pressley, M., & Vincent, M. M. (2003). How nine third-grade teachers motivate student academic engagement. The Elementary School Journal, 103(3), 239-267.
• Duit, R. & Rhöneck, C. von. (1998). Learning and understanding key concepts of electricity. In Andree T., E. Leonard J., & Jorge B. (Eds), Connecting Research in Physics Education with Teacher Education. http://kdfls1.troja.mff.cuni.cz/publications/teach1/ConnectingResInPhysEducWithTeacherEduc_Vol_1.pdf#page=50 adresinden erişildi.
• Engelhardt, P. V., & Beichner, R. J. (2004). Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits. American Journal of Physics, 72(1), 98-115.
• Erkuş, A. (2012). Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme-I. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Fuson, K. C., Kalchman, M., & Bransford, J. D. (2005). Mathematical understanding: An introduction. In M. Donovan & J. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn: Mathematics in the classroom (pp. 217-256). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
• Hewson, M. G., & Hewson, P. W. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(8), 731-743.
• Marzano, R. J. (1998). A theory-based meta-analysis of research on instruction. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved October 26, 2007, from http://www.mcrel.org/pdf/instruction/5982rr_instructionmeta_analysis.pdf.
• Marzano, R. J. (2004). Building background knowledge for academic achievement: Research on what works in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Marzano, R., Gaddy, B. & Dean, C. (2000). What Works In Classroom Instruction. Alexandria/VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.McCartney, R. W., & Wadsworth, D. D. (2013). Middle school students with exceptional learning needs investigate the use of visuals for learning science. Teaching & Learning, 7 (1), 1-20.
• McDermott, L. C., & Shaffer, P. S. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding. American journal of physics, 60(11), 994-1003.
• McDermott, L. C., & Shaffer, P. S. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding. American journal of physics, 60(11), 994-1003.
• Minstrell, J. (1989). Teaching science for understanding. In L. B. Resnick & L. E. Klopfer (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research (pp. 129-149). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Mulhall, P., McKittrick, B., & Gunstone, R. (2001). A perspective on the resolution of confusions in the teaching of electricity. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 575-587.
• Mulhall, P., McKittrick, B., & Gunstone, R. (2001). A perspective on the resolution of confusions in the teaching of electricity. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 575-587.
• Özçelik, D. A. (2010). Ölçme ve değerlendirme (4. bs.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Özdemir, E. (2014). Tarama yöntemi. M.Metin (Ed.). Kuramdan Uygulamaya Eğitimde Bilimsel araştırma Yöntemleri içinde (ss.77-97). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• Roschelle, J. (1995). Learning in interactive environments: Prior knowledge and new experience. In J.H. Falk & L.D. Dierking, Public institutions for personal learning: Establishing a research agenda. Washington, DC: American Association of Museums, 37-51.
• Smith, J., Lee, V., & Newmann, F. (2001). Instruction and achievement in Chicago elementary schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research, University of Chicago.
• Stevens, K. C. (1980). The effect of background knowledge on the reading comprehension of ninth graders. Journal of Reading Behavior, 12(2), 151-154.
• Strangman, N., & Hall, T. (2004). Background knowledge. National center on assessing the general curriculum. Wakefield, MA.