The Effect of Reverse Engineering Applications on Academic Achievement and Problem Solving Skills of Secondary School Students*

Öz

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of reverse engineering applications on academic achievement and problem solving skills in 8th grade students. The sample of the study consisted of a total of 56 students, 28 of whom were experimental and 28 of which were control group in a public school in Eyyübiye district of Şanlıurfa province in 2018-2019 academic year. In the control group, the courses were taught with the constructivist approach methods and techniques proposed by the program, while in the experimental group, reverse engineering applications were added along with the methods and techniques suggested by the program. Research from quantitative research approach; A total of 60 questions prepared by Taşçı (2018) were collected by Science Academic Achievement Test and Problem Solving Inventory developed by Serin, Serin and Saygılı (2010). In order to compare the effectiveness of reverse engineering applications, the tests were applied to the experimental and control group students as pre- and post-tests and the scores between the groups were compared. In the study; It is concluded that reverse engineering applications supported education is more effective than constructivist teaching in improving the academic achievement and problem solving skills of 8th grade students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• reverse engineering
• STEM
• academic success

Stem Eğitimini Destekleyen Tersine Mühendislik Uygulamalarının Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Akademik Başarı ve Problem Çözme Becerilerine Etkisi

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı tersine mühendislik uygulamalarının 8. sınıf öğrencilerinde akademik başarılarına ve problem çözme becerilerine etkisinin incelenmesidir. Çalışmanın örneklemini 2018-2019 eğitim öğretim yılında Şanlıurfa ili Eyyübiye ilçesinde yer alan bir devlet okulunda 8. sınıfta öğrenim gören 28’i deney, 28’i kontrol grubu olmak üzere toplam 56 öğrenciden oluşturmaktadır. Kontrol grubunda dersler programın önerdiği yapılandırmacı yaklaşım yöntem ve teknikleriyle işlenirken, deney grubunda programın önerdiği yöntem ve tekniklerin yanında tersine mühendislik uygulamaları eklenerek işlenmiştir. Araştırma nicel araştırma yaklaşımından; Taşçı (2018) tarafından hazırlanan toplam 60 soruluk Fen Bilimleri Akademik Başarı Testi ve Serin, Serin ve Saygılı (2010) tarafından geliştirilen “Çocuklar İçin Problem Çözme Envanteri” ile toplanmıştır. Tersine mühendislik uygulamalarının etkililiğini karşılaştırmak amacıyla deney ve kontrol grubu öğrencilerine ilgili testler ön ve son test olarak uygulanmış olup gruplar arası puanlar karşılaştırılmıştır. Araştırmada; tersine mühendislik uygulamaları destekli eğitimin 8. sınıf öğrencilerinde akademik başarılarını ve problem çözme becerilerini geliştirmede yapılandırıcı öğretimden daha etkili olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• tersine mühendislik
• STEM
• akademik başarı
• problem çözme becerisi

Kaynakça

1. Baroody, A. J., Feil, Y., & Johnson, A. R. (2007). An alternative reconceptualization of procedural and conceptual knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 115–131.
2. Batni, S., Jain, M.L. & Tiwari, A. (2010). Reverse engineering: a brief review. International Journal on Emerging Technologies 1(2), 73-76.
3. Bull, G., Standish, N. & Tyler-Wood, T. (2016). Teaching Science and Engineering through Reconstruction of Historic Inventions. 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies
4. Business Roundtable (2005). Tapping America's potential: The education for innovation initiative. Washington, DC: Business Roundtable. Also available online at http://www.tap2015.org/about/TAP_report2.pdf.
5. Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
6. Cantrell, P., Pekcan, G., Itani, A., & Velasquez-Bryant, N. (2006). The effects of engineering modules on student learning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 301– 309.
7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge Academic.
8. Crismond, D. P., & Adams, R. S. (2012). The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738–797.

9. Crow, J.E., Kennedy, T.J., Odell, M.R.L., Ophus, J.D. & Abbitt, J.T. (2013). “Using Just-in-Time PD to Technologically Prepare High School STEM Teachers.” In M.M. Capraro, R.M. Capraro, & C.W. Lewis, (Eds.), Improving Urban Schools: Equity and Access in K-16 STEM Education, Chapter 9, 143-157. Information Age Publishing.
10. Dempere, L.A.(2009). Reverse engineering as an educational tool for sustainability. IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable. DOI:10.1109/issst.2009.5156748
11. Gonzalez, H.B. & Kuenzi J. (2012). Congressional Research Service Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education: A Primer, p. 2. Also available online at http://www.stemedcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/STEM-Education-Primer.pdf
12. Griffith, A. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters? Educational Economics Review, 29, 911-922.
13. Havice, W. (2009). The power and promise of a STEM education: Thriving in a complex technological world. In ITEEA (Ed.), The overlooked STEM imperatives: Technology and engineering (pp. 10–17). Reston, VA: ITEEA.
14. ICASE. (2013). The Kuching Declaration. Final Proceeding of the World Conference on Science and Technology Education (WorldSTE2013). Kuching, Malaysia. Also available online at: http://www.icaseonline.net/ICASE%20Kuching%20Declaration_Final.pdf
15. International Technology Education Association. (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
16. Joyce, A. & Dzoga, M. (2011, March). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics education: Overcoming challenges in Europe. Intel Educator Academy EMEA. ISBN 9789491440144. Also available online at: http://www.ingenious-science.eu/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=3252e85a-125c-49c2-a090-eaeb3130737a&groupId=10136
17. Kennedy, Lee, & Fontecchio (2016). STEAM approach by integrating the arts and STEM through origami in K-12. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). Volume: 1, Pages: 1-5.
18. Lantz Jr., H. B. (2009). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education what form? What function? Retrieved from http://www.currtechintegrations.com/pdf/STEMEducationArticle.pdf.
19. Lewis, T. (2005). Coming to terms with engineering design as content. Journal of Technology Education, 16 (2), 37–54.
20. McCormick, R. (2004). Issues of learning and knowledge in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14(1), 21–44.
21. Merrill, C., Custer, R. L., Daugherty, J., Westrick, M., & Zeng, Y. (2008). Delivering core engineering concepts to secondary level students. Journal of Technology Education, 20(1), 48–64.
22. Museus, S, Palmer, R.T., Davis, R.J., & Maramba, D.C. (2011). Racial and Ethnic Minority Students' Success in STEM Education. Hoboken: New Jersey: Jossey-Bass, p. viii. Also available online at: http://works.bepress.com/robert_palmer/32
23. National Academy of Engineering & National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
24. National Governors Association. (2007). Building a science, technology, engineering and math agenda. Retrieved from http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/0702INNOVATIONSTEM.PDF.
25. National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
26. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
27. National Academy of Sciences (NAS). (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. National Research Council. (2012). Monitoring Progress Toward Successful K-12 STEM Education: A Nation Advancing?. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
30. National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM Education: Identifying Effective Approaches in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Committee on Highly Successful Science Programs for K-12 Science Education. Board on Science Education and Board on Testing and Assessment, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Also available online at http://www.stemreports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/NRC_STEM_2.pdf.
31. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. (2010). Prepare and Inspire: K-12 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Education for America’s Future. Also available online at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stemed-report.pdf.
32. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Alibali, M. W. (1999). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one lead to the other? Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 175–189.
33. Rogers-Chapman, M. F. (2013). Accessing STEM-focused education: Factors that contribute to the opportunity to attend STEM high schools across the United States. Education and Urban Society, XX(X), 1-22.
34. Thayer, K. (2017). How Does Reverse Engineering Work? Erişim: 10 Temmuz 2019, https://insights.globalspec.com/article/7367/how-does-reverse-engineering-work Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–26.
35. Schneider, M., Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2011). Relations among conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and procedural flexibility in two samples differing in prior knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1525.
36. Schnittka, C. G., & Bell, R. L. (2011). Engineering design and conceptual change in science: Addressing thermal energy and heat transfer in eighth grade. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1861– 1887.
37. Wendell, K. B., & Rogers, C. B. (2013). Engineering design-based science, science content performance, and science attitudes in elementary school. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 513–540.
38. West, A.B., Sickel, A. J. & Cribbs, J. D. (2015). The Science of Solubility: Using Reverse Engineering to Brew a Perfect Cup of Coffee [Çözünürlük Bilimi: Mükemmel Bir Kahve Demlemek İçin Tersine Mühendislik Kullanma]. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 52(3), 65-73.
39. Wood, K. L., Jensen, D., Bezdek, J., & Otto, K. N. (2001). Reverse Engineering and Redesign: Courses to Incrementally and Systematically Teach Design. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(3), 363–374.
40. Yeh, Y. C. (2003). Critical thinking test-Level I guidebook. Taipei, Taiwan: Psychological Publishing Co.