<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.4 20241031//EN"
        "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.4/JATS-journalpublishing1-4.dtd">
<article  article-type="research-article"        dtd-version="1.4">
            <front>

                <journal-meta>
                                                                <journal-id>e-ijer</journal-id>
            <journal-title-group>
                                                                                    <journal-title>e-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi</journal-title>
            </journal-title-group>
                                        <issn pub-type="epub">1309-6265</issn>
                                                                                            <publisher>
                    <publisher-name>Erdal TOPRAKCI</publisher-name>
                </publisher>
                    </journal-meta>
                <article-meta>
                                        <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.19160/e-ijer.39715</article-id>
                                                                <article-categories>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="en">
                                                            <subject>Studies on Education</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                            <subj-group  xml:lang="tr">
                                                            <subject>Eğitim Üzerine Çalışmalar</subject>
                                                    </subj-group>
                                    </article-categories>
                                                                                                                                                        <title-group>
                                                                                                                        <article-title>Dynamising conceptual change approach to teach some genetics concepts</article-title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <trans-title-group xml:lang="tr">
                                    <trans-title>Genetik Kavramlarının Öğretiminde Kavramsal Değişim Yaklaşımının Etkinliğinin Arttırılması</trans-title>
                                </trans-title-group>
                                                                                                    </title-group>
            
                                                    <contrib-group content-type="authors">
                                                                        <contrib contrib-type="author">
                                                                <name>
                                    <surname>Pekel</surname>
                                    <given-names>Yrd.doç.dr.feyzi Osman</given-names>
                                </name>
                                                            </contrib>
                                                    <contrib contrib-type="author">
                                                                <name>
                                    <surname>Hasenekoğlu</surname>
                                    <given-names>Prof.dr.ismet</given-names>
                                </name>
                                                            </contrib>
                                                                                </contrib-group>
                        
                                        <pub-date pub-type="pub" iso-8601-date="20150630">
                    <day>06</day>
                    <month>30</month>
                    <year>2015</year>
                </pub-date>
                                        <volume>6</volume>
                                        <issue>2</issue>
                                        <fpage>51</fpage>
                                        <lpage>68</lpage>
                        
                        <history>
                                    <date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="20150630">
                        <day>06</day>
                        <month>30</month>
                        <year>2015</year>
                    </date>
                                            </history>
                                        <permissions>
                    <copyright-statement>Copyright © 2010, e-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi</copyright-statement>
                    <copyright-year>2010</copyright-year>
                    <copyright-holder>e-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi</copyright-holder>
                </permissions>
            
                                                                                                <abstract><p>ABSTRACTThis study investigates the effect of a conceptual change approach over traditional instruction on students’ understanding of DNA, gene and chromosome concepts. 52 10th grade students belonging two different classes participated the study. One of the classes was assigned randomly to the control group, and the other class was assigned randomly to the experimental group. During teaching of the topic of DNA and gene related concepts in the biology curriculum, the conceptual change approach was applied in the experimental group whereas ‘traditional instruction’ was followed in the control group. The data were analyzed using analysis of SPSS 10.0. The results showed that the students in the experimental group performed better when compared to the control group. For the genetic concept achievement test, the posttest average percent of correct responses of the experimental group was % 79.46 and that of the control group was % 59.79 after the treatment. Add to this, it was found that students’ attitudes towards biology lessons made a statistically significant contribution to the variation in students’ understanding of DNA, gene and chromosome related concepts.</p></abstract>
                                                                                                                                    <trans-abstract xml:lang="tr">
                            <p>GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET Kavram yanılgıları öğrencilerin bilimsel açıklamaları anlama yeteneklerini sınırlandırarak (Lewis and Kattmann, 2004), diğer konu ve kavramları eksik, ilişkisiz öğrenmelerine ve başka kavram yanılgılarına neden olarak daha sonraki öğrenmelerini engelleyebilmektedir. Amaç: Dolayısıyla bu çalışmanın amacı, kavramsal değişim yaklaşımının, lise öğrencilerinin DNA, gen ve kromozom kavramlarını ile ilgili başarılarına ve biyolojiye karşı tutumlarına olan etkisini, geleneksel öğretim yaklaşımı ile karşılaştırarak ortaya koymaktır. Yöntem: Çalışmanın örneklemini bir lisenin fen bölümlerinde öğrenim gören aynı öğretim elemanın ders verdiği iki farklı şubedeki 52 ikinci sınıf öğrencisi oluşturmaktadır. Şubelerden biri, kavramsal değişim yaklaşımın kullanılacağı deney grubu; diğeri ise geleneksel öğretim yaklaşımının kullanıldığı kontrol grubu olarak rastgele seçilmiştir. Deney grubunda DNA, gen, kromozom kavramları ile ilgili konular kavramsal değişim yaklaşımını esas alan yöntemlerle, kontrol grubunda ise geleneksel ders anlatım yaklaşımlarına uygun yöntemlerle işlenmiştir. Çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak tarafımızca oluşturulan DNA, Gen, Kromozom Kavram Testi ve literatürden adapte ettiğimiz Biyoloji Dersi Tutum Ölçeği olmak üzere iki ölçekten yararlanılmıştır. Araştırmada ileri sürülen hipotezleri test etmek için bilgisayar ortamında SPSS paket programındaki “Independent sample t-test” ve “Paired sample t-test” kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Uygulama öncesi uygulanan “Bağımsız gruplar t-testi” deney ve kontrol gruplarımız arasında genetik kavramlar başarı testi açısından (t = 0.98, p = 0.330) ve biyoloji dersine ilişkin tutumları açısından (t = 0.22, p = 0.826) istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık olmadığı görülmüştür. Uygulama sonrasında gerçekleştirilen “Bağımlı gruplar t-testi” kontrol grubunun genetik kavramlar ön ve son test ortalamaları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılığın olduğunu (t = 11.89, p = 0.000; pretest = 9.52, posttest = 14.08), benzer şekilde deney grubunun ön ve son test ortalamaları arasında da (t = 12.03, p = 0.000; pretest = 8.87, posttest = 19.54) istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılığın olduğu ortaya koymuştur. Deney ve kontrol gruplarının genetik kavramlar testi son test başarı ortalamaları “bağımsız gruplar t-testi” kullanılarak karşılaştırıldığında aralarında deney grubu lehine istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık (t = 6.19, p = 0.000) olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıntılı bilgi için bakınız Tablo 4. Deney ve kontrol gruplarının ön ve son test biyoloji dersine ilişkin tutum puanları arasında kullanılan yöntemlerden kaynaklanan farklılık bulunup bulunmadığını belirlemek amacıyla “bağımlı gruplar t-testi” yapılmıştır. Bu test sonuçlarına göre kontrol grubu ön ve son test tutum puanları arasında istatistiksel anlamlı bir farklılığa rastlanmazken (t = 0.16, p = 0.871), deney grubunun ön ve son test tutum puanları arasında (t = 7.06, p = 0.000) istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklığa rastlanması deney grubunda kullandığımız stratejilerin sadece derse ilişkin başarı sağlamakla kalmadığını, aynı zamanda öğrencilerin derse ilişkin olumlu tutumlar geliştirmesini de sağladığı şeklinde yorumlanmıştır. Ayrıntılı bilgi için bakınız Tablo 5. Yorum ve Öneriler: Bu çalışmanın önemli tespitlerinden biri, öğretmen merkezli ve ders kitabı tabanlı öğretimin öğrencilerin kavramsal öğrenmelerini geliştirmede istenen başarı düzeyini sağlayamadığıdır. İkinci önemli tespiti ise, DNA, gen, kromozom kavramlarının öğretiminde kavramsal değişim yaklaşımı çerçevesinde analoji, kavramsal değişim metinleri, animasyonlu video stratejilerin kullanılmasının öğrencilerin bu kavramları daha ileri ve anlamlı düzeyde öğrenmelerini sağlamasıdır. Üçüncü önemli tespiti de, kullandığımız stratejiler kombinasyonunun öğrencilere sıkıcı gelen soyut kavramları somutlaştırabilmelerine, fikirlerinin doğruluğunu test etmek için işbirlikli çalışabilmelerine imkan sağladığından biyoloji dersine karşı daha olumlu tutumlar kazanmalarına vesile olmasıdır. Bu nedenle, DNA, gen, kromozom gibi soyut moleküler genetik kavramlarına yer verilen derslerde öğretmen ve araştırmacılara bu kavramların öğretiminde işe koştuğumuz stratejileri kullanmalarını tavsiye ediyoruz.</p></trans-abstract>
                                                            
            
                                                            <kwd-group>
                                                    <kwd>Genetics concepts</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>   conceptual change approach</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>   misconceptions</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                        
                                                                            <kwd-group xml:lang="tr">
                                                    <kwd>Genetik kavramlar</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Kavramsal değişim yaklaşımı</kwd>
                                                    <kwd>  Kavram yanılgıları.</kwd>
                                            </kwd-group>
                                                                                                            </article-meta>
    </front>
    <back>
                            <ref-list>
                                    <ref id="ref1">
                        <label>1</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Al khawaldeh S.A., (2013). Prediction/discussion-based learning cycle versus conceptual change text: comparative effects on students’ understanding of genetics. Research in Science &amp; Technological Education, 31(2), 168-183.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref2">
                        <label>2</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Alparslan, C., Tekkaya, C. &amp; Geban, O. (2003). Using the conceptual change instruction to improve learning. Journal of Biological Education, 37(3), 133–137.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref3">
                        <label>3</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Alvermann, D.E., and Hague, S.A. (1989). Comprehension of counterintuitive science texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text structure. Journal of Educational Research, 82, 197-202.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref4">
                        <label>4</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Annetta A. L., Minogue J., Holmes Y.S., Cheng M-T. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’engagement and learning about genetics. Computers &amp; Education, 53(1), 74–85.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref5">
                        <label>5</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Bahar, M., Johnstone, A. H. &amp; Hansell, M. H. (1999). Revisiting learning difficulties in biology. Journal of Biological Education, 33(2), 84-86.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref6">
                        <label>6</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Beentjes, J. W. J., &amp; van der Voort, T. H. A. (1991). Children&#039;s written accounts of televised and printed stories. Educational Technology Research &amp; Development, 39(3), 15-26.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref7">
                        <label>7</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Beerenwinkel, A., Parchmann I., Gräsel C. (2011). Conceptual change texts in chemistry teaching: A study on the particle model of matter. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1235-1259</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref8">
                        <label>8</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Boujemaa A., Pierre C., Sabah, S., Salahaddine K., Jamal, C., Abdellatif, C. (2010). Universitystudents’ conceptions about the concept of gene: Intrest of historical approach. US-China Education Review, 7(2), 9-15.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref9">
                        <label>9</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Bourgonjon J., Valcke M., SoetaertR., Schellens T. (2010). Students’ perceptions about the use of video games in the classroom. Computers &amp; Education 54, 1145–1156.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref10">
                        <label>10</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Burns E (1995). DNA writing paper: an educational aid in A-level biology. Journal of Biological Education, 29(1), 8-11.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref11">
                        <label>11</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Canpolat, N., Pinarbasi, T., Bayrakçeken, S. and Geban, O. (2006). The conceptual change approach to teaching chemical equilibrium. Research in Science &amp; Technological Education, 24 (2), 217-235.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref12">
                        <label>12</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Chambers, S. K., &amp; Andre, T. (1997). Gender, prior knowledge, interest and experience in electricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 107-123.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref13">
                        <label>13</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Çakır, Ö.S., Geban, Ö. And Yürük, N., (2002). Effectiveness of Conceptual Change Texts Oriented Instruction on Students’ Understanding of Cellular Respiration Concepts. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 30, 239-243.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref14">
                        <label>14</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Çetingül, İ., Geban Ö., (2011). Using conceptual change texts with analogies for misconceptions in acids and bases. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 41, 112-123.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref15">
                        <label>15</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Dagher, Z. R. (1994). Does the use of analogies contribute to conceptual change?, Science Education.78(6), 601–614.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref16">
                        <label>16</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Dagher, Z. R. (1995). Review of studies on the effectiveness of instructional analogies in science education. Science Education,79(3), 295–312.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref17">
                        <label>17</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., &amp; Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 335–356.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref18">
                        <label>18</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Dilber, R., (2010). Effect of conceptual change instruction on students&#039; understanding of electricity concepts. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 7 (4), 478-496.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref19">
                        <label>19</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Durkin, K., &amp; Barber, B. (2002). Not so doomed: Computer game play and positive adolescent development. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 23(4), 373–392.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref20">
                        <label>20</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Fisher, K. M. (1992). Improving high school genetics instruction, In M. U. Smith and P. E. Simmons (Eds.), Teaching genetics: Recommendations and research (Proceedings of a national conference) (pp. 24-28). Cambridge, MA: National Science Foundation.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref21">
                        <label>21</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref22">
                        <label>22</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Geban, Ö., Ertepınar, H., Yılmaz, G., Atlan, A. &amp; Şahbaz, O. (1994). The effects of Computer Aided Instruction on Students’ Science Achievements and Motivation I. National Symposium of Science Education, Dokuz Eylül University, İzmir, TURKEY</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref23">
                        <label>23</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Guzzetti, B. J., (2000). Learning counterintuitive science concepts: What we have learned from over a decade of research?, Reading &amp; Writing Quarterly, 16(2), 89-95.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref24">
                        <label>24</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Harrison A. G. (2008). Teaching with analogies: Friends or foes? In: A G Harrison &amp; R K Coll (Eds), Using analogies in middle and secondary science classrooms (pp6-21). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref25">
                        <label>25</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Huang S. D. and Aloi J. (1991). The Impact of Using Interactive Video in Teaching General Biology, The American Biology Teacher, 53(5), 281-284.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref26">
                        <label>26</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Hynd C., Alvermann D., Qian G., (1997). Preservice Elementary School Teachers’ Conceptual Change about Projectile Motion: Refutation Text, Demonstration, Affective Factors, and Relevance. Science Education, 81, 1-27.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref27">
                        <label>27</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Kibuka-Sebitosi, E., (2007). Understanding genetics and inheritance in rural school. Journal of Biological Education, 41(2), 56-61.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref28">
                        <label>28</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lewis, J. (2004). Traits, genes, particles and information: re-visiting students’ understandings of genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (2), 195–206</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref29">
                        <label>29</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lewis, J., Driver, R., Leach, J. And Wood-Robinson, C. (1997). Understanding Genetics, ‘Young People’s Understanding of, and Attitudes to, the New Genetics’ project Leeds: University of Leeds, CSSME). ISBN: 0 94421 89 9, pp, 92 .</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref30">
                        <label>30</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lewis J., Kattmann U. (2004). Traits, genes, particles and information: re-visiting students’ understandings of genetics. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 26, 195–206.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref31">
                        <label>31</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lewis J., Leach J., Wood-Robinson C. (2000a). What&#039;s in a cell?—Young people&#039;s understanding of the genetic relationship between cells, within an individual. J. Biol. Educ. 34, 129–132.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref32">
                        <label>32</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lewis, J., Leach, J. &amp; Wood-Robinson, C. (2000b). All in the genes?—Young people’s understanding of the nature of genes. Journal of Biological Education, 34(2), 74-79.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref33">
                        <label>33</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Lewis J., Wood-Robinson C. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance: do students see any relationship?. International Journal of Science Education 22, 177–195.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref34">
                        <label>34</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Malacinski, G.M and Zell P. W. (1996). Manipulating the “invisible”: Learning molecular biology using inexpensive models. The American Biology Teacher, 58(7), 428-432.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref35">
                        <label>35</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Marbach-Ad G., Stavy R. (2000). Student&#039;s cellular and molecular explanation of genetic phenomena. Journal of Biological Education 34, 200–205.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref36">
                        <label>36</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Mintzes, J.J. and Wandersee, J.H. (1998). Research in Science Teaching and Learning: A Human Constructivist View. In J.J., Mintzes, J.H. Wandersee, and J.D. Novak (eds). Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp 60-90.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref37">
                        <label>37</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Mintzes, J.J. and Wandersee, J.H. and Novak J.D., (2001). Assessing understanding in biology, Journal of Biological Education, 35, 118-123.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref38">
                        <label>38</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Nilsson N., Christense H.W., Hartvigsen J., (1996). The interexaminer reliability of measuring passive cervical range of motion. Revisited Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics, 19, p. 302–304</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref39">
                        <label>39</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers &amp; Education, 52(1), 1– 12</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref40">
                        <label>40</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Pekel, F.O. (2005). Investigations of effectiveness of conceptual change approach on understanding of DNA, gene, chromosome concepts. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Ataturk University, Instutitue of Science, Erzurum: Turkey.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref41">
                        <label>41</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Pınarbaşı, T., Canpolat N., Bayrakçeken S., Geban Ö., (2006). An Investigation of Effectiveness of Conceptual Change Text-oriented Instruction on Students’ Understanding of Solution Concepts. Research in Science Education, 36, 313-335</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref42">
                        <label>42</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Posner, G.J., Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W., &amp; Gertzog, W.A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception. Science Education, 66, 211-227.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref43">
                        <label>43</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Rotbain Y., Marbch-Ad G, Stavy R. (2005). Understanding molecular genetics through a drawing- based activity. Journal of Biological Education, 39 (4), 174-178.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref44">
                        <label>44</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Schnotz W. (2002). Towards an integrated view of learning from text visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 101-120.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref45">
                        <label>45</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Smith, L. A., and Williams, J. M., (2007). “It’s the X and Y Thing: Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Changes in Children’s Understanding of Genes”. Research in Science Education, 37, 407–422.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref46">
                        <label>46</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Stavy, R. (1991). Using analogy to overcome misconceptions about conversation of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 305–313.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref47">
                        <label>47</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Sungur, S., Tekkaya, C. and Geban, Ö.,(2001). The Contribution of Conceptual Change Texts Accompanied by Concept Mapping to Students&#039; Understanding of Human Circulatory System. School Science and Mathematics, 101, 91-101.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref48">
                        <label>48</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Templin A.T., Fetters M.K. (2002). A working model of protein synthesis using legoTM building blocks. The American Biology Teacher, 64(9), 673-678.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref49">
                        <label>49</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Thompson, J., &amp; Soyibo, K. (2002). Effects of lecture, teacher demonstrations, discussion and practical work on 10th graders’ attitudes to chemistry and understanding of electrolysis. Research in Science and Technological Education, 20(1), 25-37.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref50">
                        <label>50</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G., &amp; Mamialo, T. L. (2002). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 357–368.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref51">
                        <label>51</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., Joslin, P. and Lindauer, I. (1992). Science teachers&#039; use of analogies: Observations from classroom practice. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 413–422.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref52">
                        <label>52</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Treagust, D.F., Harrison A.G., &amp; Venville G.J., (1996). Using an analogical teaching approach to engender conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 18 (2), 213-229.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref53">
                        <label>53</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Venville, G., Donovan, J., (2008). How pupils use a model for abstract concepts in genetics. Journal of Biological Education, 43(1), 6-14.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref54">
                        <label>54</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Wang J., and Hartley K., (2003). Video Technology as a Support for Teacher Education Reform. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(1), 105-138.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref55">
                        <label>55</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Wood-Robinson C., Lewis J, Leach J., (2000). Young people&#039;s understanding of the nature of genetic information in the cells of an organism. Journal of Biological Education, 35(1), 29–36.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref56">
                        <label>56</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Yılmaz, D., Tekkaya, C., and Sungur, S., (2011). The Comparative Effects of Prediction/Discussion- Based Learning Cycle, Conceptual Change Text, and Traditional Instructions on Student Understanding of Genetics. International Journal of Science Education 33, 607–628.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                                    <ref id="ref57">
                        <label>57</label>
                        <mixed-citation publication-type="journal">Yip D. Y., (2001). Promoting the development of a conceptual change model of science instruction in prospective secondary biology teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 755- 770.</mixed-citation>
                    </ref>
                            </ref-list>
                    </back>
    </article>
