The Views of Science and Art Center (SAC) Students Regarding Socratic Inquiry Seminars

Yıl 2021, Sayı: 28, 1 - 21, 31.10.2021

Asiye Bahtiyar , Bilge Can

Öz

The purpose of this study is to determine the views of students attending Science and Art Centers (SAC) about Socratic research seminars. This qualitative study was conducted with nine undergraduate students. Individual interviews were conducted with students after the seminars, which spanned 10 weeks, about their opinions of the seminars. As a result of the content analysis, it was found that students rated the Socratic research process as a process in which they can freely express their thoughts, have a scientific experience that contributes to their development, individual differences come out, a good method is used for the development of the discussion, questions and discussions about science are held. In addition, students believe that at the end of the seminars, they can ask better questions both quantitatively and qualitatively, change their ideas, question themselves, develop their sense of curiosity, emphatically respond to different opinions and make philosophical inquiries.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Science and Art Center (SAC) students, socratic inquiry seminar, viewpoints of students

Kaynakça

• Al-Darwish, S. (2012). The role of teacher questions and the Socratic method in EFL classrooms in Kuwait. World Journal of Education, 2(4), 76-84. doi:10.5430/wje.v2n4p76 Aronson, B. (2005). Bilimsel gaflar, dogruya giden egri yolda serüvenler [Scientific Goofs: Adventures Along the Crooked Trail to Truth] (Nermin Arık, trans.). TUBİTAK Publications.
• Aydin, M. Z. (2001). Aktif ogretim yontemlerinden buldurma (Sokrates) yontemi. Cumhuriyet Theology Journal, 5(1), 55-80.
• Bijoch, S. (2015). Using nontraditional text for socratic dialogue ın a middle level montessori music classroom. (Unpublished master thesis). University of Wisconsin - River Falls, USA.
• Bozer, E. (2014). A study of developing a scale for Socratic questioning skill in 9-12. grade high school students (Unpublished master thesis). Necmettin Erbakan University, The Institute of Educational Sciences, Konya.
• Bozer, E. N. & Kurnaz, A. (2016). Uyuyan zihinleri uyandırma: Sokratik sorgulama. In E. Yılmaz, M. Çalıskan, & S. A. Sulak (Eds.), Eğitim bilimlerinden yansımalar, (pp.153-166). Çizgi Bookstore.
• Bulbul-Huner, S. (2018). A analyzing the effects of the Socratic inquiry method onacademic success and retention in life science course: An action research study. (Unpublished PhD thesis). Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa Graduate Education Institute, İstanbul.
• Bulbul-Huner, S. & Kucuktepe, C. (2018). Investigate the questioning experiences of classroom teachers in terms of the intellectual standards of Socratic inquiry. The Journal of International Education Science (INESJOURNAL), 15, 170-191. doi: 10.16991/INESJOURNAL.1556
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications.
• Cebi, B. (2006). The reflection of Socratic teaching approach to the elementary Turkish language curriculum in primary education and its position in the implementation (Unpublished master thesis). Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Samsun.
• Coban, O. (2016). Sokratik sorgulama yontemi ile sorumluluk değerinin oğretimi. (Unpublished PhD thesis). Usak University, Institute of Social Sciences, Usak.
• Dadi, M. (2013). In this study, the “avogadros number” is tried to be taught by using the method of Socrates’ finding. (Unpublished master thesis). Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Institute of Educational Sciences, Van.
• De Schrijver, J., Tamassia, L., Van De Keere, K., Vervaet, S., Meys, R., Cornelissen, E., & Sermeus, J. (2016). Reflecting about the nature of science through philosophical dialogue. In Proceedings of EAPRIL 2015 (2) 24-27 Nov 2015 (pp. 323-330). Luxembourg University, Belval, Luxembourg.
• Emir, S., Bulbul-Huner, S., & Uzelli, O. (2012). Sokratik sorgulama yonteminin akademik basarı, elestirel düsünme ve üst bilissel farkındalık düzeyleri üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi. 2. Ulusal Eğitim Programları ve Oğretim Kongresi, 27 Eylül 2012. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi, Bolu, Türkiye.
• Epcacan, C. (2013). The effect of Socrat seminar technique based educationon the reading comprehension skills of students and their attitude towards reading. Journal of Siirt University Social Sciences Institute, 1(1), 1-16.
• Ertugrul, G. & Inan, B. (2009). Socratic method: Its role in the cognitive domain of Bloom’s taxonomy and its use in advanced elt literature classes to teach plato’s republic. Dumlupınar University, Journal of Social Sciences, 25(3), 119-125.
• Hong, K. S. & Jacob S. M. (2012). Critical thinking and Socratic questioning in asynchronous mathematics discussion forums. Malaysian Journal of Educational Technology, (12)3, 7-26.
• Kantarci, Z. (2013). Sokrates and philosophy of education. Mavi Atlas Gümüshane Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 78-90.
• Knezic, D., Wubbels, T., Elbers, E., & Hajer, M. (2013). Teachers’ education in Socratic dialogue: Some effects on teacher–learner interaction. The Modern Language Journal, 97(2), 490-505. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12014.x
• Korkmazer, A. (2016). Teaching the changing state of matter by using Socrates method. (Unpublished master thesis). Inonu University, Institute of Educational Sciences Department of Science Education, Malatya.
• Kusmaryani, W. (2017). Assessing student’s speaking through Socratic questioning method. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research (ASSEHR), 82, 338-341. doi: 10.2991/conaplin-16.2017.78
• Kus, E. (2009). Nicel-nitel araştırma teknikleri (3. Baskı). Anı Publishing.
• Kucuktepe, C. (2015). An evaluation of teachers’ questions in terms of Socratic inquiry technique. Anthropologist, 20, 156-165.
• Lederman, N. G. & Lederman, J. S. (2005). Mystery bones: A series of bone activities. https://science.iit.edu/mathematics-science- education/resources/ lederman- depository/owl-pellet-activities in 10.06.2017.
• McCall, C. (2009). Teachers guide to wondering adventures (2nd Edition). Catherine McCall and East Renfrewshire Council.
• MoNE [Ministry of Education] (2016). 2016-2017 Bı̇lı̇m ve sanat merkezlerı̇ öğrencı̇ tanılama kılavuzu. Ministry of Education, Board of Education.
• MoNE [Ministry of Education] (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi oğretim programı (İlkokul ve ortaokul 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar). Ministry of Education, Board of Education.
• Merriam, S. B. (2018). Nitel arastırma-desen ve uygulama için bir rehber (3. Baskı). (Trans. Ed. Selahattin Turan). Nobel Publishing.
• Oktay, M. (2012). Sokratik yontemle sıcaklık kavramının oğretilmesine bir ornek. X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi 27-30 Haziran 2012. Niğde Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi, Niğde.
• Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2007). The thinker’s guide to: the art of socratic questioning. Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.
• Sahamid, H. (2016). Developing critical thinking through Socratic questioning: An action research study. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 4(3), 62-72. doi:10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.4n.3p.62
• Schjelderup, A. (2009). Learning science through philosophical dialogues. Farhang Journal of Iran Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies (IHCS), 22(69), 1-14.
• Shahsavar, S., Hoon, T. B., Thai, Y. P., & Samah, B. A. (2013). Promoting tertiary level students’ critical thinking through the use of Socratic questioning on the blog. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 21, 57-70.
• Trickey, S. & Topping, K. J. (2004). Philosophy for children: A systematic review. Research Papers in Education, 19(3), 365-380. doi: 10.1080/0267152042000248016
• Wenning, C. J., Holbrook, T. W., & Stankevitz, J. (2006). Engaging students in conducting Socratic dialogues: Suggestions for science teachers. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 4(1), 10-13.
• Wiggins, G. (2004). Socratic seminars: Guidelines. Authentic Education, 1-7.
• Yakar, P. (2017). The effects of using Socratic inquiry technique on attitudes towards socio-scientific issues and motivation in science learning. (Unpublished master thesis). Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, The Institute of Educational Sciences, Muğla.
• Yang, Y. C., Newby, T. J., & Bill, R. L. (2005). Using Socratic questioning to promotecritical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning environments. American Journal of Distance Education, 3, 163-181. doi: 10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_4
• Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel arastırma yontemleri. Seçkin Publishing.
• Yildiz-Demirtas, V., Karadağ, F., & Gülenç, K. (2018). Levels of the questions formulated by preschool children during the philosophical inquiry process and the qualities of their answers: Philosophy with children. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 10(2), 277-294. doi: 10.15345/iojes.2018.02.019
• Zeybek, G. (2019). Instruction of "Ohm Law" with Socratic questioning method. The Journal of Educational Theory and Practice Research (JETPR), 5(1), 53-63.