The Effects of Computer Animations and Jigsaw Technique on Academic Achievement of Students

Öz

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of computer animations technique and jigsaw technique on students\' academic achievement in general chemistry-II course. The study included 122 first-year undergraduate students from three classes of a general chemistry-II course. In this research, two instruments, which were the Test of Scientific Reasoning and Chemistry Academic Achievement Test, were used. In teaching of topics; in the control group, the traditional teaching method, in the animation group, computer animations and in the jigsaw group, jigsaw techniques were applied. From the findings of this study, which are investigates effects of teaching through animation technique and jigsaw technique they were found that this technique had more positive effects on teaching than the traditional teaching method.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Computer animation, jigsaw technique, electrochemistry, academic achievement, scientific reasoning

Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarılarına Bilgisayar Animasyonları ve Jigsaw Tekniğinin Etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışma, işbirlikli öğrenme metodunun bir alt tekniği olan jigsaw tekniği ve bilgisayar animasyonları tekniğinin öğrencilerin genel kimya II dersindeki akademik başarılarına etkisini incelmek amacı ile yapılmıştır. Çalışmaya Genel Kimya-II dersini alan üç sınıftaki toplam 122 fen bilgisi öğretmenliği birinci sınıf öğrencisi katılmıştır. Araştırmada, Kimya Akademik Başarı Testi ve Bilimsel Düşünme Beceri Testi olmak üzere iki ölçme aracı kullanılmıştır. Elektrokimya ünitesinin öğretimi; deney gruplarında bilgisayar animasyon ve jigsaw tekniği ile kontrol grubunda ise geleneksel anlatım yöntemi kullanılarak gerçekleştirildi. Çalışmada elde edilen sonuçlara göre, bilgisayar animasyonları kullanılarak gerçekleştirilen bilgisayar destekli öğretim yöntemi ve jigsaw tekniği ile dThe purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of computer animations technique and jigsaw technique on students\' academic achievement in general chemistry-II course. The study included 122 first-year undergraduate students from three classes of a general chemistry-II course. In this research, two instruments, which were the Test of Scientific Reasoning and Chemistry Academic Achievement Test, were used. In teaching of topics; in the control group, the traditional teaching method, in the animation group, computer animations and in the jigsaw group, jigsaw techniques were applied. From the findings of this study, which are investigates effects of teaching through animation technique and jigsaw technique they were found that this technique had more positive effects on teaching than the traditional teaching method.Bilgisayar animasyonları, jigsaw tekniği, elektrokimya, akademik başarı, bilimsel düşünmeComputer animation, jigsaw technique, electrochemistry, academic achievement, scientific reasoning Tam Metin Arşiv Yıl :2014 Cilt :34 No:2Yıl :2014 Cilt :34 No:1Yıl :2013 Cilt :33 No:3Yıl :2013 Cilt :33 No:2Yıl :2013 Cilt :33 No:1Yıl :2012 Cilt :32 No:3Yıl :2012 Cilt :32 No:2Yıl :2012 Cilt :32 No:1Yıl :2011 Cilt :31 No:3Yıl :2011 Cilt :31 No:2Yıl :2011 Cilt :31 No:1Yıl :2010 Cilt :30 No:3Yıl :2010 Cilt :30 No:2Yıl :2010 Cilt :30 No:1Yıl :2009 Cilt :29 No:3Yıl :2009 Cilt :29 No:2Yıl :2009 Cilt :29 No:1Yıl :2008 Cilt :28 No:3Yıl :2008 Cilt :28 No:2Yıl :2008 Cilt :28 No:1Yıl :2007 Cilt :27 No:3Yıl :2007 Cilt :27 No:2Yıl :2007 Cilt :27 No:1Yıl :2006 Cilt :26 No:3Yıl :2006 Cilt :26 No:2Yıl :2006 Cilt :26 No:1Yıl :2005 Cilt :25 No:3Yıl :2005 Cilt :25 No:2Yıl :2005 Cilt :25 No:1Yıl :2004 Cilt :24 No:3Yıl :2004 Cilt :24 No:2Yıl :2004 Cilt :24 No:1Yıl :2003 Cilt :23 No:3Yıl :2003 Cilt :23 No:2Yıl :2003 Cilt :23 No:1Yıl :2002 Cilt :22 No:3Yıl :2002 Cilt :22 No:2Yıl :2002 Cilt :22 No:1Yıl :2001 Cilt :21 No:3Yıl :2001 Cilt :21 No:2Yıl :2001 Cilt :21 No:1

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilgisayar animasyonları, jigsaw tekniği, elektrokimya, akademik başarı, bilimsel düşünme

Kaynakça

1. Abraham, M.R., Williamson, M.M. & Westbrook, S.L. (1994). A Cross-Age Study of the Understanding Five Concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 147-165.
2. Akgün, Ş. (1996). Fen Bilgisi Öğretimi. Ankara: Zirve Ofset.
3. Altıparmak, M. ve Nakipoğlu, M. (2002). İşbirlikli Öğrenmenin Dizi ve Serilerin Öğretimindeki Etkililiği. V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, Ankara.
4. Anderson, W.L., Mitchell, S.M. & Osgood, M.P. (2005). Comparison of Student Performance in Cooperative Learning and Traditional Lecture-Based Biochemistry Classes. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 33(6), 387–393.
5. Artut, P.D. & Tarim, K. (2007). The Effectiveness of Jigsaw II on Prospective Elementary School Teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 129-141.
6. Arslan, O., Bora Doğan, N. ve Samancı- Keskin, N. (2006). İşbirliğine Dayalı Öğrenme Tekniklerinin Onuncu Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Sinir Sistemi Ünitesini Öğrenmelerine Etkisi. Eğitim Araştırmaları, 23(1), 1-9.
7. Atasoy, B., Genç, E., Kadayıfçı, H. ve Akkuş, H. (2007). Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Fiziksel ve Kimyasal Değişmeler Ünitesini Anlamalarında İşbirlikli Öğrenmenin Etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 12-21.
8. Avşar, Z. ve Alkış, S. (2007). İşbirlikli Öğrenme Yöntemi “Birleştirme I” Tekniğinin Sosyal Bilgiler Derslerinde Öğrenci Başarısına Etkisi. İlköğretim Online, 6(2), 197-203

9. Ayas, A. & Demirbas, A.J. (1997). Turkish Secondary Students’ Conception of Introductory Chemistry Concept. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(5), 518-521.
10. Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B. & Silberstein, J. (1987). Is An Atom Malleable? Journal of Chemical Education, 63(1), 64-66.
11. Bilgin, İ. ve Geban, Ö. (2002). Öğrencilerin Grup Çalışmalarındaki Performansları İle Kimyasal Denge Başarıları Arasındaki İlişki. V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, ODTÜ Kültür ve Kongre Merkezi, Ankara.
12. Birk, J.P. & Kurtz, M.J. (1999). Effect of Experience on Retention and Elimination of Misconceptions about Molecular Structure and Bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 124-128.
13. Birss, V.I. & Truax, R. (1990). An Effective Approach to Teaching Electrochemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, (67), 5, 403-409
14. Boo, H. K. (1998). Students’ Understandings of Chemical Bonds and the Energetic of Chemical Reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3 (5), 569-581.
15. Boo, H.K. and Watson, J. R. (2001). Progression in High School Students’ (Aged 16- 18) Conceptualizations about Chemical Reactions in Solution. Science Education, 85(5), 568-586.
16. Burke, K. A., Greenbowe, T. J. & Windschitl, M. A. (1998). Developing and Using Conceptual Computer Animations for Chemistry Instruction. Journal of chemical education, 75(12), 1658-1661.
17. Butts, B. & Smith, R. (1987). HSC Chemistry Students’ Understanding of the Structure and Properties of Molecular and Ionic Compounds. Research in Science Education, 1, 92– 201.
18. Colburn, A. (2004). Inquiry Scientists Want to Know. Educational Leadership, 62(1), 63-66.
19. Colosi, J. C. & Zales, C. R. (1998). Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Improves Biology Lab Course. Bioscience, 48(2), 118-124.
20. Cuevas, P., Lee, O., Hart, J. & Deaktor, R. (2005). Improving Science Inquiry with Elementary Students of Diverse Backgrounds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 337-357.
21. Doymus, K. (2007a). Teaching Chemical Equilibrium with the Jigsaw Technique. Research in Science Education, 38, 249-260.
22. Doymus, K. ( 2007b). The Effect of a Cooperative Learning Strategy in the Teaching of Phase and One-Component Phase Diagrams. Journal of Chemical Education, 84 (11), 1857-1860.
23. Doymuş, K. ve Şimşek, Ü. (2007). Kimyasal Bağların Öğretilmesinde Jigsaw Tekniğinin Etkisi ve Bu Teknik Hakkında Öğrenci Görüşleri. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 173(1), 231-243.
24. Doymuş, K., Şimşek, Ü ve Şimşek, U. (2005). İşbirlikli Öğrenme Yöntemi Üzerine Derleme: İşbirlikli Öğreneme Yöntemi ve Yöntemle İlgili Çalışmalar. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 59-83.
25. Efe, R., Hevedanlı, M., Ketani, S., Çakmak, Ö. ve Aslan-Efe, H. (2007). Ortaöğretim Biyoloji Sınıflarında İşbirlikli Öğrenme Yöntemlerinde Grup Liderlerinin Etkisi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, www.e-sosder.com ISSN:1304-0278, 6(21), 22-40.
26. Eilks, I. (2005). Experiences and Reflections about Teaching Atomic Structure in a Jigsaw Classroom in Lower Secondary School Chemistry Lessons. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(2), 313-319.
27. Finley, F., Stewart, J. & Yarroch, W. (1982). Teachers’ Perceptions of Important and Difficult Science Content. Science Education, 66(4), 531-538
28. Foley , J., Van Dam, A.S. & Feiner, J. (1990). Computer Graphics Principles and Practice (2nd edt). Addison – Wesley, New York, U.S.A.
29. Garnett, P.J. & Treagust, D.F. (1992). Conceptual Difficulties Experienced By Senior High School Students of Electrochemistry: Electrochemical (Galvanic) and Electrolytic Cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (29), 10, 1079-1099
30. Ghaith, G. & El-Malak, M.A. (2004). Effect of Jigsaw II on Literal and Higer Order EFL Reading Comprehension. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 105- 115.
31. Gillies, R.M. (2006). Teachers' and Students' Verbal Behaviours during Cooperative and Small-Group Learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 271- 287.
32. Graves, J.E. (1998). Molecular Insights into the Population Structures of Cosmopolitan Marine Fishes. Journal of Heredity, 89(5), 427-437.
33. Gussarsky, E. & Gorodetsky, M. (1988). On the Chemical Equilibrium Concept: Constrained, Word Associations and Conception. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(5), 319-333.
34. Haidar, A.H. & Abraham, M.R. (1991). A Comparison of Applied and Theoretical Knowledge of Concepts Based On the Particulate Nature of Matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 919-938.
35. Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The Development of Chemistry Teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(4), 701- 705.
36. Hsin-Kai, W., Krajcik, J.S. & Eliot, S. (2001). Promoting Understanding of Chemical Representations: Students' Use of a Visualization Tool in the Classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, (7), 821-842.
37. Kokkotas, P. & Vlachos, I. (1998). Teaching the Topic of the Particulate Nature of Matter in Prospective Teachers’ Training Courses. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 291-303.
38. Kollu, E. (2005). Kubaşık Öğrenme Tekniklerinden Birlikte Öğrenme Tekniğinin 5. Sınıf Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarıları ve Arkadaşlık Düzeylerine Etkisi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adana.
39. Lai, C.Y. & Wu, C.C. (2006). Using Handhelds in a Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 284-297.
40. Laybourne K. (1998). The animation book: A complete guide to animated film-making – from flip-books to sound cartoons to 3-D animation. Three Rivers Press. N.Y., U.S.A.
41. McMillan, J. H. & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry. Sixth Edition. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
42. Nahum, T. L., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A. & Krajcik, J. (2007). Developing a New Teaching Approach for the Chemical Bonding Concept Aligned wWith Current Scientific and Pedagogical Knowledge. Science Education, 91(4), 579- 603.
43. Nicoll, G. (2001). A Report of Undergraduates Bonding Misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 707-730.
44. Oduge, N. A. & Bradley, J. D. (1996). Electrode Processes and Aspects Relating To Cell Emf, Current, and Cell Components in Operating Electrochemical Cells. Journal of chemical education, 73(12), 1145-1149.
45. Piquette, J. S. & Heikkinen, H. W. (2005). Strategies Reported Used by Instructors to Address Student Alternate Conceptions in Chemical Equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1112–1134.
46. Sanger, M. J. & Greenbowe, T. J. (1999). An Analysis of College Chemistry Textbooks as Sources of Misconceptions and Errors in Electrochemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 76 (6), 853-860
47. Saribas, D. & Köseoglu, F. (2006). The Effect of the Constructivist Method on Pre- Service Chemistry Teachers' Achievement and Conceptual Understanding about Aqueous Solution. Journal of Science Education, 7(1), 58-62.
48. Shaaban, K. (2006). An Initial Study of the Effects of Cooperative Learning on Reading Comprehension, Vocabulary Acquisition, and Motivation to Read. Reading Psychology, 27, 377-403.
49. Sisovic, D. & Bojovic, S. (2001).The Elaboration of the Salt Hydrolysis Concept by Cooperative Learning. Journal of Science Education, 2, 19-23.
50. Slavin, R.E. (1980). Cooperative Learning. Review of Education Research, 50, 315-342.
51. Slish, D.F. (2005). Assessment of the Use of the Jigsaw Method and Active Learning in Non- Majors, Introductory Biology. Bioscene, 31(4), 4-10.
52. Sönmez, S. (2005). İşbirliğine Dayalı Öğrenme Yöntemi, Birleştirme Tekniği İle Bilgisayar Okur-Yazarlığı Öğretiminin Akademik Başarıya Ve Kalıcılığa Etkisi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Adana.
53. Taber, K. S. (1997). Students’ Understanding of Ionic Bonding: Molecular Versus Electrostatic Framework. School Science Review, 78(1), 85-95.
54. Tamah, S. M. (2007). Jigsaw Technique in Reading Class of Young Learners: Revealing Students' Interaction. Washington, DC: Council on Postsecondary Accreditation. (ERIC No. ED495487).
55. Tan, K-C. D. & Treagust, D. (1999). Evaluating Students’ Understanding of Chemical Bonding. School Science Review, 81(294), 75–83.
56. Tezcan, H. & Yılmaz, Ü. (2003). Kimya Öğretiminde Kavramsal Bilgisayar Animasyonları İle Geleneksel Öğretim Yönteminin Başarıya Etkileri. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 14(2), 18-32.
57. Theall, R. M. (2003). The Effectiveness of Computer-Generated 3d Animations in Inquiry Chemistry Laboratory. Doctoral Dissertation, Arizona State University.
58. Tien, L.T., Teichert, M.A. & Rickey, D. (2007). Effectiveness of a MORE Laboratory Module in Promoting Students to Revise Their Molecular- Level Ideas about Solutions. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(1), 175-181.
59. Tobin, K. & Capie, W. (1981). Development and Validation of A Group Test of Logical Thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 4l(2), 413-424.
60. Vermaat, H., Kramers-Pals, H. & Schank, P. (2004). The Use of Animations in Chemical Education. In Proceedings of the International Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (pp.430-441). Anaheim, CA.
61. Weiss, R.E., Knowlton, D.S & Morrison, G. R. (2002). Principles for Using Animation in Computer Based Instruction: Theoretical Heuristics for Effective Design. Computers in Human Behaviour, 18, 465-477.
62. Williamson, V.M. (1992). The Effects of Computer Animation Emphasizing the Particulate Nature of Matter on the Understandings and Misconceptions of College Chemistry Students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.
63. Williamson, V.M. & Abraham, M.R. (1995). The Effects of Computer Animation on the Particulate Mental Models of College Chemistry Students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 521 – 534.
64. Yaman, S. ve Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2006). Öğretmen Adaylarının Mantıksal Düşünme Becerileri ve Kimya Dersine Yönelik Tutumlarının İncelenmesi. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 91-106
65. Yezierski, E. J. (2003). The Particulate of Matter and Conceptual Change A Cross-Age Study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University.
66. Yılmaz, A., Erdem, E. ve Morgil, İ. (2002). Öğrencilerin Elektrokimya Konusundaki Kavram Yanılgıları. Hacettepe Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23, 234-242.