An Investigation of the Relationships among 11th Grade Students' Attitudes toward Chemistry, Metacognition and Chemistry Achievement

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 32 Sayı: 3, 823 - 842, 01.09.2012

Sevgi Kıngır Nurdane Aydemir

Öz

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among 11th grade students' metacognition, chemistry achievement and attitudes toward chemistry. A total of 81 high school students at 11th grade participated in this study. Data were collected using Metacognitive Awareness Inventory and Attitude Scale toward Chemistry at the end of the second half of the academic year 2010â€"2011. Students' report card mean scores in chemistry course for that academic year were used as an indicator of their chemistry achievement. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation analysis. The results revealed that Turkish high school students held more declarative and conditional knowledge than procedural knowledge, and used debugging strategies more than the other strategies (planning, information management, monitoring and evaluating) to regulate their cognition. Significant associations were detected between attitude toward chemistry and chemistry achievement and metacognition, and between knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Attitude toward chemistry, Chemistry achievement, Metacognition

11. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kimyaya Yönelik Tutumları, Üstbilişleri ve Kimya Başarıları Arasındaki İlişkilerin İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı 11. sınıf öğrencilerinin üstbilişleri, kimya başarıları ve kimyaya yönelik tutumları arasındaki ilişkileri incelemektir. Bu çalışmaya 11. sınıf toplam 81 lise öğrencisi katılmıştır. Veriler 2010-2011 akademik yılının ikinci yarısı sonunda Üstbiliş Farkındalık Envanteri ve Kimya Tutum Ölçeği kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Verilerin toplandığı akademik yıla ait öğrencilerin kimya dersi karne not ortalamaları kimya başarılarının bir göstergesi olarak kullanılmıştır. Veriler betimleyici istatistik ve Pearson korelasyon analiz yöntemleri kullanılarak çözümlenmiştir. Analiz sonucunda öğrencilerinin açıklayıcı bilgiye ve durumsal bilgiye işlemsel bilgiden daha çok sahip oldukları ve öğrencilerin üstbilişlerini düzenlemede hata ayıklama yöntemini diğer yöntemlerden (planlama, izleme, değerlendirme ve bilgi yönetme) daha fazla kullandıkları bulunmuştur. Öğrencilerin kimyaya yönelik tutumları ile kimya başarıları ve üstbilişleri arasında ve üstbiliş bilgileri ile üstbiliş düzenlemeleri arasında anlamlı ilişkiler tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kimyaya yönelik tutum, Kimya başarısı, Üstbiliş

Kaynakça

• Abraham, M. R., Renner, J. W., Grant, R. M., & Westbrook, S. L. (1982). Priorities for research in science education: A survey. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(8), 697-704.
• Acat, M. B., Anilan, H., &Anagun, S. S. (2010). The problems encountered in designing constructivist learning environments in science education and practical suggestions. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(2), 212- 220.
• Case, J., &Gunstone, R. (2006). Metacognitive development: A view beyond cognition. Research in science education, 36, 51-67.
• Cheung, D. (2007, July). Confirmatory factor analysis of the attitude toward chemistry lessons scale. Proceeding of the 2nd NICE Symposium, Taipei, Taiwan.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences (2nded.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Costa, A. L. (1984).Mediating the metacognitive. Educational Leadership, 42(3), 57-63.
• Duit, R., &Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: a powerful framework forimproving science teaching and learning. International Journal of ScienceEducation, 25(6), 671-688.
• Eshel, Y., &Kohavi, R. (2003). Perceived classroom control, self-regulated learning strategies, and academic achievement. Educational Psychology, 23(3), 249-26.
• Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911
• Fraenkel, J. R., &Wallen, N. E. (2003).How to design and evaluate research ineducation (5thed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.
• Freedman, M. P. (1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction, attitude toward science, and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 343-357.
• Gabel, D. (1999). Improving teaching and learning through chemistry education research: A look to the future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 548-554.
• Garnett, P. J., Garnett, P. J., & Hackling, M. W. (1995). Students’ alternative conceptions in chemistry: A review of research and implications for teaching and learning. Studies in Science Education, 25, 69-95.
• Gay, G. (2002). The nature of metacognition. Retrieved January 19, 2012, from http://www.ldrc.ca/contents/view_article/146/
• Geban, Ö.,Ertepınar, H., Yılmaz, G., Altın, A., &Şahbaz, F. (1994). Bilgisayardesteklieğitiminöğrencilerin bilgisiilgilerineetkisi.I. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Sempozyumu: Bildiri Özetleri Kitabı, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir, 1-2.
• bilgisibaşarılarınave fen
• Green, S. B., &Salkind, N. J. (2005).Using SPSS for windows and macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data (4thed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education..
• Hough, L. W., & Piper, M. K. (1982). The relationship between attitudes toward science and science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(1), 33-38.
• Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82, 407-416.
• Kan, A., &Akbas, A. (2006).Affective factors that influence chemistry achievement (attitude and self-efficacy) and the power of these factors to predict chemistry achievement-I. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 3(1), 76-85. Koballa, T. R. (1988). education.ScienceEducation, 72(2), 115-126. Attitude and related concepts in science
• Koballa, T. R., & Glynn, S. M. (2004). Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning. In S. K. Abell and N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook forresearch in science education. Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum.
• Livingston, J. A. (1997). Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved February 25, 2012, from http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/Metacog.htm
• Ministry of National Education (2011). 9th grade high school chemistry curriculum. Ankara, Turkey: Author.
• Oliver, J. S., & Simpson, R. D. (1988). Influences of attitude toward science, achievement motivation, and science self-concept on achievement in science: A longitudinal study. Science Education, 72(2), 143-155.
• Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079.
• Ozgelen, S. (2012).Exploring the relationships among epistemological beliefs, metacognitive awareness and nature of science.International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 7(3), 409-431.
• Papaleontiou-Louca, E. (2003). The concept and instruction of metacognition. Teacher Development, 7(1), 9-29.
• Papanastasiou, E. C., &Zembylas, M. (2004).Differential effects of science attitudes and achievement in Australia, Cyprus, and the USA. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 259-280.
• Park, H., Khan, S., &Petrina, S. (2009). ICT in science education: A quasi-experimental study of achievement, attitudes toward science, and career aspirations of Korean middle school students. International Journal of ScienceEducation, 31(8), 993- 1012.
• Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching and assessing.Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219-225.
• Rickey, D. & Stacy, A. M. (2000).The role of metacognition in learning chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(7), 915-920.
• Salta, K., &Tzougraki, C. (2004). Attitudes toward chemistry among 11th grade students in high schools in Greece. Science Education, 88, 535-547.
• Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006).Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-139.
• Schraw, G. & Dennison, R. S. (1994).Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475.
• Simpson, R. D., Koballa, T. R., Oliver, J. S., & Crawley, F. E. (1994).Research on the affective dimension of science learning.In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (p. 211-234). New York: Macmillian.
• Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Miller, L. A., & Murphy, C. (2002).Measures of children’s knowledge and regulation of cognition. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27, 51-79.
• Sperling, R. A., Howard, B. C., Staley, R. &DuBois, N. (2004). Metacognition and self- regulated learning constructs. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 117- 139.
• Sungur, S., &Gungoren, S. (2009).The role of classroom environment perceptions in self-regulated learning and science achievement. Elementary Education Online, 8(3), 883-900.
• Sungur, S. &Senler, B. (2009). An Analysis of Turkish high school students’ metacognition and motivation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15, 45-62.
• Talton, E L., & Simpson, R. D. (1987). Relationships of attitude toward classroom environment with attitude toward and achievement in science among tenth grade biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(6), 507-525.
• Thomas, G. P., &McRobbie, C. J. (2001).Using a metaphor for learning to improve students’ metacognition in the chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 222-259.
• Topcu, M. S., &Yilmaz-Tuzun, O. (2009).Elementary students’ metacognition and epistemological socioeconomic status. Elementary Education Online, 8(3), 676-693. considering science achievement, gender and
• Uzuntiryaki, E., &Geban, O. (2005). Effect of conceptual change approachaccompanied with concept mapping on understanding of solution concepts. Instructional Science, 33, 311-339.
• Yilmaz-Tuzun, O., &Topcu, M. S. (2010). Investigating the relationships among elementary school students’ epistemological beliefs, metacognition, and constructivist science learning environment. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 255-273.