KİMYASAL BAĞLARLA İLGİLİ KAVRAM YANILGILARININ KAVRAMSAL DEĞİŞİM METİNLERİ KULLANILARAK DÜZELTİLMESİ

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

• kavram yanılgısı, kavramsal değişim, kavramsal değişim metni, analoji, kimyasal bağlar

Kaynakça

1. AAbd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning about nature of science as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of preservice elementary teachers’ views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785-810.
2. Beall, H. (1999). The ubiquitous metaphors of chemistry teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 366-368.
3. Birk, J.P. and Kurtz, M.] . (1999). Effect of experience on retention and elimination of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 124-128.
4. Boo, K. H. (1998). Students’ understanding of chemical bond and the energetic of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 569-581.
5. Chambers, S. K. & 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.
6. Aybüke PABUÇC U, Ömer GEBAN / H.Ü. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (H.U . Journal of Education). 30 (2006) 184-192 192
7. Coll, R.K. and Taylor, T.G.N. (2001) Using constructivism to inform tertiary chemistry pedagogy. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 2 (3), 215-226.
8. De Posada, J. M. (1999). The presentation of metallic bonding in high school science textbooks during three decades: science educational reforms and substantive changes of tendencies. Science Education, 83, 423-447.

9. Dhindsa, H.S. & Anderson, O.R. (2004). Using a Conceptual-Change Approach to Help Preservice Science Teachers Reorganize Their Knowledge Structures for Constructivist Teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(1), 63- 85.
10. Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75(6), 649-672.
11. Fisher, K. M. (1985). A misconception in biology: Amino acids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 53-62.
12. Glynn, S. M. (1997). Learning from science text: Role of an elaborate analogy. College Park, MD: National Reading Research Center.
13. Glynn, S. M. & T. Takahashi, (1998). Learning from analogy-enhanced science text. Ioumal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 1129-1149.
14. Griffiths, A. K, & Grant, B.A.C. (1985). High school students’ understanding of food webs: IdentiŞcation of a learning hierarchy and related misconceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 421-436.
15. Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: a case study of multiple model use in grade ll chemistry. Science Education, 84, 352-381.
16. Heywood, D. (2002). The Place of Analogies in Science Education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32 (2), 233-247.
17. Hynd, C. R., McWhorter, J . Y., Phares, V. L. & Suttles, C. W. (1994). The role of instructional variables in conceptual change in high school physics topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 933-946.
18. Luera, G.R., Otto, C.A., & Zitzewitz, P.W. (2005). A conceptual change approach to teaching energy & thermodynamics to pre-service elementary teachers. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 2(4), 3-8.
19. Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates' bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 707-730.
20. Novak, J. D. (1988). Learning science and the science of learning. Studies in Science Education, 15, 77—101.
21. Novak, JD. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited ör inappropriate prepositional hierarchies leading to improvement of learners. Science Education, 86(4), 587-571 .
22. Orgill, M., & Bodner, G. M. (2004). What Research Telis Us About Using Analogies to Teach Chemistry. Chemical Education: Research and Practice, 5(1), 15-33.
23. Osborne, R. J. & Wittrock, M. C. (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67(4), 489-508.
24. Palmer, D. (2001). Students' alternative conceptions and scientifically acceptable conceptions about gravity. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 691-706.
25. Posner, G. J ., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accomadation of a scientiŞc conception: toward theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
26. Rule, A. C. & Furletti, C., (2004). Using form and function analogy object boxes to teach human body systems, School Science and Mathematics, 104, 155-169
27. Taber, K. S. (2000). Multiple frameworks? Evidence of manifold conceptions in individual cognitive structure. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 4, 399 - 417.
28. Taber, K. S. (2003). Mediating mental models of metals: acknowledging the priority of the learner’s prior learning. Science Education, 87, 732-758.
29. Tan, K. D. and Treagust, D. F. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 81(294), 75-83.
30. Tekkaya, C. (2003). Remediating high school students’ misconceptions concerning diffusion and osmosis through concept mapping and conceptual change text. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21(1), 5-16.
31. Tsai, C. (2000). Enhancing science instruction: the use of ‘conflict maps’. International Journal of Science Education, 22. 285- 302.
32. Wang, T. & Andre, T. (1991). Conceptual change text versus traditional text and application questions versus no questions in learning about electricity. Contemporary educationalpsychology. 16, 103-1.
33. Webb, M. J. (1985). Analogies and their limitations. School Science and Mathematics, 85, 645-650.
34. Yanowitz, KL. (2001 ). The effects of analogies on elementary school students’ learning of scientific concepts. School Science and Mathematics. 101 , 133-142.