Eğitim 4.0 Araçlarının Fen Öğretiminde Kullanımı: Bir Eylem Araştırması

Öz

Eğitim 4.0, gelecekteki eğitim için benimsenen bir vizyondur. Bu çalışma, Endüstri 4.0'ın genel resminin bir parçası olarak Eğitim 4.0'ın kavramsal çerçevesine odaklanmaktadır. Bu kavramın eğitim alanında etkin bir şekilde uygulanabilmesi için hangi teknolojilerin kullanılabileceği, mevcut literatür üzerinden incelenmekte ve güncel bilgiler ışığında, söz konusu teknolojilerin eğitimdeki potansiyeli ve heyecan verici beklentileri araştırılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, araştırmada Eğitim 4.0 araçlarının, Fen Bilimleri dersi Elektrik konulu ünitelerinde kullanılmasına ilişkin ortaokul öğrencilerinin görüşlerinin alınması hedeflenmektedir. Nitel araştırma desenlerinden biri olan eylem araştırmasına uygun bir şekilde planlanan çalışma, toplamda 20 ortaokul öğrencisinin katılımıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Eğitim 4.0 araçlarının öğretim sürecindeki kullanımına dair öğrenci görüşlerini belirlemek amacıyla, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme yöntemi uygulanmış ve bu çerçevede, araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen görüşme formu veri toplama aracı olarak kullanılmıştır. Üç hafta süren veri toplama sürecinde, ortaokul düzeyindeki elektrik konuları, Eğitim 4.0 araçlarını içeren etkinliklerle desteklenerek işlenmiştir. Yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeden elde edilen verilere yönelik yapılan içerik analizi sonucuna göre, öğrencilerin görüşleri, Eğitim 4.0 araçlarının konuları daha anlaşılır hale getirdiği, öğrenilen bilgilerin akılda daha uzun süre kalmasını sağladığı, soyut konuların detaylı bir şekilde incelenebilmesine olanak tanıdığı, öğrenme sürecini etkileşimli ve keşif odaklı bir deneyime dönüştürdüğü, derse aktif katılımı arttırdığı, derse karşı ilgi ve merak uyandırdığı, yeni teknolojileri kullanabilme ve kodlama yapabilme gibi yetkinlikleri arttırdığı yönündedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Eğitim 4.0
• Eğitim 4.0 Araçları
• Elektrik Konusu
• Eylem Araştırması
• Fen Öğretimi
• Öğrenci Görüşleri

The Use of Education 4.0 Tools in Science Teaching: An Action Research Study

Öz

Education 4.0 represents a vision for the future of education. This study focuses on the conceptual framework of Education 4.0 as part of the broader vision of Industry 4.0. By reviewing current literature, it examines which technologies could be effectively utilized within education, exploring their potential and the exciting expectations they bring to the field. In this context, the study aims to gather middle school students' perspectives on using Education 4.0 tools in the science curriculum, specifically within units on electricity. Designed as an action research study—a qualitative research approach—it involved a total of 20 middle school students. To capture students' views on the use of Education 4.0 tools in teaching, semi-structured interviews were conducted using an interview form developed by the researchers as the data collection instrument. Over a three-week data collection period, electricity topics at the middle school level were supplemented with activities incorporating Education 4.0 tools. Content analysis of the semi-structured interview data revealed that students felt Education 4.0 tools made topics more comprehensible, enhanced long-term retention of information, allowed for a more detailed examination of abstract concepts, transformed the learning process into an interactive and discovery-driven experience, increased active participation, sparked interest and curiosity, and improved skills in using new technologies and coding.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Action Research
• Education 4.0
• Education 4.0 Tools
• Electricity
• Students
• Science Teaching

Kaynakça

1. Adesina, A. E. (2023). Enhancing science education with learning management system for effective learning outcomes, Qeios, 1-14. DOI:10.32388/VURDU1
2. Alebous, T. M. (2021). The extent to which teachers of science subjects use virtual scientific laboratories during corona virus pandemic: the reality & hope. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 9(3), 193-206. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.972540
3. Aliyu, F., ve Talib, C.A. (2020). Integration of augmented reality in learning chemistry: a pathway for realization of industrial revolution 4.0 goals. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(7), 854-859. http://dx.doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.07.155
4. Aljuhani, K., Sonbul, M., Althabiti, M., ve Meccawy, M. (2018). Creating a Virtual Science Lab (VSL): the adoption of virtual labs in Saudi schools. Smart Learning Environments, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0067-9
5. Astra, I. M., Tumijan, P., Uskenat, K., ve Henukh, A. (2023). The development of stem-based science teaching materials on simple electrical circuit materials. Jurnal Penelitian & Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika, 9(1), 127-138. DOI: doi.org/10.21009/1.09112
6. Badaru, K. A., ve Adu, E. O. (2022). Platformisation of Education: An Analysis of South African Universities’ Learning Management Systems. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 7(2), 66-86. https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.2022.10
7. Bonfield, C.A., Salter, M., Longmuir, A., Benson, M., ve Adachi, C. (2020). Transformation or evolution?: Education 4.0, teaching and learning in the digital age. Higher Education Pedagogies, 5(1), 223-246. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2020.1816847
8. Butt, R., Siddiqui, H., Soomro, R.A., ve Asad, M.M. (2020). Integration of Industrial Revolution 4.0 and IOTs in academia: a state-of-the-art review on the concept of Education 4.0 in Pakistan. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 17(4), 337-354. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-02-2020-0022

9. Büyükkol Köse, E., & Çetin, G. (2024). Using QR codes in the science and technology center. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 7(2), 177-193. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.1336996
10. Ciolacu, M., Tehrani, A. F., Binder, L., ve Svasta, P. M. (2018, 25-28 Ekim). Education 4.0 - Artificial Intelligence assisted Higher Education: Early recognition System with Machine Learning to support Students’ Success. 2018 IEEE 24th International Symposium for Design and Technology in Electronic Packaging (SIITME), Iasi, Romania. DOI: 10.1109/SIITME.2018.8599203
11. Costa, A. C. F., Santos, V.H. M., ve Oliveira, O. J. (2022). Towards the revolution and democratization of education: A framework to overcome challenges and explore opportunities through Industry 4.0. Informatics in Education 21(1), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2022.01
12. Darayseh, A. A. (2023). Acceptance of artificial intelligence in teaching science: Science teachers’ perspective. Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence, 4(8),100132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100132
13. Ferdinand J., Soller S., Hahn J. U., Parong J., ve Göllner R. (2023). Enhancing the effectiveness of virtual reality in science education through an experimental ıntervention ınvolving students’ perceived usefulness of virtual reality. Technology Mind and Behavior, 4(1). DOI: 10.1037/tmb0000084
14. Fernandes, J. M., ve Afonso, P. (2021). Engineering education in a context of VUCA. 4th International Conference of the Portuguese Society for Engineering Education (CISPEE) 21-23 Haziran 2021 içinde (s. 1-8). Lisbon, Portugal. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9507229
15. Fernández-Cerero, J., Montenegro-Rueda, M., ve Fernández-Batanero, J.M. (2023). Impact of university teachers’ technological training on educational ınclusion and quality of life of students with disabilities: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(3), 2576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032576
16. Gaolyan, T., Kysh, L., Lulejian, A., Dickhoner, J., Sikder, A., ve Lee, M. (2022). Lessons learned from organizing and evaluating international virtual training for healthcare professionals. International Journal of Medical Education, 13, 88-89. DOI: 10.5116/ijme.6238.459f
17. Goldin, T., Rauch, E., Pacher, C., ve Woschank, M. (2022). Reference Architecture for an Integrated and Synergetic Use of Digital Tools in Education 4.0. Procedia Computer Science, 200, 407-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.01.239
18. Grodotzki, J., Ortelt, T.R., ve Tekkaya, A.E. (2018). Remote and virtual labs for engineering education 4.0: achievements of the ELLI project at the TU Dortmund University. Procedia Manufacturing, 26, 1349-1360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.07.126
19. Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Saks, K., Leijen, ¨A., Bardone, E., ve Wang, M. (2020). Open learner models in supporting self-regulated learning in higher education: a systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 154, 103878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103878
20. Ishak, R., ve Mansor, M. (2020). The relationship between knowledge management and organizational learning with academic staff readiness for education 4.0. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 20(85), 169–184.
21. Janković, A., Maričić, M., ve Cvjetićanin, S. (2023). Comparing science success of primary school students in the gamified learning environment via Kahoot and Quizizz. Journal of Computers in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-023-00266-y
22. Janković, A., ve Lambić, A. (2022). The effect of game-based learning via kahoot and quizizz on the academic achievement of third grade primary school students. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 21(2), 224-231. DOI: 10.33225/jbse/22.21.224
23. Jin, L. (2019). Investigation on potential application of artificial intelligence in preschool children’s education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 19-20 Nisan 2019. Wuhan, China. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1288/1/012072
24. Joshi, N. (2022, March, 31). Understanding Education 4.0: The Machine Learning-Driven Future of Learning. Forbes. Retrieved Feb. 4, 2023, from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/naveenjoshi/2022/03/31/understanding-education-40-the-machine-learning-driven-future-of-learning/
25. Kalogiannakis, M., Papadakis, S., ve Zourmpakis, A. I. (2021). Gamification in science education. A systematic review of the literature. Education Sciences, 11(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010022
26. Kannan, S., ve Garad, A. (2021). Competencies of quality professionals in the era of industry 4.0: a case study of electronics manufacturer from Malaysia. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 38(3), 839-871. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-04-2019-0124
27. Koray, A., ve Bilgin, E. (2023). The effect of block coding (scratch) activities ıntegrated into the 5E learning model in science teaching on students' computational thinking skills and programming self-efficacy. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 18(1), 2825-2845.
28. Kotsis, K.T. (2024). Integration of artificial intelligence in science teaching in primary education: Applications for teachers. European Journal of Contemporary Education and E-Learning, 2(3), 27-43. DOI: 10.59324/ejceel.2024.2(3).04
29. Kozcu Cakir, N. ve Guven, G. (2019). Arduino-Assisted robotic and coding applications in science teaching: Pulsimeter activity in compliance with the 5E learning model. Science Activities, 56 (2), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2019.1675574
30. Lu, Y. (2017). Industry 4.0: A survey on technologies, applications and open research issues. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 6, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2017.04.005
31. Marchenko, G., Murzina, S., Timofeev, S., ve Vodopyanova, K. (2021). Digitalization of education: advantages and problems. In E3S Web of Conferences, 273, 12058.
32. Matos, J.F., Piedade, J., Freitas, A., Pedro, N., Dorotea, N., Pedro, A., ve Galego, C. (2023). Teaching and learning research methodologies in education: A systematic literature review. Education Science, 13(2), 173. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020173
33. McNiff, B. ve Lomax, P. (2003). You and Your Action Research Project (2. bs.). London: Routledge.
34. Mdlalose, N., Ramaila, S., ve Ramnarain, U. (2022). Using Kahoot! As A Formative Assessment Tool in Science Teacher Education. International Journal of Higher Education, 11(2), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v11n2p43
35. Miranda J., Navarrete C., Noguez J. M., Molina-Espinosa J., Ramírez-Montoya M. S., Navarro-Tuch S.A., Bustamante-Bello M. R., Rosas-Fern´andez J. B., ve Molina A. (2021). The core components of education 4.0 in higher education: Three case studies in engineering education. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 93, 107278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2021.107278
36. Miorandi, D., Sicari, S., Pellegrini, F.D., ve Chlamtac, I. (2012). Internet of things: Vision, applications and research challenges. Ad Hoc Networks, 10(7), 1497–1516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2012.02.016
37. Mukan, N., ve Lavrysh, Y. (2020). Video Conferencing Integration: Challenges and Opportunities at Universities. Revista Romaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 12, 108-114. https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/12.1sup2/253
38. Mukul, E., ve Büyüközkan, G. (2023). Digital transformation in education: A systematic review of education 4.0. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 194, 122664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122664
39. Nair, D. (2021). Online Laboratory course using low tech supplies to introduce digital logic design concepts. 2021 International e-Engineering Education Services Conference (e-Engineering), 121-126. https://doi.org/10.1109/e-Engineering47629.2021.9470699.
40. Papakostas, C., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., ve Sgouropoulou, C. (2021). Exploration of augmented reality in spatial abilities training: A Systematic literature review for the last decade. Informatics in Education, 20(1), 107-130. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2021.06
41. Pregowska, A., Masztalerz, K., Garlinska, M., ve Osial, M. (2021). A Worldwide Journey through distance edu-cation—from the post office to virtual, augmented and mixed realities, and education during the COVID-19 pandemic, Education Sciences, 11(3), 118. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030118
42. Quezada, L. R., Talbot, C., ve Quezada-Parker, B. K. (2020). From bricks and mortar to remote teaching: A teacher education program’s response to COVID-19. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4), 472-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1801330
43. Roqobih, F. D., ve Yuliani Rahayu, Y. S. (2019). Improving student's creative thinking skill through blended learning using schoology. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 28 Eylül 2018, Surabaya, Indonesia. DOI 10.1088/1742-6596/1417/1/012094
44. Rossano, V., Roselli, T., ve Quercia, G. (2020). Coding and computational thinking: Using arduino to acquire problem-solving skills. Technology Supported Innovations in School Education, 91-114. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48194-0_6
45. Sarıtaş, S., ve Badavan, Y. (2023). Dördüncü sanayi devrimi karşısında akademisyenler ve öğrenciler. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 11(21), 129-161. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.1218275
46. Scalfani, V. F., ve Vaid, T. P. (2014). 3D printed molecules and extended solid models for teaching symmetry and point groups. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(8), 1174-1180. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed400887t
47. Seufert, S., Guggemos, J., ve Sailer, M. (2021). Technology-related knowledge, skills, and attitudes of pre- and in-service teachers: The current situation and emerging trends. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 106552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106552
48. Shenkoya, T., ve Kim, E. (2023). Sustainability in higher education: Digital transformation of the fourth industrial revolution and its impact on open knowledge. Sustainability, 15(3), 2473. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032473
49. Sırakaya, M., ve Alsancak Sırakaya, D. (2022). Augmented reality in STEM education: A systematic review. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(8), 1556-1569.
50. Srivani, V., Hariharasudan, A., Nawaz, N., & Ratajczak, S. (2022). Impact of Education 4.0 among engineering students for learning English language. PLoS ONE 17(2). e0261717. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0261717
51. Strange, R., ve Zucchella, A. (2017). Industry 4.0, global value chains and ınternational busines. Multinational Business Review, 25(3), 174-184. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBR-05-2017-0028
52. Stylos G., ve Kotsis K. T. (2021). The effect of 3D Printing technology on primary school students' content knowledge, anxiety and interest toward science. International Journal of Educational Innovation, 3(1), 38-50.
53. Thorne, T. (2016). Augmenting classroom practices with QR codes. TESOL Journal, 7(3), 746-754. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.257
54. Türkel, S., ve Yeşilkuş, F. (2020). The paradıgm of dıgıtal transformatıon: Industry 4.0. Eurasian Journal of Researches in Social and Economics, 7(5), 332-346. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/asead/issue/54658/726985
55. Van Popta, E., Kral, M., Camp, G., Martens, R.L., ve Simons, P.R.J. (2017). Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider. Educational Research Review, 20, 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.10.003
56. Verner, I.M., Cuperman, D., ve Reitman, M. (2021). Exploring robot connectivity and collaborative sensing in a high-school enrichment program. Robotics, 10(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics10010013
57. Villa, J. L., Bruno, O., ve Jiménez, T. (2018). Experiences with the use of Snap Circuits and Arduino boards as tools for human development with students in an insular Colombian community. 16th LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education, and Technology: “Innovation in Education and Inclusion, 19-21 Temmuz 2018, Lima, Peru. http://dx.doi.org/10.18687/LACCEI2018.1.1.46
58. Wood, J. M. (2007). Understanding and computing Cohen’s kappa: A tutorial. Web Psych Empiricist, October 3.
59. Yakob, M., Sari, R.P., Hasibuan, M.P., Nahadi, N., Anwar, S., ve El Islami, R. A. Z. (2023). THE feasıbılıty of authentıc assessment ınstrument through vırtual laboratory learnıng and ıts effect on ıncreasıng students' scıentıfıc performance. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22(4), 631-640. https://oaji.net/articles/2023/987-1693763628.pdf
60. Yan, S., Sun, D., Zhou, Q., Yang, Y., ve Tian, P. (2023). Exploring the impact of virtual laboratory with KWL reflective thinking approach on students’ science learning in higher education, Journal of Computing in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09385-y
61. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. (11. bs). Ankara: Seçkin.
62. Yıldırım, F. S. (2020). The effect of the augmented reality applications in science class on students' cognitive and affective learning. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 6(4), 259-267. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.751023