A Comparative Analysis of The Effect of Dunn And Dunn Learning Styles Model and Traditional Teaching Method on 6th Grade Students' Achievement Levels And Attitudes İn Science Education Lesson

Abstract

In this research, effects of traditional instruction and Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model were compared on secondary school 6th grade students’ science education academic achievement and attitudes by means of “plant tissues” and “cell” subjects. Research was done with control and experiment groups on pre testpost test practices. In experiment group Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model dependent instruction, in control group traditional instruction was carried out and two applications effects’ significancy towards science education academic achievement and attitudes were searched. Research was applied in Alparslan Primary School with 6-A and 6-B classes in the first semester of 2005-2006 academic year. As a result of quantitative analyses, Science education which is taught according to Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model, increases students’ academic achievement and improve their attitudes towards science education.

Keywords

• Dunn and Dunn Learning Style,Science Education,Learning Style,Plant Tissues,Cell

İlköğretim 6. Sınıf Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Dunn ve Dunn Öğrenme Stili Modeline Dayalı Öğretim ile Geleneksel Öğretim Yönteminin Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarı Düzeyleri ve Tutumlarına Etkisinin Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Bu dersda, 6. sınıf fen bilgisi dersi yapım dokular ve hücre konularında Yöntem ve Dunn ve Dunn Eğitim Stili Modelinin Uygulaması etkisinin karşılaştırılması. Araştırma, öntest-sontest uygulamalı kontrol ve deney gruplu desen gerçekleştirilmiştir. Deney grubu öğrencilerine Dunn ve Dunn için üslup modeli kontrol grubu öğrencilerine de programlama yöntemleri, akademik başarı düzeyleri ve uyumları bir çeşit süredir. Araştırma, 2005–2006 eğitim-öğretim yılı güz (I) dönemi Ankara Alparslan lköğretim Okuluunda öğrenim gören 6-A ve 6-B şubeleriyle ilgili uygulanmıştır. Nicel analizler mevcuttur, Dunn ve Dunn Öğrenme Stili Modeli'ne göre yapılmış fen eğitiminin; akademik başarı seviylerini artırdığı ve Fen dersi dersine karşı tutumlarını sonuçlarına ulaşılmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dunn ve Dunn Ö"renme Stili, Fen E"itimi, Ö"renme Stili, Bitkisel Dokular, Hücre

Kaynakça

1. Akdeniz, A.R. ve Yi"it, N (2001). “Fen Bilimleri Ö retiminde Bilgisayar Destekli Materyallerin Ö renci Ba ar s Üzerine Etkisi”. Yeni Bin yNlNn BaMNnda Türkiye'de Fen Bilimleri E"itimi Sempozyumu Bildirileri. Maltepe Üniversitesi stanbul, 229–234
2. Alice, L.L. (1998). “Effect of programmed learning sequences versus traditional instruction on the social studies achievement and attitudes among urban third grades”, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, St. John’s University of Jamaica – Newyork.
3. ArNkan, R. (2000). Ara t rma Teknikleri ve Rapor Yazma. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
4. Berbero"lu, G. ve Demircio"lu, H. (2000). Fen Ö"rencilerinin Genel Kimya Derslerindeki BaMarNlarNnN Etkileyen Faktörler. E itim ve Bilim, 25(118), 35–42.
5. Brandt, R. (1990). On learning styles: a conversation with pat guild. Educational Leadership, 48 (2), 10-13.
6. Burke, K. and Dunn, R. (1998). Learning style: the clue to you Jamaica, NY: St. John's University, Center for the Study of Learning and Teaching Styles.
7. Büyükkaragöz, S. ve Çivi, C. (1999). Genel Ö retim Metotlar . stanbul: Beta BasNm YayNn Da"NtNm A.a.
8. Büyüköztürk, a. (2002). Faktör Analizi: Temel Kavramlar ve Ölçek GeliMtirmede KullanNmN. E itim Yönetimi Dergisi, 32, 470- 483.

9. Campbell, D.T., Stanley, J.C. (1996). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing company.
10. Campbell, L.J. (1990). Using individual learning style inventories and group teaching methods in a sixth grade classroom. Practicum Report, Nova University, Michigan, U.S. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 336 687).
11. Carlson, N.L. (2002), “Evaluation of the effectiveness of dunn and dunn model of learning styles teacher training on academic performance of at-risk, urban, middle school students: a longitudinal study”, Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Texas Woman’s University, Texas.
12. ÇaycN, B. ve Ünal, E. (2007). SNnNf Ö"retmeni AdaylarNnNn Sahip OlduklarN Ö"renme Stillerinin ÇeMitli De"iMkenlere Göre ncelenmesi. Bilim, E itim ve Dü ünce Dergisi, 7(3).
13. Dagher, Z.R. (1995). Analysis of analogies used by science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 259–270.
14. DemirbaM, Ö.O. (2001). ç MimarlNk E"itimindeki Ö"rencilerin Ö"renme Biçimleri ile BaMarN Derecelerinin liMkisi, Yay nlanmam Doktora Tezi, Bilkent Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
15. Demirel, M. (1993). Ö"renme Stratejilerinin Ö"retimi. E itim ve Bilim, 88(17), 52–59.
16. Demirkaya, H. (2003). Co"rafya Ö"retiminde 4MAT Ö"retim Sisteminin Lise Co"rafya Derslerindeki BaMarN ve Tutumlar Üzerine Etkisi, Yay nlanmam Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, E"itim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara
17. Do"ru, M. ve KNyNcN, F.B. (2005). Fen E itiminin Zorunlulu u. Aydo"du ve Kesercio"lu (Ed).
18. lkö"retimde Fen ve Teknoloji Ö"retimi (pp. 1-8). Ankara: AnN YayNncNlNk.
19. Dunn R. (2001). Learning style differences of nonconforming middle-school students. NASSP Bulletin, 85(626), 68–74.
20. Dunn, R. (1983). Coming to grips with misconception: who is most alert in the morning? Learning Styles Newsletter, 4(2).
21. Dunn, R. and Dunn, K. (1993). Teaching secondary students through their individual learning styles practical approaches for grades 7–12. Massachusetts: Ailyn and Bacon, USA
22. Dunn, R., and Debello, T. C.(Eds.). (1999). Improved test scores, attitudes, and behaviors in america's schools: supervisors' success stories. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.
23. Dunn, R., Denig, S.J. and Lovelace, M.K. (2001). Multiple intelligences and learning styles: two sides of the same coin or different strokes for different folks? Teacher Librarian, 28(3), 9–15
24. Dunn, R., Dunn, K. and Price, G.E. (1986). Learning style inventory. Lawrence, KS: Price Systems.
25. Dupree, B.M. (1991). The relationship between traditional instructional methods, contract activity packages, and math achievement of fourth grade gifted students. EdD. Thesis, The UnNversNty of Southern MNssNssNppN.
26. Ekici, G. (2001). Ö"renme Stiline DayalN Biyoloji Ö"retiminin Analizi, Yay nlanmam Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, E"itim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara
27. Ekici, G. (2003). Ö renme Stiline Dayal Ö retim ve Biyoloji Dersi Ö retimine Yönelik Ders Plan Örnekleri. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi (1.BaskN).
28. Felder, R.M. (1996). Matters of styles. ASEE Prism, 6 (4).
29. Field, A. (2002). Discovering statistics using spss. Sage Publications Ltd., UK: London.
30. German, P. J. (1988). Development of the attitude toward science in school assessment and its use to investigate the relationship between science achievement and attitude toward science in school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 689-703
31. Germann, P. J. (1988). Development of the attitudes toward science in school assessment and Nts use to Nnvestigate the relationship between science achievement and attitude toward science in school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(8), 689-703.
32. Giannitti, M.C. (1988), “An experimental investigation of relationships among the learning-style sociological preferences of middle-school students (grades 6,7,8), their attitudes and achievement in social studies, and selected instructional strategies”, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, St. John’s University.
33. Jarc, D.J. (1999). Assessing the Benefits of Interactivity and the Influence of Learning Styles on the Effectiveness of Algorithm Animation Using Web-Based Data Structures Courseware. Unpublished PhD Thesis, George Washington University.
34. Keller, B. A., Hart, E. W. and Martin, W. G. (2001).Illuminating NCTM’s principles and standards for school mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 101(6), 292–304
35. Klavas, A.A. (1992). Implementation of the dunn and dunn learning style model in united states’ elementary schools factors which facilitated or impeded the process. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, St. John’s University. Newyork.
36. Littlewood, W. (1984). Foreign and second language learning. language acquisition research and its implication for the classroom. Cambridge University Pres, USA.
37. M.E.B. (2000). lkö"retim Fen Dersleri ProgramN.
38. Marshall, C. (1990). The power of the learning styles philosophy. Educational Leadership, 48 (2), 62.
39. Mcmillan, J.H. (2000). Educational research. USA: Fundamentals for the Consume, Longman.
40. Mickler, M.L. and Zippert C.P. (1987). Teaching strategies based on learning styles of adult students. Community/Junior College Quarterly of Research Practice, 11(1), 33–37.
41. Ming, C.S. (2004). Effects of programmed learning sequences versus traditional instruction on the achievement and attitudes of bermudian seventh graders in social studies and the comparison of two learning-style identification instruments' interpretations. Unpublished Ed.D. Thesis, St. John’s University
42. Mutlu, M. (2004). Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Fotosentez Hücresel Solunum Konusunun 4Mat Ö"retim Modeli KullanNlarak Ö"retilmesinin Ö"renci Tutum ve BaMarNsN Üzerine Etkisi. Yay nlanmam Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, E"itim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
43. NOAA. NOAA Glossary (2005). http://coris.noaa.gov/glossary/
44. Ören, F.a. (2005). lkö"retim 7. SNnNf Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Ö"renme HalkasN YaklaMNmNnNn, Ö"rencilerin BaMarN, Tutum ve MantNksal DüMünme Yetenekleri Üzerine Etkisi. Yay nlanmam Doktora Tez,. Gazi Üniversitesi, E"itim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
45. Peker, M. (2003). Ö"renme Stilleri ve 4MAT Yönteminin Ö"rencilerin Matematik Tutum ve BaMarNlarNna Etkisi. Yay nlanmam Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, E"itim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara
46. Roberts, A.V. (1998). Effects of tactual of kinesthetic Nnstructional resources on the social studies achievement and attitude test scores and short and long term memory of suburban fourth-grade students. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, St. John’s University.
47. Scales, A. Y. (2000). The effect of learning styles, major and gender on learning computer-aided drawing in an introductory engineering/technical graphies course. Unpublished PhD Thesis, North Carolina State University.
48. Smith, D. and Holliday, P. (1986). Learning style and academic achievement in fourth, fifth and sixth grade students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
49. Sullivan, A.T. (1999), “Effect of learning style environmental tactual/kinesthetic preferences on the understanding of scientific terms and attitude test scores of fifth-grades students”, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, St. John’s University of Jamaica – Newyork.
50. Tabachnick, B. G., and Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. (3th Edition), New
51. York: Harpercollins College Publishers.
52. Temiz, B.K. (2001). Lise 1. SNnNf Fizik Dersi ProgramNnNn Ö"rencilerin Bilimsel Süreç Becerilerini GeliMtirmeye Uygunlu"unun ncelenmesi. Yay nlanmam Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, E"itim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara.
53. Thomson, B.S. and Mascazine, J.R. (1997). Attending to learning styles in mathematics and science classrooms. Eric Clearinghouse for Science Mathematics and Environmental Education Colombus OH, ERIC Document Abstract: Ed 432440
54. Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R. and Cox, P. W.(1977). Field dependent and field independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research. 47(1), 1–64.