The Adaptation of the Views about Scientific Inquiry Questionnaire: A Validity and Reliability Study

Yıl 2017, , 326 - 343, 19.04.2017

Dilek Karışan , Kader Bilican , Burcu Şenler

https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.307053

Cited By: 16

Öz

This study aimed to
adapt views about scientific inquiry questionnaire in to Turkish, originally
developed by Lederman et al (2014), and to explore preservice teachers’ views
about scientific inquiry. The questionnaire was translated into Turkish by
three researchers and the translation of the items from English to Turkish was
compared. The final paper was sent to three experts in the field to get expert
opinion. After making the necessary corrections, 30 teacher candidates were
interviewed to look at the clarity of the questions on the form. The final
form was applied to 314 teacher candidates. Expert opinion supports that the
translated items have content validity in terms of measuring eight of the
targeted scientific inquiry components in the original scale.   Data was analyzed by three researchers
independently in order to ensure researcher triangulation.  Inter-rater agreement was  95%; however, after raters had the
opportunity to “calibrate” their coding scheme with one another, consensus was
established virtually assuring nearly full agreement.  Results of the investigation showed that
preservice teachers generally have transformative views few of them have naive
views about scientific inquiry.

Anahtar Kelimeler

scientific Inquiry, knowledge of inquiry, preservice teachers

Bilimsel Sorgulama Hakkında Görüş Anketi: Türkçeye Uyarlama, Geçerlik Ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Lederman vd. (2014) tarafından geliştirilen Bilimsel Sorgulamaya İlişkin Görüş Formu’nun Türkçe’ye adaptasyonunun yapılması ve öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel sorgulamaya ilişkin görüşlerinin belirlenmesi hedeflenmiştir. Bilimsel Sorgulamaya İlişkin Görüş Formu üç araştırmacı tarafından Türkçe’ye çevrilmiş ve çeviriler karşılaştırılarak düzenlenmiştir. Hazırlanan son çeviri uzman görüşü alınmak üzere alanında üç uzman kişiye gönderilmiş ve görüşleri alınmıştır.  Formdaki soruların anlaşılırlığına bakmak için 30 öğretmen adayı ile görüşme yapılmıştır. Analizler sonrası son haline getirilen form 314 öğretmen adayına uygulanmıştır. Uzman görüşleri çeviri maddelerinin orijinal ölçekte hedeflenen bilimsel sorgulamanın sekiz bileşeni ölçmeye açısından kapsam geçerliliğine sahip olduğunu desteklemektedir. Araştırmacı üçlemesi yapılarak ilk olarak ayrı ayrı kodlanan veriler, fikir ayrılığı olan kodlamalar üzerinde uzlaşma sağlanması için tekrar kodlanmıştır. Kodlayıcılar arası görüş birliği% 95 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Ancak, araştırmacılar, kodlama şemalarını birbirleriyle ayarlama şansına sahip olduktan sonra neredeyse tamamen anlaşma sağlayacak şekilde fikir birliği sağlandı. Uygulama sonuçlarında öğretmen adaylarının genel olarak bilgili ve karmaşık düzeyde görüş sahibi oldukları, az bir kısmının ise yetersiz düzeyde oldukları saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

bilimsel sorgulama, bilimsel sorgulama bilgisi, öğretmen adayları

Kaynakça

• Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of science teacher education, 13(1), 1-12.
• Asay, L., & Orgill, M. (2010). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in The Science Teacher 1998–2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(1), 57–79.
• Ateş, S. & Bahar, M. (2002). Araştırmacı fen öğretimi yaklaşımıyla sınıf öğretmenliği 3. sınıf öğrencilerinin bilimsel yöntem yeteneklerinin geliştirilmesi. V. Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, Ankara: ODTÜ Eğitim Fakültesi.
• Bayir, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2013). Kimya öğretmen adaylarında sorgulayici-araştirma odakli öğretime ilişkin anlayiş oluşturma. E-aji (asian journal of instruction), 1(2).
• Bell, T., Urhahne D., Schanze S. & Ploetzner R. (2010). Collaborative Inquiry Learning: Models, tools, and challenges, International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 349- 377.
• Branch, J.L., & Solowan, D.G. (2003). Inquiry-based learning: The key to student success. School Libraries in Canada, 22(4), 6-12.
• Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 1(3), 185-216.
• Bulunuz, M. (2014). The Role of Playful Science in Developing Positive Attitudes toward Teaching Science in a Science Teacher Preparation Program."Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 58.
• Bulunuz, M. (2012). Developing Turkish Preservice Preschool Teachers' Attitudes and Understanding about Teaching Science through Play.International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7(2), 141-166.
• Bowen, G. M., & Roth, W. M. (2005). Data and graph interpretation practices among preservice science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1063-1088.
• Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of research in science teaching, 44(4), 613-642.
• Çepni, S., Kaya, A., & Küçük, M. (2005). Determining the physics teachers‟ in-service needs for laboratories. J. Turkish Educ. Sci, 3(2), 181-194.
• Çetin-Dindar, A., Kırbulut, Z. D., & Boz, Y. (2014). Modelling between epistemological beliefs and constructivist learning environment. European Journal of Teacher Education, 37(4), 479-496.
• Duru, M. K., Demir, S., Önen, F., & Benzer, E. (2011). Sorgulamaya dayalı laboratuvar uygulamalarının öğretmen adaylarının laboratuvar algısına tutumuna ve bilimsel süreç becerilerine etkisi. Ataturk universitesi eğitim fakultesi eğitim bilimleri dergisi, 33, 25-44.
• Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268-291. doi:DOI: 10.3102/0091732X07309371
• Frankel, J. R., & Wallen, E. (2004). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. Mc Graw-Hill International Edition.
• Haefner, L. A. & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). Learning by doing? Prospective elementary teachers’ developing understandings of scientific inquiry and science and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (13): 1653-1674.
• Kaya, G., & Yılmaz, S.(2016). Açık sorgulamaya dayalı öğrenmenin öğrencilerin başarısına ve bilimsel süreç becerilerinin gelişimine etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31 (2), 300-318.
• Lee, O., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2004). Professional development in inquiry‐based science for elementary teachers of diverse student groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1021-1043.
• LeBlanc, J. K., Cavlazoglu, B., Scogin, S. C., & Stuessy, C. L. (2017). The art of teacher talk: Examining intersections of the strands of scientific proficiencies and inquiry. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology.
• Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. Handbook of research on science education, 2, 831-879.
• Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners' understandings about scientific inquiry—The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65-83.
• Loughran, J. J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. Taylor & Francis.
• Mansur, N. (2015). Science teachers' views and stereotypes of religion, scientists and scientific research: A call for scientist-science teacher partnerships to promote inquiry-based learning. International Journal of Science Education, 37(11), 1767–1794.
• McGinn, M. K., & Roth, W. M. (1999). Preparing students for competent scientific practice: Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educational Researcher, 28(3), 14-24.
• Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2016). Ilköğretim fen ve teknoloji ders öğretim programi (6, 7 ve 8. siniflar). Ankara.
• Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry‐based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of research in science teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
• Next Generation Science Education Standards. (2012). Next Generation Science Education Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
• Patricia, F., (2015), "That the apple fell and Newton invented the law of gravity, thus removing God from the cosmos", in Numbers, Ronald L.; Kampourakis, Kostas, Newton's Apple and Other Myths about Science, Harvard University Press, pp. 48–56
• Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education.
• Perry, V. R., & Richardson, C. P. (2001). The New Mexico tech master of science teaching program: An exemplary model of inquiry-based learning. InFrontiers in Education Conference, 2001. 31st Annual (Vol. 1, pp. T3E-1). IEEE.
• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2004). Nursing research: Principles and methods. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
• Roberts, P., Priest, H., & Traynor, M. (2006). Reliability and validity in research. Nursing standard, 20(44), 41-45.
• Roth, W.M. (1998). How prepared are preservice teachers to teach scientific inquiry? Levels of performance in scientific representation practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9: 25–48.
• Rushton, G. T., Lotter, C., & Singer, J. (2011). Chemistry teachers’ emerging expertise in inquiry teaching: the effect of a professional development model on beliefs and practice. Journal of Science teacher education, 22(1), 23-52.
• Singer, J., & Maher, M. A. (2007). Preservice teachers and technology integration: Rethinking traditional roles. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(6), 955-984.
• Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N., & Lederman, J., (2008, March). An instrument to assess views of scientific inquiry: The VOSI questionnaire. InPaper presented at the international conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST). Baltimore, MD.
• Şaşan, H. H. (2002). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme. Yaşadıkça Eğitim, 74(75), 49-52.
• Sımşek, A. (2010). Sınıf ve Sosyal Bilgiler Öğretmen Adaylarının Tarih Öğretimine İlişkin Tutumları. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(1).
• Tsai, C. C., & Liu, S. Y. (2005). Developing a multi‐dimensional instrument for assessing students’ epistemological views toward science. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1621-1638.
• Uysal, M. P. (2010). Öğretim Etkinlikleri Kuramı Ve Bdö Tasarımına Yeni Bir Dinamik Yaklaşım. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2).
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children, 23(3), 34-41.
• Walan, S., Mc Ewen, B., & Gericke, N. (2016). Enhancing primary science: an exploration of teachers’ own ideas of solutions to challenges in inquiry-and context-based teaching. Education 3-13, 44(1), 81-92.
• Yıldırım, A., Yalçın, Y., Kaya Şengören, S., Tanel, R., Sağlam, M. ve Kavcar, N. (2011). A study of student teachers’ acquisition of science process skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 44, 203-218.
• Zion, M., & Mendelovici, R. (2012). Moving from structured to open inquiry: Challenges and limits. Science Education International, 23(4), 383–399.