Yıl 2017, Cilt 4 , Sayı 3, Sayfalar 1 - 19 2017-12-20

Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi
Examining the Effect on Development of Pre Science Teachers’ Argument Structure of Writing the Argumentation Based Experiment Report

TUFAN İNALTEKİN [1] , Hakan AKÇAY [2]


Bu çalışmanın amacı, fen eğitiminin ayrılmaz bir parçası olan laboratuvar uygulamalarında argümantasyona dayalı deney raporu yazma anlayışını kullanan fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının süreç boyunca ortaya koydukları argümanların gelişimini incelemektir. Araştırma 2012-2013 güz yarıyılında Türkiye’ deki bir devlet üniversitesinin fen bilgisi öğretmenliği programı 2. sınıfta öğrenim gören 46 öğretmen adayı ile yürütülmüştür. Araştırmanın deneysel tasarımı, örneklem gurubunun zamana bağlı nasıl değişim gösterdiğini ortaya koyan zaman serisi deseni olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu araştırmanın verileri beş hafta boyunca genel biyoloji laboratuvarı dersinde toplanmıştır. Araştırmanın veri toplama aracı, fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının biyoloji laboratuvarı derslerinde argümantasyon temelli hazırladıkları deney raporlarıdır. Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının hazırlamış oldukları deney raporları Choi (2008) tarafından geliştirilmiş olan yazarak bilim öğrenme yaklaşımı puanlama ölçeği kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırmanın verileri SPSS 17. programı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Analizden elde edilen bulgular, fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının beş hafta boyunca argümantasyon temelli hazırlamış oldukları deney raporlarındaki herbir argüman bileşeni puanında sürece dayalı anlamlı bir puan artış olduğunu göstermiştir. Araştırmanın sonucuna göre, fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının lisans dönemi laboratuvar uygulamalarında argümantasyon temelli yazarak bilim öğrenme anlayışını kullanması, onların bilimi sorgulama ve anlama yolları geliştirmede etkili bir yaklaşım olduğunu göstermektedir.

The purpose of this study is to examine effect development of argumantation components students of test reports writing argumantation based in lab applications in which is a inseparable part one of science education. The research is to occur of 46 students, which are received education in science teacher class of a state university in Turkey on 2011-2012 autumn session. The Research experimental design,  is to established as time-series pattern which how of condition of sample group produce be change to depending times. This research data is to collected during five week general biology lab. Research group to have prepare experiment reporst using for argumantation based science ınquiry approach throughout application. it is to give points with rubric the experiment reports which be typed argumantation based of students and after it is to analysed with SPSS 17. Program. According to analyse conclusions, it is to seen meaningful increase points of each component in argumantation based test reports prepared of research group during process. Research result demonstrate that students is significant to reflect efficient learning to be used of argumentation based science inquiry approach in lab application.

  • Adúriz-Bravo, A., Bonan, L., Galli, L. G., Chion, A. R.,& Meinardi, E.(2005) Scientific Argumentation in Pre-Service Biology Teacher Education, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education Volume 1, Number 1, November 2005 Akcay, H., Hand, B., & Norton-Meier, L.(2010). Creative writing and promoting understanding in science: alternative ways to interest students in writing about science, SSR, December,92(339) Akkus,R., Günel, M., &Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an Inquiry-based Approach known as the Science Writing Heuristic to Tradional Science Teaching Pratices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education,29:14,1745-1765. Andrews, R., Torgerson, C., Low, G. & McGuinn, N.(2009).Teaching argument writing to 7‐ to 14‐year‐olds: an international review of the evidence of successful practice, Cambridge Journal of Education, 39:3, 291-310 Armstrong, N. A., Wallace, C. S., & Shu-Mei Chang, Learning from Writing in College Biology, Res Sci Educ (2008) 38:483–499, DOI 10.1007/s11165-007-9062-9 Balgopal, M.M. & Wallace, A.M. (2009): Decisions and Dilemmas: Using Writing to Learn Activities to Increase Ecological Literacy, The Journal of Environmental Education, 40:3, 13-26 Baker, W. P., Barstack, R., Clark, D., Hull, E., Goodman, B., Kook, J., Kraft, K., Pushpa Ramakrishna, Elisabeth Roberts, Jerome Shaw, David Weaver & Michael Lang (2008): Writing-to-Learn in the Inquiry-Science Classroom: Effective Strategies from Middle School Science and Writing Teachers, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81:3, 105-108 http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.81.3.105-108 Baker, M. (2003). Computer mediated argumentative interactions for the co-elaboration of scientific notions. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn: Confronting cognitions in computer-supported collaborative learning environments (pp. 47–78). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer. Berland, L. K.,& McNeill, K. L.(2009). Using A Learning Progression To Inform Scientific Argumentation In Talk And Writing, Paper presented at the Learning Progressions in Science (LeaPS) Conference, June 2009, Iowa City, IA Böttcher, F., & Meisert, A. (2011). Argumentation in Science Education: A Model-based Framework, Sci & Educ (2011) 20:103–140, DOI 10.1007/s11191-010-9304-5 Bricker, L., & Bell, P. (2009). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92, 473.498 Cakir, M.(2008). Constructivist Approaches to Learning in Science and Their Implications for Science Pedagogy: A Literature Review, International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, Vol. 3, No. 4, October 2008, 193-206 Cavagnetto, A., Hand, B. M.& Norton-Meier, L.(2010).The Nature of Elementary Student Science Discourse in the Context of the Science Writing Heuristic Approach.International Journal of Science Education, 32:4, 427-449. Chin, C & Osborne, J. (2010): Supporting Argumentation Through Students' Questions: Case Studies in Science Classrooms, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19:2, 230-284 Choi, A.( 2008) A Study of Student Written Argument Using The Science Writing Heuristic Approach in Inquiry-Based Freshman General Chemistry Laboratory Classes, May 2008, UMI Microform 3323405 Copyright 2008 by ProQuest LLC Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J., & Hand, B.(2010) Examining Arguments Generated by Year 5, 7, and 10 Students in Science Classrooms, Res Sci Educ (2010) 40:149–169 , DOI 10.1007/s11165-008-9105-x , Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008 Choı, N. & Hand, B. (2010). Implementation of the Science Writing Heuristic(SWH) Approach In 8th Grade Science Classrooms, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education(2011), 9:1111-1133 Chung-Hsien Tseng & Hsiao-Lin Tuan & Chi-Chin Chin, How to Help Teachers Develop Inquiry Teaching: Perspectives from Experienced Science Teachers, Res Sci Educ DOI 10.1007/s11165-012-9292-3, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012 Cronje, R., Murray, K., Rohlinger, S.&Wellnitz, T.(2011): Using the Science Writing Heuristic to Improve Undergraduate Writing in Biology, International Journal of Science Education, DOI:10.1080/09500693.2011.628344, 1–14 D’Avanzo, C. (2003). Application of research on learning to college teaching: Ecological examples. Bioscience, 53, 1121–1128. Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching Strategies for Developing Students’Argumentation Skills About Socioscientific Issues in High School Genetics, Res Sci Educ (2010) 40:133–148 DOI 10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y Durna, T. (2010). Örnekleme. (Ed. K. Böke). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri, (s.186). İstanbıl: Alfa Yayıncılık, 2. Basım, ISBN: 978-605-106-067-5. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. E. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Erduran, S.(2006). Promoting ideas, evidence and argument in initial science teacher training, School Science Review, June, 87(321),45-50 Erduran, S., Ardac, D., & Yakmaci-Guzel, B. (2006). Learning To Teach Argumentation: Case Studies Of Pre-Service Secondary Science Teachers, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Volume 2, Number 2, July 2006 Erduran, S.(2006) Promoting ideas, evidence and argument in initial science teacher training, School Science Review, June, 87(321), 45-50 Erduran, S & Jime´nez-Aleixandre, M. P.(2011). Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research, Sci & Educ (2011) 20:585–588, DOI 10.1007/s11191-010-9295-2 Furtak, E. M., & Alonzo, A. C. (2010). The Role of Content in Inquiry-Based Elementary Science Lessons: An Analysis of Teacher Beliefs and Enactment, Res Sci Educ (2010) 40:425–449 DOI 10.1007/s11165-009-9128-y Goldston, M. J., Bland Day, J., Sundberg, C & Dantzler, J.(2010). Psychometric Analysis Of A 5E Learning Cycle Lesson Plan Assessment Instrument, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8: 633-648 Grandy, R.E.(1997). ‘Constructivisms and Objectivity: Disentangling Metaphysics from Pedagogy’,Science & Education 6(1–2), 43–53. Günel, M., Atila, M. E. & Büyükkasap, E.(2009). The Impact of Using Multi Modal Representations within Writing to Learn Activities on Learning Electricity Unit at 6th Grade, Elementary Education Online, 8(1), 183-199, 2009., http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr Günel, M., Kıngır, S.,&Geban,Ö.(2012). Argümantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme(ATBÖ) Yaklaşımının Kullanıldığı Sınıflarda Argumantasyon ve Soru Yapılarının İncelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, Cilt 37,Sayı 164, syf:316-330. Haefner, L. A., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). Learning by doing? Prospective elementary teachers’ developing understandings of scientific inquiry and science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education 26(13), 1653 – 1674. Hakyolu, H.& Ogan-Bekiroglu, F.(2011). Assessment of Students’ Science Knowledge Levels and Their Involvement with Argumentation, International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education (IJCDSE), Volume 2, Issue 1, March 2011,264-270 Hand, B., Hohenshell, L. & Praın, V. (2007). Examining the effect of multiple writing tasks on Year 10 biology students’ understandings of cell and molecular biology concepts. Instructional Science (2007) 35:343–373. DOI 10.1007/s11251-006-9012-3 Hand, B., Gunel, M& Ulu, C.(2009). Sequencing Embedded Multimodal Representations in a Writing to Learn Approach to the Teaching of Electricity, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 46, No. 3, PP. 225–247 (2009) Hand, B.& Praın, V. (2001) Teachers Implementing Writing-To-Learn Strategies in Junior Secondary Science: A Case Study Hand, B., Hohenshell, L. & Praın, V. (2007). Examining the effect of multiple writing tasks on Year 10 biology students’ understandings of cell and molecular biology concepts. Instructional Science (2007) 35:343–373. DOI 10.1007/s11251-006-9012-3 Hand, B., Yang, O. E.,& Bruxvoort, C. (2007). Using Writing-To-Learn Science Strategies to Improve Year 11 Students’ Understandings of Stoıchıometry, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education (2007) 5: 125Y143 Hand, B., Gunel, M& Ulu, C.(2009). Sequencing Embedded Multimodal Representations in a Writing to Learn Approach to the Teaching of Electricity, Journal of Research ın Science Teaching, vol. 46, NO. 3, PP. 225–247 (2009) Hand, B.,Wallance, C. W.&Yang, E. M.(2004). Using a Science Writing Heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: quantitive and qualitive aspects Hornikx, J.& Hahn, U.(2012). Reasoning and argumentation: Towards an integrated psychology of argumentation, THINKING & REASONING, 18 (3), 225–243 Hapgood, S., & Palincsa, A. S. (2006).Where Literacy and Science Intersect, Educational Leadership, Vol.64,Number:4, Science in the spotlight, syf:56-60 Hewson, M. G.,& Ogunniyi, M. B. (2011). Argumentation-teaching as a method to introduce indigenous knowledge into science classrooms: opportunities and challenges, Cult Stud of Sci Educ (2011) 6:679–692, DOI 10.1007/s11422-010-9303-5 Hofstein, A., Cohen, I., & Lazarowitz, R. (1996). The learning environment of high school students in chemistry and biology laboratories. Research in Science and Technological Education, 14, 103–115. Hohenshell, l. M., & Hand, B. (2006): Writing‐to‐learn Strategies in Secondary School Cell Biology: A mixed method study, International Journal of Science Education, 28:2-3, 261-289 Karamustafaoğlu, O.(2009).Fen ve Teknoloji Eğitiminde Temel Yönelimler, Ocak 2009 Cilt:17 No:1 Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 87-102 Katchevich, D., Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R (2011), Argumentation in the Chemistry Laboratory: Inquiry and Confirmatory Experiments, Res Sci Educ, DOI 10.1007/s11165-011-9267-9, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 Kaya, O. N., &Kılıç, Z. (2008). Etkin Bir Fen Öğretimi İçin Tartışmacı Söylev, Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD) Cilt 9, Sayı 3, (2008), (89-100) Keys, K. W. (1999). Revitalizing Instruction in Scientific Genres: Connecting Knowledge Production with Writing to Learn in Science, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0036-8326/99/020115-16 Kım, H., & Song, J. (2005). The Features of Peer Argumentation in Middle School Students’ Scientific Inquiry, Research in Science Education, DOI: 10.1007/s11165-005-9005-2, http://epic.pe.kr/v2/administrator/one_html/peerargumentation_song.pdf Kıngır,S., Geban, Ö.&Günel, M.(2011). Öğrencilerin Kimya Derslerinde Argumantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme Yaklaşımının Uygulanmasına İlişkin Görüşleri, Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, sayı:32, Syf:15-28,2011 Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G.,& Bergh, H. V. (2006). Writing as a learning tool: Testing the role of students’ writing strategies European Journal of Psychology of Education 2006, Vol. XXI, nº 1, 17-34 Kingir, S.,Geban, Ö.&Günel, M.(2012). Using the Science Writing Heuristic Approach to Enhance Student Understanding in Chemical Change and Mixture, Res Sci Educ, Springer Science, DOI 10.1007/s1165-012-9326-x Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening Inquiry into Cognitive Processes in Writing-To-Learn, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1999, Cognitive Processes in Learning Through Writing,203-268 Klein, P. D. (2000). Elementary Students' Strategies for Writingto- Learn in Science, Cognition and Instruction, 18:3, 317-348 ,http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1803_2, 07 May 2012, At: 23:38 Klein, P. D. (2006). The challenges of scientific literacy: From the viewpoint of second generation cognitive science. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 143–178. Koray, Ö., Köksal, M.S., Özdemir, M& İrfan Presley, A.(2007) The effect of creative and critical thinking based laboratory applications on academic achievement and science process skills, Elementary Education Online, 6(3), 377-389, http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr Kuhn, D.(2010) Teaching and Learning Science as Argument, Science Education, 810-824, Published online 26 March 2010 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). Kuhn, D. (2009). Do students need to be taught how to reason? Educational Research Review, 4(1), 1–6. Levını, T & Wagner, T.(2006). In their own words: Understanding student conceptions of writing through their spontaneous metaphors in the science classroom, Instructional Science (2006) 34: 227–278, DOI 10.1007/s11251-005-6929-x Llewellyn, D. & Rajes, H. (2007).Fostering Argumentation Skills DoingWhat Real Scientists Really Do, SCIENCE SCOPE, 22-28 Maloney, J. & Simon, S. (2006). Mapping Children’s Discussions of Evidence in Science to Assess Collaboration and Argumentation, International Journal of Science Education, 28:15, 1817-1841 Mar Mateos -Elena Martı´n -Ruth Villalo´n -Marı´a Luna, Reading and writing to learn in secondary education: online processing activity and written products in summarizing and synthesizing tasks, Read Writ (2008) 21:675–697, DOI 10.1007/s11145-007-9086-6 Martin, A. M & Hand, B. (2009) Factors Affecting the Implementation of Argument in the Elementary Science Classroom: A Longitudinal Case Study, Res Sci Educ, 39:17–38, DOI 10.1007/s11165-007-9072-7 Mason, L.(1998). Sharing cognition to construct scientific knowledge in school context: The role of oral and written discourse, Instructional Science 26: 359–389, 1998. 1998 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. McDermott, M. A.&Hand, B.(2012).The impact of embedding multiple modes of representation within writing tasks on high school students’ chemistry understanding, Instr Sci, DOI 10.1007/s11251-012-9225-6 Received: 28 August 2011 / Accepted: 19 March 2012, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012 Morgil, İ., Güngör Seyhan, H. & Seçken, N. (2009). Proje destekli kimya laboratuarı uygulamalarının bazı bilişsel ve duyuşsal alan bileşenlerine etkisi. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 6(1), 89-107. Nam, J., Choı, A&Hand, B.(2011). Implementation of the Science Writing Heuristic(SWH) Approach in 8th Grade Science Classrooms, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education (2011) 9: 1111-1133, National Science Council, Taiwan Norman, O., Ault Jr, C. R., Bentz, B& Meskimen,L.(2001)The black–white “achievement gap” as a perennial challenge of urban science education: A sociocultural and historical overview with implications for research and practice, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Volume 38, Issue 10, pages 1101–1114, December 2001 Norris A. Armstrong & Carolyn S. Wallace & Shu-Mei Chang, Learning from Writing in College Biology, Res Sci Educ (2008) 38:483–499, DOI 10.1007/s11165-007-9062-9 National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, D. C: National Academy Press Nückles, M., Hübner, S., Dümer, S.& Renkl, A.(2010). Expertise reversal effects in writing-to-learn, Instr Sci (2010) 38:237–258, DOI 10.1007/s11251-009-9106-9 Ogunniyi, M. B., & Hewson, M. G. (2008). Effect of an Argumentation-Based Course on Teachers’ Disposition towards a Science-Indigenous Knowledge Curriculum, International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, Vol. 3, No. 4, October 2008, 159-177 Osborne, J. (2007). Towards a more social pedagogy in science education: the role of argumentation, Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências Vol. 7 No 1, 2007 Osborne,J., Simon, S.&Erduran,S.(2002). Enhancing the guality of argumantation in school science. Paper presented at the international conference Ontological, Epistemological, Linguistics and Pedagogical Considerations of Language and Svience Literacy: Empowering Research and İnforming Instruction, Victoria, BC, Canada. Osborne,J., Erduran, S&Simon, S.(2004).Enhancing the Quality of Argumentation in School Science, Journal of Research ın Science Teaching,Vol. 41, NO. 10, PP. 994–1020 (2004) Özmen, H.(2004). Fen Öğretiminde Öğrenme Teorileri ve Teknoloji Destekli Yapılandırmacı (Constructivist) Öğrenme, The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, January 2004 ISSN: 1303-6521 volume 3 Issue 1 Article 14 Papadopoulos, P.M., Demetriadis, S.N., Stamelos, I. G&Tsoukalas, I.A.(2010) The value of writing-to-learn when using question prompts to support web-based learning in ill-structured domains, Education Tech Research Dev (2011) 59:71–90 DOI 10.1007/s11423-010-9167-0, Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2010 Passmore, C. M. & Svoboda, J. (2012): Exploring Opportunities for Argumentation in Modelling Classrooms, International Journal of Science Education, 34:10,1535-1554 Peker, D., & Wallace, C. S.(2011). Characterizing High, 2011 School Students’ Written Explanations in Biology Laboratories, Res Sci Educ (2011) 4:169–191, DOI 10.1007/s11165-009-9151-z Poock,J.R., Burke,K.A., Greenbowe,T.J. & Hand, B.M.(2007). Using the science writing heuristic in the general chemistry laboratory to improve students’ academic performance. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(8),1371-1379 Porter, M. K & Masıngıla, J. O.(2000). Examining The Effects of Writing on Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Calculus, Educational Studies in Mathematics 42: 165–177, 2000. © 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands Prain, V. & Hand, B.(1999). ‘Students Perceptions of Writing for Learning in Secondary School Science’, Science Education 83(2), 151–162. Prain, V & Waldrip, B.(2010). Representing Science Literacies: An Introduction, Res Sci Educ, 40:1–3, DOI 10.1007/s11165-009-9153-x, Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 Prain, V., Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2009): Multiple Representation in Learning About Evaporation, International Journal of Science Education, 31:6, 787-808 , http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690701824249 Rivard, L.P.& Straw, S.W.(2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science&Education,84,566-593. Rogers, M. A., Abell, S. K., Marra, R. M., Arbaugh, F., Hutchins, K. L.,& Cole, J. S.(2010). Orientations to Science Teacher Professional Development: An Exploratory Study, J Sci Teacher Educ (2010) 21:309–328 DOI 10.1007/s10972-009-9179-y Sampson, V. (2009, April). Science teachers and scientific argumentation: Trends in practice and beliefs. Paper presented at the Annual International Conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST). Garden Grove, CA Sönmez, V&Alacapınar, F.G. (2014). Örneklendirilmiş Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri (3.Baskı), Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Tse-Yang Huang& Yi-Hsuan Lee (2007)A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Volume 44, Issue 10, pages 1436–1460, December 2007 Sharma, A & Anderson, C.W.(2009) Recontextualization of Science from Lab to School: Implications for Science Literacy, Sci & Educ (2009) 18:1253–1275, DOI 10.1007/s11191-007-9112-8 Susanna Hapgood&Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar(2006).Where Literacy and Science Intersect, Educational Leadership, Vol.64,Number:4, Science in the spotlight, syf:56-60 Takao, A. Y.,&Kelly, G. J.(2003) Assessment of Evidence in University Students’ Scientific Writing, Science & Education 12: 341–363, Tippet, C. (2009). Argumentation: The Language of Scince, Journal of Elementary Science Education, Vol. 21, No.1(Winter 2009), 17-25, Document and Publication Services, Western İllinois Universi Tomas, L. & Ritchie, S. M. Positive Emotional Responses to Hybridised Writing about a Socio-Scientific Issue, Res Sci Educ (2012) 42:25–49, DOI 10.1007/s11165-011-9255-0 Von Secker, C. E.& Lissitz, R. W.(1999) Estimating the Impact of Instructional Practices on Student Achievement in Science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Volume 36, Issue 10, pages 1110–1126, December 1999 Walker, J. P.(2011).Argumentation ın undergraduate Chemıstry Laboratorıes, The Florıda State University College of Education, Doctor of Philosophy, Spring Semester, 2011 Wee, B., Shepardson, D., Fast, J.&Harbor, J.(2007). Teaching and Learning About Inquiry: Insights and Challenges in Professional Development, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18:63–89 DOI: 10.1007/s10972-006-9031-6 Yeşilyurt, S. (2006). Öğretmen adayları ve öğretim elemanları gözüyle genel biyoloji laboratuar uygulamalarının değerlendirilmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 14 (2), 481-496. Yore, L., Bisanz, G. Y., & Hand, B. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research, International Journal of Science Education, 25:6, 689-725 Zembal-Saul, C.(2009). Learning to Teach Elementary School Science as Argument, Science Education,688-719, 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Birincil Dil tr
Konular Sosyal
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Yazar: TUFAN İNALTEKİN (Sorumlu Yazar)
Kurum: KAFKAS ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ, MATEMATİK VE FEN BİLİMLERİ EĞİTİMİ BÖLÜMÜ
Ülke: Turkey


Yazar: Hakan AKÇAY
Kurum: YILDIZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ, MATEMATİK VE FEN BİLİMLERİ EĞİTİMİ BÖLÜMÜ
Ülke: Turkey


Tarihler

Başvuru Tarihi : 30 Kasım 2017
Kabul Tarihi : 13 Aralık 2017
Yayımlanma Tarihi : 20 Aralık 2017

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { kafkasegt359900, journal = {e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi}, issn = {}, eissn = {2148-8940}, address = {}, publisher = {Kafkas Üniversitesi}, year = {2017}, volume = {4}, pages = {1 - 19}, doi = {10.30900/kafkasegt.359900}, title = {Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi}, key = {cite}, author = {İNALTEKİN, TUFAN and AKÇAY, Hakan} }
APA İNALTEKİN, T , AKÇAY, H . (2017). Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi. e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi , 4 (3) , 1-19 . DOI: 10.30900/kafkasegt.359900
MLA İNALTEKİN, T , AKÇAY, H . "Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi". e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi 4 (2017 ): 1-19 <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kafkasegt/issue/33173/359900>
Chicago İNALTEKİN, T , AKÇAY, H . "Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi". e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi 4 (2017 ): 1-19
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi AU - TUFAN İNALTEKİN , Hakan AKÇAY Y1 - 2017 PY - 2017 N1 - doi: 10.30900/kafkasegt.359900 DO - 10.30900/kafkasegt.359900 T2 - e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 1 EP - 19 VL - 4 IS - 3 SN - -2148-8940 M3 - doi: 10.30900/kafkasegt.359900 UR - https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.359900 Y2 - 2017 ER -
EndNote %0 e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi %A TUFAN İNALTEKİN , Hakan AKÇAY %T Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi %D 2017 %J e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi %P -2148-8940 %V 4 %N 3 %R doi: 10.30900/kafkasegt.359900 %U 10.30900/kafkasegt.359900
ISNAD İNALTEKİN, TUFAN , AKÇAY, Hakan . "Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi". e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi 4 / 3 (Aralık 2017): 1-19 . https://doi.org/10.30900/kafkasegt.359900
AMA İNALTEKİN T , AKÇAY H . Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi. e-KEAD. 2017; 4(3): 1-19.
Vancouver İNALTEKİN T , AKÇAY H . Argümantasyon Temelli Deney Raporu Yazımının Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Argüman Yapılarını Geliştirmelerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi. e-Kafkas Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi. 2017; 4(3): 19-1.