BİLİMİN DOĞASI ÖĞRETİMİNDE İLK ADIM: YENİ TOPLUM ETKİNLİĞİ VE UYGULANIŞI ÜZERİNE TARTIŞMALAR

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı bilimin doğasının çeşitli boyutlarını derslerine açık-düşündürücü yaklaşım kullanarak entegre etmeyi planlayan, bu boyutları öğrenme kazanımlarından biri olarak düşünen fen alanı öğretmenlerinin özellikle dönem başında uygulayabilecekleri bir etkinliği bilimin doğasının hangi boyutlarının üzerinde durulabileceğini gösterecek şekilde tanıtmaktır. Kendi kurallarına göre yaşayan yeni bir toplumun bilim insanları tarafından keşfedilmesini içeren “Yeni Toplum” etkinliği bilimin doğası öğretim sürecine dahil olan ve hizmet içi-hizmet öncesi öğretmenlerden oluşan altı farklı grup üzerinde uygulanmıştır. Uygulamalardan elde edilen video kayıtları, gözlem notları, süreçte kullanılan etkinlik kağıtları, ve katılımcıların etkinlik ve süreç hakkındaki görüşleri araştırmacılar tarafından bilimin doğasının hangi yönlerinin nasıl öğretilebileceği açısından ele alınarak analiz edilmiştir. Farklı uygulamalardan elde edilen veriler bize Yeni Toplum etkinliğinin “Bilim İnsanının Yaratıcılığı, Öznelliği ve Bilimde Takım Çalışması”, “Teori-Kanun-Olgu”, “Bilimsel Metot ve Bilimde Şans Faktörü”, “Gözlem ve Çıkarım”, ve “Bilimsel Bilginin Değişebilirliği” boyutlarını açık-düşündürücü bir şekilde tartışmak için uygun sosyal bir ortam hazırladığını göstermiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bilimin Doğası,giriş etkinliği,açık düşündürücü yaklaşım,sosyal ortam

The First Step in Nature of Science Teaching: New Society Activity and Arguments on Its Implemantation

Öz

The fundemantal purpose of this study introduce a beginning of semester activity for science teachers oriented to integrate several aspects of nature of science to their teaching. Six different groups of in-service and pre-service teachers, involved in a nature of science instructional sequence, were the participants and The “New Society” activity entailing the discovery of a new society living with its own rules was implemented in the first class of these different instructional sequences. Data sources including video records, field notes, activity sheets, and participants’ reflections on activity and the process of discovery were analyzed bearing in mind that how nature of science aspects can be communicated. Analysis of data showed that “New Society” activity created a social context for leading explicit-reflective discussions on “Creativity and Subjectivity of Scientist and Team Work in Science”, “Theory-Law-Fact, “Scientific Method and the Role of Chance, “Observation and Inference” and “Tentativeness of Scientific Knowledge”

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Nature of Science,beginning of semester activity,explicit-reflective approach,social context

Kaynakça

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417 -436.
2. Abd-El Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of History of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 295-317.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy: A Project 2061 Report. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
4. Bauer, H. H. (1992). Scientific literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method. University of Illinois Press: Chicago
5. Bybee, R. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purpose to practice. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
6. Cavallo, A. (2008). Experiencing the Nature of Science: An Interactive, Beginning-of- Semester activity. Journal of College in Science Teaching, May/june, 12-15.
7. Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners' Responses to the Demands of Conceptual Change: Considerations for Effective Nature of Science Instruction. Science & Education, 15(5), 463-494.
8. DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582–601.

9. Dillon, J. (2009). On Scientific Literacy and Curriculum Reform, International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 201-213.
10. Farenga, S. J. & Joyce, B. A. (1999), Intentions of young students to enroll in science courses in the future: An examination of gender differences. Science Education, 83(1), 55–75.
11. Greenfield, T. A. (1997), Gender- and grade-level differences in science interest and participation. Science Education, 81(3), 259–276.
12. Jenkins, E. W., & Pell, R. G. (2006). The relevance of science education project (ROSE) in England: a summary of findings. Leeds, UK: Centre for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education, University of Leeds.
13. Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578.
14. Kipnis, N. (2005). Chance in Science: The Discovery of Electromagnetism by H.C. Oersted. Science & Education, 14(1), 1–28.
15. Köseoğlu, F., Tümay, H. ve Budak, E. (2008). Bilimin Doğası Hakkında Paradigma Değişimleri ve Öğretimi ile İlgili Yeni Anlayışlar. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 221-237
16. Köseoğlu, F., Tümay, H. ve Üstün, U. (2010) Bilimin Doğası Öğretimi Mesleki Gelişim Paketinin Geliştirilmesi ve Öğretmen adaylarına Uygulanması ile ilgili Tartışmalar. Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (11) 4. 129-163
17. Layton, D., Jenkins, E., & Donnelly, J.(1994). Scientific and technological literacy: meanings and rationales; an annotated bibliography. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/325_94.pdf at December 7, 2010 from
18. Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331– 359.
19. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002).Views of The nature of science Questionaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521.
20. Lederman, N.G., & Zeidler, D.L. (1987). Science teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: Do they really influence teaching behavior? Science Education, 71(5), 721-734.
21. Lee, J. D. (1998). Which kids can “become” scientists? Effects of gender, self-concepts, andperceptions of scientists. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61, 199–220.
22. Lindahl, B. (2003). Pupils’ responses to school science and technology? A longitudinal study of pathways to upper secondary school. Unpublished Summary of PhD thesis, University of Gothenburg, Kristianstad, Norway.
23. Logan, M., & Skamp, K. (2005). Students’ interest in science across the middle-school years. Teaching Science, 51(4), 8–15.
24. Loughran, J. (2007). Researching teacher education practices: Responding to the challenges, demands and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 12-20.
25. Loughran, J. (2005). Researching teaching about teaching: Self-study of teacher education practices. Studying Teacher Education, 1, 5-16
26. Matthews, M. R. (1998). In defense of modest goals when teaching about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 161–174.
27. McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (2000). International science education standards documents (41-52) In McComas (Ed.) The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers
28. Meichtry, Y.J. (1993). The impact of science curricula on students views about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5), 429-443.
29. Menon, D., Witzig, S. B., & Roberts, T. R. (2010). Developing PCK for NOS: Making Instruction Explicit. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Association of Research in Science Teaching. Philadelphia, PA
30. Miller, P. H., Slawinski Blessing, J., & Schwartz, S. (2006). Gender Differences in High- School Students' Views about Science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 363-381.
31. National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.
33. Samaras, A. P. (2002). Self-study for teacher educators: Crafting a pedagogy for educational change. New York: Peter Lang
34. Shamos, M. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
35. Simon, S. (2000). Students’ attitudes towards science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
36. Tobin, K. (2000). Interpretive research in science education. In: A.E. Kelly & R.A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. (pp. 487–512). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Yeşiloğlu, S.N., Demirdöğen, B., Köseoğlu, F. (2009) Enhancing Procpective Teachers’ Views on Nature of Science Within a Social Context. ESERA 2009 Conference İstanbul/TURKEY, August 31st - September 4th 2009.