Fizik konularının yaşamla ilişkilendirilme düzeyi: Ortaöğretim fizik dersi öğretim programının analizi

Öz

Bu araştırmada ortaöğretim fizik dersi öğretim programının yaşamla ilişkilendirilme düzeyinin belirlenmesi ve dolayısıyla öğrencilerin bu ders kapsamında yaşama ne düzeyde hazırlanabileceğinin saptanması amaçlanmıştır. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden doküman analizi yönteminden yararlanılmıştır. Araştırmanın veri kaynağını Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu tarafından 2018 yılında yayımlanan ortaöğretim fizik dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. sınıflar) öğretim programı oluşturmaktadır. Ortaöğretim Fizik Dersi Öğretim Programı, “Fen Bilimleri Dersinin Yaşamla İlişkilendirilmesine İlişkin Tema ve Göstergeler” kullanılarak içerik analizi yöntemi ile bütüncül ve ayrıntılı şekilde çözümlenmiştir. Araştırmada Ortaöğretim fizik dersi öğretim programı iki bölüm altında incelenmiştir. İlk bölümde “Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Öğretim Programları” ve “Ortaöğretim Fizik Dersi Öğretim Programının Uygulanması”, ikinci bölümde ise “Ortaöğretim Fizik Dersi Öğretim Programının Yapısı” içerisinde yer alan ünite, konu, kazanım ve açıklamaların altındaki kazanımlar ve açıklamalar incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda ortaöğretim fizik dersi öğretim programı içerisinde “Yaşamla İlişkilendirmeye” sıklıkla vurgu yapıldığı belirlenmiştir. Ortaöğretim fizik dersi öğretim programında yaşamla ilişkilendirmeye yapılan vurgu ile fen okuryazar bireylerin yetiştirilmesinin desteklendiği ifade edilebilir. Öğrencilerin fizik bilgilerini günlük yaşam problemlerinde kullanmalarının istenmesi ile eleştirel düşünme becerilerinin gelişiminin desteklendiği ortaya çıkmıştır. Aynı zamanda öğrencilerin fiziğin yaşamın bir parçası olduğunu keşfederek olası öğrenme güçlüklerinin önüne geçilmesinin amaçlandığı ifade edilebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• fizik eğitimi
• öğretim programları
• fen okuryazarlığı
• yaşamda bilim
• günlük yaşam

The level of associating physics subjects with life: Analysis of the secondary school physics curriculum

Öz

This research aims to ascertain the extent of association between the secondary school physics course curriculum and real-life situations. The goal is to determine how well students can be prepared for life within the scope of this course. The research employed the document analysis method, one of the qualitative research methods. The data source for this research is the secondary school physics course curriculum (grades 9th through 12th), published by the Board of Education in 2018. The Secondary School Physics Curriculum was analyzed comprehensively and in detail using the content analysis method, specifically focusing on the 'Themes and Indicators Related to Relating the Science Course to Life.' The research examined the secondary school physics curriculum in two sections. In the first part, the 'Ministry of National Education Curriculum' and the 'Implementation of the Secondary Education Physics Course Curriculum' were scrutinized. In the second part, the achievements and explanations related to the units, subjects, and 'Relation to Life' under the 'Structure of the Secondary School Physics Course Curriculum' were examined. The research revealed a frequent emphasis on 'Relation to Life' in the secondary school physics curriculum. It can be asserted that the education of scientifically literate individuals is reinforced by emphasizing its connection to everyday life in the secondary school physics curriculum. The study has uncovered that the cultivation of critical thinking skills is promoted through tasks that require students to apply their physics knowledge to real-life problems. It can be stated that the physics program also aims to prevent possible learning difficulties in students by enabling them to discover that physics is a part of life.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• physics education
• curriculum
• science literacy
• science in life
• daily life

Kaynakça

1. Akgün, A., Çinici, A., Yıldırım, N., & Köprübaşı, M. (2015). Investigation of how eight grade students associate scientific concepts with the ones they encounter in their daily lives. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 11(4), 1356-1368.
2. Aydın, A., & Tarakçı, F. (2018). The investigation of the pre-service science teachers’ abilities to read, interpret and draw graphs. Elementary Education Online, 17(1), 469-488.
3. Baran, M., Maskan, A., & Yaşar, S. (2018). Learning physics through project-based learning game techniques. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 221-234.
4. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Open University Press.
5. Bosser, U. (2017). Exploring the complexities of integrating socioscientific issues in science teaching [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Linnaeus University, Kalmar.
6. Canpolat, E., & Ayyıldız, K. (2019). Level of 8th grade students’ ability to relating science course with daily life. Anadolu University Journal of Education Faculty, 3(1), 21-39.
7. Cansız-Aktaş, M. (2019). Doküman incelemesi yöntemi [Document review method]. Özmen, H., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (Eds.) in, Eğitimde Araştırma Yöntemleri [Research Methods in Education] (pp. 126-127). Pegem Akademi.
8. Cengiz, E., & Ayvacı, H. Ş. (2017). Examining fifth-grade students' level of associating some daily-life events with "changes of state". Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 18(1).

9. Collins, A. (1997). National science education standards: Looking backward and forward. The Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 299-313.
10. Costa, S. L. R., & Broietti, F. C. D. (2021). Scientific practices in science education publications: An analysis of research contexts. Science Education International, 32(4), 282-291.
11. Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97-140.
12. Daşdemir, İ., & Okutan, S. (2019). The effect of special situations related to science courses on secondary school students' success in TEOG science course. Ordu University Journal of Social Science Research, 9(2), 307-317.
13. Derman, İ. (2019). Fen bilimleri dersinin yaşamla ilişkilendirilme düzeyi [The level of association of science course with daily life], [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Hacettepe University, Ankara.
14. Dixson, D. D., & Worrell, F. C. (2016). Formative and summative assessment in the classroom. Theory Into Practice, 55(2), 153–159. https://doi:10.1080/00405841.2016.1148989
15. Dülger, Z., & Ogan-Bekiroğlu, F. (2023). Examination of effectiveness of physics textbooks: Pre-service teachers’ evulation. Erciyes Academy, 37(2), 455-481.
16. Erdoğan, F. K., & Karataş, F. Ö. (2023). Improving 7th grade students’ understanding of force and motion through history of science stories: A glimpse at an ongoing effort. Participatory Educational Research, 10(2), 195-215.
17. Ertürk, S. (2013). Eğitimde "Program" Geliştirme [“Curriculum” development in education]. Edge Akademi.
18. Harris, F. (2017). The nature of learning at forest school: practitioners' perspectives'. Education 3-13, 45(2), 272-291. https://doi:10.1080/03004279.2015.1078833
19. Haryanto, P. C., & Arty, I. S. (2019). The Application of contextual teaching and learning in natural science to improve student’s HOTS and self-efficacy. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1233(1), 012106. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742- 6596/1233/1/012106
20. Jenkins, A. & Unwin, D. (2001) How to write learning outcomes. Available online: http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/education/curricula/giscc/units/format/outcomes.html
21. Karataş, T. (2017). A case study regarding association between the unit of heat and temperature and daily life within ninth (9th) grade physics course [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Çukurova University, Adana.
22. Karip, E. (2017). Türkiye'nin TIMSS 2015 performansı üzerine değerlendirme ve öneriler (TEDMEM analiz dizisi 5) [Evaluation and recommendations on Turkey's TIMSS 2015 performance (TEDMEM analysis series 5)]. Turkish Education Association.
23. Körhasan, N. D., & Kaltakçı-Gürel, D. (2019). Student teachers’ physics knowledge and sources of knowledge to explain everyday phenomena. Science Education International, 30(4), 298-309.
24. Kristiyanto, W. H. (2022). Teaching physics in scientific ınformation disclosure era through daily physics learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2392(1), 012028.
25. Malik, A., & Ubaidillah, M. (2021). Multiple skill laboratory activities: How to improve students’ scientific communication and collaboration skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(4), 585-595. https://doi:10.15294/jpii.v10i4.31442
26. Martin, A. J., Durksen, T. L., Williamson, D., Kiss, J., & Ginns, P. (2016). The role of a museum-based science education program in promoting content knowledge and science motivation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(9), 1364-1384. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21332
27. Mercer-Mapstone, L., & Kuchel, L. (2017). Core skills for effective science communication: A teaching resource for undergraduate science education. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 7(2), 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2015.1113573
28. Ministry of National Education (MoNE) (2016a). PISA 2015 Ulusal raporu [PISA 2015 National report]. Ankara: T.C. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Ölçme, Değerlendirme ve Sınav Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü.
29. Ministry of National Education (MoNE) (2016b). TIMSS 2015 Ulusal matematik ve fen bilimleri ön raporu 4. ve 8. sınıflar [TIMSS 2015 National mathematics and science preliminary report grades 4 and 8]. Ankara: T. C. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Ölçme, Değerlendirme ve Sınav Hizmetleri Genel Müdürlüğü.
30. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2018). Ortaöğretim fizik dersi öğretim programı [Secondary education physics curriculum]. Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ Dosyalar/201812103112910-ortaöğretim_fizik_son.pdf
31. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd edition). California: Sage
32. OECD. (2018). PISA 2015 Results in Focus. OECD
33. Poquet, O., Kitto, K., Jovanovic, J., Dawson, S., Siemens, G., & Markauskaite, L. (2021). Transitions through lifelong learning: Implications for learning analytics. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100039.
34. Potvin, P., & Cyr, G. (2017). Toward a durable prevalence of scientific conceptions: Tracking the effects of two interfering misconceptions about buoyancy from preschoolers to science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(9), 1121–1142. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21396
35. Purba, S. W. D., Hwang, W. Y., Pao, S. C., & Ma, Z. H. (2019). Investigation of inquiry behaviors and learning achievement in authentic contexts with the ubiquitous-physics app. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 22(4), 59-76.
36. Pursitasari, I. D., Suhardi, E., & Sunarti, T. (2019). Promoting science literacy with discovery learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1233, 012074. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012074
37. Rafanan, R. J., De Guzman, C. Y., & Rogayan, D. V. (2020). Pursuing STEM careers: Perspectives of senior high school students. Participatory Educational Research, 7(3), 38–58.
38. Resbiantoro, G., & Setiani, R. (2022). A review of misconception in physics: The diagnosis, causes, and remediation. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 403-427.
39. Roberts, D. A., & Bybee, R. W. (2014). Scientific literacy, scientific literacy and science education. N. G. Lederman ve S. K. Abell (Ed.), Handbook of research on science education: Volume II (ss. 545-558). Routledge.
40. Sari, I. P. M., Jatmiko, B., & Suprapto, N. (2023). Students’ Physics Problem-Solving Skills in Daily Life Context: Between Confession and Fact. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(1), 231-241.
41. Sarwi, S., Ellianawati, E., & Suliyanah. (2019). Grounding physics and its learning for building global wisdom in the 21st century. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1171(1), 012001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742- 6596/1171/1/012001
42. Staman, L., Visscher, A. J., & Luyten, H. (2014). The effects of professional development on the attitudes, knowledge and skills for data-driven decision making. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 42, 79-90.
43. Starkey, L., Yates, A., de Roiste, M., Lundqvist, K., Ormond, A., Randal, J., & Sylvester, A. (2023). Each discipline is different: teacher capabilities for future-focussed digitally infused undergraduate programmes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(1), 117-136.
44. Tanuğur, B., Bekiroğlu, F. O., Gürel, C., & Süzük, E. (2012). Teachers’ views on the association of new physics curriculum with daily life. Yalova Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(4), 167-187.
45. Taşkın, T., & Moğol, S. (2016). Teacher candidates’ opinions related to using creative drama as a teaching method in teaching of physics. Gazi Journal of Educational Science, 2(3), 193-210.
46. Uden, L., Sulaiman, F., Ching, G. S., & Rosales Jr, J., J. (2023). Integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics project-based learning for physics learning from neuroscience perspectives. Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1136246. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1136246
47. Ültay, E., & Yeşilyurt, M. (2018). İlkokul programında yer alan fizik konularına ilişkin genel bilgiler, özellikleri, günlük hayattaki karşılıkları ve kullanım alanları [General information, properties, equivalents in daily life and usage areas of physics subjects in the primary school curriculum] (Ed. Ayvacı, H. Ş.), İlkokulda temel fen bilimleri [Basic science in primary school]. Pegem Yayıncılık.
48. Veronika, A. T., Johannes, V. D. W., & Budijanto, U. (2017). Application of direct instruction with laboratory activity to improve students’ participation and learning achievement. People, 3, 1276–1284. https://doi:10.20319/pijss.2017.32.12761284
49. Wiwin, E., Hakim, S. R., & Kustijono, R. (2020). The Use of Physics Tricks to Practice Critical Thinking Skills in Senior High School Students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1491(1), 012064.
50. Wong, B., Chiu, Y. L. T., Murray, Ó. M., Horsburgh, J., & Copsey-Blake, M. (2023). ‘Biology is easy, physics is hard’: Student perceptions of the ideal and the typical student across STEM higher education. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 32(1), 118-139.
51. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Seçkin.
52. Yıldırım, H. H., & Ceylan, E. (2020). SES Related Differential Factors in Turkey’s PISA 2015 Science Literacy Data. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 53(3), 931-951.