BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

-

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 0 - , 30.03.2015
https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.77894

Öz

The aim of this study is examination of studies about nature of science in last 10 years in terms of different variables and guiding the future research about NOS. This study included 127 articles, which published in SSCI/SCI indexed journals. These studies were detected according to their titles, which included one of the phrases of “nature of science, “NOS”, and “nature of scientific knowledge”. In this study, qualitative approach and data analysis method were applied. Collected data were analyzed by using the content analysis method. While applying the content analyses five different variables were concerned. These were; Article’s (a) published year, (b) approach, (c) design, (d) sample and (e) data collection tools. Several findings were obtained according to these variables. Firstly, many of studies were done in 2013 in the last decade. In addition, the number of studies was increased in every year. It was determined that, the majority of studies were conducted with qualitative approaches. Moreover, studies of used mixed approach have been a significant increase in the number of studies in recent years. Furthermore, most of researchers used case study and interviews were mostly conducted for data collection. The results showed that, mostly students were selected for sample. Lastly, number of studies in Turkey increased according to last years. This condition can be explained as reflection of changing science teaching curriculum and also changing science teacher education curriculum in last 10 years. Other results were discussed under the related science education literature

Kaynakça

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the sources for our understandings about science:
  • Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education,34(3), 353-374. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International journal of science education, 22(7), 665-701.
  • 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.
  • Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Bryman, A., 1988. Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge.
  • Calik, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). Parameters of content analysis. Egitim Ve Bilim-Education And Science, 39(174), 33-38.
  • Celik, S., & Bayrakçeken, S. (2006). The effect of a ‘Science, Technology and Society ‘course on prospective teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Research in Science &
  • Technological Education, 24(2), 255-273. Collette, A. T., & Chiappetta, E. L. (1984). Science Instruction in the Middle and Secondary
  • Schools. The CV Mosby Company, 11830 Westline Industrial Drive, St. Louis, MO 63
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
  • Deng, F., Chen, D. T., Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students' views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961-999.
  • Dogan, N., & Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students' and science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: A national study. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083-1112.
  • Doğan, N., Çakıroğlu, J., Çavuş, S., Bilican, K., & Arslan, O. (2011). Öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşlerinin geliştirilmesi: Hizmetiçi eğitim programının etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(40).
  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. McGraw- Hill International.
  • Gil-Pérez, D., Guisasola, J., Moreno, A., Cachapuz, A., De Carvalho, A. M. P., Torregrosa, J. M., & Gallego, R. (2002). Defending constructivism in science education. Science & Education, 11(6), 557-571.
  • Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks.Science Education, 93(3), 422-447.
  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students' views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89(2), 314- 3
  • 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.
  • Lederman, N. G. (2004). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction.
  • In Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 301-317). Springer Netherlands. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of sciene: Past, present, and future. In Abell, S. K., &
  • Lederman, N. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831-879). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 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- 7
  • Lee, E., Pettis, A., & Hanuscin, D. L. Professional Journals as a Source of Information about Teaching NOS: An Examination of Articles Published in Science Scope, 1996-2010.
  • Martin-Dunlop, C., & Hodum, P. (2009). Scientist-Science Educator Collaborations: Do They
  • Improve Students' Understanding of the Nature of Science? Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(2), 66-75. McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 41 – 52). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • McComas, W. F., Almazroa, H., & Clough, M. P. (1998). The nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science & Education, 7(6), 511-532.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, (2013). İlköğretim Kurumları Fen
  • Bilimleri Dersi (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı, Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington,
  • DC: The National Academy Press. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states.
  • Washington, DC: The National Academy Press. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science education, 87(2), 224-240.
  • Osborne, J. F. (1996). Beyond constructivism. Science education, 80(1), 53-82.
  • Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What
  • “ideas‐about‐science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of research in science teaching, 40(7), 692-720. Özcan, M. (2013). Okulda üniversite: Türkiye’de öğretmen eğitimini yeniden yapılandırmak için bir model önerisi.
  • Piaget, J. (1966). Psychology of intelligence. Totowa, N.J: Littlefield, Adams & Co.
  • Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers' beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science education, 77(3), 261-278.
  • Quigley, C., Pongsanon, K., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). If we teach them, they can learn: Young student’s views of nature of science during an informal science education program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(2), 129-149.
  • Staver, J. R. (1998). Constructivism: Sound theory for explicating the practice of science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 501 - 520.
  • Suri, H., & Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research synthesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395- 4
  • Şimşek, H., & Yıldırım, A. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri.Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Urhahne, D., Kremer, K., & Mayer, J. (2011). Conceptions of the nature of science—are they general or context specific?. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 707-730.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1962) Thought and Language. Cambridge Massachusetts, The M.I.T.
  • Weld, J. (2004). The game of science education. Pearson Education.

Bilimin Doğası Alanında Son 10 Yılda Yapılan Çalışmaların Farklı Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 0 - , 30.03.2015
https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.77894

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı bilimin doğası alanında son 10 yılda yapılan çalışmaları farklı değişkenler açısından incelemek ve gelecekte yapılacak olan çalışmalara yol göstermektir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda son 10 yılda SSCI/SCI dergilerde yayınlanmış ve başlığında bilimin doğası terimi geçen 127 makale incelenmiştir. Çalışma nitel yaklaşım ile gerçekleştirilmiştir ve araştırma yöntemi olarak doküman analizi kullanılmıştır. Veriler içerik analizi yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. İçerik analizi gerçekleştirilirken beş farklı değişken belirlenmiştir. Bunlar:  (a) Yayın yılı, (b) Yaklaşım, (c) Desen, (d) Örneklem ve (e) Veri toplama araçlarıdır. Belirlenen değişkenlere uygun olarak çeşitli bulgular elde edilmiştir. Buna göre bilimin doğası alanında son 10 yılda en çok çalışma yapılan yılın 2013 yılı olduğu görülmektedir. Ayrıca çalışmaların sayısının her geçen yıl arttığı tespit edilmiştir. Yapılan çalışmaların büyük çoğunluğunun nitel yaklaşım ile yapıldığı belirlenmiştir. Buna ek olarak son yıllarda karma yaklaşım ile yapılan çalışma sayısında ciddi artış olmuştur. Nitel yaklaşımın çok kullanılmasına paralel olarak çalışmaların büyük çoğunluğu durum çalışması deseniyle gerçekleştirilmiştir.  Çalışmalarda katılımcı grup olarak en çok öğrenciler ile çalışılmıştır. İncelenen çalışmalar arasında veri toplama aracı olarak en çok görüşme yöntemi tercih edilmiştir. Ayrıca son on yılda bilimin doğası hakkında yayınlanan çalışmalar arasında ülkemiz kaynaklı çalışmaların oranı ciddi biçimde artmıştır. Bu durumun hem fen bilgisi öğretimi müfredat programının hem de öğretmen eğitimi programlarının değişimi ile ilgili olduğu düşünülmektedir.

Kaynakça

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Examining the sources for our understandings about science:
  • Enduring conflations and critical issues in research on nature of science in science education. International Journal of Science Education,34(3), 353-374. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International journal of science education, 22(7), 665-701.
  • 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.
  • Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Bryman, A., 1988. Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge.
  • Calik, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). Parameters of content analysis. Egitim Ve Bilim-Education And Science, 39(174), 33-38.
  • Celik, S., & Bayrakçeken, S. (2006). The effect of a ‘Science, Technology and Society ‘course on prospective teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. Research in Science &
  • Technological Education, 24(2), 255-273. Collette, A. T., & Chiappetta, E. L. (1984). Science Instruction in the Middle and Secondary
  • Schools. The CV Mosby Company, 11830 Westline Industrial Drive, St. Louis, MO 63
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
  • Deng, F., Chen, D. T., Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2011). Students' views of the nature of science: A critical review of research. Science Education, 95(6), 961-999.
  • Dogan, N., & Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students' and science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: A national study. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083-1112.
  • Doğan, N., Çakıroğlu, J., Çavuş, S., Bilican, K., & Arslan, O. (2011). Öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşlerinin geliştirilmesi: Hizmetiçi eğitim programının etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(40).
  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. McGraw- Hill International.
  • Gil-Pérez, D., Guisasola, J., Moreno, A., Cachapuz, A., De Carvalho, A. M. P., Torregrosa, J. M., & Gallego, R. (2002). Defending constructivism in science education. Science & Education, 11(6), 557-571.
  • Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks.Science Education, 93(3), 422-447.
  • Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students' views on the nature of science: Results from Korean 6th, 8th, and 10th graders. Science Education, 89(2), 314- 3
  • 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.
  • Lederman, N. G. (2004). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction.
  • In Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 301-317). Springer Netherlands. Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of sciene: Past, present, and future. In Abell, S. K., &
  • Lederman, N. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831-879). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 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- 7
  • Lee, E., Pettis, A., & Hanuscin, D. L. Professional Journals as a Source of Information about Teaching NOS: An Examination of Articles Published in Science Scope, 1996-2010.
  • Martin-Dunlop, C., & Hodum, P. (2009). Scientist-Science Educator Collaborations: Do They
  • Improve Students' Understanding of the Nature of Science? Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(2), 66-75. McComas, W. F., & Olson, J. K. (1998). The nature of science in international science education standards documents. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 41 – 52). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • McComas, W. F., Almazroa, H., & Clough, M. P. (1998). The nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science & Education, 7(6), 511-532.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, (2013). İlköğretim Kurumları Fen
  • Bilimleri Dersi (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı, Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington,
  • DC: The National Academy Press. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states.
  • Washington, DC: The National Academy Press. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science education, 87(2), 224-240.
  • Osborne, J. F. (1996). Beyond constructivism. Science education, 80(1), 53-82.
  • Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What
  • “ideas‐about‐science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of research in science teaching, 40(7), 692-720. Özcan, M. (2013). Okulda üniversite: Türkiye’de öğretmen eğitimini yeniden yapılandırmak için bir model önerisi.
  • Piaget, J. (1966). Psychology of intelligence. Totowa, N.J: Littlefield, Adams & Co.
  • Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers' beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science education, 77(3), 261-278.
  • Quigley, C., Pongsanon, K., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). If we teach them, they can learn: Young student’s views of nature of science during an informal science education program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(2), 129-149.
  • Staver, J. R. (1998). Constructivism: Sound theory for explicating the practice of science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 501 - 520.
  • Suri, H., & Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research synthesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395- 4
  • Şimşek, H., & Yıldırım, A. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri.Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  • Urhahne, D., Kremer, K., & Mayer, J. (2011). Conceptions of the nature of science—are they general or context specific?. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 707-730.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1962) Thought and Language. Cambridge Massachusetts, The M.I.T.
  • Weld, J. (2004). The game of science education. Pearson Education.
Toplam 41 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Kayahan İnce

Sinan Özgelen

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Mart 2015
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2015 Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA İnce, K., & Özgelen, S. (2015). Bilimin Doğası Alanında Son 10 Yılda Yapılan Çalışmaların Farklı Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.17860/efd.77894

The content of the Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.