Kimya Dersinde Ters Yüz Öğrenme Modeline İlişkin Öğrencilerin Görüşleri Üzerine Bir Çalışma

Öz

Bu çalışma, sınıf içi uygulamalı öğrenme yaklaşımı ile yapılan kimya öğretiminde öğrencilerin ters yüz öğrenme modeline [TYÖM] ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesini amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada nitel araştırma yöntemi kullanılarak durum çalışması deseni seçilmiştir. Araştırma, 11. sınıf öğrencilerinden oluşan bir örneklem grubuyla gerçekleştirilmiştir ve amaçlı örnekleme yöntemi ile çalışma grubunun seçimi yapılmıştır. Veri toplama aracı olarak yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu kullanılmıştır. Formda, TYÖM’nin öğretim sürecindeki etkileri, sağladığı yararlar, teknolojik faydalar, öğrencilerin kimya dersindeki başarılarına etkisi, mevcut öğrenme yöntemleriyle karşılaştırılması ve modelin kimya öğretiminde kullanımına yönelik görüşleri içeren 15 soru bulunmaktadır. Elde edilen veriler içerik analizi yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. İçerik analizinde, her tema, katılımcıların görüşleriyle desteklenerek detaylı bir şekilde açıklanmıştır. Bulgular, öğrencilerin TYÖM’ye yönelik görüşlerinin olumlu yönde değiştiğini ve modelin uygulandığı kimyasal tepkimelerde hız konusuna dair algılarının da olumlu yönde etkilendiğini göstermektedir. Çalışmanın sonuçları, TYÖM’nin kimya derslerinde uygulanmasının, öğrencilerin dersle ilgili tutumlarını ve başarılarını arttırmada etkili bir yöntem olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu bulgular, TYÖM’nin öğrenci merkezli bir yaklaşım olarak, öğrencilerin derse olan ilgilerini ve başarısını artırmada etkili olduğunu göstermektedir. Araştırma, modelin kimya öğretiminde yaygınlaştırılması gerektiğine dair öneriler sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kimya eğitimi
• ters yüz öğrenme modeli
• öğrenci görüşü

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışmada "Yükseköğretim Kurumları Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiği Yönergesi" kapsamında uyulması gerektiği belirtilen tüm kurallara uyulmuştur. Yönergenin ikinci bölümü olan "Bilimsel Araştırma ve Yayın Etiğine Aykırı Eylemler" başlığı altında belirtilen eylemlerin hiçbiri gerçekleştirilmemiştir.

A Study on Students’ Opinions Regarding the Inverted Learning Model in Chemistry Lessons

Öz

This study aims to examine students’ views on the flipped learning model [FLM] İn chemistry teaching using an experiential learning approach. The study employs a qualitative research method, and a case study design has been selected. The research was conducted with a sample group consisting of 11th grade students, and the selection of the study group was made by using purposeful sampling. A semi-structured interview form was used as the data collection tool. The form includes 15 questions regarding the effects of the FLM on the teaching process, its benefits, technological advantages, its impact on students’ success in chemistry, a comparison with existing learning methods and opinions on the use of the model in chemistry instruction. The collected data were analyzed by using content analysis method. In the content analysis, each theme was explained in detail by the participants’ views which were supported. The findings indicate that students’ views on the FLM changed positively and their perceptions of the speed in chemical reactions, when the model was applied, were also positively affected. The results of the study reveal that the application of the FLM in chemistry lessons is an effective method for increasing students’ attitudes and achievements in the subject. These findings suggest that the FLM, as a student-centered approach, is effective in enhancing students’ interest in and success in the subject. The research offers recommendations for the widespread implementation of the model in chemistry instruction.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Chemistry education
• flipped learning model
• student opinion

Kaynakça

1. Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and learning outcomes in flipped classrooms: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 27(4), 639-656. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
2. Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1986). A theory of teaching and learning chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 63(6), 523-526.
3. Akçayır, M., & Akçayır, G. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.021
4. Akdeniz, A. R. (2011). Kimya öğretimi: Kuramdan pratiğe [Chemistry teaching: From theory to practice]. Pegem.
5. Akgün, M., & Atıcı, B. (2017). The effect of flipped classroom on learners’ academic achievements and views. Kastamonu Education Journal, 25(1), 329–344.
6. Atarés-Huerta, L., & Leiva-Brondo, M. (2022, July 4-6). Flipped learning and student approach to learning in a first year chemistry subject. 14th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Palma, Spain. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2022.0369
7. Atkins, P., & Friedman, R. (2021). Chemical principles: The quest for insight (8th ed.). W.H. Freeman and Company.
8. Baird, C., & Markus, M. (2021). Environmental chemistry: A global perspective. Oxford University.

9. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2022). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 17(2), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573
10. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
11. Beriş, E. (2023). Fen bilimleri eğitiminde ters yüz öğrenme modelinin 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin akademik başarılarına, bilimsel süreç becerilerine ve üst bilişe yönelimli sınıf çevresine etkisi [The effect of flipped learning model in science education on academic achievement, scientific process skills and metacognitive orientation learning environment scale of 6th grade students] (Publication No. 826164) [Master thesis, Trakya University]. National Thesis Center.
12. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013, June 23-26). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. Proceedings of the 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22585
13. Bodner, G. M. (2014). Understanding the role of students in chemistry education. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(10), 1503-1507.
14. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2018). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Data analysis handbook for the social sciences]. Pegem.
15. Cabı, E. (2018). The impact of the flipped classroom model on students’ academic achievement. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(3), 202-221.
16. Carter, B., & Stewart, K. (2023). Flipped classroom models in STEM education: A review of the literature and application to chemistry teaching. Journal of Educational Research in Science, 41(2), 101-112.
17. Chang, R. (2016). Chemistry: The central science (13th ed.). Pearson Education.
18. Chen, F., Wang, Y., & Chen, Y. (2014). The effect of flipped classrooms on student learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 82, 50-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.007
19. Choi, J. F., & Choi, J. (2021). Development of gamification model for flipped learning. International Journal of Crisis & Safety, 6(2), 68-79.
20. Cooper, M. M., & Klymkowsky, M. W. (2013). Chemistry education: A review of research. In J. M. Schwieter & A. Benati (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 91-109). Cambridge University. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
21. Cueva, A., & Inga, E. (2022). Information and communication technologies for education considering the flipped learning model. Education Sciences, 12(3), 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030207
22. Çakır, S. (2019). The effects of the flipped learning model in education: A case study. Journal of Educational Technologies, 14(2), 150-165.
23. Demirci, N. (2017). The use of the flipped learning model in education and its effects on students. International Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 151-168.
24. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). Sage.
25. Duman, İ. (2019). Etkinlik temelli öğrenmeye dayalı ters yüz edilmiş sınıf modelinin öğrencilerin akademik başarı ve öğrenme motivasyonlarına etkisi [The effect of the activity-based flipped classroom model on students’ academic achievement and learning motivation]. (Publication No. 584820) [Doctoral dissertation, Sakarya University]. National Thesis Center.
26. Eichler, J. F., & Peeples, T. H. (2016). Using flipped classrooms in teaching chemical engineering education. Chemical Engineering Education, 50(2), 101-108.
27. Fautch, J. M. (2015). The flipped classroom for teaching organic chemistry in small classes: Is it effective? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 179-186. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RP00230J
28. Flynn, T. (2015). Investigating the impact of flipped learning on student learning outcomes. The Journal of Chemical Education, 92(12), 1956-1962. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00158
29. Freeman, S., & Quaglia, G. (2020). Active learning strategies in chemistry education: Engaging students through interactive techniques. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(3), 675-685. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00916
30. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
31. Gabel, D. (1998). Improving teaching and learning in college chemistry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 27(1), 38-42.
32. Gabel, D. (2020). Improving chemical education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RP00156H
33. Galindo-Dominguez, H. (2021). Flipped classroom in the educational system. Educational Technology & Society, 24(3), 44–60.
34. Gannod, G. C. (2008). Using flipped classrooms in higher education: A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 171-179. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00966.x
35. Gannod, G. C., Burge, J. E., & Helmick, M. T. (2008, May 10-18). Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering. 30th International Conference on Software Engineering, IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2008.4540978
36. Gerstein, J. (2011). The flipped classroom model: A full picture. User Generated Education.
37. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
38. Hamdan, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom: A pedagogical approach for higher education in the digital age. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 6(1), 1-13.
39. Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Teaching with analogies: A case study in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-821. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900416838
40. Hayırsever, F., & Orhan, A. (2018). In class practices of the flipped learning model. In M. Yazar (Ed.), New approaches in education (pp. 85-100). Eğitim.
41. Hofstein, A., & Kesner, M. (2012). The role of experimental work in science education. Research in Science Education, 42(4), 835-850. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9273-9
42. Johnson, A. B., Smith, C. D., & Lee, E. F. (2021). A study on the effectiveness of flipped learning. Journal of Educational Innovations, 10(2), 100–115.
43. Johnson, K., & Hughes, S. (2025). Flipped classroom in chemistry: Transforming traditional learning models. Journal of Chemical Education, 102(2), 2234-2245.
44. Johnstone, A. H. (2006). Chemical education: A review of research. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1595-1607. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600820191
45. Kay, R. H. (2012). The influence of flipped classrooms on student learning and engagement. Education and Information Technologies, 20(3), 567-586.
46. Kesharwani, R., & Kesharwani, R. (2022). Effectiveness of flipped learning versus traditional learning in a middle-school chemistry classroom. International Society for Technology, Education, and Science, 33-42.
47. Keskin, E., Karagölge, Z., & Ceyhun, A. (2020). Flipped learning approach in chemistry education: Effects on student achievement and motivation. Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, 8(2), 45-60.
48. Keskin, M. (2020). The flipped learning model: Theory and practice. Eğitim.
49. Kırmızıoğlu, H. A., & Adıgüzel, T. (2018). Ters-yüz sınıf modelinin lise seviyesinde uygulanması: Kimya dersi örneği [Implementing the flipped classroom model at the high school level: The chemistry course example]. In D. Akgündüz (Ed.), Fen ve matematik eğitiminde teknolojik yaklaşımlar [Technological approaches in science and mathematics education] (pp. 91–116). Anı.
50. Kim, D., Lee, S., & Kim, S. (2021). Flipped classroom and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Educational Technology & Society, 24(1), 147-160.
51. Koçak, İ., & Şimşek, A. (2023). Flipped learning in chemistry education: A review of practices and benefits. International Journal of Chemistry Education, 8(2), 35-42.
52. Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. D. (2005). Learning with multimedia: The role of interaction. In Learning and instruction in technology-enhanced environments (pp. 45–60). Elsevier.
53. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage.
54. Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220480009596759
55. Lee, J., & Park, Y. (2024). Gamification in chemistry education: Enhancing student motivation through interactive learning. International Journal of Chemistry Education, 48(2), 128-139.
56. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
57. Martinez, R., & Singh, P. (2025). Real-time chemical simulations for educational platforms: Enhancing interactive learning. Journal of Educational Technology in Chemistry, 10(2), 87-98.
58. Mason, G. S., Shuman, T. R., & Cook, K. E. (2013). Inverted classroom: A review of the literature. Computers in Education, 58(4), 585–594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.010
59. McFadden, C., & O’Connor, K. (2016). Flipped classroom pedagogies: A review of the literature. College Teaching, 64(4), 161-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2016.1184073
60. McMurry, J., & Fay, R. (2022). Chemistry: A molecular approach (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
61. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
62. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2019). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
63. Michaelsen, L. K., Davidson, N., & Major, C. H. (2014). Team-based learning practices and principles in comparison with cooperative learning and problem-based learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3&4).
64. Miller, K. A., & Schuster, T. (2022). Fostering complex thinking in chemistry: Moving beyond memorization to understanding. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(5), 1505-1516. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c01188
65. Mortimer, E. F. (1989). Concepts in chemical education. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(1), 49-52. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed066p49
66. Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Concept learning and teaching in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(7), 511-515. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed069p511
67. O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The effectiveness of flipped classrooms in higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1337-1353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.012
68. Özdemir, E., & Yılmaz, K. (2017). The place and importance of the flipped learning model in chemistry teaching. Education and Science Journal, 42(188), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2017.6729
69. Özdemir, M., & Demirtaş, H. (2020). Integration of the flipped classroom model into STEM education: Student perspectives. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning, 3(1), 12–22.
70. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Sage.
71. Puentedura, R. R. (2014). SAMR: A model for integrating technology into teaching. Tech & Learning. Ryan, M. D., & Reid, S. A. (2016). Impact of the flipped classroom on student performance and retention: A parallel controlled study in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(1), 13-23. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00717
72. Seery, M. K. (2015). Flipped learning in chemistry education: A review. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(3), 586-591. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00136F
73. Smith, T., & Williams, J. (2022). Integrating flipped learning in chemistry courses: A systematic review. International Journal of Chemistry Education, 49(4), 187-199.
74. Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work. Guilford.
75. Staker, H., & Horn, M. B. (2012). Classifying K–12 blended learning. Innosight Institute.
76. Stes, A., Van Petegem, P., & Mienert, I. (2012). Flipping the classroom in higher education: A review of the research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 582-592.
77. Taber, K. S. (2013). Chemical education: Research and practice in teaching. University of Sydney.
78. Tekin, H. (2021). Flipped classroom model in chemical education: A case study. International Journal of Chemistry Education, 7(1), 30-41.
79. Ünlütürk, A. Ö. (2022). Ters yüz öğrenme ile yapılandırılmış okul dışı fen eğitiminin çeşitli değişkenler bakımından incelenmesi [Examination of out of school science education structured with flipped learning in terms of various variables]. (Publication No. 711010) [Master thesis, Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University]. National Thesis Center.
80. Weaver, G. C., & Sturtevant, H. G. (2015). Design, implementation, and evaluation of a flipped format general chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(9), 1437-1448. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed500718h
81. Wu, P.-L., & Hsieh, C.-T. (2018). Exploring flipped learning outcomes in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology Research, 35(2), 123–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jetr.2018.02.004
82. Yang, X., & Li, Y. (2020). Title of the article in sentence case. Title of the Journal in Italics, 12(3), 123-135.
83. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Seçkin.
84. Yılmaz, A., & Güler, E. (2016). Effects of the flipped learning model: An innovative approach in education. Journal of Educational Research, 22(3), 115-130.
85. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.
86. Yin, R. K. (2023). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (7th ed.). Sage.
87. Zhang, X. (2020). Chemistry and environmental challenges. Environmental Chemistry Letters, 18(4), 1297-1305.