You are here

Home » Content

Bilimde Argümantasyona Odaklanan Etkinliklerle Kimya Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimin Doğası Hakkındaki AnlayıĢlarını GeliĢtirme

Promoting Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers’ Understanding of Nature of Science with Argumentation Focused Activities in Science

Journal Name:

  • Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2010

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Understanding the nature of science (NOS) is a critical and necessary dimension of the scientific literacy. However, studies have consistently shown that students and teachers have insufficient conceptions of NOS. In this qualitative case study, the effects of an argumentation-focused chemistry teaching course on pre-service chemistry teachers’ conceptions of NOS was examined. Participants were 23 pre-service teachers. Throughout the course, historical science vignettes and role-playing activities were used to emphasise the role of argumentation in science and NOS. Analysis of the qualitative data revealed noteworthy development and changes in participants’ conceptions of the argumentation in science, tentativeness of scientific knowledge and creativity in science.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bilimin doğasını anlama bilim okuryazarlığının önemli ve kritik bir boyutudur. Buna karşın yapılan çalışmalar öğrencilerin ve öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası hakkında yeterli anlayışlara sahip olmadığını göstermiştir. Bu nitel durum çalışmasında açık-düşündürücü öğretim yaklaşımı kullanarak geliştirdiğimiz argümantasyon-odaklı kimya öğretimi dersinin kimya öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası hakkındaki anlayışlarına etkisi incelendi. Çalışmaya 23 kimya öğretmen adayı katıldı. Derste, bilimde argümantasyonun rolünü ve bilimin doğasının çeşitli yönlerini vurgulamak için bilim tarihinden örnek olaylar ve rol oynama etkinlikleri kullanıldı. Nitel verilerin analizi, öğretmen adaylarının bilimde argümantasyonun rolü, bilimsel bilginin değişime açık olması ve bilimde yaratıcılık hakkındaki anlayışlarında önemli ilerlemeler olduğunu ortaya koydu.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-bilimde-argumantasyona-odaklanan-etkinliklerle-kimya-ogretmen-adaylarinin-bilimin-dogasi-hakkindaki-anlayiglarini-geligtirme.pdf
  • 3
859-876
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

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.
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), 1057-1095.
Akerson, V. L., Abd-El Khalick, F. & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective
explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers' conceptions of nature
of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295-317.
Brickhouse, N. W. (1990). Teachers' beliefs about the nature of science and their
relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53-62.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of
learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
de Berg, K. (2006). What happens when salt dissolves in water? An introduction to
scientific argument and counter argument drawn from the history of science.
Teaching Science, 52(1), 24-27.
GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 30, Sayı 3 (2010) 859-876 875
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science.
Open University Press, Bristol, PA.
Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific
argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
Duschl, R. A. & Wright, E. (1989). A case study of high school teachers’ decision -making models for planning and teaching science. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 26(6), 467-501.
Erduran, S. & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Argumentation in science education:
Perspectives from classroom-based research. Springer.
Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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.
Köseoğlu, F, Tümay, H. ve Budak, E. (2008). Bilimin doğası hakkında paradigma
değişimleri ve öğretimi ile ilgili yeni anlayışlar. GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi
Dergisi, 28(2), 221-237.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. (1974). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research
programmes. (eds. I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave) Criticism and the growth of
knowledge (pp. 91-196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and
classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
McComas, W. F. & Olson, J. K. (2000). International science education standards
documents. (ed. W. McComas) The nature of science in science education
rationales and strategies (pp. 41-52). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
Niaz, M. (1998). From cathode rays to alpha particles to quantum of action: A rational
reconstruction of structure of the atom and its implications for chemistry
textbooks. Science Education, 82(5), 527-552.
Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R. & Duschl, R. A. (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.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., Simon, S. & Monk, M. (2001). Enhancing the quality of
argument in school science. School Science Review, 82(301), 63-70.
GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 30, Sayı 3 (2010) 859-876 876
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Strike, K. A. & Posner, G. J. (1992). A Revisionist Theory of Conceptual Change. (eds.
R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology
and educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: State University of New
York Press.
Taşar, M. F. (2003). Teaching history and the nature of science in science teacher
education programs. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1),
30-42.
Tsai, C. C. (1998). An analysis of scientific epistemological beliefs and learning
orientations of Taiwanese eighth graders. Science Education, 82(4), 473-489.
Tümay, H. (2008). Argümantasyon odaklı kimya öğretimi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora
Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Yakmaci, B. (1998). Science (biology, chemistry and physics) teachers’ views on the
nature of science as a dimension of scientific literacy. Yayınlanmamış
Yükseklisans Tezi, Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
Yalvac, B. & Crawford, B. (2002). Eliciting prospective science teachers' conceptions
of the nature of science in Middle East Technical University (METU), in
Ankara. Paper presented at 2002 AETS Annual International Conference.
Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (1999). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin
Yayınevi.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com