Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

YAPILANDIRMACI YAKLAŞIMA DAYALI KİMYA LABORATUAR UYGULAMALARININ ÖĞRENCİLERİN BAŞARISINA, BİLİMSEL SÜREÇ BECERİLERİNE VE LABORATUAR PERFORMANSLARINA ETKİSİ

THE IMPACT OF CONTRUCTIVISM BASED GENERAL CHEMISTRY LABORATORY PRACTICES ON STUDENTS' THE ACHIEVEMENT, SCIENTIFIC PROCESS SKILLS AND LABORATORY PERFORMANCE

Journal Name:

  • Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of this study, designed according to traditional and constructivist approaches to teaching applications of scientific achievements, skills development and the scientific process of laboratory performance is to determine the effect. In this study, "Pre-Trial Model finaltest Control Group" is used. Research, Marmara University, Faculty of Education, Science Education Department of freshmen who are studying at the General Chemistry Lab within the course during the study period was conducted. In the experimental group, which will be implemented over a period of general chemistry laboratory courses in total, 10 tests were administered according to the constructivist teaching methods. Control group the same 10 esttraditional (authentication) performed according to the method. Research findings in light of the results obtained from the experimental and control groups did not create a meaningful difference in academic achievement pretest and post test in the experimental group was a significant difference.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu araştırmanın amacı, geleneksel ve yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma göre tasarlanmış genel kimya laboratuar öğretim uygulamalarının öğrencilerin akademik başarısı, bilimsel süreç becerileri ve laboratuar performanslarına olan etkisini belirleyebilmektir. Bu araştırmada, “Öntest-Sontest Kontrol Gruplu Deneme Modeli” kullanılmıştır. Araştırma, Marmara Üniversitesi, Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi, Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenliği Ana Bilim Dalı’nda öğrenim gören 120 birinci sınıf öğrencisi ile Genel Kimya Laboratuarı-II dersi bünyesinde bir öğrenim dönemi boyunca yürütülmüştür. Deney grubunda bir dönem boyunca uygulanacak olan Genel Kimya Laboratuarı-II dersinde yer alan toplam 10 deney yapılandırmacı öğretim metoduna göre uygulanmıştır. Kontrol grubu da aynı 10 deneyi geleneksel (doğrulama) metoda göre gerçekleştirmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda elde edilen bulgular ışığında; akademik başarı, bilimsel süreç becerileri testi ve laboratuar performanslarına göre deney grubu lehine anlamlı bir fark oluşmuştur.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-yapilandirmaci-yaklasima-dayali-kimya-laboratuar-uygulamalarinin-ogrencilerin-basarisina-bilimsel-surec-becerilerine-laboratuar-performanslarina-etkisi.pdf
  • 6
1
18
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Avila, L. (2006). Design, implementation, and evaluation of two laboratory course constructivist learning environments, Unpublished Dissertation, Colombia University.
Budak, E. (2001). Üniversite analitik kimya laboratuarlarında öğrencilerin kavramsal değişim, başarı, tutum ve algılamaları üzerine yapılandırıcı öğretim yönteminin etkileri. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi: Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Clough, M.P. & Clark R. (1994). Cookbooks and Constructivism. The Science Teacher. 61(2), 34-37.
Cohen L. & Manian, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge
Colburn, A. (2000). Constructivism: Science Education’s Grand Unifying Theory. The Clearance House, 74(1), 9-12.
Cumming, J. (1997).Why are Misconceptions in Science so Hard to Change? University of Sunderland, School of Education, Yayımlanmamış Ders Notları.
Driver, R. (1995). Constructivist Approaches to Science Teaching. In Steffe & Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in Education. 385-400, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ekici, G. (2001). Biyoloji öğretmenlerinin laboratuar derslerinde öğrencilerden bekledikleri davranışlar. Eğitim ve Bilim Dergisi, 26(120), 64-70,
Erdoğan, İ. (2003). Pozitivist Metodoloji, Bilimsel Araştırma Tasarımı, İstatistiksel Yöntemler, Analiz ve Yorum, Ankara: Erk Yayınevi.
Freedman, M.P. (1997). Relationship among laboratory ınstruction, attitude toward science and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 34(4), 343-357.
Fowler, L.S. (1980). An application of Piaget’ s theory of cognitive development in teaching chemistry: thelearning chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 57(2), 135-136.
Hand, B., & Treagust, D.F. (1991). Student achievement and science curriculum development using a constructive framework, School Science and Mathematics, 91 (4), 172-176.
Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J.,& Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 655-675.
Yapılandırmacı Yaklaşıma Dayalı Kimya Laboratuar Uygulamalarının Öğrencilerin Başarısına, Bilimsel Süreç
Becerilerine ve Laboratuar Performanslarına Etkisi
16 Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi (BAED), Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir-Türkiye ISSN 1308 - 8971 (online)
Hewson, P.W. (1992). Conceptual Change in Science Teaching and Teacher Education. Paper presented at a meeting on “Research and Curriculum Development in Science Teaching,” Under the auspices of theNational Center for Educational Research, Documentation and Assessment, Ministry for Education and Science, Madrid, Spain, June 1992.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 28-54.
Hoffstein, A. (1988). Practical work and Science Education, Development and Dilemmas in Science Education. New York: Palmer Press.
Jofili, Z., Geraldo, A.,& Watts, M. (1999). A Course for Critical Constructivism through Action Research: A case study from Biology. Research in Science& Technological Education, 17(1), 5-18.
Kelly, G.J. (1997). Research Traditions in Comparative Context: A Philosohical Callenge to Radical Constructivism. Science Education. 81, 355-375.
Matthews, M. R. (2002). Constructivism and science education: A further appraisal. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(2), 121-134.
McRobbie, C.J. & Fraser, B.J. (1993). Association between student outcomes and psychosocial science environments. Journal of Educational Research, 87, 78-85.
Niaz, M. (1995). A Lakatosian Conceptual Change Teaching Strategy Based on Student Ability to Built Models with Varying Degrees of Conceptual Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium. Paper presented at the 68 Annual Conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) San Francisco, April, 1995 (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 390 637).
Novak, J.D. (1988) “Learning Science and the Science of Learning”. Studies in Science Education, 15, 77-101
Okey, J.R.,Wise, K.C., & Bums, J.C.(1982). Integrated Process Skill Test-2.(Available From Dr. Lames R. Okey, Department of Science Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30362).
Osborne, J., F. (1996). Beyond Constructivism. Science Education. 81(1), 53-82.
Yapılandırmacı Yaklaşıma Dayalı Kimya Laboratuar Uygulamalarının Öğrencilerin Başarısına, Bilimsel Süreç
Becerilerine ve Laboratuar Performanslarına Etkisi
Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi (BAED), Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir-Türkiye ISSN 1308 - 8971 (online) 17
Pavelich, M.J.,& Abraham, M.R. (1979). An Inquiry format laboratory for general chemistry, Journal of Chemical Education, 53(2), 100-103
Pedras, M.J., Braukmann, J., (1991). Technology Education for Elementary School Teachers
Raghubir, K. P. (1979). The laboratory-investigative approach to science instruction. Journal of Research
Richardson, V., & Renner, J.W. (1970). A study of the inquiry-discovery method of laboratory instruction. Journal of Chemical Education, 47(1), 77-79.
Roth, W-M. & Roychoudhury, A. (1994). Physics Students’ Epistemologies and Views about Knowing and Learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 341(1), 5-30,
Sarıbaş, D. & Köseoğlu, F. (2006). The Effect of the Constructivist Method on Pre-service Chemistry Teachers’ Achievement end Conceptual Understanding About Aqueous Solutions. Journal of Science Education. 7(1), 58-61.
Schneider, R.M. Krajcik, J., Marx, R.W. & Soloway, E. (2002). Performance of Students in Project-Based Science Classrooms on a National Measure of Science Achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 39(5), 410-422.
Scott, P., Asoko, H., Driver, R., Emberton, J. (1994) Working from Children’s Ideas: Planning and Teaching a Chemistry Topic from a Constructivist Perspective içinde Fensham, P., Gunstone, P., White, R. The Content of Science. The Falmer Press.
Shiland, T.W. (1999). Constructivism: The Implications for Laboratory Work. Journal of Chemical Education. 76(1), 107-108.
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, Science Teaching, 16(1), 13-18.
Singer, S., Hilton, M. & Schweingruber, H. (2005). Needing A New Approach to Science Labs. The Science Teacher. 72(7), 10,
Taber, K.S. (2000). Chemistry Lessons for Universities?: A Review of Constructivist Ideas. University Chemistry Education. 4(2), 63-72.
Treagust, D.F. (1995) Student achievement and science curriculum development using a constructive framework. School Science and Mathematics. 91(4), 172-176.
Yapılandırmacı Yaklaşıma Dayalı Kimya Laboratuar Uygulamalarının Öğrencilerin Başarısına, Bilimsel Süreç
Becerilerine ve Laboratuar Performanslarına Etkisi
18 Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi (BAED), Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir-Türkiye ISSN 1308 - 8971 (online)
Tümay, H.(2001). Üniversite genel kimya laboratuarlarında öğrencilerin kavramsal değişimi, başarısı, tutumu ve algılamaları üzerine yapılandırıcı öğretim yönteminin etkileri. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
Ünal, G., ve Ergin, Ö. (2006). Buluş yoluyla fen öğretiminin öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına, öğrenme yaklaşımlarına ve tutumlarına etkisi. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 3(1), 36-52.
Wulfsberg, G. (1983). A piagetian learning-cycle labaratory approach to teaching descriptive inorganic chemistry, Journal of Chemical Education, 58(6), 52-57
Veath, M. L. (1988). Comparing the effects of different laboratory approaches in bringing about a conceptual change in the understanding of physics by university students. Unpublished Ph.D., University of Wyoming.
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). A Constructivist approach to teaching. ın steffe & gale (Eds.), Constructivism in Education. 3-15. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Watson, R., Prieto, T. & Dillon J.S. (1995). The effect of practical work on students’ understanding of combustion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 32, 487-502.
Zarotiadou, E, & Tsaparlis, G. (2000). Teaching lower-secondary chemistry with a piagetian constructivist and an ausbellian maeningful-receptive method: a longitudinal comparison. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe. 1(1), 37 -50,

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