Bahar, M. &, Hansell, M. H. (2000). The Relationship between some psychological
factors and their effect on the performance of grid questions and word association
tests. Educational Psychology, c. 20 n. 3, s. 346 – 364.
GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 28, Sayı1 (2008) 39-59 56
Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., Braun, H. I., Frye, D., and Sophrer, E. (1990). The
relationship of expert-system scored constrained free-response items to multiple-choice and open ended items. Applied Psychological Measurement, c. 14, s.
151-162.
Bolger, N. and Kellaghan, T. (1990). Method of Measurement and gender differences
in Scholastic Achievement. Journal of Educational Measurement, c. 27, s. 165-174.
Bransky, J., & Qualter, A. (1993). Applying Physics Concepts-Uncovering the Gender
Differences in Assessment of Performance Unit Result. Research in Science and
Technological Education, c. 11, n. 2, s. 141-156.
Breland, H., Danos, D., Kahn, H., Kubota, M., & Sudlow, M. (1991). A study of
gender and performance on advenced placement history examinations (College
Board Rep. No. 91-4; ETS RR No. 91-61). New York: College Entrance
Examination Board.
Browne, N. and Ross, C. (1991). Girls’ stuff, Boys’ stuff: Young children talking and
playing. In N. Browne (Ed.), Science and technology in the early years.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Burkam, D. T., & Burkam, A. S. (1995). Is Item Format Important? In D. R. Baker, &
K. Scantlebury (Eds.), Science “coeducation”: Viewpoints from gender, Race
and Ethnic Perpectives. NARTS monograph No. 7, 140-151.
Burton, N. W. (1996). How have changes inthe SAT’s affected women’s math scores.
Educational Researcher, c.15, n. 4, s. 5-9.
Cataloğlu, E. (1996). Promoting teachers’ awareness of students’ misconceptions in
introductory mechanics. Unpublished Master Thesis, METU, Ankara, Turkey.
DeMars, C. E. (1998). Gender differences in mathematics and science on a high school
proficiency exam: the role of responce format,” Applied Measurement in
Education, c. 11, n. 3, s. 279-299.
GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 28, Sayı1 (2008) 39-59 57
Dimitrov, M. D. (1999). Gender differences in science achievement: Differential effect
of ability, response format, and strands oflearning outcomes. Gender Differences
in Science Achievement, c. 99, n. 8, s. 445-450.
Egan, K. (1972). Structrul communication – a new contribution to pedagogy.
Programmed Learning and Educational Technology, c. 1, s. 63 – 78.
Harding, J. (1979). Sex differences in examination performance at 16. Physics
Education, c. 14, s. 280-84.
Hestenes, D, Wells, M., & Swachhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. Physics
Teacher, 30, 141-153.
Johnson, S. (1987). Gender differences in science: parallels in interest, experience and
performance. International Journal of Science Education, c. 9, n. 4, s. 467-481.
Johnstone, A. H. (1981). Diagnostic Testing in Science. In Evaluation Roles in
Education, Eds. Lewy, A. And Nevo, D. London: Gordon and Breach.
Johnstone, A. H., Morrison, T. L., and Reid, N. (1981). Chemistry About us. London:
Heinemann Educational Books.
Jovanic, J., Solano-Flores, G. and Shavelson, R. J. (1994). Performans-based
assessments: Will gender differences in science achievement be eliminated?
Education and Urban Society, c. 26, s. 352-366.
Kahle, J.B & Meece, J. (1994). Research on gender issue in the classroom. In D. L.
Gabel (eds). Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (p. 542-558). New York, NY, USA: Macmillan.
Karaçam, Sedat (2005). Farklıbilişsel stillerdeki lise öğrencilerinin hareket ve hareket
yasalarıkonularındaki kavramlarıanlama düzeyleri ile ölçme teknikleri
arasındaki ilişki. (AİBÜ, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Mayıs, 2005).
Kelly, A. (1988). Sex Stereotypes and School Science, A Three-Year Follow-up,”
Educational Studies, c. 14, s. 151-163.
Mazzoe, J., Schmitt, A., & Bleistein, C. (1992). Sex-related differences on constructed-responces and multiple-choice sections of advenced pacement examinations:
Three exploratory studies. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt 28, Sayı1 (2008) 39-59 58
Meece, J. L. & Holt, K. (1993). A Pattern Analysis of Students’ Achievement Goals.
Journal of Educational Psychology, c. 85, n. 4, s. 582-590.
Morrell, P. D., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). Students’ Attitudes Towards Shool and
Classroom Science: Are They Independent Phenomena? School Science and
Mathematics, c. 98, s. 76-82.
O’Neil, H. F. Jr., & Brown, R. S. 1998. Differential effects of question formats in math
assessment on metacognition and affect. Applied in Education, c. 11, n. 4, s. 331-351.
Otto, P. B. (1991). One Science, One Sex? School Science And Mathematics, c. 91, n.
8, s. 367-372.
Scottish Exam Board (1997). Hidher Grade Biology Examination Papers. Glasgow:
Gibson.
Sencar, S., & Eryılmaz, A. (2004). Factors Mediating the Effect of Gender on Ninth-Grade Turkish Students’ Misconceptions Concerning Electric Circuit. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching,c. 41, n. 6, s. 603-616.
Stobart, G., Elwood, J., and Quilan, M. (1992). Gender Bias in Examinations: How
Equal are the Opportunities? British Educational Research Journal, c. 18, n. 3, s.
261-276.
Yıp, D. Y., Chıu, M. M. and Chu Ho, E. S. (2004). Hong Kong student achievement in
OECD-PISA study:Gender differences in science content, literacy, skills, and
ıtem formats. Ijma:humnfam, c. 1, n. 2, s. 1-15.
Whitehouse, H. and Sullivan, M. (1992). Girls and year 12 science examinations.
Adelaide: Science Secondary Assessment Board of South Australia, Adelaide,
Australia.
Zhang, L. & Manon, J. (2000). Gender and achievement—Understanding gender
differences and similarities in mathematics assessment. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (New
Orleans, LA, April 24-28, 2000.
Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com
