___

• Ausubel, DP. (l968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Blake, A. J. & Norland, F. H. (l978). Science instruction and cognitive growth in college students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, l5(5), l 3 » 419. Boulaoude, S. B. & Giuliano, F. i . (1994). Relationship between achievement and selective variables in a chemistry course for nonrnajors. School
• Science cmd Mathematics, 94(6) 296-302. Chandran, S, Treagust, D. & Tobin, K. (l985). The role of cognitive factors in Chemistry achievement. (Report). Perth, Australia; Western Australian institute of Technology. (ED: 27350l)
• Chiu, MH. (2001). Algorithmic Problem Solving and Conceptual
• Eylül University, lzmir, Turkey. Haider, A & Abraham, MR. {l99l}. A comparison of appiied and theeretical knowledge of concepts based err the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28 (10), gig—938. Harty, H., Beall, D. & Scharmanrr, L. (1985). Relationship between elementary school students" science achievement and their attitudes toward science, interest in science, reactive curiosity and scholastic aptitude.
• Schcai Science and Mathematics, 85(6), 472479.
• Hill, G. B. & Atwater, M. M. (1995). Attitudes toward science of urban seventh grade life science students over time, and the relationship to future plans, family, teacher, curriculum, and school. Urban Education, 30(1), 7lu94. lîngle, R., B. & Shayer, M. (1971). Conceptual demands in nuffieid—O level chemistry. Ediicarien in Chemistry, 8, 182-183.
• Koballa, Jr. '1'. R., Crawley, F. E. & Shrigley, R. L. (1990). A. summary of research in science education—1988. Science Edi/zemine, 74(3), 369—
• Lawson, A.B. (1985). A review of research on formal reasoning and science teaching. Journal of Research iii Science Teaching, 22, 569—617.
• Lee, V. E. & Berkem, D. 1 . (1996). Gender differences in middle grade science achievement: Subject domain, ability and course emphasis. Science Education, 80, 613—650.
• Lewicki, D (1993). inquiry and concept formation in the general chemistry laboratory: The effects of a constructivist method of instruction on college.(D0cr0mi dissertation, State University of New York at Albany, 1993),
• Mason, D. S., Shell, D. F & Crawley, F. E. (1997). Differences in problem solving by nonscience majors in introductory chemistry on paired algeritlrmic—conceptual problems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 905—923.
• ~34: Alum ‘ İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Biiiiıiler Enstitüsü Dergisi 205554 (lt))
• Nakhleli, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry. Journal o) I
• Chemical Education, 69, 191—196. Naldileh, M. B & Mitchell, R. C. (1993). Concept learning versus problem solving: There is a difference. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), —192.
• Niaz, M. (1995). Progressive Transitions from Algorithmic to Conceptual
• Understanding in Student Ability to Solve Chemistry Problems: A Lakatosian interpretation. Science Education, 79(3), 19—36. Niaz, M & Robinson, WR. (1992). From “algoritlirnic model to ‘conceptual gestalt’ in understanding the behavior of gases: an epistemological perspective. Research in Science and Technological Education, 10, —64.
• Niaz, M & Robinson, WR. (1993). Ting algorithmic problem solving or conceptual understanding: role of development level, mental capacity and cognitive style. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2, —416.
• Nurrenljern, S. & Pickering, M. l. (1987). Concept learning versus problem solving: 1s there a difference. Journal of Chemical Education, 64, —510.
• Pickering, M. l. (1999). Further studies on concept learning versus problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 67(3), 254—255.
• Sanchez, K & Betkouski, M. (1986). A study of factors (şeeting student performance in community college general chemistry courses. ERIC clearinghouse for science, mathematics and environmental education,
• Columbus, OH, ERIC Document Reproduction Service Noz275549.
• Sawrey, B. (1990). Concept learning vs. problem solving: Revisited. Journal of Chemical Education, 67(3), 253%54.
• Schibeci, R & Riley, 1. (1986). Influence of students’ background and perceptions on science attitudes and achievements. Journal of
• Research in Science Teaching, 23, 177—187. ScrinivaSan, G. (1993). Some Factors Affecting Performance in General
• Chemistry. M.Sc. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic institute and State University, Virginia. Shayer, M. & Adey, P. (1981). Towards a Science of Teaching. London; Heinneman.
• Simpson, R. D. & Oliver, l. S. (1990). A summary of major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students.
• Science Education, 74, L18. 35 ?. Bilgin -E. Uzmn‘iryaki The new Qf'iogzcal Thinking Skills and Altitude Tau/art; Soyibo, K & Huclson, A. (2000). Effects of computer-assisted instruction
• (CAI) on E. 1th graders’ attitudes to biology and CA} and understanding of reproduction in plants and animals, Research in Science & Technological Education. 18, l89-197. Swift, J. N., Gooding, C. T. & Swift, P. R. (1989). Using research to improve the quality of classroom discussions. NARST Research Matters,
• Occasional Publications to the Science Teacher, No. 20. Thompson, .l & Soyibo, K. ( 2002). Effects of lecture, teacher demonstrations, discussion and practital work. on ret“ gradersa attitudes to chemistry and understanding of electrolysis. Research in Science &
• Technological Education, 20, 25—37. Tobin, K & Capie, W. ( 1981). The development and validation of a pencil and paper test of logical thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 4-1 (2), 4‘13—424.
• Yager, R. E. (1991). The constructivist learning model: Towards real reform in science education. The Science Teacher, September, 53-57.
• ’Zoller, U. (1993). Are lecture and learning compatible? Maybe for LOCS:
• Unlikely for HOGS. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), l95—l97. Zoller, U., Lubezky, A.., Nakhleh, M. B., Tessier, B. & Dori, Y. J. 0995). Success on algorithmic and LOCS vs. conceptual chemistry exam questions.
• Journal of Chemical Education, 72(l l), 987—989. Zeller. U. (l999). Scaling—up of higher order cognitive skills-oriented college chemistry teaching: An action-oriented research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(5), 583—596. Zoller, U, Dori, Y. l. & Lubezky, A. (2002). Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS
• (chemistry) exam questions: performance and attitudes of college students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 185—203. Abm-it İzzeıf Haymi Üniversitesi Sosyo? Bilimler Erisâitiisii Dergisi 265852] (10)