The Effect of Learning Cycle Approach on Students' Achievement in Science

Bu çalışmanın amacı 5E öğrenme evreleri yaklaşımımının ve geleneksel öğretim yönteminin sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerin fotosentez ve bitkilerde solunum konularını öğrenmedeki başarısına olan etkisini araştırmaktır. Öğrencilerin fotosentez ve bitkilerde solunum konularındaki bilgi düzeyleri Haslam ve Treagust (1987) tarafından geliştirilen iki aşamalı tanı testi kullanılarak saptanmıştır. Bu test, aynı okulun iki farklı sınıfında okuyan 67 sekizinci sınıf öğrencisine ön-test ve son-test olarak uygulanmıştır. Deney grubundaki öğrenciler (n=33) dersi 5E öğrenme evreleri yaklaşımı ile işlerken, kontrol grubunda (n=34) ise geleneksel öğretim yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Verilerin analizi için ortak varyans analizi (ANCOVA) kullanılmıştır ve öğrencilerin Mantıksal Düşünme Yetenek Testi (TOLT) ve ön-test sonuçları ortak değişken olarak atanmıştır. Araştırma bulguları 5E öğrenme yaklaşımının 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin fotosentez ve bitkilerde solunum konularını öğrenmesinde etkili bir yöntem olduğunu göstermiştir. Bununla birlikte, cinsiyetin başarı üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi bulunmamıştır.

Öğrenme Evreleri Yaklaşımının Öğrencilerin Fen Başarısına Etkisi

This study investigated the effectiveness of the 5E learning cycle on students’ achievement on photosynthesis and respiration in plants. Students’ achievement on photosynthesis and respiration in plants was measured using the photosynthesis and respiration in plants test developed by Haslam and Treagust (1987). The test was administered as pre-test and post-test to a total of 67 eight-grade students in two intact classes of the same elementary school located in an urban area. The experimental group students (n=33) received the 5E learning cycle instruction and the control group (n=34) received a traditional instruction. Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT) and pre-test scores were used as covariates in this study. The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) showed a statistically significant difference between the experimental and control groups in the favour of experimental group after the treatment. A significant difference in gain scores was detected between experimental and control groups for post test scores. Analysis also revealed no significant difference between performance of females and that of males. It is also indicated that interaction of treatment with gender difference was not significant for learning the concepts.

PDF

___

Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1986). The sequence of learning cycle activities in high school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 121–143.
Alparslan, C., Tekkaya, C., & Geban, Ö. (2003). Using the conceptual change instruction to improve learning. Journal of Biological Education, 37, 133-137.
Amir, R., & Tamir, P. (1994). In dept analysis of misconceptions as a basis for developing research-based remedial instruction: The case of photosynthesis. The American Biology Teacher, 56, 94-100.
Anderson, C.W., Sheldon, T.H., & Dubay, J. (1990). The effects of instruction on college nonmajors’ conceptions of respiration and photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 761-776.
Aşcı, Z., Özkan, Ş. & Tekkaya, C. (2001). Students’ misconceptions about respiration: A cross- age study. Eğitim ve Bilim, 120, 29-36.
Ates, S. (2005). The effectiveness of the learning-cycle method on teaching DC circuits to prospective female and male science teachers. Research in Science and Technological Education, 23, 213-227.
Barman, C. (1989). The learning cycle: Making it work. Science Scope, 12, 28-31.
Barman, C. R. (1993). The learning cycle: A basic tool for teachers, too. Perspectives in Education and Deafness, 11, 7-11.
Bell, B. (1985). Students’ ideas about plant nutrition: what are they? Journal of Biological Education, 19, 213-218.
Blank, L. M. (2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding? Science Education, 84, 486-506.
Brooks, J.G., & Brooks, M.G. (1999). In search of Understanding: the Case for Constructivist Classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Cavallo, A.M.L. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability, and students’ understanding and problem solving of topics in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 625-656.
Cavallo, A. M. L., & Laubach, T. A. (2001). Students’ science perceptions and enrollment decisions in differing learning cycle classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1029-1062.
Colburn, A. & Clough M. (1997). Implementing the learning cycle. The Science Teacher, 64, 30–33.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 5-12.
Ehindore, O.J. (1979) Formal operational precocity and achievement in biology among some Nigerian high school students. Science Education, 63, 231-236.
Erickson, G. L., & Erickson, L. J. (1984). Females and science achievement: evidence, explanations, and implications. Science Education, 68, 63-89.
Gang, S. (1995) Removing preconceptions with a “learning cycle”. Physics Teacher, 33, 346–354.
Geban, Ö., Aşkar, P., & Özkan, İ. (1992). Effects of computer simulated experiment and problem solving approaches on students learning outcomes at the high school level. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 5-10.
Griffard, P. B. & Wandersee, J. H. (2001). The two-tier instrument on photosynthesis: what does it diagnose? International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1039-1052.
Haslam, F. & Treagust, D.F. (1987). Diagnosing secondary students’ misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two-tier multiple choice instrument. Journal of Biological Education, 21, 203-211.
Johnson, M. A. & Lawson, A. E. (1998). What are the relative effects of reasoning ability and prior knowledge on biology achievement in expository and inquiry classes? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 89-103
Lavoie, D.R. (1999). Effects of emphasizing hypothetico-predictive reasoning within the science learning cycle on high school student’s process skills and conceptual understandings in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1127-1147.
Lawson, A.E. (1995). Science Teaching and the Development of Thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Lawson, A.E., Abraham, M.R. & Renner, J.W. (1989). A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. Monograph of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (Serial No. 1).
Lawson, A.E. & Thompson, L.D. (1988). Formal reasoning ability and misconceptions concerning genetics and natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 733-746.
Lindgren, J.S., & Bleicher, R. (2005). Learning the learning cycle: The differential effect on elementary preservice teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105, 61-72.
Marek E.A., Laubach, T.A. & Pedersen, J. (2003). Preservice elementary school teachers’ understandings of theory based science education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14, 147-159.
Marek, E. A., & Cavallo, A. M. L. (1997). The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Marek, E.A., & Methven, S.B. (1991). Effects of the learning cycle upon student and classroom teacher performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 41–53.
Marek, E.A., Cowan, C.C., & Cavallo, A.M.L. (1994). Students’ misconception about diffusion: How can they be eliminated? American Biology Teacher, 56, 74-78.
Musheno, B.V., & Lawson, A.E. (1999). Effects of learning cycle and traditional text on comprehension of science concepts by students at differing reasoning levels. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 23-37.
Norman, K., & Caseau, D. (1995). The learning cycle: Teaching to the strengths of students with learning disabilities in science classrooms. Journal of Science for Persons with Disabilities, 3, 18-25.
Odom, A.L., & Kelly, P.V. (2001). Integrating concept mapping and the learning cycle to teach diffusion and osmosis concepts to high school biology students. Science Education, 85, 615-635.
Pıaget, J. (1964). Cognitive development in children: Development and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 176-186.
Rakow, S.J. (1986). Teaching science as inquiry. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
Renner, J. W. (1986). Rediscovering the lab. The Science Teacher, 53, 44–45.
Renner, J.W., & Marek, E.A. (1990). An educational theory base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 241-246.
Richardson, V. (Ed.). (1997). Constructivist Teacher Education. New York: Falmer.
Settlage, J. (2000). Understanding the learning cycle: Influences on abilities to embrace the approach by preservice elementary school teachers. Science Education, 84, 43-50.
Stavy, R., Eisen, Y. & Yaakobi D. (1987). How students aged 13-15 understand photosynthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 105-115.
Sunal D. & Haas, M. (1992). Forest, Land and Water: Understanding our Natural Resources, Department of Interior, Forest Service, Washington, DC (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 354 157).
Tekkaya, C. & Balcı, S. (2003). Öğrencilerin Fotosentez ve Bitkilerde Solunum Konularındaki Kavram Yanılgılarının Saptanması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24, 101-107.
Tobin, K., & Capıe, W. (1981). Development and validation of a group test of logical thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 413- 424.
Tobin, K., & Tippins, D.J. (1993). Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In K.Tobin (Ed.), The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
Tobin, K., Tippins, D.J., & Gallard, A.J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In D.L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook on Research in Science Teaching and Learning. New York: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Trowbrıdge, L.W., Bybee, R.W. & Powell, J. (2000). Teaching Secondary School Science: Strategies for Developing Scientific Literacy. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Wandersee, J. H. (1985). Can history of science help science educators anticipate students’ misconceptions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 581-597.
Wilder M., & Shuttleworth, P. (2005). Cell inquiry: A 5E learning cycle lesson. Science Activities, 41, 37-43.
Yager, R.E. (1993). The constructivist learning model. The Science Teacher, 58, 52-57.
Young, D. J., & Fraser, B. J. (1994). Gender differences in science achievement: Do school effects make a difference? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 857-871.