İndirgemecilik açısından kimya öğretiminde makro ve mikro bilgi seviyeleri

Kimya felsefesinin önemli bir tartışma konusu olan indirgemecilik kimya eğitimi açısından ele alınabilir. Felsefi alan yazında tartışılan indirgeme türlerinin kimyanın doğası ve kimyasal bilginin niteliğine uygun olmadığı görülmektedir. Bunların kimya eğitiminde sorunlu olan makro ve mikro anlama seviyeleri ile yakın ilişkisi vardır. Nitekim indirgemecilikte makro seviyeyi açıklamada kullanılan mikroya yönelik kimyanın kuramsal bilgilerinin fiziğe indirgenebileceğini savunulmaktadır. Bu nedenle eğitimin temel kazanımları çerçevesinde kimya öğretiminde mikro- makro ilişkisinin sağlıklı kurulması ve bu seviyelerin kimyanın doğasına uygun bir şekilde öğretilmesinde indirgemelerin göz önünde tutulması gerekebilir. Bu noktada indirgemelerden kaynaklanması olası olan sorunlara yönelik belirlemelerde bulunmak ve bazı öneriler sunmak mümkündür.

Macro and micro knowledge levels for chemistry teaching in terms of reductionism

Reductionism as one of the major questions of debate of chemistry philosophy can be considered from the perspective of chemistry teaching. It can explicitly be seen that types of reductions discussed in philosophical literature are contrary to the nature of chemistry and characteristics of chemical knowledge. These have a close relationship with macro and micro levels of understanding which is problematic for chemistry education. Thus, it is defended in reductionism that theoretical information for micro oriented chemistry used to define macro level can be reduced to physics. For that reason it is necessary to establish the relationship of micro-macro for chemistry teaching under the framework of basic acquisitions of education and to consider reductions in order to allow teaching of these levels as conforming to nature of chemistry. At this point, it is possible to make some fixations directed to problems those possibly originate from reduction and to present some recommendations.

PDF

___

Bayrakçeken, S., Canpolat N. ve Çelik, S. (2011,Temmuz). Kimyanın doğası ve öğretimi. 2. Ulusal Kimya Eğitimi Kongresi‟nde sunulmuş bildiri, A.Ü, Erzurum.
Born, M., and Oppenheimer, R. (1927). Zur Quantentheorie der Molekeln. Annalen der Physik, 20(389), 457-484. Article first published online: 14 mar 2006.
Cevizci, A. (2011). Felsefe sözlüğü. İstanbul: Say Yayınları.
Chalmers, D. J. (2002). Strong and Weak Emergence. Republished in P. Clayton and P. Davies (Eds.), (2006) The re-emergence of emergence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Corning, P. A. (2002). The re-emergence of "emergence": a venerable concept in search of a theory. Complexity, 7(6), 18-30.
Craver, C. F. (2001). Structures of scientific theories. In P.K. Machamer and M. Silberstein (Eds.), Blackwell guide to the philosophy of science (pp. 55-79). Oxford: Blackwell.
Erduran, S. (2005b). Applying the philosophical concept of reduction to the chemistry of water: implications for chemical education. Science & Education, 14(2),161–171.
Erduran S., & Duschl, R. (2004). Interdisciplinary characterizations of models and the nature of chemical knowledge in the classroom. Studies in Science Education, 40(1), 105–138.
Erduran, S. (2007). Breaking the law: promoting domain-specificity in chemical education in the context of arguing about the periodic law. Foundations of Chemistry, 9(3), 247-263.
Erduran, S. (2000). Emergence and application of philosophy of chemistry in chemical education. School Science Review, 81, 85-87.
Erduran, S., Aduriz A. B. and Naaman, R. M. (2007). Developing epistemologically empowered teachers: examining the role of philosophy of chemistry in teacher education. Science & Education, 18(9-10), 975-989.
Erduran, S. (2005a, July). Beyond philosophical confusion: establishing the role of philosophy of chemistry in chemical education research. Paper presented at the International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Conference, Leeds, UK.
Gilbert, J. (1998). Explaining with models. In M.Ratcliffe (Ed.), ASE guide to secondary science education. Stanley Thornes, London
Gilbert, J. K. and Treagust, D. F. (2009). Introduction: macro, submicro and symbolic representations and the relationship between them: key models in chemical education. In Gilbert, J.K. and Treagust, D.F (Eds.), Multiple representations in chemical education, models and modeling in science education (pp.1-8). Springer.
Goldstein, J. (1999). Emergence as a Construct: History and Issues. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 1(1): 49–72.
Harrison, A. G. and Treagust, D.F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: a case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352–381.
Hendry R. F. (1998). Models and approximations in quantum chemistry. In N. Shanks (Ed.) Idealization in contemporary physics: poznan studies in the philosophy of the sciences and the humanities (63) (pp.123-42). Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.
Hendry, R. F. (2010). Chemistry: emergence vs. reduction. In C.and G. Macdonald (Eds.) Emergence in mind (pp.205–221). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hendry, R. F. (2011). The metaphysics of chemistry. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hendry, R. F. (2006). Is there downward causation in chemistry. In D. Baird, E.Scerri, and L.Mclntyre (Eds.), Philosophy of chemistry (pp. 173–189).Dordrecht: Springer.
Hendry, R. F. (2012). Reduction, emergence and physicalism. In D. M. Gabbay, P. Thagard and John Woods. (Gen.Eds.), R, F. Hendry, P.Needham and A.I.
Woody (Vol.Eds.). Handbook of the philosophy of science, philosophy of chemistry (V.6) (pp.367-386). Amsterdam: North Holland- Elsevier.
Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: a changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 701–705.
Lecourt, D. (2006). Bilim felsefesi. (Çev.I. Ergüden). Ankara: Dost Kitabevi. (Eserin orjinali 2001‟de yayımlandı).
Lutz, S. (2009, October). Carnap’s unchanging correspondence rules. Paper presented at the Second SIFA Graduate Conference, Bologna (Italy).
Mattingly, J. (2005). The structure of scientific theory change: models versus privileged formulations. Philosophy of Science, 72(2), 365–389.
Miessler, L.G. and Tarr, D.A. (2010). Inorganik Chemistry (4th ed.), New Jersey, Pearson Prentice Hall.
Moulines, C.U. (2010). The nature and structure of scientific theories. Paper presented at Seminar für Philosophie, Logik und Wissenschaftstheorie, University of Munich.
O‟Connor, T. (1994). Emergent properties. American Philosophical Quarterly, 31, 91- 104.
Peirce, C.S. (1957). Essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
Reichenbach, H. (2006). Bilim felsefesinin doğuşu. (Çev.C. Yıldırım), Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi. (Eserin orjinali 1951‟de yayımlandı).
Sarıtaş, D. and Tufan, Y. (2011, Temmuz). Kimya öğretiminde yapılan ontolojik ve epistemolojik indirgemecilik. 2. Ulusal Kimya Eğitimi Kongresi‟nde sunulmuş bildiri. AÜ, Erzurum.
Sarıtaş, D. and Tufan, Y. (2012, Haziran). Öğrencilerin kimyasal bilgilerinin kimyasal semiyotik; sentaks ve semantik açıdan incelenmesi. X.UFBMEK‟da sunulmuş bildiri. NÜ, Niğde.
Scerri, E. (2001). The new philosophy of chemistry and its relevance to chemical education. Chemıstry Educatıon: Research And Practıce In Europe,2(2), 165- 170.
Scerri, E. (1994). Has chemistry been at least approximately reduced to quantum mechanics, In D.Hull, M.Forbes, and R.Burian (Eds.), PSA, 1994: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association (pp. 160- 170). Universty of Chicago Press.
Scerri, E. (1996). Stephen Brush, the periodic table and the nature of chemistry. In: P. Janich, and N. Psarros (Eds.), Die sprache der chemie (pp. 169-176). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
Scerri, E. (1991). The electronic configuration model, quantum mechanics and reduction. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 42(3), 309-325.
Scerri, E. (2007a). The ambiguity of reduction. International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry (HYLE), 13(2), 67-81.
Scerri, E. (2007b). The periodic table: its story and its significance. New York: Oxford University Press.
Schaffner, K. F. (1969). Correspondence rules. Philosophy of Science, 36(3), 280-290.
Schummer, J. (1996). Realismus und chemie. Philosophische untersuchungen der wissenschaft von den stoffen. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
Schummer. J. (2004). Philosophie der chemie: rück- und ausblicke. Erscheint in K.Griesar (Hg.), Wenn der geist die materie küßt (s.1-12). Frankfurt: Harry Deutsch.
Schummer. J.(2006). Philosophy of chemistry. In D. M. Borchert (Ed.), Encyclopedia of philosophy, Second Edition, New York: Macmillan.
Sprenger, J. (2011). Hypothetico-deductive confirmation. _____http://www.laeuferpaar.de/papers.html.> (2011, Mart 20).
Van Brakel, J. (2000). Philosophy of chemistry, between the manifest and the scientific ımage. Leuven: Leuven University Press
Woolley, R. G. (1998). Is there a quantum definition of a molecule? Journal of Mathematical Chemistry, 23, 3–12.