Özlem OKTAY, Ahmet İlhan ŞEN, Serkan EKİNCİ

Mobil Planetaryum Etkinliği: Ortaokul Öğretmenlerinin Görüşlerinin İncelenmesi

Bu çalışmanın amacı, öğrencileriyle birlikte okul ortamında düzenlenen mobil planetaryumetkinliğine katılan ortaokul öğretmenlerinin etkinlik hakkındaki görüşlerini incelemektir.Çalışmada nitel bütüncül tek durum deseni kullanılmıştır. Ölçüt örnekleme yöntemi kullanılaraktoplam sekiz ortaokul öğretmeni çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. Öğretmenlerin mobil planetaryumetkinliğine yönelik görüşleri, derinlemesine yapılan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler aracılığıylaincelenmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında ayrıca etkinlik çerçevesinde öğretmenlerin beklenen rollerineyönelik düşünceleri tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. İçerik analizi yöntemiyle elde edilen bulgular,öğretmenlerin tamamının ailenin çocuğuyla birlikte etkinliğe katılımına yönelik olumlu görüşesahip olduklarını göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte katılımcı öğretmenler, etkinliğin okulortamında yapılmasının maliyet açısından avantajlı olduğunu belirtmişlerdir. Öte yandanöğretmenlerin bu tür ortamlardaki beklenen rollerinin alanyazında değinilen bazı öğretmenrolleriyle benzerlik gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir. Bu bağlamda öğretmenlerin beklenen rolleri;öğrencileri tanıma, öğrencilerin hazırlığı, etkinliğe dâhil olma ve ziyaret sonrası yapılacaklarolmak üzere dört ayrı kategoride tartışılmıştır. Okul ortamında düzenlenen mobil planetaryum etkinliğinin öğretmen gözünden değerlendirildiği bu çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlarıngelecekteki benzer çalışmalara ışık tutacağı düşünülmektedir.

A Mobile Planetarium Activity: Investigation of Middle School Teachers’ Views

The aim of this study was to investigate views of middle school teachers who participated with their students in a mobile planetarium activity held in school setting. A qualitative holistic singlecase study was used. A total of eight middle school teachers participated in the study. Teachers’ views were investigated through in-depth semi-structured interviews. Their views on their expected roles within the scope of activity were also explored. Results derived from the content analysis method revealed that all teachers had a positive view on parent involvement in the activity. In addition, the participating teachers stated that it was cost-effective to carry out the activity in the school setting. It was also found that the expected roles of teachers were similar to some of the teacher roles discussed in the literature. In this respect, teachers’ expected roles were discussed in 4 different categories; knowing students, students’ preparation, involvement, and post-visit activities. It is believed that the results of this study that explored the value of mobile planetarium activity in the school setting through the eyes of teachers will shed light on similar studies in future.

PDF

___

Alon, N. L., & Tal, T. (2017). Teachers as secondary players: Involvement in field trips to natural environments. Research in Science Education, 47(4), 869-887. doi:10.1007/s11165-016-9531-0
Anderson, D., Kisiel, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2006). Understanding teachers' perspectives on field trips: Discovering common ground in three countries. Curator: The Museum Journal, 49(3), 365-386.
Anderson, D., Lucas, K. B., Ginns, I. S., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Development of knowledge about electricity and magnetism during a visit to a science museum and related post‐visit activities. Science Education, 84(5), 658-679.
Anderson, D., & Zhang, Z. (2003). Teacher perceptions of field-trip planning and implementation. Visitor Studies Today, 6(3), 6-11.
Bakioğlu, B. & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2017). A study on developing a guide material for science classes supported by out-of-school learning, Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(5), 773-786.
Bamberger, Y., & Tal, T. (2007). Learning in a personal context: Levels of choice in a free choice learning environment in science and natural history museums. Science Education, 91(1), 75-95. doi:10.1002/sce.20174
Bamberger, Y., & Tal, T. (2008). Multiple outcomes of class visits to natural history museums: The students’ view. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(3), 274-284. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9097-3
Bell, R. L., & Trundle, K. C. (2008). The use of a computer simulation to promote scientific conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 346-372.
Bozdoğan, A. E., & Ustaoğlu, F. (2016). Planetaryumların öğretim potansiyeli hakkında fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının görüşleri. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 11(1), 3-23.
Braund, M., & Reiss, M. (2006). Towards a more authentic science curriculum: The contribution of out-of‐school learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1373-1388.
Chastenay, P. (2016). From geocentrism to allocentrism: Teaching the phases of the moon in a digital full-dome planetarium. Research in Science Education, 46(1), 43-77.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & Research design, Choosing among five approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California Sage Publications, Inc.
Crowley, K., Callanan, M. A., Jipson, J. L., Galco, J., Topping, K., & Shrager, J. (2001). Shared scientific thinking in everyday parent-child activity. Science Education, 85(6), 712-732. doi:10.1002/sce.1035
Davidson, S. K., Passmore, C., & Anderson, D. (2010). Learning on zoo field trips: The interaction of the agendas and practices of students, teachers, and zoo educators. Science Education, 94(1), 122-141.
DeWitt, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2008). A short review of school field trips: Key findings from the past and implications for the future. Visitor Studies, 11(2), 181-197. doi:10.1080/10645570802355562
Dillon, J., Rickinson, M., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M. Y., Sanders, D. vd. (2006). The value of outdoor learning: evidence from research in the UK and elsewhere. School Science Review, 87(320), 107.
Ertaş Kılıç, H., & Şen, A. İ. (2014). Okul dışı öğrenme etkinliklerine ve eleştirel düşünmeye dayalı fizik öğretiminin öğrenci tutumlarına etkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(176), 13-30.
Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(2), 171-190. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-9027-1
Falk, J. H., Koran, J. J., & Dierking, L. D. (1986). The things of science: Assessing the learning potential of science museums. Science Education, 70(5), 503-508.
Faria, C., & Chagas, I. (2013). Investigating school-guided visits to an aquarium: What roles for science teachers? International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 3(2), 159-174. doi:10.1080/09500693.2012.674652
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Griffin, J., & Symington, D. (1997). Moving from task‐oriented to learning‐oriented strategies on school excursions to museums. Science Education, 81(6), 763- 779.
Hofstein, A., & Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Bridging the gap between formal and informal science learning. Studies in Science Education, 28(1), 87-112. doi:10.1080/03057269608560085
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2005). Factors influencing elementary school children's attitudes toward science before, during, and after a visit to the UK National Space Centre. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 53-83.
Karnezou, M., Avgitidou, S., & Kariotoglou, P. (2013). Links between teachers' beliefs and their practices in a science and technology museum visit. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 3(3), 246-266.
Kisiel, J. (2005). Understanding elementary teacher motivations for science fieldtrips. Science Education, 89(6), 936-955. doi:10.1002/sce.20085
Lantz, E. (2011). Planetarium of the future. Curator: The Museum Journal, 54(3), 293- 312.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: CA: Sage.
Lindemann-Matthies, P., & Knecht, S. (2011). Swiss elementary school teachers’ attitudes toward forest education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 42(3), 152-167. doi:10.1080/00958964.2010.523737
Luehmann, A. L. (2009). Students’ perspectives of a science enrichment programme: Out‐of‐school inquiry as access. International Journal of Science Education, 31(13), 1831-1855.
Luehmann, A. L., & Markowitz, D. (2007). Science teachers’ perceived benefits of an out‐of‐school enrichment programme: Identity needs and university affordances. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1133-1161.
Michie, M. (1998). Factors influencing secondary science teachers to organise and conduct field trips. Australian Science Teacher’s Journal, 44(4), 43-50.
Oktay, Ö., Ekinci, S., & Şen, A. İ. (2020). Investigation of middle school students’ thoughts about a mobile planetarium activity. Elementary Education Online, 19(2), 695-717. doi: 10.17051/ilkonline.2020.693202
Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Plakitsi, K. (2013). Activity theory in formal and informal science education. In K. Plakitsi (Ed.), Activity Theory in Formal and Informal Science Education (pp. 1-15). Rotterdam: SensePublishers.
Plummer, J. D. (2009). Early elementary students' development of astronomy concepts in the planetarium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 192-209.
Plummer, J. D., Kocareli, A., & Slagle, C. (2014). Learning to explain astronomy across moving frames of reference: Exploring the role of classroom and planetariumbased instructional contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 36(7), 1083-1106.
Sontay, G., Tutar, M. ve Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2016). Okul dışı öğrenme ortamları ile fen öğretimi hakkında öğrenci görüşleri: Planetaryum gezisi. İnformal Ortamlarda Araştırmalar Dergisi, 1(1), 1-24.
Storksdieck, M. (2001). Differences in teachers’ and students’ museum field-trip experiences. Visitor Studies Today, 4(1), 8-12.
Şentürk, E. (2019). Gökevleri (Planetaryumlar). İçinde A.İ. Şen (Yay. Haz.). Okul Dışı Öğrenme Ortamları. (s. 91-116). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Tal, R., Bamberger, Y., & Morag, O. (2005). Guided school visits to natural history museums in Israel: Teachers' roles. Science Education, 89(6), 920-935.
Tal, T., & Steiner, L. (2006). Patterns of teacher-museum staff relationships: School visits to the educational centre of a science museum. Canadian Journal of Math, Science & Technology Education, 6(1), 25-46.
Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77-100. DOI 10.1177/1558689806292430
Turk, C., & Kalkan, H. (2015). The effect of planetariums on teaching specific astronomy concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 1- 15.
Wilder, S. (2014). Effects of parental involvement on academic achievement: A metasynthesis. Educational Review, 66(3), 377-397.
Wulf, R., Mayhew, L. M., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2010). Impact of informal science education on children’s attitudes about science. Paper presented at the AIP Conference Proceedings.
Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (8. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.