İlköğretim ikinci kademe öğrencilerinin tanecik kavramı hakkındaki görüşleri: Bilgi dönüşümü

Bu çalışma, ilköğretim II. kademedeki öğrencilerin fen eğitiminin temel kavramlarından olan maddenin tanecikli yapısıyla ilgili olarak tanecik kavramı konusunda model oluşturma sürecinde karşılaştıkları zorluklar ve bu zorlukların zaman içinde nasıl değiştiğini incelemek amacıyla tasarlanmıştır. Ayrıca bu konudaki öğrenilmiş bilginin ortaya konulması ve öğretilecek bilgi ile aradaki sapmanın belirlenmesi, bunların tartışılması ve çözüm önerilerinde bulunması amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla 6, 7 ve 8. sınıf öğrencilerinden oluşan 163 öğrenciye 9 açık uçlu sorudan oluşan bir test uygulanmış ve toplanan veriler nitel olarak çözümlenmiştir. Bu çalışmada öğrencilerin tanecik modelini hangi görüşler temelinde oluşturdukları belirlenmiştir. Diğer taraftan öğrenilen bilginin öğretilecek bilgi ile örtüşmediği ortaya konulmuştur. Ayrıca literatürde bulunmayan 8 kavram yanılgısı saptanmıştır.

Students’ (Grade 7-9) ideas on particle concept: Didactical transposition

This study has been designed to examine the difficulties grade 7-9 students encounter in the process of developing a model for understanding the concept of particles as part of their instruction in the particulate nature of matter. Seeking also to discover how these difficulties change over time, the study further sets out to establish what acquired knowledge by students about the subject and to determine the extent of the shift between assimilated knowledge and knowledge to be taught, attempting at the same time to discuss this shift and make recommendations for solutions. The instrument was administrated to a total of 163 grade 7-9 students and the data collected was qualitatively analyzed. The study determined which ideas the students based their particle model on. It was seen that there was no overlap between assimilated knowledge and knowledge to be taught. In addition, the study revealed 8 misconceptions so far not covered in the literature.

PDF

___

Adbo, K. ve Taber, K. S. (2008). Learners’ mental models of the particulate nature of matter: A study of 16-year-old Swedish science students. International Journal of Science Education, 1-30 (i-first article). DOI: 10.1080/09500690701799383.
Albanese, A. ve Vicentini, M. (1997). Why do we believe that an atom is colourless ? Reflections about the teaching of the particle model. Science & Education, 6, 251-261.
Atasoy, B. (2004). Temel kimya kavramları, (2.Baskı). Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
Ayas, A. (2002) Students’ level of understanding of five basic chemistry concepts. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education, 18, 19-32.
Ayas, A. ve Özmen, H. (2002). Lise kimya öğrencilerinin maddenin tanecikli yapısı kavramını anlama seviyelerine ilişkin bir çalışma, Boğaziçi University Journal of Education, 19(2), 45-60.
Baki, A. (1999). Cebirle İlgili İşlem Yanılgılarının Değerlendirilmesi. III. Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Sempozyumu. M.E.B. ÖYGM.
Barlet, R. ve Plouin, D. (1994). La dualité microscopique-macroscopique un obstacle sous-jacent aux difficultés en chimie dans l’enseignement universitaire. Aster, 25, 142-173.
Bissuel, G. (2001). Et si la physique était symbolique ?, Paris : PUFC,
Brook, A., Briggs, H. & Driver, R. (1984). Aspects of secondary students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. Children’s learning in science project, Centre for studies in science and mathematics education, University of Leeds, Leeds.
Caramazza, A., McCloskey, M. ve Green, B. (1980). “Curvilinear motion in the absence of external forces: Naive beliefs about the motion of objects”. Science, 210, 1139-1141.
Cokelez, A. ve Dumon, A. (2005). Atom and molecule: upper secondary school French students’ representations in long-term memory. Cemistry Educaiton: Research and Practice in Europe, 6(3), 119-135.
Cokelez, A. Dumon, A. & Taber, K.S. (2008). Uper secondary French students, the chemical transformation and the models register. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 807-836.
Creswell, J. V. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Çakır, S. Ö. ve Yürük, N. (1999). Oksijenli ve oksijensiz solunum konusunda kavram yanılgıları teşhis testinin geliştirilmesi ve uygulanması. III. Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Sempozyumu. 23-25 Eylül 1998. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi. Trabzon. M.E.B. ÖYGM. 193-198
Davis,, N. T., McCarty, B. J., Shaw, K.L. & Tabba, A. S. (1993). Transitions from objectivism to constructivism in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 15(6), 627-636.
De Vos W. ve Verdonk, A. H. (1996). The particulate nature of matter in science education in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(6), 657-664.
Develay, M. (1992) De l’apprentissage à l’enseignement, pour une épistémologie scolaire. Collection Pédagogies. E.S.F. éditeurs, Paris
Drouin, A. -M. (1988). Le modèle en questions. Aster, 7, 1-20.
Drouin, A. -M. ve Astolfi, J.-P. (1992). La modélisation à l’école élémentaire, in. Enseignement et apprentissage de la modélisation en science. Paris: INRP,
Fisher, K. ve Lipson, J. (1986) “Twenty questions about student errors”. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 783-803.
Genzling, J. -C. ve Pierrard, M. -A. (1994). La modélisation, la description, la conceptualisation, l’explication et la prédiction, in Nouveau regards sur l’enseignement et l’apprentissage de la modélisation en sciences, Paris: INRP.
Gilbert, J. K. (1997). Exploring models and modeling in science and technology education (Reading: New Bulmershe Papers).
Gilbert, J. ve Swift, D. (1985) “Towards a Lakatosian analysis of the Piagetian and alternative conceptions research programs”. Science Education, 69, 681-696.
Griffiths, K. A. ve Preston, R. K. (1992). Grade-12 students’ misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 611-628.
Grosslight, K., Unger, C., Jay, E. & Smith, C. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conception of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 799-822.
Harrison, A. G. ve Treagust,D. F. (2002). The particulate nature of matter: Challenges in understanding the submicroscopic world. In J. K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemistry education: Towardds a research-based preactice (pp. 189-212). The Metherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Host, V. (1989). Système et modèles: quelques repères bibliographiques, Aster, 8, 187-209.
Johnson, P. (1998). Progression in children’s understanding of a ‘basic’ particle theory: a longitudinal study, International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 393-412.
Johnstone, A. H. (2000). The presentation of chemistry – logical or physchological ? Chemistry Education : Research and Practice in Europe, 1, 9-15.
Justi, S. R. ve Gilbert, K. J. (2002). “Modelling, teachers’ views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers.” International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369-387.
Kokkotas, P., Vlachos, I. & Koulaidis, V. (1998). Teaching the topic of the particulate nature of matter in prospective teachers’ training courses. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 291-303.
Laugier, A. ve Dumon, A. (2000). Practical works and representation of chemical reaction in the macroscopic and microscopic level. Chemistry Education : Research and Practice in Europe, 1(1), 61-75.
Liu, X. ve Lesniak, K. M. (2004). Students’ progression of understanding the matter concept from elementary to high school. Science Educaiton, 89, 433-450.
Martinand, J. -L. (1990). In J. Colomb et J.-L. Martinand : Enseignement et apprentissage de la modélisation, Rapport RCP INRP-LIREST. (p.116) Document multigraphié, Lirest. Paris, Université Paris 7.
MEB. (2006). 6. sınıf fen ve teknoloji programı. Ankara: MEB. Yayınları.
McKloskey, M. (1983). “Naive theories of motion”. In D. Gentner & A Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 299-324). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Nakhleh, M. B. ve Samarapungavan, A. (1999). Elementary school children’s belief about matter. Journal of Research in Science Education, 36(7), 777-805.
Novick, S. ve Nussbaum, J. (1978). Junior high school pupils’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter: An interview study. Science Education, 63, 273-281.
Osborne, R. J., Bell, B. F. ve Gilbert, J. K. (1986) “Science teaching and children’s views of the world”. In J. Brown, A. Cooper, F. Toates, and D. Zeldin, (Eds.), Exploring the curriculum; Science in Schools (pp. 317-332). Milton Keynes & Philadelphia: Open Unv. Press
Özbek, N. K. (2007). İlköğretim 5 fen ve teknoloji ders kitabı. Ankara: Ada Yayıncılık.
Özmen, H., Ayas, A. & Coştu, B. (2002). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının maddenin tanecikli yapısı hakkındaki anlama seviyelerinin ve yanılgılarının belirlenmesi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 2(2), 507-529.
Paton, R. C. (1996). On a apparently simple modeling problem in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 18(1), 55-64.
Sökmen, H. T., Ekmekçi, M. & Güler, O. F. (2007). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji 4. sınıf ders kitabı. Ankara: Gün Yayınları.
Stains, M. ve Talanquer, V. (2007). Classification of chemical substances using particulate representations of matter: An analysis of student thinking. International Journal of Science Education. 29(5), 643-665.
Stephens, S. -A., McRobbie, C. & Lucas, K. B. (1999). Model-based reasoning in a year 10 classroom. Research in Science Education, 29, 189-208.
Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G. & Mamila, T. L. (2002). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education,24(4), 357-368.
Tsaparlis, G. (1997). Molecules and atoms at the centre stage. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 2(2), 57-65.
Tunç, T., Agalday, M., Akçam, H. K., Altunoğlu, Ü. Ç., Bağcı, N., Bakar, E., ve diğer. (2007). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji 6. sınıf ders kitabı. Ankara: MEB. Yayınları.
White, R. ve Gustone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.
Yıldırım A. ve Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Yılmaz, A. ve Alp, E. (2006). Students’ understanding of matter: the effect of reasoning ability and grade level. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(1), 22-31.