Preservice Teachers’ Thoughts about Designing Science Activities in Informal Environments

Purpose: The main purpose of this research is to determine the perspectives of preservice science teachers who have taken and have not taken course on science teaching in informal environments, on the process of designing activities within the scope of science teaching in informal environments. Design & Methodology: This study used explanatory design, one of the mixed-method design types. The sample of the study consisted of 76 senior preservice science teachers at Science Teaching Department from two different universities in Turkey. While choosing the study group, stratified purposive sampling, one of the purposive sampling methods, was used. Outdoor Science Activities Performing Scale was used as a quantitative data collection tool and interviews were used as qualitative data collection tools. Findings: According to quantitative findings, when the dimensions of the Outdoor Learning Performing Scale were compared between the groups, no statistically significant difference was found in all dimensions. However, when the qualitative findings were examined preservice science teachers who have taken the course had enough knowledge about designing and performing science activities in informal learning environments. Implications & Suggestions: To sum up, preservice science teachers who have taken the course had enough knowledge about designing and performing science activities in informal learning environments. This directly emphasizes the importance of receiving instruction in this subject. In this study, the instruction received by the preservice teachers who have taken courses was one of the main reasons for them wanting to have their students experience this process by overcoming all the difficulties they might encounter. However, preservice science teachers who have not taken the course about informal science education did not have enough knowledge about designing and performing science activities in informal learning environments.

PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ THOUGHTS ABOUT DESIGNING SCIENCE ACTIVITIES IN INFORMAL ENVIRONMENTS

Purpose: The main purpose of this research is to determine the perspectives of preservice science teachers who have taken and have not taken course on science teaching in informal environments, on the process of designing activities within the scope of science teaching in informal environments. Design & Methodology: This study used explanatory design, one of the mixed-method design types. The sample of the study consisted of 76 senior preservice science teachers at Science Teaching Department from two different universities in Turkey. While choosing the study group, stratified purposive sampling, one of the purposive sampling methods, was used. Outdoor Science Activities Performing Scale was used as a quantitative data collection tool and interviews were used as qualitative data collection tools. Findings: According to quantitative findings, when the dimensions of the Outdoor Learning Performing Scale were compared between the groups, no statistically significant difference was found in all dimensions. However, when the qualitative findings were examined preservice science teachers who have taken the course had enough knowledge about designing and performing science activities in informal learning environments. Implications & Suggestions: To sum up, preservice science teachers who have taken the course had enough knowledge about designing and performing science activities in informal learning environments. This directly emphasizes the importance of receiving instruction in this subject. In this study, the instruction received by the preservice teachers who have taken courses was one of the main reasons for them wanting to have their students experience this process by overcoming all the difficulties they might encounter. However, preservice science teachers who have not taken the course about informal science education did not have enough knowledge about designing and performing science activities in informal learning environments.

___

  • Anderson, D., Piscitelli, B., Weier K., Everett, M. & Collette, T. (2002). Children’s museum experiences: Identifying powerful mediators of learning. Curator: The Museum Journal, 45 (3), 213–231.
  • Bozdoğan, A. E. (2012). The practice of prospective science teachers regarding the planning of education-based trips: Evaluation of six different field trips. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(2), 1062-1069.
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2016). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri, Pegem A.
  • Diamond, J. (1986). The behavior of family groups in science museums. Curator: The Museum Journal, 29 (2), 139–154.
  • Falk, J. H. & Dierking, L. D. (1997). School field trips: Assessing their long-term ımpact. Curator: The Museum Journal, 40, 211–218.
  • Güler, A. (2011). Impact of a planned museum tour on the primary school students’ attitudes. Elementary Education Online, 10(1), 169-179.
  • McManus, P. M. (1988). Good Companions More on the Social Determination of Learning – Related Behaviour in a Science Museum. The International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, 7, 37 – 44.
  • Orion, N., & Hofstein, A. (1994). Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 1097–1119.
  • Öner, Z. & Güneş, T. (2017). Canlılar dünyasını gezelim ve tanıyalım ünitesi çerçevesinde yapılan informal uygulamalar ile ilgili öğretmen görüşleri. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 3(2), 583-594.
  • Piscitelli, B. & Anderson, D. (2001). Young children’s perspectives of museum settings and experiences. Museum Management and Curatorship, 19 (3), 269 – 282.
  • Sarıoğlan, A. & Küçüközer, H. (2017). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının okul dışı öğrenme ortamları ile ilgili görüşlerinin araştırılması. İnformal Ortamlarda Araştırmalar Dergisi (İAD), 2(1), 1-15.
  • Senemoğlu, N. (2003), Gelişim, Öğrenme ve Öğretim. Yargı Yayınevi.
  • Sontay, G. & Tutar, M., Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2016), “Okul Dışı Öğrenme Ortamları ile Fen Öğretimi” Hakkında Öğrenci Görüşleri, İnformal Ortamlarda Araştırmalar Dergisi (İAD), 1(1), 1-24.
  • Storksdieck, M. (2001). Differences in Teachers’ and Students’ Museum Field-Trip Experiences. Visitor Studies Today, 4(1), 8 -12
  • Tekin, H. (2001). Eğitimde Ölçme Değerlendirme. Yargı Yayınevi.
  • Türkmen, H. (2010). İnformal (Sınıf-Dışı) Fen Bilgisi Eğitimine Tarihsel Bakış ve Eğitimimize Entegrasyonu. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3 (39), 46-59.
  • Türkmen, H. (2015). İlkokul Öğretmenlerin sınıf dışı ortamlardaki fen öğretimine bakış açıları. Journal of European Education, 5 (2), 47-55.
  • Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayınevi.
İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi-Cover
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 2 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2014
  • Yayıncı: İnönü Üniversitesi