Hüseyin AKKUŞ, Duygu KILIÇ, Basri ATASOY, Hakkı KADAYIFÇ

Benzeşimlerle öğretim modelinin 9. sınıf öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki kavramsal anlamaları üzerine etkisi

Bu çalışmanın amacı, 9. sınıf öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusunu anlamalarında benzeşimlerle öğretim modelinin etkisini incelemektir. Öntest-sontest kontrol gruplu yarı deneysel desenin kullanıldığı bu çalışmada; dersler aynı öğretmenin yürüttüğü iki sınıfta 48 öğrencinin katılımıyla gerçekleştirildi. Kimyasal bağlar konusu deney grubunda benzeşimlerle öğretim modeli, kontrol grubunda ise geleneksel öğretim yaklaşımına dayalı düz anlatım modeli ile işlendi. Elde edilen veriler t-testi ve ANCOVA istatistiksel teknikleriyle analiz edildi. Benzeşimlerle öğretim modelinin öğrencilerin kimyasal bağlar konusunu anlamalarında düz anlatım modeline göre daha etkili olduğu tespit edildi. Bunun yanında ön bilgileri ve mantıksal düşünme yetenekleri daha fazla olan öğrencilerin kimyasal bağlar konusunu daha iyi anladıkları belirlendi.

The effect of teaching with analogies model on conceptual understanding of $9^{th}$ grade students’ chemical bonding concepts

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of teaching with analogies model on how 9th grade students understand chemical bonds. This study in which pre-posttest quasi-experimental design were used was conducted in two different classes consisting of 48 students with the same teacher. The subject matter chemical bond was covered on the basis of teaching with analogies model the experimental group while it was covered on the basis of traditional teaching approach in the control group. The data gained was analyzed using t-test and ANCOVA statistical techniques. That the teaching with analogies model was more effective than traditional teaching approach in teaching chemical bonds was found out. In addition to that, it was also found out that the students whose prior knowledge and logical thinking abilities are greater are better at understanding chemical bonds.

PDF

___

Akkuş, H. (2004). Kavramsal değişim metinlerinin kimyasal denge başarısı üzerine etkisi. Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
Aksu, M, Berberoğlu, G. ve F. Paykoç. (1990). “Can the GALT test be used in a Different Cultural Setting?”, Research Report.
Atasoy, B. (2004). Fen öğrenimi ve öğretimi. Ankara: Asil Yayın.
Atasoy, B., Genç, E., Kadayıfçı, H. ve Akkuş, H. (2007). Theeffect of cooperative learning to grade 7 students understanding of physical and chemical changes topic. Hacette Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, 12-21
Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View (New York, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston).
Black, D., and Solomon, J. (1987). Can pupils use taught analogies for electric current? School Science Review, 69, 249-254.
Cady, S. G. (1997). “Use of Pom Pons to Illustrate Cubic Crystal Structures”. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(7), 794-795.
Chiapetta, E., and J.M. Russell. 1982. The relationship among logical thinking, problem solving instruction, and knowledge and application of earth science subject matter. Science Education, 66, 85–93.
Clement, A. (2002), Learning with Analogies, Cases and Computers. The journal of the learning science. 11(1), 127-138.
Coll, R. K. (2006). The role of models, mental models, and analogies in chemistry teaching. In P. J. Aubusson, A. G. Harrison, & S. M. Ritchie (Eds.), Metaphor and analogy in science education (pp. 65–78). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
Çalık, M., Ayas, A. and Coll, R.(2009). Investigating the effectiveness of an analogy activity in improving students’ conceptual change for solution chemistry concepts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 74(4), 651-676.
Çetingül, İ., ve Geban, Ö. (2011). Kavramsal değişim metinleriyle verilen analojilerin asitbaz konusundaki kavram yanılgıları için kullanımı. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 41, 112-123.
Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75(6), 649-672.
Gabel, D.L. (1993). Use of The Particle Nature of Matter In Developing Conceptual Understanding. Journal of chemical education, 70, 193-194.
Geban, Ö., Aşkar, P., & Özkan, I. (1992). Effects of computer simulations and problems solving approaches on high school students. Journal of Educational Research, 86, 5–10
Glynn, S. M. (1991). Explaining science concepts: A teaching-with-analogies model. In S.
Glynn, R. Yeany, and B. Britton (Eds.). The psychology of learning science (pp. 219-240).
Glynn, S. M. (2008). Making science concepts meaningful to students: Teaching with analogies. In S. Mikelskis-Seifert, U. Ringelband, & M. Brückmann (Eds.), Four decades of research in science education: From curriculum development to quality improvement (pp. 113–125). Münster: Waxmann.
Glynn, S. M. and Muth, K. D., (1994). Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1057-1073.
Glynn, S., Duit, R., and Thiele, R. B. (1995). Teaching science with analogies: A strategy for constructing knowledge. In S. Glynn and R. Duit (Eds.), Learning science in the schools: Research reforming practice (pp. 247-273). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Glynn, S.M., Britton, B.K., Semrud-Clikeman, M, and Muth, K.D. (1989). Analogical reasoning and problem solving in textbooks. Handbook of Creativity: Assessment, Theory and Research. J.A. Glover, R.R. Running and C.R. Reynolds (Editors.), (p. 383-393). New York, Plenum.
Harrison, A. & Treagust, D. (2006). Teaching and learning with analogies. In P. Aubusson, A. Harrison & S. Ritchie (Eds.), (2006). Metaphor and analogy in science education, (pp11- 25). Dordrecht: Springer
Harrison, A. G. (1994). Is there a scientific explanation for refraction of light?- A rewiev of textbook analogies. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 40, 30-35.
Hewson, M.G. & Hewson, P.W. (1983) Effect of instruction using students’ prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 741-733.
Hodgson, T. (1995). Secondary mathematics modeling: Issues and challenges. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 351-358.
Kadayıfçı, H. (2001). Lise 3. Sınıftaki öğrencilerin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki yanlış kavramaların belirlenmesi ve yapılandırıcı yaklaşımın yanlış kavramaların giderilmesi üzerine etkisi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
Kılıç, D. (2007). Analojilerle öğretim modelinin 9. sınıf öğrencilerinin kimyasal bağlar konusundaki yanlış kavramalarının giderilmesi üzerine etkisi. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara.
Krajik, J.S., and R.E. Honey. 1987. Proportional reasoning and achievement in high school chemistry. School Science and Mathematics, 87, 25–32.
Kurtz, J. Martha (1995). “Using Analogies to teach college chemistry: A multiple analogy approach by Martha J. Kurtz”, Arizona State University.
Lawson, A. E., Baker, W. P., Didonato, L., Verdi, M. P. and Johnson, M. A. (1993). The role of hypothetico-deductive reasoning and physical analogues of molecular interactions in conceptional change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 30(9), 1073-1085.
Mayo, J.A. (2001). Using Analogies to Teach Conceptual Applications of Developmental Theories. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 14, 187-213.
Metsala, J. L., Glynn, S. (1996) Teaching with analogies: Building on the science textbook. The Reading Teacher; 49(6); Academic Research Library.
Mintzes, Joel J., J.H. Wandersee ve J.D. Novak (1998) Teaching science for understanding a human constructivist View. Gary D. Phye (Editor), Academic pres, San Diego.
Okey, J.R., Wıse, K.C. & Burns, J.C. (1982). Integrated Process Skill Test-2 (James R. Okey, Department of Science Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30362, USA).
Orgill, M.K., and Bodner, G. (2004). what research tells us about using analogies to teach chemistry. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 5(1), 15-32.
Orna, M. V.; Schreck, J. O.; Heikkinen, H.; Ayers, C.; Breyer, A.; Himes, C. L. (1994) SourceBook; ChemSource: New Rochelle, NY.
Özmen, H. (2004). Some student misconceptions in chemistry: A literature review of chemical bonding. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 13, 147 – 159
Parida B.K., M. Goswami. (2000). Using Analogy as a Tool in Science Education, School Science Quarterly Journal of Science Education, 38(4) _____http://www.ncert.nic.in/journalnew/ sschap10.htm>
Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., and Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and clasroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual chance. Rewiev of Educational research, 63, 197-199.
Roadrangka, V., Yeany, R., and Padilla, M. (1982) GALT, Group Test of Logical Thinking, Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia
Savinainen, A., Scott, P., and Viri, J. (2005). Empirical study on the efficiency of bridging in learning science. Science Education, 89, 175-195.
Simons, P. R. J. (1984). Instructing with analogies. Journal of educational Psychology, 76(3), 513-527.
Smith B. (2003) Chemical Bonding in Solids. _____http://www.callutheran.edu/BioDev/marcey/ assi_04/smith.htm> (2013, Ocak 1)
Spiro, R. J., Feltovıch, P. J., Coulson, R. L., and Anderson, D. K. (1989). Multiple analogies for complex consepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advenced knowledgeacquisition. In Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony (Editors), (p. 498-531). Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.
Taber, K. S. (2001). When the analogy breaks down - modeling the atom on the solar system. Physics Education, 36 (3), 222-226
Taber, K.S. (2002). Chemical misconception: Prevention, diagnosis and cure: Vol. 1 Theoretical background. London: Royal Society of Chemistry
Thiele, R. B., and Treagust, D. F. (1995). Analogies in chemistry textbooks. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 783-795.
Treagust, D.F. (1988). Development and Use of Diagnostic Tests to Evaluate Students’ Misconceptions in Science. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159-69.
Ünal S., Çalık M., Ayas A., Coll R.K. (2006) A review of chemical bonding studies: Needs, aims, methods of exploring students’ conceptions, general knowledge claims and students’ alternative conceptions Research in Science & Technological Education, 24(2), pp. 141–172