Fizik Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrencilerin Fizik Laboratuvar Performansını Değerlendirmeyi Öğrenmesi

Raporlanmış durum çalışması 36 fizik öğretmen adayının, öğrencilerin okul fizik laboratuvarındaki başarılarını değerlendirme çabalarını araştırmayı hedeflemektedir. Katılımcılar 3. veya 4. sınıf lisans öğrencilerinden oluşmaktadır. Öğretmen adayları zorunlu olan bir fizik laboratuvar eğitimi dersi kapsamında, bir akademik dönem boyunca laboratuvar becerilerine ilişkin öğrenme kazanımları ve laboratuvar aktiviteleri geliştirmişlerdir. Öğretmen adayları ayrıca kendi sınıf arkadaşlarıyla uyguladıkları mikro öğretim deneylerinde ölçme değerlendirme metotları ve etkinlikleri de tasarlamışlardır. Bunun yanı sıra lise öğrencilerin laboratuvar raporlarına dönüt vermişlerdir. Bulgular, böyle bir sürecin öğretmen adaylarının kendi laboratuvar raporlarının da geliştirdiğini göstermiştir. Öğretmen adaylarının, öğrencilerin laboratuvardaki başarılarını değerlendirme sürecine ait zorluk ve güçlüklerini belirlemek ve anlamak için yarı yapılandırılmış mülakatlar yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın verisi 6 dönem (3 akademik yıl) süresince toplanmıştır. Başarı değerlendirmesi, öğretmen adaylarının eğitimi ve gelecek çalışmalara ilgili sonuçlar tartışılmıştır. Örneğin, öğretmen adaylarının öğrenci başarılarını değerlendirme becerilerinin geliştirilmesi fizik öğretmen eğitimin önemli bir parçası haline getirilmelidir.

Pre-Service Physics Teachers Learn to Assess Student Performance in the School Physics Laboratory

The reported case study aimed to investigate 36 pre-service physics teachers’ efforts to learn to assess student performance in the school physics laboratory. The participants were in the third or fourth year of their undergraduate studies. They developed learning objectives closely related to laboratory skills and designed laboratory activities during a compulsory course about teaching in the physics laboratory for one academic term. They also developed assessment methods and assessment tasks, which they used when teaching experiments in microteaching (to their peers). In addition, they gave feedback to actual secondary students’ laboratory reports. Evidence has shown that such a process helped them improve their own laboratory reports. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in order to identify and understand the difficulties and challenges they experienced related to the assessment of student performance in the laboratory. Data for the study were collected for six consecutive terms (three academic years). Implications for the implementation of performance assessment, preservice teacher education and further research are discussed. For example, the issue of how to prepare pre-service teachers to become skillful in assessing student performance in the laboratory should be an important component of physics teacher education programs.

PDF

___

Abrahams, Ι. Reiss, M. J. & Sharpe, R. M. (2013). The assessment of practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 49 (2), 209-251. doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.858496.
American Association of Physics Teachers [AAPT] (2014). Recommendations for the undergraduate physics laboratory curriculum. College Park, MD, American Association of Physics Teachers. https://www.aapt.org/resources/upload/labguidlinesdocument_ebendorsed_nov10.pdf.
Anderson, C. W. (2000). Challenges to science teacher education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 293-294. doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098- 2736(200004)37:4<293::AID-TEA1>3.0.CO;2-B
Balta, N. & Eryilmaz, A. (2010). Turkish new high school physics curriculum: Teachers’ views and needs. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 1 (1), 72-88.
Black, P. J. (1993). Formative and summative assessment by teachers. Studies in Science Education, 21, 49-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269308560014
Black, P. (1995). Assessment and feedback in science education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 21, 257-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-491X(95)00015-M
Boudreaux, A., Shaffer, P.S., Heron, P. R. L. & McDermott, L. C. (2008). Student understanding of control of variables: Deciding whether or not a variable influences the behavior of a system. American Journal of Physics, 76 (2), 163-170. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2805235
Bransford, J., Brown., A. & Cocking, R. R. (2000) (Eds.). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC, National Research Council. https://www.desu.edu/sites/flagship/files/document/16/how_people_learn_book.pdf
Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA, ASCD.
Brown, J. H. & R. J. Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Assessing hands-on science. A teacher’s guide to performance assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin Press.
Cameron, M., Loesing, J., Rorvig, V. & Chval, K. B. (2009). Using student work to learn about teaching. Teaching Children Mathematics, 15 (8), 488-493.
Campbell, C. (2013). Research on teacher competency in classroom assessment. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.) Research on classroom assessment (pp. 71-84). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
Cullinane, A., Erduran, S. & Wooding, S. J. (2019). Investigating the diversity of scientific methods in high-stakes chemistry examinations in England. International Journal of Science Education, 41 (16), 2201-2217. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1666216.
Demir, S. & Demir, A. (2012). New high school instructional programs in Turkey: problems, expectations and suggestions. Elementary Education Online 11(1), 35-50.
Department for Science Education (2014). Science programs of study. Key Stage 4. London, National Curriculum in England.
Doran, R.L., Lawrenz, F. & Helgeson, S. (1993). Research on assessment in science. In D. Gabel (Ed.) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp 388-442). New York, Macmillan.
Elmas, R., Öztürk, N., Irmak, M. & Cobern, W. W. (2014). An investigation of teacher response to national science curriculum reforms in Turkey. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 6 (1), 2-33.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.
Gess-Newsome, J. & Lederman, N. G. (1999). (Eds.) Examining pedagogical content knowledge. The construct and its implications for science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Kluwer.
Gkioka, O. (2019). Preparing pre-service secondary physics teachers to teach in the physics laboratory: Results from a three-year research project. AIP Conference Proceedings 2075, 180009 (2019). doi: 10.1063/1.5091406.
Gregory, I. (2003). Ethics in Research. London, Continuum
Herbel-Eisenman, B. A. & Phillips, E. D. (2005). Using student work to develop teachers’ knowledge of Algebra. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 11(2), 62-66.
Hofstein, A. & Lunetta, V. M. (1982). The role of laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52, 201-217.
Hofstein, A. & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
Hollins, M. & Reiss, M. J. (2016). A review of the school science curricula in eleven high achieving jurisdictions. The Curriculum Journal, 27 (1), 80-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2016.1147968
Lazarowitz, R. & Tamir, P. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. In D. Gabel (Ed.) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp 94-128). New York, MacMillan.
Luft, J. A. (2009). Beginning secondary science teachers in different induction programs: The first year of teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 2355-2384. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802369367
Mercan, F. C. (2013). Turkish physics teachers’ views about the 2007 physics teaching program and its implementation. Educational Research and Reviews, 8 (17), 1559-1573. doi.org/10.5897/ERR2013.1564
Miles, M. & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
Miller, M. D., Linn, R. L. & Gronlund, N. (2013). Measurement and assessment in teaching. Boston: Pearson.
Milli Eğitim Başkanlıği ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlıği (2018). Ortaöğretim fizik dersi 9-12 sınıflar öğretim programı. Ankara, Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
Roberts, R. & Gott, R. (2006). Assessment of performance in practical science and pupil attributes. Assessment in Education, 13 (1), 45-67. doi.org/10.1080/09695940600563652 Robson, C. (2011). Real world research (3rd edition). Chichester, Wiley.
Roth, K. J. (2007). Science Teachers as Researchers. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.) Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1205-1259). Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Russell, M. K. & Airasian, P. W. (2012). Performance Assessments. In M. K. Russell & P. W. Airasian. Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications (pp 200-248). New York, McGraw-Hill.
Russell, T. & Martin, A. K. (2007). Learning to teach science. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.) Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1151-1178). Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sadi, Ö. & Yıldız, M. (2012). Physics teachers opinions on new applied 11th grade physics course at 2010-2011 academic year. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 20(3), 869-882.
Séré, M -G. (2002). Towards renewed research questions from outcomes of the European project labwork in science education. Science Education, 86, 624-644.
Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P. & Pine, J. (1991). Performance assessment in science. Applied Measurement in Education, 4(4), 347-362. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0404_7
Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P. & Gao, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30 (3), 215-232. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1435044
Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P. & Pine, J. (1997). Performance assessments: Political rhetoric and measurement reality. Educational Researcher, May, 22-27. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1177207
Shepard, L. A. (2001). The role of classroom assessment in teaching and learning. In V. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of research on teaching (pp 1066-1101) (4th Edition). Washington, DC, American Educational Research Association. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Solano-Flores, G., Javanovic, J., Shavelson, R. J. & Bachman, M. (1999). On the development and evaluation of a shell for generating science performance assessments. International Journal of Science Education, 21 (3), 293-315. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290714
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. London, Sage.
Tobin (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 403-418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1990.tb17229.x
Wiggins, G. (1992). Creating tests worth taking. Educational Leadership, May, 26-33.
Wiliam, D. (2003). Validity: All you need in your assessment. School Science Review, 85 (311), 79-81.
Wiliam, D. (2010). The role of formative assessment in effective learning environments. In H. Dumont, D. Istance & F. Benavides (Eds.). The Nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice (pp. 135-158). Paris, OECD Publishing.
Wiliam, D. & Leahy, S. (2015). Embedding formative assessment: Practical techniques for K12 classrooms. West Palm Beach, FL, Learning Sciences International.
Wilson, S., Scweingruber, H. & N. Nielsen (2015) (Eds.) Science teachers’ learning: Enhancing opportunities, creating supportive Contexts. Committee on the strengthening science education through a teacher learning continuum. Board on science education and teacher advisory council, division of behavioral and social science and education. Washington, DC, The National Academies Press.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research design and methods (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage. Yung, B. H. W. (2001). Three views of fairness in a school-based assessment scheme of practical work in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 985-1005. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010017129
Zeichner, K. M. & Conklin, H. C. (2005). Teacher Education programs. In M. Cochran-Smith and K. Zeichner (Eds.) (2005). Studying teacher education: The Report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education (pp 645-735). Washington, DC, American Educational Research Association and London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.