YÖNTEM OLARAK MÜHENDİSLİK-DİZAYNA VE DERS MATERYALİ OLARAK LEGOLARA ÖĞRETMEN İLE ÖĞRETMEN ADAYLARININ BAKIŞ AÇILARININ İNCELENMESİ

Bu araştırmanın amacı fen bilgisi öğretmenligi bölümünde ögrenim gören ögretmen adaylarının ve fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin yöntem olarak mühendislik-dizayna ve ders materyali olarak legolara bakış açılarının incelenmesidir. Araştırma 2012-2013 eğitim öğretim yılında Erciyes Üniversitesi Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenliği programında öğrenim görmekte olan 3 ve 4. sınıf ögrencileri (n=26) ve Kayseri ilinde görev yapmakta olan fen bilgisi öğretmenleri (n=22) ile yürütülmüstür. Araştırmada karma (mixed) metod kullanılmıştır. Nicel veri toplama araçlarından anket yöntemi, nitel veri toplama araçlarından mülakat ve serbest çizim yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Arastırmada tek-grup öntestson test yarı-deneysel desen kullanılmıştır. Veri toplama aracı olarak Yaşar, Baker, Robinson-Kurpius, Krause ve Roberts (2006) tarafından geliştirilen 2010 Mühendislik Egitimi Anket'i kullanılmıstır. Öğretmen ve öğretmen adaylarının ders materyali olarak legoların kullanımına iliskin bakış açılarını değerlendirmek amacıyla anket soruları oluşturulmuştur. Bu sorulara ek olarak mühendisler ve mühendislik süreciyle ilgili 6 açık uçlu ve bir çizim sorusu olusturulmuş ve kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada öğretmen ve öğretmen adaylarından olusan iki gruba seminer düzenlenmiştir. Her iki gruba seminerin basında mühendislik-dizayn ve legolarla ilgili anket uygulanmıstır. Sonra mühendislik-dizayn araştırmacılar tarafından hazırlanan mühendislik-dizayn tabanlı etkinlikler uygulanmıstır. Bu eğitimin sonunda aynı anket yeniden uygulanmıştır. Anket maddelerinden elde edilen veriler SPSS 16.00 paket program aracılığıyla, görüşme soruları betimsel analize tabi tutularak ve serbest çizimler ise değerlendirme formu kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda anketin mühendisliğin önemi ve mühendisliğe aşinalık ile lego kullanımın önemi ve legolara aşinalık boyutları incelendiğinde, ögretmen öntest- son test puanları arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmuştur (p.05). Araştırma sonucunda anketin mühendisliğin önemi ve mühendislige aşinalık, mühendisliğin ve mühendislerin özellikleri ile lego kullanımın önemi ve legolara aşinalık boyutları incelendiğinde, öğretmen adaylarının öntestson test puanları arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmuştur (p

INVESTIGATION OF IN SERVICE AND PRE SERVICE SCIENCE TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ABOUT ENGINEERING-DESIGN AS AN INSTRUCTIONAL METHOD AND LEGOS AS AN INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIAL

The aim of this study is to examine pre-service and in-service elementary science teachers' perspectives on engineering-design as a method and legos as course materials. The subjects of the study were 3rd and 4th grade pre-service elementary science teachers (n=26) at Erciyes University in the 2012-2013 academic year, and in-service teachers (n=22) who were working in Kayseri. The mixed method approach was used in this research. A survey, as a quantitative data collection tool, hand drawings and interviews as qualitative data collection tools were used. One-Group Pretest-Posttest Quasi-experimental Design was used in the study. 2010 Engineering Education Survey when was developed by Yasar, Baker, Robinson-Kurpius, Krause and Roberts (2006) was used as a data collection instrument. Survey questions was created in order to assess pre service and in service elementary science teachers’ perspectives on the use of legos as course material. In addition to these questions, 6 open-ended and drawing questions about the engineers and engineering process were developed and used. A seminar on the use of engineering-design and legos in science instruction was organized for teachers and teacher candidates in research. At the beginning of the seminar both groups were pre-surveyed on engineering design and legos. Then engineering-design method and lego materials were to the pre-service and in-service teachers. The same questionnaire was re-administered at the end of the seminar. The data collected through questionnaire was by using SPSS 16.0 package program Interview questions were analyzed by using descriptive analysis techniques, and hand drawings were analyzed by using a rubric. The study revealed that teachers’ scores on the importance of engineering, familiarity with engineering and familiarity with legos, and importance of using legos increased significantly (p< .05). However teachers' scores on characteristics of engineering and engineers did not change significantly (p>.05). The study revealed that teacher candidates’ scores on the importance of engineering, familiarity with engineering, characteristics of engineering and engineers, familiarity with legos, and importance of using legos increased significantly (p< .05). Results have shown that teachers and teacher candidates had somewhat knowledge about engineers and engineering, but they were not so familiar with the use of engineering-design as an instructional method and legos as a course material in science education

PDF

___

ALEXANDER, J. M., CARR, M. ve SCHWANENFLUGEL, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: Directions for future research. Developmental Review, 15, 1–37.
American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. 1993. Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
ARAFAH, M. M. (2011). But what does this have to do wıth science? Buildıng the case for engineerıng in k-12. Cleveland State University. Master’s Thesis. Cleveland, OH, 53.
AYAS, A. P. ve ÇEPNİ, S. (2011). Eğitimde Program Geliştirme ve Bazı Fen ve Teknoloji Programları. Çepni, S. (Ed.). Fen ve Teknoloji Öğretimi İçinde (ss. 14-30). Pegem Akademi Yayınları. 9. Baskı.
BARNETT, M. (2005). Engaging inner city students in learning through designing remote operated vehicles. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 14(1), 87-100.
BROPHY, S. KLEIN, S. PORTSMORE, M. ve ROGERS, C. (2008). Advancing Engineering Education in P-12 Classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education,369-387.
BUCCİARELLİ, Louis L. 1996. Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
BYBEE, R. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrell, & E. van Zee (Ed.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. (20–46).
CARLSEN, W. S. (1998). Engineering design in the classroom: Is it good science education or is it revolting?. Research in Science Education, 28(1), 51-63.
CHİNN, C. A. ve MALHOTRA, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218.
CRİSMOND, D. (2001). Learning and using science ideas when doing investigate-and-redesign tasks: A study of naive, novice, and expert designers doing constrained and scaffolded design work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 791-820.
CUNNİNGHAM, C. M., LACHAPELLE, C. P. ve LİNDGREN-STREİCHER, A. (2006). Elementary teachers' understandings of engineering and technology. Presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. Chicago, IL: American Society for Engineering Education.
ÇAVAŞ, B., BULUT Ç., HOLBROOK J. ve RANNIKMAE M. (2013). Fen Eğitimine Mühendislik Odaklı Bir Yaklaşım: ENGINEER Projesi ve Uygulamaları. Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi Dergisi, 1(1), 12-22.
FLEER, M. (2000). Working technologically: Investigations into how young children design and make during technology education. International Joumal of Technology and Design Education, 10(1), 43.
FORTUS, D., DERSHİMER, R. C., KRAJCİK, J. S., MARX, R. W. ve MAMLOK-NAAMAN, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science, 41(10), 1081-1110.
FORTUS, D., DERSHİMER, R. C., KRAJCİK, J. S., MARX, R. W. ve MAMLOK-NAAMAN, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science, 41(10), 1081-1110.
HMELO, C.E., HOLTON, D.L. ve KOLODNER, J.L. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 247 - 298.
HOWES, E. (2001). Designing Structures and Research Texts: Situated Learning And Elementary Teaghing. Re/constructing elementary science. 0-8204-5200-9. 149-154.
HSU, M-C., PURZER S. ve CARDELLA M.E., 2011. Elementary Teachers’ Views about Teaching Design, Engineering and Technology. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research,1(2),31–39.
KAPTAN, F. Fen Bilgisi Öğretimi, İstanbul: MEB Öğretmen Kitapları Dizisi. (1999) Fen Bilgisi Öğretimi, Anı Yayıncılık. Ankara 1999.
KATEHİ, L., PEARSON, G. ve FEDER, M. (Eds.) (2009). National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council report: Engineering in K-12 education. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
KAVAK, N., TUFAN, Y. ve DEMİRELLİ, H. (2006). "FenTeknoloji Okuryazarlığı ve İnformal Fen Eğitimi: Gazetelerin Potansiyel Rolü. G.Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 26 (3). 17.
KİMMEL, H., CARPİNELLİ, J. ve ROCKLAND R. (2007). Bringing Engineering into K-12 Schools: A Problem Looking for Solutions?, International Conference on Engineering Education – ICEE, Portugal.
KNİGHT, M. ve CUNNİNGHAM, C. M. (2004). Draw an Engineer Test (DAET): Development of a tool to investigate students' ideas about engineers and engineering. Presented at the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT.
KOLODNER, J. L., GRAY, J. T. ve FASSE, B. B. (2003). Promoting transfer through casebased reasoning: Rituals and practices in Learning by Design™ classrooms. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 3(2), 119-170.
MARULCU, I. ve SUNGUR, K. (2012). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Mühendis ve Mühendislik Algılarının ve Yöntem Olarak Mühendislik-Dizayna Bakış Açılarının İncelenmesi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(1). 13-23.
MARULCU, İ. (2010). Investigating The Impact of A Legotmbased, Engineering-Oriented Curriculum Compared To An Inquiry-Based Curriculum On Fifth Graders’ Content Learning Of Simple Machines. Doctor Thesis. Boston College Lynch Graduate School of Education Department of Teacher Education, Special Education, Curriculum and Instruction, Specialization in Mathematics, Science and Technology.
MCKENNA, Ann, AGOGİNO ve Alice (1998). A Web-based instructional module for teaching middle school students engineering design with simple machines, Journal of Engineering Education, 1-3.
MEB, 2006. Fen ve teknoloji dersi programı, İlköğretim 6,7,8. Sınıf. Ankara. Next Generation Science Standards (2013). http://www.nextgenscience.org
PENNER, D.E., LEHRER, R. ve SCHAUBLE, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanical systems: A design-based modeling approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3 ve 4), 429-449.
RİNGWOOD, J. V., MONAGHAN, K. ve MALOCO, J. (2005). "Teaching engineering design through Lego ® Mindstorms™." European Journal of Engineering Education, 30(1),91- 104.
SCHNEİDER, R.M., KRAJCİK, J.S., MARX, R.W. ve SOLOWAY, E. (2002). Performance of students in project-based science classrooms on a national measure of science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39 (5), 410-422.
SCHWARTZ, R. S., LEDERMAN, N. G. ve CRAWFORD, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(4), 610-645.
SİLK E. M. ve SCHUNN C. D. (2008). The Impact of an Engineering Design Curriculum on Science Reasoning in an Urban Setting, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 41(10), 1081-1110.
YAŞAR, S., BAKER, D., ROBİNSON-KURPİUS, S. ve ROBERTS, C. (2006). Development of a survey to assess K-12 teachers’ perceptions of engineers and familiarity with teaching design, engineering, and technology. Journal of Engineering Education, 205-216.