___

• Aktamış, H. ve Arıcı, V. A. (2013). Sanal Gerçeklik programlarının astronomi konularının öğretiminde kullanılmasının akademik başarı ve kalıcılığa etkisi. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), 58-70.
• Aslan, Z. ve Doğdu, S. (1993). Eğitim teknolojisi uygulamaları ve eğitim araç-gereçleri. Ankara: Tekışık Ofset.
• Bahar M. (2002). Students’ learning difficulties in Biology: Reasons and solutions. Kastamonu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10, 73–82.
• Barron, A. E. ve Orwig, G. W. (1997). New technologies for education: A beginner’s guide. USA: Libraries Unlimited Inc.
• Bass, K. M., Danielle, Y. ve Julia, H. (2011). The effect of raft hands-on activities on student learning, engagement, and 21st century skills. (Erişim Tarihi: 7 Aralık 2016, http://www.raft.net/public/pdfs/Rockman-RAFT-Report.pdf)
• Baxter, J. (1989). Children’s understanding of familiar astronomical events. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 502-513.
• Bisard, W. J., Aron, R. H., Francek, M. A. ve Nelson, B. D. (1994). Assessing selected physical science and earth science misconceptions of middle school through university pre-service teachers: Breaking the science ‘misconception cycle’. Journal of College Science Teaching, 24(1), 38-42.
• Bolat, M. (2016). The development and implementation of a model for teaching astronomy to deaf students. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(7), 14-27.
• Brooks, R. C. (1988). Improving student science achievement in grades 4-6 through hands-on materials and concept verbalization. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 317430, Erişim adresi: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED317430
• Chen, C. H., Yang, J. C., Shen, S. ve Jeng, M. C. (2007). A desktop virtual reality earth motion system in astronomy education. Educational Technology & Society, 10, 289-304.
• Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Diakidoy, I. N. ve Kendeou, P. (2001). Facilitating conceptual change in astronomy: a comparison of the effectiveness of two instructional approaches. Learning and Instruction, 11, 1-20.
• Doerr, H. M. (1997). Experiment simulation and analysis: an integrated instructional approach to the concept of force. International Journal of Science Education, 19(3), 265–282.
• Dupin, J. J. ve Johsua, S. (1989). Analogies and ‘modelling analogies’ in teaching: some examples in basic electricity. Science Education, 73(2), 207–224.
• Dyche, S., Mcclurg, P., Stepans, J. ve Veath, M. L. (1993). Questions and conjectures concerning models, misconceptions, and spatial ability. School Science and Mathematics, 93(4), 191–197
• Flick, L. B. (1993). The meanings of hands-on science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 4(1). 1-8.
• Frede, V. (2008). The seasons explained by reputational modeling activities. Astronomy Education Review, 7(1), 44-56. Doi: 10.3847/AER2008005
• Gilbert, J. ve Priest, M. (1997). Models and discourse: a primary school science class visit to a museum. Science Education, 81(6), 749 – 762.
• Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Visualization in science education (Ed. Gilbert, J. K.). Netherlands: Springer
• Gobert, J. D. ve Clement, J. J. (1999). Effects of student-generated diagrams versus student generated summaries on conceptual understanding of causal and dynamic knowledge in plate tectonics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 39–54.
• Gobert, J. D. (2000). A typology of causal models for plate tectonics: Inferential power and barriers to understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 937–977.
• Haury, D. L. ve Rillero, P. (1994). Perspectives on hands-on science teaching. Pathways to school improvement. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 3072926, Columbus, Erişim adresi: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED372926.pdf
• Hein, G. E. (1987). The right test for hands-on learning. Science and Children, 25(2), 8-12.
• Henriques, L. (2000). Children's misconceptions about weather: a review of the literature, the annual meeting of the national association of research in science teaching, National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA
• Justi, R. ve Gilbert, J. (2000). History and philosophy of science through models: some challenges in the case of “the atom”. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 993–1009.
• Kalkan, H. ve Kıroğlu, K. (2007). Science and nonscience students’ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts in preservice training for education teachers. Astronomy Education Review, 6(1), 15-24. doi.org/10.3847/AER2007002
• Kıroğlu, K. (2015). Students are not highly familiar with astronomy concepts–but what about the teachers? Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(4), 31-41.
• Kikas, E. (1998). The impact of teaching on students' definitions and explanations of astronomical phenomena. Learning and Instruction, 8(5), 439-454. Doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00004-8
• Kikas, E. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions and misconceptions concerning three natural phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 432-448. Doi: 10.1002/tea.20012
• Küçükahmet, L. (2000). Bir meslek olarak öğretmenlik. Öğretmenlik mesleğine giriş. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
• Kyle, J. W. C., Bonnstetter, R. J., McCloskey, J. ve Fulis, B. A. (1985). What research says: Science through discovery: Students love it. Science and Children, 23(2), 39-41.
• Lumpe, A. T. ve Oliver, J. S. (1991). Dimensions of hands-on science. The American Biology Teacher, 53(6), 345- 348.
• Mattheis, F. E. ve Nakayama, G. (1988). Effects of a laboratory-centered inquiry program on laboratory skills, science process skills, and understanding of science knowledge in middle grades students. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 307148, East Carolina University, Erişim adresi: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED307148.pdf
• Meinhard, R. (1992). Concept process-based science in the elementary school. Salem, OR: Oregon Department of Education.
• Miles, B. M. ve Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publication. Ojala, J. (1992). The third planet. International Journal of Science Education, 14(2), 191-200. Doi: 10.1080/0950069920140207
• Ojala, J. (1997). Lost in space? The concepts of planetary phenomena held by trainee primary school teachers. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 6(3), 183-203. Doi: 10.1080/10382046.1997.9965047
• Pardhan, H. ve Mohammad, R. F. (2005). Teaching science and mathematics for conceptual understanding? A rising issue. Eurasia Journal Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 1(1), 1-20.
• Parker, J. ve Haywood, D. (1998). The earth and beyond: developing primary teachers’ understanding of basic astronomical events. International Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 503-520. Doi: 10.1080/0950069980200501
• Rowland, P. M. (1990). Using science activities to internalize locus of control and influence attitudes towards science. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta
• Schneps, M. H. ve Sadler, P. M. (1989). A private universe-preconceptions that block learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
• Shapley, K. S. ve Luttrell, H. D. (1993, Ocak). Effectiveness of a teacher training model on the implementation of hands-on science. Paper presented at the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science International Conference, Charleston, SC.
• Sharp, J. (1996). Children’s astronomical beliefs: A preliminary study of year 6 children in south-west England. International Journal of Science Education, 18(6), 631-652. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0950069960180601.
• Shin, Y. S. (2003, Aralık). Virtual experiment environments design for science education. International Conference on IEEE. 388-395. Chosun Univ., South Korea.
• Sinan, O. (2007). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Enzimlerle İlgili Kavramsal Anlama Düzeyleri. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi (EFMED), 1(1),1-22.
• Şimşek, H. ve Yıldırım, A. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• Trundle, K. C. ve Bell, R. L. (2010). The use of a computer simulation to promote conceptual change: A quasiexperimental study. Computers and Education, 54, 1078-1088
• Tsai, C. ve Chang, C. (2005). Lasting effects of instruction guided by the conflict map: experimental study of learning about the causes of seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1089-1111. Doi: 10.1002/tea.10039
• Türk, C. ve Kalkan, H. (2015). The effect of planetariums on teaching specific astronomy concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 1-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9516-6
• Vosniadou, S. ve Brewer, W. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535–585. Doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90018-W
• Vosniadou, S. ve Brewer, W. (1994). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18(1), 123–183. Doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(94)90022-1
• Yair, Y. (2001). 3D-virtual reality in science education: An implication for astronomy teaching. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 20, 293-305.
• Yu, K. C. (2005). Digital full-domes: The future of virtual astronomy education. Planetarian Journal of the International Planetarium Society, 34(3), 6-11.