Araştırma Makalesi
PDF EndNote BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Fen Bilimleri Öğretmenlerinin Akıl Yürütme Becerileri Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme

Yıl 2022, Cilt 11, Sayı 2, 361 - 373, 30.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.1017938

Öz

Bu çalışmada fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin, sorgulama sürecinde kullanılan zihinsel beceriler olarak akıl yürütme becerilerini kullanabilme ve bu becerilerin öğretimine yönelik öz yeterlik algılarının durumunu değerlendirmek amaçlanmıştır. Katılımcılar olarak, İzmir iline bağlı merkez ilçelerin resmi ortaokullarında görev yapmakta olan 93 fen bilimleri öğretmeninin belirlenmesinde elverişli örnekleme kullanılmıştır. Çalışma kesitsel tarama türündedir. Katılımcıların akıl yürütme becerilerini kullanabilme yeteneklerini belirleme amacıyla “Fen Bilimleri Öğretmenleri ve Öğretmen Adaylarına Yönelik Akıl Yürütme Becerileri Testi (FBÖAYBT)” ve bu becerilerin öğretimine yönelik öz yeterlik algılarını belirleme amacıyla “Akıl Yürütme Becerileri Öğretimine Yönelik Öz yeterlik Algısı Ölçeği (AYBÖ)” veri toplama aracı olarak kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonunda, fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin akıl yürütme becerilerini kullanma yeteneği bağlamında ortalamanın üzerinde bir başarıya sahip oldukları bulunmuştur. Detaylı analizler öğretmenlerin en fazla analojik akıl yürütme, en az ise nedensel akıl yürütmede başarılı olduklarını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Bununla birlikte, FBÖAYBT’de yer alan tüm sorulara yalnızca tek bir öğretmen tarafından doğru cevap verilmesi dikkat çekicidir. Akıl yürütme becerileri öğretimine yönelik öz yeterlik algıları bağlamında, öğretmenlerin AYBÖ’nün hem geneli hem alt boyutlarında yüksek öz yeterlik algılarına sahip oldukları bulunmuştur. Detaylı analizler, öğretmenlerin akıl yürütme becerilerine dayalı öğrenme ortamı tasarlamayla ilgili maddelerde en yüksek; akıl yürütme becerileri öğretim yollarıyla ilgili maddelerde en düşük öz yeterlik algısı puanlarına sahip olduklarını göstermiştir.

Kaynakça

  • Abate, T., Michael, K. & Angell, C. (2020). Assessment of scientific reasoning: Development and validation of scientific reasoning assessment tool. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology education, 16(12), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9353
  • Aizpurua, A., Lizaso, I. & Iturbe, I. (2018). Learning strategies and reasoning skills of university students. Revista de Psicodidactica, 23(2), 110-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicoe.2018.02.002
  • Alpar, R. (2014). Spor, Sağlık ve Eğitim Bilimlerinden Örneklerle Uygulamalı İstatistik ve Geçerlik-Güvenilirlik. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  • Arıcıgil Çilan, Ç. (2009). Sosyal bilimlerde kategorik verilerle ilişki analizi: Kontenjans tabloları analizi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Baines, E., Blatchford, P. & Webster, R. (2015). The challenges of implementing group-work in primary school classrooms and including pupils with Special Educational Needs. Education 3-13, 43(1), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2015.961689
  • Bezanilla, M. J., Fernandez-Nogueira, D., Poblete, M. & Galindo-Dominguez, H. (2019). Methodologies for teaching-learning critical thinking in higher education: The teacher’s view. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tse.2019.100584
  • Blanquicett, G. E. A., Blanquicett, G. E. A., Vidal-Tovar, C.R. & Rios-Dominguez, I. C. (2020). Scientific reasoning skills and patterns of use of information and communication Technologies. The case of the students of the Universidad de Santander (Valledupar, Colombia). IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 844(2020), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/844/1/012007
  • Bostancı, Ü. Y., Kuzu, O. & Sıvacı, S. Y. (2020). Sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik algıları ve geometrik akıl yürütme becerilerinin incelenmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 54, 282-310.
  • Campbell, C. L., Jr, & Kresyman, H. (2015). Aligning business and education: 21st century skill preparation. E-journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 9(2), 13–27.
  • Chen, C. T. & She, H. C. (2015). The effectiveness of scientific inquiry with/without integration of scientific reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9508-7
  • Colburn, A. (2000). An Inquiry Primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42-44.
  • Fasching, J. L. & LaSere Erickson, B. (1985). Techniques for teaching scientific reasoning and problem solving. To Improve the Academy, Paper 78
  • Flick, L. (1991). Analogy and metaphor: Tools for understanding inquiry science methods. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2(3), 61-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02629748
  • Forslund Frykedal, K. & Hammar Chiriac, E. (2012). Group work management in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56(5), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.7225098
  • Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education (5th Ed.). Newyork: McGraw- Hill Companies.
  • Friedler, Y., Nachmias, R. & Butler Songer, N. (1989). Teaching scientific reasoning skills: A case study of a microcomputer-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 89(1), 58-67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1989.tb11890.x
  • Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A. M. L. & Marek, A. E. (2001). Relationship among informal learning environments, teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 535-549. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690116971
  • Gillies, R. M. & Boyle, M. (2010). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 933–940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.034
  • Granström, K. (2006). Group phenomena and classroom management in Sweden. In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice and contemporary issues. (pp. 1141–1160) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Hilfert-Rüppell, D., Loob, M., Klingenberg, K., Eghtessad, A., Höner, K., Müller, R., Strahl, A. & Pietzner, V. (2013). Scientific reasoning of prospective science teachers in designing a biological experiment. Lehrerbildung auf dem Prüfstand, 6(2), 135-154.
  • Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups’ ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10025
  • Hogan, K. & Fisherkeller, J. (2005). Dialogue as data: Assessing students' scientificreasoning with interactive protocols. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee ve J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (ss.95-127). Burlington: Elsevier Academic Press.
  • Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Jeong, J., Kim, H., Chae, D. C. & Kim, E. (2014). The effect of a case-based reasoning instructional model on Korean high school students’ awareness in climate change unit. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(5), 427-435.
  • Jumiarsih, D. I., Kusmayadi, T. A. & Fitirana, L. (2020). Students’ mathematical reasoning ability viewed from self-efficacy. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1538(2020), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.108/1742-6596/1538/012101

An Evaluation on Science Teachers’ Scientific Reasoning Skills

Yıl 2022, Cilt 11, Sayı 2, 361 - 373, 30.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.1017938

Öz

In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the status of science teachers’ ability to use scientific reasoning skills, which are intellectual skills used in inquiry-based learning process and their self-efficacy perceptions towards teaching them. Convenience sampling was used to determine the participants who were 93 science teachers still working at state middle schools in central districts of Izmir province. The study was on cross-sectional survey design. “Scientific Reasoning Skills Test for In-service and Preservice Science Teachers (SRSTIPST)” with the aim of determining the participants’ ability to use scientific reasoning skills and “Self-efficacy Perceptions towards Teaching Scientific Reasoning Skills Scale (SEPSRS)” with the aim of determining their self-efficacy perceptions towards teaching these skills were used as data collection tools. At the end of the study, it was found that science teachers had success above average in the context of ability to use scientific reasoning skills. Detailed analysis revealed that teachers were the most successful in analogical reasoning and the least in causal reasoning. However, the finding that only one teacher could give correct answers to the all questions in SRSTIPST was remarkable. In the context of self-efficacy perceptions towards teaching scientific reasoning skills, it was found that teachers had high self-efficacy perceptions in both sub-factors and SEPSRS totally. Detailed analysis indicated that teachers had the highest self-efficacy perceptions scores in the items related to creating scientific reasoning skills based learning environment and the lowest in the items related to instructional ways for scientific reasoning skills.

Kaynakça

  • Abate, T., Michael, K. & Angell, C. (2020). Assessment of scientific reasoning: Development and validation of scientific reasoning assessment tool. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology education, 16(12), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9353
  • Aizpurua, A., Lizaso, I. & Iturbe, I. (2018). Learning strategies and reasoning skills of university students. Revista de Psicodidactica, 23(2), 110-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psicoe.2018.02.002
  • Alpar, R. (2014). Spor, Sağlık ve Eğitim Bilimlerinden Örneklerle Uygulamalı İstatistik ve Geçerlik-Güvenilirlik. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
  • Arıcıgil Çilan, Ç. (2009). Sosyal bilimlerde kategorik verilerle ilişki analizi: Kontenjans tabloları analizi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Baines, E., Blatchford, P. & Webster, R. (2015). The challenges of implementing group-work in primary school classrooms and including pupils with Special Educational Needs. Education 3-13, 43(1), 15-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2015.961689
  • Bezanilla, M. J., Fernandez-Nogueira, D., Poblete, M. & Galindo-Dominguez, H. (2019). Methodologies for teaching-learning critical thinking in higher education: The teacher’s view. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tse.2019.100584
  • Blanquicett, G. E. A., Blanquicett, G. E. A., Vidal-Tovar, C.R. & Rios-Dominguez, I. C. (2020). Scientific reasoning skills and patterns of use of information and communication Technologies. The case of the students of the Universidad de Santander (Valledupar, Colombia). IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 844(2020), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/844/1/012007
  • Bostancı, Ü. Y., Kuzu, O. & Sıvacı, S. Y. (2020). Sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik algıları ve geometrik akıl yürütme becerilerinin incelenmesi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 54, 282-310.
  • Campbell, C. L., Jr, & Kresyman, H. (2015). Aligning business and education: 21st century skill preparation. E-journal of Business Education & Scholarship of Teaching, 9(2), 13–27.
  • Chen, C. T. & She, H. C. (2015). The effectiveness of scientific inquiry with/without integration of scientific reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9508-7
  • Colburn, A. (2000). An Inquiry Primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42-44.
  • Fasching, J. L. & LaSere Erickson, B. (1985). Techniques for teaching scientific reasoning and problem solving. To Improve the Academy, Paper 78
  • Flick, L. (1991). Analogy and metaphor: Tools for understanding inquiry science methods. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2(3), 61-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02629748
  • Forslund Frykedal, K. & Hammar Chiriac, E. (2012). Group work management in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56(5), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2012.7225098
  • Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education (5th Ed.). Newyork: McGraw- Hill Companies.
  • Friedler, Y., Nachmias, R. & Butler Songer, N. (1989). Teaching scientific reasoning skills: A case study of a microcomputer-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 89(1), 58-67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1989.tb11890.x
  • Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A. M. L. & Marek, A. E. (2001). Relationship among informal learning environments, teaching procedures and scientific reasoning ability. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 535-549. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690116971
  • Gillies, R. M. & Boyle, M. (2010). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 933–940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.034
  • Granström, K. (2006). Group phenomena and classroom management in Sweden. In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice and contemporary issues. (pp. 1141–1160) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Hilfert-Rüppell, D., Loob, M., Klingenberg, K., Eghtessad, A., Höner, K., Müller, R., Strahl, A. & Pietzner, V. (2013). Scientific reasoning of prospective science teachers in designing a biological experiment. Lehrerbildung auf dem Prüfstand, 6(2), 135-154.
  • Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups’ ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341-368. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10025
  • Hogan, K. & Fisherkeller, J. (2005). Dialogue as data: Assessing students' scientificreasoning with interactive protocols. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee ve J. D. Novak (Eds.), Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view (ss.95-127). Burlington: Elsevier Academic Press.
  • Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Jeong, J., Kim, H., Chae, D. C. & Kim, E. (2014). The effect of a case-based reasoning instructional model on Korean high school students’ awareness in climate change unit. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(5), 427-435.
  • Jumiarsih, D. I., Kusmayadi, T. A. & Fitirana, L. (2020). Students’ mathematical reasoning ability viewed from self-efficacy. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1538(2020), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.108/1742-6596/1538/012101

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Sosyal
Bölüm Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar

Merve KOCAGÜL> (Sorumlu Yazar)
PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ
0000-0002-1152-9220
Türkiye


Gül ÜNAL ÇOBAN>
DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, BUCA EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ
0000-0002-0143-0382
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2022
Yayınlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022, Cilt 11, Sayı 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Kocagül, M. & Ünal Çoban, G. (2022). Fen Bilimleri Öğretmenlerinin Akıl Yürütme Becerileri Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme . Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi , 11 (2) , 361-373 . DOI: 10.30703/cije.1017938

e-ISSN: 2147-1606

14550        14551