SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama / 2023 / Cilt: 19 Sayı: 2

Examination of the Reasoning Skills of 60-72 Months-Old Preschool Students on Socio-Scientific Issues According to Epistemic Profiles: Isparta Example

60-72 Aylık Okul Öncesi Öğrencilerinin Epistemik Profillere Göre Sosyobilimsel Konulara Yönelik Muhakeme Becerilerinin Araştırılması: Isparta Örneği

Şirin Yılmaz(İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi)0000-0002-0238-8550
Muhammed Safa Yıldırım(İSTANBUL AYDIN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1763-6139
Pages
204–226
Publication Date
2023-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the findings, it was concluded that the participant group could not make sufficient reasoning and had naive epistemic profiles even if they had ideas about current issues within the scope of SBK.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to examine preschool students' reasoning about socioscientific issues (SSI) according to their epistemic profiles.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participant group of the study consisted of 22 children aged 60-72 months studying in a public kindergarten in the central district of Isparta province in the 2021-2022 academic year.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the findings, it was concluded that the participant group could not make sufficient reasoning and had naive epistemic profiles even if they had ideas about current issues within the scope of SBK.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2021-2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Okulöncesi eğitimi · sosyobilimsel konular · muhakeme

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine preschool students' reasoning about socioscientific issues (SSI) according to their epistemic profiles. A qualitative case study was used in the study. The participant group of the study consisted of 22 children aged 60-72 months studying in a public kindergarten in the central district of Isparta province in the 2021-2022 academic year. Three scenarios about SBK developed by the researchers and two different question sets related to each scenario were used as data collection tools. Before starting the main study, researcher1 spent time with the participant group as a participant-observer within the scope of naturalistic inquiry approach and the main research process was started after she was seen as a natural member of the group. During the implementation process, researcher1 met with each student in a quiet environment with one-to-one interviews and read the scenarios and aimed to reveal the students' reasoning about the scenarios. The same process was followed for each scenario. The data collection process lasted four weeks. The interviews were recorded and converted into written format. The data obtained in the study were analyzed based on content analysis and Schommer and Kuhn's epistemological belief models. According to the findings, it was concluded that the participant group could not make sufficient reasoning and had naive epistemic profiles even if they had ideas about current issues within the scope of SBK. However, as the practices progressed and the scenarios changed, positive changes were observed in students' reasoning. The findings were discussed with reference to the literature and recommendations were presented.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, okul öncesi öğrencilerinin sosyobilimsel konulara (SBK) yönelik muhakemelerini epistemik profillere göre incelemektir. Çalışmada nitel durum çalışması kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın katılımcı grubunu 2021-2022 akademik yılında Isparta ili merkez ilçesinde bir devlet anaokulunda öğrenim gören 60-72 aylık 22 çocuk oluşturmuştur. Çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen SBK ile ilgili üç senaryo ve her senaryoya ilişkin iki farklı soru seti kullanılmıştır. Araştırmacı1 ana uygulamaya başlamadan önce natüralistik sorgulayıcı yaklaşım kapsamında katılımcı grupla katılımcı-gözlemci olarak zaman geçirmiş ve grubun doğal bir üyesi olarak görülmesinden sonra ana araştırma sürecine geçilmiştir. Uygulama sürecinde araştırmacı1 biri birebir görüşmeler ile sessiz bir ortamda her öğrenci ile bir araya gelerek senaryoları okumuş ve öğrencilerin senaryolar hakkındaki muhakemelerini ortaya koymayı hedeflemiştir. Her senaryo için aynı süreç izlenmiştir. Veri toplama süreci dört hafta sürmüştür. Görüşmeler kayıt altına alınarak yazılı formata dönüştürülmüştür. Çalışmada elde edilen veriler içerik analizi ve Schommer ve Kuhn'un epistemolojik inanç modelleri esas alınarak analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre, katılımcı grubun SBK kapsamındaki güncel konular hakkında fikirleri olsa bile yeterli muhakeme yapamadıkları ve naif epistemik profillere sahip oldukları sonucuna varılmıştır. Ancak uygulamalar ilerledikçe ve senaryolar değiştikçe öğrencilerin muhakemelerinde olumlu değişimler gözlenmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular literatürden yararlanılarak tartışılmış ve elde edilen bulgulara yönelik öneriler sunulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yılmaz, Ş., Yıldırım, M. S. (2023). Examination of the Reasoning Skills of 60-72 Months-Old Preschool Students on Socio-Scientific Issues According to Epistemic Profiles: Isparta Example. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, Cilt: 19 Sayı: 2, 204–226. https://doi.org/10.17244/eku.1281011

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (86)

  1. Albe, V. (2008). Students' positions and considerations of scientific evidence about a controversial socioscientific issue. Science & Education, 17(8), 805-827.
  2. Ali̇si̇nanoğlu, F., Özbey, S., & Kahveci̇, G. (2017). Science education in preschool. Pegem Citation Index, 1-200 Ankara.
  3. Arnas Aktaş, Y. (2002). Objectives of science education in preschool period. Journal of Child Development and Education, 1(6-7), 1-6.
  4. Ayvacı, H. Ş., Bülbül, S., & Türker, K. (2019). Investigation of prospective science teachers' attitudes towards socioscientific issues according to class level. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 38(2), 17-30.
  5. Bi̇laloğlu, R. G. (2014). Science education and activity examples in preschool period. In Mathematics and Science Activities in Preschool Education (2nd edition). Ankara: Vize Publishing.
  6. Bahçivan, E. (2017). Epistemological research in educational sciences: A critical overview of past, present, and future perspectives. Mersin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 13(2), 760-772.
  7. Bakken, L., Brown, N., & Downi̇ng, B. (2017). Early childhood education: The long-term benefits. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 31(2), 255-269.
  8. Baltacı, A. (2019). Qualitative research process: how to conduct a qualitative research? Ahi Evran University Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, 5(2), 368-388.
  9. Barnett, W. S. (2008). Preschool Education and its Lasting Effects: Research and Policy Implications.
  10. Barnett, W. S. (2011). Effectiveness of early educational intervention. Science, 333(6045), 975-978.
  11. Başbay, M. (2013). Investigation of the relationship of epistemological belief with critical thinking and metacognition with structural equation modeling. Education And Science, 38(169), 249-262.
  12. Başkale, H. (2016). Determination of validity, reliability and sample size in qualitative research. Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Nursing Electronic Journal, 9(1), 23-28.
  13. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers." The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.
  14. Brownlee, J., Petri̇wskyj, A., Thorpe, K., Stacey, P., & Gi̇bson, M. (2011). Changing personal epistemologies in early childhood pre-service teachers using an integrated teaching programme. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(4), 477-490.
  15. Carson, K., & Dawson, V. (2016). A teacher professional development model for teaching socioscientific issues. Teaching Science, 62(1), 28-35.
  16. Chmi̇li̇ar, L. (2010). Multiple-case designs. encyclopedia of case study research.
  17. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). "Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches". sage publications, London.
  18. Daempfle, P. (2012). Science & Society: Scientific thought and education for the 21st century. Jones & Bartlett Publishers Burlington
  19. Dawson, V. M. (2011). A Case Study of The Impact of Introducing Socio-Scientific Issues into A Reproduction Unit In A Catholic Girls' School. In Socio-Scientific Issues in The Classroom (Pp. 313-345). Springer, Dordrecht.
  20. Dawson, V. (2015). Western Australian High School Students' understandings about the socioscientific issue of climate change. International Journal of Science Education, 37(7), 1024-1043.
  21. Dejonckheere, P. J., Nele, D. E., Van De Keere, K., & Vervaet, S. (2016). Exploring the classroom: teaching science in early childhood. European Journal of Educational Research, 5(3), 149-164.
  22. Demi̇ral, Ü., & Türkmenoğlu, H. (2018). Investigation of prospective science teachers' risk perceptions about genetically modified organisms and their relationship with decision-making mechanisms. Journal of Yüzüncü Yıl University Faculty of Education, 15(1), 1025-1053.
  23. Demi̇ral, Ü., & Türkmenoğlu, H. (2018). The relationship of preservice science teachers' decision-making strategies in a socioscientific subject with their content knowledge. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education.
  24. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (Pp. 1-32). Sage Publications Ltd.
  25. Durmaz, H., & Karaca, H. S. (2019). The effect of science education based on socioscientific issues on 7th grade students' perspectives on socioscientific issues, scientific and reflective thinking skills. Anadolu University Journal of Education Faculty, 4(1), 21-49.
  26. Eastwood, J. L., Schlegel, W. M., & Cook, K. L. (2011). Effects of an interdisciplinary programme on students' reasoning with socioscientific issues and perceptions of their learning experiences. In Socio-Scientific Issues in The Classroom (pp. 89-126). Springer, Dordrecht.
  27. Et, S. Z., & Gömleksi̇z, M. (2021). Evaluation of science, biology, and physics curricula in terms of socioscientific issues. Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences, 31(2), 745-756.
  28. Fadzil, H. M. (2017). Exploring early childhood preservice teachers' problem-solving skills through socioscientific inquiry approach. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 18, (1).
  29. Gedi̇k, S., & Demi̇rbaş, Ç. Ö. (2018). Student views on global warming as a socioscientific topic in social studies course. Researcher, 6(3), 340-363.
  30. Harlen, W., & Qualter, A. (2018). The teaching of science in primary schools. David Fulton Publishers, London.
  31. Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: implications for learning and teaching. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353-383.
  32. Irmak, M. (2021). Development of reasoning competences and attitudes of undergraduate students related to socioscientific issues. Gazi University Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 41(3), 1801-1838.
  33. Karataş, Z. (2015). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Journal of Spiritually Based Social Service Research, 1(1), 62-80.
  34. Keselman, A., Kaufman, D. R., & Patel, V. L. (2004). You can exercise your way out of hiv" and other stories: the role of biological knowledge in adolescents' evaluation of myths. Science Education, 88(4), 548-573.
  35. Krefting, L. (1991). Rigour in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45(3), 214-222.
  36. Macaroğlu Akgül, E. (2004). Science and nature activities. Morpa Culture Publications. Istanbul
  37. Mercan, N., & Kutluca, A. Y. (2021). Investigation of the effect of epistemological beliefs of preschool teachers on their pedagogical competencies for science teaching. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Faculty of Education, (59), 30-59.
  38. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage. London.
  39. Ministry of National Education (2016). Child Development and Education/Science and Mathematics Activities. Accessed from http://www.megep.meb.gov.tr/mte_program_modul/moduller/Fen%20ve%20Matematik%20Etkinlikleri.pdf on 20/05/2022
  40. Ministry of National Education, (2013). Preschool Education Programme. Ankara. Accessed from https://tegm.meb.gov.tr/dosya/okuloncesi/ooproram.pdf on 15/04/2022.
  41. Ministry of National Education, (2022) Accessed from https://www.meb.gov.tr/3-5-yas-grubunda-okullasma-orani-48e-yukseldi/haber/25068/tr on 15/04/2022.
  42. Mone (2018). Science Course Curriculum (Primary and Secondary School 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Grades). Ankara.Neuman, W. L. (2012). Social Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Volume II (5th Edition). Istanbul: Publishing Room Northouse, page, 38-43.
  43. Nielsen, J. A. (2012). Science in discussions: An analysis of the use of science content in socioscientific discussions. Science Education, 96(3), 428-456.
  44. Nuangchalerm, P. (2009). Development of socioscientific issues-based teaching for preservice science teachers. Journal of Social Sciences, 5(3), 239-243.
  45. Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections (Vol. 13). London: The Nuffield Foundation
  46. Önal, T. K., & Saribaş, D. (2019). Science education and its importance in preschool period. International Journal of Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey Education Research, 1(2), 109-118.
  47. Özcan, F. (2018). Investigation of technology use and social skills in children receiving preschool education in terms of some variables. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Institute of Social Sciences.
  48. Özcan, C. (2020). Examination of doctoral theses in the field of science education in terms of themes determined. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Faculty of Education, 4(6), 33-41.
  49. Özcan, H.; Oran, Ş., & Arik, S. (2018). Comparative investigation of science course 2013 and 2017 curricula according to teachers' opinions. Başkent University Journal of Education, 5(2), 156-166.
  50. Özsoy, T., & Kilinç, A. (2017). Fifth grade students' views on science teaching based on socioscientific issues (Feskök Pedagogy)." Journal of Uludağ University Faculty of Education, 30(2), 909-925.
  51. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage Publications, Inc. Saint Paul MN
  52. Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget's Theory. In Piaget and his school. (Pp. 11-23). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  53. Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures. (Trans A. Rosin). Viking.
  54. Phan, H. P. (2008). Multiple regression analysis of epistemological beliefs, learning approaches, and self-regulated learning. electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 6(1), 157-184.
  55. Ramey, C., & Ramey, S. (2004). Parents involvement in children's education. Plain Talk Centre for Development & Learning, 9(4), 1-12.
  56. Reybold, L. E. (2002). Pragmatic Epistemology: Ways of knowing as ways of being. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 21(6), 537-550.
  57. Sadler, T. D. (2004). "Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues: A Critical Review of Research." Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of The National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
  58. Sadler, T. D., & Dawson, V. (2012). Socio-scientific issues in science education: contexts for the promotion of key learning outcomes. Second International Handbook of Science Education. 799-809. Springer Dordrecht
  59. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of The National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.
  60. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71-93
  61. Sadler, T. D., Foulk, J. A., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2017). Evolution of a model for socio-scientific issue teaching and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 5(2), 75-87.
  62. Sandelowski, M. (1986). The problem of rigour in qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science. 8(3), 27-37.
  63. Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of educational psychology, 82(3), 498.
  64. Schommer, M. (2019). An Emerging conceptualisation of epistemological beliefs and their role in learning. in beliefs about text and instruction with text. (Pp. 25-40). Routledge.
  65. Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. London: Sage.
  66. Si̇monneaux, L., & Si̇monneaux, J. (2009). Socio-scientific reasoning influenced by identities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(3), 705-711.
  67. Spektor-Levy, O., Baruch, Y. K., & Mevarech, Z. (2013). Science and scientific curiosity in pre-school-the teacher's point of view. International Journal of Science Education, 35(13), 2226-2253.
  68. Süt, Ö. Y., & Kutuca, A. Y. (2021). Investigation of the effect of nutrition education on children's nutrition decisions and reasoning patterns. Yaşadıkça Eğitim, 35(2), 594-620.
  69. Şahi̇n, M., & Başal, H. (2021). Investigation of the relationship between preschool teachers' performance of ensuring learning from errors and epistemological beliefs. Erzincan University Journal of Faculty of Education, 23(3), 909-930.
  70. Şimşek, N. & Çınar, Y. (2008). Science and technology teaching in preschool period. Ankara: Anı publishing.
  71. Tezel, Ö., & Güni̇ster, B. (2018). A Review of studies on socioscientific subject-based science teaching in Turkey. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Turkish World Application and Research Centre Journal of Education, 3(1), 42-60.
  72. Topçu, M. S. (2015). Socioscientific issues and teaching. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  73. Topçu, M. S. (2008). Preservice science teachers' informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues and the factors influencing their informal reasoning. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Middle East Technical University. Ankara.
  74. Topcu, M. S., Muğaloğlu, E. Z., & Güven, D. (2014). Socioscientific issues in science education: The case of Turkey. Educational Sciences in Theory and Practice, 14(6), 1-22.
  75. Türkmen, H., Pekmez, E., & Sağlam, M. (2017). Prospective science teachers' thoughts on socio-scientific issues. Journal of Aegean Education, 18(2), 448-475.
  76. Turkish Language Institution. (2013). Turkish dictionary. Ankara.
  77. Turkish Language Institution. (2022). Turkish dictionary. Ankara. Retrieved on 26/08/2022 from https://sozluk.gov.tr/ accessed from the internet address.
  78. Tüzüngüç, B. (2019). Investigation of socioscientific reasoning abilities of secondary education students. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Marmara University (Turkey).
  79. Uyanik, Balat, G. (2011). "What is Science and How Children Learn Science?" (Ed.) Berrin Akman, Gülden Uyanık Balat, Tülin Güler. Science Education in Preschool Period. Ankara: PegemA.
  80. Vecaldo, R. T. (2020). Dimensionality and predictive validity of Schommer epistemological questionnaire among Philippine pre-service teachers. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 767-782.
  81. Yalman, D. (2018). Science education in early childhood. (Ed.) Mustafa Sami Topçu, Banu Özkan. Science Education in Early Childhood.
  82. Yayla, N. (2020). Reasons why parents do not send their children to preschool education. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Institute of Educational Sciences.
  83. Yildirim, A., & Si̇msek, H. (2017). "Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences" (21 Baskı). Seçkin Publishing Ankara
  84. Yildirim, L. (2021). Comparison of teacher roles in socioscientific subjects in terms of discourse and discourse patterns used in classroom. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Pamukkale University Institute of Educational Sciences.
  85. Zhang, Y., & Wi̇ldemuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content applications of social research methods to questions. Information and library science. Santa Barbara California
  86. Zeidler, D. L., Herman, B. C., & Sadler, T. D. (2019). New Directions in Socioscientific Issues Research. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 1-9.