SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2

What are the Students’ Views Concerning the Scenarios Applied in Accordance with HDR Model in PBL Supported with Argumentation?: Neuroendocrine

Argümantasyonla Desteklenmiş PDÖ Yaklaşımında HDR Modeli Kullanılarak Geliştirilen Senaryolarla İlgili Öğrenci Görüşleri Nelerdir?: Nöroendokrin

Tuğçe Günter(Bulent Ecevit University)0000-0001-7416-2967
Pages
366–385
Publication Date
2024-08-30
🏛️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)

Students' creative suggestions regarding the parts that should be added to the scenarios were mentioned in this research.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, it was aimed to obtain the opinions of first-year nursing students of the faculty of health sciences at a state university regarding the scenarios developed according to the hypothetical-deductive reasoning model in the problem-based learning approach supported with argumentation about the endocrine and nervous system in the basic biochemistry course (N = 189).
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this descriptive research, scanning model was used.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Students' creative suggestions regarding the parts that should be added to the scenarios were mentioned in this research.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Argumantasyon · Endokrin-Sinir Sistemi · Probleme-Dayalı Öğrenme

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to obtain the opinions of first-year nursing students of the faculty of health sciences at a state university regarding the scenarios developed according to the hypothetical-deductive reasoning model in the problem-based learning approach supported with argumentation about the endocrine and nervous system in the basic biochemistry course (N = 189). In this descriptive research, scanning model was used. The 'Structured Interview Form', prepared by the education facilitator by taking the opinions of two experts in the field of chemistry education, was used to obtain the students' opinions about the scenarios. The data obtained from the form was subjected to content analysis with the NVivo program. The result of the study showed that the positive opinion frequencies of the majority of the students regarding all scenarios were higher than the negative opinion frequencies. Students' creative suggestions regarding the parts that should be added to the scenarios were mentioned in this research.

Özet

Bu çalışmada temel biyokimya dersi endokrin ve sinir sistemi konusunda argumantasyona dayalı probleme-dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımında varsayımsal- tümdengelimli akıl yürütme modeline göre geliştirilen senaryolar ile ilgili bir devlet üniversitesi sağlık bilimleri fakültesi birinci sınıf hemşirelik öğrencilerinin görüşlerinin alınması amaçlanmıştır (N=189). Betimsel nitelikteki bu araştırmada tarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Öğrencilerin senaryolar ile ilgili görüşlerinin alınmasında eğitim yönlendiricisi tarafından kimya eğitimi alanında iki uzmanın görüşü alınarak hazırlanan ‘Yapılandırılmış Görüşme Formu’ kullanılmıştır. Formdan elde edilen veriler, NVivo programıyla içerik analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Çalışmanın sonucu, öğrencilerin çoğunluğunun tüm senaryolarla ilgili olumlu görüş frekanslarının olumsuz görüş frekanslarından yüksek olduğunu göstermiştir. Araştırmada öğrencilerin senaryolara eklenmesi gereken kısımlarla ilgili yaratıcı önerilerine değinilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Günter, T. (2024). What are the Students’ Views Concerning the Scenarios Applied in Accordance with HDR Model in PBL Supported with Argumentation?: Neuroendocrine. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 2, 366–385. https://doi.org/10.5961/higheredusci.1468160

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (40)

  1. Arı, A. A., & Katrancı, Y. (2014). The opinions of primary mathematics student-teachers on problem-based learning method. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1826-1831. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.478
  2. Barrow, J., Hurst, W., Edman, J., Ariesen, N., & Krampe, C. (2024). Virtual reality for biochemistry education: the cellular factory. Education and Information Technologies, 29(2), 1647-1672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11826-1
  3. Barrows, H. S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York, NY: Springer.
  4. Barrows, H. S. (1994). Practice-based learning: Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University.
  5. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York, NY: Springer.
  6. Boye, E. S., & Agyei, D. D. (2023). Effectiveness of problembased learning strategy in improving teaching and learning of mathematics for pre-service teachers in Ghana. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ssaho.2023.100453
  7. Drisko, J. W.,&Maschi, T. (2016). Content analysis. Oxford University Press
  8. Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72. doi:10.1080/03057260208560187.
  9. Eyceyurt Türk, G., & Kılıç, Z. (2020). The effect of argumentationsupported problem based learning on the achievements of science teacher candidates regarding the subjects of gases and acids-bases. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 9(2), 440-463
  10. Groves M. (2012). Understanding clinical reasoning: the next step in working out how it really works. Medical Education, 46 (5),444– 446. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04244.x
  11. Günter, T. (2023). What are the students’ argumentation levels and the effect of argumentation, during HDR process in PBL, on their academic achievements in biochemistry education?, Journal of Biological Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2022.21 57859
  12. Günter, T., & Kılınç Alpat, S. (2018). Students’ Opinions about Problem-Based Learning PBL and Scenario Applied in Teaching ‘Electrochemistry’. Karaelmas Science and Engineering Journal, 8(1), 346-358. doi: 10.7212%2Fzkufbd.v8i1.1171
  13. Higgs, J., & Jones, M. A. (Eds.). (1995). Clinical reasoning in the health professions. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinermann.
  14. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (1998). Problem-based learning: Effects on the early acquisition of cognitive skill in medicine. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(2), 173–208. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0702_2
  15. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 48–94. doi:10.180/07370000701798495
  16. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Rodriguez, A. B. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “Doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757–792.
  17. Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. New York, NY: Routledge.
  18. Ju, H.J. (2016). Enhancing medical students’ argumentation during hypothetico-deductive reasoning (HDR) in Problem-based learning (PBL). The University of Georgia, PhD thesis, Athens, Georgia.
  19. Ju, H. (2017). Effect of Argumentation Instruction on Medical Student Experiences with Problem-Based Learning. Korean Medical Education Review, 19 (2), 101-108. https://doi.org/10.17496/ kmer.2017.19.2.101
  20. Ju, H., Choi, I., & Yoon, B. Y. (2017). Do medical students generate sound arguments during small group discussions in problembased learning?: an analysis of preclinical medical students’ argumentation according to a framework of hypotheticodeductive reasoning. Korean journal of medical education, 29(2), 101-109. doi: 10.3946/kjme.2017.57
  21. Kempainen RR, Migeon MB & Wolf FM. (2003). Understanding our mistakes: a primer on errors in clinical reasoning. Medical Teacher, 25 (2), 177-181. doi: 10.1080/0142159031000092580
  22. Korkmaz, N. S., & Özçelik, S. (2020). Evaluation of the opinions of the first, second and third term medical students about problem based learning sessions in Bezmialem Vakıf University. Bezmialem Science, 8(2):144-149. doi: 10.14235/bas.galenos.2019.3471
  23. Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harvard Educational Review, 62(2), 155–178. doi:10.4324/9780203435854_chapter_7
  24. Kulak, V. & Newton, G. (2014). A guide to using case-based learning in biochemistry education. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 42 (6), 457-473. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20823
  25. Miles, M, B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed). Sage Publications.
  26. Nargundkar, S., Samaddar, S., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2014). A guided problem‐based learning (PBL) approach: Impact on critical thinking. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 12(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12030
  27. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553–576. doi:10.1080/095006999290570
  28. Norman, G. R., Brooks, L. R., Colle, C. L., & Hatala, R. M. (1999). The benefit of diagnostic hypotheses in clinical reasoning: Experimental study of an instructional intervention for forward and backward reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 433– 448. doi:10.2307/3233841
  29. Nussbaum, E. M. (2011). Argumentation, dialogue theory, and probability modeling: Alternative frameworks for argumentation research in education. Educational Psychologist, 46(2), 84–106. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.558816
  30. Nussbaum, E., & Edwards, O. V. (2011). Critical questions and argument stratagems: A framework for enhancing and analyzing students’ reasoning practices. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(3), 443–488. doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.564567
  31. Orozco, J. A., & Yangco, R. T. (2016). Problem-based learning: effects on critical and creative thinking skills in biology. The Asian Journal of Biology Education, 9, 2-10. https://doi.org/10.57443/ajbe.9.0_2
  32. Patel, V. L., Arocha, J. F., & Zhang, J. (2005). Thinking and reasoning in medicine. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 727–750). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  33. Saiful, A. M. I. N., Utaya, S., Bachri, S., Sumarmi, S., & Susilo, S. (2020). Effect of problem based learning on critical thinking skill and enviromental attitude. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists, 8(2), 743-755. https://doi.org/10.17478/jegys.650344
  34. Si, J., Kong, H., & Lee, S. (2019). Developing Clinical Reasoning Skills Through Argumentation With the Concept Map Method in Medical Problem-Based Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem- Based Learning, 13(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541- 5015.1776
  35. Solomon, P.E., Berg, R.L., Martin, W.D. & Villee, C. (1993). Biology. (3rd ed.). USA: Saunders Collage Publishers.
  36. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  37. Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  38. Walton, D. (2007). Dialog theory for critical argumentation. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins
  39. Widiawati, L., Joyoatmojo, S., & Sudiyanto, S. (2018). Higher order thinking skills as effect of problem based learning in the 21st century learning. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 5(3), 96-105.
  40. Si, J., Kong, H., & Lee, S. (2019). Developing Clinical Reasoning Skills Through Argumentation With the Concept Map Method in Medical Problem-Based Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem- Based Learning, 13(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541- 5015.1776