SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International / 2026 / Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1

Investigation of 10th Grade Students' Example Elaboration Skill in terms of Various Variables

10. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Örnek Ayrıntılama Becerisinin Çeşitli Değişkenler Açısından İncelenmesi

Mükerrem Akbulut Taş(ÇUKUROVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8398-9357
Ayşe Gül Özbilen(T.C. MİLLİ EĞİTİM BAKANLIĞI ADANA)0000-0003-4697-0080
Pages
110–141
Publication Date
2025-03-22
🏛️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)

While asking the students to give examples in concept teaching, detailed questions and explanations that ensure the establishment of the example-attribute relationship can also be included.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Examples are a basic content component that enables students to concretize and make sense of abstract ideas in the learning, teaching and thinking processes.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The purpose of this research is to examine the ability of 10th grade students to elaborate examples on sexual and asexual reproduction in terms of various variables.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:While asking the students to give examples in concept teaching, detailed questions and explanations that ensure the establishment of the example-attribute relationship can also be included.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2019-2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:kavram öğretimi · kavram öğrenme · türdeş kavramlar

Abstract

Examples are a basic content component that enables students to concretize and make sense of abstract ideas in the learning, teaching and thinking processes. In teaching concepts, examples are frequently used to support students in constructing meaning. The purpose of this research is to examine the ability of 10th grade students to elaborate examples on sexual and asexual reproduction in terms of various variables. This study was designed using the descriptive survey model. Survey model was preferred to obtain information from a large group in order to examine the 10th grade students' giving examples of homogeneous concepts and their explanations about their examples. The sample of the study was determined by simple random cluster sampling. The sample consisted of 362 students attending the 10th grade in 5 state-affiliated Anatolian High Schools in the central districts of Adana province in the 2019-2020 academic year. Data were collected using the Example Elaboration Test (EET) and the Metacognitive Awareness Scale B form (MAS-B). The obtained data were analyzed with descriptive analysis, Kruskal Wallis H test, and Mann Whitney U test. In this study, according to the findings obtained from ÖAT, it was determined that most of the participants scored above the average in giving examples and establishing an example-term relationship, whereas they scored below the average in explaining the example-term relationship. Accordingly, it can be stated that the majority of students had difficulty in explaining the reasons for the examples they gave for homogeneous concepts. It was determined that the students who stated that they enjoyed the course very much and did not have difficulty in the course had higher EET scores than other students. It was determined that the EET scores of the students who stated that they liked the course very much and did not have difficulty in the course were higher than the other students. It was determined that receiving support education from a private institution or teacher outside the school did not create a significant difference in the EET scores of the students. No significant difference was found between the EET scores of the students whose metacognitive awareness was determined to be high and low. While asking the students to give examples in concept teaching, detailed questions and explanations that ensure the establishment of the example-attribute relationship can also be included.

Özet

Örnekler; öğrenme, öğretim ve düşünme süreçlerinde öğrencilerin soyut düşünceleri somutlaştırabilmesini ve anlamlandırabilmesini sağlayan temel bir içerik ögesidir. Kavramların öğretiminde sıklıkla öğrencilerin anlam oluşturmasını desteklemek için örnekler kullanılmaktadır. Bu araştırmanın amacı, 10. sınıf öğrencilerinin eşeyli ve eşeysiz üreme kavramları ile ilgili örnek ayrıntılama becerilerini çeşitli değişkenler açısından incelemektir. Bu çalışma betimsel tarama modeli kullanılarak tasarlanmıştır. Katılımcı öğrencilerin türdeş kavramlara örnek vermelerini ve verdikleri örnekler ile ilgili açıklamalarını incelemek amacıyla büyük bir gruptan bilgi elde etmek için tarama modeli tercih edilmiştir. Çalışmanın örneklemi, basit seçkisiz küme örnekleme ile belirlenmiştir. Örneklemi, 2019-2020 eğitim öğretim yılı Adana ili merkez ilçelerinde bulunan devlete bağlı 5 Anadolu Lisesinde 10. sınıfa devam eden 362 öğrenci oluşturmuştur. Veriler, Örnek Ayrıntılama Testi (ÖAT) ve Üst Bilişsel Farkındalık Ölçeği B formu (ÜBFÖ-B) kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Elde edilen veriler betimsel analiz, Kruskal Wallis H testi ve Mann Whitney U testi ile analiz edilmiştir. Bu çalışmada ÖAT’den elde edilen bulgular doğrultusunda katılımcı öğrencilerin çoğunun örnek verme ve örnek-terim ilişkisi kurmada ortalamanın üstünde puan aldığı buna karşılık örnek-özellik ilişkisini açıklamada ortalamanın altında puan aldığı tespit edilmiştir. Buna göre, öğrencilerin çoğunluğunun türdeş kavramlara verdikleri örneklerin gerekçelerini açıklamakta zorlandıkları belirtilebilir. Dersi çok sevdiğini ve derste zorlanmadığını belirten öğrencilerin ÖAT puanlarının diğer öğrencilere göre daha yüksek olduğu belirlenmiştir. Okul dışında özel bir kurum ya da öğretmenden destek eğitim almanın ise öğrencilerin ÖAT puan ortalamalarında anlamlı bir fark oluşturmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Üst bilişsel farkındalığı yüksek ve düşük olarak belirlenen öğrencilerin ÖAT puan oratlamaları arasında anlamlı bir farklılık bulunamamıştır. Kavram öğretiminde öğrencilerden örnek vermesini isterken örnek-özellik ilişkisini kurmayı sağlayan ayrıntılayıcı sorulara ve açıklamalara yer verilebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Taş, M. A., Özbilen, A. G. (2025). Investigation of 10th Grade Students' Example Elaboration Skill in terms of Various Variables. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 1, 110–141. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1458395

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (92)

  1. Abrams, E. D. (1994). A comparison of the effects of multiple visual examples and nonexamples versus prototypical examples on science concept learning: An exploratory study based upon the concept of photosynthesis. Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College.
  2. Aka Özmay, Y. (2007). Adana’daki ev dışı (outdoor) fungusların izolasyonu, identifikasyonu, mevsimsel dağılımı ve alerjik hastalıklarla ilişkilendirilmesi. [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Çukurova Üniversitesi.
  3. Akbulut Taş, M. ve Karataş Coşkun, M. (2017). Üniversite öğrencilerinin demokrasi kavramı ile ilgili sınıflama davranışlarının değerlendirilmesi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16(61), 428-447. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.304684
  4. Alkan, S., Güven, B. ve Yılmaz, Ş. (2017). The types of examples teachers use in teaching function concept. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(23), 367-384. Alkan, S. ve Güven, B. (2018). Ders kitaplarında kullanılan örnek türlerinin analizi: Limit konusu. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 9(1), 147-169. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.334530
  5. Alkış Küçükaydın, M. (2020). Fen eğitiminde kavram öğretimi konulu araştırmaların sistematik derleme yöntemiyle incelenmesi. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 21(2), 36-56. https://doi.org/10.12984/egeefd.746326
  6. Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research, Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 181-214. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070002181
  7. Aydin, S. (2014). Using example generation to explore students’ understanding of the concepts of linear dependence/independence in linear algebra. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(6), 813-826. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.877606
  8. Bagatır, A., Yüceler, B., Atalay, N, Tokgöz, H. ve Yılmaz, U. G. (2021) Ortaöğretim 10. sınıf Biyoloji Ders Kitabı. MEB yayınları.
  9. Bolkan, S., & Goodboy, A. K. (2019). Examples and the facilitation of student learning: Should instructors provide examples or should students generate their own? Communication Education, 68(3), 287-307. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2019.1602275
  10. Burts, D. C., Warren, M. C., Gilmore, A. C., & Jane Ford, M. (1985). The effects of the presentation order of examples and nonexamples on first-grade students' acquisition of coordinate concepts. The Journal of Educational Research, 78(5), 310-314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1985.10885622
  11. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (5. Baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
  12. Can, A. (2018). SPSS ile bilimsel araştırma sürecinde veri analizi (6. Baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
  13. Chi, M. T., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13(2), 145-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(89)90002-5
  14. Clinton, V., Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2016). Learning about posterior probability: Do diagrams and elaborative interrogation help? The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(3), 579-599. Https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2015.1048847
  15. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2021). Eğitimde araştırma yöntemleri. (E.Dinç ve K.Kıroğlu, Çev. Ed., 1. Baskı). Pegem Akademi Yayınları.
  16. Dahlberg, R.P., & Housman, D.L. (1997). Facilitating learning events through example generation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33, 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002999415887
  17. Daley, N., & Rawson, K. A. (2021). Effects of elaborations included in textbooks: Large time cost, reduced attention, and lower memory for main ideas. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1165-1189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09553-x
  18. Di Vesta, F. J., & Finke, F. M. (1985). Metacognition, elaboration, and knowledge acquisition: Implications for instructional design. Education Communications Technology Journal, 33(4), 285-293. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02769366
  19. Dornisch, M., Sperling, R. A., & Zeruth, J. A. (2011). The effects of levels of elaboration on learners’ strategic processing of text. Instructional Science, 39, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9111-z
  20. Farooq, O. (2019). The effect of elaborative interrogation on the synthesis of ideas from multiple sources of information. Open Information Science, 3(1), 76-87. https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2019-0006
  21. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
  22. Goldenberg, P., & Mason, J. (2008). Shedding light on and with example spaces. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9143-3
  23. Goldman, Z. W., & Goodboy, A. K. (2014). Making students feel better: Examining the relationships between teacher confirmation and college students' emotional outcomes. Communication Education, 63(3), 259-277. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2014.920091
  24. Gökbulut, Y. ve Ubuz, B. (2013). Prospective primary teachers’ knowledge on prism: Generating definitions and examples. İlköğretim Online [Elementary Education Online], 12(2), 401-412.
  25. Griffin, M. M. (1993). Do student-generated rational sets of examples facilitate concept acquisition? The Journal of Experimental Education, 61(2), 104-115. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1993.9943855
  26. Gündüz, E., Yılmaz, M. ve Çimen, O. (2016). MEB ortaöğretim 10. sınıf biyoloji ders kitabının bilimsel içerik bakımından incelenmesi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 414-430. Hamilton, J. R. (1997). Effects of three types of elaboration on learning concepts from text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22(3), 299-318. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1997.0935
  27. Hamilton, J. R. (2004). Material appropriate processing and elaboration: The impact of balanced and complementary types of processing on learning concepts from text. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(2), 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709904773839851
  28. Hannon, B. (2012). Differential-associative processing or example elaboration: Which strategy is best for learning the definitions of related and unrelated concepts. Learning and Instruction, 22(5), 299-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.11.005
  29. Haras, Ö. (2009). “Üreme” ünitesinin 5e modeline göre öğretiminin öğrencilerin kavramsal anlama ve tutumları üzerine etkisi. [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi.
  30. Kadıoğlu, A., Demirbağ, Z. ve Şahin, B. (2005). Temel biyoloji: Canlılar bilimi. (Genişletilmiş 2. Baskı). Sonhaber Matbaacılık.
  31. Karakaya, F., Yılmaz, M., Çimen, O. ve Adıgüzel, M. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının partenogeneze yönelik kavram yanılgılarının belirlenmesi ve düzeltilmesi. Başkent University Journal of Education, 7(1), 81-91. http://buje.baskent.edu.tr/index.php/buje/article/view/236
  32. Karakelle, S. ve Saraç, S. (2007). Çocuklar için üst bilişsel farkındalık ölçeği (ÜBFÖ-Ç) A ve B formları: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 10(20), 87-103.
  33. Karataş Coşkun, M. (2011). Kavram öğretimi. Karahan Kitapevi.
  34. Keeton T. W., Gould J. L., & Gould C. B. (2003). Genel biyoloji (Cilt 1), (Demirsoy, A., Türkan, İ., Gündüz, E., Çev., 2. Baskı). Palme Yayıncılık, (Orjinal eser basım yılı 1993).
  35. Khan Academy. (2023, Mart). Lise biyoloji dersleri.
  36. Kula, F. ve Ören-Vural, D. (2019). Matematik öğretiminde örnekler: Temel tanım, kavram ve yaklaşımlar. Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 569-586. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2019.19.46660-427934
  37. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
  38. Leopold, C., & Leutner, D. (2015). Improving students’ science text comprehension through metacognitive self-regulation when applying learning strategies. Metacognition Learning, 10, 313–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-014-9130-2
  39. Lewalter, D. (2003). Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals. Learning and Instruction, 13, 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00019-1
  40. Markle, S. M. (1975). They teach concepts. Don't they? Educational Researcher, 4(6), 3-9. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1175693
  41. Martorella, P. H. (1986). Teaching concepts. (J. M. Cooper, Ed.). In Classroom teaching skills. (pp. 182-223). D.C. Heath and Company.
  42. Maskour, L., Alami, A., Zaki, M., & Agorram, B. (2019). Plant classification knowledge and misconceptions among university students in Morocco. Education Sciences, 9(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9010048
  43. Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the science of learning: evidence-based principles for the design of multimedia instruction. American Psychologist, 63(8), 760. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.63.8.760
  44. Mazer, J. P. (2017). Associations among classroom emotional processes, student interest, and engagement: A convergent validity test. Communication Education, 66(3), 350-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2016.1265134
  45. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2018). Ortaöğretim biyoloji dersi (9,10,11 ve 12.sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara: MEB Yayınları.
  46. Merrill, M. D., Tennyson, R. D., & Posey, L.O. (1992). Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide. Educational Technology Publications.
  47. Murat, M., Kanadlı, S. ve Ünişen, A. (2011). Yedinci sınıf öğrencilerinin hayvanların üremesi, büyümesi ve gelişmesi konusundaki kavram yanılgıları ve olası kaynakları. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi [Journal of Turkısh Science Education], 8(1), 179-197.
  48. Murphy, G. L. (2016). Is there an exemplar theory of concepts? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1035-1042. https://doi.org/0.3758/s13423-015-0834-3
  49. Nergiz, D. ve Akbulut-Taş, M. (2021). Zarf kavramının öğretiminde örnek ayrıntılama stratejisinin kavram öğrenmeye, kalıcılığa ve transfere etkisi. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(2), 232-252. https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.810659
  50. O’Reilly, T., Symons, S., & MacLatchy-Gaudet, H. (1998). Brief Research Report: A comparison of self-explanation and elaborative interrogation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 434–445. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1997.0977
  51. Oliveira, A. W., Bretzlaff, T., & Brown, A. O. (2020). Memorable exemplification in undergraduate biology: Instructor strategies and student perceptions. Research in Science Education, 50, 625-643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9704-0
  52. Ortaöğretim Genel Müdürlüğü. (2023, Ağustos). Biyoloji 10 Beceri Temelli Etkinlik Kitabı. T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı https://ogmmateryal.eba.gov.tr/panel/upload/etkilesimli/kitap/beceri_temelli/10/biyoloji/index.html#p=3
  53. Ozgur, Z., Ellis, A. B., Vinsonhaler, R., Dogan, M. F., & Knuth, E. (2019). From examples to proof: Purposes. strategies. and affordances of example use. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 53, 284-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.03.004
  54. Özcan, Z. Ç., Kılıç, Ç. ve Obalar, S. (2018). Öğrencilerin matematikteki hatalarını belirleme ve gidermede açıklayıcı ipuçlarıyla desteklenmiş çözümlü örnekler. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 45, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.21764/maeuefd.322223
  55. Özkara, A. (2006). Afyonkarahisar ili merkez ilçe hava fungus florasının belirlenmesi. (Yayın no. 181420) [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi.] Tez Merkezi. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ adresinden 14.7.2020 tarihinde erişilmiştir.
  56. Özsoy, S. ve Özsoy, G. (2013). Eğitim araştırmalarında etki büyüklüğü raporlanması. İlköğretim Online, 12(2), 334-346. Papleontiou-louca, E. (2003). The concept and instruction of metacognition. Teacher Development, 7(1), 9-30. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530300200184
  57. Park, O. C. (1984). Example comparison strategy versus attribute identification strategy in concept learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21(1), 145-162. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1162358
  58. Park, O. C., & Tennyson, R. D. (1980). Adaptive design strategies for selecting number and presentation order of examples in coordinate concept acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(3), 362–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.72.3.362
  59. Park, O. C., & Tennyson, R. D. (1986). Computer-based response-sensitive design strategies for selecting presentation form and sequence of examples in learning of coordinate concepts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 153–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.78.2.153
  60. Perry, J., Lundie, D., & Golder, G. (2019). Metacognition in schools: What does the literature suggest about the effectiveness of teaching metacognition in schools? Educational Review, 71(4), 483-500. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1441127
  61. Petty, O. S., & Jansson, L. C. (1987). Sequencing examples and nonexamples to facilitate concept attainment. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 18(2), 112-125. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.18.2.0112
  62. Rawson, K. A., Thomas, R. C., & Jacoby, L. L. (2015). The power of examples: Illustrative examples enhance conceptual learning of declarative concepts. Educational Psychological Review, 27, 483–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9273-3
  63. Renkl, A. (2014). Toward an instructionally oriented theory of example‐based learning. Cognitive science, 38(1), 1-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12086
  64. Roelle, J, Nowitzki, C., & Berthold, K. (2017). Do cognitive and metacognitive processes set the stage for each other? Learning and Instruction, 50, 54-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.11.009
  65. Sağlam, Y. ve Dost, Ş. (2016). A qualitative research on example generation capabilities of university students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14. 979-996. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9624-7
  66. Sağlam-Kaya, Y. (2019). Öğretmen adaylarının teknopedagojik eğitim yeterliklerinin çeşitli değişkenler ve öğretmen öz yeterlikleri bağlamında incelenmesi. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 12(1), 185-204. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.420909
  67. Sesli, E. ve Yilmaz, K. (2012). Development and application of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic test for high school students’ understanding of cell division and reproduction. Journal of Biological Education, 46(4), 214-225. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2012.688849
  68. Stark, R., Mandl, H., Gruber. H., & Renkl, A. (2002). Conditions and effects of example elaboration. Learning and Instruction, 12, 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00015-9
  69. Steininger, T., Wittwer, J., & Voss, T. (2022). Classifying examples is more effective for learning relational categories than reading or generating examples. Instructional Science, 50, 771–788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09584-7
  70. Ströker, E. (2005). Bilim kuramına giriş. (Çev. D. Özlem). İnkılap Kitabevi.
  71. Tennyson, R. D., & Cocchiarella, M. J. (1986). An emprically based instructional design theory for teaching concepts. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 40-71. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543056001040
  72. Tennyson, R. D., & Park, O. C. (1980). The teaching of concepts: A review of instructional design research literature. Review of educational research, 50(1), 55-70. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543050001055
  73. Tennyson, R. D., Woolley, F. R., & Merrill, M. D. (1972). Exemplar and nonexampler variables which produce correct concept classification behavior and specified classification errors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63(2), 144–152.https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032368
  74. Tessmer, M., & Driscoll, M. P. (1986). Effects of a diagrammatic display of coordinate concept definitions on concept classification performance. Educational Communication and Technology, 34(4), 195-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02767401
  75. Titsworth, S., Quinlan, M. M., & Mazer, J. P. (2010). Emotion in teaching and learning: Development and validation of the classroom emotions scale. Communication Education, 59(4), 431-452. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634521003746156
  76. Trendt, J. C. (2014). Building the language of geometry through the use of examples and non-examples. [Unpublished master thesis]. California State Polytechnic University.
  77. Watson, A., & Chick, H. (2011). Qualities of examples in learning and teaching. ZDM Mathematics Education, 43, 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0301-6
  78. Watson, A., & Shipman, S. (2008). Using learner generated examples to introduce new concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69, 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9142-4
  79. Weinstein, Y., Madan, C. R., & Sumeracki, M. A. (2018). Teaching the science of learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-07-0087-y
  80. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). The teaching of learning strategies. Innovation Abstracts, 5(32), 1-4. ERIC Document No. ED 237 180.
  81. Willoughby, T., Wood, E., & Khan, M. (1994). Isolating variables that impact or detract from the effectiveness of elaboration strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.2.279
  82. Wissman, K. T., Zamary, A., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2023). Enhancing declarative concept application: The utility of examples as primary targets of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 29(2), 341–357. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000432
  83. Woloshyn, V. E., Pressley, M., & Schneider, W. (1992). Elaborative-interrogation and prior-knowledge effects on learning of facts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 115. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.84.1.115
  84. Yılmaz, M., Gündüz, E., Diken, E. H. ve Çimen, O., (2017). 8. sınıf fen bilimleri ders kitabındaki biyoloji konularının bilimsel içerik açısından incelenmesi. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(3), 1047-1063. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.330600
  85. Zamary, A., & Rawson, K. A. (2018a). Which technique is most effective for learning declarative concepts—Provided examples, generated examples, or both? Educational Psychology Review, 30, 275-301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9396-9
  86. Zamary, A., & Rawson, K. A. (2018b). Are provided examples or faded examples more effective for declarative concept learning? Educational Psychology Review, 30, 1167-1197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-018-9433-y
  87. Zaslavsky, O. (2019). There is more to examples than meets the eye: Thinking with and through mathematical examples in different settings. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 53, 245-255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.10.001
  88. Zhu, X., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Learning mathematics from examples and by doing. Cognition and Instruction, 4(3), 137-166. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0403_1
  89. Zodik, I., & Zaslavsky, O. (2008). Characteristics of teachers’ choice of examples in and for the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 165-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9140-6
  90. Zohar, A., & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: Current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 121-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.847261
  91. Alkan, S., Güven, B. ve Yılmaz, Ş. (2017). The types of examples teachers use in teaching function concept. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(23), 367-384.
  92. Gündüz, E., Yılmaz, M. ve Çimen, O. (2016). MEB ortaöğretim 10. sınıf biyoloji ders kitabının bilimsel içerik bakımından incelenmesi. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 414-430.