Journals / Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 37

Effects of the Argumantation Based Inquiry Approach on Students’ Concept Learning Levels

Argümantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme Yaklaşımına Dayalı Laboratuvar Etkinliklerinin 7. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kavram Öğrenmelerine Etkisi: Yaşamımızdaki Elektrik Ünitesi

Pages
61–75
Publication Date
2015-01-01
DOI
—
🏛️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)

After the implementation there was a significant difference between the experimental and the control groups in favor of the experimental group in terms of concept learning level.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to explore the effects of using the Argumentation Based Inquiry (ABI) approach (adopted from the Science Writing Heuristic - SWH approach) on students’ concept learning levels.
📊
Key Findings & Data:ABI approach which is an inquiry based approach was constructed Keys, Hand, Prain and Collins (1999).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:After the implementation there was a significant difference between the experimental and the control groups in favor of the experimental group in terms of concept learning level.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010-2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Araştırma-Sorgulama · Argümantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme Yaklaşımı · Inquiry

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore the effects of using the Argumentation Based Inquiry (ABI) approach (adopted from the Science Writing Heuristic - SWH approach) on students’ concept learning levels. ABI approach which is an inquiry based approach was constructed Keys, Hand, Prain and Collins (1999). In the study, quasi experimental design with pretest and posttest control group is used. The experimental group performed laboratory activities through ABI approach, the control group performed laboratory activities through traditional approach. The sampling of our study was comprised of the students from a primary public school in Yalova. The students were 7th graders in the academic year 2010-2011. A total of 65 students (31 girls and 34 boys) participated in our study. Conceptional Test was used in this study as the instrument. After the implementation there was a significant difference between the experimental and the control groups in favor of the experimental group in terms of concept learning level.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacını, Fen ve Teknoloji dersinde laboratuvar uygulamalarının Argümantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme (ATBÖ) yaklaşımını temel alan aktivitelerle gerçekleştirildiği deney grubunda yer alan öğrenciler ile klasik yaklaşımı kullanan kontrol grubunda yer alan öğrenciler arasında, kavram öğrenme düzeyleri açısından, bir farklılığın olup olmadığının belirlenmesi oluşturmaktadır. ATBÖ yaklaşımı Keys, Hand, Prain ve Collins (1999) tarafından geliştirilmiş araştırma-sorgulamaya dayalı bir yaklaşımıdır. Araştırmanın modeli ön ve son test kontrol gruplu yarı deneysel desendir. Bu araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, Yalova ilinde bir devlet ilköğretim okulunda 2010–2011 eğitim-öğretim yılında yedinci sınıfta öğrenim gören öğrenciler oluşturmuştur. Çalışma grubu 31 kız, 34 erkek olmak üzere toplam 65 öğrenciden oluşmuştur. Bu çalışmada Kavram Testi veri toplama aracı olarak kullanılmıştır. Uygulamanın ardından deney grubu ile kontrol grubu arasında, kavram öğrenme düzeyleri açısından deney grubu lehine anlamlı bir fark oluşmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

ULU, C., BAYRAM, H. (2015). Effects of the Argumantation Based Inquiry Approach on Students’ Concept Learning Levels. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 37, 61–75. https://ajindex.com/articles/138322

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Akar, M.S. (2007). Laboratuar dersinde yazma metinleri oluşturmanın ve analoji kullanımının akademik başarıya etkisi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Akkus, R., Gunel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 29 (14), 1745-1765.
  2. Basso, S. A. (2009). Using the science writing heuristic to enhance middle school science students' understanding of force and motion laboratory activities. Unpublished master thesis, California State University, Fullerton, USA. Choi, A. (2008). A study of student written argument using the Science Writing Heuristic approach in inquiry-based freshman general chemistry laboratory classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA. Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J., & Hand, B. (2010). Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms. Res Sci Educ, 40,149–169. Chin,C., & Chia,L.G. (2006). Problem-based learning: Using III-structured problems in biology project work. Science Education, 90, 44 – 67. Erkol, M., Kışoğlu, M., & Büyükkasap, E. (2010). The effect of implementation of science writing heuristic on students’ achievement and attitudes toward laboratory in introductory physics laboratory. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 2310–2314.
  3. Erol, G. (2010). Asit baz konusunun çoklu yazma etkinlikleri ve yaparak yazarak bilim öğrenme metodu kullanılarak öğretilmesinin değerlendirilmesi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Maramara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Grimberg, B.I., & Hand, B. (2009). Cognitive pathways: Analysis of students’ written texts for science understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 503–521.
  4. Gunel, M., Omar, S.,& Hand, B. (2003). Student perception in using the science writing heuristic. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, USA. Günel, M. (2006). Investigating the impact of teachers implementation practices on academic achievement in science during a long-term professional development program on the science writing heuristic. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University, Ames, USA. Gunel, M., Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2007). Writing for learning in science: a secondary analysis of six studies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5, 615-637. Gü