SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2026 / Volume: 12 Issue: 2

Investigating the relationship among gifted students’ spatial reasoning skills, their conceptual understanding of astronomy and academic achievement

Pelin Ertekin(İNÖNÜ ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-8011-0178
Mustafa Serdar Köksal(HACETTEPE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-2185-5150
Pages
—
Publication Date
2025-06-01
🏛️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)

Overall, the findings indicate positive and significant direct and indirect relationships between gifted students' grade level, static and dynamic spatial reasoning skills, conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics, and science achievement.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship among sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-grade gifted students' spatial reasoning skills, conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics, and science achievement.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research sample consists of 642 gifted middle school students enrolled in Science and Art Centers across 12 cities in Turkey.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the findings indicate positive and significant direct and indirect relationships between gifted students' grade level, static and dynamic spatial reasoning skills, conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics, and science achievement.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Gifted students · Spatial reasoning skill · Science achievement

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship among sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-grade gifted students' spatial reasoning skills, conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics, and science achievement. To achieve this, the study was designed as a multi-factor predictive correlational study. The research sample consists of 642 gifted middle school students enrolled in Science and Art Centers across 12 cities in Turkey. Data were collected using the Conceptual Understanding of Basic Astronomy Subjects Test, the Mental Image-Focused Spatial Reasoning Skill Test, and the Science Achievement Test. Path analysis was employed as the statistical method, and a path diagram was used to illustrate the explanatory relationships among the observed variables. The analysis revealed that grade level positively and significantly predicts static and dynamic spatial reasoning skills, conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics, and science achievement among gifted students. Additionally, both static and dynamic spatial reasoning skills positively and significantly predict students' conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics. Similarly, science achievement is positively and significantly predicted by students' static and dynamic spatial reasoning skills as well as their conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics. Overall, the findings indicate positive and significant direct and indirect relationships between gifted students' grade level, static and dynamic spatial reasoning skills, conceptual understanding of basic astronomy topics, and science achievement.

🔖

Cite This Article

Ertekin, P., Köksal, M. S. (2025). Investigating the relationship among gifted students’ spatial reasoning skills, their conceptual understanding of astronomy and academic achievement. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Volume: 12 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1464011

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (124)

  1. Agan, L. (2004). Stellar ideas: Exploring students’ understanding of stars. Astronomy Education Review, 3(1), 77-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/AER2004008
  2. Al-Balushi, S.M., & Coll, R.K. (2013). Exploring verbal, visual and schematic learners’ static and dynamic mental images of scientific species and processes in relation to their spatial ability. International Journal of Science Education, 35(3), 460 489. https://doi.org/10.1080 /09500693.2012.760210
  3. Andersen, L. (2014). Visual–spatial ability: Important in STEM, ignored in gifted education. Roeper Review, 36(2), 114-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2014.884198
  4. Arny, T.T. (1994). Explorations an introduction to astronomy. Mosby-Year Book.
  5. Aslan, Z., Aydın C., Demircan, O., Derman E., & Kırbıyık, H. (1996). Liseler için astronomi ve uzay bilimleri ders kitabı [Astronomy and space sciences textbook for high schools]. Tekışık Yayıncılık.
  6. Aşut, N. (2013). Üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin epistemolojik inançlarının fen öğrenmeye yönelik motivasyon düzeyi ve fen başarısıyla ilişkisi [Relationship of gifted students’ epistemological beliefs with science achievement and motivation towards science learning] (Publication No. 350922) [Master’s thesis, İnönü University]. National Thesis Center.
  7. Atwood, R.K., & Atwood, V.A. (1997). Effects of instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of the causes of night and day and the seasons. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8 (1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009455201314
  8. Bailey, J.M., & Slater, T.F. (2003). A review of astronomy education research. Astronomy Education Review (AER), 2(2), 20 – 45. http://dx.doi.org/10.3847/AER2003015
  9. Bailey, L.M., Morris, L.G., Thompson, W.D., Feldman, S.B., & Demetrikopoulos M.K. (2016). Historical contribution of creativity to development of gifted science education in formal and informal learning environments. In M.K. Demetrikopoulos & J.L. Pecore (Eds.), Interplay of creativity and giftedness in science (pp. 3-15). Sense Publishers.
  10. Baker, H.E. (1987). Astronomy and space science activities for fifth and sixth grade gifted and talented students [Unpublished master’s thesis]. California State University.
  11. Barnett, M., & Morran, J. (2002). Addressing children’s alternative frameworks of the moon’s phases and eclipses. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 859–879. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110095276
  12. Baxter, J. (1989). Children's understanding of familiar astronomical events. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 502 513. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069890110503
  13. Bayram, N. (2013). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş: AMOS uygulamaları [Introduction to structural equation modeling: AMOS applications] (2nd ed.). Ezgi Kitabevi.
  14. Bektasli, B. (2006). The relationships between spatial ability, logical thinking, mathematics performance and kinematics graph interpretation skills of 12th grade physics students (Publication No. 3226336) [Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
  15. Bentler, P.M. (2005). EQS 6 Structural equations program manual. Multivariate Software.
  16. Black, A. (2005). Spatial ability and earth science conceptual understanding. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 402-414. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-53.4.402
  17. Bretones, P.S., & Neto, J.M. (2011). An analysis of papers on astronomy education in proceedings of IAU meetings from 1988 to 2006. Astronomy Education Review (AER), 10(1), 10-18. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2010010
  18. Brunsell, E., & Marcks, J. (2004). Identifying a baseline for teachers' astronomy content knowledge. Astronomy Education Review, 3(2), 38-46. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2004 015
  19. Bryne, B.M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Routledge.
  20. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E, Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2016). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods]. Pegem Akademi.
  21. Coble, K., Camarillo, C.T., Trouille, L.E., Bailey, J.M., Cochran, G L., Nickerson, M.D., et al. (2013). Investigating student ideas about cosmology I: Distances and structure. Astronomy Education Review (AER), 12(1), 1-54. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2012038
  22. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539
  23. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and LISREL applications] (2nd ed.). Pegem Akademi.
  24. DeRoche, E.F. (1967). A study of the effectiveness of selected creative exercises on creative thinking and the mastern of a unit in elementary Science (Publication No. 6704542) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
  25. D'Oliveira, T.C. (2004). Dynamic spatial ability: An exploratory analysis and a confirmatory study. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 14(1), 19 38. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap1401_2
  26. Dove, J. (2002). Does the man in the moon ever sleep? An analysis of student answers about simple astronomical events: A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 823-834. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110066935
  27. Downing, S.M., & Haladyna, T.M. (2006). Handbook of test development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  28. Dunlop, J. (2000). How children observe the universe. Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, 17(02), 194-206. https://doi.org/10.1071/AS00194
  29. Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Who needs 3D when the universe is flat?. Science Education. 98(3), 412-442. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21109
  30. Frede, V. (2006). Pre-service elementary teacher’s conceptions about astronomy. Advances in Space Research, 38, 2237– 2246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2006.02.017
  31. Fucili, L. (2009). Implementing astronomy education research. In J. M. Pasachoff, & J. R. Percy (Eds.), Teaching and learning astronomy (pp. 66-79). Cambridge University Press.
  32. Gardner, M.K., & Sternberg, R.J. (1994). Novelty and intelligence. In R. Sternberg & R. Wagner (Eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence (pp. 38-74). Cambridge University Press.
  33. Gazit, E., Yair, Y., & Chen, D. (2005). Emerging conceptual understanding of complex astronomical phenomena by using a virtual solar system. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(5/6), 459-470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-0221-3
  34. General Directorate of Special Education and Guidance Services (September 2019). Bilim ve sanat merkezleri öğrenci tanılama ve yerleştirme kılavuzu 2019-2020 [Student identification and placement guide for science and art centers 2019-2020]. https://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2019_11/15173608_TanYlama_KYlavuzu__YeYitek_Ekli_2.pdf
  35. Gilbert, J.K., & Newberry, M. (2007). The characteristics of the gifted and exceptionally able in science. In K. S. Taber (Ed.), Science education for gifted learners (pp. 15-31). Routledge.
  36. Goodman, A.A., Udomprasert, P.S., Kent, B., Sathiapal, H., & Smareglia, R. (2011). Astronomy visualization for education and outreach. In I.N. Evans, A. Accomazzi, D.J. Mink & A.H. Rots (Eds.), Astronomical data analysis software and systems XX (pp. 659-662). Astronomical Society of the Pacific.
  37. Göncü, Ö. (2013). İlköğretim beşinci ve yedinci sınıf öğrencilerinin astronomi konularındaki kavram yanılgılarının tespiti [Determining of astronomical misconception in fifth and seventh grade students] [Master’s thesis, Mehmet Akif Ersoy University]. National Thesis Center.
  38. Gronlund, N.E., & Linn, R.L. (1990). Measurement and evaluation in teaching (6th ed.). Macmillan Publishing.
  39. Gündoğdu, T. (2014). 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin astronomi konusundaki başarı ve kavramsal anlama düzeyleri ile fen dersine yönelik tutumları arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi [Investigation of relationship between 8th grade students' achievement and conceptual understanding levels in astronomy and attitudes towards science course] (Publication No. 372278) [Master’s thesis, Marmara University]. National Thesis Center.
  40. Hannust, T., & Kikas, E. (2007). Children’s knowledge of astronomy and its change in the course of learning. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22(1), 89 104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2006.11.001
  41. Hegarty, M. (2010). Components of spatial intelligence. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 52, 265–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(10)52007-3
  42. Hegarty, M., Crookes, R.D., Dara-Abrams, D., & Shipley, T.F. (2010, August). Do all science disciplines rely on spatial abilities? Preliminary evidence from self-report questionnaires. In C. Hölscher, T.F. Shipley, M.O. Belardinelli & J.A. Bateman (Eds.), Spatial Cogniton VII: International Conference on Spatial Cognition 2010 (pp. 85-94). Springer.
  43. Heyer, I. (2012). Establishing the empirical relationship between non-science majoring undergraduate learners' spatial thinking skills and their conceptual astronomy knowledge (Publication No. 3507367) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Wyoming]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
  44. Hollow, R. (2005). Engaging gifted science students through astronomy. Highlights of Astronomy, 13, 1041-1043. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1539299600018062
  45. Jeffery, D.J. (2001). Introductory astronomy problems. Portpentagram Publishing.
  46. Johnes, M.G., & Broadwell, B. (2008). Visualization without vision: Students with visual impairment. In J.K. Gilbert, M. Reiner & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 283-294). Springer Science & Business Media.
  47. Jones, S., & Burnett, G. (2008). Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 4(1), 47-61. https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.200804151352
  48. Kalkan, H., Kiroğlu, K., Türk, C., Bolat, M., Kalkan, S., & Aslantürk, A. (2014). Basic astronomy concepts in the footsteps of Eratosthenes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3731-3739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.832
  49. Kanlı, U. (2014). A study on identifying the misconceptions of pre-service and in-service teachers about basic astronomy concepts. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(5), 463-471. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1120a
  50. Kanlı, U. (2015). Using a two-tier test to analyse students' and teachers' alternative concepts in astronomy. Science Education International, 26(2), 148 165. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1064041.pdf
  51. Kikas, E. (2006). The effect of verbal and visuo-spatial abilities on the development of knowledge of the Earth. Research in Science Education, 36(3), 269 283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-9010-5
  52. Kim, E.S., Yu, H.W., & Choe, S.U. (2011). Investigation of the 7th grade science-gifted students' understanding about the lunar phase through their own observation and interpretation. Journal of The Korean Earth Science Society, 32(5), 514 520. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2011.32.5.514
  53. Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3th ed.). The Guilford Press.
  54. Kolar, C.G., & Ho-Wisniewski, E. (2009, 04 January). Assessing high school gifted student progress in science through misconceptions and MOSART. Paper presented at the 2009 American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. https://digitalcommons.imsa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=oir_pr
  55. Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Spatial visualization in physics problem solving. Cognitive Science, 31, 549–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/15326900701399897
  56. Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (2013). Educational testing and measurement: Classroom application and practice (10th ed.). Wiley.
  57. Kurnaz, M.A. (2012). Turkish students’ understandings about some basic astronomy concepts: A cross grade study. World Applied Sciences Journal, 19(7), 986 997. https://idosi.org/wasj/wasj19(7)12/11.pdf
  58. Küçüközer, H. (2007). Prospective science teachers’ conceptions about astronomical subjects. Science Education International, 18(2), 113 130. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1065856.pdf
  59. Lee, J., & Bednarz, R. (2012). Components of spatial thinking: Evidence from a spatial thinking ability test. Journal of Geography, 111(1), 15 26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.07.048
  60. Lelliott, A., & Rolnick, M. (2010). Big ideas: a review of astronomy education research 1974-2008. International Journal of Science Education, 32(13), 1771 1799. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903214546
  61. Loehlin, J.C. (2004). Latent variable models. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  62. Maker, C.J. (2005). The DISCOVER project: Improving assessment and curriculum for diverse gifted learners. National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.
  63. Maker, C.J. (2020). Culturally responsive assessments of spatial analytical skills and abilities: development, field testing, and implementation. Journal of Advanced Academics, 31(3), 234-253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X20910697
  64. Mardia, K.V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57(3), 519-530. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/57.3.519
  65. Miller, D.I., & Halpern, D.F. (2013). Can spatial training improve long-term outcomes for gifted STEM undergraduates?. Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 141-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.03.012
  66. Moche, D.L. (2009). Astronomy: A self-teaching guide (7th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  67. Mulholland, J., & Ginns, I. (2008). College MOON Project Australia: Preservice teachers learning about the Moon’s phases. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9055-8
  68. Murphy, K.R., & Davidshofer, C.O. (2005). Psychological testing: Principles and applications (6th ed.). Pearson Education International.
  69. Myron Atkin, J. (1961). Teaching concepts of modern astronomy to elementary‐school children. Science Education, 45(1), 54-58. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730450117
  70. National Research Council (NRC). (2006). Learning to Think Spatially. National Academy Press.
  71. Ogan-Bekiroglu, F. (2007). Effects of model-based teaching on preservice physics teachers’ conceptions of the Moon, Moon phases, and other lunar phenomena. International Journal of Science Education, 29(5), 555 593. https://doi.org/0.1080/09500690600718104
  72. Osadebe, P.U. (2015). Construction of valid and reliable test for assessment of students. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(1), 51-56. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ10838 61.pdf
  73. Padalkar, S. (2010). Spatial cognition and visualization in elementary astronomy education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai.
  74. Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows. Allen-Unwin.
  75. Percy, J.R. (2006). Teaching astronomy: Why and how?. The Journal of the American Association of Variable Star Observers (JAAVSO), 35, 248 254. https://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2006JAVSO.35.248P
  76. Percy, J.R. (2009). Why astronomy is useful and should be included in the school curriculum. In J.M. Pasachoff and J.R. Percy (Eds.), Teaching and learning astronomy: Effective strategies for education worldwide (pp. 10-13). Cambridge University Press.
  77. Plummer, J., Wasko, K., & Slagle, C. (2011). Children learning to explain daily celestial motion. International Journal of Science Education, 33(14), 1963-1992. https://doi.org/10. 1080/09500693.2010.537707
  78. Plummer, J.D., Kocareli, A., & Slagle, C. (2014). Learning to explain astronomy across moving frames of reference: Exploring the role of classroom and planetarium-based instructional contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 36(7), 1083-1106. https://doi.org/10. 1080/09500693.2013.843211
  79. Plummer, J.D., & Maynard, L. (2014). Building a learning progression for celestial motion: An exploration of students' reasoning about the seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(7), 902-929. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21151
  80. Plummer, J.D., Bower, C.A., & Liben, L.S. (2016). The role of perspective taking in how children connect reference frames when explaining astronomical phenomena. International Journal of Science Education, 38(3), 345 365. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1140 921
  81. Prather, E.E., Rudolph, A.L., & Brissenden, G. (2009). Teaching and learning astronomy in the 21st century. Physics Today, 62, 41 47. https://home.miracosta.edu/rfrench/astro/rte2010/assets/PrathRudBriss_PT_Oct09.pdf
  82. Pyryt, M.C. (2000). Talent development in science and technology. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Mönks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik, International handbook of giftedness and talent (2nd ed., pp. 427-438). Elsevier Science.
  83. Rudmann, D. (2002, 02 April). Solving astronomy problems can be limited by intuited knowledge, spatial ability, or both. Paper presented at the annual American Educational Research Association. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED468815.pdf
  84. Sadler, P.M. (1992). The initial knowledge state of high school astronomy students (Publication No. 9228416) [Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
  85. Sasson, I., & Dori, Y.J. (2012). Transfer Skills and Their Case-Based Assessment. In B., Fraser, K. Tobin, & C.J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 691-710). Springer Science & Business Media.
  86. Schönborn, K.J., & Bögeholz, S. (2009). Knowledge transfer in biology and translation across external representations: experts' views and challenges for learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 931-955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9153-3
  87. Schumacker, R.E., & Lomax, R.G. (2010). A beginners guide to structural equation modeling. Routledge.
  88. Sharp, J.G. (1996). Children's astronomical beliefs: a preliminary study of year 6 children in south‐west England. International Journal of Science Education, 18(6), 685-712. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069960180604
  89. Shea, D.L., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C.P. (2001). Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectually talented young adolescents: A 20-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 604–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.604
  90. Shipley, T.F., & Gentner, D. (2013). Introduction to the special issue on spatial learning and reasoning processes. Cognitive Processing, 14(2), 103 104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-013-0565-1
  91. Sorby, S.A. (2001). A course in spatial visualization and its impact on the retention of female engineering students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v7.i2.50
  92. Stover, S., & Saunders, G. (2000). Astronomical misconceptions and the effectiveness of science museums in promoting conceptual change. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 12(1), 41-52. https://doi.org/10.1615/10.1007/BF03176897
  93. Subaşı, M., Aydın, S., & Koçak, G. (2015). Gifted students’ perceptions on basic astronomy concepts. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies (JETERAPS), 6(6), 444-451.
  94. Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  95. Taber, K.S. (Ed.). (2007). Science education for gifted learners. Routledge.
  96. Taber, K.S. (2010). Challenging gifted learners: General principles for science educators and exemplification in the context of teaching chemistry. Science Education International, 21(1), 5-30. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ890658.pdf
  97. Taylor, H.A., & Hutton, A. (2013). Think3d!: Training spatial thinking fundamental to STEM education. Cognition and Instruction, 31(4), 434-455. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008. 2013.828727
  98. Trumper, R. (2000). University students‟ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts. Physics Education, 35(1), 9-15. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/35/1/301
  99. Trumper, R. (2001a). A cross-age study of junior high school students‟ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 23(11), 1111-1123. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010025085
  100. Trumper, R. (2001b). Across-age study of senior high school students‟ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts. Research in Science and Technological Education, 19(1), 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140120046259
  101. Trumper, R. (2003). The need for change ın elementary school teacher training-a cross-college age study of future teachers‟ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 309-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00017-9
  102. Trumper, R. (2006). Teaching future teachers basic astronomy concepts-seasonal changes-at a time of reform in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(9), 879-906. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20138
  103. Trundle, K.C., Atwood, R.K., & Christopher, J.E. (2002). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of moon phases before and after instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 633–658. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10039
  104. Trundle, K.C., Atwood, R.K., & Christopher, J.E. (2007). A longitudinal study of conceptual change: preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 303–326. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20121
  105. Tuckman, B.W., & Harper, B.E. (2012). Conducting educational research. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  106. Türk, C. (2016). The correlation between pre-service science teachers’ astronomy achievement, attitudes towards astronomy and spatial thinking skills. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(2), 187-199. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n2p187
  107. Van Teijlingen E., & Hundley, V. (2002). The impotance of pilot studies. Nursing Standard, 16(40), 33-36. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns2002.06.16.40.33.c3214
  108. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W.F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535 585. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90018
  109. Vosniadou, S., Skopeliti, I., & Ikospentaki K. (2004). Modes of knowing and ways of reasoning in elementary astronomy. Cognitive Development, 19, 203 222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.12.002
  110. Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C.P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817-835. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016127
  111. Wallace, C.S., Prather, E.E., Mendelsohn, B.M. (2013). Astro 101 students’ perceptions of science: Results from the thinking about science survey instrument. Astronomy Ecuation Review (AER), 12 (1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2012042
  112. Weakley, K.D. (2010). The effects of an inquiry-based earth science course on the spatial thinking of pre-service elementary teacher education students (Publication No. 3410420) [Doctoral dissertation, Western Michigan University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
  113. Webb, R.M., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C.P. (2007). Spatial ability: A neglected dimension in talent searches for intellectually precocious youth. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 397–420. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.397
  114. Wellner, K. (1995). A correlational study of seven projective spatial structures with regard to the phases of the Moon (Publication No. 9536267) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
  115. Wells, C.S., & Wollack, J.A. (2003). An instructor’s guide to understanding test reliability. Testing & Evaluation Services, University of Wisconsin.
  116. Wilhelm, J. (2009). Gender differences in lunar‐related scientific and mathematical understandings. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 2105-2122. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802483093
  117. Wilhelm, J., Jackson, C., Sullivan, A., & Wilhelm, R. (2013). Examining differences between preteen groups ‟spatial-scientific understandings: A quasi-experimental study. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(5), 337 351. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2012.753858
  118. Wu, H., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88(3), 465–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10126
  119. Yair, Y., Schur, Y., & Mintz, R. (2003). A “thinking journey” to the planets using scientific visualization technologies. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 43-49. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022107627775
  120. Yen, J.C., Tsai, C.H., & Wu, M. (2013). Augmented reality in the higher education: Students’ science concept learning and academic achievement in astronomy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 165-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.322
  121. Yerdelen-Damar, S.Y., & Aydın, S. (2015). Relations of approaches to learning with perceptions of learning environment and goal orientations. Education and Science, 40(179), 269-293. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.4332
  122. Young, A., & Shavl, S.J. (2013). Multiple choice testing for introductory astronomy: Design theory using Bloom's taxonomy. Astronomy Education Review, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2012027
  123. Zeilik, M., Schau, C., & Mattern, N. (1998). Misconceptions and their change in university-level astronomy courses. The Physics Teacher, 36(2), 104 107. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.880056
  124. Percy, J.R. (2006). Teaching astronomy: Why and how?. The Journal of the American Association of Variable Star Observers (JAAVSO), 35, 248 254. https://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2006JAVSO.35.248P