SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2

DETERMINATION OF THE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE TOPIC “PASSAGE OF SUBSTANCES THROUGH CELL MEMBRANE” BY TWO-TIER TEST

Sevil Özcan(AYDIN ADNAN MENDERES ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6352-0255
Pages
275–286
Publication Date
2019-02-28
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)

The correct response rate for questions was significantly different between participating and nonparticipating groups (p = .01 for multiple choice questions and p = .003 for open ended questions), and most successful training program was physiotherapy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Information that is contrary to the scientific reality is called misconceptions, and students gain them as a result of their past experiences.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It was performed with 335 students.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The correct response rate for questions was significantly different between participating and nonparticipating groups (p = .01 for multiple choice questions and p = .003 for open ended questions), and most successful training program was physiotherapy.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:health technician · misconceptions · passage of substances through cell membrane

Özet

Information that is contrary to the scientific reality is called misconceptions, and students gain them as a result of their past experiences. Learning new and correct information becomes more difficult or even hamper due to misconceptions. This study was conducted to determine the misconceptions of the health-care technician students related with the passage of substance through cell membrane. It was performed with 335 students. The research subject was explained to the students in a two-hour course by a researcher in the human physiology course. One week later, a two-tier diagnostic test consisting of seven questions was applied. It was seen that diffusion was the most known subject by the students and the correct answer rate was 77.9% (n:261). On the other hand, the least known subject was the calculation amount and the direction of the passage matter's (plasmolysis and deplasmolysis events) depending on ambient density (number of correct answer: 9.3%, n:31). Some misconceptions that were identified are the following: 1- 33.7% of students thought that the active substance transport occurred only from low density medium towards high density medium. 2-36.1%of students thought that pure water was isotonic. 3-53.7% of the students thought that the large molecules such as starch could pass through the membrane until the density to equal in both side. The data were compared in SPSS 15.0 program depending on whether students participated in the training programs that was given as a research subject or not. The correct response rate for questions was significantly different between participating and nonparticipating groups (p = .01 for multiple choice questions and p = .003 for open ended questions), and most successful training program was physiotherapy.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özcan, S. (2019). DETERMINATION OF THE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE TOPIC “PASSAGE OF SUBSTANCES THROUGH CELL MEMBRANE” BY TWO-TIER TEST. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 2, 275–286. https://ajindex.com/articles/1457897

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (27)

  1. Artun, H. &Coştu, B. (2011). Sınıf öğretmen adaylarının difüzyon ve osmoz kavramları ile ilgili yanılgılarının belirlenmesi. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8 (4), 117-127.
  2. Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  3. Balım, A. G., Yenice, N. & Oluk, S. (2003). Canlılar Bilimi, (p.55), Anı Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  4. Boynukara, Z., Başar, A., Bozkurt, O., Cansaran, A., Darçın, E. S., …Yıldırım, C. (2008). Genel Biyoloji, (p.62), 1. Baskı, Pegem Yayınevi, Ankara.
  5. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L.& Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy.
  6. Chegg study (2018, September 15) Retrieved from https://www.chegg.com/homework-help/definitions/active-transport-systems-14
  7. Christianson, R. G.& Fisher, K. M. (1999).Comparison of student learning about diffusion and osmosis in constructivist and traditional classrooms.International Journal of Science Education, 21(6), 687-698.
  8. cK-12 (2018, January 10) Retrieved from https://www.ck12.org/search/?q=active%20transport&referrer=top_nav&autoComplete=false
  9. Çakır M. &Aldemir B. (2011). İki aşamalı genetik kavramlar tanı testi geliştirme ve geçerlilik çalışması. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 8 (16), 335-353.
  10. Çinici, A.&Demir, Y. (2013). Difüzyon ve ozmos kavramlarına yönelik tanı testi geliştirilmesi ve uygulanması. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (13).
  11. Dimitrov, O.,Kozhuharova, M., Argirova, T., Bogoev, V., Minkov, I., Kimenov, G., Slavova, M. (2004). Biology and Health Education, 10th grade Textbook, (p. 119-122), Bulvest Pub., Sofia.
  12. Hasni, A., Roy, P. &Dumais, N. (2016). The teaching and learning of diffusion and osmosis: What can we learn from analysis of classroom practices? A case study.Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(6).
  13. Harman, G. (2014). Hücre zarından madde geçişi ile ilgili kavram yanılgılarının tahmin-gözlem-açıklama yöntemiyle belirlenmesi. Turkish Science Education, 11(4), 81-106.
  14. Karataş, F. Ö., Köse, S. &Coştu, B. (2003). Öğrenci yanılgılarını ve anlama düzeylerini belirlemede kullanılan iki aşamalı testler. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1 (13), 54-69.
  15. Khan Academy (2018, September 15) Retrieved from https://www.khanacademy.org/science/high-school-biology/hs-energy-and-transport/hs-passive-and-active-transport/a/hs-active-transport-review
  16. Kurt, H. & Ekici, G. (2013). Biyoloji öğretmen daylarının bağımsız kelime ilişkilendirme testi ve çizme-yazma tekniğiyle “ozmos” kavramı konusundaki bilişsel yapılarının belirlenmesi. Turkish Studies-International Periodical forthe Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 8(12), 809-829.
  17. Odom, A. L. (1993). Action potentials & biology textbooks: accurate, misconceptions or avoidance?. The American biology teacher, 468-472.
  18. Odom, A. L. & Barrow, L. H. (1995).Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students’ understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32 (1), 45-61.
  19. Odom, A. L.& Kelly, P. V. (2001). Integrating concept mapping and the learning cycle to teach diffusion and osmosis concepts to high school biology students.Science Education, 85(6), 615-635.
  20. Odom, A.L. & Barrow, L.H. (2007).High school biology students’ knowledge and certainty about diffusion and osmosis concepts.School science and mathematics, 107 (3), 94-101. Wiley Online Library, Retrieved fromhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2007.tb17775.x/full
  21. Oztas, F. (2014). How do high school students know diffusion and osmosis? High school students’ difficulties in understanding diffusion & osmosis.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 116, 3679 – 3682.
  22. Selvi, M.&Yakışan, M. (2014). Üniversite birinci sınıf öğrencilerinin enzimler konusu ile ilgili kavram yanılgıları. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2).
  23. Tarakçı, M., Hatipoğlu, S., Tekkaya, C.&Özden, M. Y. (1999). A cross-age study of high school students' understanding of diffusion and osmosis. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(15).
  24. Tekkaya, C., Şen, B. &Özden, M. Y. (1999). University students’ misconceptions concerning osmosis and diffusion. Eğitim ve Bilim, 23 (113), 28-34.
  25. Yağbasan, R. & Gülçiçek, Ç. (2003). Fen öğretiminde kavram yanılgılarının karakteristiklerinin tanımlanması. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1 (13), 102-120.
  26. Yel, M., Bahçeci, Z. & Yılmaz, M. (2009). Genel Biyoloji, 2. Baskı, (p. 274-276), Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık, Ankara.
  27. Yıldırım, O., Nakiboğlu, C.& Sinan, O. (2016). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının difüzyon ile ilgili kavram yanılgıları. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6(1), 79-99.