SavedAdd your journal

Journals / The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences / 2026 / Volume: 4

ANALYSIS OF PROSPECTIVE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS ON MODELS ACCORDING TO SOLO (STRUCTURE OF OBSERVED LEARNING OUTCOMES) TAXONOMY

Cem Gültekin
Canan Nakiboğlu
Pages
—
Publication Date
2016-09-01
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)

The prospective teachers’ views regarding the use of models were generally in the pre-structural and untistructural levels and no view in the extended abstract level could be identified.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:: In this study it was investigated prospective chemistry teachers’ views on the nature of models and the use of models and modeling in chemistry teaching by using Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A qualitative study was performed on 16 prospective chemistry teachers who attended the fifth grade.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The prospective teachers’ views regarding the use of models were generally in the pre-structural and untistructural levels and no view in the extended abstract level could be identified.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Models · prospective chemistry teachers · SOLO taxonomy

Abstract

: In this study it was investigated prospective chemistry teachers’ views on the nature of models and the use of models and modeling in chemistry teaching by using Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy. A qualitative study was performed on 16 prospective chemistry teachers who attended the fifth grade. Three open-ended questions were used as the data collection tool. The assessment scale, prepared by the researchers, was employed to make the descriptive analysis of what understanding levels on the SOLO prospective teachers’ answers corresponded to. The views of the prospective teachers about the model definition were usually found to be in the pre-structural level, which is the lowest level and no view was identified to be at the highest level, which is the extended abstract. The prospective teachers’ views regarding the use of models were generally in the pre-structural and untistructural levels and no view in the extended abstract level could be identified.

🔖

Cite This Article

Gültekin, C., Nakiboğlu, C. (2016). ANALYSIS OF PROSPECTIVE CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ VIEWS ON MODELS ACCORDING TO SOLO (STRUCTURE OF OBSERVED LEARNING OUTCOMES) TAXONOMY. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, Volume: 4. https://ajindex.com/articles/1550402

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Biggs, J. B. and Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic Press.
  2. Biggs, J. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  3. Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E. & Smith, C. (1991). Understanding Models and Their Use in Science: Conceptions of Middle and High School Students and Experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 799-822.
  4. Güneş, B., Gülçiçek, Ç. ve Bağcı N. (2004). Eğitim fakültelerindeki fen ve matematik öğretim elemanlarının model ve modelleme hakkındaki görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(1), 35-48.
  5. Ingham, A.M., Gilbert, J.K. (1991). The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 193-202.
  6. Justi, R. & Gilbert, J. (2003). Teachers’ views on the nature of models. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1369-1386.
  7. Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Minogue and Jones (2009). Measuring the Impact of Haptic Feedback Using the SOLO Taxonomy. International Journal of Science Education, 31(10), 1359–1378.
  8. Treagust, F.D. (2002). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science, International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1141-1153.
  9. Van Driel, H. J. ve Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers’ Knowledge of Models and Modelling in Science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1141-1153.
  10. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi. The images in table 2 and table 3 were taken from http://www.pamhook.com/