Journals / Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 43

ANALYSIS OF HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY TEXTBOOKS IN TERMS OF GRAPHS AND GRAPH-RELATED ACTIVITIES

ORTAÖĞRETİM KİMYA DERS KİTAPLARININ GRAFİKLER VE GRAFİKLERLE İLGİLİ AKTİVİTELER AÇISINDAN İNCELENMESİ

Pages
211–222
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

By the end of the study, it was found that graphs already provided in chemistry textbooks are used mostlyfor the purpose of instruction rather than assessment and evaluation and that their usage for evaluation and assessment isinadequate.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the contributions of the graphs and graph-related activities in 9th, 10th,11th, and 12th-grade chemistry textbooks to graph drawing, reading, and interpreting skills.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, documental surveyanalysis was used as the data collection method and assessment categories determining the distribution for units and sectionswere formed by considering (i) the number of graphs that were presented for instruction, measurement and assessment; (ii) thenumber of graphs required to be drawn by students in activities of assessment-evaluation, experiments; and (iii) the number ofmultiple-choice and open-ended questions requiring graph-reading and graph-interpreting in 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th-gradechemistry textbooks.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By the end of the study, it was found that graphs already provided in chemistry textbooks are used mostlyfor the purpose of instruction rather than assessment and evaluation and that their usage for evaluation and assessment isinadequate.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the contributions of the graphs and graph-related activities in 9th, 10th,11th, and 12th-grade chemistry textbooks to graph drawing, reading, and interpreting skills. In this study, documental surveyanalysis was used as the data collection method and assessment categories determining the distribution for units and sectionswere formed by considering (i) the number of graphs that were presented for instruction, measurement and assessment; (ii) thenumber of graphs required to be drawn by students in activities of assessment-evaluation, experiments; and (iii) the number ofmultiple-choice and open-ended questions requiring graph-reading and graph-interpreting in 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th-gradechemistry textbooks. By the end of the study, it was found that graphs already provided in chemistry textbooks are used mostlyfor the purpose of instruction rather than assessment and evaluation and that their usage for evaluation and assessment isinadequate. It was also discovered that the number of graphs students are required to draw in assessment and evaluation activitieswas significantly low and that as the type of questions that require graph-reading and interpreting, open-ended questions weremore often given. At the completion of the study, some suggestions were given, regarding the use of graphs in textbooks.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, 9., 10., 11. ve 12. sınıf kimya ders kitaplarında yer alan grafiklerin ve grafiklerle ilgili aktivitelerin grafikçizme, okuma ve yorumlama becerilerine yönelik katkısını niceliksel olarak değerlendirebilme amaçlanmıştır. Veri toplamayöntemi olarak, belgesel tarama yönteminin kullanıldığı çalışmada 9., 10., 11. ve 12. sınıf kimya ders kitaplarında (i) konuanlatımı amaçlı ve ölçme-değerlendirme amaçlı sunulan grafiklerin sayılarını, (ii) ölçme-değerlendirme ve etkinlik/deneyaktivitelerinde öğrenciler tarafından çizilmesi beklenen grafiklerin sayılarını ve (iii) grafik okumayı ve yorumlamayı gerektirençoktan seçmeli ve açık uçlu soru sayılarını dikkate alarak ünite ve bölümlere göre de dağılımını belirleyen değerlendirmekategorileri oluşturulmuştur. Çalışma sonunda, kimya ders kitaplarında hazır halde sunulan grafiklerin ölçme ve değerlendirmeamacından çok konu anlatımı amacıyla kullanıldığı, ölçme ve değerlendirme amaçlı kullanımlarının yetersiz kaldığıbelirlenmiştir. Kitabın etkinlik/deney ve ölçme-değerlendirme aktivitelerinde öğrenciler tarafından çizilmesi istenen grafiksayısının son derece az olduğu, grafik okuma ve yorumlama gerektiren soru türü olarak daha çok açık uçlu sorulara yer verildiğibelirlenmiştir. Çalışmada sonunda, ders kitaplarında grafiklerin kullanılmasına yönelik önerilere yer verilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜLTEKİN, C., NAKİBOĞLU, C. (2022). ANALYSIS OF HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY TEXTBOOKS IN TERMS OF GRAPHS AND GRAPH-RELATED ACTIVITIES. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 43, 211–222. https://ajindex.com/articles/492844

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Ateş, S. ve Stevens, J. T. (2003). Teaching line graphs to tenth grade students having different cognitive developmental levels by using two different instructional modules. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21 (1), 55-66.
  2. Ayas, A., Çepni, S., Johnson, D. ve Turgut, M.F. (1997). Kimya Öğretimi. YÖK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitimi Geliştirme Projesi Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmen Eğitimi, Ankara.
  3. Beichner, R. (1994). Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs”, American Journal of Physics, 62, 750-762.
  4. Berg, C. A. and Philips, D. G. (1994). An investigation of the relationship between logical thinking structures and the ability to construct and interpret line graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 323–344. Berg, C.A. and Smith, P. (1994). Assessing students’ abilities to construct and interpret line graphs: Disparities between multiple- choice and free-response instruments. Science Education, 78 (6), 527–554. Bowen, G. M., Roth, W. M. and McGinn, M. K. (1999). İnterpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: Toward a social practice view of scientific representation practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (9), 1020-1043.
  5. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. 5.Baskı, Ankara:
  6. Pegem A Yayıncılık. Canham, M. and Hegarty, M. (2010). Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learning and Instruction, 20, 155–166. Cook, M., Wiebe, E.N. and Carter, G. (2008). The influence of prior knowledge on viewing and interpreting graphics with macroscopic and molecular representations. Science Education, 92 (5), 848–867. DeMeo, S. and Mills, P. (2001). Looking for linearity: Integrating graphing for first-year chemistry students. Chemical Educator, 6 (1), 2–4. Demirci N., Karaca, D. ve Çirkinoğlu, A. G. (2006). Üniversite öğrencilerinin grafik anlama ve yorumlamaları ile kinematik başarıları arasındaki ilişki. VII. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitim Kongresi, 175, Ankara.
  7. Friel, S. N., Curcio, F. R. and Bright, G. W. (2001). Making sense of graphs: Critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 32 (2), 124-158.
  8. Gay, L.R. & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research: competencies for analysis and application. Merrill an imprint of Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Columbus, Ohio. Glazer, N. (2011). Challenges w