SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kastamonu Education Journal / 2015 / Cilt: 23 Sayı: 2

MAKING MEANING OF MASS VARIABLE IN RACE PROBLEMS

YARIŞ PROBLEMİNDE KÜTLENİN ANLAMLANDIRILMASI

Ahmet YAVUZ
Burcu BAYKAL
Burak Kağan TEMİZ
Pages
601–618
Publication Date
2015-05-15
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)

Findings obtained indicated that mass of vehicles was important but that was not a single criterion for predicting race result among students.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to investigate how middle school students make meaning the relationship between mass of vehicles and their speed on a horizontal plane.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Race Question Set developed by authors was administrated to 738 middle school students.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings obtained indicated that mass of vehicles was important but that was not a single criterion for predicting race result among students.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kütle · Sürat · Yarış Tahmini

Abstract

This study aims to investigate how middle school students make meaning the relationship between mass of vehicles and their speed on a horizontal plane. Accordingly, students’’ schemes constructed from daily life observations for concepts such as the concept of mass and differences between schemes and variables including level of class and gender were investigated. Race Question Set developed by authors was administrated to 738 middle school students. A descriptive study (relational-screening model) was adopted for analyzing students’ answers. Findings obtained indicated that mass of vehicles was important but that was not a single criterion for predicting race result among students.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, yatay düzlemde yarışan düzenekler için, yarış sonucunu tahmin etmede kütlenin, ortaokul öğrencileri tarafından nasıl anlamlandırıldığını araştırmaktır. Bu doğrultuda öğrencilerin kütle kavramı hakkında günlük hayattaki gözlemlerinden yapılandırdıkları şemaların, sınıf düzeyi, cinsiyet gibi değişkenler bakımından farklılık gösterip göstermedikleri analiz edilmiştir. Bu amaçla araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilen ve beş açık uçlu sorudan oluşan Yarış Soru Seti, 738 ortaokul öğrencisine uygulanmıştır. Tarama araştırma deseninin benimsendiği bu araştırmada, öğrenci cevapları betimsel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, öğrencilerin kütlesi en az olan aracın yarışı kazanacağını belirttiklerini; fakat kütle miktarının yarış sıralaması tahmininde tek ölçüt olarak kullanılmadıklarını göstermiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

YAVUZ, A., BAYKAL, B., TEMİZ, B. K. (2015). MAKING MEANING OF MASS VARIABLE IN RACE PROBLEMS. Kastamonu Education Journal, Cilt: 23 Sayı: 2, 601–618. https://ajindex.com/articles/940873

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Aristote. (1862). Physique d’Aristote, ou Leçons sur les principes généraux de la nature / traduite en français pour la première fois et accompagnée d’une paraphrase et de notes. par J. Barthélemy- Saint-Hilaire,A. Durand, Ladrange (Paris). Bachelard, G. (1938). La formation de l’esprit scientifique: contribution à une psychanalyse de la connaissance. Vrin Baykal, B. (2014). Fen ve Teknoloji dersi öğretmenlerinin sınıf içi iletişim ve etkileşimlerinin analizi: Diyalojik ve otoriter tartışmalar. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans tezi, Niğde Üniversitesi,
  2. Niğde. Bliss, J. (2008). Commonsense reasoning about the physical world. Studies in Science Education, 44(2), 123–155. doi:10.1080/03057260802264149 Bovet, M., ve Halbwachs, F. (1980). Le poids et la masse en classe de sixième. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 53(1), 4–18.
  3. Brown, D., ve Clement, J. (1992). Classroom teaching experiments in mechanics. Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, 380–397.
  4. Buckingham, D., ve Shultz, T. R. (2000). The developmental course of distance, time, and velocity con- cepts: A generative connectionist model. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1(3), 305–345.
  5. Büyüköztürk Ş, Kılıç Çakmak E, Akgün Ö E, Karadeniz Ş, Demirel F (2009). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi. Ankara.
  6. Carey, S. (2000). Science education as conceptual change. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21(1), 13–19.
  7. Chi, M. T. H. (2005). “Commonsense Conceptions of Emergent Processes: Why Some Misconceptions are Robust”. The Journal of the Learning Sciences. 14(2): 161-199.
  8. Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 50(1), 66–71.
  9. Clement, J. (1994). Imagistic simulation and physical intuition in expert problem solving. In Proce- edings of the 16th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 201–206). diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an Epistemology of Physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2/3), 105–225. doi:10.2307/3233725 diSessa, A.A., Gillespie, N., & Esterly, J. (2004). Coherence versus Fragmentation in the Develop- ment of the Concept of Force. Cognitive Science. 28: 843-900.
  10. Galili, I. (1993). Weight and gravity: teachers’ ambiguity and students’ confusion about the con- cepts. International Journal of Science Education, 15(2), 149–162.
  11. Galili, I. (1995). Interpretation of students’ understanding of the concept of weightlessness. Rese- arch in Science Education, 25(1), 51–74.
  12. Galili, I. (2001).