KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 20 Sayı: 1

Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Sıvıların Kaldırma Kuvveti Konusundaki Anlayış ve Kavram Yanılgılarının Belirlenmesi

Determining the Understandings and Misconceptions of Science Teacher Candidates on the Buoyancy Force of Liquids

Süleyman Akçay(SÜLEYMAN DEMİREL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-0651-6425
Sayfa
279–298
Yayın Tarihi
2026-06-26
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Ayrıca, öğretmen adayları arasında sıvıların kaldırma kuvvetiyle ilgili altı farklı yanlış anlama tespit edilmiştir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Fen bilimleri eğitimcileri arasında, öğretmenlerin bilimsel kavramların doğru anlaşılması ve geliştirilmesinde çok önemli bir rol oynadığı yaygın olarak kabul edilmektedir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Aynı zamanda, bunlar anlamlı ve etkili öğrenme sürecindeki görünmez engellerden biridir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Ayrıca, öğretmen adayları arasında sıvıların kaldırma kuvvetiyle ilgili altı farklı yanlış anlama tespit edilmiştir.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Fen bilimleri öğretmen adayları · sıvıların kaldırma kuvveti · anlayış

Özet

Fen bilimleri eğitimcileri arasında, öğretmenlerin bilimsel kavramların doğru anlaşılması ve geliştirilmesinde çok önemli bir rol oynadığı yaygın olarak kabul edilmektedir. Bu nedenle, öğrencilerin bilimsel olarak doğru kavramlar edinmelerini sağlamada öğretmen eğitiminin önemi yadsınamaz. Öte yandan, yanlış kavramlar, bilimsel gerçeklerle örtüşmeyen zihinsel modeller veya şemalardır. Aynı zamanda, bunlar anlamlı ve etkili öğrenme sürecindeki görünmez engellerden biridir. Bu araştırmanın amacı, fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının sıvıların kaldırma kuvveti hakkındaki anlayışlarını ve yanlış kavramlarını belirlemektir. Bu amaçla, Tahmin Et-Gözlemle-Açıkla (POE) tekniği kullanılmıştır. Araştırma nitel bir araştırma tasarımına sahiptir ve tematik içerik analizi kategorisine girmektedir. Çalışma grubu, bir devlet üniversitesinde öğrenim gören 48 fen bilimleri öğretmen adayından oluşmaktadır. Veriler, yazılı açık uçlu sorulara verilen cevaplardan elde edilmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda, fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının çoğunun (%65) sıvıların kaldırma kuvveti hakkındaki anlayışlarının bilimsel gerçeklerle örtüşmediği belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, öğretmen adayları arasında sıvıların kaldırma kuvvetiyle ilgili altı farklı yanlış anlama tespit edilmiştir. Son olarak, araştırma bulgular çerçevesinde tartışmalar ve önerilerle sonuçlandırılmıştır.

Abstract

Among science educators, it is widely accepted that teachers play a crucial role in the correct understanding and development of scientific concepts. Therefore, the importance of teacher training in enabling students to acquire scientifically accurate concepts cannot be denied. Misconceptions, on the other hand, are mental models or schemas that do not align with scientific facts. At the same time, these are one of the invisible barriers in the meaningful and effective learning process. The aim of this research is to determine the understandings and misconceptions of Science Teacher Candidates regarding the buoyancy of liquids. For this purpose, the Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) technique was used. The research has a qualitative research design and falls into the category of thematic content analysis. The study group consists of 48 science teacher candidates studying at a state university. Data were obtained from the answers given to written open-ended questions. As a result of the research, it was determined that most of the understandings of science teacher (65%) candidates about the buoyancy of liquids do not in accordance with scientific facts. In addition, six different misconceptions about the buoyancy of liquids were identified among the teacher candidates. Finally, the research is concluded with discussions and recommendations within the framework of the findings.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Akçay, S. (2026). Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarının Sıvıların Kaldırma Kuvveti Konusundaki Anlayış ve Kavram Yanılgılarının Belirlenmesi. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, Cilt: 20 Sayı: 1, 279–298. https://doi.org/10.17522/balikesirnef.1774026

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (55)

  1. Astiti, D. T., İbrahim, M., & Hariyono, E. (2020). Application of POE (predict-observe-explain) learning strategies to reduce students’ misconceptions in science subjects in elementary school. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology, 5(7), 437-445. https://doi.org/10.38124/IJISRT20JUL478
  2. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In E. Simmt & B. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 annual meeting of the Canadian mathematics education study group (pp. 3–14). Edmonton, Alberta: CMESG/GCEDM.
  3. Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S., & Mewborn, D. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematics knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 433–456). Macmillan.
  4. Çakır, Ç. Ş., & Baydere, F. K. (2022). The effects of laboratory practices based on scientific process skills on prospective science teachers' conceptual understanding: The example of buoyancy force. MSKU Journal of Education, 9(1), 172-195. https://doi.org/10.21666/muefd.947304
  5. Çepni, S., & Şahin, Ç.(2012). Effect of different teaching methods and techniques embedded in the 5e instructional model on students’ learning about buoyancy force. International Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 4(2), 97–127. https://doi.org/10.51724/ijpce.v4i2.98
  6. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage.
  7. Dawkins, K. R., Dickerson, D. L., McKinney, S. E., & Butler, S. (2008). Teaching density to middle school students: preservice science teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical practices. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(1), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.82.1.21-26
  8. diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (1998). What changes in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1155–1191. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980201002
  9. Doğan, N., & Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students' and science teachers' conceptions of nature of science: A national study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083-1112. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20243
  10. Ecevit, T., & Özdemir Şimşek, P. (2017). The evaluation of teachers ‘science concept teaching and their action to diagnose and eliminate misconceptions. Elementary Education Online, 16(1), 129-150. https://ilkogretim-online.org/index.php/pub/article/view/111/103
  11. Ginns, I. S., & Watters, J. J. (1995). An analysis of scientific understandings of preservice elementary teacher education students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(2), 205-222. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320209
  12. Güneş, T., Taştan Akdağ, F., & Güneş, O. (2016). Readiness and misconceptions of high school students in learning of the buoyancy of liquids. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 2(1), 20-32. https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.279081
  13. Gyeltshen, S., & Wangchuk, S. (2025). Using the Predict–Observe–Explain (POE) strategy in enhancing student’s conceptual understanding the energy conservation law. Science & Education, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-025-00625-4
  14. Halford, G. S., Brown, C. A., & Thompson, R. M. (1986). Children's concepts of volume and flotation. Developmental Psychology, 22(2), 218. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.22.2.218
  15. Hardy, I., Jonen, A., Möller, K., & Stern, E. (2006). Effects of instructional support within constructivist learning environments for elementary school students' understanding of "floating and sinking.". Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(2), 307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.2.307
  16. Harrell, P. E., Kirby, B., Subramaniam, K., & Long, C. (2022). Are elementary preservice teachers floating or sinking in their understanding of buoyancy?. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(2), 299-320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10160-7
  17. Kala, N., Yaman, F., & Ayas, A. (2013). The effectiveness of predict–observe–explain technique in probing students’ understanding about acid–base chemistry: A case for the concepts of pH, pOH, and strength. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11, 555-574. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9354-z
  18. Karaçam, S., & Gürsel, Ü. (2017). High school students’ visual images about the concept of buoyancy and roots of those images. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 1(41), 326-345. https://doi.org/10.21764/EFD.14301
  19. Kearney, M. (2004). Classroom use of multimedia-supported predict–observe–explain tasks in a social constructivist learning environment. Research in Science Education, 34, 427-453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-8795-y
  20. Kember, D. (1991). Instructional design for meaningful learning. Instructional Science, 20(4), 289-310. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00043255
  21. Kennedy, M. J., Thomas, C. N., Aronin, S., Newton, J. R., & Lloyd, J. W. (2014). Improving teacher candidate knowledge using content acquisition podcasts. Computers & Education, 70, 116-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.010
  22. Kim, J., & Kendeou, P. (2021). Knowledge transfer in the context of refutation texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 67, 102002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.102002
  23. Kırtak Ad, V. N., & Kocakülah, M. S. (2018). The effect of full studio model on conceptual understanding of preservice science teachers about the concept of buoyant force. Journal of Science Education, 6(2), 120-145. https://izlik.org/JA58ZL74BH
  24. Kohn, A. S. (1993). Preschoolers' reasoning about density: Will it float? Child development, 64(6), 1637-1650. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb04204.x
  25. Köse, S., Coştu, A. G. B., & Keser, Ö. F. (2003). Determination of students’ misconceptions in science: activities through POE method. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 13(13), 43-53. https://izlik.org/JA96XS28XD
  26. Kuo, B. C., Chen, C. H., & de la Torre, J. (2018). A cognitive diagnosis model for identifying coexisting skills and misconceptions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 42(3), 179-191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621617722791
  27. Libarkin, J. C., Crockett, C. D., & Sadler, P. M. (2003). Density on dry land: Demonstratıons wıthout buoyancy challenge student mısconceptıons. The Science Teacher, 70(6), 46–50. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24156089
  28. Loverude, M. E., Kautz, C. H., & Heron, P. R. (2003). Helping students develop an understanding of Archimedes’ principle. I. Research on student understanding. American Journal of Physics, 71(11), 1178-1187. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1607335
  29. Meyer, J., & Land, R. (2005). Overcoming barriers to student understanding. Routledge.
  30. Miles M.B., & Huberman A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
  31. Minogue, J., & Borland, D. (2016). Investigating students’ ideas about buoyancy and the influence of haptic feedback. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9585-1
  32. Modell, H., Michael, J., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2005). Helping the learner to learn: the role of uncovering misconceptions. The American Biology Teacher, 67(1), 20-26. https://doi.org/10.1662/0002-7685(2005)067[0020:HTLTLT]2.0.CO;2
  33. MoNE, (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı (İlkokul ve Ortaokul 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar). https://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/Dosyalar/201812312311937-FEN%20B%C4%B0L%C4%B0MLER%C4%B0%20%C3%96%C4%9ERET%C4%B0M%20PROGRAMI2018.pdf
  34. MoNE, (2024a). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar). https://cdn.eba.gov.tr/icerik/GorusOneri/2024Programlar/2024programfen345678.pdf
  35. MoNE, (2024b). Ortaöğretim fizik dersi öğretim programı (9, 10, 11 ve 12. sınıflar). https://cdn.eba.gov.tr/icerik/GorusOneri/2024Programlar/2024programfen345678.pdf
  36. Oğuz, A., & Yürümezoğlu, K. (2008). Experiment clarifies buoyancy. Physics Education, 43(3). 247-248. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/43/3/F03
  37. Önen, F. (2005). The removing of students misconceptions about pressure with constructivist approach in elementary school (Publication No. 159234) [Master’s thesis, Marmara University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  38. Radovanović, J., Sliško, J., & Ilić, I. S. (2019, August). Active learning of buoyancy: An effective way to change students’ alternative conceptions about floating and sinking. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1286, No. 1, p. 012011). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1286/1/012011
  39. Resbiantoro, G., & Setiani, R. (2022). A review of misconception in physics: the diagnosis, causes, and remediation. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 403-427. https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/924
  40. Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2023). Learning to teach science. In N. G. Lederman, D. L. Zeidler, J. S. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1162-1196). Routledge.
  41. Şahin, F. (2013). Examination of the 8th grade students conceptual understandings about buoyancy force (Publication No. 337169) [Master’s thesis, Balıkesir University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  42. Sharif, M. (2018). Barriers in learning mathematics and students’ misconception in secondary schools. Asian Journal of Management Sciences & Education, 7(2)139-145. http://www.ajmse.leena-luna.co.jp/AJMSEPDFs/Vol.7(2)/AJMSE2018(7.2-18).pdf
  43. She, H. C. (2002). Concepts of a higher hierarchical level require more dual situated learning events for conceptual change: A study of air pressure and buoyancy. International Journal of Science Education, 24(9), 981-996. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098895
  44. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
  45. Soyibo, K. (1995). A review of some sources of students’ misconceptions in biology. Singapore Journal of Education, 15(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188799508548576
  46. Stronge, J. H. (2018). Qualities of effective teachers. Ascd.
  47. Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(2), 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(88)90011-X
  48. Taslidere, E. (2016). Development and use of a three-tier diagnostic test to assess high school students’ misconceptions about the photoelectric effect. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(2), 164-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2015.1124409
  49. Ünal, S., & Coştu, B. (2005). Problematic issue for students: Does it sink or float?. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 6(1), Article 3. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Suat-Uenal-2/publication/26411488_Problematic_issue_for_students_Does_it_sink_or_float/links/5702556508ae9969f7027bb1/Problematic-issue-for-students-Does-it-sink-or-float.pdf
  50. Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & Health Sciences, 15(3), 398-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048
  51. Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers' practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137-158. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200102)38:2 3.0.CO;2-U
  52. Vosniadou, S. (2007). Conceptual change and education. Human Development, 50(1), 47-54. https://doi.org/10.1159/000097684
  53. Yates, T. B., & Marek, E. A. (2014). Teachers teaching misconceptions: A study of factors contributing to high school biology students’ acquisition of biological evolution-related misconceptions. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 7(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12052-014-0007-2
  54. Yin, Y., Tomita, M. K., & Shavelson, R. J. (2008). Diagnosing and dealing with student misconceptions: floating and sinking. Science Scope, 31(8), 34-39. https://michellesclassroom.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/diagnosing-and-dealing-with-student-misconceptions.pdf
  55. Zhang, J., Chen, Q., Sun, Y., & Reid, D. J. (2004). Triple scheme of learning support design for scientific discovery learning based on computer simulation: Experimental research. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(4), 269-282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00062.x