KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences / 2026 / Volume: 2

THE COMPARISON OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS` LEARNING STRATEGIES FOR CHEMISTRY COURSES

Tolga Gök
Özge Gök
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2015-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️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)

The detailed findings and suggestions were reported in the study.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:It is essential to know, comprehend, apply, analyze, synthesize, and evaluate the physical science (chemistry, earth science, physics, etc.) for the science and engineering students.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The research was conducted with 166 students.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The detailed findings and suggestions were reported in the study.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:chemistry · higher education · learning strategies

Abstract

It is essential to know, comprehend, apply, analyze, synthesize, and evaluate the physical science (chemistry, earth science, physics, etc.) for the science and engineering students. The purpose of this study was to compare the tendency of the higher education technical vocational school and engineering students to physical science. The research was conducted with 166 students. Data were collected using Learning Strategy Survey (LSS). Cognitive/metacognitive strategies (CMS) and resource management strategies (RMS) of the students were compared with the help of this survey designed for chemistry courses. The results presented that the usage of learning strategies of the higher education technical vocational school and engineering students were similar in terms of chemistry. The students` thoughts revealed that the chemistry is not accepted as a key-course for their major field and they preferred to memorize the content of the course without any comprehension. The detailed findings and suggestions were reported in the study.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Gök, T., Gök, Ö. (2015). THE COMPARISON OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS` LEARNING STRATEGIES FOR CHEMISTRY COURSES. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, Volume: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1550455

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (7)

  1. Buyukozturk, S., Akgun, O. E., Ozkahveci, O., & Demirel, F. (2004). The validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4(2), 207–239.
  2. Cook, E., Kennedy, E., & McGuire, S. Y. (2013). Effect of teaching metacognitive learning strategies on performance in general chemistry courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 90, 961−967 Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911.
  3. Hutcheson, G. D., & Sofroniou, N. (1999). The multivariate social science scientist: Statistics using generalized linear models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Karadeniz, C. B. (2010). The geography learning strategies of the education faculty students. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 36, 69-80.
  4. Lynch, D. J., & Trujillo, H. (2011). Motivational beliefs and learning strategies in organic chemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(6), 1351-1365.
  5. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning. Michigan: School of Education Building, The University of Michigan. ERIC database number: ED338122. Rao, Z., & Liu, F. (2011) Effect of academic major on students' use of language learning strategies: A diary study in a Chinese context, The Language Learning Journal, 39(1), 43-55.
  6. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371.
  7. Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-139.