You are here

Home » Content

BİLİMSEL OKURYAZARLIKTA İLK ADIM: AKADEMİK BİLGİ DÜZEYLERİNİN BİLİM, SÖZDE-BİLİM AYRIMI BAĞLAMINDA GELİŞTİRİLMESİ

The First Step in Scientific Literacy: Improving Students’ Academic Knowledge in the Context of Science – Pseudoscience Demarcation

Journal Name:

  • Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2015
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.14582/DUZGEF.546

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
This study, which focused on the scientific content – terminology dimension of scientific literacy, aimed at investigating the effect of the teaching process planned within the context of issue of demarcation of science from pseudoscience on the academic achievement of middle school students. In the research process, pseudoscientific cases associated with some of the objectives included in the Science and Technology Program (MEB, 2006) were presented to the students and discussed both with the whole class and in small groups. The study group consisted of 18 final year middle school students. Data were collected by the “Academic Knowledge Test (AKT)” developed by the researchers. AKT was administered to each student twice: once at the beginning of the process and once at the end. The data obtained via AKT were divided into three different categories through two coding operations at different times by the specialists in the field of science education. The data collected were analyzed by Sign Test and Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test. The research findings revealed that the activities prepared within the context of the issue demarcation of science from pseudoscience created a significant difference in the academic knowledge levels of the students regarding related objectives.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bilimsel okuryazarlığın, bilimsel içerik – terminoloji boyutuna odaklanılmış bu çalışmada, bilim sözde-bilim ayrımı tartışması bağlamında planlanmış bir öğretim sürecinin ortaokul öğrencilerinin akademik başarılarına etkisi araştırma konusu yapılmıştır. İlgili süreçte, Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Öğretim Programı’nda (MEB, 2006) yer alan kazanımlarla ilişkilendirilmiş bazı sözde-bilimsel vakalar bir dizi etkinlik ile öğrencilere sunularak hem bütün sınıf hem de küçük gruplar halinde tartışmaya açılmıştır. Çalışma grubunda 18 ortaokul son sınıf öğrencisinin yer aldığı araştırmanın veri toplama aracını araştırmacılar tarafından geliştirilmiş “Akademik Bilgi Testleri” (ABT) oluşturmuştur. ABT’leri öğretim sürecinden önce ve sonra olmak üzere her öğrenciye toplam iki kez uygulanmıştır. ABT’lerden elde edilen veriler fen eğitimi alanında uzman araştırmacılar tarafından farklı zamanlarda iki kez kodlanarak İşaret ve Wilcoxon İşaretli Sıralar Testi ile analiz edilmiştir. Ulaşılan bulgular, bilim sözde-bilim bağlamı esas alınarak hazırlanan etkinliklerin, öğrencilerin ilgili kazanımlara yönelik akademik bilgi düzeylerinde anlamlı bir farklılık oluşturduğunu ortaya koymuştur.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon 784508126_e_cetinkaya_h_turgut_m_k_duru_s_ercan.pdf
  • 24
446
476
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

ACARA. (2014). F-10 Curriculum / Science Learning Area. Retrieved
on 12-August-2014, at URL:
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/science
Afonso, A. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2010) Pseudo‐science: A meaningful
context for assessing nature of science, International Journal of
Science Education, 32(3), 329-348.
Allchin, D. (2004). Pseudohistory and Pseudoscience, Science &
Education, 13, 179-195.
Beyerstein, B. L. (1996). Distinguishing Science from Pseudoscience.
Retrieved on 16-August-2014, at URL:
http://www.sfu.ca/~beyerste/research/articles/02SciencevsPseudoscienc
e
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and
the culture of learning, Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2005). Anket geliştirme. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri
Dergisi, 3(2), 133-148.
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving Scientific Literacy: From Purposes to
Practice. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific Literacy: Another Look at Its
Historical and Contemporary Meanings and Its Relationship to
Science Education Reform, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching. 37(6), 582- 601.
Dori, Y.J., Tal, R., & Tsaushu, M. (2003). Teaching biotechnology
through case studies: Can we improve higher-order thinking
skills of non-science majors?, Science Education, 87, 767–793.
Erduran, S. (1995). Science or Pseudoscience: Does Science Education
Demarcate? The Case of Chemistry and Alchemy in Teaching.
Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2015) 446-476 472
The Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, SanFrancisco.
Genovese, J. E. C. (2005). Paranormal beliefs, schizotypy, and thinking
styles among teachers and future teachers, Personality and
Individual Differences, 39 (1), 93-102.
Herrington, J. & Oliver, R. (1995). Critical characteristics of situated
learning: implications for the instructional design of multimedia.
ASCILITE 1995 Conference, University of Melbourne,
Melbourne.
Hodson, D. (2003) Time for action: Science education for an alternative
future, International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645-
670.
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2007). The nature of science education
for enhancing scientific literacy, International Journal of
Science Education, 29(11), 1347-1362.
Kılıç, E. (2004). Durumlu öğrenme kuramının eğitimdeki yeri ve önemi,
Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(3), 307-320.
Klassen, J. S. (2002). "A Theoretical Framework for the Incorporation
of History in Science Education". Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. The University of Manitoba, Faculty of Education.
Laugksch, R. (2000). “Scientific Literacy: A conceptual Overview”,
Science Education, 84(1), 71–94.
Lederman, N. & Niess, M.. (1998). “Survival Of The Fittest”, School
Science and Mathematics, 4(98), 169–172.
Leonard, M. J. (2004). Toward epistemologically authentic engineering
design activities in the science classroom. National Association
for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, B.C.
Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J. V. & Lohr, J. M. (2012). Science and
Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology. Newyork: Guilford Press.
Linnenbrink, E. A. & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler
for academic success, School Psychology Review, 31 (3), 313-
327.
Lundström, M. (2007). Students Beliefs In Pseudoscience. European
Science Education Research Association Conference (ESERA),
Malmö: Sweden.
Ertan ÇETİNKAYA-Halil TURGUT-M. KurşadDURU-Serhat ERCAN 473
Martin, M. (1994). Pseudoscience, the paranormal, and the science
education, Science & Education, 3, 357-371.
Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science Teaching: The Role of History and
Philosophy of Science. New York: Routledge.
McFarlane, D. A. (2013). Understanding the challenges of science
education in the 21st century: new opportunities for scientific
literacy. International Letters of Social and Humanistic
Sciences, 4, 35-44.
McLean, C. P. & Miller N. A. (2010). Changes in Critical Thinking
Skills Following a Course on Science and Pseudoscience: A
Quasi-Experimental Study, Teaching of Psychology, 37 (2), 85-
90.
Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific Literacy: A Conceptual and Empirical
Review, Daedalus, 112(2), 29 - 48.
MEB. (2006). İlköğretim Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi (6., 7. ve 8. Sınıflar)
Öğretim Programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.
NRC. (1996). National Science Education Standarts. Washington, D.
C.. National Academy Press.
NSTA. (1982). Science-technology-society: Science education for the
1980s. Washington, D.C.
Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of
argumentation in the pedagogy of school science, International
Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.
Nickell, D. S. (1992). "The Pseudoscientific beliefs of high school
students". Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University
School of Education, Indiana
Pella, M. O., O’Hearn, G. T. & Gale, C. G. (1966). Referents to
scientific literacy, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4,
199– 208
Pena, A. & Paco, O. (2004). Attitudes and Views of Medical Students
toward Science and Pseudoscience, Medical Education Online, 9
(4), 1-7.
Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1994). Bibliography: Students’ Alternative
Frameworks and Science Education, (4th Ed.). Kiel: Germany.
Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(2015) 446-476 474
Preece, P. F., & Baxter, J. H. (2000). Scepticism and gullibility: The
superstitious and pseudoscientific beliefs of secondary school
students, International Journal of Science Education, 22(11),
1147–1156.
Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: socioscientific
issues as contexts for practice, Studies in Science
Education, 45 (1), 1-42.
Siegel, S. (1957). Nonparametric Statistics, The American Statistician,
11(3), 13-19.
Turgut, H. (2005). "Yapılandırmacı Tasarım Uygulamasının Fen Bilgisi
Öğretmen Adaylarının Bilimsel Okuryazarlık Yeterliklerinden
“Bilimin Doğası” ve “Bilim-Teknoloji-Toplum İlişkisi”
Boyutlarının Gelişimine Etkisi". Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi,
Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul
Turgut, H. (2007). Herkes İçin Bilimsel Okuryazarlık, Ankara
Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(2), 233-256.
Turgut, H., Akçay, H. ve İrez, S. (2010). Bilim sözde - bilim ayrımı
tartışmasının öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğası inanışlarına
etkisi, Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 10 (4), 2621-
2663.
Yager, S.O., Lim, G., & Yager, R. (2006). The advantages of an STS
approach over a typical textbook dominated approach in middle
school science, School Science and Mathematics, 106, 248–260.
Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma
Yöntemleri. Güncelleştirilmiş ve Genişletilmiş 5. Baskı. Ankara:
Seçkin Yayıncılık
Zeidler, D. L. & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: theory
and practice, Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21 (2),
49-58

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com