EN
TR
The Differences Created by Using Different Representations of Questions on Evaluating the Student's Physics Achievements/Farklı Soru Sunum Biçimlerinin Öğrencilerin Fizik Başarılarını Ölçmede Oluşturduğu Farklılıklar
Abstract
Extended Abstract
Problem and Purpose: The developments in science and technology affect almost every stage in our lives. Natural sciences is an area in which the basics of science and technology are taught. Teaching of science is the basis of a good education. Thanks to the education in science, people develop their minds and creativity. That is why contemporary theories must be applied in the education of science. Teaching physics includes many types of presentation covering verbal, mathematical, pictorial and graphical forms. In addition for the data showing how the application of different test types affect students' success, physics education researchers have recently claimed that the different types of presentation in the same test affect the success. The aim for solving physics problems using multiple representations is to express physical events in different forms such as words, charts, tables, diagrams and equations.
Method: The purpose of this study is to explore, whether there is an effect of the questions, which are prepared by using different representations (verbal, mathematical, pictorial and graphical) to evaluate the student's physics achievement. For this purpose, two quizzes, that includes the questions which are prepared by using multiple representations, were applied to the 166 students that were 11th grade science classes of a high school and a special programmed Anatolian high school. This study, which investigates the relationship between student's achievements in term of the multiple representations via the valid and reliable two quizzes results, is scanning type descriptive study.
Results: The student's answers of the two quizzes were analyzed for each question, which were in different representational forms, by using paired-sample t-test analysis. According to the findings of the t-test results of the two quizzes, it is found that there are statistically significant differences between the success level of the verbal, pictorial, mathematical and graphical questions of the same physical concept in each quiz questions. To sum up, it has been found out that there is a difference in success levels of the questions prepared in four different but equivalent forms aiming at measuring the learning levels of the same physics topic. This difference is obvious enough to take into consideration in graphical representation. Based on the results of the study, it can be said that teachers must employ different question forms in physics. They must show due care for the usage and comprehension of graphics in all topics in physics so that the students can understand the problems presented in graphics. Careful attention must be given to the balanced usage of different question forms in sample problems and presentation of topics in coursebooks, aiding materials and documents etc. that students benefit from. Preparing questions for tests, teachers must take into consideration that students' success levels do not only depend upon the difficulty of questions but the way how they are asked. Therefore, they must give equal weight to all forms of questions.
Keywords: Multiple represantation forms, Student's achievement, Physics education,Questions forms.
Keywords
References
- Aydın, B. (1993). Seçme gerektiren test maddeleri ile kısa cevap gerektiren test maddelerinin psiko- metrik özellikleri ve öğrenci başarısı bakımından karşılaştırılması, Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
- Braden, A. (1996). Visual literacy (Ed. D.H. Jonassen), Handbook Of Research For Educational Communications and Tecnology. USA: Prentice Hall.
- Cömert, R. (2010). Farklı Soru Sunum Biçimlerinin Öğrencilerin Fizik Başarılarını Ölçmede Oluşturduğu Farklılıklar. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara: Türkiye.
- Çepni, S., Ayas, A., Johnson, D. ve Turgut, M. (2007). Fizik öğretimi. YÖK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitimi Geliştirme Projesi Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmen Eğitimi Dizisi, Ankara.
- De Leone, C. ve Gire, E. (2005). Is instructional emphasis on the use of non-mathematical representations worth the effort? P. Heron, L. McCullough ve J. Marx (Eds.), 2005 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, Salt Lake City, UT, 45-48.
- Gül, Ş. ve Yeşilyurt, S. (2011). The effect of computer assisted instruction on fourth grade primary students’ achievements and attitudes towards science and technology lesson. e-international journal of educational research, 2 (1): 30-43.
- Hestenes, D. (1997). Modeling methodology for physics teachers. E.F. Redish and J.S. Rigden (Eds.), The Changing Role of Physics Departments in Modern Universities: Proceedings of the International Conference on Undergraduate Physics Education, American Institue of Physics Conference Proceedings, 399 (2): 935–957.
- Hinrichs, B. (2005). Using the system schema representational tool to promote student understanding of Newton’s Third Law. J. Marx, P. Heron, and S. Franklin (Eds.), American Institue of Physics Conference Proceedings 790 (pp. 117-120). Melville, New York.
Details
Primary Language
Turkish
Subjects
-
Journal Section
Research Article
Publication Date
February 11, 2012
Submission Date
February 11, 2012
Acceptance Date
-
Published in Issue
Year 1970 Volume: 3 Number: 3