Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

THE EFFECTS OF 'MODEL OF MODEL BASED INSTRUCTION' TEACHING MODEL TO STUDENTS' UNDERSTANDING LEVEL ABOUT ENERGY CONCEPT

Year 2011, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 1 - 16, 20.06.2011

Mehmet Kurnaz , Mehmet Altan Kurnaz , Ayşegül Sağlam Arslan

Abstract

Introduction: Although there are many alternative approaches in related literature to teach energy effectively, students are still hard to learn it. Also, teachers are hard to teach it. Thus, it is believed that effectiveness of new approaches should also be researched. The objective of this paper is to investigate students' understandings about energy concept in a learning environment designed in terms of 'Model Based Instruction'. For this purpose, Model of Model Based Instruction (MOMBI) as one of the model of Model Based Instruction Approach was accepted as the teaching model for the study.
Method: Didactical engineering was used as the research method owing to its potential to carry out experimental study. The sample consisted of 33 students enrolled in an introductory physics course in Karadeniz Technical University in Turkey. To emerge students' understandings, the data was collected with pre and post tests including open-ended questions. The obtained data analyzed through the rubric developed in terms of related literature. Analyzes were realized by first author of the study and checked its correctness by the second author. The effectiveness of the learning environment was determined with comparing the pre and post tests results.
Results: In the study, analyzes of student answers put forth three main points about students' understandings related with energy. These are energy as a concept, energy types, and relationship between energy and a system/object. The analysis of pre-test showed that the students did not try to define energy or explain it truely. It is also noticed that students did not have adaequate understandings about energy types and relationship between energy and a system/object before the instruction process. Hereby, it was determined that the students came inadequate and incorrent acquisitions to university. The analysis of post-test revealed that the students defined energy, its types and relationship of it with a system sufficiently. Thus, it was decided that the students' understandings increased at the expected quality after the instruction process. Moving from here, the study was concluded that the learning environment designed in terms of MOMBI had an effective nature to teach energy subject.
Suggestions: Based on the results, MOMBI was recommended to lecturer or teachers in the instruction processes. Also, since Model Based Instruction Approach and its MOMBI model was highlighted in recent years, it is recommended to researchers to carry out new researches on this field.

Keywords

Model Based Learning Energy Didactical Engineering

References

  • Abraham, M. R., Williamson, V. M., and Wetsbrook, S. L. (1994). A cross-age study of the understanding of five chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31 (2): 147-165.
  • Arslan, S. (2009). Matematik Öğretiminde Düşünme Farklılıkları Dersi. Yayınlanmamış Ders Notları, KTÜ Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi, Trabzon.
  • Artigue, M. (1994). Didactical engineering as a framework for the conception of teaching products. R. Biehler, R. W. Scholz, R. StraBer, B. Winkelmann (Ed.), Didactics of Mathematics as a Scientific Discipline, (27-29). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Artigue, M. (2009). Didactical design in mathematics education. C. Winslİw (Ed.), Nordic research in mathematics education (7–16). Rotterdam: Sense.
  • Aydın, G., and Günay Balım, A. (2005). Yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma göre modellendirilmiş disiplinler arası uygulama: Enerji konularının öğretimi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 38 (2): 145-166.
  • Barnett, M. (2002). Adressing children‘s alternative frameworks of the Moon‘s phases and eclipses. International Journal of Science Education, 24 (8): 859-879.
  • Boyes, E., and Stanisstreet, M. (1990). Pupils‘ ideas concerning energy sources. International Science Education, 12 (5): 513-529.
  • Brook, A. J., and Wells, P. (1988). Conserving the circus? An alternative approach to teaching and learning about energy. Physics Education, 23: 80-85.
  • Buckley, B. C., Gobert, J. D., and Christie, M. T. (2002). Model-based Teaching and Learning with Hypermodels: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know?. Presented as part of the symposium Hypermodel Research in Theory and Practice. April 2002, American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
  • Capel, S., Leask, M., and Turner, T. (1999). Learning to teach in the secondary school. London, Routledge.
  • Cartier, J., Rudolph, J. and Stewart, J., 2001, The Nature and Structure of Scientific Models NCISLA, Working Paper, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, School of Education, University of Wisconsin–Madison, [03.02.2010] http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ncisla
  • Coll, R. K., and Treagust, D. F. (2003). Learners‘ mental models of metalic bonding: a cross-age study. Science Education, 87 (5): 685-707.
  • Devi, R., Tiberghien, A., Baker, M., and Brna, P. (1996). Modelling Students' Construction of Energy Models in Physics. Instructional Science, 24(4): 259-293.
  • Driver, R. (1995). Constructivist approaches to science teaching. L. P. Steffe and J. Gale (Ed.), Constructivism in education (385–400). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Duit, R. (1984). Learning the Energy Concept in School-Empirical Results from the Philippines and West Germany. Physics Education, 19: 59–66.
  • Duit, R., ve Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science - from behaviorism towards social constructivism and beyond. B. J. Fraser and K. G. Tobin (Ed.), International handbook of science education (3–25). Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Domenech, J. L., Gil-perez, D., Gras-marti, A., Guisasola, J., Torregrosa, J.M., Salinas, J., Trumper, R., Valdes, P., and Vilches, A., (2007). Teaching of energy issues: A debate proposal for a global reorientation. Science ve Education, 16: 43-64.
  • Fry, M., Dimeo, L., Wilson, C., Sadler, J., and Fawns, R. (2003). A new approach to teaching ―energy and change‖: using an abstract picture language to teach thermodynamic thinking in junior science classes. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49 (1).
  • Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. J. and Elmer, R., (2000). Positioning Models in Science Education and in Design and Technology Education. Gilbert, J. K. and Boulter, C. J. (Ed.), Developing Models in Science Education, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Gobert, J. D., and Buckley, B. C. (2000). Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22 (9): 891 – 894.
  • Greca, I. M., and Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1): 1-11.
  • Hanke, U. (2008). Realizing Model-Based Instruction - The Model of model-based ınstruction. D. Ifenthaler, P. Pirnay-Dummer and J. M. Spector (Ed.), Understanding Models for Learning and Instruction (175-186). Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
  • Hanke, U., and Huber, E. (2008). Acceptance of Model-Based Instruction among Students. IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age.
  • Hanke, U., and Huber, E. (2010). Acceptance of Model-Based Instruction among Students in Spanish and Mathematics. J. M. Spector, D. Ifenthaler, P. Isaías, Kinshuk, and D. Sampson (Ed.), Learning and Instruction in the Digital Age (225-235). Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
  • Hestenes, D. (2006). Notes for a Modeling Theory of Science, Cognition and Instruction. Proceedings of the GIREP conference: Modelling in Physics and Physcis Education.
  • Heuvelen, A.V. and Zou, X. (2001). Multiple representations of work-energy processes. American Journal of Physics, 69 (2): 184.
  • Huis C., and Berg E., (1993). Teaching energy: a systems approach. Physics Education, 28 (3): 147-153.
  • Keating, T., Barnett, M., Barab, S. A., and Hay K.E. (2002). The Virtual Solar System Project: Developing Conceptual Understanding of Astronomical Concepts Through Building Three- Dimensional Computational Models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11 (3): 261-275.
  • Kirkwood, V., and Carr, M. (1988). Final report: Learning in Science Project (Energy), Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton.
  • Kirkwood V., and Carr M. A. (1989). Valuable teaching approach: some insights from LISP (Energy). Physics Education, 24: 332-334.
  • Köse, S., Bağ, H., Sürücü, A., and Uçak, E. (2006) Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının canlılardaki enerji kaynaklarıyla ilgili görüşleri. International Journal of Enviromental and Science Education, 1 (2): 141-152.
  • Kurnaz, M. A. (2007). Enerji Kavramının Üniversite 1. Sınıf Seviyesinde Öğrenim Durumlarının Analizi, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, KTU, Trabzon.
  • Kurnaz, M. A., and Sağlam Arslan, A. (2008). Turkish University Freshmen‘s Understanding of the Energy Concept, XXIII CESE Conference. 7-10 July 2008, Athens.
  • Kurnaz, M. A., and Çalık, M. (2009). A thematic review of ‗energy‘ teaching studies: focuses, needs, methods, general knowledge claims and implications. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 1 (1): 1-26.
  • Kurnaz, M. A., and Sağlam Arslan, A. (2009). Using the Anthropological Theory of Didactics in Physics: Characterization of the Teaching Conditions of Energy Concept and the Personal Relations of freshmen to this Concept. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(1): 72-88.
  • McDermott, L. C., (1993). Guest comments: How we teach and how student learn—A mismatch? American Journal of Physics. 61: 295-298.
  • Nersessian, N. J. (1995). Should physicists preach what they practice? Constructive modeling in doing and learning physics. Science ve Education, 4: 203–226.
  • Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. A. Gentner ve A. L. Stevens (Ed.), Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Papadouris, N., and Constantinou C. P. (2006). Design, development and validation of a teaching proposal for energy: results from a pilot implementation, GIREP, Amsterdam.
  • Papadouris, N., Constantinou, C.P., and Kyratsi, T. (2008). Students‘ use of the energy model to account for changes in physical systems, Journal of Research in science teaching, 45 (4): 444-469.
  • Patrick, P.G. (2006). Mental Models Students Hold of Zoos. Unpublished Doctora Thesis, The University of North Carolina, Greensboro.
  • Sağlam Arslan, A. (2009). Cross-grade comparison of students‘ understanding of energy concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19 (3): 303-313.
  • Sağlam-Arslan, A., and Kurnaz, M. A. (2009). Prospective physics teachers‘ level of understanding energy, power and force concepts. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 10 (1): Article 6.
  • Sağlam Arslan, A., and Kurnaz, M. A. (2011). Students‘ conceptual understanding of energy: Do the learning difficulties in energy concept discovered in the 1990s persist still? Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 3 (1&2): 109-118.
  • Taylor, I., Barker, M., and Jones, A. (2003). Promoting mental model building in astronomy education. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (10): 1205–1225.
  • Thornton, R. K. (1999). Using the results of research in science education to improve science learning. International conference on science education, Nicosia, Cyprus. [Internet-04.03.2010] http://probesight.concord.org/what/articles/thornton.pdf
  • Tiberghien, A. (2000). Designing teaching situations in the secondary school. R. Millar, J. Leach and J. Osborne (Ed.), Improving science education: the contribution of research, (27-47). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
  • Trumper R. (1990). Being constructive: An alternative approach to the teaching of the energy concept, part one. International Journal of Science Education, 12: 343-354.
  • Trumper, R. (1998). A longitudinal study of physics‘ students‘ conceptions on energy in pre-service training for high school teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7 (4): 311- 318.
  • Solomon, J. (1992). Getting to know about energy –in school and society. London, The Falmer Pres.
  • Warren, J. W. (1983). Energy and its carriers: A critical analysis. Physics Education, 18 (5): 209-212.
  • Watts, D. M. (1983). Some alternative views on energy. Physics Education, 18: 213–217.
  • White, R. and Gustone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London, The Falmer Press.
  • Yıldırım, A., and Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. 5. Baskı, Ankara, Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yürümezoğlu, K., Ayaz, S., and Çökelez, A. (2009). İlköğretim İkinci Kademe Öğrencilerinin Enerji ve Enerji ile İlgili Kavramları Algılamaları. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi (EFMED), 3 (2): 52–73.
  • THE EFFECTS OF 'MODEL OF MODEL BASED
  • INSTRUCTION' TEACHING MODEL TO STUDENTS’
  • UNDERSTANDING LEVEL ABOUT ENERGY CONCEPT
  • Ministry of National Education-Turkey
  • Karadeniz Technical University-Turkey

MODEL TABANLI ÖĞRENME YAKLAŞIMINI TEMEL ALAN ÖĞRENME ORTAMININ ÖĞRENCİLERİN ENERJİ KAVRAMINI ANLAMA DÜZEYLERİNE ETKİSİ

Year 2011, Volume: 2 Issue: 2, 1 - 16, 20.06.2011

Mehmet Kurnaz , Mehmet Altan Kurnaz , Ayşegül Sağlam Arslan

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı 'Model Tabanlı Öğrenme' (MTO) yaklaşımına göre tasarlanan öğrenme ortamının öğrencilerin enerji konusu ile ilgili alternatif fikirlerini giderme ve eksik bilgilerini tamamlamalarına etkilerini değerlendirmektir. Bu amaç kapsamında öğretim ortamı 'Model Tabanlı Öğrenme' yaklaşımının öğretim modellerinden biri olan Model Tabanlı Öğretim Modeline (Model of Model Based Instruction -MOMBI-) göre tasarlanmış ve uygulanmıştır. Uygulamalı olarak gerçekleştirilen çalışmada araştırma yöntemi olarak Didaktiksel Mühendislik yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Matematik Öğretmenliği Programında Temel Fizik I dersi alan 33 öğrenci araştırmanın çalışma grubunu oluşturmaktadır. Tasarlanan öğrenme ortamının etkilerini değerlendirmek amacıyla 4 açık uçlu sorudan oluşan bir başarı sınavı geliştirilmiş ve öğrencilerin uygulamadan önce ve sonra bu soruları cevaplandırmaları sağlanmıştır. Elde edilen verilerin analizinde ilgili literatüre ve uzman görüşlerine dayalı olarak geliştirilen rubrikten yararlanılmıştır. Analizler birinci araştırmacı tarafından gerçekleştirilmiş diğer araştırmacı tarafından doğruluğu kontrol edilmiştir. Öğrenme ortamının etkililiği ön ve son test bulgularının karşılaştırmasına dayanmaktadır. Elde edilen bulgular, öğrencilerin anlama seviyelerinde beklenilen nitelikte bir artış olduğunu göstermiştir. Bulgulardan hareketle enerji kavramının öğretimi için MOMBI öğretim modeline göre tasarlanan öğretim ortamının öğrencilerin öğrenmesinde anlamlı bir etkisi olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu anlamda, MOMBI öğretim modelinin enerji kavramının öğretimi sürecinde kullanılması önerilmektedir. Ayrıca 'Model Tabanlı Öğrenme' yaklaşımının son yıllarda kendini gösteren yeni bir yaklaşım olması sebebiyle farklı konulara uygulanmasını temel alan çalışmaların yürütülmesinin literatüre önemli katkılar sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.
Anahtar kelimeler: 

Keywords

Model Tabanlı Öğrenme MOMBI Enerji Didaktiksel Mühendislik

References

  • Abraham, M. R., Williamson, V. M., and Wetsbrook, S. L. (1994). A cross-age study of the understanding of five chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31 (2): 147-165.
  • Arslan, S. (2009). Matematik Öğretiminde Düşünme Farklılıkları Dersi. Yayınlanmamış Ders Notları, KTÜ Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi, Trabzon.
  • Artigue, M. (1994). Didactical engineering as a framework for the conception of teaching products. R. Biehler, R. W. Scholz, R. StraBer, B. Winkelmann (Ed.), Didactics of Mathematics as a Scientific Discipline, (27-29). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Artigue, M. (2009). Didactical design in mathematics education. C. Winslİw (Ed.), Nordic research in mathematics education (7–16). Rotterdam: Sense.
  • Aydın, G., and Günay Balım, A. (2005). Yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma göre modellendirilmiş disiplinler arası uygulama: Enerji konularının öğretimi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 38 (2): 145-166.
  • Barnett, M. (2002). Adressing children‘s alternative frameworks of the Moon‘s phases and eclipses. International Journal of Science Education, 24 (8): 859-879.
  • Boyes, E., and Stanisstreet, M. (1990). Pupils‘ ideas concerning energy sources. International Science Education, 12 (5): 513-529.
  • Brook, A. J., and Wells, P. (1988). Conserving the circus? An alternative approach to teaching and learning about energy. Physics Education, 23: 80-85.
  • Buckley, B. C., Gobert, J. D., and Christie, M. T. (2002). Model-based Teaching and Learning with Hypermodels: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know?. Presented as part of the symposium Hypermodel Research in Theory and Practice. April 2002, American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
  • Capel, S., Leask, M., and Turner, T. (1999). Learning to teach in the secondary school. London, Routledge.
  • Cartier, J., Rudolph, J. and Stewart, J., 2001, The Nature and Structure of Scientific Models NCISLA, Working Paper, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, School of Education, University of Wisconsin–Madison, [03.02.2010] http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/ncisla
  • Coll, R. K., and Treagust, D. F. (2003). Learners‘ mental models of metalic bonding: a cross-age study. Science Education, 87 (5): 685-707.
  • Devi, R., Tiberghien, A., Baker, M., and Brna, P. (1996). Modelling Students' Construction of Energy Models in Physics. Instructional Science, 24(4): 259-293.
  • Driver, R. (1995). Constructivist approaches to science teaching. L. P. Steffe and J. Gale (Ed.), Constructivism in education (385–400). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Duit, R. (1984). Learning the Energy Concept in School-Empirical Results from the Philippines and West Germany. Physics Education, 19: 59–66.
  • Duit, R., ve Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science - from behaviorism towards social constructivism and beyond. B. J. Fraser and K. G. Tobin (Ed.), International handbook of science education (3–25). Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Domenech, J. L., Gil-perez, D., Gras-marti, A., Guisasola, J., Torregrosa, J.M., Salinas, J., Trumper, R., Valdes, P., and Vilches, A., (2007). Teaching of energy issues: A debate proposal for a global reorientation. Science ve Education, 16: 43-64.
  • Fry, M., Dimeo, L., Wilson, C., Sadler, J., and Fawns, R. (2003). A new approach to teaching ―energy and change‖: using an abstract picture language to teach thermodynamic thinking in junior science classes. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49 (1).
  • Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. J. and Elmer, R., (2000). Positioning Models in Science Education and in Design and Technology Education. Gilbert, J. K. and Boulter, C. J. (Ed.), Developing Models in Science Education, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Gobert, J. D., and Buckley, B. C. (2000). Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22 (9): 891 – 894.
  • Greca, I. M., and Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1): 1-11.
  • Hanke, U. (2008). Realizing Model-Based Instruction - The Model of model-based ınstruction. D. Ifenthaler, P. Pirnay-Dummer and J. M. Spector (Ed.), Understanding Models for Learning and Instruction (175-186). Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
  • Hanke, U., and Huber, E. (2008). Acceptance of Model-Based Instruction among Students. IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age.
  • Hanke, U., and Huber, E. (2010). Acceptance of Model-Based Instruction among Students in Spanish and Mathematics. J. M. Spector, D. Ifenthaler, P. Isaías, Kinshuk, and D. Sampson (Ed.), Learning and Instruction in the Digital Age (225-235). Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
  • Hestenes, D. (2006). Notes for a Modeling Theory of Science, Cognition and Instruction. Proceedings of the GIREP conference: Modelling in Physics and Physcis Education.
  • Heuvelen, A.V. and Zou, X. (2001). Multiple representations of work-energy processes. American Journal of Physics, 69 (2): 184.
  • Huis C., and Berg E., (1993). Teaching energy: a systems approach. Physics Education, 28 (3): 147-153.
  • Keating, T., Barnett, M., Barab, S. A., and Hay K.E. (2002). The Virtual Solar System Project: Developing Conceptual Understanding of Astronomical Concepts Through Building Three- Dimensional Computational Models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11 (3): 261-275.
  • Kirkwood, V., and Carr, M. (1988). Final report: Learning in Science Project (Energy), Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton.
  • Kirkwood V., and Carr M. A. (1989). Valuable teaching approach: some insights from LISP (Energy). Physics Education, 24: 332-334.
  • Köse, S., Bağ, H., Sürücü, A., and Uçak, E. (2006) Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının canlılardaki enerji kaynaklarıyla ilgili görüşleri. International Journal of Enviromental and Science Education, 1 (2): 141-152.
  • Kurnaz, M. A. (2007). Enerji Kavramının Üniversite 1. Sınıf Seviyesinde Öğrenim Durumlarının Analizi, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, KTU, Trabzon.
  • Kurnaz, M. A., and Sağlam Arslan, A. (2008). Turkish University Freshmen‘s Understanding of the Energy Concept, XXIII CESE Conference. 7-10 July 2008, Athens.
  • Kurnaz, M. A., and Çalık, M. (2009). A thematic review of ‗energy‘ teaching studies: focuses, needs, methods, general knowledge claims and implications. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 1 (1): 1-26.
  • Kurnaz, M. A., and Sağlam Arslan, A. (2009). Using the Anthropological Theory of Didactics in Physics: Characterization of the Teaching Conditions of Energy Concept and the Personal Relations of freshmen to this Concept. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(1): 72-88.
  • McDermott, L. C., (1993). Guest comments: How we teach and how student learn—A mismatch? American Journal of Physics. 61: 295-298.
  • Nersessian, N. J. (1995). Should physicists preach what they practice? Constructive modeling in doing and learning physics. Science ve Education, 4: 203–226.
  • Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. A. Gentner ve A. L. Stevens (Ed.), Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Papadouris, N., and Constantinou C. P. (2006). Design, development and validation of a teaching proposal for energy: results from a pilot implementation, GIREP, Amsterdam.
  • Papadouris, N., Constantinou, C.P., and Kyratsi, T. (2008). Students‘ use of the energy model to account for changes in physical systems, Journal of Research in science teaching, 45 (4): 444-469.
  • Patrick, P.G. (2006). Mental Models Students Hold of Zoos. Unpublished Doctora Thesis, The University of North Carolina, Greensboro.
  • Sağlam Arslan, A. (2009). Cross-grade comparison of students‘ understanding of energy concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19 (3): 303-313.
  • Sağlam-Arslan, A., and Kurnaz, M. A. (2009). Prospective physics teachers‘ level of understanding energy, power and force concepts. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 10 (1): Article 6.
  • Sağlam Arslan, A., and Kurnaz, M. A. (2011). Students‘ conceptual understanding of energy: Do the learning difficulties in energy concept discovered in the 1990s persist still? Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 3 (1&2): 109-118.
  • Taylor, I., Barker, M., and Jones, A. (2003). Promoting mental model building in astronomy education. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (10): 1205–1225.
  • Thornton, R. K. (1999). Using the results of research in science education to improve science learning. International conference on science education, Nicosia, Cyprus. [Internet-04.03.2010] http://probesight.concord.org/what/articles/thornton.pdf
  • Tiberghien, A. (2000). Designing teaching situations in the secondary school. R. Millar, J. Leach and J. Osborne (Ed.), Improving science education: the contribution of research, (27-47). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
  • Trumper R. (1990). Being constructive: An alternative approach to the teaching of the energy concept, part one. International Journal of Science Education, 12: 343-354.
  • Trumper, R. (1998). A longitudinal study of physics‘ students‘ conceptions on energy in pre-service training for high school teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7 (4): 311- 318.
  • Solomon, J. (1992). Getting to know about energy –in school and society. London, The Falmer Pres.
  • Warren, J. W. (1983). Energy and its carriers: A critical analysis. Physics Education, 18 (5): 209-212.
  • Watts, D. M. (1983). Some alternative views on energy. Physics Education, 18: 213–217.
  • White, R. and Gustone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London, The Falmer Press.
  • Yıldırım, A., and Şimşek, H. (2006). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. 5. Baskı, Ankara, Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yürümezoğlu, K., Ayaz, S., and Çökelez, A. (2009). İlköğretim İkinci Kademe Öğrencilerinin Enerji ve Enerji ile İlgili Kavramları Algılamaları. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi (EFMED), 3 (2): 52–73.
  • THE EFFECTS OF 'MODEL OF MODEL BASED
  • INSTRUCTION' TEACHING MODEL TO STUDENTS’
  • UNDERSTANDING LEVEL ABOUT ENERGY CONCEPT
  • Ministry of National Education-Turkey
  • Karadeniz Technical University-Turkey
There are 60 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Studies on Education
Journal Section Educational Sciences and Sciences of Field Education
Authors

Mehmet Kurnaz

Mehmet Altan Kurnaz

Ayşegül Sağlam Arslan

Publication Date June 20, 2011
Published in Issue Year 2011Volume: 2 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Kurnaz, M., Kurnaz, M. A., & Sağlam Arslan, A. (2011). MODEL TABANLI ÖĞRENME YAKLAŞIMINI TEMEL ALAN ÖĞRENME ORTAMININ ÖĞRENCİLERİN ENERJİ KAVRAMINI ANLAMA DÜZEYLERİNE ETKİSİ. E-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 1-16.
 Download Cover Image

Creative Commons Lisansı
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)


[email protected]                http://www.e-ijer.com    Address: Ege University Faculty of Education İzmir/Türkiye