The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System

Esra Özay Köse

Research Article

The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System

Year 2013, Volume: 3 Issue: 3, 9 - 17, 30.09.2013

Esra Özay Köse

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to study effect of argumentation based science inquiry (ABSI) on stu-
dents’ achievement and attitude toward biology in teaching of circulation system and teachers’ knowledge and
attitude about ABSI. For this aim, a 30 items achievement test, a 15 items attitude toward biology test and an open-
ended question for learning of thinking about ABSI were administered to 40 secondary school students from two
different ninth class that one of them control group applied traditional approach and other one experiment group
applied ABSI approach. Also, a 30 items knowledge and attitude test about ABSI were implemented to 20 biol-
ogy, chemistry, and physics teachers in secondary school in Erzurum. According to analysis of data, it was elicited
that there is an increase of achievement in experiment group but there isn’t a different between control group and
experiment group, there is an increase of attitude toward biology in experiment group and students of experimental
group have positive view about ABSI approach. In analyze of teachers, it was elicited that teachers have middle
level (unstable) knowledge and attitude about ABSI approach.

Keywords

Argumentation based science inquiry approach, Biology, Achievement, Attitude

References

Alexopoulou, E., Driver, R., 1996. Small-groupdiscussion in physics: Peer interactionmodes in pairsandfours. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 33(10): 1099-1114.
Anonim 2013. http://atbo.org/page_id=394.31/03/2012.
Bell, P.,Linn, M. C., 2000. Scienti carguments as learningartifacts: Designingforlearningfromthe web with KIE. International Jo- urnal of ScienceEducation, 22(8): 797-817.
Burns, J., 1997. Achievingunderstanding in science. (eds. B. Bel- landR. Baker)Developingthesciencecurriculum in aotearoa- newzealand. Auckland: Longman, pp. 23-38.
Ceylan, Ç., 2010. Fen laboratuvar etkinliklerinde argümantasyon tabanlı bilim öğrenme – atbö yaklaşımının kullanımı. Yüksek lisans tezi, Ankara.
Crawford, T.,Kelly, G. J., Brown, C., 2000. Ways of knowingbe- yondfactsandlaws of science: An ethnographicinvestigation of studentengagement in scienti cpractices. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 37(3): 237-258.
Driver, R., Newton, P., Osborne, J., 2000. Establishingthenorms of scienti cargumentation in classrooms. ScienceEducation, 84(3): 287-312.
Duschl, R. A.,Osborne, J.,2002. Supportingandpromotingargumen- tationdiscourse in scienceeducation. Studies in ScienceEduca- tion, 38: 39-72.
Erduran, S. andJiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., 2007. Argumentation in scienceeducation: Perspectivesfromclassroom-basedresearch. Chapter in Erduran, S. (2007). Methodologicalfoundations in thestudy of argumentation in scienceclassrooms. Springer.
Geddis, A. N., 1991. Improvingthequality of scienceclassroomdis- course on controversialissues. ScienceEducation, 75(2): 169- 183.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P.,Rodriguez, A. B., Duschl, R. A., 2000. “Doingthelesson” or “doingscience”: Argument in highscho- olgenetics. ScienceEducation, 84(6): 757-792.
Kaya O. N., 2005. Tartışma Teorisine Dayalı Öğretim Yaklaşımının Öğrencilerin Maddenin Tanecikli Yapısı Konusundaki Başa- rılarına ve Bilimin Doğası Hakkındaki Kavramalarına Etkisi, Doktora Tezi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara
Kaynar P., 2009. Genetik Olarak Değiştirilmiş Organizmalara (GDO) Genel Bir Bakış, Türk Hijyen ve Deneysel Biyoloji Dergisi, 66: 177-185
Keçeci G.,Kırılmazkaya G., Kırbağ Zengin F., 2011. İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Genetiği Değiştirilmiş Organizmaları On- lineArgümantasyon Yöntemi ile Öğrenmesi, 6th International Advanced Technologies Symposium (LATS’11), 16-18 May 2011, Elazığ, Turkey.
Keys, C. W.,Hand, B., Prain, V., Collins, S., 1999. Using theSci- enceWritingHeuristic as a Toolfor Learning fromLaboratory in SecondaryScience. Journal of research in scienceTeaching. 36(10): 1065-1084.
Kırbağ Zengin F., Keçeci G., Kırılmazkaya G., Şener A., 2011. İl- köğretim Öğrencilerinin Nükleer Enerji Sosyo- Bilimsel Konu- su Online Argümantasyon Yöntemi İle Öğrenmesi, 5th Inter- national ComputerandInstructinonalTecnologiesSymposium, 22-24 Semtember 2011, Fırat University, Elazığ- Türkey.
Lawson, A. E., 2003. Thenatureanddevelopment of hypotheticopredictiveargumentationwithimplicationsforscienceteaching. International Journal of ScienceEducation, 25(11): 1387-1408.
Newton, P., Driver, R. andOsborne, J., 1999. Theplace of argumen- tation in thepedagogy of schoolscience. International Journal of ScienceEducation, 21(5): 553-576.
Özkara, D.,2011. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Basınç Konusunun Sekizinci Sınıf Öğrencilerine Bilimsel Argümantasyona Dayalı Etkinlikler ile Öğretilmesi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adıyaman.
Pekel, 2005. DNA, Gen, Kromozom İle İlgili Kavramların Öğre- tilmesinde Kavramsal Değişim Yaklaşımının Etkinliğinin İncelenmesi, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzurum.
Strike, K. A.,Posner, G. J., 1992. A revisionisttheory of conceptu- alchange. (eds. R. A. DuschlandR. J. Hamilton), Philosophy of science, cognitivepsychologyandeducationaltheoryandpracti- ce. Albany, NY: StateUniversity of New York Press.
Toulmin S.,1958. TheUses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. T ümay H.,Köseoğluoğlu F., 2011. Kimya Öğretmen Adaylarının Argümantasyon Odaklı Öğretim Konusunda Anlayışlarının Geliştirilmesi,Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 8(3).
Yeşiloğlu,S.N., 2007. Gazlar Konusunun Lise Öğrencilerine Bilim- sel Tartışma(Argümantasyon) Odaklı Yöntem İle Öğretimi (Tez Çalışması), Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Kimya Eğitimi Bilim Dalı, Ankara.
Zeidler, D. L., 1997. Thecentral role of fallaciousthinking in scien- ceeducation. ScienceEducation, 81(4), 483-496. Zohar, A.,Nemet, F., 2002. Fosteringstudents’ knowledgeandargu- mentationskillsthroughdilemmas in humangenetics. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 39(1): 35-62.

Taşıma ve Dolaşım Ünitesinin Öğretiminde Argümentasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme Yaklaşımının Etkisi

Year 2013, Volume: 3 Issue: 3, 9 - 17, 30.09.2013

Esra Özay Köse

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı Argümentasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenmenin (ATBÖ) öğrencilerin taşıma ve dolaşım
sistemi ile ilgili akademik başarıları ve biyoloji dersine yönelik tutumlarına etkisini ve Ortaöğretim öğretmenle-
rinin ATBÖ ile ilgili bilgi ve tutumlarını araştırmaktır. Bu amaç için, 2011-2012 öğretim yılında Erzurum İli’nde
bir ortaöğretim okulunda öğrenim gören geleneksel yaklaşımın uygulandığı biri kontrol, diğeri ise ATBÖ’ nin
uygulandığı deney grubu olan iki farklı dokuzuncu sınıftan 40 lise öğrencisine 30 maddeden oluşan bir başarı testi,
15 maddeden oluşan bir tutum testi ve öğrencilerin yöntem hakkında düşüncelerini almak için açık uçlu bir soru
uygulanmıştır. Erzurum ili ortaöğretimlerinde görev yapan 20 Fizik, Kimya, Biyoloji öğretmenine ise 30 madde-
lik bir ATBÖ bilgi ve tutum testi uygulanmıştır. Verilerin analizinden ATBÖ uygulanan sınıfta bir başarı artışının
olduğu ama geleneksel yaklaşım uygulanan sını a kıyaslandığında bir farkın olmadığı, deney grubundaki öğrenci-
lerin biyolojiye karşı tutumlarının arttığı ve ATBÖ yöntemi hakkında olumlu görüşler bildirdikleri tespit edilmiştir.
Öğretmenlere yapılan analizde ise öğretmenlerin ATBÖ hakkında orta düzeyde bilgi ve tutuma sahip oldukları
sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

Argümentasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme yaklaşımı, biyoloji, başarı, tutum

References

Alexopoulou, E., Driver, R., 1996. Small-groupdiscussion in physics: Peer interactionmodes in pairsandfours. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 33(10): 1099-1114.
Anonim 2013. http://atbo.org/page_id=394.31/03/2012.
Bell, P.,Linn, M. C., 2000. Scienti carguments as learningartifacts: Designingforlearningfromthe web with KIE. International Jo- urnal of ScienceEducation, 22(8): 797-817.
Burns, J., 1997. Achievingunderstanding in science. (eds. B. Bel- landR. Baker)Developingthesciencecurriculum in aotearoa- newzealand. Auckland: Longman, pp. 23-38.
Ceylan, Ç., 2010. Fen laboratuvar etkinliklerinde argümantasyon tabanlı bilim öğrenme – atbö yaklaşımının kullanımı. Yüksek lisans tezi, Ankara.
Crawford, T.,Kelly, G. J., Brown, C., 2000. Ways of knowingbe- yondfactsandlaws of science: An ethnographicinvestigation of studentengagement in scienti cpractices. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 37(3): 237-258.
Driver, R., Newton, P., Osborne, J., 2000. Establishingthenorms of scienti cargumentation in classrooms. ScienceEducation, 84(3): 287-312.
Duschl, R. A.,Osborne, J.,2002. Supportingandpromotingargumen- tationdiscourse in scienceeducation. Studies in ScienceEduca- tion, 38: 39-72.
Erduran, S. andJiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., 2007. Argumentation in scienceeducation: Perspectivesfromclassroom-basedresearch. Chapter in Erduran, S. (2007). Methodologicalfoundations in thestudy of argumentation in scienceclassrooms. Springer.
Geddis, A. N., 1991. Improvingthequality of scienceclassroomdis- course on controversialissues. ScienceEducation, 75(2): 169- 183.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P.,Rodriguez, A. B., Duschl, R. A., 2000. “Doingthelesson” or “doingscience”: Argument in highscho- olgenetics. ScienceEducation, 84(6): 757-792.
Kaya O. N., 2005. Tartışma Teorisine Dayalı Öğretim Yaklaşımının Öğrencilerin Maddenin Tanecikli Yapısı Konusundaki Başa- rılarına ve Bilimin Doğası Hakkındaki Kavramalarına Etkisi, Doktora Tezi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara
Kaynar P., 2009. Genetik Olarak Değiştirilmiş Organizmalara (GDO) Genel Bir Bakış, Türk Hijyen ve Deneysel Biyoloji Dergisi, 66: 177-185
Keçeci G.,Kırılmazkaya G., Kırbağ Zengin F., 2011. İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Genetiği Değiştirilmiş Organizmaları On- lineArgümantasyon Yöntemi ile Öğrenmesi, 6th International Advanced Technologies Symposium (LATS’11), 16-18 May 2011, Elazığ, Turkey.
Keys, C. W.,Hand, B., Prain, V., Collins, S., 1999. Using theSci- enceWritingHeuristic as a Toolfor Learning fromLaboratory in SecondaryScience. Journal of research in scienceTeaching. 36(10): 1065-1084.
Kırbağ Zengin F., Keçeci G., Kırılmazkaya G., Şener A., 2011. İl- köğretim Öğrencilerinin Nükleer Enerji Sosyo- Bilimsel Konu- su Online Argümantasyon Yöntemi İle Öğrenmesi, 5th Inter- national ComputerandInstructinonalTecnologiesSymposium, 22-24 Semtember 2011, Fırat University, Elazığ- Türkey.
Lawson, A. E., 2003. Thenatureanddevelopment of hypotheticopredictiveargumentationwithimplicationsforscienceteaching. International Journal of ScienceEducation, 25(11): 1387-1408.
Newton, P., Driver, R. andOsborne, J., 1999. Theplace of argumen- tation in thepedagogy of schoolscience. International Journal of ScienceEducation, 21(5): 553-576.
Özkara, D.,2011. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Basınç Konusunun Sekizinci Sınıf Öğrencilerine Bilimsel Argümantasyona Dayalı Etkinlikler ile Öğretilmesi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adıyaman.
Pekel, 2005. DNA, Gen, Kromozom İle İlgili Kavramların Öğre- tilmesinde Kavramsal Değişim Yaklaşımının Etkinliğinin İncelenmesi, Atatürk Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzurum.
Strike, K. A.,Posner, G. J., 1992. A revisionisttheory of conceptu- alchange. (eds. R. A. DuschlandR. J. Hamilton), Philosophy of science, cognitivepsychologyandeducationaltheoryandpracti- ce. Albany, NY: StateUniversity of New York Press.
Toulmin S.,1958. TheUses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. T ümay H.,Köseoğluoğlu F., 2011. Kimya Öğretmen Adaylarının Argümantasyon Odaklı Öğretim Konusunda Anlayışlarının Geliştirilmesi,Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 8(3).
Yeşiloğlu,S.N., 2007. Gazlar Konusunun Lise Öğrencilerine Bilim- sel Tartışma(Argümantasyon) Odaklı Yöntem İle Öğretimi (Tez Çalışması), Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü Kimya Eğitimi Bilim Dalı, Ankara.
Zeidler, D. L., 1997. Thecentral role of fallaciousthinking in scien- ceeducation. ScienceEducation, 81(4), 483-496. Zohar, A.,Nemet, F., 2002. Fosteringstudents’ knowledgeandargu- mentationskillsthroughdilemmas in humangenetics. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 39(1): 35-62.

There are 24 citations in total.

Details

Journal Section	Biyoloji / Biology
Authors	Esra Özay Köse
Publication Date	September 30, 2013
Submission Date	September 19, 2012
Acceptance Date	May 9, 2013
Published in Issue	Year 2013 Volume: 3 Issue: 3

Cite

APA	Köse E. O. (2013). The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 3(3), 9-17.
AMA	Köse EO. The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System. J. Inst. Sci. and Tech. September 2013;3(3):9-17.
Chicago	Köse Esra Özay. “The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System”. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 3, no. 3 (September 2013): 9-17.
EndNote	Köse EO (September 1, 2013) The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 3 3 9–17.
IEEE	Köse E. O., “The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System”, J. Inst. Sci. and Tech., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 9–17, 2013.
ISNAD	Köse Esra Özay. “The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System”. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 3/3 (September 2013), 9-17.
JAMA	Köse EO. The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System. J. Inst. Sci. and Tech. 2013;3:9–17.
MLA	Köse Esra Özay. “The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System”. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, vol. 3, no. 3, 2013, pp. 9-17.
Vancouver	Köse EO. The Effect of Argumentation Based Science Inquiry Approach in Teaching of Circulation System. J. Inst. Sci. and Tech. 2013;3(3):9-17.

Article Files

Full Text