Deneyimli Kimya Öğretmenlerinin "Yanlış Kavrama" ile İlgili Alan Eğitimi Bilgilerinin İncelenmesi

Year 2016, Volume: 1 Issue: 2, 75 - 104, 27.12.2016

Canan Nakiboğlu , Ayşe Zeynep Şen

Abstract

Öz: Öğrencilerin öğrenme güçlükleri ve yanlış kavramaları ile ilgili bilgi birikimleri alan eğitimi bilgisi (AEB)'nin bileşenlerinden biri olan öğrencilerin feni anlamalarının bir alt boyutudur ve bir öğretmenin sahip olması gereken önemli bir bilgi türüdür. Bu nedenle çalışmada, deneyimli kimya öğretmenlerinin yanlış kavramalar konusundaki AEB’leri incelenmiştir. Durum çalışması modeline göre tasarlanmış bu çalışmada veriler gözlem, görüşme ve ders planı yolu ile toplanmıştır. Çalışmada 25 yıldan daha fazla öğretim deneyimine sahip üç kimya öğretmeni yer almıştır. Çalışma sonunda deneyimli kimya öğretmenlerinin; yanlış kavramaların doğası, kaynakları ve nasıl önlenmesi gerektiği konusunda sahip oldukları AEB'lerinin kısmen gelişmş olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Mesleki deneyimin, lisansüstü eğitimin ve çalıştaylara katılma gibi faktörlerin öğretmenlerin AEB gelişimine olan etkisinin de incelendiği çalışma sonucunda, öğretmenlerin lisansüstü eğitim yapmaları ve farklı hizmet içi eğitim aktivitilerine katılmanın AEB gelişimlerine etkisinin mesleki deneyime göre nispeten daha fazla olduğu belirlenmiştir.

References

• Adadan, E.,& Öner, D. (2014). Exploring the progression in preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge representations: The case of “behavior of gases”. Research in Science Education, 44(6), 829-858.
• Aydeniz, M.,& Kırbulut, Z. D. (2014). Exploring challenges of assessing pre-service science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 42(2), 147-166.
• Aydın, S. (2012). Examination of chemistry teachers’ topic-specific nature of pedagogical content knowledge in electrochemistry and radioactivity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, TURKEY.
• Aydın, S., Demirdogen, B., Tarkın, A., Kutucu, S., Ekiz, B., Akın, F. N., Tüysüz, M., & Uzuntiryaki, E. (2013), Providing a set of research-based practices to support preservice teachers’ long-term professional development as learners of science teaching. Science Education, 97, 903–935.
• Aydın, S. & Boz, Y. (2013). The nature of integration among PCK components: A case study of two experienced chemistry teachers. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 615-624.
• Bektas, O., Ekiz, B., Tuysuz, M., Kutucu, E.S., Tarkin, A., & Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E.(2013). Pre-service chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of the natureof science in the particle nature of matter. Chemistry Education Research andPractice, 14, 201-213.
• Bektaş, O. (2015). Pre-service science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in the physics, chemistry, and biology topics. European Journal of Physics Education, 6(2), 41-53.
• Boesdorfer, S.,&Lorsbach, A. (2014).PCK in action: examining one chemistry teacher's practice through the lens of her orientation toward science teaching. International Journal Of Science Education, 36(13), 2111-2132.
• Boz, N.,& Boz, Y. (2008). A qualitative case study of prospective chemistry teachers’ knowledge about instructional strategies: Introducing particulate theory. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19, 135–156.
• Bucat, R. (2005). Implications of chemistry education research for teaching practice: pedagogical contentKnowledge as a way forward. Chemical Education International, 6(1), 1-2.
• Chick, H.L., Pham, T., & Baker, M. (2006). Probing teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge: Lessons from the case of the subtraction algorithm. In P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen, & M. Chinnappan (eds.), Identities, Cultures and Learning Spaces. Proceedings of the 29th annual conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia, 139-146,Adelaide, SA: MERGA.
• Clermont, C. P., Borko, H., & Krajcik, J. S. (1994). Comparative study of the pedagogical content knowledge of experienced and novice chemical demonstrators. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 31(4),419-441.
• Cochran, K. F., King, R. A., & DeRuiter, J. A. (1991). Pedagogical content knowledge: A tentative model for teacher preparation. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED340683).
• Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263-272.
• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design qualitative, quatitative, and mixed methods approaches. USA: Sage Publications.
• De Jong, O. (1997). The pedagogical content knowledge of prospective and experienced chemistry teachers: A comparative study. Paper presented at NARST Annual Meeting, Chicago.
• De Jong, O., Ahtee, M., Goodwin, A., Hatzinikita, V.,& Koulaidis, V. (1999). An international study of prospective teachers’ initial teaching conceptions and concerns: the case of teaching ‘combustion’.European Journal of Teacher Education, 22(1), 45-59.
• De Jong, O., Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2005). Preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge ofusing particle models in teaching chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 947–964.
• Drechsler, M.,& Van Driel, J. (2008). Experienced teachers’ pedagogical content knowledgeof teaching acid–base chemistry. Research in Science Education, 38(5), 611-635.
• Fernandez-Balboa, J.,& Stiehl, J. (1995). The generic nature of pedagogical content knowledge among college professors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 293-306.
• Gess-Newsome, J. and Lederman, N. G. (Eds.). PCKand Science Education in (pp. 95-132). Netherlands: Kluwer.
• Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
• Hashweh, M. Z. (2005) Teacher pedagogical constructions: a reconfigurationof pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 11(3), 273-292.
• Hume, A.,& Berry, A. (2013). Enhancing the practicum experience for pre-service chemistry teachers through collaborative core design with mentor teachers. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 2107-2136.
• Karakoç, Ö. (2003). Kimya öğretmen adaylarının elektrokimya konularındaki alan eğitimi bilgilerinin gelişimi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Balıkesir Üniversitesi, Balıkesir, TÜRKİYE.
• Kind, V. (2014). A degree is not enough: a quantitative study of aspects of pre-service science teachers' chemistry content knowledge. International Jpurnal Of Science Education,36(8), 1313-1345.
• Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching.
• Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3-11.
• Mavhunga, E.,& Rollnick, M. (2013). Improving PCK of chemical equilibrium in pre-service teachers. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(1-2), 113-125.
• Nakiboğlu, C. (2003). Instructional misconceptions of Turkish prospective chemistry teachers about atomic orbitals and hybridization. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. 4(2) 171-188.
• Nakiboğlu, C., Karakoç, Ö., & De Jong, O. (2010). Examining pre-service chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and influences of Teacher course and practice school. Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 76-79.
• Nilsson, P. (2014) When teaching makes a difference: developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge through learning study. International Journal of Science Education,36(11), 1794-1814.
• Özden, M. (2008). Konu alan bilgisinin pedagojik alan bilgisi üzerine etkisi: Maddenin fiziksel hâllerinin öğretilmesi durumu. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 8, 611-645.
• Park, S.,& Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research In Science Education, 38, 261-284.
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher,15(2), 4-14.
• Skelly, K. M. (1993). The development and validation of a categorization of sources of misconceptions in chemistry. Third International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca: Cornell University.
• Smith, Deborah C. & Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5(1), 1-20.
• Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education.Teaching and Teacher Education, 4 (2), 99-110.
• Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical contentknowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673–695.
• Van Driel, J. H.,De Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of pre-service chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86, 572-590.
• Woldeamanuel, M. M., Atagana, H., & Engida, T. (2014). What makes chemistry difficult? African Journal of Chemical Education (AJCE), 4(2), Special Issue (Part I), 31-43.