INVESTIGATION OF CLASSROOM TEACHER CANDIDATES’ COGNITIVE STRUCTURES ON SOME BASIC SCIENCE CONCEPTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.173Keywords:
cognitive structure, classroom teacher candidates, science concepts, word association testsAbstract
In this study, it was aimed to investigate the cognitive structures of classroom teacher candidates on some basic science concepts. Word association test (WAT) technique was used to gather data. Twelve keywords related to basic physics, chemistry, and biology concepts were determined and used in the formation of WAT’s. Forty-three classroom teacher candidates studying at 2nd classes at an education faculty were the participants of this study. Data obtained by WAT were examined by using number of different responses given to each keyword, and by drawing concept maps according to both frequencies and relatedness coefficients. A cut-off point technique was used when drawing the concept maps. Because of this study, it can be said that participants have moderate cognitive structures on the investigated science concepts and their cognitive structure was strongest on chemistry concepts and weakest on biology concepts.
Article visualizations:
References
Artun, H., & Costu, B. (2011). Sinif ogretmen adaylarinin difuzyon ve osmoz kavramlari ile ilgili yanilgilarinin belirlenmesi, Turk Fen Egitimi Dergisi, 8(4), 117-127.
Assaraf, O.B., Dodick, J., & Tripto, J. (2013). High school students’ understanding of the human body system, Research in Science Education, 43(1), 33-56.
Author (2015). Exploring the relationship between cognitive structure outcomes and test achievements of pre-service science teachers on chemical bonding via flow mapping.
Aydoğdu, M., & Kesercioğlu, T. (2005). İlköğretimde Fen ve Teknoloji Öğretimi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
MEB Talim ve Terbiye Dairesi Baskanligi (2013). Ilkokul Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3-8.siniflar) ogretim programi, Ankara.
Bahar, M., Johnstone, A.H., & Sutcliffe, R.G. (1999). Investigation of students’ cognitive structure in elementary genetics through word association tests. Journal of Biological Education, 33,3,134-141.
Bayram, H., Sökmen, N., & Savcı, H. (1997). Temel fen kavramlarının anlaşılma düzeyinin Saptanması, M.Ü. Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 9, 89-100.
Brodley, J. D., & Mosimege, M. D. (1998). Misconceptions in acids and bases: A comparative study of student science teachers with different chemistry backgrounds, South African Journal of Chemistry, 51 (3) 137.
Çepni, S., Küçük, M., & Ayvacı, H.Ş.(2003). İlköğretim birinci kademedeki fen bilgisi programının uygulanması uzerine bir calışma, Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23, 3, 131-145.
Cildir, I., & Sen, A.I. (2006). Lise ogrencilerinin elektrik akimi konusundaki kavram yanilgilarinin kavram haritalariyla belirlenmesi, Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 30, 92-101.
Cin, M. (2005). Sinif ogretmeni adaylarinin sera etkisi hakkindaki kavram yanilgilari, Cukurova Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 2(31), 124-128.
Demircioglu, H. (2002). Sinif ogretmen adaylarinin bazi kimya kavramlarini anlama duzeyleri ve karsilasilan yanilgilar, KTU Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu, Master of Science Thesis, Trabzon.
Demircioğlu, H., Demircioğlu, G., & Ayas, A. (2004). Sınıf oğretmeni adaylarının bazı kimya kavramlarını anlama düzeylerinin klinik mülakatlarla tespiti, Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17, 53-66.
De Vos, W., & Verdonk, A.H. (1996). The particulate nature of matter in science education and in science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 657-664.
Ercan, F., Tasdere, A., & Ercan, N. (2010). Kelime iliskilendirme testi araciligiyla bilissel yapinin ve kavramsal degisimin gozlenmesi. Turk Fen Egitimi Dergisi, 7(2), 136-154.
Ginns, J.S., & Watters, J.J. (1995). An analysis of scientific understandings of preservice elementary teacher education students, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 2, 205-222.
Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K.J. (2006). Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education, Learning and Instruction, 16, 416-432.
Jonassen, D.H., Reeves, T.C., Hong, N., Harvesy, D., & Peters, K. (1997). Concept mapping as cognitive learning and assessment tools, Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 8(3), 289-308.
Kahraman, S., Ya;cin, M., Ozkan, E., & Akgul, F. (2008). Sinif ogretmenligi ogrencilerinin kuresel isinma konusundaki farkindaliklari ve bilgi duzeyleri, Gazi Universitesi Gazi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 28(3), 249-263.
Kahyaoglu, M., & Yangin, S. (2007). Ilkogretim sinif ogretmenligi, fen bilgisi ve matematik ogretmen adaylarinin fen bilgisi ogretimine yonelik tutumlari, ZKU Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(6), 203-220.
Kaptan, F. (1998). Fen Bilgisi Ogretimi, Ankara: Ani yayincilik.
Kaptan, F., & Korkmaz, H. (2001). Hizmet oncesi sınıf oğretmenlerinin fen eğitiminde isi ve sıcaklıkla ilgili kavram yanılgıları, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21, 59-65.
Kostova, Z. (2008). Word association test for studying conceptual structures of teachers and students, Bulgarian Journal of Scientific and Education Policy, 2(2), 209-231.
Özata-Yücel, E., Özkan, M. (2015). Determination of secondary school students’ cognitive structure, and misconception in ecological concepts through word association test. Educational Research and Reviews, 10, 5, 660-674.
Ozdemir, S.M.(2008). Sinif ogretmeni adaylarinin ogretim surecine iliskin oz-yeterlik inanclarinin cesitli degiskenler acisindan incelenmesi, Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Yonetimi, 54, 277-306.
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods
Sourcebook. (3rd Ed.). USA: Sage Publications.
Nakhleh, M.B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry?, Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191-196.
Nakiboglu, C. (2008). Using word associations for assessing non major science students’ knowledge structure before and after general chemistry instruction: the case of atomic structures, Chem.Educ.Res.Pract., 9, 309-322.
Selvi, M., & Yakisan, M. (2005). Exploring students’ cognitive structures through flow maps: Ecological cycles. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 2 (1), 29-30.
Shavelson, R. J. (1972) Some aspects of the relationship between content structure and cognitive structure in physics instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 225-234.
Taber, K.S. (2001). Building the structural concepts of chemistry: some considerations from educational research, Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 2(2), 123-158.
Tsai, C.C (1998). An analysis of Taiwanese eight graders’ science achievement, scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structure outcomes after learning basic atomic theory, International Journal of Scientific Education, 20(4), 413-423.
Tsai, C. C. (2001). Probing students’ cognitive structures in science: The use of a flow map method coupled with a meta-listening technique. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, 257-268.
Tsai, C. C., & Huang, C. M. (2002). Exploring students’ cognitive structures in learning science: A review of relevant methods. Journal of Biological Education, 36(4), 163-169.
Turker, F. (2005). Developing a three-tier test to assess high school students’ misconceptions concerning force and motion. Master of Science Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Unal, S. (1993). Fen bilgisi ogretiminde ilkokul ogretmenlerinin yeterliligi, MU Ataturk Egitim Fakultesi Egitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5, 157-167.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
