Yıl: 2010 Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 51 - 64 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings

Öz:
Cinsiyetler arasındaki sadece birkaç psikolojik farklılık deneysel kanıtlanabilir. Burada sunulan çalışma hayvanat bahçesine bir okul gezisi esnasındaki müfredat dışındaki bir öğrenme ortamındaki kız ve erkekler arasındaki farklarla ilgilidir. Esas odak noktası sözü edilen öğrenme ortamının bilişsel ve motivasyonal düzeyleridir. Yüksek lise (Gymnasium) düzeyindeki 223 beşinci sınıf öğrencisine bir ön test-son test çalışma deseni uygulanmıştır. Kız öğrenclier daha yüksek düzeyde bir içsel motivasyon göstermişler ve açık uçlu bilgi sorularında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı daha yüksek bir kazanım elde etmişlerdir. Sonuçlar öğrenmenin bağlamsal modeli çerçevesinde tartışılmıştır.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Müfredatın dışındaki öğrenme ortamlarında kız ve erkek öğrenciler arasındaki farklar

Öz:
Only few psychological differences between the sexes can be proven empirically. Presented here is a study about learning in the extracurricular environment of a zoological garden during a school excursion with particular regard to the differences between boys and girls. In the main focus are, hereby, motivational and cognitive levels of the aforementioned learning situation. A pre/post-test design was conducted with 223 fifth graders of the highest stratification level (Gymnasium). Girls showed a higher degree of intrinsic motivation and also had statistically significant more knowledge gain in the subscale of open-ended knowledge-items. The results are discussed within the framework of the Contextual Model of Learning.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
0
0
0
  • Allen, M. J., & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Belmont, California:Wadsworth, Inc.
  • Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom‘s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
  • Baram-Tsabari, A., Sethi, R. J., Bry, L., & Yarden, A. (2008). Asking scientists: a decade of questions analyzed by age, gender, and country. Science Education, 93(1), 131-160.
  • Beuster, F. (2006). Die jungenkatastrophe. Das überforderte geschlecht.(Reinbek: Rowohlt-Verlag.
  • Bischof-Köhler, D. (2004). Von natur aus anders. Die psychologie der geschlechtsunterschiede. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag.
  • Bitgood, S. (1989). School field trips: an overview. Visitor Behavior, 4 (2), 3-6.
  • BMBF (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung) (2006). Indikatoren zur ausbildung im hochschulbereich. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Web site: http://www.bmbf.de/pub/sdi-06-07.pdf
  • BMBF (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung) (2008). Bildungs(miss)erfolge von jungen und berufswahlverhalten bei jungen/männlichen jugendlichen. Retrieved August 13, 2009, from Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Web site: http://www.bmbf.de/pub/Bildungsmisserfolg.pdf
  • Boldt, U., & Schütte, M. (2006). Jungen in ihrer vielfalt wahrnehmen! Zur arbeit mit jungen in der grundschule. Die Grundschulzeitschrift, 194, 4-8.
  • Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (2002). Forschungsmethoden und evaluation für human- und sozialwissenschaftler. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. The experience of play in work and games. San Francisco, Washington, London: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  • Dar-Nimrod, I., & Heine, S. J. (2006). Exposure to scientific theories affects women‟s math performance. Science, 314(5798), 435.
  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, London: Plenum Press.
  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). Die Selbstbestimmungstheorie der motivation und ihre bedeutung für die pädagogik. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 39, 223-238.
  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2005). Intrinsic motivation inventory (IMI). Retrieved September 1, 2005, from Web site: http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/measures /intrins.html
  • Dierking, L. D., Ellenbogen, K. M., & Falk, J. H. (2004). In principle, in practice: Perspectives on a decade of museum learning research. Science Education, 88(S1), 1-3.
  • Dierking, L. D., Falk, J. H., Rennie, L., Anderson, D., & Ellenbogen, K. (2003). Policy statement of the „informal science education” ad hoc committee. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 108-111.
  • Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (1992). The museum experience. Washington, D.C.: Whalesback Books.
  • Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor experiences and the making of meaning. Walnut Creek: Alta Mira Press.
  • Falk, J. H., & Storksdieck, M. (2005a). Learning science from museums. História, Ciêcias, Saúde- Manguinhos, 12 ,117-143.
  • Falk, J. H., & Storksdieck, M. (2005b). Using the contextual model of learning to understand visitor learning from a science center exhibition. Science Education, 89(5), 744-778.
  • Fear-Fenn, M., & Kapostasy, K. K. (1992). Math + science + technology = Vocational preparation for girls: A difficult equation to balance. Columbus, OH: Center for Sex Equity, Ohio State University.
  • Feher, E., & Rennie, L. (2003). Guest editorial. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 105- 107.
  • Friedler, Y., & Tamir, P. (1990). Sex differences in science education in Israel: an analysis of 15 years of research. Research in Science & Technological Education, 8(1), 21-34.
  • Gardner, P. L. (1998). The Development of males‟ and females‟ interests in science and technology. In L. Hoffmann, A. Krapp, R. A. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning. Proceedings of the Seeon Conference on Interest and Gender (pp. 41-57). Kiel: Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel (IPN).
  • Gehlhaar, K.-H., Klepel, G., & Fankhänel, K. (1999). Analyse der ontogenese der interessen an biologie, insbesondere an tieren und pflanzen, an humanbiologie und natur- und umweltschutz. In R. Duit, & J. Mager (Eds.), Studien zur naturwissenschaftsdidaktischen lern- und interessenforschung (pp. 118-130). Kiel: Leibniz-Institut für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften an der Universität Kiel.
  • Gottfried, A. E. (1985). Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior high school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 631-645.
  • Gottfried, A. E. (1990). Academic Intrinsic Motivation in young elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 525-538.
  • Gräsel, C. (Ed.). (2008). Lernen im Museum. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 36(2).
  • Griffin, J. (1994). Learning to learn in informal science settings. Research in Science Education, 24, 121-128.
  • Griffin, J. (1998). Learning science through practical experiences in museums. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 655-663.
  • Griffin, J., Kelly, L., Savage, G., & Hatherly, J. (2005). Museums actively researching visitor experiences and learning (MARVEL): a methodological study. Open Museum Journal, 7(1), 1-19.
  • Hanna, G. (2000). Declining gender differences from FIMS to TIMSS. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 23(1), 11-17.
  • Harms, U., & Krombass, A. (2008). Lernen im museum - das contextual model of learning. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 36(2), 150-166.
  • Hein, G. E. (1998). Learning in the museum. London: Routledge.
  • Hyde, J. S. (2005). The Gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60 (6), 581-592.
  • Jenkins, E.W. (2006). Student opinion in England about science and technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 24(1), 59-68.
  • Kaiser, G., & Steisel, T. (2000). Results of an analysis of the TIMS study from a gender perspective. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 23(1), 18-24.
  • Kessels, U. (2004). Mädchenfächer – jungenfächer? Geschlechtertrennung im Unterricht. Friedrich Jahresheft, XXII, 90-94.
  • Kimura, D. (1999). Sex and cognition. Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Krapp, A. (1992). Konzepte und forschungsansätze zur Analyse des zusammenhangs von interesse, lernen und leistung. In A. Krapp, & M. Prenzel (Eds.), Interesse, lernen, leistung (pp. 9-52). Münster: Aschendorff Verlag.
  • Krapp, A. (1993). The construct of interest - characteristics of individual interests and interestrelated actions from the perspective of a person-object-theory. München: Universität der Bundeswehr München.
  • Krombass, A., & Harms, U. (2006). Ein computergestütztes informationssystem zur biodiversität als motivierende und lernförderliche ergänzung der exponate eines naturkundemuseums. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 12, 7-22.
  • Krombass, A., Urhahne, D., & Harms, U. (2003). Alters- und geschlechtsunterschiede beim außerschulischen lernen mit einem computergestützten informationssystem zur biodiversität. In: A. Bauer (Ed.) Entwicklung von wissen und kompetenzen (pp. 205-208), Kiel: IPN.
  • Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., & d‟Apollonia, S. (1996). Withinclass grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 423-459.
  • Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 424-436.
  • Mölle, M., Schwank, I., Marshall, L., Klöhn, A., & Born, J. (2000). Dimensional complexity and power spectral measures of the EEG during functional versus predicative problem solving. Brain and Cognition, 44, 547-563.
  • OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2009). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow's world. Retrieved February 10, 2009 from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Web site: http://www.pisa.oecd.org/ dataoecd/15/13/39725224.pdf
  • Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Columbus, OH: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
  • Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (2006). Essentializing differences between women and men. Psychological Science, 17(2), 12-135.
  • Randler, C., Baumgärtner, S., Eisele, H., & Kienzle, W. (2007). Learning at workstations in the zoo: A controlled evaluation of cognitive and affective outcomes. Visitor Studies, 10(2), 205-216.
  • Rennie, L. J., & Johnston, D. J. (2004). The nature of learning and its implications for research on learning from museums. Science Education, 88(S1), 4-16.
  • Renninger, K. A., Hoffmann, L., & Krapp, A. (1998). Interest and gender: Issues of development and learning. In L. Hoffmann, A. Krapp, R. A. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning. Proceedings of the Seeon Conference on Interest and Gender (pp. 9-21). Kiel: Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel (IPN).
  • Rheinberg, F. (2004). Motivationsdiagnostik. Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.
  • Schiefele, U. (1992). Interesse und qualität des erlebens im unterricht. In A. Krapp, & M. Prenzel (Eds.), Interesse, lernen, leistung (pp. 85-121). Münster: Aschendorff Verlag.
  • Schiefele, U. (1998) Individual interest and learning – What we know and what we don´t know. In: L. Hoffmann, A. K. Krapp, A. Renninger, & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and Learning (pp. 91-104). Kiel: IPN.
  • Schwank, I. (2003). Einführung in prädikatives und funktionales denken. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 35(3), 70-78.
  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., Campbell, D.T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Smith, W.S., McLaughlin, E., & Tunnicliffe, S.D. (1998). Effect on primary level students of inservice teacher education in an informal science setting. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9 (2), 123-142.
  • Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women‟s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.
  • Stanat, P., & Kunter, M. (2003). Kompetenzerwerb, bildungsbeteiligung und schullaufbahn von mädchen und jungen im ländervergleich. In J. Baumert, R. Lehmann, M. Lehrke, B. Schmitz, M. Clausen, I. Hosenfeld, O. Köller, & J. Neubrand (Eds.), PISA 2000 - Ein differenzierter blick auf die länder der bundesrepublik Deutschland (pp. 211-242). Opladen: Leske + Budrich Verlag.
  • Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613-629
  • Todt, E. (2000). Geschlechtsspezifische interessen – entwicklung und möglichkeiten der modifikation. Empirische Pädagogik, 14(3), 215-254.
  • Todt, E., & Schreiber, S. (1996). Development of interest. Paper presented at Seeon Conference on Interest and Gender. Seeon, Germany, 9.-13. June.
  • Wilde, M. (2007). Das contextual model of learning – ein theorierahmen zur erfassung von lernprozessen. In D. Krüger, & H. Vogt (Eds.), Theorien in der biologiedidaktischen forschung (pp. 165-176). Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer-Verlag.
  • Wilde, M., & Bätz, K. (2006). Einfluss unterrichtlicher vorbereitung auf das lernen im naturkundemuseum. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 12, 77-89.
  • Wilde, M., & Urhahne, D. (2008). Museum learning: A study of motivation and learning achievement. Journal of Biological Education, 42, 78-83.
  • Zimmer, K., Burba, D., & Rost, J. (2004). Kompetenzen von mädchen und jungen. In M. Prenzel, J. Baumert, W. Blum, R. Lehmann, D. Leutner, M. Neubrand, R. Pekrun, H-G. Rolff, J. Rost, & U. Schiefele (Eds.), PISA 2003. Der bildungsstand der jugendlichen in Deutschland – Ergebnisse des zweiten internationalen Vergleichs (pp. 211-224). Münster, New York, München, Berlin: Waxmann Verlag GmbH.
APA BAETZ K, WITTLER S, WILDE M (2010). Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. , 51 - 64.
Chicago BAETZ Katrin,WITTLER Sebastian,WILDE Matthias Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. (2010): 51 - 64.
MLA BAETZ Katrin,WITTLER Sebastian,WILDE Matthias Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. , 2010, ss.51 - 64.
AMA BAETZ K,WITTLER S,WILDE M Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. . 2010; 51 - 64.
Vancouver BAETZ K,WITTLER S,WILDE M Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. . 2010; 51 - 64.
IEEE BAETZ K,WITTLER S,WILDE M "Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings." , ss.51 - 64, 2010.
ISNAD BAETZ, Katrin vd. "Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings". (2010), 51-64.
APA BAETZ K, WITTLER S, WILDE M (2010). Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), 5(1), 51 - 64.
Chicago BAETZ Katrin,WITTLER Sebastian,WILDE Matthias Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik) 5, no.1 (2010): 51 - 64.
MLA BAETZ Katrin,WITTLER Sebastian,WILDE Matthias Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), vol.5, no.1, 2010, ss.51 - 64.
AMA BAETZ K,WITTLER S,WILDE M Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik). 2010; 5(1): 51 - 64.
Vancouver BAETZ K,WITTLER S,WILDE M Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik). 2010; 5(1): 51 - 64.
IEEE BAETZ K,WITTLER S,WILDE M "Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings." International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), 5, ss.51 - 64, 2010.
ISNAD BAETZ, Katrin vd. "Differences between boys and girls in extracurricular learning settings". International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik) 5/1 (2010), 51-64.