Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi

Leman ALAKOYUN, (Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı, Haktanır Ortaokulu, Şanlıurfa, Türkiye)
Özgecan TAŞTAN KIRIK (Çukurova Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi, Matematik ve Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Bölümü, Adana, Türkiye)
Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi
21 4
Yıl: 2023 Cilt: Sayı: 59 Sayfa Aralığı: 284 - 303 Metin Dili: Türkçe DOI: 10.9779/pauefd.1156446 İndeks Tarihi: 13-09-2023

Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi

Öz:
Bu çalışmada yarı-deneysel desenlerden eşitlenmemiş kontrol gruplu desen kullanılarak, Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin (POGIL®) yedinci sınıf öğrencilerinin fen bilimleri dersindeki motivasyonlarına ve mantıksal düşünme becerilerine etkisi araştırılmıştır. Araştırmaya kontrol grubundan 28 ve deney grubundan 27 olmak üzere toplam 55 öğrenci katılmıştır. Katılımcılar uygun örnekleme yöntemi ile belirlenmiştir. Kontrol grubunda Saf Madde ve Karışımlar ünitesi, öğrenciler arası etkileşimin sınırlı olduğu süregelen öğretim yöntemi ile öğretilirken deney grubunda POGIL ile öğretilmiştir. Katılımcıların mantıksal düşünme becerilerini ölçmek için Mantıksal Düşünme Grup Testi ve fen bilimleri dersine yönelik motivasyonlarını ölçmede ise Öğrenmede Güdüsel Stratejiler Ölçeği’nin Motivasyon Ölçeği ön test ve son test olarak uygulanmıştır. Bulgulara göre uygulamanın sonunda POGIL grubunun, süregelen öğretim yöntemlerinin uygulandığı gruba kıyasla motivasyon ve mantıksal düşünme becerisi puanları anlamlı düzeyde daha yüksektir. Sonuç olarak POGIL’in Saf Madde ve Karışımlar ünitesini öğretmede ortaokul öğrencilerinin motivasyon ve mantıksal düşünme becerilerini geliştiren etkili bir strateji olduğu söylenebilir.
Anahtar Kelime: süreç odaklı rehberli sorgulamayla öğrenme (POGIL) maddenin tanecikli yapısı mantıksal düşünme becerileri motivasyon ortaokul öğrencileri

The Effect of Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning on Motivation and Logical Thinking Skills

Öz:
This study employed a non-equivalent control group design to investigate the effect of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL®) on seventh grade students' motivation and logical thinking skills in a science course. There were 55 students in total, 28 students in the control group and 27 students in the experimental group. A convenient sampling method was used to select the participants. The Pure Substances and Mixtures unit was taught to the students in the control group by using the ongoing teaching method with limited interaction while POGIL was implemented in the experimental group. Group Assessment of Logical Thinking (GALT) was administered to assess the participants' logical thinking skills and the Motivation Scale of the Motivational Strategies Scale in Learning was used as the pre-test and post-test to assess their motivation for the science course. According to the results, the POGIL group had significantly higher motivation and logical thinking skills scores than the control group that used the ongoing teaching methods. Thus, it can be claimed that POGIL is an effective strategy to improve middle school students' motivation and logical thinking skills for teaching the Pure Substances and Mixtures unit.
Anahtar Kelime: process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) particulate nature of matter logical thinking skills motivation middle school students

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abdullah, S., & Shariff, A. (2008). The effects of inquiry-based computer simulation with cooperative learning on scientific thinking and conceptual understanding of gas laws. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(4), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75365
  • Abraham, M. R. (2005). Inquiry and the learning cycle approach. In N. J. Pienta, M. M. Cooper, and T. J. Greenbowe (Eds), Chemists' guide to effective teaching (pp. 41- 52). Prentice Hall.
  • Aksu, M., Berberoğlu, G., & Paykoç, F. (1990). Can the GALT test be used in a different cultural setting? (Research Report). Ankara: METU.
  • Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning. A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68(1), 52–81.
  • American Chemical Society [ACS]. (2023). Middle school chemistry: Lesson plans. [Available online at https://www.middleschoolchemistry.com/lessonplans/], Retrieved on January 10, 2019.
  • Amiot, L. M. (2007). The particulate nature of polyatomic ions: An exploratory study using molecular drawing software. [Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College]. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4550&context=gradscho ol_dissertations
  • Andriani, S., Nurlaelah, E., & Yulianti, K. (2019). The effect of process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) model toward students’ logical thinking ability in mathematics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(4), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042108
  • Artuz, J. K. A., & Roble, D. B. (2021). Developing students’ critical thinking skills in mathematics using online-process oriented guided inquiry learning (O-POGIL). American Journal of Educational Research, 9(7), 404–409. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-9-7-2
  • Ashman, A., & Gillies, R. (Eds.). (2003). Cooperative learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups. Routledge.
  • Atila, M. E., & Sözbilir, M. (2016). Fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programındaki yapılandırmacılığa dayalı öğelerin öğretmenler tarafından uygulanışı: Nitel bir çalışma [Application of constructivist principles in science and technology curriculum into practice by teachers]. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18(2), 1418-1457.
  • Becker, N., Stanford, C., Towns, M., & Cole, R. (2015). Translating across macroscopic, submicroscopic, and symbolic levels: the role of instructor facilitation in an inquiry- oriented physical chemistry class. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(4), 769–785. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00064E
  • Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. E. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press.
  • Bunce, D. M., & Hutchinson, K. D. (1993). The use of the GALT (Group Assessment of Logical Thinking) as a predictor of academic success in college chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), 183-187. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed070p183
  • Bümen, N. T., Çakar, E., & Yıldız, D. G. (2014). Türkiye’de öğretim programına bağlılık ve bağlılığı etkileyen etkenler [Curriculum fidelity and factors affecting fidelity in the Turkish contex]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 14(1), 203-228.
  • Bümen, N.T., & Yazıcılar, Ü. (2020). Öğretmenlerin öğretim programı uyarlamaları üzerine bir durum çalışması: Devlet ve özel lise farklılıkları [A case study on the teachers' curriculum adaptations: Differences in state and private high school]. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(1), 183-224. https://doi.org/10.17152/gefad.595058
  • Carolan, T. F., Hutchins, S. D., Wickens, C. D., & Cumming, J. M. (2014). Costs and benefits of more learner freedom: Meta-analyses of exploratory and learner control training methods. Human Factors, 56(5), 999–1014. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720813517710
  • Değirmenci, A., & Doğru, M. (2019). İlkokul 4. sınıf fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı maddeyi tanıyalım ünitesi kazanımlarının gerçekleşme düzeyinin değerlendirilmesi [The evaluation of realization level of gains of let’s know about substance unit in 4th grade science curriculum in primary school]. Gazi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(1), 102-121.
  • Demirkazan, Y. K., Kalik, G. & Öcal, K. (2018). Ortaokul ve imam hatip ortaokulu fen bilimleri 7 ders kitabı [Middle school and imam hatip middle school science textbook 7]. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.
  • De Gale, S., & Boisselle, L. N. (2015). The effect of POGIL on academic performance and academic confidence. Science Education International, 26(1), 56-79.
  • De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179– 201. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002179
  • Doğan, Y. (2010). Fen ve teknoloji dersi programının uygulanması sürecinde karşılaşılan sorunlar [The problems encountered during the implementation of science and technology curriculum]. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 86- 106.
  • Douglas, E. (2014). Introduction to materials science and engineering: A guided inquiry. Pearson Higher Education.
  • Farrell, J. J., Moog, R. S., & Spencer, J. N. (1999). A guided-inquiry general chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 570. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p570
  • Geiger, M. (2010). Implementing POGIL in allied health chemistry courses: Insights from process education. International Journal of Process Education, 2(1), 19-34.
  • Glazer, N. (2015). Student perceptions of learning data-creation and data-analysis skills in an introductory college-level chemistry course. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), https://doi.org/338–345. 10.1039/C4RP00219A
  • Gülmez Güngörmez, H., & Akgün, A. (2020). Kavram yanılgılarının giderilmesinde süreç odaklı rehberli sorgulayıcı öğrenme ortamının etkisi: Kuvvet ve enerji ünitesi örneği [The effect of the process oriented guided inquiry learning environment on the elimination of concept mistakes; example force and energy unit]. Journal of History School, 49, 4118-4147. http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/Joh.45680
  • Ham, Y., & Myers, B. (2019, February). Supporting guided inquiry with cooperative learning in computer organization. SIGCSE 2019: Proceedings of the 50th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 273–279. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287355
  • Hanib, M. T., Suhadi, S., & Indriwati, S. E. (2017). Science processing skill improvement through POGIL. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, 5(4), 118–122.
  • Hanson, D. M. (2006). Instructor's guide to process-oriented guided-inquiry learning. Pacific Crest.
  • Hanson D. (2011). General chemistry: Guided explorations. (2nd ed.). Brooks/Cole.
  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). The particulate nature of matter: Challenges in understanding the submicroscopic world. In Chemical education: Towards research- based practice (pp. 189-212). Springer, Dordrecht.
  • Hazır Bıkmaz, F., (2006). Yeni ilköğretim programları ve öğretmenler [New elementary curricula and teachers]. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(1), 97-116. https://doi.org/10.1501/Egifak_0000000125
  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368
  • Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students’ and scientists’ reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663–687. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1025
  • Irwanto, Saputro, A. D., Rohaeti, E., & Prodjosantoso, A. K. (2018). Promoting critical thinking and problem solving skills of preservice elementary teachers through process-oriented guided-inquiry learning (POGIL). International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 777–794. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11449a
  • Jasperson, J. (2013). The effects of guided inquiry on students' understanding of physics concepts in the middle school science classroom. [Master’s thesis, Montana State University]. Bozeman, Montana. https://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/2794/JaspersonJ0813.pdf ?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  • Karplus, R. (1977). Science teaching and the development of reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14 (2), 169-175. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660140212
  • Kırık, Ö. T., & Boz, Y. (2012). Cooperative learning instruction for conceptual change in the concepts of chemical kinetics. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(3), 221-236. https://doi.org/10.1039/C1RP90072B
  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
  • Koballa, T. R., Jr., & Glynn, S. M. (2007). Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 75–102). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 27–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.518645
  • Kyndt, E., Raes, E., Lismont, B., Timmers, F., Cascallar, E., & Dochy, F. (2013). A meta- analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educational Research Review, 10, 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002
  • Lavoie, D. (1999). Effects of emphasizing hypothetico-predictive reasoning within the science learning cycle on high school student’s process skills and conceptual understandings in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1127– 1147. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199912)36:10<1127::AID- TEA5>3.0.CO;2-4
  • Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
  • Lawson, A. E., (2001). Using the learning cycle to teach biology concepts and reasoning patterns, Journal of Biological Education, 35(4), 165-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2001.9655772
  • Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-Analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB] (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı (İlkokul ve Ortaokul 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar) [Science course curriculum (Elementary and middle school grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8)].
  • Moog, R. S., & Farrell, J. J., (2011). Chemistry: A guided inquiry. (5th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Moog, R. S., Spencer, J. N., & Straumanis, A. R. (2006). Process-oriented guided inquiry learning: POGIL and the POGIL project. Metropolitan Universities, 17(4), 41-52.
  • National Research Council [NRC] (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, cross-cutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development [OECD]. (2016). PISA 2015 results in focus: PISA (Vol. 1). OECD Publishing.
  • Özkanbaş, M., & Kırık, Ö. T. (2020). Implementing collaborative inquiry in a middle school science course. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21, 1199-1217. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RP00231F
  • Öztürk, İ. H. (2012). Öğretimin planlanmasında öğretmenin rolü ve özerkliği: Ortaöğretim tarih öğretmenlerinin yıllık plan hazırlama ve uygulama örneği [Teacher’s role and autonomy in instructional planning: The case of secondary school history teachers with regard to the preparation and implementation of annual instructional plans]. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12, 271-299.
  • Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows. Open University Press
  • Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., et al. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47 –61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
  • Pintrich, P. R. (1988). A process-oriented view of student motivation and cognition. In J. S. Stark & L. Mets (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning through research. New directions for institutional research, 57 (pp. 55-70). Jossey-Bass.
  • PhET (n.d.). Bir molekül yapalım. Retriewed January 12, 2019, from https://phet.colorado.edu/sims/html/build-a-molecule/latest/build-a-molecule_tr.html
  • PhET (2023). Etkinliklere gözat. Retriewed January 5, 2019, from https://phet.colorado.edu/tr/teaching-resources/browse- activities?sims=all&types=all&subjects=CHEMISTRY&levels=MIDDLE_SCHOO L&locales=all&query=bir+molek%C3%BCl+yapal%C4%B1m
  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Report No. NCRIPTAL- 91-B-004). National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED338122.pdf
  • POGIL (2022). POGIL curricular materials. Retrieved on December 10, 2018, from https://pogil.org/curricular-materials
  • Qureshi, S., Vishnumolakala, V. R., Southam, D. C., & Treagust, D. F. (2017). Inquiry- based chemistry education in a high-context culture: A Qatari case study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(6), 1017-1038. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9735-9
  • Rahayu, S., Aldresti, F., & Fajaroh, F. (2019). Improving the quality of learning environment through Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) enriched by socioscientific issues (SSI) on chemistry solution. Proceeding of the 4th International Conference on Education, 4(2), 76-86. https://doi.org/10.17501/24246700.2018.4210
  • Rannikmae, M., & Holbrook, J. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(3), 275-288.
  • Rickey, D., & Stacy, A. M. (2000). The role of metacognition in learning chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(7), 915. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed077p915
  • Roadrangka, V. (1991). The construction of a group assessment of logical thinking (GALT). Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 12(2), 148-154.
  • Roadrangka V., Yeany, R. H. & Padilla M. J. (1982). Group test of logical thinking. University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
  • Rojas-Drummond, S., & Mercer, N. (2003). Scaffolding the development of effective collaboration and learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 99– 111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00075-2
  • Rosadi, I., Sunarno, W., & Article, H. (2018). The effectiveness of Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning to improve students’ analytical thinking skills on excretory system topic. Biosaintifika: Journal of Biology & Biology Education, 10(3), 684–690.
  • Rosenshine, B. & Meister, C. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership, April, 26-33.
  • Royal Society of Chemistry [RSC] (n.d.). Chemical misconceptions II - An analogy for the atom. Retrieved on January 13, 2019 from https://edu.rsc.org/download?ac=13333
  • Royal Society of Chemistry [RSC] (2023). Education: Inspiring your teaching and learning. Retrieved on January 13, 2019, from https://edu.rsc.org/searchresults?qkeyword=&PageSize=10%20&%20108%20param etrics=WVFACET5%7C115500%2CWVFACET2%7C115153%2CWVF%20ACET 2%7C115155&cmd=AddPm&val=WVFACET2%7C115154
  • Rönnebeck, S., Bernholt, S., & Ropohl, M. (2016). Searching for a common ground—A literature review of empirical research on scientific inquiry activities. Studies in Science Education, 52(2), 161–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351
  • Rushton, T. G. Lotter, C. & Singer, J. (2011). Chemistry teachers’ emerging expertise in inquiry teaching: The effect of a professional development model on beliefs and practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 23-52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-010-9224-x
  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). When rewards compete with nature: The undermining of intrinsic motivation and self regulation. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 13–54). Academic Press.
  • Schlatter, E., Molenaar, I., & Lazonder, A. W. (2020). Individual differences in children’s development of scientific reasoning through inquiry-based instruction: Who needs additional guidance? Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00904
  • Sevinc, B., Ozmen, H., & Yigit, N. (2011). Investigation of primary students’ motivation levels towards science learning. Science Education International, 22(3), 218-232.
  • Sharma, T. (2022). Promoting creative thinking with process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL). The Journal of Oriental Research Madras, 92(47), 43–49.
  • Stender, A., Schwichow, M., Zimmerman, C., & Härtig, H. (2018). Making inquiry-based science learning visible: the influence of CVS and cognitive skills on content knowledge learning in guided inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 40(15), 1812–1831. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1504346
  • Sungur, S. (2004). An implementation of problem based learning in high school biology courses [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Middle East Technical University. Şen, Ş., Yılmaz, A., & Geban, Ö. (2015). The effects of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning environment on students’ self-regulated learning skills. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 66, 54–66.
  • Valanides, N. C. (1996). Formal reasoning and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 96 (2), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1996.tb15818.x
  • Van Leeuwen, A., & Janssen, J. (2019). A systematic review of teacher guidance during collaborative learning in primary and secondary education. Educational Research Review, 27, 71-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.001
  • Villagonzalo, E. C. (2014, March 6-8). Process oriented guided inquiry learning: An effective approach in enhancing students’ academic performance. [Conference presentation]. DLSU Research Congress, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines 2(1), 1-6. https://www.dlsu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/pdf/conferences/research- congress-proceedings/2014/LLI/LLI-I-007-FT.pdf
  • Vishnumolakala, V. R., Southam, D. C., Treagust, D. F., Mocerino, M., & Qureshi, S. (2017). Students’ attitudes, self-efficacy and experiences in a modified processoriented guided inquiry learning undergraduate chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(2), 340-352. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00233A
  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
  • Yuliastini, I. B., Rahayu, S., Fajaroh, F., & Mansour, N. (2018). Effectiveness of POGIL with ssi context on vocational high school students’ chemistry learning motivation. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 7(1), 85–95.
  • Zeineddin, A. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2010). Scientific reasoning and epistemological commitments: Coordination of theory and evidence among college science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1064– 1093. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20368
  • Zgraggen, S. (2018). Comparing the process oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL) method to an independently developed guided inquiry method (InDGIM) in a high school academic chemistry course [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Arcadia University.
  • Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27(2), 172-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.12.001
APA ALAKOYUN L, Kırık Ö (2023). Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. , 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
Chicago ALAKOYUN LEMAN,Kırık Özgecan Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. (2023): 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
MLA ALAKOYUN LEMAN,Kırık Özgecan Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. , 2023, ss.284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
AMA ALAKOYUN L,Kırık Ö Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. . 2023; 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
Vancouver ALAKOYUN L,Kırık Ö Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. . 2023; 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
IEEE ALAKOYUN L,Kırık Ö "Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi." , ss.284 - 303, 2023. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
ISNAD ALAKOYUN, LEMAN - Kırık, Özgecan. "Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi". (2023), 284-303. https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.1156446
APA ALAKOYUN L, Kırık Ö (2023). Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (59), 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
Chicago ALAKOYUN LEMAN,Kırık Özgecan Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , no.59 (2023): 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
MLA ALAKOYUN LEMAN,Kırık Özgecan Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, vol., no.59, 2023, ss.284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
AMA ALAKOYUN L,Kırık Ö Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2023; (59): 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
Vancouver ALAKOYUN L,Kırık Ö Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2023; (59): 284 - 303. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
IEEE ALAKOYUN L,Kırık Ö "Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi." Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, , ss.284 - 303, 2023. 10.9779/pauefd.1156446
ISNAD ALAKOYUN, LEMAN - Kırık, Özgecan. "Süreç Odaklı Rehberli Sorgulamayla Öğrenmenin Motivasyon ve Mantıksal Düşünme Becerilerine Etkisi". Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 59 (2023), 284-303. https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.1156446
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
24-04-2024 9:6

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları