Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter

Haluk ÖZMEN (Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Fatih Eğitim Fakültesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Bölümü, Trabzon, Türkiye)
International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik)
3 0
Yıl: 2011 Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 99 - 121 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter

Öz:
Bu çalışma ilköğretim 4., 5. ve 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin günlük olaylarda maddenin tanecikli yapısı ile ilgili kavramalarını belirlemek üzere gerçekleştirildi. Öğrencilere beş soru soruldu ve veriler mülakatlar kullanılarak toplandı. Mülakatlar, her seviyeden dört öğrenci olmak üzere on iki öğrenci ile, bu öğrenciler maddenin tanecikli yapısı ile ilgili bölümü bitirdikten sonra gerçekleştirildi. Elde edilen sonuçlar, her seviyedeki öğrencilerin maddenin mikroskobik özellikleri ile ilgili anlama seviyelerinin oldukça düşük olduğunu göstermektedir. Öğrenciler, taneciklerin düzenlenmesi, tanecikler arası boşluklar, tanecik sayıları, tanecik büyüklüğü ve taneciklerin hareketi gibi mikroskobik özelliklerle ilgili sınırlı bilgiye veya alternatif kavramalara sahiptirler. Ayrıca, öğrencilerin maddenin tanecikli yapısı ile ilgili kavramalarındaki ilerleme değişkendir. Öğrencilerin fenle ilgili bilgilerini günlük yaşamdaki tecrübeleriyle ilişkilendirmekte sorun yaşadıkları da belirlenmiştir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları

Türk ilköğretim öğrencilerinin maddenin tanecikli yapısı ile ilgili kavramaları

Öz:
This study was conducted to determine 4th, 5th, and 6th grade primary students‟ conceptions about the particulate nature of matter in daily-life events. Five questions were asked of students and interviews were used to collect data. The interviews were conducted with 12 students, four students from each grade, after they finished the formal courses related to the particulate nature of matter. The results show that the understanding level of students in all grades about the microscopic properties of matter was quite low. They have little knowledge of or alternative conceptions about the microscopic properties of the particles such as the order of the particles, spaces between particles, the number of particles in different phases, the size of particles and the movement of the particles. And also, progression of students‟ conceptions on the particulate nature of matter is multifaceted. In addition, it was also determined that students have trouble connecting science knowledge to their daily-life experiences.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Eğitim, Eğitim Araştırmaları
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abraham, M. R., Williamson, V. M., & Westbrook, S. L. (1994). A cross-age study of the understanding of five chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 147-165.
  • Adadan, E., Irving, K. E., & Trundle, K. C. (2009). Impacts of multi-representational instruction on high school students‟ conceptual understandings of the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 31(13), 1743-1775.
  • Adbo, K., & Taber, K. S. (2009). Learners‟ mental models of the particle nature of matter: A study of 16-year-ols Swedish science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 757-786.
  • Albanese, A., & Vicentini, M. (1997). Why do we believe that an atom is colourless? Reflections about the teaching of the particle model. Science & Education, 6, 251-261.
  • Ayas, A., & Özmen, H. (2002). A study of students‟ level of understanding of the particulate nature of matter at secondary school level, Bogazici University Journal of Education, 19(2), 45-60.
  • Ayas, A., Özmen, H., & Çalık, M. (2010). Students‟ conceptions of the particulate nature of matter at secondary and tertiary level. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 165-184.
  • Bar, V. (1989). Children‟s views about the water cycle. Science Education, 73, 481–500.
  • Bar, V., & Travis, A. S. (1991). Children‟s views concerning phase changes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 363-382.
  • Benson, D. L., Wittrock, M. C., & Baur, M. E. (1993). Students‟ preconceptions of the nature of gases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(6), 587-597.
  • Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B., & Silberstein, J. (1988). Theories, principles and laws, Education in Chemistry, 25, 89-92.
  • Bergquist, W., & Heikkinen, H. (1990). Student ideas regarding chemical equilibrium, Journal of Chemical Education, 66(12), 1000-1003.
  • Boo, H. K., & Watson, J. R. (2001). Progression in high school students‟ (aged 16-18) conceptualizations about chemical reactions in solution. Science Education, 85, 568-585.
  • Bouwma-Gearhart, J., Stewart, J., & Brown, K. (2009). Student misapplication of a gas-like model to explain particle movement in heated solids: Implications for curriculum and instruction towards students‟ creation and revision of accurate explanatory models. International Journal of Science Education, 31(9), 1157-1174.
  • 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.
  • Boz, Y. (2006). Turkish pupils‟ conception of the particulate nature of matter, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 203-213.
  • Briggs, H., Brook, A., & Driver, R. (1984). Aspects of secondary students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. CLISP: The University of Leeds.
  • Bunce, D. M., & Gabel, D. (2002). Differential effects on the achievement of males and females of teaching the particulate nature of chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 911-927.
  • Campbell, B., & Lubben, F. (2000). Learning science through context: Helping pupils make sense of everyday situations. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 239-252.
  • Canpolat, N. (2006). Turkish undergraduates‟ misconceptions of evaporation, evaporation rate, and vapour pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1757-1770.
  • Chang, J. Y. (1999). Teacher college students‟ conceptions about evaporation, condensation, and boiling. Science Education, 83, 511-526.
  • Coştu, B. (2006). Determining students’ conceptual change levels: Evaporation, condensation, and boiling. Doctoral Dissertation, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey.
  • Coştu, B. (2008). Learning science through the PDEODE teaching strategy: Helping students make sense of everyday situations. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(1), 3-9.
  • Coştu, B., & Ayas, A. (2005). Evaporation in different liquids: Secondary students‟ conceptions. Research in Science and Technology Education, 23, 73-95.
  • Coştu, B., Ayas, A., & Niaz, M. (2010). Promoting conceptual change in first year students‟ understanding of evaporation. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 11, 5-16.
  • de Vos, W., & Verdonk, A. H. (1996). The particulate nature of matter in science education and in science. Journal of Research in Science Education, 33(6), 657–664.
  • Demircioğlu, H., Akdeniz, A. R., & Demircioğlu, G. (2004). Maddenin tanecikli yapısına ilişkin kavram yanılgılarının giderilmesinde çalışma yapraklarının etkisi. Paper presented at the XII. annual meeting of Educational Sciences, Gazi University, 15-18 October 2004, Volume III, pp. 2137-2160, Ankara.
  • Flores-Camacho, F., Gallegos-Cazares, L., Garritz, A., & Garcia-Franco, A. (2007). Incommensurability and multiple models: Representations of the structure of matter in undergraduate chemistry students. Science & Education, 16, 775-800.
  • Gabel, D. L. (1993). Use of the particle nature of matter in developing conceptual understanding, Journal of Chemical Education, 60(3), 193-194.
  • Gabel, D. L., Samuel, K. V., & Hunn, D. (1987). Understanding the particulate nature of matter, Journal of Chemical Education, 64(8), 695-697.
  • Gallagher, J. J. (2000). Teaching for understanding and applications of science knowledge. School Science and Mathematics, 100(6), 310-318.
  • Garcia Franco, A., & Taber, K. S. (2009). Secondary students‟ thinking about familiar phenomena: Learners‟ explanations from a curriculum context where “particles” is a key idea for organizing teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31(14), 1917-1952.
  • Gopal, H., Kleinsmidt, J., Case, J., & Musonge, P. (2004). An investigation of tertiary students„ un-derstanding of evaporation, condensation and vapor pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1597-1620.
  • Griffiths, A. K., & Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade-12 students‟ misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 611-628.
  • Harlen, W. (2002). Links to everyday life: The roots of scientific literacy. Primary Science Review, 71, 8-10.
  • Harrison, A. G. (2001). Textbooks for outcomes science: A review. The Queensland Science Teacher, 27(6), 20-22.
  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students‟ mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80, 509-534.
  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84, 352–381.
  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). The particulate nature of matter: Challenges in understanding the microscopic world. In J. K. Gilbert et al. (Eds.), Chemical Education: Towards Research-Based Practice, (pp. 189-212). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
  • Hatzinikita, V., Koulaidis, V., & Hatzinikitas, A. (2005). Modeling pupils‟ understanding and explanations concerning changes in matter. Research in Science Education, 35, 471-495.
  • Henriques, L. (2000). Children’s misconceptions about weather: A review of the literature, paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
  • Hinton, M. E., & Nahkleh, M. B. (1999). Students„ microscopic, macroscopic, and symbolic representations of chemical reactions. Chemical Educator, 4(4), 1-29.
  • Holgersson, I., & Löfgren, L. (2004). A long-term study of students‟ explanations of transformations of matter. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(1), 77-96.
  • Jimenez Gomez, E. J., Benarroch, A., & Marin, N. (2006). Evaluation of the degree of coherence found in students‟ conceptions concerning the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(6), 577-598.
  • Johnson, P. (1998). Children‟s understanding of changes of state involving the gas state, Part 1: Boiling water and the particle theory. International Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 567-583.
  • Johnson, P. (2000). Children‟s understanding of substances: Part I. Recognizing chemical change. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 719-737.
  • Johnson, P., & Papageorgiou, G. (2010). Rethinking the introductory of particle theory: A substance-based framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 130-150.
  • Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 75–83.
  • Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 701-704.
  • Kokkotas, P., Vlachos, I., & Koulaidis, V. (1998). Teaching the topic of the particulate nature of mat-ter in prospective teachers training courses. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 291-303.
  • Krnel, D., Glazar, S. S., & Watson, R. (2003). The development of the concept of "matter": A cross-age study of how children classify materials. Science Education, 87(5), 621-639.
  • Krnel, D., Watson, R., & Glazar, S. A. (1998). Survey of research related to the development of the concept of “matter”. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 257-289.
  • Lee, O., Eichinger, D. C., Anderson, C. W., Berkheimer, G. D., & Blakeslee, T. D. (1993). Changing middle school students‟ conceptions of matter and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(3), 249–270.
  • Liu, X., & Lesniak, K. (2005). Students’ progression of understanding the matter concept from ele-mentary to high school. Science Education, 89, 433-450.
  • Liu, X., & Lesniak, K. (2006). Progression in children’s understanding of the matter concept from elementary to high school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 320-346.
  • Löfgren, L., & Hellden, G. (2008). Following young students‟ understanding of three phenomena in which transformations of matter occur. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 481-504.
  • Löfgren, L., & Hellden, G. (2009). A longitudinal study showing how students use a molecule concept when explaining everyday situations. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 1631-1655.
  • Margel, H., Eylon, B. S., & Scherz, Z. (2008). A longitudinal study of junior high school students‟ conceptions of the structure of materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 132-152.
  • Meheut, M. (2004). Designing and validating two teaching-learning sequences about particle models. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 605-618.
  • Nakhleh, M. B. & Samarapungavan, A. (1999). Elementary school children‟s beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 666-805.
  • Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don‟t learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69, 191–196.
  • Nakhleh, M. B., Samarapungavan, A., & Sağlam, Y. (2005). Middle school students’ beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 581-612.
  • Noh, T., & Scharmann, L. (1997). Instructional influence of a molecular-level pictorial presentation of matter on students‟ conceptions and problem-solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 199-217.
  • Ogborn, J., Kress, G., Martins, I., & McGillicuddy, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Osborne, R. J., & Cosgrove, M. M. (1983). Children‟s conceptions of the changes of the state of water. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 825–838.
  • Osborne, R. J., & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children’s science. London: Heinemann.
  • Othman, J., Treagust, D. F., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2008). An investigation into the relationship between students‟ conceptions of the particulate nature of matter and their understanding of chemical bonding. International Journal of Science Education, 30(11), 1531-1550.
  • Özmen, H., & Kenan, O. (2007). Determination of the Turkish primary students' views about the particulate nature of matter. Asia Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 1-7.
  • Özmen, H., Ayas, A., & Coştu, B. (2002). Determination of the science student teachers‟ understanding level and misunderstandings about the particulate nature of the matter. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 2(2), 506-529.
  • Paik, S. H., Kim, H. N., Cho, B. K., & Park, J. W. (2004). K-8th grade Korean students‟ conceptions of “changes of state” and “conditions for changes of state”. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 207-224.
  • Papageorgiou, G., & Johnson, P. (2005). Do particle ideas help or hinder pupils‟ understanding of phenomena? International Journal of Science Education, 27(11), 1299-1317.
  • Papageorgiou, G., Johnson, P., & Fotiades, F. (2008). Explaining melting and evaporation below boiling point. Can software help with particle ideas? Research in Science & Technological Education, 26(2), 165-183.
  • Pereira, M. P., & Pestana, M. E. M. (1991). Pupils’ representations of water. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 313-319.
  • Pierri, E., Karatrantou, A., & Panagiotakopoulos, C. (2008). Exploring the phenomenon of “change of phase” of pure substances using the microcomputer-based-laboratory (MBL) system. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 9, 234-239.
  • Pozo, J. I., & Gomez Crespo, M. A. (2005). The embodied nature of implicit theories: The consistency of ideas about the nature of matter. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 351-387.
  • Prain, V., Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2009). Multiple representation in learning about evaporation. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 787-808.
  • Raviola, A. (2001). Assessing students‟ conceptual understanding of solubility equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 629–631.
  • Sirhan, G. (2007). Learning difficulties in chemistry: An overview. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(2), 2 – 20.
  • Snir, J., Smith, C. L., & Raz, G. (2003). Linking phenomena with competing underlying models: A software tool for introducing students to the particulate model of matter. Science Education, 86, 694-830.
  • Solomonidou, C., & Stavridou, H. (2000). From inert object to chemical substances: Students initial conceptions and conceptual development during an introductory experimental chemistry sequence. Science Education, 84, 382-400.
  • Stern, L., Barnea, N., & Shauli, S. (2008). The effect of a computerized simulation on middle school students‟ understanding of the kinetic molecular theory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 305-315.
  • Talanquer, V. (2009). On cognitive constraints and learning progression: The case of “structure of matter”. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 2123-2136.
  • Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A. L., Crowley, J., Yung, B. H. W., Cheong, I. P.-A., & Othman, J. (2010). Evaluating students‟ understanding of kinetic particle theory concepts relating to the states of matter, changes of state and diffusion: A cross-national study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 141-164.
  • Treagust, D.F., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T.L. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1353-1368.
  • Tsai, C. -C. (1999). Overcoming junior high school students‟ misconceptions about the microscopic views of phase change: A study of an analogy activity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 83-91.
  • Tsaparlis, G. (1997). Atomic and molecular structure in chemical education: A critical analysis from various perspectives of science education. Journal of Chemical Education, 74, 922–925.
  • Tytler, R. (2000). Comparison of year 1 and year 6 students‟ conceptions of evaporation and condensation: Dimensions of conceptual progression. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 447-467.
  • Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2001). Deconstructing learning in science: Young children‟s responses to a classroom sequence on evaporation. Research in Science Education, 30, 339-355.
  • Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2004). Young children learning about evaporation: Insights from a longitudinal study. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4, 111-126.
  • Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2005). A longitudinal study of children‟s developing knowledge and reasoning in science. Research in Science Education, 35, 63-98.
  • Tytler, R., Prain, V., & Peterson, S. (2007). Representational issues in students‟ learning about evaporation. Research in Science Education, 37, 313-331.
  • Valanides, N. (2000). Primary student teachers‟ understanding of the particulate nature of matter and its transformations during dissolving. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1(2), 249-262.
  • Wu, H., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students‟ use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 821-842.
  • Yezierski, E. J. (2003). The particulate nature of matter and conceptual change: A cross-age study. Doctoral Dissertation, Arizona State University, USA.
  • Yılmaz, A., & Alp, E. (2006). Students’ understanding of matter: the effect of reasoning ability and grade level. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6, 22-31.
APA ÖZMEN H (2011). Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. , 99 - 121.
Chicago ÖZMEN Haluk Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. (2011): 99 - 121.
MLA ÖZMEN Haluk Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. , 2011, ss.99 - 121.
AMA ÖZMEN H Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. . 2011; 99 - 121.
Vancouver ÖZMEN H Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. . 2011; 99 - 121.
IEEE ÖZMEN H "Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter." , ss.99 - 121, 2011.
ISNAD ÖZMEN, Haluk. "Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter". (2011), 99-121.
APA ÖZMEN H (2011). Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), 6(1), 99 - 121.
Chicago ÖZMEN Haluk Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik) 6, no.1 (2011): 99 - 121.
MLA ÖZMEN Haluk Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), vol.6, no.1, 2011, ss.99 - 121.
AMA ÖZMEN H Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik). 2011; 6(1): 99 - 121.
Vancouver ÖZMEN H Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik). 2011; 6(1): 99 - 121.
IEEE ÖZMEN H "Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter." International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik), 6, ss.99 - 121, 2011.
ISNAD ÖZMEN, Haluk. "Turkish primary students' conceptions about the particulate nature of matter". International Journal of Environmental and Science Education (elektronik) 6/1 (2011), 99-121.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
22-04-2024 16:47

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