A case study on teaching of energy as a subject for 9th graders

Sevim Bezen 1 * , Celal Bayrak 1, Isil Aykutlu 1
More Detail
1 Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey
* Corresponding Author
EUR J SCI MATH ED, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp. 243-261. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9509
OPEN ACCESS   1687 Views   1065 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study aims to describe how energy subject is taught in 9th grades. The study is designed as a descriptive case study with the participation of 3 physics teachers and 85 students. Data were obtained through observation, interviews, and documents, and they were analyzed through descriptive analysis method. In the observations made at the participating schools, it was revealed that the teaching process of energy subject was improved by general lecturing and hence students have incorrect or incomplete knowledge on the topic. In the study, it was determined that teaching of energy subject was enjoyable because it is mostly related to daily life and it includes interpretation-based questions; it was also determined, however, that students have difficulty comprehending the subject.
Keywords: energy, physics education, physics education program, physics teacher

CITATION

Bezen, S., Bayrak, C., & Aykutlu, I. (2017). A case study on teaching of energy as a subject for 9th graders. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(3), 243-261. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9509

REFERENCES

  • Altun, M., Arslan, Ç. ve Yazgan, Y. (2004). Lise matematik ders kitaplarının kullanım şekli ve sıklığı üzerine bir çalışma [A study on thewaysand how frequentlyhighschoolmathematicscoursebooksareused]. Journal Of UludagUniversityFaculty Of Education, 17(2), 131-147.
  • Bagley, C., & Hunter, B. (1992). Restructuring, constructivism, and technology: Forging a new relationship. Educational Technology, 22-27.
  • Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (1990).Pupils’ ideas concerning energy sources.International Science Education, 12(5), 513-529.
  • Brown, D. E. (1994).Facilitating conceptual change using analogies and explanatory models.International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), 201-214.
  • Chambers, S. K., & Andre, T. (1997).Gender, prior knowledge, interest and experience in electricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 107-123.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five approaches (3rd edition.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Çınar, O., Teyfur, E. veTeyfur, M. (2006).Primary school teachers and administrators’ views about constructivist education approach and programs.Inönü University Journal Of The Faculty Of Education, 7(11), 47-64.
  • Çolak, S. (2005).The effect of the teaching methots based on constructive learning approach on the successes in the subject of acids-bases and their conceptional variations, and the attitudes against the science lessons of eight class students primary school (Unpublished master’s thesis). Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Dagher, Z. R. (1994). Does the use of analogies contribute to conceptual change?.Science Education, 78(6), 601-614.
  • Driver, R., & Warrington, L. (1985).Students' use of the principle of energy conservation in problem situations.Physics Education, 20, 171-176.
  • Duit, R. (1992). Vorstellung und physiklernen [Conceivability and physics learning].Physik in der schule, 30, 282-285.
  • Ekici, G. (2005). Liseöğrencilerininöğrenciseçmesınavına (ÖSS) yöneliktutumlarınınbazıdeğişkenleraçısındanincelenmesi [High school students, Student Selection Exam (SSE ) analyzed in terms of the attitudes of some variables]. HacettepeÜniversitesiEğitimFakültesiDergisi, 28, 82-90.
  • Ellse, M. (1988).Transferring not transforming energy.School Science Review, 69, 427-437.
  • Ergin S. ve Sarı, M. (2013). Fizik öğretmenlerinin öğrencilerin öğrenme stillerine uygun öğretim yapma düzeylerini belirleme üzerine bir çalışma [A study on determiningphysicsteachers’ levels of realizing a teachingappropriatetostudents’ learningstyles]. Fen Bilimleri Öğretimi Dergisi, 1(2), 81-96.
  • Ersoy, A. (2006). Technologically supported project-based learning applications at the fifth grade of primary school (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).Anadolu University, Eskişehir.
  • Ertem, H. Y. (2013). Fizik öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı öğretim programını uygulama yeterlilikleri üzerine bir durum çalışması [A casestudy on physicsteachers’ proficiency in applyingconstructivistteaching program]. I. Ulusal Fizik Eğitimi Kongresi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi. Ankara, 12-14 Eylül.
  • Gilbert, J. K., & Pope, M. L. (1986). Small group discussions about conceptions in science: A case study. Research in Science and Technology Education, 4, 61-76.
  • Glesne, C. (2012). Nitel Araştırmaya Giriş [IntroductiontoQualitativeResearch] (Ed: Ersoy, A. ve Yalçınoğlu, P.).Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Gökçe, E.,İşcan, D. C. ve Erdem, A. (2012). Öğretmen adaylarının sınıf ortamında yapılandırmacılık yaklaşımına uygun çalışmalar gerçekleştirmesine ilişkin gözlemleri [Observations of pre-service teachers on realizingstudies in classappropriateforconstructivistapproach]. Journal Of Research in EducationandTeaching, 1(1), 111-127.
  • Hewson, M. G., & Hewson, P. W. (1983).Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual changes strategies on science learning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(8), 731-743.
  • Hoffman, L. (Eds.) (1990). Naturwissenschaftlich-techischebildung und beruflicheorientierung (Teil A). Frauen imberuf.Förderungnaturwissenschaftlich-techischerfürbildungmädcheninderrealschule, 118-148. Köln: DeutscherInstuts-Verlang.
  • Hynd, C. (2001). Persuasion and its role in meeting educational goals.Theory into Practice, 40(4), 270-277.
  • Jin, H., & Anderson, C. W. (2012).A learning progression for energy in socio-ecological systems.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1149-1180.
  • Kaper, W. H., & Goedhart, M. J. (2002).“Forms of energy”, an intermediary language on the road to thermodynamics? Part II. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 119-137.
  • Kaptan, F. (1999). Fen Bilgisi Öğretimi (TeachingScience). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  • Karadağ, E., Deniz, S., Korkmaz, T. veDeniz, G. (2008). Constructivist learning approach: A research on the scope of views of class teachers. Journal OfUludag University Faculty Of Education, 21(2), 383-402.
  • Karagöz, C. (2007). Attitutes and interests of pre-service chemistry teachers towards nuclear energy.Unpublished master’s thesis, Gazi University, Ankara.
  • Karakış, Ö. (2006). The usage level of general learning strategies of students’ having different learning styles at some of the higher studies institutions (Unpublished master’s thesis).AbantİzzetBaysal University, Bolu.
  • Karakuyu, Y. (2006). Misconceptions in heat and temperature among high school students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).SüleymanDemirel University, Isparta.
  • Karamustafaoğlu, O. ve Sontay, G. (2012). Bir TIMSS sınavının ardından: TIMSS 2011’e katılan öğrenci ve uygulayıcı öğretmenlerin görüşleri [After a TIMMS Exam: Views of studentsandteacherswhoparticipated in 2011 TIMMS]. X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi. Niğde, 27-30 Haziran.
  • Kesidou, S., &Duit, R. (1993).Students’ conceptions of the second law of thermodynamics-an interpretive study.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(1), 85-106.
  • Kılıç, G. B. (2001). Oluşturmacı fen öğretimi [ConstructionistScienceEducation].EducationalSciences: Theory&Practice, 1(1), 9-22.
  • Köse, S., Bağ, H., Sürücü, A. veUçak, E. (2006).The opinions of prospective science teachers’ about energy sources for living organisms.International Journal Of Environmental and Science Education, 1(2), 141–152.
  • Kruger, C. (1990). Some primary teachers‟ ideas about energy.Physics Education, 25(2), 86-91.
  • Küçük, M., Çepni, S. veGökdere, M. (2005). Turkish Primary School Students‟ Alternative Conception About Work, Power And Energy. Journal Physics Teacher Education Online, 3(2), 22-28.
  • Kutluca, T. ve Aydın, M. (2010). Difficulties secondary school mathematics teachers encountered during application of the new mathematics curriculum. Dicle University Journal Of Social Sciences Institute, 2(1), 11-20.
  • Limon, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual changes: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 36(4-5), 357-380.
  • Martin, D. J. (1997). Elementary science methods.A constructivist approach. Kennesaw State College, Delmar Publishers.
  • McMillan, J. H. (2004). Educational research: Fundematals for the consumer. (Fourth Edition).USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2013). Ortaöğretim Fizik Dersi Öğretim Programı [Secondary School PhysicsTeaching Program]. Ankara: Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.
  • Ogborn, J. (1990). Energy, change, difference and danger.School Science Review, 72(259), 81-85.
  • Okur, M. & Azar, A. (2011).Primary teachers’ opinions about alternative measurement and assessment techniques used in science and technology course.Kastamonu Education Journal, 19(2), 387-400.
  • Papadouris, N., Constantinou, C.P., & Kyratsi, T. (2008). Students’ use of the energy model to account for changes in physical systems. Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 45(4), 444-469.
  • Peers, C. E., Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2003). Supports and concerns for teacher professional growth during the implementation of a science curriculum innovation. Research in Science Education, 33, 89-110.
  • Sanders, M. (1993). Erroneousideasaboutrespiration: Theteacherfactor. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching, 30(8), 919-934.
  • Sherman. J. S. (2000). Science and science teaching. U.S.A.: The College of New Jersey.
  • Solomon, J. (1982). How children learn about energy or does the first law come first?. School Science Review, 63(224), 415-422.
  • Stylianidou, F., Ormerod, F., & Ogborn, J. (2002). Analysis of science textbook pictures about energy and pupils’ readings of them. International Journal of Science Education, 24(3), 257-283.
  • Sünkür, M., Arabacı, B. İ. veŞanlı, Ö. (2012). Elementary school students’ views toward smart board practices (Malatya city sample). E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy NWSA-Education Sciences, 7(1),313-321.
  • Şahin, M. (2013). Fizik 9 soru kitabı [Physics 9 WorkBook]. Ankara: Plazma Yayıncılık.
  • Tanrıverdi, B. (2009). Analyzing primary school curriculum in terms of sustainable environmental education.Education and Science, 34(151), 89-103.
  • Tatar, E. veOktay, M. (2007). Students’ missunderstandings about the energy conservation principle: A general view to studies in literature. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 2(3), 79-81.
  • Tobin, K., &Tippins, D. (1993).Constructivism as a deferent for teaching and learning. In K. Tobin (Ed.), Thepractise of consıructivism in science education (pp. 3-21). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Trumper, R., &Gorsky, P. (1993). Learning about energy: The influence of prior knowledge, cognitive levels and closed mindedness. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 637-648.
  • Trumper, R. A. (1998).Longitudinal study of physics students’ conceptions on energy in pre-service training for high school teachers.Journal of Science Education Technology, 7(4), 311-318.
  • Trumper, R., Raviolo, A., &Shnersch, A. M. (2000). A cross-cultural survey of conceptions of energy among elemantary school teachers in training- empirical results from Israel and Argentina. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 697-714.
  • Tüysüz, C. ve Aydın, H. (2009).The elementary school science and technology teachers’ perceptions toward to new science and technology curriculum.Gazi University Journal OfGazi Educational Faculty, 29(1), 37-54.
  • Ünal, S. (2011).Analysis of elementary secondary level students’ knowledge and attitude about environment: Dikili district sample (Unpublished master’s thesis). Balıkesir University, Balıkesir.
  • Warren, J. W. (1983). Energy and its carriers: A critical analysis. Physics Education, 18, 209-212.
  • Watts, D. M. (1983).Some Alternative Views of Energy. DM Watts Physics Education, 18(5), 213-261.
  • Yağbasan, R. veGülçiçek, G. (2003).Describing the characteristics of misconceptions in science teaching.Pamukkale University Journal Of Education, 13, 110-128.
  • Yangın, S. ve Dindar, H. (2007).The perceptions of teachers about the change on elementary school science and technology curriculum. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33, 240-252.
  • Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri [QualitativeResearchMethods in SocialSciences].Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yin, R. Y. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. (Fourth Edition). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.
  • Yip, D. Y. (1998). Teachers’ misconceptions of the circulatory system.Journal of Biological Education, 32(3), 207-216.
  • Yuenyong, C., & Yuenyong, J. (2007). Grade 1 to 6 thai students’ existing ideas about energy. Science Education International, 18(4), 289-298.
  • Zain, M. N. A., & Sulaiman, F. (1998). Physics students’ conceptions of energy and technological development in energy. Renewable Energy, 14(1), 415-419.