The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study

Ganime AYDIN (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Turkey)
İlköğretim Online (elektronik)
4 0
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 19 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 1155 - 1184 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298 İndeks Tarihi: 17-10-2020

The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study

Öz:
This study aimed to examine the effects of guided inquiry-based learning (GIBL)implementations applied to fourth-grade students in a Turkish rural school on both students and anelementary teacher. It was designed as a case study using qualitative data in the form of structuredstudents’ views journaled by the teacher, used video recordings, and observations by the researcher. 15GIBL experiments with 5E learning model in a structured classroom rather than laboratory wereconducted with 42 students. The results of student’s views showed positive effects of GIBLimplementations on the learning of concepts, interest to science, group work and the attitude of theirteacher. GIBL implementations helped the teacher to realize her role regarding the students, awareness ofthe required competencies, skills, and self-confidence.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F.,Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A. &Tuan, H. L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), pp.9-13. doi:10.1002/sce.10118
  • Akerson, V. L., & Dickinson, L. E. (2003). Using GIS technology to support K-8 scientific inquiry teaching and learning. Science Educator, 12(1), 41. 12.03.2009 retrived from https://search.proquest.com/docview/228707159/fulltextPDF/D6B976613C634B5BPQ/1?accou ntid=15572
  • Alake-Tuenter, E., Biemans, H. J., Tobi, H., Wals, A. E., Oosterheert, I., & Mulder, M. (2012). Inquiry-based science education competencies of primary school teachers: A literature study and critical review of the American National Science Education Standards. International Journal of Science Education, 34 (17), pp.27. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.669076
  • Appleton, K. (2003). How do beginning primary school teachers cope with science? Toward an understanding of science teaching practice. Research in science education, 3(1).https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023666618800
  • Appleton, K. (2002). Science activities that work: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Research in Science Education, 32(3), 393-410. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020878121184
  • Arnheim, R. (2007). Visual thinking, Ogdul (Ed.), Istanbul, Metis Press.
  • Ates, S. (2005).Improvement of prospective teacher’s ability on defining and controlling variables, Journal of Gazi Education Faculty, 25(1), 21-39.
  • Avraamidou, L., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2010).In search of well-started beginning science teachers: Insights from two first-year teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 661 686.doi:10.1002/tea.20359
  • Aydın, G. (2016). Reflections of inquiry-based laboratory experiments on prospective teachers’ communication skills. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences. doi:10.15345/iojes.2016.02.005
  • Aydın, G. &, Sahin, F. (2009). The effects of inquiry learning on photosynthesis and respiration concepts, scientific process skills and achievement of 8th grade students. pp. 2-3. Dissertation Doctorate Thesis, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Banchi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and children, 46(2), 26. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/236901022?pq-origsite=gscholar on December,2019
  • Baskurt, P. (2009). The effects of activities which were done with simple materials about force and motion unit at 8 grades students on their attitude, achievement and meaningful understanding. Dissertation Master Thesis, Gazi University Educational Science Institute, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Baxter, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and measurement of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp.147–161). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), p.35. Retrieved from https://knilt.arcc.albany.edu/images/archive/6/6f/20090424031839!Simplifying_inquiry_instruc tion.pdf on May 2017.
  • Bilgin, N. (2014). Content Analysis in Social Science. Political Press, Ankara.
  • Blank, L.M. (2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: a better warranty for student understanding. Science Education, 84, 486–506.doi: 10.1002/1098-237
  • Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Booth, G. (2001). Is inquiry the answer?. The Science Teacher, 68 (7), 57. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/openview/450b2d2f405fb6cad59463dad84ce8ed/1?pqorigsite=gscholar.
  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational researcher, 33(8), 3-15.doi: 10.3102/0013189X033008003
  • Bryant, R. (2006). Assessment results following inquiry and traditional physics laboratoryactivities.Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(7), 56-61.Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/openview/1d3c2e9d4119f8bdf1a5aebb967779d6/1?pqorigsite=gscholar&cbl=49226
  • Buck, L. B., Bretz, S. L., & Towns, M. H. (2008). Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of College Science Teaching, 38(1), 52-58.Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e24a/3028f7c279e3b8c4ab609970753bd7089991.pdf
  • Buyukozturk, S. (Ed) (2014). Research Methods (15th ed). Ankara: Pegem Academy Press,pp.80 125
  • Bybee, R., & Landes, N. M. (1990). Science for life and living: An elementary school science program from Biological Sciences Improvement Study (BSCS). The American Biology Teacher, 52(2), 92-98. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/4449042.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A62e64e1ced4b2bf938ab8 cbfa1e40d7a
  • Calık, M, Ayas, A, Unal, S. (2006). Determination of student conceptions related to concept of consciousness: An age comparison study. Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 4 (3), 309-322. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/tebd/issue/26119/275161on April 2016
  • Campbell, T. & Neilson, D. (2009). Student Ideas & Inquiries: Investigating Friction in the Physics
  • Classroom. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 46(1), p.4. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3200/SATS.46.1.13-16
  • Chaney, B. (1995). Student outcomes and the professional of 8Th grades teachers in science and mathematics. Prepared for NSF grant RED9255255. Rockville, MD: Westat
  • Cheung, D. (2008). Facilitating chemistry teachers to implement inquiry-based laboratory work. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(1), 107-130.doi: 10.1007/s10763- 007-9102-y
  • Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science scope, 23(6), 42-44. Retrieved from http://www.experientiallearning.ucdavis.edu/module2/el2-60-primer.pdf on May 2017
  • Cresswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Crawford, B. A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom?. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(3), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:100942272
  • Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642.doi: 10.1002/tea.20157
  • Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2000).Teacher quality and student achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8, 1. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v8n1.2000
  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Hudson, L. (1990). Chapter 4: Precollege science and mathematics teachers: Supply, demand, and quality. Review of research in education, 16(1), 223-264.
  • Dori, Y. J., Sasson, I., Kaberman, Z., & Herscovitz, O. (2004). Integrating case-based computerized laboratories into high school chemistry. The Chemical Educator, 9(1), 4-8.
  • Druva, C.A. & Anderson, R.D. (1983). Science teacher characteristics by teacher behavior and by student outcome: A meta-analysis of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 20,467-479.doi: 10.1002/tea.3660200509
  • Dusch, R.E. & Grandly, E., R. (2005).Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: framing the debates. Inquiry Conference on Developing a Consensus Research Agenda, New Brunswick, Rutgers University.
  • Eick, C. J., & Reed, C. J. (2002). What makes an inquiry-oriented science teacher? The influence of learning histories on student teacher role identity and practice. Science Education, 86(3), 401-416. doi: 10.1002/sce.10020
  • Eick, C.J., & Stewart, B. (2010).Dispositions supporting interns in the teaching of reform-based science materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 783–800.doi: 10.1007/s10972-009-9174-3
  • Ekborg, M. (2003). How student teachers use scientific conceptions to discuss a complex environmental issue. Journal of Biological Education. 37(3), 126-133. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2003.9655867
  • Enderle, P., Dentzau, M., Roseler, K., Southerland, S., Granger, E., Hughes, R., & Saka, Y. (2014). Examining the influence of RETs on science teacher beliefs and practice. Science Education, 98(6), 1077- 1108.doi: 10.1002/sce.21127
  • Eslinger, E., White, B., Frederiksen, J., & Brobst, J. (2008).Supporting inquiry processes with an interactive learning environment: Inquiry Island. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17 (6), 610–617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008- 9130-6
  • Fansa, M. (2012). Investigation of the effect of research based learning method on academic achievement, attitude towards science lesson and scientific process skills of 5th grade students in the exchange and recognition of material. Master thesis, Hatay, Mustafa Kemal University Social Science Institute.
  • Feyzioglu, E. Y., & Demirci, N. (2013). Class and science teachers' knowledge awareness and opinions about the 5E learning, Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 10(24), pp. 131-163.
  • Flick, L. & Lederman, N. G. (2004). Scientific inquiry and nature of science. Contemporary Trends And Issues in Science Education.doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5814-1
  • 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
  • Fradd, S. H., & Lee, O. (1999). Teachers' roles in promoting science inquiry with students from diverse language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 28(6), 14-42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X028006014
  • Fraser, B. J. (1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research, 1(1), 7-34. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:100993251
  • French, D., & Russell, C. (2002). Do graduate teaching assistants benefit from teaching inquiry-based laboratories?. Bio Science, 52(11), 1036-1041.doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052
  • Furtak, E.M. (2005). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90, pp.453-467. doi:10.1002/sce.20130
  • Garnett, P. J., Garnett, P. J., & Hackling, M. W. (1995). Students' alternative conceptions in chemistry: A review of research and implications for teaching and learning., Studies in Science Education, 25:1, 69- 96, doi: 10.1080/03057269508560050
  • Gillies, R. & Boyle, M. (2010). Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 933–940.doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.034
  • Gillies, R. M., & Nichols, K. (2015). How to support primary teachers’ implementation of inquiry: teachers’ reflections on teaching cooperative inquiry-based science. Research in Science Education, 45(2), 171- 191.doi: 10.1007/s11165-014-9418-x
  • Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
  • Granger, E. M., Bevis, T. H., Saka, Y., Southerland, S. A., Sampson, V., & Tate, R. L. (2012).The efficacy of student-centered instruction in supporting science learning. Science, 338(6103),105-108.doi: 10.1126/science.1223709
  • Griffiths A.K. and 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. doi:10.1002
  • Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press .
  • Harlen, W., & Holroyd, C. (1995). Primary Teachers' Understanding of Concepts in Science and Technology. Interchange 34. Scottish Council for Research in Education. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED462251.pdf on May 2007.
  • Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers' understanding in science and its impact in the classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 323-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461757
  • Hassard, J. (2005). The art of teaching science. Oxford University Press. New York.
  • Herron, M. D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. The school review, 79(2), 171-212.
  • Herrington, D. G., Bancroft, S. F., Edwards, M. M., & Schairer, C. J. (2016). I want to be the inquiry guy! how research experiences for teachers change beliefs, attitudes, and values about teaching science as inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(2), 183-204. doi: 10.1007/s10972-016-9450-y
  • 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.doi: 10.1080/00461520701263368
  • Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V.N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: neglected aspects of research, Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201- 217.https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543052002201
  • Hofstein, A., & Walberg, H. J. (1995). Instructional strategies. Improving science education, 70-89. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Hofstein, A., Nahum, T. L., & Shore, R. (2001).Assessment of the learning environment of inquiry-type laboratories in high school chemistry. Learning Environments Research, 4(2), 193- 207. doi: 10.1023/A: 1012467417645
  • Howes, E.V., Lim, M., & Campos, J. (2009). Journeys into inquiry-based science:literacy practices, questioning, and empirical study. Science Education, 93, 189–217.doi: 10.1002/sce.20297
  • Ingersoll, R. M. (2003). Who controls teachers' work? Power and accountability in America's schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Kask, K., & Rannikmäe, M. (2006). Estonian teachers’ readiness to promote inquiry skills among students, Journal of Baltic Science Education,1 (9).
  • Keller, J. T. (2001). From theory to practice: creating an inquiry-based science classroom, pp.162. Unpublished Master Thesis, University of Pacific Lutheran. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/7381945.
  • Kind, V. (2009). A conflict in your head: An exploration of trainee science teachers’ subject matter knowledge development and its impact on teacher self-confidence. International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1529-1562. doi: 10.1080/09500690802226062
  • Kirschner, P., 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 InquiryBased Teaching, Educational Psychologist, 41:2, 75-86,doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102
  • Lanza, J. (2007). Classroom tips for teaching inquiry labs, Environmental Literacy Council. Retrieved October 12, 2007, from http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/1271.html
  • Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Wodsworth Publishing Company, USA.
  • Lazarowitz, R., & Tamir, P. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, 94-130.
  • Leach, J. & Scott, P. (1999). Learning science in the classroom: Drawing on individual and social perspectives. The European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Gothenburg, Sweden, August 1999.
  • Leonard, W. H. (1986). An experimental test of an extended discretion laboratory approach for university level biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23:807-814. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660260108
  • Lin, H. S., Hong, Z. R., & Cheng, Y. Y. (2009). The interplay of the classroom learning environment and inquiry-based activities. International Journal of Science Education, 31(8), 1013-1024. doi: 10.1080/09500690701799391
  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Llewellyn, D. (2002). Inquiry within: Implementing inquiry-based science standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  • Lotter, C., Rushton, G. T., & Singer, J. (2013). Teacher enactment patterns: how can we help move all teachers to reform-based inquiry practice through professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(8), pp.4.doi: 10.1007/s10972-013-9361-0
  • Luckie, D.B., Maleszewski, J.J., Loznak, S.D., & Krha, M. (2004). Infusion of collaborative inquiry throughout a biology curriculum increases student learning: A four-year study of teams and streams. Advances in Physiology Education, 28(4), 199-209. doi: 10.1152/advan.00025.2004.
  • Lumpe, A. T., Haney, J. J., & Czerniak, C. M. (2000).Assessing teachers' beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(3), 275- 292.doi: 10.1002/ (sici) 1098- 2736(200003)37:33.0.co; 2-2
  • Lumpe, A., Czerniak, C., Haney, J., & Beltyukova, S. (2012). Beliefs about teaching science: the relationship between teachers’ participation in professional development and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 34(2), 153-166. doi:10.1080/09500693.2010.551222
  • Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory: Historical perspectives and contexts for contemporary teaching. International handbook of science education, 1, 249-262.
  • Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2011). Managing, analyzing, and interpreting data. C. Marshall & GB Rossman, Designing Qualitative Research, 5, 205-227.
  • Mayer, C. L. (2004). An analysis of the dimensions of a web-delivered problem-based learning environment. Dissertation Thesis. University of Missouri, Columbia.
  • Maxwell, J. A. (2008). Designing a qualitative study. The SAGE handbook of applied social research methods, 2, 214-253.
  • Merriam, S. B. (2013). Qualitative research. A Guide for Design and Application, (Trans, Edit; Selahattin Turan). Ankara: Nobel Press.
  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
  • Metz, K. E. (2004). Children's understanding of scientific inquiry: Their conceptualization of uncertainty in investigations of their own design. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 219-290. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2202_3
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
  • Morrison, J. A. (2013). Scientists’ participation ın teacher professional development: the impact on fourth to eighth grade teachers’ understanding and implementation of inquiry science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(4),pp.16. doi: 10.1007/s10763-013-9439-3
  • Mulholland, J., &Wallace, J. (1996). Breaking the cycle: Preparing teachers to teach science. Journal of Science Education, 8, 17 – 38. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173739
  • Nakhleh, M. B., & Samarapungavan, A. (1999). school children's beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in science Teaching, 36(7), 777-805. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199909)36:7<777::AIDTEA4>3.0.CO;2-Z
  • National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment [NRC], (1996). National science education standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press. p.105.
  • National Research Council [NRC). (2000). Inquiry and The National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning.pp.23.Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
  • National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. pp. 16-23-26-31-60.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317– 328. doi. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027870190403
  • Newman Jr, W. J., Abell, S. K., Hubbard, P. D., McDonald, J., Otaala, J., & Martini, M. (2004). Dilemmas of teaching inquiry in science methods. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(4), 257-279. doi: 10.1023/B:JSTE.0000048330.07586.d6
  • Palmer, D. (2006). Durability of changes in self-efficacy of preservice primary teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 655-671. doi: 10.1080/09500690500404599
  • Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in science Education, 38(3), 261-284. doi. 10.1007/s11165-007-9049-6
  • Patton, M., Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation Methods (3rd.ed.). Thousand Oaks,CA; Sage.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods, (Trans; Ed,. Butun and Demir). Ankara: PegemA Akademi.
  • Project 2061 [American Association for the Advancement of Science]. (1989). Science for all Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology (Vol. 89). Amer Assn for the Advancement of.
  • Posnanski, T. J. (2010). Developing understanding of the nature of science within a professional development program for in-service teachers: Project nature of science teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(5), 589- 621.doi: 10.1007/s10972-009-9145-8
  • Renner, J.W; Abraham, M.R., Birnie, H.H. (1998).The necessity of each phase of the learning cycle in teaching high school physics’. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 25(1), 39-58.doi: 10.1002/tea.3660250105
  • Robertson, B. (2006). Getting past ‘inquiry versus content’. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 67-70. Retrieved from http://heartlandscience.pbworks.com/f/inquiry_article1.pdf.
  • Roth, K. & Garnier, H.(2007). What science teaching looks like: An international perspective, Educational leadership, 64(4). Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/64c5/019fd2f8ecc9f94404dd8f42a4ae0912ab42.pdf
  • 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, 1-37. doi: 10.1080/03057267.2016.1206351.
  • Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed?. Educational psychologist, 40(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1
  • Rushton, G. T., 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(1), 23-52. doi: 10.1007/s10972-010-9224.
  • Russell, C. B., & Weaver, G. C. (2011). A comparative study of traditional, inquiry-based and research-based laboratory curricula: impacts on understanding of the nature of science. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(1), 57-67.doi: 10.1039/c1rp90008k
  • Salovaara, H,(2005). An exploration of students’ strategy use in inquiry-based computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, 39–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1365- 2729.2005.00112.
  • Schunk, D. H. (2014). Learning Theories (5th ed), Sahin (Eds.), pp. 140, Ankara Nobel Press..
  • Scholer, A. & Hatton, M. (2008). An evaluation of the efficacy of a laboratory exercise on cellular respiration. Journal of College Science Teaching. 38(1) 40-45.Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/200326141?pq-origsite=gscholar
  • Schwab, J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab, & P. F. Brandwein, (Eds.), the teaching of science (pp. 1-103). New York: Simon and Schuster.
  • Smith, A., & Hall, E. H. (1902). The teaching of chemistry and physics in the secondary school. Longmans, Green, and Company.
  • Smith, K.J. and Metz, P.A. (1996). Evaluating student Understanding of Solution Chemistry Through Microscopic Representations. Journal of Chemical Education. 73(3), 233-235. doi:10.1021/ed073p233
  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  • Songer, N.B., Lee, H. & Kam, R. (2002). Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms: what are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy? Journal of research in science teaching, 2(39), 128-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10013
  • Soy, S. (1997).The case study as a research method uses & users of information– LIS391.D1-Spring. pp. 2. Retrived from https://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~ssoy/usesusers/l391d1b.htm on 5 July 2015.
  • Sun, D., Looi, C. K., & Xie, W. (2017). Learning with collaborative inquiry: a science learning environment for secondary students. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 26(3), 241-263. doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2016.1205509
  • Thomas, G. & Meldrum, A. (2018) "Students’ perceptions of changes to the learning environments of undergraduate physics laboratories: An empirical study", Interactive Technology and Smart Education, Vol. 15 Issue: 2, pp.165-180, https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-10-2017-0045
  • Thomas, J. A., & Pedersen, J. E. (2003). Reforming science teacher preparation: What about extant teaching beliefs?. School Science and Mathematics, 103(7), 319-330.doi: 10.1111/j.1949- 8594.2003.tb18209.x
  • Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School science and Mathematics, 90(5), 403-418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949- 8594.1990.tb17229.x
  • Trowbridge, L., Bybee, R., & Powell, J. (2004).Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing scientific literacy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
  • Tournaki, N., & Podell, D. M. (2005). The impact of student characteristics and teacher efficacy on teachers’predictions of student success. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 299–314. doi. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.003
  • Van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H. & Asma, L. J. (2012). Primary teachers' attitudes toward science: A new theoretical framework. Science Education, 96(1), 158-182. doi: 10.1002/sce.20467
  • Wallace, C.S. & Kang, N. (2003).An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers’ beliefs about inquiry: an examination of competing belief sets, Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 41 (9), 936- 960. doi: 10.1002/tea.20032
  • Wee, B., Shepardson, D., Fast, J., & Harbor, J. (2007). Teaching and learning about inquiry: Insights and challenges in professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(1), 63-89. doi: 10.1007/s10972-006-9031-6
  • Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Information Center. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED447128.pdf.
  • Wilke, R. R. & Straits W. J. (2005). Practical advice for teaching inquiry-based science process skills in the biological sciences. The American Biology Teacher, 67 (9), 534- 540. doi: 10.1662/0002
  • Wheeler, L., & Bell, R. (2012). Open-ended inquiry. The Science Teacher, 79(6), 32
  • White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and instruction, 16(1), 3-118.
  • Whitworth, B. A., Maeng, J. L., & Bell, R. L. (2013). Differentiating inquiry. Science Scope, 37(2), 10.
  • Wolf, S. J., & Fraser, B. J. (2008). Learning environment, attitudes and achievement among middle-school science students using inquiry-based laboratory activities. Research in science education, 38(3), 321- 341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9052-y
  • Wu, H. K., & Hsieh, C. E. (2006). Developing sixth graders’ inquiry skills to construct explanations in Inquirybased learning environments. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1289-1313. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600621035
  • Yıldırım, A., Simsek,H. (2014). Qualitative Methods in Social Sciences, Seckin Press, Ankara.
  • Yıldız, E., Aydoğdu, B., Akpınar, E., & Ergin, Ö. (2006). The attitude of science teachers to science experiments. Boğaziçi Üniversity Journal of Education. 24(2), 71-86. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/43756
  • Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). pp. 18. In United States: Library of congress cataloguing-in-publication data.
  • Yang, W-T.,Yu-Ren Lin, Y-R., Hsiao-Ching She, H-C & Huang, K-Y., (2015).The effects of prior-knowledge and online learning approaches on students’ inquiry and argumentation abilities, International Journal of Science Education, 37:10, 1564- 1589, doi:10.1080/09500693.2015.1045957
  • Zuckerman, G. A., Chudinova, E. V., & Khavkin, E. E. (1998). Inquiry as a pivotal element of knowledge acquisition within the Vygotskian paradigm: Building a science curriculum for the. Cognition and Instruction, 16 (2), pp. 202. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci1602_3
APA AYDIN G (2020). The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. , 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
Chicago AYDIN GANİME The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. (2020): 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
MLA AYDIN GANİME The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. , 2020, ss.1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
AMA AYDIN G The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. . 2020; 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
Vancouver AYDIN G The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. . 2020; 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
IEEE AYDIN G "The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study." , ss.1155 - 1184, 2020. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
ISNAD AYDIN, GANİME. "The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study". (2020), 1155-1184. https://doi.org/doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
APA AYDIN G (2020). The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. İlköğretim Online (elektronik), 19(3), 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
Chicago AYDIN GANİME The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. İlköğretim Online (elektronik) 19, no.3 (2020): 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
MLA AYDIN GANİME The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. İlköğretim Online (elektronik), vol.19, no.3, 2020, ss.1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
AMA AYDIN G The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. İlköğretim Online (elektronik). 2020; 19(3): 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
Vancouver AYDIN G The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study. İlköğretim Online (elektronik). 2020; 19(3): 1155 - 1184. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
IEEE AYDIN G "The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study." İlköğretim Online (elektronik), 19, ss.1155 - 1184, 2020. doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
ISNAD AYDIN, GANİME. "The effects of guided inquiry-based learning implementations on 4th grades students and elementary teacher; a case study". İlköğretim Online (elektronik) 19/3 (2020), 1155-1184. https://doi.org/doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2020.727298
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
23-04-2024 14:2

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