Effects of the science writing heuristic approach on primary school students' science achievement and attitude toward science course;Yaparak yazarak bilim öǧrenimi-YYBÖ yaklaşiminin ilköǧretim öǧrencilerinin fen akademik başarisma ve fen ve teknoloji dersine yonelik tutumuna etkisi

Egitim ve Bilim

Volumn 35, Issue 155, 2010, Pages 49-62

  Günel, Murat ^a   Memiş, Esra Kabataş ^a   Büyükkasap, Erdoǧan ^b  

^a ATATÜRK UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b ERZINCAN UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Inquiry; Science attitude; Swh; Writing to learn

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873497543     PISSN: 13001337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Açikgöz, K. U. (2002). Aktif Ögrenme (6. Baski). izmir: Egitim Dunyasi Yayinlari.
2. Akkus, R., Gunel, M. & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an Inquiry-based Approach Know as the Science Writing Heuristic to Tradational Science Teaching Practices: Are there differences. International Journal of Science Education, 29 (14), 1-21.
3. Andrade, H.L., Du, Y., Wang, X.(2008). Putting rubrics to the Test: The efect of a model, Criteria generation, and rubric- referenced Self- Assesment on Elementary School Students' Writing. Educational Measurement: Issue and Practice, 27(2), 3-13.
4. Barman, C. (1989). Making it work. Science Scope, 12(5), 28-31.
5. Bozdogan, A.E. ve Altunçekiç, A. (2007). Fen Bilgisi Ogretmen Adaylarinin 5-E Ogretim Modelinin Kullanilabilirligi Hakkindaki Gorusleri. Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi, 15(2), 579-590.
6. Burke, K. A., Hand., P., Poack., J., & Greenbowe, T., (2005). Using The Science Writing Heuristic. Journal of College Science Teaching., 35 (1), 36-41.
7. Ergin, I., Kanli, U. ve Tan, M. (2007). Fizik Egitiminde 5-E Modeli'nin Ogrencilerin Akademik Basansina Etkisinin incelenmesi. Gazi Eǧitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 27(2), 191-209.
8. Erkol, M., Buyukkasap, E., ve Gunel, M. (2008). Genel Fizik Laboratuari Dersinde Yaparak ve Yazarak Bilim Ogrenme (YYBO) Yaklasiminin Akademik Basariya Etkisi. 8. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri Egitimi ve Matematik Egitmi Kongresi, 27-29 Agustos 2008, Abantizzet Baysal Universitesi, BOLU.
9. Grandy, R. & Duschl, R.A. (2007). Reconsidering the Character and Role of Inquiry in School Science: Analysisi of a conference. Science &Education, 16, 141-166.
10. Gunel, M. (2006). Investigating the impact of teacher' implementation practices on academic achievement in science during a long-term Professional development program on the Science Writing Heuristic. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University, Ames.
11. Gunel, M., Akkus, R., Hohenshell, H., & Hand, B. (2004). Improving student performance on higher order cognitive questions through the use of the Science Writing Heuristic. Paper presented at the National Associationfor Research in Science Teaching, B.C. Vancouver, Canada.
12. Gunel, M., Hand, B. & Hohenshell, L.(2006). The Impact of Students'Self-Evaluation of the Science Writing Heuristic: Closing the Achievement Gap. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), San Francisco, California.
13. Hand, B., & Keys, C. (1999). Inquiry investigation: A new approach to laboratory reports. The Science Teacher, 66, 27-29.
14. Hand, B., Prain, V., Lawranence, C. & Yore, L. D. (1999). A Writing in Science Framework Designed to enhange Science Literacy. International Journal ofScience Education, 21, 1021-1035.
15. Hand, B., Wallace, C., & Yang, E. (2004). Using the science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal ofScience Education, 26, 131-149.
16. Hewsen, P. W., Beeth, M. E., and Thorley, N. R. (1998). Teaching for Conceptual Change. International Handbook ofScience Education. 199-218.
17. Hohenshell, M. L. & Hand, B., (2006). Writing-to-learn Strategies in Secondary School Cell Biology: A mixed Method Study. International Journal ofScience Education. 28(2), 261-289.
18. Kabatas, E., Gunel, M., Buyukkasap, E., Uzoǧlu, M. & Hand, B. (2008). Effect of the implementation of Science Writing Heuristic on students understanding of electricity unit 6TH grade setting in Turkey, NARST Conference, 2008 March 30th - April 2th, Baltimore, MD, USA.
19. Keys, C W. (1999). Language as an Indicator of Meaning generation: An analysis of Middle School Students' Written Discourse about scientific Investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (9), 1044¬1061.
20. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V. & Collins, S. (1999). Using the Science Writing Heuristic as a Tool for Learning from Laboratory Investigations in Secondary Science. Journal of research in science Teaching. 36(10), 1065-1084.
21. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning experience as a source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
22. Kurt, ş. ve Akdeniz, A.R. (2004). Ogretmen Adaylarinin Kuvvet Kavrami ile Ilgili Yanilgilarini Gidermede Kesfedici Laboratuvar Modelinin Etkisi. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 27, 196-205.
23. NRC (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
24. Ozogul, G., Olina, Z. and Sullivan, H. (2008). Teacher, Self and peer evaluation of lesson plans written by preservice teacher. Education Tech Research Dev, 56, 181-201.
25. Posner, G.J., Strike, K. A., Hewsen, P. W. & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a Scientific Conceptual: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change. Science Education, 66 (2), 211-227.
26. Ramsey, J. (1993). Developing conceptual storylines with the learning cycle. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 5(2), 1-20.
27. Prain, V. & Hand, B. (1999). Students perceptions of writing for learning in secondary school science. Science Education, 83(2), 151-162.
28. Sebba, J., Deakin Crick, R., Yu, G., Lawson, H. and Harlen, W.(2008). Impact of Self And Peer Assessment on Students in Secondary Schools. Research Brief.
29. Yore, L., Bisanz, G. L. & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (6), 689 - 725.