Effect of technology-embedded scientific inquiry on senior science student teachers' self-efficacy

Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 223-232

  Çallk, Muammer ^a  

^a TRABZON   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Environmental chemistry; Science education; Self efficacy; Student teacher

Indexed keywords

EID: 84880083169     PISSN: 13058215     EISSN: 13058223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.12973/eurasia.2013.931a     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aksit, N. (2007). Educational reform in Turkey. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 129-137.
2. Adams, D.D. & Shrum, J.W. (1990). The effects of microcomputer-based laboratory exercises on the acquisition of line graph construction and interpretation skills by high school biology students. Journal Research in Science Teaching, 27(8), 777-787.
3. Avery, L. M. & Meyer, D. Z. (2012), Teaching science as science is practiced: opportunities and limits for enhancing preservice elementary teachers' self-efficacy for science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 395-409
4. Ayas, A., Özmen, H. & çalik, M. (2010). Students' conceptions of the particulate nature of matter at secondary and tertiary level. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(1), 165-184
5. Aydeniz, M., Baksa, K. & Skinner, J. (2010). Understanding the impact of an apprenticeship-based scientific research program on high school students' understanding of scientific inquiry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(4), 403-421.
6. Ayvaci, H.S., Özsevgeç, T. & Aydin, M. (2004). A pilot study of effect of data logger on Ohm Laws [Data logger cihazinin ohm kanunu üzerindeki pilot uygulamasi]. The Turkish Journal of Educational Technology, 3(3), article 13.
7. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company
8. Banks, L.D., Elser, M. & Saltz C.(2005). Analysis of the K-12 component of the central arizona-phoenix long-term ecological research (CAP LTER) Project. Environmental Education Research, 11(5), 649-663.
9. Bell, P., & Linn, M. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the Web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817.
10. Calik, M. (2011). How did creating constructivist learning environment influence graduate students' views? Energy, Education, Science and Technology Part B Social and Educational Studies, 3(1), 1-13.
11. Chen, W., Tan, N.Y.L., Looi, C.K., Zhang, B. & Seow, P.S.K. (2008). Handheld computers as cognitive tools: Technology-enhanced environmental learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(3), 231-252.
12. çalik, M., Ayas, A. & Coll, R.K. (2010). Investigating the effectiveness of usage of different methods embedded with four-step constructivist teaching strategy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(1), 32-48
13. çalik, M. & Coll, R.K. (2012). Investigating socioscientific issues via scientific habits of mind: Development and validation of the scientific habits of mind survey (SHOMS). International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), 1909-1930.
14. çalik, M. & Eames, C. (2012). The Significance of national context: A comparison of environmental education in Turkey and New Zealand. Asia Pacific Education Researcher, 21(3), 423-433
15. çalik, M., Costu, B., ültay, N., Aytar, A., Artun, H., Özsevgeç, T., Ebenezer, J. & Küçük, Z. (2011). A thematic review of technology embedded science inquiry. Paper presented at World Conference on New Trends in Science Education, September 19-23, Kusadasi, Turkey
16. çalik, M., Okur, M. & Taylor, N. (2011). A comparison of different conceptual change pedagogies employed within the topic of "sound propagation". Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 729-742
17. çalik, M., Özsevgeç, T., Küçük, Z., Aytar, A., Artun, H., Kolayli, T., Kiryak, Z., ültay, N., Turan, B., Ebenezer, J., & Costu, B. (2012). Analyzing senior science student teachers' environmental research projects of scientific inquiry: A preliminary study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 379-383.
18. Dori, Y. J. & Sasson, I. (2008). Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case-based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(2), 219-250.
19. Duschl, R. & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72.
20. Ebenezer, J. (2008). Technology-embedded scientific inquiry classroom observation protocol. Developed under NSF-ITEST-TITiC (2004-2007) project. Unpublished, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.
21. Ebenezer, J. V., Lugo, F., Beirnacka, B. & Puvirajah, A. (2003). Community building through electronic discussion boards: Pre-service teachers' reflective dialogues on science teaching. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(4), 397-411
22. Ebenezer, J.V. (2001). A hypermedia environment to explore and negotiate students' conceptions: Animation of the solution process of table salt. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(1), 73-92.
23. Ebenezer, J.V., Columbus, R., Kaya, O.N., Zhang, L. & Ebenezer, D.L. (2012). One science teacher's professional development experience: A case study exploring changes in students' perceptions of their fluency with innovative technologies. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 22-37.
24. Ebenezer, J.V., Kaya, O.N. & Ebenezer, D.L. (2011). Engaging students in environmental research projects: Perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 94-116.
25. Friedrichsen, P.M., Munford, D. & Orgill, M (2006). Brokering at the boundary: A prospective science teacher engages students in inquiry. Science Education, 90(3), 522-543.
26. Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International.
27. Hoadley, C. M. & Linn, M. C. (2000). Teaching science through online, peer discussions: SpeakEasy in the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 839- 857
28. Hoban, G., Loughran, J. & Nielsen, W. (2011). Slowmation: preservice elementary teachers representing science knowledge through creating multimodal digital animations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(9), 985-1009.
29. Hogan, K., Nastasi, B. K. & Pressley, M. (2010). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 379-432.
30. Karsli, F. & çalik, M. (2012). Can freshman science student teachers' alternative conceptions of 'electrochemical cells' be fully diminished? Asian Journal of Chemistry, 24(2), 485-491
31. Klem, L. (2000). Structural equation modeling. In L. Grimm & P. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (Vol. II). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
32. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
33. Kutluca, T. (2012). The feasibility of computer assisted instructional materials developed on the subject of quadratic functions. Energy Education Science Technology, Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 4(4), 1879-189
34. Kwon, O.N. (2002). The effect of calculator-based ranger activities on students' graphing ability. School Science and Mathematics, 102(2), 57-67.
35. Lapp, D. A. & Cyrus V. F. (2000). Using data collection devices to enhance students' understanding. Mathematics Teacher, 93(6), 504-510.
36. Liang, L.L., Ebenezer, J. & Yost, D.S. (2010). Characteristics of pre-service teachers' online discourse: The study of local streams. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(1), 69-79.
37. Linn, M. C., Clark, D. & Slotta J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87, 517- 538.
38. Lumpe, A., Czerniak, C., Haney, J. & Beltyukova, S. (2012). Beliefs about teaching science: The relationship between elementary teachers' participation in professional development and student achievement, International Journal of Science Education, 34(2), 153-166
39. McDonald, R. P., & Ho, R. H. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64-82.
40. Means, B. (1998). Melding authentic science, technology, and inquiry-based teaching: Experiences of the GLOBE program. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(1), 97-105.
41. Moseley, C., Reinke, K. & Bookout, V. (2002). The effect of teaching outdoor environmental education on preservice teachers' attitudes toward self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. The Journal of Environmental Education, 34(1), 9-15
42. Nelson, B., Ketelhut, D. J., Clarke, J., Bowman, C., & Dede, C. (2005). Design-based research strategies for developing a scientific inquiry curriculum in a multi-user virtual environment. Educational Technology, 45(1), 21-27.
43. Özsevgeç, T. (2011). Computer literacy of Turkish preservice teachers in different teacher training programs. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(1), 13-21.
44. Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.
45. Reid-Griffin, A. & Carter, G. (2008). Uncovering the potential: the role of technologies on science learning of middle school students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 329-349
46. Sadler, T.D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42.
47. Sandoval, W.A. & Reiser B.J. (2003). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345-372.
48. Schultz, S. (2003). Promoting powerful teaching and students' learning in science using probeware. In D. Lassner & C. McNaught (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 1849-1851), Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
49. Schwartz, R.S., Lederman, N.G. & Crawford, B.A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: an explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610-645.
50. Sia, A. (1992). Preservice elementary teachers' perceived efficacy in teaching environmental education: A preliminary study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the ECO-ED North American Association for Environmental Education, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
51. Tal, R. & Hockberk, N. (2003). Assessing high order thinking of students participating in the "WISE" project in Israel. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29, 69-89.
52. Teo, T. & Ursavas, Ö.F. (2012). Technology acceptance of pre-service teachers in Turkey: A cross-cultural model validation study. International Journal of Instructional Media, 39(3), 193-201.
53. Trochim, W.M.K. (2001). The research methods knowledge base, 2nd ed. Cincinnati: Atomic Dog Publishing.
54. ültay, N. & çalik, M. (2012). Trends in studies into the effectiveness of context-based chemistry curricula. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(6), 686-701
55. Vries, D., Lund, K. & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 11(1), 63-103.
56. Yilmaz, H., & Huyugüzel-Cavas, P. (2008). The effect of the teaching practice on pre-service elementary teachers' science teaching efficacy and classroom management beliefs. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4, 45-54.