REMEMBERING RATES FOR THE SUBJECTS WHO LEARNED IN THE SCIENCE LESSON

Salih Gülen

Abstract


The purpose of this research is determining the rate of recalling of science subjects for students completing basic education. The qualitative research method was used in the study. In this context, face-to-face interviews, fully structured interviews and documents were reviewed. Homogeneous samples were used in the study. The sample consisted of 48 people. In addition, 7 people were interviewed face to face. A fully structured interview form, face-to-face interview and document review were used to collect data. Both descriptive and content analyzes were used to analyze the data. In addition, percentage and frequency values were used in document analysis. As result of the analysis the subjects most remembered by the participants are respectively living things and life, matter and nature, physical events, world and universe learning fields. Number of acquisitions of learning subject areas is consistent with frequency values of recalled subjects obtained in research. The most remembered subjects in the science lesson are the systems, the characteristics of living things and nature. As a result of face-to-face interview, it was determined that the methods and activities used by teachers in the classroom were effective in remembering the subject.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

DOI

Keywords


science curriculum, science lesson, learning subject areas, remembrance, student views, qualitative research

Full Text:

PDF

References


Anagün, Ş. S., Kılıç, Z., Atalay, N., & Yaşar, S. (2015). Are classroom teacher candidates ready to perform science curriculum? International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 10(11) 127-148. DOI Number: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.8611

Author, (2018a). Sample problem solving study in the process of structuring information. The name of the journal has been deleted so that the author identity is not clear.

Author, (2018b). The aim of this course is to examine the perspectives of students in different class levels to solve daily life problems. The name of the journal has been deleted so that the author identity is not clear.

Author, (2018c). Determination the effect of STEM-integrated argumentation based science learning approach in solving daily life problems. The name of the journal has been deleted so that the author identity is not clear.

Author, (2015). Constructivism; Evaluation of Sample Application and Its Effect on Persistence. The name of the journal has been deleted so that the author identity is not clear.

Aydın, S., & Çakıroğlu, J. (2010). Teachers’ views related to the new science and technology curriculum: Ankara case. Elementary Education Online, 9(1), 301-315

Bakırcı, H., & Kutlu, E. (2018). Determination of science teachers’ views on STEM approach. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 9(2), 367-389. DOI: 10.16949/turkbilmat.417939

Bekmezci, S., & Ateş, Ö. (2018). Teachers’ views on the science course curriculum updated in 2013. Manisa Celal Bayar University Journal of Social Sciences, 16 (3), 57-76. Doi: 10.18026/cbayarsos.465707

Bozkurt-Altan, E., Yamak, H., & Buluş-Kırıkkaya, E. (2016). Applications of STEM training in pre-service teacher education: Design-based science education. Trakya University Faculty of Education Journal, 6(2), 212-232.

Çalık, B., & Aksu, M. (2018). A systematic review of teachers’ questioning in turkey between 2000-2018. Elementary Education Online, 17(3), 1548-1565. Doi:10.17051/ilkonline.2018.466389

Cangüven, H., Öz, O., Binzet, G., & Avci, G . (2017). Examination of ministry of national education 2017 draft science program according to revised bloom taxonomy. International Journal of Eurasian Education and Culture, 2(2), 62-80.

Çokluk, Ö., Yılmaz, K., & Oğuz, E. (2011). A qualitative interview method: focus group interview. Theoretical Education, 4(1), 95-107.

Demir, N., & Akarsu, B. (2013). Secondary school students' perceptions about the nature of science. Journal of european Education. 3(1), 1-9.

Deveci, İ., Konuş, F. Z. Aydız, M. (2018). Investigation in terms of life skills of the 2018 science curriculum acquisitions. Cukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 47(2), 765-797. DOI: 10.14812/cuefd.413514

Eke, C. (2018). Analysis of objectives of science curriculum according to the webb's depth of knowledge levels. Journal of Social Research and Behavioral Sciences, 4(6), 174-190.

Fitzgerald, A., & Smith, K., (2016). Science that matters: Exploring science learning and teaching in primary schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4), 64-78.

Gedik, N., Altıntaş, E., & Kaya, H. (2011). Student's views about homework in the science and technology courses. Journal of European Education. 1(1), 6-13.

Glesne, C. (2013). Introduction to qualitative research (Trans. Ed.: Ersoy, A., & Yalcinoglu, P.). Ankara: Anı Publishing.

Gülhan, F., & Şahin, F. (2016). The effects of science-technology-engineering-math (STEM) integration on 5th grade students’ perceptions and attitudes towards these areas. International Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1), 602-620. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14687/ijhs.v13i1.3447

İdin, Ş., & Kaptan, F. (2017). A study on examining doctorate dissertations prepared according to the renewed elementary science curriculum. Eskişehir Osmangazi University Turkish World Application and Research Center Educational Journal, 2(1), 29-43.

Merriam, S. B. (2013). A guide for qualitative research design and implementation (Trans. Ed.: Turan, S.). Ankara: Nobel Publishing.

MoNE, (2018a). Weekly lessons and times schedule. Date of access; 06/05/2018

MoNE, (2018b). Curriculum of science education (primary school and middle school 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 classes). Ankara: Ministry of Education Publications.

Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. H., Tank, K., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (419-425). West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.

Polat, S., & Baş, G. (2012). 5E The Effect of Constructivist Learning Model on Students' Learning Level in Social Studies Course. Çankırı Karatekin University Journal of the Institute of Social Sciences, 3(2), 69-92.

Seheroğlu, B. S. (2014). The effect of differentiated science education on the basis of depth and complexity on gifted and talented students in view of success, scientific process skills and attitude. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Istanbul University Institute of Educational Sciences, Istanbul.

Sheldrake, R., Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J., (2017). Science Teaching and Students’ Attitudes and Aspirations: The Importance of Conveying the Applications and Relevance of Science. International Journal of Educational Research, 85, 167-183.

Shırazı, S., (2017). Student Experience of School Science. International Journal of Science education, 39(14), 1891-1912.

Tarkın-Çelikkıran, A., & Aydın-Günbatar, S. (2017). Analysis of prospective chemistry teachers' views on STEM applications. University Journal of Education Faculty, 14(1), 1624-1656.

Tüysüz, C., & Aydın, H. (2009). Elementary science and technology course teacher’s opinions on the new science and technology program. Gazi University Journal of Education Faculty, 29 (1), 37-54.

Yaman, S., & Çakir, E. (2018). The effect of flipped classroom model on students’ science success and computational thinking skills. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Faculty of Education, 38(1), 75-99.

Yıldırım, A., & Simsek, H. (2013). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.

Yıldırım, N., Maşeroğlu, P., (2016). Predict-observe-explain-based activities in the association of chemistry with the daily life and student views. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 7(1), 117-145. DOI: 10.17569/tojqi.47585


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Salih Gülen

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2018. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.


This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).