International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1308-951X

Original article | International Journal of Research in Teacher Education 2023, Vol. 14(1) 54-72

Examination of Conceptual Understandings Among Prospective Science Teachers on Electrolytic Conductivity Using Predict-Observe-Explain Implications

Hatice Güngör Seyhan & Gülseda Eyceyurt Türk

pp. 54 - 72   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijrte.2023.523.4   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2211-23-0001

Published online: March 28, 2023  |   Number of Views: 60  |  Number of Download: 192


Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the effect of the Predict-Observe-Explain technique conducted within the scope of argumentation-supported learning on the conceptual understanding of prospective science teachers on "Electrolytic conductivity". Based on this main purpose action research in practice-based was applied in the study. It was observed that prospective science teachers often constructed non-scientific arguments and had difficulty in justifying many of their arguments before the implications. After the implications, it was observed that the prospective science teachers had the targeted arguments and were able to write grounds and rebuttal in the categories of completely/partially correct to their arguments.

Keywords: Argumentation-supported learning, chemistry-II course, electrolytic conductivity, predict-observe-explain technique, prospective science teachers


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Seyhan, H.G. & Turk, G.E. (2023). Examination of Conceptual Understandings Among Prospective Science Teachers on Electrolytic Conductivity Using Predict-Observe-Explain Implications . International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 14(1), 54-72. doi: 10.29329/ijrte.2023.523.4

Harvard
Seyhan, H. and Turk, G. (2023). Examination of Conceptual Understandings Among Prospective Science Teachers on Electrolytic Conductivity Using Predict-Observe-Explain Implications . International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 14(1), pp. 54-72.

Chicago 16th edition
Seyhan, Hatice Gungor and Gulseda Eyceyurt Turk (2023). "Examination of Conceptual Understandings Among Prospective Science Teachers on Electrolytic Conductivity Using Predict-Observe-Explain Implications ". International Journal of Research in Teacher Education 14 (1):54-72. doi:10.29329/ijrte.2023.523.4.

References

    REFERENCES

    Abraham, M. R., Grzybowski, E. B., Renner, J. W., & Marek, E. A. (1992). Understandings and misunderstandings of eight graders of five chemistry concepts found in textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 105-120. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290203

    Akgün, A., & Gönen, S. (2004). Çözünme ve fiziksel değişim ilişkisi konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının belirlenmesi ve giderilmesinde çalışma yapraklarının önemi [The importance of worksheets in identifying and overcoming misconceptions about the relationship between dissolution and physical change]. Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 3(10), 22-37. Retrieved from www.e-sosder.com

    Aydın, M. (2005). Bütünleştirici öğrenme kuramına uygun bilgisayar destekli dijital deney araçları ile fen laboratuar deneyleri tasarlama ve uygulama [Design and implementation of science laboratory activities using data logger and constructivist laboratory approach]. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey.

    Brown, G., & Atkins, M. (1988). Effective teaching in higher education. London: Methuen.

    Coll, R. K., & Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding held by upper secondary and tertiary students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19(2), 171-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140120057713

    Council of Higher Education, (2018). Higher education teacher training undergraduate programs, (http://www.yok.gov.tr/kurumsal/idari-birimler/Egitim-ogretim-dairesi/yeni-ogretmen-yetistirme-lisansprogramlari) [Last retrieved on 2021, March, 11].

    Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Lanning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4. Edition). USA: Pearson Education Inc.

    Cros, D., Maurin, M., Amouroux, R., Chastrette, M., Leber, J., & Fayol, M. (1986). Conceptions of first-year university students of the constituents of matter and the notions of acids and bases. European Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 305-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528860080307

    Cros, D., Chastrette M., & Fayol, M. (1988). Conceptions of second-year university students of some fundamental notions in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 10(3), 331-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069880100308

    Çalık, M., & Ayas, A. (2005). A cross-age study on the understanding of chemical solutions and their components. International Education Journal, 6(1), 30-41. Retrieved from http://iej.cjb.net

    Çimer, O. S., & Çakır, İ. (2008). Using the predict-observe-explain (POE) strategy to teach the concept of osmosis. XIII. IOSTE Symposium, 21-26 September, Izmir.

    Demircioğlu, G., Özmen, H., & Ayas, A. (2004). Some concept alternative conceptions encountered in chemistry: A research on acid and base. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4(1), 73–80. Retrieved from https://web.s.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=7c8a6261-082b-49a5-bcfa-25fb30eed396%40redis

    Demircioğlu, H., Vural, S., & Demircioğlu, G. (2012). “REACT” stratejisine uygun hazirlanan materyalin üstün yetenekli öğrencilerin başarisi üzerine etkisi [The effect of a teaching material developed based on “REACT” strategy on gifted students’ achievement]. Journal of Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Education, 31(2), 101-144. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/omuefd/issue/20247/214812

    Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A

    Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children’s ideas. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.

    Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2007). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In Erduran, S., & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from Classroom-Based Research. Springer.

    Erduran, S., & Msimanga, A. (2014). Science curriculum reform in South Africa: Lessons for professional development from research on argumentation in science education. Education as Change, 18(S1), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/16823206.2014.882266

    Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012

    Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation-reduction equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 121-142. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660291006

    Garratt, J., Overton, T., & Threlfall, T. (1999). A question of chemistry: Creative problems for critical thinkers. Harlow, UK: Pearson.

    Gilbert, J. K., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10, 61-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057268308559905

    Goldsworthy, A., Watson, R., & Wood Robinson, V. (2000). Developing understanding in scientific enquiry. Hatfield, UK: Association for Science Education.

    Hazel, E., & Prosser, M. (1994). First-year university students’ understanding of photosynthesis, their study strategies and learning context. The American Biology Teacher, 56(5), 274-279. https://doi.org/10.2307/4449820

    Rogers, F., Huddle, P. A., & White, M. W. (2000). Simulations for teaching chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(7), 920-926. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed077p920

    Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2014). Using technology to revolutionize cooperative learning: An opinion. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article1156. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01156

    Kearney, M., Treagust, D. F., Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. G. (2001). Student and teacher perceptions of the use of multimedia supported predict–observe–explain tasks to probe understanding. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 589–615. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013106209449

    Keogh, B., & Naylor, S. (1999). Concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science: an evaluation. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 431–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290642

    Kind, V. (2004). Beyond appearances: Students' misconceptions about basic chemical ideas. 2nd Edition, Royal Society of Chemistry.

    King, D., Bellocchi, A., & Ritchie, S. M. (2008). Making connections: Learning and teaching chemistry in context. Research in Science Education, 38, 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9070-9

    Köseoğlu, F., Tümay, H., & Kavak, N. (2002). An effective teaching method based on constructivist learning theory –Predict–Observe-Explain– “Can water be boiled with ice? V. National Science and Mathematics Education Congress, (September), Ankara, Turkey.

    Liew, C. W., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). The effectiveness of predict-observe-explain tasks in diagnosing students’ understanding of science and in identifying their levels of achievement, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, 13-17 April, 1998.

    Maskill, R., & Cachapuz, A. F. C., (1989). Learning about the chemistry topic of equilibrium: The use of word association tests to detect developing conceptualizations. International Journal of Science Education, 11(1), 57-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069890110106

    McGregor, L., & Hargrave, C. (2008). The use of “Predict-Observe-Explain” with on-line discussion boards to promote conceptual change in the science laboratory learning environment. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference (pp.4735-4740). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

    Metin, M. (2011). Effects of teaching material based on 5E model removed pre-service teachers’ misconceptions about acids-bases. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy (BJSEP), 5(2), 274-302. Retrieved from http://bjsep.org/index.php?page=11&volume_id=5&issue_id=3

    Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191-196. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed069p191

    Niaz, M. (2002). Facilitating conceptual change in students’ understanding of electrochemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 425-439. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110074044

    OECD, (2012). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Results from PISA 2012 Problem Solving, Country Note, Turkey.

    Okur, M., & Güngör Seyhan, H. (2021). Effect of the argumentation-supported PBL on the determination of pre-service science teachers' misconceptions about the particulate, space, and motion nature of matter. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences (IOJES), 13(4), 1069-1088. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2021.04.009

    Orgill, M., & Sutherland, A. (2008). Undergraduate chemistry students’ perceptions of and misconceptions about buffers and buffer problems. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 131-143. https://doi.org/10.1039/B806229N

    Osborne, R. J., & Cosgrove, M. M. (1983). Children's conceptions of the changes of state of water. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(9), 825-838. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660200905

    Osborne, R. J., & Gilbert, J. A. (1980). A method for investigation of concept understanding in science. European Journal of Science Education, 2(3), 311-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528800020311

    Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004b). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035

    Özden, M. (2009). Enhancing prospective teacher’s development through problem-based learning in chemistry education: Solutions and properties. Asian Journal of Chemistry 21(5), 3671 – 3682. Retrieved from https://asianjournalofchemistry.co.in/User/SearchArticle.aspx?Volume=21&Issue=5&Article=&Criteria=

    Özkaya, A. R. (2002). Conceptual difficulties experienced by prospective teachers in electrochemistry: Half-cell potential, cell potential, and chemical and electrochemical equilibrium in galvanic cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(6), 735-738. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed079p735

    Pabuçcu, A., & Geban, Ö. (2015). The effects of applications arranged according to the 5E learning cycle on misconceptions about acid-base. Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education Faculty, 15(1), 191-206. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2015.15.1-5000128602

    Rakkapao, S., Pengpan, T., & Prasitpong, S. (2013). Evaluation of POE and instructor-led problem solving approaches integrated into force and motion lecture classes using a model analysis technique. European Journal of Physics, 35(1), 015016. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/35/1/015016

    Raviolo, A. (2001). Assessing students’ conceptual understanding of solubility equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 629–631. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed078p629

    Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henrikson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission, Directorate General for Research. Available from: http://www.ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-onscienceeducation_en.pdf. [Last retrieved on 2021 March 06].

    Ross, B., & Munby, H. (1991). Concept mapping and misconceptions: a study of high school students’ understandings of acids and bases. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 11-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069910130102

    Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) Press.

    Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92, 447–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20276

    Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997). Students’ misconceptions in electrochemistry: Current flow in electrolyte solutions and the salt bridge. Journal of Chemical Education, 74, 819-823. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed074p819

    Schoon, K. J. (1995). The origin and extent of alternative conceptions in the earth and space sciences: A survey of pre-service elementary teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 7(2), 27–46. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/43155640

    Sheppard, K. (2006). High school students’ understanding of titrations and related acid base phenomena. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(1), 32-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/B5RP90014J

    Shymansky, J. A., Yore, L. D., Treagust, D. F., Thiele, R. B., Harrison, A., Waldrip, B. G., et al., (1997). Examining the construction process: A study of changes in Level 10 students’ understandings of classical mechanics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(6), 571-593. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199708)34:6<571::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-K

    Sizmur, S., & Osbourne, J. (1997). Learning processes and collaborative concept mapping. International Journal of Science Education, 19(10), 1117-1135. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970191002

    Smith, J. K., & Metz, P. A. (1996). Evaluating student understanding of solution chemistry through microscopic representations. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(3), 233-235. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed073p233

    Solomon, J. (1991). Exploring the nature of science: Key stage 3. Glasgow, UK: Blackie.

    Solomon, J., Duveen, J., Scott, L., & McCharty, S. (1992). Teaching about the nature of science trough history: Action research in the classroom. Journal of Research and Science Teaching, 29(4), 409-421. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290408

    Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Taber, K. S. (2002). Alternative conceptions in chemistry: Prevention, diagnosis and cure. London: The Royal Society of Chemistry.

    Temel, S. (2014). The effects of problem-based learning on pre-service teachers’ critical thinking dispositions and perceptions of problem-solving ability. South African Journal of Education, 34(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.15700/201412120936

    Vieira, R. M., Tenreiro-Vieira, C., & Martins, I. P. (2011). Critical thinking: Conceptual clarification and its importance in science education. Science Education International, 22(1), 43-54. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ941655

    White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. New York: Falmer.

    Yıldız, M. (2012). Geometrik optik öğretiminde yapılandırmacı öğrenme kuramına dayalı olarak geliştirilen laboratuar materyallerinin etkililiğinin değerlendirilmesi [Determining effectiveness of the materials based on constructivist learning in geometrical optic teaching]. [Unpublished Master’s Thesis]. Karadeniz Technical University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Trabzon, Turkey.