Author :
Year-Number: 2021-Volume 13, Issue 4
Yayımlanma Tarihi: 2021-09-06 12:09:40.0
Language : English
Konu : Social Studies
Abstract
Keywords
Abstract
To qualify individuals in society as scientifically literate, they need to have a sufficient understanding of science, technology, and the relationship of society. Educational restructuring efforts emphasize scientific literacy as an important goal. The studies, in the literature, reveal that teachers and teacher candidates have misconceptions about science and technology and there is an important lack of knowledge about the effects of science and technology on society. This study aims to determine the opinions of social studies teacher candidates about science, technology, and the impact of science and technology on society. A semi-structured interview technique was used in this study, designed as a case study, among qualitative research methods. The study was carried out with 10 social studies teacher candidates who took the Science-Technology and Social Change course at a university in the Western Black Sea region in 2018. The themes reached in the analysis process were grouped under three dimensions: science, technology, and the relationship of society with science and technology. The results obtained from the study show that teacher candidates have misconceptions about science, that they confuse the concepts of science and technology, and that science and technology studies are affected by the social structure of the society
Keywords
- Abd-El-Khalick, F., & BouJaoude, S. (1997). An exploratory study of knowledge base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(7), 673-699. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)10982736(199709)34:7<673::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-J
- Akgün, İ. (2015). Investigation of 7th grade students’ level of achievement on the science, technology and society learning space in social studies in terms of some variables. International Journal of Turkish Literature Culture Education, 4 (2), 770-782. http://dx.doi.org/10.7884/teke.480
- Akgün, İ. H., & Akgün, M. (2020). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının dijital okuryazarlık düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(2), 1006-1024.
- American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Ata, B. (2017). Bilim, teknoloji ve sosyal değişme. B. Ata (Ed.). Bilim ve Teknolojinin Sosyal Değişmeye Etkisi. (s.3- 11). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
- Bağcı-Kılıç, G., Haymana, F., & Bozyılmaz, B. (2008). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programının bilim okuryazarlığı ve bilimsel süreç becerileri açısından analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 33(150), 52-63.
- Benzer, E. (2020). Bi̇li̇msel okuryazarlik ve medya okuryazarliği arasindaki ̇ i̇li̇şki ̇: Fen bi ̇lgi̇si̇ öğretmen adaylari örneği̇. Araştırma ve Deneyim Dergisi, 5(1), 10-23.
- Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth: Heinemann.
- Chen, S. (2001). Prospective teachers’ views on the nature of science and science teaching. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation) Indiana University, Indiana, USA
- Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. New York: Sage.
- Çakıcı, Y. (2012). Exploring Turkish upper primary level science textbooks’ coverage of scientific literacy themes. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 49, 81-102.
- Çepni, S., Ayvacı, H. Ş., & Bacanak, A. (2009). Bilim teknoloji toplum ve sosyal değişim. Trabzon: Çelepler Matbaacılık.
- Çepni, S., & Bacanak, A. (2002). A study on determining mathematics student teachers’ scientific literacy, paper presented at the meeting of the changing times, changing needs. First International Conference on Education Faculty of Education Eastern Mediterranean University, May 8-10, Gazimagusa, Turkish Republic of Nothern Cyprus.
- Çınar, M., & Köksal, N. (2013). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının bilime ve bilimin doğasına yönelik görüşleri. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), 43-57.
- Doğan, B. N. (2005). In Turkey, the investigation of views on the nature of science branch of high school science teachers and students. (Unpublished master’s thesis) Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
- Duban, N. (2010). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının fen ve teknoloji okur-yazarı bireylere ve bu bireylerin yetiştirilmesine ilişkin görüşleri. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 3(2), 162-174.
- Er, H. (2017). A sample application for use of biography in social studies; science, technology and social change course. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(5), 156-170.
- Erdoğan, R. (2004). Investigation of the preservice science teachers’ views on nature of science. (Unpublished master’s thesis) Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
- Gülteki ̇n, M. (2020). Değişen toplumda eğitim ve öğretmen nitelikleri. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 10(1), 654-700. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.682130
- Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (Eds.). (1997). Supplementary teaching materials promoting scientific and technological literacy. Tartu, Estonia: ICASE (International Council of Associations for Science Education).
- Hurd, P. D. (2000). Science education for the 21st century. School Science and Mathematics, 100(6), 282-288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2000.tb17321.x
- Jan, H. (2017). Teacher of 21st century: Characteristics and development. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences 7(9), 50-54.
- Kabatas Memis, E., & Ezberci Cevik, E. (2017). Examination of students’ small groups discussion in argumentation process: Scientific and socio-scientific issues. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 3(2), 126-137. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.325788.
- Kalyon, D. Ş. (2020). Adaptation of scientific literacy skill test to Turkish. Kastamonu Education Journal, 28 (5), 2019-2043.
- Kahyaoğlu, E. (2004). Turkish preservice science teachers’ views on sts: characteristics of scientists’ work. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis) Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
- Kaymakçı, S. (2010). Yeni sosyal bilgiler programı ve ders kitaplarının bilim ve teknolojiye yaklaşımı. B. Ata (Ed.) Bilim teknoloji ve sosyal değişme (pp. 13-38). Ankara: Pegama Yay.
- Kesgin, D., & Timur, B. (2020). Öğretmen adaylarının bilimin doğasına yönelik görüşleri. Eğitim ve Toplum Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 270-299.
- Kolstø, S. D. (2006). Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689–1716. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560878
- Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: a conceptual overview. Science Education, 84, 71-94.
- Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
- McComas, W. F. (1998). The principle elements of the nature of science: Dispelling the myths. In W.F. McComas (Eds.). The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 53–70). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: CA: Jossey Bass.
- Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Londra: Sage Pub.
- Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı[Ministry of National Education] (2014) Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. İlköğretim Sosyal Bilgiler Dersi Programı [Primary Education Social Studies Curriculum]. Ankara: MEB Yayınları
- Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education] (2016). İlköğretim sosyal bilgiler 6.sınıf eğitim programı ve klavuzu [Primary education social studies 6th grade education program and manual]. Ankara: MEB Yayınları.
- Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of National Education] (MEB) (2019). Sosyal bilgiler dersi öğretim programı (ilkokul ve ortaokul 4, 5, 6 ve 7. sınıflar) [Social studies lesson curriculum (primary, and secondary school 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th grades)]. Ankara: MEB Yayınları.
- National StandFarts for Social Studies-NCSS (2010). The themes of social studies. Retrieved September 01, 2020 from http://www.socialstudies.org/standards/strands.
- National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Research Council. (2004). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National
- National Science Education Standards (1996). National academy of sciences. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
- National Science Teachers Association [NSTA]. (2003). Standards for science teacher preparation. Retrieved September 01, 2020 from http://www.nsta.org/pdfs/NSTAstandards2003.pdf.
- Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2007). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006. Retrieved September 11, 2020 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/63/35/37464175.pdf
- Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework. Retrieved September 11, 2020 from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/dataoecd/ 46/14/33694881.pdf
- Özdemir, S. M. (2011). Education and curricula within the context of social change and globalization: a conceptual analysis. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 12(1), 85-110.
- Ozer, S., Kıray, S. A., & Cardak, O. (2020). Science teacher candidates’ views about science-technology-society environment relations. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 91, 83-104.
- Pala, Ş., & Başıbüyük, A. (2020). Ortaokul beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin sosyal bilgiler dersi bilim teknoloji ve toplum öğrenme alanına ilişkin akademik başarılarının incelenmesi. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 49(228), 301334. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.631709
- Patton, M. Q. (2005). Qualitative research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
- Ryan, A. G., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1992). Students’ preconceptions about the epistemology of science. Science Education, 76, 559–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760602
- Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socio scientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20042
- Sönmez, E., & Pektaş, M. (2017). The effects of some activities of biotechnology in extra-curricular on middle school students nature of science perceptions and biotechnology knowledge. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 25(5), 2019-2036.
- Şahi ̇n, C. T. (2017). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel okuryazarlıklarının geliştirilmesi: eylem araştırması. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18 (3), 250-268. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.369225
- Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. USA. Sage Publications, Inc.
- Tairab, H. H. (2001). How do pre-service and in-service science teachers view the nature of science and technology? Research in Science and Technological Education, 19(2) 235-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140120087759
- Turgut, H. (2005). Yapılandırmacı tasarım uygulamasının fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının bilimsel okuryazarlık yeterliklerinden “bilimin doğası” ve “bilim-toplum-teknoloji ilişkisi” boyutlarının gelişimine etkisi [The effect of constructivist design application on the development of "nature of science" and "science-society-technology relationship" dimensions of science teacher candidates' scientific literacy competencies]. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis) Yıldız Technical University Graduate School of Social Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey.
- Turgut, D., & Yakar, Z. (2020). Does teacher education program affect on development of teacher candidates’ bioethical values, scientific literacy levels and empathy skills? International Education Studies, 13(5), 8093.
- Volk, K. S., & Dugger, W. E. (2005). East meets west: What Americans and Hong Kong people think about technology. Journal of Technology Education. 17(1), 53-68.
- Yalvaç, B., Tekkaya, C., Çakıroğlu, J., & Kahyaoğlu, E. (2007). Turkish preservice science teachers’ views on science–technology– society issues. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 331–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600708667
- Yakmacı, B. (1998). Science (biology, chemistry and physics) teachers’ views on the nature of science as a dimension of scientific literacy. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis) Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey.
- Yılmaz, A. S. (2014). Entrepreneurship education as a social changing agent. Journal of World of Turks. 6(1), 297- 310.
- Yiğit, E. Ö. (2011). Sosyal bilgiler öğretmen adaylarının teknoloji okuryazarlığı düzeylerinin ve teknoloji ile bütünleştirilmiş sosyal bilgiler öğretimine yönelik görüşlerinin belirlenmesi [Determining the technology literacy levels of social studies teacher candidates and their views on social studies integrated with technology]. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis) Marmara University Institute of Educational Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey.
- Yiğit, E. Ö., Çengelci, T., & Karaduman, H. (2013). Pre-service social studies teachers’ views about reflection of technology on values. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 4(1), 73-96.
- YÖK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitimi Geliştirme Projesi [YÖK / World Bank National Education Development Project]. (1997). İlköğretim sosyal bilgiler öğretimi [Elementary social studies education]. Ankara, Turkey
- YÖK. (2018). Öğretmen yetiştirme lisans programları [Teacher Training Undergraduate Programs]. Ankara: YÖK yayını. Retrieved September 2, 2020 from https://www.yok.gov.tr/Documents/Kurumsal/egitim_ogretim_dairesi/Yeni Öğretmen-YetistirmeLisans Programlari/AA_Sunus_%20Onsoz_Uygulama_Yonergesi.pdf.
- Yürektürk, F., & Coşkun, H. (2020). Türkçe öğretmenlerinin teknoloji kullanımına ve teknoloji destekli türkçe öğretiminin etkililiğine dair görüşleri. Ana Dili Eğitimi Dergisi, 8(3), 986-1000. https://doi.org/10.16916/aded.748300
- Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas.Science Education, 86(3), 343–367.
