Results (
Indonesian) 1:
[Copy]Copied!
Using different conceptual change methods embedded within the 5E Model: A sampleteaching for heat and temperatureJ. Phys. Tchr. Educ. Online, 5(1), Summer 2008 (Mehmet Altan Kurnaz, Science Teacher and PhD Candidate in the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, Karadeniz Technical UniversitySince constructivism not only stresses students’ pre existing knowledge but also engages students actively, much more research has paid more attention two issues: (a) students’ alternative conceptions, and (b) conceptual change. In a conceptual complement process, Çalık and Ayas (2005) pointed out that miscellaneous conceptions may arise different from the one accepted by scientific community. These conceptions are generally called ‘preconceptions’, ‘alternative frameworks’, ‘children science’, ‘alternative science’, or ‘misconception’ (e.g. Baser & Çataloglu, 2005; Petersson, 2002; Rowlands, Graham, Berry. & McWilliams, 2007). In fact, determining what students think about the given phenomena is not enough to replace various student conceptions with scientific ones. Basically, as science educators, these are cases which we must endeavor to overcome. Despite the fact that many activities have been devised to achieve conceptual change, the significance of them may be different for teachers and pupils (Osborn & Tasker, 1985). Indeed, knowing the differences between them gives teachers a chance for an excellent teaching process. Even though constructivism places emphasis on taking into account students’ pre-existing knowledge and / or alternative conceptions, teachers may have difficulty knowing how to incorporate them during his / her teaching experience (e.g. Çalık & Ayas, 2005; Driver & Oldman, 1985; Fensham, Gunstone & White, 1994; Matthews, 2002). Ever since alternative conceptions have been seen as a starting point for further learning, much research has been conducted on various subjects such as force, motion, energy, power, work, heat, temperature, mass, weight and so forth. Undoubtedly, because of the fact that students encounter these concepts in their daily lives from an early age (Baser & Çataloglu, 2005; Senocak, Dilber, Sözbilir & Taskesenligil, 2003; Paik, Cho & Go, 2007), students’ ideas and alternative conceptions of heat and temperature is one of most studied areas in science education (Sözbilir, 2003). Further, these concepts are cornerstone for physics, biology and chemistry (Koh & Paik, 2002 cited in Paik, Cho & Go, 2007). These studies have reported that students hold alternative conceptions on the related concepts because of either its abstract structure (Aydogan, Gümüs & Gülçiçek, 2003; Baser & Çataloglu, 2005), or their earlier daily life experience or text books (DeBerg, 2008; Leite, 1999; Sözbilir, 2003) or cultural notions (Ericson, 1979; Harrison, Grayson & Treagust, 1999; Lubben, Netshisuaulu & Campell, 1999).Because the first author has been working as a science teacher, we have examined his 6 -13 year old students’ alternative conceptions in science. (e.g. Adawi, Berglund, Booth & Ingerman, 2002; Aydogan, Günes & Gülcicek, 2003; Bulus Kırıkkaya, Güllü, 2008; Ericson, 1979; Eryılmaz & Sürmeli, 2002; Sözbilir, 2003; Niaz, 2000; Kaptan & Korkmaz, 2001; Pathare & Pradhan, 2008; Paik et al., 2007; Senocak et al, 2003). Alternative conceptions studied were the following: (a) the temperature of an object depends on its size (Baser and Çataloglu, 2005; Erikson, 1979, 1980; Paik et al., 2007), (b) heat is form of energy (Erikson, 1979, 1980), (c) heat is a material substance (Bulus-Kırıkkaya and Güllü, 2008; Erikson, 1979, 1980), (d) there is no difference between heat and temperature (Baser and Çataloglu, 2005; Sözbilir, 2003; Tiberghien, 1985), (e) the time necessary for cooling and heating substances does not depend on volume and mass (Baser and Çataloglu, 2005), (f) temperature can flow from one substance to another (Baser and Çataloglu, 2005; Baser and Geban, 2007), and (g) there are two types of heat, cold heat and hot heat (Baser and Çataloglu, 2005; Baser and Geban, 2007; Erikson, 1979, 1980). Because of its importance, some studies have attempted to refute and overcome students’ alternative conceptions of ‘heat’ and ‘temperature’ by means of different conceptual change strategies such as conceptual change text (Akyüz, 2004; Baser & Geban, 2007), conceptual change theory of Posner et al. (1982) (Baser & Çataloglu, 2005; Baser, 2006a), worksheet (Gönen & Akgün, 2005), a designed program (Kalem, Tanel & Çallıca, 2002), text book style, textbook usage and K-W-L (What I Know, What I Want to Learn, What I Learned) (Akyüz, 2004), Microcomputer-Based Laboratories (Wiser, Kipman & Halkiadakis, 1988), an inquiry approach coupled with concept substitution strategies (Harrison et al., 1999), cognitive conflict (Baser, 2006b), meta-conceptual teaching on inducing a particularly problematic aspect of the conceptual changes (Wiser & Amin, 2001), a teaching model (Thomaz et al., 1995) and analogy (Perschard & Bitbol, 2008). In the light of the aforementioned studies, Wiser et al. (1988)confessed that there was no evidence that computer based curriculum facilitated conceptual change even though classroom interventions have helped students at problem solving level. Further, Taylor and Coll (1997) criticized that cognitive conflict may engender to reduce student’s confidence even though it has many advantages to accomplish conceptual change. Similarly, if the conceptual technique such as conceptual change text, analogy, worksheet etc. frequently use itself, students may be bored, hence, this may frustrate to achieve effective results (Çalık, 2006; Dole, 2000; Huddle, White & Rogers, 2000). Also, despite the fact that conceptual change text is effective in remedying students’ alternative conceptions, a hands-on activity that students experience explicitly may sometimes be more effective (Chambers & Andre, 1997). Since a teaching activity can be seen as a phase of conceptual elaboration, we assume that using different conceptual change techniques embedded within 5E model may completely diminish students’ alternative conceptions. That is, the authors recommend a new way to address alternative conceptions that the other methods (conceptual change text, change theory of Posner, worksheet, a design program, etc.) fail to properly address. By presenting a sample activity for teacher usage, we are planning to fill in a gap between teacher’s theoretical knowledge and their classroom behavior in practice for constructivism as addressed by Widodo, Duit and Müller (2002). Based on the tenets of constructivism, the purpose of this paper is to propose a 5E model on containing students’ alternative conceptions by means of conceptual change text, analogy and worksheet together. The model is appropriate for grade 5-8 students.Theoretical Framework
To facilitate applicability of constructivism, some models such as 3E, 4E, 5E and 7E are suggested. Even though the models have about similar steps, 5E is a popular version of constructivism (e.g. Hanuscin & Lee, 2007). Since each “E” displays part of the process of helping students’ learning sequence experiences to link prior knowledge with new concepts, this model consist of: engagement, exploration, explanation, elaboration, and evaluation (e.g. Abell & Volkman, 2006; Boddy, Watson & Aubusson, 2003; Bybee, Taylor, Gardner, Scotter, Powell, Westbrook & Landes, 2006). Why we preferred 5E model can be explained with difficulty of ‘elaboration’ (Nas, 2008). That is, students and teachers find the step ‘elaboration’ difficult to devise and implement. As a matter of fact, the second author’s experience also support this notion since the student teachers at the university have difficulty in designing and implementing the 5E and 7E models, especially the fourth step (elaboration) of the 5E model and the 4-6th steps (expanding, extending, exchanging) of the 7E model. Now we will outline what to do in each step.
Teaching Design
Because we prefer the 5E model, we will present each phase to clarify how we adapted the mentioned techniques.
Enter (Engaging) (5 or 10 minutes) Before implementing the activity, all students are taken to the schoolyard and divided into small groups. The teacher should get students to confront their own pre-existing ideas. In specific, (s) he asks initial questions at the top of the worksheet and create both class and group discussion. By observing them, (s)he can capture students’ alternative conceptions such as ‘there is no difference between heat and temperature’, ‘there are two types of heat, cold heat and hot heat’, and ‘heat is form of energy’ since concepts ‘heat’ and ‘temperature’ are very common for alternative conception researches.
Exploration (20 or 25 minutes)
Here, the teacher fosters the students to play a basketball game which is explained at the second part of worksheet (see Appendix 1). (S)he also encourages them to complete the table given in the worksheet. However, the students most probably concentrate on the game and not notice the special term as “shooting number and the number of played ball”. The teacher should especially emphasize this statement. In this process, even though all information is presented in worksheet, the teacher explains that in the game, think of your teacher as a heat source, think of yourself as a substance taking heat, think of the ball given to you in the game as heat, think of your shooting number as temperature. Then, they answer the following questions within their small groups by negotiating: ‘Explain the relationships between the heat and the temperature’, ‘Explain the differences of the heat and the temperature’. By doing this, students are able to make a connection between playing basketball and science in a contextual based manner. That is, the mentioned attempt intends that students say ‘a-ha’ moments (e.g. Metcalf & Tinker, 2004)
Being translated, please wait..
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ce48f/ce48f249138547446af6a8be2678a33941a77385" alt=""