Application and evaluation of biology laboratory experiments with computer-based digital experimental tools
Keywords:
Biology education, Digital experimental tools, Laboratory practicesAbstract
It is widely accepted that learning-science-by-doing and/or facilitating meaningful experience is preferred over rote memorization in the science classrooms. To this end, this study shows that using the computer-based digital experimental tools in the biology laboratory can function as activities that can facilitate their learning to be more effective, and foster positive attitudes towards learning science and high level of self-efficacy in the subject area. The aim of this research is to determine the students' perception on their self-efficacy in teaching science, their attitudes towards the laboratory course, and their self-efficacy in using the computer-based digital experimental tools. The research was carried out with 28 students who were registered in the Department of Biology Education, at a major university in Turkey. The research employed one group pretest-posttest model experimental design. As a data collection tools, Teaching Self-Efficacy Scale developed by Tschannen-Moran & Hoy (2001), Laboratory Self Efficacy Scale developed by (2009) and Laboratory Attitude Scale developed by Ekici (2002) were used in this study. The analyses of the study were carried out using SPSS 20 program. The descriptive statistics, normality test, T-test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used. The results of the research showed that the computer-based learning with digital experimental tools had a positive impact on the students' perception on their self-efficacy for teaching science and self-efficacy levels for using the computer-based digital technology.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Alkan, C. (1988). Bilgisayar destekli öğrenme modülleri [Computer-based Learning Modules]. A.Ü. Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 21, 255-263.
Ayas, A., Cepni, S. & Akdeniz, A. R. (1994). Fen Bilimleri Eğitiminde Laboratuvarın Yeri ve Önemi [The Role and Importance of Laboratory in Science Education]. Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi, 205, 7-11.
Aydin, M. (2005). Bütünleştirici öğrenme kuramına uygun bilgisayar destekli dijital deney araçları ile fen laboratuvar deneyleri tasarlama ve uygulama [Design and implementation of science laboratory activities using data logger and constructivist laboratory approach] Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü (Unpublished master's thesis).
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press.
Boniec, M. L., Valazquez, A. G. & Joyce, A. (2011). Impact of data loggers on science teaching and learning . European Schoolnet (Eun Partnership Aisbl).
Capa, Y., Cakiroglu, J. & Sarikaya, H. (2005). The development and validation of a Turkish version of the teachers’ sense of efficacy scale. Eğitim ve Bilim, 30(137): 74–81.
Ekici, G. (2002). Biyoloji öğretmenlerinin laboratuvar dersine yönelik tutumlarının farklı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi [Investigation of biology teachers’ attitudes for laboratory courses in terms of different variations]. V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, 22- 25 Eylül, ODTÜ, Ankara.
Ekici, G. (2009). Biyoloji öğretmenlerinin laboratuvar kullanımı öz-yeterlik algılarının incelenmesi [An examination of the biology teachers’ laboratory self-efficacy perceptions]. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3), 25-35.
Gul, S. & Sozbilir, M. (2015). Biology education in research trends in Turkey. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 93-109.
Guven, B. & Uzman, E. (2006). Ortaöğretim coğrafya dersi tutum ölçeği geliştirme çalışması [The development of scale for secondary geography course attitude]. Kastamonu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(2), 527-536.
Hancock, D. R., Bray, M., & Nason, S. A. (2002). Influencing university students’ achievement and motivation in a technology course. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 365-372.
Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi [Scientific Research Method]. Ankara: Nobel Yayınevi, Ankara.
Kennedy, D., & Finn, S. (2000). The use of datalogging in teaching physics and chemistry in second-level schools in Ireland. The Natıonal Centre For Technology In Educatıon And The Department Of Educatıon And Scıence, University College Irish Science Teachers’ Cork Association.Newton, L. R. (2000). Data-logging in practical science: research and reality. International Journal of Science Education, 22(12), 1247-1259.
Ng, P., & Yeung, Y. (2002). Implications of data-logging on physics experiments: A preliminary study, ınnovate ideas in science teaching theories and examplars. The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong.
Olgun, M. P. (2001). Okul Öncesi eğitim kurumlarında çalışan eğitimcilerin bilgisayar destekli eğitim hakkındaki görüş ve tutumlarının incelenmesi [Understanding preschool teachers thoughts and attitudes toward computer assisted introduction]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
Pektas, M., Turkmen, L. & Solak, K. (2006). The effect of computer assisted instruction in the learning of urinary system and digestıve system units for the science teacher candidates. Kastamonu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2: 465-472.
Riza, E. T. (1997). Eğitim teknolojileri uygulamaları [Educational Technology Practices]. Anadolu Matbaası, İzmir.
Rodrigues, S., Pearce, J., & Livett, M. (2001). Using video analysis or data loggers during practical work in first year physics. Educational Studies, 27(1), 31-43.
Rogers, L., & Wild, P. (1996). Data-Logging: Efffects On Practical Science. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 12 (3), 130-145.
Senemoglu, N. (2001). Gelişim öğrenme ve öğretim [Development of learning and teaching]. Gazi Kitapevi, Ankara.
Sonmez, V. (2004). Öğretmen el kitabı.[Teachers’ Handbook]. Anı Yayınları, Ankara.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. London: Sage Publication.
Tezbasaran, A. A. (1997). Öğretim ve Öğrenmede Bilgisayara Dayalı Bilgi Teknolojileri [Information Technologies of Computer-based Learning and Teaching]. Bilim Teknik Dergisi, 355, 54-55.
Thornton, R., & Sokoloff, D. R. (1998). Assessing student learning of Newton’s law: The force and motion conceptual evaluation and the evaluation of active learning laboratory and lecture curricula. American Journal of Physics, 664, 338-352.
Usun, S. (2000). Dünya’da ve Türkiye’de bilgisayar destekli eğitim [Computer-based Learning in the World and Turkey]. İstanbul: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
Wood, R. E. & Bandura, A. (1989). Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards on self-regulation of complex decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(5), 805–814.
Yager, R. E. (2000). A vision for what science education should be like for the first 25 years of a new millenium. School Science and Mathematics, 100(6), 327-342.
Yaman, M. & Soran, H. (2000). Türkiye’de ortaöğretim kurumlarında biyoloji öğretiminin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of secondary education in biology teaching in Turkey]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,18, 229–237.
Yılmaz, M. (2007). Sınıf öğretmeni yetiştirmede teknoloji eğitimi.[Technology education for class teacher training]. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(1), 155-167.
Yigit T, N. & Akdeniz, A. R. (2003). The effect of computer-assisted activities on student achievement in physics course: electric circuits sample. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(3), 99-113.
YOK/Dünya Bankası Milli Eğitim Geliştirme Projesi, Öğretmen Eğitimi Dizisi. (1997). İlköğretim fen öğretimi. Ankara. [YOK/World Bank National Education Development Project, Teacher Training Series. Primary science education.]
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-efficacy and educational development. In (Ed. A. Bandura) Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp.202-231). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors can retain copyright, while granting the journal right of first publication. Alternatively, authors can transfer copyright to the journal, which then permits authors non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in an open access archive. In addition, Creative Commons can be consulted for flexible copyright licenses.
©1999 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
