Educational Research and Reviews

  • Abbreviation: Educ. Res. Rev.
  • Language: English
  • ISSN: 1990-3839
  • DOI: 10.5897/ERR
  • Start Year: 2006
  • Published Articles: 2009

Full Length Research Paper

The effect of fire context on the conceptual understanding of students: “expansion-contraction”

Sibel, Er Nas
  • Sibel, Er Nas
  • Department of Elementary Education, Fatih Faculty of Education, Karadeniz Technical University, Turkey.
  • Google Scholar
Tülay Şenel Çoruhlu
  • Tülay Åženel Çoruhlu
  • Department of Elementary Education, Fatih Faculty of Education, Karadeniz Technical University, Turkey.
  • Google Scholar
Arzu Kirman Bilgin
  • Arzu Kirman Bilgin
  • Department of Elementary Education, Faculty of Education, Kafkas University, Turkey.
  • Google Scholar


  •  Received: 03 August 2016
  •  Accepted: 24 October 2016
  •  Published: 10 November 2016

References

Adadan E, Trundle KC, Irving KE (2010). Exploring grade 11 students' conceptual pathways of the particulate nature of matter in the context of multirepresentational instruction. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 47(8):1004-1035. 
Crossref

 

Adbo K, Taber KS (2009). Learners' mental models of the particle nature of matter: A study of 16‐year‐old Swedish science students. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 31(6):757-786.
Crossref

 
 

AÅŸçı Z, Özkan Åž, Tekkaya C (2001). Students' misconceptionsabout reaspiration: A cross-age study. Educ. Sci. 26(120): 29-36.

 
 

Ayas A, Özmen H (2002). A study of students' level of understanding of the particulate nature of matter at secondary school level. BoÄŸaziçi University J. Educ. 19(2):45-60 [in Turkish].

 
 

Barker V, Millar R (1999). Students' reasoning about basic chemical

 
 

reactions: what changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? Int. J. Sci. Educ. 21(6):645-665. 
Crossref

 
 

Barker V, Millar R (2000). Students' reasoning about basic chemical thermodynamics and chemical bonding: what changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? Int. J. Sci. Edu. 22(11):1171-1200. 
Crossref

 
 

Bayram G, Kibar FS (2014). Ortaokul fen bilimleri 5 ders kitabı [Elementary science 5th textbook]. Ankara: Sevgi Publishing.

 
 

Belt ST, Leisvik MJ, Hyde AJ, Overton TL (2005). Using a context-based approach to undergraduate chemistry teaching–a case study for introductory physical chemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 6(3):166-179. 
Crossref

 
 

Bennett J, Gräsel C, Parchmann I, Waddington D (2005). Context-based and conventional approaches to teaching chemistry: Comparing teachers' views. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 27(13):1521-1547.
Crossref

 
 

Bennett J, Hogarth S, Lubben F (2003). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and Science-Technology-Society (STS) approaches in the teaching of secondary science. EPPI-Centre and University of York.

 
 

Burbules NC, Linn MC (1991). Science education and philosophy of science: Congruence or contradiction? Int. J. Sci. Edu. 13(3):227-241. 
Crossref

 
 

Büyüköztürk Åž (2004). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Data analysis handbook for social sciences]. Ankara: PegemA Publication.

 
 

CORD (1999). Algebra 1: Mathematics in Context, South-Western Educational.

 
 

Crawford ML (2001). Teaching Contextually: Research, Rationale, and Techniques for Improving Student Motivation and Achievement in Mathematics and Science, CCI Publishing, Waco, Texas.

 
 

Çepni S, Ayas A, Akdeniz AR, Özmen H, YiÄŸit N, Ayvacı HÅž (2005). Fen ve teknoloji öÄŸretimi [Science and technology teaching]. Ankara: Pegema Publishing.

 
 

Er Nas S (2013). Evaluating effectiveness of the guide material about transferring concepts to daily life in elaborate stage in matter and heat unit. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Karadeniz Technical University, Institute of Education, Trabzon, Turkey [in Turkish].

 
 

Gilbert JK (2006). On the nature of "Context" in chemical education Int. J. Sci. Educ. 28(9):957-976. 
Crossref

 
 

Gilbert JK, Bulte AM, Pilot A (2011). Concept development and transfer in context‐based science education. Int. J. Sci. Edu. 33(6):817-837. 
Crossref

 
 

Griffiths AK, Preston KR (1992). Grade‐12 students' misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 29(6):611-628. 
Crossref

 
 

Kikas E (1998). The impact of teaching on students' definations and explanationsof astronomical phenomena. Learn. Instr. 8(5):439-454. 
Crossref

 
 

King D (2012). New perspectives on context-based chemistry education: using a dialectical sociocultural approach to view teaching and learning. Stud. Sci. Educ. 48(1):51-87. 
Crossref

 
 

King DT (2009). Context-based chemistry: creating opportunities for fluid transitions between concepts and context. Teach. Sci.: J. Aus. Sci. Teacher. Assoc. 55(4):13-19.

 
 

King DT, Winner E, Ginns I (2011). Outcomes and implications of one teacher's approach to context-based science in the middle years. Teach. Sci. 57(2):26-30.

 
 

Akgül ME, Åžentürk K (2001). Çocukta "yüzme ve batma" kavramlarının geliÅŸimi (Developing of the child's "floating and sinking" concepts). Yeni Binyılın Başında Türkiye'de Fen Bilimleri EÄŸitimi Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı (Science Education Symposium in Turkey at the Beginning of the New Millennium Announcement Book), 505–508, Maltepe University, Istanbul [in Turkish].

 
 

Marek EA (1986). They misunderstand, but they'll pass. Sci. Teach. pp. 32-35.

 
 

Mayoh K, Knutton S (1997). Using out‐of‐school experience in science lessons: reality or rhetoric? Int. J. Sci. Educ. 19(7):849-867. 
Crossref

 
 

Moore T, Harrison A (2007). Floating and sinking: Everyday science in middle school. 1-14. 

 
 

Nakhleh MB (1992). Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. J. Chem. Educ. 69(3):191. 
Crossref

 
 

Navarra A (2006). Achieving Pedagogical Equity in the Classroom, Cord Publishing. Waco, Texas, USA.

 
 

Özmen H, Kenan O (2007). Determination of the Turkish primary students' views about the particulate nature of matter. Asia-Pacific For. Sci. Learn. Teach. 8(1):1-15.

 
 

Özmen, H. (2003). Chemistry student teachers' levels of linking their knowledge with daily life about acid and base concepts. Kastamonu Educ. J. 11 (2):317-324 [in Turkish].

 
 

Ramsden JM (1997). How does a context-based approach influence understanding of key chemical ideas at 16+? Int. J. Sci. Educ. 19(6):697-710. 
Crossref

 
 

Richey RC (2000). The future role of Robert M. Gagné in instructional design. The Legacy of Robert M. Gagne pp. 255-281.

 
 

Stolk MJ, Bulte AMW, de Jong O, Pilot A (2009). Towards a framework for a professional development programme: empowering teachers for context-based chemistry education. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 10(2):164-175. 
Crossref

 
 

Tharenou P, Donohue R, Cooper B (2007). Management Research Methods. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Crossref

 
 

Ültay N, Çalık M (2012). A thematic review of studies into the effectiveness of context-based chemistry curricula. J. Sci. Educ. Tech. 21:686-701. 
Crossref

 
 

Ünal S, CoÅŸtu B (2005). Problematic issue for students: Does it sink or float? Asia-Pasific For. Sci. Learn. Teach. 6(1):1.

 
 

Valanides N (2000). Primary student teachers'understandıng of the particulate nature of matter and its transformatıons during dissolving. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 1(2):249-262. 
Crossref