Examination of pre and post argumentation quality of eighth-graders acquiring information from different sources in socioscientific issues

Esra Ergunt; Serkan Yılmaz

Makale detayları

Examination of pre and post argumentation quality of eighth-graders acquiring information from different sources in socioscientific issues

Yazarlar:

Esra Ergunt | Serkan Yılmaz

Yayıncı:

Kocaeli University

Ana Başlıklar:

Fen Bilgisi Eğitimi

Dergi:

Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.119-142

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001318683

pISSN:

2636-8846

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 This study, which examines the quality of verbal argumentation produced before and after receiving information about GMOs and base stations through research, presentations, and interviews, was conducted in a public secondary school in Ankara. The pilot study included 25 seventh-graders, while the main study involved 36 eighth-graders from the same school. The participants were initially selected through convenience sampling and then divided into research, presentation, and interview groups of 12 students each using criterion sampling. The data collection tools of this holistic multiple-case design study were classroom discussions, an argumentativeness scale, and concept cartoons. In the study, information sources were randomly assigned to three groups: the research group gathered information through research, the presentation group from an expert, and the interview group through three different interviews. Each group was divided into four subgroups of three students, each with similar argumentativeness scores but differing opinions on socioscientific issues. The groups participated in the practices before and after acquiring information; all small-group and whole-class discussions were audio-recorded. Transcribed data underwent content analysis, resulting in 152 sections of argumentation being identified. The highest number of argumentations occurred at level 2 in all groups, with frequencies gradually decreasing in subsequent levels. The research group produced the highest number of high-quality argumentations, while the interview group lagged behind. At all levels, more argumentation was produced for base stations than for GMOs. When compared to the previous process, more and higher-quality argumentations were produced in the post. Finally, some recommendations were made based on the results.

 This study, which examines the quality of verbal argumentation produced before and after receiving information about GMOs and base stations through research, presentations, and interviews, was conducted in a public secondary school in Ankara. The pilot study included 25 seventh-graders, while the main study involved 36 eighth-graders from the same school. The participants were initially selected through convenience sampling and then divided into research, presentation, and interview groups of 12 students each using criterion sampling. The data collection tools of this holistic multiple-case design study were classroom discussions, an argumentativeness scale, and concept cartoons. In the study, information sources were randomly assigned to three groups: the research group gathered information through research, the presentation group from an expert, and the interview group through three different interviews. Each group was divided into four subgroups of three students, each with similar argumentativeness scores but differing opinions on socioscientific issues. The groups participated in the practices before and after acquiring information; all small-group and whole-class discussions were audio-recorded. Transcribed data underwent content analysis, resulting in 152 sections of argumentation being identified. The highest number of argumentations occurred at level 2 in all groups, with frequencies gradually decreasing in subsequent levels. The research group produced the highest number of high-quality argumentations, while the interview group lagged behind. At all levels, more argumentation was produced for base stations than for GMOs. When compared to the previous process, more and higher-quality argumentations were produced in the post. Finally, some recommendations were made based on the results.

 This study, which examines the quality of verbal argumentation produced before and after receiving information about GMOs and base stations through research, presentations, and interviews, was conducted in a public secondary school in Ankara. The pilot study included 25 seventh-graders, while the main study involved 36 eighth-graders from the same school. The participants were initially selected through convenience sampling and then divided into research, presentation, and interview groups of 12 students each using criterion sampling. The data collection tools of this holistic multiple-case design study were classroom discussions, an argumentativeness scale, and concept cartoons. In the study, information sources were randomly assigned to three groups: the research group gathered information through research, the presentation group from an expert, and the interview group through three different interviews. Each group was divided into four subgroups of three students, each with similar argumentativeness scores but differing opinions on socioscientific issues. The groups participated in the practices before and after acquiring information; all small-group and whole-class discussions were audio-recorded. Transcribed data underwent content analysis, resulting in 152 sections of argumentation being identified. The highest number of argumentations occurred at level 2 in all groups, with frequencies gradually decreasing in subsequent levels. The research group produced the highest number of high-quality argumentations, while the interview group lagged behind. At all levels, more argumentation was produced for base stations than for GMOs. When compared to the previous process, more and higher-quality argumentations were produced in the post. Finally, some recommendations were made based on the results.

 Baz istasyonları ve GDOlar hakkında araştırma, sunum ve röportaj yollarıyla bilgi edinmeden önce ve sonra üretilen sözlü argümantasyonların kalitesini inceleyen bu çalışma, Ankarada bir kamu ortaokulunda yürütülmüştür. Pilot çalışma 25 yedinci sınıf öğrencisiyle, asıl çalışma ise aynı okuldaki 36 sekizinci sınıf öğrencisi ile yapılmıştır. Katılımcılar öncelikle uygun örnekleme yoluyla seçilmiş, daha sonra ölçüt örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak her biri 12 öğrenciden oluşan araştırma, sunum ve röportaj gruplarına ayrılmıştır. Bütüncül çoklu durum desenli bu çalışmanın veri toplama araçları sınıf içi tartışmalar, tartışmacılık ölçeği ve kavram karikatürleridir. Araştırmada bilgi edinme kaynakları üç gruba rastgele atanmıştır. Araştırma grubu bilgiyi araştırma yoluyla, sunum grubu bilgiyi bir uzman aracılığıyla, röportaj grubu ise bilgiyi üç farklı kişi ile görüşerek elde etmiştir. Her grupta, tartışmacılık puanları açısından benzer ancak sosyobilimsel konulardaki görüşleri açısından farklı üçer öğrenciden oluşan dört alt grup oluşturulmuştur. Gruplar bilgi edinme süreçleri öncesinde ve sonrasında argümantasyon süreçlerine katılmış, küçük grup ve toplu sınıf tartışmaları gerçekleştirilmiş ve tamamı ses kaydına alınmıştır. Deşifre edilen yazılı döküme içerik analizi uygulanmıştır. Belirlenen 152 argümantasyon bölümü için tüm gruplarda en fazla argümantasyon 2. seviyede üretilmiş ve sonraki seviyelerde frekanslar giderek azalmıştır. En fazla sayıda kaliteli sözlü argümantasyon araştırma grubunda üretilirken, röportaj grubu bu açıdan son sırada yer almıştır. Tüm seviyelerde baz istasyonları için GDOlara göre daha fazla argümantasyon üretilmiştir. Son süreçte ise öncekine oranla daha fazla ve daha kaliteli argümantasyon üretildiği görülmüştür. Son olarak, araştırma sonuçları doğrultusunda bazı önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

Makale detayları

Examination of pre and post argumentation quality of eighth-graders acquiring information from different sources in socioscientific issues

Yazarlar:

Esra Ergunt | Serkan Yılmaz

Yayıncı:

Kocaeli University

Ana Başlıklar:

Fen Bilgisi Eğitimi

Dergi:

Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.119-142

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001318683

pISSN:

2636-8846

argumentation

socioscientific issue

quality of argumentation

science educationargümantasyon

sosyobilimsel konu

argümantasyon kalitesi

fen eğitimi

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Esra Ergunt | Serkan Yılmaz

Yayıncı: Kocaeli University

Ana Başlıklar: Fen Bilgisi Eğitimi

Dergi: Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.119-142

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 5/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001318683

pISSN: 2636-8846

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Esra Ergunt | Serkan Yılmaz

Yayıncı:

Kocaeli University

Ana Başlıklar:

Fen Bilgisi Eğitimi

Dergi:

Kocaeli Üniversitesi Eğitim Dergisi Vol.7 Issue 1, pp.119-142

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001318683

pISSN:

2636-8846