Email the author 
.png)
.png)
Promoting Students' Understanding of the Concept of Pressure: Active Learning Environment versus Traditional One
Abstract
One of the topics students have understanding difficulties in science is pressure. The study investigates the effectiveness of an active-learning environment on the students' understanding of the concept of pressure. The sample consisted of 30 students from a public secondary school in Turkey. This study used a pre-test, post-test, quasi-experimental research design with a control group. Ten lessons were conducted with both groups. The control group was taught using the coursebook's two activities, while the experimental group was taught using additional activities and models. After the treatment, a post-test was given to both groups to determine the active-learning environment's effectiveness on the students' understanding of the concept of pressure. Interviews were also conducted with the experimental group. The post-test results showed a significant difference in favor of the experimental group. It was determined that students in both groups had misunderstandings of the topic before and after instruction. The interviews showed that the experimental group students perceive that the active learning environment facilitated better and easier learning. The conclusion that can be drawn is that the active learning environment was more effective for the students in the experimental group to learn about the concept of pressure.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Armbruster, P., Patel, M., Johnson, E., & Weiss, M. (2009). Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 8(3), 203-213. doi: 10.1187/cbe.09-03-0025
Besson, U. (2010). Calculating and understanding: formal models and causal explanations in science, common reasoning and physics teaching. Science & Education, 19, 225-257. doi: 10.1007/s11191-009-9203-9
Besson, U., & Viennot, L. (2004). Using models at the mesoscopic scale in teaching physics: two experimental interventions in solid friction and fluid statics. International Journal of Science Education, 26(9), 1083-1110. doi: 10.1080/0950069042000205396
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No.1. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Burrowes, P. A. (2003). A student-centered approach to teaching general biology that really works: lord's constructivist model put to a test. American Biology Teacher, 65(7), 491-494. doi: 10.1662/0002-7685(2003)065[0491:ASATTG]2.0.CO;2
Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & DeLeeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: a theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43. doi: 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90017-5
Chiu, P. H. P., & Cheng, S. H. (2017). Effects of active learning classrooms on student learning: a two-year empirical investigation on student perceptions and academic performance. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(2), 269-279. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2016.1196475
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education. Routledge: New York.
Engel Clough, E., & Driver, R. (1985). What do children understand about pressure in fluids? Research in Science and Technological Education, 3, 133–144. doi: 10.1080/0263514850030106a
Faulconer, E. K., Griffith, J., Wood, B., Acharrya, S., & Roberts, D. (2018). A comparison of online, video synchronous, and traditional learning modes for an introductory undergraduate physics course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(5), 404-411. doi: 10.1007/s10956-018-9732-6
Feng, S. L., & Tua, H. L. (2005). Using ARCS model to promote 11th graders' motivation an achievement in learning about acids and bases. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3, 463-484. doi: 10.1007/s10763-004-6828-7
Fernandez, F. B. (2017). Action research in the physics classroom: the impact of authentic, inquiry based learning or instruction on the learning of thermal physics. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 3(3), 1-20. doi:10.1186/s41029-017-0014-z
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Julia, C., & Antoli, J. O. (2018). Impact of implementing a long-term stem-based active learning course on students' motivation. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1-25. doi: 10.1007/s10798-018-9441-8
Kariotoglou, P., & Psillos, D. (1993). Pupils' pressure models and their implications for instruction. Research in Science & Technological Education, 11(1), 95-108. doi: 10.1080/0263514930110109
Kariotoglou, P., & Psillos, D. (2019). Teaching and learning pressure and fluids. Fluids, 4(4), 194-204. doi: 10.3390/fluids4040194
Keller, J. W., & Mattie, N. (1991). Teaching effectiveness: comparisons between traditional and nontraditional college students. Innovative Higher Education, 15(2), 177-183. doi: 10.1007/BF00898029
Kerlinger, F. N. (1970). Foundations of Behavioral Research. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Killian, M., & Bastas, H. (2015). The effects of an active learning strategy on students' attitudes and students' performances in introductory sociology classes. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 15(3), 53-67. doi: 10.14434/josotl.v15i3.12960
Kim, J. S. (2005). The effects of a constructivist teaching approach on student academic achievement, self-concept, and learning strategies. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6(1), 7-19. doi: 10.1007/BF03024963
Kim, K., Sharma, P., Land, S. M., & Furlong, K. P. (2013). Effects of active learning on enhancing student critical thinking in an undergraduate general science course. Innovative High Education, 38, 223-235. doi: 10.1007/s10755-012-9236-x
Kuethe, O. D. (1991). Confusion about pressure. The Physics Teacher, 29(1), 20-22. doi: 10.1119/1.2343194
Kuvac, M., & Koc, I. (2018). The effect of problem-based learning on the environmental attitudes of preservice science teachers. Educational Studies, 1-23. doi: 10.1080/03055698.2018.1443795
Limniou, M., & Schermbrucker, I., & Lyons, M. (2018). Traditional and flipped classroom approaches delivered by two different teachers: the student perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 797-817. doi: 10.1007/s10639-017-9636-8
Lord, T. R. (1997). A comparison between traditional and constructivist teaching in college biology. Innovative Higher Education, 21(3), 197-216. doi: 10.1007/BF01243716
Lorsbach, A., & Tobin, K. (1995). Toward a critical approach to the study of learning environments in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 25(1), 19-32. doi: 10.1007/BF02356457
Marbach-Ad, G., & Sokolove, P. G. (2002). The use of e-mail and in-class writing to facilitate student–instructor interaction in large-enrollment traditional and active learning classes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(2), 109-119. doi: 10.1023/A:1014609328479
McCarthy, J. P., & Anderson, L. (2000). Active learning techniques versus traditional teaching styles: two experiments from history and political science. Innovative Higher Education, 24(4), 279-294. doi: 10.1023/B:IHIE.0000047415.48495.05
Michael, J. A. (1998). Students' misconceptions about perceived physiological responses. Advances in Physiology Education, 274(6), 90-98. doi: 10.1152/advances.1998.274.6.S90.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M.. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. London: Sage Publications.
Morosan, C., M. Dawson, & Whalen, E. A. (2017). Using active learning activities to increase student outcomes in an information technology course. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 29(4), 147-157. doi: 10.1080/10963758.2017.1382369
Niemi, H., Nevgi, A., & Aksit, F. (2016). Active learning promoting student teachers' professional competences in Finland and Turkey. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(4), 471-490. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2016.1212835
Owen, S., Dickson, D., Stanisstreet, M., & Boyes, E. (2008). Teaching physics: students' attitudes towards different learning activities. Research in Science & Technological Education, 26(2), 113-128. doi: 10.1080/02635140802036734
Park, E. L., & Choi, B. K. (2014). Transformation of classroom spaces: traditional versus active learning classroom in colleges. Higher Education, 68, 749–771. doi: 10.1007/s10734-014-9742-0
Prescott, A., & Mitchelmore, M. (2009). The impact of teacher misconceptions about projectile motion on student learning. Cosmed Proceedings International Conference on Science and Mathematics Education, 46-53.
Psillos, D., & Kariotoglou, P. (1999). Teaching fluids: intended knowledge and students' actual conceptual evolution. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 17-38. doi: 10.1080/095006999290813
Sere, M. G. (1982). A study of some frameworks used by pupils aged 11 to 13 years in the interpretation of air pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 299- 309. doi: 10.1080/0140528820040309
Sesen, B. A., & Tarhan, L. (2011). Active-learning versus teachercentered instruction for learning acids and bases. Research in Science & Technological Education, 29(2), 205-226. doi: 10.1080/02635143.2011.581630
She, H. C. (2002). Concepts of higher hierarchical level required more dual situational learning
events for conceptual change: a study of students' conceptual changes on air pressure and buoyancy. International Journal of Science Education, 24(9), 981–996. doi: 10.1080/09500690110098895
She, H. C. (2005). Promoting students' learning of air pressure concepts: the interrelationship of teaching approaches and student learning characteristics. The Journal of Experimental Education, 74(1), 29- 51. doi: 10.3200/JEXE.74.1.29-52
Şahin, Ç., Akbulut, H. İ., & Çepni, S. (2012). Teaching of solid pressure with animation, analogy and worksheet to primary 8th students. The Journal of Instructional Technologies & Teacher Education, 1(1), 22-51.
Taraban, R., Box, C., Myers, R., Pollard, R., & Bowen, C. W. (2007). Effects of active-learning experiences on achievement, attitudes and behaviours in high school biology. Journal of Research in Science, 44(7), 960-979. doi: 10.1002/tea.20183
Taylor, N., & Lucas, K. B. (2000). Implementing and evaluating a sequence of instruction on gaseous pressure with preservice primary school student teachers. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 46(4), 9-34.
Towns, M. H., & Grant, E. R. (1997). I believe I will go out of this class actually knowing something: cooperative learning activities in physical chemistry. Research in Science Teaching, 34(8), 819–835. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199710)34:8<819::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-Y
Tural, G. (2015). Active learning environment with lenses in geometric optics. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 16(1), 1-18.
Tural, G., & Tarakçı, D. (2017). Effects of physical models and simulations to understand daily life applications of electromagnetic induction. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(3), 292-307. doi: 10.1080/02635143.2017.1295370
Tytler, R. (1992). Children's explanations of air pressure generated by small group activities. Research in Science Education, 22(1), 393-402. doi: 10.1007/BF02356920
Tytler, R. (1998). Children’s' conceptions of air pressure: exploring the nature of conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 20(8), 929- 958. doi: 10.1080/0950069980200803
Yager, R. E., Choi, A., Yager, S. O., & Akcay, H. (2009). Comparing science learning among 4th-, 5th-, and 6th- grade students: STS versus textbook-based instruction. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 15-24. doi: 10.1007/BF03173681
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/mimbar-sd.v7i3.29391
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2020 Mimbar Sekolah Dasar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View Mimbar Sekolah Dasar Stats