8/2017 vol. 13
Stats
CC-BY 4.0
Get citation
The Use of Fables in Science Laboratory
Hatice Kayhan 1
,
 
Behbood Mohammadzadeh 1
,
 
Sevilay Atmaca 2
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Cyprus International University
 
2
Freelance Researcher, TURKEY
 
 
Online publication date: 2017-07-12
 
 
Publication date: 2017-07-27
 
 
Corresponding author
Behbood Mohammadzadeh   

Cyprus International University, Cyprus International University, Faculty of Education, ELT Department, 90000 Lefkosa, Cyprus
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(8):4471-4480
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00941a
 
 
Article (PDF)
References (39)
 
KEYWORDS
science education
fables
creative writing
 
TOPICS
Science Education
 
ABSTRACT
In this study, undergraduate students were asked to construct fables which occurred in science laboratory. A fable is a type of story which mainly give moral lessons and put forward the principle of life. According to the directions, the students used “rules in laboratory”, “safety cautions”, “laboratory materials” and “first aid principles” in a correct manner. Research group were chosen from Department of Elementary School Education students. Students’ fables were marked with rubrics developed by the researchers. In the marking process, general qualifications of fables and basic principles of science laboratory were questioned in a correct manner. Data was examined by using “code and theme list” to “content analysis technique”. As a result, fables presented and information about their true values were focused on. This study is thought to make contributions in terms of the original contributions for researchers and teachers who are seeking innovations in science education and laboratory techniques in terms of the application.
 
REFERENCES (39)
1.
Avwiri, H. E. (2016). Emerging Trends in Science Education in a Dynamic Academic Environment. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(2), 31-38.
Google Scholar
 
 
2.
Böyük, U., & Demir, S. (2010). Fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretmenlerinin laboratuvar çalışmalarına yönelik yeterlik görüşlerinin farklı değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. TUBAV Bilim Dergisi, 4(3), 81-83.
Google Scholar
 
 
3.
Burnett, C., & Myers, J. (2002) ‘Beyond the frame’: exploring children’s literacy practices. Reading, 36(2), 56–62.
Google Scholar
 
 
4.
Carter, R. (2004) Language and Creativity. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
 
 
5.
Crenshaw, P., Hale, E., & Harper, S. (2011). Producing intellectual labour in the classroom: the utilization of a critical thinking model to help students take command of their thinking. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(7), 13–22.
Google Scholar
 
 
6.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Google Scholar
 
 
7.
Dorion, K. R. (2009). Science through drama: A multiple case exploration of the characteristics of drama activities used in secondary science lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2247-2270.
Google Scholar
 
 
8.
Eilks, I. (2015). Science education and education for sustainable development-justifications, models, practices and perspectives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(1), 149-158.
Google Scholar
 
 
9.
Engel, L. C., & Ortloff, D. H. (2009). From the local to the supranational: curriculum reform and the production of the ideal citizen in two federal systems, Germany and Spain, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(2), 179-198.
Google Scholar
 
 
10.
Gannon, S. (2013). From a wonderful story to the no-nonsense facts: affect, knowledge and sexual citizenship in pedagogical texts for young children and their parents, Sex Education, 13(4), 371-382.
Google Scholar
 
 
11.
Geertsen, H. R. (2003). Rethinking thinking about higher-level thinking. Teaching Sociology, 31, 1–19.
Google Scholar
 
 
12.
Güleryüz, H. (2002) Yaratıcı Çocuk Edebiyatı. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
Google Scholar
 
 
13.
Forawi, S. A. (2016). Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 20, 52-62.
Google Scholar
 
 
14.
Hale, A. (1984). Safety management for outdoor program leadership. Unpublished manuscript. In Camille J. Bunting, (2006). Interdisciplinary teaching through outdoor education. Newzeland: Human Kinetics.
Google Scholar
 
 
15.
Hançer, H. H., Şensoy, Ö., & Yıldırım, H. İ. (2003). İlköğretimde çağdaş fen bilgisi öğretiminin önemi ve nasıl olması gerektiği üzerine bir değerlendirme. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 83.
Google Scholar
 
 
16.
Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science: Towards a personalized approach. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Google Scholar
 
 
17.
Lunnetta, V. N., Hofstein, A., & Clough, M. P. (2007). Learning and teaching in the school science laboratory: an analysis of research, theory and practice. In N. Lederman, & S. Abel (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 393–441). Mahwah, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Google Scholar
 
 
18.
Halonen, J. S. (1995). Demystifying critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 75–81.
Google Scholar
 
 
19.
Karasar, N. (2006). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel yayın dağıtım.
Google Scholar
 
 
20.
Kroeber, A.L. (2016). Animal tales of the Eskimo, The Journal of American Folklore, 12(44), 17-23.
Google Scholar
 
 
21.
Oğuzkan, F. (2006). Çocuk Edebiyatı. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Google Scholar
 
 
22.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expended source book qualitative data analysis. London: Sage Publication.
Google Scholar
 
 
23.
May, R. (1975). The courage to create. New York: Norton.
Google Scholar
 
 
24.
Nickerson, R. S. (1999). Enhancing creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp.392–430). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
 
 
25.
Nelli, P. (2009). Citizenship and nationality in changing Europe: a comparative study of the aims of citizenship education in Russia and Finnish national education policy texts. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41(6), 723-744.
Google Scholar
 
 
26.
Ness, R. (2015). Promoting innovative thinking. American Journal of Public Health, 105, 114–118.
Google Scholar
 
 
27.
Reis, P., & Galvão, C. (2007). Reflecting on Scientists’ Activity Based on Science Fiction Stories Written by Secondary Students. International Journal of Science Education, 29(10), 1245-1260.
Google Scholar
 
 
28.
Roth, W-M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science Education as/for Participation in the Community. 88(2), 263–291.
Google Scholar
 
 
29.
Silman, F. & Caglar, M. (2010). A Comparative overview of citizenship education in Cyprus. International Review of Education, 56(5-6), 671-682.
Google Scholar
 
 
30.
Solbrekke, T. D, Heggen, K., & Engebretsen, E. (2014). Ambitions and responsibilities: A textual analysis of the Norwegian national curriculum regulations for nursing education. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(4), 479-494.
Google Scholar
 
 
31.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21.
Google Scholar
 
 
32.
Scott, S. (2008). Perceptions of students’ learning critical thinking through debate in a technology classroom: a case study. The Journal of Technology Studies, 7(1), 39–44.
Google Scholar
 
 
33.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–15). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
 
 
34.
Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93–105.
Google Scholar
 
 
35.
Tobin, K. (1998). ‘Sociocultural perspectives on the teaching and learning of science’, in M. Larochelle, N. Bednarz and J. Garrison (Eds.) Constructivism and Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 195–212.
Google Scholar
 
 
36.
Toplis, R, & Allen, M. (2012). ‘I do and I understand? Practical work and laboratory use in United Kingdom schools. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(1), 3-9.
Google Scholar
 
 
37.
Watts, M. (2001). Science and poetry: passion v. prescription in school science? International Journal of Science Education, 23(2), 197-208.
Google Scholar
 
 
38.
Wallace, B., Berry, A., & Cave, D. (2009). Teaching problem solving and thinking skills through science. Abington, Oxon: Routledge.
Google Scholar
 
 
39.
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2000). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Google Scholar
 
 
Share
Send by email
RELATED ARTICLE
Science teaching in BRICS: A systematic review of pedagogical approaches and challenges
The concept of pH and its logarithmic scale: A Micro Bit experience through inquiry, modeling, and computational thinking
A bibliometric analysis covering the relevant literature on science anxiety over two decades
Inquiry skills teaching and its relationship with UAE secondary school students’ critical thinking: Systematic review of science teachers’ perspectives
A systematic literature review about local wisdom and sustainability: Contribution and recommendation to science education
Indexes
 
Keywords index
Topics index
Authors index
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
Scroll to top