 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 12, Issue 1, Article 7 (Jun., 2011) |
Learning occurs through the individual’s own construction but it can’t be realized by a teacher (Driscoll, 1994; Nieswandt, 2001). In traditional science lessons, teachers come to teach and students memorize or mimic their acts. Thus, most of students feel that science is one of the most difficult subjects to learn and one can not apply it to the everyday life (Ghani, 2006). Further, students hate learning science (Ghani, 2006). Furthermore, science is not popular among students (aged 14-16) in the world (Sjøberg & Schreiner, 2006). More often, teachers hear from students in classes questions like “why do I have to know this information and how will I ever use it in the future?”(Ipek, 2007). As a consequence, students entering primary education are often reported to have weak science background with very few students studying the physical sciences at the upper secondary levels, and are often reported to have negative attitudes toward science (Peterson & Treagust, 1997; Speedy, 1989). Based on this premise, numerous studies have been conducted to determine the factors that affect the students’ attitudes in science that can be listed, including: teaching-learning approaches, the use of the presentation graphics, the type of science courses taken, methods of studying, intelligence, gender, motivation, attitudes, science teachers and their attitudes, self-adequacy, previous learning, cognitive styles of pupils, career interest, socioeconomic levels, influence of parents, social implications of science and achievement (Erdemir, 2009).
If so, what should we teach in science classes (in content) and to what extent (in details)? This is a vital question in an educational setting. In addition, how should we change students’ attitudes towards science in order to engage students with science careers (Minstrell & van Zee, 2000). To overcome these problems, The Ministry of National Education of Turkey has decided to give up traditional methods and develop a new physics curriculum based on Context-Based Learning (CBL) in 2007. The new physics curriculum in Turkey proposes a set of learning experiences that should be provided to all students. It is organized around competencies while taking into account of the individuals' differences, and adopts the vision of science and technology literacy that aims at linking physics and technology with the students’ own life and their environment (TTKB, 2007).
The New physics curriculum also states that the rate of increase in production of knowledge that grows about 30% with respect to previous years. Teaching all information to students is impossible in formal education. This requires choosing some main contents among others by considering the merits of them (TTKB, 2007). For this reason, students should be provided with necessary information they will need science engagement both in school and after school in their life. When students are active in learning process, they move from being passive recipients of knowledge to being participants in activities that encompass analysis, synthesis and evaluation besides developing skills, values and attitudes (Sivan, et al., 2000). Active learning not only emphasizes the development of students’ skills but also their exploration of their own attitudes and values (Sivan, et al., 2000). CBL provides science for students with opportunities to test theories with real-life problems (Overton, 2007) that take part in students’ life and arouse students’ interest. Therefore, the use of a meaningful and appropriate context has been shown to motivate learners (Hennessy, 1993). Further, interest-focused problems, from student’s point of view, have potential to develop more interesting activities, provide more choice, and ensure optimally challenging tasks (Savin-Baden and Wilkie, 2004).
One of the student-centered instructional approaches used for effective instruction in science education is Problem-based learning (PBL). Through the use of PBL instruction that is organized and driven by real life contexts as in CBL (Overton, 2007), students can solve problems encountered in any area of everyday life by using scientific method (TTKB, 2007). Overton (2007) describes PBL as a subcategory of CBL. CBL and PBL provides students with guided experience in learning through solving complex, real-world problems (Hmelo-Silver; 2004), which is presented as a scenario to intrigue students’ curiosity in small groups (Barrows & Kelson, 1995; Sahin, 2007). PBL is a learning method that uses problems as a basis for students to improve their problem-solving skills and to obtain knowledge (Inel and Balim, 2010). An important point of PBL is that the learning resulting from a resolution of the problem is often more important than the solution (Peterson & Treagust, 1997). Thus, PBL allows students become active learners and makes students responsible for their learning (Hmelo & Ferrari, 1997; Kolodner et al., 1996; Serin, 2009), develops more positive attitudes to physics lesson (e.g., Alper, 2008; Akinoglu & Tandogan, 2007; Dolmans et al., 2001; van Kampen et al., 2004; Prince, 2004; Selçuk & Tarakçi, 2007) and allow higher conceptual learning gains (Alper; 2008; Sahin, 2010). In conclusion, PBL is designed to help students to construct an extensive and flexible knowledge, develops as individuals apply their knowledge in a variety of problem situations, develop effective problem-solving skills includes the ability to apply appropriate meta-cognitive and reasoning strategies and it develops self-directed, lifelong learning skills; becomes effective collaborator who knows how to function well as part of a team (Barrows & Kelson, 1995; Kolodner, 1993; Torp & Sage, 1998; Wilkerson & Gijselaers, 1996; Serin, 2009).
When students engage in a PBL, also known as the PBL tutorial process, several steps are followed. At first, students are presented with a well-structured problem scenario. It is noticed that well-structured problems should provide the information, the compass, and a clear destination for the problem solver, tapping only the lower-level thinking skills of knowledge, comprehension, and application. Afterwards, students formulate and analyze the problem by identifying the relevant facts from the scenario. This fact-identification step helps them represent the problem. As students understand the problem better, they generate hypotheses about possible solutions and research solutions to the problem. Later, students apply their findings and evaluate their hypotheses in light of what they have learned. Then, at the completion of each problem, students reflect on the abstract knowledge gained. At the end, they present their solution (Akçay, 2009; Chin and Chia, 2006; Fogarty, 1997; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Sahin, 2007; Serin, 2009).
Since PBL applied widely as an instructional model, several studies have paid more attention to PBL in different perspectives in Turkey: Newtonian mechanics (Sahin, 2010), motion and energy (Tandogan, 2006), Electromagnetism (Saglam, 2010), Pressure (Serin, 2009), Medicine (Alper, 2008), Biology (Akinoglu and Tandogan, 2007; Inel and Balim, 2010), Mathematic (Boran and Aslaner, 2008).
For instance, Sahin (2010) investigated the effects of problem based learning on students’ beliefs about physics learning and conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics. In result of this study, PBL group gained higher conceptual learning than the traditional group. However, there was no difference between their attitudes. Inel and Balim (2010) found a significant difference in favor of the PBL students’ for the concepts concerning the “Systems in Our Body” unit in the science and technology course. Tandogan (2006) concluded that PBL is effective on conceptual development and re-mediating misconceptions in the unit of “meeting of force and motion-energy”. Another study in electromagnetism course Saglam (2010) revealed that providing students with some formative assessments during the PBL process confidence could help them to better judge their understanding. According to Serin (2009) PBL students mostly engaged with doing research, designing and making experiments and in general students are enthusiastic about the PBL instruction. Akinoglu and Tandogan (2007) determined that the implementation of PBL had positively affected students’ academic achievement and their attitudes towards the science course and it also affects students’ conceptual development positively and keeps their misconceptions at the lowest level. However, Alper (2008) concluded that although students have positive attitudes toward PBL applications, more than half of the students do not want to be in PBL study in future.
With respect to improvement of education in the secondary school and enhancement of the students’ engagement, it is important to know how good PBL classroom practices can be enhanced and what are the views of students about effective PBL discussion and working together. Consequently, the present study aims to investigate the effects of PBL on high school students’ attitudes towards physics and physics learning, scientific process skills and their physics conceptual understanding when compared with traditional instruction.
