Mnenje učiteljev o učinkih demonstracijskih eksperimentov na interes učencev in njihovo kemijsko znanje

  • Luka Vinko PedagoÅ¡ka fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani, Slovenija
  • Seamus Delaney Faculty of Arts and Education, Deakin University, Australia
  • Iztok Devetak PedagoÅ¡ka fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani, Slovenija
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.893
Ključne besede: razumevanje kemijskih pojmov, demonstracijski eksperimenti, poučevanje kemije, interes učencev

Povzetek

Kemija je eksperimentalna veda, ki uporablja eksperiment kot eno glavnih orodij preučevanja. Laboratorijsko in drugo praktično delo sta tako bistvena tudi pri kemijskem izobraževanju. Demonstracijske eksperimente učitelji uporabljajo kot pedagoški pristop, ki lahko povečuje učenčev interes za kemijo pa tudi motivira učence za učenje z razumevanjem. Če so učenci v demonstracijo aktivno vključeni, pa so lahko demonstracijski eksperimenti enako učinkoviti oziroma še učinkovitejši kot samostojno eksperimentiranje učencev. Namen raziskave je bil preučiti mnenja učiteljev o učinkih demonstracijskih eksperimentov na učenčev interes in uspešnost pri pouku kemije ter na kakovost učenčevega kemijskega znanja. V raziskavi, ki je temeljila na kvantitativnem raziskovalnem pristopu, je sodelovalo 81 osnovnošolskih in srednješolskih učiteljev iz različnih statističnih regij Slovenije. Učitelji so izpolnili spletni vprašalnik, ki se je navezoval na njihovo mnenje o učinkih izvajanja demonstracijskih eksperimentov na interes učencev in uspešnost pri pouku kemije ter na kakovost učenčevega kemijskega znanja. Ugotovljeno je bilo, da učitelji ne glede na delovno dobo in pogostost izvajanja demonstracijskih eksperimentov po večini menijo, da demonstracijski eksperimenti pozitivno vplivajo na interes in uspešnost učencev pri pouku kemije ter na kakovost učenčevega kemijskega znanja.

Prenosi

Podatki o prenosih še niso na voljo.

Literatura

Ashkenazi, G., & Weaver, G. C. (2007). Using lecture demonstrations to promote the refinement of concepts: the case of teaching solvent miscibility. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 186–196.

Basheer, A., Hugerat, M., Kortam, N., & Hofstein, A. (2017). The effectiveness of teachers’ use of demonstrations for enhancing students’ understanding of and attitudes to learning the oxidation-reduction concept. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(3), 555–570.

Beall, H. (1996). Report on the WPI Conference†demonstrations as a teaching tool in chemistry: Pro and conâ€. Journal of chemical education, 73(7), 641–642.

Bodner, G. M. (2001). Why lecture demonstrations are ‘exocharmic’ for both students and their instructors. University Chemistry Education, 5(1), 31–35.

Buncick, M. C., Betts, P. G., & Horgan, D. D. (2001). Using demonstrations as a contextual road map: enhancing course continuity and promoting active engagement in introductory college physics. International Journal of Science Education, 23(12), 1237–1255.

Chamely-Wiik, D. M., Haky, J. E., Louda, D. W., & Romance, N. (2014). SQER3: An instructional framework for using scientific inquiry to design classroom demonstrations. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(3), 329–335.

Haagen-Schützenhöfer, C., & Joham, B. (2018). Professionalising physics teachers in doing experimental work. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 8(1), 9–34.

Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 70(256), 33–40.

Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Towards a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 22(1), 85–142.

Hofstein, A. (2015). Laboratory Work, Forms of. Encyclopedia of Science Education, 563–566.

Johnstone, A. H. & Al-Shuaili, A. (2001). Learning in the laboratory; some thoughts from the literature. University Chemistry Education, 5(2), 42–51.

Kelter, P. (1994). Are our demonstration-based workshops doing more harm than good? Journal of Chemical Education, 71(2), 109–110.

Logar, A., & Savec, V. F. (2011). Students’ hands-on experimental work vs lecture demonstration in teaching elementary school chemistry. Acta Chimica Slovenica, 58(4), 866–875.

Meyer, L. S., Panee, D., Schmidt, S., & Nozawa, F. (2003). Using demonstrations to promote student comprehension in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(4), 431–435.

Moore, J. W. (2000). Enthusiastic teachers, vivid experiments. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(4), 429.

Pavlin, J., Glažar, S. A., SlapniÄar, M., & Devetak, I. (2019). The impact of students’ educational background, interest in learning, formal reasoning and visualisation abilities on gas context-based exercises achievements with submicro-animations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20(3), 633–649.

Price, D. S., & Brooks, D. W. (2012). Extensiveness and perceptions of lecture demonstrations in the high school chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 420–427.

Trowbridge, L., Bybee, R., & Powell, J. (2000). Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing scientific literacy. Pearson.

Tsaparlis, G. (2009). Learning at the macro level: The role of practical work. In J. K. Gilbert & D. Treagust (Eds.), Multiple representations in chemical education, models and modeling in science education (pp. 109–136). Springer.

Waldman, A. S., Schechinger, L., & Nowick, J. S. (1996). A coordinated chemistry outreach program for thousands of high school students. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(8), 762–764.

Walton, P. H. (2002). On the use of chemical demonstrations in lectures. University Chemistry Education, 6(1), 22–27.

White, R. T. (1996). The link between the laboratory and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), 761–774.

Wissiak-Grm, K. S., & Glažar, S. A. (2002). Pomen eksperimentalnega dela pri uÄenju in pouÄevanju kemije v osnovni Å¡oli [The importance of experimental work in learning and teaching chemistry in primary school]. Sodobna pedagogika, 53(2), 96–106.

Zimrot, R., & Ashkenazi, G. (2007). Interactive lecture demonstrations: a tool for exploring and enhancing conceptual change. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 197–211.

Objavljeno
2020-06-24
Kako citirati
Vinko, L., Delaney, S., & Devetak, I. (2020). Mnenje učiteljev o učinkih demonstracijskih eksperimentov na interes učencev in njihovo kemijsko znanje. Revija Centra Za študij Edukacijskih Strategij , 10(2), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.893
Številka
Letn. 10 Št. 2 (2020): VARIA Issue
Rubrike
VARIA

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
  2. The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
  3. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.