Investigation of the Contribution of Differentiated Instruction into Science Literacy
Keywords:
Downloads
Abstract
The aim of this study is to reveal contributions of the differentiated instruction implemented in the primary school 4th grade science course into science literacy levels of the students. The case study method among qualitative research methods were used in the study. The research was carried out in the second term of 2015-2016 academic year. The study group consisted of the 4th grade students (n=23, 9-10 aged) studying in the Kozabirlik Primary State School in Bilecik city center in Turkey. Interviews (teachers and students), observations and student diary forms were administrated as data collection tools in the study. The content analysis method was implemented in the analysis of the obtained data. It was concluded from the findings that the differentiated instruction improved involvements of the students with the science-technology-society and the environment and developed their scientific process skills and thus contributed to the science literacy levels of the students.
Downloads
References
Amadio, R. (2014). Differentiated instruction in secondary mathematics. Unpublished master thesis. University of Wisconsin, Superior.
Google Scholar CrossrefAnderson, K. M. (2007). Tips for teaching: Differentiating instruction to include all students. Preventing School Failure, 51(3), 49-54.
Google Scholar CrossrefAuerbach, C. F., & Silverstein, L. B. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York: New York University Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefAvcı, S., Yüksel, A., Soyer, M. ve Balıkçıoğlu, S. (2009). Şiir bilgisi konusu için tasarlanmış farklılaştırılmış sınıf ortamının öğrenciler üzerinde yarattığı bilişsel ve duyuşsal değişimler. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 9(3), 1043-1084.
Google Scholar CrossrefAyers, D. J. (2008). The effect of teacher attitudes on differentiated instruction in two rural elementary schools in Monreo Country, Georgia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Capella University, Minneapolis.
Google Scholar CrossrefBaş, G. (2015). Sosyal-yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamı tasarımının öğrenenlerin akademik başarılarına, derse yönelik tutumlarına ve bilişüstü farkındalık düzeylerine etkileri ile öğrenme sürecine katkıları. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya.
Google Scholar CrossrefBogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Google Scholar CrossrefBurkett, J. A. (2013). Teacher perception on differentiated instruction and its influence on instructional practice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Central Oklahoma, Oklahoma.
Google Scholar CrossrefCan, M., Şahin, Ç. (2015). Okul öncesi öğretmen adaylarının fene ve fen öğretimine yönelik tutumlarının incelenmesi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(2), 13-26
Google Scholar CrossrefCarter, J. (2011). How do i differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all learners? In E. L. Kronowitz (Ed.). The Teacher's Guide to Success. (pp. 290-300). Massachusetts: Allyn And Bacon.
Google Scholar CrossrefChampman, C., & King, R. (2009). Differentiated instructional strategies for reading in the content areas. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefCook, C., Goodman, N. D., & Schulz, L. E. (2011). Where science starts: Spontaneous experiments in preschoolers’ exploratory play. Cognition, 120(3), 341-349.
Google Scholar CrossrefCreswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefCreswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefÇalıkoğlu, B. S. (2014). Üstün zekâlı ve yetenekli öğrencilerde derinlik ve karmaşıklığa göre farklılaştırılmış fen öğretiminin başarı, bilimsel süreç becerileri ve tutuma etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
Google Scholar CrossrefÇepni, S., Ayvacı, H. Ş. ve Bacanak, A. (2006). Fen eğitimine yeni bir bakış: Fen-teknoloji-toplum (3.Baskı). Trabzon: Celepler Matbaacılık.
Google Scholar CrossrefDee, A. L. (2011). Preservice teacher applicatıon of differentiated instruction. The Teacher Educator, 46(1), 53-70.
Google Scholar CrossrefDenzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefDurbin, D. J., Pickett L. H., & Powell, T. L. (2011). Kindergarten scientists: The pot of gold at theend of the rainbow. Science activities: Classroom project sand curriculum ideas. Science Activities, 48(4), 129-136.
Google Scholar CrossrefEkiz, D. (2003). Eğitimde araştırma yöntem ve metotlarına giriş: Nitel, nicel ve eleştirel kuram metodolojisi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Google Scholar CrossrefErsözlü, Z. N. (2008). Yansıtıcı düşünmeyi geliştirici etkinliklerin ilköğretim 5. sınıf öğrencilerinin sosyal bilgiler dersindeki akademik başarılana ve tutumlarına etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Elazığ.
Google Scholar CrossrefEurydice. (2011). Avrupa’da fen eğitimi: Ulusal politikalar, uygulamalar ve araştırma. Araştırma raporu. Ankara: Eurydice Türkiye Birimi.
Google Scholar CrossrefFattig, M. L., & Taylor, M. T. (2008). Co-teaching in the differentiated classroom: successful collaboration, lesson design, and classroom management, grades 5-12. San Francisco, California, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Google Scholar CrossrefGlesne, C. (2012). Nitel araştırmaya giriş. (Çev., A. Ersoy ve P. Yalçınoğlu). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
Google Scholar CrossrefGregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. (2007). Differentiated instructional strategies: One size doesn't fit all (2nd Edition). California, USA: Corwin Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefGregory, G. H., & Hammerman, E. (2008). Differentiated instructional strategies for science, grades K-8. California, USA: Corwin Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefHamill, K. (2010). Differentiated instruction. Retrieved from, http://downloads.smarttech.com/media
Google Scholar Crossref/sitecore/en/pdf/smart_publications/edcompass/feature_articles/current_article/edcompass-featurearticle-dec2010.pdf [Date of access: 04.04.2017].
Google Scholar CrossrefJoseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., & Ramsook, L. (2013). The impact of differentiated instruction in a teacher education setting: Successes and challenges. International Journal ofHigher Education, 2(3), 28-40.
Google Scholar CrossrefKaplan, M. (2016). Farklılaştırılmış öğretim yöntemi ile işlenen fen bilimleri dersi 7.sınıf kuvvet ve hareket ünitesinin öğrencilerin kavramsal anlamalarına, bilimsel süreç becerilerine ve akademik başarılarına etkisi. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
Google Scholar CrossrefKaufeldt, M. (2010). Begin with the brain: Orchestrating the learner-centered classroom (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefKoeze, P. A. (2007). Differentiated instruction: The effect on student achievement in an elementary school. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Eastern Michigan University, Michigan.
Google Scholar CrossrefKurnaz, A. (2007). İlköğretim beşinci sınıf sosyal bilgiler dersinde beceri ve içerik temelli eleştirel düşünme öğretiminin öğrencilerin eleştirel düşünme becerileri, erişi ve tutumlarına etkisi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Konya.
Google Scholar CrossrefLandrum, T. J., & McDuffie, K. A. (2010). Learning styles in the age of differentiated instruction. Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 18(1), 6-17. Doi: 10.1080/09362830903462441
Google Scholar CrossrefLevy, H. M. (2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House, 81(4), 161-165.
Google Scholar CrossrefLiu, X. (2009). Beyond science literacy: Science and the public. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education. 4(3), 301-311.
Google Scholar CrossrefMaddox, C. (2015). Elementary (K-5) teachers’ perceptions of diffrentiated instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Walden University, Minneapolis.
Google Scholar CrossrefMayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59, 14-19.
Google Scholar CrossrefMaxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interpretive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefMcGraw-Hill, G. (2010). Professional Development; Leadership Handbook: An Administrator's Quick-Reference Guide: An Administrator's Quick-Reference Guide (Grade Level 6-8). The United States of America: Macmillan/McGraw-Hill.
Google Scholar CrossrefMcNamara, C. (1999). General Guidelines for Conducting Interviews. Retrieved from, www.managementhelp.org/evaluatn/intrview.htm [Date of access: 17.03.2017].
Google Scholar CrossrefMerriam, S. B. (2013). Nitel araştırma desen ve uygulama için bir rehber. (Çev. Editörü: S. Turan). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
Google Scholar CrossrefMerriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Google Scholar CrossrefMiles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefMurawski, W. W., & Hughes, C. (2009). Response to intervention, collaboration, and coteaching: A logical combination for successful systemic change. Preventing School Failure, 53, 267-277.
Google Scholar CrossrefMuthomi, M. W., & Mbugua, Z. K. (2014). Effectiveness of differentiated instruction on secondary school students achievement in mathematics. International Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 4(1), 116-122.
Google Scholar CrossrefMyers, B. E. (2004). Effects of investigatie laboratory integration on student content knowledge and science process skill achievement across learning styles. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Florida, Florida.
Google Scholar CrossrefNational Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefNational Science Teachers Association [NSTA]. (2009). NSTA position statement: Parent involvement in science learning. Retrieved from, http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/parents.aspx [Date of access: 15.01.2017].
Google Scholar CrossrefO’Meara, J. (2010). Beyond differentiated instruction. Thousand oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefOlsen, J. K. (2007). Impacts of technology-based differentiated instruction on special needs students in the context of an activity-based middle school science instructional unit. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
Google Scholar CrossrefPatton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefRegan, K. (2009). Improving the way we think about students with emotional and/or behavioral disorders. Teaching Exceptional Children, 41(5), 60-65.
Google Scholar CrossrefRobinson, L., Maldonado, M., & Whaley, J. (2014). Perceptions about implementation of differentiated instruction. Annual Mid-South Educational Research (MSERA) Conference, 7 November 2014, Knoxville, Tennessee.
Google Scholar CrossrefSaysal-Araz, Z. (2013). İlköğretim 4. ve 5. Sınıf öğrencilerinin fen ve teknoloji okuryazarlık düzeyleri ile eleştirel düşünme düzeyleri arasındaki ilişki. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Afyonkarahisar.
Google Scholar CrossrefSontay, G., Tutar, M. ve Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2016). Okul dışı öğrenme ortamları ile fen öğretimi hakkında öğrenci görüşleri: Planetaryum gezisi. İnformal Ortamlarda Araştırmalar Dergisi (İAD), 1(1), 1-24.
Google Scholar CrossrefSmith, G. E., & Throne, S. (2009). Differentiating instruction with technology in middle school classrooms (1st Edition). Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
Google Scholar CrossrefStake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefStanford, P., Crowe, M. W., & Flice, H. (2010). Differentiating with technology. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 6(4), 1-9.
Google Scholar CrossrefStefanekis, E. H. (2011). Differentiated assessment: How to assess the learnin potential of every student. San Francisco: CA: John Willey & Sons, Inc.
Google Scholar CrossrefStronge Teacher Effectiveness Performance Evaluation System [STRONG]. (2012). Classroom observation form (formal observation). Retrieved from, http://www.mcvea.org/extras/EvalFrom
Google Scholar CrossrefStronge.pdf [Date of access: 14.09.2015].
Google Scholar CrossrefSubban, P. K., & Round, P. N. (2015). Differentiated instruction at work, reinforcing the art of classroom observation through the creation of a checklist for beginning and pre-service teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 117-131.
Google Scholar CrossrefSüren, T. (2008). İlköğretim birinci kademe öğrencilerinin bilimsel okuryazarlık düzeyleri. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Afyonkarahisar.
Google Scholar CrossrefŞentürk, C. (2017). Science literacy in early childhood. Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSR-JRME), 7(1/3), 51-62.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (2014a). Öğrenci gereksinimlerine göre farklılaştırılmış eğitim (2. Baskı, Çeviren: Diye Kültürlerarsı İletişim Hizmetleri). İstanbul: SEV Yayıncılık.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (2014b). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd edition). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (2005). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school’s journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(2), 77-87.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (2001b). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (2000a). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs ofall learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (2000b). Reconcilable differences? Standards-based teaching and differentiation. Educational Leadership, 58(1), 6-11.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A., Brimijoin, K., & Narvaez, L. (2008). The differentiated school: Making revolutionary changes in teaching and learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design: Connecting content and kids. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTomlinson, C. A., & Moon, T. R. (2013). Assessment and student success in a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefTurkish Council of Higher Education [YÖK]. (1997). İlköğretim fen öğretimi. Ankara: Milli Eğitimi Geliştirme Projesi Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmen Eğitimi.
Google Scholar CrossrefTurkish Ministry of National Education [MEB]. (2005). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi 4-5. sınıflar öğretim programı. Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü Basım Evi.
Google Scholar CrossrefWahl, L., ve Duffield, J. (2005). Using flexible technology to meet the needs of diverse learners: What teachers can do. Retrieved from, https://www.wested.org/online_pubs/kn-05-01.pdf [Date of access: 05.04.2017].
Google Scholar CrossrefYager, R. E. (1993). Science-technology-society as reform. School Science and Mathematics, 93(3), 145-151.
Google Scholar CrossrefYağlıkara, S. (2006). Okulöncesi dönem çocuklarına çevre bilinci kazandırmada fen ve doğa etkinliklerinin etkileri konusunda öğretmen görüşleri. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.
Google Scholar CrossrefYin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Google Scholar CrossrefDownloads
Published
Almetric
Dimensions
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All articles are published under Creative Commons copyright (CC BY). Authors hold the copyright and retain publishing rights without restrictions, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles as the original source is cited.
