A Systematic Planning for Science Laboratory Instruction: Research-Based Evidence

Nuri Balta

doi:10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a

Full Text (PDF)

Nuri Balta ¹ ^*

More Detail

¹ Canik Basari University, TURKEY^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop an instructional design model for science laboratory instruction. Well-known ID models were analysed and Dick and Carey model was imitated to produce a science laboratory instructional design (SLID) model. In order to validate the usability of the designed model, the views of 34 high school teachers related to SLID’s steps were gathered via a survey. The survey results on the basis of necessity of SLID’s elements showed that the mean of the items was extremely high. Statistical analysis on teachers’ views about SLID across teachers’ gender, subject and school type resulted in no differences. The outcome of this study, that is SLID, is expected to enhance the process of teaching and learning science in laboratory setting.

Keywords

instructional design
science laboratory
Dick and Carey ID model

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2015, Volume 11, Issue 5, 957-969

https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a

Publication date: 16 Dec 2015

Article Views: 2515

Article Downloads: 3389

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Arzi, H. J. (1998). Enhancing science education through laboratory environments: More than walls, benches and widgets. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.). International handbook of science education (p. 595-608). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
Aydoğdu, C. & Yardımcı, E. (2013). Accidents occurred in elementary science laboratories and teachers’ behaviour manners toward these accidents. H. U. Journal of Education, 44, 52-60.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Byers, W. (2002). Promoting active learning through small group laboratory classes. University Chemistry Education, 6, 28–34.
Dick, W., Carry, L. & Carry, J. O. (2001). The systematic design of instruction. Fifth ed., AddisonWesley Educational Publishers Inc.
Deacona, C. & Hajek, A. (2011). Student Perceptions of the Value of Physics Laboratories. International Journal of Science Education, 33(7), 943–977.
Erökten, S. (2010). The evaluation of chemistry laboratory experiences on science students’ anxiety levels. H. U. Journal of Education, 38, 107-114.
Freedman, M.P. (1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction attitude toward science and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 343–57.
Gagne, R., Briggs & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design, fourth ed., Wadsworth Pub.
Gerlach, V. S. & Ely, D. P. (1980). From Teaching and Media: A Systematic Approach, Second Edition, MA: Allyn. and Bacon. Copyright 1980 by Pearson Education
Heinich, R., Molenda, M., & Russell, D. (1993). Instructional Media and the New Technologies of Instruction, Macmillan Pub. Co., New York.
Henderson, D., D. Fisher, & B. Fraser. (2000). Interpersonal behaviour laboratory learning environments and student outcomes in senior biology classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(1), 26–43.
Hofstein, A., & V.N. Lunetta. (1982). The role of laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201–17.
Hofstein, A., & V.N. Lunetta. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.
Keller, J. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational design, Journal of Instructional Development, 10, 2–10.
Zook, K. (2001), Instructional design for classroom teaching and learning, Houghton Mifflin Company, USA.
Kirschner, P. A., & Meester, M. A. M. (1988). The laboratory in higher science education: Problems, premises and objectives. Higher Education, 17, 81–98.
Lee, S. W.-Y., Lai, Y.-C., Yu, H.-T. A. & Lin, Y.-T. K. (2012). Impact of biology laboratory courses on students' science performance and views about laboratory courses in general: innovative measurements and analyses. Journal of Biological Education, 46(3), 173-179.
Lock, R. (2010). Biology fieldwork in schools and colleges in the UK: An analysis of empirical research from 1963 to 2009. Journal of Biological Education, 44(2), 58–64.
Malkawia, S & Al-Araidah, O. (2013). Students’ assessment of interactive distance experimentation in nuclear reactor physics laboratory education, European Journal of Engineering Education, 38(5), 512–518.
Merril, M. D. (1996). Instructional transaction theory: An instructional design model based on knowledge objects. Educational Technology, 36(3), 30-37.
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2004). Designing effective instruction, 4th edition, New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Pajares, M.F. (1992). Teacher beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307–32.
Peterson, C. (2003). Bringing ADDIE to life: instructional design at its best, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12, 227–241.
Pickering, M. (1980). Are lab courses a waste of time? The Chronicle of Higher Education, 19, 80.
Posner, G. J, Rudnitsky, A. N. (2001). Course Design: A guide to Curriculum Development for Teachers. USA: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Pradesa, A. & Espinar, S. R. (2010). Laboratory assessment in chemistry: an analysis of the adequacy of the assessment process, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(4), 449–461.
Reiser, R. A. & Dempsey, J.A. (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology, Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
Secker, C.E.V., & R.W. Lissitz. (1999). Estimating the impact of instructional practices on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36(10), 1110– 26.
Siorenta, A. & Jimoyiannis, A. (2008). Physics instruction in secondary schools: An investigation of teachers’ beliefs towards physics laboratory and ICT. Research in Science & Technological Education, 26(2), 185–202.
Smith, D. (2004). Issues and trends in higher education biology fieldwork. Journal of Biological Education, 391, 6–10.
Smith P. L. & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional Design. New York: Merrill.
Tobin, K.G. (1990). Research on Science Laboratory Activities: In Pursuit of Better Questions and Answers to Improve Learning, School Science and Mathematics, 90, 403-418.
Tyler, R.W. (1971). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Van Driel, J.H., D. Beijaard, & N. Verloop. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–58.

How to cite this article

APA

Balta, N. (2015). A Systematic Planning for Science Laboratory Instruction: Research-Based Evidence. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(5), 957-969. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a

Vancouver

Balta N. A Systematic Planning for Science Laboratory Instruction: Research-Based Evidence. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2015;11(5):957-69. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a

AMA

Balta N. A Systematic Planning for Science Laboratory Instruction: Research-Based Evidence. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2015;11(5), 957-969. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a

Chicago

Balta, Nuri. "A Systematic Planning for Science Laboratory Instruction: Research-Based Evidence". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2015 11 no. 5 (2015): 957-969. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a

Harvard

Balta, N. (2015). A Systematic Planning for Science Laboratory Instruction: Research-Based Evidence. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(5), pp. 957-969. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a

MLA

Balta, Nuri "A Systematic Planning for Science Laboratory Instruction: Research-Based Evidence". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 11, no. 5, 2015, pp. 957-969. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1366a