Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

ANALYZING SCIENCE ACTIVITIES IN FORCE AND MOTION CONCEPTS: A DESIGN OF AN IMMERSION UNIT

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we analyze the science activities offered at 7th grade in the Turkish science and technology curriculum along with addressing the curriculum’s original intent. We refer to several science education researchers’ ideas, including Chinn & Malhotra’s (Science Education, 86:175–218, 2002) theoretical framework and Edelson’s (1998) conceptualization of authentic science practices in our analyses. Our primary goal is to critique the science and technology curriculum and then offer alternative insights into learning science and doing science about force and motion concepts at 7th grade from epistemological and sociological perspectives. We introduce an Immersion Unit for teaching and learning the concepts of force and motion and discuss the elements of this immersion approach. Finally, we provide recommendations for designing and implementing similar immersion units for the science activities that are in practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrams, E., Southerland, S. & Silva, P. (2007). Integrating inquiry in the classroom: Realities and opportunities. Hartford: Age of Information Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2002). Whose scientific knowledge? The colonizer and the colonized. In W.-M. Roth & J. Désautels (Eds.), Science education as/for sociopolitical action (pp. 151–166). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aitheide, D. L. (1996). Qualitative media analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayar, M. C. & Yalvac, B. (2010). A sociological standpoint to authentic scientific practices and its role in school science teaching. Ahi Evran Univ. Kırşehir Eğitim Fakultesi Dergisi (KEFAD), Special Issue, 11(4), 113–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S. A. & Hay, K. E. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of experts: Issues related to the science apprentice camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 70–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barab, S. A., Squire, K. & Dueber, B. (2000). Supporting authenticity through participatory learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 37–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, B. (1982). T.S. Kuhn and social science. NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayraktar, S. (2009). Misconceptions of Turkish pre-service teachers about force and motion. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 273–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berland, L. K. & Reiser, B. J. (2010). Classroom communities’ adaptations of the practice of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 94, 1–26. doi:10.1002/sce.20420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A. & Granger, D. E. (2009). No silver bullet for inquiry: Making sense of teacher change following an inquiry-based research experience for teachers. Science Education, 93, 322–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozan, M. & Kucukozer, H. (2008). Science teachers’ opinions about science activities and problem solving. Elementary Education Online, 7(2), 218–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buxton, C. (2006). Creating contextually authentic science in a “low-performing” urban elementary school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 695–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cakir, R. & Yildirim, S. (2007). Analysis of the newly adopted “science and technology program” for the 4th and 5th level of elementary education in Turkey. In C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds.), Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications 2007 (pp. 11–14). Chesapeake: AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiappetta, E. L. & Fillman, D. A. (2007). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1847–1868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chinn, C. A. & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demirci, N. (2005). A study about students’ misconceptions in force and motion concepts by incorporating a Web-assisted physics program. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 4(3), 40–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dogan, Y. (2009). Science and technology course teaching activities: An investigation of the level of adoption and application based on teacher perceptions. Ankara: Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Gazi University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A. & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking science to school. Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A. & Grandy, R. E. (2008). Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation. Rotterdam: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D. C. (1998). Realising authentic science learning through adaptation of scientific practice. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (Vol. 1, pp. 317-322). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  • Education Reform Initiative (2005). Newly developed curricula evaluation report. Available from http://www.erg.sabanciuniv.edu/docs/mufredat_raporu.doc

  • Erdoğan, M. (2007). Yeni geliştirilen dördüncü ve besinci sınıf fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programının analizi: Nitel bir çalışma. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5(2), 221–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etheredge, S. & Rudnitsky, A. (2003). Introducing students to scientific inquiry: How do we know what we know? Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, M. J. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92, 404–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Izci, E., Ozden, M. & Tekin, A. (2008). Evaluation of new science and technology curriculum: Sample of adiyaman. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 5(2), 70–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomleksiz, M. N. & Bulut, I. (2006). Teachers’ views toward the new science and technology curriculum. Firat University Journal of Social Science, 16(2), 173–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grandy, R. & Duschl, R. A. (2007). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Analysis of a conference. Science & Education, 16, 141–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrenkohl, L. R. & Guerra, M. R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 431–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Javid, C. (2007). Immersion units and inquiry tool box. The board of regents of the Univ. of wisconsin system. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kılıç, G. B., Haymana, F. & Bozyılmaz, B. (2008). İlköğretim fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim programının bilim okuryazarlığı ve bilimsel süreç becerileri açısından analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 33, 52–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koc, Y., Isiksal, M. & Bulut, S. (2007). Elementary school curriculum reform in Turkey. International Education Journal, 8(1), 30–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredricks, J. & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaels, S., Shouse, A. W. & Schweingruber, H. A. (2008). Ready, set science. Washington: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MoNE] (2005). İlköğretim Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Öğretim Programi. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MoNE] (2009). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin başarılarının belirlenmesi. Türkçe, matematik, fen ve teknoloji, sosyal bilgiler, ingilizce raporu. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moebius-Clune, B. N., Elsevier, I. H., Crawford, B. A., Trautmann, N. M., Schindelbeck, R. R. & van Es, H. M. (2011). Moving authentic soil research into high school classrooms: Student engagement and learning. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education, 40(1), 102–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (with Olson, J. F., Preuschoff, C., Erberber, E., Arora, A. & Galia, J.) (2008). TIMSS 2007 international mathematics report: Findings from IEA’s trends in international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades. Chestnut Hill: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

  • National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national standards in science education. Washington: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do – student performance in reading, mathematics and science (Vol. 1), PISA, OECD Publishing.

  • Posner, G. J. (2004). Analyzing the curriculum (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, M.-W. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry science laboratories. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T. & Aydeniz, M. (2013). Traversing the divide between high school science students and sophisticated nature of science understandings. A Multi-pronged approach. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(4), 529–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, R. S. & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Authentic scientific inquiry as context for teaching nature of science: Identifying critical elements of success. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 331–355). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, L. & Roseman, J. (2004). Can middle school science textbooks help students learn important ideas? Findings from project 2061’ curriculum evaluation study: Life science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 538–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy. A complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. The Journal of the Learning Science, 13, 305–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak, I. & Baumgartner, E. (2004). The teacher as partner: Exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 393–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tekbiyik, A. & Akdeniz, A. R. (2008). Teachers’ views about adoption and application of primary science and technology curriculum. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D. & Lesgold, A. M. (2002). Mapping to know: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86, 264–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tudge, J. & Scrimsher, S. (2003). Lev S. Vygotsky on education: A cultural-historical, interpersonal, and individual approach to development. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Educational psychology: A century of contributions (pp. 207–228). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkish Academy of Sciences (2004). The Turkish Sciences Academy’s views and implications for new curricula. Available from http://www.tuba.gov.tr/habergoster.php?haber=akademihaber_14.

  • Valverde, G. A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R. G., Schmidt, W. H. & Houang, R. T. (2002). According to the book: Using TIMSS to investigation the translation of policy into practice through the world of textbooks. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Aufschnaiter, C. & Rogge, C. (2010). Misconceptions or missing conceptions? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 6(1), 3–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yagci, E. & Demirel, M. (2010). An evaluation of elementary education science and technology curriculum in Turkey from the aspect of integrated teaching approach. World Applied Sciences Journal, 8(3), 387–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yangin, S. & Dindar, H. (2007). The perceptions of teachers about the change on elementary school science and technology curriculum. H.U. Journal of Education, 33, 240–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yıldız, E. & Tatar, N. (2012). Fen ve teknoloji ders kitaplarındaki etkinliklerin bilimsel surec becerilerine ve yapisal özelliklerine göre incelenmesi. Egitim ve Bilim, 37, 108–125.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Science and Society Department, Educational Research Division, The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK), Akay Cad. No: 6, Bakanlıklar/Ankara, 06420, Turkey

    Mehmet C. Ayar

  2. Department of Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, University of Tennessee, A 408 Jane and David Bailey Education Complex, Knoxville, TN, 37996-3442, USA

    Mehmet Aydeniz

  3. College of Education and Human Development, Department of Teaching, Learning and Culture, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843-4232, USA

    Bugrahan Yalvac

Authors
  1. Mehmet C. Ayar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehmet Aydeniz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bugrahan Yalvac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet C. Ayar.

Appendices

Appendices

Appendix 1

Workbook Activity 1

This activity aims to remind students of what they have learned about force and motion concepts last year. Students are expected to answer questions regarding force and motion.

Workbook Activity 2

This activity aims to have students write down what they know before the unit, and after the unit.

Workbook Activity 3

This activity aims to have students write a story in regard to a given scenario focusing on force and motion in daily life.

Workbook Activity 4

Students are expected to understand force applied in elastic objects and show force’s direction by drawing arrows on the pictures provided.

Workbook Activity 5

Students are expected to draw a graph illustrating the relationship between weight and extension in light of the data given.

Workbook Activity 6

Students are expected to discover elasticity in their daily life. They are provided with pictures illustrating elasticity.

Workbook Activity 7

Students are provided with a case that shows the data collected and transformed into a graph. Students are expected to answer questions in regard to the data and graph plotted.

Workbook Activity 8

Students are provided with pictures illustrating whether work is done and they are expected to fill in the blanks and answer questions.

Workbook Activity 9

Students are expected to conceptualize the case that discusses whether work is done or not.

Workbook Activity 10

Students are expected to understand energy in their life. They are expected to answer questions in light of a diagram illustrating energy in a variety of circumstances.

Workbook Activity 11

Students are expected to understand potential energy by building a connection to acrobats. They are provided with the picture illustrating such connection and answer questions.

Workbook Activity 12

Students are provided with a case that illustrates energy in aircraft and truck. They are expected to compare energy in both situations and answer questions.

Workbook Activity 13

Students are provided with pictures illustrating energy types in different situations and they are expected to answer questions.

Workbook Activity 14

Students are provided a report that describes energy in avalanche of snow. In light of information given in the report, students are expected to answer questions.

Workbook Activity 15

Students are provided with a picture illustrating the positions of a swimmer when she jumps into the pool. Students are expected to understand energy conservation when she jumps.

Workbook activity 16

Students are provided with a caricature that describes energy conservation between elastic potential energy and kinetic energy.

Workbook Activity 17

Students are provided with different pictures that aim to illustrate energy conservations. In regard to these pictures, students are expected to answer questions.

Workbook Activity 18

Students are provided with information about different kinds of levers. According to these levers, they are expected to match which condition is pertaining to which lever system.

Workbook Activity 19

Students are provided with pictures illustrating different kinds of lever systems. Similar to activity 18, they are expected to answer question.

Workbook Activity 20

Students are expected to understand the relationship between pulley system and force applied. This activity is more hands-on compared with the activities mentioned above. Students are expected to conduct two simple experiments to conceptualize such relationship.

Workbook Activity 21

Students are expected to understand a system of an inclined plane by doing a simple experiment and conceptualize the relationship between height and force applied.

Workbook Activity 22

Students are provided with pictures illustrating different kinds of simple machines. In addition to these examples in pictures, they are expected to come up with different examples from their life.

Workbook Activity 23

Students are provided with pictures illustrating simple machines not mentioned in science classroom and they are expected to identify these simple machines and understand their purposes.

Workbook Activity 24

Students are provided with a complex simple machine system. They are expected to understand it and design their own simple machine system. They are expected to explain energy conservations in their own design.

Workbook Activity 25

Students are provided with different situations in pictures that cover friction.

Workbook Activity 26

Students are provided with different pictures illustrating friction and they are expected to identify conditions that minimize friction.

Appendix 2

Book Activity 1: Playing with Springs

Students are expected to recognize a device facilitating the daily life in a way that answers why springs are used commonly and what their characteristics are. They are provided with different types of springs to observe variables, thickness, thinness, and spring rate.

Book Activity 2: Constructing a Spring

Students are expected to construct a spring. They are given iron and copper strings in different lengths, thickness, and thinness. They are expected to wrap strings into stick, and then apply a force to each spring.

Book Activity 3: Designing a Dynamometer

Students are expected to design a dynamometer with materials; rubber band, different types of weights, ruler, paper strips, pencil, and clips.

Book Activity 4: When do we do work?

Students are expected to identify in what conditions they do work. In this activity, students are expected to use their school bag and their textbook in order to implement the activity.

Book activity 5: velocity, mass, and kinetic energy

Students are expected to investigate the relationship between velocity, mass, and kinetic energy. Materials given include 4–5 textbooks, toy car, and 3 stones fitting to toy car, ruler, and wheel chock.

Book activity 6: Gravitational Potential Energy and its Dependents

Students are expected to prepare a surface about 2–4 in. thick with sand in which they are going to fall a ball at the height of 50 cm and then 1.5 m subsequently and observe the impact of ball on the surface. The same investigation will be done with basketball and a plastic ball at the height of 50 cm subsequently. Among the materials provided are basketball, plastic ball, sand and meter stick.

Book activity 7: Elastic Potential Energy and its Dependents

Students are provided with a scenario about elastic potential energy by connecting to their daily life before doing the activity. In light of the scenario, they are expected to understand the factors influencing the elastic potential energy. To do the activity, materials including thick and thin rubber bands, a piece of paper and ruler are given.

Book activity 8: Changing the Direction of Force

Students are expected to use simple machines and understand how they are functioning and affecting people’s life. To do this activity, they are provided with materials including heavy book, meter stick, stationary block (for fulcrum), adze, pulley, and nailed wooden log. They are given 6 different situations in pictures. They are expected to set up each situation by using materials given. In one situation, they are expected to take out a nail driven in log with a hand and with an adz or adze. In another situation, they are expected to use a pulley to lift a book up though a picture illustrated.

Book activity 9: Do the Same Work with Less Force

Students are expected to learn how force is increased by using simple machine (e.g. lever). They are provided materials (e.g. dynamometer, ruler, wooden block, and triangular fulcrum). They are provided with pictures illustrating how they can complete the activity. Firstly, they lift up the block at the height of 4 cm when the block is on the table and check their dynamometer to see how much force is applied. Next, they switch the stationary point about 2 cm to obtain fulcrum and apply a force and use the dynamometer to see how much a force is applied at the same height (4 cm). All measurements should be recorded in the chart.

Book activity 10: Change the Direction and Magnitude of Applied Force via Pulley

This activity has two phases. At the first phase, students are expected to prepare an experiment set up. This set up includes pulley, nail, wire, and pencil. The pulley is hung at the fixed position. Next, they measure the weight of block itself via dynamometer. Then they add the weight to the mechanism, which is a fixed pulley and measure how much it weighs. The measurement is recorded in a chart. At the second phase, they design another set up. By means of dynamometer, they measure both a pulley and a block. Their weights are recorded. Then, they measure the weight of a system by a dynamometer. This mechanism refers to a single movable pulley.

Book activity 11: Decrease in Kinetic Energy

Students are expected to investigate kinetic energy in different types of surfaces (e.g. land, carpet, and marble). They are provided with materials including car, meter stick, thin wooden plate, and two to three books. They are expected to prepare a setup with given materials in order to investigate a decrease in kinetic energy at different surfaces.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ayar, M.C., Aydeniz, M. & Yalvac, B. ANALYZING SCIENCE ACTIVITIES IN FORCE AND MOTION CONCEPTS: A DESIGN OF AN IMMERSION UNIT. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 13, 95–121 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9476-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9476-y

KEY WORDS

Search

Navigation