Search

The aim of this study is to develop a scale to determine the scientist image of high school students and their perceptions of scientist's gender and the risks they have. Descriptive survey model, one of the quantitative research techniques, was used in the study. 760 10th grade students participated in the study. The study was conducted in the spring semester of 2018-2019 academic years. In data collection, item pools were created for the following draft scales developed by researches: (1) "Scientist in Images Scale (ImSca)" to determine students' images of scientists; (2) "Scale for the Perception of Scientist's Gender (GenSca)" to determine students' perceptions of scientist's gender; and (3) "Scale for the Perception of the Risks that Scientist has (RiskSca)" to determine students' perceptions about the risks that scientists have. The construct validity of the scales was determined by using exploratory factor analysis on the data obtained from the scales and reliability of the scales was determined through internal consistency coefficients. As a result of the data analysis, the following structures were formed: ImSca has a 26-item structure with 8 factors, GenSca has a 23-item structure with 3 factors, and RiskSca has a 27-item structure with 6 factors. According to the results of confirmatory factor analyses, the structure of all three scales formed within the scope of the study was confirmed.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the meanings assigned by pre-service teachers to the wastepaper basket and waste (crumpled) papers in their drawings of a scientist. The study was carried out with 220 pre-service teachers during the 2015-2016 academic years. A phenomenological research method was used. First, the pre-service teachers were administered the 'Draw-A-Scientist Test' in order to identify their images of a scientist and then they were asked to describe and explain the scientist they drew. And a semi-structured interview was performed with the 34 pre-service teachers who included a wastepaper basket and waste paper in their drawings in order to identify the meanings assigned to the wastepaper and wastepaper basket by these teachers. The data were analysed by using content analysis. The results of the analysis showed that with these figures the pre-service teachers revealed their belief that when scientists conduct research, they follow a confirmatory experimental process in a similar manner to the way school science experiments. Based on these results, it can be suggested in the analysis of the drawings that waste paper and wastepaper baskets can be regarded as indicators of the stereotypical image of scientists and of the scientific method they use.

Students come across with the notion of atom almost every year during their education life. Higher conceptual understandings of atomic theories among science teachers is of crucial importance in their understanding of physics and chemistry courses. In this sense, the purpose of the present study is to investigate which of the atomic theories science teachers often confuse and to discuss the possible reasons behind the confusion of one theory with the other. This study used the phenomenology method of qualitative research. Participants of the study were comprised of 55 first and second year university students attending the Department of Science Teaching during the 2015-2016 academic year. In order to discover the most confusing atomic theories and the reasons of this confusion, students were asked to write down the atomic theories that they often confuse with one another and the reasons why they do so. Using content analysis, two independent coders analyzed the collected data. The result of the analyses revealed that students mostly got confused between Bohr’s Atomic Theory and Modern Atomic Theory. It was also found that the underlying reasons of this confusion were that “In both theory, the protons and neutrons are found together at the center of the atom (the nucleus) surrounded by electrons spinning around it” and “students cannot differentiate between the concepts of layer, orbit and shell”, and some recommendations were offered concerning the instruction of these subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]