A Scale of Perceptions Towards Traditional

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of ACADEMIC RESEARCH
Vol. 5. No. 5. September, 2013
S. Yangin, S. Sidekli. A scale of perceptions towards traditional and contemporary science teaching methods:
constructing with teacher candidate students. International Journal of Academic Research Part B; 2013; 5(5), 73-80.
DOI: 10.7813/2075-4124.2013/5-5/B.11
A SCALE OF PERCEPTIONS TOWARDS TRADITIONAL

AND CONTEMPORARY SCIENCE TEACHING METHODS:
CONSTRUCTING WITH TEACHER CANDIDATE STUDENTS
1
Selami Yangin , Sabri Sidekli
Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Faculty of Education, Rize

Mugla Stk Kocman University, Faculty of Education, Mugla (TURKEY)
E-mails: selami.yangin@erdogan.edu.tr, ssidekli@mu.edu.tr
DOI: 10.7813/2075-4124.2013/5-5/B.11
ABSTRACT
The objective of this study is to develop a Scale of Perceptions Towards Science Teaching Methods
(SPTSTM) to quantify the perceptions of teacher candidate students toward science teaching methods and that
would help researchers in their academic studies in this field. The scale has been applied to 802 teacher candidate
students from Faculty of Education in Turkey. Sampling was preferred all the teacher candidate students in the
senior year were tried to be included in the study. In analyzing the data, Varimax rotation technique was utilized
along with the principal components analysis, a sub-procedure of factor analysis method. As a result of applying
the draft scale comprised of 60 items, a 31-item scale has been developed. Cronbach-Alpha reliability coefficient of
the scale was calculated as 0.845. The sub-categories of the scale were named as the perception towards science
teaching methods; interest, importance, application, self-efficacy, and priority. SPTSTM would contribute to the
determination of teacher candidate students towards science teaching methods and to perceive these perceptions
and assess better.
Key words: Factor Structure, Perceptions, Scale Development, Science, Teacher Candidate Students,
Teaching Methods
1. INTRODUCTION
Teaching strategies and methods shape the learning environment. Science teachers have an exciting
opportunity to teach kids about how science makes the world work. Unfortunately, reduced teaching budgets and
apathy on the part of students sometimes makes it difficult to get students interested in topics like biology, earth
science, anatomy, physics, and chemistry. Some teachers are now using techniques such as peer learning, roleplaying, and incorporating current events in science lesson plans. These techniques help engage students and
help them understand the importance of science. They also make it fun to teach scientific concepts and help
students understand common topics in the scientific world (Aydede et al., 2006:25).
The teachinglearning process is complex and, therefore, cannot be reduced to well-designed algorithms or
a string of sequences of specific teaching methodsalthough, during a single lesson, several different teaching
methods or phases of functional components can typically be recognized (Leach and Scott, 2000:41; Reid et al.,
2012:343).
Since students have different cognitive, affective and psychomotor characteristics, teachers should use
appropriate teaching methods and techniques. In previous studies, it is pointed out that teachers use teaching
methods and techniques such as presenting, direct instruction, or question and answer technique more and they
used methods and techniques enabling the students to learn actively such as exploring, laboratory, drama,
experiment, trip-observation and drama less or never in Science and Technology lessons (Demirezen, 2001:27;
Aktepe and Aktepe, 2009:70; Binler, 2007:24; Ramnarain, 2011:91-101). However, in studies (see Hewson et al.,
1999a:247-273; Hewson et al., 1999b:373-384; Lemberger, Hewson and Park, 1999:347-371; Meyer et al.,
1999:323-346; Tabachnick and Zeichner, 1999:309-322; Tsai, 2002:771-783; Neuhaus and Vogt, 2005:73-84;
Roehrig and Luft, 2006:963-985; Tsai, 2008:16-31; Tosun, 2009:374-379; Crawford, 2007:613-642; Schoeman and
Mabunda, 2012:240-254), the beliefs, attitudes and dispositions of prospective and beginning teachers have been
well documented. As can be seen, many of the studies that addressed teacher candidate students' beliefs and
thoughts about teaching have been conducted. In this respect, this study is considered of great importance. In
order to provide suggestions for teaching methods to develop teacher candidate students perceptions toward
school science, it is important to clarify teacher candidate students views on preferred teaching methods in the
science classroom. Development of such a scale for perceptions towards science teaching methods bears an
importance in terms of studies to be conducted on the issue in the future.
Despite the importance of science course teaching strategies and methods, little is known about what
perceptions of students teachers about traditional and contemporary science teaching methods are critical for
Baku, Azerbaijan| 73
educators science teaching. In the available research there is a lack of a general framework of teacher candidate
students perceptions for science teaching methods. Based on the available research and the arguments presented
above, the objective of this study is to develop a perception scale that would determine the perceptions of teacher
candidate students studying in faculties of education towards traditional and contemporary science teaching
methods, and that would contribute to literature with respect to analyses to be obtained as a result.
2. METHODOLOGY
The basic purpose of this study was to show evidence of reliability and validity for a scale to measure the
perception of teacher candidate studentss about science teaching methods. In this study, scale development was
applied.
2.1. Target Population
Teacher candidate students majoring in Elementary School Classroom Teacher Education, and Science
Education Department in Faculty of Education constituted the target population of this study during the fall
semester of the 2012-2013 academic years from Turkey. I conducted with two third of the teacher candidate
students in each classroom. The teacher candidate students for scale applications were selected randomly from
those teacher candidate students whose gave me permission. Therefore, no sample selection was needed since
this study was conducted directly on the population. Considering that the perception towards science teaching
methods would be more clear-cut in teacher candidate students, it was deemed adequate to include teacher
candidate students having their education in faculties of education as target group.
2.2. Stages Concerning The Development of The Scale
In developing SPTSTM, I tracked the determination of scale items, preparation and implementation of a
draft scale, and determination of reliability and validity stages respectively.
2.3. Stage of Scale Item Determination
The relevant literature has been reviewed and the perception (and attitude, views, ideas) scales used in
current studies have been examined by researcher. In determining the scale items, items that were present in The
Frye Opinion Questionnaire developed by Frye (1971:1-77) have been utilized. Besides, in order for researcher of
this research to add new items, 5 open-ended questions were asked to 112 teacher candidates concerning their
views, thoughts, and applications towards teaching methods:
a. What are your thoughts on science teaching methods in professional life?
b. Do you have negative feelings (such as inability, complexity, incomprehension) about science
teaching methods and these uses?
c. Do you have positive feelings (such as interest, ability, efficacy, comprehension) about science
teaching methods and these uses?
d. What kind of difficulties do you think you can face when doing teach?
e. Write an essay describing your feelings and thoughts towards science teaching methods and
techniques.
2.4. Stage of Draft Scale Preparations
Statements of the teacher candidate students concerning the issue that would possibly be placed in the
scale as have been systematically selected. Thus, an item pool has been formed containing 65 sentences. The
items in the SPTSTM consisting of 65 items has been submitted to the consideration of specialists and a draft
scale made up of a total of 60 items manifesting 30 positive and 30 negative connotations has been prepared as a
result of the feedbacks. Positive and negative statements were avoided not to be placed one under another in
order for the statements in the scale not to be misleading. They were alternated. Each item could produce one of
five responses, each of which corresponded to a numeric score. The responses and their scores were: 1-Strongly
disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Neither agree nor disagree, 4-Agree, 5-Strongly agree. Given the 60 items in the survey,
possible survey scores could range from 60 to 300. See Appendix for the 30 item final version of the 60 item draft
survey translated from Turkish to English. 818 teacher candidate students from the target departments took the
draft survey. Sixteen of the responses were excluded, however, due to errors in the subjects responses.
2.5. Stage of Scale Implementation
Initially, the draft scale (60 items) has been applied to 316 female and 502 male teacher candidate students,
a total of 818, having their education at the departments of the relevant faculty during fall semester of 2012-2013
academic years. About 62.4% of those students were from the Elementary School Class Master Education and
59.2% from the Science Education Department. These teacher candidate students were admitted into the program
before the Special Teaching Methods in Science Education course, they did not take any teaching methods and
techniques related courses.
2.6. Stage of Determining the Reliability and Validity of the Scale
Reliability and validity are the most important characteristics to exist items in a scale tool. In this respect,
reliability and validity of the draft scale was established by using the data obtained from the scale filled by 802
teacher candidates.
74 | PART B. SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
Reliability is a concept that puts forth the inter-consistency of all the questions in a scaling tool, homogeneity
and efficiency in assessing the concept in question numerous methods have been developed for the purpose of
determining the reliability of the scale. Among the most adopted of them is Cronbach-alpha coefficient. Since this
coefficient has consistent statistical foundation and is calculated by taking into consideration all the questions, it
reflects the general reliability of the test the most compared to other coefficients (Ozdamar, 2004:41). Cronbachalpha coefficient is a measure of the inter-consistency of the items present in the scale. It is frequently used in
determining the reliability of scales established on the multiple choice questions and total scores (Alpar, 2003:37).
Thus, Cronbach-alpha coefficient has been calculated in order to determine the reliability of SPTSTM for the scale
to be more objective, it should not only be reliable but also valid (Auerbach, 2003:38). Validity is the degree of
correct measurement without confusing one characteristic that a scaling tool aims to measure with any other
characteristic (Tekin, 2000:52). For the purpose of the validity of SPTSTM, a more preferred content validity and
structural validity verifications were carried out. Content validity is an indication whether the items present in the
scaling tool is sufficient quality- and quantity-wise in terms of measuring the characteristic aimed to be measured
(Buyukozturk, 2005:26). It requires collaboration with the field expert, and it is determined by consulting the experts
(Karasar, 2000:34; Tavsancl, 2002:21). In determining the content validity of SPTSTM, obtaining the expert views
concerning the field was deemed fit and adequate. Whereas, structural validity makes it possible to explain
connections related to the results. That is, it manifests how correctly the measuring toll assesses an abstract fact (a
concept, dimension, etc.) (Tavsancl, 2002:22). There are different structural validity methods. The structural
validity of SPTSTM, namely whether it could measure a single structure was analyzed by factor analysis method.
Factor analysis is one of the multivariate statistical methods that ensures the presentation of the data in a more
significant and summed-up manner by taking the relations between a variables group as the basis. This method
analyzes the relations between the variables and helps to convert to a less number of variables. The results of the
reliability test and factor analysis are discussed on next pages.
2.7. Data Processing and Analysis
SPSS 16.0 software package was utilized for analyzing the data from the scale. In order to examine the
contribution of the items present in the form to the scale and to determine the items that work on an average, item
analysis has been implemented as a first step to the data obtained from the scale applied to 802 teacher
candidates. Item analysis is conducted for the purpose of obtaining information to be used in item selection studies.
In other words, the item analysis is carried out in order to calculate the item statistics, select the items that could
directly be included in the test, determine the items that could be included in the test following a correction,
establish the manner of these correction studies to be conducted on these items, and to sort the items not suitable
to include in the test. In this analysis, reliability of the scale items is examined by checking the correlation between
each item score and the total scores resulting from the test, and the item having a low correlation coefficient are
decided to exclude from the scale (Karasar, 2000:34). Total items test correlation concerning the items of the scale
was determined by calculating Pearsons momentum multiplication correlation coefficient. At this stage, items with
an item total correlation lower than 0.30 have been excluded from the scale. At the second stage, data of SPTSTM
were subjected to factor analysis, basic components analysis was selected, and Varimax rotation technique was
implemented. In this analysis, items with a factor load value below 0.45 and the items with a difference between
two higher load values 0.10 at least (Buyukozturk, 2005:27) were excluded from the scale. Analyses were repeated
since the scale was planned to include five factors. The Alpha internal consistency coefficient of each sub-factor of
the developed SPTSTM and in this respect, the total item correlations has been calculated.
3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
In the item analysis carried for the purpose of determining which items should be selected in order for
SPTSTM to have high reliability and validity, the item analysis was conducted based on the item-total score
correlation for assessing the ability of each item to scale, and the obtained findings were given in Table 1.
Table 1. Item analysis results of SPTSTM
Item No
I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
I8
I9
I10
I11
I12
I13
I14
I15
I16
I17
I18
I19
I20
Item-Total Score Correlation

0.4159*
0.2621
0.4133*
0.4791*
0.4745*
0.4473*
0.5186*
0.3912*
0.3712*
0.3734*
0.3426*
0.3164*
0.3282*
0.4064*
0.4500*
0.4180*
0.3762*
0.5085*
0.4585*
0.5612*
Item No
I21
I22
I23
I24
I25
I26
I27
I28
I29
I30
I31
I32
I33
I34
I35
I36
I37
I38
I39
I40

0.4785*
0.3715*
0.4114*
0.4661*
0.4288*
0.2561
0.3386*
0.4884*
0.3680*
0.4519*
0.5392*
0.2399
0.5303*
0.5789*
0.4877*
0.5595*
0.5645*
0.3912*
0.4410*
0.5155*
Item No
I41
I42
I43
I44
I45
I46
I47
I48
I49
I50
I51
I52
I53
I54
I55
I56
I57
I58
I59
I60

0.5669*
0.5165*
0.6155*
0.5407*
0.4922*
0.5852*
0.4962*
0.3392*
0.5183*
0.3777*
0.4577*
0.3416*
0.4206*
0.2391
0.3391*
0.3501*
0.3570*
0.3993*
0.3617*
0.3897*
Note: *p<.05
Examining Table 1 led to a decision that four items with an item-total score correlation lower than 0.30 (I2,
I26, I32, and I54) would not contribute much to the scaling of the perception to be measured, and it was deemed
suitable to exclude from the scale. All the item total score correlation apart from these items was found to be
significant at a level of 0.05. Cronbach-alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale for 56 remaining items
has been calculated and it was established that an item that would lower the reliability of the scale was not present
by checking the values of the internal consistency coefficient of the scale after the item was deleted for each item.
The suitability of the data for factor analysis was determined by utilizing Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test. The fact
that KMO was higher than 0.60 and Barlett test was found to be significant manifested that it is suitable for factor
analysis (Buyukozturk, 2005:35). KMO sampling adequacy benchmark is perfect between 0.90-12.00, very good
between 0.80-0.89, good between 0.70-0.79, medium between 0.60-0.69, weak between 0.50-0.59, and
unacceptable below 0.50 (Buyukozturk, 2005:36). With the factor analysis conducted on the data obtained from the
2
scale, KMO coefficient 0.876 and Barlett coefficient ( =7432.186; p<0.05) were found to be significant. These
obtained values manifested that factor analysis could be applicable on our data. The scale used as a measuring
tool is expected to measure a characteristic spanning over a single dimension. This principle is especially important
in scaling the perceptions and establishes that the items present in the perception scale are inter-related. The fact
that a scale has single dimension connotes that the items constituting the scale measures a single structure (Balc,
2005:12). The single-dimension characteristic of SPTSTM at the first stage was tested by basic components
analysis which is the sub-application of the factor analysis. The expectation that the factors in the scale were more
clear-cut and significant was analyzed by utilizing Varimax rotation technique. The basic components analysis used
in factor analysis and the following Varimax rotation analysis were found to be formulated under 14 factors, of
which the eigenvalue of items present in the scale were higher than 1. These 14 factors explained 64.52 % of the
variance concerning the scale. For the reason that the factor number concerning the scale was much higher than
expected, this number was planned to be lowered. To Buyukozturk (2005:38), the factor that contains in the first
step 2/3 of the total variance related to variables included in the analysis is assessed as an important factor
number. In this respect, when the factors of SPTSTM were analyzed, it was determined that the first five factors
with high eigenvalues explained 45.74 % of the total variance. This variance rate made it possible for the SPTSTM
to be assessed as single scale made up of five factors. This is also clearly expressed in the line chart drawn
according to the eigenvalues.
Fig. 1. Scree test of eigenvalues from principal component analysis

When the Scree test shown in Figure 1 is examined, in which exists eigenvalues on the vertical axis and
factors on the horizontal axis, a high acceleration rate fall is observed after the first factor. This manifests that the
scale might be single-dimension. On the other hand, it is also observed that the curve progresses in the same
direction, meaning that the contribution of additional variances brought about by the following factors are close to
each other. Thus, it could be concluded that the optimal factor number which contains high acceleration rate rapid
falls would be five. Eigenvalues concerning the five factors determined for SPTSTM, variance percentages, and
total variance percentages are shown in Table 2. This finding might be an indicator that the scale could be multidimensional.
Table 2. SPTSTM findings of five factors obtained as a result of factor analysis of SPTSTM
Factor
Eigenvalue
Variance Percentages
Total Variance Percentages
1
2
3
4
5
13.10
2.810
2.514
2.265
1.945
23.390
5.017
4.490
4.045
3.473
23.390
28.408
32.897
36.943
40.416
Moving from the explanations in Figure 1 and Table 2, the scale was thought to be five-factor. Factor
number was coded as five in the factor analysis implementation conducted on the data again after this stage. With
respect to the conducted analyses, twenty-one items with a factor load value less than 0.45 in SPTSTM (I1, I9, I11,
I12, I13, I14, I15, I16, I17, I18, I20, I24, I30, I33, I35, I38, I39, I48, I49, I56, I60) and four items with a difference
between the factor loads less than 0.1 (I31, I37, I42, I47) were excluded from the scale. The distribution of thirtyone items that constitute SPTSTM in five factors, factor loads, and the Cronbach-alpha values of the factors are
given in Table 3.
Table 3. The distribution of items constituting SPTSTM to factors, factor load values, and item analysis results
Line
Item
No
No
F1: INTEREST
1.
I34
2.
I36
3.
I40
4.
I41
5.
I43
6.
I44
7.
I45
8.
I46
F2: SIGNIFICANCE
9.
Item Total
Correlation
0.5626
0.5335
0.5179
0.5690
0.6251
0.5547
0.4945
0.5769
1
1=0.856
0.681
0.605
0.588
0.646
0.621
0.708
0.686
0.569
Components
3
0.4306
0.618
I4
I5
I6
I7
I8
0.4755
0.4767
0.4589
0.5043
0.3832
0.747
0.697
0.716
0.568
0.701
I19
0.4543
0.568
16
I21
17
I23
18
I25
19
I27
20
I28
21
I29
F4: SELF-EFFICACY
0.4656
0.3877
0.4148
0.3058
0.4656
0.3399
0.506
0.666
0.649
0.701
0.533
0.488
15
22
2=0.809
I3
10
11
12
13
14
F3: APPLICATION
3=0.753
4=0.750
I49
0.5203
0.522
I51
I53
I55
I57
0.4543
0.4144
0.3337
0.3623
0.590
0.597
0.746
0.743
27
I10
0.3594
0.595
28
I22
0.3442
0.679
0.3472
0.3359
0.3746
0.595
0.507
0.562
23
24
25
26
F5: PRIORITY
5=0.646
29
I50
30
I52
31
I58
Cronbach alpha ()=0.845
When analyzed, Table 3 shows that the developed SPTSTM manifests a five-factor structure consisting of
F1, F2, F3, F4, and F5. Among these sub-factors, F1 contains 8 items I34, I36, I40, I41, I43, I44, I45, I46), F2
contains 6 items (I3, I4, I5, I6, I7, I8), F3 contains 7 items (I19, I21, I23, I25, I27, I28, I29), F4 contains 5 items (I49,
I51, I53, I55, I57), and F5 contains 5 items (I10, I22, I50, I52, I58).
Depending on the alpha coefficient of a scale, its reliability is interpreted as: if 0.00<0.40 the scale is
reliable, if 0.40<0.60 reliability of the scale is low, if 0.60<0.80 the scale is quite reliable, and if 0.80<1.00
the scale is highly reliable (Kalayc et al., 2005:44). The Cronbach-alpha reliability coefficient of SPTSTM was
calculated as 0.845. This value shows that SPTSTM is a highly reliable scale. The analysis of Table 1 manifests
that the Cronbach-alpha values of sub-factors of the scale are 1=0.856, 2=0.809, 3=0.753, 4=0.750, 5=0.646
respectively. The item total correlations of these sub-factors are seen to be differed 0.4945 and 0.6251, 0.3832 and
0.5043, 0.3058 and 0.4656, 0.3337 and 0.5203, 0.3359 and 0.3746. The sub-factors were named by looking at the
expressions of items accumulated in five components. F1 was dubbed the interest dimension for it reflected the
perception towards the interest in the science teaching methods, F2 was dubbed the significance dimension for it
reflected the perceptions towards the importance and necessity of some teaching methods, F3 was dubbed the
application dimension for it reflected the perception towards the practical levels about science teaching methods,
F4 was dubbed the self-efficacy dimension for it reflected the perception towards the self-efficacy about the
science teaching method, and F5 was dubbed the priority dimension for it reflected the perception towards the
priorities over science teaching methods.
Six score series have been utilized, one of which being the total scale score, while analyzing the relation of
SPTSTM sub-factors with each other and with the total scale score. During the formulation of these score series,
every single factor was regarded as a sub-scale, and sub-scale scores have been obtained by adding the item
scores constituting the factor. Pearsons momentum multiplication correlation coefficients were calculated in order
to reveal the relations between these score series. The results are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Correlation of the sub-factors of SPTSTM with each other and total scale
Interest
Significance
Application
Self-Efficacy
Priority
Significance
Application
Self-Efficacy
Priority
Total
0.449**
-
0.483**
0.407**
-
0.492**
0.338**
0.338**
-
0.455*
0.318**
0.312**
0.306**
-
0.846**
0.709**
0.713**
0.654**
0.641**
Note: **All correlations have p<0.01
Examination of Table 4 leads to the fact that positively high and significant correlations of the interest,
significance, application, self-efficacy, and priority factors of SPTSTM. The correlations are both with each
other and with the total scale score, which supports the structural validity of the SPTSTM.
4. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
In this study, a five-point Likert-type SPTSTM, which can be used to measure the perception of teacher
candidate students towards contemporary and traditional science teaching methods, was developed, and findings
concerning the reliability and validity of the scale presented. In the first stage of the analysis on the data concerning
SPTSTM, item analysis was applied to the data from a 60 item draft scale. As a result, four items found to have
insignificant contributions to measuring teacher candidate students perceptions toward science teaching methods
were excluded from the scale.
Results from factor analysis applied to the remaining 56 item SAR data indicated that the items with
eigenvalues higher than 1 could be formulated under 14 factors. Since the factor number of the scale was much
more than expected, the number was planned to be decreased. Analysis of the factors of SPTSTM revealed that
the first five factors with high eigenvalues explained 2/3 of the total variance, and this finding enabled the scale to
be assessed as a five-factor scale. As a result of the factor analysis and Varimax rotation technique applied on
SPTSTM, 29 items have been excluded from the scale. It was established that the final state of SPTSTM consisted
of a total of 31 items, 14 of which had negative connotations and 17 had positive connotations (see Appendix) and
that these items were grouped under five factors, namely interest, significance, application, self-efficacy, and
priority. These factors explained 51.25% of the total variance. For the whole SPTSTM, internal consistency
coefficient was 0.845 and the sub-scales were found to be 0.856, 0.809, 0.753 and 0.646, respectively.
Frye (1971) developed The Frye Opinion Questionnaire Number 1269, was composed of forty-four opinion
statements in a seven-point Likert-type scale for analyses and two statements asking the students to make
comments about the course. The sub-dimension numbers of The Frye Opinion Questionnaire and SPTSTM scales
are different, and sub-dimension names dont look like. The contents of items in SPTSTM are different. Developed
in this respect, SPTSTM is expected to add variety to literature.
Findings to be obtained via the implementation of SPTSTM in studies to be carried out in future will ensure
establishing the positive/negative perceptions of teacher candidate students towards science teaching
approaches/methods. In addition, findings to be acquired by applying SPTSTM along with different variables would
enable a better perception and assessment of the ideas of university student towards science teaching methods
and would also ensure precautions to be taken concerning the issue. In this respect, it is expected that the addition
of Practical Science Teaching Methods and the likes to the programs in faculties of education beginning from the
academic year of 2013-2014 would positively contribute to the perceptions of teacher candidate students towards
science teaching methods.
In context, my theoretical framework is based on a large number of international studies. The findings of this
research demonstrate that the theoretical framework of the perceptions for science teaching methods on
international literature is applicable to teacher candidate students. Although this theoretical framework is only
tested in the Turkey context in this study, I believe that these perceptions are critical for teacher candidate
students science teaching methods across different educational contexts. However, further empirical research
applying the scale developed in this study in other contexts would be very useful to test the validity and applicability
of this scale.
REFERENCES
1. Aktepe V. & Aktepe L. Students' views on the teaching methods used in the teaching of science and
technology: Kirsehir BLSEM instance. Kirsehir Ahi Evran University Journal of Education, 10(1):69-80.
(2009).
2. Alpar R. Applied multivariate statistical methods introduction 1. Nobel Publications, Ankara, Turkey.
(2003).
3. Auerbach, CF. Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York University Pres.
(2003).
4. Aydede M.N., Caglayan C., Matyar F. & Glnaz O. Science and technology teachers' perceptions
about their teaching methods and evaluation techniques. Cukurova University, Faculty of Education
Journal, 3(32): 24-33. (2006).
5. Balci A. Social science research methods, techniques and principles. 5th print, Pegem Publishing,
Ankara, Turkey. (2005).
6. Binler A.I. Tendency of science teachers to use teaching methods and techniques. Kafkas University,
Institute of Science, Published Master of Science Thesis, Kars, Turkey. (2007).
7. Bykztrk S. Data analysis for the social sciences handbook. 5th print, PegemA Publishing, Ankara,
Turkey. (2005).
8. Crawford B. Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 44(4):613-642. (2007).
9. Demirezen S. Teachers' views on teaching strategies and teaching methods and techniques.
Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Sciences, Unpublished Master's Thesis, Ankara, Turkey.
(2001).
10. Frye B.M. Attitude toward science and the audio-tutorial method of teaching general botany at
Oklahoma State University. Doctor of Education Thesis. The Faculty of The Graduate College.
Oklahoma State University, 1-77. (1971).
11. Hewson P.W., Tabachnick B.R., Zeichner K.M., Blomker K.B., Meyer H. & Lemberger J. Educating
prospective teachers of biology: Introduction and research methods. Science Education, 88:247-273.
(1999a).
12. Hewson P.W., Tabachnik B.R., Zeichner K.M. & Lemberger J. Educating prospective teachers of
biology: Findings, limitations and recommendations. Science Education, 88:373-384. (1999b).
13. Kalayci S., Albayrak A.S., Eroglu A., Kcksille E., Ak B. & Karaalti M. SPSS applied multivariate
statistical techniques. Asil Publication 1. Edition, Ankara, Turkey. (2005).
14. Karasar N. Scientific research method. 10th edition, Nobel, Ankara, Turkey. (2000).
15. Leach J. & Scott P. Childrens thinking, learning, teaching and constructivism. In M. Monk & J.
Osborne (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say (pp. 4154).
Buckingham: Open University Press. (2000).
16. Lemberger J., Hewson P.W. & Park H.J. Relationships between prospective secondary teachers
classroom practice and their conceptions of biology and of teaching science. Science Education,
88:347-371. (1999).
17. Meyer H., Tabachnick B.P., Hewson P.W., Lemberger J. & Park H.J. Relationships between
prospective elementary teachers classroom practice and their conception of biology and teaching
science. Science Education, 88:323-346. (1999).
18. Neuhaus B. & Vogt H. Dimensionen zur beschreibung verschiedener biologielehrertypen auf
grundlage ihrer einstellungen zum biologieunterricht [Dimensions for the description of different types
of biology teachers based on their attitudes towards biology education]. Zeitschrift fr Didaktik der
Naturwissenschaften, 11:73-84. (2005).
19. zdamar K. The statistical data analysis with package programs I. Eskisehir, Turkey, Kaan Bookstore.
(2004).
20. Ramnarain U. Teachers use of questioning in supporting learners. South African Journal of Education,
31:91-101. (2001).
21. Reid J.A., Mayer D., Santoro N. & Singh M. Learning and teaching: Issues for teacher education. AsiaPacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(4):343-345. (2012).
22. Roehrig G.H., Luft J. Does one size fit all? The induction experience of beginning science teachers
from different teacher-preparation programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43:963-985.
(2006).
23. Schoeman S. & Mabunda P.L. Teaching practice and the personal and socio-professional
development of prospective teachers. South African Journal of Education, 32:240-254. (2012).
24. Tabachnick B.R. & Zeichener K.M. Idea and action: Action research and the development of
conceptual change teaching of science. Science Education, 88:309-322. (1999).
25. Tavancil E. Attitudes measurement and data analysis with SPSS. Nobel Publications, Ankara,
(2002).
26. Tekin H. Educational measurement and evaluation. Yargi Publications, Ankara, Turkey. (2000).
27. Tosun T. The beliefs of preservice elementary teachers towards science and science teaching. School
Science and Mathematics, 100(9), 374-379. (2009).
28. Tsai C.C. Nested epistemologies: Science teachers beliefs of teaching, learning and science.
International Journal of Science Education, 24:771-783. (2002).
29. Tsai C.C. The preferences toward constructivist internet-based learning environments among
university students in Taiwan. Computers in Human Behavior, 24:16-31. (2008).
APPENDIX:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The teacher should give demonstrations (teacher conducting with concrete materials) to
arouse interest in a new science activity.
The teacher should not require each pupil to keep a notebook of experiments be
conducted in science class.
Question-answer teaching method does not allow adequate development of students
own opinions in science courses.
Multimedia teaching by technologies is especially good for the fast learner in science
courses.
Conventional lecture instruction isnt better for the average learner than the discussion
techniques in science courses.
Laboratory method is very important for science courses.
Strongly
agree
Disagree
Neither
agree nor
disagree
Agree
1. Strongly disagree; 2. Disagree; 3. Neither agree nor disagree; 4. Agree; 5. Strongly agree
Strongly
disagree
Perceptions towards traditional and contemporary science teaching methods scale (Final version)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
11.
Project/research based teaching is my favorite teaching method in a science class.

Science concepts are not better understood by pupils when role playing or drama
activities are employed.
The teacher should draw analogies between science understanding and the pupils
environment.
If I had a choice between the brainstorming method and conventional lecture method of
teaching I would choose the latter.
The textbook isnt necessary for science teaching.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
12.
The teacher should not read from the textbook in science courses.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
13.
When students work in buzz groups, they can better understand the science lesson.
The teacher should direct experiments (such as those in a text or activity / lab. book with
directions and answers to the experiment) in science courses.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
20.
The students should show movies, filmstrips, slides and videotapes in science courses.
The problem of individual differences among students in science courses cant solved
by the discussion method.
Boredom in science courses is eliminated by demonstration of the audiovisual materials.
The teacher should use basic inquiry skills (having students observe phenomena,
classify, measure, communicate information, use numbers) and causal inquiry skills
(having students use cause and effect, inference, prediction, and conclusion skills) in
science courses.
If a student masters a new science concept quickly, this might be because I knew the
necessary methods in teaching that concept.
I will not continually find better ways to teach science.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
21.
I dont know the steps necessary to teach science concepts effectively.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
22.
I will not be very effective in monitoring science experiments.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
23.
The teacher should provide the materials to be used by the students in a science lesson.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
24.
The presence of a number of teaching methods makes me feel worried.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
25.
I would prefer this course were taught in the traditional (conventional) manner.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
26.
Knowing teaching methods makes me feel confident in my future professional life.

The field trips and observation method provides a better learning situation for students
than the conventional lecture-laboratory discussion method in science courses.
Teaching process is a difficult task for science courses.
When the science grades of my students improve it is usually because I found more
effective teaching methods.
I will generally teach science ineffectively.
Of all the methods of science teaching I feel the closed-ended testing based laboratory
method is the best.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
7.
8.
9.
10.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Copyright of International Journal of Academic Research is the property of International

Journal of Academic Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites
or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However,
users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

A Scale of Perceptions Towards Traditional

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Scale of Perceptions Towards Traditional

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL of ACADEMIC RESEARCH

Vol. 5. No. 5. September, 2013