International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2021, Vol. 17(1) 158-171

 Qualitative Evaluation of Prospective Science Teachers’ Concept Maps about the Atom

Özlem Eryılmaz-Muştu

pp. 158 - 171   |  DOI:   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1911-14-0004.R1

Published online: February 01, 2021  |   Number of Views: 66  |  Number of Download: 371


Concept maps are used to assess and improve prospective teachers’ conceptual understanding levels. In this research, the aim was to describe prospective science teachers’ conceptual understanding of the atom by using concept maps. The research employed the case study approach, one of the qualitative research patterns. The research group consisted of 15 fourth-year prospective science teachers. The concept maps drawn by the participants were used to describe their conceptual understanding of the atom. For data analysis, the descriptive analysis method, one of the qualitative analysis methods, was used. The data obtained from the concept maps were divided into the categories previously defined by the researcher. The created categories were evaluated by two academics with expertise in physics education, and a correspondence analysis was conducted. As a result of the research, it was concluded that prospective teachers could establish successful and meaningful propositions in concept maps, however, most of the propositions were collected in the categories of “meaningless,” “improvable,” or “acceptable.”

Keywords: Atom, Concept Map, Conceptual Understanding, Qualitative Analysis, Physics Education

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Eryilmaz-Mustu, O. (2021).  Qualitative Evaluation of Prospective Science Teachers’ Concept Maps about the Atom . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(1), 158-171. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2021.329.11

Eryilmaz-Mustu, O. (2021).  Qualitative Evaluation of Prospective Science Teachers’ Concept Maps about the Atom . International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(1), pp. 158-171.

Chicago 16th edition
Eryilmaz-Mustu, Ozlem (2021). " Qualitative Evaluation of Prospective Science Teachers’ Concept Maps about the Atom ". International Journal of Progressive Education 17 (1):158-171. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2021.329.11.

  1. Aytaçlı, B. (2012). A detailed analysis on case study. Adnan Menderes University Education Faculty Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(1), 1-9. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bağcı Kılıç, G. (2003). Concept maps and language: A Turkish experience. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1299-1311. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bahar, M. (2001). Biyoloji eğitiminde kavram haritalannın kullanımı The use of concept maps in biology education / . Abant İzzet Baysal University Journal of Education Faculty, 1(1), 25-40. [Google Scholar]
  4. Baş, T., & Akturan, U. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde bilgisayar destekli nitel araştırma yöntemleri/ Computer aided qualitative research methods in social sciences. . Ankara: Seçkin yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bauman, A. (2018). Concept maps: Active learning assessment tool in a strategic management capstone class. College Teaching, 66(4), 213-221. [Google Scholar]
  6. Burdina, M. (2015). Rethinking the use of concept maps in introductory economics courses. Journal of Economics and Economic Education Research, 16(1), 31-41. [Google Scholar]
  7. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2016). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri / Scientific research methods (21.ed). Ankara: Pegem Akademi. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bybee, R. W. (1996). The contemporary reform of science education. J. Rothon, & P. Bowers içinde, Issues in Science Education (s. 1-14). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association, National Science Education Leadership Association. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cheema, A. B., & Mirza, M. S. (2013). Effect of concept mapping on students’ academic achievement. Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 7(2), 125 -132. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cornwell, P. (1996). Concept maps in the mechanical engineering curriculum. ASEE Annual Conference.  [Google Scholar]
  11. Davey, L. (1991). The application of case study evaluations. Elementary Education Online, 8(2), 1-2. [Google Scholar]
  12. Eden, C. (1988). Cognitive mapping. European Journal of Operational Research, 36, 1-13. [Google Scholar]
  13. Enger, S. K. (1998). Students' conceptual understanding:qualitative evidence in concept maps. Paper presented at the Annual meeting ofthe mid-South Education Research Association (27th MSERA). New Orleans, LA: ERIC DOcument No: ED427060. [Google Scholar]
  14. Han, G., & Goldstein, B. R. (2013). J. J. Thomson's plum‐pudding atomic model: The making of a scientific myth. Annalen der Physik, 525(8-9), A129-A133. [Google Scholar]
  15. Harnisch, D. L., Sato, T., Zheng, P., Yamagi, S., & Connell, M. (1994). Concept mapping approach and its applications in instruction and assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. [Google Scholar]
  16. Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Econdary students' mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5), 509-534. [Google Scholar]
  17. Hentschel, K. (2009). Atomic Models, J.J. Thomson's “Plum Pudding” Model. D. In Greenberger, K. Hentschel, & F. Weinert  (Ed.) (pp. 18-21) Compendium of Quantum Physics Springer. [Google Scholar]
  18. Jacobs-Lawson, J. M., & Hershey, D. A. (2002). Concept maps as an assessment tool in psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 1, 9-25. [Google Scholar]
  19. Karagöz, Ö., & Sağlam Arslan , A. (2012). Analysis of primary school students’ mental models relating to the structure of atom. Turkısh Scıence Educatıon, 9(1), 132-142. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kaya, O. N. (2003). An alternatıve way of assessment ın educatıon: Concept Maps. Hacettepe University Journal of Education Faculty, 25, 265-271. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kinchin, I. M., Hay, D. B., & Adams, A. (2000). How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research, 41(1), 43-57. [Google Scholar]
  22. McClure, J. R., & Bell, P. E. (1990). Effects of an environmental education-related sts approach instruction on cognitive structures of preservice science teachers. University Park, PA:Pennsylvania State University. (ERIC DocumentReproduction Service No. ED 341 582). [Google Scholar]
  23. McClure, J. R., Sonak, B., & Suen, H. K. (1999). Concept map assessment of classroom learning:reliability, validity, and logistical practicality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 475-492. [Google Scholar]
  24. Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413-448. [Google Scholar]
  25. Novak, J. D. (1980). Progress in application of learning theory. Theory into Practice, 19(1), 58-65. [Google Scholar]
  26. Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge. Concept maps as facilitativetools in school and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. [Google Scholar]
  27. Novak, J. D., & Cañas , A. J. (2006). The origins of concept mapping tool and the continuing evolution of the tool. Information Visualization, 5, 175-184. [Google Scholar]
  28. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, R. (1984). Learning how to learn. NewYork: Cambridge University Pres. [Google Scholar]
  29. Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. R., & Johansen, G. T. (1983). The use of concept mapping andknowledge with junior high school science students. Science Education, 67(5), 625-645. [Google Scholar]
  30. Novak, J. D., & Ridley, D. R. (1988). Assessing student learning in light of how students learn. The AAHE Assessment Forum American Association for Higher Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 299923). [Google Scholar]
  31. Regis , A., Albertazzi, P. G., & Roletto, E. (1996). Concept maps in chemistry education. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(11), 1084-1088. [Google Scholar]
  32. Robertson, A. (1994). Toward constructivist research in environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 25(2), 21–31. [Google Scholar]
  33. Romero, C., Cazorla, M., & Buzón, O. (2017). Meaning learning using concept maps as a learning straregy. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 7(3), 313-332. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ruiz‐Primo, M. A., Schultz, S. E., Li, M., & Shavelson, R. J. (2001). Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept‐mapping techniques. Journal of Research in Scıence Teaching, 38(2), 260- 278 . [Google Scholar]
  35. Siau, K., & Tan, X. (2008). Use of cognitive mapping techniques in information systems development. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 4, 49-57. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ünlü , P., İlgeç, Ş. K., & Taşar, M. F. (2006). Investigating teacher candidates’ knowledge structures about momentum and impuls by the method of using concept maps. Education and Science, 31(139), 70-79. [Google Scholar]
  37. Wandersee, J. H. (1994). Concept mapping and the cartography of cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 923-936. [Google Scholar]
  38. Williams, C. G. (1998). Using concept maps to assess conceptual knowledge of function. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(4), 414-421. [Google Scholar]
  39. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri / Qualitative research methods in social sciences  (10. Ed.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık. [Google Scholar]