The Practice of Prospective Science Teachers regarding the Planning of Education Based Trips: Evaluation of Six Different Field Trips.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this study is to explain how planning educational trips out of school environments for training pur-ooses should be as well as to determine the opinions and the practices of prospective science teachers. The study that lasted for two years was carried out in parallel with the elective course Education in Informal _earnmg Environments in the Spring Term of the Academic Year of 2007-2008 and 2008-2009. Thirty-four 4th grade prospective science teachers participated in the study from the Giresun University Education Faculty Science Teaching Programme. In line with the research, educational trips to six different places were organized The research data used in qualitative research observation form and semi-structured interview technique were obtained. The observed results showed that prospective science teachers were careful, willing, and joyful in all field trips and worked in cooperation. The interview results also showed that prospective teachers' knowledge and their self-confidence increased for educational trips for training purposes planned. Key Words Informal Learning Environments, Science Education, Fieldtrip. The class environment's having limited sources to bring in the new knowledge which is acquired with the fast developments in science and technology to the society in an easy understandable, and enjoyable way has caused the need for alternative environments (Bozdogan, 2007; Kisiel, 2007). These places which are described as informal education environments include mass media, sports centres, zoos, botanic parks, woodlands, museums, libraries, aquariums, open air laboratories, nature centres, and a of social areas which we wont be able to count here (Hannu, 1993; Howe & Disinger, 1988). Informal education environments' being fun and natural, the people visiting these places being volunteers and the introduction of opportunity of gaining different experiences and teaching to different age groups of people with different activities can be seen as an advantage (Taylor & Caldarelli, 2004). It was introduced by the researches conducted that different activities which were presented apart from formal education resources were rich teaching resources which made learning more fruitful (Ramey-Gassert, 1997), encouraged learning by different ways which the class environment wasn't able to introduce, helped each student to enlighten themselves in their own paces (Melber & Abraham, 1999) and support the education at school (Gerber, Cavallo, & Marek, 2001; Hannu, 1993). One of the formal education environments which include a lot of fields is the field trips which are organized by the schools. These trips are one of the leading and effective education strategies which attract the attention of students and whose outcomes are permanent. This strategy is one of the ways which provide students unique opportunities to understand the natural environment and promote the sustainability of education. These natural environments help the concepts and complex knowledge which are told in school environment to be observed in its natural environment , to be aware of the real world and it also provides to gain experience at first hand (Bowker & Tearle, 2007; Kola-Olusanya, 2005; Leback, 2007; Rennie & McClafferty 1995; Scarce 1997; Skop, 2008; Tal, 2004b). They can also provide permanent change in the students' knowledge, attitudes and behaviours (Ballantyne & Packer, 2009; Knapp & Barrie, 2001; Orion, Hofstein, Tamir, & Giddings, 1997; Rudman, 1994; Tal & Morag, 2009). However, this condition must not mean that we deny the importance of education which is performed in the class because the best education takes place when a relation between intramural and extramural environments is built and carried out (Ballantyne & Packer, 2006; Kisiel, 2007). Moreover, it is emphasized that the field trips which are well-organised and associated with the school curriculum create successful outcomes (Bowker & Tearle; Kisiel, 2005; Tal, Bamberger, & Morag, 2005). …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".