Thematic Review of Studies about Preschool Astronomy Education in Turkey1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to examine thematically the articles and dissertations made in Turkey about preschool astronomy education. In the research, a descriptive study was conducted, and the survey model was used. The study covered researches of preschool astronomy education that can be accessed in the national databases. Studies in analyzing data were; the type of publication, the distribution of the studies according to the years and the indexes in which they are included, the keywords used, the subject/concept of astronomy, the purpose of the studies, and the distribution according to the provinces, the methodologies used in the studies, the basic results achieved in the studies and the suggestions. The studies were first coded separately by researchers, and the reliability of the coding was ensured by forming a common opinion. As a result, most of the studies determined were articles of the year 2015 and above, and these studies are generally published in ULAKBIM indexed journals. Most repetitive keywords in research; preschool, astronomy, and mental model. The concept of astronomy focuses on studies of the Sun, Earth, and Moon. The studies mostly aimed to reveal the students' level of knowledge, misconceptions, and mental models related to basic astronomy concepts. The most preferred research method in the studies was the qualitative paradigm; the most preferred research designs were case studies and survey models. The researches were mostly carried out with the children in preschool age and the provinces of Balıkesir and Trabzon with samples smaller than 100 people. In most of the studies, interviews, drawings, and observations were used as data collection tools, and the content analysis technique was used in the analysis of the data. The general results of the studies showed that the mental models of preschool children about astronomy consist of concrete concepts and the participants lack knowledge on astronomy. In the studies, suggestions were made to researchers and practices.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".