คู่มือการประชุมสัมมนา ปี 3

Biology 2021, 10, 506 10 of 17

2.7. Data Collection Tools

Cause-effect relationship scale: The cause-effect relationship scale, developed by Nuhog˘lu [17].
The scale includes 10 judgment sentences about a cause-effect relationship. Students are
asked to mark their thoughts about the events mentioned in these sentences according
to the options “always”, “often”, “occasionally”, “rarely”, and “never”. The validity and
reliability studies of the first part of the cause-effect relationship scale were conducted with
123 secondary school 6th-, 7th- and 8th-grade students. The Cronbach Alpha reliability
coefficient determined for this scale consisting of 10 items, 5 of which are positive and 5 of
which are negative, was found to be ↵ = 0.88.

Semi-Structured interview form: In order to evaluate the activities in terms of students, a
semi-structured interview form consisting of 9 open-ended questions was used for student
views. Interview questions were prepared in order to reveal the advantages, disadvantages,
contributions, efficiency of teamwork, attitude towards science lesson, students’ future
goals and desire to prepare scientific projects for Arduino-supported STEM activities.

3. Results

In this section, the first research question, and the effects of the developed Arduino-
supported STEM activities on students’ skills for establishing a cause-effect relationship
were included.

3.1. Results for the Arduino-Supported STEM Activities Students Developed

The first research question is: Secondary school science class, for the “How can be
designed Arduino-supported activities for the lesson of Human Body System in a science
class at the secondary school level?” After the 3-period activities planned with the treatment
group students for the human body systems lesson, the students developed ideas and
created products for the solution of the given knowledge-based life problems.

As mentioned in the method section, 5 different models were designed by the students.
These models are; a distance-sensitive bracelet model, a pressure-sensitive epiglottis model,
a liquid flow-sensitive pulmonary blood circulation model, a dust-sensitive nose model,
and moisture-sensitive hand model. Thus, valid and reliable Arduino-supported STEM
activities that biology teachers can use while teaching human body system lesson the have
been brought to the education community.

3.2. Results for the Effects of the Developed Arduino-Supported STEM Activities on Students’
Skills for Establishing a Cause-Effect Relationship

The second research question is: Do the STEM activities supported with Arduino
have a significant contribution to the skills for establishing a cause-effect relationship of
the students?

Cause-effect relationship scale was applied to the treatment and control groups to
determine whether there is a significant difference between the students’ ability to establish
a cause and effect relationship and the Arduino supported STEM activities developed.
Research data were analyzed using SPSS 21 statistical program. Analyses were carried
out using nonparametric methods due to the small number of study samples. Descriptive
findings are given with mean and standard deviation values. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks
test was used to compare repeated measurements. If statistically p < 0.05, it is accepted
that there is a significant difference between the dependent variable and the independent
variable [18]. The results regarding the comparison of the cause-effect relationship scale
pre-test scores of the control and the treatment group students are given in Table 5.

Biology 2021, 10, 506 11 of 17

Table 5. Results Regarding the Comparison of Cause-Effect Relationship Scale Pre-Test Scores of the
Control and Treatment Group Students.

Groups N x SUp
Control Group 9 27.00
Treatment Group 10 31.90 1.05 43.500 0.069
5.48

When Table 5 is examined, it is seen that there is no significant difference between the
initial means of the students. The skills for establishing a cause-effect relationship of the
treatment (x = 27.00) and control group (x = 31.90) students before the study are close to
each other. The results regarding the comparison of the cause-effect relationship scale the
post-test scores of the control and the treatment group students are given in Table 6.

Table 6. Results Regarding Pre-Test-Post-Test Comparative Cause-Result Relationship Scale of Control
and Treatment Group Students.

Groups N Pre-Test Post-Test Z p

9 x SS x SS
Control Group 27.00 6.38 31.11 1.05 2.675 0.069
Treatment Group 10 31.90 4.38 39.50 5.48 2.374 0.018 *

* p < 0.05.

When Table 6 is examined, the mean of the treatment group students increased from
31.90 to 39.50. At the same time, there is an increase in the mean of the control group, but
when the treatment group and the control group are examined together, it is seen that
the mean of the treatment group students is higher than the mean of the control group.
Considering that the p-value is 0.018 in the treatment group, it can be said that there is a
significant difference between the treatment group and the control group in terms of skills
for establishing a cause-effect relationship.

3.3. Evaluation of the Activities

In order to evaluate the activities from the perspective of the students, student views
were consulted. According to the results of the semi-structured interview form filled by the
students, the students evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of Arduino-supported
STEM education, its contributions, counseling, group work, attitude towards science,
competence, desire to prepare scientific projects and its effects on future career choices.

According to the findings obtained from the interview form, some of the students’
views are as follows:

“After doing activities with Arduino, we learned more. For example, we understood how
the arduino works and what healthcare professionals, especially doctors, do and experience.”

“In the activities we did with Arduino, I learned the diseases that can happen to people
and learned how to develop ideas with sensors in order to find solutions.”

“Team work was very good. Really, our time was so good and we moved forward without
ever getting bored.”

“I used to not like science lesson, after this activity, I started to like science lesson, it
made me understand the subject better.”

“I used to want to be a teacher. But now I am thinking of becoming a doctor or surgeon.”

“In the past, I wanted to be a translator because I did not know about professions and
because I was good at foregin language, now I want to be a scientist or professor.”

According to the opinions of the students about the activities;

Biology 2021, 10, 506 12 of 17

4 they understood the subject better,
4 they have decided to choose a profession in the field of health in the future,
4 found the activities fun and efficient,
4 they liked science lesson more.

4. Discussion

In this study, Arduino-supported STEM activities were developed, the developed
activities were implemented to middle school students, and the effects of the activities on
students’ ability to establish cause and effect relationships were examined.

According to the results of the study, the students developed different projects for
the five topics of the human body systems lesson. The students prepared projects by
integrating biology subjects with electronics and robotics for the solution of the given
information-based life problem. Since Arduino includes a simple circuit connection [19],
teachers think that Arduino is more suitable for physics subjects and they designed and
implemented activities in the physics subjects of the science class [20,21]. When the studies
done with Arduino are examined, it is seen that biology is given a very little place in the
studies [22,23]. With this study, biology was combined with physics and robotics and a
resource that teachers can use in their lessons related to these three fields is presented.

Students developed different ideas for the solution to the information-based life
problem given during the activities. Different students designed different models to solve
the same problem and fixed the Arduino in different places. Unlike traditional education,
STEM education is an education method where students are at the center, work in groups,
and develop ideas [24]. The use of technology in education is a necessity for the twenty-first
century generation that grew up with technology [25]. For this reason, this study will shed
light on future studies, as it is a study that combines STEM education with technology.

When the studies conducted in the field of education in recent years are examined, the
significance of the skills of the twenty-first century is mentioned [26] and many skills such
as critical thinking [27], problem-solving skills [28,29], working in groups [30], analysis-
synthesis [31] are tried to be gained to students. For students to be able to solve problems,
they must first understand the cause of the problem and predict the results of the solution
they found [32]. In this study, it is seen that there is a significant difference between students’
skills for establishing cause-effect relationships and Arduino-supported STEM education.
Therefore, it can be said that Arduino-supported STEM education gives students the
skill for establishing cause-effect relationships. Studies have shown that STEM education
increases the academic achievement of students [33] changes their interest in the course
positively [34], gives them critical thinking [35], and increases their desire to prepare
scientific projects. This study proved that STEM education gives students the skill for
establishing cause-effect relationships.

5. Conclusions

Considering the contributions of the Arduino-supported STEM study to students,
teachers can apply such activities in other subjects of the science lesson, do similar studies
for other gains of the systems unit in our body, and apply them with all grade levels. In
addition, Considering the effects of the Arduino-supported STEM study on the future goals
of the students, the Ministry of National Education can purchase and supply arduino for
schools, train teachers in coding with arduino, and the work can be expanded throughout
the country in order to train doctors or engineers who love their profession for the future.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, methodology G.M.; formal analysis, A.G.A and G.M.;
investigation, G.M.; writing, G.M; supervision, A.G.A. This article was produced from the master’s
thesis written by the second author under the supervision of the first author. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Biology 2021, 10, 506 13 of 17

Institutional Review Board Statement: This study was carried out with the decision of Yıldız 11
Technical University Ethics Commission numbered E-73613421-604.01.02-2102150018.

Informed Consent Statement: Participant consent forms and parent consent forms were distributed
to the students to ensure ethical conditions in the study.

Data Availability Statement: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the
corresponding author upon reasonable request.

BBiioollooggyy 22002211,, 1100,, xx FFOORR PPEEEERR RREEVVIIEEAWWcknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the Yildiz Technical University for their contributions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

AAAAAArpdrrpppuddeppiuunneeoiidnnnnCiooxddirCCAiicxxuiirriAAtccsuuiittss

FiFFgiiuggruue Arree1.AAD11is..taDDnciisse-ttSaaennnccsieeti--vSSeeebnnrssaciitteiilvveteembborrdaaeccl’eesllceeirttcummitoo. ddeell’’ss cciirrccuuiitt..

FiFFgiiuggruue Arree2.AAPr22e..ssPPurrree-ssSsseuunrrsieeti--vSSeeeEnnpssiiigttliiovvtteeisEEmppoiidggell’oosttcttiiirsscummit.ooddeell’’ss cciirrccuuiitt..

Biology 2021, 10, 506 14 of 17

Figure A2. Pressure-Sensitive Epiglottis model’s circuit.

BBioiloolgogyy22002211, ,1100, ,xxFFOORRPPEEEERRRREEVVIEFIEWFiWgiguurereAA33. .DDuusstt--SSeennssiittiivvee NNoossee mmooddeell’’ss cciirrccuuiitt.. 1155oof f1188

..

FFiFiggiugurureereAAA44.4.P.PuPulumlmlmoononanarayrryCyCiCricriucrculaultaliatoitnoionmnmomdooedlde’sel’lcs’isrccciurircictu.uiti.t.

FFiFiggiugurureereAAA55.5.M.MMooiosistiustutruerre-se-es-senensnistsiitviitveiveheahhnaadnndmdmomdooedld’esel’lcs’isrccciurircictu.uiti.t.

Biology 2021, 10, 506 Epiglottis Pulmonary
(Thin-Film Pressure Sensor) (Water Flo
Appendix B int fsrPin = A2;
int val = 0; volatile int flow_fre
Bracelet int buzzerPin = 8; unsigned int l_hour
(Distance-Sensor) void setup() unsigned char flow
int santimetre; { unsigned long curr
int sure; Serial.begin(9600); unsigned long cloo
int trigPin = 7; } int buzzer = 8;
int echoPin = 6; void loop() void flow ()
int mavi = 9; { {
int yesil = 10; val = analogRead(fsrPin); flow_frequency++;
int kirmizi = 8; Serial.print("Uygulanan Basinc: "); }
void setup() Serial.println(val); void setup()
{ if( val > 300){ {
pinMode(trigPin, OUTPUT); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, HIGH); pinMode(flowsenso
pinMode(echoPin, INPUT); delay(100); pinMode(buzzer,OU
Serial.begin(9600); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, LOW); digitalWrite(flowse
} delay(100); Serial.begin(9600);
void loop(){ } attachInterrupt(0, fl
digitalWrite(trigPin, LOW); else{ sei();
delayMicroseconds(2); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, LOW); currentTime = milli
digitalWrite(trigPin, HIGH); } cloopTime = curren
delayMicroseconds(10); } }
digitalWrite(trigPin, LOW); void loop ()
sure = pulseIn(echoPin, HIGH); {
santimetre = (sure/2)/29.1; currentTime = milli
Serial.print(santimetre); if(currentTime >= (
Serial.println("cm"); {
if(santimetre < 80) { cloopTime = curren
digitalWrite(yesil,HIGH); l_hour = (flow_freq
digitalWrite(mavi,LOW); flow_frequency = 0
digitalWrite(kirmizi,LOW); } Serial.print(l_hour,
else if((santimetre > =80) && Serial.println(" L ");
(santimetre < 120)) { }
digitalWrite(mavi,HIGH); if(l_hour > 500){
digitalWrite(yesil,LOW); digitalWrite(buzzer
digitalWrite(kirmizi,LOW); } delay(100);
else if((santimetre > 120)){ digitalWrite(buzzer
digitalWrite(mavi,LOW); delay(100);
digitalWrite(yesil,LOW); }
digitalWrite(kirmizi,HIGH); } else{
delay(100); } digitalWrite(buzzer
}
}

15 of 17

Circulation Nose Hand
ow Sensor) (Dust Sensor) (Humidity Sensor Card)
equency; int measurePin = A0; #include <dht11.h >
r; int buzzerPin = 8; #define DHT11PIN 2
wsensor = 2; int ledPower = 2; int buzzerPin = 8;
rentTime; int samplingTime = 280; dht11 DHT11;
opTime; int deltaTime = 40; void setup()
int sleepTime = 9680; {
or, INPUT); float voMeasured = 0.0; Serial.begin(9600);
UTPUT); float calcVoltage = 0.0; }
ensor, HIGH); float dustDensity = 0.0; void loop()
flow, RISING); void setup(){ {
is(); Serial.begin(9600); Serial.println();
ntTime; pinMode(ledPower,OUTPUT); int chk = DHT11.read(DHT11PIN);
} Serial.print("Humidity (%): ");
is(); void loop(){ Serial.println((float)DHT11.humidity,
(cloopTime + 1000)) digitalWrite(ledPower,LOW); 2);
ntTime; delayMicroseconds(samplingTime); delay(2000);
quency * 60/7.5); voMeasured = if( DHT11.humidity > 60){
0; analogRead(measurePin); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, HIGH);
delayMicroseconds(deltaTime); delay(100);
DEC); digitalWrite(ledPower,HIGH); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, LOW);
; delayMicroseconds(sleepTime); delay(100);
rPin, HIGH); if(voMeasured >500){ }
rPin, LOW); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, HIGH); else{
delay(100); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, LOW);
rPin, LOW); digitalWrite(buzzerPin, LOW); }
delay(100); }
}
else{
digitalWrite(buzzerPin, LOW);
}
Serial.print("Okunan Deger: ");
Serial.println(voMeasured);
delay(1000);
}

Biology 2021, 10, 506 16 of 17

References

1. Bybee, R. What is STEM education? Science 2010, 329, 996. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Christopoulos, A.; Pellas, N.; Laakso, M.-J. A Learning Analytics Theoretical Framework for STEM Education Virtual Reality

Applications. Educ. Sci. 2020, 10, 317. [CrossRef]
3. Kelley, T.; Knowles, J. A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2016, 3, 1. [CrossRef]
4. Li, Y.; Schoenfeld, A.H.; diSessa, A.A.; Grasser, A.C.; Benson, L.C.; English, L.D.; Duschl, R.A. Design and design thinking in

STEM education. J. STEM Educ. Res. 2019, 2, 93–104. [CrossRef]
5. Tan, W.L.; Venema, S.; Gonzalez, R. International Association for Development of the Information Society, Paper presented at the

International Association for Development of the Information Society (IADIS). In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference
on Educational Technologies, Sydney, Australia, 11–13 December 2017.
6. Louis, L. Working Principle of Arduino and Using it as a Tool for Study and Research. Int. J. Control Autom. Commun. Syst. 2018,
1, 21–29. [CrossRef]
7. Zlatanov, N. Arduino and Open Source Computer Hardware and Software. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol. (IRJET) 2017, 4. [CrossRef]
8. Banzi, M. Getting Started with Arduino; O’Reilly Media, Inc.: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2009.
9. Joynes, C.; Rossignoli, S.; Fenyiwa Amonoo-Kuofi, E. 21st Century Skills: Evidence of Issues in Definition, Demand and Delivery for
Development Contexts; K4D Helpdesk Report; Institute of Development Studies: Brighton, UK, 2019.
10. Hmelo, C.E.; Evensen, D.H. Problem-based learning: Gaining insights on learning interactions through multiple methods of
inquiry. In Problem-Based Learning: A Research Perspective on Learning Interactions; Evensen, D.H., Hmelo, C.E., Hmelo-Silver, C.E.,
Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2000; pp. 1–18, ISBN 978-0-8058-2644-9.
11. Li, Y.; Wang, K.; Xiao, Y.; Froyd, J.E. Research and trends in STEM education: A systematic review of journal publications. IJ
STEM Educ. 2020, 7, 11. [CrossRef]
12. Kerpiç, A.; Bozkurt. An Evaluation of 7th Grade Mathematics Textbook Activities within the Framework of Activity Design and
Practice Principles. Mustafa Kemal Univ. J. Soc. Sci. Inst. 2011, 8, 303–318.
13. Corlu, M.S. [STEM: Integrated Teaching Framework]. In STEM Kuram ve Uygulamalari; Corlu, M.S., Çalli, E., Eds.; Pusula:
Istanbul, Turkey, 2017; pp. 1–10.
14. Lawshe, C.H. A Quantative Approach to Content Validity. Pers. Psychol. 1975, 28, 563–575. [CrossRef]
15. Yurdugül, H. Using Scope Validity Indexes for Scope Validity in Scale Development Studies. In Proceedings of the XIV. Educational
Sciences Congress Pamukkale University Faculty of Education, Denizli, Turkey, 28–30 September 2005.
16. Veneziano, L.; Hooper, J. A Method for Quantifying Content Validity of Health-Related Questionnaires. Am. J. Health Behav. 1997,
21, S67–S70.
17. Nuhog˘ lu, H. Investigation of the Effects of System Dynamics Approach on Attitude, Achievement and Different Skills in Primary
School Science and Technology Lesson. Ph.D. Thesis, Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara, Turkey, 2008.
18. Rosner, B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics, 7th ed.; Cengage learning: Boston, MA, USA, 2010.
19. Zöhra, B. Sensor Applications with Arduino. 2017. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313109058_
ARDUINO_ILE_SENSOR_UYGULAMALARI (accessed on 1 June 2021).
20. Rinaldi, R.G.; Fauzi, A. A complete damped harmonic oscillator using an Arduino and an Excel spreadsheet. Phys. Educ. 2020,
55, 015024.
21. Fokides, E.; Papadakis, D.; Kazoullis, V. To drone or not to drone? Results of a pilot study in primary school settings. J. Comput.
Educ. 2017, 4, 339–353. [CrossRef]
22. Pino, H.; Pastor, V.; Grimalt-Álvaro, C.; López, V. Measuring CO2 with an Arduino: Creating a Low-Cost, Pocket-Sized Device
with Flexible Applications That Yields Benefits for Students and Schools. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 96, 377–381. [CrossRef]
23. Alò, D.; Castillo, A.; Vial, P.M.; Samaniego, H. Low-cost emerging technologies as a tool to support informal environmental
education in children from vulnerable public schools of southern Chile. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2020, 42, 635–655. [CrossRef]
24. Rusk, F.; Rønning, W. Group work as an arena for learning in STEM education: Negotiations of epistemic relationships. Educ. Inq.
2020, 11, 36–53. [CrossRef]
25. Çetin, M.; Demircan, H.Ö. Empowering technology and engineering for STEM education through programming robots: A
systematic literature review. Early Child Dev. Care 2020, 190, 1323–1335. [CrossRef]
26. Bellotti, F.; Bottino, R.M.; Fernández-Manjón, B.; Nadolski, R.J. Guest Editorial: Game Based Learning for 21st Century Transfer-
able Skills: Challenges and Opportunities. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2014, 17, 1–2.
27. Chang, C.-Y.; Kao, C.-H.; Hwang, G.-J.; Lin, F.-H. From experiencing to critical thinking: A contextual game-based learning
approach to improving nursing students’ performance in Electrocardiogram training. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2019, 68, 1225–1245.
[CrossRef]
28. Rahman, M. 21st Century Skill “Problem Solving”: Defining the Concept. Asian J. Interdiscip. Res. 2019, 2, 64–74. [CrossRef]
29. Zhong, L.; Xu, X. Developing real life problem-solving skills through situational design: A pilot study. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev.
2019, 67, 1529–1545. [CrossRef]
30. Ferdous, T.; Karim, A. Working in Groups outside the Classroom: Affective Challenges and Probable Solutions. Int. J. Instr. 2019,
12, 341–358. [CrossRef]

Biology 2021, 10, 506 17 of 17

31. Stehle, S.M.; Peters-Burton, E.E. Developing student 21st Century skills in selected exemplary inclusive STEM high schools. Int. J.
STEM Educ. 2019, 6, 1–15. [CrossRef]

32. Aldowah, H.; Al-Samarraie, H.; Fauzy, W.M. Educational data mining and learning analytics for 21st century higher education: A

review and synthesis. Telemat. Inform. 2019, 37, 13–49. [CrossRef]
33. Sarican, G.; Akgunduz, D. The impact of integrated STEM education on academic achievement, reflective thinking skills towards

problem solving and permanence in learning in science education. Cypriot J. Educ. Sci. 2018, 13, 94–107. [CrossRef]
34. Vennix, J.; den Brok, P.; Taconis, R. Do outreach activities in secondary STEM education motivate students and improve their

attitudes towards STEM? Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2018, 40, 1263–1283. [CrossRef]
35. Putri, F.S.; Istiyono, E. The Development of Performance Assessment of Stem-Based Critical Thinking Skill in the High School

Physics Lessons. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Educ. 2017, 12, 1269–1281.





THE SCIENCE LEARNING ISSN 1648-3898 /Print/
ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY ISSN 2538-7138 /Online/
SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE

Demet Şahin Kalyon Abstract. This research explored dream
science classrooms of primary school third-
Introduction and fourth-grade students. Research is
designed as a case study. The students were
In recent years, it has attracted pretty much attention on how to teach rst asked to illustrate their dream science
science to students. The well-accepted view is not only to provide students classroom and produce a short descrip-
with scienti c concepts, but also to grow scienti c literate individuals by tion of their drawings. Second, they were
engaging them in scienti c inquiry process because science learning is asked to write their expectations of their
characterized by conceptual understanding, as well as granting purposeful teachers, their classmates, and themselves
participation and, therefore, a sense of belonging of children in scienti c in their science classes. Three hundred and
practice (Caiman & Jakobson, 2019).In science classes, there is a need for prac- twelve participants were identi ed using
tices allowing students to discover science instead of teaching ready-made the convenience sampling method. The
scienti c information. It is necessary to teach students how to do science. research evaluated the students’ drawings
Science education is the teaching of science to non-scientists, including chil- and descriptions in the rst step, and their
dren, and it uses some attractive and surprising means around the children. expectations in the second step. Students,
It is the education of the food the children eat, the water they drink, the air in their drawings, conveyed the following
they breathe, their bodies they are curious about, the animals they feed, the messages: Experiments (lab works) could
cars they get on, the electricity they use, the light, and the sun they bene t. be used in science education, and di erent
With science education, students have the chance to know and interpret classroom activities and science courses
scienti c explanations of the natural world they live in. In this sense, science could be done outside the classroom. In
education is a natural and concrete education that needs to be done through addition, they expected their teachers to
the appropriate methods, taking the children’s interests and needs, the level have them perform more experiments in
of their developments, their wishes, and their environmental potentials into the classes, to o er them interesting and
consideration (Balbag & Karaer, 2016). intriguing knowledge, to encourage them
to conduct research and projects, and
Science education at the primary schools provides the opportunity for ask questions. Their expectations of their
developing scienti c ideas, challenging the nonscienti c ideas that children classmates to follow the classroom rules,
are likely to form with no guidance. It gives children experience of scienti c to work in collaboration, to share, and to
activity to inform the development of attitudes toward science (Harlen & appreciate them so that they can bene t
Qualter, 2017). from science classes more e ciently. They
expected themselves to be successful in
The subjects and concepts taught in science classes naturally exist in science classes.
our world. Science classes enable students to explore natural phenomena Keywords: classroom environment, learn-
surrounding them and construct concepts toward them. Brie y, science ing environment, science class, science
classes should attract students as the way nature attracts people through teaching, student drawings.
di erent colors, sounds, avors, smells, and textures. Science classes aim to
teach students how to discover and use information instead of memorizing Demet Şahin Kalyon
it. In addition, students should raise an idea about scienti c methodology Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University, Turkey

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605 605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

through science classes. The activities performed in these classes help students learn basic science concepts and
develop skills to adapt their knowledge to daily life by working on everyday problems. As a consequence of the
activities performed in the classrooms, students are expected to acquire the skills and to develop a positive attitude
toward science classes. In this case, the e ectiveness of science classes is shaped by the classroom environment,
and attitudes of teachers and students toward the class. Therefore, the classroom environment, teacher practices,
and student characteristics have the capability to shape the class overall.

Several studies have claimed that the students do not like science classes very much, although these classes
have a robust relationship with daily life, and their interest in this class has been gradually decreasing (Murphy
& Beggs, 2003; Murphy et al., 2004; Osborne et al., 2003; Scamp & Logan, 2005; Potvin et al., 2014). Besides, it is
thought that one of the biggest challenges of this century is to inspire students for continuing their learning and
achievement in science education (Bal-Taştan et al., 2018). The problem of declining interest in school science is
international (not universal), and many reasons have been put forward to explain this, such as gender and grade
level (Alexander et al., 2012; Cavas, 2011; Guvercin et al., 2010), primary school teachers’lack of con dence in teach-
ing science and their insu cient subject matter knowledge, (Murphy & Beggs, 2003).

Student attitudes toward school subjects are shaped by the interaction of three variables: teacher character-
istics, student characteristics, and the learning environment (Myers & Fouts, 1992). Therefore, the characteristics
of the learning environment a ect the interests and attitudes of students because teachers can include di erent
activities in science classes as long as their knowledge and environmental conditions allow. Diverse activities de-
ployed in the learning environment a ect students’ interests and attitudes toward the class positively.

What is a learning environment then? Imagine a traditional classroom. What are the class members doing?
What tools (physical and mental) are they using to learn? With whom are the participants doing their work? What is
the work like? What is the nature of communication among the participants? What purposes are you able to derive
for the activity of the group? These are just a few of the variables determining the nature of learning environment
(Magnusson & Sullivan-Palincsar, 1995).

A learning environment is characterized by a unique interactive combination of teacher activities, peer in-
teractions, and teacher-to-student interactions that evolve within the classroom setting (Myers & Fouts, 1992). It
has been found that the learning environment is reliably and strongly correlated with achievement and a ective
outcomes (Fraser, 1999). The expectations of students about the science classroom environment were favorably
correlated with the student attitude toward science and the student’s academic achievement in science (Bas, 2012;
McRobbie & Fraser, 1993; Talton &Simpson, 1987).

The physical environment of the classroom, science classroom activities, and peer interactions are all signi cant
issues that need to be considered when analyzing how individuals think about the science class (Talton &Simpson,
1987). For this reason, this research explored what kind of environment and with whom (students’expectations of
their teachers and classmates) students would like to be taught in science classes. To serve this purpose, students
were asked to draw a science class of their dreams, hence the data of the research were collected through these
drawings. Drawings are used as a data-collection tool such as questionnaires, scales, observations, and interviews
in educational research. Drawings were used as the data collection tool in educational research because they are
considered one of the fun activities of children. Furthermore, drawing is not only a tool through which children can
express themselves easily but also a process that can be combined with teaching areas such as science education
(Balliel-Unal, 2017; P. Hudson & Hudson, 2001).

Children inherently develop a speci c language to communicate with their environments during their infancy,
which is how they communicate verbally. They are then taught to communicate through the written language.
Children also develop a visual language acting as a link between verbal language and written language. Children
from 12-18 months can realize that a pencil left marks and these marks can also be traced, which is considered a
great discovery for them. Afterward, children combine lines and create new designs. As they grow, they master in
drawing, and their shapes and signs can be used to portrait the world surrounding them. Their drawings develop
from simple to complex with natural and orderly steps. This process provides children with means for visual com-
munication (Nelson et al., 1998).

The study of Gomez-Arizaga et al. (2005) showed that the use of children’s drawings is a helpful tool for
researchers because drawings are one of the ways that children reveal their inner selves and worlds. The use of
drawing and writing is one of the e ective ways of identifying students’ perception on an ideal classroom: role
de nition of their teachers, their expectations of their classmates, and the actual classroom arrangement (traditional
versus nontraditional) (Ulker et al., 2013) inasmuch as even the most straightforward drawing extends exclusive

606

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

opportunities for complementing expressions, and enable people to communicate what words cannot in many
cases (Malchiodi, 2003, p. 1). Students make representations in their drawings to express their thoughts, feelings,
and perceptions and show relationships and changes (Nelson & Chandler, 1999).

Drawings have been used as data collection tools in some studies in the eld of science education; however,
the purpose of these studies is mostly to illustrate a scientist or a science teacher image of students and teacher
candidates (Akkus, 2013; Go & Kang, 2015; Oğuz-Ünver, 2010; Şahin, 2009; Thomas et al. 2001; Thomas & Peder-
sen, 2003; Yontar-Toğrol, 2000). The number of studies aiming to reveal thoughts about the learning environment
through drawings is very limited (Yılmaz et al., 2008). Besides, the data are generally obtained through scales in
studies to de ne the learning environment (Efe et al. 2007; den Brok et al. 2010; Welch et al. 2014). Such studies
generally examined middle and high school students. This research aimed to ll a gap in the science education
literature because thoughts of primary school students about their teachers, learning process, their classmates
were obtained through their drawings. The research makes an important contribution to the concept of a science
teacher and the science learning process.

In this research, primary school students were asked to depict their dream science classrooms. The research
aimed to reveal how students dreamed of learning environment in their science classes. The research results and

ndings may be used as a guide for teachers and teacher candidates while conducting the science classes. While
organizing science classes, it is helpful for teachers and teacher candidates to know their students’expectations to
perform the lessons more e ectively because research on the learning environment provides a well-established
approach to explain and understand what is going on in classrooms.

Based on this idea, the research explored dream science classrooms of third- and fourth-grade students. The
research had the following research questions:

1. What kind of science classrooms do the third- and fourth-grade students dream of?
2. What are the expectations of primary school students of their teachers in their science classrooms?
3. What are the expectations of primary school students of their classmates in the science classrooms?
4. What are the expectations of primary school students of themselves in their science classrooms?

Research Methodology

Research Design

In this research, third- and fourth-grade students illustrated their dream science classrooms through their
drawings. This research is designed as a case study. Case study is considered one of the most widely used research in
social sciences. It can explain phenomena that are di cult to understand through experimental studies and trying
to de ne cases where they emerge (Buyukozturk et al., 2010; Yin, 2003). Bogdan and Biklen (1992, p.62) de ne case
study as a detailed study of a subject, a formation, or a speci c phenomenon through collected documents. The
“case” speci ed in this design can be a person, an event, a social activity, a group, or an institution (Jupp, 2006, p.
20). The case examined in the research is the learning environment in which students want to be in their science
classes. The students drew what kind of classroom they want to be in their science classes. In addition, they wrote
their expectations of their teachers, themselves, and their classmates. In this way, the students’drawings about the
learning environment in the science classes and their expectations of their teachers and classmates were analyzed,
and multifaceted and in-depth implications were tried to be derived from their perceptions. To sum, the learning
environment was examined in the context of the physical environment, the teacher, the student itself, and its
classmates. Research data were collected in the rst semester of the 2018-2019 academic year.

Participants

The convenience sampling method was used to select the study sample because it is a frequently used method
in qualitative research and includes available and ready-to-use groups of people (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1990). In this
research, data collection took approximately 40 minutes, which corresponds to one class hour, so that administration
and teachers should voluntarily allocate 40 minutes to this research as an extracurricular activity. For this reason,
the schools with teachers and students who could voluntarily participate in this research were determined. The
reason for selecting these schools is that the researcher has had a close relationship with school administrators and
teachers for a long time because candidate teachers enrolled in the university where the researcher is employed

607

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

do their teaching practices in these schools. In addition, Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa University, where the researcher is
employed, has a contract with these schools. Administrators and teachers in these schools are willing to contribute
to scienti c studies. Finally, studies were conducted with third- and fourth-grade students enrolled in two primary
schools in Tokat, a city in Turkey. The number of students participating in the research is given in Table 1.

Table 1
Participants of the research

School Grade Gender Total

School A 34 FM 215
School B 98 117 93 122 136
64 72 69 67

A total of 351 students participated in the research, but as a result of the preliminary examination of the
drawings, the drawings of 39 students were considered invalid.

Thus, the sample was composed of a total of 312 primary school students, of whom 156 were third graders,
156 were fourth graders. During the data collection process, the participants were told that their drawings and
written expressions would not be used for any other purpose. Rather than their drawings, only some demographic
information such as gender, school, and grade and the participants were not asked for further personal informa-
tion. The required permissions were obtained from administrators and teachers during the data collection process.

Measures

In this research, the students’ drawings and written expressions were used as data collection tools. In the
data-collection stage, the students were rst asked to draw their dream science classrooms and write a short
description about what they drew. They were then asked to write down what they expected from their teachers,
their classmates, and themselves. All the data were collected on a single sheet of paper. They drew on the front
side of the paper and wrote the description of the drawing on the back side. Then, they were asked to answer the
questions “What are your expectations of your teacher in the science class?”, “What are your expectations of your
classmates in the science class?” and “What are your expectations of yourself in the science class?.” There was no
restriction on the use of the pencil while drawing. The students were instructed that they could use only pastel,
dry paint, or pencil. The students were given 40 minutes to draw, and there was no guidance on what to draw.

Data Analysis

A constant comparison procedure was utilized in this research. This procedure allows researchers to evaluate
themes obtained from interviews, eld notes, and other sources and to compare them with the same or another
set of data (Merriam, 1998). The themes in this research were obtained from the analysis of the drawings and
written expressions. The analysis was conducted in two steps: analysis of the students’ drawings and analysis of
the students’ expectations. Drawings and their descriptions were evaluated in the rst step, while the students’
expectations were evaluated in the second step.

First Step: Students’ Drawings

The content analysis method was utilized to examine the students’ drawings. For the analysis, themes were
identi ed and quanti ed by their frequencies (Figure 1). The drawings were evaluated only for the visual elements
they contained, and no psychological analysis was conducted. The Draw-a-Scientist Test (DAST-C) (Chambers,
1983) and the Draw-a-Science-Teacher Test Checklist (DASTT-C) (Thomas et al., 2001) have been used in studies
conducted on the data collected through drawings in the eld of science. The DAST-C was not adopted by this
research because it is an assessment tool created to reveal a scientist’s image. The DASTT-C asks participants to

608

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

draw themselves as if they were a science teacher. Nevertheless, the purpose of this research was to reveal what
kind of learning environment students would like to be in. Although the DASTT-C does not serve the purpose of
the research, some headings in the DASTT-C score sheet still functioned as a source for the researcher in generat-
ing the main themes of this research.

Figure 1
Themes of the analysis

Student drawings were examined one by one, and all the drawing elements were transferred to the computer.
The main themes and sub-themes were identi ed in this process. Accordingly, the student drawings were evaluated
under the main themes of “environment, “ “materials,”“expressions,” and “people. “ Each theme consisted of some
sub-themes, which were determined based on the frequency of the elements that the students drew. For example,
there is the sub-theme titled “depicted environment” under the main theme of “ environment. “ It appeared that
they often drew classroom, laboratory, and out-of-classroom environments, therefore, the“depicted environment”
was identi ed as a sub-theme. Other sub-themes were similarly generated. After determining the main themes
and sub-themes, an expert opinion was taken. Following the interviews with the experts it was concluded that
this analysis framework was appropriate for the research.

Second Step: Students’ Expectations

Student’s expectations were analyzed in the same way. Themes were generated based on their expecta-
tions and identi ed and quanti ed by their frequencies. The main themes were identi ed as “ expectations of
teachers,”“expectations of classmates,” and “expectations of themselves. “ For example, there is the sub-theme of
“experimenting” under the main theme of “expectations of teachers.” It was seen that the students mostly asked
their teachers to have them do experiments. For this reason, the “experimenting” was identi ed as a sub-theme.
Other sub-themes were created in the same way. After determining the main themes and sub-themes, the expert
opinion was taken. Following the interviews with the experts it was concluded that this analysis framework was
appropriate for the research.

Research Results

Students’ Drawings

The drawings of the students were evaluated within four themes: environment, materials, expressions, and
people. Each theme consisted of some sub-themes.

609

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Environment

Depicted Environment

As Table 1 illustrates, most of the students (n=112) drew themselves in a classroom or a laboratory setting. Fig-
ures 2 and 3 show an example drawing and its description depicting students in a classroom or a laboratory setting.

Figure 2 Figure 3
An example of a classroom An example of a laboratory

4G701: “Children open their books and 4G132: “I am explaining that I want to be
are being taught solid and liquid materials.” taught science in the laboratory.”

Table 2
The frequency distribution of environments in the students’ drawings

Environments Grade Total

Classroom 34 112
Laboratory 112
Outdoor 68 44 39
Exclusive classroom 53 59 20
Library 8 31 1
Invalid 13 7 28
-1
11 17

As Table 2 indicates, 39 students drew themselves in an out-of-classroom environment, while 20 of them drew
themselves in an exclusive classroom. Figures 4 and 5 provide two examples of such drawings.

1 4G70: Number and letter (4G) represent grade. The last two or three numbers (70) represent the number of the student participating in
the study.

610

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

Figure 4 Figure 5
An example of outdoor environment An example of an exclusive classroom

3G21: “We are learning our sense organs in a 4G20: “A smartboard for students to see better,
study rural area.” a place to understand what they see, a telescope
to see outside - space -, a library, a place to do
science to comprehend these potions, and a study
place for a group of four.”

Types of Activities in Students’ Drawings

Some of the participating students did not draw any activities even though they drew a classroom or a labora-
tory. Therefore, the number of activities in the drawings (n=109) was less than the environments drawn.

As Table 3 depicts, the majority of students drew the following science activities with a total of 127 activities:
experiment 74, observation 45, research 4, discussion 2, and problem-solving activities 2.

Figures 6 and 7 show some examples of such drawings.

Figure 6 Figure 7
An example of an experiment An example of an observation

4G5: ‘‘We are experimenting with our teacher.’’ 3G11: ‘‘We are observing beings in nature and
listening to our teacher.’’

611

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Table 3
Frequencies of types of activities in the students’ drawings

Grade

Types of activities 3 4 Total

Experiment 37 37 74
Lecture 34 27 61
Observation 11 34 45
Research 2 2 4
Discussion 2 - 2
Problem-solving activities 2 - 2
Others Demonstration, reading, activity, interview, Demonstration (5), taking notes, explo- 15
drama, picnic, playing games sion, watching videos
Invalid or no activity 60 49 109

Some students (n=61) drew themselves as if they had been lectured (Table 3). Lecture means that the teacher
teaches the subject actively while students only sit at their desks and listen to the teacher passively. In such draw-
ings, the teacher was illustrated as being in front of the board and talking, and students just sat at their desks.
Figure 8 presents an example of such drawings.

Figure 8
An Example of a Lecture

4G15: “Teachers are explaining some facts about the world and students are listening to the lesson.”

Seating Arrangements in Students’ Drawings

Table 4 shows that the majority (n=95) of students drew themselves as sitting with a traditional-seating arrange-
ment. Students in Turkey usually sit at their desks arranged according to the traditional seating concept. Students
usually sit at their desks in pairs. Figure 9 presents an example of such a seating arrangement drawn by students.

Some students drew themselves in an individual (n=44) classroom-seating arrangement either in a lab or a
classroom. Figures 10 and 11 present some examples of such drawings.

The number of students drawing a laboratory-seating arrangement (n=42) was less than those drawing tra-
ditional seating. Figure 12 shows an example of a laboratory-seating arrangement drawn by the students. In this
arrangement, students work at the lab tables as groups.

612

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

Some students designed their exclusive classrooms. These classrooms have an exclusive-seating arrangement
(n=9). In the research, students were asked to draw their dream science classrooms. However, it is noteworthy that
the number of the students drawing an exclusive-seating arrangement, and the students drawing di erent seating
arrangements was low.

Table 4
The frequency of seating arrangements in students’ drawings

Grade

Seating Arrangements 34 Total

Traditional (pairs) 60 35 95
Individual 22 22 44
Laboratory seating 16 26 42
Exclusive 45 9
U shape 12 3
Square -2 2
Others - Circle 1
No seating arrangement 46 70 116

Figure 9 Figure 10
An example of a traditional (pairs) seating An example of an individual seating in the class

3G38: “The teacher is talking about the 3G113: “The teacher is explaining the
layers of the Earth; all students are importance of the matter and asks
listening to the teacher.” us to prepare a project.”

613

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Figure 11 Figure 12
An example of an individual seating An example of a laboratory
arrangement in the laboratory seating arrangement

3G105: “I have depicted that I want to 4G98: “We are doing experiments
do experiment in the lab.” in the laboratory.”

Materials

Real-life Items and Models

One-third of the participating students drew real-life items or models in their drawings. Models drawn by
children were generally related to a human body, the Earth, or the Universe (Figure 13). More than half of these
children drew a globe (n=45) (Table 5). Students drew rocks, mines, minerals, animals, and foods as real-life items.

Table 5
The Frequency of Real-life Items and Models in the Students’ Drawings

Grade

Real-life Items and models 3 4 Total
5
World globe 2 40 45
Human skeleton model 3 (Sense organs) 11 13
Other models The earth’s crust (2), planets (4), human body 12
- (2), molecule (1)
Rocks-mines-minerals 1 11 11
Fossil 6 7
Others Animals, microbes (2), fruits (2), substances in 11
solid, liquid, and gas forms

614

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

Figure 13
An example of models and real-life items

Visual Aids
The students mostly drew a board in their drawings (n=149). It was followed by books, computers, and pictures.

Table 6
The frequency of visual aids in the students’ drawings

Visual aids Grade Total

Blackboard or interactive whiteboard 34 149
Book 98
Computer 83 66 23
Pictures 50 48 1
2 21

1

615

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Figure 13
An example of visual aids

Laboratory Equipment

Students illustrated glassware more in their drawings (n = 92). In their drawings, thirty-six of them drew some
glass materials that contain chemicals. There were also glassware, microscopes, and telescopes in their drawings.
Figure 14 shows some examples of such drawings.

Table 7
The frequency of laboratory equipment in the students’ drawings

Laboratory equipment 3 Grade Total

Lab glassware 41 4 92
Chemicals 16 36
Microscope 5 51 34
Telescope 1 20 28
29
27

Others 14
glasses, lab coat, ruler, scissors, amperem-
battery

Expressions

Scripts on the Board

In the students’ drawings, it was found that there was some subject-related information on the boards that
were covered during the semester, in which this research was conducted (e.g., the earth’s features, sense organs,
states of matter, rocks, mines, and minerals). Only seven third graders wrote the steps of an experiment on the board
in their drawings. The number of students who wrote questions or formulas on the board in their drawings was 10.

616

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

Table 8
The frequency of scripts on the board in the students’ drawings

Scripts on the board 3 Grade Total

Earth’s features 4 4 20
Class/subject 9 12
Making an experiment 7 16 7
A question 2 3 5
A formula 2 - 5
Sense organs 4 3 4
States of matter - 3 4
Rocks-mines-minerals - 3
A chemical bond 1 4 1
3
-

Figure 14 Figure 15
An example of laboratory equipment An example of sense organs

Speech Bubbles

The ndings show that 24 students added some speech bubbles to their drawings. These speech bubbles
usually contained speeches of teachers who were introducing lessons and subjects. Two students drew the mo-
ments when the teacher praised them (e.g., “you’re ne”. “don’t stop”…). Three students used the bubbles to ask
questions to the teacher.

617

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Figure 16
An example of a speech bubble

People

People in the Students’ Drawings

The ndings of the research revealed that teachers and students were usually illustrated with happy facial
expressions in the students’ dream science classrooms (Figures 10 and 14). Only one student drew scientists.

Table 9
People in the students’ drawings

Grade

People in the Students’ drawings 3. 4. Total

Teacher 49 48 97
Student 66 75 133
Happy facial expression 67 75 142
Unhappy facial expression 3 2 5
Others Al-Biruni, Galileo, Pythagoras, - 5
Magellan, Columbus

Students’ Expectation

Students’ Expectations of Their Teachers

Once students were asked what they expected from their teachers in science classes, they gave di erent an-
swers (Table 10). One of the most frequent expectations of the participants (n = 67) was that they wish their teacher
had them do experiments. Sample statements from the students for such an expectation are presented below:

3G105: ‘‘I want him/her to take us to the lab to do experiments.’’
4G109: ‘‘I want my teacher to have us do experiments and to teach how an experiment is done.’’

618

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

Table 10
Third and fourth graders’ expectations of their teachers in science classes

Students’ expectations of the teacher Grade 4 Total

Experimenting 3 35 67
Sound knowledge on subject matter 53
Meets expectations / no expectations 32 25 27
Negative image 28 18
Positive image 7 20 17
Activities 5 17
Entertainment 12 13 16
Appreciation 5 11
Pedagogical content knowledge 8 5 7
Asking questions 9 6
Utilizing materials - 12 4
Others 4 12
3 8
-
2

7

2

1

Checking homework (2), conducting research (2), doing
observation (2), having students write down (2), teaching
with visual aids (2), supplying more materials, allowing
group works

Another frequent expectation of students (n= 53) was addressed under the theme of subject matter knowledge
of the teacher. In this sense, students generally expected their teachers to give them new and di erent scienti c
knowledge and di erent examples. Sample statements from the students for such expectations are presented below:

3G15: ‘‘I expect my teacher to explain everything completely.’’

4G107: ‘‘Of course, I expect my teacher to teach us new things. For example, I think we could learn more about the Earth’s
crust and its movements if we could go out.’’

Some students stated that their teachers met their expectations in science classes (n=27).
3G94: ‘‘Our teacher has the traits I appreciate.’’

4G28: ‘‘Our teacher does everything we expect.’’

Some students expressed their expectations through the poor personality traits of their teachers (n=18). Such
statements were addressed within the theme of a negative image. In this regard, students often stated that they
expected their teachers not to be angry.

3G87: ‘’I expect our teacher to have eye contact with us and not to get angry.’’

4G5: ‘’I expect my science teacher not to be angry.’’

On the other hand, some students expressed their expectations through the positive personality traits of their
teachers (n=18). Such statements were addressed within the theme of a positive image. Therefore, students often
expressed that they expected their teachers to be good-humored and good-hearted.

3G17: ‘‘I expect my teacher to be happy and good-humored.’’

4G39: ‘‘I expect my teacher to be lovely.’’

Some students stated that they expected their teachers to have them do di erent activities (n=17). The state-
ments of the students addressed under this theme include only the word “activity, “ but it is not known what kind
of activities they were talking about. Only some students expressed their expectations using the words “activity”
and “game. “

3G77: ‘‘I expect my teacher to have us write down a lot and do many activities.’’

4G127: ‘‘I wish the lessons have some more activities.’’

The participating students wanted their teachers to add fun to science classes (n=16). These students often
desired the lessons to be fun through experiments.

619

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

3G65: ‘‘I want my teacher to have us do fun experiments.’’
4G101: ‘‘I expect my teacher to entertain us.’’
Some students stated that they wanted their teacher to appreciate them (n=11).
3G41: ‘‘When I give the correct answer to my teacher question, I expect him/her to tell me, “Well done!”
4G29: ‘‘I expect my teacher to warn me when I do it wrong and to appreciate me when I do it right.’’
A few students emphasized that they expected their teachers to teach exceptionally. These expectations were
addressed under the theme of pedagogical content knowledge (n=7).
3G8: ‘‘I expect my teacher to teach the science lesson very well.’’
4G78: ‘‘I would like him/her to teach us well.’’
Few students expressed that they expected their teachers to ask them questions (n=6).
3G5: ‘‘I expect my teacher to ask us questions and to teach something about science.’’
4G10: ‘‘I expect her/him to ask us questions.’’
Some students stated that they had expectations of their teachers, such as checking homework (2), conduct-
ing research (2), doing observation (2), having them write down (2), teaching with visual aids (2), supplying more
materials, and allowing group works. Examples of students’ expectations of their teachers are presented below.
3G47: ‘‘I would like him/her to have us write down a lot.’’
4G156: ‘‘I expect my teacher to allow us to go out to nature and study mines.’’

Students’ Expectations of Their Classmates

Students had di erent expectations of their classmates in their science classes. The ndings of the research
revealed that these expectations were mostly related to classroom rules, such as following the rules and being
quiet in the classroom.

Table 11
Third and fourth graders’ expectations of their classmates in science classes

Students’ expectations of their classmates 3 Grade Total

Silence 33 4 99
Following the rules 7 43
Effective listening 24 66 27
Cooperation 19 36 24
Success 11 3 23
Solidarity 15 5 21
Respect 8 12 16
Positive personality traits 6 6 11
Sharing 3 8 7
Appreciation 3 5 4
Active participation in class 1 4 3
Not teasing 2 1 2
No expectations - 2 10
-
10

As Table 11 indicates, students mostly expected their classmates to be quiet (n=99). Another expectation that
students frequently repeated was that their classmates to follow classroom rules (f=43).

3G7: ‘‘I expect my classmates to be quiet and listen to the lesson.’’

620

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

4G104: ‘‘I expect them to be quiet.’’
The expectations of the students for listening to the lessons were addressed within the theme of e ective
listening (n=27). The ndings, in this regard, revealed that students often expected their classmates to listen to
the lesson carefully and e ectively.

3G29: ‘‘I expect my classmates to be quiet and listen to the lesson.’’
4G32: ‘‘I expect them to listen to the lesson quietly.’’
Some students stated that they wanted to do the activities in cooperation with their classmates (n=24).
3G60: ‘‘I would like to do experiments with my classmates.’’
4G144: ‘‘I expect to do teamwork to ful ll what the teacher wants.’’
Some students stated that they expected their classmates to be successful in science classes (n=23)
3G66: ‘‘I want my friends to be researchers, intelligent, and successful.’’
4G141: ‘‘I expect them to listen to the lesson well and succeed because their success a ects class achievement.’’
The ndings of the research depicted that some students asked their friends to help them with things they
did not know.
3G63: ‘‘I expect to help each other.’’
4G87: ‘‘What I expect from my classmates is to be supportive.’’
Some students stated that their classmates should respect each other.
3G4: ‘‘I would like him/her to be respectful, honest, helpful, and sensitive to me.’’
4G57: ‘‘I expect them to be respectful and not to be quarrelsome.’’
Using words such as “tolerant, “ “benevolent, “ “honest, “ and “sensitive,” students stated that they expected
their classmates to have positive personality traits.
3G25: ‘‘ I expect them to be kind, compassionate, and tolerant.’’
4G72: ‘‘They should allow me to participate in the games during breaks, and they should be generous, helpful, and good-
hearted.’’
A few students emphasized the word“sharing.“ These students expected their classmates to share knowledge
and possessions. In addition, some students expected to be appreciated by their classmates. Not being teased was
another expectation stated by the students.
3G61: ‘‘I would like my classmates to appreciate what I do.’’
4G46: ‘‘I would like them to share what they know.’’

Students’ Expectations of Themselves

Their expectations of themselves were to focus on increasing academic achievement only. The number of
students mentioning activities that support 21st-century skills, such as conducting research and designing a
project, was only 10.

Table 12
Third and fourth graders’ expectations of their themselves in the science class

Grade

Students’ expectations of themselves 3 4 Total

Studying hard 20 13 33
Being successful 48 109
Active participation 52 61 102
Others Invention, exploring a formula, conduct- 10
ing research, writing well (2), generating 50
different ideas,
Conducting a project, writing well, do-
ing experiments, conducting research

621

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Students stated that they mostly wanted to be successful and to participate in science classes actively. Another
expectation was to study hard.

3G19: ‘‘I would like to study hard and to give correct answers to the questions.’’

3G53: ‘‘I always want to get the full mark from exams and to come in the rst rank in the world.’’

3G48: ‘‘I would like to listen to the classes well and to be successful.’’

Discussion

This research explored third- and fourth-grade students’ dream science classrooms. The research revealed
the students’ expectations of their teachers, their classmates, and themselves. Besides, students’ dream science
classrooms were depicted based on the results obtained.

The ndings of the research revealed that primary school students portrayed their dream science classrooms
as the classrooms with a traditional-seating arrangement or a laboratory. The reason why the number of students
who drew a classical classroom environment for science classes is high could be that the lessons are taught in
traditional classrooms instead of a laboratory setting. The study of Kaplan (2011) investigated the learning environ-
ment of the primary school students, asking them to draw their learning environment in science classes. The study
found that none of the fourth-grade students drew a laboratory. The purpose of the science curriculum is to raise
all individuals as science-literate; therefore, di erent methods and techniques have been adopted to achieve this
goal. Classroom/school and out-of-school learning environments were designed according to the research-inquiry
based learning strategy for students to acquire the knowledge meaningfully and permanently (Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı
[MEB], 2018). Laboratory practices comply with the research-inquiry strategy. As a consequence of this fact, it is
expected the laboratory practices to be performed to reach the objectives set in the curriculum. Nevertheless,
some studies have claimed that there are negative situations regarding the use of laboratories in science classes
(Ayvaci & Kucuk, 2005; Boyuk et al., 2010; Demir et al., 2011; Gunes et al., 2013).

The students mostly drew an out-of-class environment after laboratory. They made beautiful drawings il-
lustrating how science subjects are taught in out-of-class environments. Outdoor education explains “ where, “
“ how, “ and “ why” education is given in out-of-school environments (Ford, 1986). Outdoor education covers all
activities outside the classroom in which all sense organs are used to enrich the educational content (Priest, 1986;
Lappin, 1997). Language, arts, social studies, mathematics, science, and music are among the curricular areas often
associated with outdoor education (Lappin, 1997). It is prudent to say that out-of-class environments are natural
laboratories for science classes. In this case, it would be safe to say that out-of-class learning environments should
be frequently applied within science classes. Students also re ected their dream science classes taught outside in
their drawings to support the above-mentioned idea.

The studies showed that out-of-class learning environments for science classes positively a ect students’learn-
ing levels, attitudes, and perspectives (Bowker & Tearle, 2007; Bozdogan & Yalcin, 2006; Kulaligil, 2016). Nevertheless,
primary school teachers and teacher candidates do not have positive attitudes toward out-of-class environments
(Bostan-Sarioglan & Kucukozer, 2017; Turkmen, 2015).

With parallels to the results of the studies of Gomez-Arizaga et al. (2015) and Balliel-Unal (2017), this research
also revealed that the students, in their drawings, illustrated students doing experiments the most. Participants
in both studies drew themselves, assuming that they were doing experiments. The number of students drawing
fundamental skills required for a science class, such as observation, research, discussion, problem-solving activities,
was less than the ones drawing experiments. Although the number of students drawing di erent activities was
low, the number of them drawing student-centered activities was more. Gomez-Arizaga et al. (2015) reported that
the children tended to draw pictures depicting themselves in student-centered activities.

Although the number of students who drew student-centered activities was high, there were also students
drawing teacher-centered activities such as a lecture. It is thought-provoking that the participants portrayed
students who carefully listen to a teacher standing in front of the board in their dream science classroom. This
result implies that teachers do not include di erent activities, especially experimental activities, in science classes.
Studies have argued that teachers do not prefer having their students do experiments due to teachers’ percep-
tion that doing experiments has little e ect on permanent learning (Ulucinar et al., 2008), lack of laboratories
and equipment (Demir et al., 2011), teachers’ lack of knowledge about laboratory equipment, and the supply of
missing equipment (Taskin-Ekici et al., 2002). In a study examining the teachers’ perception, it was shown that all

622

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

participants emphasized that labwork was of critical importance in science education to understand theory and
stimulation (Ottander & Grelsson, 2006). Although the teachers thought it was important, they could not conceive
that the main purpose of the lab work was to make scienti c inquiries. The ndings of the same research, based on
the teachers’ interview, revealed that the main objective of lab work was to put the theory into practice, stimulate
students’ interests and enjoyment, and practice relevant skills and techniques (Ottander & Grelsson, 2006).

The fact that the students are seated in accordance with the teaching method, it can maintain educational
activities e ectively and make the learning activity more e cient (Sahin, 2019) Some studies found a relationship
between seating arrangement in the classroom and various factors, such as achievement (Cinar, 2010; Perkins &
Wiema, 2005), asking questions (Marx, Fuhrer, & Hartig, 1999; Moore & Glynn, 1984), communicating with peers
during class (Granström, 1996), and learning motivation (Buyuksahin, 2019). The ndings of this research revealed
that the traditional seating arrangement was portrayed in the students’drawings more. The number of students who
drew di erent arrangements having some advantages over row (traditional) arrangement was smaller. Students in
Turkey usually sit at their desks in pairs with the traditional-seating arrangement. Such a fact might lead students
to prefer this arrangement in their drawings. Should motivation and success be aimed in science classes, changing
the seating arrangement can be useful. The fact that the students drew the row (traditional) arrangement in their
drawings too much may indicate that this arrangement is preferred in their classrooms more.

Science classes can be more meaningful and useful when real-life items are used in the classes. Moreover, they
are also suitable for the use of models. However, the ndings of the research revealed that students include real-life
items and models in their drawings, but the number of these students is insigni cant. Students, in their illustrations,
drew globes, human body models, skeletons, fossils, and rocks, mines, and minerals as real-life items and models.

Visual aids are teaching tools that are used to encourage students to learn and facilitate the learning process,
as well as to motivate students. That is why science classes use visual aids, such as drawings, posters, and charts.
Students, in their drawings, illustrated boards, interactive boards, books, and computers as visual aids. This may
prove that they have previously experienced or seen these kinds of materials only.

Most of the children depictured themselves and other people, their teachers and classmates, with a happy
face in their drawings. Studies have presented that children’s drawings re ect their emotions and inner worlds
(Golomb, 1994; Rosenblatt & Winner, 1988; Serin, 2003). Students’ depiction of themselves as happy implies that
they are happy in science classes. Gomez-Arizaga et al. (2016) examined the perceptions of third -grade students
about science classes through their drawings. Their studies depicted that a clear majority of the children (76%)
illustrated themselves with a happy face, while none of them illustrated themselves with an unhappy face.

The ndings of the research showed that the participating students expected their teachers to have them
do more experiments. Students can acquire knowledge by reading textbooks and doing the activities in these
books. They stated that they wish their teachers to teach them what would attract their attention and raise their
curiosity. Moreover, they expressed that they wanted to do di erent activities that would make science classes fun.
Furthermore, it was noteworthy to emphasize that there were students expecting student-centered activities that
were suitable for science classes, such as research, group work, and observation. Students’expectations of teachers
may a ect their attitudes toward school, and possibly their motivation to learn. Besides, students stressed their
relationships with teachers more than do teachers. Students also academically invested in teachers when they
perceived that the teachers cared about their learning enough to make additional e orts to enhance achievement
(Rubie Davis et al., 2006). Moreover, the students expressed that they expected to be appreciated by their teachers.
Researchers claimed that students’self-expectations, achievements, and behaviors change when they realize that
their teachers care about them (Muller et al., 1999).

The students stated that they expected their classmates mostly to be quiet and follow the rules. Another
expectation was that they expected from their classmates to listen to the lesson. They also expressed that they
expected from their classmates to cooperate with their classmates and expected them to succeed in science
classes, too. Moreover, they stated that they expected help from their classmates in subjects they were not good
at. Expressing that they want to be appreciated by their classmates, the students stated that they expected their
classmates to have positive personality traits by using words, such as tolerant, benevolent, honest, and sensitive.

The ndings of the research revealed that academic achievement was what students expected most. As in
every class, it is aimed to raise science-literate individuals with 21st-century skills in science classes. It is an interest-
ing nding that students’expectations related to such skills were rare. This may be because the teachers’and even
parents’ expectations of students are directed toward academic achievement.

623

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Conclusions

The classroom is an essential element of the Turkish education system. Therefore, this research suggests that
the physical environment of the classroom, science classroom activities and interactions with peers and teachers
are all signi cant issues that need to be considered when analyzing how individuals think about the science class.
This research reveals what kind of classroom the third- and fourth-grade students dream of in the science class,
and what are their expectations of their teachers and classmates in the classroom.

The research is in the eld of science education, we have information about the interactions in the classroom.
As we improve our understanding of how students, teachers, and science function together in a learning environ-
ment, the quality of science education in Turkey will also increase. There is a need to create supportive, encourag-
ing, and interesting environments where science subjects can be learned, positive attitudes toward science can
be developed, and academic achievement is a ected positively. It is thought that students should have a voice in
the creation of such environments, and students’ views on science classrooms are of importance.

Is there a science classroom that students prefer? The ndings of the research reveal that the answer is “yes!”.
Brie y, science can be taught through experiments and di erent classroom activities. Classes can also be done
in out-of-classroom environments. Science classes can involve student-centered practices, such as experiments,
observation, research, and problem-solving activities. In addition, students expect their teachers to have them do
more experiments in their classes, to provide interesting and intriguing scienti c information, to encourage them to
conduct research and projects, and ask questions, to be good-humored, and to appreciate them. Students expect
their classmates to follow the classroom rules, to work in collaboration, to share, and to appreciate them to bene t
from science classes more. Finally, they expect themselves to be successful in science classes.

This research examines the primary school students’ views on their dream science classrooms through their
drawings. Therefore, it serves as a guide in designing the learning environment for teachers and teacher candidates.
The ndings of this research can provide recommendations to Turkish teachers who are interested in creating more
supportive and e ective learning environments. This research is important because it was conducted with primary
school students with their drawings and expressions rather than any learning environment questionnaire. The
research can also be used as a guide for researchers who will conduct such a research at di erent grade levels. The
research determines what kind of environment students would like to be in their science classes. In this research,
certain control variables, such as gender and socioeconomic status, were not examined. Picking variables can be
a limitation of the research, and therefore, future studies may obtain di erent results when they select more dif-
ferent variables than the variables used in this research.

Note

This research was presented as an oral presentation at the 18th International Primary Teacher Education
Symposium.

References

Akkus, H. (2013). Pre-service secondary science teachers’ images about themselves as science teachers. Journal of Baltic Science
Education, 12(2), 249-260. http://oaji.net/articles/2015/987-1425758849.pdf

Alexander, J. M., Jonhson, K. E., & Kelley, K. (2012). Longitudinal analysis of the relations between opportunities to learn about
Science and the development of interests related to science. Sci Educ 96(5), 763–786. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21018

Ayvacı, M. Ş., & Küçük, M., (2005). İlköğretim okulu müdürlerinin fen bilgisi laboratuvarlarının kullanımı üzerindeki etkileri [The
e ects of primary school principals on using science laboratories]. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 165, 1–9.

Balbağ, Z., & Kararer, G., (2016). Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin fen öğretiminde karşılaştıkları sorunlara yönelik öğretmen görüşleri
[The opinions of the science teachers towards science teaching problems]. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(3),1-11.
http://www.jret.org/FileUpload/ks281142/File/01.m._zafer_balbag.pdf

Ballıel Ünal, B. (2017). İlkokul öğrencilerinin fen bilgisine yönelik algılarının çizdikleri resimlerle analizi. [Analysis of perceptions
of primary school students towards science using the pictures they draw]. Journal of Human Sciences, 14(3), 3031-3043.
https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v14i3.4623.

Bal-Taştan, S., Davoudi, S. M. M., Masalimova, A. R., Bersanov, A. S., Kurbanov, R. A., Boiarchuk, A. V., & Pavlushin, A. A. (2018).
The ımpacts of teacher’s e cacy and motivation on student’s academic achievement in science education among sec-
ondary and high school students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6), 2353-2366.
https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/89579

624

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

Bas, G. (2012). Investigating the correlation between students’perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and their
academic success in science course with path analysis. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 11(4),367-378. http://oaji.net/
articles/2014/987-1419169197.pdf

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Allyn and Bacon.
Bostan Sarıoğlan, A., & Küçüközer, H. (2017). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının okul dışı öğrenme ortamları ile ilgili görüşlerinin

araştırılması [Investıgatıon of preservıce scıence teachers’ opınıons regarded to outdoor school learnıng envıronments].
İnformal Ortamlarda Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(1), 1-15.
Bowker, R., & Tearle, P. (2007). Gardening as a learning environment: A study of children’s perceptions and understanding of
school gardens as part of an international project. Learning Environments Research, 10(2), 83-100.
Bozdoğan, A. E., & Yalçın, N. (2006). Bilim merkezlerinin ilköğretim öğrencilerinin fene karşı ilgi düzeylerinin değişmesine ve
akademik başarılarına etkisi: enerji parkı [The e ects of science centers on the change of “science interest” levels of pri-
mary education students and on their academic success: energy park]. Ege Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 95-113.
Böyük, U, Demir, S., & Erol, M. (2010). Fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretmenlerinin laboratuvar çalişmalarina yönelik yeterlik görüşlerinin
farkli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi [Analyzıng the profıcıency vıews of scıence and technology teachers on laboratory
studıes ın terms of dı erent varrıables]. TÜBAV Bilim Dergisi, 3(4). https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tubav/issue/21519/615001
Büyüköztürk, Ş., Çakmak, K. E., Akgün, E, Ö., Karadeniz, Ş., & Demirel, F. (2010). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scienti c research
methods]. Pegem.
Büyükşahin, Y. (2019). Eğri oturalim; doğru öğrenelim: Esnek oturma düzeniyle hazirlanmiş sinif ergonomisinin öğretmen ve
öğrencilerin motivasyon düzeylerine etkisi [Let’s sit skew and learn right: Investigation the classroom ergonomics prepared
with exible seating e ects on the motivation levels of teacher and students]. Academy Journal of Educational Sciences,
3(2), 152-164. https://doi.org/10.31805/acjes.635136
Caiman, C., & Jakobson, B. (2019). The role of art practice in elementary school science. Science & Education, 28, 153–175.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00036-2
Cavas, P. (2011). Factors a ecting the motivation of Turkish primary students for science learning. Science Educational Interna-
tional, 22(1), 31–42
Chambers, W. D. (1983). Stereotypic images of scientist: The draw-a scientist test. Science Education. 67(2), 255-265.
Çınar, İ. (2010). Sınıf coğrafyası: Geleneksel derslikte kim, nerede oturur? [Classroom geography: Who sit where in the traditional
classrooms?] The Journal of International Social Research, 3(10), 200-212. http://www.sosyalarastirmalar.com/cilt3/sayi10pdf/
cinar_ikram.pdf
Demir, S., Böyük, U., & Koç, A. (2011). Fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretmenlerinin laboratuvar şartları ve kullanımına ilişkin görüşleri
ile teknolojik yenilikleri izleme eğilimleri [Views of science and technology teachers on laboratory conditions and use of
laboratory with their tendencies to follow technological innovations]. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(2), 66-79.
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article- le/160793
den Brok, P., Telli, S., Çakıroğlu, J., Taconis, R., & Tekkaya, C. (2010). Learning Environment Pro les of Turkish Secondary Biology
Classrooms. Learning Environment Research, 13, 187-204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-010-9076-5
Dennis W. Moore (1984). Variation in question rate as a function of position in the classroom. Educational Psychology, 4(3), 233-
248. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341840040304
Efe, R., Hevedanlı, M., Ketani, Ş., İnce, H. H., & Aslan E. H. (2007). Nasıl bir öğrenme ortami? Biyoloji sini arinda öğrenme or-
tami yapisinin belirlenmesi [What type of learning environment? Finding out the nature of learning environment in
biology classes]. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9, 69-83. le:///C:/Users/Lenova/Downloads/
Ayvaci_H._S._ve_kucuk_M._2005_._Ilkogret.pdf
Ford, P. (1986). Outdoor education: De nition and philosophy. ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools Digest.
https://www.ericdigests.org/pre-923/outdoor.htm
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen N. E. (1990). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill
Fraser, B. J. (1999). Using learning environment assessment to improve classroom and school climates. In H.J. Freiberg (Eds.),
School climate: Measuring, improving and sustaining healthy learning environments (pp. 65-83). Falmer Press.
Go, Y., & Kang, J. (2015). Early childhood pre-service teachers’self-images of science teaching in constructivism science education
courses. Asia-Paci c Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 16(2), 1–25.
Golomb, C. (1994). Drawing as representation: The child’s acquisition of a meaningful graphic language. Visual Arts Research,
20(2), 14-28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20715828.pdf
Gomez-Arizaga, M., Bahar, K. A., Maker, C. J., Zimmerman, R. H., & Pease, R. (2016). How does science learning occur in the
classroom? Students’ perceptions of science instruction during implementation of the REAPS model. Eurasian Journal of
Mathematics and Science Education, 12(2), 1-24. https://www.ejmste.com/article/how-does-science-learning-occur-in-the-
classroom-students-perceptions-of-science-instruction-during-4499
Granstrom, K. (1996). Private communication between students in a classroom in relation to di erent classroom features.
Educational Psychology, 16, 349-364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014434196016040
Guvercin O., Tekkaya C., & Sungur S. (2010). A cross age study of elementary students’ motivation towards science learning.
Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 39, 233–243.
Güneş, M., Dilek, N., Topal., N., & Can, N. (2013). Fen ve teknoloji dersinde laboratuar kullanimina yönelik öğretmen ve öğrenci
değerlendirmeleri [Teacher and student assessments regarding to use of science and technology laboratory]. Dicle
Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (20) , 1-11 https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/zgefd/issue/47944/606567
Harlen, W., & Qualter, A. (2017). The teaching of science in primary schools. David Fulton Publishers.

625

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/
(pp. 605-627) ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/

Hudson, P., & Hudson, S. (2001). Linking visual arts with science and technology in the primary classroom. Investigating: Australian
Primary and Junior Science Journal, 17(4), 26-29.

Jupp, V. (2006). The sage dictionary of social resarch methods. Sage.
Kaplan, M . (2011). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin fen ve teknoloji dersi öğrenme ve öğretme ortamina yönelik düşünceleri [The

opinions of primary school students in terms of science and technology courser’s learning and teaching environments].
Eğitim ve İnsani Bilimler Dergisi: Teori ve Uygulama, (4), 77-92. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/eibd/issue/22682/242211
Kulalıgil, A. (2016). Sınıf dışı öğrenme ortamlarında gerçekleşen öğretim uygulamalarının 5. Sınıf fen bilimleri dersinde öğrencilerin
akademik başarı yaratıcılık ve motivasyonlarına etkisi [The e ect of teaching practices occurring in out-of-class teaching
environments on academic success, creativity and motivation of fth grade science class students] [Unpublished master’s
thesis]. Pamukkale University.
Lappin, E. (1997). Outdoor education for behavior disordered students. ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools
Las Cruces NM. https://www.ericdigests.org/pre-922/outdoor.htm
Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (1995). Learning environments as a site of science education reform: An illustration using
interdisciplinary guided inquiry. Theory into Practice, 34(1), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849509543656
Malchiodi, C. A. (Ed.). (2003). Handbook of art therapy. Guilford Press.
Marx, A., Fuhrer, U., & Hartig, T. (1999). E ects of classroom seating arrangements on children’s question-asking. Learning
Environments Research, 2(3), 249–263.
McRobbie, C. J., & Fraser, B. J. (1993). Associations between student outcomes and psychosocial science environment. Journal
of Educational Research, 87, 78-85. https://doi.org/10.1080./00220671.1993.994117
Merriam, S. (1998). Analytic techniques and data management. In S. Merriam (Eds). Qualitative research and case study applica-
tions in education (pp. 155-177). Jossey-Bass.
Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (2018). Fen bilimleri dersi öğretim program [Primary Science Curriculum]. Ankara.
Muller, C., Katz, S. R., & Dance, J. (1999). Investing in teaching and learning: Dynamics of the teacher-student relationship from
each actor’s perspective. Urban Education, 34(3), 292–337.
Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2003). Children’s perceptions of school science. School Science Review, 84(308), 109-116.
Murphy, C., Beggs, J., Carlisle, K., & Greenwood, J. (2004). Students as catalysts in the classroom: The impact of co-teaching between
science student teachers and primary classroom teachers on children’s enjoyment and learning of science. International
Journal of Science Education, 26(8), 1023-1035. https://doi.org/10.1080/1468181032000158381
Myers, R. E., & Fouts, J. T. (1992). A cluster analysis of high school science classroom environments and attitudes towards science.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 929-937.
Nelson, M., & Chandler, W. (1999). Some tools common to art and science. Art Education, 52(3), 41-47. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/3193803?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference
Nelson, P. L, Martin, S. S., & Baldwin, V. G. (1998). Drawing skills and science concepts in young children: A study of relationships.
Studies in Art Education, 39(3), 262-69.
Oğuz-Ünver, A. (2010). Perceptions of scientists: A comparative study of fth graders and fourth year student teachers. Necatibey
Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 4(1), 11-28.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes toward science: A review of the literature and its implications. International
Journal of Science Education, 25 (9), 1049-1079. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0950069032000032199
Ottander, C., & Grelsson, G. (2006). Laboratory work: The teachers’ perspective. Journal of Biological Education, 40(3), 113-118.
Perkins, K. K., & Wieman, C. (2005). The surprising impact of seat location on student performance. The Physics Teacher, 43, 30-33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.1845987
Potvin, P., Hasni, A. (2014). Analysis of the decline in interest towards school science and technology from grades 5 through 11.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23, 784–802 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9512-x
Priest, S. (1986). Rede ning outdoor education: A matter of many relationships. Journal of Environmental Education, 17(3), 13-15.
Rosenblatt, E., & Winner, E. (1988). The art of children’s drawing. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 22 (1), 3-15. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/3332960?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference
Rubie-Davies, C., Peterson, E., Irving, E., Widdowson, D., & Dixon, R. (2006). Expectations of achievement. Research in Education,
83, 36–53.
Scamp, K., & Logan, M. (2005). Students’ interest in science across the middle school years. Teaching Science, 51(3), 8-15.
Serin, A. Y ( 2003). Bir iletişim araci olarak çocuk resimleri [Children’s drawings as a communication tool]. Çağdaş Eğitim Dergisi,
10 (302), 17-23.
Şahin, D. (2009). İlköğretim birinci kademe öğrencilerinin bilim insanına yönelik düşünceleri [Primary school students’ thoughts on
the scientist]. http://www.eab.org.tr/eab/2009/pdf/284.pdf
Talton, E. L., & Simpson, R. D. (1987). Relationships of attitude toward classroom environment with attitude toward and
achievement in science among tenth grade biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 507–525.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660240602
Taşkın, Ekici., F., Ekici, E., & Taşkın S., (2002, Eylül). Fen laboratuvarlarının içinde bulunduğu durum. [The situation of science
laboratories]. V. Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, s.132, ODTÜ, Ankara.
Thomas, J. A., & Pedersen, J. E. (2003). Reforming elementary science teacher preparation: What about extant teaching beliefs?
School Science and Mathematics, 103(7), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.2003.103.issue-7
Thomas, J. A., Pedersen, J. E., & Finson, K. D. (2001). Validating the draw-a-science-teacher-test checklist: Exploring mental models
and teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(4), 295-310.

626

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605

Journal of Baltic Science Education,Vol. 19, No. 4, 2020

ISSN 1648–3898 /Print/ THE SCIENCE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ IMAGINE
ISSN 2538–7138 /Online/ (pp. 605-627)

Türkmen, H. (2015). İlkokul öğretmenlerin sınıf dışı ortamlardaki fen öğretimine bakış açıları [Primary teachers point of view
about science teaching in outdoor learning]. Environments Journal of European Education, 5(2), 47-55.

Ulker, R., Yilmaz, Z., Solak, A., & Erguder, L. (2013). Classroom environment: What does students’ drawings tell? Anthropologist,
16(1-2), 209-215.

Uluçınar, Ş., Doğan, A., & Kaya, O. N. (2008) Sınıf öğretmenlerinin fen öğretimi ve laboratuvar uygulamalarına ilişkin görüşleri
[Vıews of elementary teachers on scıence teachıng and laboratory]. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 16(2), 485- 494.

Welch, A. G., Cakir, M., Peterson, C. M., & Ray, C. M. (2014). The relationship between gender and classroom environment in Turkish
science classrooms. Educational Research and Reviews, 9(20), 893-903.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research. Sage Publications.
Yontar Toğrol, A. (2000). Öğrencilerin bilim insanı ile ilgili imgeleri [Students ımages of the scientist]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 25(118), 49-57.

Received: April 07, 2020 Accepted: July 22, 2020

Cite as: Sahin Kalyon, D. (2020). The science learning environment primary school students’ imagine. Journal of Baltic Science
Education, 19(4), 605-627. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.605

Demet Şahin Kalyon PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Primary Education, Tokat
Gaziosmanpasa University Faculty of Education, Tokat Gaziosmanpasa
University, 60250, Tokat, Turkey.
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: https://www.gop.edu.tr/AkademikOzgecmis/100/demet-sahin-kalyon
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4321-4880

627

https: / / doi.org / 10.33225 / jbse / 20.19.605





Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 565−570 Technology Report
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Time Bomb Game: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Fun
and Challenging Game Reviewing the Structural Theory of Organic
Compounds

JAó lsveárNo uCnaersvadlahoSiMlvaonJuteń iiroor,†,*U,† lissPeasulSoilvRaodbeerStoouSsaan,†toAsndteonLioimJao,†seḾ MaeryloALnenitee Sousa Lima,†
Juń ior,†
Kimberly Benedetti Vega,† Francisco Serra Oliveira Alexandre,‡ and André Jalles Monteiro†

Downloaded via SAKON NAKHON RAJABHAT UNIV on February 3, 2022 at 08:48:40 (UTC). †Departamento de Química Organ̂ ica e Inorgan̂ ica, Universidade Federal do Ceara,́ 60451-970 Fortaleza, Ceara,́ Brazil
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles. ‡Cien̂ cia e Tecnologia do Ceara, Instituto Federal de Educaca̧ õ , 62800-000 Aracati, Ceara,́ Brazil

*S Supporting Information

ABSTRACT: This report provides information about a free-of-charge,
trilingual (Portuguese, Spanish, and English) game-based application that
engages high school and undergraduate students in reviewing the
structural theory of organic compounds in a challenging way. In Time
Bomb Game, students must disarm a time bomb on their own by
correctly answering random questions from a database with 621
questions. Students and professors have tested and evaluated the app,
and the results revealed that the game design, content, playability, and
usefulness are helpful as a complementary didactic tool to provide
students with the required theoretical knowledge.

KEYWORDS: High School/Introductory Chemistry, First-Year Undergraduate/General, Organic Chemistry,
Humor/Puzzles/Games, Molecular Properties/Structure

■ INTRODUCTION mobile apps into the course curriculum and classroom
instruction.9,10
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, significant discoveries
about the nature of atoms placed theories of molecular structure The present generation of students is adopting smartphones
and bonding on a more secure foundation, which provided the and appears to be using them regularly because these devices are
conceptual basis for the structural theory of matter by suggesting multifunctional computers serving as video players, game
that substances are defined by a specific arrangement of systems, browsers, music players, and navigation systems, and
atoms.1−6 they have many valuable capabilities that have tremendous
potential for use in chemical education.11−15
Mastery of the structure of organic compounds is crucial to
understand as the organic molecules interact and react to each There are hundreds of applications that can be downloaded at
other. For this reason, usually, introductory organic courses no charge, or purchased for just a few dollars, but there is no free
teach the structural theory of organic compounds as a beginning app in a game format that is able to cover the structural theory of
chapter.7 organic compounds in Portuguese, English, and Spanish
languages.
Unfortunately, this subject is considered by many students as
one of the most challenging subjects, having abstract concepts In past years, we have focused our research on the design of
that may be challenging to grasp, and often involving learning computer games that have been engaging students in reviewing
activities that require ingenuity and higher problem-solving different chemical concepts16−20 more recently in game-based
skills. However, regardless of how students view the abstractness applications.16,17 The student satisfaction and the findings of the
of the subject, they are compelled to take it because it is a part of assessment of the learning motived us to design a new game-
the curriculum and is considered a major topic.8 based app for helping students review the structural theory of
organic compounds in a challenging and fun way.
As chemistry educators, it is important to recognize these
difficulties and to use different teaching strategies to enhance the Received: June 19, 2019
students’ learning experience in the classroom, as well as to Revised: December 3, 2019
provide viable and relevant resources for self-directed study. Published: January 2, 2020
One such approach includes integrating smartphones and

© 2020 American Chemical Society and 565 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00571
Division of Chemical Education, Inc. J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 565−570

Journal of Chemical Education Technology Report

■ PLAYING THE GAME In all modes, the player must correctly answer 20 multiple-
choice questions to disarm the time bomb. However, each mode
We developed a game-based application named Time Bomb has a level of difficulty. In the beginner and intermediate modes,
Game for Android21 and IOS21 devices using the Unity the player has 15 min to disarm the bomb, and the time available
Platform.22 It is a trilingual (Portuguese, English, and Spanish), to complete the mission is reduced by 2 and 4 min, respectively,
free-of-charge, dynamic, and easy-to-play game that allows every time the player answers incorrectly. In the third mode
students to review the structural theory of organic chemistry. We (advanced), the player must disarm the bomb in 10 min with no
designed the game so that students win the game when they incorrect answers.
disarm a time bomb with their knowledge and not as a matter of
luck. When the player responds correctly (Figure 1d), a new
question appears on the screen, and the number of correct
To begin, the player clicks on the biggest button located at the answers is summed up on the bottom of the screen. If an
center of the main screen (Figure 1a). From the main screen, it is incorrect answer is selected, the game indicates that the chosen
alternative is wrong by making it red. The time is reduced, and a
Figure 1. (a) Main screen of the game where a player can (b) select new question appears on the screen.
topics of interest, (c) select a game mode, and (d) answer a question.
When the mission is completed, the player wins, and a game-
also possible to check the ranking of the players (Gallery of over screen appears in which they can check the total number of
Heroes), to change the game settings, or to read the game rules. questions answered on each topic along with the number of hits.
When play is initiated, two screens sequentially appear to set up Players can share scores on various social media platforms by
the game parameters by selecting the selected groups of topics clicking on the button on the top right of the screen (Figure 2a).
(Figure 1b) that determine the subjects of the questions that In addition, players can register their data in a “Gallery of
appear during the game and choose one of three possible game Heroes” by clicking on the “Heroes” button (Figure 2a), or even
modes, which determine the difficulty of the game (Figure 1c). to check all answered questions (Figure 2b) by clicking on the
“Feedback” button (Figure 2a), which will present all answered
questions with the correct alternative highlighted in green. After
that, for each question, the player can access a short comment
(Figure 2c) to know why the alternative indicated as correct is
the correct one by clicking on the Question Mark (?) button
located at the bottom of the Figure 2b.

On the other hand, when a player fails to disarm the time
bomb, the application simulates an explosion through a sound,
and an image that resembles a cracked screen appears (Figure
2d). From this screen, players have the same postgame action
options described above, except they cannot register their data in
the Heroes Gallery.

■ EVALUATORS’ OPINIONS

Student evaluators of the Time Bomb Game included 203
undergraduate students of Introductory Organic Chemistry (U)
from six different courses (Agronomy, Food Engineering,
Fishery Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Pharmacy, Den-
tistry, and Zootechnics) from our university, and 76 high school
students (H). A total of 35 chemistry professors (P) tested and
evaluated the Time Bomb Game; these included 7 professors
from our own university and 28 professors from other Brazilian
universities.

All opinions regarding the application were obtained using a
printed survey containing 13 statements. Responses using a
Likert-type scale23 are shown in Figure 3 for four areas of
interest: design, content, playability, and usefulness. In general,
the responses to the 13 statements showed high levels of
agreement (“agree” and “agree totally”) from those surveyed.
Therefore, we believe that the game is dynamic, fun, and easy-to-
play and has an attractive design able to capture the attention of
the player. The questions are clear and well-elaborated and
adequately cover the content seen in the classroom. Moreover,
students agree that the game is an innovative didactic tool that
can help them review structural theory.

In general, the responses on the 13 statements (see the
Supporting Information) presented received a high level of
agreement (agree and agree totally) from those surveyed.
Therefore, in general, we believe with reasonable accuracy that
the Time Bomb Game has an attractive design that captures the
attention of the player and makes it easy to play/review the

566 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00571
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 565−570

Journal of Chemical Education Technology Report

Figure 2. (a) Congratulations screen. (b) Checking the answers of the
questions. (c) Questions comment. (d) Failure screen.

content seen in the classroom through questions that are clear Figure 3. Survey results showed the distribution of Likert scores for
and well-elaborated. Moreover, the game is a dynamic and fun evaluators’ responses by survey statement.
way to help students to review the structural theory of organic
compounds. Therefore, the application is an excellent educa- • “Excellent tool, putting comments for each of the issues
tional tool that can complement the traditional materials, such as certainly was an excellent idea and certainly is a very
books, in the student learning process. important factor.” [professor from IFCE]

The Time Bomb Game has also been very favorably evaluated • “The game is wonderful, creative, with smart questions
by professors and students who left positive comments and some and answers. Also, it catches the attention of the player
suggestions for improvement in the evaluation form. A selection and motivates him to continue playing it to disarm the
of comments from professors and students (translated here into
English by the authors) demonstrates the pedagogical value of
the app.

• “The game is a great initiative, well designed and has good
questions. It will certainly help students to review the
content for which it is intended. However, I think there
are some improvements in design.” [professor from
UECE]

567 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00571
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 565−570

Journal of Chemical Education Technology Report

bomb. The creators and mentors of the game are to be theory of organic compounds via use of the application as a
congratulated.” [professor from UnB] complementary teaching tool and students’ learning by
• “It’s a great game, which makes it much easier to learn and traditional lectures. The posttest was similar to the pretest and
review content.” [Pharmacy student] asked students to answer questions that covered the topics seen
• “Congratulations to the developers of the game! I in the classroom. The students had 50 min to respond to both
particularly felt much helped.” [Food engineering tests.
student] Statistical Analysis
• “Great way to fix the content, because you can play the
app any time and be learning the subject.” [Agronomy A t-test for paired samples was used to determine whether there
student] was a statistical increase in the number of correct questions of
each group between the pre- and posttest (Table 1).
The development of the Time Bomb Game is continually
based on user feedback from students and professors who Table 1. Comparison of Student Performance Relative to Use
evaluated the first version of the application. Although the vast of the Application
majority of comments were positive, some suggestions for
improvement were related to design. On the basis of these Students’ Average Scoresa
suggestions, we asked students how the new version should be
designed. From their responses, we redesigned the application Group (N) Pretest Posttest Av Score Differences
entirely, which is presented in this report and has received better
evaluations. EG 1 (38) 7.8 ± 3.5 11.5 ± 4.9 3.7b
EG 2 (38) 7.9 ± 4.2 12.2 ± 5.0 4.3b
■ EVALUATION OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL ROLE OF CG 1 (34) 6.5 ± 3.3 7.6 ± 4.0 1.1c
THE GAME
aThe scores have a range of 0−20. bp < 0.0001. cp = 0.0911.
The evaluation was carried out with 110 12th grade students
from Governador Adauto Bezerra High School in Fortaleza- There was a significant statistical increase in the number of
Brazil. Three classes were randomly chosen as two experimental correct questions in the experimental groups (p = 0.0000);
groups (EG, 76 students) and one control group (CG, 34 however, there was no difference in the control group (p =
students). 0.0911). This increase has different magnitudes among the
groups (p = 0.0022). The differences were more considerable
The following hypothesis was tested: There is a significant between the EG1 than in the CG (p = 0.0067), and between the
difference between student learning of structural theory of EG2 than in the CG (p = 0.0009), and there were no significant
organic chemistry supplemented with the application (EG) as a differences between the EG1 and EG2 (p = 0.5269) (Tables 2
complementary educational tool as compared to student and 3).
learning by a traditional lecture with textbooks, whiteboards,
and slideshow presentations (CG). Table 2. One-Way ANOVA on Test Performance between the
Experimental and Control Groups
The experimental study was conducted using a controlled
pretest and posttest with 20 multiple-choice questions that were Variation Sum of Squares dF MS F Value p Value
each designed to analyze the effect of the instructional role of the 6.498 0.0022
developed game on the learning of structural theory organic Between groups 205.5 2 102.8
compounds at the high school level. (See the Supporting Error 1692.4 107 15.8
Information.) Total 1897.9 109

Pretest and Posttest Table 3. Post hoc DMS Test for Independent Samples for
Comparing the Differences of the Number of Correct
The pretest was administered to all three groups (1 control and 2 Answers between the Groups
experimental) in the classroom before any lecture about the
structural theory of organic chemistry. This test aimed to verify Differences between Groups Av Scorea Difference SD p Value
the students’ knowledge about the subject.
EG1 − CG 2.61 0.945 0.0067
The posttest was also administered to all three groups in the EG2 − CG 3.19 0.933 0.0009
classroom after all groups had had seven traditional lectures of EG2 − EG1 0.58 0.913 0.5269
50 min each covering the following topics:
aThe scores have a range of 0−20.
• Aromaticity
• Hybridization Groups EG1 and EG2 had no significant difference in the
• Electronic distribution increase in the average number of questions with correct answers
• Lewis structures and formal charges between the posttest and the pretest. Still, these had a more
• Intermolecular forces substantial difference when compared to the CG control group.
• Molecular geometry
• Resonance Therefore, on the basis of the previous statistical analysis, we
can conclude that the use of the application by students as a
Both experimental and control groups had the same lectures complementary educational tool contributes to the improve-
with the same teacher. However, there was a significant ment of students’ learning.
difference: the two experimental groups had access to the app
between both tests while the control group did not play the game ■ CONCLUSIONS
at any time.
The new generation of chemistry students is growing up in the
The aim of this posttest was verifying whether there was a modern era of electronic devices and is more engaged with
significant difference between students’ learning of structural learning activities when smartphones are used in the classroom

568 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00571
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 565−570

Journal of Chemical Education Technology Report

as new technologies, and multimedia presentations naturally (5) Larder, D. F.; Kluge, F. F. Alexander Mikhailovich Butlerov’s
attract young students.11,24,25 Therefore, students will be the Theory of Chemical Structure. J. Chem. Educ. 1971, 48 (5), 287−289.
leading force in the adoption of chemistry apps that are in (6) Kikuchi, S. A History of the Structural Theory of Benzene-The
continuous growth in user base along with the increasing Aromatic Sextet Rule and Hückel’s Rule. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74 (2),
adoption of mobile computing technologies in the classrooms by 194−201.
educators.26 (7) Report of the Organic Subcommittee of the Curriculum
Committee, Part II. J. Chem. Educ. 1972, 49 (11), 761−763.
There are many possibilities to use mobile applications as (8) Gabunilas, L. M.; Adlao, E.; Burns, K.; Chiu, J. S.; Sanchez, S. S. A.
tools for learning basic sciences successfully. The Time Bomb Utilizing Portable Virtual Reality in Teaching Chemistry. Sci. Int.
Game is an example of a useful didactic resource to promote (Lahore) 2018, 30 (2), 263−266.
understanding of the basic concepts of the structural theory of (9) Mazur, E. Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual Series in Educational
organic compounds, allowing students to review these concepts Innovation; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997.
through a fun game designed to achieve this aim. Due to its (10) Pacansky-Brock, M. Tools for Participatory Learning: Best Practices
intuitive and interactive features, the learning process is a ludic
process that allows students to review the content taught in the for Teaching with Emerging Technologies; Routledge: New York, 2012;
classroom and possibly help them to improve their performance Chapter 5.
in the exams. (11) Williams, A.; Pence, H. E. Smart Phones, a Powerful Tool in the
Chemistry Classroom. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 683−686.
However, to enhance the educational experience, educators (12) Wijtmans, M.; van Rens, L.; van Muijlwijk-Koezen, J. E.
should treat these educational applications merely as a helpful Activating Students’ Interest and Participation in Lectures and Practical
tool since the apps alone cannot address all the obstacles that the Courses Using Their Electronic Devices. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (11),
students face in the process of learning. 1830−1837.
(13) Libman, D.; Huang, L. Chemistry on the Go: Review of
The apps should not replace the educators’ role in leading the Chemistry Apps on Smartphones. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90 (3), 320−
learning process. Chemistry mobile apps should be combined 325.
organically with other pedagogical tools such as conventional (14) Korich, A. Harnessing a Mobile Social Media App to Reinforce
paper media, live demonstrations, and even old-school lecturing Course Content. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93 (6), 1134−1136.
to reach educational goals.26 (15) Silva, T.; Galembeck, E. Surveying Biochemistry Applications for
Mobile Devices to Compare Availability and Topics Covered. J. Chem.
■ ASSOCIATED CONTENT Educ. 2015, 92 (7), 1256−1260.
(16) Sousa Lima, M. A.; Monteiro, A. C.; Melo Leite Juń ior, A. J.; de
*S Supporting Information Andrade Matos, I. S.; Alexandre, F. S. O.; Nobre, D. J.; Monteiro, A. J.;
da Silva Juń ior, J. N. Game-Based Application for Helping Students
The Supporting Information is available at https://pubs.ac- Review Chemical Nomenclature in a Fun Way. J. Chem. Educ. 2019, 96
s.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00571. (4), 801−805.
(17) Silva Juń ior, J. N. Organic Reactions Game. Available for Android
Survey, pretest, and posttest (PDF, DOCX) devices at https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.

■ AUTHOR INFORMATION A11v1r15.OrganicReactions and available for iOS devices at https://
apps.apple.com/us/app/organic-reactions-the-game/id1438488985
Corresponding Author (accessed Nov 30, 2019).
(18) da Silva Juń ior, J. N.; Sousa Lima, M. A.; Xerez Moreira, J. V.;
*E-mail: [email protected]. Oliveira Alexandre, F. S.; de Almeida, D. M.; de Oliveira, M. d. C. F.;
ORCID Melo Leite Juń ior, A. J. Stereogame: An Interactive Computer Game
That Engages Students in Reviewing Stereochemistry Concepts. J.
José Nunes da Silva Juń ior: 0000-0002-6631-4382 Chem. Educ. 2017, 94 (2), 248−250.
(19) da Silva Juń ior, J. N.; Nobre, D. J.; do Nascimento, R. S.; Torres,
Notes G. S.; Leite, A. J. M.; Monteiro, A. J.; Alexandre, F. S. O.; Rodriguez, M.

The authors declare no competing financial interest. T.; Rojo, M. J. Interactive Computer Game That Engages Students in
The Android version of the Time Bomb Game is available at Reviewing Organic Compound Nomenclature. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com. (5), 899−902.
A11v1r15.TimeBombST, and the iOS version is available at (20) da Silva Juń ior, J. N.; Sousa Lima, M. A.; Nunes Miranda, F.;
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/time-bomb-game/ Melo Leite Juń ior, A. J.; Alexandre, F. S. O.; de Oliveira Assis, D. C.;
id1456069569 (both accessed Nov 30, 2019). Nobre, D. J. Nomenclature Bets: An Innovative Computer-Based Game

■ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To Aid Students in the Study of Nomenclature of Organic Compounds.
J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (11), 2055−2058.
We thank Professor David Janô Nobre and his students from (21) Unity Technologies homepage. https://unity3d.com/ (accessed
Governor Adauto Bezerra High School for participating in the Nov 30, 2019).
evaluation of the instructional role of the game. (22) The Android version of the Time Bomb Game is available at
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.A11v1r15.
■ REFERENCES TimeBombST and the iOS version is available at https://apps.apple.
com/us/app/time-bomb-game/id1456069569 (both accessed Nov 30,
(1) Tiernan, N. F. Gilbert Newton Lewis and the Amazing Electron 2019).
Dots. J. Chem. Educ. 1985, 62 (67), 569−570. (23) Likert, R. A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Arch.
(2) Pauling, L. G. N. Lewis and the Chemical Bond. J. Chem. Educ. Psychol. 1932, 22 (140), 5−55.
1984, 61 (3), 201−203. (24) van der Kolk, K.; Hartog, R.; Beldman, G.; Gruppen, H.
(3) Benfey, O. T. August Kekulé and the Birth of the Structural Exploring the Potential of Smartphones and Tablets for Performance
Theory of Organic Chemistry in 1858. J. Chem. Educ. 1958, 35 (1), 21−
23. Support in Food Chemistry Laboratory Classes. J. Sci. Educ. Technol.
(4) Leicester, H. M. Contributions of Butlerov to the Development of 2013, 22 (6), 984−992.
Structural Theory. J. Chem. Educ. 1959, 36 (7), 328−329.

569 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00571
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 565−570

Journal of Chemical Education Technology Report

(25) Wu, H.-K.; Lee, S.W.-Y.; Chang, H.-Y.; Liang, J.-C. Current
Status, Opportunities and Challenges of Augmented Reality in
Education. Comput. Educ. 2013, 62, 41−49.
(26) Huang, L. Chemistry Apps on Smartphones and Tablets. In
Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Opportunities and Trends; Garcia-
Martinez, J., Serrano-Torregrosa, E., Eds.; Wiley-VHC: Weinheim,
2015; pp 621−650.

570 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00571
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 565−570



The use of educational games within the structure and properties
of matter unit in science class

Özlem ELTEM and Asiye BERBER, 2020

Abstract

Given the rapid pace of science today, we can feel the influence of it in all aspects of
our lives. Therefore, it is aimed to raise individuals with advanced thinking skills who learn and
use knowledge in science class and can combine science and technology. In line with such
purposes, it is believed that different methods and techniques are required to be used within
classes. In this study, educational game techniques have been used in teaching of the

d the effects of this teaching
technique have been researched to measure the academic success of students as well as the
opinions of students and teachers. Mixed research design has been employed within the study.
Control group pre-test - final test model has been preferred for the quantitative dimension of

the researcher has been used for the collection of the quantitative data. In the qualitative
dimension of the research, semi-structured interviews, researcher's observations and diaries,
and science journals of students have been utilized. According to the findings obtained,
educational game has positively affected the students, increased the course success (p<.05)
and participation in the course. A significant change has been observed in the success levels
of the students and a positive change has been found in their views on the Science lesson.

Keywords : Science teaching, Educational games, Use of educational games in science class,
Structure and properties of matter

p<.
:

3 13 112, 130, 204 218
17 2565 6

Id: 734027

Participatory Educational Research (PER)
Vol. 8(2), pp.200-219, April 2021
Available online at http://www.perjournal.com
ISSN: 2148-6123
http://dx.doi.org/10.17275/per.21.36.8.2

The use of educational games within the structure and properties of matter
unit in science class

Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Education, Eskisehir Provincial Directorate of National
Education, science teacher.

ORCID: 0000-0001-7122-8887

Asiye BERBER*

Article history Science Education, Science Education,
Received: ORCID: 0000-0001-7122-8887
08.05.2020
Given the rapid pace of science today, we can feel the influence of it in
Received in revised form: all aspects of our lives. Therefore, it is aimed to raise individuals with
20.10.2020 advanced thinking skills who learn and use knowledge in science class
and can combine science and technology. In line with such purposes, it
Accepted: is believed that different methods and techniques are required to be used
23.11.2020 within classes. In this study, educational game techniques have been

Key words: science class and the effects of this teaching technique have been
Science teaching, researched to measure the academic success of students as well as the
Educational games, opinions of students and teachers. Mixed research design has been
Use of educational games in employed within the study. Control group pre-test - final test model has
science class,
Structure and properties of researcher has been used for the collection of the quantitative data. In the
matter qualitative dimension of the research, semi-structured interviews,
researcher's observations and diaries, and science journals of students
have been utilised. According to the findings obtained, educational game
has positively affected the students, increased the course success (p<.05)
and participation in the course. A significant change has been observed
in the success levels of the students and a positive change has been found
in their views on the Science lesson.

Introduction

Science education should encourage scientific literacy, help improve daily life skills of
individuals, let people understand their self-nature and that of others and should contain
curricula that is valid in different countries of the world (Reiss & White, 2014). Through the
prepared science curricula, it is aimed to enable students to see daily life phenomena from a
scientific perspective and notice their natural environment. Another objective of the science

* Correspondency: : E-mail: [email protected]

Participatory Educational Research (PER), 8(2);200-219, 1 April 2021

class is to develop the thinking skills of students and make them individuals who do research

and question (MEB, 2013). Given the objectives, the plan is to raise individuals that learn and

use knowledge in science class, are aware of the formation process of scientific knowledge, can

combine science and technology and have advanced thinking skills. However, teachers are not

often able to achieve the level of success they desire due to intense but complex nature of

science class ( It is believed that this problem could be

overcome with the use of new methods and techniques in classes by science teachers. Therefore,

success should be integrated with methods and techniques (authentic learning, cartoons and

others) that will increase students' interest and positively affect their attitudes towards science.

Educational games are among the approaches that attract the attention and interest of children

( Turkay, Hoffman, Kinzer, Chantes, & Vicari, 2014; Rule, & Schneider,

2009).

Throughout history, children have played games by imitating adults and everything around
them. Thus, it might be concluded that children use what they learn in games. Playing games
and learning process are interrelated concepts. In history, Plato used to give apples and small
toys to his students to teach them arithmetic. Aristo, Comenius, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and

have mostly been considered as suitable only for kids. However, new

developments in education have brought about alternative learning methods. Teaching with

games is one of the most important student-oriented methods used in education and is

applicable to all age groups (Boghian, Cojocariu, Popescu & Teachers think that

the use of games within lessons is necessary and useful, the fear for lessons can be reduced in

a fun learning environment and thus lessons can become more concrete and comprehensible

(Usta et al., 2017).

Educational games are useful for children to repeat and reinforce what they have learnt at class

and enable them to have fun and relax while using their cognitive skills (Demirel, 2009). They

add dynamism to the class environment, increase participation and attract the attention of all

children to the lesson (Clark, Tanner Smith, Hostetler, Fradkin & Polikov, 2018). By

materializing the learning experience of students, they enable internal motivation and pull them

in (Peirce, Conlan &

experience the possible future incidents through practical applications whose boundaries are

determined beforehand (Doran & Watson, 1973). These applications contribute to the social,

psychological, physical, linguistic, and intellectual development of children (Godwin-Jones,

& & Akman, 2016) and provide opportunity for students to

learn via structured experiences. Besides, educational games give an idea to individuals about

their own behaviors and thus allowing for self-assessment at the end of peer interaction. They

provide characteristics such as decision-making, evaluation, problem solving, negotiating,

innovating, and taking incentives within a risk-free environment (Lynee, 2004). Moreover, they

help develop the values of respect for diversity, independence &

Biter, 2019) aswell as improving self-confidence, relationship with peers and the learning of

students (Nemerow, 1996). Children mostly manifest their internal conflicts, anxiety, anger,

and distress in games, and reflect the negative situations they encounter in their family or

environment as well as their distress to the games (Gifford, 2002).

According to the findings of pediatric development studies, it has been stated that games should
be designed with a content suitable for children development so that they could be provided
with socially rich learning experiences and a balance between learning experiences in real world
can be assured. It is possible to make subjects more interesting, encourage students and even

Participatory Educational Research (PER)
-201-

The use of educational games within the structure and properties of matter unit in science class A.Berber

enable those that are not very active to participate in the class using the educational games
prepared accordingly (Miller & Kocurek, 2017). Furthermore, the rules of games must be
flexible since not all kids have the same interests, knowledge, or skills. No matter how long it
is, teachers must utilize educational games in each class and guide the process well (Demirel,
2009).

Teaching process through educational games in science class

While the content of science class is related to daily life and could easily be learnt,
students think that it is one of the most difficult classes. Research suggests that the attitude of
students towards science gets more negative as they grow older (especially at the ages of 11
and 12). Researchers are of the opinion that the reason behind this fact could be ineffective

&

Educational games within the scope of science class could be used as a method for students to
acquire cognitive and affective acquisitions. The students realizing the problem within the game
and analyzing the factors affecting the game have a higher possibility of being successful. A
student should observe, collect, classify, and evaluate the data in order to be able to identify the
variables. All students could gain these skills through educational games (Doran & Watson,
1973). Previous studies indicate that children correlate the science class with games and enjoy
the class as a result at early ages, however; as they grow older, the level of this correlation and
pleasure decreases. Accordingly, if the science class is given through games, students find it
easy and continue to enjoy the class and thereby, the level of success could increase (Kozcu

n, 2007).

Within this study educational games have been applied to 7th grade students, who are at their
early stage of puberty, by considering their physical, cognitive, and social development level.
According to Demirel (2005), games provide an enjoyable and relaxed environment for students
and bring positive changes to in-class activities. Within this context, sample games applied
within the study bear importance in that they have made the class student-oriented rather than
teacher-oriented. Besides, this study is of importance since the science class will be more
comprehensible, more enjoyable and become the one in which students will be able to express
themselves in an easier way thanks to the games planned to be used as an alternavitve method
for reaching the goals of the class. In line with all these studies, in this study, the effects of

pinions by using
have been

investigated.

Methodology

Mixed research design has been used in the study. This research design requires the
combination or integration of the quantitative and qualitative methods as well as their data in a
study (Creswell, 2013). Within mixed research design, the strengths of methods are combined.
Therefore, generalization is possible in mixed research design; precise measurements are
performed, and perspectives are examined in detail (Creswell, 2017).

Participants
The population of this study consists of 7th grade students attending science class in

Turkey during the 2017-2018 academic year. 7/A (test group, 14 students) and 7/B (control
group, 14 students) classes of a public school have been selected as samples in the study.

Participatory Educational Research (PER)
-202-

Participatory Educational Research (PER), 8(2);200-219, 1 April 2021

However, 12 students from the experimental group and 13 students from the control group have
participated in the activities and the other 3 students have not participated in the activities due
to absenteeism. The application has been performed by the researcher. The researcher is a
teacher with 8 years of teaching experience.

Group equalization
In order to ensure the general success equalization, the weighted success grades of the

students at the end of 6th grade have been analyzed through independent samples t-test. The
result has been found as 0.647 for the value of p>.05. Since the value of 0.647 is bigger than
the value of p>.05, it has been concluded that there is no significant difference between the
groups, and it could be stated that the two groups are identical. As a result, the control and
experiment groups have been randomly designated.

Data collection tools
The quantitative or qualitative collection of data varies with regard to the type of the
& Nazik, 2003). Since both quantitative and qualitative data have been required

for this study, quantitative and qualitative data collection methods have been used together.

The researcher notes and diary, science journals and semi-structured interviews have been
and Properties

A semi-structured interview form and a success test related to the matter and its properties unit
has been developed by the researcher. The collected quantitative data and qualitative data have
been analyzed through a statistics package program and content analysis, respectively.

Qualitative data collection tools
The data and methodology have been diversified while the qualitative data collection

tools are being prepared. The data has been asked before and after the application and collected
at various times to perform the data diversification. Since the data has been collected through
multiple data collection tools, diversification has also been performed. Science teachers and
academicians have also been consulted while preparing the interview form, researcher journal
and student journals. The required adjustments have been made in line with expert views. The

Quantitative data collection tools
The success test developed by the researcher has been used for the collection of

quantitative data and expert view has been consulted for the test. The content validity has been
ensured through the amendments in line with the expert view and the necessary items have been
added in order to measure all the acquisitions that students should comprehend, understand and
carry out. The pilot applications have been conducted and various calculations have been made
with the necessary item statistics. The average item difficulty index, average item
distinctiveness index and reliability coefficient of the test with 25 items have been 0.55, 0.51
and 0.81, respectively. The success test has been applied twice as the pre-test and final test.

lu
&

Participatory Educational Research (PER)

-203-

The use of educational games within the structure and properties of matter unit in science class A.Berber

Data collection
The necessary approvals have been obtained before starting the data collection process

within the study. The application period has lasted for a total of 8 weeks. At the beginning of

experimental and control groups as a pre-test. Furthermore, semi-structured interviews have
been made with the experimental group. These interviews have been recorded in video files and
then the application has been started after the preparation stages.

Preparation and application of educational games
The educational games have been designed so that they could have simple and

understandable instructions, grab the attention of students, provide opportunities for students to
demonstrate their various skills, require collaboration and teamwork, and are suitable for the
student level and school conditions. It is particularly paid attention to the fact that the
educational games contain all the acquitions that students should know, comprehend and carry
out at the end of the semester. Accordingly, 6 games have been prepared; 5 games structured

been consulted to determine the convenience of the designed games. The application has started
after deciding that the prepared educational games are suitable for children. Depending on their
contents, the games have been used for 2 or 3 lessons during the explanation, deepening and
assessment stages of the class.

Applied educational games:

taken into account in the historical development of atom. Students try to find the
scientist described by their friends.

concepts related to the subject.

they touch with their eyes closed is homogenous or heterogeneous.
-

learn the names and symbols of elements.

to calculate the ionic charges of elements.

aim is to assess the entire unit.

The classes have been carried out in accordance with the class book in both the experimental
and the control group throughout the application. The class book contains theoretical
knowledge as well as experiments and tests. The classes have been supported with educational
games and activities structured in detail under 6 sub-titles in the experimental group. The

Diary

applied to the experimental and control groups as a final test. Furthermore, semi-structured
interviews have been re-conducted with the experimental group. These interviews have been
recorded in video files.

Participatory Educational Research (PER)
-204-