Index

EXPERIENCED SCIENCE TEACHERS’ SUBJECT MATTER KNOWLEDGE AND
PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE REGARDING BIOGEOCHEMICAL
CYCLES IN THE CONTEXT OF EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
OF
MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
BY
BAHAR YILMAZ YENDİ
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR
THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN
THE DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
JUNE 2019
Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences
Prof. Dr. Tülin GENÇÖZ

Director
I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elvan ŞAHİN

Head of Department
This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elvan ŞAHİN Prof. Dr. Ceren ÖZTEKİN

Co-Supervisor Supervisor
Examining Committee Members
Prof. Dr. Osman Nafiz KAYA (Uşak Üni., MFBE)
Prof. Dr. Ceren ÖZTEKİN (METU, MSE)
Prof. Dr. Gaye TEKSÖZ (METU, MSE)
Prof. Dr. Semra SUNGUR (METU, MSE)
Assoc. Prof. Dr. M. Serdar KÖKSAL (Hacettepe Üni., ÖEB)

PLAGIARISM
I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and
presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare
that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all
material and results that are not original to this work.
Name, Last name: Bahar YILMAZ YENDİ
Signature:
iii
ABSTRACT
PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE REGARDING BIOGEOCHEMICAL
CYCLES IN THE CONTEXT OF EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
Yılmaz Yendi, Bahar
Ph. D., Department of Elementary Education
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Ceren Öztekin
Co-Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elvan Şahin
June 2019, 341 pages
This study investigated experienced science teachers’ subject matter (SMK) and
pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) regarding biogeochemical cycles in the
context of education for sustainable development (ESD). Three science teachers (one
male, two females) from different schools participated in the study. In this
qualitative research, multiple case studies were used as research design. Data were
obtained through interviews, content representations, observations, card sorting
activity and teacher documents.
Considering the results, it was observed that teachers had lack of knowledge in both
their substantive and syntactic structures in the topic of biogeochemical cycles. The
results also revealed that teachers conceptually associated sustainable development

iv
with the carbon cycle mostly but they could not reflect their SD understanding to
their teaching of the cycles. When teachers' PCK were examined, it was found that
teachers differed in the central and peripheral goals of science education. In
addition, teachers were knowledgeable about both the objectives in the curriculum
and the horizontal and vertical relations of the topic. Although teachers were aware
of the students’ prerequisite knowledge in order to comprehend the topic, they did
not consider students’ different learning styles during their teaching practice.
Moreover, it was found that teachers had limited knowledge of both subject-specific
and topic-specific instructional strategies. Teachers generally used teacher-centered
strategies which caused them to be incompetent for implementing ESD. Similarly,
teachers adopted traditional assessment methods. Eventually, it is recommended
that teacher educators and program developers should enhance teacher education
programs where teachers can gain experience especially in terms of instructional
and assessment strategies specific to ESD and integrate their SD understanding with
different topics.
Keywords: Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Education for Sustainable
Development, Science Education, Matter Cycles.
v
ÖZ
DENEYİMLİ FEN BİLİMLERİ ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR
KALKINMA EĞİTİMİ KAPSAMINDA MADDE DÖNGÜLERİ KONUSUYLA
İLGİLİ KONU ALAN VE PEDAGOJİK ALAN BİLGİLERİ
Yılmaz Yendi, Bahar
Doktora, İlköğretim Bölümü
Tez Yöneticisi: Prof. Dr. Ceren Öztekin
Ortak Tez Yöneticisi: Doç. Dr. Elvan Şahin
Haziran 2019, 341 sayfa
Bu çalışma, deneyimli fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri konusundaki
konu alan ve pedagojik alan bilgilerini sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimi kapsamında
araştırmayı amaçlamıştır. Çalışmaya farklı ortaokullarda görev yapan, deneyimli üç
(bir erkek, iki kadın) fen bilgisi öğretmeni katılmıştır. Nitel araştırma yaklaşımının
benimsendiği bu çalışmada, araştırma deseni olarak çoklu durum çalışması
kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın verileri, röportajlar, içerik gösterimleri, sınıf içi
gözlemler, kart gruplama aktivitesi ve öğretmen dökümanları aracılığıyla elde
edilmiştir.
Sonuçlar göz önüne alındığında; öğretmenlerin madde döngüleri konusunda hem
kavramsal hem de bilimin doğasına yönelik konu alan bilgilerinin eksik olduğu
gözlemlenmiştir. Öte yandan, çalışmanın bulguları, öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir
kalkınma kavramı ile madde döngüleri konusunu kavramsal anlamda an çok

vi
karbon döngüsünde ilişkilendirebildiklerini ancak öğretimlerine yansıtamadıklarını
ortaya çıkarmıştır. Öğretmenlerin madde döngüleri ile ilgili pedagojik alan bilgileri
incelendiğinde, öğretmenlerin fen eğitiminin amaçlarına yönelik farklı görüşlere
sahip olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunun yanısıra öğretmenler, öğretim programındaki
konu ile ilgili kazanımları bilmekte ve ilgili konunun diğer sınıf düzeylerindeki
konularla ilişkisini kurabilmektedirler. Öğretmenler, öğrencilerinin madde
döngüleri konusunu kavrayabilmeleri için sahip olmaları gereken ön bilgilerinin
farkında olmalarına rağmen, öğrencilerin farklı öğrenme biçimlerini ve becelerini
dikkate alan bir öğretim sergilemedikleri gözlemlenmiştir. Çalışmanın bulguları,
öğretmenlerin hem alana hem de konuya özel öğretim stratejileri konusunda sınırlı
bilgiye sahip olduklarını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Öğretmenlerin genel olarak öğretmen
merkezli öğretim stratejilerini kullandıkları, bunun da öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir
kalkınma eğitimi konusunda yetersiz kalmalarına neden olduğu saptanmıştır. Aynı
şekilde, öğretmenler geleneksel değerlendirme yöntemlerini benimsemişlerdir.
Sonuç olarak, program geliştirme uzmanları ve eğitimcilere, öğretmenlerin hem
sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimine özel öğretim ve değerlendirme yöntemleri
açısından deneyim kazanabilecekleri hem de sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramını
konu alan bilgilerine entegre edebilecekleri eğitimleri içeren programlar
geliştirmeleri önerilmektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Pedagojik Alan Bilgisi, Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Eğitimi, Fen
Eğitimi, Madde Döngüleri.
vii
DEDICATION
To My Dear Son Deniz Aras Yendi
&
To My Love Atak Yendi
&
To My Family
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Ceren
Öztekin for her great guidance, patience, advice, criticism, encouragements and fast
feedbacks throughout the study. I also want to thank to my co-supervisor Assoc.
Prof. Dr. Elvan Şahin for her support and encouragement. You were always ready
to assist me in solving every kind of problem while writing this dissertation.
The other committee members, Prof. Dr. Gaye Teksöz, Prof. Dr. Osman Nafiz Kaya,
Prof. Dr. Semra Sungur and Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mustafa Serdar Köksal also deserved
special thanks. I am grateful for your comments and suggestions to my dissertation.
Moreover, I would like to thank to my family… My father Selahattin Yılmaz, my
mother Nuray Yılmaz, my brother Ümit Yılmaz, my sisters Esin Yılmaz Ertürk and
Nesrin Toraman. You have always encouraged me even you were living far away
from me. Thank you very much for your support and everyting that you give to me.
I have also special thanks to my mother-in-law Fisun Yendi and my father-in-law
Sedat Yendi. You always believed in and helped me. During this journey, I
entrusted my little son Deniz Aras to you. Your love for my son has been my
greatest support. Without you, this thesis would never end. Thank you very much
for your great patience. I have also special thanks to a special person, my dear
husband Atak Yendi. I feel so lucky to have found you. Thank you very much for
your infinite love. And my cutest son Deniz Aras Yendi… I am sorry that I could
not spend enough time with you during the writing of this thesis. Your presence
was my greatest motivation. Thanks God for giving you to me. I love you all. I am
grateful for having a family like you.
ix
I also would like to express my gratitude and appreciation for my dear friends who
contributed their greatest effort for my success and motivation. First, I want to
thank to Şenil Ünlü Çetin, Özlem Erkek and Umut Alper for their both endless
friendship and academic and emotional support. I am grateful for being part of my
life, being great friends and sisters. Thanks to my friends Nehir Yasan Ak, Kader
Bilican, Yasemin Özdem, Semanur Kandil, Tuna Coşkun and Aylin Birlik for their
heartfelt support. Furthermore, I want to express my gratitude to all members of
ELE family in METU. I also would like to thank to my collegaues in Giresun
University, Büşra Tuncay Yüksel and Hatice Özata for their friendship and
encouragement.
Next, my appreciation goes to the teachers participated in this study. You were the
most important components of this dissertation. Thank you very much for your
effort, participation and good faith. I also would like to thank to the school
administrations that have enabled me to conduct this research.
Finally, my special thanks especially go to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the great leader
and the founder of Republic of Turkey. Especially as a woman, if I can make a little
contribution to science, I owe it to Ataturk’s beliefs in Turkish women. His ideas
will always shed light on my way.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLAGIARISM ....................................................................................................................... iii
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................... iv
ÖZ........................................................................................................................................... vi
DEDICATION .................................................................................................................... viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................. ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................... xi
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. xviii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. xxii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................ xxiv
CHAPTER
1.INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1
1.1.Science Education and Education for Sustainable Development......................... 5

1.2.Significance of the Study ............................................................................................ 7
1.3.Statement of the Problem ......................................................................................... 10
1.4.Definition of Important Terms ................................................................................ 11
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................15
2.1. Pedagogical Content Knowledge........................................................................... 15

2.1.1. Development of PCK and PCK Models in Science Education.................... 15
2.1.2. Studies on PCK of Science Teachers ............................................................... 25
2.1.2.1. Studies on Science Teachers’ PCK on Biology Topics ........................... 26
2.1.2.2. Studies on Science Teachers’ PCK for NOS ............................................ 42
2.1.2.3. Studies on Science Teachers’ PCK for SD ............................................... 48
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................51
3.1. Interpretive Research Paradigm ............................................................................ 52

3.2. Qualitative Research Approach ............................................................................. 53
xi
3.3. Case Study Design.................................................................................................... 54
3.4. Data Collection Procedures ..................................................................................... 56
3.4.1. Sampling of the Study....................................................................................... 56
3.4.2. Participants of the Study .................................................................................. 58
3.4.3. Data Collection Tools ........................................................................................ 59
3.4.3.1. Interviews .................................................................................................... 59

3.4.3.1.1. Questions on Biogeochemical Cycles ............................................... 60
3.4.3.1.2. Embedded Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire .................. 61
3.4.3.1.3. Content Representation (CoRe) ......................................................... 61
3.4.3.2. Card-Sorting Activity ................................................................................. 62

3.4.3.3. Video Recording ......................................................................................... 64
3.4.3.4. Documents ................................................................................................... 65

3.4.3.4.1. Personal Documents............................................................................ 65
3.4.3.4.2. Researcher-Generated Documents .................................................... 66
3.5. Data Analysis ............................................................................................................ 66
3.5.1. Data Analysis of Subject Matter Knowledge ................................................. 67

3.5.1.1. Substantive Knowledge ............................................................................. 67
3.5.1.2. Syntactic Knowledge .................................................................................. 75

3.5.1.3. SD Understanding ...................................................................................... 75
3.5.2. Data Analysis of Pedagogical Content Knowledge ...................................... 77

3.5.2.1. Orientations to Science Teaching ............................................................. 78
3.5.2.2. Knowledge of Curriculum ........................................................................ 80
3.5.2.3. Knowledge of Instructional Strategies .................................................... 80

3.5.2.4. Knowledge of Students’ Understanding ................................................. 81
3.5.2.5. Knowledge of Assessment ........................................................................ 82
3.6. Trustworthiness of the Study.................................................................................. 83

3.6.1. Credibility ........................................................................................................... 84
3.6.2. Transferability .................................................................................................... 85
3.6.3. Dependability..................................................................................................... 86
xii
3.6.4. Confirmability ................................................................................................... 86
3.7. Ethical Issues............................................................................................................. 87
3.8. Assumptions of the Study....................................................................................... 87
3.9. Limitations of the Study .......................................................................................... 88
4. FINDINGS .........................................................................................................................90
4.1. CASE 1: Kemal’s Subject Matter Knowledge and Pedagogical Content

Knowledge on Biogeochemical Cycles ........................................................................ 90
4.1.1. Kemal’s Subject Matter Knowledge ............................................................... 91
4.1.1.1. Kemal’s Substantive Knowledge ............................................................. 91
4.1.1.1.1. Kemal’s Knowledge about Carbon Cycle ........................................ 92
4.1.1.1.2. Kemal’s Knowledge about Hydrologic Cycle ................................. 96

4.1.1.1.3. Kemal’s Knowledge about Nitrogen Cycle ..................................... 99
4.1.1.2. Kemal’s Syntactic Knowledge ................................................................ 102
4.1.1.3. Kemal’s Understanding of Sustainable Development Regarding

Biogeochemical Cycles ......................................................................................... 108
4.1.1.3.1. Kemal’s Knowledge on the Connections between Carbon

Cycle and Sustainable Development .............................................................. 109
4.1.1.3.2. Kemal’s Knowledge on the Connections between Hydrological

4.1.1.3.3. Kemal’s Knowledge on the Connections between Nitrogen

4.1.2. Kemal’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge .................................................. 116
4.1.2.1. Kemal’s Orientation to Science Teaching ............................................. 116
4.1.2.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Curriculum....................................................... 124

4.1.2.2.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Goals and Objectives ............................... 124
4.1.2.2.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Materials .................................................... 127

4.1.2.3. Kemal’s Knowledge of Instructional Strategies ................................... 128
4.1.2.3.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Subject Specific Strategies ....................... 128
4.1.2.3.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Topic Specific Strategies .......................... 130

4.1.2.3.2.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Representations ................................. 130
xiii
4.1.2.3.2.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Activities ............................................. 133
4.1.2.4. Kemal’s Knowledge of Students’ Understanding of Science ............. 133
4.1.2.4.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Requirements for Learning ..................... 133
4.1.2.4.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Areas of Students’ Difficulties ................ 135
4.1.2.5. Kemal’s Knowledge of Assessment ....................................................... 135
4.1.2.5.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Dimensions of Science Learning

to Assess.............................................................................................................. 136
4.1.2.5.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Methods of Assessment ........................... 137
4.2. CASE 2: Hale’s Subject Matter Knowledge and Pedagogical Content

Knowledge on Biogeochemical Cycles ....................................................................... 140
4.2.1. Hale’s Subject Matter Knowledge ................................................................. 140
4.2.1.1. Hale’s Substantive Knowledge ............................................................... 140

4.2.1.1.1. Hale’s Knowledge about Carbon Cycle ......................................... 141
4.2.1.1.2. Hale’s Knowledge about Hydrologic Cycle .................................. 146
4.2.1.1.3. Hale’s Knowledge about Nitrogen Cycle ...................................... 150
4.2.1.2. Hale’s Syntactic Knowledge ................................................................... 153
4.2.1.3. Hale’s Understanding of Sustainable Development Regarding

Biogeochemical Cycles.......................................................................................... 159
4.2.1.3.1. Hale’s Knowledge on the Connections between Carbon

4.2.1.3.2. Hale’s Knowledge on the Connections between Hydrological
4.2.1.3.3. Hale’s Knowledge on the Connections between Nitrogen

4.2.2. Hale’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge ...................................................... 170
4.2.2.1. Hale’s Orientation to Science Teaching ................................................. 170
4.2.2.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Curriculum .......................................................... 179

4.2.2.2.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Goals and Objectives ................................... 179
4.2.2.2.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Materials ....................................................... 182

4.2.2.3. Hale’s Knowledge of Instructional Strategies ...................................... 183
xiv
4.2.2.3.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Subject Specific Strategies .......................... 183
4.2.2.3.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Topic Specific Strategies ............................. 185
4.2.2.3.2.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Representations .................................... 185
4.2.2.3.2.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Activities ................................................ 192
4.2.2.4. Hale’s Knowledge of Students’ Understanding of Science ................ 193
4.2.2.4.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Requirements for Learning ........................ 193

4.2.2.4.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Areas of Students’ Difficulties ................... 195
4.2.2.5. Hale’s Knowledge of Assessment .......................................................... 196
4.2.2.5.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Dimensions of Science Learning

to Assess ............................................................................................................. 196
4.2.2.5.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Methods of Assessment.............................. 198
4.3. CASE 3: Selda’s Subject Matter Knowledge and Pedagogical Content

Knowledge on Biogeochemical Cycles ...................................................................... 202
4.3.1. Selda’s Subject Matter Knowledge ............................................................... 202
4.3.1.1. Selda’s Substantive Knowledge ............................................................. 202
4.3.1.1.1. Selda’s Knowledge about Carbon Cycle ........................................ 203

4.3.1.1.2. Selda’s Knowledge about Hydrologic Cycle ................................. 207
4.3.1.1.3. Selda’s Knowledge about Nitrogen Cycle ..................................... 210
4.3.1.2. Selda’s Syntactic Knowledge .................................................................. 213
4.3.1.3. Selda’s Understanding of Sustainable Development Regarding

Biogeochemical Cycles ......................................................................................... 219
4.3.1.3.1. Selda’s Knowledge on the Connections between Carbon

4.3.1.3.2. Selda’s Knowledge on the Connections between Hydrological
4.3.1.3.3. Selda’s Knowledge on the Connections between Nitrogen

4.3.2. Selda’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge .................................................... 227
4.3.2.1. Selda’s Orientation to Science Teaching ............................................... 227

4.3.2.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Curriculum ........................................................ 234
xv
4.3.2.2.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Goals and Objectives .................................. 234
4.3.2.2.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Materials ...................................................... 237
4.3.2.3. Selda’s Knowledge of Instructional Strategies ..................................... 237
4.3.2.3.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Subject Specific Strategies ......................... 237
4.3.2.3.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Topic Specific Strategies ............................ 239
4.3.2.3.2.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Representations ................................... 239

4.3.2.3.2.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Activities ............................................... 243
4.3.2.4. Selda’s Knowledge of Students’ Understanding of Science ............... 243
4.3.2.4.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Requirements for Learning ....................... 243
4.3.2.4.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Areas of Students’ Difficulties .................. 245

4.3.2.5. Selda’s Knowledge of Assessment ......................................................... 246
4.3.2.5.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Dimensions of Science Learning

to Assess.............................................................................................................. 246
4.3.2.5.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Methods of Assessment ............................. 247
5. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS ........................................... 250
5.1. Science Teachers’ Subject Matter Knowledge .................................................... 250
5.2. Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge ......................................... 259

5.3. Implications & Recommendations ....................................................................... 272
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 276
APPENDICES
A.MADDE DÖNGÜLERİ VE SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR KALKINMA KAVRAMINA
YÖNELİK GÖRÜŞME SORULARI ................................................................................. 296
B. BİLİMİN DOĞASI BİLGİSİNE YÖNELİK GÖRÜŞME SORULARI ...................... 297
C. KART GRUPLAMA AKTİVİTESİ .............................................................................. 299
D. İÇERİK GÖSTERİMİ RÖPORTAJ SORULARI......................................................... 302
E. ORIJINAL DRAWINGS OF SCIENCE TEACHERS ................................................ 304
F. RUBRIC USED FOR INFORMED NOS VIEWS ........................................................ 311
G. PERMISSION OF METU HUMAN SUBJECTS ETHICS COMMITTEE ............... 312
H. PERMISSION OF MINISTRY OF NATIONAL EDUCATION .............................. 313
xvi
I. CURRICULUM VITAE ..................................................................................................314
J. TURKISH SUMMARY / TÜRKÇE ÖZET ....................................................................315
K. THESIS PERMISSION FORM / TEZ İZİN FORMU .................................................341
xvii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1. Participant Teachers’ Demographic Information ………………………....58
Table 3.2. Data Collection Tools……………………………………………………….…59
Table 3.3. The Details of Interview Questions on Biogeochemical Cycles……….....60
Table 3.4. The Details of the Embedded VNOS-C Questionnaire…………………….61
Table 3.5. The Details of the Content Representation (CoRe) Interview………........62
Table 3.6. The Details of the Card-Sorting Activity…………………………………….64
Table 3.7. The Details of Video-Recording……………………………………………...65
Table 3.8. The Scientific Explanations of the Processes in the Biogeochemical

Cycles…………………………………………………………………………………….....68
Table 3.9. The Components and Processes within the Biogeochemical Cycles….....73
Table 3.10. The Explanations of Categories of Participant Teachers’

Substantive Knowledge…………………………………………………………………..74
Table 3.11. The Thematic Connections between Biogeochemical Cycles and

SD Related Issues………………………………………………………………………….76
Table 3.12. Categories and Codes Used to Identify Participant Teachers’ SD

Understanding……………………………………………………………………………..77
Table 3.13. The Components and Subcomponents of the PCK model used
in the current study ……………………………………………………………………….78
Table 3.14. The Goals of Different Orientations to Teaching Science………………..79
Table 3.15. The Categories and Codes of Knowledge of Curriculum………………..80
Table 3.16. The Categories of Knowledge of Topic-Specific Strategies………………81
Table 3.17. The Categories and Codes of Knowledge of Students’

Understanding……………………………………………………………………………..82
Table 3.18. Categories and Codes for Knowledge of Assessment…………………….83
Table 3.19. Proposed Criteria and Analogous Quantitative Criteria…………………83
xviii
Table. 4.1. Kemal’s Understanding of the Carbon Cycle………………………………92
Table 4.2. Kemal’s Understanding of the Hydrological Cycle…………………….....96
Table 4.3. Kemal’s Understanding of the Nitrogen Cycle…………………………….99
Table 4.4. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Empirical NOS……………………………103
Table 4.5. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Theory & Law…………………………….104
Table 4.6. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Tentative NOS…………………………….105
Table 4.7. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Inferential NOS…………………………...105
Table 4.8. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Creative and Imaginative NOS…………106
Table 4.9. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Subjective NOS………………………….. 107
Table 4.10. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Socio-Cultural NOS……………………..107
Table 4.11. Kemal’s Sample Statements related to Beliefs about Central Goals
for Science Teaching……………………………………………………………………...116
Table 4.12. Kemal’s Sample Statements related to Beliefs about Peripheral Goals
Table 4.13. Kemal’s Sample Statements Related to Orientations Parallel to

His Teaching………………………………………………………………………………119
Table 4.14. Kemal’s Sample Statements Related to Reasons of Orientations

Not Corresponded with His Teaching…………………………………………………121
Table 4.15. Kemal’s Intended Objectives Related to Topic of Biogeochemical

Cycles……………………………………………………………...………………………125
Table 4.16. Kemal’s Aim of Using Teaching Sources…………………….................128
Table 4.17. Kemal Sample Questions to Assess Student Learning………………....137
Table 4.18. The Summary of Kemal’s Knowledge of Assessment…………………..139
Table 4.19. Hale’s Understanding of the Carbon Cycle………………………………143
Table 4.20. Hale’s Understanding of the Hydrological Cycle……………………….146
Table 4.21. Hale’s Understanding of the Nitrogen Cycle…………………………….150
Table 4.22. Hale’s Sample Statements of Empirical NOS…………………………….154

xix
Table 4.23. Hale’s Sample Statements of Theory & Law……………………………..155
Table 4.24. Hale’s Sample Statements of Tentative NOS…………………………….156
Table 4.25. Hale’s Sample Statements of Inferential NOS……………………………156
Table 4.26. Hale’s Sample Statements of Creative and Imaginative NOS………….157
Table 4.27. Hale’s Sample Statements of Subjective NOS……………………………158
Table 4.28. Hale’s Sample Statements of Socio-Cultural NOS……………………....158
Table 4.29. Hale’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs About Central Goals
Table 4.30. Hale’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs about Peripheral Goals
Table 4.31. Hale’s Sample Statements Related to Orientations Parallel to Her

Teaching…………………………………………………………………………………...173
Table 4.32. Hale’s Sample Statements Related to Reasons of Orientations Not

Corresponded with Her Teaching……………………………………………………...178
Table 4.33. Hale’s Intended Objectives Related to Topic of Biogeochemical

Cycles……………………………………………………………………………………...180
Table 4.34. Hale’s Aim of Using Teaching Sources………………………………......182
Table 4.35. Hale’s Sample Questions to Assess Students’ Learning………………..198
Table 4.36. The Summary of Hale’s Knowledge of Assessment……………………..201
Table 4.37. Selda’s Understanding of the Carbon Cycle……………………………..203
Table 4.38. Selda’s Understanding of the Hydrological Cycle………………………207
Table 4.39. Selda’s Understanding of the Nitrogen Cycle……………………………210
Table 4.40. Selda’s Sample Statements of Empirical NOS……………………………214
Table 4.41. Selda’s Sample Statements of Theory & Law…………………………….215
Table 4.42. Selda’s Sample Statements of Tentative NOS…………………………….216
Table 4.43. Selda’s Sample Statements of Inferential NOS…………………………...216
Table 4.44. Selda’s Sample Statements of Creative and Imaginative NOS…………217

xx
Table 4.45. Selda’s Sample Statements of Subjective NOS…………………………...218
Table 4.46. Selda’s Sample Statements of Socio-Cultural NOS………………………218
Table 4.47. Selda’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs about Central

Goals for Science Teaching………………………………………………………………227
Table 4.48. Selda’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs about Peripheral

Goals for Science Teaching……………………………………………………………...228
Table 4.49. Selda’s Sample Statements Related to Orientations Parallel to Her

Teaching…………………………………………………………………………………...230
Table 4.50. Selda’s Sample Statements Related to Orientations Not

Corresponded with Her Teaching…………..………………………………………….232
Table 4.51. Selda’s Intended Objectives Related to Topic of Biogeochemical

Cycles……………………………………………………………………………………...235
Table 4.52. Selda’s Aim of Using Teaching Sources………………………………......237
Table 4.53. Selda’s Sample Questions to Assess Students’ Learning………………..247
Table 4.54. The Summary of Selda’s Knowledge of Assessment……………………249
xxi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1. Magnusson et al. (1999)’s Model of the Relationships among the
Domains of Teacher Knowledge………………………………………………..............3
Figure 1.2. Magnusson et al. (1999)’s PCK Model for Science Teaching…….……....4
Figure 2.1. Grossman (1990)’s PCK Model……………...……………….………..…...17
Figure 2.2. Cochran et al. (1993)’s PCKg Model………………………….…………….18
Figure 2.3. Veal & Makinster (1999)’s Hierarchical Model of PCK……………….....19
Figure 2.4. Park & Oliver (2008)’s Hexagonal Model of PCK…………………………20
Figure 2.5. Rollnick et al. (2008)’s Tailored PCK Model……………………………….21
Figure 2.6. Modified Tailored PCK Model……………………………………….........22
Figure 2.7. Consensus Model of PCK……………………………………………….......23
Figure 2.8. Integrative and Transformative Models of PCK………………………….24
Figure 3.1. The Procedure of The Study…………………………………………………55
Figure 4.1. Kemal’s Drawing of Carbon Cycle………………………………………….95
Figure 4.2. Kemal’s Drawing of Hydrological Cycle……………………………….....98
Figure 4.3. Kemal’s Drawing of Nitrogen Cycle………………………………………101
Figure 4.4. Kemal’s Conceptions of Sustainable Development……………………...115
Figure 4.5. Kemal’s Drawing Used to Teach the Carbon Cycle……………………..130
Figure 4.6. Kemal’s Drawing Used to Teach the Hydrological Cycle………………131
Figure 4.7. Kemal’s Drawing Used to Teach the Nitrogen Cycle……………………131
Figure 4.8. Hale’s Drawing of Carbon Cycle…………………………………………..144
Figure 4.9. Hale’s Drawing of Hydrological Cycle……………………………………149
Figure 4.10. Hale’s Drawing of Nitrogen Cycle……………………………………….152
xxii
Figure 4.11. Hale’s Conceptions of Sustainable Development………………………169
Figure 4.12. The Schemas Hale Used to Teach the Hydrological Cycle……………186
Figure 4.13. The Animation Hale Used to Show the Transpiration…………………187
Figure 4.14. The Schema Hale Used to Teach the Carbon Cycle…………………….187
Figure 4.15. The Animations Hale Used to Show the Carbon and Oxygen
Cycles…………………………………………….………………………………………..188
Figure 4.16. The Schemas Hale Used to Teach the Nitrogen Cycle…………………189
Figure 4.17. The Animations Hale Used to Show the Nitrogen Cycle……………...190
Figure 4.18. The Puzzle Activity Hale’s Used to Assess Students’ Learning….....192
Figure 4.19. The Concept Map Completion Activity Hale’s Used to Assess
Students’ Learning……………………………………………………………………….193
Figure 4.20. Selda’s Drawing of Carbon Cycle………………………………………..206
Figure 4. 21. Selda’s Drawing of Hydrological Cycle………………………………..209
Figure 4.22. Selda’s Drawing of Nitrogen Cycle……………………………………...212
Figure 4.23. Selda’s Conceptions of Sustainable Development……………………..226
Figure 4.24. Selda’s Drawing Used to Teach the Hydrological Cycle………………239
Figure 4.25. Selda’s Drawing Used to Teach the Carbon Cycle………………….....240
Figure 4.26. Selda’s Drawing Used to Teach the Nitrogen Cycle……………………240
Figure 4.27. Selda’s Illustration Used to Repeat the Hydrological Cycle……….....241
Figure 4.28. Selda’s Illustration Used to Repeat the Carbon Cycle………………….241
Figure 4.29. Selda’s Illustration Used to Repeat the Nitrogen Cycle………………..242
xxiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
PCK Pedagogical Content Knowledge
SMK Subject Matter Knowledge
PK Pedagogical Knowledge
KofC Knowledge of Context
CK Content Knowledge
CoRe Content Representation
SD Sustainable Development
ESD Education for Sustainable Development
NOS Nature of Science
VNOS Views of Nature of Science
xxiv
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In all sub- fields of education, the main aim of teaching is to ensure students’
learning and understanding. However, teachers’ ability to teach (Kind, 2009) is the
most influential factor on classroom learning (Lumpe 2007). Thus, teachers have
enormous impact on students’ understanding and achievement (Aydin, 2012;
Brown, Friedrichsen, & Abell, 2013; Lumpe, 2007; Sanders, 2000; van Driel, Beijaard,
& Verloop, 2001). Since 1980’s, education researchers have focused on the topics like
‘‘teacher knowledge’’ and ‘‘teacher practical knowledge’’ to provide rich and
valuable data to explain the effects of teachers’ knowledge and practice on students’
success (Abell, 2007; Aydin, 2012; Carter, 1990; Friedrichsen, 2008; Grossman, 1990;
Hashweh, 2005; Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999; Shulman, 1986, 1987; Şen, 2014;
Zembylas, 2007; Rollnick, Bennett, Rhemtula, Dharsey, & Ndlovu, 2008).
In the first half of 20th century, researchers concluded that teachers’ content
knowledge is the most important indicator of qualified teachers. Afterward,
researchers started to investigate pedagogical knowledge in latter half of the 20 th
century (Shulman, 1986). Shulman, however, claimed that content knowledge and
pedagogical knowledge are linked. Thus, problems of teaching and teacher
knowledge have led Shulman to introduce the construct of "pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK)" as missing paradigm (Shulman, 1987). According to Shulman
(1987), PCK has been a combination of content and pedagogy which is defined as:
the special amalgam of content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge in

particular topics which is organized, represented and adapted to the diverse
interests and abilities of learners, and presented for instruction (p.8).
1
Shulman's PCK construct explained the question of what successful teachers should
know about ways to lead students’ understanding. (Grossman, 1990; Lederman,
Gess-Newsome & Latz, 1994; Mulhall, Berry, & Loughran, 2003). PCK can be
conceived as teachers’ detailed knowledge about both subject matter and the
general pedagogy regarding the learners’ prior knowledge and difficulties, the use
of assessment and instructional strategies (representations, figures, activities) and
curricular resources (Abell, 2007; Magnusson et al., 1999; Tobin & McRobbie, 1999).
Consequently, PCK is regarded as central to effective teaching and learning
(Cochran, DeRuiter & King, 1993; Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko 1999).
As a construct, PCK also offers a perspective for science education researchers.
Especially, Magnusson et al.’s (1999) transformative PCK model has been used
dominantly in most of PCK studies in the field of science teacher education (Abell,
2008; Kind, 2009). In this model, researchers concluded that teachers have four main
knowledge domains as subject matter knowledge (SMK), pedagogical knowledge
(PK), knowledge of educational context and PCK (Figure 1.1). Following
Grossman’s (1990) PCK construct, Magnusson et al. (1999) argued that the other
three domains of teacher knowledge form and shape PCK. Differently, in their
model, Magnusson and her friends included teacher beliefs in addition to teacher
knowledge since they thought that beliefs affect teachers’ teaching.
Inspired by Tamir (1988), they incorporated “knowledge of assessment” in their
PCK model. Moreover, the term “conception of teaching purposes” used by
Grossman was changed to “orientation to science teaching”. Thus, in their PCK
model for science teaching (Figure 1.2), Magnusson et al. (1990) described five
components which are (a) knowledge of science curricula, (b) knowledge of
students’ understanding, (c) knowledge of assessment of scientific literacy, (d)
knowledge of instructional strategies, and (e) orientation to teaching science. It is
worth noting that this model also includes beliefs of teacher in each component
along with knowledge. Using this model as a framework, this study focused on
2
teachers’ SMK and PCK to give insights into the practical value of PCK in the topic
of biogeochemical cycles in the context of sustainable development.
Figure 1.1. Magnusson et al. (1999)’s Model of the Relationships among the Domains
of Teacher Knowledge [modified from Grossman, 1990] (p. 98)
3
Figure 1.2. Magnusson et al. (1999)’s PCK Model for Science Teaching (p. 99)
4
1.1.Science Education and Education for Sustainable Development
Since 1950s, the perennial goal of science education has been to educate learners as
scientifically literate citizens. Today, a number of researchers have argued that
scientific literacy should meet the needs of the 21st century (Choi, Lee, Shin, Kim &
Krajcik, 2011) in order to create a more sustainable world (Hodson, 2011; McFarlane,
2011). In the 21st century, science and technology have been progressing rapidly.
Especially due to the environmental problems resulted by these rapid changes have
caused individuals to change their ethical and moral concerns (Karaarslan, 2016).
Thus, many science researchers have concluded that there is a need for
reconceptualization of science education considering the rapid changes in both
ethical and moral concerns and, therefore, the need to emphasize sustainable
development (SD) issues due to the rise in environmental problems (e.g., Carter,
2008; Colucci-Gray, Perazzone, Dodman & Camino, 2013; Feldman & Nation, 2015).
Carter (2008), for example, asserted that the aim of the science education in 21th
century is to help students make critical judgments about science and to improve
their skills and knowledge in order to be responsible citizens for more sustainable
world. In response to needs of developing societies, the science education, as a
discipline, should equip learners with knowledge and perspectives about
sustainable development (Feldman & Nation, 2015), improve their skills, interests
and motivation to take action regarding social and global problems (Tytler, 2007),
and to change their values and attitudes to ensure a sustainable future (Stratton,
Hagevik, Feldman & Bloom, 2015). In this regard, Science Curriculum in Turkey has
been revised in 2013 and 2017 to integrate sustainability topics into existing
curriculum. Accordingly, sustainable development was listed as one of the
components of Science -Technology- Environment- Society (STES) learning domain
in the national science curriculum revised in 2013 (MoNE, 2013). In there,
sustainable development defined as ‘‘developing consciousness about using natural
resources efficiently to meet the needs of the future generations and consider the
5
individual, societal, economic benefits’’ (MoNe, 2013). In 2017, although, STSE
learning domain is excluded from the current science curriculum, sustainable
development is still one of the general aims of the curriculum. In this curriculum,
sustainable development defined by pointing out the interaction between people,
environment and society and the awareness of the relation inside the society,
natural resources and economy. Also, the concept of sustainable development is
placed as one of the subtopics under the Energy Transformations and Environment
Science of the 8th grade (MoNe, 2017). However, changes or revisions in the
curricula do not guarantee a solution to educational problems and to raise
responsible citizens to build up a sustainable future. Even if the new curricula
suggest newtopics and also new strategies and methods for teaching and
assessment, teachers might have difficulties in reflecting the new curriculum into
their teaching” (Aydın & Çakıroğlu, 2010). Science education is seen as a leading
factor to create more sustainable societies (UNCED, 1992); teachers’ competencies
have been discussed at all levels of education programs from pre-school to higher
education (e.g., Rieckmann, 2012; UNECE, 2011). Due to the paradigm shifts in
perspective of science education in the 21st century mentioned above, the role of
science teachers specifically has been a matter of debate. This means that the
reconceptualization of science education requires altering teachers’ approaches
related to content and PCK for teaching sustainable development issues. Therefore,
in order to engage SD issues with every discipline from art to science and
mathematics, teachers should possess necessary and appropriate knowledge, skills
(especially, system thinking skills), values and pedagogy to implement education
for sustainable development (ESD) (McKeown and Hopkins, 2003). Therefore,
considering the challenges as a result of the curricula revisions, the need for
research on teachers’ SMK and PCK for SD in the discipline of science is inevitable
(Kadji-Beltran, Zachariou, Liarakou & Flogaitis, 2014). Regarding these
considerations, the current research which explores experienced science teachers’
6
SMK and PCK is supposed to provide valuable theoretical and practical information
to the science teacher education literature in the context of ESD.
1.2.Significance of the Study
While PCK has been a subject of research since the 1980s, many researchers asserted
that PCK is a topic-specific construct (Aydin, Friedrichsen, Boz, & Hanuscin, 2014;
Cochran, King, & DeRuiter, 1993; Loughran, Mulhall, & Berry, 2004; Mavhunga,
2014; van Driel, et al., 1998; Veal & MaKinster, 1998). However, little is known about
how teachers develop their PCK in different topics. Therefore, the PCK literature
has underlined that there is a need for more research on PCK construct in different
topics in different disciplines (Abell, 2008; Aydin, 2012; Aydin, Friedrichsen, Boz, &
Hanuscin, 2014; De Jong, et al., 2005; Loughran, et al., 2004; Magnusson, Borko, &
Krajcik, 1994; Pitjeng-Mobasala & Rollnick, 2018; Sen, 2014; van Driel et al., 1998). In
response to this need, the current study initially aims to provide valuable
information on experienced teachers’ topic-specific PCK.
As mentioned above, previous studies in PCK literature call for more research on
teachers’ PCK structure in different topics. Furthermore, many educational
researchers have chosen to investigate either teachers’ subject matter knowledge or
their pedagogical content knowledge separately. This research also contributed to
PCK literature with regard to consider both teachers’ SMK and PCK together. In this
study, the transformative model of PCK developed by Magnusson et al. (1999) was
adopted to gather detailed information on the nature of science teachers’ PCK. From
the perspective of this model, PCK is a new type of knowledge formed by
conversion of subject matter knowledge (SMK), pedagogical knowledge (PK) and
knowledge of context (KofC). As many researchers studying on PCK development
have emphasized that there is a need of research to ascertain how teachers’
transform SMK into their PCK within a discipline (Abell, 2008, Aydin, 2012, Sen,
2014; Magnusson et al., 1999), the current study is supposed to get valuable
7
information on teachers’ substantive and syntactic structure of SMK to provide
evidence for the science teachers’ PCK in the discipline of science education.
Specifically, PCK researches on the field of science education mostly have focused
on the chemistry topics (Aydin & Boz, 2012). Since PCK research in biology topics is
rare (Aydemir; 2014; Aydin & Boz, 2012; Kind, 2009; Sen, 2014), the topic of
biogeochemical cycles not studied yet in PCK literature in the context of science
education was selected. Another significant is that the current research aimed to
identify science teachers’ PCK in the context of education for sustainable
development (ESD). In 2013-2014 education year, during the data collection of the
study, the changes made for the integration of the sustainable development issues
into the science curriculum had not been implemented yet in the 8th grades.
However, based on the interdisciplinary nature of the concept of sustaianable
development, the researcher concluded that, due to the being an environmental
issue, the topic of biogeochemical cycles can be an important tool for reflecting
teachers’ understanding of sustainable development. It is important to highlight
whether sceince teachers develop their perceptions for SD in the existing subjects
rather adding the concept as a separate subject. Therefore, based on the
interdisciplinary nature the concept of SD, the results of the current study are
significant due to providing valuable evidence how science teachers connect the
biogeochemical cycles and sustainable development issues
Researches on the transformative PCK model of Magnusson et al. (1999) have
mostly focused on one or some components of PCK. However, because of the nature
of PCK, studying only one or two components is really hard regarding the overlap
of the components. Correspondingly, to mark off the components is difficult in
terms of data collection, data analysis and discussion (Abell, 2008; Friedrichsen &
Dana, 2005; Friedrichsen et al., 2010). Especially, among the components, the
orientation towards science teaching was the least studied one. At this point, there is
still need more research to better understand the overarching construct of this
8
component. Therefore, to portray experienced teachers’ PCK construct obviously,
both orientations to science teaching and all components of PCK model offered by
Magnusson et al. (1999) were examined in current research.
In respect of the methodological approach, qualitative research was selected in this
study to examine teachers’ topic-specific PCK. Abell (2008) highlighted that the
structure of PCK hidden in teachers’ mind is tacit. More recently, investigators (Ijeh
& Onwu, 2013; Kapyla, Heikkinen, & Asunta, 2009; Rollnick et al., 2008) have
suggested to conduct qualitative methods through using various data sources in
order to disclose how teachers’ PCK develops. McConnell et al. (2013) emphasized
that especially interviews and lesson observations are vital to gain deep
understanding of content knowledge and PCK structure. Therefore, this study used
multiple case study design to obtain rich and deep information about teachers’ PCK
by the help of the multiple data sources such as interviews, classroom observations
with help of the video recorder, teacher documents and card-sorting activity. Thus,
the results of the study are supposed to gather marvelous evidence in order to
clarify the complicated construct of PCK.
Most of the PCK studies have focused on the development of pre-service teachers’
PCK (Loughran et al., 2004; Nilsson, 2008; Shannon, 2006; van Driel, de Jong, &
Verloop, 2002; Zembal-Saul, Krajcik, & Bluemenfeld, 2002). However, PCK is
developed by teachers with experiences on teaching. Therefore, expert teachers have
more pedagogical content knowledge than less experienced ones (Abd-El-Khalick,
2006; Cochran et al., 1993; Käpylä, Heikkinen, & Asunta, 2008; Magnusson et al.,
1999; Shulman, 1987). Because of this reason, the current research is hoped to
provide beneficial insights into PCK literature in terms of the PCK development of
experienced science teachers regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles in the
context of ESD.
9
In related literature, most studies asserted that due to the tacit nature of PCK,
concrete examples of classroom settings that are useable and applicable in science
teaching are difficult to find (Hume, 2010; Mthethwa-Kunene, Onwu & de Villiers,
2015; Park & Chen, 2012; Rollnick et al., 2008). In this manner, Loughran et al. (2004)
and van Driel, Veal, and Janssen (2001) underlined the importance of the studies on
real classroom practices of experienced teachers’ PCK in particular topics. In this
regard, ESD literature has also emphasized that there is a couple of studies on
classroom-related practice (Anyolo, 2018; Birdsall, 2015; Corney & Reid, 2007).
Therefore, it is significant that science teachers’ practices in authentic classrooms
were focused to provide more empirical evidence about how teachers develop their
PCK in the context of ESD regarding biogeochemical cycles. Especially, the results
of the study including concrete examples of real practitioners are supposed to enrich
pre-service and other in-service science teachers’ repertoire of teaching practices in
the same topic providing rich and valuable data for professional development
programs such as pre-service teacher education programs and in-service teacher
training programs.
1.3.Statement of the Problem
The main aim of the study is to investigate experienced science teachers’ SMK and
PCK regarding biogeochemical cycles in the context of SD. Thus, the following
research questions were put forward to guide the study:
1. What is the science teachers’ subject matter knowledge for teaching
biogeochemical cycles in the context of sustainable development?
1.1. What is the science teachers’ substantive knowledge regarding
biogeochemical cycles?
1.2. What is the science teachers’ syntactic knowledge regarding nature of
science?
1.3. What are the science teachers’ understanding of SD regarding
10
2. What is the science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching
2.1. What are the science teachers’ orientations to teaching science?
2.2. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of curriculum for teaching
2.3. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of instructional strategies for
teaching biogeochemical cycles?
2.4. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of students for teaching
2.5. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of assessment for teaching
1.4.Definition of Important Terms
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) is a new type of teacher knowledge by the
combination of subject matter knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and knowledge
of context type of knowledge (Magnusson et al., 1999). The authors defined PCK as:
‘’...is a teacher’s understanding of how to help students understand specific subject

matter. It includes knowledge of how particular subject matter topics can be
organized, represented and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of
learners, and then presented for instruction (p.96).’’
The pedagogical content knowledge were investigated with the adopted model of
PCK (Magnusson et al., 1999) in terms of science teachers’ orientations to science
teaching, knowledge of curriculum, knowledge of instructional strategies,
knowledge of students’ understanding, and knowledge of assessment.
Orientations to Science Teaching is defined as teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about
the goals of science teaching at a specific grade level (Magnusson et al., 1999). This
overarching component plays a central role so it guides teachers to decide the
planning of instructional strategies, the content of the student assignments, the use
11
of curricular materials and textbooks and the evaluation of students’ understanding
(Borko & Putnam, 1996; Magnusson et al., 1999).
Knowledge of Curriculum consists of two categories namely, knowledge of goals and
objectives, and knowledge of specific curricular programs and materials
(Magnusson et al., 1999). In this study, knowledge of specific curricular programs
was not examined because of the national curriculum in Turkey. This curriculum is
offered by Ministry of National Education and pursued in all elementary schools in
the country.
Knowledge of Instructional Strategies includes two categories: knowledge of subject-
specific strategies and knowledge of topic-specific strategies. Subject-specific
strategies means teachers’ overall approaches specific for science teaching. The
strategies in this category represent the general approaches to enacting science
instruction (Magnusson et al., 1999). In this study, teacher centered strategies and
student centered strategies that participant teachers’ handled to teach the
biogeochemical cycles topic was used to analyze teachers’ knowledge of subject
specific strategies. Topic-specific strategies refer to teachers’ knowledge of strategies
to facilitate student learning of specific science concepts. Representations and
activities are two categories of this type of strategies (Magnusson et al., 1999).
Knowledge of Students’ Understanding means teacher knowledge that helps student to
develop specific scientific knowledge. It consists of two categories: requirements for
learning and the areas of students’ difficulties (Magnusson et al., 1999). Knowledge
of requirements for learning refers the knowledge about prerequisite knowledge for
learning specific science concepts (Magnusson et al., 1999). Knowledge of areas of
students’ difficulties means that teachers’ knowledge about the science concepts or
areas that student learning is difficult.
Knowledge of Assessment refers to teachers’ knowledge about the ways what and how
students learn. There are two categories which are knowledge of dimensions of
12
science learning and knowledge of methods (Magnusson et al., 1999). The category
of dimensions of science learning includes the aspects of students’ learning which
are important to assess in the teaching of a particular topic. In the literature, the
dimensions of science learning to assess were identified as conceptual
understanding, interdisciplinary themes, nature of science, and science process
skills. Thus, in this study, dimensions were adopted to gather data related to
participant teachers’ this type of knowledge. The other category of knowledge of
assessment is the knowledge of methods of assessment. This knowledge refers to
the methods that teachers employed to assess students’ specific dimensions of
science learning (Magnusson et al., 1999).
Subject Matter Knowledge (SMK) refers to elementary science teacher’s content
knowledge consisted of substantive and syntactic structures (Schwab, 1964) in the
topic of biogeochemical cycles. Biology has a special standing concerning teachers’
content knowledge (Abell 2007) due to being the only science subject that includes
both substantive and syntactic structures (Schwab,1964). In this respect, substantive
knowledge refers participant teachers’ both conceptual understanding (basic
concepts & processes) and SD understanding whereas syntactic knowledge is
pertinent to the participant teachers’ understanding of nature of science regarding
biogeochemical cycles.
Sustainable Development (SD) has gained wide acceptance in the late 1980s, after its
appearance in Our Common Future, also known as The Brundtland Report. The
report defined the term as; ‘‘development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs
(WCED, 1987, p. 41).’’ Three pillars of society, economy and environment are
needed to consider together at the core of sustainable development.
13
Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) refers to:
all aspects of awareness, education and training provided to enhance an

understanding of the linkages among the issues for sustainable development and
to develop the knowledge, skills, perspectives and values empowering students
to make informed decisions for environmental integrity, economic viability and a
just society for present and future generations while respecting cultural diversity
(UNESCO, 2013b).
Experienced Teachers are the practitioners having at least five or more years’
experience in teaching. According to Berliner (2001), there is no particular time
duration to be competent in the profession but five or more years in teaching is
acceptable time in order to gain expertise.
14
CHAPTER 2
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter aims to give a glimpse of the studies that both theoretically and
empirically lay the basis for this research. Initially, the studies regarding the
development of PCK models in science education were reviewed. Then, considering
science teachers’ SMK regarding biology topics, PCK researches conducted in both
Turkey and abroad were summarized. Finally, studies aiming to explore science
teachers’ PCK for both NOS and ESD were examined.
2.1. Pedagogical Content Knowledge
2.1.1. Development of PCK and PCK Models in Science Education
For more than three decades, pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) has been
recognized as not only one of the most important components of professional
knowledge but also one of the most complicated to understand (Gess-Newsome,
2015; Shulman, 1987; van Driel & Berry, 2012). Scholars consistently acknowledge
that the two essential factors to achieving good teaching are content knowledge and
pedagogical knowledge (Shulman 1986). Furthermore, Shulman (1986, 1987) stated
that PCK should be considered when describing and evaluating teaching expertise
since it refers to the way the teachers link their knowledge on the topic itself with
the pedagogical knowledge they have. Shulman’s (1987) definition of PCK is as
below:
It represents the blending of content and pedagogy into an understanding of how

a particular topics, problems or issues are organized, represented and adapted to
the diverse interests and abilities of learners and presented for instruction (p.8).
15
Shulman (1987) suggested that achieving effective teaching requires different types
of knowledge from the teacher. He categorized these knowledge types as: 1) content
knowledge; 2) general pedagogical knowledge; 3) curriculum knowledge; 4)
pedagogical content knowledge; 5) knowledge of the learners and their
characteristics; 6) knowledge of educational contexts; and 7) knowledge of
educational ends, purposes, and values with their philosophical and historical
grounds (Shulman, 1986). Shulman's definition of PCK is distinctive and useful as it
shows the researchers in this area what successful teachers know about ensuring
and achieving student understanding. After Shulman’s first proposal, many other
researchers modified and reinterpreted PCK (Gess-Newsome, 2015; Grossman, 1990;
Lederman & Gess-Newsome, 1992; Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999; Park &
Oliver, 2008). A paradigm shift in the field of teacher education research was
observed upon Shulman’s definition and construction of PCK (Carlsen, 1999).
In the following year, Tamir (1988) was inspired by Shulman’s view on PCK, and he
focused on teacher knowledge. Teacher knowledge, in his view, has two basic
components: subject matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. The latter
consisted of subcategories that are general pedagogical knowledge and subject
matter-specific pedagogical knowledge which is actually PCK. Knowledge of
students’ understanding, curriculum, instructional strategy, and assessment are the
components of subject matter-specific pedagogical knowledge. Tamir’s work
contributed knowledge and skills for assessment to the PCK models.
Influenced by Shulman’s PCK construct, Grossman (1990) became the first
researcher to systematize the elements of teacher knowledge. She expanded
Shulman’s definition and schematized the constituents of PCK. In her model (Figure
2.1), PCK included three main dimensions: subject matter knowledge, general
pedagogical knowledge, and contextual knowledge. She believed that the
mentioned types of knowledge then formed pedagogical content knowledge. For
Grossman (1990), PCK consisted of four elements: 1) conception of teaching
16
purposes, 2) knowledge of students (their understanding or misunderstanding of a
specific topic), 3) curricular knowledge, and 4) knowledge of instructional
strategies. Grossman considered the “conception of teaching purposes” more
important than other elements and labelled it as an overarching component.
Despite the fact that Grossman (1990) developed a transformative PCK model, her
explanation did not mention if PCK was an active or passive process. Besides, she
stated that the division between the PCK components was not clear.
Figure 2.1. Grossman (1990)’s PCK Model (p.5)
Adopting a constructivist view of learning, Cochran, DeRuiter, and King (1993)
suggested that there is a need for an alteration of Shulman and Grossman’s
conceptualization of PCK. They promoted the term “Pedagogical Content
Knowing” (PCKg) through which they emphasized PCK has dynamic and
developing nature. They criticized Shulman (1986) and Grossman (1990)’s views of
17
transformative PCK. In their perspective, PCKg was whole rather distinct and
developed simultaneously with the contribution of teacher’s knowledge in other
four components in the teaching context. Cochran et al. (1993) emphasized the
significance of experience when it comes to teacher knowledge. Therefore, their
PCKg model (Figure 2.2) is reflective of the development of PCKg over time with
experience. The model also shows that pedagogy, subject matter, student, and
environmental contexts are the ingredients of PCKg. The developed model
visualizes how all four components are related to each other.
Figure 2.2. Cochran et al. (1993)’s PCKg Model (p. 238)
In separate study, Veal and Makinster (1999) developed taxonomy for pedagogical
content knowledge. For them, PCK demonstrated eight attributes that are as
follows: context, environment, nature of science, assessment, pedagogy, curriculum,
socio-culturalism, classroom management, knowledge of students, content
knowledge. Due to hierarchical structure of the taxonomy (Figure 2.3), for a teacher
18
to develop a thriving PCK, content knowledge, knowledge of students, and PCK
attributes are essential and fundamental. However, this PCK development does not
indicate a linear progression. Rather, the researchers acknowledged that those
elements are interdependent. In other words, Veal and Makinster’s (1999) taxonomy
proved PCK to be a continuous journey in addition to showing that growth in one
component has an impact in the overall PCK.
Figure 2.3. Veal & Makinster (1999)’s Hierarchical Model of PCK (p. 11)
19
Moreover, Veal and Makinster (1999) critized the idea of direct transformation of
pedagogical content knowledge. They argued that since PCK was based on
contextual settings, it could not be directly transformed; could only adapted to other
contexts. PCK, in their definition, is to explain the content to students with the use
of varied strategies of instruction. To further exemplify this description, Veal and
MaKinster (1999) likened the PCK process to the translation of one language to
another. In other words, teacher should be able to translate one language (PCK) to
convey the message (content) to people speaking a different language (students).
In their recent work, Park and Oliver (2008) worked on and developed Magnusson
et al. (1990)’s model. Their work introduced a sixth component which they called
“teacher efficacy”. The authors named this model of PCK construction as Hexagonal
Model (Figure 2.4). Not only the introduction of the concept of teacher efficacy but
also the emphasis on reflection, students’ role, and distinctive teaching
characteristics distinguishes Park and Oliver’s (2008) work from others in this field.
Figure 2.4. Park & Oliver (2008)’s Hexagonal Model of PCK (p. 279)
20
When we look at the Hexagonal model, we see that the authors referred to two
levels of PCK: understanding and enactment. Within the context of this model,
understanding means that the teacher recognizes the challenges, students’ needs or
learning difficulties, and the instruction strategies needed to explain a specific topic.
Enactment, on the other hand, refers to the application of teachers’ understanding
during a real teaching situation. Furthermore, placing reflection (both in and on
action) at the heart of the model illustrates its significance within PCK. Finally, the
model developed by Park and Oliver (2008) puts a special emphasis on the
idiosyncrasy of PCK which is related to several factors such as distinctive
characteristics of teachers in teaching, students’ traits, and teachers’ experience.
Rollnick, Bennett, Rhemtula, Dharsey and Ndlovu (2008) produced their model of
PCK (Figure 2.5) as a mixture of four domains of teacher knowledge. These are
content knowledge, context knowledge, knowledge of students, and general
pedagogical knowledge. According to the researchers, during practice, these
domains trigger the development of four other domains called “products of
education” which are content representations, instructional strategies specific for a
content, curriculum saliency, and assessment.
Figure 2.5. Rollnick et al. (2008)’s Tailored PCK Model (p. 1381)
21
Influenced by Cochran, DeRuiter and King (1993)’s teacher knowledge bases, they
placed PCK at the interface between knowledge and practice. In this model, they
also concluded that PCK had influence on manifestations in the classroom. Then,
Davidowitz and Rollnick (2011) modified this model by including teachers’ beliefs.
According to this new model (Figure 2.6), there is a reciprocal relationship between
teachers’ beliefs and teacher knowledge domains.
Figure 2.6. Modified Tailored PCK Model (Davidowitz & Rollnick, 2011, p.10)
Finally, the latest PCK model (Gess-Newsome, 2015) was developed as a result of a
conference held in 2012, with the aspiration to adopt a common definition of
pedagogical content knowledge. In this PCK Summit model (Figure 2.7), there are
five professional knowledge bases: 1) knowledge of assessment, 2) pedagogical
knowledge, 3) content knowledge, 4) knowledge of students, and 5) curricular
knowledge. There is a bivious interaction between these types of knowledge and
topic-specific professional knowledge. Having professional knowledge means being
knowledgeable about and proficient in instruction methods and strategies, content
representation. In addition to these, the teacher is expected to know about students’
potential misconceptions and challenges, dispositions as well as scientific methods
22
and applications. On the other hand, teachers’ beliefs, the context of education, and
teaching orientation all act as filters in shaping teacher’s professional knowledge.
Only then this specific knowledge can be reconstructed to achieve a personal PCK
through classroom context during the practice. The process of developing
knowledge continues after it is applied in classroom context where it is subjected to
students’ beliefs, behavior, and existing knowledge about the topic. Student
outcomes can be used to evaluate teacher’s professional knowledge on the topic
since they affect teachers’ personal PCK achieved through practice in the classroom
and the topic-specific professional knowledge.
Figure 2.7. Consensus Model of PCK (Gess-Newsome, 2015)
23
As can be seen, in PCK literature, there are many definitions and models of
pedagogical content knowledge. Gess-Newsome (1999) examined PCK in two
categories as integrative and transformative (Figure 2.8). In integrative understanding
of PCK, it is viewed as a combination of different factors as pedagogical knowledge
and subject matter knowledge in addition to context knowledge. In other words,
PCK is not a new or separate domain of knowledge in integrative model. This
model is also adopted by Cochran et al. (1993) and Veal and MaKinster (1999). Kind
(2009) concluded that due to the lack of interaction among the components,
integrative models did not have explanatory power. On the other hand, the
transformative model (Figure 2.10) indicates that PCK is the blend of pedagogical
knowledge, subject matter knowledge, and context knowledge. Unlike the
integrative model, PCK construct here is regarded a special type of knowledge.
According to Kind (2009), transformative models have an important mechanism
showing the influence of SMK on PCK for teaching particular topics. Models
developed by Magnusson et al. (1999), Grossman (1990), and Shulman (1986, 1987)
are as well transformative models.
Figure 2.8. Integrative and Transformative Models of PCK (Gess-Newsome, 1999, p.
12)
24
After examining the PCK development literature, it is observed that the process of
teaching is complex, fuzzy and difficult to understand. Hence, most of educational
researches have tried to bring forth different solutions in order to clarify the concept
of teaching. With an aim to increase the quality of teaching, the researchers,
therefore, proposed distinct PCK models having different views of PCK. However,
among models of PCK, there are some common components such as pedagogical
knowledge, subject matter knowledge, and context knowledge. Additionally, there
was a consensus regarding the teacher’s knowledge about representations as well as
difficulties and challenges experienced by students (Van Driel et al., 1998).
Furthermore, studies on PCK suggest that there is still a need for more research the
components of PCK so as to clarify the interaction between such.
As a result, even though the definition of PCK has fuzzy meaning, and proposed
models have missing pieces in PCK paradigm, PCK construct is an effective tool for
understanding the nature of teaching and teacher knowledge (Gess-Newsome,
1999).
2.1.2. Studies on PCK of Science Teachers
In PCK literature, there has been various studies focusing on the disciplines of
chemistry (Aydeniz & Kırbulut, 2014; Aydin, 2012; Clermont et, al., 1993; Drechsler
& van Driel, 2008; Geddis et al., 1993; Hanuscin et al., 2018; Hume, 2010; Özden,
2008; Padilla et al., 2008; Rollnick et al., 2008; Usak, Ozden & Eilks, 2011; van Driel et
al., 1998) and physics (Berg & Brouwer, 1991; Halim & Meerah, 2002; Juhler, 2016;
Karal & Alev, 2016; Magnusson et al., 1994; Magnusson et al., 1999; Melo, Cañada &
Mellado, 2017; Nurmatin & Rustaman, 2016) in the different contexts. However, as
the scope of the study was science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and
subject matter knowledge in the field of biogeochemical cycles, both foreign and
national PCK studies conducted with either biology teachers or science teachers
teaching biological topics were mostly reviewed in this section.
25
2.1.2.1. Studies on Science Teachers’ PCK on Biology Topics
Researchers explored the construction and development of PCK in teaching biology
topics using two different approaches (Mthethwa-Kunene, Onwu & Villiers, 2015).
The first approach included longitudinal studies with an aim to increase teachers’
knowledge by employing certain experimental interventions as part of professional
development programs such as training courses or workshops (Arzi & White, 2008;
Brown et al., 2013; Friedrichsen et al., 2007; Gess-Newsome et al., 2017; Henze et al.,
2008; Lee & Luft, 2008). The second approach focused on investigating what
teachers know about teaching particular topics. This approach applied qualitative
methods to gather data (Mthethwa-Kunene, Onwu & Villiers, 2015; Friedrichsen &
Dana, 2005; Kapyla, Heikkenen & Asunta, 2009; Lankford, 2010). By focusing on the
nature of topic-specific PCK, the components of PCK and PCK development in
biology topics, this section explores in detail such PCK studies which were
conducted with science teachers.
Brown, Friedrichsen and Abell (2013) conducted an analysis on 4 pre-service
biology teachers by using a longitudinal approach to study their level of
pedagogical content knowledge. Throughout the analysis, their main focus was on
orientation toward science, knowledge of instructional sequence, and knowledge of
student. By making use of a teacher certification program, researchers analyzed the
development in the pre-service biology teachers’ knowledge as they gained
experience over time. Data sources for the research included written account of
interviews with teachers, teachers’ lesson plans, their field notes as well as the
materials they produced for in-class use. The study showed K-16 experience and
educational background to be the two factors having an impact on the orientations
of future teachers’ science teaching. The research also demonstrated these
orientations to be remarkably resistant to change over time. The teachers were
found to believe that teaching is conveying the information to the student and in
return, the student is expected to just listen to the teacher. On the other hand,
26
teachers’ knowledge of learner developed to some extent over time. To illustrate this
finding, teachers had little awareness and knowledge as to the students’ challenges
at the beginning; however, their understanding increased throughout the
certification program. Lastly, the teachers began with conveying information as they
believed students would not be able to grasp the knowledge without the help of
teachers. As a result, teachers couldn’t follow the 5E learning cycle step by step. Yet,
using different activities and instructional strategies, they demonstrated
transformation in that regard as they gained more experience. To sum up, the
research revealed that prospective biology teachers developed their knowledge on
instructional strategies and learner to a certain degree, and in parallel to each other.
Resulting from their willingness to respond to students’ expectations and facilitate
learning process, teachers improved themselves in terms of instructional strategy.
The science teaching orientation of pre-service teachers was found to be in harmony
with the other two components as well as having an impact on those.
There was another study by Friedrichsen, Lankford, Brown , Pareja, Volkmann and
Abell (2007). The researchers benefited from an alternative certification program
(ACP) to examine the differences between teacher with and without teaching
experience. The participants of the ACP consisted of four biology teachers and two
of them did not have experience in teaching while the other two worked as biology
teachers for two years. For data collection purposes, researchers made use of Lesson
Preparation Method. The participants were requested to write their own lesson
plans for the teaching of the concept of heritable variation. Participants’ lesson plans
were used as primary data sources in addition to transcription of follow‐up
interviews. As a result, it was seen that both experienced and inexperienced
teachers’ orientation to teaching was didactic and they prepared identical lesson
plans. Not possessing pedagogical content knowledge in the field of heritable
variation, all participants relied on and benefited from their general pedagogical
27
knowledge. To sum up, it can be said that teaching experience does not make a
considerable difference but it facilitates the synthesis of pedagogical components.
Concerning the implementation of new curriculum, in their longitudinal study,
Henze et al. (2008) investigated PCK of nine science teachers who had teaching
experience. The teachers were expected to teach about solar system and the universe
(two models). While they had teaching experience, the application of the recent
science curriculum was somehow new to them. The teachers worked on
development of PCK with an emphasis on instruction methods and strategies,
understanding of students, assessment methods, goals and objectives of the subject
within the new curriculum. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews
for three consecutive years. Upon the analysis of collected data, it was seen that
those teachers had two different PCK forms: 1) type A PCK where the focus was on
the content of the topic; and 2) type B PCK was interested in the content of the topic
in addition to developing models in science. At the core of type A PCK was the
knowledge about instruction methods and strategies while the periphery consisted
of knowledge about understanding of students, assessment methods, goals and
objectives of the subject. There were some similarities between type A and B PCK. It
was observed that knowledge about goals and instruction methods was in harmony
with each other. In both types, knowledge about goals and objectives did not show
any sign of change. It is also worth noting that when teachers were more aware of
students’ challenges and knowledgeable about the subject matter, they developed
and used instruction strategies in a more effective way. The teachers benefited from
exam papers to renew their understanding of and knowledge about their students
as they provided an up-to-date report of students’ difficulties, misunderstandings,
and challenges. Therefore, it can be said that there was a correspondence between
knowledge of students and assessment. Lastly, there was a relation among
knowledge of assessment and instruction methods as the teachers had the
opportunity to assess the student in the exams after teaching them the content of
28
subject matter. However, considering the development of PCK, type A and B PCKs
have their own characteristics, and their subcomponents interact with each other in
their own way. At this point, it should be noted that authors believed that
pedagogical knowledge as well as teachers’ belief have an impact in shaping PCK.
For example, it can be argued that if a teacher lacks SMK and has a positivist
approach to the models of universe and solar system, they may develop type A
PCK. On the other hand, teachers with sufficient SMK and a relativist approach to
the models may develop type B PCK. The last thing to note is the unsynchronized
development of subcomponents of PCK. While there was a considerable
improvement in one component, there was little in another.
Arzi and White (2007)’s longitudinal study was a long-term research to investigate
how teacher’s subject matter knowledge evolved over the years as they gained
teaching experience. The study was conducted with secondary school science
teachers for 17 years in Australia. The research employed one-to-one interviews
with teachers with the use of concept profiles method to examine any change in
subject matter knowledge. It was detected that although the general knowledge is
kept in memory, the details fade away if not used or revised. Teachers
demonstrated a progress in their understanding of structure. It was observed that
what teachers know about and how interested they are in their field of study makes
a critical contribution to their development. On the contrary, they are more likely to
have shortcomings in other topics. Within the scope of this research, the curriculum
presented to the teachers works as the sole most important factor that is used to
measure knowledge of teachers. As a result of this study, the researchers suggested
a model which shows the growth of teacher’s content knowledge in three stages.
These stages are 1) academic details acquisition, 2) curricular aggregation, and 3)
intra- and inter-disciplinary linking and pattern construction.
Orientation to science teaching has pivotal position when growth in teachers’
pedagogical content knowledge is considered. To examine this further, Friedrichsen

29
& Dana (2005) conducted a research with four experienced and respected biology
teachers. The collection of data was made through card-sorting method, interviews,
and observation in classroom environment. The study demonstrated the complex
character of teacher orientation through the use of various central and peripheral
goals. Within the frame of the research, central goals were defined as main factors
controlling teachers’ teaching as well as their decisions about teaching act.
Peripheral goals, on the other hand, are less influencing on teaching act. The
research revealed that teachers’ orientations were different for each individual
course. The goals within the scope of this study were categorized as affective,
schooling, and subject matter goals. Developing a positive stance to science and
being curious or self-confident were included within affective goals which meant
that these were of priority and concern for teachers. Schooling goals were preparing
students for college or life. When subject matter goals were concerned, the
researchers found that they were always present; however, they were not the sole
and key goals for teachers. As a result, it was emphasized that the character of
teachers’ orientations is dynamic and time-bound. Finally, Friedrichsen and Dana
(2005) stated that due to their complex character, teachers’ orientations should not
and cannot be constrained to a single orientation.
In order to examine biology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge, Lankford
(2010) carried out a research with six biology teachers who had experience in
teaching. The subjects selected for the scope of the study were diffusion and
osmosis. It was observed that five teachers held a constructivist orientation which
acknowledges the importance of students’ active participation in the process of
learning and knowledge construction. On the other hand, one of the teachers had
knowledge transmission orientation in which teachers see themselves as conveyor
of the knowledge to students. Analyzing the factors that have an impact on teachers’
orientations, Lankford (2010) discovered that teachers’ teaching experience,
participation in professional development activities and interaction with their
30
colleagues were among the influencers. The teachers who had constructivist
orientation implicitly followed 5E instructional model to teach the selected topics. In
terms of sequence in teaching, all teachers taught first diffusion and then osmosis.
When they had to use images to teach, it was observed that all teachers began with
simple images and then moved on to more complex ones. Teachers identified
possible challenges for students in using topic-specific terminology, understanding
the images for the molecular level activities, and knowing the direction of water
during osmosis. Being able to identify students’ challenges and misconceptions
helped teachers in determining which instruction method to use. With regards to
assessment, teachers asked questions to get their ideas and opinions about the topic
and this contributed to teachers’ knowledge about their students. So knowing not
only their challenges but also their primary knowledge further supported teachers
in choosing their teaching strategies. For example, teachers used analogies and
animated videos about the topic (i.e. diffusion and osmosis) to facilitate students’
learning. It was observed that sometimes teachers shared extra information
although the teaching goals and objectives were defined by the state. Lastly, the
researcher found that teachers referred to previous subjects to make the current
topic more understandable to the students.
With an aim to compare teachers who had different levels of content knowledge,
Kapyla, Heikkenen and Asunta (2009) explored two different groups of teachers’
content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge and their relationship with
each other. The first group was pre-service biology teachers while the second was
pre-service primary school teachers. The concerned topics within this study were
photosynthesis and plant growth. The experts in this topic were pre-service biology
teachers whereas pre-service primary school teachers were considered beginners.
The main elements addressed in this study were knowledge of instruction
strategies, knowledge of students (conceptual challenges), knowledge of
curriculum, and teachers’ orientation to science teaching. The research was
31
performed in Finland (Jyvaskyla) with 10 teachers in each group. Lesson plans,
interviews with teachers, and surveys were used to collect data. Upon the analysis
of the data, pre-service biology teachers had more awareness about their students’
challenges and misconceptions regarding the selected topics while pre-service
primary school teachers had no awareness. The researchers found pre-service
biology teachers to be more informed about the topics while insufficiency in
knowledge about the selected topics was discovered in pre-service primary school
teachers. Related to their knowledge of curriculum, pre-service biology teachers
were able to differentiate which concept was more important. In terms of instruction
strategies, pre-service primary school teachers benefited from activities that need
the students to be more creative in their thinking while pre-service biology teachers
used activities focusing directly on the teaching of the topic itself. It was observed
that each group needed to improve themselves regarding experiments. The
researchers argued the two groups of teacher both lacked knowledge of instruction
strategies so there may be no relation between knowledge about content and
instruction strategies. Therefore, they suggested that PCK should be included in all
training programs for teachers. Regarding teachers’ orientation to science teaching,
there was a difference between the two groups of teachers. Pre-service primary
school teachers put students at the center of the lesson while pre-service biology
teachers were teacher-centered and held didactic lessons as in Magnusson et. al.
(1999)’s model of PCK. As a result, the researchers discovered that possessing better
knowledge of content brings better knowledge of students and curriculum. Yet,
those teachers with better knowledge of content hold teacher-centered approach to
their lessons and convey the information in a didactic way. According to the
researchers, this demonstrates that the teachers’ knowledge about instruction
strategies as well as the orientations to science teaching is inadequate. To sum up, it
can be said that the findings of this research partly is in support of the argument
that the level of knowledge of content directly affects the level of pedagogical
content knowledge.
32
Again, in their qualitative study, Mthethwa-Kunene, Onwu and de Villiers (2015)
explored the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and its development of four
experienced biology teachers (Grade 11-12) in the context of teaching school
genetics. The study used a qualitative research approach within an interpretive
paradigm involving multiple-case study method. The researchers used knowledge
of content, knowledge of students, and pedagogical knowledge to define PCK. This
qualitative research used as data sources the concept maps prepared by teachers,
interviews with teachers before and after lessons, video records of the lessons,
surveys for teachers after lessons, students’ work samples as well as journals written
by teachers. The study revealed that the teachers had the required content
knowledge in genetics. They applied diverse instructional strategies specific to the
relevant topic. The topic-spesific strategies included analogies, illustrations, and
peer teaching. The teachers did not, however, implement strategies to support
students to visualize or internalize the topic. Lastly, the study demonstrated that the
participants were unaware of their students’ misconceptions or challenges
regarding genetics.
Area of expertise was another element explored in PCK studies. Comparative
studies on biology teachers’ PCK in both their major and non-major topics were
conducted by researchers. Sanders, Borko, and Lockard (1993) examined three
science teachers in terms of their planning, teaching and reflecting in their major
and non-major fields. The teachers had three to eight years of experience in their
major field while in their non-major, they had one or two times experience. When
teaching in their major area, their teaching experience constituted the primary
source with extra and repetitive revisions every school year. It was observed that
they possessed a solid knowledge of students and the learning environment (i.e.
classroom). On the other hand, the researchers discovered a disparity between
planning, teaching and reflection. The teachers expressed that in their major area
they found it easy to adjust the sequence of lesson considering the challenges or
33
demands of students. There was also a difference in applying the instruction
methods in their major and non-major fields. While in their major fields the teachers
possessed a large number of materials and activities and they were good at
planning for their lesson, they needed improvement in planning in their non-major
area. The teachers faced challenges in identifying key concepts to teach, the
appropriate activities for the lesson, the instruction method, and learning goals
when they had deficiencies in SMK. The teachers lacked adequate pedagogical
knowledge in teaching in their non-specialization area. An example of this was the
failure to estimate the length of an activity which caused them to prepare
unnecessary activities. When PCK was considered, the participants were insufficient
in knowledge of students as well as instruction strategies in their non-major fields.
Another difference was observed when their way of teaching was examined. They
were unable to adopt a student-centered approach while teaching in their non-major
field. They were challenged to focus on questions from students in their non-major
area. They did not feel comfortable to make their own definitions for the terms they
need to explain in their non-major area; instead, they focused on delivering the
descriptions from written sources. Another finding of the study was the poor ability
of the teachers to manage the classroom during lessons in their non-major field. The
researchers observed differences in reflection as well. Whereas the teachers were
concerned about students’ understanding and their challenges in the major field,
teaching process was their main focus in the non-major field. As a result of the
study, the researchers argue that planning and teaching were facilitated by mainly
pedagogical knowledge if the teacher’s content knowledge is insufficient in the
beginning; and then, over time they improve and internalize content knowledge.
Another study on science teachers’ PCK in planning for their major and non-major
fields was conducted by Ingber (2009). Six teachers participated in the study which,
in particular, examined how they planned for the lesson, what resources they used,
and which instruction methods they employed. Questionnaires and think-aloud
34
method were data collection tools for this study. The researcher found the
participants to be more qualified in using the terminology within their field of
expertise while planning. Additionally, they were able to describe more concepts. In
terms of resources, when planning for their major area, they demonstrated a better
knowledge on what to use for better teaching and increased SMK. Surprisingly, the
results of this study did not show a significant relation between area of expertise
and use of instruction methods. Ingber (2009) declared that the latter was teacher-
specific.
Chan and Yung (2018) also studied the impact of teaching experience on the
development of PCK. They explored the approach to teaching a new concept
(polymerase chain reaction) and development of PCK in planning, teaching, and
reflection steps. Two high school biology teachers with teaching experience
participated in the study. The researchers benefited from semi-structured interviews
with teachers, field notes, and in-class observations. The results of the study showed
that prior teaching experience affected the planning for the new concept but it did
not necessarily facilitate the development of PCK. Therefore, the researchers argued
that there are two categories of teachers with experience. The first group of teachers
is able to benefit from their prior experience for the purpose of new PCK
development. The second group, however, fails to do the same. The difference
between the groups results from their inclination to have the mentality to make use
of the current SMK for the purpose of new PCK development. Chan and Yung
(2018) suggest that training programs for teachers should support them in
developing this inclination.
In the abovementioned studies, teachers’ PCK were always analyzed through
qualitative approaches. There are also quantitative studies exploring teachers’ SMK
and PCK in biology topics. An example of such is a study conducted by Park, Jang,
Chen, and Jung (2011). Carried out with the participation of seven biology teachers,
the study aimed to examine their PCK and application of reforms in the topics of
35
photosynthesis and heredity. The researchers developed a PCK rubric for the
assessment of teachers’ PCK (2008, as cited in Park et al., 2011). The rubric included
knowledge of students and instruction methods. In order to evaluate the teachers’
application of reforms, the researchers employed the Reformed Teaching
Observation Protocol (RTOP) which was created by Sawada, Piburn, Turley,
Falconer, Bloom, et al., (2000, as cited in Park et al., 2011). Apart from these data
collection tools, in-class observations during lessons and interviews before and after
the lessons were used as sources. The findings revealed that having a strong PCK
supports teachers to integrate reforms in their teaching. It was also observed that
when teachers have a profound content knowledge, they are inclined to focus more
on reforms. Despite the constraints of the study due to the use of correlational
research method, this study contributed to the literature with its results.
Furthermore, Jüttner, Boone, Park and Neuhaus (2013) underlined that the last 20
years saw a growth in the number of studies exploring teachers’ professionalism
and professional development. With an aim to contribute to the literature with a
comparable research, they investigated the development and utilization of tools that
would help in assessing content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge of
biology teachers. The study suggests a theoretical model for the development of
such tools through benefiting from empirical data gathered from students. In
addition, the researchers inquired if it was possible to assess CK and PCK separately
with a paper-pen test. The results obtained from the Rasch analysis applied for 158
biology teachers show that the tools managed to objectively and reliably assess the
CK and PCK of teachers. In other words, it is possible to develop and use new tools
together with in-class observations during lessons for the measurement of teacher
performance.
The researchers in the literature argued that there is a possibility for an interaction
between separate PCK components. To further study this argument, Park and Chen
(2012) examined high school biology teachers. The results of the study revealed a
36
strong interaction between knowledge of students and instructional strategies. They
also argued that these components also interacted with other PCK components. The
authors stated that teachers’ orientation to science teaching can either constrain or
facilitate the interaction between PCK components. For example, acting as a
conveyor of knowledge (i.e. adopting a didactic approach) can isolate the
knowledge of instructional strategies from other components. On the other hand,
when a student-centered approach to teaching is adopted, there occurs an
interaction between knowledge of students and knowledge of instruction strategies.
Knowledge of curriculum was observed to have a little impact on (therefore a basic
interaction with) other PCK components. Lastly, while knowledge of assessment did
not incorporated into other components of PCK, it did have an interaction with
knowledge of instruction strategies and students. In other words, the development
of knowledge of assessment may strengthen the interaction among PCK
components.
When the literature was reviewed, it is seen that there are many PCK studies carried
out with pre-service and in-service science and biology teachers abroad. However,
the number of such studies is limited in the Turkish educational context. The
following section examines the studies conducted in Turkey with the participation
of pre-service and in-service science teachers.
Firstly, some PCK studies were conducted to examine Turkish in-service science
teachers’ PCK in biology topics. Recently, Şen, Öztekin & Demirdöğen (2018)
explored the influence of content knowledge on pedagogical content knowledge
through a study with the participation of three experienced science teachers. The
topic selected for the scope of the study was cell division. The researchers collected
data through interviews with teachers, in-class observation during lessons as well as
teacher documents such as exam papers. The study employed inductive method to
analyze the teachers’ CK and within-case method for the analysis of PCK. To
understand how PCK is influenced by CK, cross-case analysis was utilized. The
37
results of the data analysis demonstrated a possible influence of CK on the
knowledge of instruction strategies and students. On the other hand, it was found
that teachers’ orientation to teaching science may not be influenced by CK at all.
Lastly, CK was found to have an impact on knowledge of curriculum as well as
knowledge of assessment while it seemed quite complicated.
Aydemir, Çakıroğlu and Tekkaya (2012) studied science teachers’ knowledge of
students through examining five experienced elementary science teachers in
teaching genetics. Knowledge of students, within the scope of this study, was
explored in two different categories: students’ needs while learning about genetics
and their challenges regarding this topic. The researchers observed the participants
during lessons and they also held interviews with them. It was found that due to its
abstract character, genetics was difficult to be understood by elementary school
students. The authors also stated that sequence of knowledge is significant in
biology which means learners should first be taught about other topics to lay the
basis for more complex and abstract ones. Within the scope of this study, for
example, they can understand genetics after they learn about cell, cell division, and
fertilization.
Using the PCK model by Magnusson et al. (1999), Karakulak and Tekkaya (2010)
investigated PCK of two new teachers in the field of ecology. The researchers
collected data through semi-structured interviews with teachers, observations,
lesson plans, concept maps, and field notes. It was discovered that new teachers
faced challenges and possessed misconceptions in understanding ecosystem,
habitat, decomposers, biodiversity, food web, and energy flow within ecosystem.
While having general knowledge about ecology, they were challenged to link the
learning objectives with their knowledge. The research also revealed that they
needed improvement in their knowledge of instructional strategies in ecology.
Lastly, it was found that the teachers lacked sufficient knowledge about the
challenges and misconceptions that the students faced regarding ecology.

38
In the Turkish PCK literature, there are also some studies examined pre-service and
prospective science teachers’ biology-specific PCK. For example, Kaya (2009)
examined the interaction between the components of PCK in pre-service science
teachers by focusing on the topic of ozone layer depletion. Firstly, the author
conducted an open-ended questionnaire with the participation of 216 pre-service
teachers in their last year at the faculty. The aim of the questionnaire was to
measure their level of knowledge about the topic (ozone layer depletion). The
results of the questionnaire helped the researcher to categorize the pre-service
teachers as high, average, and low ability groups. Interviews with 25 randomly
selected participants from every ability groups were organized to explore their PCK
and the interactions between and within the PCK components of pre-service science
teachers in teaching the selected topic. It was found that PCK and knowledge of
subject matter were in interaction with each other. Moreover, the researcher
discovered an important interaction within the components of PCK (apart from
knowledge of assessment). Finally, PCK of pre-service science teachers differed
according to their subject matter knowledge. The results from different data
collection methods supported each other.
Again, the aim of Uşak (2009)’s study is to explain prospective science and
technology teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) about the cell. The
researcher interviewed the pre-service teachers, gathered their lesson and laboratory
plans, and benefited from concept maps prepared by the pre-service teachers.
Carried out with six pre-service science and technology teachers in Pamukkale
University (Turkey), the study showed that the participants had insufficient
knowledge of instruction methods. On the other hand, they demonstrated sufficient
content knowledge. It was also discovered that they adopted a teacher-centered
approach in teaching although some of them preferred activities for students which
would enable them to actively take part in learning process.
39
A distinct study in the Turkish literature is the collaborative work of Graf, Tekkaya,
Kılıç and Özcan (2011). This study is distinct as it is a comparative study involving
two Turkish and two German pre-service science teachers. It aimed to explore the
participants’ PCK on evolution. Similar to the other mentioned studies, this research
collected data through semi-structured interviews with teachers, lesson plans
prepared by the participants, and their concept maps. The authors found the
knowledge of curriculum to be inadequate in both Turkish and German pre-service
science teachers. They were not aware of the place and content of the topic in the
curriculum. They also didn’t know about the grade the concerned topic is explained
and the content of the textbooks regarding evolution. Both group of teachers
showed lack of knowledge when it came to instruction strategies. Turkish teachers
stated that due to their inadequate content knowledge, it was difficult to rectify the
misconceptions identified among students. They declared that the method of
questioning might be utilized while teaching evolution. Unlike their Turkish
colleagues, German teachers opted for more student-centered strategies such as
station method cooperative learning. They also made use of representations to help
the students understand this abstract topic. When their knowledge of students was
examined, Turkish pre-service teachers believed natural selection and variation to
be easy-to-learn. The abstract nature of the topic of evolution was one of the reasons
behind students’ struggle to comprehend it. Another reason was the difficulty to
relate it to everyday life. German teachers, however, found the process of evolution
and origin of life to be challenging for their students. Teachers identified religious
beliefs, families, and non-scientific books as the causes of misconceptions among
their students. According to both Turkish and German teachers, the most common
misconception among students regarding evolution was the idea that human is
descendant of monkeys. To evaluate their students, Turkish teachers used written
assessments such as gap-filling or true/false at the end of their lesson. In terms of
timing of the assessment, German teachers were different, and they conducted
evaluations before, during, and after the lesson so as to follow the development and
40
change in their knowledge. Again, unlike their Turkish colleagues, German teachers
preferred essay type, open-ended, and two-tier questions. To sum up, both groups
of teachers couldn’t demonstrate a rich PCK in evolution. They lacked knowledge of
curriculum. They also did not have sufficient knowledge in terms of instruction
strategies (i.e. what to use and how). However, there was a difference in terms of
their approaches to teach. While in the Turkish context, teacher-centered approach
was adopted, German pre-service teachers stayed student-centered one. Lastly,
Turkish teachers were not able to use special assessment methods for the topic of
evolution.
Applying qualitative methods of research, Bektaş (2015) also carried out a
comparative study to examine PCK of pre-service science teachers in varied topics
within biology, physics, and chemistry. Physical and chemical changes,
reproduction, growth, and evolution, light and sound were selected topics. Open-
ended questions were data sources for this study which was conducted with the
participation of 33 pre-service science teachers. Descriptive analysis method was
employed to analyze the gathered data. The research showed that knowledge of
students in the selected topics was enough for some teachers. Ten teachers reported
misconceptions among students about light and sound while 17 of them revealed
misconceptions about physical and chemical changes. For biology themes, however,
the number of teachers reporting misconceptions was seven. It was found that some
pre-service teachers lacked adequate knowledge of assessment and instruction
methods. Regarding how to identify and then tackle misconceptions, many of the
teachers expressed that they benefit from open-ended questions and traditional
instruction methods, respectively.
Influenced by Park and Chen’s (2012) study, Soysal (2018) performed a research to
identify PCK components of an elementary science teacher with nine years of
experience as well as to show the inferred relationships the PCK components have.
Semi-structured interview method was used to collect qualitative data. The

41
interview with detailed questions was conducted by the researcher at the school
where the participant of the study worked. The interview questions were
categorized into five groups with 20 primary questions and several related
questions. The gathered data was analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively in
order to have a thorough understanding of the participant’s PCK. The research
revealed that there was a strong and direct interaction among knowledge of
curriculum, knowledge of instruction strategies, and knowledge of students.
However, restricted level of interaction was identified between knowledge of
assessment and orientation to science teaching and the other PCK components.
2.1.2.2. Studies on Science Teachers’ PCK for NOS
Considering the literature on learning and teaching science, it is obvious that the
most studied and explored concepts are characteristics of the knowledge required in
teaching science to elementary and the ways it is developed. Recently, there has
been a tendency on a global scale towards incorporating scientific literacy within
curriculum. To be able to respond to such changes in curriculum, teachers are
expected to have two separate subject matter knowledge. The first one is knowledge
of science, and the second is knowledge about science. The difference between these
two is that knowledge of science means the information we have as a result of
scientific efforts. Knowledge about science, however, can also be worded as “nature
of science” (NOS), and it represents the “how” of science, i.e. rules and methods on
how we obtain scientific information and it becomes an accepted concept/fact/theme
etc. (Shulman, 1986; 1987). Additionally, teachers should also have adequate
pedagogical content knowledge to perform well while teaching the mentioned
subject matter knowledge. It can be said that supporting teachers in teaching NOS
still remains a great source of difficulty in teacher education. Although science
education literature presents few studies with teachers who are able to teach NOS
adequately, there is still a need for more in-depth research on PCK of teachers in
regard to NOS.
42
Nargund-Joshi, Rogers and Akerson (2011) conducted a study focusing on how
teachers’ NOS beliefs affect their teaching. With an aim to fill a gap in the PCK
literature and to explore teachers’ orientation to teaching science in Eastern
societies, the researchers selected two Indian secondary teachers. Teachers’
orientation was also examined in terms of its adjustment to the educational reform
in India. Semi-structured interviews with teachers, in-class observations as well as
materials about the educational reform were used as data collection tools. The
results of this research revealed teachers’ orientations to be not in harmony with
their teaching in real life. It was observed that there were discrepancies about the
definition of science, the methods to teach science, and the assessment
tools/instruments. Interestingly, during their lessons, the participants were not able
to show science as being imaginative while they held this belief in theory. For
example, laboratory activities which could have provided a space for the students to
be creative were employed as a means to verify the theoretical knowledge they
learn. While teachers stated the importance of student-centered approach in the
interviews, in actual classroom situations they were found to be implementing
rather traditional methods (e.g. following the textbook to teach, holding content-
intense lessons). In terms of assessment, in the classroom the teachers were
expecting to hear right answers although they acknowledged the students’ need for
sufficient time to fully and correctly comprehend what their teachers explain to
them. In the Indian context, teachers’ high expectations from students were linked
to the importance of exams their students should take. Therefore, the researchers
argued that the requirement to prepare students for exams affected teachers and
caused a disparity between their ideas about teaching and their practice in real
classroom situations. The authors, therefore, concluded that educational reforms
should be prepared by considering teacher orientations to teaching; otherwise,
success rate aimed through reforms will not be reached. Apart from exams, the
study discovered other elements which have an impact on teachers’ orientation,
such as classroom management, required period of time to assess students’ work,

43
teachers’ low self-assessment about their subject matter knowledge, and small
number of materials for in-class use. In conclusion, the authors proposed that
culture- and context-specific elements should be given consideration in studies
examining teachers’ orientations as they may have an influence on such.
Looking at different factors related to NOS, Wahbeh and Abd-El-Khalick (2014)
aimed to explore how a course on NOS affects understanding of in-service
secondary school science teachers and retention of such understanding as well as
their planning and teaching. The researchers also investigated which elements
enable teachers to apply their understanding of NOS in classroom. The 6-week NOS
course they took was an explicit-reflective nature applied with the use of learning-
as-conceptual-change frame. The course benefited from metacognitive methods as
well as written documents about NOS in order to increase the impact. 19 in-service
secondary school science teachers were participants of the NOS course. After they
were trained, the teachers were asked to prepare their plans to teach NOS. Upon the
analysis of data to determine the level of improvement in the concerned area, six
teachers were chosen since they showed remarkable improvement. Following the
selection of 6 teachers, the researchers observed them while they applied what they
planned at the end of the course. In order to analyze the impact of the NOS course,
the authors used teachers’ instruction plans, in-class observations, interviews, and
other materials prepared by teachers as data collection sources. The results of the
research showed that the intense and integrated NOS course improved teachers’
understanding of NOS and helped them retain that for five months. While planning
for their teaching of NOS, they faced difficulties but also succeeded. In teaching
phase, their conception of NOS was shaped by their new understanding of NOS,
and since it was only applied to science themes, the teachers were restricted in terms
of using their new understanding in new contents.
Using Magnusson, Krajcik, and Borko’s (1999) framework, Hanuscin et al. (2011)
studied the pedagogical content knowledge for three elementary school teachers’
44
NOS. The teachers were selected from among those who managed to increase the
understanding of NOS in students. The data sources used included surveys,
interviews, observations during lessons, and documents and materials gathered
from the classrooms for three years to determine their PCK. The results
demonstrated that teachers possessed solid knowledge of instruction methods to
teach NOS. On the other hand, they did not have sufficient knowledge of
assessment which would contribute to and facilitate progress in their teaching and
knowledge of students. Therefore, the authors pointed to the necessity to focus on
professional development that would improve PCK for NOS. For example, teachers
may be supplied with appropriate materials to ensure continuous progress in their
PCK for NOS in teaching.
Another study in this field was conducted by Faikhamta (2013) to examine NOS
understanding and orientation of in-service science teachers. The researcher
employed a PCK-based NOS course designed with Hanuscin et al. (2011)’s NOS
model which was adapted from Magnusson et al. (1999)’s model. By means of
different reflective methods such as mystery cube and collision theories, the course
aimed to uncover teachers’ understanding of NOS in detail. Covering every PCK
components which are students, orientations, instruction methods, curriculum, and
assessment, the NOS course was highly comprehensive. The results of the study
revealed that about various elements of NOS, the participants had prior knowledge,
both informed and uninformed, yet they demonstrated growth in their
understandings. The author focused on teachers’ orientations with regard to PCK. It
was found that project-based learning approach was mostly adopted among
teachers prior to the course while this tended to change towards inquiry-based
learning methods which encourage the students to be more active in the learning
process. This research did not focus on other components of PCK or the relationship
among them.
45
Among the longitudinal studies, again, one of the recent PCK for NOS researches is
Bravo and Cofre (2016)’s research which questioned how biology teachers develop
PCK in the field of human evolution. Two biology teachers attended a professional
development program (PDP) which had components on recent content, joint lesson
planning as well as application of planning. Upon completion of the course, the
participants applied their planned lessons during which they were video-recorded.
These records were then used to determine teachers’ methods, classroom activities,
and students’ difficulties and misconceptions on evolution. The data collection was
achieved through pre-interviews to learn about the participants’ prior content
representation, a group interview following their lessons, and individual stimulated
recall interviews to help them reflect on their own teaching (final content
representation). The collected data was analyzed by not only the authors but also
the teachers with an aim to give them an opportunity to reflect on changes if any
and the underlying causes for their instruction strategies and methods. The analysis
revealed change in teachers’ knowledge as well as beliefs about the methods to
employ while teaching evolution and about their students’ challenges and needs in
the said topic. Teachers stated that reflecting on their teaching practice contributes
to development and growth in their PCK. Results also showed that both teachers
demonstrated a poor understanding of the NOS and of evolution at the beginning of
the PDP. However, at the end of the first part of the PDP (at the university), both
teachers reached a very good level of knowledge regarding evolution, as well as the
NOS, which was determined by valid and reliable instruments.
In the Turkish context, PCK for NOS is one of the important research areas of
interest for educators although the number of researches is limited. Demirdöğen,
Hanuscin, Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci and Köseoğlu (2016) ‘s study, for example, aimed
to investigate the complex nature of early development of orientations, knowledge
of instructional strategies, knowledge of students, and knowledge of assessment.
The participants of the study were 30 pre-service chemistry teachers who registered
46
in a Research in Science Education course which was intended to improve their PCK
for NOS. Data collection methods included open-ended surveys, classroom
observations, and materials prepared by teachers (e.g. lesson plans) in addition to
interviews. The data was examined with the use of in-depth analysis of explicit PCK
together with constant comparative method. Upon analysis of the data, it was found
that sufficient understanding and beliefs are required in order to teach NOS.
Secondly, the NOS course provided a developmental progress in PCK for NOS and
this was observed in their application of the newly acquired knowledge during their
lessons. Thirdly, the majority of teachers did not include in their lessons the NOS
aspects about which they did not have sufficient knowledge. This result indicated
that teachers should feel confident in their understanding of NOS so that they can
better teach NOS. Lastly, teachers with well-integrated PCK for NOS hold more
successful lessons to teach NOS.
Similarly, Demirdöğen (2016) conducted a PCK for NOS study to explore the
interaction between teaching orientations and PCK components through deductive
approach. The participants of the study were eight pre-service science teachers.
Semi-structured interviews, open-ended survey, and content representation were
used to collect data for the study. Regarding the interaction between teaching
orientations and PCK components, the study showed that the underlying purpose
behind teaching science imposes the components of PCK with which it interacts. It
was also discovered that there is no direct interaction between beliefs of teacher
(about NOS) and the components of PCK on the condition that such beliefs are not
linked to the purposes for teaching science. Lastly, the author detected an
interaction among teacher’s beliefs about teaching and learning science and
knowledge of instruction methods.
Bilican, Tekkaya & Çakıroğlu (2012) conducted a study on PCK only for planning to
teach NOS. The research participants were three pre-service science teachers who,
within the scope of the research, received an NOS course. Upon completion of the
47
course, the participants were requested to prepare a lesson plan to teach NOS by
applying their newly acquired understanding of NOS. The results of the study
exposed their continuing inability to explicitly include NOS in their lesson plan and
to find suitable assessment methods to evaluate their students’ understanding of
NOS. In conclusion, the authors suggested that student assessment methods for
NOS and different ways to integrate NOS while teaching science should be among
the objectives of attempts to support the improvement of PCK among pre-service
science teachers.
2.1.2.3. Studies on Science Teachers’ PCK for SD
Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is recently introduced to the world of
education as a new area. With its own content, ESD necessitates a holistic approach
and reforms in educational structures. Not only novice teachers but also
experienced ones face difficulties while teaching in that field. Teachers who will
implement ESD should be trained on concepts of sustainable development. They
also should be able to comprehend the links and relations between ESD and
systemic thinking, values education, and interdisciplinary approach. Teacher
education in ESD should enable teachers to incorporate ESD in their teaching, and it
should adopt teaching strategies in harmony with ESD methods. In light of these
requirements, this section summarizes studies on science teachers’ PCK for SD and
ESD.
Firstly, Birdsall (2015) examined the application of teachers’ understanding of
sustainability to pedagogy and its impacts on students’ learning in her dissertation.
Two teachers participated in the study; and interviews with teachers as well as
documents were used to collect data. For the analysis of data, the author benefited
from two frameworks: 1) description of sustainability and 2) pedagogical context
knowledge (PCxK) with four components. The results revealed an intricate
interaction among three PCxK components and little involvement of the fourth
48
when application of sustainability was considered. It was discovered that some
students understood sustainability although only two of them managed to associate
their understanding with the scientific ideas. Lastly, the author argued that
although the PCxK model demonstrated a certain level of accuracy, further studies
should be conducted in order to have more reliable data on its ability to elucidate
PCK of teachers.
“Systems thinking” has gained significance in both ESD and daily life. Therefore,
teachers should know about systems and their behavior (content knowledge) in
order to efficiently demonstrate a topic to their students. In other words, knowing,
for example, diffusion and osmosis in biology may not be enough for effective
teaching. Teachers should also recognize the strategies to promote systems thinking
in students. However, currently there is not sufficient data on the development of
professional knowledge when it comes to teaching systems thinking. Rosenkränzer,
Hörsch, Schuler and Riess (2017) conducted a study to examine teaching systems
thinking. The participants of the study were student teachers. The researchers
focused the impact of three types of courses (technical, didactic and mixed course)
on the PCK for teaching systems thinking. It was found out that teacher education
can be used to promote PCK for teaching systems thinking. The results also showed
that technical courses on their own are not efficient enough in promoting PCK for
teaching systems thinking. The findings of this study can be considered to improve
teacher education in terms of promoting systems thinking
Another study aiming to respond to the need for professional development in ESD
was conducted by Kadji-Beltran, Zachariou, Liarakou and Flogaitis (2014). The
researchers implemented a mentoring program for both experienced and novice
teachers through which they received support in planning and implementing ESD.
The study also intended to examine the possibility of introducing mentoring as a
means to train them for ESD. The results of the study demonstrated that mentoring
is significant in training teacher for ESD because it basically consists of all necessary
49
aspects of ESD both experientially and practically. It was also worth noting that it
increased interaction among teachers and enabled them to start groups to learn
about ESD together. Lastly, mentoring helped teachers improve their PCK for ESD.
50
CHAPTER 3
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The main purpose of the study is to investigate experienced science teachers’ subject
matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the topic of
biogeochemical cycles regarding education for sustainable development. In order to
reader to understand how the researcher addressed the research questions, this
chapter discussed the methodology employed in this study. Thus, the following
research questions were put forward to guide the study:
1. What is the science teachers’ subject matter knowledge for teaching

biogeochemical cycles in the context of sustainable development?
1.1. What is the science teachers’ substantive knowledge regarding
1.2. What is the science teachers’ syntactic knowledge regarding nature of
science?
1.3. What are the science teachers’ understanding of SD regarding
2. What is the science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching
2.1. What are the science teachers’ orientations to teaching science?
2.2. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of curriculum for teaching
2.3. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of instructional strategies for
teaching biogeochemical cycles?
2.4. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of students for teaching
2.5. What is the science teachers’ knowledge of assessment for teaching
51
In the next section of the chapter, the researcher would like to explain the
interpretive research paradigm considering the focus of the study. Then, this was
followed by the section on the qualitative research approach implemented to
support methodological perspective and findings of the study. The rest of the
chapter addressed the research design, the sampling and participants, data
collection tools, and data analysis. Finally, the chapter represented how the
trustworthiness and ethical considerations of the current study were addressed.
3.1. Interpretive Research Paradigm
Researchers have different views of what constitutes the truth and knowledge
(Denzin & Lincoln, 2008). These views guide the researchers’ thinking, beliefs, or
assumptions about society involved (Lincoln & Guba, 1990). They frame how the
researchers understand the world and influence the researchers’ approaches to do
research but there is a set of beliefs to guide these views named as research
paradigm (Creswell, 2009). Thomas Kuhn (1962) used the term paradigm firstly to
denote a conceptual framework shared by a community of scientists. Kuhn defines
the paradigm as a research culture with a set of beliefs, values, and assumptions
that researchers make a consensus as far as the nature and conduct of research
concerned (Kuhn, 1962). A paradigm is as a way of describing a world view that is
informed by philosophical assumptions about the nature of social reality, the ways
of knowing, and ethics and value systems. It thus leads researcher to ask certain
questions and use appropriate approaches to systematic inquiry (Patton, 2002).
Researchers become interested in different theoretical research paradigms based
upon their own philosophical assumptions. Therefore, these research paradigms
have differences in the assumptions of reality and knowledge which provide a basis
for their particular research approach (Scotland, 2012). Knowledge and reality are
constructed in and out of interaction between humans, and developed in a social
and cultural context (Crotty, 1989). Interpretive research paradigm approaches the
52
reality from subjects, typically from people who own their experiences, views and
backgrounds. It aims to understand the phenomenon from an individual’s
perspective; investigating interactive relations among individuals in their natural
settings (Creswell, 2009). This means that the interpretive paradigm emphasizes on
the process of understanding the situation in which the research is done (Connole,
1998).
The researcher would like to understand and interpret experienced teachers’ subject
matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge in the context of EfSD. Because the
focus of the study was to examine teachers’ understanding, views and experiences
in their natural teaching settings, an interpretive research paradigm has been
adopted.
3.2. Qualitative Research Approach
Willis (2007) asserts that researchers using interpretive paradigm tend to favor
qualitative research approach (Thomas, 2003, p.6). He emphasized that qualitative
methods often give rich information that are necessary for interpretivist researchers
to fully understand the context. In this point of view, there is a tight connection
between interpretive paradigm and qualitative approach. Researchers using
interpretive paradigm and qualitative approach often seek experiences,
understandings and perceptions of individuals for their data to uncover reality
rather than rely on numbers of statistics. Following the above points, Creswell
(2009) states that “qualitative research is a means for exploring and understanding
the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem” (p.4).
Hence, in educational research, if researcher seeks understandings and experiences
of a group of students or teachers, qualitative methods are likely to be the best-
suited methods (Patton, 2002; Tahnh & Tahnh, 2015). In the light of this view,
qualitative research approaches were used in order to obtain intensive and detailed
description of experienced teachers’ SMK and PCK on the topic of biogeochemical
53
cycles for the current study. To gather in-depth information about the teachers, the
various qualitative data collection methods (interviews, video-
recording/observations, documents) and data analysis strategies (inductive and
deductive analysis) were implemented.
3.3. Case Study Design
One of the most widespread used designs in qualitative research is case studies
(Flick, 1996). Taylor, Sinha and Ghoshal (2006) present case studies as common and
attractive methods of qualitative research. Case study is important context for in-
depth description and analysis of what is being studied (Merriam, 2009). Yin (2003)
also defines case study as an empirical study that explores a contemporary
phenomenon within its natural settings. As the name suggests, case study is the
investigation of a case; it can be an individual person, a group or organizations that
are studied in their context (Robson, 2007). The purpose is to generate in-depth,
detailed and intensive description and knowledge of well-defined phenomenon or
context (Burton, Brundrett & Jones, 2014; Taylor, Sinha & Ghoshal, 2006).
In this study, multiple case studies design was chosen considering the purpose and
nature of the research questions being addressed. The cases of this study were
experienced science teachers from different schools. Basically, the researcher is
interested in the nature of the subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content
knowledge of experienced science teachers. Thus, how participant science teachers
generate their pedagogical content knowledge during their experienced years
directed the researcher to focus on the case for experienced science teachers. As a
result, three experienced science teachers were the three cases of the current study.
Moreover, their subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge were
two units of analysis in the study. Figure 3.1 summarizes methodology and the data
collection procedures of the current study.
54
55
Figure 3.1. The Procedure of The Study
3.4. Data Collection Procedures
This section included detailed information about sampling, participants and data
collection tools of the current study. Furthermore, the analysis procedures of the
data which had been collected during spring semester in 2013-2014 academic year
were presented in depth.
3.4.1. Sampling of the Study
A qualitative study does not aim to generalization similar to a quantitative study
(Merriam, 2009). Thus, rather than using the quantitative approach, selecting a
sample from a large group of in-service teachers, purposive sampling was selected.
The selection of the information-rich cases is the most important aspect of purposive
sampling. The aim of the study was to get detailed information about experienced
science teachers’ SMK and PCK, therefore teachers who had a potential to provide
rich data were selected (Patton, 2002). Thus, the important task is to determine the
selection criteria for the interest of the study (Merriam, 2009). In the following,
criteria to select the participant of the current study were presented with their
reasons.
 First of all, eco-schools were selected to conduct this study as science teachers’
SMK and PCK regarding biogeochemical cycles in the context of SD. The
concept of SD had not been integrated into the science curriculum implemented
in 2013-2014 academic year when the data collected, so this study was
conducted in middle schools where the Eco-Schools program were applied. As
Eco-schools program offers a guiding program that aims to provide
environmental education, environmental management and sustainable
development education in preschool and primary and middle schools, it is
expected that the science teachers in these schools have higher knowledge and
awareness of SD than the ones in non-eco schools. To be able to select the
participants which more detailed data can be collected, the researcher joined the
56
annual meeting of Eco-schools program performed by TURCEV (Turkish
Environmental Education Foundation). Thus, the researcher had a chance to
specify science teachers who were willingness to participate to the study.
Among the science teachers the researcher specified, three teachers whose
weekly schedules were appropriate for the classroom observations were
selected.
 Secondly, the context in which the participants worked was the another
criterion. Literature including the studies of PCK emphasized that teachers
working in the same or similar context should be selected due to the fact that
the context influences how teachers teach (Berliner, 2001; Henze et al., 2008;
Loughran et al., 2008; Park & Oliver 2008). For this reason, three teachers from
the three public middle schools having similar contexts in Cankaya Province
were picked as participants to eliminate the context’s manipulation on teachers’
practice. Additionally, as private schools did not give permission to record the
classroom settings with the video-taped, the researcher were lead to conduct
the study with public schools because of the missing important points of the
teaching in the real classroom environment. Hence, selected public schools had
similar context participating the Eco-schools program with the 30-40 students in
each classroom.
 The third criterion was being experienced teachers. Because, PCK develops
with experience (Abell, 2008) and teaching experience in real classroom context
is one of the vital sources for PCK development (Grossman, 1990). Because of
this, experienced science teachers’ were selected to conduct this study.
 Having all of the other criteria did not guarantee of being the participant of the
current study. The last criterion was the place of the selected topic in the
Science Curriculum (MoNE, 2005), recently known as Science Curriculum. The
topic of biogeochemical cycles is placed in 8th-grade level in the curriculum.
Thus, in-service science teachers who taught at the 8th-grade level were
selected to obtain in-depth information for the current research.

57
In addition to the selection of the information-rich cases, the researcher make
decisions on some issues such as location, time, topic, money, respondents
regarding the participants (Marshall & Roseman, 2016). In this manner, the
researcher preferred to use the convenient sampling. When compared with other
types of purposive sampling, convenient sampling may cause to getting poorer
information from the phenomena studied. Nevertheless, the researcher was forced
to use this sampling technique due to the number of the criteria and the
unwillingness attitudes of the teachers in the schools.
3.4.2. Participants of the Study
In light of the criteria predetermined, four experienced science teachers were
selected at first. However one of participating teachers dropped out during the
study because of the administrative reasons. Ultimately, three experienced science
teachers, having at least 5-year or more teaching experience, participated to the
current study. The participant teachers have different characteristics; therefore,
these differences gave opportunity to clarify the patterns for the cases of the study,
separately. The researcher used pseudonym for the participant teachers as Kemal
for Participant 1, Hale for Participant 2 and Selda for Participant 3. Some
demographic information about the participants was summarized in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1. Participant Teachers’ Demographic Information
Participant Teaching Graduation Bachelor’s Master/PhD

Experience Degree Degree
Kemal 38 Years Education Science -
Institute Teacher
Arts and Science Physics
Faculty
Hale 26 years Arts and Science Biology Master & PhD
Faculty in Molecular
Biology
Selda 21 years Arts and Science Biology -
Faculty
58
3.4.3. Data Collection Tools
In qualitative studies, interviews, documents and observations were three basic data
collection tools in order to offer the detailed description of the phenomena studied
(Merriam, 2009). Taking into consideration this notion, the researcher used
interviews, card-sorting activity, video recording and observations and documents
as multiple source of information to get insight about participant teachers’ SMK and
PCK components in the current study. Table 3.2 presented the data collection tools
and related SMK and PCK components in detail.
Table 3.2. Data Collection Tools
Data Collection Tools SMK and PCK Components

Interviews
Questions on Biogeochemical Cycles Substantive Knowledge &
SD Understanding
Embedded VNOS-C Questionnaire Syntactic Knowledge
Content Representation (CoRe) Knowledge of Curriculum

Knowledge of Instructional Strategies
Knowledge of Students
Knowledge of Assessment
Card-sorting Activity Orientations to Science Teaching
Video Recording / Classroom Knowledge of Curriculum
Observation Knowledge of Instructional Strategies
Knowledge of Students
Knowledge of Assessment
Documents
Teachers’ Drawings Substantive Knowledge
Teachers’ Exam Papers Knowledge of Assessment
3.4.3.1. Interviews
Patton (2002) stated that interviews are valuable information about the participants’
point of view that is not observable to the researcher. For the case studies, interview
is the best technique (Merriam 2009) and serves as a vital source of information (Yin,
59
2003) to get detailed understanding of the phenomena studied. Based on the nature
of the research, the researcher needs ask additional important questions different
from the prepared ones to get specific answers from participants during the
interviews. In such a time, semi-structured interviews are invaluable data collection
tools to enable participants to reflect their ideas. In the light of these, both semi-
structured and structured interviews are used as the primary data sources to gather
participant teachers’ content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in the
current study. All interviews were audio-taped with the permission of the
participants.
3.4.3.1.1. Questions on Biogeochemical Cycles
The researcher based on the 8th grade objectives of Science Curriculum stated in
2005 and the science textbook approved by Ministry of National Education in 2014
prepared seven semi-structured interview questions to unveil both teachers’
substantive knowledge and SD understanding on biogeochemical cycles (See
Appendix A). The first three questions are used to obtain detail information about
the teachers’ conceptual knowledge on biogeochemical cycles. In addition, the
researcher expected participating teachers to draw the figure of each matter cycle to
gather detailed information about their conceptual knowledge. Moreover, last four
questions are prepared to grasp in depth information on how participated teachers
connect the SD issues and biogeochemical cycles. Each interview was conducted to
participant teachers at their available times in the schools in one meeting and
spanned around 45 minutes.
Table 3.3. The Details of Interview Questions on Biogeochemical Cycles
Data Source Purpose Time / Length

Questions on To get detailed information about Two weeks before the
biogeochemical participant teachers’ conceptual and teaching / About 45
cycles SD understanding minutes
60
3.4.3.1.2. Embedded Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire
Participant teachers’ understanding on nature of science was corresponded to their
syntactic knowledge entitled SMK. In order to determine participant teachers’ NOS
views, revised Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire, form C (VNOS-C) was
conducted in conjunction with semi-structured interviews (Table 3.4). Lederman,
Abd-El-Khalick, Bell, and Schwartz (2002) developed the original version of
questionnaire that is translated and adapted in Turkish by Doğan, Çakıroğlu,
Çavuş, Bilican, and Arslan (2011).
Table 3.4. The Details of the Embedded VNOS-C Questionnaire
Data Source Purpose Time & Length

Embedded VNOS-C To gather comprehensive At the beginning of the
Questionnaire information about participant study & About 40
teachers’ syntactic knowledge minutes
In the VNOS-C questionnaire, ten open-ended questions were conducted to get
participants views on NOS aspects. namely empirical nature of science, subjective
nature of science, tentative nature of science, role of creativity and imagination in
nature of science, inferential nature of science, socio-cultural embeddedness of
scientific knowledge, and the function of laws and theories. These questions of the
questionnaire were modified by adapting to the topic studied in order to give
participants teachers an opportunity to express their ideas easily. The VNOS-C
questionnaire previously used and validated in lots of research was utilized in
current study and provided in Appendix B. The instrument was administered to
participant teachers in one meeting at their available times in schools and lasted
approximately in 40 minutes. The participant teachers’ voice was recorded.
3.4.3.1.3. Content Representation (CoRe)
Loughran et al. (2004) devised Content Representations (CoRes) to make the links
between the experts’ knowledge of content, teaching and learning about a particular
61
topic more explicit to others. CoRe was handled for getting understanding how
teachers constructed the topic that was taught (Loughran, Berry, & Mulhall, 2006). It
is an important data collection tool in order to portray holistic overviews of expert
teachers’ topic-specific nature of PCK (Loughran et al. 2006, Rollnick et al., 2008).
One of the most important difficulties in PCK studies was the terminology in this
field might not be understood by teachers (Aydin, 2012). Due to this reason,
Loughran et al., (2004) and Aydin (2012) suggested to use an understandable
language in studying with CoRes. Additionally, Aydin and Boz (2012) asserted that
all the major components of PCK are related to the themes of CoRe. Therefore, the
researcher conducted CoRe, whose original format was a table, as an interview tool
that she can get a clear understanding of the participant teachers’ PCK on the topic
of biogeochemical cycles (See Appendix D). Some additional sub-questions allied to
the main questions were used to get deeply information. The CoRe interview were
conducted to the teachers at their available times in the schools in one meeting and
spanned around 50 minutes. The voices of the participants were recorded during
the CoRe interview.
Table 3.5. The Details of the Content Representation (CoRe) Interview

CoRe Interview To get detailed information about One week before the
participant teachers’ PCK components teaching of the topic
on the topic of biogeochemical cycles & About 50 minutes
3.4.3.2. Card-Sorting Activity
In the current study, the researcher has adopted the PCK model developed by
Magnusson et al., (1999). However, Friedrichsen and Dana (2005) and Friedrichsen
et al. (2011) stated that Magnusson and her colleagues did not approached to
teachers’ orientations to science teaching in detail. Herewith, in the process of the
forming the card-sorting activity, the researcher considered the realities of the
Turkish educational system, Science and Technology curriculum, and the literature
62
related to teachers’ orientations. As Aydin (2012) emphasized, the realities of the
educational system and the curriculum has an important influence on orientations
to teaching science. In Turkey, High School Entrance Exam (TEOG) was given
extremely importance by both teachers and students. In the light of such
considerations three scenarios were added to take these realities into account.
Furthermore, one ESD orientation was written considering that the study was
intended to explore teachers’ SMK and PCK in the context of ESD. Friedrichsen et
al. (2005) also discussed that teachers may have more than one orientation which
their goals for science teaching are incompatible. Thus, they emphasized that the
science teaching orientations mainly formed by the basis on teachers’ beliefs about
the goals and purposes of teaching science. Lastly, based on the emphasis on the
teachers’ beliefs about goals of teaching science (Friedrichsen & Dana, 2005;
Volkmann et al., 2005) and the ESD context of the study, the additional questions
were asked during the card sorting activity. Thereby, the card sorting activity was
got through the thirteen scenarios and six questions in total.
In the card-sorting activity (Friedrichsen & Dana, 2003; 2005), cards including
scenarios were utilized to determine participant teachers’ orientations and goals for
teaching science at 8th grade level in middle schools. In the activity, participants
teachers were expected to sort the cards into three groups: first group including
cards that are parallel to their teaching, second group including cards that are
different from their teaching and third group including cards that teachers are
unsure to teach in that way. Afterwards, teachers requested to clarify the common
characteristics of the selected cards in the groups and to explain the main
similarities and differences between the scenarios and their teaching. Then, the
researcher asked in what ways the scenarios and their goals and purposes for
teaching science were related. Card-sorting activity was implemented to participant
teachers at their available times in the schools. The instrument was conducted in
two meetings and spanned around 90 minutes in total. All scenarios and questions
63
were provided in Appendix C with the versions of Turkish. All of the process of the
card-sorting activity was audio-taped with the permission of the participants.
Table 3.6. The Details of the Card-Sorting Activity
Card-Sorting To collect in-depth information At the beginning of the

Activity about participant teachers’ study & About 60
orientations to teaching science minutes
3.4.3.3. Video Recording
Video-recording involves the collection of ‘naturally occurring data’ using video
cameras (Goldman & McDermott, 2009; Knoblauch, Schnettler, Raab & Soeffner,
2006). Naturally occurring data includes the ongoing interaction of people in a
specific context and all aspects of the environment that structure the interactions
recorded (Jewitt, 2012). In this study, video-recording was used to obtain naturally
occurring data to understand how participant teachers transform their subject
matter knowledge to PCK for teaching the biogeochemical cycles. In their real
classroom settings, the progress of teachers’ teaching was recorded at the back desk
of the class. Researcher’s position is important during video-recording procedures
(Merriam, 2009). Researcher did not interfere with any activity, and only recorded
the environment of the class and how teacher performed his/her teaching about the
topic of biogeochemical cycles. Video-records lasted in eleven course hours in total.
While Kemal’s and Hale’s teachings lasted in four hours, Selda thought the topic in
three hours. All records were transcribed verbatim in order to analyze in detail.
An essential advantage of videotaping is that most potentially useful interaction and
behavior can be captured (Patton, 2002). The advantage in terms of the credibility is
that the researcher is able to review the same situations again and again. Videotaped
materials are rich and provide several possibilities for analyzing the data. In the
64
studies that this method was used, data triangulation enabled the researchers to
reduce personal influence on the results (Merriam, 2009).
Table 3.7. The Details of Video-Recording

Video Recording/ To collect comprehensive 8th grade class hours from
Classroom information about the beginning to the end of
Observation participant teachers’ PCK the topic
components on the topic of
biogeochemical cycles
3.4.3.4. Documents
Documents refer to a wide range of written, visual, digital, and physical material
relevant to study. Researchers categorize documents in different ways. The two
common types of documents used in qualitative research are public and personal
documents (Merriam, 2009). Bogdan and Biklen (2007) refer the popular culture
document as a third type. There are visual documents which include films, videos,
and photography as fourth type. Moreover, documents can be generated by the
researcher for the purpose of the investigation (Merriam, 2009). In this study,
personal documents and researcher-generated documents were used to obtain in-
depth information about experienced teachers’ SMK and PCK components in the
context of ESD.
3.4.3.4.1. Personal Documents
Bogdan and Biklen (2007) define personal documents as ﬁrst-person narratives that
describe an individual’s actions, experiences, and beliefs. Such documents help to
researcher to understand the inner meaning of the participant’s personal
perspective (Merriam, 2009). In order to gather rich data about teachers’ knowledge
of assessment, teachers’ exam papers were used as personal documents in this
study. These documents were shared to the researcher during the data collection
process.
65
3.4.3.4.2. Researcher-Generated Documents
When documents are used in a study, they are referred as public records, personal
documents or visual/physical material already present in the research setting. These
documents are existing and ready-made source of data because they have not been
produced for the research purpose (Merriam, 2009). On the other hand, researcher -
generated documents were prepared based on the research purpose. This type of
documents is prepared by the researcher or for the researcher by participants after
the study has begun. The specific purpose of research-generated document is to
grasp more information about the situation, person, or event being investigated. In
this study, science teachers’ drawingss were used as research-generated documents.
These drawings were used to obtain more information about the teachers’
substantive knowledge on biogeochemical cycles. Participant teachers requested to
explain their understanding on each cycle through drawing. Teachers were not
interfered with the researcher while they were drawing. In results chapter, based
on teachers’ orijinal drawings (See in Appendix E), the researcher redrawn the
drawings of teachers to ease them become clear. Also the researcher used English
versions of the Turkish terms in the participants’ drawings to be understandable for
the reader whose native language is not Turkish.
3.5. Data Analysis
In qualitative studies, the data analysis provides an intensive and holistic
description of the data (Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2009). In data analysis process,
researcher tries to understand what the data tell (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Merriam,
2009). In addition to the interpretation of the findings, the researcher makes sense of
the data through both data analysis and data collection processes. In qualitative
research, the data collection and data analysis are inseparable procedures (Bogdan
& Biklen, 2007; Merriam, 2009). During the data collection of the present study, the
researcher got insights how the teachers use PCK components and had an idea
about how to analyze the collected data. The obtained data in this study was
66
analyzed according to the nature of the data and the aim of the data collection tools.
In the following parts, the details of the data analysis for the teachers’ SMK and
PCK were explained.
3.5.1. Data Analysis of Subject Matter Knowledge
In this study, Shulman’s view of SMK was used to explain the teachers’ content
knowledge on the topic of biogeochemical cycles. This view of Shulman was
derived from the study of Schwab (1964) and consisted of two types of SMK:
substantive and syntactic (Abell, 2007). Specifically for this study, the researcher
also wondered the participant teachers’ SD understanding regarding
biogeochemical cycles. Therefore, the teachers’ SMK and PCK were explained in the
context of SD. In the following titles, the data analysis procedures of participants’
subject matter knowledge regarding biogeochemical cycles as substantive, syntactic
and SD understanding are specified respectively.
3.5.1.1. Substantive Knowledge
The organization of concepts, facts, principles, and theories of a discipline is defined
as the substantive content knowledge (Abell, 2007, p.1107). In this study,
substantive knowledge refers to participant teachers’ conceptual understanding
(basic concepts & processes) related to biogeochemical cycles.
The teachers’ substantive knowledge of biogeochemical cycles was investigated
with the help of the three open-ended interview questions. In parallel with these
questions, teachers were requested to explain the each cycle through drawings. Both
the interviews, drawings and classroom observations were used to understand
participant teachers’ substantive knowledge related to the components and
processes within the biogeochemical cycles. To analyze the participants’ responses
to the questions, the researcher prepared a rubric consisted of the scientific
definitions of the concepts and processes of the biogeochemical cycles (Table 3.8).
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
Using the related literature, the researcher also prepared an overall rubric presented
in Table 3.9 including all components and processes within the biogeochemical
cycles. The rubrics enabled to categorize the participant teachers’ substantive
understanding on biogeochemical cycles. By adopting Simpson and Marek (1988)’s
categorization levels, participant teachers’ responses were put under three levels of
understanding as sound understanding, partial understanding, and naïve
understanding. In the following, the explanations of the categories were presented
in Table 3.10.
Table 3.10. The Explanations of Categories of Participant Teachers’ Substantive

Knowledge
Category Explanation
Participant teachers’ understanding including all components and
Sound processes of the cycle being evaluated. The teachers’ statements
should be consisted with the scientific explanations.
Participant teachers’ understanding including lack of knowledge
Partial on both components and processes within the cycle being
evaluated. The teachers’ responses were demonstrated as partial, if
the statements:
 did not include at least one component and/or process of
the cycle being evaluated,
 included inadequate explanations when compared to the
scientific explanations.
Participant teachers’ understanding including unscientific
Naïve explanations and misconceptions related to the components and
processes of the cycle being evaluated.
74
3.5.1.2. Syntactic Knowledge
The syntactic structures of a discipline refer to the rules of evidence and proof used
to generate and justify knowledge claims (Abell, 2007, p.1107). Abd-El-Khalick and
Boujaoude (1997) emphasized that Nature of Science knowledge is referred as the
syntactic knowledge of the science discipline. Therefore, to gather participant
teachers’ syntactic knowledge, VNOS-C was conducted. The researcher utilized the
rubric that serve as a basis for evaluation of VNOS responses (Abd-El-Khalick, 1998;
Lederman, Schwartz, Abd-El-Khalick & Bell, 2001). This rubric (See in Appendix F)
shown in helped the research enable the determination of the teachers’ informed
views of NOS.
3.5.1.3. SD Understanding
Participant teachers’ understanding on sustainable development issues were
examined as a knowledge type under subject matter knowledge regarding the topic
of biogeochemical cycles. In order to examine participant teachers’ conceptions of
SD in terms of biogeochemical cycles, four questions were asked (See in Appendix
A). To be able to determine the science teachers’ conceptions on the relations
between biogeochemical cycles and SD issues, the thematic connections between
biogeochemical cycles and sustainable development developed by Koutalidi and
Scoullos (2016, p.14) were mainly used (Table 3.11). Additionally, the researcher
added some issues and phenomena through the related literature. After that, the
researcher used seven categories of SD developed by Kilinc and Aydin (2013, p.741)
in order to identify the teachers’ main conceptions of SD. Some existing codes were
revised and also additional codes (in italic) were derived from the data of the
current study. These seven categories and also codes formed under them can be
seen in Table 3.12.
75
76
Table 3.12. Categories and Codes Used to Identify Participant Teachers’ SD
Understanding (Kilinc & Aydin, 2013, p. 741)
Categories Codes
Environment  Sustaining the natural balance
 Finding permanent solutions
 Interdependecy of living things
 Damaging the environment
Society  Future generations
 Improving the living standards of the society
 Sustainable lifestyles
 Awared/Educated society
 Health of the society
 Shared responsibility
Economy  Creating new job opportunities
 Sustainable production
 Production-based development
 Sustainable investments
 Industrial development
 Dependency on foreign trades
Energy  Using renewable energy sources
 Scarcity of energy
Politics  Having strong government and catching up with
developed countries
 Developments in every area
 Developin policies
 International treaties
Technology  Developing technologies
Education  Developments in education
3.5.2. Data Analysis of Pedagogical Content Knowledge
In order to analyze experienced science teachers’ PCK, the model developed by
Magnusson, Krajcik and Borko (1999) was used in the current study. The model
consists of five components which are orientations to science teaching, knowledge
of curriculum, knowledge of instructional strategies, knowledge of students’
understanding of science, and knowledge of assessment. All components were used
in order to analyze participant teachers’ PCK on the topic of biogeochemical cycles.
The details of the components and subcomponents of the model are shown in Table
3.13.
77
Table 3.13. The Components and Subcomponents of the PCK model used in the
current study
Components Subcomponents
Orientations to Science teaching Central Goals
Peripheral Goals
Knowledge of Curriculum Goals and Objectives
Curriculum Materials
Knowledge of Instructional Strategies Subject-Specific Strategies
Topic-Specific Strategies
Knowledge of Students’ Students’ Requirements for Learning
Understanding Areas of Student Difficulty
Knowledge of Assessment Dimensions of Science Learning to Assess
Methods of Assessment
3.5.2.1. Orientations to Science Teaching
Magnusson et al. (1999) defines this component of PCK as teachers’ knowledge and
beliefs about the goals of science teaching at a specific grade level. The orientations
as an overarching component of PCK play a central role and guide teachers to
decide the planning of instructional strategies, the content of the student
assignments, the use of curricular materials and textbooks and the evaluation of
students’ understanding (Borko & Putnam, 1996, Magnusson et al., 1999). In the
literature, there are nine different orientations discussed by the science researchers
respectively, process, academic rigor, didactic, conceptual change, activity driven,
discovery, project-based science, inquiry and guided inquiry. The details of the
orientations are shown in Table 3.14. In this study, teachers’ orientations to science
teaching were uncovered by the help of the card-sorting activity explained in data
collection tools in detail. In card sorting activity, teachers’ orientations were
gathered by both the questions about the teachers’ beliefs about goals of teaching
science and the thirteen scenarios including the nine orientations mentioned below.
The obtained data were categorized in two dimensions which are central goals and
peripheral goals proposed by Friedrichsen and Dana (2005) to explain teachers’
beliefs about goals of teaching science.
78
79
3.5.2.2. Knowledge of Curriculum
This component of PCK consists of two categories namely, knowledge of goals and
objectives, and knowledge of specific curricular programs and materials
(Magnusson et al., 1999). In this study, knowledge of specific curricular programs
was not examined because of the national curriculum in Turkey. This curriculum is
offered by Ministry of National Education and pursued in all elementary schools in
the country. Participant teachers’ knowledge of curriculum was obtained by the
help of the CoRe interview questions and their teaching practices recorded by video
camera. Codes both generated based on the gathered data and PCK literature were
used to analyze participant teachers’ knowledge of goals and objectives, and
knowledge of materials.
Table 3.15. The Categories and Codes of Knowledge of Curriculum
Categories Codes
Knowledge of Goals and Objectives of the topic
Objectives Horizontal relations
Vertical relations
The violation/modification of the curriculum
Knowledge of Materials Dependence on curricular materials
Sources that teacher use
Aim of using source
3.5.2.3. Knowledge of Instructional Strategies
In the PCK model of Magnusson et al. (1999), knowledge of instructional strategies
component is constituted of two categories: knowledge of subject-specific strategies
and knowledge of topic-specific strategies. Subject-specific strategies means
teachers’ overall approaches specific for science teaching. The strategies in this
category represent the general approaches to enacting science instruction
(Magnusson et al., 1999). In this study, teacher centered strategies (for example;
Lecturing, Questioning etc.) and student centered strategies (for example; 5E
Learning Cycle, Conceptual Change Approach, Guided Inquiry etc.) that participant
teachers’ handled to teach the biogeochemical cycles topic was used to analyze
80
teachers’ knowledge of subject specific strategies. Topic-specific strategies refer to
teachers’ knowledge of strategies to facilitate student learning of specific science
concepts. Representations and activities are two categories of this type of strategies
(Magnusson et al., 1999). In order to analyze the participant teachers’ knowledge of
topic specific strategies, the categories shown in Table 3.16 were used. Participant
teachers’ knowledge of instructional strategies was obtained by the help of the CoRe
interview questions and their teaching practices recorded by video camera.
Table 3.16. The Categories of Knowledge of Topic-Specific Strategies
Category Type of Category

Knowledge of Representations Illustrations (Photos, Videos, Figures, Drawings)
Examples
Models
Analogies, Metaphors
Simulations
Knowledge of Activities Demonstrations
Investigations
Experiments
Problems
3.5.2.4. Knowledge of Students’ Understanding
This type of knowledge means teacher knowledge that helps student to develop
specific scientific knowledge. It consists of two categories: requirements for learning
and the areas of students’ difficulties (Magnusson et al., 1999). Knowledge of
requirements for learning refers the knowledge about prerequisite knowledge for
learning specific science concepts (Magnusson et al., 1999). Knowledge of areas of
students’ difficulties means that teachers’ knowledge about the science concepts or
areas that student learning is difficult. There are several reasons why students find
difficult to learn science concepts. Thus, teachers should be having enough
knowledge about the difficulties that specific for each science topic (Magnusson et
al., 1999). In this study, the categories and codes used for analysis of the participant
teachers’ knowledge of students’ understanding on biogeochemical cycles topic
were presented in Table 3.17. Participant teachers’ knowledge of students’
81
understanding was obtained by the help of the CoRe interview questions and their
teaching practices recorded by video camera.
Table 3.17. The Categories and Codes of Knowledge of Students’ Understanding
Categories Codes
Requirements of Prerequisite knowledge on biogeochemical cycles topic
Learning Abilities and skills that students need to learn the topic
Students’ learning styles
Areas of Students’ Abstract structure of the concepts
Difficulties Misconceptions about the topic
The existence of terminology
3.5.2.5. Knowledge of Assessment

This component of PCK model used in this study refers to teachers’ knowledge
about the ways what and how students learn. There are two categories to underlay
this type of teacher knowledge: knowledge of dimensions of science learning and
knowledge of methods (Magnusson et al., 1999; Tamir, 1988). The category of
dimensions of science learning includes the aspects of students’ learning which are
important to assess in the teaching of a particular topic. In the literature, the
dimensions of science learning to assess were identified as conceptual
understanding, interdisciplinary themes, nature of science, and science process
skills (Champagne, 1989). Based on the context of the study, these dimensions were
adopted as conceptual knowledge, syntactic knowledge (NOS understanding) and
SD understanding of participant teachers. The other category of knowledge of
assessment is the knowledge of methods of assessment. This knowledge refers to
the methods that teachers employed to assess students’ specific dimensions of
science learning (Magnusson et al., 1999).
In this study, teachers knowledge of methods of assessment is categorized as
formative and summative mentioned in the literature (Earle, 2015). Formative
assessment is the evaluation during the learning process to provide ongoing
feedback to improve students’ learning whereas summative assessment is
implemented to understand how well students have learned at the end of the unit
82
(Sadler, 1998). In formative assessment, the purpose is to monitor students’ learning
process. However, summative assessment is interested in the students overall
achievements and products (Black et al., 2003). Moreover, the ways of assessment
were labeled as formal and informal with parallel to methods of assessment.
Table 3.18. Categories and Codes for Knowledge of Assessment
Categories Codes
Knowledge of dimensions of science learning Conceptual understanding
to assess SD Understanding
Nature of science
Science process & ESD skills
Knowledge of Methods of Assessment The type of assessment
Formative & Summative
The way of assessment
Formal & Informal
3.6. Trustworthiness of the Study
The aim of trustworthiness in a qualitative research is to support the argument that
the research’s findings are “worth paying attention to” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). This
statement is completely related to validity and reliability issues. The terms
‘reliability’ and ‘validity’ are not used by many proponents of qualitative design.
Lincoln and Guba (1985) prefer the terms credibility, transferability, dependability and
confirmability, because they felt that these terms better reflect the underlying
assumptions involved in qualitative research (Trochim, 2006). Table 3.19 shows the
proposed terms in qualitative research and the “analogous” quantitative criteria.
Table 3.19.Proposed Criteria and Analogous Quantitative Criteria (Trochim, 2006)
Traditional criteria for quantitative Alternative criteria for qualitative

research research
 Internal validity  Credibility
 External validity (generalization)  Transferability
 Reliability  Dependability
 Objectivity  Confirmability
83
3.6.1. Credibility
Credibility means that how results of a study coincide with reality (Merraim, 2009).
To establish trustworthiness in a qualitative research, confirmation of credibility is
most important factor (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). There are different strategies to
increase credibility; making triangulation, prolonged engagement, external check by
peer review, clarifying researcher position and member check (Creswell, 2007;
Merriam, 2009). In this study, triangulation, peer review, prolonged engagement in
the classroom settings and clarifying research position was included to address
credibility in the designing the research procedure.
Firstly, the researcher used data triangulation to provide a richer, more multilayered
and more credible data set from the participants. Using multiple data collection
methods such as interviews, video-records, and documents strengthened the criteria
of credibility. Also, multiple data sources were used to provide more credible
information. Researcher examined the transcriptions of data gathered both
interviews and video-recordings to compare and contrast teachers’ perceptions.
Moreover, teachers’ exam papers and drawings helped researcher to obtain the
consistent results.
Secondly, external check of peer review strategy was used to address the credibility
of the study. Two colleague experienced in qualitative research were asked to
advise the data collection and analysis methods of the study. Furthermore, a
researcher familiar with science education and PCK checked and analyzed some
portion of the data to increase the credibility of the study. In the light of these
reviews, different interpretations and any disagreements were examined and
resolved through the discussions and negotiations. In addition to these, the
researcher’s advisor and co-advisor also gave feedbacks throughout the research.
These feedbacks based on advisors’ perceptions, experiences and comments helped
researcher to recognize her own biases and widen her vision about the progress of
the current research.
84
Thirdly, prolonged engagement in the teaching environment of the participants
gave more credible information about the teachers’ perceptions and PCK. The
researcher spent time with the participants at their schools in regular intervals
throughout the one semester (five months) to obtain more credible data. Also, the
researcher visited the participant before the study to explain the purpose of the
study and what she wanted them to do. Meanwhile, the researcher had chance to
observe the participants’ in their natural settings. During these meetings, researcher
and participants became familiar talking about teaching, students, context of the
school and science curriculum. These meetings and conversations were beneficial to
obtain more detailed and thicker description of the current study.
Lastly, clarifying the researcher bias was another important issue to ensure the
credibility of the research findings. In qualitative studies, researcher position is
important factor (Merriam, 2009). The researcher’s experiences, expectations, values
and training affects the results of the study (Merriam, 2009; Patton, 2002) because
the researcher is the instrument in qualitative studies (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The
researcher took a qualitative research course before the research was conducted.
This does not mean that the researcher became expert in doing qualitative research
but the course helped researcher to get a wider perspective on the nature of the
qualitative research approach. Moreover, the researcher had an opportunity to
examine several qualitative studies and three main qualitative books throughout the
course so she provided necessary underpinnings of the qualitative approach. In
addition, the researcher had experienced with pre-service teachers in practice
teaching course since 2011 so she could advanced her knowledge about how PCK
develops. Furthermore, the pilot study helped the researcher to make revisions for
providing more detailed and credible data. As a result, all evidences mentioned
above provided the credibility of the researcher bias.
3.6.2. Transferability
Transferability means the degree to which the results of qualitative studies can be
generalized or transferred to different situations (Merriam, 2009). Although it is
85
difficult to generalize the qualitative results from one context to another,
transferability can be increased by thick description of the research context and
paper trail (Lincoln & Guba, 2009). In this study, these strategies were used to
increase the transferability of the research. The researcher described the context of
the study; participants; the data collection procedures and findings in detail.
Moreover, several of the data collection and analysis documents were included in
an appendix part. The complete set of data collection and analysis documents are on
file and available upon request. Thus, intensive description and access to the
research’s “paper trail” gave other researchers the ability to transfer the conclusions
of this study to other contexts.
3.6.3. Dependability
Dependability in qualitative study refers to reliability in quantitative research. To
address dependability, the research findings and collected data should be consistent
and could be repeated (Merriam, 2009; Patton, 2002). In this study, triangulation,
peer review and clarifying the researcher bias to ensure both the dependability of
the research results. These efforts were explained in credibility part of this section.
This means that the strategies to increase credibility help to ensure dependability.
Yin (2009) states the purpose of dependability is to prevent the errors and bias in the
study. The case study protocol describing the detail description of the data
collection, data analysis, the decisions throughout the research provided
dependability of a study (Merriam, 2009; Yin, 2009). In the current study, this
protocol was explained in the previous sections of this methodology chapter.
Moreover, a science education researcher also analyzed some parts of the data to
provide agreements with the findings of the study. The results compared and
inconsistencies were discussed to arrive at a consensus.
3.6.4. Confirmability
Confirmability means the degree to neutrality of researcher while the study was
implementing and the results were interpreting (Linccoln & Guba, 1985). It is a
86
researcher effort to ensure that the findings of the study are not affected by the
characteristics and ideas of the researcher (Merriam, 2009). There are a number of
strategies to ensure confirmability in qualitative research (Trochim, 2006).
Triangulation, identifying researcher position, detailed description of the context
and methods are some of these strategies. All of these strategies was also used to
enhance the credibility and dependability of the research and detailed in previous
parts.
3.7. Ethical Issues
Protection of the participants from harm, deception of the participants, and
confidentiality of data are three important points related to the ethics in research
(Frankel & Wallen, 2006). Under these considerations, first, Institutional Review
Board (IRB) approval was taken from METU Human Subjects Ethics Committe
(Appendix F) in order to be able to conduct the study. IRB approved that the current
study has no potential to harm both participant teachers and the students in the
classes. The researcher took an additional permisson from Ministry of National
Education (Appendix G) to carry out the study in the public middle schools.
Besides, anonymity of participants and the school were assured. For all participants,
pseudonyms were used. Besides, participants of the study were not deceived. They
all accepted to participate to the study voluntarily. Participants were informed
about the purpose of the study. The researcher also explained that whenever they
want, they could quit the study and the results of the study could be shared with
them if they want. Finally, except the researcher, her advisor, and additional coders,
nobody had access the data collected for the study. Considering the important
points above mentioned, the ethics in the current research was guaranteed.
3.8. Assumptions of the Study
For this study, the following assumptions were made:
1. The rubrics prepared in order to analyze the teachers’ understandings are
well-developed tools consistent with the focus of the study.
87
2. The participants may have some prior knowledge about the issues in the
study. They took the related courses so they had a background in these
issues and they are able to give some information scientifically on the
questions being addressed.
3. The participants’ actions are not affected by the presence of the audio and
video recorder in the study.
3.9. Limitations of the Study
The following limitations originating from the nature of the qualitative study were
explained for this study.
 Firstly, generalizability of the study is one of the limitations of this study.
The number of participants is limited to three in-service science teachers.
Therefore, results of the study may only be generalized to individuals and
contexts whose characteristics and descriptions are similar to those studied
in this study.
 Secondly, the data collection tools of the current study were prepared based
on the science and technology curriculum revised in 2005. After the study
began, the curriculum was changed two times in 2013 and 2018. These
changes were not taken into consideration throughout the analysis and
interpretation of the data.
 Thirdly, participant teachers’ native language was Turkish. Therefore all
data collection tools and procedures were implemented in Turkish. All
quotations and codes derived from Turkish data were translated into
English so the terminology of the translated data may have some problems.
To reduce the limitation of this issue, the suggestions of the advisor were
valuable for the quality of the translations.
 In the beginning of the study, the researcher planned to investigate three
topics, namely biogeochemical cycles, energy sources and recycling to
determine teachers’ SMK and PCK in the context of ESD. Therefore, the
duration of interviews of each participant’s SMK and PCK sometimes could
88
take very long time than expected. When necessary, in order to minimize the
risk of being bored, the researcher occasionally used structured interview
questions rather than semi-structured ones.
 There can be some limitations concerning the use of video-recording
method. The most essential limitations are mechanical problems and the
influence of videotaping on behavior.
 There can be some limitations in terms of the orientations used in the study.
Although, considering the aim of the study, four orientations were added;
the researcher adhered to the nine orientations shown in Table 3.15. Some
current orientations (e.g. argumentation, STEM) were not considered.
Moreover, Magnusson et al. (1999) stated that teachers can identify multiple
orientations depending on the topic or the grade level. However, all
orientations which participant teachers identify for characterizing both their
belief systems and purpose for teaching science at 8th grade could not be
observed. Regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles, the researcher could
only report one or two dominant orientations.
 The post-interviews related to either participated teachers’ SMK or PCK
could not be conducted.
89
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
This chapter presents the findings of the study. Results are detailed for each
participant for content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in two parts.
In the first part of each case, teacher’s content knowledge is reported. Hereby, based
on the data collected through interviews and drawings, participant’s substantive,
syntactic and SD understanding regarding biogechemical cycles are analyzed and
presented under the heading of content knowledge. In the second part of the each
case, detailed results are presented for teacher’s PCK components namely,
orientation to science teaching, knowledge of curriculum, knowledge of
instructional strategies, knowledge of students’ understanding and knowledge of
assessment. For each case, teacher’s statements taken from data based on interviews,
video-recordings (classroom observations) and documents are reported for the
description of teacher’s use of each component of PCK. At the end of the chapter,
the findings of the teachers’ both content knowledge and pedagogical content
knowledge are summarized.
4.1. CASE 1: Kemal’s Subject Matter Knowledge and Pedagogical Content
Knowledge on Biogeochemical Cycles
In this study, the researcher used the pseudonym for the participant teachers and
Kemal was called as Case 1. Kemal is male and sixty years old. He was graduated
from Education Institute in 1977. He had worked in a high school for five years in
different branch of study. In 1982, he was graduated from physics department in
Faculty of Arts and Science of a public university. He had taught physics lessons in
high schools for twenty-five years. Kemal has already been working in Eco-schools
project implemented by TÜRÇEV (Turkish Foundation of Environmental

90
Education) for four years in his current middle school. Currently, he has been
teaching science for eight years in a public middle school as a science teacher. Kemal
has taught 5, 7 and 8th grades during 2013-2014 education year and has twenty
course hours as work load per week. There were thirty-six students in his
classroom. In this section, Kemal’s results of subject matter knowledge and
pedagogical content knowledge were presented.
4.1.1. Kemal’s Subject Matter Knowledge
4.1.1.1. Kemal’s Substantive Knowledge
The results of Kemal’s substantive knowledge regarding biogeochemical cycles are
presented under three subheadings, respectively the carbon, hydrological and
nitrogen cycle.
Kemal first was requested to answer the question what the biogeochemical cycle is.
He started to the definition by explaining that the amount of the materials needs to
be balanced. In the continuation of his explanation, Kemal defined the
biogeochemical cycle as ‘the materials such as carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus
and, water which are the building blocks of the earth are used by the living things
and returned to the earth’’. Although Kemal referred the biotic components of the
cycles mentioning the living organisms such as plants, animals, he did not
specifically touch upon abiotic components (i.e. the sun and the soil) and reservoirs
of chemicals in his definition. As a result, his understanding of the cycle was
considered as partial according to the scientific definition.
Researcher (R): How can you define biogeochemical cycle?

Kemal (K): …There are some materials such as carbon, nitrogen, oxygen,
phosphorus and water whose amounts needs to be balanced…These materials
are the building blocks of the organic compounds in living things. The living
things are plants, animals etc. They are used by the living things and returned to
the earth…
91
4.1.1.1.1. Kemal’s Knowledge about Carbon Cycle
To reveal Kemal’s understanding of carbon cycle, he was requested to draw and
explain the carbon cycle. Considering his statements in both his drawing and
teaching; Kemal’s understanding of carbon cycle was labeled as partial due to the
lack of his knowledge. In Table 4.1, Kemal’s understanding related to the carbon
cycle is summarized.
Table. 4.1. Kemal’s Understanding of the Carbon Cycle
Kemal’s Understanding
Components within the cycle  The plants (Producers)
 The animals and humans (Consumers)
 Bacteria (Decomposers)
 CO2 in the atmosphere, dissolved
carbon compounds in water, fossil
fuels, the structure of living things
(Carbon Reservoirs)
 Sun (Abiotic Component)
 Soil (Abiotic Component)
 Water (Abiotic Component)
Processes within the cycle  Photosynthesis
 Transformation of carbon from plants
to animals through food chain
 Respiration of plants and animals
 Combustion of fossil fuels
 Decomposition
Kemal began his explanation with the importance of carbon cycle. When asked the
question of why the carbon cycle is important, he stated that carbon is very
important matter because it is the basis of the building blocks of living things such
as carbohydrates, proteins, and fats. He also addressed the importance of CO2 for
the plants to make food and produce oxygen through photosynthesis.
R: Why is the carbon cycle important?

K: Carbon is very important matter. It [carbon] constitutes the basic building
blocks of living things. It is in the structure of carbohydrates, proteins, and oils.
Besides, plants use CO2 in photosynthesis to produce oxygen and food. In this
manner, it is [carbon] very important for life...
92
Then Kemal began to explain the carbon cycle through drawing (Figure 4.1). He first
mentioned the release of carbon to the atmosphere because of combustion of fossil
fuels. He included fossil fuels as a source of carbon element in his drawing.
Although he did not draw specifically the process of combustion, during
explanation phase of his drawing, he verbalized that people consumed the fossil
fuels in their daily lives. Then, he continued to his drawing expressing the removal
of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through plants during photosynthesis.
Although he also mentioned about the plants in aquatic systems, he did not
specifically explain the aquatic carbon cycle. Then, he mentioned that the organic
compounds (food) formed in the photosynthesis enter the bodies of composers
through food chain. In here, Kemal referred the process of transformation of organic
carbon from plants to consumers. Later, he explained that living things such as
plants, animals and humans also release carbon dioxide to the atmosphere with
respiration. Finally, Kemal emphasized that carbon dioxide returns back to the
atmosphere and the soil by the process of decomposition. However, he did not
show the decomposition process in his drawing.
R: Could you please explain the carbon cycle by drawing?

K: …[Drawing] One of the most important sources of the carbon is the fossil fuels
such as oil, natural gas and coal, which we call non-renewable energy sources.
We use those [fossil fuels] in our homes, in our cars; in factories…As we use
these fuels, the carbon dioxide gas is released to the atmosphere… Then plants
use this carbon dioxide. When they [plants] consume it [carbon dioxide] in
photosynthesis, they [plants] produce oxygen and organic compounds… By the
way, photosynthesis do not happen just on land. Plants living in the sea also
make photosynthesis. This organic compound produced through photosynthesis,
in turns, enters the bodies of living things. I mean animals; humans are eating it
[plant]. Living things are continously releasing CO2. Plants, animals and people
give out water vapor and carbon dioxide through respiration. This carbon
dioxide is released to the atmosphere again ... Finally there are dead bodies of
living things. These dead bodies are separated by the decomposers and the
carbon dioxide gas return to the atmosphere and the soil.
Although Kemal did not explain the sun as the driving force of the cycle in his
drawing, he specifically addressed the sun as the energy source for the
photosynthesis in his teaching of carbon cycle.
93
K:…We know the sun is important for living things. What does the sun provide
to the plants? Through its rays, it gives energy to the plants. What does the plant
do with this sun energy? They [plants] photosynthesize on their leaves? They
produce food…[Classroom Observation]
Kemal also expressed all reservoirs of the carbon in four earth spheres as
atmosphere, hydrosphere, lithosphere, and biosphere. However, he did not refer the
major source of CO2 as plants (biomass) and oceans.
K:…First, the carbon is found in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. The second is
in the hydrosphere. I mean that the carbon compounds are dissolved in the
water. In the lithosphere, it [carbon] is fossillized. It [carbon] is found in the
structure of fossil fuels as oil, coal, natural gas. Finally, in the biosphere, the
living things contain carbon compounds such as proteins, carbonhydrates,
nucleic acids etc…
Kemal did not draw the oxygen cycle separately. He pointed out the processes of
oxygen cycle are reverse of the ones in the carbon cycle. He expressed that the
carbon and oxygen cycles are interrelated. Kemal touch upon the oxygen cycle
briefly in during his teaching of carbon cycle. He mentioned about the characteristic
of oxygen element and referred the importance of O3 for the living things.
K: There's no need to mention the oxygen cycle. The processes in the carbon cycle
also occur in the oxygen cycle. This cycle [O2] is reverse of the carbon cycle. The
oxygen and carbon cycle are interrelated. So, if there is no carbon cycle, there will
be no circulation of oxygen…
In conlusion, considering Kemal’s statements in both his teaching and drawing
related to the carbon cycle, it can be said that his explanations had lack of the
knowledge. First, he stated the sun as the energy source of photosynthesis not a
driving force of the cycle. While explaining the photosynthesis, he did not mention
the algae and cynobacteria as producers. Furthermore, he did not refer the major
source of CO2 as plants (biomass) and oceans. Additionally he did not touch upon
the carbon cycle in aquatic systems. Therefore, Kemal’s understanding of carbon
cycle was labeled as partial.
94
95
Figure 4.1. Kemal’s Drawing of Carbon Cycle
4.1.1.1.2. Kemal’s Knowledge about Hydrologic Cycle
To identify Kemal’s understanding of hydrologic cycle, he was requested to draw
and explain the hydrological cycle. Considering his statements in both his drawing
and teaching; Kemal’s understanding of hydrological cycle was labeled as partial. In
Table 4.2, Kemal’s understanding related to the hydrological cycle is summarized.
Kemal initially define the hydrological cycle as ‘‘the water which evaporates from
the water resources is condensed and return to the earth in the form of
precipitation’’.
Table 4.2. Kemal’s Understanding of the Hydrological Cycle
Components within the cycle  The plants (as Producers)
 The animals (as Consumers)
 Oceans, Lakes, Glaciers, Rivers, Ground
Waters (as Water Resources)
 Soil(as Abiotic component)
 Sun (as Energy source)
 Temperature & Wind (Climatic factors)
Processes within the cycle  Evaporation
 Condensation
 Precipitation
 Transpiration
 Surface Flows
 Infiltration
Then, he explained all reservoirs of the water as oceans, lakes, glaciers, rivers and
underground waters as the abiotic components of the hydrological cycle. Besides, he
mentioned the existence of water as a feature that separates the earth from other
planets. In addition to this, he underlined the importance of water for living things
in his teaching of hydrological cycle.
K: …We know that 3/4 of earth is water. There are oceans, seas, lakes and rivers.
There are also glaciers and ground-waters…The most important feature that
separates the earth from other planets is its atmosphere and the presence of the
water vapor in it [atmosphere]....
96
...So drinking water is very important to us...You have known that the cells of
organisms can live only watery environment. So water is very important for
plants, for animals, for all living things…[Classroom Observation].
When it comes to his explanations through drawing, Kemal mentioned about the
process of evaporation. He stated that the water evaporates due to the heat energy
from the sun. Although he stated the rain, snow and hail as the types of
precipitation and the process of condensation as the formation of clouds in this
explanation, he did not show these processes [precipitation and condensation] in his
drawing (Figure 4.2) as well. Moreover, he addressed the plants and animals as the
biotic components of the cycle. In here, he explained the presence of water vapor in
the atmosphere due to the respiration of animals and plants. He also touched upon
the transpiration of plants in the cycle.
R: Could you please explain hydrologic cycle by drawing?

K:…[Drawing] Now let's say we have a lake. Next to this lake, there are plants
and animals. There is a water vapor because of the process of respiration in
plants and animals. There is a factory and a house near the lake as well. Smoke
and water vapor are constantly coming from the factory and house chimneys to
the atmosphere… The lake is warming up; water is evaporating due to the heat
energy from the sun. Plants are also releasing water vapor through the process of
transpiration. These vapors form clouds in the air…From the clouds; water
should be fallen back to the earth as a type of precipitation like rain, snow, or hail
according to the weather conditions…
Futhermore, Kemal was expected to refer both surface flows and the process of
penetration in the hydrological cycle. Although he did not give place these
processes [penetration and surface flows] in his explanations through drawing, he
explained them during his teaching of hydrological cycle. He also mentioned the
short and long water cycle. Lastly, Kemal touched upon some climatic conditions
such as temperature and wind as factors affecting water cycle.
97
98
Figure 4.2. Kemal’s Drawing of Hydrological Cycle
In conclusion, Kemal’s explanations related to all abovementioned processes and
components of the hydrological cycle (Table 4.2.) were consistent to the scientific
explanations. However, considering the lack of the knowledge regarding the sun
and gravity as the driving forces for the cycle, Kemal’s understanding of
hydrological cycle was labeled as partial.
4.1.1.1.3. Kemal’s Knowledge about Nitrogen Cycle
To better grasp Kemal’s understanding of nitrogen cycle, he was requested to draw
and explain the nitrogen cycle. Considering the statements in both his drawing and
teaching; Kemal’s understanding of nitrogen cycle was labeled as partial due to the
lack of his knowledge. In Table 4.3, Kemal’s understanding related to the nitrogen
cycle is summarized.
Table 4.3. Kemal’s Understanding of the Nitrogen Cycle
Components within the cycle  The plants (Legumes) (as Producers)
 The animals and people (as Consumers)
 Decomposers
 Nitrogen-fixing bacteria
 Nitrifying bacteria & Denitrifiers
 Atmosphere and the soil (as Nitrogen
Reservoirs)
 Water (as Abiotic component)
Processes within the cycle  Nitrogen fixation
 Nitrification
 Denitrification
 Transformation of nitrogen compounds
in the plants to animal compounds
through food chain (N-Assimilation)
 Lightning
Kemal first emphasized that nitrogen is essential material for living things because
of the formation of proteins, nucleic acids, ATP, DNA, RNA and vitamins. He
addressed the atmosphere as a reservoir contains 78% nitrogen gas. Besides, he
pointed out the components of the nitrogen cycle such as soil, plants, animals,
99
decomposers, nitrogen fixing bacteria, nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria. Kemal
defined the processes of nitrogen fixation, nitrification and denitrification in the
cycle clearly. He referred the nitrogen assimilation through the food chain.
R: Could you please explain the hydrological cycle by drawing?

K:…[Drawing] Nitrogen is a very important element for life. There is 78%
nitrogen gas in the atmosphere ... Plants and other living things cannot use this
nitrogen directly. Nitrogen in the atmosphere is caught by nitrogen-fixing
bacteria in the roots of plants (legumes) and converted to nitrate by nitrification.
Already through the plants we can get nitrogen with the food. Then nitrogen
compounds in dead organisms are converted to ammonia by decomposers. This
ammonia is converted into nitrate by chemosynthetic nitrite and nitrate bacteria
in the soil. This nitrate is taken up by plants in order to be used in the synthesis
of amino acids, nucleic acids, ATP, vitamins, DNA and RNA... Excess nitrate
accumulation in soil is a dangerous situation. Nitrate forms nitric acid when
dissolved in water. For this reason, the excess nitrate in the soil is converted into
nitrogen gas by the denitrification bacteria and goes back to the atmosphere
again.
Kemal referred the lightning in order to capture the nitrogen in the cycle. He
emphasized the knowledge that the lightning is the way of fixing nitrate in the soil
although the minority of the cycle is based on this process.
K: One way of capturing nitrate in the soil is lightning. This process only
connects the nitrogen in the places where it [lightning] falls. This involves a very
small fraction of the nitrogen cycle. In true sense, nitrogen is formed by fixing to
plant roots with nitrogen-fixing bacteria, its transformation to food. This food is
consumed by animals and the nitrogen compounds in the bodies of dead
organisms separated by bacteria and they [nitrogen compounds} returned to the
atmosphere as nitrogen gas.
In short, Kemal’s statements regarding the all abovementioned processes and
components of nitrogen cycle (Table 4.3) were consistent to the scientific
explanations. However, he did not mention the cynobacteria in aquatic systems as a
nitrogenous bacteria and the sun as the energy source of the cycle in both his
drawing (Figure 4.3) and teaching. In these considerations, Kemal’s understanding
of nitrogen cycle was labelled as partial.
100
101
Figure 4.3. Kemal’s Drawing of Nitrogen Cycle
To conclude, it can be said that Kemal’s substantive knowledge in the topic of
biogeochemical cycles was partial considering his responses related to the
components and processes of the cycles. In the next section, Kemal’s syntactic
knowledge regarding his NOS understanding was documented.
4.1.1.2. Kemal’s Syntactic Knowledge
In this section, the results of Kemal’s syntactic knowledge (NOS view) were
presented based on empirical, tentative, inferential, creative and imaginative,
subjective, socio-cultural nature of science as well as the distinction between theory
and law. Kemal’s NOS views were obtained by using the interview questions in
embedded VNOS-C questionnaire.
Empirical NOS: When asked the questions of what the science is and what makes
science differ from other disciplines, Kemal, first, explained the science as ‘‘All
studies conducted to understand the universe and the world we live in’’. He
expanded his explanation with the definition of scientific knowledge as knowledge
gained based on the scientific methods and processes. He accepted science both as a
body of knowledge and as a process, yet possessed the misconception that a
universal scientific method exists. Moreover, Kemal acknowledged that the most
important feature that differ science from other disciplines is its dependence on the
data obtained from experiments and observation. Kemal stated that scientists can
prove the existence of global warming based on data and observations such as
increase in the temperatures, melting of icebergs. Thus, he believed that scientist use
observations and experiments to reach definite conclusions and make claims based
on these evidences. On the other hand, he failed to understand that experiments and
observations are not the only route to scientific knowledge and many scientists have
used non-experimental techniques to advance knowledge (Abd-El-Khalick, 2005).
Under these circumstances, Kemal’s understanding had deficits in terms of
empirical NOS (See table 4.4 for sample quotas).
102
Table 4.4. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Empirical NOS
NOS view Sample Statements

Empirical …Scientists dealing with positive sciences (physics, chemistry,
biology etc.) communicate with each other through clear
evidences… In the scientific process, you get results with the
experiments.
…Let’s give a simple example. Torricelli went to a sea shore,
took a mercury bowl and a tube in one meter in length. He filled
the tube with mercury and it [mercury] becomes stable when it
reaches to the height of about 76 cm. He repeated the procedure
many times and concluded that because of the air pressure, the
mercury in the tube comes to rest at 76 cm, at sea level…If every
scientist repeat the experiment as Torricelli did, they reach the
same conclusion…In positive sciences, there is something called
experiment and there is observation.
…Scientists know that Earth temperature has increased 3-4
degrees up to now. At least they [scientists] provide evidences
like the melting of glaciers in the poles, the joining of icebergs to
the oceans…These are very important data that show the global
warming really happens.
Theory & Law: When asked the differences between theory and law, Kemal was not
aware of the understanding that theories and laws are different kinds of scientific
knowledge. He also ascribed to a hierarchical view of the relationship between
scientific theories and laws whereby theories become laws when ‘proven true’. He
held the common misconception that the theories are the knowledge that needs to
be proven. He also detailed his assertion that laws are certain knowledge with the
example of Newton’s laws of motion. When asked whether greenhouse effect is
theory or law, he failed to understand that it is a theory (Ramanathan, 1988; Wilkins,
1993) because of his misconception on the explanatory function of theories. He
perceieved the theories as the knowledge needed ‘‘proof’’. Therefore, his responses
implied that he failed to understand the functions of and differences between
theories and laws (See table 4.5 for sample quotas).
103
Table 4.5. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Theory & Law

Theory & Law …He [scientist] proposes an idea to solve a problem. What we
call this idea is hypothesis…Scientists also formulate many
hypotheses related to the same problem in different places and
later write scientific articles. Then many scientists do an
aggrement on these hypotheses. So they become theories if they
[hypotheses] are confirmed by all scientists. Theories can
sometimes be wrong. But when the theories are proven, we call
them as laws in simple sense…The facts that scientists know its
certainty called law…
…Newton formulated the law of gravity… Based on this law,
the pen I throw to the up will fall to the ground. In every time,
the pen will fall…If so, the laws always work and they are
always true.
…The greenhouse effect is an important event that warms the
earth. Scientists are sure of the fact that the greenhouse gases
such as water vapor, CO2, methane, etc., which holds the heat
reflected from earth, warm up the atmosphere and thus the
earth. They [scientists] can also collect data on the changes in the
proportions of these gases in the atmosphere. In the line with
this knowledge, I perceive the greenhouse effect as a law…
Tentative NOS: When asked whether the theories and laws can be changed, Kemal
acknowledged that all scientific knowledge is subject to change. He emphasized
that scientific knowledge can be developed in the light of new technologies and by
different interpretations of previous knowledge in different way. He expanded his
answers by giving examples of the studies in CERN, and the atom models to explain
how scientific knowledge changed. When asked whether theories and laws can be
changed, he claimed that theories can be changed. However, his explanations
indicated that theory change were not associated with a tentative view of science.
Rather, he reflected a naive view that theory is an intermediate step in the
generation of ‘true’ scientific knowledge as law (Abd-El-Khalick, 2005). Besides, he
had also claimed that laws are certain knowledge. Thus, the results showed that his
misconception related to the functions of theories and laws caused her explanations
on tentative NOS to be inconsistent and partial (See table 4.6 for sample quotas).
104
Table 4.6. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Tentative NOS

Tentative …In science it is necessary to perceive; knowledge as tentative…
We cannot ignore Newton's laws of gravity, but it can be
improved in the light of the different interpretations [new ways
of thinking]. In this sense, I believe that it [law] can change ...
For example; The Einstein’s Theory of Relativity questioned to
the Newton’s laws…
At CERN, an experiment was conducted regarding the
formation of the universe…What will be results of this
experiment? Will the results disprove the existing laws?... I
mean, I do not think science and technology will advance if we
see the law as certain knowledge…
We know how the atomic theory has changed from Dalton’s
view to the present day…Atom was indivisible but it later
found to be comprised of sub-particles such as proton, neutron
and electron…
Inferential NOS: When asked how scientists are certain about the appearance of the
dinosaurs, Kemal’s responses implied that scientists make inferences. He did not
mention the term ‘‘inference’’ explicitly but he implied that scientists make
interpretations based on evidences. For example, he emphasized that scientists
constructed models of dinosaurs depending on the fossil evidences. Thus, Kemal’s
understanding on inferential NOS reflected that scientific claims are based on
empirical evidences. In other words, it can be said that Kemal’s understanding of
inferential NOS were affected by his view of empirical NOS (See table 4.7 for sample
quotas).
Table 4.7. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Inferential NOS

Inferential Science is divided into many branches, for example geologists and
biologists worked together and based on fossil evidences, and they
concluded that dinosaurs had lived. At the same time, they
[scientists] investigated the skeletal systems and bone structures of
dinosaurs, and constructed models using technology. Thus, they
got an idea of how dinosaurs looked like.
105
Creative and Imaginative NOS: Kemal recognized the crucial role of imagination
and creativity in science. He claimed that scientists’ imagination and creativity is
essential for the continuation of their investigation. In his example of inferential
NOS, he also implied how scientists use their imagination and creativity due to the
get an idea of how dinosaurs looked like. Hence, his responses included informed
views because of the understanding that scientists’ imagination and creativity have
an important role in every part of the scientific investigation. Kemal’s sample
statements can be seen in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Creative and Imaginative NOS

Creative and Scientists take advantage of their creativity and imagination,
Imaginative and they do not go a step further unless they did not use them
[their imagination and creativity]. If science is based on
curiosity, I think it [science] will advance by imagination and
creativity.
For me, scientist should use them [imagination and creativity]
in every stage of their work…No matter which phase he is in.
He should progress using his/her creativity and imagination.
Subjective NOS: Kemal possessed naïve understanding of subjective NOS. He
claimed that scientist’s preconceptions, values; background should not influence
their investigations. He held the misconception that science should be objective and
value-free. He acknowledged that the reason of scientists’ different interpretations is
the lack of evidence. For instance, he asserted that there are several different
interpretations of the causes of the dinosaurs’ extinction because scientists did not
have enough evidence to prove why the dinosaurs become extinct. Sample
106
Table 4.9. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Subjective NOS

Subjective …Scientist should be objective. All scientists, of course, have
different perspectives, but they have to come together and
create a consortium to produce a common result based on the
same data…
…Concerning dinosaurs’ extinction, scientists have a lot of
different views such as climate change, meteorite hit, separation
of continents, volcanic eruptions, depletion of their foods etc.
It's been a long time since this [dinosaurs’ extinction] happened
and scientists have no chance of going back. They do not have
enough evidence to prove it [dinosaurs’ extinction] so they have
different interpretations on the causes of the extinction
Socio-Cultural NOS: Kemal indicated naïve understanding of socio-cultural NOS.
To hold a naïve understanding of socio-cultural NOS, participant should consider
that science is isolated from the norms and values of the society. At this point,
Kemal believed that science is universal and it should be independent of the culture.
Sample statements can be seen in Table 4.10.
Table 4.10. Kemal’s Sample Statements of Socio-Cultural NOS

Socio-Cultural Science is universal. It should be independent of the cultural
values. I mentioned that science is objective and seeks the true
results. If it is so, it should not be influenced by them [socio-
cultural values and norms].
To sum up, Kemal’s responses implied that he did not possess informed
understanding on all NOS tenets. Specifically, he had naïve understanding on the
functions of and differences between theory and law, subjective and socio-cultural
NOS. In fact, it can be also said that Kemal’s NOS views were dependent to each
other. For example, although Kemal asserted that scientific knowledge can be
changed by the new interpretations, he held the naïve idea that the change of laws is
difficult because laws are certain knowledge. Specifically, regarding embedded
NOS views on theory and law, he had the misunderstanding that the greenhouse
effect is a law. Therefore, he hold the misconception about the functions and
107
differences between theory and law. In here, the deficiencies in his understanding
of the functions of theories and laws affected his view of tentative NOS. Likewise,
his misconception that there is a scientific method universally accepted led his
understanding to be naïve in terms of subjective and socio-cultural NOS. On the
other hand, Kemal’s understanding that scientific claims are based on empirical
evidences helped his view of inferential NOS become substantial. Kemal’s
understanding was more informed on the aspects of creative and inferential NOS.
To conclude, Kemal did not have sophisticated views of NOS because he was not
deeply informed in all of the NOS tenets. Moreover, it observed that he did not
translate any aspects of NOS into his classroom practice of biogeochemical cycles.
Next section documented Kemal’s SD understanding regarding biogeochemical
cycles.
4.1.1.3. Kemal’s Understanding of Sustainable Development Regarding

Biogeochemical Cycles
In order to reveal Kemal’s understanding of sustainable development (SD)
regarding biogeochemical cycles, he was asked to state what the causes,
consequences and solutions to the disruptions on the cycles. Besides, his teaching of
biogeochemical cycles was observed. Therefore, both his practice and responses
unveiled how Kemal linked the biogeochemical cycles to the aspects of sustainable
development.
Kemal began with the explanation that anthropogenic activities are main causes of
many problems related to the biogeochemical cycles. He generally touched upon the
unconscious use of natural resources (water, energy, food, soil, etc.) by human
beings. Therefore, he attributed the environmental problems to human activities
referring the environmental aspect of SD. He especially had the idea that human
activities should sustain the balance of nature.
Kemal (K): The factors that cause the deterioration of the cycles are people
[behavior]… We [people] have polluted the seas, cut the trees, and released too
much greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. We are seriously abusing the balance
of the nature. We devastated the earth…
108
4.1.1.3.1. Kemal’s Knowledge on the Connections between Carbon Cycle
and Sustainable Development
In respect of the degradation in carbon cycle, Kemal stated that the environmental
problems such as the extensive use of fossil fuels and deforestation caused to the
increase in emissions of CO2 and other greenhouses gases to the atmosphere. He
specially emphasized the atmospheric pollution because of the activities arising
from energy need. In here, Kemal had the idea that population growth caused the
unbalanced use of natural resources and consequently, the scarcity of energy
resources. As a solution, he suggested the use of renewable energy sources by
emphasizing the consequences of the consumption of the non-renewable ones for
future generations. In other words, Kemal stressed that the development should be
compatible with the balance of nature and the future of generations. Therefore, it
can be said that Kemal linked the aspect of energy to the SD aspects of society and
environment by implying that the problem of scarcity of energy caused to the
damage the natural resources which affects the future generations.
K: …It is said that there are 7 billion people in the world. If we calculate the daily
carbon dioxide gas releasing from the factories, cars, houses where those people’s
activities were carried out, we can realize that there was excessive atmosphere
pollution. We have released too much carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. We
know the only living thing that assimilates the carbon dioxide from the air is the
plants. So, if the air is so much polluted and forests are destroyed, how much the
plants can photosynthesize? How will the carbon-oxygen cycle continue?
…For example, we have still suffered from the consequences of the Chernobyl in
Black Sea region. I accept that we need energy but I think that the use of non-
renewable energy sources such as fossil fuel and nuclear is too dangerous for our
future…
Furthermore, it can be seen that Kemal tried to imply the unsustainable modes of
production through the industrialization and urbanization. He emphasized that a
society could develop its prosperity by the help of the industrialization. He had the
idea that production-based development improves the living standards of the
society. However, he mentioned that the unplanned industrialization destroy the
vegetation from land for construction of roads, bridges, and factories. He, therefore,
109
implied that unplanned development policies could cause to be damaged the
environment. In here, it can be obviously seen that Kemal referred four aspects of
SD, namely; economy, politics, society and environment by emphasizing the
production-based society, development policies, society’s prosperity and damaging
the nature.
K: If we want to create a society with a high level of prosperity, we need to make

production. I mean we need to industrialize. Industrialization means the
construction of new factories, new roads, new houses and new cars etc. To build
these structures, however, millions of trees are destroyed. For example, 17
million trees were cut [in Istanbul] for construction of second bridge in
Bosphorus. [In fact] Not only the trees, but also the entire ecosystem was
damaged. While creating a wealthy society, we are destroying nature.
Industrialization means construction of more factories with chimneys, so it
means more carbon is released to the atmosphere. So what I mean is that
industrialization pollutes the world… The desires of the human beings and
madness of production and consumption, which came with industrialization,
polluted the world.
Kemal also emphasized the SD aspect of politics in preserving the balance of the
nature. He especially mentioned that all countries including both developed and
developing countries must have the policies to control the CO2 emissions for the
equilibrium of the nature. In here, Kemal also touched upon the social responsibility
for development of the society. He believed that both governments and humans
should know their own responsibilities to protect the future generations. Kemal also
attributed society’s level of of prosperity to the developments in education by
means of educated and awared generations. Moreover, he touched upon that green
technologies needs to be developed in order to decrease CO2 emissions. He
suggested that renewable energy sources should be used. However, he complained
that these [renewable] energy sources were not preferred due to the high cost of
system setup. Thus, he implied that the permanent solutions for the environmental
problems should be found by the help of the develpoment in every area including
society, economy, energy, politics, technology and education. Therefore, he stressed
the all aspects of SD by underlying the geopolitical and social issues.
110
K: …We all know that we need to conserve the balance of the nature. It is
important to note that the countries which pollute the world mostly are G7
countries. They [G7 countries] have an organization once a year and talk about
what to do, which is not enough to save the earth. It is necessary to take action to
save the earth. When the balance of the world is overturned, all of the people not
only in G7’s will all suffer the consequences of this deterioration. The people in
all societies are on the same ship…If we raise environmentally conscious
generations, we see that societies with a high level of prosperity are formed. All
countries should reduce their carbon emissions. Both underdeveloped and
developing countries such as Turkey are using the technologies produced by the
G7's. Then, the produced technologies need to be greener. Technologies which
filter or reduce the carbon emission need to be produced and consumed. Most
importantly, renewable energies must be used. Since it is costly to establish and
expand facilities, these energy sources are not preferred, unfortunately…
Kemal, again, stressed the aspect of environment implying that sustainaning the
natural balance is important. He pointed out the global warming and climate
change as the main results of the disruption of the carbon cycle arising from the
antropogenic activities. He, therefore, touched upon that human activities should
sustain the balance of nature.
K:…If we do not value the protection of nature and the environment, the
economic strength will have no meaning. Today, we pay the biggest bill of
environmental damage caused by global warming and climate change… We
know that greenhouse gases such as water vapor, CO2 and methane warm up the
atmosphere naturally holding the heat reflected from earth and but we have
released too much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.
The atmosphere is covered by CO2 because of the excessive burning of fossil fuels
in cars, home, factories…This event causes earth to get warmer seriously. At the
end of this warming, climate changes… Drought will begin to occur and our
world will be desert…At the same time, because of excessive rains, the excessive
floods will occur. Finally, due to the extreme decrease in temperature, the earth
will glaciate. These are [all] the consequences of the climate change…
Briefly, when Kemal’s responses related to the causes, results and solutions to the
degradation of the carbon cycle were examined, it can be seen that he touched upon
the important phenomena such as greenhouse effect, global warming, climate
change and atmospheric pollution. Additionally, he connected these phenomena
with the main issues of sustainable development except the poverty. During his
explanations of the connections between the carbon cycle and SD, Kemal also
111
addressed all seven aspects of sustainable development including environment,
society, economy, politics, energy, technology and education.
4.1.1.3.2. Kemal’s Knowledge on the Connections between Hydrological Cycle

Kemal generally showed the understanding that the degradations in carbon cycle
affects the hydrological cycle. As can be seen, during he was mentioning the climate
change as a result of the disruption of carbon cycle; he touched upon the
phenomena of desertification and glaciation as the phenomena which affect the
hydrological cycle directly. However, he did not address how these phenomena
affected the hydrological cycle. Likewise, although he addressed the droughts and
floods as a result of climate change, he could not connect these issues to the
degradation of the water cycle.
Kemal also addressed the large amounts of agricultural irrigation as unconscious
use of underground waters. In here, he referred the unbalanced use of water
resources as the causes of the water scarcity and the depletion of the fertility of the
lands used for agriculture. In other words, he again stressed the damage of the
natural resources affects the future generations. Therefore, Kemal, ih here, had the
idea that balanced use of natural resources is important for development of the
generations of the society.
K: As I said, we have polluted the world. I think our children will suffer the
consequences of this water pollution. After the 40-50 years, they will not be able
to find potable fresh water. We witness to the excessive withdrawing of ground
waters where there have been a lot of agricultural activities. In those places, the
formation of the pothole increased. For example, there has been a problem of
land subsidence in Konya Plain [a plain takes place in the Central Anatolian
Region of Turkey] because of extensive irrigation in recent years.
To summarize, when Kemal’s responses related to the causes and results of the
degradation of the hydrological cycle were examined, it can be seen that he touched
upon the SD issues such as floods and droughts, water scarcity and agricultural
activities. Moreover, he addressed the water pollution, desertification and glaciation
as the phenomena that influence the hydrological cycle. However, he could not
112
explain the connections between these phenomena and related SD issues. Again, he
did not touch upon the phenomena such as soil salinization through salt water
intrusion and the pollution of water resources through atmospheric pollution.
Moreover, he did not address the trans-border conflicts of water, the diseases
arising from water pollution or the non-conventional water resources as sustainable
issues related to the hydrological cycle. Terefore, regarding hydrological cycle,
Kemal’s understanding of SD only focused on the aspects of environment and
society emphasizing that balanced use of natural resources is important for
development of the generations of the society.
4.1.1.3.3. Kemal’s Knowledge on the Connections between Nitrogen Cycle

When Kemal’s responses were examined in terms of the degradation of nitrogen
cycle, it can be seen that he addressed that household, industrial and agricultural
wastes caused to water pollution. He also emphasized the reduction in variation
due to the water pollution. In other words, he implied the interdependency of the
cycles. Therefore, he attributed the environmental problems to human activities
referring the environmental aspect of SD. He especially had the idea that human
activities damaged the sustainable balance of nature.
K: Now let's say we have a lake or a sea or a river. Now this lake is 200 meter in
depth. Within these depths, plants, algae, and/or planktons live. But if there is a
very intense pollution in the lake due to the household wastes, agricultural
activities, industrial wastes from factories, paint wastes from leather and textile
industry, the water becomes blurred with time which blocks sunlight. So,
photosynthesizing organisms living in this contaminated lake cannot produce
oxygen. Due to the lack of oxygen both in the water and atmosphere, this is
resulted with a decrease in the number of biodiversity which in turns cause the
extinction of the species over time.
Moreover, he did not emphasize the eutrophication due to the excessive nitrates in
the soil or water resources. In the same way, he did not address that the greenhouse
gases includes nitrogen. Thus, he did not relate the excessive nitrogen in the
atmosphere to the acid precipitation. On the other hand, it was observed that Kemal
113
mentioned the acid rains in her teaching of biogeochemical cycles. During his
teaching of carbon cycle, he only mentioned that the structure of acid rains includes
contains carbon element. However, he did not relate this phenomenon to the
nitrogen cycle. To sum up, it can be seen that Kemal only addressed the acid
precipitation as a phenomenon and water pollution as an issue of sustainable
development in nitrogen cycle. In that case, Kemal’s understanding of SD only
focused on the aspects of environment emphasizing that human activities should
sustain the balance of nature.
Finally, while mentioning the solutions, Kemal especially focused on the SD aspect
of education. He emphasized that developments in education could create more
sustainable world for the future generations with the help of educated and awared
people. Thus, he stressed the society aspects by underlying the future generations.
K:…Sustainable life, sustainable environment, sustainable energy, sustainable

nature, sustainable economy. The basis of all these issues lies in education. In
such issues, if we do not educate our society, we will disappear. We will struggle
with ilnesses, the problmes such as the loss of land, the scarcity of water or
energy. But if we are educated in terms of sustainability, I believe that we can
cope with all of these problems and make our world a more peaceful, greener,
safer home. I mean that education leads to awareness of people and finally
people in the society can share the responsibility for the future…
To conclude, When Kemal’s explanation related to the results, causes and solutions
to the depletion in biogeochemical cycles examined, it can be seen that he mostly
underlined the issues and aspects of SD in the carbon cycle. Therefore, it can be said
that he failed to connect both nitrogen and hydrological cycles to the related
sustainable development aspects although he mentioned some SD issues related to
these cycles. Additionally, although Kemal mainly approached to biogeochemical
cycles from the environmental aspect, he adressed all aspects of SD in related parts
of his explanations. To sum up, Kemal’s conceptions of SD regarding
biogeochemical cycles can be seen in Figure 4.4.
114
115
Figure 4.4. Kemal’s Conceptions of Sustainable Development
4.1.2. Kemal’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge
4.1.2.1. Kemal’s Orientation to Science Teaching
In this section, Kemal’s beliefs about goals of science teaching at grade 8th were
presented based on the analyses of his responses to both the card-sorting scenarios
and the interview questions related to the goals of science teaching.
Kemal cited that his beliefs about central purposes for science teaching were
generally affected by the national science curriculum and TEOG exam (currently
known as LGS). He expressed that his basic goal of science teaching was to transmit
the curriculum objectives. Furthermore, he focused on the goal of preparing
students to courses taught at high school which are chemistry, physics, and biology.
He emphasized that specifically in 8th grade level; the goal of science teaching was to
prepare learners to high school exam because of the existence of TEOG (See Table
4.11 for sample quotas).
Table 4.11. Kemal’s Sample Statements related to Beliefs about Central Goals for
Science Teaching
Central Goals Sample Statements

To transmit the knowledge As a science teacher I have no special goal. I
required by curriculum present the topics as a curriculum objective at
the 8th grade. That is, we present the
scientific concepts as curriculum
knowledge…
To prepare learners to high …Science teaching, in my view, is an
school courses education given students to prepare them for
high school years…That is to say, science
education is branched to physics, chemistry,
and biology in high school. So science
education in middle school basically should
given students to prepare them to these
courses…
To prepare learners to high …My main goal at the 8th grade is to prepare
school exam students to high school exam. One of the
visions of our school is to be successful in
high school entrance exam, too. We try to
prepare students for a qualified Anatolian or
science high school.
116
When it comes to his peripheral goals for science teaching, Kemal pointed out that
one of his goals for science teaching is to connect science and daily life. Moreover,
he stated that he tried to help students fulfill their needs in daily life. His responses
included that science teaching is necessary to comprehend technological knowledge
and development (See Table 4.12 for sample quotas).
Table 4.12. Kemal’s Sample Statements related to Beliefs about Peripheral Goals for
Science Teaching
Peripheral Goals Sample Statements

To prepare learners to life …In a simple sense, preparing children
for life is a part of science education…
To help learners to satisfy their needs …Science education is a process in which
in daily life students are given basic knowledge
related to their lives or to survive in a
rapidly changing world. They need to
have this knowledge in order to meet the
needs of their daily life (i.e., the need for
shelter, nutrition, the energy…)
To help learners to connect science and Technology is inevitable need in today’s
technology world. Science teaching is necessary to
comprehend the technology. This
[science] education helps students learn
how to use technology as well.
Kemal’s beliefs about the central and peripheral goals of science teaching
completely overlapped with the orientations that he chose as parallel to his science
teaching. These orientations were based on the scenarios in the card-sorting activity.
Kemal stated that the scenarios numbered 1, 4, 5 and 13 corresponded to his
teaching. These scenarios were didactic, conceptual change, academic rigor and the
reality of Turkish Educational System respectively (Table 4.13 for sample quotas).
Although he chose the conceptual change as his orientation to science teaching at 8 th
grade, it could be obviously seen that his explanation was not appropriate the
definition of conceptual change.
117
First of all, he pointed out that he generally preferred didactic teaching to transmit
necessary knowledge to the students in a shorter time in 8th grades.
Kemal (K):…In my science courses, I usually give a general definition of

biogeochemical cycles, I try to reinforce this definition with some examples in
our daily lives, and transfer the knowledge of biogeochemical cycles to the
students. The aim of the students’ learning is to answer the questions asked in
written exams.
According to Kemal, teachers had to teach the particular body of the curriculum in
certain times because of TEOG. Hence he mentioned that the main goal was to
prepare students to high school and the entrance exam so he preffered solving
different questions related to topics during his courses. Futhermore, he expressed
that teachers had both legal obligation and responsibility for obeying the curriculum
and they were not free to carry out different activities.
K:…TEOG is a national common examination that 8th grade students in all over
the country enter in the same day. It means that if you do not complete to
teaching of required topics until certain dates in the first and second semester,
you are responsible for any problems arising from the incomplete topics. We
[teachers] have a legal obligation and administrative responsibility…We sign on
this issue that we will complete the topics... My problem is that we are not free.
We are given a curriculum, given a time schedule, and I have to be in accordance
with the curriculum.
When he was asked why he selected those scenarios, he stated that because the
scenarios shared a common characteristic, which is being teacher-centered. He
expressed that there was a limited time to complete the topics because of the
national examination (i.e., TEOG) so those scenarios were appropriate for his
science teaching in 8th grades.
118
119
Kemal pointed out that he could not utilize the remaining scenarios, including
activity driven, discovery, guided inquiry, project based, inquiry, process, liberation
and curriculum goals due to their student-centered nature. He explained that such
scenarios required time and not suitable for crowded classrooms. He also
mentioned the teachers’ and students’ anxiety regarding national exam, the
overloaded curriculum, and the context of the school were most important factors to
be done these activities. Kemal’s sample quotas related to these scenarios can be
seen in Table 4.14.
Although he varied his teaching with daily-life examples and questions to facilitate
students’ understanding of the basic concepts, observation data (the teaching of the
biogeochemical cycles) revealed that lecturing and questioning were dominated his
teaching as well. He did not use any subject-specific strategies (orientations) apart
from the direct instruction. His teaching was generally structured, sequenced and
led by himself which was line with his orientation.
120
121
122
123
4.1.2.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Curriculum
4.1.2.2.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Goals and Objectives
In the Science and Technology curriculum utilized during the study, there was only
one objective specific to the topic of biogeochemical cycles, which is students are able to
explain biogeochemical cycles parallel to the energy flow in the food chain (MoNE, 2005, p.354).
The acquisition of this objective is closely related to the understanding of the
previous topic which is energy flow in the food chain. Hence, the objectives of
previous topic should be considered as a reminder to teach the topic of
biogeochemical cycles. While Kemal was teaching the cycles, it was generally
observed that he both helped students to recall the previous knowledge and
checked whether the students gained the objectives related to photosynthesis,
respiration, relationship between producers and consumers, and nutrition and
energy flow in the food chain.
When Kemal asked the aim of teaching biogeochemical cycles in CoRe interview, he
pointed out that the main aim of teaching this topic was the acquisition of the
objectives in the curriculum.
Researcher (R): What is your aim of teaching the topic of biogeochemical cycles?
Kemal (K): As a science teacher I have no special goal. That is, we [teachers]
present these topics as curriculum knowledge at 8th grade. While teaching
biogeochemical cycles, I try to teach the importance of the cycles and the actions
to be taken due to the continuation of the cycles. In other words, we answer the
questions such as why carbon cycle, water cycle, nitrogen cycle are so important
and what happens if they are disrupted… [CoRe Interview].
Besides, he emphasized that it was not enough to give students only the curriculum
objectives to comprehend this topic. He therefore stated that because this topic is a
matter of vital importance in human’s daily life, he expected his students to gain
affective domain objectives, indicated in Table 4.15, apart from the one in the
curriculum.
K: When the people interfere in the biogeochemical cycles, many problems come
to light...If the industrialization and technology cause so much pollution in the
124
world; the problems arising from the disruption of the cycles will continue to
happen increasingly. The earth is warming day to day; the earth’s climate is
changing. The forests are destroyed and the variation is decreasing. These
problems affect human's life, affecting whole living things’ lives. Then we need
to solve these problems. So, I aim that students should be aware of the
consequences of deterioration of the cycles and at least I try to make them more
sensitive to environmental problems as an individual…[CoRe Interview]
Table 4.15. Kemal’s Intended Objectives Related to Topic of Biogeochemical Cycles
Intended Objectives
To describe the effects of human on the biogeochemical cycles
To comprehend the consequences of deterioration of the biogeochemical cycles
To recognize what needs to be done for the continuation of the biogeochemical
cycles
To raise awareness for environmental problems as an individual
In line with Kemal’s CoRE interview, observation data (the teaching of cycles)
pointed out that he tried to attract his students’ attention to the human effects on the
biogeochemical cycles. For example, he exemplified the environmental problems
that occur as the consequences of human activities during his teaching of carbon
cycle. Especially he associated the problems related to carbon and oxygen cycles to
the deforestation (i.e., forest fires and the cutting down the trees).
K: …When people are interfering too much in nature, the balance of nature is
destroyed. How people interfere in nature? For example, millions of hectares of
the forests are disappearing because of cutting down the trees or forest fires.
There are people who cut the trees intentionally and set up new buildings. For
whatever the reason is, cutting trees is equivalent to killing people for me. Each
tree both feeds us and produces oxygen. So, trees and plants are very important
to maintain the cycles of carbon and oxygen...We are the consumers so if we
want to contribute to the continuation of the cycles, we can plant a lot of trees
and pay attention to our consumption habits…[Classroom Observation].
Moreover, Kemal was aware of both the horizontal and vertical relations to the topic
of biogeochemical cycles in the science and technology curriculum. Regarding the
horizontal relations, he emphasized that the previous topics of energy flow in food
chain, photosynthesis and respiration are very closely related to the topic of the
biogeochemical cycles. He pointed out that the learners’ comprehension of these
previous topics has vital importance in their understanding of the biogeochemical

125
cycles. As Kemal expressed, it was observed that he often recalled the previous
topics during his teaching of biogeochemical cycles.
K:... In the previous topic, you learned that living things were transferring the
energy to each other. First of all, we mentioned an ecosystem, did not we? We
said that there are living things in the ecosystem and they continue their lives by
transferring their energy to each other in this ecosystem. We started to energy
flow with photosynthesis. We told the green plants have vital importance for the
continuation of life by the help of the photosynthesis. They were at the bottom of
the food chain....Which organisms consume the plants?
Student (Std): Consumers.
K: Yes, that is herbivors. Herbivors eats the plants and they receive the energy.
Then the carnivores eat the herbivors and the energy transfers to the carnivores.
While the energy flows among the organisms in this way, living things consume
something during their lifetime? What do they consume? For example, plants
consume carbon dioxide, animals consume oxygen…If so these inorganic matters
should be cycled within the ecosystem due to continuation of the life Therefore,
in this topic, we will mention about the biogeochemical cycles… [Classroom
Observation].
When the vertical relations were taken in consideration, Kemal emphasized that the
biogeochemical cycles are closely related to the topics of the basic building blocks of
living things, the properties of elements and compounds, and the chemical bonds
included in the learning area of matter and change in the science and technology
curriculum at the grades of 6 and 7. In his teaching of biogeochemical cycles, it was
observed that he often touched briefly on the required topics related to the each
cycle. For example, at the beginning of his teaching of biogeochemical cycles, he
leaded in the topic reminding to his students the importance of the building blocks
of living things and the elements in these structures. Moreover, he evoked his
students the difference between evoparation and boiling during his teaching of
hydrological cycles.
K:…You know that living things made up of the molecules of carbohydrates,

proteins, fats, vitamins. When we examine the structure of these molecules, we
see that they include some elements having vital importance. You had learned
these molecules in the 6th grade, and even in the 7th grade. We said that there
are carbon, hydrogen and oxygen elements in the structure of the organisms.
Also there is nitrogen, phosphorus. They are very important for all living things.
So, if these basic elements were not replaced when they were used up, we would
126
say that after a certain time, life would end. If living things can not use oxygen,
they will not be able to breathe. If the carbon did not return to the nature, plants
would not photosynthesize…Nitrogen is the basic building block of proteins. Its
absence spells out the loss of living things. [CoRe Interview].
When asked the presentation sequence of the cycles in the curriculum, Kemal was
aware of the place of the topic and the sequence of the sub-topics. However, he
pointed out that he presented the cycles respectively carbon and oxygen cycle,
hydrologic cycle and nitrogen cycle. He attributed the reason of the modification of
the sequence of the sub-topics to the familiarity to pre-requisite topic and the
importance of the problems related to the disruption of the carbon cycle. In other
words, he modified the curriculum due to both his students’ understanding and his
beliefs about the teaching the cycles.
R: How is the sequence of the cycles presented in the curriculum?

K: In the curriculum, the matter cycles topic starts when the topic of energy flow
in the food chain ends. First, the water cycle is presented, then carbon cycle and
lastly, nitrogen cycle is presented. However, I do not pay attention to the
sequence of the cycles…
R: Well, in your opinion, why is the sequence of the cycles presented in the
curriculum like this?
K: I do not know why the sequence of cycles is like this in the textbook. The
authors of the textbooks know the reason of this presentation sequence but I do
not know ...I can only explain why I teach the cycles of carbon and oxygen first.
The biggest problems of the world faced with are the ones arising from the
disruption of oxygen and carbon cycles. There are too many industrilization, too
much air pollution. The ratio of carbon is becoming higher day to day in the
atmosphere and we can see that how the climate changes. So I begin with these
cycles to the teaching of the topic of biogeochemical cycles. And I also said that
the previous topics of photosynthesis and respiration are very familiar with these
two cycles... It is easier to teach in this sequence for me…[CoRe Interview].
4.1.2.2.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Materials
In terms of resources used, Kemal explained that he has used the textbook and his
own lecture notes to teach the biogeochemical cycles. He stated that he did not use
textbook or student exercise book in the classroom actively. He underlined that he
only used the textbook to follow the curriculum and that his main source was his
own notebook that prepared from the internet sites (Table 4.16).
127
K: There was a problem with the cycles when I tried to teach depending on the
textbook in the previous years. For me, it (textbook) was not enough. I prepared
my own notes by the searching of the internet. I constructed a notebook which
includes all of the topics in the curriculum in detail. I usually teach in line of
these notes. Besides, before I teach, I update my knowledge about the topic from
the internet. That is all. [CoRe Interview].
Table 4.16. Kemal’s Aim of Using Teaching Sources
Sources that teacher use Aim of using in teaching

Textbook To follow the curriculum
Internet To update the information about the
topic
Personal Notebook To teach the topics by the help of the
information in notebook & To aid
students take notes of related topic.
During the classroom practice, it was observed that Kemal usually used his
notebook to benefit from the information related to the biogeochemical cycles. He
took it as reference during both the teaching of the concepts and the drawing of the
figure of each cycle. On the other hand, he did not use the textbook and student
exercise book as he stated.
4.1.2.3. Kemal’s Knowledge of Instructional Strategies
In this section, the knowledge of instructional strategies of participant teachers was
reported in two categories namely, knowledge of subject specific strategies and
knowledge of topic specific strategies.
4.1.2.3.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Subject Specific Strategies
The strategies handled in this category represent the general approaches to enacting
science instruction. Teachers’ knowledge of subject-specific strategies is related to
the ‘‘orientations to teaching science’’ component of PCK (Magnusson, Krajcik &
Borko, 1999).
Kemal stated that he mostly used direct instruction and questioning method. He
pointed out that he let his students to answer questions and share their ideas about
128
the topic and explained the topic the help of drawings and daily life examples
through the lecture.
Researcher (R): How do you teach the topic of biogeochemical cycles? Which
instructional strategies do you use in general?
Kemal (K): I draw the relevant figure and picture of the cycle all over the
blackboard. I try to draw every thing I say... I finish the topic when I
completed the drawing... I try not to teach in a boring way. I expect them
[students] to be active in the lessons by using questioning method. [CoRe
Interview].
Kemal attributed the main reason of the preffering questioning method to the
crowded classrooms. He stated that each student has different characteristic and
therefore, he could not use different methods according to their different learning
styles. Furthermore, Kemal complained the students’ high level readiness
because of the national examination prevented employing of different methods.
R: Why do you prefer to use this teaching method?

K: The classrooms are very crowded. There are at least 40 students in each
class and every student’s perception and characteristic is different. I can not
teach according to the learning style of each student. Besides, the students
have already known the topic because they are taking extra lessons after
school. They are studying for the TEOG exam... They have no difficulty in
understanding of these topics…[CoRe Interview].
Kemal pointed out that the time devoted to teach the biogeochemical cycles in the
curriculum was adequate. Accordingly, he addressed that he spent less time for
teaching the topic than suggested by the curriculum. According to him, it is
necessary to employ this method in order to teach the topic in a short period of time.
When Kemal’s teaching of biogeochemical cycles was examined, it could be seen
that the main characteristic of his teaching was its teacher-centeredness. He
generally used questioning and direct instruction to transmit the content knowledge
to learners. His teaching was generally based on lecturing. He did not use any
student-centered strategies like 5E Learning Cycle, Conceptual Change Approach
and Guided Inquiry etc.
129
4.1.2.3.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Topic Specific Strategies
Knowledge of topic-specific strategies of participant teacher was presented with two
sections as; knowledge of representations and knowledge of activities.
4.1.2.3.2.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Representations
Results showed that Kemal used the representations like drawings and examples in
order to aid students in developing the understanding of the topic of
biogeochemical cycles. Especially, he actively used the blackboard to draw the
figures to represent the concepts of carbon (Figure 4.5), hydrological (Figure 4.6),
and nitrogen cycle (Figure 4.7). For each cycle, he drew the whole cycle
systematically, explaining the concepts throughout the lecture. Sometimes, he
invited students to the board and asked them to draw some parts of the cycle.
Figure 4.5. Kemal’s Drawing Used to Teach the Carbon Cycle
130
Figure 4.6. Kemal’s Drawing Used to Teach the Hydrological Cycle
Figure 4.7. Kemal’s Drawing Used to Teach the Nitrogen Cycle
131
Moreover, he gave various daily life examples to support the comprehension of
students. At the beginning of the topic of biogeochemical cycles, to attract students’
attention to the balanced amounts of matters in nature, he exemplified the
consumption of the foods found in the refrigerator from daily life.
K: You go home, you open the refrigerator, and you slice some cheese, and eat
it. The next day you go home again, you open the refrigerator again, take
some cheese and you eat. You do same things on the 3rd day, and when you
go home on the 4th day, will you find cheese in the refrigerator?
Std: I do not. No.
K: Do not? Why?
Std: Because I eat it all.
K: You eat and finished it. What will you eat next time? You will eat olives.
After a certain period of time, the olives will finish. So what? If we do not
replace the things we have consumed, we will not be able to use them again.
The same thing is valid for biogeochemical cycles. The cycle continues as long
as the matters are in their reservoirs…[Classroom Observation].
Especially in his teaching of hydrologic cycle, Kemal gave many examples to
emphasize the importance of water for living things. He first mentioned the
examples of Aral Lake and the civilizations on waterfronts in order to attract
students’ attention to the conservation of the natural resources. Then, he tried to
explain how important the water is by the example of a deer’s thirst.
K:… I watched it in a documentary. One scientist says that a lake whose size is
five times bigger than Marmara Sea disappeared. A lake called Aral. It is
disappearing and its waters are drawn. Such a lake disappears, but nobody cares.
But if there was a drop of water from space, it was announced as extraordinary
news. These statements cause me to be sorry because we can not preserve our
sources. When you examine all civilizations, they were on waterfronts. What was
the first civilization established in the Euphrates and Dicle basins? Is Sumerian
civilization? Or Anka, Asian civilizations, you will see that they are established
on the edge of a water source. The most important part of our life is being sucked
into the water. One of our indispensable resources is water. It is essential for all
living things…
…
K:… A deer thirsts; a crocodile awaits it in the swamp. The deer knows it, but
goes there to drink water. Would you go there?
Std: Yes, I would.
K: You did. Why?
132
Std: In any case I will die. I would try to drink water. Other wise I will die due to
the thurst. For me, being the food of crocodile is better than the thurst.
K: Okay, as you say, the deers go and drink water from there. So drinking water
is very important to us...You have known that the cells of organisms can live only
watery environment. So water is very important for plants, for animals, for all
living things… [Classroom Observation].
4.1.2.3.2.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Activities
Kemal did not include any activities regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles in
his lessons. He used the representations rather than activities. He stated that he
could only give examples and draw figures because of his students’ high level
readiness. He pointed out that since his students have already known the topic, the
topic did not attract them anymore. In a result, Kemal expressed that he did not
conduct any activities found in the textbook and student exercise book.
4.1.2.4. Kemal’s Knowledge of Students’ Understanding of Science
This component of PCK focuses on the teachers’ knowledge in order to help
students develop specific scientific knowledge. There are two subcomponents:
requirements for learning and areas of difficulties. In this section, Kemal’s
knowledge of learners’ understanding regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles
was presented.
4.1.2.4.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Requirements for Learning
Kemal was aware of the pre-requisite knowledge needed by students to learn the
topic of biogeochemical cycles. He first emphasized that students need to know the
structure of the carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen elements, the compounds
they formed, and the organic structure of living things.
Researcher (R): What prerequisite knowledge do students have to learn the topic
of biogeochemical cycles?
Kemal (K): First of all, it is necessary to for students to know carbon, hydrogen,
oxygen, nitrogen elements. As well as their place on the periodic table, and
whether metal or not. Students also should describe the properties of these
elements. They should describe the chemical structure of the compounds formed.
The important thing is to perceive the importance of these elements in our daily
133
life... Secondly, they need to know the organic molecules that living things
consist of. They will learn what happens to these organic structures after living
things die. So they will infer that organisms which are producers, consumers and
decomposers are very important components of biogeochemical cycles…[CoRe
Interview].
Then, he underlined the understanding of the topics of the photosynthesis and
respiration; and food chain in the ecosystems as third requirement of the topic.
K:...The processess of photosynthesis and respiration are very important factors

especially in the carbon and oxygen cycles. In the photosynthesis, the amount of
light, the amount of water and the carbon dioxide is very important elements. In
the respiration again, the food produced by plants and the amount of oxygen.
And the interactions among the organisms in the food webs are important as
well. These components are closely related to the biogeochemical cycles because
they are the components and processes which take place in the cycles directly.
Therefore it is required that the students should comprehend these topics
meaningfully [CoRe Interview].
In his teaching, Kemal generally used the pre-requisite knowledge to aid his
students’ learning of the new topic of biogeochemical cycles easily. For instance,
while teaching the topic of carbon cycle; he recalled the topic of energy flow in the
food chain to introduce the relations between organic and inorganic structures in
the cycle.
K: Who consume carbon dioxide in the air?

Std: Plants.
A: Plants use the carbondioxide in the air. So, the organisms that can produce
their own food use this carbondioxide. What do they produce by using the
carbon dioxide?
Std: Food.
K: They produce organic food, do not they? Well, do the plants live forever?
Std: No.
K: They die, do not they? How the plants die?
Std: They get dry.
Std: They turn pale.
K: So, does this plant die when an animal eat it?
Std: No, it does not.
K: Well, what happens in that case?
Std: Gives its energy.
134
K: Yes, it gives the energy to another organism. So, the plant does not die; it
becomes the food and turns into energy for other organisms [Classroom
Observation].
On the other hand, Kemal considered his students’ neither skills, abilities nor
learning styles. He, generally, touched upon his students’ requirements for their
conceptual understanding.
4.1.2.4.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Areas of Students’ Difficulties
Kemal stated that his students did not have any difficulty or any misconception in
the topic of biogeochemical cycles. Kemal pointed out that students have concerned
about the exam results, not the comprehension of the topic. He complained that his
students have neglected the topic of biogeochemical cycles because of the limited
number of the questions asked in the TEOG exam. Moreover, he stated that in
environmental topics, students could not transform their knowledge to the daily
life. He complained that the learners cannot develop an attitude in accordance with
their environmental awareness.
R: Do students have learning difficulties that will affect your teaching about
biogeochemical cycles? This may be misconception or partial understanding. At
what points are students have difficulties?
K: …I do not have any inclusive student in my classes. I have taught in two 8th
grades, both are successful. There are no excuses to understand this topic.
R: Do not their prior knowledge have any misconception?
K: Absolutely not. As I said before, their prior knowledge is very good... I have
known these students since 5th grade. So, I have known whether the students
comprehend the topics or not. Thus I can say that they do not have any
difficulties in preliminary knowledge or comprehension of the required topics.
However, ecpecially in such topics related to environmental issues, students can
not transform their knowledge to their daily life. We can not evaluate whether
students gain environmental awareness [CoRe Interview].
4.1.2.5. Kemal’s Knowledge of Assessment
This category of PCK includes two subcomponents namely; knowledge of
dimensions of science learning to assess and knowledge of methods of assessment.
Kemal’s knowledge of assessment was presented in this section.
135
4.1.2.5.1. Kemal’s Knowledge of Dimensions of Science Learning to Assess
Kemal’s knowledge of assessment on students’ learning was examined in the
dimensions of conceptual understanding, interdisciplinary themes, NOS
understanding, science-process skills and/or problem solving skills. Kemal stated
that during the lessons, he could only assess the content knowledge that students
were supposed to learn in the curriculum.
Researcher (R): Is there any assessment methods do you use in order to evaluate
students’ learning during the lessons?
Kemal: Due to the national exam, we have a limited time, so we transmit the
knowledge of the current topic and pass to new one. We can only assess what
and how much students learn according to their grades on the written exams. I
can also use the questioning in order to either evaluate their conceptual
understanding or recall the knowledge on the previous topic. [CoRe Interview].
Data gathered via observations also revealed that Kemal generally focused on the
assessment in order to evaluate his students’ conceptual understanding rather than
assessing other types of domains such as interdisciplinary themes, NOS
understanding, science-process skills and/or problem solving skills. It was also
observed that he endeavoured to elicit his students’ conceptual knowledge asking
several questions to monitor students’ learning on previous topic. For example, he
used the questioning method to reveal students’ prior conceptual knowledge
related to photosynthesis and respiration before his teaching on carbon cycle.
K: ….In this topic, we will talk about the biogeochemical cycles. First of all, I
want to start with carbon cycle. Why is carbon important? Do you have any idea?
Std: It is important to produce food. Plants need carbon to produce food.
K: Carbon or a compound of carbon?
Std: The compound of carbon.
K: It needs carbon dioxide. Anything else?
Std: Carbon dioxide takes place in respiration. We gave CO2 to the air.
K: Yes.
Std: Fossil fuels contain carbon.
K: Yes, your friend has mentioned something important.
Std: Acid rains include carbon.
K: Yes, Anyting else?
Std: It takes place in foods and in the atmosphere.
K: Ok, then let’s mention about carbon cycle [Classroom Observation].
136
Some questions that Kemal used to assess his students’ learning after the teaching of
carbon and oxygen cycle were presented below in Table 4.17.
Table 4.17. Kemal Sample Questions to Assess Student Learning
Questions
How do the plants produce energy?
What are the fossil fuels?
Where are fossil fuels used?
4.1.2.5.2. Kemal’s Knowledge of Methods of Assessment
Kemal stated that he preferred to use only traditional assessment methods namely,
informal questioning and written exam. He emphasized that he used only written
exams which include multiple choice, true/false and open-ended questions to
evaluate his students’ conceptual understanding. He stated that the open-ended
questions were distinctive ones to understand how much students learn.
Furthermore he addressed the informal questioning to recall the prior knowledge of
students during the lessons. He did mention any alternative assessment methods
like concept map, structured grid, peer or self assessment.
R: Are there any specific methods that you generally use to assess students’
learning on the topic of biogeochemical cycles? How do you use these methods?
K: Only written exams. Besides, I ask the questions in order to understand
whether students learn previous topic before starting to new topic. That’s it.
R: Ok, then why do you assess in this way? What are the reasons?
K: The system of TEOG forces us to use such methods. We do not have time to
assess students’ progress during the lessons. We have to be interested in
students’ scores on the exams. When a question is asked in the written exam or
national exam, how many students can answer this question correctly is more
important for me. For example, I asked a question during the lesson and Fatma
answered very well. I said ‘‘Fatma, you well done, you learned very well’’ but
then she took 20 points (out of 100) in the written exam. This result is not good
for me. I mean that if the student has meaningful understanding of the topic,
he/she should receive high scores in the exams.
R: Which type of questions do you ask in the exams?
K: There are multiple choices. There are the questions that students fill in the
blanks. If we want, we ask two open-ended questions. The students get high
scores from other questions except the open-ended ones. These are are distinctive
in order to evaluate whether students meaningfully understand the topic [Core
Interview].
137
Kemal used the traditional assessment techniques during his teaching of the cycles,
too. He preferred generally the close ended questions to monitor his students’
learning. He did not use any other assessment technique apart from the questioning
to monitor learners’ understanding through the topic. As mentioned in his CoRe
interview, he did not provide any feedback for additional activities or review the
points that learners have difficulties as well. In this regard, Kemal’s formative
assessment was missing.
R: Do you assess your students’ learning during the course? Or do you use any
technique to evaluate what the students learn during the lesson?
K: No, I do not. I have no time to assess students’ learning during the course. If
the classroom size is 20 students, I can use different assessment techniques but in
the crowded classroom I generally use questioning to either recall the previous
topic or monitor the students’ learning. [CoRe Interview].
It was observed that Kemal only focused on the summative assessment at the end of
the unit. He held a common written exam including multiple choice items (ten
questions), true-false questions (five questions), and short answer (five questions).
In the exam, there was only one multiple choice question in order to assess students’
conceptual understanding on the carbon cycle. It was also observed that he could
not even use the assessment techniques in the textbook and student workbook to
assess his students’ understanding during and after the teaching the topic. In the
light of the explanations above, Kemal’s knowledge of assessment was summarized
in Table 4.18.
Kemal underlined that teachers had serious problems about the alternative
assessment techniques. He stated that Ministry of National Education expected
teachers to apply different methods, but they were not informed about these
techniques. He asserted that teachers do not know how to assess students’ learning.
K: …We have serious problems with the measurement and evaluation. The
Ministry of Education writes a lot of things about measurement and evaluation in
the curriculum and wants us to use these methods actively. We have no idea
about how they are used. The authorities can come and inform through the in-
service training. They should train us on how these methods applied in the
lessons…[CoRe Interview].
138
139
4.2. CASE 2: Hale’s Subject Matter Knowledge and Pedagogical Content
Hale was called for Case 2. Hale is female and forty-six years old. She was
graduated from biology department in Faculty of Arts and Science of a public
university in 1988. After graduation, she worked as a biology teacher for one year.
Hale had completed her PhD in the department of molecular biology between the
years of 2003-2009. She attained trainings on student-centered instructional
strategies and alternative assessment techniques. Moreover, she has communicated
with their colleagues to share teaching experiences via social media. She is an active
participator in TÜRÇEV (Turkish Foundation of Environmental Education)’s
activities and annual meetings. Hale has already been working in Eco-schools
project implemented by TÜRÇEV for seven years in her current middle school.
Currently, she has been teaching science for twenty-five years in public middle
schools as a science teacher. Hale has taught 7 and 8th grades during 2013-2014
education year and has twenty course hours as work load per week. There were
thirty-three students in her classroom. In this section, Hale’s results of subject matter
knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge were presented.
4.2.1. Hale’s Subject Matter Knowledge
4.2.1.1. Hale’s Substantive Knowledge
The results of Hale’s substantive knowledge regarding biogeochemical cycles are
are presented in three headings, respectively; carbon cycle, hydrologic cycle and
nitrogen cycle.
Hale initially was requested to answer the question what the biogeochemical cycle
is. She explained the cycle as ‘‘a process in which the amounts of the materials are
conserved without being completely consumed’’. Hale underlined the balance in the
amounts of the chemical materials stating ‘‘nature preserves and balances the
140
amounts of the materials such as water, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorus
which are necessary for vital activities of living things’’. She continued to her
explanation mentioning ‘‘plants, animals and other living organisms need to
consume these materials [water, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorus] and
then, the detritus of the organisms are decomposed into inorganic matters under the
soil by decomposers’’. She added that these inorganic matters are used by living
things through food web and returns to the atmosphere again. She detailed the
biotic components of the cycles as plants, animals, decomposers, and living
organisms in food web. Although she highlighted the soil as abiotic component of
the cycles, she did not touch upon the sun as the source of continual influx of energy
or driving force in the cycles. She also did not address the reservoirs of chemicals as
the abiotic components. In result, Hale’s understanding of the cycle was considered
as partial.
Researcher (R): How can you define biogeochemical cycle?

Hale (H): Cycle is a process in which the amounts of the materials are protected
without being completely consumed. Nature preserves and balances the amounts
of these chemical materials which are necessary for vital activities of living
things…The materials such as water, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorus
are used by plants, animals and other living organisms and then, decomposers
decompose the detritus and the dead bodies of the organisms to inorganic
matters under the soil. These inorganic matters are used by plants and other
living things through food web and returns to the atmosphere again…
4.2.1.1.1. Hale’s Knowledge about Carbon Cycle
To reveal Hale’s understanding of carbon cycle, she was requested to draw and
explain the carbon cycle. Hale’s understanding of carbon cycle was labeled as
partial based on the statements in both her drawing and teaching. In Table 4.19,
Hale’s understanding related to the carbon cycle is summarized.
When asked the question of why the carbon cycle is important, Hale initially
underlined the existence of carbon and oxygen in the structure of living things. She
highlighted the functions of carbon and oxygen in the formation of organic
141
compounds such as proteins, carbohydrates, and fats addressing the food
requirement of all living things, she emphasized the importance of CO2 for the
photosynthesizing organisms to produce food.

H: Carbon and also oxygen are the main materials of substances that form the
structure of the living body including cells. They [carbon and oxygen] are
important elements because they constitute the structure of nutrients such as
proteins, fats and carbohydrates. Furthermore, every living thing needs food to
produce energy for vital activities. We, consumers, do not produce our own food.
We can get the food through plants. Plants and other photosynthesizing
organisms need carbon dioxide to produce food. For this reason, CO2 has also
vital importance for both the plants and all other living things.
Table 4.19. Hale’s Understanding of the Carbon Cycle
Hale’s Understanding
Components within the cycle  Plants, algae-cyanobacteria (as Producers)
 The animals and humans (as Consumers)
 Bacteria under the soil (as Decomposers)
Organic compounds in the structure of all
living things, fossil fuels, atmospheric CO2
(as Carbon Reservoirs)
 Soil (as Abiotic Component)
 Water (as Abiotic Component)
Processes within the cycle  Burning of fossil fuels
 Photosynthesis of plants, algae,
cyanobacteria
 Respiration of plants, animals and people
 Transferring of carbon element from plants
to animals and people by food substances
 Decomposition
 Carbon cycle in aquatic environment
Then, Hale continued to explain the carbon cycle through drawing (Figure 4.6). She
initially underlined the process of combustion stating that the carbon dioxide is
released to the atmosphere as a result of burning fossil fuels in human activities. She
drew the fossil fuels under the soil as a source of carbon element. Later, she
continued to draw the processes of respiration and photosynthesis. She touched
upon that carbon dioxide is also released to the atmosphere through the plants,
142
animals and humans during respiration. She detailed that carbon element in the
structure of the food is transformed to the animals, people; reacts with the oxygen
gas and returns to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide in the process of respiration. In
here, Hale also referred the process of transformation of carbon from plants to
consumers. Although she merely showed the plants as autotrophs in her drawing,
she mentioned that organisms such as plants, algae, and cyanobacteria use the
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to make food during photosynthesis. Lastly, she
addressed the process of decomposition in her explanations through drawing
(Figure 4.8)

H: …[Drawing] The main processes in the carbon cycle are photosynthesis,
respiration and combustion. The carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is released
during the processes of respiration and combustion, and used by plants in the
process of photosynthesis. First I want to mention about the removal of carbon
dioxide from the atmosphere via burning of the fossil fuels. When bodies of
human, animals and plants stay under the soil for a long time, they form fossil
fuels such as oil, coal, and natural gas. We use these fossil fuels in our homes or
factories to produce energy. Thus, carbon and its derivatives are released to the
atmosphere because of the burning of these fossil fuels…We know that there is
almost 0.03 % CO2 in the atmosphere. Plants are only living things which can use
the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. They use this CO2 during photosynthesis
and produce food. Thus, the carbon element in the carbon dioxide is stored in the
food. Then, animals and people eat this food and the carbon compounds in the
food are transferred to consumers. They [animals and humans] give out water
vapor and carbon dioxide to the atmosphere again breaking up this food with
oxygen gas during respiration. And lastly, decomposers separate the dead bodies
of the animals, people and plants under the soil and the carbon dioxide returns to
the atmosphere. And all processes are perpetually repeated for the maintenance
of the life…
From the drawing, it can be inferred that Hale was aware of the reservoirs of the
carbon. She referred the sources of carbon element as the structure of living things,
atmosphere, and fossil fuels in her explanations during the drawing. On the other
hand, she did not state the dissolved carbon compounds in oceans as a reservoir.
Besides, she did not address the major source of carbon dioxide as oceans and
biomass.
143
144
Figure 4.8. Hale’s Drawing of Carbon Cycle
H: …Carbon and also oxygen are the main materials of substances that form the
structure of the living body and cells. They [carbon and oxygen] are important
elements because they constitute the structure of food substances such as
proteins, fats and carbohydrates….
…There is almost 0.03 % CO2 in the atmosphere…
…When bodies of human, animals and plants stay under the soil for a long time,
they form fossil fuels such as oil, coal, and natural gas…
When we mention plants we're not just talking about plants and trees on land.
Algae living in water, i.e., cyanobacteria function as the plants. You know that in
the carbon cycle, the producers in the water are algae.
Hale also referred that the oxygen cycle is associated with the carbon cycle. She
stated that the processes within these [carbon and oxygen] cycles are interrelated,
thus, did not draw the processes of the oxygen cycle separately. She solely
emphasized that the process of combustion arises from the existence of oxygen.
Moreover, she pointed out the importance of oxygen by explaining the function of
ozone layer. She stated that the ozone layer absorbs the ultraviolet rays which are
hazardous to the living things. In her explanation of carbon cycle, it can be seen that
she explained the existence oxygen in the structure of all living things. In addition,
Hale mentioned the proportion of the oxygen gas in the atmosphere.
H: We know that the oxygen cycle is reverse of the carbon cycle. The processes
are interrelated in these [carbon and oxygen] cycles. The materials which are
products in the oxygen cycle are inputs in the carbon cycle. Moreover, all
combustion reactions arise from the existence of oxygen. I said that the carbon
dioxide is released to the atmosphere during the burning of fossil fuels. This
process [burning] needs the oxygen to happen. Also the process of the breaking
of the food substances in the respiration also needs oxygen because this process
is also a type of combustion…The atmosphere contains the ratio of 21% oxygen
gas. Also, the oxygen is found as ozone in the atmosphere. We know that the
ozone layer protects us from the ultraviolet rays…
145
In a brief, Hale’s statements regarding the processes and components of carbon
cycle in Table 4.19 were consistent to the scientific explanations. Although she
underlined all biotic and abiotic components of the cycle, she did not state the
dissolved carbon compounds in oceans as a reservoir. Additionally, she implied the
aquatic carbon cycle while her teaching of carbon cycle but her explanations were
not substantial. Lastly, she did not address the major source of carbon dioxide as
oceans and biomass. In these considerations, Hale’s understanding of carbon cycle
was labeled as partial.
4.2.1.1.2. Hale’s Knowledge about Hydrologic Cycle
To grasp Hale’s understanding of hydrologic cycle, she was requested to draw and
explain the hydrological cycle. Hale’s understanding of hydrological cycle was
labeled as sound based on the statements in both her drawing and teaching. In
Table 4.20, Hale’s understanding related to the hydrological cycle is summarized.
Table 4.20. Hale’s Understanding of the Hydrological Cycle
 The animals, humans (as Consumers)
 Oceans, Lakes, Glaciers, Ground Waters
and Streams (as Water Resources)
 Soil (as Abiotic component)
 Temperature & Wind (Climatic factors)
 Condensation
 Precipitation
 Surface Flows
 Transpiration
 Penetration
146
Hale began her explanation with the importance of water. She expressed the role of
water in the structure of living things which is in line with the scientific explanation.
She mentioned the necessity of water in the bodies of organisms for metabolic
activities. She exemplified the use of water in photosynthesis for plants and the
filtering process of kidneys in human body.
H: …For me, water is most important matter in the earth. The life is derived from
the water. For instance, if so, the water was found in Mars, living creatures
would come into existence, because the water is equivalent to the life. We need
water for all metabolic activities such as eating, breathing, the filtering of the
kidneys etc. Besides, the plants have to use water for producing food in
photosynthesis…We can say that the water is vital importance for all living
things…
Then, Hale mentioned all reservoirs of the water by giving an example for the
amounts of the water resources on Earth. At that moment, she addressed the
reservoirs of water such oceans, ground waters, lakes, rivers, and glaciers. She also
mentioned the oceans as the major water resources.
H: …There are several water sources on earth as oceans, seas, rivers, lakes and
underground waters. Let’s think that the amount of water on Earth is a hundred
glasses in total. The ninety-seven glasses are the salty water in seas and oceans,
and we do not use them as drinkable water. Then, two glasses of them are kept in
icebergs. We, people, can only use one glass of water for drinking…We know
that there are 7 billion people who need water in the world. However, we have
one glass of water to drink! If so, we should use this water carefully. We should
use our reasonable efforts in order to protect the natural water cycle…
Hale continued to her explanation with the process of evaporation in hydrological
cycle. She especially underlined that the water evaporates at any temperature.
Additionally, she highlighted the evaporation rate in the oceans. Then she showed
the process of condensation in her drawing and mentioned about the formation of
clouds. Thereafter, Hale detailed the process of precipitation as snow, rain and hail
according to the atmospheric temperature. She also mentioned that the wind causes
to the transmission of the precipitation to the different regions. She emphasized the
surface flows and the process of penetration, as well. Moreover, she addressed the
releasing of water vapor to the atmosphere through respiration and referred the
147
process of transpiration of the plants in the hydrological cycle. However, she
showed neither the biotic components as plants, animals and people nor the
processes of respiration and transpiration in her drawing (Figure 4.9).

H:…[Drawing] First of all, through evaporation, water vapor moves from water
sources to the atmosphere. Water evaporates at any temperature. The larger the
area, the greater the evaporation…Therefore, the evaporation rate in the oceans is
always highest among the rates of evaporation in other sources. Besides, all
living things, including plants, animals, humans; give carbon dioxide and water
vapor to the atmosphere through the respiration. Plants also give water vapor to
the atmosphere through transpiration. Water vapor coming to the atmosphere,
through all these processes, condenses and falls down as precipitation. We know
that clouds forms due to the cooling of water vapor within the Earth’s
atmosphere. They contain droplets or ice crystals depending on the atmospheric
temperature. Therefore, different precipitation types such as rain, snow, hail can
occur. The precipitation does not always occur in the region where the water
evaporates. The wind causes the clouds to move, so the precipitation falls into
the different regions such as the soil, the settlements and the mountains apart
from the oceans or lakes. The water percolates into the soil and forms the
ground-water or joins to oceans or lakes through surface flows. Again, the water
in oceans and lakes evaporates and returns to the atmosphere. In this manner,
the water moves as a natural cycle…
In conclusion, Hale’s explanations related to all abovementioned processes and
components of the hydrological cycle (Table 4.20.) were consistent to the scientific
explanations. However, considering the lack of the knowledge regarding the sun
and gravity as the driving forces for the cycle, Hale’s understanding of hydrological
cycle was labeled as partial.
148
149
Figure 4.9. Hale’s Drawing of Hydrological Cycle
4.2.1.1.3. Hale’s Knowledge about Nitrogen Cycle
To identify Hale’s understanding of nitrogen cycle, she was requested to explain the
cycle through drawing. Hale’s understanding of nitrogen cycle was labeled as
Hale’s understanding related to the cycle is summarized.
Table 4.21. Hale’s Understanding of the Nitrogen Cycle
 The herbivores, the omnivores, the
humans (as Consumers)
 Decomposers
 Nitrifying & Denitrifying bacteria
 Atmosphere and the soil (as Nitrogen
reservoirs)
 Water (as Abiotic component)
 Nitrification
 Denitrification
 Transformation of nitrogen compounds in
living things (N-Assimilation)
 Lightning
Hale first emphasized the atmospheric reservoir of nitrogen gas. She mentioned that
nitrogen gas in the atmosphere is used in neither photosynthesis nor respiration by
producers or consumers. She detailed that plants can only use the nitrogenous
compounds in the soil such as ammonia, ammonium or nitrate. In here, she touched
upon the soil as a nitrogen reservoir. Then she highlighted that nitrogen is the one
of the basic components in the structure of living things. She elaborated that
proteins and nucleic acids such as DNA, RNA and vitamins contain the nitrogen.
Hale, thus, underlined the importance of nitrogen for living things.
H: …In the atmosphere, there is in the ratio of 78% nitrogen gas. However, living
things cannot use this nitrogen gas directly in the processes of photosynthesis or
respiration. Plants can only use the ammonia, ammonium or nitrate in the soil. In
150
other words, the nitrogen gas should be converted to the nitrogenous
compounds due to be usable form for living organisms…The nitrogen element is
required for the proteins, nucleic acids such as DNA and RNA and also vitamins
which form the basic structures of the organisms. So, the nitrogen is essential for
the continuation of life…
After that, Hale was requested to explain the nitrogen cycle through drawing
(Figure 4.10). She initially addressed the lightning process. Then, she mentioned the
process of nitrogen fixation. She explained that the nitrogen gas in the atmosphere is
converted to the ammonia by the nitrogen fixing bacteria in the soil or on the roots
of legumes. Besides, she clearly defined the processes of nitrification, nitrogen
assimilation and decomposition such in the scientific explanation. Lastly, she
underlined the process of denitrification as the conversion of nitrogenous
compounds in the soil to the nitrogen gas by denitrifying bacteria. She referred the
plants, herbivores, omnivores, decomposers, nitrogen-fixing and nitrifying-
denitrifying bacteria as the biotic components of the nitrogen cycle. On the other
hand, Hale did not mention the cyanobacteria as nitrogenous bacteria in aquatic
systems.

H: …[Drawing] Now, we can separate the soil as upper and under. Thus, there
are organisms living both under the soil and on the soil. First of all, some of the
nitrogen gas in the atmosphere fixes to the soil as nitrogen oxides through the
process of lightning. Furthermore, there are the nitrogen-fixing bacteria in the
soil and on the roots of the legumes. These bacteria convert N2 to the nitrogenous
compounds as the ammonia and the ammonium. Also, they convert the
ammonium and ammonia to the nitrate. The nitrogen compounds in the soil are
absorbed by the plants. Herbivores first eat these plants and then omnivores eat
the herbivores. In other words, the nitrogen element transforms to the organic
compounds in the structure of plants, animals and people. After the plants,
animals and people die, the organic nitrogen compounds in the wastes and the
bodies of them is separated to the inorganic compounds by the decomposers in
the soil. Lastly, these nitrogenous compounds in the soil either are used by plants
or returns to the atmosphere as nitrogen gas through the denitrifying bacteria in
the soil…
151
152
Figure 4.10. Hale’s Drawing of Nitrogen Cycle
In short, Hale’s responses regarding the all processes and components of nitrogen
cycle in Table 4.21 were consistent to the scientific explanations. On the other hand,
Hale’s statements in both her drawing (Figure 4.10) and teaching did not refer the
sun as energy source and the cyanobacteria in aquatic systems as a component of
the cycle. In these considerations, Hale’s understanding of nitrogen cycle was
labelled as partial.
To conclude, it can be said that Hale’s substantive knowledge in the topic of
biogeochemical cycles was partial considering her responses related to the
components and processes of the cycles. In the next section, Hale’s syntactic
knowledge regarding her NOS understanding was documented.
4.2.1.2. Hale’s Syntactic Knowledge
In this section, the results of Hale’s syntactic knowledge (NOS view) were presented
based on empirical, tentative, inferential, creative and imaginative, subjective, socio-
cultural nature of science as well as the distinction between theory and law.
Empirical NOS: When asked the question of what the science is, Hale first
explained the science as ‘‘all of the systematic research carried out to understand the
universe and find out solutions to the problems people face with’’. She also defined
the science as a kind of knowledge gained through the scientific methods including
testable procedures. Therefore, it can be said that she accepted the idea that
scienctists use step by step procedures known as scientific method in answering
their questions. She acknowledged that scientific knowledge requires scientific
claims based on the evidences, that the experiments and observations are the
testable procedures to develop the scientific knowledge. On the other hand, she did
not recognize that non-experimental techniques can also be used to advance
scientific knowledge. In the light of her explanations, Hale had a lack of knowledge
on the empirical NOS (See table 4.22 for sample quotas).
153
Table 4.22. Hale’s Sample Statements of Empirical NOS

Empirical …Science is all of the systematic studies carried out to
understand the world and find solutions to the problems we
face in life. It [science] is a type of knowledge obtained through
the testable methods such as the experiments…
…Science is different from other disciplines by means of
including scientific claims based on the evidences.
…Scientists make observations by using five senses to find out
the answer the research question. They formulate a hypothesis
that explains the research question. Then, they should conduct a
controlled experiment in order to obtain evidences. Thus, they
can reach results by the data at the end of the experiment.
Therefore, to obtain a scientific knowledge, such a scientific
method is needed…
Theory & Law: When Hale was requested to answer the question what the
differences between theory and law, she failed to understand that theories and laws
are different kinds of scientific knowledge. She hold the idea that theories are
named as laws when became universally accepted. She defined the theories as the
knowledge that needs to be proven, and thus she held the misconception that laws
are certain knowledge. She detailed her assertion with the example of the laws of
thermodynamics and Newton’s laws of motion. Therefore, her responses indicated
that she hold the misconception that there is a hierarchical view of the relationship
between theories and laws. When asked whether greenhouse effect is theory or law,
although she explained the greenhouse effect correctly, she failed to understand that
it is a theory (Ramanathan, 1988; Wilkins, 1993) because of her misconception on the
explanatory function of theories. Thus, her excerpts showed that she failed to
understand the functions of theories and laws, as well (See table 4.23 for sample
quotas).
154
Table 4.23. Hale’s Sample Statements of Theory & Law

Theory & Law …I think theory and laws are connected to each other. Many
theories can be put forward, but these theories need to be
proven. If theories become universal and proven, they are called
laws. However laws are certain knowledge that describes the
natural phenomena by the mathematical connections [formula].
For example Newton’s laws of motion, the laws of
thermodynamics are absolute knowledge supported by the
mathematical equations…
…The greenhouse effect is a natural process that warms the
earth. It is defined as the event that the warming of the earth
through the rise of greenhouse gases such as methane, CO2, etc.
Recently, the scientists have collected data indicating that the
amount of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been
increased. They [scientists] also get evidences such as the
melting of icebergs and the increased temperature of the earth.
Moreover, all scientists around the world have accepted the
existence of global warming. I think greenhouse effect is a law in
the light of these explanations…
Tentative NOS: When asked whether scientific knowledge can be changed, Hale
indicated that scientific knowledge is subject to change in the light of new
technologies. She asserted that different interpretations of previous knowledge can
advanced the scientific knowledge. She expanded her answers by giving examples
of the studies in the states of matter. When asked whether theories and laws can be
changed, on the other hand, she emphasized that the theories can be changed but
the laws are certain knowledge and cannot be changed. However, her explanations
related to the theory change were not associated with a tentative view of science.
Rather, she had a naive understanding that theories are steps to generate scientific
laws (Abd-El-Khalick, 2005). Thus, the results showed that her misconception
related to the functions of theories and laws caused her explanations on tentative
NOS to be inconsistent (See table 4.24 for sample quotas).
155
Table 4.24. Hale’s Sample Statements of Tentative NOS

Tentative …I believe that the new technologies and the new and different
interpretations of the knowledge can change the existing
knowledge. For example, in nowadays, the scientific knowledge
that there are three states of matter as solid, liquid and gas is not
valid. In recent years, scientists have concluded that matter has
four states adding its [matter] state of plasma. Besides, it is known
that the space has more plasma state of matter than one in earth.
…Scientific theories can be changed over time but the change of
laws is difficult. The evolution theory and the theory of relativity
will change by the exploration of new knowledge and new
technologies. I mean these theories will be disproved with new
interpretations. On the other hand, before the law of gravity has
not become a law, many theories had been put forward. Then, one
of these theories had been universal and named as the law of
gravity. The thing I want to say, is that the change of the law is
quite difficult…
Inferential NOS: When asked how scientists are certain about the appearance of the
dinosaurs, Hale acknowledged that scientists make inferences. She did not say the
term ‘‘inference’’ explicitly but she implied that scientists make interpretations
based on the fossil evidences. She expanded her responses stating that the fossil
evidences of dinosaurs’ skeletal help scientists conclude how they looked like. Thus,
Hale’s understanding on inferential NOS reflected that scientific claims are based on
empirical evidences. Therefore, it can be said that Hale’s understanding of
inferential NOS were affected by her view of empirical NOS. Thus, it can be said
that Hale had informed views on the aspect of inferential NOS (See table 4.25 for
sample quotas).
Table 4.25. Hale’s Sample Statements of Inferential NOS

Inferential Even though scientists could not observe the dinosaurs, they have
investigated the fossil evidences. The fossils of dinosaurs are the
proof that these creatures had lived. Scientists can only conclude
about how they looked like based on their skeletal systems.
Besides, the structure of their teeth and jaws proved that they were
herbivore or carnivore. Furthermore, the existence of the fossils
belonged to the different creatures in the same area is evidence that
dinosaurs had died simultaneously.
156
Creative and Imaginative NOS: Hale recognized that scientists need to be creative
and imaginative for the continuation of their research. She claimed that scientists’
characteristics such as exploring and inquiring are the essential parts of their
imagination and creativity. On the other hand, she failed to understand that
scientists’ imagination and creativity have a crucial role in every part of their
scientific investigation. She asserted that the imagination and creativity is just
needed at the part of the planning or designing a research. Hence, her view of
creative and imaginative NOS was affected by her misconception that scientists use
step by step scientific method universally accepted. Thus, this misconception caused
her understanding on creative NOS to be partial (See sample quotas in Table 4.26).
Table 4.26. Hale’s Sample Statements of Creative and Imaginative NOS

Creative and …Scientists’ imagination and creativity are essential for their
Imaginative productivity. If these features [creativity and imagination] are
absent, science will repeats itself. We define the scientists as
explorers, and questioners. For me, all these characteristics are
the parts of scientists’ imagination and creativity…
…For me, scientists should use their imagination and creativity

at the beginning of their research, such as preparing of a
research question or formulating of a hypothesis. In other parts
of their studies, scientists should follow the steps of scientific
method…
Subjective NOS: When asked how scientists reach different conclusions with the
same data, she referred to the subjective NOS emphasizing that scientists’
background knowledge, preconceptions and interests potentially played a role in
their interpretation of the data. She claimed that scientists drew varying inferences
and thus, reached several different conclusions on the causes of the dinosaurs’
extinction due to the subjectivity in science. Additionally, she implied that scientist’
interest of area affects how a researcher interprets the data by giving example on the
conflict in the causes of global warming. Therefore, Hale had informed views on
the aspect of subjective NOS (Table 4.27).
157
Table 4.27. Hale’s Sample Statements of Subjective NOS

Subjective …Scientists can interpret the same data in different way. Their
[scientists] perspectives, background knowledge and field of
study might affect their interpretations.
…For instance, scientists have different views related to
dinosaurs’ extinction. They reach different conclusions as
meteorite hit, continental drift, or volcanic eruptions. I mean
that while geologists interpret the cause of the extinction as
continental drift, astrophysicists can conclude as the meteor hit.
Their [scientists’] interest of study might influence their claims.
In the same way, scientists conflict in the causes of global
warming. Some of them said that global warming is a natural
process but many of them believed that it [global warming] is a
result of human activities…
Socio-Cultural NOS: To be categorized as holding informed understanding of
socio-cultural NOS, participant should indicate an understanding that science is a
human endeavor and, as such, is influenced by the society and culture in which it is
practiced (Lederman et al., 2001). In Hale’s case, she believed that science should be
isolated from the society and culture. On the other hand, her example related to
Turkey reflected the informed view that science is influenced by religion, cultural
values and traditions. Thus, Hale’s understanding on the tenet of socio-cultural
NOS had deficits due to her contradictory expressions. Sample statements can be
seen in Table 4.28.
Table 4.28. Hale’s Sample Statements of Socio-Cultural NOS

Socio-Cultural I think that science should not be influenced by the society’s
culture or values. However, in our country, science is related to
the religion, cultural values and traditions. In my lessons, I can
observe that student might influenced by their values or home
culture. They can answer the questions aligned with their
religious beliefs or traditional lifestyles. In my opinion science
should have a common language; it [science] should not be
influenced by the values of cultures.
158
In short, Hale’s responses implied that she possessed inadequate understanding on
NOS tenets. Specifically, she had naïve understanding on the functions of/
differences between theory and law and socio-cultural NOS. In fact, it can be said
that there were interactions among Hale’s NOS views. For example, although Hale
asserted that scientific knowledge can be changed by the new interpretations, she
held the naïve idea that the change of laws is difficult because laws are certain
knowledge. In here, the deficiencies in her understanding of the differences between
theories and laws affected her view of tentative NOS. Likewise, her misconception
that there is a scientific method universally accepted led her interpretations to be
inadequate in terms of creative NOS. On the other hand, Hale’s understanding that
scientific claims are based on empirical evidences helped her view of inferential
NOS become substantial. To conclude, Hale did not have sophisticated views of
NOS because she was not deeply informed in all of the NOS tenets. Moreover, it
observed that she did not translate any aspects of NOS into her classroom practice
of biogeochemical cycles.
4.2.1.3. Hale’s Understanding of Sustainable Development Regarding

In order to reveal Hale’s understanding of sustainable development (SD) regarding
biogeochemical cycles, she was requested to answer what the causes, results and
solutions to the disruptions to the cycles. Besides, her teaching of biogeochemical
cycles was observed. Therefore, her responses and practice were unveiled how Hale
linked the biogeochemical cycles to the issues of sustainable development.
Initially, Hale emphasized the human activities are main causes of the problems
related to the biogeochemical cycles. She touched upon the unconscious use of
natural resources by humans. Therefore, she attributed the damage of the
environment to the population explosion by emphasizing environmental aspect of
SD. She especially had the idea that the balance of nature should be sustained
without damaging the environment.
159
Researcher (R): What are the causes of the disruption in biogeochemical cycles?
Please explain.
Hale (H): The balance of the ecosystems is very important to the continuation of
life. We know that when humans interfere with nature, it often produces
disastrous consequences. When the balance of the cycles is destroyed, all living
things are affected by the consequences…For me; the main cause of the
disruption of the cycles is human. Because of our activities, not only the water
resources, but also the air and the soil are polluted. One and other day, the
consequences of these pollutions will influence the people’s life adversely…
4.2.1.3.1. Hale’s Knowledge on the Connections between Carbon Cycle

Concerning of the degradation in carbon cycle, Hale stated that the environmental
problems such as the extensive use of fossil fuels and deforestation caused to the
increase in emissions of CO2 and greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. She tried to
connect the scarcity of energy resources and energy problem to the population
growth. Hale, in here, implied the issue of the unsustainable consumption of energy
sources. She attributed the damage of the balance of the environment to the
unsustainable lifestyles of human beings. She also referred the interdependence of
living thing by explaining the results of the deforestation. Therefore, she mentioned
about the issues of three aspects of SD, namely; environment, energy and society by
mainly emphasizing the damaging the environment, scarcity of energy resources
and unsustainable consumption behavior.
H: …Plants are very important for the cycles. Do you know that the amount of O2
produced by one oak tree in a day satisfy the O2 need of seventy-two people. I
believe that the destruction of plants or forests threatens the lives of the other
living creatures that exist there. We, all living things, are dependent to each
other….Especially in carbon cycle; we know that they [plants] are the single
organisms that remove the CO2 from the air. If we destroy the vegetation and the
forests, the amount of the CO2 in the air will increase. Additionally, we use too
much fossil fuel for satisfying the need of the energy in our homes, factories and
cars. If we continue to use the non-renewable energy sources extensively, the
balance of the carbon cycle will get worse from day to day. Carbon emission will
increase; as a result air pollution will increase.
160
Hale especially drew attention to the increase in the amount of diseases in the
regions where the industrial activities is high. In other words, she attributed the
health problems to the atmospheric pollution and global warming originating from
the unsustainable industrial development. Therefore, she approached to sustainable
development by the environmental social and economical aspects regarding that
unplanned industrial development affects both the environment and society. She
also imply to refer the environmental aspect of sustainable development by
mentioning the scientific environmental research.
H: …In recent years, there is an extreme increase in the amount of the diseases.
According to the researches carried out in our country, there is an increase in
lung diseases in and around Zonguldak (a city where there is the coal mining
industry in Turkey) where carbon dioxide gas is released too much. Furthermore,
scientists discuss about many unknown diseases that may be the result of the
insolation of the living species hidden in icebergs in water through the melting of
glaciers...
In addition, it can be seen that Hale tried to address the unsustainable modes of
production and consumption through the industrialization. She mentioned that the
unplanned industrialization causes to be destroyed the vegetation from land for
construction. She emphasized that development policies to improve the society’s
living standards should sustain the balance of the nature. She, therefore, linked the
environmental problems arising from unplanned development policies to the social
aspect of SD. Besides, she implied that the wealth of the society is based on the
transffering its resources to future generations. In here, she touched upon the SD
aspects of environment, energy, society, economy and politics by underlying the
environmental damage, energy need, unsustainable production and lifestyles, and
unplanned development policies.
H:… Our forests are not our heritage. We have to transfer these sources from the
generations before us to future generations. Evliya Çelebi said in his book
‘Seyahatname’ that the wealth of its forests is the indicator of the country's total
wealth. However, when we look at surroundings today, we destroy forests and
build residences. We build roads and factories. We demolish the detached houses
with gardens; we plan multi-storey apartments instead of each garden house. At
least 100 people start to live in the place where 10 people lived. This means more
161
consumption, more energy demand, more carbon emissions and therefore more
pollution…
Hale, furthermore, emphasized the geopolitical issues in preserving the balance of
the cycle. She underlined the Kyoto protocol as an international treaty signed in
order to reduce the greenhouse gases emissions to the atmosphere. In here, Hale
touched upon the need of sharing social responsibility for action. She especially
addressed the use of renewable energy sources to solve the environmental problems
related to the carbon emission. Therefore, she implied the issue of non-carbon
economy mentioning the investments in renewable energy sources needs to be
made in order to stop CO2 emissions. In here, Hale addressed the environmental,
social, economic and political aspects of sustainable development issues. Besides, ,
she suggested that the use of renewable energy sources should be increased to be
able to find permanent solutions to the environmental problems.
H:… As we know, Kyoto is the only international contract signed to reduce the
onset of global warming. The purpose of this contract is to reduce the emissions
of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. The US is the only country that has
signed but not ratified this protocol. In this country, which has the greatest
economic power, we know that carbon emissions are very high. As a country
with a population of 75 million, our carbon emissions are high, too. Increase in
carbon emissions is big threat in the global sense. If so, nations should not only
sign such protocols, but also implement them. In particular, I think that the exact
solution is to use renewable energy sources like wind and sun. I think it would
be more useful to use solar, wind or water energy instead of building a thermal
power plant.We can establish governmental policies by making investments in
renewable energy sources, by this way; our solutions can be permanent and long-
term…
Moreover, Hale explained that the increase in carbon emission causes to the
negative effects on Earth such as global warming and climate change. While she
was explaining the global warming, she referred also the greenhouse effect and
greenhouse gases. Furthermore, she emphasized the change in the weather events,
the sea level rise and the loss of ice mass as the results of climate change. She
pointed out the global warming and climate change as the main results of the
162
increase in carbon emissions arising from the antropogenic activities. He, therefore,
touched upon that human activities should sustain the balance of nature.
H: … The increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere brings

many negative effects. Especially in recent years, what we call global warming
threatens our world. We know the Earth warms through the reflection of sun
rays from the surface of Earth. I mean that greenhouse gases hold these reflected
sun rays and Earth warms. However, with the increase in the amount of carbon
dioxide, greenhouses gases blocked the return of these rays to the atmosphere
and the Earth’ temperature increase in time.In fact, we perceive global warming
as an increase in Earth’s temperature but this is actually a deterioration of the
balance of nature. It means that winters will be colder and summers will be
hotter. In other words, it means that droughts in summer and extreme rainfall in
the winter can occur. The glaciers that have existed for millions of years have
started to melt. Water levels are expected to increase in the coastal countries.
Those are the signals of climate change…
Briefly, when Hale’s responses related to the causes, results and solutions to the
degradation of the carbon cycle were examined, it can be seen that she touched
upon the important environmental phenomena such as greenhouse effect, global
warming, climate change and atmospheric pollution. Additionally, she connected
these phenomena with the all issues of sustainable development except the poverty.
During her explanations of the connections between the carbon cycle and SD, Hale
also addressed five aspects of sustainable development including environment,
society, economy, politics and energy.
4.2.1.3.2. Hale’s Knowledge on the Connections between Hydrological

Cycle and Sustainable Development
Hale generally touched upon the disruptions to the water cycle originating from the
water pollution. She connected the unplanned urbanization as a factor affecting the
water cycle. In here, she touched upon the unplanned land use through the damage
of the environment to build roads and constructions. Tus, she implied that
industrial development should sustain the balance of the nature without damaging
the environment. Then, she underlined the health impacts such as skin and
intestinal diseases arising from the polluted water resources. She also referred the
interdependence of living thing by explaining the results of the water pollution.
163
Therefore, she approached to sustainable development by the environmental and
social aspects regarding that damage of the environment affect the both social and
biological life.
H: …We, people, pour the waste oils and detergents to the sinks and do not even
think whether these wastes are contaminated to the water resources. The
chemical wastes of factories, also, pollute the surface and ground resources.
Therefore, the water pollution threatens the organisms living in waters. On the
other hand, we build the excellent bridges, roads, and residences but meanwhile
we ignore other living things, too. This unplanned urbanization also causes to the
decrease in the number of both the organisms living on/under the soil and the
ground waters over time…
During her teaching of hydrological cycle, it can be seen that Hale, additionally,
mentioned the issue of scarcity of water. She addressed the use of non-conventional
water resources to overcome the scarcity of potable water. In here, she drew
attention to the underdeveloped countries’ economic and technological
dependences on foreign trade. In other words, she implied that to be able to have a
strong economy, governments should support the investments in technological
development. Therefore, it can be said that Hale referred the SD aspects of politics,
economy and technology.
H: Waste water treatment in order to produce drinking water is not common in

our country. However, in a few countries, treated water is consumed. In other
words, waste or salt water is processed and transformed into potable water.
Especially in Israel, there is a great system that transforms the ocean water into
drinking water. However, there are no economic and technological
developments in our country to establish such a system. Unfortunately, our
technological development is dependent on foreign countries as a developing
country…
In the same way, Hale complained about the absence of the policies in order to
protect water resources in Turkey. In here, she, again, mentioned the issue of
dependence of foreign trade. She underlined the issue of water conflict by stating
that the precautions need to be taken for the water scarcity. Again, she approached
to sustainable development from the aspect of environment by emphasizing the
environmental research to increase the awareness of the society. She referred that
164
responsibility should be shared in order to overcome the global water conflict by
implying that world peace is necessary for the development of future generations.
Therefore, she linked the SD aspects of environment, society, economy and politics.
H: When we look at our country, we have a lot of underground resources. It is

possible to use these waters by artesian wells. Turkey is also a peninsula
surrounded by sea on three sides. Then Turkey should not be a country where
there is a problem of scarcity of water. However, there is a shortage of water in
Turkey in recent years. If so there is a serious problem with our water policy.
Twenty years ago, in his report, an American scientist underlined that if Turkey
does not get control the water resources, water shortage will be happened in 40-
50 years. Twenty years passed, and he's right. We are not able to use our
underground resources because their usage is under control of foreign countries.
As a country, if we cannot control water resources, which are our most important
natural resource, we cannot develop. In many countries, the future has signaled
the scarcity of water. Turkey is one of these countries. As long as environmental
problems continue, there will be a water conflict in 25 years. Moreover, it is said
that third world war will be due to the water conflict…
To summarize, when Hale’s responses related to the causes, results and solutions to
the degradation of the water cycle were examined, it can be seen that she touched
upon the important environmental problem of water pollution. She also underlined
the issues of the potable water scarcity, heath impacts through water pollution,
trans-border water conflict and non-conventional water resources. On the other
hand, she did not refer the phenomena such as soil and water salinization through
salt water intrusion, desertification and glaciation. Therefore, regarding
hydrological cycle, Hale’s understanding of SD mainly focused on the aspects of
environment, society, politics, technology and economy emphasizing that finding
permanent solutions to environmental damage, unplanned development policies
based on foreign trade, development technologies and shared responsibility for
future generations.
165
4.2.1.3.3. Hale’s Knowledge on the Connections between Nitrogen Cycle
Considering the degradation of the nitrogen cycle, Hale addressed the negative
effects of extensive use of fertilizer in agricultural activities. She emphasized that
unsustainable lifestyles of human beings threaten the many species in water and
soil. Therefore, she underlined the environmental and social aspects of SD.
Moreover, she suggested the alternative agriculture methods in order to cope with
the pesticides in her teaching. After that, she connected to health problems to the
pollution in water and soil due to the arising from the absence of good agriculture
practices. Thus, she linked the social, environmental and economical aspects of SD
by underlying that the sustainable production and consumption is necessary for the
finding permanent solutions to environmental damage.
H: The degradation of the nitrogen cycle affects the all living things directly
because all living things consume the nitrogen through nutrition. We know that
in recent years, farmers have used more chemical fertilizers in the agricultural
lands. The organisms living in water and soil are under threat due to excessive
use of pesticides. Furthermore, the percolation of the chemicals to the soil and
ground waters causes the excessive nitrogen in the soil. As a result, the soil will
be infertile. Furthermore, the food produced by plants will be unhealthy due to
the chemicals. As soon, health problems will arise…
…In old times, farmers planted fruit trees on the side of their fields or gardens.
The birds that came to eat fruits also eliminated the pesticides without damaging
the crops. This is a very simple agricultural method. People have practiced this
method for centuries. Thus, they didn't cause to mix any chemicals into our soil
or our water resources. However, with the methods used in agriculture practices
in recent years, the soil and water has been heavily contaminated. We eat the
potatoes in the polluted soil and consume the fish in polluted lake. The foods we
consume threaten our health [Classroom Observation].
Moreover, Hale mentioned the acids rains as an environmental damage originating
from the industrial development. She also attributed the water pollution to the acid
rains and again emphasized the increase in health problems in society.
H:…The gases exiting through nuclear explosions or industrial activities combine

with water vapor in the atmosphere, causing an environmental problem called
acid rain. Therefore, these dangerous precipitation causes water sources to
166
become contaminated. Many studies conclude that there is an increase in skin
diseases, stomach and intestinal diseases in places where the excessive water
pollution is occurred…
Regarding the issue of food safety from the social aspect of SD, Hale complained
about the insufficient agricultural development policies. She addressed the decrease
in the agricultural production and as a result, the increase in dependence on
imported seeds due to insufficient investments in agricultural industry. She, thus,
addressed the political, economic and social aspects of sustainable development.
H: Turkey’s seed warehouses are empty because of the agricultural investments.

Most of our seeds are now imported from foreign countries. Being a country with
an endemic species as much as Europe, it is very scary to be dependent on
foreign countries. In our country, both scientific studies and investments are
insufficient. I don't know the consequences the use of these imported seeds on
the lands. Financial support for farming is lacking and thus, domestic
production decreases. There should not be such agricultural policy.
To sum up, it can be seen that Hale touched upon the important environmental
problems of acid rains and soil pollution as the results of the degradation of the
nitrogen cycle. She also underlined the health impacts through water and soil
pollution, alternative agricultural methods, food safety and the use of fertilizers as
the issues of sustainable development related to the nitrogen cycle. On the other
hand, she did not refer the phenomena of eutrophication and greenhouse effect of
nitrogenous gases in the cycle. Besides, she did not mention the issue of sewage
treatment. In that case, Hale’s understanding especially environmental, social,
economical and political issues regarding the connections between nitrogen cycle
and sustainable development issues.
Finally, while mentioning the solutions, Hale especially focused on the SD aspects
of education, society and economy. She gave example of SAP to stress the social and
economical aspects of SD by underlying the social equity and creating job
opportunities. She also emphasized that developments in education could create
more livable world for the future generations with the help of educated and awared
society.
167
H: There's a balance in nature. This balance between human and nature should
be preserved in a way that can meet our energy needs without damaging the
natural resources. For example, a project called GAP was made in the 90s in our
country. That region was chosen because women, children and farmers living
there were disadvantaged groups. The aim was to ensure the same level of social,
cultural and economic equity of these citizens such the ones living in other
regions by both increasing the job opportunities and improving education in the
region. It was a great project. Such projects should be increased if we want to
catching up with the developed countries. Especially, education is an important
issue for our future generations. All citizens in our society should be educated in
terms of using natural resources in balanced way. Environmental awareness is a
key issue to create greener society. If you can develop environmental awareness,
you can fullfil the responsibilities to make our world more livable for our
children…
To conclude, When Hale’s explanation related to the results, causes and solutions to
the depletion in biogeochemical cycles examined, it can be seen that she mostly
underlined the issues and aspects of SD in the carbon cycle. Moreover, ,it can be
said that although she can not connect the nitrogen and hydrological cycles to the
related sustainable development issues, she mainly mentioned environmental,
social, economical and political aspects of SD issues related to these cycles.
Additionally, Hale intensively approached to the phenomena and issues of
sustainable development from the environmental, social and economical aspects
whereas she addressed the aspects of education and technology rarely. To sum up,
Hale’s conceptions of SD regarding biogeochemical cycles can be seen in Figure 4.
11.
168
169
Figure 4.11. Hale’s Conceptions of Sustainable Development
4.2.2. Hale’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge
4.2.2.1. Hale’s Orientation to Science Teaching
In this section, Hale’s beliefs about goals of science teaching at grade 8th were
presented based on the analyses of her responses to the card-sorting scenarios and
the interviews related to the goals of science teaching and classroom observations.
Hale stated that her beliefs about central purposes for science teaching were
determined by the slogan as ‘‘science is the life itself’’. She addressed that her main
goal of science teaching was to prepare learners to life. Moreover, she pointed out
that science teaching helps learners to find solutions to their problems faced with in
daily life. Her responses also included that science teaching is also necessary to
develop environmental awareness (See Table 4.29 for sample quotas).
Table 4.29. Hale’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs About Central Goals for
Science Teaching

To prepare learners to life My basic goal of science teaching is to prepare
my students to the life. We have a slogan that
science is life itself. In this way, science teaching
is an important for the students to get in touch
with daily life…
To help learners to find solutions …Science teaching also should be given to help
the problems in daily life students find solutions to the problems they face
with in their daily lives. Life is a combination of
physics, chemistry and biology. We want
students to gain basic understanding of science
concepts such the physical and chemical changes,
the structure of living things. That is to say,
science education is necessary to obtain basic
knowledge related to the life…
To help learners to develop …I, as a human, pay attention to the
environmental awareness environmental protection. I also try to help my
students to establish a relationship between
human and environment. The environmental
knowledge that they have gained in science
lessons also helps them to achieve this goal.
When this knowledge is not enough, I make
effort to develop their environmental
awareness…
170
When it comes to her peripheral goals for science teaching, Hale pointed out that
she also considered the national curriculum and the examination system in Turkey.
Therefore, she touched upon that she has to transmit the scientific concepts required
by the curriculum. Hereby, she emphasized that one of her goals of teaching science
is to prepare her students to the TEOG [High School Entrance Exam] (currently
known as LGS) examination. In addition, she expressed that science teaching also
prepares the students to high school courses such as physics, chemistry and biology.
(Sample quotas can be seen in Table 4.30).
Hale’s beliefs about the central and peripheral goals of science teaching nearly
overlapped with the orientations that she chose as parallel to her science teaching.
Hale expressed that the scenarios related to activity driven, discovery, conceptual
change, guided inquiry, project-based, inquiry, process and curriculum goals
corresponded to her science teaching.
Table 4.30. Hale’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs about Peripheral Goals for
Science Teaching

To help students to comprehend For me, the important thing is that students
the knowledge required by should comprehend the science concepts and
curriculum relate them to the daily life. The Ministry of
National Education also requires us to transmit
basic science concepts to the students through
science and technology curriculum …
To prepare learners to high school …We should acknowledge that there is an
exam exam in our country in order to be enrolled to a
qualified science or Anatolian high school.
Because of this situation, I try to prepare my
students to this exam solving different
questions in my lessons. However, my primary
goal is to prepare them to the life not the high
school…
To prepare learners to high school As you know, science education is divided into
courses the branches as physics, chemistry and biology
at high school. Therefore, science education at
elementary level also includes the basis
knowledge necessary to understand more
complex and abstract knowledge in high school
courses…
171
When she was asked why she selected those scenarios, Hale stated that because the
scenarios shared a common characteristic of being student-centered. She
emphasized that she gave importance to the active participation of the students in
her science courses. Hale cited that she generally tried to prefer the alternative
teaching and assessment techniques apart from the traditional ones. She, therefore,
pointed out her preferred scenarios were generally accordance with her science
teaching at 8th grades. Hale’s sample quotas related to these scenarios can be seen in
Table 4.31.
Researcher (R): In your opinion, what are the common characteristics of these
scenarios?
H:…7th and 8th grade students’ hormonal system changes because of the
puberty. Students have also an anxiety for the TEOG exam. Therefore, it's hard to
get students’ attention. But when I present a topic in different ways, I can see that
many students understand it better. I chose these cards because they include
alternative learning and teaching methods apart from traditional teaching and
learning methods. Additionally, the strategies are generally student-centered in
these cards. They [scenarios] include many different strategies referring different
intelligence groups. For example, in one of them, students can interpret the
statistical data. Here, it is related to the logical mathematical intelligence. Again,
one of them includes the interviewing process. Students good at language skills
can prepare interview questions easily. Thus, students have an active role in the
teaching and learning process. In the same way, in my lessons, I generally try to
use different activities such in these scenarios. I want my students to be active in
the classroom…
172
173
174
175
176
Hale pointed out that she could not utilize the remaining scenarios, including
didactic, discovery, liberation and reality of educational system due to their teacher-
centered nature. She explained that she avoided carrying out these methods because
either teacher is at the center of the learning environment or the students are
completely alone in these scenarios. Hale emphasized that she regarded the active
participation of the students in her lessons so she did not choose the above-
mentioned scenarios. Hale’s sample quotas related to these scenarios can be seen in
Table 4.32.
R: What are the common characteristics of the scenarios that you do not prefer to
use?
H: I do not carry out these scenarios because either the teacher is at the center of
the learning environment or the student is alone. I'm interested in a student-
centered learning environment and group work without much intervention.
However many colleagues perceive student-centered education differently. In
their science lessons, they separated all units to the students, and students try to
present the topics. The teacher does nothing. This is not student-centered. I don't
think they know what student-centered education means…
Observation data revealed that Hale used project-based learning to help her
students comprehend the biogeochemical cycles, as well. As she stated, she also
used direct instruction being varied by different daily-life examples, figures, and
questions to facilitate students’ understanding of the basic concepts. Her teaching
was generally based on the students’ project presentations and discussions.
Therefore, it can be said that as far as possible, her teaching was line with her
orientations.
177
178
4.2.2.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Curriculum
4.2.2.2.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Goals and Objectives
In the Science Curriculum (2005), there was only one objective specific to the topic
of biogeochemical cycles, which is students are able to explain biogeochemical cycles
parallel to the energy flow in the food chain (MoNE, 2005, p.354). The acquisition of this
objective is closely related to the understanding of the previous topic which is
energy flow in the food chain. Hence, the objectives of previous topic should be
considered as a reminder to teach the topic of biogeochemical cycles.
Hale also emphasized that the aim of the teaching biogeochemical cycles was to
explain the concepts with their connections with the topics of energy flow in the
food chain. Hereby, she expressed that student could easily understand the
connections between biogeochemical cycles and biotic/abiotic environment. While
Hale was teaching the biogeochemical cycles, it was observed that when needed,
she checked whether the students gained the objectives related to the nutrition and
energy flow in the food chain recalling their prior knowledge. When Hale was
asked the aim of teaching the topic of biogeochemical cycles, she stated that she
mainly expected her students to gain the objective required by the curriculum.
Hale (H): First of all, students’ comprehension of the previous topics is very
important for the teaching of matter cycles. For this reason, I expect that the
students had gained the objectives of photosynthesis, respiration, energy flow
and energy pyramid. They should know the connections between biotic and
abiotic components of the ecosystems so I always begin to teach matter cycles by
repeating these topics. We then define the concept of cycle and the importance of
the cycles of carbon, oxygen, water, nitrogen, and the problems that may occur as
a result of the deterioration of the cycles. In general, I follow the curriculum and
help my students gain the curriculum objectives…[CoRe Interview].
Hale also pointed out that she expected her students to gain some affective
domains, indicated in Table 4.33., in addition to the curriculum objectives. She cited
that she gave importance to develop students’ environmental consciousness in
especially environmental topics. Therefore, she stated that students should

179
comprehend the importance of the balanced use of the natural resources. Hale
added she helped learners to raise awareness for environmental problems caused by
the deterioration of the biogeochemical cycles.
H:…I usually expect the students to develop some attitudes and raise
environmental awareness in such environmental topics. For example, the
students should be aware of the balanced use of these matters in nature. Rather
than consume the existing one, they should be aware of what needs to be done to
preserve the amounts of them. I think they [students] should be aware of what
may happen as a result of the deterioration of the cycles. I mean that Earth is
bordered but there is no limit in the sky. If a fire or a disaster happened in our
country, they [students] must be aware of the consequences in other countries.
They have just known the effects of the explosions in Chernobyl and Fukujima.
Therefore, I hope that in the future, they will transform their environmental
awareness to their daily lives… [CoRe Interview].
Table 4.33. Hale’s Intended Objectives Related to Topic of Biogeochemical Cycles
Intended Objectives
To comprehend the importance of the balanced use of natural resources
cycles
To raise awareness for environmental problems caused by human based
deterioration of the biogeochemical cycles.
In line with Hale’s CoRe interview, observation data (the teaching of cycles) pointed
out that she tried to attract her students’ attention to the importance of the natural
resources and the results of human effects on biogeochemical cycles. For instance,
during her course on the carbon cycle, she emphasized the deforestation and
excessive use of fossil fuels as a human based cause of deterioration of the cycle.
H:… We have destroyed the green plants that will take the carbon dioxide gas in
the air. Researches show that over the last thirty years, one fifth of the trees on
the earth have been destroyed. Reducing so much of the plants, of course, means
that the atmospheric proportions of carbon dioxide will increase. Unfortunately,
we are consciously destroying forests to build roads. Which else human activity
can damage the carbon cycle of? Do you have opinion?
Student (Std): The smokes releasing from factory and houses chimneys.
H: Yes, absolutely. In our lives, we use fossil fuels in many places such as
factories, homes, wherever energy is needed. If you consider the amount of fossil
fuels used by the world's population, you can understand how the excessive
180
carbon dioxide gas sent to the atmosphere causes global warming. [Classroom
Observation].
Furthermore, Hale was aware of both vertical and horizontal relations to the topic of
biogeochemical cycles in the science and technology curriculum. Regarding the
horizontal relations, she pointed out that she considered whether the students
comprehended the previous topics of photosynthesis, respiration and energy flow
in food chain before the teaching of biogeochemical cycles. She emphasized that
these topics were prerequisite knowledge affecting students’ understanding of
biogeochemical cycles. When Hale’s teaching of cycles was examined, it was also
observed that she often recalled the previous topics during her teaching of
When the vertical relations were taken in consideration, Hale emphasized that the
biogeochemical cycles are also closely related to the topics in the science curriculum
at the grades of 5, 6 and 7. She stated that students’ prior knowledge of the topics of
the weather events (the formation of cloud and hail) in the 5 th grade, the topic of
physical and chemical changes in the 6th grade, and lastly, the topics of the
properties of elements and compounds, the chemical bonds and basic building
blocks of living things in the 7th grade are important for their comprehension of
biogeochemical cycles. In her teaching of biogeochemical cycles, it was observed
that Hale often touched briefly on the required topics related to the each cycle. For
example, at the beginning of her teaching of carbon and nitrogen cycles, she started
to remind her students the properties of carbon and nitrogen elements and the role
of these elements in the structure of living things (building blocks of living things).
In the same way, in the teaching of water cycle, she recalled her students’ prior
knowledge related to the formation of cloud, hail and the changes of matter states-
physical change.
When asked the presentation sequence of the cycles in the curriculum, Hale was
aware of the place of the topic and the sequence of the sub-topics. Hale stated that
the curriculum presented the cycles respectively water cycle, carbon-oxygen cycle
181
and nitrogen cycle. She expressed that she also presented the cycles with
accordance with the curriculum. In her teaching of the cycles, it could be seen that
she did not change the sequence of the sub-topics, too. However, she also pointed
out that she can sometimes change the place of the topic based on her students’
prior knowledge. In other words, Hale expressed that she can modify the
curriculum in order to ease her students’ understanding.
4.2.2.2.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Materials
In terms of resources used, Hale explained that she has actively used the textbook
and student exercise book to teach the biogeochemical cycles. She underlined that
she generally used the textbook to follow the curriculum. Besides, Hale pointed out
that she preferred the student exercise book and her activity sheets to evaluate the
students’ understanding of the topic. She emphasized that she prepared the activity
sheets through the results of her communication with her colleagues in social
media. Moreover, she also pointed out that she reaped the benefit of the
presentations and animations during the teaching of biogeochemical cycles. In here,
she stated that she used the internet both to show the animations and to obtain
updated information related to the cycles (Table 4.34).
Table 4.34. Hale’s Aim of Using Teaching Sources

Textbook To follow the curriculum
Presentations/Animations To teach the water, carbon-oxygen and
nitrogen cycles.
Student Exercise Book To evaluate the students’ understanding of
the biogeochemical cycles
Activity sheets To evaluate the students’ understanding of
the biogeochemical cycles
Internet To show the animations & To update the
information related to the topic of cycles
Summary Sheets To repeat the topic of biogeochemical cycles
182
During the classroom practice, it was observed that Hale actively used presentations
with animations to transmit the concepts and processes of the biogeochemical
cycles. At the end of the teaching of cycles, she expected her students make the
activities in student exercise book and in her own activity sheet. Lastly, she
distributed a summary sheet of each cycle in order to both repeat the topic and
attach to the students’ notebooks.
4.2.2.3. Hale’s Knowledge of Instructional Strategies
4.2.2.3.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Subject Specific Strategies
Hale stated that she prefer to use project/problem-based learning in the teaching of
biogeochemical cycles. She explained that she expected her students to investigate
the causes, results and solutions to the deterioration of the cycles and discuss the
results in the classroom. Then, she pointed out that she mostly used direct
instruction and questioning method to complete the students’ missing points. She
pointed out that she often let her students to answer questions and share their ideas
about the topic.
Hale (H): I said that I teach the topics parallel to the curriculum. While I teach the
biogeochemical cycles, I often use questioning method to transmit the concepts of
the topic. In the same way, I ask several questions in order to remind their
knowledge related to the previous topic. I usually benefit from the figures and
animations in order to explain the processes of the cycles. I also give examples
from their daily lives. I show photos from Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl
to attract my students’ attention to the consequences of the environmental
problems…Besides, in these topics, the students generally study in groups and
present their products in the classroom. During their presentations, they can use
visual materials such as videos and animations, too. [CoRe Interview].
183
Observation data revealed Hale generally used the direct instruction and
questioning to explain the important points related to the biogeochemical cycles as
well. Moreover, she gave her students chance to both present their studies related to
the problems and solutions to the biogeochemical cycles and discuss the results with
their peers.
As she stated, she also mostly preferred the questioning method in order to either
remind her students the previous knowledge or understand what they learn about
the topic. For instance; during the teaching of carbon cycle, Hale used questions to
monitor what her students know about fossil fuels and the sources of carbon in
nature.
H: Let’s continue with the carbon cycle. You know there is 0.03 % carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere. This amount of carbon is important for us. The increase in the
amount of the carbon is a problematic, and unfortunately in recent years we
know this value has increased. Except the atmosphere, where is the carbon
stored in nature?
Std: There is in fossil fuels.
H: Yes. What does fossil fuel mean?
Std: In the oxygen-free environment, the detritus of the plants and animals…
H: With oxygen or oxygen-free?
Std: Oxygen-free, yes. The detritus of plants and animals constitute the fossil
fuels such as wood, coal and natural gas under the soil.
H: Yes, absolutely. Fossil fuels are the detritus of the dead plants, animals and
human bodies that contain carbon and they [fossil fuels] are formed as a result of
a long period of time without oxygen under the soil. What else?
Std: In the structure of plants and human.
H: Yes. C, H, O and N are found in the structure of living things... And also in the
oceans, the carbon compounds are found as dissolved carbon compounds.
[Classroom Observation].
In conclusion, when Hale’s teaching of biogeochemical cycles was examined, it
could be seen that direct instruction and questioning dominated her courses on the
topic of biogeochemical cycles. Although the main characteristic of her teaching was
its teacher-centeredness, she also preferred the project-based learning as a student-
centered strategy in order to make her students to be active.
184
4.2.2.3.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Topic Specific Strategies
4.2.2.3.2.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Representations
Results showed that Hale used the representations like presentations, illustrations,
animations, and examples in order to aid students in developing the comprehension
of the topic of biogeochemical cycles. She actively used the presentations to help the
students to comprehend the cycles. When necessary, she expressed the processes of
each cycle through the different visuals in the presentations. For example, she used
the schemas (Figure 4.12) in order to both explain the concepts of hydrological cycle
and summarize the cycle at the end of her lesson. Moreover, she showed an
animation to explain the process of transpiration in the plants (Figure 4.13).
While teaching of carbon cycle, Hale also used a schema (Figure 4.14) in order to aid
her students’ understanding. Besides, she showed two animations (Figure 4.15)
related to oxygen and carbon cycles so she could attract her students’ attention to
the connections between producers, composers and decomposers in these cycles.
Besides, during her teaching the nitrogen cycle, she noticed that her students had
difficulties on the processes of nitrification, nitrogen assimilation and
decomposition. Therefore, she used different visuals and animations to explain the
processes of the cycle. She showed the schemas in order to explain the components
and processes of the cycle (Figure 4.16). Then she used the animations to both
emphasize the relations between biotic and abiotic components and summarize the
processes of the nitrogen cycle (Figure 4.17).
185
186
Figure 4.12. The Schemas Hale Used to Teach the Hydrological Cycle
Figure 4.13. The Animation Hale Used to Show the Transpiration
Figure 4.14. The Schema Hale Used to Teach the Carbon Cycle
187
188
Figure 4.15. The Animations Hale Used to Show the Carbon and Oxygen Cycles
189
Figure 4.16. The Schemas Hale Used to Teach the Nitrogen Cycle
190
Figure 4.17. The Animations Hale Used to Show the Nitrogen Cycle
Moreover, Hale gave various daily life examples to support the comprehension of
her students. For example, in her teaching of hydrologic cycle, Hale gave an
example from her experiences to emphasize the deterioration of the water cycle as a
result of human-based activities.
H: In the water cycle, we wonder about the decrease in the amount of usable
water. If so what is the cause of this problem in the water cycle? As your friend
just said, the poisonous gases, entering the atmosphere, caused trouble in the
structure of the rains falling on the earth. The rains fall down to earth as acid
rains. There's something I remember from my grandmother: in old times, there
had been five-pound oil cans. After these cans had been empty, my
grandmother’s mother had put them in the garden. The rainwater had been
falling on those cans. They had used the rainwater to wash vegetables and fruits
or to bathe. Now it is not possible to do such a process with rain water.
Particularly, after the nuclear explosions or volcanic eruptions experts warn us to
avoid exposure to the first rain as much as possible. Why? Because they contain
acids, and are dangerous for the living things [Classroom Observation].
Hale also used a simple example of a hundred glasses of water to attract her
students’ attention to the amount of usable water resources on Earth.
H: As you know, there are many sources of water such as oceans, seas,
groundwater, rivers, and lakes. The amount of these resources is expressed in
units of million cubic meters. It's hard to keep them in mind, of course. A
scientist has made an analogy that every individual can understand. He likened
the total amount of water resources on earth to a hundred glasses of water. The
ninety-seven glasses of the hundred glasses are composed of salty waters such as
ocean and seas. Three glasses of water left behind. He says two glasses of these
three glasses of water are hidden in icebergs. It remained one glass of water. One
glass of water also creates fresh water resources such as ground waters, lakes and
rivers. An average of 7.5 billion people will consume this water. Imagine, if a
drop is disappeared, what happens as a result of this decrease? Today, we see
that more than a drop has disappeared from the water resources. The lakes are
dried and the rivers are shrinked. Then why is the amount of water decreased?.
191
4.2.2.3.2.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Activities
Hale stated that she conducted the activities found in the textbook and student
exercise book. As she cited, she included the activities regarding the topic of
biogeochemical cycles in her lessons. Although she generally preferred a wide range
of representations, she also used the puzzle solving and concept map completion
activities in order to understand whether her students comprehend the topic of the
cycles. In this cross puzzle activity, students are required to ask the appropriate
questions for the each concept (hydrological cycle, cloud, oxygen, decomposer,
nitrogen, lightning) shown numbers. (Figure 4.18).
Figure 4.18. The Puzzle Activity Hale’s Used to Assess Students’ Learning
(In Turkish)
In addition, Hale asked her students to complete the concept maps with the given
concepts regarding the unit of living things and energy relations. After students
complete the concept map, she showed the completed concept map (Figure 4.19) as
a visual on the board through the projector. In this map, students are required to fill
192
the empty boxes with the appropriate concepts such as living things, decomposer,
composer and respiration.
Figure 4.19. The Concept Map Completion Activity Hale’s Used to Assess Students’
Learning (In Turkish)
4.2.2.4. Hale’s Knowledge of Students’ Understanding of Science
requirements for learning and areas of difficulties. In this section, Hale’s knowledge
of learners’ understanding regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles was
presented.
4.2.2.4.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Requirements for Learning
Hale was aware of the pre-requisite knowledge needed by students to learn the
topic of biogeochemical cycles. She initially underlined that students need to know
the structure of the carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen elements, the
compounds they formed, the amount of these elements in the atmosphere. Then she
pointed out that the organic structure of the living things is the other pre-requisite
knowledge that students need to learn.
193
H: They must know the structures of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen.
What are the structure of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen? What kind of
compounds do these matters form? Where are they stored in nature? They
[students] have already learned these concepts in 7th grade and previous units of
this year. Therefore, they are able to connect these topics to the biogeochemical
cycles. Another point is that students need to know the roles of these substances
in the structure of living things. Besides, students also should know the amount
of these matters in the atmosphere. By this way, they can easily comprehend the
consequences of the deterioration of the cycles… [CoRe Interview].
After that, she emphasized that students’ comprehension of the topics of energy
flow in the food chain, and the processes of the photosynthesis and respiration is
also important for students’ understanding of the biogeochemical cycles. In this
regard, she expected her students to know the relations between biotic and abiotic
components of the ecosystems.
H: I give information to the children about energy transformations. I say that the
source of our energy is the sun. Starting from the green plants that can use the
energy of the sun directly, they know how this energy can flow among the
plants, animals, and people. What do producers and consumers mean? What is
the relationship between producers and consumers? I expect them to know these
topics. They also need to know about the nutrition of living things because I
expect them to know that energy can be transformed by food chains and webs
among living things. They have already known the importance of green plants.
Other than that, we talks about blue-green algae and cyanobacteria as a
producer. If they know these relationships between biotic and abiotic
components in nature, they can understand the importance of the ecological
balance that they form and that they need to be protected. The students’ prior
knowledge on these issues make their comprehension of matter cycles topic
easier. [CoRe Interview].
As she mentioned, Hale often used the pre-requisite knowledge to aid his students’
learning of the new topic of biogeochemical cycles in her teaching. For instance,
before the teaching of the topic of nitrogen cycle; she wanted her students to remind
the topic of the organic building blocks of the living things. She expected her
194
students to remember the role of nitrogen in the structure of living things in order to
teach the processes between biotic and abiotic components in the cycle.
H: You learned the buildings blocks of living things last year. Now, let’s
remember the molecules found in the structure of living things. Which molecules
constitute the structure of living things?
Std1: Carbon hydrates, proteins and fats.
H: Yes. Which elements are there in the structure of proteins?
Std2: Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen.
H: Yes. What else?
Std3: Nitrogen.
H: Yes, Nitrogen, phosphorous and sulphur so the nitrogen element, which
forms the proteins in the structure of living things, is one of the most important
matter for us…[Classroom Observation].
In the same vein, it can be seen that she reminded the topic of the compounds to
explain the nitrification process in the nitrogen cycle.
H: …There are nitrogen-binding and nitrogen-decomposing bacteria in the roots

of the legumes and in the soil. Through these bacteria, nitrogen can be converted
into compounds like nitrate, nitrite, ammonium, ammonia and nitric acid in the
soil. You remember these nitrogenous compounds from the topic of elements
and compounds, right?... [Classroom Observation].
Moreover, Hale considered her students’ both skills and abilities and learning styles
during her teaching of biogeochemical cycles. She preffered both use of project-
based stragetgy and various topic-specific strategies. She gave her students an
opportunity to discuss their peers’ projects and reflect their ideas. Furthermore, it
could be said that she was concerned the different types of learning styles due to the
existence of various representations.
4.2.2.4.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Areas of Students’ Difficulties
Hale stated that her students did not have any difficulty or misconception in the
topic of biogeochemical cycles. She pointed out that students were knowledgeable
about the related topics because of the private lessons in the cram school. On the
other hand, Hale emphasized that students cannot transform their environmental
knowledge to daily life. She complained that the learners cannot develop an attitude
in accordance with their environmental awareness. In here, it can be said that Hale
195
was concerned about the lack of her students’ skill development on affective
domain.
R: Do students have learning difficulties that affect your teaching about

what points do students have difficulties?
H: There is no point that students have difficulties or misconception in these
topics but I think there is a problem with the transformation of their knowledge
to the daily life. For example, s/he [student] knows that s/he shouldn't throw the
trash to the street or knows how to use natural resources consciously. But
learners have some habits so they can't transfer their knowledge to the behavior.
This is a difficulty we generally face with in environmental issues and
unfortunately we cannot easily assess the students’ behaviors or attitudes.
However, as far as I can, I try to help my students to comprehend the
environmental issues and problems im my science lessons.
R: Do not their prior knowledge have any misconception?
H: As I said, my students have learned the topics and known the atmospheric
events related to the biogeochemical cycles since the 4th grade. Therefore, they
do not have any misconception with their prior knowledge. [CoRe Interview].
4.2.2.5. Hale’s Knowledge of Assessment
Kemal’s knowledge of assessment regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles was
presented in this section.
4.2.2.5.1. Hale’s Knowledge of Dimensions of Science Learning to Assess
Hale’s knowledge of assessment on students’ learning was examined in the
dimensions of conceptual understanding, NOS understanding, and the connections
sustainable development issues regarding biogeochemical cycles. Hale stated that
during the teaching of the science topics, it is important to know whether the
students understand the related concepts. Therefore, Hale emphasized that she
preferred to evaluate the conceptual knowledge presented in the curriculum during
the lessons. Besides, she cited that in her teaching of biogeochemical cycles, she used
the project work to engage the students in the learning process. She underlined that,
in the projects, she could evaluate her students’ skill development through the peer
196
assessments. Hale emphasized that the peer assessment supports the students’
development of critical thinking, and interpersonal skills, as well as enhancing
understanding the conceptual knowledge related to the biogeochemical cycles.
Additionally, she expressed that students could also develop both cognitive skills
such as problem solving, decision making, critical thinking) and science process
skills (communicating, analyzing and interpreting etc) during the preparation of
their projects.
When Hale’s teaching of biogeochemical cycles examined, it was observed that she
gave her students chance to present their projects as a group work on the related
topics. Her students could only evaluate their peers’ performance during the
presentations by the help of an asseesment rubric. Besides, observation data
revealed that although Hale generally focused on the assessment in order to
evaluate her students’ conceptual understanding, through her different questions,
she tried to draw her students’ attention to the SD related issues. It was also
observed that she used questioning to either reveal her students’ conceptual
knowledge or monitor her students’ prior knowledge on previous topic, as well. For
example, she tried to elicit students’ prior conceptual knowledge on the
photosynthesis and respiration before his teaching on biogeochemical cycles.
H: …Now, let's remind the topics that you learned in the previous weeks. You
know, we have learned and made generalizations about the needs of living
things. What kind of needs do you have? What are the needs of the living things,
when you think of plants, animals, and people?
Student (Std): The common need of them is food.
H: Yes, your friend Dilan says that plants, animals, and people needs food. What
else?
Std: Plants needs water.
H: Do not the people need water?
Std: Yes, they need water, too. However, the plants need to produce food and
water is necessary for producing food in the photosynthesis.
H: Yes, all living things need water? What else?
Std: They need energy to survive.
H: Yes. They need energy for the continuation of their metabolic activities. What
else do they need?
Std: The plants need the light for the photosynthesis.
197
H: Yes, what else?
Std: Again plants need the carbon dioxide in order to photosynthesize.
H: Yes, absolutely. What else?
Std: The oxygen in the respiration.
H: I satisfy the need of food and then this food is burned with the oxygen to
produce energy. Yes. Is the respiration only done by the people?
Std: No. Plants and animals can do respiration, too.
H: Yes, I want to ask a question in here. The living things need water, carbon
dioxide, and oxygen. We do not mention but we also need nitrogen. Some
matters in nature are needed for the continuation of the life. We always consume
these matters in different ways but we know that the amount of these matters
should be stable. How the amount of these matters preserve in the atmosphere?
Std: They can be renewed. In other words, the amount of them is preserved
through the matter cycles.
H: Yes. Therefore the amount of the matters can be stable by the help of the
matter cycles. And today, you will learn how the matters that the living things
need for the life cycle in nature… [Classroom Observation]
Some questions that Hale used to assess his students’ learning during the teaching
of biogeochemical cycles were presented below in Table 4.35.
Table 4.35. Hale’s Sample Questions to Assess Students’ Learning
Questions
What are the needs of living things in order to survive?
What is the importance of water for living things?
Where is the carbon stored in nature?
What does fossil fuel mean?
Which compounds does the nitrogen form?
Where is the nitrogen found in the structure of living things?
What are the humans’ effects on the carbon cycle?
What should be done for prevention of the balance of the carbon-oxygen cycle?
4.2.2.5.2. Hale’s Knowledge of Methods of Assessment
Hale stated that she preferred to use different assessment methods namely; informal
questioning, activities on textbook and students exercise book, her own activity
sheets, peer assessment for students’ project works, and written exam. She
emphasized that she generally used the questioning method to either recall the
198
students’ prior knowledge or understand how much students learn in her lessons.
Furthermore, she pointed out that she expected her students to both answer the
questions and do the activities in the textbook or student exercise book. She also
cited that she often distributed to the students the activity sheets she prepared after
the teaching of the topics. She mentioned that when suitable, she used the
alternative assessment methods like concept map and peer assessment through the
topic of biogeochemical cycles.
H: …In written exams, I can assess whether the students understand or not.
Before the exam, I use the questioning very often in the topic of biogeochemical
cycles. Again, students have done activities such as the completion of a concept
map. We also use activities in the student exercise book. Sometimes I can
distribute the activity sheets I prepared. Then, for the reinforcement, we solve
many test questions asked in previous TEOG exams at the end of the unit. In
addition, students also make presentations about these issues. I also expect them
to evaluate their friends’ performances. I give them a guideline and a criteria
table for the presentations. According to these documents, they can both make
presentations and evaluate their friends’ group work. They can also learn the
related topics by the help of the presentations.
R: Ok, why do you assess in this way? What are the reasons?
H: I think it is more effective than the written exam. When you assess the
students learning during the lessons, you can see whether the students can
answer properly or not. For example, I usually ask my questions to the students
who do not raise their fingers. When I asked the question, I can see whether the
student can establish the connections between the topics. Students can also
recognize their lack of knowledge through the discussion in the classroom. But
they [students] can forget assignments you gave as homework or they [students]
can get the answers from their friends before they come to class. Then I can't
understand whether students can learn the content in such way. However, I can
observe easily by the help of the various activities in the classroom. Students’
participation is very important for me. I expect them to express their opinions
and knowledge. Then if I have to do the activity and if I couldn't do it in the
classroom, I can give it as homework. After that I solve the question in the
classroom next lessons... [CoRe Interview].
During her teaching of the cycles, Hale preferred generally the open-ended
questions to provide feedbacks on how much her students understand.
Furthermore, the whole students presented their projects related to the topic of
199
biogeochemical cycles in groups. Hale tried to provide feedbacks or review the
points that learners have difficulties through these presentations. Although she tried
to develop her students’ affective or cognitive skills through peer assessment
technique, her students could only evaluate their peers’ performance during the
presentation. In this regard, Hale’s formative assessment was missing.
R: Do you assess your students’ learning during the course?

H: Yes, I try to evaluate my students’ comprehension during the lesson as much
as possible because I can be aware of the misconceptions or missing points
immediately. You know, it is really hard to assess whether all of 40 students
understand in a 40-minute lesson. However, I prefer these assessment techniques
because if I cannot get answers in some questions, I return to the related topics
and help my students to comprehend properly.
It was observed that Hale also focused on the summative assessment at the end of
both the related cycle and the unit. She used the activities on the student exercise
book to evaluate whether students learn the related concepts. Moreover, she used
her own activity sheet after the teaching of biogeochemical cycles to evaluate
students’ learning. She also held a written exam including multiple choice items
(twenty questions). In the exam, there was only one multiple choice question in
order to assess students’ conceptual understanding on the biogeochemical cycles. In
the light of the explanations above, Hale’s knowledge of assessment was
summarized in Table 4.36.
200
201
4.3. CASE 3: Selda’s Subject Matter Knowledge and Pedagogical Content
Selda was called as Case 3. Selda is female and forty-eight years old. She was
graduated from biology department in Faculty of Arts and Science of a public
university in 1993. After teaching as a classroom teacher for one year in a public
primary school, she has been teaching science for twenty years in public middle
schools as a science teacher. Selda has already been working in Eco-schools project
implemented by TÜRÇEV for three years in her current middle school. Selda has
taught 6, 7 and 8th grades in 2013-2014 education year and has twenty course hours
as work load per week. There were thirty students in her classroom. In this section,
Selda’s results of subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge
were presented.
4.3.1. Selda’s Subject Matter Knowledge
4.3.1.1. Selda’s Substantive Knowledge
The results of Selda’s substantive knowledge regarding biogeochemical cycles are
presented in three headings, respectively; carbon, hydrological and nitrogen cycle.
Initially, Selda requested to answer the question what the biogeochemical cycle is.
She explained the cycle as ‘’ the process in which the matters such as water, carbon,
oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur are used by living things and return to
their resources again. She continued to the definition by emphasizing the limited
amount of these matters. Thus, she underlined that they [matters] should be used in
balanced way. She explained that the survival of the life is based on the continuity
of the matter cycles. It can be seen that Selda referred the living things as biotic
components of the cycles. On the other hand, she did not address the abiotic
components such as the sun and soil although she highlighted the reservoirs of
chemicals in her definition. As a result, Selda’s understanding of the cycle was
labeled as partial according to the scientific definition.

202
Researcher (R): How can you define biogeochemical cycles?
Selda (S): In nature, matters such as water, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, carbon
and oxygen are used by living things and returned to their sources. These
matters used by living things are not unlimited…Therefore, it is important to
preserve the amounts of these substances and to use them in a balanced way
because these substances are very important for living things and for the
continuation of life. Any increase or decrease in the amount of these substances
or any deterioration in the cycle prevents the system from functioning properly…
4.3.1.1.1. Selda’s Knowledge about Carbon Cycle
To reveal Selda’s understanding of carbon cycle, she was requested to explain the
carbon cycle through drawing. Selda’s understanding of carbon cycle was labeled as
Selda’s understanding related to the carbon cycle is summarized.
Table 4.37. Selda’s Understanding of the Carbon Cycle
Selda’s Understanding
Components within the cycle  Plants (as Producers)
 Animals, herbivores, omnivores and people
(as Consumers)
 Decomposers
 Organic compounds in the structure of all
living things, fossil fuels, CO2 in the
atmosphere (as Carbon Reservoirs)
 Soil (As abiotic component)
 Water (As abiotic component)
 Sun (As energy source)
Processes within the cycle  Burning of fossil fuels
 Photosynthesis of plants
 Respiration of living things
 Transferring of carbon element from plants
to consumers through food chain
 Decomposition
When asked the question of why the carbon cycle is important, Selda first stated the
existence of carbon and oxygen elements in the structure of living things. She
highlighted their [carbon and oxygen] functions in the formation of organic
compounds such as proteins, carbohydrates, and fats. Furthermore, she underlined
203
the importance of both CO2 in photosynthesis for the producing food and O2 for the
respiration of living things.

S: Carbon and oxygen are important elements because they are found in the
structure of living organisms. The proteins, carbohydrates and fats are the basic
organic molecules including carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. All living things
compromised of these molecules…Moreover; we need the energy to survive.
Hence, humans do respiration to satisfy their need of energy. We can use the
oxygen gas and the food produced in photosynthesis by used CO2. In this
manner, CO2 is also important to get energy…
Afterward, Selda began to explain carbon cycle through drawing (Figure 4.21). She
first addressed the process of combustion explaining the release of CO2 to the
atmosphere through the use of fossil fuels in human activities. She continued to her
drawing the process of respiration and photosynthesis. She expressed that the
carbon dioxide is released to the atmosphere by the way of respiration of living
things. After that, Selda explained the photosynthesis as the process that the plants
use both the carbon dioxide and the water in the soil; therefore, make food by the
help of the energy of the sun. As is seen, she clearly pointed out the abiotic
components of the cycle as the sun, water and soil. Although she did not show the
process of transformation of organic carbon in her drawing (Figure 4.20), she
mentioned that the carbon element is transformed to the consumers (i.e. herbivores,
omnivores,) through the food chain. After that, Selda mentioned about the
decomposition process. She, however, did not show the process of decomposition in
her drawing (Figure 4.20).

S: …[Drawing] Let's draw a settlement. There's a road here. There's a house and
a factory at the side of the road. The burning of fossil fuels from the chimneys of
these houses and factories results in gases such as carbon dioxide and carbon
monoxide. Also, there are humans, here. They are respirating. Millions of human
around the world takes O2 from the air and gives CO2 to the atmosphere. I'm
drawing a lot of trees as producers, across the road. Carbon dioxide released by
respiration and as a result of burning fossil fuels is used in the photosynthesis by
green plants. Water is needed in the cycle. Plants are receiving water from the
soil and carbon dioxide from the air. I’m drawing a leaf because I need to show
204
chlorophyll. As a result, plants produce oxygen and food through the
photosynthesis by the help of the sun and chlorophyll. Later, the carbon in the
food is passed to other organisms through the food chain. In other words,
herbivores eat plants and take carbon compounds into their bodies. Again, the
food is transferred from herbivores to carnivores and all other living things in the
food web. Then the dead animal and plant residues are decomposed by the
decomposers and the carbon dioxide returns to the atmosphere and thus, the
carbon cycle is completed…
She also added that carbon and oxygen cycles are interrelated. She explained that
the process of respiration is reverse of the process of the photosynthesis. Thus, Selda
did not separately draw the processes of the oxygen cycle. She also mentioned the
proportion of 21 % oxygen gas in the atmosphere.
S:…As known, there is 21% oxygen gas in the atmosphere. The only living things
that can produce oxygen are plants. Plants are the most important organisms for
the continuity of life because they place in the lowest step of the food chain. As in
the carbon cycle, in the oxygen cycle, the oxygen produced by the plants through
photosynthesis must be used in the respiration process. As a result, these [carbon
and oxygen] cycles are inseparable and reverse of each other. There's no need to
mention the oxygen cycle separately. The continuation of one depends on the
continuation of the other. Therefore, I think the cycle should be called as the
carbon-oxygen cycle.
Moreover, observation data revealed that Selda was aware of the reservoirs of
carbon. She pointed out the sources of the carbon element as organic compounds in
living things, fossil fuels and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere during her teaching
of carbon cycle.
S: …In general, carbon is included in the structure of the organic compounds

such as carbohydrates, fats and proteins. As I mentioned before, these [organic
compounds] are the basic substances that form the structure of living things so
all living things contain carbon. In addition, fossil fuels contain carbon, and as a
result of the burning of them, carbon dioxide is released to the air. Lastly, we
know that the atmosphere contains approximately 0.03% carbon dioxide. These
are the sources of carbon dioxide that are basically involved in the carbon cycle…
205
Figure 4.20. Selda’s Drawing of Carbon Cycle
206
In a brief, Selda’s statements regarding the processes and components of carbon
cycle in Table 4.37 were consistent to the scientific explanations. However, she did
not state the dissolved carbon compounds in oceans as a reservoir. She did not refer
the algae and cynobacteria as producers, as well. Additionally, she did not touch
upon the aquatic carbon cycle in neither her drawing nor teaching. Lastly, she did
not address the major source of carbon dioxide as oceans and biomass. In these
considerations, Selda’s understanding of carbon cycle was labeled as partial.
4.3.1.1.2. Selda’s Knowledge about Hydrologic Cycle
To grasp Selda’s understanding of hydrologic cycle, she was requested to explain
the cycle through drawing. Selda’s understanding of hydrologic cycle was labeled
as partial based on the statements in both her drawing and teaching. In Table 4.38,
Selda’s understanding related to the hydrological cycle is summarized.
Table 4.38. Selda’s Understanding of the Hydrological Cycle
 The animals, people (as Consumers)
 Oceans, Lakes, Glaciers, Ground Waters and
Streams (as Water Resources)
 Soil
 Condensation
 Precipitation
 Surface Flows
 Penetration
Selda initially addressed the importance of water. She expressed the need of water
for the metabolic activities. She expanded her explanation by stating the organisms
consist of cells and, cellular activities can only occur in the watery environment.
Thus, she expressed the role of water in the structure of living things accordance
with the scientific explanation.
S:…It is impossible to think of a life without water. Water is a vital and necessary
matter for living things because cellular activities can only occur in the presence
207
of water. Since all living things are made of cells, we need water for all our
metabolic activities…
Then, Selda mentioned all reservoirs of the water as the abiotic components of the
hydrological cycle. Although she explained the water resources as oceans, ground
waters, lakes, rivers, and glaciers; she only showed the oceans and ground waters in
her drawing (Figure 4.21). However, she only showed the oceans and ground
waters as the reservoirs in her drawing. Selda continued to her explanation with the
drawing of the evaporation process in the hydrological cycle. She pointed out the
formation of clouds by the water vapor evaporated from the water resources. She,
then, addressed the process of precipitation as snow and rain. Then, she explained
the surface flows and penetration process in the cycle.

S:…[Drawing] There is a mountain in here. At the top of the mountain, the water
is found as snow and ice. Let’s draw an ocean and ground waters accumulated
under the soil. In addition to these water resources, there are lakes, rivers,
streams and glaciers. Now, first the water evaporates from these water resources
and the water vapor forms the clouds. Later, it falls down to the earth as snow or
rain. As a result of precipitation, while some of the water percolates as ground
waters, some flows to the rivers and oceans. And the water evaporates again, and
the cycle continues like this…
Although she did not touch upon the condensation process in her explanations
through drawing, she explained this process in her teaching of the cycle. Besides,
during her teaching of water cycle, she explained the respiration as a process that all
living things (plants, animals and humans) give water vapor to the atmosphere.
Therefore, she referred both the biotic components and the process of respiration.
On the other hand, she addressed the transpiration process neither through her
drawing nor her teaching. Moreover, she did not mention about the sun and gravity
as the abiotic components of the hydrological cycle.
S:… The water cycle begins with the evaporation of the surface and underground
waters. The water vapor meets the cold air layer and falls down to the Earth
again as precipitation. Plants and animals also give water vapor to the
atmosphere through the respiration [Classroom Observation].
208
Figure 4. 21. Selda’s Drawing of Hydrological Cycle
209
In conclusion, Selda’s statements regarding the processes and components of
hydrological cycle in Table 4.38 were consistent to the scientific explanations.
However, Selda did not mention about the abiotic components such as sun and
gravity. Besides, she did not touch upon the climatic factors such as temperature
and wind affecting the hydrological cycle. Finally, she did not address the
transpiration process of the hydrological cycle. In these considerations, her
understanding of hydrological cycle was labelled as partial.
4.3.1.1.3. Selda’s Knowledge about Nitrogen Cycle
To identify Selda’s understanding of nitrogen cycle, she was requested to explain
the cycle through drawing. Hale’s understanding of nitrogen cycle was labeled as
Selda’s understanding related to the cycle is summarized.
Table 4.39. Selda’s Understanding of the Nitrogen Cycle

 The herbivores, the omnivores, (as
Consumers)
 Atmosphere and soil (as Nitrogen
reservoirs)
 Transformation of nitrogen compounds in
the plants to animals through food chain
 Lightning
Selda initially highlighted the importance of the nitrogen for the living things. She
detailed that nitrogen is one of the major elements in the structure of organic
molecules such as proteins and nucleic acids. Her responses regarding the
importance of the nitrogen were consistent with the scientific explanations.
Afterward, Selda began to explain the nitrogen cycle through drawing (Figure 22).
She continued to her explanation by emphasizing the atmospheric reservoir of the
nitrogen gas with the amount of 78%. She underlined that this atmospheric nitrogen
210
gas cannot be used directly by the organisms. She added that only producers can
take the nitrogen from the soil as dissolved nitrogenous compounds. Additionally,
she addressed the lighting as a process that the nitrogen gas fixed to the soil. Here,
she implied the soil as a reservoir of the nitrogen. Then, she drew the bacteria which
she called nitrogen bacteria in the soil and roots of plants. In pursuit of her drawing,
she continued to explain the process of the nitrogen fixation stating that the nitrogen
bacteria in the soil fix the nitrogen gas and convert to the nitrate. Later, she touched
upon the nitrogen-assimilation explaining the transformation of the nitrogenous
compounds from the plants to the herbivores through the food chain. However, she
did not show the plants as a biotic component in her drawing (Figure 4.22). She also
addressed the decomposition process through the nitrogen bacteria. In here,
however, she did not differentiate the decomposers and nitrifying bacteria. She also
did not state other nitrogen bacteria such as denitrifying and cyanobacteria as biotic
components of the cycle. Therefore, she could not explain the main processes of
nitrification and denitrification correctly neither in her drawing nor teaching
practice.

S:…[Drawing] Nitrogen is also very important element like carbon, hydrogen
and oxygen. Why is it important? It is involved in the structure of proteins. There
is nitrogen in proteins and nucleic acids in the structure of living organisms.
Although with the amount of 78%, the most found gas in the air is nitrogen but
living things cannot use this nitrogen directly. First, there are nitrogen bacteria in
the roots of the legumes and in the soil. These nitrogen bacteria take the free
nitrogen in the air in the form of ammonia and convert it into nitrogenous
compounds and nitrate. Then these nitrogenous compounds are taken by plants.
These plants are consumed by herbivores and then carnivores eat the herbivores.
Therefore, in this way food including nitrogen compounds can be transferred
between living organisms. Let's draw one rabbit there. Rabbit will eat the plants.
Then it [rabbit] will give the nitrogen to the soil again. In other words, the plant
and animal residues will be separated by the decomposers and nitrogenous
compounds will return to the soil again. At the same time, the free nitrogen in the
atmosphere is fixed to the soil by the help of the lightning and thunderstorms…
211
Figure 4.22. Selda’s Drawing of Nitrogen Cycle
212
In short, Selda’s statements regarding the processes and components of nitrogen
cycle in Table 4.39 were consistent to the scientific explanations. On the other hand,
she did not differentiate the decomposers and nitrifying bacteria. Furthermore, she
did not state other nitrogen bacteria such as denitrifying and cyanobacteria as biotic
components of the cycle. Therefore, her explanations about the processes of
nitrification and denitrification were not substantial. The statements in both her
drawing (Figure 4.22) and teaching did not include the sun as energy source which
is the important component of the nitrogen cycle as well. In these considerations,
Selda’s understanding of nitrogen cycle was labelled as partial.
To conclude, it can be said that Selda’s substantive knowledge in the topic of
biogeochemical cycles was partial considering her responses related to the
components and processes of the cycles. In the next section, Selda’s syntactic
knowledge regarding her NOS understanding was documented.
4.3.1.2. Selda’s Syntactic Knowledge
In this section, the results of Selda’s syntactic knowledge (NOS view) were
presented based on empirical, tentative, inferential, creative and imaginative,
subjective, socio-cultural nature of science as well as the distinction between theory
and law.
Empirical NOS: When asked the question of what the science is, Selda first stated
that science is a process including the sense of wonder. She explained the science as
‘’the process of finding solutions to the problems people face with in their daily
life’’. She accepted that scientific knowledge is based on the evidences; and that
scientist make conclusions based on the data collected through observation and
experiments. In order to assert her view, she stated that scientists can conclude the
existence of global warming based on data and observations such as graphs increase
in temperatures. On the other hand, she also adapted the view that there exist
stepwise procedures to reach conclusions and, thus, failed to understand that
experiments and observations are not the sole way to advance the scientific
213
knowledge. In the light of these considerations, Selda’s understanding had missing
points in terms of empirical NOS (See Table 4.40 for sample quotas).
Table 4.40. Selda’s Sample Statements of Empirical NOS

Empirical Science is first a process including the sense of wonder. It
[science] is the process of finding solutions to the problems
people face in the world they live in… Science serves all areas of
our lives. For example, in education field, we can use computers
and other technological devices by the help of the scientific
developments…
…Science is different from other disciplines by means of its
realistic structure because science is based on the experiments.
Scientists can make conclusions based on the evidences…
…Why all people around the word mention about the global
warming? Scientists can provide evidences, make observations
and experiments…They observe based on their senses. They
also propose a research question, formulate a hypothesis, and
then do an experiment…Finally; they collect data and conclude
the results. NASA, for example, can show a lake’s situation in a
period of time with the photographs, graphics, in other words
with evidences. So they [scientist] have collected data for years
and have reached to the conclusion that Earth’s temperature has
increased approximately 4 degree since 1900’s.
Theory & Law: Requested to answer the question of differences between theory and
law, it was understood that Selda was not aware that theories and laws are different
kinds of scientific knowledge. Asserting that theories become laws when universally
accepted, she possessed naïve understanding that there is a hierarchical relationship
between theories and laws. Besides, her responses included the misconceptions that
the theories are the knowledge that needs to be proven and laws are certain
knowledge. She gave examples from Newton laws of motion and Evolution theory.
Although she explained the greenhouse effect correctly, she failed to understand
that it is a theory (Ramanathan, 1988; Wilkins, 1993) because of her misconception
on the explanatory function of theories. Thus, her excerpts indicated that she failed
to understand the functions of the theories and laws, as well (See table 4.41 for
sample quotas).
214
Table 4.41. Selda’s Sample Statements of Theory & Law

Theory & Law … Many theories can be put forward, but these theories need to
be accepted by all scientists around the world. If the theories are
proven, they are called laws. For example no one disclaim the
certainty of Newton’s laws of motion or Principle of Pascal.
However, I can accept the Darwin’s theory but you cannot
accept it; because this theory needs some evidences…That is, it
needs to be proven…
…The greenhouse effect is a law for me. Scientists have a
common conclusion that the global warming really happens.
They all concluded that the increase in the temperature is caused
by the greenhouse gases. The results of the studies, conducted in
twenty years, have indicated that the temperature of the earth
has been increasing. There are many evidences, such as the
graphics showing the change of the temperature on Earth in
twenty years. Therefore, greenhouse effect is a law, under these
circumstances…
Tentative NOS: When asked whether scientific knowledge can be changed, Selda
realized that scientific knowledge is subject to change. She argued that there are
different interpretations of previous knowledge and new technologies can advanced
the scientific knowledge. She elaborated her answers giving examples from the
ways of treatment of diseases and the opinions on the shape of Earth. When asked
whether theories and laws can be changed, however, she hold a naïve view of the
laws are certain knowledge and difficult to change. Additionally, although she
asserted that theories can be changed, her assertion was not accordance with the
tentative view of science. Rather, she reflected naïve understanding of theories as a
step in the generation of laws (Abd-El-Khalick, 2005). Thus, the results showed that
her misconception related to the functions of theories and laws caused her
understanding on tentative NOS to be partial (See table 4.42 for sample quotas).
215
Table 4.42. Selda’s Sample Statements of Tentative NOS

Tentative …Scientific knowledge can be changed. Science is not a stable
rather a constantly developing phenomenon. More realistic
results can be obtained by observations and experiments. For
example, the flat earth opinion. This opinion had been
researched over time, and rejected by the new interpretations
based on different research. Additionally, technologies on the
treatments of the diseases such as cancer have been
developing day by day…
…I think laws are the scientific knowledge difficult to be
changed. On the other hand, theories are more open to change.
The evolution theory of Darwin can be developed over time,
and if all scientists accept its certainty, we can call it as
Darwin’s Law. However, do you think that the Newton’s laws
of motion can be changed? I think, this is almost impossible…
Inferential NOS: When asked how scientists are certain about how dinosaurs
looked like, Selda acknowledged that scientists make inferences. She did not use the
term ‘‘inference’’ explicitly but she implied that scientists make interpretations
based on the evidences. She expanded her responses stating ‘‘based on the fossil
evidences, scientists concluded that dinosaurs were descended from reptiles and
had lived millions of years ago.’’ She also expressed that the fossil evidences of
dinosaurs’ skeletal systems and their habitat help scientists be certain about their
appearance and feeding habits. Hence, Selda’s understanding of inferential NOS
was substantial (See table 4.43 for sample quotas).
Table 4.43. Selda’s Sample Statements of Inferential NOS

Inferential …It is now a well-known fact that dinosaurs had lived millions of
years ago and reptiles were their ancestors. Scientists investigated
the fossil evidences as they [scientists] obtained the proof of their
[dinosaurs] existence. We can see the models of dinosaurs based on
fossil evidences in museums. In addition, scientists can provide the
evidences of the physical structure and feeding patterns of the
dinosaurs through their habitat and fossil evidences of the skeletal
systems…
216
Creative and Imaginative NOS: Selda was aware of the crucial role of imagination
and creativity in science. She realized that scientists’ imagination and creativity is
essential for the continuation of their investigation. Hence, her responses were
informed because of the understanding that scientists’ imagination and creativity
have an important role in every part of the scientific investigation. In here, it can be
also seen that Selda acknowledged that scientific knowledge can develop by the
help of scientists’ different perspectives. In other words, she was aware of the
subjectivity in science. Selda’s sample statements related to the creative NOS can be
seen in Table 4.44.
Table 4.44. Selda’s Sample Statements of Creative and Imaginative NOS

Creative and …It is impossible to think that science is apart from imagination
Imaginative and creativity. The scientist first begins with curiosity…then,
imagination and creativity are necessary for the development of
their research.
Perhaps this characteristic [creativity and imagination] of
science is most used in planning, but at every stage, I think that
scientists should need creativity and imagination. For example,
he/she is in a certain part of his or her research but can come up
with different ideas and use the advantage of creativity and
imagination. Therefore, she/he can develop his/her research…
Subjective NOS: When asked how scientists reach different conclusions with the
same data, she accepted that science is influenced by the scientists’ background
knowledge, preconceptions, political views and values. Likewise, her responses on
the aspect of creative and imaginative NOS supported her informed view on
subjective NOS. On the other hand, she asserted that subjectivitiy causes scientific
knowledge to be unreliable, thus she reflected the naïve view that science should be
objective and value-free. From this point of view, the results showed that Selda’s
inconsistent expressions on the subjective NOS caused her understanding to be
partial. Sample statements can be seen in Table 4.45.
217
Table 4.45. Selda’s Sample Statements of Subjective NOS

Subjective Unfortunately, the work of scientists, of course, is influenced by
political views, lifestyles, background knowledge, religious
views or economic concerns. On the other hand, I think that
scientists and science should be objective; scientists’ values
should not affect their research. Unfortunately, the countries
that hold the power in the global world influence on science. I
think the results are distorted and reflected us differently…If
science was a authority that could be changed according to
interests, individuals or values, how could people trust
science?...
Socio-Cultural NOS: To be categorized as holding informed understanding of
socio-cultural NOS, participant should indicate an understanding that science is a
human endeavor and, as such, is influenced by the society and culture in which it is
practiced (Lederman et al., 2001). Giving example related to Muslim societies Selda
accepted that science is influenced by religion, culture and values of the society. On
the other hand, aligned with her partial understanding regarding subjective NOS,
Selda asserted that science should be value-free and scientific research is isolated
from the norms and values of the society. Thus, Selda’s understanding had deficits
on the tenet of socio-cultural NOS due to her contradictory expressions. Sample
Table 4.46. Selda’s Sample Statements of Socio-Cultural NOS

Socio-Cultural Science is also influenced by the culture, religion, norms and
values of the society. For example, Notice that, European
societies have always produced, and Arab countries have
always consumed. As the Muslim societies, we had used what
Europeans were produced. We haven't advanced in technology.
The Muslim societies and Arab Peninsula was the least affected
by the science and technology revolutions in the Renaissance.
It’s all about the religious views of Muslim societies. I think all
kinds of social, cultural and religious values affect science in this
way…However, I think that science should be universal. It
should be independent from the religion or cultural values of
the society. It should not deal with superstition…It should have
a common and unique language…
218
To sum up, Selda’s responses implied that she possessed inadequate understanding
on NOS tenets. Specifically, she had naïve understanding on the functions of/
differences between theory and law. In fact, it can be said that there were
interactions among Selda’s NOS views. For example, although Selda asserted that
scientific knowledge can be changed by the new interpretations, she held the naïve
idea that the change of laws is difficult because laws are certain knowledge. In here,
the deficiencies in her understanding of the functions of theories and laws affected
her view of tentative NOS. Likewise, her partial understanding of subjective NOS
caused her understanding of socio-cultural NOS to be partial, as well. On the other
hand, Selda’s understanding that scientific claims are based on empirical evidences
helped her view of inferential NOS become substantial. To conclude, Selda did not
have sophisticated views of NOS because she was not deeply informed in all of the
NOS tenets. Moreover, it observed that she did not translate any aspects of NOS
into her classroom practice of biogeochemical cycles.
4.3.1.3. Selda’s Understanding of Sustainable Development Regarding

In order to reveal Selda’s understanding of sustainable development (SD) regarding
biogeochemical cycles, she was requested to answer what the causes, results and
solutions to the disruptions to the cycles are. Besides, her teaching of
biogeochemical cycles was observed. Therefore, both her responses and practice
unveiled how Selda linked the biogeochemical cycles to theaspects of sustainable
development.
Selda mainly touched upon the unconscious use of natural resources as the cause of
the disruption to the biogeochemical cycles. She pointed out that people have
abused the limited natural resources. She, therefore, attributed the population
growth to the main cause of the environmental damage. She had the idea that
human activities should sustain the balance of the nature. She, also, implied the
interdependency of the living things by emphasizing the energy flow through the
219
biogeochemical cycles. Therefore, she approached the use of natural resources by
the environmental aspect of SD.
Researcher (R): What are the causes of the disruption in biogeochemical cycles?
Please explain.
Selda (S): We know that there are living and non-living things in ecosystems.
The living organisms in this ecosystem provide their need of energy and food
through the biogeochemical cycles. Therefore, cycles are necessary for the energy
flow and the continuity of life. Unfortunately, in recent years, people have
damaged the cycles. They [cycles] are negatively affected by people's activities…
The resources on earth are limited. If we do not use the resources in a balanced
way and prevent them functioning properly, we will suffer the consequences.
4.3.1.3.1. Selda’s Knowledge on the Connections between Carbon Cycle

Regarding the deterioration of the carbon cycle, Selda emphasized the deforestation
and unsustainable consumption of natural resources as the main environmental
problems related to the carbon cycle. She tried to connect the scarcity of energy
resources and energy problem to the population explosion. Because of the increase
in energy need, she stated that there has been an increase in damage of the
environment. Thus, in here, Selda attributed the environmental problems to the
energy. Moreover, Selda tried to address the unsustainable modes of production
through the industrialization. Specifically, she underlined the unsustainable energy
production through the increase in the number of power plants using non-
renewable energy resources. Moreover, she touched upon the unplanned
industrialization as the factor leading vegetation removal to build constructions. As
a result, she connected the increase in CO2 emission to the excessive use of fossil
fuels and deforestation. In here, she also referred the atmospheric pollution because
of the excessive carbon emission. Therefore, she emphasized the three aspects of SD
namely; environment, energy and economy.
S: …The world’ population is constantly increasing and we have the energy

shortages. In order to satisfy the world’s need of energy, the number of thermal
power plants is rapidly increasing. We're cutting the trees and destroy the forests
to build more power plants. Again, the increase in population causes unplanned
220
urbanization. The green lands were destroyed to build the residences and
shopping malls. For example, you can't breathe in Istanbul (Most crowded city in
Turkey) because of intense air pollution. In other words, as a result of the
excessive use of fossil fuels in these constructions and the destruction of forests,
the more carbon dioxide is released to the atmosphere. Therefore this situation
negatively affects the carbon and oxygen cycle…
Then, Selda addressed the governmental policies to cope with the problems related
to the energy need. She especially mentioned that the best solution is to support the
use of renewable energy sources with sufficient development policies. In here, Selda
implied the shared responsibility to cope with the problems related to the scarcity of
energy both universally and socially. She also touched upon the importance of
scientific research for the development. Therefore, in here, she referred the
environment, society, energy and politics aspects of SD by emphasizing the
solutions the envrionmental problems with the use of renewable energy resources,
development policies, responsibilities shared by internationally and socially and
finally scientific research for development in every area.
S: Carbon emission is one of the biggest problems in the world. Whether

developed or not, all countries have to take steps in this regard. As long as it is
supported by state policies, there can be permanent solutions to these problems.
Especially, regarding the energy problem, the measures to be taken and policies
are very important. We know that as all natural resources on Earth, energy
resources are limited. If so, the best solution is to support the use of renewable
energy sources and to do scientific research and projects in this regard; I think
that it is necessary to develop policies towards this sector.
When Selda was asked the results of the disruption in biogeochemical cycles, she,
again, stressed the aspect of environment implying the sustaining the natural
balance. She pointed out the global warming and climate change as the main results
of the disruption of the carbon cycle arising from the anthropogenic activities. She
mentioned that the increase in the amount of greenhouses gases due to the
unconscious use of fossil fuels causes to the global warming. She added that the
climate changes as a result of the global warming over time. Thus, she emphasized
that human activities devastated the sustainable balance of the nature.
221
S: …Burning of fossil fuels and cutting of the trees causes directly or indirectly
increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If the more carbon dioxide is
released to the atmosphere, the Earth’s temperature will increase. The increase in
the amount of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide in the air means the
increase in the temperature of the earth. We call this event as global warming
you know. Over time, this warming causes to the climate change. As a result,
these problems cause the damage of the balance of the nature…
Briefly, when Selda’s responses were examined, it can be seen that she touched
upon the important environmental phenomena such as greenhouse effect, global
warming, climate change and atmospheric pollution. Additionally, she connected
these phenomena with the scarcity of energy resources and unsustainable
production due to the population growth. She also referred the geopolitical
implications emphasizing the development policies that support the use of
renewable energy sources. However, she did not refer the carbon economy policies
to overcome the problems related to deteriorations of the carbon cycle. Furthermore,
she did not mention about the poverty as an issue of SD related to the carbon cycle.
During her explanations of the connections between the carbon cycle and SD, Selda
also addressed five aspects of sustainable development including environment,
society, economy, politics and energy.
4.3.1.3.2. Selda’s Knowledge on the Connections between Hydrological

Cycle and Sustainable Development
Selda generally pointed out the environmental problem related to the water such as
water pollution and the scarcity of water. She touched upon the damage of water
resources due to the energy need. Moreover, she attributed the water pollution to
the decrease in the number of living things into the waters. In here, she referred the
interdependency of living things by the aspect of environment. She also underlined
the water scarcity because of the unconscious use of water resources. She
exemplified the decrease in the occupancy rates of dams because of the high
temperature as a result of global warming. Thus, she only pointed out the issue of
drought as a cause of the deterioration of water cycle. Therefore, Selda mainly
222
addressed the environment and energy aspects of SD through the water scarcity and
water pollution.
S: … I've just said we destroy the rivers and streams to build a hydroelectric
power plant. We also consume the water unconsciously in cities. We pour the
waste oil into the sink or tankers cause oil spill to the seas. Thus, we pollute our
water resources. We are endangering the life of both ourselves and the living
things in the waters. Recently I have heard that there will be water shortage in
Ankara and Istanbul this year. The reason is the decrease in the rate of occupancy
in dams. The reason for this situation is that the water evaporates too much due
to increasing temperatures due to the greenhouse effect. When there is a lot of
evaporation, the dams are not filled. In result, the deterioration of a cycle actually
causes other cycles to deteriorate...
To summarize, when Selda’s responses were examined, it can be seen that she only
touched upon the issues of droughts and water scarcity for the hydrological cycle.
However, she did not refer how these issues related considering the disruption of
the hydrological cycle. Again, she did not touch upon the phenomena such as soil
salinization, desertification and glaciation. Moreover, she did not address the trans-
border conflicts of water, the diseases arising from water pollution or the non-
conventional water resources as sustainable issues related to the hydrological cycle.
As a result, Selda mainly focused the environmental aspect of SD in terms of the
phenomena and SD issues related to the hydrological cycle.
4.3.1.3.3. Selda’s Knowledge on the Connections between Nitrogen Cycle

As can be seen above, Selda addressed the water pollution caused by household
wastes; industrial and agricultural wastes. She connected the reduction in variation
due to the water and soil pollution. She addressed the removal of large quantities of
water from rivers and ground water supplies for agricultural activities. Although
she also mentioned the excessive use of chemical fertilizers in agricultural activities,
she did not connect this problem to the degradation of nitrogen cycle. On the other
hand, she stressed the unsustainable production through agricultural activities. She
also considered the lives of other living things by emphasizing interdependency of
223
the living things. Thus, she approached the problems of water and soil pollution
from the environmental and social aspects of SD.
S: …We pour the waste oil into the sink and also tankers cause oil spill to the
seas. Thus, we pollute our water resources. We threaten the life of both ourselves
and the living things in the water resources. For example, if the water plants
cannot take the sun light to make photosynthesis, therefore they cannot produce
oxygen and food for other living things in the water. In a result, the destruction
of the carbon-oxygen cycle caused the water pollution causing the decrease in the
number of the living things in the water over time…
…There are many people doing agricultural activities in Turkey. They can use
the underground waters unconsciously by opening wells for irrigation in
agricultural lands. Also, the excessive use of fertilizers can cause the soil
pollution in there. These chemicals can reach the underground water resources
and consequently, pollute the water resources.
To sum up, it can be seen that Selda only addressed the soil pollution as a
phenomenon in the nitrogen cycle. She emphasized the water pollution and the
excessive use of fertilizers but she did not relate these issues to the nitrogen cycle.
Moreover, she did not emphasize the eutrophication due to the excessive nitrates in
the soil or water resources. In the same way, she did not address that the
greenhouse gases includes nitrogen. Thus, he did not relate the excessive nitrogen in
the atmosphere to the acid precipitation. Besides, she did not mention any issue of
sustainable development in nitrogen cycle except for the use of fertilizers. In that
case, Selda’s explanations on the connections between the nitrogen cycle and
sustainable development issues were focused on the SD aspects of environment and
society.
224
Finally, while mentioning the solutions, Selda especially focused on the SD aspect of
education. She emphasized that developments in education could create more
sustainable world for the future generations with the help of educated and awared
people. Thus, she stressed the society aspects by underlying the future generations.
To conclude, When Selda’s explanation related to the results, causes and solutions
to the depletion in biogeochemical cycles examined, it can be seen that she mostly
underlined the issues and aspects of SD in the carbon cycle. Therefore, it can be said
that she failed to connect both nitrogen and hydrological cycles to the related
sustainable development aspects. Moreover, Selda mainly approached to the
phenomena and issues of sustainable development from the environmental aspect
whereas she addressed the economic, educational and technological aspects rarely.
She also did not stressed the technological aspect of SD. To sum up, Selda’s
conceptions of SD regarding biogeochemical cycles can be seen in Figure 4.23.
225
226
Figure 4.23. Selda’s Conceptions of Sustainable Development
4.3.2. Selda’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge
4.3.2.1. Selda’s Orientation to Science Teaching
In this section, Selda’s beliefs about goals of science teaching at grade 8th were
presented based on the analyses of her responses to the card-sorting scenarios and
the interviews related to the goals of science teaching and classroom observations.
Selda cited that her beliefs about central purposes for science teaching were
generally affected by the national science curriculum and the examination system.
She expressed that her basic goal of science teaching was to transmit the curriculum
knowledge. She also emphasized that in 8th grade level; the goal of science teaching
was specifically to prepare learners to the TEOG (currently known as LGS)
examination. In addition, she expressed that science teaching also prepares the
students to high school courses (See Table 4.47 for sample quotas).
Table 4.47. Selda’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs about Central Goals for
Science Teaching

To transmit the knowledge We, all science teachers, have to follow the
required by curriculum national science curriculum in Turkey. I have
to teach the topics required by the curriculum.
Therefore, my main goal is to present the topics
as a curriculum objective…
To prepare learners to high school …As we know, science teaching is consisted of
courses the science branches such as physics, chemistry,
and biology. Science concepts in elementary
level are step for the science lessons in high
schools. We try to prepare our students to the
high school courses by giving the basic
scientific knowledge given in the curriculum…
To prepare learners to high school …Especially, at the 8th grade, students, their
exam families, and also our school administration is
concerned the TEOG exam. So, I try to prepare
my students for the exam in my science lessons.
I generally solve retired questions related to the
topic…
227
When it comes to her peripheral goals for science teaching, Selda pointed out that
one of her goals for science teaching is to connect science and students’ daily life.
She stated that in science lessons, she tried to help students fulfill their basic needs
in daily life. Her responses included that students are able to develop
environmental awareness in science lessons (See Table 4.48 for sample quotas).
Table 4.48. Selda’s Sample Statements Related to Beliefs about Peripheral Goals for
Science Teaching

To prepare learners to life We, as a human, born in nature and life. We
cannot isolate ourselves from the nature. So, the
aim of science teaching is to help students to
grasp the relationship between themselves and
their natural environment. I mean science
education is necessary to obtain basic knowledge
related to the life…
To help learners to satisfy their Who am I?, How do I keep living?, How do I
needs in daily life feed?, How do I run?, How do I sleep?...The
answers of these questions are given directly in
the science lessons. We have basic needs such as
seeing, hearing, feeding, sleeping to survive in
life. Through the science lessons, we try to help
our students to comprehend how they meet these
needs in daily life…
To help learners to develop …We have to protect the nature we have existed.
environmental awareness In science lessons, there are also environmental
topics in order to emphasize the relationship
between human and nature. I try to help my
students to comprehend the importance of the
relations between human and nature. In this
regard, I try to help my students to gain
environmental awareness…
Selda’s beliefs about the central and peripheral goals of science teaching completely
overlapped with the orientations that she chose as parallel to her science teaching.
Hale expressed that the scenarios related to the didactic, conceptual change,
academic rigor, curriculum goals and the educational system based on examination
corresponded to her science teaching. Although she chose the conceptual change as
her orientation to science teaching at 8th grade, it could be obviously seen that her
explanation was not appropriate to the definition of conceptual change.

228
When she was asked why she selected those scenarios, Selda stated that the
scenarios shared a common characteristic, which is being teacher-centered. She
expressed that there is a limited time to complete the topics before the national
exam. She, therefore, complained about both the overloaded curriculum and
educational system based on the examination. As a result, she cited that those
scenarios can be matched for her science teaching at 8th grades. Selda’s sample
quotas related to these scenarios can be seen in Table 4.49.
Selda (S): The common feature of the activities in these cards is to be designed in
order to give intensive curriculum knowledge in limited time. The activities are
teacher-centered. These limited activities can only be done because of our
examination-based education system. Neither I nor the students can do more
activity at 8th grade. I need to have control the time because I have an overloaded
curriculum that consists of subjects that should be completed before the TEOG
exam. If I have additional time, I want to do different activities but we have to
prepare our students to the national exam. Their families and the school
administration force us to prepare the students for qualified Anatolian high
school…
Selda pointed out that she could not utilize the remaining scenarios, including
activity driven, discovery, conceptual change, academic rigor, guided inquiry,
project based, inquiry, process and liberation due to their student-centered nature.
She explained that such scenarios required time and not suitable for crowded
classrooms. She also mentioned the teachers’ and students’ anxiety regarding
national exam, the overloaded curriculum, and the context of the school were most
important factors to be done these activities. Selda’s sample quotas related to these
scenarios can be seen in Table 4.50.
Observation data (the teaching of the biogeochemical cycles) revealed that his
teaching was generally based on lecturing as well, although she varied her teaching
with daily-life examples, figures and questions to facilitate students’ understanding
of the basic concepts. She did not use any subject-specific strategies (orientations)
apart from the direct instruction. Her teaching was generally structured, sequenced
and led by herself which was line with his orientations.
229
230
231
232
233
4.3.2.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Curriculum
4.3.2.2.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Goals and Objectives
In the Science and Technology curriculum (2005), there was only one objective
specific to the topic of biogeochemical cycles, which is students are able to explain
biogeochemical cycles parallel to the energy flow in the food chain (MoNE, 2005, p.354).
The acquisition of this objective is closely related to the understanding of the
previous topic which is energy flow in the food chain. Hence, the objectives of
previous topic should be considered as a reminder to teach the topic of
In the same way, Selda touched upon that the students should gain the objectives of
the topic of energy flow in the food chain in order to enable students’ learning of
biogeochemical cycles. Therefore, she stated that she often controlled whether her
students gained the objectives regarding photosynthesis, respiration, and nutrition
and energy flow in the food chain in her lessons. When Selda was asked the aim of
teaching of biogeochemical cycles, she responded by stating that she expected her
students gain the relevant objectives in the curriculum, as well.
Selda (S): In 8th grades, we simply present the biogeochemical cycles. I, as a
teacher, generally expect my students gain the curriculum objectives. What are
they? For example, I want them to learn that matter cycles are important to the
continuation of life. Also, they should learn the consequences of the deterioration
of these cycles. Thus, I first begin with the concept of cycle and the features of the
carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen. Then, I generally explain the processes
in each cycle, and the factors that can affect the continuation of the cycles.
Additionally, these cycles includes the processes such as photosynthesis,
respiration, the flow energy and food between the organisms. So, I consider the
students’ learning on these topics. For instance, before the introduction of the
carbon and oxygen cycles I want to ask my students’ prior knowledge related to
the photosynthesis and respiration…[Core Interview].
Selda also pointed out that she expected her students to gain some affective
domains, indicated in Table 4.51., in addition to the curriculum objectives. She
stated that she tried to raise the students’ consciousness in the use of natural
234
resources in balanced way. She also underlined that she expected her students to
comprehend the environmental problems as a result of disruption of the cycles. She
cited that students should gain environmental awareness for the continuation of the
matter cycles.
S: I focused more on the environmental awareness in such topics. I want my

students to know that natural resources are limited and we need to use them
carefully and in balanced way. Students should understand the environmental
consequences caused by problems in the matter cycles. It is important to find
solutions to the environmental problems they often face in their daily lives. I
want students to learn to take responsibility in order to ensure the survival of the
cycles. We discuss what they can do individually for more livable world…[Core
Interview].
Table 4.51. Selda’s Intended Objectives Related to Topic of Biogeochemical Cycles
Intended Objectives
To comprehend the importance of the balanced use of natural resources
To raise environmental consciousness for the conservation of the natural resources
cycles as an individual
As far as Selda’s teaching of cycles was examined, it was observed that she tried to
attract her students’ attention to the needs to be done for the continuation of the
biogeochemical cycles. For example, during her lesson on the carbon cycle, Selda
underlined the use of renewable energy sources and planting more trees in order to
decrease the carbon emission to the atmosphere.
S: We said cycles are important for the continuation of life but we influence the
cycles consciously or through indirect ways. Now, in your opinion, what are the
circumstances in which people have a negative impact on the carbon cycle?
Std1: We burn and cut off the forests.
S: Yes. True. What else?
Std2: For example, we burn wood and coal in our homes.
S: Yes, we use fossil fuels too much. What happens if we use fossil fuel?
Std2: More carbon is released. The cycle is adversely affected.
S: Then you have to either increase the oxygen to compensate or not to release
more carbon. What should I do?
Std3: More afforestation is required.
Std2: More plants are needed.
235
S: Yes. We need reforestation. Likewise, I need to reduce the use of these non-
renewable fossil fuels because these resources should be balanced. Then what can
we do to prevent the consumption of these resources?
Std2: We can use renewable energy.
Std1: We can use solar energy.
S: Well done. We need to use renewable energy sources and plant more trees. We
should be respectful and sensitive to the environment...[Classroom Observation].
Regarding the horizontal relations to the topic of biogeochemical cycles in the
science and technology curriculum, Selda emphasized that she expected her
students to learn the previous topics of photosynthesis, respiration and energy flow
in food chain energy flow in food chain, before the introduction of the
biogeochemical cycles. When Selda’s teaching of cycles was examined, it was also
observed that she often recalled the above-mentioned topics during her teaching of
carbon cycle.
When the vertical relations to the topic of biogeochemical cycles were taken in
consideration, Selda did not mention about the students’ prior knowledge related to
the topics of physical and chemical changes in the 6th grade, elements and
compounds and basic building blocks of living things in the 7th grade. However, in
her teaching of biogeochemical cycles, it was observed that Selda touched briefly on
the required topics. For example, at the beginning of her teaching of carbon cycle,
she helped her students recall their prior knowledge related to the organic and
inorganic compounds. In the same vein, Selda expected her students remind the
topic of physical and chemical changes to introduce the evaporation and
condensation processes in the water cycle.
When asked the presentation sequence of the cycles, Selda was aware of the place of
the topic and the sequence of the sub-topics. She stated that the curriculum
presented the cycles respectively water cycle, carbon-oxygen cycle and nitrogen
cycle. She expressed that she also taught the cycles in the same sequence with the
curriculum. In her teaching of the cycles, it could be seen that she did not change the
sequence of the sub-topics, too. However, she also pointed out that she can
sometimes change the place of the topic based on her students’ prior knowledge. In
236
other words, Selda expressed that she can modify the curriculum in order to ease
her students’ understanding.
4.3.2.2.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Materials
In terms of resources used, Selda explained that she has actively used the textbook
and student exercise book to teach the biogeochemical cycles. She underlined that
she generally used the textbook to both follow the curriculum and repeat the cycles.
Additionally, Selda pointed out that she preferred the use of student exercise book
to whether the students’ understand of the topic (Table 4.52).
Table 4.52. Selda’s Aim of Using Teaching Sources

Textbook To follow the curriculum & To
repeat the related topic
Student Exercise Book To evaluate the students’
understanding of the biogeochemical
cycles
During her teaching of biogeochemical cycles, it was observed that Selda actively
used the textbook to transmit and repeat the concepts and processes of the
biogeochemical cycles. She wanted one of her students to read the related part of
textbook and then she repeated the knowledge given in the curriculum. At the end
of the teaching of cycles, she expected her students make the questions and
activities in student exercise book.
4.3.2.3. Selda’s Knowledge of Instructional Strategies
4.3.2.3.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Subject Specific Strategies
Selda stated that she mostly used direct instruction and questioning method. She
pointed out that she expected her students to read the textbook before the
237
introduction of the new topic. Then, she addressed that during the lesson; she
always started with the questioning and let her students to share their ideas about
the topic. Then she explained that she continued to teach the topic by the help of
drawings and daily life examples through the lecture.
Selda (S): First of all, I want my students to read the related topic from textbooks
or other sources before starting a topic. I ask questions and they share their
opinions. I try to ask questions that are related to their daily lives. Then, as the
order of each cycle comes, I draw and describe them verbally. I want them to
note on their notebooks. I usually draw the figures in the textbook. And finally, I
want one of my students to read the knowledge in the textbook. I explain the
concepts again when necessary. If I have a time, I choose some students
randomly and want them to summarize the relevant cycle. Moreover, I especially
solve the retired questions related to the cycles [Core Interview].
Observation data also revealed that Selda generally used the direct instruction to
explain the important points related to the biogeochemical cycles. As she stated, she
also mostly preferred the questioning method only understand what they learn
about the topic. She generally expected her students to summarize the related cycle.
When Selda’s teaching of biogeochemical cycles was examined, it could be seen that
the main characteristic of her teaching was its teacher-centeredness. She generally
used questioning and direct instruction to transmit the content knowledge to
learners. Her teaching was generally based on lecturing. She did not use any
student-centered strategies like 5E Learning Cycle, Conceptual Change Approach
and Guided Inquiry etc.
238
4.3.2.3.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Topic Specific Strategies
Knowledge of topic-specific strategies of participant teacher was presented with two
sections as; knowledge of representations and knowledge of activities.
4.3.2.3.2.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Representations
Results showed that Selda only used the representations like drawings, illustrations
and examples in order to aid students in developing the comprehension of the topic
of biogeochemical cycles. She actively used the board to draw the figures (Figure
4.24, 4.25 & 4.26) to represent the concepts of hydrologic, carbon and nitrogen
cycles.
Figure 4.24. Selda’s Drawing Used to Teach the Hydrological Cycle
239
Figure 4.25. Selda’s Drawing Used to Teach the Carbon Cycle
Figure 4.26. Selda’s Drawing Used to Teach the Nitrogen Cycle

240
Additionally, Selda used her students’ presentations in order to summarize the
biogeochemical cycles. She gave chance her students to present their work on the
cycles. She repeated the hydrological, carbon and nitrogen cycles using the
illustrations (Figure 27-28-29) in the presentations.
Figure 4.27. Selda’s Illustration Used to Repeat the Hydrological Cycle
Figure 4.28. Selda’s Illustration Used to Repeat the Carbon Cycle
241
Figure 4.29. Selda’s Illustration Used to Repeat the Nitrogen Cycle
Moreover, she rarely gave daily life examples to support the comprehension of
students. For example, at the teaching of hydrological cycle, to attract students’
attention to the consequences of human based degradation of the cycle; she
exemplified the excessive consumption of the water resources in metropolitans.
S: What are the positive and negative impacts of humans on the water cycle?
Std: Global warming.
S: Global warming. Yeah. What is the impact of global warming on rivers,
streams and lakes in our country?
Std: They are getting dry.
S: For example, I saw the lake of Eğirdir. It is at the level of drought. What else?
Std: Unconscious use of water resources.
S: Unconscious use. How do we consume water unconsciously?
Std: Contamination, for example, water is mixed with chemicals. The toxic waste
is mixed up.
S: Yes. There are many living things in the water. Apart from us, there are plants
and other living things that live in the waters. We will not pollute the water by
considering other living things. We'll be more conscious. It is very important to
use water consciously. For example, we unconsciously consume water resources
in the metropolis. When we brush our teeth, we leave the taps open, we spend a
lot of water while washing our carpets. This summer, the occupancy rate for
dams is expected to decrease in Ankara and Istanbul. The rainfall was lower than
previous years. If so, we have to use our water resources consciously. [Classroom
Observation].
242
4.3.2.3.2.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Activities
Selda did not include any activities regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles in
her lessons. She used the representations rather than activities. Although she
wanted to do the activity related to the hydrological cycle in the textbook, she could
not perform due to the absence of the equipment. She stated that she could only
give examples and draw figures because of her students’ disinterested attitudes. In a
result, Selda expressed that she did not conduct any activities found in the textbook
and student exercise book.
4.3.2.4. Selda’s Knowledge of Students’ Understanding of Science
requirements for learning and areas of difficulties. In this section, Selda’s knowledge
of learners’ understanding regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles was
presented.
4.3.2.4.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Requirements for Learning
As mentioned in Selda’s knowledge of curriculum, Selda only stated that students
should comprehend the topic of energy flow in the food chain to learn the topic of
biogeochemical cycles. On the other hand, Selda did not mention about the
students’ prior knowledge related to the topics of physical and chemical changes;
elements and compounds and basic building blocks of living things regarding the
vertical relations of the topic.
Selda (S): Students first need to know the energy flow and food chain. They
should know that living things such as producers, consumers and decomposers
are connected to each other. Photosynthesis and respiration are important
processes that the student must know especially for the understanding of the
carbon cycle. Again, we repeat the issues such as how energy is transferred
between organisms and how energy is obtained in ecosystems. For this reason,
before I begin the topic of matter cycles or during the teaching of the cycles, I
243
remind to the students these topics in order to ease their understanding of the
cycles…[CoRe Interview].
As she mentioned, observation data deduced that Selda generally considered both
vertical and horizontal pre-requisite knowledge to aid her students’ learning of the
new topic of biogeochemical cycles, as well. For instance, she controlled her
students’ prior knowledge on the energy flow in food chain in order to introduce
the new topic of biogeochemical cycles. She expected her students to remember the
relations between the biotic (producers, consumers, decomposers etc.) and abiotic
components in the ecosystems.
S: Yes, we will start the carbon and oxygen cycle. Tell me where does oxygen
exist in nature?
Std: 21% in the atmosphere, my teacher.
S: Yes, what else?
Std: Produced in photosynthesis.
S: How do the plants produce oxygen?
Std: Plants take CO2 from the air. They get water from the soil and produce
oxygen and nutrients.
S: Yes. They produce nutrients and oxygen with the help of sunlight and
chlorophyll in their structure. So where is used the products of photosynthesis?
Std: Respiration.
S: Yes. What are the products of respiration?
Std: CO2 and water.
S: Yes. Absolutely. These events are the opposite, aren't they? We learned these
issues [photosynthesis and respiration] in the previous topic. As you can see,
carbon and oxygen return in nature through the processes of photosynthesis and
respiration. [Classroom Observation].
Moreover, she controlled her students’ prior knowledge on the topic of building
blocks of living things before the introduction of carbon cycle. Furthermore, she
reminded to her students the physical and chemical changes during her teaching of
water cycle.
S: …Well, first, let's focus on the water cycle. Why doesn't the water in the world
run out? How can the amount of water remain constant?
Std: With the water cycle.
S: So what happens in the water cycle that the waters remain constant?
Std: First it is raining but then the water evaporate and return as rain or snow
again.
244
S: Yes. Evaporation. You have learned it in the topic of state of matter. We know
the water can boil at a certain temperature but evaporate at any temperature. Do
you remember?
Std: Yes.
S: The water falls as rain, snow to the land, then evaporates again and returns to
the atmosphere. Well, what is evaporation, physical or chemical change?
Std: Physical.
S: So, the snow, the hail, the rain, they're all solid and liquid states of water. The
structure of water is unchanged, only its state changes in the water
cycle…[Classroom Observation].
On the other hand, Selda considered her students’ neither skills, abilities nor
learning styles. She, generally, touched upon her students’ requirements for their
conceptual understanding.
4.3.2.4.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Areas of Students’ Difficulties
Selda stated that her students did not have any difficulty or any misconception in
the topic of biogeochemical cycles. She mentioned that students were generally
insensitive to the environmental topics. She complained that students were not
familiar to environmental issues in their daily life, thus the transformation of their
environmental knowledge to the environmental attitude was difficult.
R: Do students have learning difficulties that affect your teaching about

what points do students have difficulties?
S: They [students] can understand this topic easily. We repeat it many times in
the classroom. We read again from the textbook at the end of the teaching. They
also solve the questions in the student exercise book. They don't have any
difficulty. Many students already know the topic because they are prepared for
the TEOG exam. On the other hand, students are not interested in environmental
topics in general. They are actually close to such issues. These issues are not
talked about in the family, and visual and written media cannot give wide
publicity to them. That is, students cannot encounter such issues in his daily life.
They only learn at school, in class. Therefore, no matter how hard we try to teach
in the lessons, students are unable to apply their learning to their life. It is really
hard to create an environmental consciousness and make it turn into behavior.
We try to raise awareness for students on environmental issues and expect them
to be conscious in their daily lives. But how far can we, as a teacher, accomplish
this? This is an issue to be discussed for me. [CoRe Interview].
245
4.3.2.5. Selda’s Knowledge of Assessment
Selda’s knowledge of assessment regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles was
presented in this section.
4.3.2.5.1. Selda’s Knowledge of Dimensions of Science Learning

to Assess
Selda’s knowledge of assessment on students’ learning was examined in the
dimensions of conceptual understanding, NOS understanding and the connections
of sustainable development issues regarding biogeochemical cycles. Selda stated
that during the lessons, she considered whether the students understand the
concepts given in the curriculum. Therefore, she emphasized that she preferred to
evaluate the conceptual knowledge that students were supposed to learn in the
curriculum during the lessons.
Data gathered via observations also revealed that Selda generally focused on the
assessment in order to evaluate her students’ conceptual understanding rather than
assessing other types of domains such as sustainable development (SD) and NOS
understanding. It was observed that she used questioning either to reveal her
students’ conceptual knowledge or monitor their prior knowledge during her
teaching of biogeochemical cycles. For instance, before the teaching of carbon cycle,
she expected her students to summarize the previous topic of hydrological cycle
briefly. Moreover, she tried to help the students to catch the missing points on the
processes of the water cycle.
S: So we have finished the water cycle. Who will repeat the water cycle? What is
the water Cycle?
Std: Once the water on the earth evaporate and when it hits a cold layer in the
air, it condenses as a cloud and then come back to the earth as rain or snow.
S: Clouds will form.
Std: Yes, then the water turns back to the earth with types of precipitation of
snow, hail or rain. Therefore, the water cycle is completed.
246
S: How do plants and animals contribute to the cycle?
Std: By respiration, they actually give water to the air in the form of vapor.
S: Yeah. Who wants to add something else? Did you understand the water cycle?
Yes. Now let's do the activity on page 137 in your exercise book. After that, we
will answer the retired questions in TEOG exams about this cycle...[Classroom
Observation].
Some questions that Selda used to assess her students’ learning during the teaching
of biogeochemical cycles were presented below in Table 4.53.
Table 4.53. Selda’s Sample Questions to Assess Students’ Learning
Questions
What is the importance of water for living things?
How the plants and people contribute to the water cycle?
What are the sources of the carbon in nature?
Where is the nitrogen found in the structure of living things?
4.3.2.5.2. Selda’s Knowledge of Methods of Assessment
Selda stated that she preferred the traditional assessment methods namely, informal
questioning and written exam. She underlined that the exam questions were
prepared by the all science teachers and asked to all students in 8 th grade in the
school. Therefore, she emphasized that she could only use written exams which
include multiple choice, true/false and open-ended questions to evaluate her
students’ conceptual understanding. Furthermore, she addressed that the informal
questioning was used to either recall the prior knowledge of students or reveal the
students’ learning of the current topic. She also underlined that she has to evaluate
whether the students gain the curriculum objectives because of the national exam.
Thus, she stated that she solved the retired questions asked in TEOG exams related
to the biogeochemical cycles. On the other hand, she did not mention any
alternative assessment methods like concept map, structured grid, peer or self-
assessment.
S: We hold three written exams per semester. For example, we prepare written
exam questions with the teachers in science group in common. Thus, we can
247
measure what the student understands about the topics. During the lessons, we
use the questioning technique frequently to understand what the student has
learned.
R: Which type of questions do you ask in the exams?
S: There are multiple choice items and open ended items. Sometimes, we can ask
as fill in the blanks in order to understand whether the students can comprehend
the concepts.
R: Ok, then why do you assess in this way? What are the reasons?
S: In the science group of our school we prepare the lesson plans through the
curriculum. We are also concerned about the fulfillment of the topics in the
curriculum because of the TEOG exam. Therefore, we cannot evaluate the
student in the process of teaching. We don't have time for this assessment. We
have to apply such methods because we have an exam-oriented education
system. We solve the questions in the textbooks in the classroom or give them as
homework. Moreover, the classrooms are too crowded so it is not suitable to
evaluate students individually. In order to evaluate the students’ learning, we
can do only written exams or solve the questions that have been asked by TEOG
in the previous years… [CoRe Interview].
During her teaching of the cycles, Selda used the traditional assessment techniques
as well. She preferred both close and open ended questions to monitor her students’
learning. Additionally, after the teaching of each cycle, she wanted her students to
write the summary of the cycle in the blank given in the student exercise book. It
was observed that she did not use any other assessment technique except the
questioning to monitor the learners’ understanding through the topic. She did not
provide any feedback or review the points that learners have difficulties. In this
respect, the formative assessment was fragmented that does not go through the
whole topic. When Selda’s summative assessment was taken in consideration, it can
be seen that she focused on the assessment of students’ learning by the written exam
at the end of the unit. She held a common exam consisted of twenty-five multiple
choice items. In the exam, there were four questions in order to assess students’
conceptual understanding on the biogeochemical cycles. Additionally, she tried to
solve the retired questions in TEOG exam to understand whether the learners
comprehend the topic of biogeochemical cycles at the end of her teaching. In the
light of the explanations above, Selda’s knowledge of assessment was summarized
in Table 4.54.
248
249
CHAPTER 5
5. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
In this chapter, the findings of the current research were discussed in terms of
science teachers’ subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in
the context of education for sustainable development. In the light of the discussed
points, the conclusions of the results were made. Afterwards, the implications were
presented for pre-service and in-service science teachers’, science teacher educators,
and curriculum developers. Lastly, some further researches on teacher education
were recommended in the light of the findings revealed in the study.
5.1. Science Teachers’ Subject Matter Knowledge
In order to reveal experienced science teachers’ SMK in the context of education for
sustainable development, both teachers’ both substantive, syntactic structures and
SD understanding regarding biogeochemical cycles were examined. Thus, in this
part, the results of participated teachers’ SMK were discussed based on the
considerations of the findings in the literature.
In this study, substantive knowledge refers to participant teachers’ conceptual
understanding (basic concepts & processes) related to biogeochemical cycles. Based
on the findings of the study, it can be concluded that participant science teachers
had deficit conceptual knowledge in the biogeochemical cycles.
Specifically, all teachers had partial understanding on the carbon, hydrological and
nitrogen cycles. In terms of the carbon cycle, participant teachers had some
inadequate knowledge. For example, Kemal and Selda did not touch upon the
carbon cycle in aquatic systems. Although Hale implied the aquatic carbon cycle
during her teaching, her explanations were not substantial. Additionally, Kemal and
250
Selda did not mention the algae and cynobacteria as producers. Furthermore, all
participant teachers did not address the major source of carbon dioxide as oceans
and biomass. They also stated the sun as the energy source of photosynthesis not a
driving force of the cycle. When participant teachers’ substantive knowledge
regarding the carbon cycle were compared to the explanations and the schemas in
the science curriculum (MoNE, 2013), it can be concluded that the science teachers’
understanding of the carbon cycle were accordance with the curriculum. For
example, in line with the deficits in teachers’ understanding, the aquatic carbon
cycle and other producers except the plants (i.e. cyanobacteria and algae) in the
carbon cycle were not covered in the science curriculum. Additionally, there is no
information about the major sources of carbon. Strikingly, in the cycle, the sun was
not referred even as an energy source. Considering the hydrological cycle, all
participant teachers had lack of knowledge that the sun and gravity were the
driving forces for the cycle. When participant teachers’ substantive knowledge
regarding the hydrological cycle were compared to the explanations and the
schemas in the science curriculum (MoNE, 2013), again, it can be concluded that the
science teachers’ understanding of the hydrological cycle were curriculum-led. The
content of the science curriculum did not give place to the sun and gravity as
driving forces as well. Lastly, the science teachers’ statements related to the nitrogen
cycle were inadequate according to the scientific explanations. For example, none of
the teachers mention the cyanobacteria in aquatic systems as nitrogenous bacteria
and the sun as the energy source of the cycle in their both drawings and teaching.
When participant teachers’ substantive knowledge regarding the nitrogen cycle
were compared to the explanations and the schemas in the science curriculum
(MoNE, 2013), it can be obviously seen that the science teachers’ understanding of
nitrogen cycle differentated. Kemal and Hale’s understanding were over the
curriculum whereas Selda had lack of knowledge in accordance with the
curriculum.
251
In the light of these circumstances, , it can be concluded that participant teachers’
substantive knowledge might be affected by the science curriculum. In this study,
specifically, the curriculum might support the science teachers’ ignorance of the
abovementioned components or processes of the cycles. In other words, the limited
content of the 8th grade science textbook might influence on the teachers’
substantive knowledge. This means that even if they were experienced, they may
forget the unused knowledge over time. This result fits with Arzi and White (2007)’s
work which aims to understand what occurs to teachers’ content knowledge over
time. In their longitudinal study of seventeen-year, Arzi and White (2007) followed
twenty-two teachers from their first year of teaching onwards. Based on the findings
of their study, they concluded that school curricula which acted as both an
organizer and information source had influenced teachers’ content knowledge most
significantly. Thus, they argued that CK became more coherent over time, while
unused CK was forgotten, and little new knowledge was developed. Therefore,
teachers become expert at teaching school science, leaving their academic science
aside.
Another salient finding related to participant teachers’ substantive knowledge was
the level of their substantive knowledge. As Hale and Selda’s specialist science were
biology, it was expected that their conceptual understanding on biogeochemical
cycles as an biology topic should be more substantial than Kemal’s understanding.
However, when teachers’ conceptual understanding of the cycles compared, it can
be obviously seen that Kemal’s substantive knowledge regarding matter cycles was
better than Selda. For example, in nitrogen cycle, Selda did not differentiate the
decomposers and nitrifying bacteria. Furthermore, she did not state the denitrifiers
as one of the nitrogen bacteria in the cycle. Therefore, her explanations about the
processes of nitrification and denitrification were not substantial. In that vein, it can
be concluded that Kemal had more successful than Selda in terms of undertanding
and teaching the biogeochemical cycles which is the topic in his non-specialist
subject area. This meant that he was forced to learn the topic of biogeochemical
252
cycles in detail, and seek help to teach effectively in his non-specialist subject
teaching. Kind (2009) illustrated this result in her study investigating how science
teachers respond in developing expertise to teach outside their specialism. Thus, she
showed that science teachers’ lessons in their non-specialist sciences were more
successful than those taught within specialism. A significant contributory factor was
that the teachers made more effort to learn the topic and received more help in
preparing their non-specialist science lessons (Ingber, 2009).
Secondly, the science teachers’ understanding of nature of science were also
investigated as syntactic knowledge (Schwab, 1964) in the current study. Consistent
with previous research findings (Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman, 2000; Akerson &
Abd-El-Khalick, 2003; Brickhouse, 1990; Cullen, Akerson & Hanson, 2012; Dogan &
Abd-El-Khalick 2008; Lederman, 1992; Lederman, 1999; Liu & Lederman, 2007;
Schwartz, Westerlund, García, & Taylor, 2010; Shim, Young, & Paolucci, 2010;
Tairab, 2001) in-service science teachers possessed inadequate conceptions of NOS
in current study. Particularly, teachers’ NOS views on the tentative nature of
scientific knowledge, differences between theories and laws, scientists’ subjectivity
and socio-cultural embeddness of scientific knowledge included naïve explanations.
Participant teachers realized the tentative nature of scientific knowledge and
implied that scientific knowledge can be changed by the new interpretations of
existing knowledge. On the other hand, when asked whether theories or laws can be
changed, their responses related to theory change were not associated with a
tentative view of scientific knowledge. Rather, they reflected a naive view of
theories as an intermediate step in the generation of ‘true’ scientific knowledge as
laws (Abd-El-Khalick, 2005). Thus, they held a naïve understanding that laws are
absolute knowledge giving examples from laws in physical sciences such as law of
gravity, law of motion, and law of thermodynamics. This misconception might have
resulted from the deterministic nature of the physical laws (Mc Comas, 1998). In the
physical sciences laws are typically deterministic because the connection between
the cause and effect are more securely linked (McComas, 1998). Thus, teachers are
253
confident of their naïve understanding of laws are accurate and certain knowledge.
Therefore, participant teachers ascribed to a hierarchical view of the relationship
between scientific theories and laws whereby theories become laws when ‘proven
true’ which reflects the teachers’ misconceptions in the NOS aspect of functions of
and differences between theories and laws (Bilican, 2014; Demirdogen, 2012; Dogan
& Abd-El-Khalick, 2008)
Next, teachers had common myth that there is one universally accepted scientific
method. In other words, teachers thought that scientific method should include
testable procedures. This misunderstanding caused teachers’ assertion that
experimentation is only route to obtain true scientific knowledge. Furthermore,
teachers’ misunderstanding of universal scientific method led to their naive
conceptions that science should be objective. On the other hand, the contributions
from both the philosophy of science and psychology reveal that complete objectivity
is impossible. Especially from the psychological perspective, the notion of theory-
laden observation hinders scientist to be objective (Lederman & Abd-El-Khalick,
1998). Besides, scientists hold myriad personal values, preconceptions and prior
experiences about the way the world operates. This is an unavoidable subjectivity
that allows science to progress (Lederman, Schwartz, Abd-El-Khalick & Bell, 2001).
Moreover, science teachers’ myths on NOS tenets above-mentioned had influence
on their conceptions of empirical, inferential, and creative-imaginative NOS tenets.
For example, teachers’ misconception of universal scientific method seeking correct
answer led their views of creativity in science. As a result of the discussion on
participants teachers’ NOS understanding, it can be said that it is impossible to
argue that NOS tenets are independent from each other. To be able to say that
teachers have sophisticated views of NOS, they should be deeply informed in all of
the NOS tenets (Akerson & Abd-El-Khalick, 2003; Şen, 2014).
In the light of these circumstances, in this study, participant teachers’ naive NOS
views might be related with their educational backgrounds including their primary,
254
secondary and undergraduate education. Specifically, the science approach in
science textbooks and the structure of laboratory activities which they experienced
along with their educational lifes and the lack of familiarity of NOS courses in their
college education might be important reasons for participants science teachers’
naive ideas on NOS. First of all, as being student, participant teachers’ experiences
on laboratory activities during their previous education might have led to their
inaccurate NOS views. Unfortunately, many common science teaching methods
such as laboratory activities serve to work against the creativity in science (Abd-El-
Khalick, 2005; McComas, 1998). Starting from primary level to undergraduate level,
the majority of laboratory works are verification activities. The laboratory manual
provides step-by-step directions and students are expected to perform activities,
make observations and then arrive at a particular conclusion. There is an
expectation that the conclusions formed will be both self-evident and uniform.
Consequently, the laboratory activities promote the misconception that science is
procedural and objective (Bilican, 2014; Clough, 2006). In his book, Tobias (1990)
argued that students are not given opportunities to see science as an exciting and
creative pursuit in the laboratories. Thus, due to the way of teaching science,
participant teachers could have misunderstanding of nature of science in their
student years. The depiction of science in the textbooks might also cause participant
teachers’ inadequate views on NOS (Abd-El-Khalick, Waters & Le, 2008; Bilican,
2014; Clough, 2006; Irez; 2009; Vesterinen, Aksela, & Lavonen, 2011). The studies
just showed that the way of nature and aspects of science portrayed in science
textbooks have many problems. Textbooks introduced the science as a procedural
process seeking facts. Additionally, they either neglected NOS aspects or reflected
inaccurate NOS views (Irez, 2009; Vesterinen, Aksela, & Lavonen, 2011). Therefore,
these problems related to science textbooks which introduced at their any education
level impeded participant teachers to possess naïve understanding about nature of
science. Moreover, the absence of NOS courses in their college education might be
another reason hindering teachers to develop NOS understanding. As known, the
courses related to the history and nature of science has been integrated to the
255
teacher education programs in Turkey, recently. Throughout the well-organized
method or elective courses in science teacher education, teachers are given
opportunities to discuss and reflect on the various aspects of NOS within in the
different contexts. Thus, NOS is made pervasive theme for teachers by means of
teacher education (Abd-El-Khalick, 2000; Bilican, 2014). As the participant teachers
in the current research had experiences more than twenty years, they might have
been a lack of familiarity of NOS courses in their undergraduate level. Hereby, they
could not possess conceptual understanding of NOS.
In this study, participant teachers were expected to reflect NOS aspects into their
practice regarding the topic of biogeochemical cycles. However, none of the teachers
could translate any NOS aspects into their teaching. Since the rudimentary subject
matter knowledge was considered to be one of the constraints that hinder teachers’
integration NOS effectively (Abd-El-Khalick, & Akerson, 2003; Schwarzt &
Lederman, 2002), the argument that teachers did not translate their NOS
understanding into their classroom settings was an inevitable result of the current
study. Especially, the teachers had lack of knowledge about the embedded NOS
views regarding biogeochemical cycles. For example, when asked whether
greenhouse effect is theory or law, although they explained the greenhouse effect
correctly, they failed to understand that it is a theory (Ramanathan, 1988; Wilkins,
1993) because of their misconception on the functions of theories. Thus, the
emphasis is that teaching about NOS requires science teachers to have more than a
superficial knowledge and understanding of NOS aspects (Abd-El-Khalick &
Lederman, 2000). There has been an consensus among researchers in educational
field that deep conceptual understanding of subject matter is a necessary and crucial
component of teachers’ knowledge and professional base for effective teaching
(Abell, 2007; Abd-El-Khalick & BouJaoude 1997, Aydin, 2012; Grossman, 1990;
Magnusson et al., 1999; Shulman 1986, 1987; NRC, 1996; 2000). On the other hand,
these studies also concluded that subject matter knowledge is necessary but not
sufficient requirement for teaching effectively. Even if teachers had desired NOS
256
understanding, they could not translate their beliefs into the instructional practices
(Abd-El-Khalick, & Lederman, 2000; Lederman, 1992, 1999; Luft & Roehrig, 2007).
There is a variety of factors constrained the translation of teachers’ NOS views into
practices except from the conceptual understanding. To be able to teach NOS,
teachers must intend and believe they can teach NOS, must concern students’ needs
and abilities to learn NOS and must have the pedagogical knowledge base for
teaching NOS (Schwartz & Lederman, 2002). In other words, teachers’ orientations
and PCK for NOS are important factors that mediate teachers’ translation of their
views on NOS into their teaching practices (Clough, 2006; Hanuscin & Hian, 2009;
Hanuscin, Lee, & Akerson, 2011; Lederman, 2007). The vision of the science
curriculum is to educate learners as scientific literate individuals (MoNE, 2013) and
the nature of science is an important element of scientific literacy. Thus, to help
students possess an understanding of NOS, science teachers have an crucial role.
However, participant teachers in this study did not intend to teach NOS aspects in
their teaching of biogeochemical cycles. When their orientations were examined, it
could be seen that the science teachers’ central goals were to either transmit the
curriculum objectives or develop environmental awareness related to the
biogeochemical cycles. They did not attempt to teach NOS in their lessons. In other
words, it can be said that participated teachers could not develop PCK for NOS
because of their lack of orientations to teach NOS. This result is in line with some
empirical PCK studies confirmed that orientations to teaching science may function
as either an inhibiting or facilitating factor in the interactions among the PCK
components (Aydin, 2012; Bilican, 2016; Demirdogen, 2016; Magnusson et al. 1999;
Sen, 2016). Therefore, in here, the absence of teachers’ orientations to teach NOS
constrained their PCK for NOS. A great deal of research has also indicated that
science teachers should be provided with opportunities to develop not only their
understanding of NOS, but also their ability to transform this understanding to
facilitate student interpretation in the classroom context (Abell 2008; Akerson et al.
2006; Haunscin et al. 2011, Hanuscin, 2013).
257
Lastly, in the current research, science teachers’ conceptions of SD were
investigated as a separate subject matter knowledge type. Based on the
interdisciplinary nature of SD concept, the study investigated how science teachers
connect the biogeochemical cycles and sustainable development issues regarding
the seven main aspects of SD namely, environment, society, economy, politics,
technology, education and energy. To identify science teachers’ conceptions of SD,
they were asked to explain the causes, results and solutions to the degredation of
the biogeochemical cycles. As can be seen from the findings, seven main conceptual
areas identified by Kilinc and Aydin (2013) were raised: ‘environment’, ‘economy’,
‘society’, ‘politics’, ‘energy’, ‘technology’, and ‘education’. This picture showed that
SD issues was not understood exclusively in terms of the environment or the three
popular pillars (the environment, society, and the economy) of SD. Nevertheless,
Hale and Selda mainly focused the environmental, societal and economic aspects of
SD respectively, whereas Kemal addressed the political issues moslty as third aspect
of the SD. Thus, even though some research assumed that people do not take
‘politics’ into account in thinking about SD (e.g. Gil-perez et al., 2003), this study
displayed that science teachers used political arguments in defining SD.
Additionally, teachers connected SD aspects to the carbon cycle. Especially, Selda
and Kemal did not related the nitrogen and hydrological cycle with the related SD
concepts and issues.
It can be said that both formal education of science teachers’ professional experience
and their informal education through written and digital media (TV, newspapers
and internet) may be responsible for this variety of the SD conceptins of the science
teachers. In terms of formal education, as participant science teachers studied in
middle public shools implementing Eco-Schools Project, they might be familiar with
the all conceptions of SD. On the other hand, both the science curriculum in Turkey
and both Ecoschool programme were based mainly on biophysical and ecological
aspects of environment, so the result that science teachers moslty defined SD in
terms of the environment. In that vein, Summers and Childs (2007) investigated
258
teachers’ conceptions of sustainable development using questionnaire in secondary
science teacher training course. In line with the result of the study, they argued that
substantial number of science teachers focused the centrality of the environmental
factors while explaining the sustainable development.
Regarding informal ESD, research showed that that both the students and the
teachers mostly learn the information about environmental issues via print and
visual media; especially television (Kılınç et al., 2008; Öztaş & Kalıpçı, 2009). For
instance, Kemal adressed the documentaries about the Al Gore and the news from
the activitists of GreenPeace in order to explain the environmental corcerns such as
global warming and greenhouse effect. Therefore, it can be argued that news or
documentaries about 5-year development plans, the SAP and environmental
degradation may lead to awareness among the science teachers. In their study,
Kilinc and Aydin (2013) also concluded that development plans have received
attention in fora like political discussions in the Turkish popular media. For
example, Hale gave SAP as an example to explain the contribution of the project to
the local community. Thus, it can be argued that these kinds of excellent examples
may help teachers to cover all aspects of SD.
Additionally, the science teachers’ conceptions could be specific to Turkish context.
Their statements like having strong government, dependence on foreign traits,
production of new technology, industrial development for production, improving
living standards of the society and creating new job opportunities showed that
science teachers faced the current problems of Turkey as a developing country.
Therefore, it can be said that contextual reasons might affect teachers’ conceptions.
5.2. Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge
In order to reveal experienced science teachers’ topic-specific PCK regarding
biogeochemical cycles in the context of education for sustainable development,
teachers’ orientations to science teaching and PCK components namely, knowledge
of curriculum, knowledge of instructional strategies, knowledge of students
259
understanding and knowledge of assessment were examined. Thus, in this part,
participant teachers’ topic-specific PCK was discussed based on the considerations
of the findings in both the study and the literature.
Labeling teachers’ orientations to teaching science is difficult due to its multi-
dimensional and complex nature (Luft & Roehring, 2007). Friedrichsen and Dana
(2005) concluded that central and peripheral goals related to subject matter,
schooling and affective domain formed the orientations to science teaching at any
grade level. For example, in this study, Kemal and Selda were focused on both
subject matter and schooling goals. In other words, those teachers were attempted
to both transmit the curriculum objectives and prepare learners to high school
entrance exam (TEOG) as central goals. Thus, it can be said that the two teachers’
orientations were limited and teacher-centered such as didactic (lecturing) and
academic-rigor. On the other hand, Hale’s central goals were to help the learners to
connect science and daily life and develop environmental awareness which was
related to affective domain goals. During her classroom practice, her beliefs and
orientations generally shaped her teaching in a way which the students were
participative and active. For example, she preferred the project-based learning as a
student-centered orientation and gave opportunity the learners to represent their
project and reflect their ideas about the problems related to the cycles.
In the context of the study, many factors might explain teachers’ orientations to
science teaching such as contextual factors (i.e. exam-based educational system, the
context of the school), overloaded curriculum and teachers’ discomfort with their
SMK as mentioned previously. (Avraamidou, 2012; Feierabend et al., 2011;
Friedrichsen et al., 2011; Friedrichsen & Dana, 2005; Samuelowicz & Bain, 1992).
First, in Turkey, in order to enroll qualified ‘‘Science or Anatolian Lycee’’, students
studied in middle school have to take the high school entrance exam (TEOG
[currently known LGS]) and get good scores. Due to this examination-based system,
elementary education is mostly based on performing multiple-choice exercises,
especially at 8th grades. Moreover, the school administration gives importance to the
260
exam-based teaching because the quality judgements about the teachers and schools
are shaped based on the scores which the students get from the TEOG exams. This
view was supported by their parents as well. Especially, in this study, teachers were
aware of the benefits of orientations such as project-based, process, and inquiry
which students have participative, interactive and reflective roles. However, they
complained about the contextual factors such as type of the school (public/private),
crowded classrooms, deficiency of the laboratory and the students’ and their
families concerns about the TEOG exam. In a result, these contextual factors
mentioned above may force teachers to modify ideal goals of teaching and thus,
prefer the teacher-led orientations (Friedrichsen et al., 2011; Friedrichsen & Dana,
2005; Samuelowicz & Bain, 1992).
Another probable factor influencing teachers’ orientations to science teaching may
be overloaded curriculum. Because of the schedule of high school entrance exam,
the participants also complained about the time issue for fulfillment of the required
topics in the curriculum. They stated that additional time is necessary for preparing
and grading the student-centered activities due to the curriculum load. In the same
way, studies promoted that teachers preferred to teach didactically due to the time
necessary for preparing minds-on activities (Friedrichsen & Dana, 2005) and
overload of teaching works (e.g. grading) (Nargund-Joshi, et al., 2011).
Lastly, science teachers’ orientations to teaching science may be related to their
discomforts with their SMK (Avraamidou, 2012; Feierabend et al., 2011; Friedrichsen
et al., 2011; Friedrichsen & Dana, 2005). The findings of the study revealed that all
teachers were lack of SMK in the topic of biogeochemical cycles. Especially, both
Kemal and Selda’s syntactic knowledge and SD understanding regarding
environmental topics was generally inadequate. Particularly, in the context of ESD,
many researches confirmed that teachers’ understanding of sustainable
development and environmental issues is crucial for their beliefs for integrating
ESD into their practice (Corney, 2006; Spiropoulou, Antonakaki, Kontaxaki
&Bouras, 2007; Summers et al., 2005). Therefore, the deficiency of their SMK may
261
force teachers to prefer teacher-centered orientations which they transmitted their
conceptual knowledge didactically.
Participant science teachers’ knowledge of curriculum was analyzed in two
categories, namely, knowledge of goals and objectives and knowledge of materials.
In terms of knowledge of goals and objectives, the results of the current research
revealed that science teachers could directly addressed the curriculum objectives
regarding the biogeochemical cycles. Furthermore, they were aware of the
horizontal and vertical relations of the topic. It is thought that science teachers’
knowledge of curriculum objectives may be related to their experience. As
participant teachers had experiences more than ten years, they were familiar to the
curriculum objectives and the pre-requisite knowledge (horizontal and vertical
relations) in order to teach the biogeochemical cycles. In the same way, the PCK
studies held with novice or prospective teachers also confirmed that pre-service
science teachers did not possess adequate knowledge of curriculum. They were not
aware of the both objectives and the pre-requisite horizontal and vertical topics
(Graf et al., 2011; Hanuscin et al., 2011; Mıhlandız & Timur, 2011; Özcan & Tekkaya,
2011; Tekkaya & Kılıç; 2012; Uşak, 2009).
Another issue in order to be discussed was the teachers’ violation and/or
modification of the curriculum. Except the curriculum ones, all teachers expected
their students to gain additional affective domain objectives such as developing
environmental awareness to preserve the balance of the biogeochemical cycles.
Additionally, whereas two teachers pointed out that if necessary, they can modify
the sequence of the sub-topics, the other participated teacher already changed the
sequence of the topic during the classroom practice. Based on the PCK studies, it can
be said that the factors such as teachers’ interests and beliefs, owing to curriculum
saliency, and knowledge of students’ understanding might explain teachers’
violation of the curriculum (De Miranda, 2008; Friedrichsen et al., 2011; Friedrichsen
& Dana, 2005; Rollnick et al., 2008). First of all, the curriculum saliency can defined
as ‘’the teacher’s knowledge of the place of the topic in the curriculum and the
262
purpose for teaching’’ (Rollnick et al., 2008, p.1367). That is, the awareness of the
curriculum saliency might help teachers to diagnose the problems related to the
sequence of teaching the sub-topics and cause teachers’ modification of the
curriculum. In addition, teachers’ interests and beliefs also can explain the reason of
their violation of the curriculum (Friedrichsen et al., 2011; Friedrichsen & Dana,
2005). Especially, in this study, participated teachers’ beliefs and concerns of the
topic could be the reason for exceeding the curriculum in terms of the additional
affective domain objectives. Lastly, it could be interaction between teachers’
violation of the curriculum and knowledge of students. If science teachers are
knowledgeable about their students’ understanding, they can modify the textbooks
(De Miranda, 2008) and curricular sources as response to the students’ specific
needs and characteristics. For example, one of the participated teachers firstly
presented the carbon cycle by reason of the students’ familiarity of the previous
topic of photosynthesis and respiration.
Finally, regarding teachers’ dependence of curriculum materials and sources, the
results of the study revealed that all teachers used the science textbook to follow the
curriculum. However, in terms of use of the activities in textbooks and student
exercise book, only one of the teachers was dependent to the curriculum resources.
Other two teachers preferred either solving more questions or repeating the content
related to the topic. As a result, they had a deficiency about the activities included in
the curriculum. The reason of the ignoring the activities covered in the curriculum
might be the contextual factors such as the frequency of the curriculum revisions
and the exam-based educational system. First of all, since the republic of Turkey
established in 1923, science curriculum were revised or developed 11 times (Çalık &
Ayas, 2008). Then, currenty, the science curriculum was revised in 2013 and 2018.
Researchers emphasized that teachers could not carry out the existing curriculum
completely when the new curriculum was developed (Çalık & Ayas, 2008). As a
result, science teachers continue to teach as they used to be (Coll & Taylor, 2012).
Thus, the frequent alterations in the curriculum could cause science teachers to
263
ignore of the curriculum. Secondly, the existence of the High School Entrance Exam
(TEOG) leads teachers to solve more questions to prepare students to the exam
during the teaching of the topics. Thus, this situation could cause science teachers to
be tended to ignore of the curriculum activities. In their study, Mıhlandız and Timur
(2011) promoted the influence of contextual factors on science teachers’ knowledge
of curriculum, as well.
In the knowledge of instructional strategies, there were both differences and
similarities among the science teachers. The only correspondence was the
dominancy of the teacher centered subject-specific instructional strategies like direct
instruction and questioning. Although Hale adopted the student centered strategies
such as problem and project based learning in her teaching of biogeochemical
cycles, her instruction was generally based on questioning. Hale stated that she had
gotten training on what student-centered instructional strategies and how they can
be used in classroom environment. Moreover, she underlined that she actively used
the social media both to share her own experiences on teaching and to regard the
different instructional strategies used by her colleagues. On the other hand, two
other teachers, Kemal and Selda, did not prefer to use any student centered
strategies. Moreover, they were aware of their inadequate knowledge of
instructional strategies. The teachers, in fact, agreed that they should be trained
about how to use instructional strategies.
In terms of the differences in knowledge about instructional strategies, the level of
teacher-centeredness of the instruction was the main distinguishing factor affecting
science teachers’ use of topic-specific strategies. In other words, science teachers
varied in the aspects elaborated during the instruction (e.g. content, SD issues) and
the numbers of representations and activities used. For instance, Hale used both
various representations such as real-life examples, figures, illustrations, animations,
and activities required by the curriculum, whereas Kemal and Selda only used their
own figures and limited number of examples during their teaching of
biogeochemical cycles. Furthermore, they did not use any activities in the
264
curriculum. Regarding the aspects they adverted during the instruction, although
Selda and Kemal mainly touched upon the conceptual knowledge, Hale, again,
differentiated in the expressions on the SD aspects. It could be obviously seen that
she often mentioned the issues and phenomena of the SD during her teaching of the
cycles.
Likewise, researches on teacher education had similar findings to the ones in the
current study. For example, Magnusson et al. (1999) concluded that teachers did not
have enough knowledge about the use of the instructional strategies. Some different
studies, accordingly, argued that teachers’ lack of experience on how subject-
specific strategies can be implemented could be the reason of their ignorance of the
use of the student-centered strategies (Aydemir, 2014; Aydin, 2012; Brown et al.,
2013; Friedrichsen et al., 2007; Ingber, 2009; Karakulak & Tekkaya; 2010; Mıhlandız
& Timur, 2011; Settlage, 2000; Şen, 2014). In fact, teachers’ lack of knowledge about
how to use topic-specific strategies could be also a reason for their level of teacher
centeredness of the instruction. Especially, in the context of ESD, studies had shown
that teachers’ understanding of ESD specific strategies is not comprehensive and so
they feel strongly that they should train about the ways to integrate of ESD into
their subjects (Anyolo, Karkkainen, & Keinonen, 2018; Ravindranath, 2007; Winter,
2007). The nature of the strategies used in ESD context should be participative,
interactive, reflective, experiential and based on the school context (Kadji-Beltran,
Zachariou, Liarakou & Flogaitis, 2014). In other words, ESD requires implementing
the learner-centered topic specific strategies such as case studies, discussion and
debates, field trips, role-plays etc. Likewise, the results of the study revealed the
similar findings that participated teachers did not use any ESD specific strategies to
integrate SD issues into their teaching of biogeochemical cycles.
Magnusson et al. (1999) underlined that science teachers’ knowledge of subject
specific strategies shaped based on their orientations to science teaching
(Magnusson et al., 1999). Therefore, the teachers’ instructional decisions might be
filtered through their orientations to teaching science. In other words, they could
265
prefer using the strategies fitted to their orientations. Thus, as discussed in the
section of science teachers’ orientation to science teaching, contextual factors
influencing science teachers’ orientations might affect teachers’ implementation of
subject-specific strategies at the 8th grade, as well. That is, the exam-based
educational system, type of the school (public/private), crowded classrooms,
deficiency of the laboratory and the students’ and their parents’ concerns about the
high school entrance exam could be the reasons of teachers’ ignorance of the subject-
specific strategies and preferences to teacher-led strategies.
One of the reasons for the differences in the level of teacher-centeredness of the
topic-specific strategies could be the teachers’ SMK. Although all of the teachers
participated to the study had a lack of knowledge about both conceptual and
syntactic (NOS) understanding, Hale was obviously knowledgeable regarding the
connections between sustainable development issues and biogeochemical cycles. In
other words, it can be said that Hale had more robust SMK than the other two
teachers. PCK literature had already underlined the importance of SMK for
developing a strong PCK (Abell, 2008; Magnusson et al, 1999; Shulman, 1986). As
mentioned the discussion of teachers’ substantive knowledge, especially in the
subject of biology, the use of multiple representations could be a good indicator of
teachers’ SMK (Oh & Kim, 2013). Furthermore, in his studies, Shulman (1986; 1987)
indicated that expert teachers had more knowledgeable about the ways that make
specific content (in this study, SD issues) more comprehensible to the students.
Again, Gess-Newsome (1992) emphasized that content expert teachers used more
examples related to students’ daily life. In this regard, studies conducted in the
context of ESD also underlined that teachers’ lack of understanding of the nature
and issues of sustainable development caused them to have difficulties in
integration of ESD in their practice (Cotton, Warren, Maiboroda, & Bailey,2007;
Corney, 2006; Spiropoulou, Antonakaki, Kontaxaki & Bouras 2007). Likewise, in this
study, it could be obviously seen that Kemal and Selda had a lack of knowledge the
266
connections between SD issues and biogeochemical cycles and could not elaborate
the issues of SD during their instruction.
Another reason of the level of teacher centeredness of the instruction might be the
contextual factors. In this study, specifically, the existence of high school entrance
exam was shown as an important factor affecting science teachers’ topic-specific
strategies. For example, Kemal and Selda emphasized that the rareness of the
questions related to the topic of biogeochemical cycles asked in TEOG exam could
cause them to use direct instruction. Moreover, they complained that the students’
anxiety of the exam led them to teach the topic in a didactic way.
In terms of dependence on the activities suggested by the curriculum, the influence
of knowledge of curriculum on science teachers’ knowledge of topic-specific
strategies should be discussed. In fact, Kemal and Selda used only textbooks to
follow the content of the topic. They, moreover, had deficiency about the activities
in the curriculum. Thus, they did not implement such activities in their teaching of
biogeochemical cycles. That is, their lack of knowledge about curriculum affected
their use of topic-specific instructional strategies. Most studies reported the similar
findings that there was an interaction between knowledge of instructional strategies
and curricular knowledge (Aydin, 2012; Hanuscin et al., 2010; Falk, 2012) study.
Most of the PCK studies also claimed that most robust interaction were found
between knowledge of students’ understanding and knowledge of instructional
strategies (Boz & Boz, 2008; Brown et al., 2013; Demirdoğan, 2012; Hanuscin et al.,
2010; Park & Chen, 2012; Soysal, 2018). As the correspondence with the results of
these studies, science teachers’ knowledge of students’ requirements might affect
their aspects elaborated (e.g. SD issues) during their teaching. For example, Hale
was aware of her students’ needs for developing more affective skills in the topic of
environmental issues, so she stressed more the SD related issues in her teaching.
Moreover, she used various topic-specific representations and activities to reach
more students whose learning styles and abilities were different.
267
Regarding knowledge of students, participated teachers’ responses were analyzed
in two categories, namely; knowledge of students’ requirements and knowledge of
students’ difficulties and misconceptions. In terms of knowledge of students’
requirements, all teachers could address the pre-requisite topics such as the weather
events (the formation of cloud and hail) in the 5th grade, the topic of physical and
chemical changes in the 6th grade, and lastly, the topics of the properties of elements
and compounds, the chemical bonds and basic building blocks of living things in
the 7th grade. They were also aware of students’ prior knowledge on the topic of
energy flow in the food chain in the 8th grade. Thus, teachers seemed to have
sufficient knowledge for students’ prior knowledge on the topic of biogeochemical
cycles. On the other hand, considering the students’ learning styles and abilities to
be able to comprehend the topic, Hale was solely concerned her students’ needs. As
mentioned in the discussion of instructional strategies, she gave importance to her
students’ different learning styles by using many topic-specific strategies. Moreover,
she used project-based learning as a student-centered strategy in order to make the
students active. Regarding science teachers’ knowledge of students’ difficulties, all
of the teachers stated that students had difficulties in make their understanding
actual in the environmental topics. Teachers complained that students had problems
of developing attitudes awareness in such environmental topics. However, only
Hale tried to help students to develop environmental awareness through
discussions including real-life examples.
Especially, the reason for the similarities between science teachers’ knowledge of
learners, might be related to their teaching experience. Because of the experiences
more than twenty years, all teachers were aware of their students’ pre-requisite
knowledge. Similarly, most studies addressed that the lack of classroom experiences
might be the major reason for the student-teachers’ lack of knowledge of students’
understanding (Cochran et al., 1993; De Jong, Van Driel & Verloop, 2005;
Friedrichsen et al., 2009; Veal et al., 1999).
268
Regarding the differences between teachers’ knowledge of students, both teachers’
SMK and their beliefs and orientations to science teaching also could assist for their
knowledge of learners (De Miranda, 2008; Sanders et al., 1993; Van Driel, 2008).
Except Hale, Kemal and Selda adopted teacher-centered orientations and aimed to
transmit the curriculum objectives. Therefore, their orientations did not permit
teachers to consider students’ needs in the context of learning styles and abilities to
comprehend the topic. Contrarily, Hale’s knowledge about students might be
leaded to adjust different topic-specific representations and activities to make her
teaching more efficient for students (Akerson, 2005;Aydın et al., 2010; Brown et al.,
2013; Demirdöğen, 2012; Hanuscin et al., 2011; Şen, 2014).
Another source of teachers’ knowledge of learners could be their subject matter
knowledge. Among the participated teachers, Hale was the most knowledgeable
one in terms of understanding of SD issues on biogeochemical cycles. Thus, her
SMK based on her expertise on biological education and informal training on
science education could be most important factor influencing her understanding of
students’ needs. In a similar way, PCK studies (2012) stated that experienced
teachers most robust SMK was knowledgeable about learners’ both understanding
and difficulties (Aydemir, 2014; Aydin, 2012; Şen, 2014).
Considering the knowledge of assessment, teachers’ knowledge of both dimensions
of science learning and methods of assessment were two sub-components analyzed.
In terms of teachers’ knowledge on dimensions of science learning, all participant
teachers aimed to assess students’ conceptual understanding and also ignored the
assessment of NOS aspects on the topic of biogeochemical cycles. Teachers’
emphasis on the assessment of conceptual understanding also emphasized in the
previous research (Aydin, 2012; Lankford, 2010; Tekkaya & Kılıç, 2012; Şen; 2014).
However, it can be seen that Hale also concerned her students’ both comprehension
of SD related issues and development of science process skills and/or cognitive skills
such as critical thinking, problem-solving and decision making through project-
based learning. Regarding the participated teachers’ knowledge of methods of
269
assessment, Kemal and Selda focused generally traditional and summative
assessment techniques (informal questioning, multiple choice test) whereas Hale
preferred to use authentic assessment strategies such as performance/ peer
assessment (students’ projects), and concept map completion tasks. Moreover, her
formative assessment was coherent that go through the whole topic. She tried to
provide feedbacks or re-teaching the points that learners have difficulties.
The one probable factor influencing teachers’ knowledge of assessment could be
their beliefs and orientations to science teaching. As Kemal and Selda held both the
beliefs on transmission of the curriculum objectives and orientations including
teacher-centered strategies like direct instruction (didactic orientation), their
assessment was generally based on traditional assessment in order to evaluate their
students’ conceptual knowledge. On the other hand, Hale aimed to assess both her
students’ conceptual knowledge, skills and SD issues on the related topic due to the
her preference on the use of student-centered orientations such as process-skill
development, inquiry, project-based etc., so teacher may have chosen to focus on the
authentic assessment techniques such as peer assessment and concept map.
Another reason may be the inadequate emphasis of integration and assessment on
both NOS and SD issues the science curriculum (Abd-El-Khalick, 2006; Combes,
2005; Hanuscin et al., 2011; Karaaslan, 2016; Kim & Fortner, 2006). When the 8th
grade science curriculum in Turkey was examined (MoNE, 2005; 2013), the lack of
specific goals and objectives on development of students’ NOS and SD
understanding could be obviously seen. The curriculum only focused on the
objectives which aim students’ conceptual understanding on the related topic.
Therefore, teachers did not need to intend to teach the NOS and SD aspects. In this
regard, they did not attempt to assess these dimensions in their lessons. Park and
Oliver (2008) also underlined that the goals and objectives in the curriculum had
influence on teachers’ knowledge of assessment.
270
Additionally, contextual factors, especially the exam-based educational system
might affect teachers’ knowledge of assessment. The questions asked in the high
school entrance exam (TEOG) are focused on the content rather than NOS or SD
issues. Even if teacher may view that NOS or SD issues should be taught, the system
may force teachers to ignore the assessment of these issues. Similar situation has
been emphasized in the countries having exam-based education system, for
example, in China (Zhang et al., 2003) and in India (Nargund-Joshi et al., 2011).
Likewise, regarding the methods of assessment, teachers heavily focused on
summative assessment by preparing written exams including multiple choice items
as in the national exams. The contextual factors regarding to country and school in
which teachers teach has an important factor on their classroom practice (Aydin,
2012; Loughran et al., 2004; Şen, 2014).
Moreover, science teachers used traditional assessment techniques rather than
alternative or authentic ones. In other words, they have lack of knowledge on the
methods of assessment. Similar findings also represented in previous studies
(Canbazoğlu et al., 2010; Graf et al., 2011; Kaya, 2009; Taşdere & Özsevgeç, 2012;
Uşak et al., 2011; Şen, 2014). The reason of teachers’ use of traditional assessment
could be their lack of experience on how the authentic techniques implement
through both courses in their undergraduate education and trainings in their
professions. Except Hale, other two teachers participated to this study had no
training on science or biology-specific professional development on alternative
assessment strategies. Similarly, Kaya (2009) also emphasized the lack of emphasis
on assessment in teacher education by underlying the ignorance of the related
courses in undergraduate education. He concluded that the limited number of
assessment courses led teachers to focus traditional assessment techniques.
Therefore, teachers might have a tendency to implement such assessment strategies
which they were familiar from their K-16 education.
271
5.3. Implications & Recommendations
In light of the results concluded and the points discussed, the study has numerous
implications and recommendations for pre-service and in-service teacher educators,
curriculum developers and teacher education research.
The results of the study concluded that PCK is specific to topic, context (classroom,
school, parents etc.), teacher and students (Abell, 2008; Lankford, 2010; Nargund-
Joshi, et al., 2011; Park & Oliver, 2008). This study aimed to investigate PCK of
experienced teachers for the case of teaching biogeochemical cycles in the context of
ESD. From this point, the result of the study is helpful for the understanding of the
topic-specific PCK regarding the teaching of the topic of biogeochemical cycles.
This study provided the inspiration for education of both inservice and pre service
teachers. As literature emphasized, teaching experience is a core source of PCK
(Grossman, 1990; van Driel et al., 2002). On the other hand, it can not be inferred
that robust teaching experience mean rich PCK (Friedrichsen et al., 2009). Results
revealed that science teachers do not have grasp PCK and content knowledge about
biogeochemical cycles in the context of SD. All teachers participated to the study
complained about the deficiencies on science or topic specific training, and they
stated especially their deficiencies for teaching SD and NOS. Considering the
results, it was remarkable that inservice teachers should be supported on the
environmental topics regarding the close connections of SD issues and NOS. The
support should include not only content knowledge about environmental topics,
NOS and SD but also PCK components. This means that professional development
should support teachers to enrich their practice of teaching concerning students’
difficulties, how to respond this difficulties by means of enriched teaching and
assessment strategies. Furthermore, these professional trainings should be discipline
based and specific to topic teachers taught (Nakiboğlu & Tekin, 2006). Hence, these
professional support should give teachers opportunity to reflect on the specific
topics (i.e. NOS and SD) with regard to how different science topics could be taught
272
to learners because each topic has its own instructional strategies, assessments,
curriculum and student difficulties.
There are some problems identified in this study that curriculum developers should
cope with. First of all, curriculum developers should place specific NOS and SD
objectives in biogeochemical cycles. From the point of curriculum materials,
teachers should be supported in order to teach NOS and ESD effectively (Kawaga,
2009). Additional teaching resources including specific practices on instructional
and assessment strategies on NOS and SD can be developed. If these suggestions
are not adapted to the curriculum, science teachers may not be voluntarily to teach
both NOS and SD with the connections between environmental topics because
science teachers tend to teach what curricular objectives mention as it is understood
by the findings of the current study.
In order to meet needs of teachers, another remedy for the development of rich PCK
is to provide long-term professional development (De Jong et al., 2002; Gilbert, De
Jong, Justi, Treagust, & van Driel, 2002; Hanuscin et al., 2011; Nakiboğlu & Karakoç,
2006; van Driel et al., 1998). Learning the content knowledge and curricular
adaptations are not sufficient for teachers to teach NOS and SD integrated
environmental topics. Therefore, theoretical framework of this study, topic specific
PCK, can be used in planned development program to increase how well science
teachers teach NOS and SD integrated environmental topics (Şahin, Ertepınar &
Teksöz, 2009) . Firstly, in these programs, science teachers’ orientation towards
science should need to be changed. However, orientation towards science is
multidimensional and resistant to change (Luft & Roehring, 2007). Therefore,
planned PD programs should be long standing to change teachers’ orientations.
Otherwise, program could be unsuccessful for changing orientation towards science
in shaping PCK.
Bucat (2004) argued that the profession of teaching suffers from the disease named
as amnesia due to deficiency for sharing the wisdom of teaching experience. Thus,
273
by the current PCK study, it is hoped to help other inservice or preservice teachers
to have shared memory for teaching biogeochemical cycles. Concerning all PCK
components; the results of the study have valuable practical information in teaching
environmental topics regarding SD issues. This information recommended teacher
educator to use these real-classroom experiences in professional development for
both inservice and preservice education.
Lastly, there are some recommendations for further research. It was known that
PCK is specific to context (e.g. both school and country level), learners, topics, and
teachers. Using same topic, the studies should be conducted with one teacher which
teaches in different groups of learners (e.g. high and low achievers) or different
grades of learners (4,5,6 & 7th grades) to examine the PCK development. Then, the
researchers should examine how the context influences teachers’ PCK. For example,
comparison studies in rural and urban schools or with different countries should be
conducted.
Regarding orientations to science teaching, the curren research was limited to nine
orientations identified by Magnusson et. Al (1999). Thus, new studies should
examine how current orientations such as argumentation and STEM affect PCK
development.
This study can be strengthened by connecting teachers’ PCK to student
achievement. Therefore further researches connecting teachers’ PCK to students’
learning and achievement can provide important insights into the nature of PCK.
Especially, using the Gess-Newsome (2015)’ PCK model, researchers should
investigate the connections between teachers’ PCK and their students’ achievement.
In Turkey, studies specifically using PCK framework in the context of ESD is too
limited. This PCK study was focused on biology topics regarding ESD. PCK studies
should be implemented in both other topics of biology and different subjects such as
chemistry & physics regarding ESD. Additonally, studies that will aim to delve the
274
effect of an intervention (e.g. workshop or elective course) should be conducted to
examine the teachers’ PCK development in the context of ESD.
REFERENCES
275
REFERENCES
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & BouJaoude, S. (1997). An exploratory study of the knowledge

base for science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 673-699.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). The influence of history of science courses on

students’conceptions of nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Oregon State University, Corvallis.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers'

conceptions of nature of science: a critical review of the literature. International
journal of science education, 22(7), 665-701.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). Developing deeper understandings of nature of science:

The impact of a philosophy of science course on preservice science teachers'
views and instructional planning. International Journal of Science Education, 27
(1), 15-42.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Preservice and experienced biology teachers' global and

specific subject matter structures: Implications for conceptions of pedagogical
content knowledge. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology
Education, 2(1), 1-29.
Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Waters, M., & Le, A. P. (2008). Representations of nature of

science in high school chemistry textbooks over the past four decades. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 45(7), 835-855.
Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. K. Abell, & N. G.

Lederman (Eds), Handbook of Research on Science Education. (pp.1105- 1151).
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Abell, S.K. (2008). Twenty years later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain
a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1405-1416.
Akerson, V. L., & Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science:

Ayearlong case study of a fourth‐grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 40(10), 1025-1049.
Akerson, V. L., Morrison, J. A., & McDuffie, A. R. (2006). One course is not enough:
Preservice elementary teachers' retention of improved views of nature of
science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 194-213.
276
Akerson, V. L. (2005). How do elementary teachers compensate for incomplete
science content knowledge? Research in Science Education, 35, 245-268.
Anyolo, E. O., Karkkainen, S., & Keinonen, T. (2018). Implementing Education for
Sustainable Develoment in Namibia: School Teachersí Perceptions and
Teaching Practices. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 20(1). 64-81.
Arzi, H. J., & White, R. T. (2008). Change in teachers' knowledge of subject matter: A
17‐year longitudinal study. Science Education, 92, 221–251.
Audesirk, T., Audesirk, G., & Byers, B. E. (2014). Biology: Life on earth (10th ed.).
USA: Pearson.
Avraamidou, L. (2012). Prospective elementary teachers’ science teaching

orientations and experiences that impacted their development. International
Journal of Science Education, 1-27.
Aydemir, M. (2014). The Investigation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Teachers:The

Case of Teaching Genetics.Unpublised Doctoral Thesis. Middle East Technical
University, Ankara.
Aydemir, M., Çakıroğlu, J. & Tekkaya, C. (October, 2012). Science teachers’

knowledge of students about genetic topic. 9th International Conference on
Hands-on Science, Antalya, 181.
Aydeniz, M. & Kirbulut, Z. D. (2014). Exploring challenges of assessing pre-service

science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), Asia-Pacific Journal
of Teacher Education, 42:2, 147-166.
Aydın, S., & Boz, Y. (2010). Pre-Service Elementary Science Teachers’ Science
Teaching Efficacy Beliefs and Their Sources. Elementary Education Online, 9 (2):
694–704.
Aydin, S. (2012). Examination of chemistry teachers’ topic-specific nature of pedagogical

content knowledge in electrochemistry and radioactivity. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Aydin, S., & Boz, Y .(2012). Review of studies related to PCK in the context of
science teacher education: Turkish case. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice,
12(1), 479–505.
Aydin, S., Friedrichsen, P. M., Boz, Y., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2014). Examination of the
topic-specific nature of pedagogical content knowledge in teaching
electrochemical cells and nuclear reactions. Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, 15(4), 658–674.
277
Aydın, S., B. Demirdöğen, F. N. Akın, E. Uzuntiryaki-Kondakçı, and A. Tarkın.
2015. “The Nature and Development of Interaction among Components of
Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Practicum. Teaching and Teacher Education
46: 37–50.
Aydın, S. Çakıroğlu, J. (2010). İlköğretim Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Öğretim

Programına İlişkin Öğretmen Görüşleri: Ankara Örneği. İlköğretim Online, 9(1),
301-315.
Bektaş, O (2015)Pre-service Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge in

the Physics, Chemistry, and Biology Topics. European Journal of Physics
Education,6(2), 41-53.
Berg, T. & Brouwer, W. (1991). Teacher awareness of student alternate conceptions

about rotational motion and gravity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28
(1), 3-18.
Berliner, D. C. (2001). Learning about and learning from expert teachers.

International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 463-482.
Bilican, K. (2014). Development of pre-service science teachers’ nature of science views and
nature of science instructional planning within a contextualized explicit reflective
approach. Unpublised Doctoral Thesis. Middle East Technical University,
Ankara.
Bilican, K., Tekkaya, C., & Cakiroglu, J. (2012). Pre-service science teachers’
instructional planning for teaching nature of science: a multiple case
study.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 468-472.
Birdsall, S. (2015) Analysing teachers’ translation of sustainability using a PCK

framework, Environmental Education Research, 21(5), 753-776.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliams, D. (2003). Assessment for
learning. Putting it into practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Bogdan R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction

to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee
(Ed.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 673-708). New York: Simon &
Schuster Macmillan.
278
Bravo, P., & Cofré, H. (2016) Developing biology teachers’ pedagogical content
knowledge through learning study: the case of teaching human evolution,
International Journal of Science Education, 38:16, 2500-2527.
Brickhouse, N. W. (1990). Teachers' beliefs about the nature of science and their
relationship to classroom practice. Journal of teacher education, 41(3), 53-62.
Brown, P., Friedrichsen, P., & Abell, S. (2013). The development of prospective
secondary biology teachers PCK. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 133–
155.
Bucat, R. (2004). Pedagogical Content knowledge as a way of forward: Applied

research in chemistry education. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 5,
215-228.
Burton, N., Brundrett, M., & Jones, M. (2014). Doing your Education Research Project.
London: Sage Publictions.
Canbazoğlu, S., Demirelli, H., & Kavak, N. (2010). Investigation of the relationship
between pre-service science teachers’ subject matter knowledge and
pedagogical content knowledge regarding the particulate nature of matter.
Elementary Education Online, 9(1), 275-291.
Carter, K. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston

(Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 291–310). New York:
MacMillan.
Carter, L. (2008). Globalization and science education: Implications of science in the

new economy. Journal of Research in Science Teachin, 45(5), 617- 633.
Champagne, A (1989). Scientific literacy: A concept in search of a definition. In

Champagne, Lovitts, & Calinger (eds.), This year in school science 1989: Scientific
literacy. Washington, D.C., American Association for the Advancement of
Science.
Chan, K. K. H., & Yung, B. H. W. (2018). Developing Pedagogical Content

Knowledge for Teaching a New Topic: More Than Teaching Experience and
Subject Matter Knowledge. Research in Science Education, 48, 233-265.
Choi, K., Lee, H., Shin, N., Kim, S. W., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Re‐ conceptualization of
scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 48(6), 670-697.
279
Clermont, C.P., Krajcik, J.S., & Borko, H. (1993). The influence of an intensive in-
service workshop on pedagogical content knowledge growth among novice
chemical demonstrators. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 21–43.
Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners’ responses to the demands of conceptual change:

Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science & Education,
15(5), 463-494.
Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J., & King, R. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An
integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263-
272.
Coll, R. K., & Taylor, N. (2012). An international perspective on science curriculum

development and implementation. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin & C. J. McRobbie
(Ed.) Second International Handbook of Science Education (pgs. 771-782) New
York: Springer Publishing Co.
Colucci-Gray, L., Perazzone, A., Dodman, M., & Camino, E. (2013). Science
education for sustainability, epistemological reflections and educational
practices: From natural sciences to trans-disciplinarity. Cultural Studies of
Science Education, 8(1), 127-183. 7–183.
Combes, B. P. Y. (2005). The united nations decade of education for sustainable

development (2005-2014): Learning to live together sustainably. Applied
Environmental Education and Communication, 4, 215-219.
Connole, H. (1998). Approaches to social science inquiry in Research Methodologies in

Education, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Corney, G., & Reid, A. (2007). Student teachers’ learning about subject matter and
pedagogy in education for sustainable development. Environmental Education
Research, 13(1), 33-54.
Cotton, D. R. E., Warren, M. F., Maiboroda, O., & Bailey, I. (2007). Sustainable
development, higher education and pedagogy: a study of lecturers’ beliefs and
attitudes. Environmental Education Research, 13(5), 579–597.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approaches (2nd ed.). California: Sage Publications.
Crotty, M. (1989). The foundations of social research. London: Sage Publications.
Cullen, T. A., Akerson, V. L., & Hanson, D. L. (2010). Using action research to
engage K-6 teachers in nature of science inquiry as professional development.
Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(8), 971-992.
280
Çalık, M., & Ayas A. (2008). A critical review of the development of the Turkish
science curriculum. In R. K. Coll & N. Taylor (Eds.), Science education in context:
An international examination of the influence of context on science curricula
development and implementation (pp. 161–174). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Davidowitz, B., & Rollnick, M. (2011). What lies at the heart of good undergraduate
teaching? A case study in organic chemistry. Chemical Education Research and
Practice, 12, 355-366.
De Jong, O., van Driel, J., & Verloop, N. (2005). Preservice teachers’ pedagogical
content knowledge of using particle models in teaching chemistry. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 42, 947-964.
De Miranda, M. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and engineering and

technology teacher education: Issues for thought. Journal of the Japanese Society
of Technology Education, 50(1), 17–26.
Demirdöğen, B. (2012). Development of pre-service chemistry teachers pedagogical content

knowledge for nature of science: An intervention study. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Demirdöğen, B. (2016) Interaction Between Science Teaching Orientation and

Pedagogical Content Knowledge Components, Journal of Science Teacher
Education, 27:5,495-532.
Demirdöğen, B., Hanuscin, D. L., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E., & Köseoğlu, F. (2016).

Development and Nature of Preservice Chemistry Teachers’ Pedagogical
Content Knowledge for Nature of Science. Research in Science Education.
46(4), 575–612.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of
qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Doğan, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2008). Turkish grade 10 students’ and science
teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: a national study. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 45(10), 1083–1112.
Doğan, N., Çakıroğlu, J., Çavuş, S., Bilican, K., & Arslan, O. (2011). Öğretmenlerin
bilimin doğası hakkındaki görüşlerinin geliştirilmesi: hizmetiçi eğitim
programının etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40, 127- 139.
Drechsler, M. & van Driel, J. H. (2008), Experienced teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge of teaching acid–base chemistry. Research in Science Education, 38,
611-631.
281
Earle, S. (2015) ‘An exploration of whole-school assessment systems. Primary Science,
136 (Jan/Feb, 20-22.
Enger, E. D., Ross, F. C., & Bailey, D. B. (2012). Concepts in biology (14th ed.). New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Faikhamta, C. (2103). The Development of In-Service Science Teachers’

Understandings of and Orientations to Teaching the Nature of Science within
a PCK-Based NOS Course. Research in Science Education, 43(2):847 – 869.
Falk, A. (2012). Teachers learning from professional development in elementary

science: reciprocal relations between formative assessment and pedagogical
content knowledge. Science Education, 96(2), 265–290.
Feierabend, T., Jokmin, S., & Eilks, I. (2011). Chemistry teachers’ views on teaching
‘climate change’- an interview case study from research-oriented learning in
teacher education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12, 85-91.
Feldman, A., & Nation, M. (2015). Theorizing sustainability: An introduction to

science teacher education for sustainability. In S.K. Stratton, R. Hagevik, A.
Feldman, M. Bloom (Eds.). Educating science teachers for sustainability, (pp.3-13),
USA: Springer.
Flick, L. B. (1996). Understanding a generative learning model of instruction: A case

study of elementary teacher planning. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7(2),
95-122.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education
(5th ed.). NewYork: McGraw-Hill.
Friedrichsen, P., & Dana, T. (2005). A substantive-level theory of highly regarded

secondary biology teachers’ science teaching orientations. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 42, 218–244.
Friedrichsen, P.M., Lankford, D., Brown, P., Pareja, E., Volkmann, M., & Abell, S. K.
(2007). The PCK of future science teachers in an alternative certification program,
Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching
Annual Conference, New Orleans, LA, April 15-18, 2007.
Friedrichsen, P. M., (2008). A conversation with Sandra Abell: Science teacher

learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 4(1),
71-79.
282
Friedrichsen, P., Van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Taking a closer look at science
teaching orientations. Science Education, 358-376.
Graf, D., Tekkaya, C., Kılıç, D., & Özcan, G. (April, 2011). Alman ve Türk fen bilgisi
öğretmen adaylarının evrim öğretimine ilişkin pedagojik alan bilgisinin,
tutumlarının ve pedagojik alan kaygılarının araştırılması, 2nd International
Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, Antalya, 418-425.
Geddis, A.N., Onslow, B., Beynon, C., & Oesch, J. (1993). Transforming content
knowledge: Learning to teach about isotopes. Science Education, 77, 575– 591.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical Content knowledge: an introduction and

orientation. In: Gess-Newsome, J.; Lederman, N.G. (Eds.) Examining
Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 3-17.
Gess-Newsome, J., & Carlson J. (2013). The PCK summit consensus model and
definition of pedagogical content knowledge. In: The Symposium “Reports from
the Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) Summit, ESERAConference 2013,
September, 2013.
Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill

including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK Summit. In A. Berry, P.
Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Reexamining pedagogical content knowledge in
science education (pp. 28–42). New York, NY: Routledge.
Gess-Newsome, J., Taylor J. A., Carlson, J., Gardner, A. L., Wilson, C. D., &
Stuhlsatz, M. A. M. (2017). Teacher pedagogical content knowledge, practice,
and student achievement, International Journal of Science Education, DOI:
10.1080/09500693.2016.1265158.
Gil-Perez, D., Vilches, A., Edwards, M., Praia, J., Marques, L., & Oliveira, T. (2003).
A proposal to enrich teachers’ perception of the state of the world: First
results. Environmental Education Research, 9(1), 67–90.
Goldman, S. and McDermott, R. (2009) Staying the course with video analysis, in
Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences
Routledge: New York: 101-114.
Grossman, P. (1990). The making teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education.
Newyork: Teacher College Press.
Halim, L. & Meerah, S. M. (2002). Science Trainee Teachers' Pedagogical Content

Knowledge and Its Influence on Physics Teaching. Research in Science &
Technological Education, 20(2).215-225.
283
Hanuscin D. and Hian J., (2009, April), Critical incidents in development of pedagogical
content knowledge for teaching the nature of science: insights from a mentor– mentee
relationship, Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Association for
Research in Science Teaching, Garden Grove, CA.
Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H., & Akerson, V. L. (2011). Elementary teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Science
Education, 95(1), 145–167.
Hanuscin, D. L. (2013). Critical incidents in the development of pedagogical content

knowledge for teaching the nature of science: a prospective elementary
teacher’s journey. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(6), 933–956.
Hanuscin, D. L., Cisterna, D. & Lipsitz , K. (2018). Elementary Teachers’ Pedagogical

Content Knowledge for Teaching Structure and Properties of Matter. Journal of
Science Teacher Education, 29(8), 665-692.
Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: a reconfiguration of

pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice,
11(3), 273–292.
Henze, I., van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2008). Development of experienced science
teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of models of the solar system and
the universe. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1321–1342.
Hodson, D. (2011). Looking to the future: Building a curriculum for social activism.
Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Hume, A., & Berry, A. (2010). Constructing CoRes—a strategy for building PCK in
pre-service science teacher education. Research in Science Education, 41(3), 341–
355.
Ingber, J. (2009). A comparison of teachers' pedagogical content knowledge while planning

in and out of their science expertise. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia
University, NY, USA.
Irez, S. (2009). Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks. Science

Education, 93(3), 422-447.
Juhler, M. V. (2016) The Use of Lesson Study Combined with Content

Representation in the Planning of Physics Lessons During Field Practice to
Develop Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education,
(27)5, 533-553.
284
Jüttner, D. M., Boone, W., Park, S., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2013). Development and use of
a test instrument to measure biology teachers’ content knowledge (CK) and
pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Educational Assessment, Evaluation and
Accountability, 25, 45-67.
Kadji-Beltran, C., Zachariou, A., Liarakou, G., & Flogaitis, E. (2014. Mentoring as a
strategy for empowering Education for Sustainable Development in schools,
Professional Development in Education, 40:5, 717-739.
Karaarslan, G. (2016). Science teachers as ESD educators: an outdoor ESD model for
developing systems thinking skills. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Middle
East Technical University, Ankara.
Karakulak, Ö. & Tekkaya C. (October, 2010). Göreve yeni başlamış fen bilgisi
öğretmenlerinin ekoloji öğretimi konusunda pedagojik alan bilgilerinin
incelenmesi. XI. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, İzmir.
Karal, I., S. & Alev, N. (2016) Development of pre-service physics teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) throughout their initial training,
Teacher Development, 20(2), 162-180.
Kawaga, F. (2007). Dissonance in students’ perceptions of sustainable development

and sustainability: Implications for curriculum change. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, 8(3), 317–338.
Kaya, O. N. (2009).The nature of relationships among the components of

pedagogical content knowledge of preservice science teachers: ‘Ozone layer
depletion’ as an example. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 961–
988
Käpylä, M., Heikkinen, J.-P., & Asunta, T. (2008). Influence of content knowledge on
pedagogical content knowledge: The case of teaching photosynthesis and
plant growth. International Journal of Science Education, 9(1), 1–21.
Kilinc, A. & Aydin, A. (2013). Turkish Student Science Teachers’ Conceptions of

Sustainable Development: A phenomenography. International Journal of Science
Education, 35(5), 731-752.
Kılınc¸,A.,Boyes, E.,&Stanisstreet,M. (2011).Turkishschool students and global

warming:Beliefs and willingness to act. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science
&Technology Education, 7(2), 121–134.
Kim, C., & Fortner, R. W. (2006). Issue-spesific barriers to addressing environmental

issues in the classroom: An exploratory study. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 37(3), 15–22.
285
Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives
and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169–204.
Knoblauch, H., Schnettler, B., Raab, J., & Soeffner, H. (2006). Video analysis--
Methodology and Methods: Qualitative Audiovisual Data Analysis in Sociology.
Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Koutalidi, S., & Scoullos, M. (2016). Biogeochemical cycles for combining chemical
knowledge and ESD issues in Greek secondary schools part I: designing the
didactic materials. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(1), 10-23.
Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of

Chicago Press.
Lankford, D. (2010). Examining The Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Practice of

Experienced Secondary Biology Teachers for Teaching Diffusion and Osmosis.
Published Doctoral Thesis. University of Missouri, USA.
Lederman, N.G. & Gess-Newsome, J. (1992). Do subject matter knowledge,

pedagogical knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge constitute the
ideal gas law of science teaching? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 3(1), 16-
20.
Lederman, N. G., Gess-Newsome, J., & Latz, M. S. (1994). The nature and
development of preservice science teachers’ conceptions of subject matter and
pedagogy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 129–146.
Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers' understanding of the nature of science and

classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of
research in science teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
Lederman, N. G., Schwartz, R. S., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Bell, R. L. (2001). Preservice
teachers’ understanding and teaching of nature of science: An intervention
study. The Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology
Education,1(2), 135–160.
Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of
the nature of science questionnaire: toward valid and meaningful assessment
of learners’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 39(6), 497–521.
286
Lee, E., & Luft, J.A. (2008). Experienced secondary science teachers’ representation
of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education,
30(10), 1343-1363.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Liu, S. Y., & Lederman, N. G. (2007). Exploring prospective teachers’ worldviews

and conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education,
29(10), 1281-1307.
Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content
knowledge I science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting
professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 41, 370-391.
Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and Developing Science
Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2008). Exploring pedagogical content
knowledge in science teacher education. International Journal of Science
Education, 30(10), 1301–1320.
Luft, J., & Roehrig, G. (2007). Capturing science teachers' epistemological beliefs:
The development of a teacher beliefs interview. Electronic Journal of Science
Education, 11(2), 38-63.
Lumpe, A. T. (2007). Research-based professional development: teachers engaged in

professional learning communities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(1),
125–128.
Magnusson, S., Borko, H., & Krajcik, J. (1994). Teaching complex subject matter in
science: Insights from an analysis of pedagogical content knowledge. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in
Science Teaching, March 26-29, Anaheim, CA.
Magnusson, S.; Krajcik, J.; & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of
pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome; N.
G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and
its implications for science education, Boston: Kluwer, 95-132.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (2016). Designing Qualitative Research. 6th Edition.

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mavhunga, E. (2014). Improving PCK and CK in pre-service chemistry teachers. In

H. Venkat, M. Rollnick, M. Askew, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Exploring
287
mathematics and science teachers’ knowledge: Windows into teacher thinking
(pp. 31–48). Oxford: Routledge.
McComas, W. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: dispelling the
myths in McComas, W. (Eds.), The Nature of Science in Science Education:
Rationales and Strategies (pp. 53-70). Dordercht, The Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic.
McConnell, T. J., Parker, J. M., Eberhardt, J., Koehler, M. J., Lundeberg, M. A. (2013).
Virtual Professional Learning Communities: Teachers’ Perceptions of Virtual
Versus Face-to-Face Professional Development. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 22 (3). 267-277.
McFarlane, D. A. (2012). Paradigms in 21st Century Global Science Education, A

Review Essay of Derek Hodson’s Looking to the Future: Building a
Curriculum for Social Activism. International Journal of Scientific Research in
Education, 5(1), 18-25.
McKeown, R., & Hopkins, C. (2005). EE and ESD: Two paradigms, one crucial goal.
Applied Environmental Education and Communication, 4, 221-224.
Melo L., Cañada, F. & Mellado V. (2017). Exploring the emotions in Pedagogical
Content Knowledge about the electric field. International Journal of Science
Education, 39 (8), 1025-1044.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mıhladız, G. & Timur, B. (2011). Pre-service teachers views of in-service science

teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Eurasian Journal of Physics and
Chemistry Education, January (Special Issue), 89-100.
MoNE (2005). Fen ve Teknoloji Öğretim Programı. Ankara: MEB Yayınları.
MoNE (2013). İlköğretim Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı. Retrieved from:
http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/www/guncellenen-ogretim-programlari/icerik/151.
MoNE (2017). Fen Bilimleri Dersi Öğretim Programı. Retrieved from:

http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=143.
Mthethwa-Kunene, E., Onwu, G. O., & de Villiers, R. (2015). Exploring Biology

Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge in the Teaching of Genetics in
Swaziland Science Classrooms. International Journal of Science Education,( 37)7,
1140-1165.
288
Mulhall, P., Berry, A., & Loughran, J. (2003). Frameworks for representing science
teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science
Learning and Teaching, 4(2), 53–70.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington

DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC) (2000). Inquiry and the national science education
standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Nakiboğlu, C. ve Karakoç, Ö. (2005). Öğretmenin sahip olması gereken dördüncü

bilgi: Alan öğretimi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 5(1), 181-206.
Nargund-Joshi, V., Rogers, M. A. P., & Akerson V. L. (2011). Exploring Indian

Secondary Teachers' Orientations and Practice for Teaching Science in an Era
of Reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 48(6):624 – 647.
Nilsson, P. (2008). Teaching for understanding: The complex nature of pedagogical

content knowledge in pre-service education. International Journal of Science
Education, 30, 1281-1299.
Nurmatin, S., & Rustaman, N. Y. (2016). Exploring PCK ability of prospective

science teachers in reflective learning on heat and transfer. Proceedings of
International Seminar on Mathematics, Science and Computer Science Education
(MSCEIS 2015).
Oh, P. S., & Kim S. K. (2013) Pedagogical Transformations of Science Content

Knowledge in Korean Elementary Classrooms. International Journal of Science
Education, (35)9, 1590-1624.
Özcan, G. & Tekkaya, C. (September, 2011). Exploring pre-service science teachers’

pedagogical content knowledge and concerns in the context of evolution. The
European Conference on Educational Research 2011, Berlin.
Özden, M., (2008). The effect of content knowledge on pedagogical content

knowledge: The case of teaching phases of matters. Educational Sciences: Theory
and Practice, 8(2), 633-645.
Öztaş, F. & Kalıpçı, E. (2009). Teacher Candidates’ Perception Level of

Environmental Pollutant and Their Risk Factors. International Journal of
Environmental & Science Education, 4 (2), 185-195.
289
Pitjeng-Mosabala, P., & Rollnick, M. (2018) Exploring the development of novice
unqualified graduate teachers’ topic-specific PCK in teaching the particulate
nature of matter in South Africa’s classrooms. International Journal of Science
Education, (40)7, 742-770.
Padilla, K., Ponce-de-León, A. M., Rembado, F. M., & Garritz, A. (2008).

Undergraduate professors' pedagogical content knowledge: The case of
'amount of substance’. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1389-
1404.
Park, S., & Chen, Y. C. (2012). Mapping out the integration of the components of
pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): examples from high school biology
classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 922–941.
Park, S., Jang, J., Chen, Y., & Jung, J. (2011). Is pedagogical content knowledge (PCK)
necessary for Reformed science teaching? Evidence from and empirical study.
Research in Science Education, 41, 245-260.
Park, S., & Oliver, S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content
knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as
professionals. Research in Science Education, 38, 261-284.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ramanathan, V. (1988). The Greenhouse Theory of Climate Change: A Test by an

Inadvertent Global Experiment. Science, 240(4850), 293-299.
Ravindranath, M. J. (2007). Environmental education in teacher education in India:

Experiences and challenges in the united nation’s decade of education for
sustainable development. Journal of Education for Teaching, 33(2), 191–206.
Reece, J. B., Taylor, M. R., Simon, E. J., Dickey, J. L., & Hogan, K. (2015). Campbell
biology: concepts and connections. Boston: Pearson.
Rieckmann, M. (2012). Future-oriented higher education: Which key competencies

should be fostered through university teaching and learning? Futures, 44 (2),
127–135.
Robson, C. (2007). How to Do a Research Project: A Guide for Undergraduate Students.

Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Rollnick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., & Ndlovu, T. (2008). The place
of subject matter knowledge in pedagogical content knowledge: A case study
290
of South African teachers teaching the amount of substance and chemical
equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1365–1387.
Rosenkränzer, F., Hörsch, C., Schuler, S., & Riess, W. (2017) Student teachers’
pedagogical content knowledge for teaching systems thinking: effects of
different interventions. International Journal of Science Education, (39)14, 1932-
1951.
Sadava, D., Heller, H. C., Orians, G. H., Purves, W. K., & Hillis, D. M. (2008). Life:
The science of biology (8th ed.). USA: Sinauer Associates.
Sadler, D. R. (1998). Formative Assessment: revisiting the territory. Assessment in

Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 77-84.
Samuelowicz, K., & Bain, J. D. (1992). Conceptions of teaching held by academic

teachers. Higher Education, 24 (93), 93-111.
Sanders , L. R., Borko, H., Lockard, J. D. (1993). Secondary science teachers’

knowledge base when teaching science courses in and out of their area of
certification. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(7), 723-736.
Schwab, J.J. (1964). The structure of the disciplines: Meaning and significance. In
G.W. Shulman, L.S. (1986).Those who understand: Knowledge growth in
teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(4), 4-13.
Schwartz, R. S., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). “It's the nature of the beast”: The
influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of
science. Journal of Research in science teaching, 39(3), 205-236.
Schwartz, R., Westerlund, J. F., García, D. M., & Taylor, T. A. (2010). The Impact of
Full Immersion Scientific Research Experiences on Teachers’ Views of the
Nature of Science. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 14(2), 1-40.
Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the Philosophical Underpinnings of Research: Relating

Ontology and Epistemology to the Methodology and Methods of the
Scientific, Interpretive, and Critical Research Paradigms. English Language
Teaching, 5(9), 9-16.
Settlage, J. (2000). Understanding to learning cycle: Influences on abilities to

embrace the approach by preservice elementary school teachers. Science
Education, 84, 43-50.
Shannon, J. C. (2006). How is PCK embodied in the instructional decisions teachers’ make
while teaching chemical equilibrium? Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Washington, USA.
291
Shim, M. K., Young, B. J., & Paolucci, J. (2010). Elementary teachers’ views on the
nature of scientific knowledge: A comparison of inservice and preservice
teachersapproach. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 14(2). 1-18.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.

Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.

Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.
Simpson, W. D., & Marek, E. A. (1988). Understandings and misconceptions of

biology concepts held by students attending small high schools and students
attending large high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(5), 361-
374.
Solomon, E. P., Berg, L. R., & Martin, D. W. (2008). Biology (8th ed.). China: Thomson
Brooks/Cole.
Soysal, Y. (2018) An exploration of the interactions among the components of an

experienced elementary science teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge,
Educational Studies, 44(1), 1-25.
Spiropoulou, D., Antonakaki, T., Kontaxaki, S. & Bouras, S. (2007). Primary

Teachers' Literacy and Attitudes on Education for Sustainable
Development. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(5), 443-450.
Stake, R. E. (2000). The art of case study research. California: Sage Publications.
Stratton, S. K., Hagevik, R., Feldman, A. & Bloom, M. (2015). Toward a sustainable
future: The practice of science teacher education for sustainability. In S.K.
Stratton, R. Hagevik, A. Feldman, M. Bloom (Eds.). Educating science teachers
for sustainability, (pp.445-458), USA: Springer.
Summers, M., Childs, A., & Corney, G. (2005). Education for sustainable
development in initial teacher training: Issues for interdisciplinary
collaboration. Environmental Education Research, 11(5), 623–647.
Summers, M & Childs, A. (2007). Student science teachers' conceptions of

sustainable development: an empirical study of three postgraduate training
cohorts. Research in Science & Technological Education,(25)3, 307-327.
Şahin, E., Ertepınar, H., & Teksöz, G. (2009). Implications for a green curriculum
application toward sustainable development. Hacettepe University Journal of
Education, 37: 123-135.
292
Şen, M. (2014). Study on Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Content
Knowledge Regarding Cell Division. Unpuplished Master Thesis. Middle East
Technical University, Ankara.
Şen, M, Öztekin, C., & Demirdöğen, B. (2018) Impact of Content Knowledge on

Pedagogical Content Knowledge in the Context of Cell Division. Journal of
Science Teacher Education, (29)2, 102-127.
Tahnh, N. C., & Tahnh, T. T. L. (2015). The Interconnection Between Interpretivist

Paradigm and Qualitative Methods in Education. American Journal of
Educational Science, 1(2), 24-27.
Tairab, H. H. (2001). How do pre-service and in-service science teachers view the
nature of science and technology?. Research in Science & Technological Education,
19(2),235-250.
Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher

education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4 (2), 99-110.
Taşdere, A. & Özsevgeç T. (June, 2012). Fen ve teknoloji öğretmen adaylarının

pedagojik alan bilgisi bağlamında strateji-yöntem-teknik ve ölçme-
değerlendirme bilgilerinin incelenmesi. X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik
Eğitimi Kongresi, Niğde.
Taylor, B., Sinha, G., &Ghoshal, T. (2006). Research Methodology: A guide for
researchers in Management & Social Sciences. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of Private
India Limited.
Thomas, M. R. (2003). Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods in Theses

and Dissertations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Tobias, S. (1990). They’re Not Dumb, They’re Different Stalking the Second Tier. Arizona,
USA: Research Corporation.
Tekkaya, C. & Kılıç, D.S. (2012). Pre-service biology teachers’ pedagogical content
knowledge regarding teaching evolution. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi
Dergisi, 42, 406-417.
Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge and co-
participation in science classrooms, In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman
(Eds.). Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 215–234). Dordrecht, The
Netherlands: Kluwer.
Trochim, W. M. (2006). Qualitative measures. Research Measures Knowledge Base, 361–

9433.
293
Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for
Australia’s Future. Australian Education Review. Camberwell, Vic: Australian
Council for Educational Research.
UNCED (1992). United Nations Conference on environment and development. Rio de

Janerio. UN.
UNECE. (2003). ‘‘Basic elements for the UNECE strategy for education for sustainable
development’’ Statement of education for sustainable development by the UNECE
ministers of the environment. UNECE 5th Ministerial Conference ‘‘Environment
for Europe’’, Klev.
UNECE (2011). Learning for the future. Competences in education for sustainable
development. Retrieved from
http://www.unece.org.unecedev.colo.iway.ch/fileadmin/DAM/env/esd/01_Ty
po3site/ExpertGroupCompetences.pdf
UNESCO (2013b). Education for Sustainable Development (ESD): A Sound

Investment to Accelerate African Development. Retrieved from
https://en.unesco.org/events/education-sustainable-development-esd-sound-
investment-accelerate-african-development.
Uşak, M. (2009). Preservice science and technology teachers’ pedagogical content

knowledge on cell topics. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 9(4), 2033-
2046.
Uşak, M., Özden, M., & Eilks, I. (2011) A case study of beginning science teachers’
subject matter (SMK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of teaching
chemical reaction in Turkey. European Journal of Teacher Education,(34)4, 407-
429.
Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & De Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers'
pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 35(6),
673–695.
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and
reform in science education: The role of teachers' practical knowledge. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137-158.
Van Driel, J. H., & Berry, A. (2012). Teacher professional development focusing
onpedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 41(1), 26-28.
Veal, W.R. & Makınster, J.G. (1998). Pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies
Electronic Journal of Science Education available at
http://unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/vealmak.html (accessed 30.03.2017).
294
Vesterinen, V. M., Aksela, M., & Lavonen, J. (2011). Quantitative analysis of
representations of nature of science in Nordic upper secondary school
textbooks using framework of analysis based on philosophy of chemistry.
Science & Education, 1-17.
Volkmann, M. J., Abell, S. K., & Zgagacz, M. (2005). The challenges of teaching
physics to preservice elementary teachers: Orientations of the professor,
teaching assistant, and students. Science Education, 89(5), 847-869.
Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014) Revisiting the Translation of Nature of

Science Understandings into Instructional Practice: Teachers' nature of science
pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, (36)3,
425-466.
Wilkins, L. (1993). Between facts and values: print media coverage of the
greenhouse effect, 1987-1990. Public Understanding of Science, 2, 71-84.
Willis, J. W. (2007). Foundations of Qualitative Research: Interpretive and Critical

Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Winter, C. (2007). Education for sustainable development and the secondary

curriculum in English schools: Rhetoric or reality? Cambridge Journal of
Education, 37(3), 337-354.
WCED (1987). Our common future. World Commission on Environment and

Development, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). California: Sage
Publications.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks,
Washington DC: Sage Publications.
Zhang, B., Krajcik, J., Sutherland, L. M., Wang, L., Wu, J., & Qiang, Y. (2003).
Opportunities and challenges of China’s inquiry-based education reform in
middle and high school: Perspectives of science teachers and teacher
educators. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1, 477–503.
Zembal-Saul, C., Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (2002).Elementary student teachers’

science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 443-
463.
Zembylas, M. (2007). Emotional ecology: The intersection of emotional knowledge

and pedagogical content knowledge in teaching. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 23(4), 355–367.
295
APPENDICES
A.MADDE DÖNGÜLERİ VE SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR KALKINMA KAVRAMINA
YÖNELİK GÖRÜŞME SORULARI
Ön Bilgi Soruları:
 Adınız, Soyadınız:
 Yaşınız: Cinsiyet:
 Mezun olduğunuz üniversite/Bölüm:
 Mesleki tecrübeniz (yıl/ay):
 Görev yapmakta olduğunuz okul:
 Kaç yıldır bu okulda görev yapıyorsunuz?
 Daha önce çevre ile ilgili eğitime katıldınız mı?
 Katıldıysanız, eğitimin içeriği:
 Daha önce çevre ile ilgili etkinlik/seminer/konferans vs. katıldınız mı?
 Katıldıysanız, etkinlik/seminer/konferans vs içeriği:
 Üyesi olduğunuz dernek/kurum/kuruluşlar:
Madde Döngülerine Yönelik Sorular

1) Madde döngüsü denince ne anlıyorsunuz? Sizce madde döngüsü ne demektir?
2) Madde döngüleri nelerdir? Şekil çizerek açıklayabilir misiniz?
3) Döngülerin ekosistem için önemi nedir?
Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Kavramına Yönelik Sorular

4) Döngülerin bozulmasına neden olan faktörleri söyleyebilir misiniz? Bu faktörler
o döngüyü neden/nasıl bozmaktadır?
5) Madde döngülerindeki bozulmalar sorunlara yol açar mı?
*Evet, Ne gibi sorunlara yol açabilir? Örnek vererek açıklayabilir misiniz?
*Hayır, Nedenini örneklerle açıklayabilir misiniz?
6) Madde döngülerindeki bozulmaları azaltmak için neler yapılmalıdır? Ne gibi
çözümler önerirsiniz?
7) Madde döngüleri konusunu sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramı ile
ilişkilendirebilir misiniz? Nasıl/Ne açıdan ilişki kuruyorsunuz? Açıklayabilir
misiniz?
296
B. BİLİMİN DOĞASI BİLGİSİNE YÖNELİK GÖRÜŞME SORULARI
1) Sizce bilim nedir? Bilimi; din, felsefe gibi diğer disiplinlerden ayıran özellikler
nelerdir?
2) Küresel ısınma, yüzyılı aşkın süredir dünya yüzeyinde yıl boyunca kara, hava
ve denizlerde görülen ortalama sıcaklıklarda görülen artış olarak
tanımlanmaktadır. Bilim insanları küresel ısınmanın meydana geldiği
konusunda nasıl emin olmaktadırlar? Onların bu konuda emin olmalarını
sağlayan faktörler nelerdir?
3) Sera etkisi, bilimsel bir kanun mudur yoksa bilimsel bir teori midir? Nedenini
açıklayabilir misiniz?
4) Bilimsel teori ve bilimsel kanun arasında bir fark var mıdır?

*Evet, Nedenini açıklayabilir misiniz?
*Hayır, Nedenini açıklayabilir misiniz?
5) Bilimsel teoriler (örn: İklim değişikliği ile ilgili bir teori) zaman içinde değişir
mi?
* Evet, Teorilerin neden değiştiğini açıklar mısınız?
* Hayır, Nedenini açıklar mısınız?
6) Bilimsel kanunlar zaman içinde değişir mi?

*Evet; Neden değişirler? Açıklayabilir misiniz?
*Hayır; Nedenini açıklayabilir misiniz?
7) Bilim insanlarının araştırmalarında takip ettikleri belli bir bilimsel yöntem var
mıdır?
*Evet, Bu yöntem/yöntemler nelerdir? Örnek vererek açıklayabilir misiniz?
8) Bilim insanları yenilenebilir enerji kaynakları/iklim değişikliği ile ilgili bilimsel

deneyler ve araştırmalar yapmaktadırlar. Bilim insanları bu araştırmalarını
yaparken kendi hayal gücü ve yaratıcılıklarını kullanırlar mı?
*Evet, (a) Araştırmalarının hangi aşamasında kullanırlar? (b) Bilim insanlarının
neden yaratıcılık ve hayal güçlerini kullanırlar? Açıklayabilir misiniz?
9) Bilim insanları küresel ısınmanın sebepleri konusunda görüş ayrılığına

düşmektedirler. Bazı araştırmacılar, insanların fosil yakıtları sürekli
kullanmasının gezegenimizin ısınmasına sebep olduğunu söylerken, diğer bir
297
kısım bilim insanı ise milyonlarca yıldır hava koşullarını belirleyen doğal
kuvvetlerin buna sebep olduğunu söylemektedirler. Örnekten hareketle, bilim
insanları aynı verileri kullanarak nasıl farklı sonuçlara ulaşabilmektedirler?
Açıklayabilir misiniz?
10) Bazı iddialara göre bilim oluşturulduğu toplumun değerlerinden etkilenir- din,
sosyal-kültürel değerler, felsefik varsayımlar ve entellektüel normlar gibi.
Bazılarına göre ise bilim evrenseldir, sosyal, kültürel değerler ve normlardan
bağımsızdır.
*Bilimin sosyal, kültürel değerlere bağımlı olduğunu düşünüyorsanız, nedenini
uygun örneklerle açıklayınız.
*Bilimin sosyal, kültürel değerlerden bağımsız olduğunu düşünüyorsanız
nedenini uygun örneklerle açıklayınız.
298
C. KART GRUPLAMA AKTİVİTESİ
A. Fen ve çevre/sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitiminin amaçlarına yönelik sorular
1. Sizce ilköğretim kademesinde fen öğretilmesinin sebepleri/amaçları nelerdir? Bu

konudaki görüşünüz nedir?
2. Neden fen eğitiminin bu tür amaçları olduğunu düşünüyorsunuz? Bu kanıya
varmanızı sağlayan etmenler nelerdir?
3. Sizce fen eğitimi ile sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimi arasında bir bağlantı var
mıdır? Açıklayabilir misiniz?
4. Sizce ilköğretim kademesinde çevre ve çevre eğitimi ile ilgili konuların
öğretilmesinin (sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimi verilmesinin) sebepleri/amaçları
neler olabilir? Bu konudaki görüşünüz nedir?
B. Kartları gruplama süreci

YÖNERGE:
Araştırmacı öğretmenden örnek senaryoların bulunduğu kartları üç gruba
ayırmasını ister. Öğretmenin seçtiği birinci kart grubu yaptığı öğretimi yansıtan,
ikinci kart grubu yaptığı öğretimi yansıtmayan ve üçüncü kart grubu ise yaptığı
öğretimi yansıtıp yansıtmadığı konusunda emin olmadığı senaryoları içeren
kartlardan oluşmalıdır. Senaryolar örnek olarak verilmiştir. Senaryolar çalışmanın
kapsamında olan madde döngüleri, yenilenebilir ve yenilenemez enerji kaynakları
ve geri dönüşüm konularını içermektedir. Her bir senaryoda bu konular ile ilgili
ifadeler bulunmaktadır. Öğretmen seçtiği karttaki öğretim yaklaşımını senaryoda
belirtilen konuda kullanmayıp, araştırma kapsamındaki diğer bir konuda
kullanıyor ise bunu açıkça ifade etmelidir. Bu işlem bittikten sonra, araştırmacı
öğretmene yaptığı gruplamalar ile ilgili sorular sorar.
299
Birinci kart grubu
1. ….kartların yaptığınız öğretim ile paralel olduğunu düşünüyorsunuz. Bu
kartlardaki senaryolar daha önce bahsettiğiniz amaçlara ulaşmanıza nasıl yardımcı
oluyor? Başka bir deyişle, bu senaryolar öğretiminiz ile ilgili
amaçlarınızla/hedeflerinizle nasıl bağdaşmaktadır? (Öğretmenin öğretimi ile paralel
olan kartlar için).
2. Kendi yaptığınız öğretim ile öğretiminizi yansıtan senaryolar arasındaki
benzerlikler nelerdir?
3. Seçtiğiniz birinci kart grubundaki senaryoların ortak özellikleri nelerdir?
4. Kartlardaki senaryolarda bulunan öğretim yöntemlerine ek olarak adı geçen
konuları öğretme için kullandığınız başka yöntemler var mı? Var ise nelerdir? Ek
olarak bahsettiğiniz bu yöntemler amaçlarınıza ulaşmanıza nasıl yardımcı
olmaktadır?
İkinci kart grubu
5. ….kartlarının yaptığınız öğretim ile paralel olmadığını düşünüyorsunuz.
Nedenini açıklayabilir misiniz?
6. Seçtiğiniz ikinci kart grubundaki senaryoların ortak özellikleri nelerdir?
7. Seçtiğiniz ikinci grup kartlarda bulunan senaryoları ne tür değişiklikler yaparak
kullanırsınız?
Üçüncü kart grubu
8. Son olarak seçtiğiniz üçüncü kart grubunda bulunan kartların öğretiminizi
yansıtıp yansıtmadığından emin olamadınız. Bunun nedenlerini açıklayabilir
misiniz?
9. Bu kart grubundaki senaryoların ortak özellikleri nelerdir?
10. Eklemek istediğiniz başka bir şey var mı?
Senaryolar:
1. Öğrencilere madde döngülerini öğretmenin etkili bir yolu düz anlatım
yöntemiyle tahtaya döngülerin şemalarını çizip aralarındaki farkları anlatmaktır
(Didactic)
2. Laboratuar ya da sınıf için çeşitli aktiviteler/etkinlikler kullanmak geri dönüşüm

konusunu öğretmek için etkili bir yoldur (Activity driven)
3. Yenilenebilir ve yenilenemez enerji kaynaklarını öğretmenin en iyi yolu,

öğrencilere yenilenebilir ve yenilenemez enerji kaynaklarının kullanım alanlarına
ilişkin bir etkinlik planlatmaktır (Discovery)
4. Geri dönüşüm konusunu öğretmenin iyi bir yolu öğrencilerin konu ile ilgili ön
bilgilerini ortaya çıkaracak sorular sorarak sahip oldukları kavram yanılgılarını
belirlemek ve sonrasında gidermeye çalışmaktır (Conceptual change)
300
5. Yenilenebilir ve yenilenemez enerji kaynakları öğretmenin etkili bir yolu konu ile
ilgili farklı ve zor sorular çözmektir (Academic-rigor)
6. Madde döngüsünde öğretmenin etkili bir yolu öğrencilerin değişkenlerine

kendilerinin karar verdikleri bir deney tasarlamalarına izin vermektir (Guided
inquiry)
7. Geri dönüşüm konusunu öğretmenin etkili yollarından biri, öğrencileri çevre

koruma ile ilgilenen sivil toplum kuruluşlarına katılma konusunda teşvik etmek ve
sivil toplum kuruluşları ile işbirliği yaparak öğrencilerin atıklar konusunda çözüm
önerileri sunmalarını sağlamaktır. (Project-based)
8. Yenilenemez enerji kaynaklarının sebep olduğu çevre sorunlarını öğretmenin

etkili bir yolu, öğrencileri gruplara ayırıp, onlara yakın çevrelerinden bir senaryo
vererek, öğrencilerden bu sorunlarla ilgili bir neden-sonuç ilişkisi oluşturmalarını,
sonuç çıkarmalarını ve bu sonuçları oluştururken kullandıkları bilgilerin
geçerliliğini değerlendirmelerini istemektir (Inquiry)
9. Karbondioksit döngüsünü öğretmenin etkili bir yolu bu konu ile ilgili yapılan
araştırmalardaki verileri kullanmaktır. Daha sonra öğrencilerden neden
karbondioksit döngüsü önemlidir ile ilgili hipotez kurmalarını, verileri
yorumlamalarını, analiz etmelerini ve sonuçlarını sınıftaki diğer öğrencilerle
paylaşmalarını istemektir (Process-Scientific skill development)
Çalışma Kapsamında Eklenen Senaryolar
10. Geri dönüşüm konusunu öğretmenin etkili yollarından biri, konu ile ilişkili
kavramları inceledikten sonra, öğrencilerin bu kavramları açık bir şekilde
tartışmalarını sağlayarak, kendi kavramlarını geliştirmelerine izin vermektir.
(Liberation)
11. Yenilenebilir enerji alanında yapılan araştırmaların ve geliştirilen teknolojilerin

çevre ve ülke ekonomisine katkılarını öğretmenin etkili yollarından biri
öğrencilerden konu ile ilgili uzmanlar kişilerle (mühendisler ve bilim insanları, vb.)
görüşme/mülakat yapmalarını ve araştırma sonuçlarını sınıf arkadaşlarına
sunmalarını istemektir (Müfredat amacı: SPS, STSE)
12. Öğrencileri çevreye duyarlı ve sorumluluk sahibi bir vatandaş olarak

yetiştirmenin etkili bir yolu, öğrencilerden insan faaliyetleri sonucu günümüzün en
önemli problemlerinden biri olan atık sorununa nasıl çözüm bulunacağı üzerine
araştırma yapmalarını istemektir (Müfredat amacı: STSE)
13. Bir öğretmen olarak öğrencileriniz için yapabileceğiniz en iyi şeyin onları liseye
hazırlamak olduğunu düşünürsünüz. Bu yüzden, konuyu öğretip sonrasında
mümkün olduğu kadar fazla soru çözmeye çalışırsınız (Eğitim Sistemi-Sınav
gerçeği)
301
D. İÇERİK GÖSTERİMİ RÖPORTAJ SORULARI
Pedagojik Alan Bilgisine Yönelik Sorular
Öğrencilerin öğrenmesi gereken kavramlar

Ana Soru 1: “Madde döngüleri’’ konusundaki ana amacınız kapsamında,
öğrencilerinizin neyi/ neleri öğrenmesini hedefliyorsunuz?
 Öğrencilerin bu konu ile ilgili hangi kavramları öğrenmesini bekliyorsunuz?
 Sizce öğrencilerin öğrenmesi gereken en önemli kavramlar/noktalar
nelerdir? Bu noktaları/ kavramları nasıl belirliyorsunuz?
 Müfredatta bu konu ile ilgili kavramların sıralanışı nasıldır?
Öğrencilerin geliştirmesi gereken beceri/kazanımlar

Ana Soru 2: Bu ders kapsamında öğrencilerinizin öğrenmesini amaçladığınız
kazanımlar neler olabilir? (Fen-Teknoloji-Toplum-Çevre (FTTÇ), Bilimsel Süreç
Becerileri (BSB), Tutum ve Değerler (TD), Bilimin Doğası ve Sürdürülebilir
Kalkınma ile ilgili kazanımlar)
 Bu konu ile ilgili fen ve teknoloji müfredatında öğrencilerin hangi
tutum/davranış/becerileri geliştirmeleri bekleniyor?
Ana Soru 3: Bahsettiğiniz bu kazanımlar sürdürülebilir kalkınma ile ne ölçüde
ilişkilidir? Neden? (Bu kazanımlar SKE hedefleri ile ne ölçüde örtüşür?)
Konuyu Bilmenin Önemi

Ana Soru 4: Öğrencilerin ‘‘Madde döngüleri’’ konusunu ve konu ile ilgili
kazanımları bilmesi neden önemlidir?
 Bu konuyu öğrenmeleri öğrencilere ne gibi avantajlar sağlar?
 Öğrenciler öğrendikleri bu bilgi ve becerileri nasıl kullanabilirler? Bu bilgi ve
beceriler onlara nasıl faydalı olacak? Olmayacaksa nedenini açıklar mısınız?
Öğretim ile ilgili zorluk ve sınırlılıklar

Ana Soru 5-6: “Madde döngüleri” konusuyla ilgili bu kazanımları öğretirken
karşılaşacağınız zorluklar ve sınırlılıklar neler olabilir?
 Sizce bu konuyu öğretmek neden zordur?
 Bu konuyu öğretmeyi zorlaştıran ve sınırlayan etkenler nelerdir?
 Bu konuyu öğretmenin zorluklarını/sınırlılıklarını nasıl öğrendiniz? (Bu
konuyu öğretmenin zor olduğuna nasıl karar verdiniz?)
302
Öğrencilerin anlama/kavramaları
Ana Soru 7: Madde döngüleri konusundaki öğretiminizi etkileyecek, öğrencilerin
sahip olabileceği öğrenme güçlükleri (kısmi kavrama, kavram yanılgısı vb.) neler
olabilir?
 Öğrencileriniz bu konuyu öğrenirken hangi noktalarda zorlanmaktadır?
 Madde döngüleri konusunda öğrencilerinizin sahip olabileceği bu öğrenme
güçlüklerinin nedenleri neler olabilir?
 Öğrencilerin yukarıda bahsettiğiniz ana kavramlarla ilgili olarak sahip
oldukları yanlış kavramalar neler olabilir?
 Öğrencilerin bu konuyu öğrenebilmeleri için hangi ön bilgilere ve becerilere
sahip olmaları gerekir?
 Öğrencilerin bu konudaki kavram yanılgıları ve yaşadıkları zorluklar sizin
öğretiminizi etkiliyor mu? Nasıl?
 Öğrencilerin zorlandıkları noktaları ve yanlış kavramaları düşünerek ders
planınızda ne gibi değişiklikler yapıyorsunuz?
Öğretim Yöntem ve Stratejileri

Ana Soru 8: Öğretim sürecinizi (dersin işlenişi), hangi yöntem ve öğrenme
stratejilerini neden kullanacağınızı belirterek ayrıntılarıyla açıklayınız.
 Günlük hayat ile ilişkili anlatıyorsanız, nasıl bir ilişki kuruyorsunuz?
 Bu öğretim stratejilerini kullanmayı tercih etmenizin nedenleri nelerdir?
 Bu stratejileri kullanmayı nasıl öğrendiniz? Bu stratejileri kendiniz mi
geliştirdiniz yoksa başka kaynaklardan mı (kişi, kaynak, vb) öğrendiniz?
 Konuyu öğretirken öğrencilerin konu ile ilgili yanlış kavramalara sahip
olduklarının farkına varsanız ne yaparsanız?
 Yapmayı planladığınız bu aktivite/stratejinin etkili olduğunu/olacağını nasıl
öğrendiniz/nereden biliyorsunuz?
 Yaptığınız öğretimin etkili olup olmadığını nasıl anlarsınız? (Öğretim
esnasında)
Öğrencilerin anlama/kavramalarını değerlendirme yöntemleri

Ana Soru 9: Öğrencilerinizin ne öğrendiğini değerlendirmek için kullanacağınız
özel yol ve araçlar nelerdir, açıklayınız?
 Niçin bu ölçme tekniklerini kullanmayı tercih ediyorsunuz?
 Değerlendirme sonuçları size nasıl yardımcı olmaktadır? Bu sonuçlar size
neler anlatmaktadır?
 Öğrencilerin bu konudaki yanlış kavramalarını ve zorlandıkları noktaları
anlamak için kullandığınız değerlendirme teknikleri var mı? Bunları nasıl
öğrendiniz/Kaynaklarınız nelerdir?
303
E. ORIJINAL DRAWINGS OF SCIENCE TEACHERS
DRAWNGS OF KEMAL
Kemal’s drawing of carbon cycle
Kemal’s drawing of hydrological cycle
Kemal’s drawing of nitrogen cycle

304
Kemal’s drawing used to teach the carbon cycle
Kemal’s drawing used to teach the nitrogen cycle
305
DRAWINGS OF HALE
Hale’s drawing of carbon cycle
306
Hale’s drawing of hydrological cycle
Hale’s drawing of nitrogen cycle
307
DRAWINGS OF SELDA
Selda’s drawing of carbon cycle
Selda’s drawing of water cycle
308
Selda’s drawing of nitrogen cycle
Selda’s drawing used to teach the hydrological cycle
309
Selda’s drawing used to teach the carbon cycle
Selda’s drawing used to teach the nitrogen cycle
310
F. RUBRIC USED FOR INFORMED NOS VIEWS
NOS Aspects and Descriptions (Lederman, Schwartz, Abd-El-Khalick & Bell, 2001,
p. 15)
Aspect Description
Tentativeness Scientific knowledge is subject to change with new observations
and with the reinterpretations of existing observations. All other
aspects of NOS provide rationale for the tentativeness of scientific
knowledge.
Empirical basis Scientific knowledge is based on and/or derived from
observations of the natural world.
Subjectivity Science is influenced and driven by the presently accepted
scientific theories and laws. The development of questions,
investigations, and interpretations of data are filtered through the
lens of current theory. This is an unavoidable subjectivity that
allows science to progress and remain consistent, yet also
contributes to change in science when previous evidence is
examined from the perspective of new knowledge. Personal
subjectivity is also unavoidable. Personal values, agendas, and
prior experiences dictate what and how scientists conduct their
work.
Creativity Scientific knowledge is created from human imaginations and
logical reasoning. This creation is based on observations and
inferences of the natural world.
Social/cultural Science is a human endeavor and, as such, is influenced by the
embeddedness society and culture in which it is practiced. The values and
expectations of the culture determine what and how science is
conducted, interpreted, and accepted.
Observations and Science is based on both observations and inferences.
inferences Observations are gathered through human senses or extensions of
those senses. Inferences are interpretations of those observations.
Perspectives of current science and the scientist guide both
observations and inferences. Multiple perspectives contribute to
valid multiple interpretations of observations.
Theories and laws Theories and laws are different kinds of scientific knowledge.
Laws describe relationships, observed or perceived, of
phenomena in nature. Theories are inferred explanations for
natural phenomena and mechanisms for relationships among
natural phenomena. Hypotheses in science may lead to either
theories or laws with the accumulation of substantial supporting
evidence and acceptance in the scientific community. Theories
and laws do not progress into one and another, in the hierarchical
sense, for they are distinctly and functionally different types of
knowledge.
311
G. PERMISSION OF METU HUMAN SUBJECTS ETHICS COMMITTEE
312
H. PERMISSION OF MINISTRY OF NATIONAL EDUCATION
313
I. CURRICULUM VITAE
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Surname, Name: Yılmaz Yendi, Bahar

Nationality: Turkish (TC)
Date and Place of Birth: 12.01.1982, Kavak/Samsun
Marital Status: Married
Phone: +90 454 310 12 50
email: [email protected]
EDUCATION
Degree Institution Year of Graduation
PhD Middle East Technical University (METU), 2008-

Education Faculty
Elementary Education
BS Ondokuz Mayıs University (OMU), 2005

Education Faculty,
Elementary Science Education
High School Tülay Başaran Anatolian Lycee 2000
WORK EXPERIENCE
Year Place Enrollment
2018- Giresun Universitesi, Education Faculty, Research Assistant

Department of Elementary Science
Education
2007- 2018 Ocak METU, Education Faculty, Department of Research Assistant

2006-2007 OMU, Education Faculty, Department of Research Assistant

FOREIGN LANGUAGES
Advanced English
314
J. TURKISH SUMMARY / TÜRKÇE ÖZET
Deneyimli Fen Bilimleri Öğretmenlerinin Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Eğitimi

Kapsamında Madde Döngüleri Konusuyla İlgili Konu Alan ve
Pedagojik Alan Bilgileri
GİRİŞ
Eğitimin alt alanlarında, öğretimin temel amacı, öğrencilerin öğrenmelerini ve
anlamalarını sağlamaktır. Ancak, öğretmenlerin öğretme konusundaki yetenekleri
(Kind, 2009) sınıf içi öğrenmede en etkili faktördür (Lumpe 2007). Bu nedenle,
öğretmenlerin, öğrencilerin anlamaları ve başarılarına muazzam bir etkisi vardır
(Aydın, 2012; Brown, Friedrichsen ve Abell, 2013; Lumpe, 2007; Miller, 2001;
Sanders, 2000; van Driel, Beijaard ve Verloop, 2001). Bu nedenle, 1980'lerden bu
yana, eğitim araştırmacıları, öğretmenlerin sahip oldukları bilgi ve uygulamaların
öğrencilerin başarısı üzerindeki etkilerini açıklamak ve bu alanda zengin ve değerli
veriler sağlamak için '' öğretmen bilgisi '' ve '' öğretmenlerin uygulama bilgisi '' gibi
konulara odaklanmışlardır (Abell, 2007; Aydın, 2012; Carter, 1990; Friedrichsen,
2008; Grossman, 1990; Hashweh, 2005; Magnusson, Krajcik ve Borko, 1999;
Shulman, 1986, 1987; Şen, 2014; Zembylas, 2007; Rollnick ve diğerleri, 2008).
20. yüzyılın ilk yarısında araştırmacılar, öğretmenlerin içerik bilgisinin, nitelikli
öğretmenlerin en önemli göstergesi olduğu sonucuna vardılar. 20. yüzyılın ikinci
yarısında ise, araştırmalar, öğretmenlerin pedagoji bilgileri üzerinde yoğunlaşmıştır
(Shulman, 1986). Ancak, Shulman, öğretmenlerin konu alan ve pedagoji bilgilerinin
bağlantılı olduğunu iddia etmiştir. Bu nedenle, öğretme ve öğretmenlerin sahip
olması gereken bilgiler ile ilgili sorunlar, Shulman'ın "pedagojik alan bilgisi (PAB)"
yapısını tanıtmasına neden olmuştur (Shulman, 1987). Shulman'a (1987) göre, PAB
hem içerik hem de pedagoji bilgisini içermekte ve “öğrencilerin farklı ilgi alanlarına
315
ve becerilerine göre düzenlenmiş ve uyarlanmış; öğretilen konuya özgü içerik
bilgisinin ve pedagojik bilginin özel birleşimi” (s.8) olarak tanımlanmaktadır.
Shulman'ın PAB yapısı, başarılı öğretmenlerin öğrencilerin anlamalarını sağlamak
için hangi bilgileri bilmeleri gerektiği sorusuna açıklık getirmiştir (Grossman, 1990;
Lederman, Gess-Newsome ve Latz, 1994; Mulhall ve Loughran, 2003). PAB,
öğretmenlerin hem konu alan hem de öğrencilerin önceki bilgi ve güçlükleri,
değerlendirme ve öğretim stratejileri kullanımı ve de müfredat kaynakları gibi genel
pedagoji hakkındaki detaylı bilgileri olarak görülmektedir (Abell, 2007; Magnusson
ve diğerleri, 1999; Tobin ve McRobbie, 1999). Sonuç olarak, PAB etkili öğretme ve
öğrenmenin merkezi olarak kabul edilmektedir (Cochran, DeRuiter ve King 1993;
Magnusson, Krajcik ve Borko 1999). Teorik bir yapı olarak, PAB, fen eğitimi
araştırmacıları için de ayrıca farklı bir bakış açısı sunmaktadır. Özellikle,
Magnusson ve arkadaşlarının (1999) PAB modeli, fen bilgisi eğitimi alanındaki PAB
çalışmalarının çoğunda kullanılmıştır (Abell, 2008; Kind, 2009). Bu modelde,
araştırmacılar, öğretmenlerin konu alan bilgisi (KAB), pedagojik bilgi (PB), eğitimsel
bağlam bilgisi ve PAB olarak dört ana alanda bilgi sahibi olduğu sonucuna
varmışlardır. Teorik çerçeve olarak bu modelin kullanıldığı bu çalışma, fen eğitimi
disiplininde PAB'ın uygulamaları hakkında fikir vermek adına öğretmenlerin konu
alan bilgisi ve PAB’larına odaklanmıştır.
Fen Eğitimi ve Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma için Eğitim
21. yüzyılda, bilim ve teknolojinin hızla ilerlemesi sonucu, çevresel sorunlardaki
artış, bireylerin hem etik hem de ahlaki kaygılarında değişimlere neden olmuştur.
Bu nedenle, araştırmacılar fen eğitiminde özellikle çevresel sorunlar ve
sürdürülebilir kalkınma konularının dikkate alınması gerektiğini
vurgulamaktadırlar. 1950'lerden bu yana, fen eğitiminin hedefi, öğrencileri bilimsel
okuryazar vatandaşlar olarak eğitmek olmuştur. Ancak, günümüzde birçok
araştırmacı, bilimsel okuryazarlığın daha sürdürülebilir bir dünya yaratmak için, 21.
yüzyılın ihtiyaçlarını karşılaması gerektiğini (Choi, Lee, Shin, Kim ve Krajcik, 2011)
316
savunmaktadır (Hodson, 2011; McFarlane, 2011). Bu ihtiyaçtan yola çıkarak, fen
eğitiminin yeniden kavramsallaştırılması gerektiği sonucuna varılmaktadır (Carter,
2008; Colucci-Gray, Perazzone, Dodman ve Camino, 2013; Feldman ve Nation,
2015). Carter (2008), fen eğitiminin 21. yüzyıldaki amacının, hem öğrencilerin bilim
hakkında eleştirel yargılarda bulunmalarına yardımcı olmak hem de daha
sürdürülebilir bir dünya için sorumlu vatandaşlar olabilmeleri adına gereken bilgi
ve becerilerini geliştirmek olduğunu iddia etmiştir. Dolayısıyla, fen eğitimi,
gelişmekte olan toplumların ihtiyaçlarına cevap verebilmek için, öğrencilerin
sürdürülebilir kalkınma konusu hakkında bilgi ve bakış açılarını geliştirmeli
(Feldman ve Nation, 2015); sosyal ve küresel sorunlarla ilgili harekete geçebilmeleri
için gereken becerilerini, ilgi alanlarını ve motivasyonlarını arttırmalı (Feldman ve
Nation, 2015; Tytler, 2007) ve sürdürülebilir bir gelecek sağlamak adına değer
yargıları ve tutumlarını değiştirmelidir (Stratton, Hagevik, Feldman ve Bloom,
2015). Bu bağlamda, Türkiye'deki fen bilgisi müfredatı, sürdürülebilirlik konularını
mevcut programa dâhil etmek için yenilenmiştir (MEB, 2013). Ancak, müfredattaki
değişiklikler ya da düzeltmeler, eğitimin sorunlarına çözüm getirmeyi ve
sürdürülebilir bir gelecek oluşturmak için sorumlu vatandaşlar yetiştirmeyi garanti
etmemektedir. Yeni müfredat, öğretim ve değerlendirme için yeni stratejiler ve
yöntemler önerse bile, öğretmenler müfredatı uygulamakta ve öğretimlerine
yansıtmakta zorlanabilmektedirler (Aydın ve Çakıroğlu, 2010).
Eğitim, daha sürdürülebilir toplumlar yaratmada öncü bir faktör olarak
görülmektedir (UNCED, 1992); bu nedenle okul öncesi eğitiminden yükseköğretime
kadar tüm eğitim programlarında öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimi
konusundaki yeterlikleri tartışılmaktadır (örneğin, Rieckmann, 2012; UNECE, 2011).
Yukarıda belirtildiği üzere, fen eğitiminin perspektifindeki değişimler nedeniyle,
fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimindeki (SKE) rolü özellikle
tartışma konusudur. Diğer bir deyişle, fen eğitiminin yeniden kavramlaştırılması,
öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma (SK) konularını öğretebilmek için hem konu
alan bilgileri hem de PAB ile ilgili yaklaşımlarını değiştirmeleri gerektiği anlamına
317
gelmektedir. Bu nedenle, SK konularını sanattan, fen ve matematiğe kadar bütün
disiplinlere dâhil edebilmek için öğretmenler, sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitiminin
uygulanabilmesi için gerekli olan bilgi, beceri, değer yargıları ve uygun pedagoji
bilgisine sahip olmalıdır (McKeown ve Hopkins, 2003). Dolayısıyla, müfredat
değişimleri sonucu ortaya çıkan zorluklar göz önüne alındığında, fen bilgisi
öğretmenlerinin sürdürülebilirlik için eğitim bağlamında gerekli konu alan ve
pedagojik alan bilgileri ile ilgili araştırma yapma ihtiyacı kaçınılmazdır (Kadji-
Beltran, Zachariou, Liarakou ve Flogaitis, 2014). Bu ihtiyaca cevap olarak, deneyimli
fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin konu alan ve PAB'larını inceleyen mevcut araştırmanın,
SKE bağlamında, fen eğitimi alan yazınına değerli teorik ve pratik bilgiler sağlaması
beklenmektedir.
Çalışmanın Önemi
PAB alanında yapılan çalışmalar, öğretmenlerin farklı konularda PAB’larına yönelik
araştırma yapılması gerektiğini vurgulamaktadırlar. Ayrıca, birçok eğitim
araştırmacısı çalışmalarında ya öğretmenlerin konu alan bilgilerini ya da pedagojik
bilgilerini incelemeyi seçmiştir. Bu araştırma öğretmenlerin hem KAB'larını hem de
PAB'larını birlikte ele alması açısından PAB alan yazınına katkıda bulunmuştur.
Ayrıca fen eğitiminde, PAB alanında yapılan araştırmalar çoğunlukla kimya
konularına odaklanmıştır (Aydın ve Boz, 2012; Aydın; 2012). Biyoloji konularıyla
ilgili PAB araştırması nadir olduğundan (Aydemir; 2014; Aydın ve Boz, 2012; Tür,
2009; Şen, 2014), henüz PAB alan yazında çalışılmayan madde döngüleri konusu
çalışma için seçilmiştir. Ek olarak, mevcut araştırma, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin
PAB'larını sürdürülebilir kalkınma için eğitim (SKE) bağlamında tanımlamayı
amaçlamıştır. Spesifik olarak, çevresel bir konu olması nedeniyle, madde döngüleri,
öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma konusundaki anlayışlarını ve SKE için
pedagojik alan bilgilerini araştırmak için de önemli bir konudur. Bu nedenle, bu
çalışmanın sonuçları, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri ve sürdürülebilir
kalkınma kavramlarını nasıl ilişkilendirdiklerine dair değerli kanıtlar sağlaması
nedeniyle önemlidir.
318
PAB alan yazındaki çalışmalar, öğretmenlerin bu bilgiyi sınıf içi uygulamalarında
nasıl kullandıklarını gösteren sınırla sayıda araştırma olduğunu göstermektedir
(Mthethwa-Kunene, Onwu ve de Villiers, 2015; Park ve Chen, 2012; Rollnick ve
diğerleri, 2008). Ayrıca, SKE alan yazını da, bu eğitime ilişkin sınıf içi uygulamaları
gösteren çalışmaların sayısının az olduğuna vurgu yapmaktadır (Anyolo, 2015;
Birdsall, 2015; Corney ve Reid, 2007). Dolayısıyla, bu araştırma, öğretmenlerin
madde döngüleri konusuna özgü PAB'larını nasıl geliştirdiklerine dair kanıtları,
gerçek sınıf ortamlarından uygulamaları gözler önüne sererek sağlamayı
amaçlamıştır. Ek olarak, Van Driel, Veal ve Janssen (2001), deneyimli öğretmenlerin
belirli konulardaki PAB'larının gerçek sınıf ortamında uygulamaları üzerine yapılan
çalışmaların önemli olduğuna dikkat çekmişlerdir. Özellikle, Loughran ve
arkadaşları (2004), öğretmenlerin PAB'larına yönelik somut örneklerin sunulduğu
çalışmaların sınırlı olduğunu vurgulamıştır. Dolayısıyla, gerçek uygulayıcıların
somut örneklerini içeren bu çalışmanın, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin ve öğretmen
adaylarının ilgili konuda sınıf içi öğretim uygulamalarını zenginleştirebilmeleri
amacıyla düzenlenen mesleki gelişim programlarına (örn. hizmet-öncesi ve hizmet-
içi eğitimler) zengin ve değerli veriler sağlaması beklenmektedir.
Araştırma Soruları
Çalışmanın temel amacı, deneyimli fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri
konusunda KAB ve PAB'larının sürdürülebilir kalkınma için eğitim bağlamında
incelenmesidir. Bu nedenle, çalışmayı yön vermek adına aşağıdaki araştırma
soruları ortaya konmuştur:
 Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin, sürdürülebilir kalkınma bağlamında madde
döngüleri öğretmek için konu bilgisi nedir?
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri hakkındaki kavramsal
bilgileri nelerdir?
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri konusunda bilimin
doğasına yönelik bilgileri nelerdir?
319
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri konusundaki SD bilgileri
nelerdir?
 Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngülerini öğretmek için pedagojik alan
bilgileri nelerdir?
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin fen öğretimine yönelimleri nelerdir?
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri ile ilgili müfredat bilgileri
nelerdir?
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri ile ilgili öğretim stratejileri
nelerdir?
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri ile ilgili için öğrenci
bilgileri nelerdir?
o Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri ile ilgili değerlendirme
bilgileri nelerdir?
YÖNTEM
Araştırma Deseni
Mevcut çalışmada, deneyimli öğretmenlerin PAB’ları hakkında yoğun ve ayrıntılı
bilgiler elde etmek adına nitel araştırma yaklaşımı benimsenmiştir. Nitel
araştırmalarda en yaygın kullanılan araştırma desenlerinden biri durum
çalışmalarıdır (Flick, 2007). Durum çalışmalarında amaç, iyi tanımlanmış olan
bağlam çerçevesinde, durumla ilgili derinlemesine, ayrıntılı ve yoğun bilgi
üretmektir (Burton, Brundrett & Jones, 2008; Taylor, Sinha ve Ghoshal, 2013).
Dolayısıyla, ele alınan araştırma sorularının amacı ve niteliği göz önüne alınarak, bu
çalışmada çoklu durum çalışması araştırma deseni olarak seçilmiştir.
Katılımcılar
Amaçlı örneklem yöntemi aracılığı ile önceden belirlenmiş kriterler ışığında, zengin
ve kapsamlı bilgiye ulaşılabilecek dört deneyimli fen bilgisi öğretmeni katılımcı
olarak seçilmiştir. Ancak, katılan öğretmenlerden biri idari nedenlerden dolayı
çalışmadan ayrılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, bu çalışmaya en az 5 yıllık mesleki deneyimi
320
olan üç fen bilgisi öğretmeni katılmıştır. Araştırmacı, katılımcı öğretmenler için
Kemal, Hale ve Selda takma isimlerini kullanmıştır.
Veri Toplama Araçları
Bu çalışmada veriler, 2013-2014 yılı bahar döneminde, 8.sınıflarda görev yapan fen
bilgisi öğretmenlerinden elde edilmiştir. Nitel araştırmalarda, görüşmeler, belgeler
ve gözlemler, incelenen olayların ayrıntılı tanımını sunmak için üç temel veri
toplama aracıdır (Merriam, 2009). Araştırmacı, bu görüşü dikkate alarak, çalışmada
röportajlar, kart gruplama aktivitesi, video kaydı aracılığıyla sınıf içi gözlemler ve
öğretmen dokümanlarını veri toplama aracı olarak kullanmıştır.
Verilerin Analizi
Bu çalışmada öğretmenlerden elde edilen veriler, hedeflenen bilgi türlerine göre
ayrı ayrı kategorilere ayrılarak analiz edilmiştir. Katılımcıların madde döngülerine
yönelik kavramsal bilgilerini (substantive knowledge) analiz etmek için araştırmacı,
madde döngüleri konusunun içerdiği kavram ve süreçlerin bilimsel tanımlarından
oluşan bir değerlendirme listesi hazırlamıştır. Ayrıca, her bir döngü içindeki
bileşenleri ve süreçleri içeren genel bir değerlendirme listesi hazırlanmıştır. Simpson
ve Marek (1988) 'in derecelendirme ölçeği kullanılarak, katılımcı öğretmenlerin
madde döngüleri ile ilgili kavramsal bilgileri ilgili kategorilere ayrılmıştır. Katılımcı
öğretmenlerin bilimin doğasına yönelik bilgilerini (syntactic knowledge) toplamak
için VNOS-C ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Öğretmenlerin VNOS-C’ye yönelik görüşlerinin
değerlendirilmesinde Lederman, Schwartz, Abd-El-Khalick ve Bell (2001) tarafından
geliştirilen değerlendirme tablosu kullanılmıştır. Katılımcı öğretmenlerin madde
döngüleri ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma (SK) kavramı arasındaki bağlantıları ile ilgili
anlayışlarını belirleyebilmek için Koutalidi ve Scoullos (2016, s.14) tarafından
geliştirilen tematik bağlantılar esas alınmıştır. Ayrıca, öğretmenlerin SK ile ilgili
temel kavramlarının belirlenebilmesi için Kılınç ve Aydın (2013)’a ait yedi temel
kategori kullanılmıştır.
321
Son olarak, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin PAB’larını analiz etmek için, bu çalışmada
Magnusson, Krajcik ve Borko (1999) tarafından geliştirilen model kullanılmıştır.
Model, fen öğretimine yönelimler, müfredat bilgisi, öğretim stratejileri bilgisi,
öğrencilerin fen bilgisi anlayışı ve değerlendirme bilgisini içeren beş bileşenden
oluşmaktadır. Bu modele göre her bir bileşen ve ilgili bileşenlerin alt boyutları,
kategorileri ve alt kategorileri temsil ederken, kodlar ilgili alan yazından ve
öğretmenlerin cevaplarından çıkarılmıştır.
SONUÇLAR ve TARTIŞMA
Bu bölümde, hem çalışmadaki hem de alan yazındaki bulgular dikkate alınarak;
deneyimli fen öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri konusundaki konu alan bilgileri ve
PAB’leri sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimi bağlamında tartışılmaktadır.
Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Konu Alan Bilgileri
Sürdürülebilir kalkınma için eğitim (SKE) bağlamında deneyimli fen bilgisi
öğretmenlerinin konu alan bilgilerini ortaya çıkarmak için, öğretmenlerin hem
temel kavramsal anlayışları, hem bilimin doğası anlayışları hem de madde
döngülerine yönelik ilgili SK anlayışları incelenmiştir. Bu nedenle, bu bölümde,
katılımcı öğretmenlerin KAB’larına yönelik bulgular, alan yazındaki sonuçlar
dikkate alınarak tartışılmıştır.
Bu çalışmada, madde döngülerine yönelik kavramsal bilgi anlamında, katılımcı fen
öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri konusunda bilgi eksikliğinin olduğu sonucuna
varılabilir. Öğretmenlerin spesifik olarak karbon, su ve azot döngülerinde
kavramsal olarak eksiklikleri olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Diğer taraftan fen öğretim
müfredatı incelendiğinde, öğretmenlerin eksik bilgilerinin programdaki
eksikliklerle benzer olduğu saptanmıştır.
Bu şartlar ışığında, katılımcı öğretmenlerin temel bilgilerinin fen müfredatından
etkilenebileceği sonucuna varılabilir. Bu çalışma, özellikle, 8. sınıf fen ders
kitaplarının sınırlı içeriğinin öğretmenlerin temel bilgileri üzerinde etkili

322
olabileceğini göstermektedir. Bu sonuç, öğretmenlerin, deneyimli olsalar bile,
zaman içinde kullanılmayan bilgiyi unutabileceklerini ortaya çıkarmıştır.
Öğretmenlerin içerik bilgisine zaman içinde ne olduğunu anlamayı amaçlayan Arzi
ve White (2007) 'nin çalışmaları da bu sonucu desteklemektedir. On yedi yıllık
boylamsal çalışmalarında, Arzi ve White (2007) yirmi iki öğretmeni öğretmenliğe ilk
başladıkları yıldan itibaren takip etmiştir. Çalışmalarının bulgularına dayanarak,
öğretimde hem rehber hem de bilgi kaynağı olarak başvurulan müfredatların,
öğretmenlerin içerik bilgisini önemli şekilde etkilediği sonucuna varmışlardır.
Böylece, kullanılmayan içerik bilgisinin unutulduğunu ve zaman içinde çok az yeni
bilginin geliştirildiğini savunmaktadırlar. Bu nedenle öğretmenlerin, müfredat
bilgisini öğretmede uzmanlaşarak, akademik ve bilimsel bilgiyi bir kenara
bırakabilecekleri sonucu ortaya çıkmıştır.
Çalışmada, katılımcı öğretmenlerin temel bilgileriyle ilgili göze çarpan bir başka
bulgu da temel bilgi düzeyleridir. Hale ve Selda’nın uzmanlık alanı biyoloji
olduğundan, bir biyoloji konusu olarak madde döngüleri hakkındaki kavramsal
anlayışlarının Kemal’in anlayışından daha fazla olması beklenmiştir. Bununla
birlikte, öğretmenlerin döngülerle ilgili kavramsal bilgileri incelendiğinde, Kemal’in
madde döngüleri hakkındaki temel bilgilerinin Selda’dan daha iyi olduğu açıkça
görülmektedir. Örneğin, azot döngüsünde Selda, ayrıştırıcıları ve azot bağlayıcı
bakterileri ayırt edememiş, dahası, azot ayrıştırıcı bakterileri ise azot bakterilerinden
biri olarak belirtmemiştir.. Bu nedenle azot döngüsündeki süreçlerle ilgili bilgisi
yetersizdi. Bu bağlamda, Kemal'in, uzmanlık alanı dışındaki madde döngüleri
konusunu anlama ve öğretme konusunda Selda'dan daha başarılı olduğu sonucuna
varılabilir. Kind (2009), bu sonucu, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin uzmanlıklarının
dışında bir konunun öğretilmesine nasıl tepki verdiklerini araştırdığı çalışmasında
göstermiştir. Böylece, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin uzmanlık alanları dışındaki
derslerinin, uzmanlıkları dâhilinde öğretilenlerden daha başarılı olduğunu
göstermiştir. Ayrıca bu öğretmenler, uzmanlık dışı fen konularını öğrenmek için
daha fazla çaba harcamaktadırlar.
323
İkinci olarak, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin bilimin doğası hakkındaki anlayışı da bu
çalışmada sözdizimsel bilgi olarak araştırılmıştır (Schwab, 1964). Önceki araştırma
bulguları ile tutarlı olarak (Abd-El-Khalick ve Lederman, 2000; Akerson ve Abd-El-
Khalick, 2003; Brickhouse, 1990; Cullen, Akerson ve Hanson, 2012; Doğan ve Abd-
El-Khalick 2008; Lederman, 1992) Lederman, 1999; Liu ve Lederman, 2007;
Schwartz, Westerlund, García ve Taylor, 2010; Shim, Young ve Paolucci, 2010;
Tairab, 2001) hizmet içi öğretmenlerin bu çalışmada bilimin doğasına ilişkin yetersiz
görüşlerine sahip oldukları saptanmıştır. Özellikle öğretmenlerin ifadeleri, bilimsel
bilginin geçici doğası, teoriler ve yasalar arasındaki farklılıklar, bilim adamlarının
öznelliği ve bilimsel bilginin sosyo-kültürel yapısına ilişkin naif açıklamalar
içermektedir. Ayrıca, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin belirtilen bilimin doğası
boyutlarına ilişkin mitleri, yine öğretmenlerin bilimin deneysel, çıkarımsal ve
yaratıcı boyutlarına ilişkin görüşlerini etkilemiştir.
Bu koşullar ışığında, bu çalışmada, katılımcı öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası görüşleri,
ilköğretim, ortaöğretim ve lisans eğitimini içeren eğitim geçmişleriyle ilişkili
olabilir. Özellikle, fen ders kitaplarındaki fen bilimi yaklaşımı ve eğitim yaşamları
ile birlikte deneyimledikleri laboratuar faaliyetlerinin yapısı ve bilimin doğasına
yönelik derslere lisans eğitimlerinde aşinalıklarının olmaması, katılımcıların bilimin
doğası hakkındaki yanlış fikirlerinin önemli nedenleri olabilir. Her şeyden önce,
öğrenci olarak, katılımcı öğretmenlerin önceki eğitimleri sırasında laboratuar
deneyimleri yanlış NOS görüşlerine yol açmış olabilir. Ne yazık ki, laboratuar
etkinlikleri gibi birçok yaygın fen öğretimi yöntemi, bilimde yaratıcılığa karşı
çalışmaya hizmet etmektedir (Abd-El-Khalick, 2005; McComas, 1998). İlköğretim
seviyesinden lisans seviyesine kadar, laboratuvar çalışmalarının çoğu doğrulama
faaliyetleridir. Laboratuvar el kitabı adım adım yönergeler sağlar ve öğrencilerden
etkinlik yapmaları, gözlemler yapmaları ve daha sonra belirli bir sonuca varmaları
beklenir. Oluşan sonuçların hem kendine özgü hem de tek tip olacağı beklentisi
vardır. Sonuç olarak, laboratuar faaliyetleri bilimin nesnel olduğu yanılgısını
arttırmaktadır (Bilican, 2014; Clough, 2006). Tobias (1990), laboratuarlarda bilimin
324
öğrencilere heyecan verici ve yaratıcı bir süreç olarak görme fırsatı verilmediğini
savunmuştur.
Ders kitaplarında bilimin gösterimi de katılımcı öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası
hakkındaki yetersiz görüşlerine neden olabilir (Abd-El-Khalick, Waters & Le, 2008;
Bilican, 2014; Clough, 2006; İrez; 2009; Vesterinen, Aksela ve Lavonen, 2011). ).
Çalışmalar bilim ders kitaplarında gösterilen bilimin doğası ve yönlerinin birçok
sorunu olduğunu gösterniştir. Ders kitapları bilimi, gerçekleri arayan bir süreç
olarak tanıtmıştır. Ek olarak, bilimin doğası yönlerini ihmal ederek yanlış NOS
görüşlerini yansıtmaktadırlar (Irez, 2009; Vesterinen, Aksela ve Lavonen, 2011). Bu
nedenle, herhangi bir eğitim seviyesinde tanıtılan fen ders kitaplarıyla ilgili bu
sorunlar, katılımcı öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası hakkında sağlam bir anlayışa sahip
olmalarını engellemiştir. Ayrıca, bilimin doğasına yönelik derslerin lisans
eğitiminde olmayışı, öğretmenlerin bilimin doğası anlayışını geliştirmelerini
engelleyen bir başka neden olabilir. Bilindiği gibi, bilim tarihi ve doğası ile ilgili
dersler, son zamanlarda Türkiye'deki öğretmen eğitimi programlarına entegre
edilmiştir. Fen bilgisi öğretmenliği eğitiminde iyi organize edilmiş yöntem veya
seçmeli dersler boyunca öğretmenlere, bilimin doğasının farklı bağlamlardaki çeşitli
yönlerini tartışma ve yansıtma fırsatları sunulmaktadır. Böylece, bilimin doğası
öğretmen eğitimi ile öğretmenler için yaygın bir tema haline getirilmiştir (Abd-El-
Khalick, 2000; Bilican, 2014). Mevcut araştırmaya katılan öğretmenlerin yirmi yıldan
fazla deneyimleri olduğundan, lisans seviyesindeki bu derslerle ilgili bir aşinalık
eksikliği olabilir.
Son olarak, mevcut araştırmada, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin SK hakkındaki
düşünceleri ayrı bir konu bilgisi türü olarak incelenmiştir. Çalışma, SK kavramının
disiplinlerarası niteliğine dayanarak, fen öğretmenlerinin, çevre, toplum, ekonomi,
politika, teknoloji, eğitim ve enerji gibi SK’nın yedi ana yönü ile madde döngülerini
nasıl ilişkilendirdiklerini araştırmıştır. Fen öğretmenlerinden SK kavramlarını
tanımlamak için, biyojeokimyasal döngülerin bozulmasının nedenlerini, sonuçlarını
ve çözümlerini açıklamaları istenmiştir.. Bulgulardan anlaşılacağı gibi, Kılınç ve
325
Aydın (2013) tarafından belirlenen yedi temel kavramsal alan ortaya atılmıştır:
'çevre', 'ekonomi', 'toplum', 'politika', 'enerji', 'teknoloji' ve 'eğitim '. Bu sonuç, SK
konularının yalnızca çevre veya SK’nın üç popüler ayağı (çevre, toplum ve
ekonomi) açısından anlaşılmadığını göstermiştir. Bununla birlikte, Hale ve Selda
temel olarak sırasıyla SD'nin çevresel, toplumsal ve ekonomik yönlerine
odaklanırken, Kemal siyasi meseleleri SD'nin üçüncü yönü olarak ele almıştır. Bu
nedenle, bazı araştırmalar insanların SD hakkında düşünürken politik yönünü
dikkate almadıklarını varsaymasına rağmen (örneğin, Gil-perez ve diğerleri, 2003),
bu çalışma fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin SK tanımında siyasi argümanlar
kullandıklarını göstermiştir. Ek olarak, öğretmenler SK kavramşarını en çok karbon
döngüsüyle ilişkilendirmişlerdir. Özellikle Selda ve Kemal azot ve su döngüsünde
SD kavramlarını yansıtmakta başarılı olamamışlardır.
Hem fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin hem mesleki deneyimlerinin hem de yazılı ve
dijital medya (TV, gazeteler ve internet) yoluyla gayrı resmi eğitimlerinin bu tür SD
kavramlarından sorumlu olabileceği söylenebilir. Örgün eğitim açısından, katılımcı
öğretmenler eko-okullar projesini uygulayan ortaokullarda eğitim verdikleri için,
SD'nin tüm kavramlarına aşina olabilirler. Öte yandan, Türkiye'deki fen bilgisi
müfredatı ve ekookullar programının her ikisi de temel olarak çevrenin biyofiziksel
ve ekolojik yönlerine dayanmaktadır. Sonuçta fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin SD'yi
çevre açısından tanımladığı ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu bağlamda, Summers ve Childs
(2007), fen öğretmenlerinin ortaöğretime yönelik bir eğitim kursunda anket
kullanarak sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramlarını araştırmıştır. Çalışmanın sonucu
doğrultusunda, çok sayıda fen bilgisi öğretmeninin sürdürülebilir kalkınmayı
açıklarken çevresel faktörlere odaklandığını iddia etmişlerdir.
Gayri resmi eğitimleri ilgili olarak, araştırmalar hem öğrencilerin hem de
öğretmenlerin çoğunlukla çevresel konularla ilgili bilgileri yazılı ve görsel medya
aracılığıyla öğrendiklerini; göstermektedir (Kılınç ve diğerleri, 2008; Öztaş ve
Kalıpçı, 2009). Örneğin, Kemal, küresel ısınma ve sera etkisi gibi çevresel kaygıları
açıklamak için Al Gore hakkındaki belgesellere ve Green Peace ile ilgili haberlere
326
değinmiştir. Bu nedenle, 5 yıllık kalkınma planları, GAP ve çevresel bozulma ile
ilgili haber veya belgesellerin fen bilgisi öğretmenleri arasında farkındalığa yol
açabileceği söylenebilir. Kılınç ve Aydın (2013) da yaptıkları çalışmada, Türk
medyasında kalkınma planlarının siyasi ve çevresel tartışmalara dikkat çektiği
sonucuna varmıştır. Mesela Hale, projenin yerel topluma katkısını açıklamak için
GAP’tan bahsederek, SK’nın bileşenlerine vurgu yaptı. Bu nedenle, bu tarz güzel
örneklerin öğretmenlerin SK’yı tüm yönleri ile tartışmasına yardımcı olabileceği
söylenebilir.
Ek olarak, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin SK ile ilgili görüşleri, Türkiye bağlamına özgü
olabilir. Güçlü hükümete sahip olmak, yabancı ticarete bağımlı olmak, yeni
teknolojilerin üretimi, üretim için endüstriyel gelişim, toplumun yaşam
standartlarını iyileştirmek ve yeni iş olanakları yaratmak gibi ifadeleri, fen bilgisi
öğretmenlerinin Türkiye'nin gelişmekte olan bir ülke olarak şu anki sorunlarıyla
karşı karşıya olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu nedenle, ülke merkezli bağlamsal
nedenlerin öğretmenlerin görüşlerini etkileyebileceği söylenebilir.
Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Pedagojik Alan Bilgileri
Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Fen Öğretimine Yönelimleri
Bu çalışmada Kemal ve Selda, 8. sınıfta fen öğretmenin amacını; müfredat
kazanımlarını aktarma ve öğrencileri liseye ve liselere giriş sınavına (TEOG)
hazırlama olarak belirtmişlerdir. Katılımcı öğretmenler, aynı zamanda öğrencilerin
fen ve günlük yaşamla bağlantı kurmalarına ve çevresel farkındalık geliştirmelerine
yardımcı olmak gibi amaçlarının da olduğunu ifade etmelerine rağmen, sınıf içi
uygulamaları sırasında bu hedeflerini görmezden gelmişlerdir. Öte yandan, Hale
öğrencilerin katılımcı ve aktif olmasını sağlamak için proje merkezli öğrenmeyi bir
yönelim olarak tercih etse de, bütün öğretmenlerin sınıf içi fen eğitimi
yönelimlerinin sınırlı olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Genel olarak katılımcılar, madde
döngüleri konusunda öğretmen merkezli ve düz anlatım yaklaşımına uygun bir
öğretim sergilemişlerdir.
327
Öğretmenlerin fen öğretimine yönelimleri; yoğun müfredat, konu alan bilgisindeki
yetersizlikler ve bağlamsal faktörler (sınav temelli eğitim sistemi, okul bağlamı
gibi…) gibi birçok faktörle açıklanabilir (Avraamidou, 2012; Feierabend ve diğerleri,
2011; Friedrichsen ve diğerleri, 2011; Friedrichsen ve Dana, 2005; Samuelowicz ve
Bain, 1992). Türkiye'de, nitelikli bir Fen ya da Anadolu lisesinde öğrenim
görebilmek için, ortaokul öğrencileri lise giriş sınavına (TEOG [şu anda bilinen
ismiyle LGS]) girmek ve iyi puanlar almak zorundadır. Bu sınav odaklı sistem
nedeniyle, özellikle 8. sınıflarda çoktan seçmeli sorulara dayanan bir öğretim
sergilenmektedir. Ayrıca, okul yönetimleri de sınava dayalı öğretime önem
vermektedir, çünkü ülkemizde öğretmenler ve okullar hakkındaki kalite
değerlendirmeleri, öğrencilerin TEOG sınavlarından aldıkları puanlara dayanarak
şekillenmektedir. Özellikle, bu çalışmada öğretmenler, öğrencilerin katılımcı ve
etkileşim içerisinde oldukları proje tabanlı, sorgulama gibi yönelimlerin yararlı
olduğunun farkında olmalarına rağmen, okul türü (kamu / özel), kalabalık sınıflar,
laboratuvarın yetersizliği ve de öğrencilerin ve ailelerinin TEOG sınavı ile ilgili
endişelerinin olması gibi bağlamsal faktörlerin öğretimlerini etkilemesinden şikâyet
etmektedirler. Sonuç olarak, yukarıda belirtilen bu bağlamsal faktörler,
öğretmenleri ideal öğretme hedeflerini değiştirmeye zorlayabilmekte ve böylece
öğretmenin öğretmen merkezli yönelimleri tercih etmesine sebep olabilmektedir
(Friedrichsen ve diğerleri, 2011; Friedrichsen ve Dana, 2005; Samuelowicz ve Bain,
1992).
Öğretmenlerin fen öğretimine yönelik yönelimlerini etkileyen bir başka olası faktör,
aşırı yoğun müfredat olabilmektedir. Lise giriş sınavının takvimi nedeniyle
katılımcı öğretmenler, müfredatta yetişmesi gereken konuları tamamlayabilmek için
sürelerinin kısıtlı olduğundan yakınmaktadırlar. Müfredatın bu yoğunluğunun
yanında, öğrenci merkezli etkinliklerin hazırlanması ve derecelendirilmesi için
ayrıca ek süre gerektiğini belirtmişlerdir. Aynı şekilde araştırmalar, öğretmenlerin
öğrencilerine yönelik zihinsel aktiviteleri hazırlamak için gereken zaman
(Friedrichsen ve Dana, 2005) ve öğretim çalışmalarının aşırı yüklü olması (Nargund-
328
Joshi, vd., 2011) gibi nedenlerle didaktik öğretimi tercih ettiklerini ortaya
koymaktadır.
Son olarak, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin fen öğretimine yönelimlerini, konu alan
bilgileri ile ilgili huzursuzlukları olabilmektedir (Avraamidou, 2012; Feierabend ve
diğerleri, 2011; Friedrichsen ve diğerleri, 2011; Friedrichsen ve Dana, 2005).
Çalışmanın bulguları, tüm öğretmenlerin madde döngüleri konusunda sınırlı konu
alan bilgisine sahip olduğunu ortaya çıkarmıştır. Özellikle, Kemal ve Selda’nın
bilimin doğası ve SK’ya yönelik anlayışlarında eksiklikler gözlemlenmiştir.
Özellikle, SKE bağlamında yapılan birçok araştırma, öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir
kalkınma ve çevre konuları ile ilgili anlayışlarının, sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimini
öğretimleriyle bütünleştirmeye yönelik inançları açısından çok önemli olduğunu
doğrulamıştır (Corney, 2006; Spiropoulou, Antonakaki, Kontaxaki ve Bouras, 2007;
Summers ve ark. , 2005). Bu nedenle, konu alan bilgilerindeki bu eksiklik,
öğretmenleri kavramsal bilgileri didaktik bir şekilde aktardıkları, öğretmen
merkezli yönelimleri tercih etmeye zorlayabilmektedir.
Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Müfredat Bilgisi
Katılımcı fen öğretmenlerinin müfredat bilgisi, müfredat amaç ve hedefleri bilgisi
açısından, yeterli bulunmuştur. Öğretmenler, madde döngülerle ilgili müfredat
kazanımlarını doğrudan ifade etmişlerdir. Ayrıca, ilgili konunun hem 8. Sınıftaki
diğer konularla hem de alt sınıflardaki ilgili konularla bağlantılarının
farkındadırlar. Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin müfredat kazanımları ile ilgili bilgilerinin
deneyimleriyle ilgili olabileceği düşünülmektedir. Katılımcı öğretmenler on yıldan
fazla deneyime sahip olduklarından, madde döngüleri konusundaki müfredat
kazanımlarına ve öğretilmesi için gerekli ön bilgiye sahiptirler. Aynı şekilde,
deneyimsiz öğretmenlerle yapılan PAB çalışmaları da, bu öğretmenlerin müfredat
ile ilgili yeterli bilgiye sahip olmadıklarını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çalışmalar,
öğretmen adaylarının ilgili konuların öğretilebilmesi için hem gerekli kazanımların
hem de ön bilgi ve koşulların farkında olmadıklarını göstermektedir (Graf ve
329
diğerleri, 2011; Hanuscin ve diğerleri, 2010; Mıhlandız ve Timur, 2011; Özcan ve
Tekkaya, 2011; Tekkaya ve Kılıç; 2012; Uşak, 2009).
Tartışılması gereken bir diğer husus, öğretmenlerin müfredat ile ilgili yaptıkları
değişikliklerdir. Müfredatta yer alan kazanımlar dışında, tüm öğretmenler,
döngülerin devamlılığının sağlanabilmesi için, öğrencilerde çevre bilinci ve
farkındalık oluşturma gibi tutumlar geliştirmeyi amaçladıklarını belirtmişlerdir. Ek
olarak, Hale ve Selda, gerektiğinde konunun alt başlıklarını değiştirebileceklerini
belirtirken, Kemal madde döngülerini anlatırken ilk olarak karbon döngüsünü
anlatmayı tercih etmiş, yani konu sıralamasını değiştirmiştir. Yapılan PAB
çalışmalarına dayanarak, öğretmenlerin fen öğretime yönelik inançları (yönelimleri)
ve öğrenci bilgileri gibi faktörlerin, müfredatta yaptıkları değişiklikleri
açıklayabileceği söylenebilir (De Miranda, 2008; Friedrichsen et al., 2011;
Friedrichsen & Dana, 2005; Rollnick et al., 2008). Özellikle, bu çalışmada, katılımcı
öğretmenlerin fen öğretimine yönelik inançları, tutum geliştirmeye yönelik ek
hedefleri olması açısından müfredatı ihlal etmelerinin nedeni olabilir (Friedrichsen
ve diğerleri, 2011; Friedrichsen ve Dana, 2005). Son olarak, öğretmenlerin müfredata
yönelik değişiklikleri ile öğrenci bilgileri arasında bir etkileşim olabilmektedir. Eğer
öğretmenler, öğrencilerinin ön bilgilerinin farkındalarsa, ders kitaplarını (De
Miranda, 2008) ve müfredat kaynaklarını (Bayer ve Davis, 2012) öğrencilerin özel
ihtiyaçlarına ve özelliklerine cevap verecek şekilde değiştirebilmektedirler. Örneğin,
bu çalışmada, Kemal, öğrencilerin fotosentez ve solunum konularına aşina olmaları
nedeniyle, karbon döngüsünü önce anlatarak müfredatta değişiklik yapmıştır.
Son olarak, bu çalışma, tüm öğretmenlerin öğretim programını takip etmek için ders
kitaplarını kullandığını ortaya koymuştur. Diğer taraftan, ders kitapları ve öğrenci
çalışma kitabındaki etkinliklerin kullanımı bakımından, öğretmenler yetersiz
kalmışlardır. Örneğin, Kemal ve Selda, madde döngüleri anlatırken müfredatta yer
alan aktiviteleri kullanmak yerine, daha fazla soru çözmeyi veya konuyu tekrar
etmeyi tercih etmişlerdir. Öğretmenlerin müfredatta yer alan etkinlikleri görmezden
gelmelerinin nedenleri, müfredatla ilgili yapılan değişikliklerin sıklığı ve sınav
330
temelli eğitim sistemi gibi bağlamsal faktörler olabilir. 1923 yılında Türkiye
Cumhuriyeti'nin kuruluşundan beri, fen bilgisi öğretim programı 11 kez yenilenmiş
veya geliştirilmiştir (Çalık ve Ayas, 2008). Hatta 2013 ve 2018 yıllarında da fen
bilgisi öğretim programında değişiklikler yapılmıştır. Araştırmacılar, yeni bir
müfredat geliştirildiğinde, öğretmenlerin henüz mevcut müfredatı tamamen
uygulayamadıklarını vurgulamaktadır (Çalık ve Ayas, 2008). Yeni müfredat,
öğretim ve değerlendirme için yeni stratejiler ve yöntemler önerse bile, öğretmenler
yeni müfredatı öğretimlerine yansıtmakta büyük zorluklar yaşamaktadırlar (Aydın
ve Çakıroğlu, 2010). Sonuç olarak, yeni müfredatta yer alan stratejilere uymak
yerine, önceki öğretim şekillerine devam etmektedirler (Coll ve Taylor, 2012).
Böylece, müfredatta sık sık yapılan değişiklikler fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin bu
değişiklikleri görmezden gelmelerine neden olabilmektedir. Liseye Giriş Sınavı
(TEOG), öğrencileri sınava hazırlamak için, öğretmenlerin öğretimleri esnasında
soru çözme etkinliklerine daha fazla yer vermelerine neden olabilmektedir.
Mıhlandız ve Timur (2011), çalışmalarında, yukarıda bahsi geçen bağlamsal
faktörlerin fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin müfredat bilgilerini etkilediği sonucunu
desteklemektedirler.
Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Öğretim Stratejileri Bilgisi
Fen bilgisi öğretmenleri arasında öğretim stratejileri bilgisi açısından hem farklılık
hem de benzerlikler mevcuttur. Katılımcı öğretmenler, derse özel öğretim stratejileri
açısından benzer özelliklere sahiplerdir. Tüm öğretmenler, fen bilgisini derslerinde
düz anlatım ve soru sorma gibi öğretmen merkezli öğretim stratejilerini baskın bir
şekilde kullanmışlardır. Her ne kadar Hale, döngüleri öğretirken öğrenci merkezli,
problem ve proje tabanlı öğretim stratejilerini benimsemiş olduğunu belirtse de,
öğretimini genel olarak soru sorma stratejisine dayandırdığı gözlemlenmiştir. Diğer
taraftan öğretmenlerin öğretim stratejileri bilgilerindeki farklılık ise, öğretimlerinin
öğretmen merkezliliğinin seviyesidir. Bu durum, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin konuya
özgü öğretim stratejileri tercihlerini etkileyen ayırt edici faktör olmuştur. Başka bir
deyişle, fen bilgisi öğretmenleri madde döngülerini öğretirken, hem vurguladıkları
331
hususlar (örneğin; kavramsal bilgi, SK kavramları gibi…) hem de kullanılan
betimleme ve faaliyetlerin sayısında farklılıklar göstermişlerdir. Örneğin, Hale,
gerçek hayattan örnekler, çeşitli şekiller, resimler, animasyonlar ve müfredatta yer
alan etkinlikleri kullanırken; Kemal ve Selda sadece kendi çizdikleri şekilleri ve
sınırlı sayıdaki gündelik örnekleri kullanmışlardır. Yine Selda ve Kemal sadece
kavramsal bilgilere değinirken, Hale özellikle SK kavramlarına ve konuyla
ilişkilerine ağırlık vermiştir.
Öğretmen eğitimi ile ilgili yapılan araştırmalar, bu çalışmanınkilerle benzer
bulgulara sahiptir. Özellikle, Magnusson ve diğ. (1999) öğretmenlerin öğretim
stratejileri ve kullanımı hakkında yeterli bilgiye sahip olmadıklarını
vurgulamaktadır. Bazı araştırmalar, öğretmenlerin derse özel stratejilerin nasıl
uygulanabileceği konusundaki deneyim eksikliğinin, öğrenci merkezli stratejilerin
kullanımına ilişkin yetersiz bilgiye sahip olmalarına neden olabileceğini
savunmaktadır (Aydemir, 2014; Aydın, 2012; Brown ve ark. ., 2013; Friedrichsen ve
diğerleri, 2007; Ingber, 2009; Karakulak ve Tekkaya; 2010; Mıhlandız ve Timur, 2011;
Settlage, 2000; Şen, 2014). Öğretmenlerin disipline özel stratejilerin nasıl
kullanılacağına ilişkin sahip oldukları bilgi eksikliği, aynı zamanda öğretimin
öğretmen merkezliliğinin düzeyini de belirleyebilmektedir. Özellikle, SKE
bağlamında yapılan araştırmalar, öğretmenlerin SKE'ne özgü stratejiler ile ilgili
bilgilerinin eksik olduğunu ve bu nedenle SK kavramlarını mevcut konularla
bütünleştirmeye yönelik öğretim stratejileri ile ilgili eğitim almaları gerektiğini
göstermiştir (Kanyimba, 2002). SKE bağlamında kullanılan stratejiler, katılımcı,
etkileşimli, yansıtıcı, deneysel ve okul yapısı ve bağlamına uygun nitelikte olmalıdır
(Kadji-Beltran, Zachariou, Liarakou ve Flogaitis, 2014). Diğer bir deyişle, SKE, vaka
çalışmaları, tartışmalar, alan gezileri, rol yapma gibi öğrenci merkezli özel
stratejilerin uygulanmasını gerektirmektedir. Çalışmanın sonuçları, katılan
öğretmenlerin madde döngülerini anlatırken, SK kavramlarını mevcut konuya
entegre etmek için, SKE’ye yönelik hiçbir özel stratejiyi kullanmadığını göstermiştir.
332
Magnusson ve diğ. (1999), fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin fen öğretimine yönelimlerine
dayanarak belirli öğretim stratejilerine sahip olabileceklerinin altını çizmektedir
(Magnusson ve ark., 1999). Başka bir deyişle, öğretmenler fen eğitimi ile ilgili
yönelimlerine uygun stratejileri kullanmayı tercih edebilmektedirler. Bu nedenle,
fen öğretimine yönelimlerle ilgili bölümde tartışıldığı üzere, fen öğretmenlerinin
yönelimlerini etkileyen bağlamsal faktörler, öğretmenlerin 8. sınıftaki fen eğitimine
özel stratejilerini etkileyebilmektedir. Yani, sınava dayalı eğitim sistemi, okul türü
(devlet / özel), kalabalık derslikler, laboratuvarın yetersizliği ve öğrencilerin ve
ebeveynlerinin lise giriş sınavı ile ilgili kaygıları öğretmenlerin öğretmen merkezli
öğretim stratejilerini tercih etmelerinde etkilidir.
Öğretmenlerin öğretmen merkezli stratejilerinin düzeyindeki farklılık,
öğretmenlerin konu alan bilgilerindeki farklılık ile açıklanabilir. Araştırmaya katılan
tüm öğretmenler hem kavramsal hem de bilimin doğası açısından bilgi eksikliğine
sahip olsa da, sadece Hale’nin sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramları ile madde
döngüleri arasındaki bağlantılar anlamında yeterli bilgiye sahip olduğu
gözlemlenmiştir. Başka bir deyişle, Hale’nin SK kavramına yönelik konu alan bilgisi
diğer öğretmenlerinkinden daha güçlüdür. PAB alan yazını, güçlü bir PAB
geliştirmek için konu alan bilgisinin önemini sürekli olarak vurgulamaktadır (Abell,
2008; Magnusson ve diğerleri, 1999; Shulman, 1986). Öğretmenlerin, özellikle de
biyoloji konularında farklı betimlemeler, örnekler, şekiller kullanması, konu alan
bilgilerinin iyi bir göstergesi olabilmektedir (Oh ve Kim, 2013). Ayrıca, Shulman
(1986; 1987) çalışmalarında, deneyimli öğretmenlerin belirli bir konuyu (bu
çalışmada, SD kavramlarını) öğrenciler için daha anlaşılır hale getirme yöntemleri
ile ilgili daha bilgili olduklarını belirtmiştir. Yine, Gess-Newsome (1992), konu alan
bilgisi iyi olan öğretmenlerin, öğrencilerin günlük yaşamıyla ilgili daha fazla
örnekler kullandıklarını vurgulamıştır. Bu bağlamda, SKE alanında yapılan
çalışmalar da, öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramı ile ilgili bilgi
eksikliklerinin, SKE’nin uygulamaları ile ilgili zorluklar yaşamalarına sebep
olduğunun altını çizmektedir (Corney, 2006; Spiropoulou, Antonakaki, Kontaxaki
333
ve Bouras 2007). Bu çalışmada da, diğer çalışmalarda görüldüğü üzere, Kemal ve
Selda'nın SK kavramları ile madde döngülerini ilişkilendirme konusunda bilgi
eksikliği olduğu ve sonuç olarak öğretimleri sırasında SK kavramlarını yeterince
detaylandıramadıkları açıkça görülmektedir.
Öğretmenlerin öğretim stratejileri ile ilgili bilgisi üzerinde bağlamsal faktörler de
etkili olabilmektedir. Bu çalışmada özellikle liseye giriş sınavı, fen bilgisi
öğretmenlerinin konuya özgü öğretim stratejilerini etkileyen önemli bir faktör
olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Örneğin, Kemal ve Selda, TEOG sınavında madde
döngüler konusuyla ilgili nadir soru çıktığı için, konuyu düz anlatım yoluyla
öğretmeyi tercih ettiklerini belirtmişlerdir. Ayrıca, öğretmenler öğrencilerin sahip
olduğu sınav kaygısının, konuları didaktik bir şekilde öğretmelerine yol açtığından
şikâyet etmektedirler.
Ayrıca, öğretmenlerin müfredat bilgisinin, konuya özel öğretim stratejileri
üzerindeki etkisi tartışılmalıdır. Örneğin, Kemal ve Selda ders kitaplarını sadece
öğretim programını takip etmek için kullanmışlardır. Bu durum, madde döngüleri
konusunu anlatırken, müfredatta önerilen etkinlikleri göz ardı etmelerine neden
olmuştur. Başka bir deyişle, öğretim programı ilgili bilgi eksiklikleri, ders esnasında
kullandıkları öğretim stratejileri etkilemiştir. Aynı şekilde, PAB çalışmalarının
çoğunda bulgular, öğretmelerin öğretim stratejileri bilgisi ile müfredat bilgileri
arasında bir etkileşim olduğunu göstermektedir (Aydın, 2012; Hanuscin ve
diğerleri, 2010; Falk, 2012).
PAB çalışmalarının birçoğu, PAB bileşenleri arasında en güçlü etkileşimin, öğretim
stratejileri bilgisi ve öğrenci bilgisi arasında bulunduğunu iddia etmektedir
(Akerson, 2005; Boz ve Boz, 2008; Brown ve diğerleri, 2013; Demirdoğan, 2012;
Hanuscin ve ark., 2010; Park ve Chen, 2012; Soysal, 2018). Bu çalışmaların
sonuçlarında da belirtildiği üzere, fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin “öğrencilerin
gereksinimleri hakkındaki bilgileri”, öğretimleri sırasında vurguladıkları konuları
(örneğin, SD konuları) etkileyebilmektedir. Örneğin, bu çalışmada, Hale, madde
334
döngüleri konusunda, öğrencilerinin çevresel tutum ve beceri geliştirmeleri
gerektiğini düşünerek, öğretiminde SK ile ilgili konuları daha fazla vurgulamıştır.
Ayrıca, öğrencilerin farklı öğrenme biçimlerini ve yeteneklerini dikkate alarak, daha
fazla öğrenciye ulaşmak adına konuya özel örnekler, sunumlar ve aktiviteler
kullanmayı tercih etmiştir.
Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Öğrenci Bilgisi
Katılımcı öğretmenlerin, öğrencilerin gereksinimleri ile ilgili yeterli düzeyde bilgi
sahibi oldukları gözlemlenmiştir. Bütün öğretmenler, madde döngülerini daha
kolay öğrenmeleri için öğrencilerin 5. sınıftaki hava olayları (bulut ve dolu
oluşumu), 6. sınıftaki fiziksel ve kimyasal değişiklikler, 7. sınıftaki elementlerin ve
bileşiklerin özellikleri, kimyasal bağlar ve canlıların temel yapı taşları ve son olarak
8. sınıftaki besin zincirinde enerji akışı konularında bilgi sahibi olmaları gerektiğinin
farkındaydılar. Öte yandan, öğrencilerin öğrenme biçimleri ve yetenekleri göz
önüne alındığında, sadece Hale’nin öğrencilerinin bu ihtiyaçlarına yönelik bir
öğretim sergilediği ortaya çıkmıştır. Öğretim stratejileri ile ilgili bölümde tartışıldığı
üzere, konuya özgü farklı öğretim stratejileri kullanarak, öğrencilerinin farklı
öğrenme biçimlerine hitap etmeye çalışmıştır. Ayrıca, öğrencilerin daha aktif
olabilmesi için öğrenci merkezli olan proje tabanlı öğrenmeyi öğretimine yansıtmayı
tercih etmiştir. Öğrencilerin karşılaştıkları zorluklar ile ilgili olarak, tüm
öğretmenler öğrencilerin bu ve buna benzer çevre konularında tutum ve farkındalık
geliştirme konusunda sorun yaşadıklarını belirtmişlerdir. Ancak, sadece Hale’nin
gerçek hayattan örnekler içeren tartışmalarla öğrencilerinin çevre bilincini
geliştirmelerine yardımcı olmaya çalıştığı gözlemlenmiştir. Yapılan çalışmalar da,
öğretmenlerin öğrencilerle ilgili sahip oldukları bilgilerin, öğretimi daha verimli
hale getirmek için öğretmenleri konuya özel farklı sunumlar ve etkinlikler
düzenlemeye yönlendirilebileceğini göstermektedir (Akerson, 2005; Aydın ve
diğerleri, 2010; Boz ve Boz, 2008; Brown ve diğerleri, 2013). ; Demirdöğen, 2012;
Hanuscin ve diğerleri, 2010; Şen, 2014).
335
Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin öğrenci bilgilerini, özellikle öğretmenlik deneyimleri
etkileyebilmektedir. Yirmi yılı aşkın deneyimleri, bu çalışmadaki tüm öğretmenlerin
öğrencilerinin ön bilgileri ile ilgili bilgili olmalarına neden olmaktadır. Benzer
şekilde, çoğu çalışma, sınıf içi deneyimin, öğretmenlerin öğrencilere yönelik
bilgilerine etkisinin çok büyük olduğunu göstermektedir. (Cochran ve diğerleri,
1993; Friedrichsen ve diğerleri, 2009; Gullberg ve diğerleri, 2008; Jong, Van Driel ve
Verloop, 2005; Veal ve diğerleri, 1999);
Öğretmenlerin öğrenci bilgileri arasındaki farklılığı, öğretmenlerin farklı konu alan
bilgileri ve de fen öğretimine yönelik farklı inançları ve yönelimleri ile açıklanabilir
(De Miranda, 2008; Sanders ve diğerleri, 1993; Van Driel, 2008). Hale dışında, Kemal
ve Selda öğretmen merkezli yönelimleri benimsedikleri ve genel olarak müfredat
kazanımlarını aktarmayı amaçladıkları gözlemlenmiştir. Bu nedenle, fen eğitimine
yönelimleri, öğrencilerinin ihtiyaçlarını, öğrenme stillerini ve becerilerini göz
önünde bulundurmalarına izin vermemiştir. Yine, Hale’nin, SK kavramları ile
madde döngüleri arasındaki ilişkiler anlamında bilgili olması, öğrencilerinin
ihtiyaçlarını anlamasına imkân sağlamıştır. Çalışmanın bulguları ile benzer şekilde,
PAB çalışmaları, deneyimli öğretmenlerin konu alan bilgilerinin, öğrencilerinin hem
anlamaları hem de yaşadıkları zorlukları bilme konusunda öğretmenlerin bilgilerini
etkilediğini göstermektedir (Aydemir, 2014; Aydın, 2012; Şen, 2014).
Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenlerinin Değerlendirme Bilgisi
Katılımcı öğretmenler fen öğreniminin değerlendirme boyutları bağlamında,
öğrencilerin yalnızca kavramsal öğrenmelerini değerlendirmeyi amaçlamış ve aynı
zamanda madde döngüleri konusundaki bilimin doğası boyutlarının
değerlendirilmesini göz ardı etmişlerdir. Önceki araştırmalarda da öğretmenlerin
sadece öğrencilerinin kavramsal öğrenmelerini değerlendirdiklerine vurgu
yapılmaktadır (Aydın, 2012; Lankford, 2010; Tekkaya ve Kılıç, 2012; Şen; 2014).
Öğretmenlerin değerlendirme bilgisini etkileyen muhtemel faktörlerden biri, fen
öğretimine olan inanç ve yönelimleri olabilir. Kemal ve Selda, fen eğitiminin genel
336
amacının müfredat kazanımlarının aktarılması olduğunu düşünmekte ve öğretmen
merkezli stratejileri içeren (örneğin; düz anlatım) yönelimleri tercih etmektedirler.
İfadeleri ile doğru orantılı olarak, ders esnasında genellikle öğrencilerin kavramsal
öğrenmelerini değerlendirmek üzere geleneksel değerlendirmeye yönelmişlerdir.
Öte yandan, Hale ek olarak öğrencilerinin madde döngüleri kapsamında SK ile ilgili
sorunları anlamalarını ve de proje tabanlı öğrenme yoluyla eleştirel düşünme,
problem çözme ve karar verme gibi bilişsel becerilerini geliştirmeyi amaçlamıştır.
Fakat seçtiği değerlendirme yöntemleri bu amaçlara hizmet etmekten uzaktır.
Kemal ve Selda genel olarak geleneksel ve sonuca dayalı değerlendirme tekniklerine
(soru-cevap, çoktan seçmeli test) yoğunlaşırken; Hale, performans / akran
değerlendirme (öğrenci projeleri) ve kavram haritası gibi otantik değerlendirme
stratejilerini kullanmayı tercih etmiştir. Bu yöntemlerle öğrencilerin yanıtlarına geri
bildirimde bulunmaya ve öğrencilerin zorluk yaşadığı noktaları yeniden öğretmeye
çalışsa da, öğrencilerin öğrenmelerini biçimlendirmek üzere kullandığı yöntemler,
amaçlarına hizmet etmemiştir. Diğer bir deyişle, fen bilgisi öğretmenleri
değerlendirme yöntemlerini kullanma konusunda sıkıntı yaşamaktadırlar.
Fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin alternatif veya otantik yöntemlerden ziyade geleneksel
değerlendirme tekniklerini kullandıkları ve değerlendirme bilgisi yönünden eksik
olduğu birçok çalışmada da vurgulanmaktadır (Canbazoğlu ve ark., 2010; Graf ve
ark., 2011; Kaya, 2009; Taşdere ve Özsevgeç, 2012; Uşak ve ark., 2011; Yarden ve
Cohen, 2009; Şen, 2014). Öğretmenlerin daha çok geleneksel değerlendirmeyi
kullanmalarının nedeni, otantik değerlendirme yöntemlerinin nasıl uygulandığı
konusunda ne lisans eğitimlerinde ne de mesleki gelişim eğitimlerinde (hizmet-içi
eğitimler) hiçbir deneyime sahibi olmamalarıdır. Hale, alternatif değerlendirme
stratejileri konusunda fen eğitimine özel mesleki gelişim eğitimi almamış olmasına
rağmen, uygulama konusunda deneyimsizdir. Benzer şekilde, Kaya (2009) lisans
eğitimindeki ilgili derslerin altını çizerek, öğretmen eğitiminde değerlendirme
stratejileri bakımından eksiklikler olduğunu vurgulamıştır. Ayrıca, sınırlı sayıda
düzenlenen değerlendirmeye yönelik hizmet içi eğitimlerin öğretmenleri geleneksel
337
değerlendirme tekniklerine yönlendirdiği sonucuna varmıştır. Bu nedenle,
öğretmenler öğrenim hayatları boyunca aşina oldukları bu tarz geleneksel
değerlendirme stratejilerini uygulama eğiliminde olmaktadır. PAB alan yazını da,
özellikle değerlendirme bilgisindeki gelişimin, diğer bileşenlerin geliştirilmesinden
daha fazla zaman ve emek gerektirebileceğini vurgulamaktadır (Hanuscin ve
diğerleri, 2011; Henze ve diğerleri, 2008).
Fen bilgisi öğretim programında hem bilimin doğası hem de SK konularının
değerlendirilmesine yönelik vurgunun yetersiz olması (Abd-El-Khalick ve diğerleri,
1998; Hanuscin ve diğerleri, 2011; Karaaslan, 2016), öğretmenlerin sadece kavramsal
öğrenmeyi değerlendirmelerine neden olabilmektedir. Türkiye'deki 8. sınıf fen
bilgisi müfredatı incelendiğinde (MEB, 2005; 2013), öğrencilerin bilimin doğası ve
SK anlayışlarının geliştirilmesine yönelik özel amaç ve hedeflerin eksikliği açıkça
görülebilmektedir. Müfredat, genel olarak öğrencilerin konularla ilgili kavramsal
öğrenmelerini amaçlayan kazanımlara odaklanmaktadır. Bu nedenle, öğretmenler,
bir kazanım olarak ele alınmayan bilimin doğası ve SK konularını öğretme ya da
değerlendirme amacı gütmemektedirler. Bu bağlamda, Park ve Oliver (2008),
müfredatta yer alan amaç ve kazanımların öğretmenlerin değerlendirme bilgilerini
son derece etkilediğinin altını çizmektedirler.
Ek olarak, bağlamsal faktörler, özellikle sınav temelli eğitim sistemi, öğretmenlerin
değerlendirme bilgilerini etkileyebilmektedir. Liseye giriş sınavında (TEOG)
sorulan sorular bilimin doğası veya SK konularından ziyade kavramsal içerik
bilgisine odaklanmaktadır. Öğretmeler bilimin doğası veya SK kavramlarının
öğretilmesi gerektiğini düşünse bile, sınav odaklı bu eğitim sistemi, öğretmenleri bu
konuları değerlendirmekten alıkoymaktadır. Örneğin Çin (Zhang ve ark. 2003) ve
Hindistan (Nargund-Joshi ve ark., 2011) gibi sınava dayalı eğitim sistemine sahip
ülkelerde de benzer durumların yaşandığı vurgulanmaktadır. Aynı şekilde,
değerlendirme yöntemleriyle ilgili olarak, öğretmenler, ülke genelinde yapılan
sınavlarda olduğu gibi, çoktan seçmeli maddeleri kullanarak yazılı sınavlar
hazırlayarak öğrencilerin öğrenmelerini değerlendirmektedirler. Buradan hareketle,
338
öğretimin yapıldığı ülke ve okula ilişkin bağlamsal faktörlerin öğretmenlerin
değerlendirmelerine yönelik sınıf içi uygulamaları üzerinde önemli bir etkiye sahip
olduğu söylenebilir (Aydın, 2012; Loughran ve ark., 2004; Şen, 2014).
Öneriler
PAB üzerine yapılan çalışmaların sonuçları, bu kavramın konuya, öğretmene,
öğrencilere ve bağlama (sınıf, okul ortamları, öğrencilerin ebeveynleri vb.) özgü
olduğunu göstermiştir (Abell, 2008; Lankford, 2010; Nargund-Joshi, et. ve diğerleri,
2011; Park ve Oliver, 2008). Bu noktadan hareketle, PAB'ın konudan konuya,
öğretmenden öğretmene, sınıftan sınıfa değiştiği iddia edilebilir. Sadece bir PAB
çalışmasının sonuçlarından, bir konunun nasıl öğretileceğine dair bir cevaba
ulaşılamaz (Park ve Oliver, 2008). Bu çalışma, SKE bağlamında madde döngüleri
konusunda deneyimli öğretmenlerin PAB’larını araştırmayı amaçladığından,
öğretmenlerin madde döngüleri konusuna özgü PAB'larının, SKE bağlamında
anlaşılması açısından faydalı bilgiler içermektedir.
Bu çalışma, aynı zamanda geleceğin öğretmenleri olan öğretmen adaylarına faydalı
bilgiler sunmaktadır. Çalışmaların, öğretmen adaylarının da bu çalışmadaki
öğretmenlerle benzer sorunlarının olduğunu göstermesi, tüm öğretmenler için SKE
bağlamında mesleki gelişim programlarına ihtiyaç olduğunu göstermektedir.
Öğretmenlere ve öğretmen adaylarına SKE bağlamında verilmesi gereken mesleki
gelişim eğitimlerinin sadece çevresel konular, bilimin doğası ve sürdürülebilir
kalkınma kavramlarını değil, PAB bileşenlerini de içermesi gerektiği
vurgulanmaktadır.
Öğretmenlik deneyimi, PAB’ın temel dayanağıdır (Grossman, 1990; van Driel ve
ark. 2002). Öte yandan, yalnızca öğretim deneyimi, zengin bir pedagojik alan bilgisi
anlamına gelmez (Friedrichsen ve diğerleri, 2009). Çalışmanın sonuçları,
öğretmenlerin, öğrencilerin zorluklarını anlama ve bu zorluklara farklı ve zengin
öğretim ve değerlendirme stratejileriyle cevap verebilme konusunda profesyonel
gelişim programları ile desteklenmesi gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır. Bu destek,

339
disipline ve öğretilen konuya özel olmalıdır (Nakiboğlu ve Tekin, 2006). Sonuçlar,
fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin SKE bağlamında madde döngüleri konusunda yeterli
konu alan ve pedagojik alan bilgisine de sahip olmadığını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Bu
nedenle; özellikle iyi bir SKE için, mevcut müfredatta SK ile bağlantısı olan fen
konularına odaklanılmalı, SK kavramları mevcut konularla bağlantılı verilmelidir.
Bu çalışma, eğitimcilere madde döngülerinin sürdürülebilir kalkınma bağlamında
nasıl öğretilebileceği konusunda bilgiler vermesi ve bu bilgileri farklı konulara
yansıtabilmeleri açısından faydalıdır. Özellikle çalışmanın sonuçları, madde
döngülerinin SK bağlamında öğretilmesine yönelik değerli pratik bilgilere sahiptir.
Bu gerçek sınıf içi bilgiler, öğretmen yetiştirme programlarında (lisans eğitimleri ya
da hizmet içi eğitimler) gerçek ve somut örnekler olarak gösterilerek, öğretmenlerin
deneyimlerini birbirleri ile paylaşmaları bakımından faydalı olabilir.
Çalışmada fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin SK bağlamında konu alan bilgilerinin yetersiz
olduğunu ve bu bilgileri öğretimlerine yansıtamadıklarını ortaya çıkmıştır. Her
şeyden önce, fen bilgisi öğretim programı geliştirme uzmanlarının bilimin doğası ve
SD kavramlarını dikkate alarak, özellikle kazanımlar anlamında programda konu
bazında düzenlemeler yapması gerektiği açıktır. Ayrıca öğretim materyalleri
açısından da program geliştirilmeli ve öğretmenler desteklenmelidir. Bilimin doğası
ve SK’ya özel öğretim ve değerlendirme stratejileri üzerine uygulamaları içeren
müfredat kaynakları geliştirilebilir. Çalışmanın bulguları öğretmenlerin öğretim
programında yer alan kazanımları öğretmeye ve müfredat kaynaklarını izlemeye
eğilimli olduğunu gösterdiğinden, önerilen değişiklikler öğretim programına
uyarlanmadığı takdirde, fen bilgisi öğretmenleri hem bilimin doğası hem de
sürdürülebilir kalkınma kavramını mevcut konularla bütünleştirmekte sorunlar
yaşamaya devam edecektir.
340
K. THESIS PERMISSION FORM / TEZ İZİN FORMU
ENSTİTÜ / INSTITUTE
Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü / Graduate School of Social Sciences
Uygulamalı Matematik Enstitüsü / Graduate School of Applied Mathematics
Enformatik Enstitüsü / Graduate School of Informatics
Deniz Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Graduate School of Marine Sciences
YAZARIN / AUTHOR
Soyadı / Surname : YILMAZ YENDİ

Adı / Name : Bahar
Bölümü / Department : İlköğretim/Elementary Education
TEZİN ADI / TITLE OF THE THESIS (İngilizce / English) :

PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE REGARDING BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
IN THE CONTEXT OF EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
TEZİN TÜRÜ / DEGREE: Yüksek Lisans / Master Doktora / PhD
1. Tezin tamamı dünya çapında erişime açılacaktır. / Release the entire

work immediately for access worldwide.
2. Tez iki yıl süreyle erişime kapalı olacaktır. / Secure the entire work for
patent and/or proprietary purposes for a period of two years. *
3. Tez altı ay süreyle erişime kapalı olacaktır. / Secure the entire work for
period of six months. *
* Enstitü Yönetim Kurulu kararının basılı kopyası tezle birlikte kütüphaneye teslim edilecektir.
A copy of the decision of the Institute Administrative Committee will be delivered to the library
together with the printed thesis.
Yazarın imzası / Signature ............................ Tarih / Date …………………
341

Index

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Index

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Index

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EXPERIENCED SCIENCE TEACHERS’ SUBJECT MATTER KNOWLEDGE AND

PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE REGARDING BIOGEOCHEMICAL

CYCLES IN THE CONTEXT OF EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE

BAHAR YILMAZ YENDİ

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

Prof. Dr. Tülin GENÇÖZ

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elvan ŞAHİN

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elvan ŞAHİN Prof. Dr. Ceren ÖZTEKİN

Examining Committee Members

Prof. Dr. Osman Nafiz KAYA (Uşak Üni., MFBE)

Prof. Dr. Ceren ÖZTEKİN (METU, MSE)

Prof. Dr. Gaye TEKSÖZ (METU, MSE)

Prof. Dr. Semra SUNGUR (METU, MSE)

Assoc. Prof. Dr. M. Serdar KÖKSAL (Hacettepe Üni., ÖEB)

material and results that are not original to this work.

Name, Last name: Bahar YILMAZ YENDİ

EXPERIENCED SCIENCE TEACHERS’ SUBJECT MATTER KNOWLEDGE AND

PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE REGARDING BIOGEOCHEMICAL

CYCLES IN THE CONTEXT OF EDUCATION FOR SUSTAINABLE

Yılmaz Yendi, Bahar

Ph. D., Department of Elementary Education

Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Ceren Öztekin

Co-Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Elvan Şahin

June 2019, 341 pages

pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) regarding biogeochemical cycles in the

obtained through interviews, content representations, observations, card sorting

activity and teacher documents.

results also revealed that teachers conceptually associated sustainable development

teachers differed in the central and peripheral goals of science education. In

and topic-specific instructional strategies. Teachers generally used teacher-centered

strategies which caused them to be incompetent for implementing ESD. Similarly,

teachers adopted traditional assessment methods. Eventually, it is recommended

programs where teachers can gain experience especially in terms of instructional

Keywords: Pedagogical Content Knowledge, Education for Sustainable

Development, Science Education, Matter Cycles.

DENEYİMLİ FEN BİLİMLERİ ÖĞRETMENLERİNİN SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR

KALKINMA EĞİTİMİ KAPSAMINDA MADDE DÖNGÜLERİ KONUSUYLA

İLGİLİ KONU ALAN VE PEDAGOJİK ALAN BİLGİLERİ

Yılmaz Yendi, Bahar

Doktora, İlköğretim Bölümü

Tez Yöneticisi: Prof. Dr. Ceren Öztekin

Ortak Tez Yöneticisi: Doç. Dr. Elvan Şahin

Haziran 2019, 341 sayfa

Bu çalışma, deneyimli fen bilgisi öğretmenlerinin madde döngüleri konusundaki

konu alan ve pedagojik alan bilgilerini sürdürülebilir kalkınma eğitimi kapsamında

araştırmayı amaçlamıştır. Çalışmaya farklı ortaokullarda görev yapan, deneyimli üç

benimsendiği bu çalışmada, araştırma deseni olarak çoklu durum çalışması

kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın verileri, röportajlar, içerik gösterimleri, sınıf içi

gözlemler, kart gruplama aktivitesi ve öğretmen dökümanları aracılığıyla elde

Sonuçlar göz önüne alındığında; öğretmenlerin madde döngüleri konusunda hem

gözlemlenmiştir. Öte yandan, çalışmanın bulguları, öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir

kalkınma kavramı ile madde döngüleri konusunu kavramsal anlamda an çok

incelendiğinde, öğretmenlerin fen eğitiminin amaçlarına yönelik farklı görüşlere

sahip olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunun yanısıra öğretmenler, öğretim programındaki

konularla ilişkisini kurabilmektedirler. Öğretmenler, öğrencilerinin madde

döngüleri konusunu kavrayabilmeleri için sahip olmaları gereken ön bilgilerinin

farkında olmalarına rağmen, öğrencilerin farklı öğrenme biçimlerini ve becelerini

dikkate alan bir öğretim sergilemedikleri gözlemlenmiştir. Çalışmanın bulguları,

bilgiye sahip olduklarını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Öğretmenlerin genel olarak öğretmen

merkezli öğretim stratejilerini kullandıkları, bunun da öğretmenlerin sürdürülebilir