<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Muhammet Usak</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN BIOLOGY EDUCATION</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Artificial intelligence (AI)</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biology education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">learning science</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2024</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October/2024</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://oaji.net/articles/2023/987-1729493648.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">23</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Artificial intelligence (AI) in biology education can be defined as the deployment of AI in sections of study that help learners and researchers in their areas of concentration, specifically biological sciences. 
It gives a significant meaning toward the improvement of biology education since AI contributes toward the improvement of research methods and the expansion of knowledge on the associated biological concepts. AI can be integrated with biology in numerous ways, including but not limited to the following: improve students’ engagement, create unique learning environments as well and create interaction and simulations. 
Continued advances in artificial intelligence as a powerful tool in biological research will prove a major boon to the further development of biology education. Traditional basic biological sciences and such interdisciplinary fields as computational biology will step up their cooperation and come up with new theoretical predictions. They develop new theoretical frameworks; all these exciting changes that are rocking the biological world today are destined to reshape the face of the education in biology in the twenty-first century.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Editorial</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">806-808</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SCIENCE TEACHERS’ BELIEFS AS BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF CONSTRUCTIVIST-BASED EDUCATION REFORM</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">classroom management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">constructivism</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">learning science</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Teacher beliefs</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Teaching Science</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">December/2012</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2014/987-1419168866.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A new Science and Technology program had been applied in Turkey since 2005. Constructivism has been the predominant influence on the program. Accordingly, science teachers are expected to have beliefs that are consistent with constructivism. However, the question of “what are the Turkish science teachers’ beliefs” is important because, the success of the program is dependent upon the teachers’ beliefs. This paper reports on the investigation of the science teachers’ beliefs about teaching science, learning science and managing behavior problems and any relationships among these belief systems. Data were collected through interviews with 18 science teachers. Results indicated that most of the science teachers held transitive beliefs about teaching science, and traditional beliefs about learning science and managing behavior problems. While teachers with 1-10 years experiences held a constructivist belief, this belief gave way to traditional belief as the teaching experience advanced. Beliefs of teachers were both interrelated and nested.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">302-317 </style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mattias Lundin</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mats Lindahl</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">EXPERIENCES AND THEIR ROLE IN SCIENCE EDUCATION</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">experience</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">learning science</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science education</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">March/2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2016/987-1481049603.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This study focuses what role re-actualized experiences may have in a school science setting. Observations were done in two Swedish schools with emphasis on teacher centred lessons. Data consist of field notes, recordings and documents. Two major themes of the results can be highlighted. First, the teachers’ and pupils’ mutual interest in pupils’ re-actualized experiences. Second, the limited elaboration of those. These issues are discussed due to teachers’ work with different purposes. We call that teachers’ orchestration of multiple agendas in science education. Re-actualized experiences appear to become means for motivating pupils in their work with different tasks in order to make them cope.
    The results of this study indicate a difference, compared to what Bergqvist (1990) reports on students posing questions. Here the immediate concern neither seemed to be inductive learning nor to find any correct answers, as in Bergqvist’s study. Instead the task including writing questions and formulation of so called hypotheses promoted the re-actualization of experiences. The task connects the classroom activity to pupils’ previous experiences. The ways of dealing with re-actualized experiences seem to have been appropriated in a way that a limited elaboration has become sufficient. Expressed in other words, we could say that an agenda concerning time and the progress of lessons towards other content areas, sometimes become crucial. In other cases an agenda of considering safety becomes crucial. Although time seem to be at stake, it has to be stressed that re-actualized experiences might become relevant in a not necessarily expected way.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">31-39</style></section></record></records></xml>