<?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%">Hakki Kadayifci</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BARRIERS TO STUDENTS’ CREATIVE EVALUATION OF UNEXPECTED EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS</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%">creativity barriers</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">laboratory work</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">students’ explanations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">unexpected findings</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2017</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">June/2017</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2017/987-1497964307.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">16</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">E-ISSN 2538-7138</style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science lecturers usually do not pay special attention to giving students the chance to evaluate persistent unexpected experimental findings that they cannot explain with their existing theories, propose alternative hypotheses and develop new theories in inquiry tasks at schools, despite the importance of these processes in scientific discoveries. Students’ reactions to this type of findings have been a subject for conceptual change studies that new theories were presented to explain the findings. This research, in contrast, examined students’ ways of interpreting their unexpected experimental findings about the molar mass of the sulfur element while hiding a new theory, and their barriers to discovering the scientific explanation of these findings, which is new to them, in the framework of the creativity paradigm. The research was conducted with 155 first-year undergraduate students who were enrolled in a chemistry laboratory course. A majority of the participants said that the unexpected findings might have resulted from experimental errors or methodical problems. Few students stated that these findings might be valid and have a new explanation. The barriers to students' discovery of new scientific explanation for findings were classified as: lack of pre-knowledge, obstacles of existing structures, failure of creative cognitive processes and social-personal blocks.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">414-428</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%">Andrej Šorgo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Slavko Kocijančič</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PRESENTATION OF LABORATORY SESSIONS FOR SCIENCE SUBJECTS IN SLOVENIAN UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOLS</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%">laboratory work</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">teachers' attitudes</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">upper secondary schools</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">June/2011</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2014/987-1410008530.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Among Slovenian upper secondary school science teachers a study was conducted about the implementation of laboratory work in Science teaching. One of the specific goals was to acquire preliminary data about the status of laboratory exercises in teaching Biology, Chemistry and Physics. Answers were received from 64 Biology teachers, 64 Chemistry teachers and 63 Physics teachers (about 40% of Slovene secondary school Science teachers).
The differences in attitudes towards and performance of laboratory work among teachers of different Science subjects are small. It can be concluded that teachers of all three subjects have generally positive attitudes towards laboratory work. The differences occur in the way laboratory work is performed. Not so positive are the findings that many of the exercises are presented to the students as demonstrations, and an expository style is preferred. In the future, efforts should be made to transform expository labs into inquiry- and problem-based laboratory work.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">98-113 </style></section></record></records></xml>