See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297515664
The effect of brain based learning biology education upon the academic
success and attitude
Article · January 2011
CITATIONS
READS
25
1,569
2 authors, including:
Solmaz Aydın
Kafkas University
29 PUBLICATIONS 193 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Students' academic motivation View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Solmaz Aydın on 23 August 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies
2011 Volume (issue) 3(1): 87-98
The effect of brain based
learning biology education upon
the academic success and attitude
Solmaz Aydin*, Mustafa Yel
Gazi University, Gazi Education Faculty, Department of Secondary Science and Mathematics Education,
Biology Education, Ankara, Turkey
Abstract
The aim of this study is to explore the effect of the learning environment, equipped with activities
prepared according to the Brain-Based Learning Theory, on academic achievements and biology
course attitudes of ninth grade students, compared to the conventional learning environment. The
research was carried out using the experimental research model with pretest-posttest control groups.
The research was conducted with 44 students placed in experiment and control groups and selected
from the ninth grade students of a high school during the 2007-2008 academic year in Ankara through
the objective appointment method. The data gathering tools of the study were; the personal
information questionnaire, the substance transportation in cell achievement test, and the attitude scale.
The data gathered through these tools were analyzed through the SPSS software. After the analysis, it
was determined that teaching the subject of substance transportation in cell with brain-based learning
activities increases student achievement. In addition, it was concluded that the brain-based teaching
does not create any difference in students' attitudes towards the biology course.
Keywords: Brain-Based Learning, Biology Teaching, Achievement, Attitude
© Sila Science. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The technological offerings of this age urge people to always search for the better. As a
result of these endeavors, numerous findings are gathered about the functioning of the brain
and new unknowns are unveiled each passing day. Various researchers, departing from the
findings of researches on brain, aim at rendering educational activities more effective and
efficient. They think that adequate and long lasting learning can be achieved in a learning
environment and through learning activities designed by considering the principles of brain
functioning.
________________
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +90-312-202-8103, Fax: +90-312-202-3926.
E-mail address: aysolmaz@mynet.com (S. Aydin).
88
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
It is apparent in the current conditions of educational institutions that learning
environments suitable for the student are not adequate and the ways the student learns better
are not considered. By considering the fact that people who think, investigate and produce
knowledge are needed today; the learning environments in which mastery learning can be
achieved should be created. The conventional teaching approaches are inadequate in this
respect and unable to equip students with necessary comprehension skills and higher-level
cognitive behaviors. Thus, novel theories should be implemented in the teaching process
along with the conventional methods. One of these theories is the brain-based learning theory.
The objective in the brain-based learning is to achieve the meaningful learning, rather than
memorizing the given information.
Learning, in brain, is a process which starts with the reception of incoming information by
the sensory memory. The information is first sent to the thalamus. Then, it is either sent to the
cortex for analysis and response, or sent to amygdala (short-term memory) for scanning and
storing in the memory. Then the information is sent to hippocampus (long-term memory). In
order for information to be conveyed from the short-term memory to the long-term memory,
strategies such as repetition should be used [1]. Since learning occurs in the brain in this way,
learning environments should be designed in line with the brain-based learning principles.
The brain-based learning involves acknowledging the brain's rules for meaningful learning
and organizing teaching with those rules in mind [2].
It is known that the brain is divided into two hemispheres; 80% of which is composed of
right and left cerebral hemispheres [3], and the 20% of which is composed of right and left
limbic system [4]. Today, the concept of successful human has changed after the researches
on the brain. In this respect, the individual who effectively uses the both hemispheres of his or
her brain and is able to easily pass from one to the other is considered to be successful. It has
been observed that more success is achieved in cases both hemispheres are used in harmony
and collaboration than in cases they are used separately [5]. When organizing the learning
environment in educational institutions, this fact should be taken into consideration and
activities that will run the both hemispheres of the brain should be carried out.
There exist three interactive processes that were defined as objective in the application of
the brain-based learning and need to be considered in the teaching process;
1. Orchestrated Immersion: It is the process of interpreting information in students' minds
and their focusing on the content that they are confronted with. When the wholeness and
connecting to each other are inevitable, the students have to use local memory systems to
discover the content [2]. Movies, videos and video games can be presented as examples of
orchestrated immersion.
2. Relaxed Alertness: Brain is like a camera lens; it opens up when the individual faces a
problem, is interested in something or feels him or herself innocent like a child, and it closes
off under a threat related to helplessness. Several studies demonstrate that some learnings are
positively affected in peaceful environments and in conditions of determination, while they
are suppressed in fatigue and under threat. This situation, which appears when an experience
is seen as a threat, is called “downshifting”. Since downshifting affects the frontal lobe of
brain, it prevents the individual to learn and find solutions to problems [5]. Therefore, an
environment should be created in which the student will not feel threatened and receive the
information comfortably. Teachers, for relaxed alertness, can use songs and word puzzles.
3. Active Processing: is the process of reconciliation and internalization of the information
by the learner in a meaningful and conceptually appropriate way. This learning, which enables
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
89
students to assume the responsibility of the direction and the nature of their change, is their
only way of making sense out of their experiences, that is, the path that goes to understanding.
Active processing, which emerges after the student's integration with the life, is not a phase in
a course. In other words, students need time to establish new connections [2]. What educators
need to do in this regard is to organize activities that can be carried out jointly with students in
order to enable them to receive information in a meaningful and consistent way. These
objectives were taken into consideration in this study while preparing the activities.
In the brain-based learning theory, the responsibility to learn belongs to the students. Thus,
it is a student-oriented teaching. In classes in which student-oriented teaching is conducted,
students select their own projects, work at their own proceeding speeds, get excited as they
learn new things, present their knowledge in their own ways, and effectively participate in
individual or group activities. Teachers, on the other hand, know students' expectations, listen
and respect to their opinions, encourage them about their decisions and skills, emphasize on
the activities that students enjoy, and help them in interpreting and organizing what they learn
[6]. For these reasons, it is important to create a brain-compatible classroom environment.
There exist several important essentials to create a brain-compatible learning environment in
the classroom. These essentials are necessary for the brain to progress even when individual
strategies, technics and plans are highly diverse. These are; confidence, meaningful content,
enough time, selection and enriched environment [7]
Confidence: In a confident classroom environment, the student participates in discussions.
Since the student does not feel under threat, the brain is ready to easily receive the content. In
order to form an healthy communication environment between the teacher and students,
mutual trust should be established. The fear of betrayal and exclusion should be minimized,
and the feelings of inclusion support and confidence should be increased [8].
Meaningful Content: Meaning is the connection that the student establishes between what
s/he learns, that is the content, and his/her prior knowledge, experiences, feelings, behaviors
and attitudes. The more connections the student establishes, the more the content becomes
meaningful. In order for students to give meaning to learning, teachers should;
• Show models in classroom related to the subject.
• Provide examples related to the subject and compatible with their prior knowledge and
experiences.
• Create artificial meanings in order to support the meaning, if students' experiences can
not be used [9].
Enough Time: New information attracts the attention of the brain. The brain needs time and
opportunity to digest and adapt these informations [10]. Students should be granted time to
comprehend what they learn
Selection: Students are free to select activities in the brain-based learning. They are also
free to structure the learning tasks related to the subject [11]. The brain-based learning, in this
respect, demonstrates that it is a learning process suitable to the constructivist approach.
Enriched Environment: The enriched environment causes students to face the information
and enables the brain to concentrate on the content. The following principles should be
considered for an enriched classroom environment:
1. The brain should be provided with what it can achieve.
2. In order to keep neurons always active and render the reception of information more
effective, repetitions should be done.
3. Positive or negative feedbacks should be provided on time.
90
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
4. Learning should be adapted according to each student.
5. Consistency and intensity are important [10].
In order to create an enriched environment, teachers should benefit from several activities,
materials and technological elements in classes. Technology may help to create an active
environment in which students not only can problem solve but also can find their own problems. In
addition, in case of lack of materials, it presents several possibilities such as video and computer
simulations [12].
The High School Biology is a course in which activities that attract the brain's attention
such as games, music and videos can be easily used. Students at the high school level are
adolescents proceeding to become adults. In the adolescence period, the brain has transited
from the concrete reasoning phase to the abstract reasoning phase. At the end of this period,
the brain matures and completes the connections at the neural network. Now, learning
depends on strengthening the existing synapses [13]. While organizing the learning
environment in biology course, appropriate activities should be prepared by considering these
development phases. Biology teaching, with its conventional teaching approach, is not able to
keep up with scientific and technological developments. Hence, how the student can learn
should be considered and the learning environment should be rendered the best for the brain
to process knowledge. In this respect, the brain-based learning theories which are studentoriented become important.
In line with the studies on brain-based learning and its usage in the teaching process, the
aim of this study is to determine its influence on students' learning and their attitudes towards
the Biology course by comparing the learning environment which is based on the brain-based
learning theory with the conventional learning environment. To this end, in the study;
1. The posttest scores of the experiment group in which teaching activities based on the
brain-based learning theory were carried out and the control group in which the conventional
method was used were compared, and it was investigated whether there were differences
between the scores according to gender.
2. The achievement levels of the experiment and control groups were determined by
comparing their pretest and posttest scores.
3. It was investigated whether there existed a difference between the attitude scores of the
experiment and control groups before and after the experimental process, and whether a
difference existed between these attitude scores according to gender.
During the research, students were provided with the opportunity to eat sweet things such
as chocolate and to drink water, and the classroom was air-conditioned; since brain cells
consume oxygen and glucose for fuel. It is important for the brain to get adequate amounts of
these elements to operate at the maximum level. The low amounts of oxygen and glucose in
the blood cause lethargy and sleep. Another element that is important for the healthy activity
of the brain is water. Water is necessary for the movement of neuron signals. Low amount of
water decreases the influence and rate of the signals. Most students do not have breakfast
which contains adequate amount of glucose and do not drink adequate amount of water during
the day. Therefore, it is important for schools to have breakfast programs and educate students
on this issue. In addition, students should be given opportunity to drink necessary amounts of
water [14]. Moreover, in brain-compatible classrooms, along with active assessment methods
such as portfolio and learning diaries, conventional assessment methods such as test and
grading scales are also used. Thus, the student assumes the responsibility of his/her own
learning and can reflect how s/he has learned [15]. In order to determine the difference
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
91
between the achievement levels of the experiment and control groups, the multiple choice test
method was used.
2. Method
2. 1. Research model
This research was carried out using the experimental research model with pretest-posttest
control groups. The formerly existing groups were defined as the experiment and control
groups through the objective appointment method and measurements related to both groups
were conducted before and after the experimental process.
The research was conducted with 44 students selected from the ninth grade students of a
high school during the 2007-2008 academic year in Ankara through the objective appointment
method. It was attempted to select students whose personal characteristics and prior
knowledge were similar. In addition, their distribution in classrooms was considered while the
numbers of females and males were balanced. Those students who could not be matched in
terms of their personal characteristics were excluded from the research. In line with the
characteristics indicated in the questionnaire, students were balanced as 22 of them were
placed in the experiment group and 22 of them in the control group. Classes were conducted
in the experiment group in line with the course plan prepared towards the brain-based learning
activities, and in the control group with the conventional method. The research was carried
out by the researcher. The experimental process steps of the research are as follows:
1. The research was applied on the subject of “Substance Transportation in Cell”, and
lasted for four weeks.
2. Before the class, students in the control group were informed that they could drink water
and eat sweet things such as chocolate during the class, and the classroom was aired out
frequently.
3. Before the application, students were asked to keep a learning diary and they were
informed briefly about the learning diary.
4. The students of the experimental group were divided into groups of 5-6 for group works.
5. The teaching method and tests presented in Table 1 were applied to the experiment and
control groups.
2. 2. Data gathering tools
The data gathering tools of the study were; the personal information questionnaire, the
achievement test, and the biology course attitude scale.
Personal Information Questionnaire:
In order to balance the number of students placed in the experiment and control groups, the
personal information questionnaire, which consists of six questions, was prepared. The
questionnaire was presented to relevant professors and applied to the experiment and control
groups after making corrections in line with their opinions.
Achievement Test:
The acquisitions were defined after analyzing the High School 9th Grade Biology Course
Curriculum, and 35 multiple questions at the levels of knowledge, comprehension and
92
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
application were prepared by the researcher. These questions were presented to the professors
in the Department of Biology Education and modified according to their suggestions. The
achievement test was applied to 10th grade students, who had already learned the subject of
“Substance Transportation in Cell”, for item and reliability analysis. According to the
obtained data, the item difficulty and item distinctiveness were calculated and the item
reliability analysis was conducted. After the analyses conducted, the achievement test,
consisted of totally 20 questions, was obtained. The alpha reliability coefficient of the test was
found to be 0.72, average difficulty was 0.39 and distinctiveness was 0.45. The item analysis
results are presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Item analysis results
Question Nr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Item Difficulty Index (p)
0.57
0.50
0.50
0.30
0.23
0.42
0.30
0.30
0.50
0.53
0.23
0.46
0.34
0.38
0.34
0.38
0.23
0.53
0.46
0.30
Item Distinctiveness Index (r)
0.38
0.38
0.69
0.30
0.30
0.38
0.46
0.46
0.38
0.76
0.30
0.61
0.53
0.30
0.38
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.76
0.30
Biology Course Attitude Scale:
The biology course attitude scale developed by Arıcak and Ilgaz [16] was used. The alpha
reliability value of the scale is 0.94. The scale is of 4-point likert type and consists of 19
items. The attitude test was applied to the experiment and control group students as pretest
and posttest.
2. 3. Planning course activities compatible with the brain-based learning theory
While the brain-based activities were determined, firstly the literature was scanned, and
after defining the objectives of the brain-based learning, these objectives were taken into
consideration while planning the activities. While the course plans were prepared; the
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
93
acquisitions, the explanations given about these acquisitions and the misconceptions about the
subject of “Substance Transportation in Cell” in the MEB [17] High School 9th Grade
Biology Course Teaching Program were taken into account.
The activities were prepared in the form of course plan and consisted of five sections. The
first part of the plan: includes the name of the course, grade level, subject, methods and
technics, equipments, acquisitions and their explanations; I. Introduction section: includes the
learning and teaching activities; II. Development section: includes the orchestrated
immersion, relaxed alertness and active processing activities; III. Conclusion section: includes
the emphasis of the subjects learned in the class; IV. Evaluation section: includes the
measurement and evaluation activities; V. Practice and assignment section: includes
reminding students of writing what they learned to the learning diaries and giving activity
assignments. The prepared course plans and activities were applied to the experimental group
students after modifying them in line with the obtained expert opinions.
2. 4. Analysis of data
After the application, the data gathered from the personal information questionnaire were
calculated as percentage and frequency in the SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences) software and these rates were used to balance the groups. Each item in the
achievement test was assigned five points and then achievement scores were calculated. The
data related to the attitude scale were calculated in a way compatible to the 4-point Likert
scale, and thus, the student attitude scores were defined. Arithmetic means, standard
deviations, t and p values of the obtained data were found.
In order to determine the difference between the posttest points of the experiment and
control groups, the independent groups t-test was used. The dependent groups t-test was used
to determine the difference between the groups' pretest-posttest points (achievement rate). In
addition, in order to determine the difference between the attitude scores of the experiment
and control group students, the dependent groups t-test was used. In all evaluations, the
significance level was found to be 0.05.
3. Findings and comments
3. 1. Comparison of posttest scores of the experiment and control groups
The achievement test was reapplied on the experiment and control groups as posttest in
order to test if there exists any difference between the posttest scores of the experiment group
on which teaching activities based on the brain-based learning theory were applied and the
control group on which the conventional method was applied. The scores that students got
from this test were analyzed through the independent groups t-test. Analysis results are
presented in Table 2.
The results in Table 2 imply that there is a significant difference between posttest scores of
experiment and control group students since the p value is far fewer than the significance
level of 0.05 (0.029<0.05). When the averages of the experiment and control groups are
considered, the experiment group is Xexper=51.36, and the control group is Xcontrol=42.04. The
difference is in favor of the experiment group since the achievement average of the
experiment group is higher than that of the control group. In other words, students in the
experiment group on which the brain-based learning activities were applied are more
successful than students in the control group on which the conventional method was applied.
94
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
Table 2. Analysis results related to the achievement posttest scores of experiment and
control group students
Group
N
X
Experimental
Control
22
22
51.363
42.045
S
13.902
13.421
Sd(Df)
Levene’s Test
Sig.
t
p
0.692
2.262
0.029*
42
3. 2. Comparison of pretest and posttest scores of the experiment and control groups:
The analysis was carried out through the dependent groups t-test in order to determine if
there existed any difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the experiment group
on which teaching activities based on the brain-based learning theory were applied and the
control group on which the conventional method was applied. The results are given in Table
3.
Table 3. Analysis results related to the experiment and control group students'
achievement pretest and posttest scores
Experimental
N
X
S
Pretest
22
31.818
8.666
Posttest
22
51.363
Control
N
X
Pretest
22
28.181
Posttest
22
42.045
13.902
S
11.291
13.421
One Sample
K-S test
Sd (Df)
t
p
KS-Z=0.821
Sig.= 0.511
21
-7,374
0.000*
One Sample
K-S test
Sd (Df)
t
KS-Z=0.766
Sig.= 0.600
21
-4.469
p
0.000*
According to the results given in Table 3, the experiment group p value is fewer than the
significance level of 0.05 (0.000<0.05). Thus, there is a significant difference between the
experiment group students' pretest and posttest scores. When the pretest and posttest averages
are analyzed; it is observed that it increased from X öntest=31.81 to X sontest=51.36. Student
score averages in the posttest increased 61.45% compared to the pretest.
It is observed that the p value of the control group is fewer than the significance level of
0.05 (0.000<0.05). A significant difference was found between pretest and posttest scores.
When the pretest and posttest averages are analyzed; it is observed that it increased from
X öntest=28.18 to X sontest=42.04. So, the posttest average is 49.18% higher than the pretest
average (Figure 1.). According to analysis results, achievement averages of both groups have
increased, and the increase in the experiment group's score average is higher.
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
95
87-98
Fig. 1. Comparison of experiment and control groups' achievement averages.
3. 3. Comparison of experiment and control group students' attitude scores towards the
biology course
Attitude test was applied on experiment and control group students before and after the
application in order to determine if there existed difference between the attitude scores of the
experiment group and control group before and after the experimental process. By analyzing
the gathered data through the dependent groups t-test, it was determined if there existed a
difference between the pretest and posttest attitude scores of the experiment and control
groups. The findings are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Analysis results related to experiment and control group students' attitude
pretest and posttest scores
S
Experimental
N
X
Pretest Attitude
32
53.312
13.801
Posttest Attitude
32
53.812
12.282
Control
N
X
S
Pretest Attitude
34
55.000
11.607
Posttest Attitude
34
52.029
10.007
One Sample
S test
K-
Sd
(Df)
t
p
KS-Z=1.052
Sig.= 0.218
31
-0.148
0.883
One Sample K-S
test
Sd
(Df)
t
KS-Z=0.543
Sig.= 0.930
33
1.176
p
0.248
The p values of the experiment and control groups given in Table 4 are higher than 0.05
and, thus, there is not any difference between pretest and posttest attitude scores. So, no
change has occurred before and after the application between experiment and control groups'
attitude scores.
96
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
4. Conclusion
According to the findings of the research, it was determined that the posttest achievement
average of the experiment group to which the brain-based teaching was applied was higher
than that of the control group to which the conventional teaching was applied, and thus, it was
concluded that more success can be achieved in the brain-based learning compared to the
conventional learning. In line with this finding, it can be argued that brain-based activities can
be used in biology courses. In the current age, in which genetics and biotechnology are
rapidly advancing, it is highly important for students to mastery learn in biology courses and
to become science-literate individuals.
After the dependent groups t-test conducted in order to compare the achievement rates of
experiment and control groups, it was observed that learning occurred in both groups;
however, it became evident that the achievement rate after the experimental process in the
group to which the brain-based teaching was applied was higher than the conventional
teaching. As it is seen in this study, the student's learning rate in conventional classrooms is
low. However, more success can be achieved by creating a brain-compatible learning
environment. The biology course, when its subjects are considered, is a course in which
numerous learning activities can be carried out. In this respect, many brain-based activities
can be implemented in biology subjects. In addition, it was observed that the brain-based
learning environment did not create any difference in students' attitudes towards the course.
The following suggestions may be stated for further studies on this issue:
• Brain-based activities may be implemented in longer durations, and thus, its
influence on students' attitudes towards biology course may be investigated.
• The brain-based teaching may be compared with other teaching models.
• Students' opinions on brain-based activities may be collected and assessed.
When the studies on this issue are considered; Wortock [18], on students of the department
of nursing, determined that the brain-based teaching, compared to the conventional teaching,
increases the critical thinking skill on the issue of the functioning of heart; Bello [19] has
found that the brain-based learning increases students' achievements and training teachers
about the brain-based learning is more influential in improving mathematical thinking; and
Weimer [20] has demonstrated that the brain-based learning strategies meet the social and
sensual needs of students, improve the long-term memory, enable the student to concentrate
on the course, and thus, increase students' remembering.
In addition, Tüfekci [21] has determined that the brain-based learning increases success
and permanency in the Classroom Management course. Ozden [22] and Avci [23] in their
study conducted in Science course, and Cengelci [24] in the Social Sciences course, have
determined that more success can be achieved and permanency can be increased in the brainbased learning compared to the conventional learning. These studies support the findings of
this research. As a conclusion, it was determined in this study that brain-based teaching is
compatible with and can be implemented in biology courses. In addition, teachers are able to
use different teaching methods in other topics [25-28].
References
[1] Forester AD, Reinhard M. The Learners’ Way: Brain-Based Learning in Action. Portage &
Main Press, Canada, 2000.
[2] Caine RN, Caine G. Making Connections: Teaching and The Human Brain. Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, 1991.
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
97
[3] Ozden Y. Ogrenme ve Ogretme. Pegem A Yayincilik, Ankara, Turkey, 2003 (in Turkish).
[4] Jensen E. Teaching With The Brain in Mind. Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, Virginia, 1998.
[5] Duman B. Ogrenme-Ogretme Kuramlari ve Süreç Temelli Ogretim. Ani Yayyincilik, Ankara,
Turkey, 2004 (in Turkish).
[6] Mccombs LB, Whisler JS. The Learner- Centered Classroom and School: Strategies for
Increasing Student Motivation and Achievement. Jossey- Bass, San Francisco, 1997.
[7] Ellingsen R. The Classroom of the 21st Century: The Integrated Thematic Instruction Approach
to Brain-Compatible Learning. Susan Kovalik & Associates, 2000.
[8] Ornstein CA, Lasley II TJ. Strategies for Effective Teaching. Mc Graw Hill, USA, 2000.
[9] Duman B. Neden Beyin Temelli Ogrenme? Pegem A Yayincilik, Ankara, Turkey, 2007 (in
Turkish).
[10] Sprenger M. Becoming a “Wiz” at Brain-Based Teaching. Corwin Pres, USA, 2007.
[11] Demirel O. Kuramdan Uygulamaya Egitimde Program Geligtirme. Pegem A yayincilik, Ankara,
Turkey, 2004 (in Turkish).
[12] Bransford JD, Brown AL, Cocking RR. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School.
Washington: National Academy Pres, 2000.
[13] Topbas E. Ceviz Yapili Beyin. Tek Agac Eylul Yayincilik, Ankara, Turkey, 2007 (in Turkish).
[14] Sousa DA. How The Brain Learns: A Classroom Teacher’s Guide. Corwin Press, Inc. California,
2001.
[15] Fogarty R. Brain Compatible Classrooms Standards. Skylight Professional Development,
Emporia State University, USA, 2002.
[16] Aricak OT, Ilgaz G. Acimlayici ve dogrulayici faktor analizi ile biyoloji dersi tutum olceginin
yapi gecerliliginin incelenmesi. Egit Aras Dergisi 2007;28:1–8 (in Turkish).
[17] MEB, Ortaogretim 9. sınıf Biyoloji Dersi Ogretim Programi. Ankara, Turkey, 2007 (in Turkish).
Accessed from: http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/ogretmen/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewd
[18] Wortock JMM. Brain Based Learning Principles Applied to the Teaching of Basic Cardiac Code
to Associate Degree Nursing Students Using the Human Patient Simulator. PhD Thesis,
University of South Florida, 2002.
[19] Bello DM. The Effect of Brain-Based Learning with Teacher Training in Division and Fractions
in Fifth Grade Students of A Private School. PhD Thesis, Capella University, 2007.
[20] Weimer C. Engaged Learning Through the Use of Brain-Based Teaching: A Case Study of Eight
Middle School Classroom. PhD Thesis, Northern Illinois University, 2007.
[21] Tufekci S. Beyin Temelli Ogrenmenin Erisiye, Kaliciliga, Tutuma ve Ogrenme Surecine Etkisi.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Hacettepe Universitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu, Egitim Bilimleri
Anabilim Dali, Ankara, Turkey, 2005 (in Turkish).
[22] Ozden M. Fen Bilgisi Dersinde Beyin Temelli Ogrenmenin Akademik Basariya ve Hatirlama
Duzeyine Etkisi. Unpublished Master Thesis, Anadolu Universitesi, Egitim Bilimleri Enstitusu
Ilkogretim Bolumu, Eskisehir, Turkey, 2005 (in Turkish).
[23] Avci DE. Beyin Temelli Ogrenme Yaklasiminin Ilkogretim 7. Siniff Ogrencilerinin Fen Bilgisi
Dersindeki Basari, Tutum ve Bilgilerinin Kaliciligi Uzerine etkisi. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Gazi
Universitesi. Egitim Bilimleri Enstitutusu. Fen Bilgisi Ogretmenligi Bilim Dali. Ankara, Turkey,
2007 (in Turkish).
[24] Cengelci T. Sosyal Bilgiler Dersinde Beyin Temelli Ogrenmenin akademik Basariya ve Kaliciliga
Etkisi. Unpublished Master Thesis, Anadolu Universitesi, Egitim Bilimleri Enstitusu, Ilkogretim
Bolumu, Ankara, Turkey, 2005 (in Turkish).
[25] Kurnaz MA, Calik MA. Thematic review of ‘energy’ teaching studies: focuses, needs, methods,
general knowledge claims and ımplications. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B, 2009;1:1–26.
[26] Karamustafaoglu O. Active learning strategies in physics teaching. Energy Educ Sci Technol Part
B 2009;1:27–50.
98
S. Aydin, M. Yel / EEST Part B Social and Educational Studies
3
(2011)
87-98
[27] Cepni S. Effects of computer supported ınstructional material (csım) in removing students
misconceptions about concepts: “Light, light source and seeing.” Energy Educ Sci Technol Part B
2009;1:51–83.
[28] Haliloglu Tatli Z. Computer based education: Online learning and teaching facilities. Energy
Educ Sci Technol Part B 2009;1:171–181.
View publication stats