The effect of activity-based nanoscience and nanotechnology education on pre-service science teachers’ conceptual understanding
Source abstract
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to examine the effect of activity-based nanoscience and nanotechnology education (ABNNE) on pre-service science teachers’ (PST’) conceptual understanding of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Within this context, the study was conducted according to mixed methods research with the use of both quantitative and qualitative methods. The participants were 32 PST who were determined by using criterion sampling that is one of the purposive sampling methods. ABNNE was carried out during 7 weeks as 2 h per week in special issues at physics course. Design and implementation of ABNNE were based on “Big Ideas” which was found in literature and provided guidance for teaching nanoscience and nanotechnology. All activities implemented during ABNNE were selected from literature. “Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Concept Test (NN-CT)” and “Activity-Based Nanoscience and Nanotechnology Education Assessment Form (ABNNE-AF)” were used as data collection tools in research. Findings obtained with data collection tools were discussed with coverage of literature. The findings revealed that PST conceptual understanding developed following ABNNE. Various suggestions for increasing PST conceptual understanding of nanoscience and nanotechnology were presented according to the results of the study.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Nanotechnology research and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. Ahmed T, Imdad S, Yaldram K, Raza SM (2015) Awareness and attitude about nanotechnology in Pakistan. J Nano Educ 7:44–51. https://doi.org/10.1166/jne.2015.107410.1166/jne.2015.1074 ↗
2. Albe V (2012) Nanoscience and nanotechnologies education: teachers’ knowledge. In: Bruguière C, Tiberghien A, Clément P (eds) E-book proceedings of the ESERA 2011 conference: science learning and citizenship. Lyon, France
3. Amin JA (2011) Development and implementation of an activity based science teaching programme for pre service student teachers. Dissertation, Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda
4. Anıl Ö, Küçüközer H (2010) Ortaöğretim 9. sınıf öğrencilerinin düzlem ayna konusunda sahip oldukları ön bilgi ve kavram yanılgılarının belirlenmesi (Identifying 9th grader students’ previous knowledge and misconceptions about plane mirrors). Türk Fen Eğitimi Derg 7:104–122
5. Aslan O, Şenel T (2015) Fen alanları öğretmen adaylarının nanobilim ve nanoteknoloji farkındalık düzeylerinin çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi (Examining nanoscience and nanotechnology awareness level of preservice science teachers in terms of different variables). Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Derg 24:363–38910.14582/DUZGEF.534 ↗
6. Aslan O, Şenel T, Zor E (2014) Preservice science teachers’ awareness of nanoscience and nanotechnology. In: 10th Nanoscience and nanotechnology conference. June 17–21, 2014, İstanbul, Turkey
7. Aydın Sayılan A, Mercan Y (2016) Hemşirelik öğrencilerinin nanoteknoloji bilgi düzeyleri ve bilgi düzeylerini etkileyen faktörler (Nursing students’ knowledge levels about nanotechnology and factors influencing knowledge levels). J Hum Sci 13:5706–5720. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v13i3.425610.14687/jhs.v13i3.4256 ↗
8. Bach A-M, Waitz T (2015) International activities in nanoscale science and engineering education. International conference new perspectives in science education
9. Bainbridge WS (2002) Public attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 4:561–57010.1023/A:1022805516652 ↗
10. Bamberger YM, Krajic J (2012) Teacher belief and change about integrating nanoscale science and technology into a secondary science curriculum. Electron J Sci Educ 16:1–20
11. Ban K, Kocijancic S (2011) Introducing topics on nanotechnologies to middle and high school curricula. In: 2nd World conference on technology and engineering education. Ljubljana, Slovenia
12. Bansal V, Kumar R (2012) Activity based learning new method of learning: a case study of teach-next. Int J Res Econ Soc Sci 2:414–428
13. Besley JC, Kramer VL, Priest SH (2008) Expert opinion on nanotechnology: risks, benefits, and regulation. J Nanopart Res 10:549–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-007-9323-610.1007/s11051-007-9323-6 ↗
14. Bhushan B (2010) Introduction to nanotechnology. In: Bhushan B (ed) Springer handbook of nanotechnology, 3rd edn. Springer, Heidelberg10.1007/978-3-642-02525-9 ↗
15. Bhushan B (2016) Introduction to nanotechnology: history, status, and importance of nanoscience and nanotechnology education. In: Winkelmann K, Bhushan B (eds) Global perspectives of nanoscience and engineering education. Springer international publishing, Switzerland
16. Blonder R (2010) The influence of a teaching model in nanotechnology on chemistry teachers’ knowledge and their teaching attitudes. J Nano Educ 2:67–75. https://doi.org/10.1166/jne.2010.100410.1166/jne.2010.1004 ↗
17. Blonder R, Dinur M (2012) Teaching nanotechnology using student-centered pedagogy for increasing students’ continuing motivation. J Nano Educ 3:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1166/jne.2011.101610.1166/jne.2011.1016 ↗
18. Blonder R, Mamlok-Naaman R (2014) Learning about teaching the extracurricular topic of nanotechnology as a vehicle for achieving a sustainable change in science education. Int J Sci Math Educ 14:345–37210.1007/s10763-014-9579-0 ↗
19. Blonder R, Sakhnini S (2012) Teaching two basic nanotechnology concepts in secondary school by using a variety of teaching methods. Chem Educ Res Pract 13:500–516. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2rp20026k10.1039/C2RP20026K ↗
20. Brickhouse NW (1990) Teachers’ beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. J Teach Educ 41:53–6210.1177/002248719004100307 ↗
21. Büyüköztürk Ş, Kılıç Çakmak E, Akgün ÖE, Karadeniz Ş, Demirel F (2013) Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (Scientific research methods) (14. Baskı). Pegem Akademi, Ankara
22. Castellini OM, Walejko GK, Holladay CE et al (2007) Nanotechnology and the public: effectively communicating nanoscale science and engineering concepts. J Nanopart Res 9:183–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-006-9160-z10.1007/s11051-006-9160-z ↗
23. Cheng J-C, Hung J-F, Huang T-C (2014) Promoting middle school students’ understanding and situational interest in integrating nanotechnology into science curriculum. US-China Educ Rev A 4:48–53
24. Cobb MD, Macoubrie J (2004) Public perceptions about nanotechnology: risks, benefits and trust. J Nanopart Res 6:395–40510.1007/s11051-004-3394-4 ↗
25. Cohen L, Manion L, Marison K (2007) Research methods in education, 6th edn. Routlegde, New York10.4324/9780203029053 ↗
26. Corley EA, Scheufele DA, Hu Q (2009) Of risks and regulations: how leading U.S. nanoscientists form policy stances about nanotechnology. J Nanopart Res 11:1573–1585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-009-9671-510.1007/s11051-009-9671-5 ↗
27. Coughlan A, Johnson D, Diefes-Dux HA, et al (2014) Enhanced learning of mechanical behavior of materials via combined experiments and nanohub simulations: learning modules for sophomore MSE students. In: Proceedings of the materials research society symposium. Boston, MA.10.1557/opl.2015.152 ↗
28. Creswell JW (2012) Qualitative inquiry and research: choosing among five traditions, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
29. Demirel R, Aslan O (2014) Kavram karikatürleriyle desteklenen fen ve teknoloji öğretiminin öğrencilerin akademik başarıları ve kavramsal anlamalarına etkisi (the effect of science and technology teaching promoted with concept cartoons on students’ academic achievement and conceptual understanding). Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygul 10:368–392
30. Driver R, Erickson G (1983) Theories-in-action: some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students’ conceptual frameworks in science. Stud Sci Educ 10:37–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305726830855990410.1080/03057268308559904 ↗
31. Ekli E (2010) İlköğretim ikinci kademe öğrencilerinin nanoteknoloji hakkındaki temel bilgi ve görüşleri ile teknolojiye yönelik tutumlarının bazı değişkenler açısından araştırılması (investigation of the elementary school secondary level students’ basic knowledge and opinions about nanotechnology and attitudes towards technology in relation to some variables). Master Thesis, Muğla University: Muğla, Turkey.
32. Ekli E, Şahin N (2010) Science teachers and teacher candidates’ basic knowledge, opinions and risk perceptions about nanotechnology. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2:2667–2670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.39210.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.392 ↗
33. Elmarzugi NA, Keleb EI, Mohamed AT et al (2014) Awareness of Libyan students and academic staff members of nanotechnology. J Appl Pharm Sci 4:110–11410.7324/JAPS.2014.401020 ↗
34. Farshchi P, Sadrnezhaad KS, Nejad NM et al (2011) Nanotechnology in the public eye: the case of Iran, as a developing country. J Nanopart Res 13:3511–3519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-011-0274-610.1007/s11051-011-0274-6 ↗
35. Feather JL, Aznar MF (2011) Nanoscience education, workforce training, and K-12 resources. CRC Press, Boca Raton
36. Fonash SJ (2001) Education and training of the nanotechnology workforce. J Nanopart Res 3:79–8210.1023/A:1011472503007 ↗
37. Furlan PY (2009) Engaging students in early exploration of nanoscience topics using hands-on activities and scanning tunneling microscopy. J Chem Educ 86:705–71110.1021/ed086p705 ↗
38. Gardner G, Jones G, Taylor A et al (2010) Students’ risk perceptions of nanotechnology applications: implications for science education. Int J Sci Educ 32:37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069090333103510.1080/09500690903331035 ↗
39. Greenberg A (2009) Integrating nanoscience into the classroom: perspectives on nanoscience education projects. ACS Nano 3:762–76910.1021/nn900335r ↗
40. Gyalog T (2007) Nanoscience education in Europe. Eur Secur 38:13–15
41. Hingant B, Albe V (2010) Nanosciences and nanotechnologies learning and teaching in secondary education: a review of literature. Stud Sci Educ 46:121–15210.1080/03057267.2010.504543 ↗
42. Huffman D, Ristvey J, Tweed A, Palmer E (2015) Integrating nanoscience and technology in the high school science classroom. Nanotechnol Rev 4:81–102. https://doi.org/10.1515/ntrev-2014-002010.1515/ntrev-2014-0020 ↗
43. Hutchinson K, Shin N, Stevens SY, et al (2007) Exploration of student understanding and motivation in nanoscience. In: National association for research in science teaching. New Orleans, Louisiana.
44. Hutchinson K, Bryan L, Bodner G (2009) Supporting secondary teachers as they implement new science and engineering curricula: case examples from nanoscale science and engineering education. In: 2009 Annual conference & exposition. Austin, Texas
45. İpek Akbulut H, Şahin Ç, Çepni S (2013) İş ve enerji konusu ile ilgili kavramsal değişimin incelenmesi: İkili yerleşik öğrenme modeli örneği (Examining conceptual change in work and energy topic: Dual situated learning model sample). Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Derg 13:241–268
46. İpek Akbulut H, Şahin Ç, Çepni S (2014) İkili yerleşik öğrenme modeline göre geliştirilen öğretim materyalinin öğrencilerin bilişsel öğrenme düzeylerine ve kavramsal anlamalarına etkisinin incelenmesi (examining the effect of material developed according to dual situated learning model on students’ cognitive learning levels and conceptual change). YYÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Derg 11:47–75
47. Jones MG, Andre T, Kubasko D et al (2003) Remote atomic force microscopy of microscopic organisms: technological innovations for hands-on science with middle and high school students. Sci Educ 88:55–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011210.1002/sce.10112 ↗
48. Jones MG, Falvo MR, Taylor AR, Broadwell BP (2007) Nanoscale science: activities for grades 6–12. NSTA Press, Arlington
49. Jones MG, Tretter T, Taylor A, Oppewal T (2008) Experienced and novice teachers’ concepts of spatial scale. Int J Sci Educ 30:409–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069070141662410.1080/09500690701416624 ↗
50. Jones MG, Blonder R, Gardner GE et al (2013a) Nanotechnology and nanoscale science: educational challenges. Int J Sci Educ 35:1490–1512. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.77182810.1080/09500693.2013.771828 ↗
51. Jones MG, Paechter M, Yen C et al (2013b) Teachers’ concepts of spatial scale: an international comparison. Int J Sci Educ 35:2462–2482. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.61038210.1080/09500693.2011.610382 ↗
52. Jones MG, Gardner GE, Falvo M, Taylor A (2015) Precollege nanotechnology education: a different kind of thinking. Nanotechnol Rev 4:117–127. https://doi.org/10.1515/ntrev-2014-001410.1515/ntrev-2014-0014 ↗
53. Kadıoğlu F (2010) Fen öğretiminde öğrenim gören öğretmen adaylarının nanoteknoloji ile ilgili güncel ve geleceğe yönelik düşünceleri (actual and future oriented thoughts about nanotechnology of teacher candidates studying science teaching programme). Master Thesis, Gazi University: Ankara, Turkey
54. Kahan DM, Slovic P, Braman D, et al (2007) Affect, values, and nanotechnology risk perceptions: an experimental ınvestigation. 2nd Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Paper10.2139/ssrn.968652 ↗
55. Karataş FÖ, Ülker N (2014) Kimya öğrencilerinin nanobilim ve nanoteknoloji konularındaki bilgi düzeyleri (Undergraduate chemistry students’ understanding level of nano-science and nano-technology). Türk Fen Eğitimi Derg 11:103–118. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10121a10.12973/tused.10121a ↗
56. Kılınç Alpat S, Uyulgan MA, Şeker S et al (2017) Nanoteknoloji konusunda işbirlikli öğrenme yönteminin ortaöğretim 10.sınıf öğrencilerinin akademik başarı ve görüşlerine etkisi (effect of cooperative learning on academic achievement and opinions of the 10th grade students’ in the topic of nanotechnology at secondary level). İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Derg Cilt 18:27–57. https://doi.org/10.17679/inuefd.28612810.17679/inuefd.286128 ↗
57. Kırtak Ad VN, Kocakülah MS (2013) Fizik ve fen bilgisi öğretmen adayları farkı fark edebiliyor mu? Kütle ve ağırlık merkezi kavramları örneği (can pre-service physics and science teachers detect the difference? An example of centre of mass and centre of gravity concepts). Türk Fen Eğitimi Derg 10:56–74
58. Kocakülah A (2006) Geleneksel öğretimin ilk, orta ve yükseköğretim öğrencilerinin görüntü oluşumu ve renklere ilişkin kavramsal anlamalarına etkisi (the effect of traditional teaching on primary, secondary and university students’ conceptual understanding of image formation and colours). Master Thesis, Balıkesir University: Balıkesir, Turkey
59. Kocakülah MS, Kenar Açıl Z (2011) İlköğretim öğrencilerinin gözüyle ‘yerçekimi nerededir?’ (the question of ‘where is the gravity?’ From the elementary school students’ point of view). Türk Fen Eğitimi Derg 8:135–152
60. Kocakülah MS, Kural M (2012) Ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin üretken öğrenme modeline göre tasarlanan öğretim ile tek yarıkta kırınım konusundaki kavramsal değişimlerinin incelenmesi (an investigation of the effects of teaching based on generative learning model on secondary school students’ conceptual change about single-slit diffraction). Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Mat Eğitimi Derg 6:338–375
61. Kocakulah S, Ustunluoglu E, Kocakulah A (2005) The effect of teaching in native and foreign language on students’ conceptual understanding in science courses. Asia-Pacific Forum Sci Learn Teach 6:1–30
62. Kulik T, Fidelus JD (2007) Education in the field of nanoscience. Warsaw
63. Kumar DD (2007) Nanoscale science and technology in teaching. Aust J Educ Chem 68:20–22
64. Kural M, Kocakülah MS (2014) Fikirler arası çatışmaya dayalı öğretimin öğrencilerin ince zarda girişim konusundaki kavramsal anlamalarına etkisi (Effects of teaching based on cognitive conflict about thin film interference on students’ conceptual understanding). Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Derg 3:50–97
65. Laherto A (2010a) An analysis of the educational significance of nanoscience and nanotechnology in scientific and technological literacy. Sci Educ Int 21:160–175
66. Laherto A (2010b) Interdisciplinary aspects of nanoscience and nanotechnology for informal education. In: Taşar MF, Çakmakcı G (eds) Contemporary science education research: teaching. Pegem Akademi, Ankara
67. Laherto A (2011) Incorporating nanoscale science and technology into secondary school curriculum: views of nano-trained science teachers. Nordiana 7:126–13910.5617/nordina.234 ↗
68. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–17410.2307/2529310 ↗
69. Lee C, Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) Public attitudes toward emerging technologies. Sci Commun 27:240–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/107554700528147410.1177/1075547005281474 ↗
70. Lin S-F, Lin H-S, Wu Y-Y (2013) Validation and exploration of instruments for assessing public knowledge of and attitudes toward nanotechnology. J Sci Educ Technol 22:548–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9413-910.1007/s10956-012-9413-9 ↗
71. Lin S-F, Chen J-Y, Shih K-Y et al (2015a) Science teachers’ perceptions of nanotechnology teaching and professional development: a survey study in Taiwan. Nanotechnol Rev 4:71–80. https://doi.org/10.1515/ntrev-2014-001910.1515/ntrev-2014-0019 ↗
72. Lin SY, Wu MT, Cho YI, Chen HH (2015b) The effectiveness of a popular science promotion program on nanotechnology for elementary school students in I-Lan City. Res Sci Technol Educ 33:22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2014.97173310.1080/02635143.2014.971733 ↗
73. Lu C-C, Sung C-C (2011) Effect of nanotechnology instructions on senior high school students. Asia-Pacific Forum Sci Learn Teach 12:1–18
74. Macoubrie J (2006) Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in government. Public Underst Sci 15:221–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/096366250605699310.1177/0963662506056993 ↗
75. Maynard V, Hsu M, Chen K, Chang RPH (2006) 2006–2672: Laying the foundation for nanoscience and nanotechnology with an introductory module for high school students. 113th Annual ASEE conference and exposition, 18–21 June, 2006, Chicago, IL, United States
76. Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis. Sage, Thousand Oaks
77. Ministry of National Education (MoNE) (2013a) İlköğretim Kurumları (İlkokullar ve Ortaokullar) Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, Ankara
78. Ministry of National Education (MoNE) (2013b) Ortaöğretim Biyoloji Dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, Ankara
79. Ministry of National Education (MoNE) (2013c) Ortaöğretim Kimya Dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, Ankara, p 128
80. Ministry of National Education (MoNE) (2013d) Ortaöğretim Fizik Dersi (9, 10, 11 ve 12. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, Ankara
81. Murday JS (2009) NSF workshop report: Partnership for nanotechnology education. University of South California, Los Angeles, http://www.nsf.gov/crssprgm/nano/reports/educ09_murdyworkshop.pdf , Date of access: 10.12.2015
82. Nerlich B, Clarke DD, Ulph F (2007) Risks and benefits of nanotechnology: how young adults perceive possible advances in nanomedicine compared with conventional treatments. Health Risk Soc 9:159–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369857070130685610.1080/13698570701306856 ↗
83. Ng W (2009) Nanoscience and nanotechnology for the middle years. Teach Sci 55:16–24
84. Pajares MF (1992) Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct. Rev Educ Res 62:307–33210.3102/00346543062003307 ↗
85. Palmquist BC, Finley F (1997) Preservice teachers’ views of the nature of science during a post baccalaureate science teaching program. J Res Sci Teach 34:595–61510.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199708)34:6<595::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-I ↗
86. Pektas M, Alev N, Kurnaz MA, Bayraktar G (2015) Physics, chemistry and biology student teachers’ understandings of nanotechnology. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 191:1767–1771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.67710.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.677 ↗
87. Peter D. Hart Research Associates (2008) Awareness of and attitudes toward nanotechnology and synthetic biology. Washington, DC. https://www.nanotechproject.org/process/assets/files/7040/final-synbioreport.pdf , Date of access: 07.09.2014
88. Planinšič G, Kovač J (2008) Nano goes to school: a teaching model of the atomic force microscope. Phys Educ 43:37–45. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/43/01/00210.1088/0031-9120/43/01/002 ↗
89. Poteralska B, Zielinska J, Mazurkiewicz A (2007) The development of education and training systems in the field of nanotechnology. J Coll Teach Learn 4:7–16
90. Retzbach A, Marschall J, Rahnke M et al (2011) Public understanding of science and the perception of nanotechnology: the roles of interest in science, methodological knowledge, epistemological beliefs, and beliefs about science. J Nanopart Res 13:6231–6244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-011-0582-x10.1007/s11051-011-0582-x ↗
91. Rubab S (2012) Introducing nano science education at pre-university level. Sch Sci 49:24–28
92. Sagun-Gököz B (2012) Design and implementation of a nanoscience & nanotechnology workshop: Investigating 11th grade students’ awareness and conceptual understanding of nanoscience & nanotechnology. Master Thesis, Boğaziçi University: İstanbul, Turkey.
93. Sahin N, Ekli E (2013) Nanotechnology awareness, opinions and risk perceptions among middle school students. Int J Technol Des Educ 23:867–881. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9233-010.1007/s10798-013-9233-0 ↗
94. Şahin F, Hacıoğlu Y (2010) Bilimsel tartışma destekli örnek olayların 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin ‘ kalıtım ’ konusunda kavram öğrenmelerine ve okuduğunu anlama becerilerine etkisi (The effect of case studies supported by scientific discussions to concept learning and reading comprehension skills of 8. grade students about inheritance). In: International conference on new trends in education and their implications. 11–13 November, 2010 Antalya-Turkey
95. Schank P, Krajcik J, Yunker M (2007) Can nanoscience be a catalyst for educational reform? In: Allhoff F, Lin P, Moor J, Weckert J (eds) Nanoethics: the ethical and social implications of nanotechnology. Wiley Publishing, Hobeken
96. Scheufele DA, Lewenstein BV (2005) The public and nanotechnology: how citizens make sense of emerging technologies. J Nanopart Res 7:659–667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-005-7526-210.1007/s11051-005-7526-2 ↗
97. Scheufele DA, Corley EA, Dunwoody S et al (2007) Scientists worry about some risks more than the public. Nat Nanotechnol 2:732–73410.1038/nnano.2007.392 ↗
98. Semenderoğlu F, Aydın H (2014) Öğrencilerin biyoteknoloji ve genetik mühendisliği konularını kavramsal anlamalarına yapılandırmacı yaklaşımın etkisi (Effect of constructivist approach on students’ conceptual understanding of biotechnology and genetic engıneering topics). Turkish Stud 9:751–77310.7827/TurkishStudies.6634 ↗
99. Şenel A (2009) Nanoteknoloji kavramlarına ilişkin rehber materyal geliştirilmesi (development of resource materials related to nanotechnology concepts). Master Thesis, Gazi University: Ankara, Turkey
100. Şenel T, Aslan O (2014) Ortaokul ve lise fen alanları öğretmen adaylarının nanobilim ve nanoteknoloji farkındalıklarının çeşitli değişkenlere göre incelenmesi (Examining nanoscience and nanotechnology awareness of secondary school and high school preservice science teachers in terms of different variables). XI. Ulusal fen bilimleri ve matematik eğitimi kongresi, 11–14 Eylül, 2014, Adana, Türkiye10.14582/DUZGEF.534 ↗