Fen Bilimleri ve Biyoloji Öğretmenlerinin “ Mikropipet Ustası” Etkinliğine Yönelik Görüşleri: Bir Mesleki Gelişim Deneyimi

Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945–1969. Doi: 10.1080/09500690701749305.

Amolins, M. W., Ezrailson, C. M., Pearce, D. A., et al. (2015). Evaluating the effectiveness of a laboratory-based professional development program for science educators. Advances in Physiology Education, 39(4), 341–351. Doi: 10.1152/advan.00088.2015.

Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in Teaching and Teacher Education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10–20. Doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.007.

Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199. Doi: 10.3102/0013189X08331140.

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115. Doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.

Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open, 4(1), 1–10.

Gardner, K., Glassmeyer, D., & Worthy, R. (2019). Impacts of STEM professional development on teachers’ knowledge, self-efficacy, and practice. Frontiers in Education, 4, Article 26. Doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00026.

Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54. Doi: 10.1002/sce.10106.

Hsieh, H.F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. Doi: 10.1177/1049732305276687.

Jawad, M. N., Bhattacharjee, A., Lehmann, R., et al. (2021). Remote laboratory exercise to develop micropipetting skills. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 22(1), Article 22.1.27. Doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2399.

Kılıç, D., Keleş, Ö., & Uzun, N. (2015). Fen bilimleri öğretmenlerinin laboratuvar kullanımına yönelik özyeterlik inançları: Laboratuvar uygulamaları programının etkisi. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 218–236. Doi: 10.17556/jef.22252.

Kızkapan, O., Tanık Önal, N., & Saylan Kırmızıgül, A. (2024). Laboratory use self-efficacy of Turkish pre-service science teachers trained in different teacher education programmes. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 14(4), 195–213. Doi: 10.26529/cepsj.1571.

Lincoln, Yvonna S., & Egon G. Guba. "Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications." International Journal of Intercultural Relations 9.4 (1985): 90062-8.

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Richter, T. A., Wilkinson, C. D., Griffiths, B. B., et al. (2022). Pipette Olympics: An engaging exercise for undergraduate laboratory training. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 21(1), A81–A84. Doi: 10.59390/NOYQ7921.

Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334–340. Doi: 10.1002/1098-240X(200008)23:4<334::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-G.