Orgаnik kimyo tа’limidа ochiq tipli STEAM loyihаlаrini loyihаlаshning didаktik modеli vа uni аmаliyotgа joriy еtish mеtodikаsi
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21370870Ключевые слова:
organik kimyo, STEAM, ochiq tipli loyiha, didaktik model, loyiha pasporti, kompetensiyaviy baholash.Аннотация
Mazkur maqolada organik kimyo ta’limida ochiq tipli STEAM loyihalarini loyihalashning didaktik modeli
yoritilgan. Model muammoli vaziyat, loyiha pasporti, STEAM integratsiyasi, loyiha faoliyati, kompetensiyaviy baholash
va refleksiyani yagona tizimga birlashtiradi. Empirik asos sifatida 60 nafar 11-sinf o‘quvchisi bilan o‘tkazilgan 16 haftalik
tajriba materiallarining ikkilamchi tahlilidan foydalanildi. Yakuniy ko‘rsatkich tajriba guruhida 8,3 ± 0,70, nazorat guruhida
6,1 ± 0,85 ballni tashkil etdi (p < 0,001; Cohen’s d = 2,83). Natijalar modelning asosiy kompetensiyalarni rivojlantirish
imkoniyatini ko‘rsatadi.
Библиографические ссылки
1. National Academy of Engineering; National Research Council. STEM Integration in K–12 Education: Status, Prospects,
and an Agenda for Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2014. DOI: 10.17226/18612.
2. Bybee R. W. The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press, 2013.
3. Henriksen D. Full STEAM Ahead: Creativity in Excellent STEM Teaching Practices // The STEAM Journal. 2014. Vol.
1, No. 2. Article 15. DOI: 10.5642/steam.20140102.15.
4. Krajcik J. S., Blumenfeld P. C. Project-Based Learning // The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences.Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2006. P. 317–334.
5. Bell S. Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future // The Clearing House. 2010. Vol. 83, No. 2.
P. 39–43. DOI: 10.1080/00098650903505415.
6. Overton T., Potter N., Leng C. A Study of Approaches to Solving Open-Ended Problems in Chemistry // Chemistry
Education Research and Practice. 2013. Vol. 14. P. 468–475. DOI: 10.1039/C3RP00028A.
7. Overton T. L., Randles C. A. Beyond Problem-Based Learning: Using Dynamic PBL in Chemistry // Chemistry Education
Research and Practice. 2015. Vol. 16. P. 251–259. DOI: 10.1039/C4RP00230J.
8. Johnstone A. H. Why Is Science Difficult to Learn? Things Are Seldom What They Seem // Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning. 1991. Vol. 7, No. 2. P. 75–83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x.
9. Cooper M. M., Stowe R. L. Chemistry Education Research: From Personal Empiricism to Evidence, Theory, and
Informed Practice // Chemical Reviews. 2018. Vol. 118, No. 12. P. 6053–6087. DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00020.
10. Orgill M., York S., MacKellar J. Introduction to Systems Thinking for the Chemistry Education Community // Journal of
Chemical Education. 2019. Vol. 96, No. 12.
11. Rahmawati Y., Andanswari F. D., Ridwan A. et al. STEM Project-Based Learning in Chemistry // International Journal
of Innovation, Creativity and Change. 2020. Vol. 13, No. 7. P. 1673–1694.
12. Brookhart S. M. How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2013.
13. Moskal B. M. Scoring Rubrics: What, When and How? // Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 2000. Vol. 7.
Article 3.
14. Black P., Wiliam D. Assessment and Classroom Learning // Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice.
1998. Vol. 5, No. 1. P. 7–74. DOI: 10.1080/0969595980050102.
15. Hattie J., Timperley H. The Power of Feedback // Review of Educational Research. 2007. Vol. 77, No. 1. P. 81–112.
DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487.
16. Azizxo‘jayeva N. N. Pedagogik texnologiyalar va pedagogik mahorat. Toshkent: Moliya, 2003.
17. Jo‘rayev R. H., Tolipov U. Q., Sharipov Sh. S. Pedagogik texnologiyalar va pedagogik mahorat. Toshkent: Fan va
texnologiya, 2018.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2026 MAKTABGACHA VA MAKTAB TA’LIMI JURNALI
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.
