The relation between respondent's knowledge gathering from the written responses and its drawing is the central focus of this study. Organs and organ systems that are drawn more frequently are believed to be better understood than systems that are not included in the drawing. (2002) used children's drawings to provide a reliable projection of what children know about the human body.
Reiss & Tunnicliffe (2001), Reiss, Tunnicliffe, Andersen & Bartoszeck et al. In the case of the human body, numerous misunderstandings were identified either by interviews and/or drawings. Introduction Students' ideas about natural phenomena have been investigated by various methods. We propose that using the method of drawing in combination with written responses (or interviews) would provide more reliable information about children's understanding about scientific phenomena including the human body. We failed to find any relationship between these two methods. We investigated relationships between the level of understanding shown by university students' written responses focused on the function of bodily organs/ organ systems and their ideas about the human body drawn on separate sheets of paper. In contrast, drawings have been considered as a simple research instrument that enables easy comparisons at the international level. Interviews or written tests with open-ended questions may effectively elicit students in-depth thinking, but they are difficult to quantify and some times subjective. There are several ways for gathering information about student's knowledge. It has been determined that students have limited, insufficient and low level of knowledge about physical processes related to water cycle, the physical processes are not understood properly, and the events in the water cycle cannot be linked with weather events in daily life such as rain and snow (Alkış, 2006 Bar, 1989 Henriques, 2000 Osborne & Cosgrove, 1983 Shepardson, Bryan, Michelle, Schellenberger & Harbor, 2009). Although there are not many studies on the water cycle (Bar, 1989 Ben-zvi-Assarf & Orion, 2005 Bechard, Pascoe & Zahor, 2007 Shepadarson et al., 2009 Çardak, 2009 Çelikler & Topal, 2011 Chin & Mageswary, 2013 Çeken, 2010 Derman & Yaran, 2017 Ahi, 2017 Vo, Forbes, Zangori & Schwarz, 2015), previous studies have revealed that students know inadequate and wrong concepts about water cycle (Bechard et al., 2007 Ben-zvi-Assarf & Orion, 2005 Derman & Yaran, 2017 Taiwo, Ray, Motswiri & Masene, 1999). The water cycle is one of the prominent issues that water-literate individuals should know (Bar, 1989 Chin & Mageswary, 2013 Çardak, 2009 He, 2018 Otaki, Sakura & Otaki, 2015 Wheeler, 2012 Wood, 2014).
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance". This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary". The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional". The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics". These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly.