Öz Anahtar KelimelerBu çalışmanın amacı bağlam temelli kimya eğitimi yaklaşımının 9.

ABSTRACT:The goal of this study is to set criteria for writing good contextual questions. This is a theoretical research work based on an extensive literature review. Extensive literature comprised of reviewing leading data bases, educational journals, and proceedings. All the collected materials from these resources were read, compiled, analyzed, interpreted, and synthesized. The information gathered from these sources were systematically used as an input to generate criteria for writing good contextual questions. Eventually, 3 main criteria and 11 sub-criteria were generated from these studies. Besides, the difference between contextual and idealized questions was presented comparatively. As a final step, common misunderstandings i.e., myths related to contextual questions were determined and presented in detail. This study can be seen as a how-to-guide to all stake holders of education for writing good contextual questions. Keywords: context, context based education, contextual teaching and learning, contextual questions, questions Extended AbstractPurpose and Significance: The goal of this study is to set criteria for writing good contextual questions based on relevant literature. Contextual teaching and learning (CTL) is a very prominent approach. CTL approach is interpreted and developed by a wide array of researchers from many different countries with similar perspectives. During the implementation process, practitioners should need to use contextual questions somehow though there are very limited number of studies indicating how to generate good contextual questions.Methods: This is a theoretical research work based on an extensive literature review. Extensive literature comprised of reviewing leading data bases, educational journals and proceedings. All the collected materials from these resources were read, compiled, analyzed, interpreted, and synthesized. The information was gathered from these sources were systematically used as an input for discussions to generate criteria for writing good contextual questions.

Understanding the intellectual demands of an intended curriculum is crucial as it defines the frames for teaching and learning processes and practice during lessons. In this study, upper-secondary school chemistry curricula contents in Czechia, Finland, and Turkey were analysed, and their objectives were compared using the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy (RBT). The intellectual demands were examined analysing the action verbs in the three curricula objectives based on their association with the intended cognitive process dimensions in the RBT. The Turkish upper-secondary chemistry curriculum was found to be more structured, detailed, and containing more objectives than the Czech and Finnish curricula. The domineering objectives in cognitive demands were understand (77.2%) and analyse and apply (both 7.1%). Conceptual items dominated (59.8%) with procedural items identified (29.1%). Also, there are five metacognitive items (3.9%). The Czech curriculum, compared to the Finnish and Turkish curricula, does not take modern trends in the field of chemistry into account. The cognitive demands in the Czech curriculum were skewed toward apply (40%) with understand and evaluate accordingly represented by 20%. Conceptual items dominate with a 53.3% of occurrence. In the Finnish curriculum, the cognitive demands were skewed toward apply (47.1%) with create (23.5%) and understand (17.6%). Procedural (35.3%) domains predominate, although metacognitive objectives represent a significant share (23.5%) too. These findings from the contents and intellectual demands of the curricula in each of the three countries have the potential to help teachers and other actors in education design the interventions and assessments implemented in the classes. Comparing the distribution of intellectual demands between the countries provides an international reference for educational reforms in hand in many countries.

No abstract