Teacher Perceptions on the Use of 5E Learning Cycle Model in Social Studies Courses


  • Mustafa Sagdic
  • Erol Koçoğlu




Social studies, Learning, Learning model, Teacher, 5E learning cycle.


Several methods are used to improve meaningful learning levels of students in learning environment during the social studies course learning-instruction process. The 5E instruction method is among these models. One of the constructivist instructional approaches, the 5E method is an ancillary and regulatory model for teachers who are the leaders in the learning-instruction process. This model, which is significant for teachers, includes a number of stages. Conducting active and effective activities during these stages depends on the organization and transfer of the course activities to the stages of this learning cycle. The aim of the present study was to determine the perceptions of social studies teachers on the use of the 5E learning cycle method in social studies courses. In the present study that aimed to tackle perceptual analysis with a qualitative approach, the phenomenology design that was deemed adequate for the nature of the study topic was utilized. A semi-structured interview form developed by the authors was used to collect the study data. The study group members, whose perceptions on the research topic were obtained with the semi-structured interview form, included social studies teachers employed in various public middle schools in Malatya province, Turkey. NVivo 11 analysis software was used to assess and analyze the study data based on the sub-themes. The study findings demonstrated that social studies teachers had interesting perceptions on the study topic.


Anıl, Ö. and Küçüközer, H. (2017). Yapılandırmacı kurama dayalı 5E öğretim modelinde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Kara Harp Okulu Bilim Dergisi, 27(1), 1-24.

Aydın, F. and Güngördü, E. (2015). Coğrafya Eğitiminde Özel Öğretim Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem-Akademi Publications.

Blank, L. M. (1999). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding, Science Education, 84, 486-506.

Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving Scientific Literacy. N.H.: Heinemann, Portsmouth.

Cherry, G. R. (2011). Analysis of Attitude and Achievement Usıng the 5e Instructional Model in an Interactive Television Environment, ProQuest Digital Doctoral Dissertations, Old Dominion University.

Cornelius, M. (2012). “The 5E Learning Cycle and Students Understanding of the Nature of Science”. Unpublished master’ thesis Montana State University. Bozeman, Montana.

Doğan, S., Demir, S. B. and Pınar, M. A. (2014). Yönetici görüşlerine göre MEB 2013 Yılı Yönetici Atama ve Yer Değiştirme Yönetmeliği, Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 7(2), 224-245.

Eısenkraft, A. (2003). Expanding the 5E model, The Science Teacher,70(6),56-59.

Ekiz, D. (2003). Eğitimde Araştırma Yöntem ve Metodlarına Giriş. Ankara: Anı Publications.

Hokkanen, S. L. (2011). Improving student achievement, interest and confidence in science through the implementation of the 5E learning cycle in the middle grades of an urban school. Unpublished master’ thesis. Bozeman, Montana Masters of Science, Montana State University.

İlter, İ. and Ünal, Ç. (2014). Sosyal bilgiler öğretiminde 5E öğrenme döngüsü modeline dayalı etkinliklerin öğrenme sürecine etkisi: bir eylem araştırması. TSA, 1, 295-330.

Karplus, R. and Thier, H. D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand- McNally.

Koçoğlu, E. and Egüz, Ş. (2019). Türkiye’de, sosyal bilgiler eğitimine ilişkin alan eğitimcilerinin sorunsal tespitleri. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(1/1): 27-38

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and development of thinking. Belmont CA USA Wads word.

Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R. and Renner, J. W. (1989). A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. Kansas State University, Manhattan, Ks: National Association for research in science teaching.

Lederman, J. S. (2009). “Levels of Inquiry and the 5 E’s Learning Cycle Model. Monterey, CA: National Geographic School Publishing” Web: http://www. ngspscience.com, Accessed date: 12 February 2020.

Marek, E. A. (2008). “Why the learning cycle?”, Journal of Elementary Science Educating, 20(3), 63-69.

Marek, E. A. and Cavallo, A. M. (2008). The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Martin, D. J. (2000). Elementary Science Methods: A Constructivist Approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomason Learning.

Morse, G., Roberts, D., Szesze, M. and Wayne, V. (2004). Montgomery Country Public Schools. Science Teacher’s Handbook, 36.

Patton, Q. M. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage Publications.

Şahin, C., Çalık, M. and Çepni, S. (2009). Using different conceptual change methods embedded within 5E model: a sample teaching of liquid pressure. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B-Social and Educational Studies, 1 (3-4), 115-125.

Ürey, M. and Çalık, M. (2008). Combining different conceptual change methods within 5E model: a sample teaching design of ‘cell’concept and its oxrganelles. In Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 9 (2), 1-15.

Van Hook, S. J. and Huziak-Clark, T. L. (2007). Tip-to-tail: Developing a conceptual model of magnetism with kindergartners using inquiry-based instruction, Journal of Elementary Science Education, 19 (2), 45-58.

Vincent, D., Cassel, D. and Milligan, J. (2008). Will it float?. Science and children, 45 (6), 36.

Yalçın, F. A. and Bayrakçeken, S. (2010). The effect of 5E learning model on preservice science teachers’ achievement of acids-bases subject. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(2), 508-531.

Yıldırım, A. and Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Publications.




How to Cite

Sagdic, M., & Koçoğlu, E. (2020). Teacher Perceptions on the Use of 5E Learning Cycle Model in Social Studies Courses. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 9(2), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v9i2.2513