ORGANIK KIMYO FANINI O‘QITISHDA STEAM LOYIHALASH TEXNOLOGIYASI: KVAZI- EKSPERIMENTAL TADQIQOT
Kalit so‘zlar:
STEAM ta’lim, loyihaga asoslangan ta’lim, organik kimyo, kimyo o‘qitish metodikasi, kvazi-eksperiment, summativ baholash.Abstrak
Maqolada organik kimyoni o‘qitishda STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering,
Arts, Mathematics) yondashuvini loyihaga asoslangan ta’lim bilan integratsiyalovchi olti
bosqichli loyihalash texnologiyasi va o‘quv yili davomidagi kursni qamrab oluvchi oltita
loyihadan iborat STEAM matritsasi taklif qilingan. Texnologiya samaradorligi Andijon
viloyatidagi umumta’lim maktabida 2025–2026-o‘quv yilida teng bo‘lmagan nazorat
guruhli kvazi-eksperiment asosida baholangan (tajriba sinfi n = 30, nazorat sinfi n = 31).
To‘rtta choraklik summativ baholash natijalari aralash dispersion tahlil, Welch t-testi,
Mann–Uitni testi va kovariatsion tahlil (ANCOVA) yordamida tahlil qilingan. Tajriba sinfi
o‘quv yilini nazorat sinfiga nisbatan sezilarli darajada past ko‘rsatkich bilan boshlagan
bo‘lsa-da (68,4% va 80,3%), 4-chorakka kelib farq kamaygan va statistik ahamiyatini
yo‘qotgan (90,3% va 93,7%; p = 0,23; farqning 95% ishonch oralig‘i −9,0 dan 2,2 foiz
punktgacha). Guruh va chorak o‘rtasidagi o‘zaro ta’sir statistik jihatdan ahamiyatli
bo‘lgan (p = 0,030). Dastlabki va yakuniy natijalar o‘rtasidagi o‘sish tajriba sinfida
yuqoriroq bo‘lgan (21,9 va 13,4 foiz punkt; d = 0,51), biroq bu farq Welch testida
chegaraviy ahamiyatga ega (p = 0,054), Mann–Uitni testida esa statistik jihatdan
ahamiyatli (p = 0,010) bo‘lgan. ANCOVA natijalari 4-chorakda guruhlar o‘rtasida
statistik jihatdan ahamiyatli farqni ko‘rsatmagan. 1- va 4-chorak natijalari o‘zaro deyarli
korrelyatsiyalanmagani sababli boshlang‘ich farqning kamayishi o‘rtachaga qaytish
hodisasi bilan izohlanishi mumkin. Shuning uchun natijalar texnologiya samaradorligiga
oid dastlabki dalil sifatida baholanishi mumkin.
Библиографические ссылки
1. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidentining 2020-yil 12-avgustdagi PQ-4805-son «Kimyo va biologiya yo‘nalishlarida
uzluksiz ta’lim sifatini va ilm-fan natijadorligini oshirish chora-tadbirlari to‘g‘risida»gi qarori // Qonunchilik ma’lumotlari
milliy bazasi.
2. Why Is Science Difficult to Learn? Things Are Seldom What They Seem. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-
2729.1991.tb00230.x.
3. Grove N. P., Bretz S. L. A Continuum of Learning: From Rote Memorization to Meaningful Learning in Organic
Chemistry // Chemistry Education Research and Practice. – 2012. – Vol. 13, № 3. – P. 201–208. – DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1039/C1RP90069B.
4. Perignat E., Katz-Buonincontro J. STEAM in Practice and Research: An Integrative Literature Review // Thinking
Skills and Creativity. – 2019. – Vol. 31. – P. 31–43. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.10.002.
5. Yakman G., Lee H. Exploring the Exemplary STEAM Education in the U.S. as a Practical Educational Framework for
Korea // Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education. – 2012. – Vol. 32, № 6. – P. 1072–1086. – DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.6.1072.
6. Bell S. Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future // The Clearing House. – 2010. – Vol. 83,
№ 2. – P. 39–43. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415.
7. Krajcik J. S., Blumenfeld P. C. Project-Based Learning // The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences / ed.
by R. K. Sawyer. – Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. – P. 317–334.
8. Chen C.-H., Yang Y.-C. Revisiting the Effects of Project-Based Learning on Students’ Academic Achievement: A Meta-
Analysis Investigating Moderators // Educational Research Review. – 2019. – Vol. 26. – P. 71–81. – DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.11.001.
9. Becker K., Park K. Effects of Integrative Approaches among Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
(STEM) Subjects on Students’ Learning: A Preliminary Meta-Analysis // Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and
Research. – 2011. – Vol. 12, № 5–6. – P. 23–37.
10. Umurzoqov Sh. S., Rabbimova Y. B., Xaliqulov X. J., Eshonqulov Z. A. Kimyo fani bo‘yicha STEAM dasturiga
asoslangan loyihalarni ishlab chiqish, qayta ishlangan plastmassadan 3D chop etish uchun xomashyo yaratish // Modern
Science and Research. – 2025. – Vol. 4, № 2. – B. 562–574. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14879339.
11. G‘opirov K. Amaliy mazmundagi test topshiriqlaridan maktab kimyo darsligi mazmunini STEAM yondashuv
asosida takomillashtirishda foydalanish // Obshchestvo i innovatsii (Society and Innovations). – 2024. – Vol. 5, № 10/S. –
B. 298–307. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415-vol5-iss10/S-pp298-307.
12. Xolmirzayev O‘. I. Kimyo fanidan tabiiy-ilmiy savodxonlikni oshirishda STEAM yondashuvining ahamiyati //
Respublika ilmiy-amaliy konferensiyasi materiallari. – 2025. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.71337/inlibrary.uz.yosc.103502.
13. Asqarov I. R., Do‘monov B. M., Bo‘riyev R. O. Organik kimyo fanini o‘qitishda STEM yondashuv asosida loyiha-
amaliy mashg‘ulotlar texnologiyasi // Development of Science. – 2025. – Vol. 3, № 11. – B. 214–220. – URL:
https://www.devos.uz/article.php?id=2493.
14. Bo‘riyev R. O‘. Organik kimyo ta’limida ochiq tipli STEAM loyihalarini loyihalashning didaktik modeli va uni
amaliyotga joriy etish metodikasi // Maktabgacha va maktab ta’limi. – 2026. – Vol. 7, № 2. – B. 41–46.
15. Soares R. A. D., Maia D. L. Abordagem STEAM no Ensino de Química: O Estado da Questão // Conexões – Ciência
e Tecnologia. – 2023. – Vol. 17. – Article e022020. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.21439/conexoes.v17i0.2787.
16. Cooper M. M., Stowe R. L. Chemistry Education Research—From Personal Empiricism to Evidence, Theory, and
Informed Practice // Chemical Reviews. – 2018. – Vol. 118, № 12. – P. 6053–6087. – DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00020.
17. Sanders M. STEM, STEM Education, STEMmania // The Technology Teacher. – 2009. – Vol. 68, № 4. – P. 20–26.
18. Kelley T. R., Knowles J. G. A Conceptual Framework for Integrated STEM Education // International Journal of
STEM Education. – 2016. – Vol. 3. – Article 11. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.
19. 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:
https://doi.org/10.17226/18612.
20. Henriksen D. Full STEAM Ahead: Creativity in Excellent STEM Teaching Practices // The STEAM Journal. – 2014.
– Vol. 1, № 2. – Article 15. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.5642/steam.20140102.15.
21. Papert S., Harel I. Situating Constructionism // Constructionism / ed. by I. Harel, S. Papert. – Ablex Publishing,
1991. – P. 1–11.
22. Quigley C. F., Herro D. “Finding the Joy in the Unknown”: Implementation of STEAM Teaching Practices in Middle School Science and Math Classrooms // Journal of Science Education and Technology. – 2016. – Vol. 25, № 3. – P. 410–426.
– DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9602-z.
23. Handayani D., Nurhamidah. The Development of Student Soft Skills through the Integration of PjBL STEAM
Learning in the Organic Chemistry 1 Topic of Hydrocarbons // Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia Indonesia. – 2024. – Vol. 8, № 1. –
P. 29–38. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/jpki.v8i1.71120.
24. Rahmawati Y., Erdawati E., Ridwan A., Veronica N., Hadiana D. Developing Students’ Chemical Literacy through
the Integration of Dilemma Stories into a STEAM Project on Petroleum Topic // Journal of Technology and Science
Education. – 2024. – Vol. 14, № 2. – P. 376–392. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.2221.
25. Rahmawati Y., Taylor E., Taylor P. C., Ridwan A., Mardiah A. Students’ Engagement in Education as Sustainability:
Implementing an Ethical Dilemma-STEAM Teaching Model in Chemistry Learning // Sustainability. – 2022. – Vol. 14, № 6.
– Article 3554. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063554.
26. Ridwan A., Rahmawati Y., Hadinugrahaningsih T. STEAM Integration in Chemistry Learning for Developing 21st
Century Skills // MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends and Practices. – 2017. – Vol. 7, № 2. – P. 184–194.
27. Pandolfi T. V. T., Mendes A. N. F. Construção de Jogos Pedagógicos sobre Funções Orgânicas Aplicando a
Abordagem STEAM // Kiri-kerê: Pesquisa em Ensino. – 2025. – № 25. – P. 360–366. – DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47456/39qs1x67.
28. Rahmawati Y., Ramadhani S. F., Afrizal, Puspitasari M., Mardiah A. Development of Students’ Conceptual
Understanding through STEAM Project Integration in Thermochemistry // JTK: Jurnal Tadris Kimiya. – 2021. – Vol. 6, № 1.
– P. 62–74. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.15575/jtk.v6i1.5498.
29. Shadish W. R., Cook T. D., Campbell D. T. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal
Inference. – Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
30. 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, № 4. – P. 468–475. – DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00028A.
31. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. – 2nd ed. – Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
32. Hake R. R. Interactive-Engagement versus Traditional Methods: A Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics
Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses // American Journal of Physics. – 1998. – Vol. 66, № 1. – P. 64–74. – DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809.
33. Glynn S. M., Brickman P., Armstrong N., Taasoobshirazi G. Science Motivation Questionnaire II: Validation with
Science Majors and Nonscience Majors // Journal of Research in Science Teaching. – 2011. – Vol. 48, № 10. – P. 1159–1176.