Physics is the most basic of all sciences. It is not possible to explain the meaning and the content of physics with one simple sentence. It is at the root of every field of sciences and underlines all phenomena. It is not a set of facts and rules to be memorized. Instead, memorization is a fruitless way to try to learn physics (Bueche, 1988). Up until the date 1950s and 1960s, science in elementary and middle school consisted mostly of reading and memorization. In high school, as in college, the curriculum in physics was generally considered to consist of course syllabus, a text, a collection of standard problems, and a set of prescribed laboratory experiments. Among all of the other effects, students’ preconceptions play important role. Researchers have been doing research studies to diagnose students’ misconceptions about physical concepts and rules. Clement (1982) and Eryılmaz (2002) studied in many different subjects in physics, especially in mechanics. And they met at the same point of decision that, student’s preconception about force and motion has a great influence on performance in introductory mechanics. Researchers have been developed and studied the effectiveness of many methods in physics education. Hake (1998b) strongly suggest that classroom use of interactive engagement methods can increase mechanic course effectiveness in both conceptual understanding and problem solving well beyond that achieved with traditional methods. Most effective, contemporary, and popular methods are categorized and called as interactive engagement methods (Duch, 1996; Hake, 1998; Heller, Keith, & Anderson, 1992; Heller, 1992; Hestenes, 1987). Interactive engagement (IE) methods are methods that promote conceptual understanding through Interactive engagement of students in hands on (usually) and heads on (always) activities that yield immediate feedback through interaction with peers and/or instructors. (Hake, 1998a) In this study we are going to use Peer Instruction with Concept Tests. We couldn't use most of the Interactive engagement methods because we don't have enough equipment. The main problem of this study is as follows: What is the effect of teaching methods (Peer Instruction vs Traditional Instruction) on 10th grade students' post attitude and post achievement scores in Newton’s laws when the effects of students' gender, prior attitude and achievement are controlled?

This study was conducted with three teachers, six classes and total of 192 tenth grade students in the public high schools at Yenimahalle district of Ankara. For each teacher, two classes were used in the study. The teachers were trained for how to implement Peer Instruction in the classroom. Students from three classes participated in Traditional Instruction group and referred as control group, whereas the other three classes instructed by Peer Instruction referred as experimental group. The Physics Attitude Test and Physics Achievement Test were applied twice as pre-test and after a three-week treatment period as a post-test to both groups to assess and compare the effectiveness of two different types of teaching utilized in physics course. The Observation Checklist was used for treatment verification. The data obtained from the administration of post-tests were analyzed by statistical techniques of Multivariate Analyses of Covariance.

Students' scores on the Physics Achievement Test were very low even after the treatments. This is a reflection of very important problems in the society and educational system. Students' gender, prior attitude towards the topic and prior achievement about Newton's Laws explain significant amount of variance in the students' physics achievement and attitudes toward physics. In other words, they have successfully used to equalize initial group differences. The PI enriched with concept tests increased students' achievement in physics more than the Traditional Instruction. However, its effect size laid small to medium (h2 = 0.06). The effect of the Peer InstructionI compared to the Traditional Instruction on the students' attitudes toward Newton's laws was not significant.