Measuring the Level of Complexity of Scientific Inquiries: The LCSI Index
pp. 1-20 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.227a | Article Number: ijese.2015.038
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 1001 | Article Download: 620
The study developed and applied an index for measuring the level of complexity of full authentic scientific inquiry. Complexity is a fundamental attribute of real life scientific research. The level of complexity is an overall reflection of complex cognitive and metacognitive processes which are required for navigating the authentic inquiry through high levels of uncertainty, from the unknown to the known. To develop the index, an educational framework was set up, in which five teams of high school students were conducting a full authentic scientific inquiry, using online facilitation. Protocols obtained from the teams’ on-line communications were used for developing the Level of Complexity of Scientific Inquiry (LCSI) index. The index measures complexity by measuring the number of deviations from a linear straightforward inquiry process and the magnitude of these deviations. In structured teacher guided inquiries, the index measurement would be zero. The more students activate self-regulatory processes and grapple with the unknown, the higher is the obtained measurement.
Keywords: Scientific inquiry; authentic inquiry; inquiry assessment; science education assessment
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy (Project 2061). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Alonzo, A. & Aschbacher, P. R. (2004). Value Added? Long assessment of students’ scientific inquiry skills. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598.
Buck, L. B., Bretz, S. L., & Towns, M. H. (2008). Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory Journal of College Science Teaching, 52-58.
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2001). Epistemologically authentic scientific reasoning. In K. Crowley, C. D. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 351–392). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175-218.
Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916–937.
Fahy, P. (2001). Addressing some common problems in transcript analysis. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 1(2). http://www.irrodl.org/content/v1.2/research.html/#Fahy (Retrieved August 15, 2013).
Gobert,J., Heffernan, N., Ruiz, C., & Ryung, K. (2007). AMI: ASSISTments Meets Inquiry. Proposal NSF-DRL# 0733286 funded by the National Science Foundation.
Gobert, J. D., Sao Pedro, M. A., Baker, R. S. J., Toto, E., & Montalvo, O. (2012). Leveraging educational data mining for real-time performance assessment of scientific inquiry skills within microworlds. The Journal of Educational Data Mining , 4, 105-143.
Gotwals, A. & Songer, N. (2006). Measuring Students’ Scientific Content and Inquiry Reasoning. In Eds. L. Erlbuam Associates (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, (pp.196-202). ICLS 2006, S. Barab, K. Hay, and D. Hickey, Bloomington.
Herron, M. D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. School Review, 79, 171-212.
Hollingworth, W. R., & McLoughlin, C. (2003). Even foundation level students can get the HOTS for science! Paper presented at the 7th Pacific Rim, First Year in Higher Education Conference, QUR Gardens Point Campus.
International Council for Science (2011). Report of the ICSU ad-hoc review panel on science education (2011). Paris, France: International Council for Science.
Kipnis, M., & Hofstein, A. (2008). The inquiry laboratory as a source of development of metacognitive skills. Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 601-627.
Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: The effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 281-298.
Lee, H. S., & Songer, N. B. (2003). Making authentic science accessible to students. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1-26.
Loh, B., Reiser, B. J., Radinsky, J., Edelson, D. C., Gomez, L. M., & Marshall, S. (2001). Developing reflective inquiry practices: A case study of software, the teacher, and students. In K. Crowley, C. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 279-323). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., Calderhead, W. J., Dunlap, E. E., Hodell, E. C., & Freer, B. D. (2010). Learning the control of variables strategy in higher and lower achieving classrooms: Contributions of explicit instruction and experimentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 1, 90–101.
Lunsford, E., & Melear, C. T. (2004). Using scoring rubrics to evaluate inquiry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 34, 34-38.
Martin-Hansen, Lisa. (2002). Defining Inquiry. The Science Teacher, 69(2), 34-37.
Myers, M. J., & Burgess, A. B. (2003). Inquiry-based laboratory course improves students’ ability to design experiments and interpret data. Advances in Physiology Education, 27(1), 26–33.
Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). IMPROVE: A multidimensional method for teaching mathematics in heterogeneous classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 365-394.
Michalsky, T. (2003). The effects of metacognitive guidance within asynchronous learning networks on inquiry learning processes (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Bar-Ilan University, Israel.
National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press
National Research Council (2005). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). PISA literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from PISA 2000. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 193–203.
Quellmalz, E., Timms, M., & Schneider, S. (2009). Assessment of student learning in science simulations and games. National Research Council Report, Washington, D.C.
Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuILE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263-305). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 8–22.
Ruiz, G. M., Carlton, J. T., Grosholtz, E. D., & Hines, A. H. (1997). Global invasions of marine and astuarine habitats by non- indigenous species: Mechanisms, extent and consequences. American Zoologist, 37, 621–632.
Salmon, G. (2002). Mirror, mirror, on my screen…Exploring online reflections. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33, 379-391.
Scalise, K., Timms, M., Clark, L., & Moorjani, A. (2009). Student learning in science simulatons: What makes a difference? Paper presented at the America Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Schwab, J.J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J.J. Schwab and P.F. Brandwein (ED.), The teaching of science, (pp. 3–103). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schwartz, R. S. Lederman, N. G. & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610-645.
Solomon, J. (1989). The social construction of school science. In R. Millar (Ed.), Doing science: Images of science in science education (pp. 126-136). Philadelphia, PA: The Falmer Press.
Spanier, E., & Galil, S. (1991). Lessepsian migration: A continuous biogeographical process. Endeavor, New Series, 15, 102-106.
Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Metacognition, abilities and developing expertise: What makes an expert student? Instructional Science, 26, 127-140.
Tamir, P., Nussinovitz, R., & Friedler, Y. (1982). The design and use of practical tests assessment inventory. Journal of Biological Education, 16, 42-50.
Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Victoria, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research Press.
Wu, P. Wu, H., & Hsu, Y. (2014). Establishing the criterion-related, construct, and content validities of a simulation-based assessment of inquiry abilities. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1630-1650.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82–91.
Zohar, A. (1996). To learn, to think and to learn to think. [Hebrew]. Jerusalem, Israel: Branko Weiss Institution for Development of Thinking.
Full text PDF
“Uncentering” Teacher Beliefs: The Expressed Epistemologies of Secondary Science Teachers and How They Relate to Teacher Practice
Glenn R. Dolphin, John W. Tillotson
pp. 21-38 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.228a | Article Number: ijese.2015.039
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 1024 | Article Download: 575
This multi-university, three-year longitudinal study examined the relationship among seven secondary science teachers’ personal, student and scientific epistemologies. Paying close attention to each participant’s use of metaphor when speaking about his/her learning, students’ learning and the products/processes of science, we were able to discern each participant’s epistemological stance as indicating the acquisition metaphor of learning or the participation metaphor of learning or some combination of the two (pluralistic). We compared video recordings of each participant’s classroom teaching practice to develop an understanding for how their epistemological stance might relate to that practice. Based on our results, we contradict the current paradigm that beliefs guide practice, by positing that practice might actually determine beliefs. Where teachers having more field experiences were more likely to talk about learning through doing (participation) and those whose practice emphasized knowledge transfer, adhered to the acquisition metaphor for student learning. If teacher practice influenced their beliefs, this has profound implications for the structure of teacher education programs.
Keywords: Science teaching, epistemology, teacher beliefs, teacher practice, metaphors of learning.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 1057-1095.
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Embedding nature of science instruction in preservice elementary science courses: Abandoning scientism, but. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(3), 215-233.
Aikenhead, G., & Ryan, G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: "views on science-technology-society" (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477-491.
Bartos, S., & Lederman, N. (2014). A new perspective on teachers' conceptions of nature of science and scientific inquiry and their classroom practice. Paper presented at the Association of Science Teacher Educators 2014 International Conference, Antonio, Texas.
Barry, D., Tillotson, J.W., & Young, M.J. (in preparation). Validating the Beliefs About Reformed Science Teaching and Learning Instrument for Use with Secondary Science Teachers.
Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Bickmore, B., Thompson, K., Grandy, D., & Tomlin, T. (2009). Commentary: On teaching the nature of science and the science-religion interface. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57(3), 168-177.
BouJaoude, S. (2000). Conceptions of science teaching revealed by metaphors and by answers to open-ended questions. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(2), 173-186.
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., Rockoff, J., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). The narrowing gap in New York City teacher qualifications and its implications for student achievement in high-poverty schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 27(4), 793-818.
Brickhouse, N. (1990). Teachers' beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 53-62.
Bryan, L. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective elementary teacher's belief system about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 835-868.
Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Chai, C., Teo, T., & Lee, C. (2009). The change in epistemological beliefs and beliefs about teaching and learning: A study among pre-service teachers. Asia - Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 37(4), 351-362.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J., & Rockoff, J.E. (2013). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. NBER Working Paper No. 19424. September 2013, Revised April 2014. JEL No. H0.
Christodoulou, A., Osborne, J., Richardson, K., Howell-Richardson, C., & Simon, S. (2010). A study of student beliefs about the epistemology of science and their relationship with students' personal epistemologies.Unpublished manuscript.
Clement, J. J. (2008). Creative model construction in scientists and students: The role of imagery, analogy, and mental simulation. Dordercht: Springer.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007) How and why do teacher credentials matter for student achievement? (CALDER working paper) Retrieved April 3, 2014, from, http://www.caldercenter.org/PDF/1001058_Teacher_Credentials.pdf.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). Executive summary. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Studying Teacher Education: The Report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education (p. 1-36). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (with LePage, P.,Hammerness, K.,& Duffy, H.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 20(1), 43-63.
Davis, E. A., Petish, D., &Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607-651.
Driscoll, M. (2005). Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.). New York: Allyn& Bacon.
Grossman, P. (2008). Responding to our critics: From crisis to opportunity in research on teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(1), 10-23.
Haney, J. J., Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 971-993.
Hanuscin, D. L. (2013). Critical Incidents in the development of pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science: A prospective elementary teacher's journey. of Science Teacher Education, 24(6), 933-956.
Hodson, D. (1993). Philosophic stance of secondary school science teachers, curriculum experiences, and children's understanding of science: Some preliminary findings. Interchange, 24(1&2), 41-52.
Jackson, D. (2011). Authentic inquiry and science teachers' epistemological beliefs: A multiple case study. ASTE 2011 Internatinal Conference, Minneapolis, MN.
Jones, G., & Carter, G. (2007). Science teachers attitudes and beliefs. In S. Abell, & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1067-1104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow (1st ed.). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kang, N., & Wallace, C. (2005). Secondary science teachers' use of laboratory activities: Linking epistemological beliefs, goals, and practices. Science Education, 89(1), 140 – 165.
Kienhues, D., Bromme, R., & Stahl, E. (2008). Changing epistemological beliefs: The unexpected impact of a short-term intervention. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 545-565.
Kinchin, I., Hatzipanagos, S., & Turner, N. (2009). Epistemological separation of research and teaching among graduate teaching assistants.Journal of further and Higher Education, 33(1), 45 – 55.
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: Towards a more holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77-97.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Lederman, N., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. (2002). Views of nature of science questionaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of nature of science. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 497-521.
Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers' understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
Luehmann, A. L. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation. Science Education, 91(5), 822-839.
Luft, J. (2007). Minding the gap: Needed research on beginning/newly qualified science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 532-537.
Luft, J.A., Roehrig, G.H., & Patterson, N.C. (2003). Contrasting landscapes: A comparison of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers’ practices, beliefs, and experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 77-97.
Luft, J., &Roehrig, G. (2007). Capturing science teachers' epistemological beliefs: The development of the teacher beliefs interview. The Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 38-63.
Maggioni, L., VanSledright, B., & Alexander, P. (2009). Walking on the borders: A measure of epistemic cognition in history. The Journal of Experimental Education, 77(3), 187-213.
Mansour, N. (2009). Science Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices: Issues, Implications and Research Agenda. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(1), 25-48.
McGinnis, J. R., & Parker, C., & Graeber, A. O. (2004). A cultural perspective of the induction of five reform-minded beginning mathematics and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 720-747.
Minogue, J. (2010). What is the teacher doing? what are the students doing? an application of the draw-a-science-teacher-test. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 767-781.
National Research Council. (2002). The knowledge economy and postsecondary education: Report of a workshop. Committee on the Impact of Changing Economy on Post-secondary Education. Division of Behavioral and Social sciences and education. Center for Education. P.A. Graham and N.G. Stacey (Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2010). Preparing Teachers: Building Evidence for Sound Policy. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Creating scientific concepts. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
OED. (1994). Oxford english dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Pajares, M. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
Penick, J., &Yager, R. (1988). Science teacher education: A program with a theoretical and pragmatic rationale. Journal of Teacher Education, 39, 59-64.
Reddy, M. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284-324). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Reeder, S., Utley, J., & Cassel, D. (2009). Using metaphors as a tool for examining preservice elementary teachers' beliefs about mathematics teaching and learning. School Science and Mathematics, 109(5), 290-297.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), The handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 102-119). New York: Macmillan.
Richardson, L., & Simmons, P. (1994). Self-Q research method and analysis, teacher pedagogical philosophy interview: Theoretical background and samples of data. Athena, GA: University of Georgia.
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417-458.
Robinson, J. & Yager, R.E. (1998). Translating and using resesarch for improving teacher education in science and mathematics. Final reprot from the OERI-funded Chatauqua ISTEP Research Project (Salish II). Supported by the Office of Eductional Research and Improvement, US Department of Education (Grant No. R168U60001).
Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers' beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a Reform‐Based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 412-422.
Salish I Research Project Final Report. (1997). Secondarr Science and MathTeacher Preparation Programs: Influences on New Teachers and their Students. Iowa City, IA: Science Eduation Center, The University of Iowa.
Salter, I. Y., & Atkins, L. J. (2014). What students say versus what they do regarding scientific inquiry. Science Education, 98(1), 1-35.
Savasci, F. & Berlin, D. R. (2012). Science teacher beliefs and classroom practice related to constructivism in different school settings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(1), 65-86.
Schalock, D. (2004). Connecting teaching, teacher preparation, and student learning: The importance of theory development. Teachers for a New Era Quarterly, 1(4), 1-2.
Schemp, P., Sparkes, A., & Templin, T. (1993). The micro politics of teacher induction. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 447-472.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4 – 13.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.
Simmons, P.E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crockett, D.,… Labuda, K. (1999). Beginning teachers: beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 930-954.
Southerland, S., Johnston, A., & Sowell, S. (2006). Describing teachers' conceptual ecologies for the nature of science. Science Education,90(5), 874-906.
Tillotson, J.W., Yager, R.E., & Penick, J. (2007). Reflections on Preservice Program Experiences. (Unpublished Interview Protocol), Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University.
Tillotson, J.W. & Young, M.J. (2013). The IMPPACT project: A model for studying how preservice program experiences influence science teachers’ beliefs and practices. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(3), 148-161.Tobias, S. (2010). Science teaching as a profession: Why it isn't. How it could be. Keynote presentation to the Association of Science Teacher Educators Annual International Meeting, Sacramento CA, January 14-16, 2010.
Tobias, S. (2010). Science teaching as a profession: Why it isn't. How it could be. Keynote presentation to the Association of Science Teacher Educators Annual International Meeting, Sacramento CA, January 14-16, 2010.
Tobin, K., & LaMaster, S. U. (1995). Relationships between metaphors, beliefs, and actions in a context of science curriculum change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 225-242.
Tsai, C. (2002). Nested epistemologies: Science teachers' beliefs of teaching, learning and science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 771-783.
Tsai, C. (2007). Teachers' scientific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students' views. Science Education, 91(2), 222-243.
Waters-Adams, S. (2006). The relationship between understanding of the nature of science and practice: The influence of teachers' beliefs about education, teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 28(8), 919-944.
Wilson, S.M., Floden, R.E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2001). Teacher preparation research: An insider’s view from the outside. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 190-204.
Windschitl, M. (2005). Guest editorial: The future of science teacher preparation in America: Where is the evidence to inform program design and guide responsible policy decisions? Science Education, 89(4), 525-534.
Full text PDF
The Effectiveness of Teaching Aids for Elementary Students’ Renewable Energy Learning and an Analysis of Their Energy Attitude Formation
Ying-Chyi Chou, Hsin-Yi Yen, Hong-Wei Yen, Yu-Long Chao, Ying-Hsiu Huang
pp. 39-49 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.229a | Article Number: ijese.2015.040
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 1142 | Article Download: 591
As an examination of the influences of a renewable energy teaching activity employing teaching aids on elementary students’ knowledge of, attitude toward, and behavior of energy saving and carbon reduction, this study designed a teaching experiment in which experimental group was subjected to the teaching with four teaching aids for students to practice whereas the control group was not. Results revealed that the teaching activity significantly improved the attitude and increased some knowledge items but did not affect the behavior. The behavior was more connected to attitude and knowledge for experimental group than for control group. The formation of the positive attitude could be related to the sensory stimulation generated by the teaching aids and associated affective responses when it was analyzed from a product-trial perspective. The analysis should inspire the understanding of the possible mechanisms of how learning experiences affect attitude.
Keywords: Teaching Aids, Renewable Energy Learning, Energy Attitude
Aguirre-Bielschowsky, I. (2013). Electricity saving behaviours and energy literacy of New Zealand children. Doctoral dissertation, the University of Otago, New Zealand.
Ashley, C., Oliver, J. D., & Zemanek, J. E. (2011). Trial-attitude formation in green product evaluations. In R. Srinivasan & L. McAlister (Eds.), 2011 AMA Winter Educators’ Conference: Marketing Theory and Applications (pp. 320–321). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2009). Introducing a fifth pedagogy: Experience-based strategies for facilitating learning in natural environments. Environmental Education Research, 15(2), 243–262.
Bodur, H. O., Brinberg, D., & Coupey, E. (2000). Belief, affect, and attitude: Alternative models of the determinants of attitude. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(1), 17–28.
Boylan, C. (2008). Exploring elementary students’ understanding of energy and climate change. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(1), 1–15.
Carrier, S. J., Tugurian, L. P., & Thomson, M. M. (2013). Elementary science indoors and out: Teachers, time, and testing. Research in Science Education, DOI: 10.1007/s11165-012-9347-5
Choi, K., & Chang, H. (2004). The effects of using the electric circuit model in science education to facilitate learning electricity-related concepts. Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 44(6), 1341–1348.
Corney, G. (2000). Student geography teachers’ pre-conceptions about teaching environmental topics. Environmental Education Research, 6(4), 313–329.
Crapper, M., Donald, R., Hill, D., Hall, A., & French, W. (2008). Models for teaching sustainable development to children. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Engineering Sustainability, 161(4), 229–236.
Evans, G. W., et al. (2007). Young children’s environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39, 635–659.
Falk, J. H., Koran, J. J. Jr., & Dierking, L. D. (1986). The things of science: Assessing the learning potential of science museums. Science Education, 70, 503–508.
Fazio, R. H., & Zanna, M. P. (1981). Direct experience and attitude-behavior consistency. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 14 (pp. 161–202). New York: Academic Press.
Finson, K. D., & Enochs, L. G. (1987). Student attitudes toward science-technology-society resulting from visitation to a science-technology museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 593–609.
Gobe, M. (2001). Emotional branding. New York: Allworth.
Ibeh, G. F., Onah, D.U., Umahi, A. E., Ugwuonah, F. C., Nnachi, N. O., & Ekpe, J.E. (2013). Strategies to improve attitude of secondary school students towards physics for sustainable technological development in Abakaliki L.G.A, Ebonyi, Nigeria. Journal of Sustainable Development Studies, 3(2), 127-135.
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2005). Factors influencing elementary school children's attitudes to science before, during and following a visit to the UK National Space Centre. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 53-83.
Kim, J., & Morris, J. D. (2007). The power of affective response and cognitive structure in product-trial attitude formation. Journal of Advertizing, 36(1), 95–106.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lee, L. S., Lin, K. Y., Guu, Y. H., Chang, L. T., & Lai, C. C. (2012). The effect of hands-on ‘energy saving house’ learning activities on elementary school students’ knowledge, attitudes, and behavior regarding energy saving and carbon-emissions reduction. Environmental Education Research, DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2012.727781
Lin, M. G. (2012). Learning effectiveness of integrating the greenergy teaching aids into the elementary school curriculum. Unpublished master’s thesis, National University of Tainan, Taiwan.
Liu, S. Y., Chen, R. H, Chiu, Y. R, & Lai, C. M. (2012). Building energy and children: Theme-oriented and experience-based course development and educational effects. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 11(1), 185–192.
Morris, J. D., Woo, C., Geason, J. A., & Kim, J. (2002), The power of affect: Predicting intention. Journal of Advertising Research, 42(3), 7-17.
Orr, D.W. (1992). Ecological literacy: Education and the transition to a postmodern world. New York: State University of New York Press.
Osborne, R., & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children’s science. Melbourne: Heinemann.
Ou, C. H., Fang, P. L., Miao, R. I., Lai, C. H., & Pan, H. T. (2007). A study on the effects of implementing experiential energy education curriculum in an elementary school on the pupils’ energy literacy. 2007 Annual report of research and development achievements made by authorities and schools of Kaohsiung City Government.
Perry, D. L. (1993). Designing exhibits that motivate. In M. Borun, S. Grinell, P. McNamara, & B. Serrell (Eds.), What research says about learning in science museums, Vol. 2 (pp. 25–29). Washington, DC: Association of Science.
Ramey-Gassert, L., Walberg, H. J., III, & Walberg, H. J. (1994). Reexamining connections: Museums as science learning environments. Science Education, 78, 345–363.
Roschelle, J. (1995). Learning in interactive environments: Prior knowledge and new experience. In J. H. Falk & L. D. Dierking (Eds.), Public institutions for personal learning: Establishing a research agenda (pp. 37-51). Washington, DC: American Association of Museums.
Schmitt, B. H. (1999). Experiential marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15, 53-67.
Sneath, J. Z., Finney, R. Z., & Close, A. G. (2005). An IMC approach to event marketing: The effects of sponsorship and experience on consumer attitudes. Journal of Advertising Research, 45(4), 373-381.
Steup, M. (2006). Analysis of knowledge. In E. N., Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved 04/04/2014 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-analysis/
Takaki, K. Jinno, N., Kajiwara, S., Yamaguchi, A., Kikuchi, M., & Suzuki, M. (2007). Development of energy and environment education program and teaching aids for upper grade of elementary school by effective utilization of regional collaboration. IEEJ Transactions on Fundamentals and Materials, 127(4), 205-211.
Tytler, R. (2002). Teaching for understanding in science: Student conceptions research and changing views of learning. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 48(3), 14-21.
Full text PDF
A Garden-Based Approach to Teaching Life Science Produces Shifts in Students’ Attitudes toward the Environment
Carley Fisher-Maltese, Timothy D. Zimmerman
pp. 51-66 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.230a | Article Number: ijese.2015.041
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 1091 | Article Download: 636
Recently, schools nationwide have expressed a renewed interest in school gardens, viewing them as innovative educational tools. Most of the scant studies on these settings investigate the health/nutritional impacts, science learning potential, or emotional dispositions of students. However, few studies examine the shifts in attitudes that occur for students as a result of experiences in school gardens. The purpose of this mixed method study was to examine a school garden program at a K-3 elementary school. Our study sought to demonstrate the value of garden-based learning through a focus on measures of learning typically associated with the informal learning environment. These measures tend to take into account shifts in attitude which can be important factors in learning. In contrast, existing studies on school gardens that do examine learning emphasize individual learning of traditional school content (math, science, etc.). Though we did not set out to alter students’ attitudes toward the environment, based upon some preliminary work, we decided to administer an existing environmental attitude survey from Ratcliffe (2007). Interestingly, results from pre/post environmental attitude surveys indicate little to no change, but results from pre/post tests, interviews, and recorded student conversations reveal important, positive shifts in students’ attitudes toward the environment. We argue that these mixed results point to the important role school gardens play in impacting attitudes toward the environment but that better tools are necessary to accurately measure these shifts.
Keywords: Environmental attitudes, informal learning, outdoor learning, garden-based learning, early childhood science methods.
Alexander, J., North, M.W., & Hendren, D.K. (1995). Master gardener classroom garden project: An evaluation of the benefits to children. Child Environments, 12(2), 124-133.
Ash, D. (2003). Dialogic inquiry in life science conversations of family groups in a museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 138-162.
Ash, D., Crain, R., Brandt, C., Loomis, M., Wheaton, M., & Bennett, C. (2007). Talk,tools, and tensions: Observing biological talk over time. International Journal of Science Education, 29(12), 1581-1602.
Bamberger, Y., & Tal, T. (2007). Learning in a personal context: Levels of choice in a free choice learning environment in science and natural history museums. Science Education, 91(1), 75-95.
Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A.W., & Feder, M.A. (Eds.). (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
Blair, D. (2009). The child in the garden: An evaluative review of the benefits of school gardening. Journal of Environmental Education, 40(2), 15-38.
Borun, M., Chambers, M., & Cleghorn, A. (1996). Families are learning in science museums. Curator: The Museum Journal, 39(2), 123-138.
Brunotts, C.M. (1998). School gardening: A multi-faceted learning tool. An evaluation of the Pittsburgh civic garden center’s Neighbors and Schools Gardening Together. Unpublished master’s thesis, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Brynjegard, S. (2001). School gardens: Raising environmental awareness in children. San
Rafael, CA: School of Education, Dominican University of California. (ERIC Documentation Reproduction Service No. ED452085). Retrieved October 25, 2010, from http://edres.org/eric/ED452085.htm.
Bunting, T.E., & Cousins, L.R. (1983). Development and application of the Children’s Environmental Response Inventory. Journal of Environmental Education, 15(1), 3-10.
California School Garden Network. (2006). Gardens for learning: Creating and sustaining your school garden. Irvine, CA: California School Garden Network.
Canaris, I. (1995). Growing foods for growing minds: Integrating gardening into the total curriculum. Children’s Environments, 12(2), 134-142.
Carrier, S. (2009). Environmental education in the schoolyard: Learning styles and gender. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40(3), 2-12.
Carter, R.L. & Simmons, B. (2010). History and philosophy of environmental education. In A.M. Bodzin, B.S. Klein and S. Weaver (Eds.) The inclusion of environmental education in science teacher education (pp. 3-16). Springer: New York, NY.
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. London, England: Sage Publications.
Desmond, D., Grieshop, J., & Subramaniam, A. (2002). Revisiting garden based learning in basic education: Philosophical roots, historical foundations, best practices and products, impacts, outcomes, and future directions. Prepared for IIEP/FAO, SDRE Food and Agricultural Organization/United Nations, Rome, Italy, UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning, Paris, France.
Dierking, L.D., Falk, J.H., Rennie, L., Anderson, D., & Ellenbogen, K. (2003). Policy statement of the “Informal Science Education” Ad Hoc Committee. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 108-111.
Dillon, J., Rickinson, M., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Choi, M.Y., Sanders, D., Benefield, P. (2006). The value of outdoor learning: Evidence from research in the U.K. and elsewhere. School Science Review, 87(320), 107-111.
Dirks, A.E., & Orvis, K. (2005). An evaluation of the junior master gardener program in third grade classrooms. HortTechnology, 15, 443-447.
Dunlap, R. E., & Jones, R. E.. (2003). Environmental attitudes and values. In R. Fernandez-Ballesteros (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychological assessment, Vol. 1 (pp. 364-369). London: Sage.
Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results: The ‘New Environmental Paradigm’. Journal of Environmental Education, 9(1), 10-19.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., Jones, R. E. (2002). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425-442.
Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2005). From living to virtual: Learning from museum objects. Curator: The Museum Journal, 48(3), 317-338.
Faddegon, P.A. (2005). The kids growing food school gardening program: Agricultural literacy and other educational outcomes. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NJ.
Falk, J.H. (1999). Museums as institutions for personal learning. Daedalus, 128, 259-275.
Falk, J.H. (2001). Free-choice science learning: Framing the issues. In: Falk, J., (Ed.), Free-choice science education: How people learn science outside of school (pp. 2-9). New York: Teacher’s College Press.
Falk, J.H. & Dierking, L.D. (2002). Lessons without a limit: How free-choice learning is transforming education. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
Fancovicova, J., & Prokop, J. (2011). Plants have a chance: Outdoor educational programmes alter students’ knowledge and attitudes towards plants. Environmental Education Research, 17(4), 537-551.
Farmer, J., Knapp, D., & Benton, G. M. (2007). An elementary school environmental education field trip: long-term effects on ecological and environmental knowledge and attitude development. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38(3), 33-42.
Firestone, W.A. (1987). Meaning in method: The rhetoric of qualitative and quantitative methods in classroom environment research. Educational Researcher, 16, 16-21.
Fisher-Maltese, C. (2014). The school garden: Fertile ground for learning. In L. Kuh (Ed).Thinking Critically about Environments for Young Children: Bridging Theory and Practice (Chapter 6). New York: Teachers College Press.
Fisher-Maltese, C. & Zimmerman, T.D. (April, 2014). Teaching science in an informal setting: Assessing a garden-based approach to teaching the life cycle of insects. Paper presented at the 2014 Annual American Educational Research Association Meeting, Philadelphia, PA.
Fraser, B. J., & Tobin, K. (1992). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in classroom environment research. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Educational environments: Antecedents, consequences, and evaluation (pp. 271-292). London: Pergamon Press.International Social Science Council. (2014). Networking conferences for young scientists.
Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.worldsocialscience.org/activities/networking-conferences-for-young-scientists/.
Jaus, H. (1982). The development and retention of environmental attitudes in elementary school children. Journal of Environmental Education, 13(2), 12-18.
Johnson, B., & Manoli, C. C. (2010). The 2-MEV scale in the United States: a measure of children's environmental attitudes based on the theory of ecological attitude. The Journal of Environmental Education, 42(2), 84-97.
Kisiel, J. (2003). Teachers, museums, and worksheets: A closer look at a learning experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14(1), 3-21.
Klemmer, C.D., Waliczek, T.M., & Zajicek, J.M. (2005a). Development of a science achievement evaluation instrument of a school garden program. HortTechnology, 15, 433-438.
Klemmer, C.D., Waliczek, T.M., & Zajicek, J.M. (2005b). The effect of a school gardening program on the science achievement of elementary students. HortTechnology, 15, 448-452.
Knapp, D. (2000). The Thessaloniki declaration: A wake-up call for environmental education? The Journal of Environmental Education, 31(3), 32-39.
Lineberger, S.E. & Zajicek, J.M. (2000). School gardens: Can a hands-on teaching tool affect students’ attitudes and behaviors regarding fruits and vegetables? HorTechnology, 10(3), 593-597.
Maloney, M.P., & Ward, M.P. (1973). Ecology: Let’s hear from the people: An objective scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge. American Psychologist, 28(7), 583-586.
Manoli, C., Johnson, B., & Dunlap, R. (2007). Assessing children’s environmental world views: Modifying and validating the New Ecological Paradigm Scale for use with children. Journal of Environmental Education, 38(4), 3-13.
Milfont, T., & Duckit, J. (2009). The environmental attitudes inventory: A valid and reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 80-94.
Mittelstaedt, R., Sanker, L., & Vanderveer, B. (1999). Impact of a week-long experiential education program on environmental attitude and awareness. Journal of Experiential Education, 22(3), 138-148.
Moore, R. (1995). Growing foods for growing minds: Integrating gardening and nutrition education into the total curriculum. Children’s Environments, 12(2), 134-142.
Musser, L., & Malleus, A. (1994). The children’s attitudes toward the environment scale.The Journal of Environmental Education, 23(3), 22-26.
Nanney, M., Johnson, S., Elliot, M., & Haire-Joshu, D. (2006). Frequency of eating home-grown produce is associated with higher intake among parents and their pre-school aged children in rural Missouri. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 107(4), 577-584.
National Foundation for Educational Research. (2011). Food growing activities at school report. Retrieved on April 29, 2014, from http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/publications/OFGA01/OFGA01.pdf.
National Gardening Association. (2010). Garden in every school registry. Retrieved April 23, 2010, from http://kidsgardening.com
No Child Left Inside (NCLI) Coalition. (2010). About the No Child Left Inside Act. Retrieved December 16, 2010, from http://www.cbf.org/ncli/action/about.
Orion, N., & Hoffstein, A. (1994). Factors that influence learning during a scientific fieldtrip in a natural environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1097-1119.
Palmer, J. (1998). Environmental education in the 21st century. Routledge, London. Parliamentary Assembly. (1994). Report on an action programme for environmental education in teacher training. Retrieved on May 14, 2014, from http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Doc/XrefViewHTML.asp?FileID=8192&Language=EN.
Penuel, W. R., Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2007). Designing formative assessment software with teachers: An analysis of the co-design process. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 51-74.).
Public Schools NSW. (2013). Kitchen garden pilot program: Evaluation report. Retrieved on April 29, 2014 from http://www.kitchengardens.det.nsw.edu.au/kg/assets/kitchen_garden_final.pdf.
Rahm, J. (2002). Emergent learning opportunities in an inner-city youth gardening program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 164-184.
Ratcliffe, M. (2007). Garden-based education in school settings: The effects on children’s vegetable consumption, vegetable preferences, and ecoliteracy. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Tufts University, Boston.
Rennie, L.J. (2007). Learning science outside of school. In: S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 125-167). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Inc.
Rowe, S. (2002). The role of objects in active, distributed meaning-making. Perspectives on Object-Centered Learning in Museums, 19-35.
Sieber, S. D. (1973). The integration of fieldwork and survey methods. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1335-1359.
Skelly, S.M. & Zajiceck, J.M. (1998). The effect of an interdisciplinary garden program in the environmental attitudes of elementary school students. HorTechnology, 8(4). 579-583.
Smith, L.L., & Mostenbocker, C.E., (2005). Impact of hands-on science through school gardening in Louisiana public elementary schools. HortTechnology, 15, 439-443.
Smith-Sebasto, N. J., & Cavern, L. (2006). Effects of pre- and post-trip activities associated with a residential environmental education experience on students’ attitudes towards the environment. The Journal of Environmental Education, 37(4), 3-17.
Stokes, E., Edge, A., & West, A. (2001). Environmental education in the educational systems of the European Union: Synthesis report. Retrieved on May 14, 2014 from http://www.medies.net/_uploaded_files/ee_in_eu.pdf.
Thorp, L., & Townsend, C. (December, 2001). Agricultural education in an elementary school: An ethnographic study of a school garden. Proceedings of the 28th Annual National Agricultural Education Research Conference in New Orleans, LA (pp. 347-360). Retrieved from http://www.aaaeonline.org/conference_files/758901.
Waliczek, T.M., Bradley, J.C., Lineberger, R.D., & Zajicek, J.M. (2000). Using a web-based survey to research the benefits of children gardening. HorTechnology, 10(1), 71-76.
Waliczek, T.M., & Zajicek, J.M. (1999). School gardening: Improving environmental attitudes of children through hands-on learning. Journal of Environmental Horticulture, 17, 180-184.
Weigel, R. & Weigel, J. (1978). Environmental concern: The development of a measure. Environment & Behavior, 10, 3-15.
Zimmerman, T.D. (2005). Promoting knowledge integration, of scientific principles and environmental stewardship: Assessing an issue-based approach to teaching evolution and marine conservation. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of California, Berkeley.
Zimmerman, T.D. (March, 2010). Capturing learning across formal and informal contexts. Paper presented at the National Association for Research on Science Teaching Annual Conference. Philadelphia, PA.
Zimmerman, T.D. (2011). Mobile devices for promoting museum learning. In J.E. Katz, W. LeBar, and E. Lynch (Eds.) Creativity and Technology: Social Media, Mobiles and Museums (pp. 264-291) MuseumsEtc, Edinburgh, UK.
Full text PDF
Integrating Sustainable Consumption into Environmental Education: A Case Study on Environmental Representations, Decision Making and Intention to Act
Andreas Ch. Hadjichambis, Demetra Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, Hara Ioannou, Yiannis Georgiou, Constantinos C. Manoli
pp. 67-86 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.231a | Article Number: ijese.2015.042
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 1024 | Article Download: 559
During the last decades, current consumption patterns have been recurrently blamed for rendering both the environment and our lifestyles unsustainable. Young children are considered a critical group in the effort to make a shift towards sustainable consumption (environmentally friendly consumption). However, young people should be able to consider sustainable consumption as a potential venue, among their options. The present study investigates the effectiveness of an environmental education program aiming to familiarize children aged 8-12 with the notion of sustainable consumption by focusing on children’s environmental representations and their intentions to act (decision-making). Findings revealed that the program employed influenced children’s environmental representations into becoming more sustainable ones. In addition, the environmental program provided children with more environmental criteria, allowing children to report their intentions to act as sustainable consumers. Relating children’s environmental representations to their decision-making criteria, findings indicated an emerging relationship between children’s environmental representations, and their intentions to act, as reflected through the decision-making process.
Keywords: Andreas Ch. Hadjichambis, Demetra Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, Hara Ioannou, Yiannis Georgiou, Constantinos C. Manoli
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action control from cognition to behavior. (pp. 11-39). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
Ambusaidi, A., Boyes, E., Stanisstreet, M., & Taylor, N. (2012). Omani students views about global warming: Beliefs about actions and willingness to act. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 21(1), 21-39. doi:10.1080/10382046.2012.639154
Atran, S., Medin, D. L., & Ross, N. O. (2005). The cultural mind: Environmental decision making and cultural modeling within and across populations. Psychological Review, 112(4), 744-776. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.744
Autio, M., & Wilska, T. (2003). ‘Vihertävät tytöt ja vastuuttomat pojat – nuorten kuluttajien ympäristöasenteet’ (green girls and irresponsible boys – young consumers’ attitudes towards environment). Nuorisotutkimus, 21(2), 3-18.
Bang, M., Medin, D. L., & Atran, S. (2007). Cultural mosaics and mental models of nature. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(35), 13868-13874. doi:10.1073/pnas.0706627104
Barr, S., Gilg, A. W., & Ford, N. J. (2001). Differences between household waste reduction, reuse and recycling behaviour: A study of reported behaviours, intentions and explanatory variables. Environmental and Waste Management, 4(2), 69-82.
Barratt Hacking, E., Barratt, R., & Scott, W. (2007). Engaging children: Research issues around participation and environmental learning. Environmental Education Research, 13(4), 529-544.
Bass, K., Barnett, T., & Brown, G. (1999). Individual difference variables, ethical judgments, and ethical behavioral intentions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9(2), 183-205.
Benn, J. (2004). Consumer education between ‘consumership’ and citizenship: Experiences from studies of young people. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28(2), 108-116.
Benn, J. (2002). Consumer education: Educational considerations and perspectives. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26(3), 169-177.
Bentley, M., Fien, J., & Neil, C. (2004). Sustainable consumption: Young australians as agents of change. A report to the national youth affairs research scheme.Australia: Australian Government Department of Family and Community Service.
Biltagy, M. M. S. (2013). Higher education for sustainable consumption: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Education and Research, 1(9), 1-12.
Blais, A. R., & Thompson, M. M. (2008). Decision processes in military moral dilemmas: The role of moral intensity and moral judgment. Toronto,Canada: Defence R&D.
Burgess, J., Harrison, C. M., & Filius, P. (1998). Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning A, 30(8), 1445-1460.
Caravita, S. (2001). A re-framed conceptual change theory? Learning and Instruction, 11(4), 421-429.
Carida, H. C. (2011). Primary pupils' consumer habits and behaviors in the purchase and management of products and services: The case of Greece. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 21(2), 142-161. doi:10.1080/10911359.2011.544968
Carleton-Hug, A., & Hug, J. W. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for evaluating environmental education programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(2), 159-164. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.07.005
Chhokar, K., Dua, S., Taylor, N., Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (2011). Indian secondary students' views about global warming: Beliefs about the usefulness of actions and willingness to act. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(5), 1167-1188. doi:10.1007/s10763-010-9254-z
Christidou, V., Dimopoulos, K., & Koulaidis, V. (2004). Constructing social representations of science and technology: The role of metaphors in the press and the popular scientific magazines. Public Understanding of Science, 13(4), 347-362. doi:10.1177/0963662504044108
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015-1026.
Cook, D. T. (2008). The missing child in consumption theory. Journal of Consumer Culture, 8(2), 219-243. doi:10.1177/1469540508090087
Corraliza, J. A., & Berenguer, J. (2000). Environmental values, beliefs, and actions: A situational approach. Environment and Behavior, 32(6), 832-848.
De Young, R. (1996). Some psychological aspects of reduced consumption behavior: The role of intrinsic satisfaction and competence motivation. Environment and Behavior, 28(3), 358-409.
Dettmann-Easler, D., & Pease, J. L. (1999). Evaluating the effectiveness of residential environmental education programs in fostering positive attitudes toward wildlife. Journal of Environmental Education, 31(1), 33-39.
Durning, A. T. (1995). Are we happy yet? san francisco:Sierra club books. In T. Roszak, M. E. Gomes & A. D. Kanner (Eds.), [Ecopsychology: Restoring the earth healing the mind] (pp. 68-76). San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Emerald, N. D. (2004). Consumerism, nature and the human spirit. (Unpublished Master thesis). Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Engels, C. A., & Jacobson, S. K. (2007). Evaluating long-term effects of the golden lion tamarin environmental education program in Brazil. Journal of Environmental Education, 38(3), 3-14. doi:10.3200/JOEE.38.3.3-14
Fan, J. X., & Xiao, J. J. (1998). Consumer decision-making styles of young-adult chinese. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 32(2), 275-294.
Fien, J., Neil, C., & Bentley, M. (2008). Youth can lead the way to sustainable consumption. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 2(1), 51-60.
Fischer, D., & Freund, E. (2012). Educating for sustainable consumption as a response to the global water crisis: An investigation of an embedded learning approach. In W. Leal Filho (Ed.), Climate change and the sustainable use of water resources (pp. 743-759). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fröhlich, G., Sellmann, D., & Bogner, F. X. (2013). The influence of situational emotions on the intention for sustainable consumer behaviour in a student-centred intervention. Environmental Education Research, 19(6), 747-764.
González-Gaudiano, E. (1999). Education and sustainable consumption: The case of Mexico. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 4(1), 176-192.
Heimlich, J., & Ardoin, N. (2008). Understanding behaviour to understand behaviour change: A literature review. Environmental Education Research, 14(3), 215-237.
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8.
Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. J. (2006). Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education. Learning and Instruction, 16(5), 416-432. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.09.003
Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. J. (2008). Applying social representations theory in educational evaluation: A methodological framework. In M. Ortiz, & C. Rubio (Eds.), Educational evaluation: 21st century issues and challenges (pp. 1-29). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Jansen, L. A., & Fogel, J. S. (2010). Ascribing intentions in clinical decision-making. Journal of Medical Ethics, 36(1), 2-6. doi:10.1136/jme.2009.032045
Jensen, B. (2002). Knowledge, action and pro-environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 325-334.
Jensen, B. B., & Schnack, C. (1997). The action competence approach in environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 3(3), 163-179.
Jickling, B., & Spork, H. (1998). Education for the environment: A critique. Environmental Education Research, 4(3), 309-328.
Jickling, B. (1992). Why I don’t want my children to be educated for sustainable development. Journal of Environmental Education, 23(4), 5-8.
Kaiser, F. G., Wölfing, S., & Fuhrer, U. (1999). Environmental attitude and ecological behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(1), 1-19.
Kang, J., Liu, C., & Kim, S.-H. (2013). Environmentally sustainable textile and apparel consumption: The role of consumer knowledge, perceived consumer effectiveness and perceived personal relevance. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 37(4), 442-452. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12013
Kanner, A. D., & Gomes, M. E. (1995). The all-consuming self. In T. Roszak, M. E. Gomes & A. D. Kanner (Eds.), Ecopsychology: Restoring the earth healing the mind (pp. 77-91). San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Books.
Kaur, P., & Singh, R. (2006). Children in family purchase decision making in india and the west: A review. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 8, 1-30.
Khan, I., Tauqir, A. G., & Salman, M. (2012). Impact of brand related attributes on purchase intention of customers: A study about the customers of Punjab, Pakistan. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(3), 194-200.
Knapp, D., & Benton, G. M. (2006). Episodic and semantic memories of a residential environmental education program. Environmental Education Research, 12(2), 165-177.
Kollmus, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239-260.
Kopnina, H. (2013). An exploratory case study of Dutch children's attitudes toward consumption: Implications for environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 44(2), 128-144. doi:10.1080/00958964.2012.706240
Koskinas, K., Papastamou, S., Mantoglou, S., Prodromitis, G., & Alexias, G. (2000). Environment and quality of life: Social representations of the term ‘environment’. Athens, Greece: Greek Letters.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. 2nd edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Lee, K. (2011). The green purchase behavior of hong kong young consumers:The role of peer influence, local environmental involvement, and concrete environmental knowledge .Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(1), 21-44.
Lester, B. T., Ma, L., Lee, O., & Lambert, J. (2006). Social activism in elementary science education: A science, technology, and society approach to teach global warming. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 315-339. doi:10.1080/09500690500240100
Lijmbach, S., Margadant-van Arcken, M., van Koppen, C. S. A., & Wals, A. E. J. (2002). "Your view of nature is not mine": Learning about pluralism in the classroom. Environmental Education Research, 8(2), 121-135.
Loughland, T., Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2002). Young people’s conceptions of environment: A phenomenographic analysis. Environmental Education Research, 8(2), 187-197.
Malandrakis, G., Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (2011). Global warming: Greek students' belief in the usefulness of pro-environmental actions and their intention to take action. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 68(6), 947-963. doi:10.1080/00207233.2011.590720
McCann-Erickson. (2001). Pilot study on youth and sustainable consumption in Europe. Paris: Executive Summary.
McEachern, M. G., & Warnaby, G. (2008). Exploring the relationship between consumer knowledge and purchase behaviour of value-based labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(5), 414-426.
Michaelis, L. (2000). Ethics of consumption. Oxford: Oxford Centre for the Environment.
Moscovici, S. (2001). Why a theory of social representations? In K. Deaux, & G. Philogene (Eds.), Representations of the social (pp. 8-36). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
OXFAM. (2002). Highly affected, rarely considered: The international youth parliament commission’sreport on the impacts of globalisation on young people.Sydney: OXFAM.
Papadouris, N. (2012). Optimization as a reasoning strategy for dealing with socioscientific decision-making situations. Science Education, 96(4), 600-630. doi:10.1002/sce.21016
Payne, P. (1998). Children’s conceptions of nature. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 14(1), 19-26.
Phenice, L., & Griffore, R. (2003). Young children and the natural world. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 4(2), 167-178.
Pomery, E. A., Gibbons, F. X., Reis-Bergan, M., & Gerrard, M. (2009). From willingness to intention: Experience moderates the shift from reactive to reasoned behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(7), 894-908. doi:10.1177/0146167209335166
Powers, A. L. (2004). An evaluation of four place-based education program . Journal of Environmental Education, 35(4), 17-32.
Pruneau, D., Doyon, A., Langis, J., Vasseur, L., Ouellet, E., McLaughlin, E., . . . Martin, G. (2006). When teachers adopt environmental behaviors in the aim of protecting the climate. Journal of Environmental Education, 37(3), 3-12. doi:10.3200/JOEE.37.3.3-12
Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship—Teaching socioscientific issues. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Redman, E. (2013). Advancing educational pedagogy for sustainability: Developing and implementing programs to transform behaviors. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 8(1), 1-34.
Rickinson, M. (2001). Learners and learning in environmental education: A critical review of the evidence. Environmental Education Research, 7(3), 207-320.
Robelia, B., & Murphy, T. (2012). What do people know about key environmental issues? A review of environmental knowledge surveys. Environmental Education Research, 18(3), 299-321. doi:10.1080/13504622.2011.618288
Robins, N., & Roberts, S. (2006). Making sense of sustainable consumption. In T. Jackson (Ed.), The earthscan reader in sustainable consumption (pp. 39-49). London, UK: Earthscan.
Rogers, R. W. (1983). Cognitive and psychological processes in fear appeals and attitude change: A revised theory of protection motivation. . In J. T. Cacioppo, & R. E. Petty (Eds.), Social psychophysiology (pp. 153-176). New York: Guilford.
Ross, T. P. (2003). The reliability of cluster and switch scores for the controlled oral word association test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18(2), 153-164. doi:10.1016/S0887-6177(01)00192-5
Rudsberg, K., & Öhman, J. (2010). Pluralism in practice - experiences from Swedish evaluation, school development and research doi:10.1080/13504620903504073
Shepardson, D. P., Wee, B., Priddy, M., & Harbor, J. (2007). Students' mental models of the environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 327-348. doi:10.1002/tea.20161
Skamp, K., Boyes, E., & Stannistreet, M. (2009). Global warming responses at the primary secondary interface 1. students' beliefs and willingness to act. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 25, 15-30.
Solomon, J., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1994). STS education—International perspectives on reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
Szerényi, Z., Ágnes, Z., & Anna, S. (2011). Consumer behaviour and lifestyle patterns of Hungarian students with regard to environmental awareness. Society and Economy, 33(1), 89-109. doi:10.1556/SocEc.33.2011.1.8
Tonglet, M., Phillips, P. S., & Bates, M. P. (2004). Determining the drivers for householder pro-environmental behaviour: Waste minimisation compared to recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 42(1), 27-48. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2004.02.001
UNCED. (1992). Agenda 21. the earth summit: The united nations conference on environment and development, rio de janeiro.
UNEP. (2008). Planning for change: Guidelines for national programmes on sustainable consumption and production. Nairobi: UNEP.
UNESCO. (1999). Follow-up to rio: Education, public awareness and training, chapter 36 of agenda 21 (in greek). Athens: PEEKPE Publications.
UNESCO-UNEP. (2000). Is the future yours?: Research project on youth and sustainable consumption. Paris: UNESCO/UNEP.
Uskola, A., Maguregi, G., & María-Pilar, J. -. (2010). The use of criteria in argumentation and the construction of environmental concepts: A university case study. International Journal of Science Education, 32(17), 2311-2333. doi:10.1080/09500690903501736
Wagner, W. (1998). Social representations and beyond: Brute facts, symbolic coping and domesticated worlds.Culture and Psychology, 4(3), 297-329.
Full text PDF
Associations of Middle School Student Science Achievement and Attitudes about Science with Student-Reported Frequency of Teacher Lecture Demonstrations and Student-Centered Learning
Arthur Louis Odom, Clare Valerie Bell
pp. 87-97 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.232a | Article Number: ijese.2015.043
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 963 | Article Download: 563
The purpose of this study was to examine the association of middle school student science achievement and attitudes about science with student-reported frequency of teacher lecture demonstrations and student-centered learning. The student sample was composed of 602 seventh- and eighth-grade students enrolled in middle school science. Multiple regression was used to investigate the association of attitudes toward science, student-centered learning, and teacher demonstrations with science achievement. Both attitudes toward science and student-centered learning were positively associated with science achievement, and student-centered learning was positively associated with attitude toward science. Teacher demonstrations were found to have a negative association with student achievement, and no significant association with attitudes toward science. Findings of this study suggest that demonstrations provide insufficient opportunity for students to develop an understanding of the processes of science. Furthermore, observing teacher demonstrations may be valuable, but they are not a substitute for laboratory investigations by students.
Keywords: Science achievement, attitudes, teacher lecture demonstrations
Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
Baker, T. R, & White, S. H. (2003). The effects of GIS on students' attitudes, self-efficacy, and achievement in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Geography, 102(6), 243-254.
Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self‐efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 485-499.
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CTB/McGraw-Hill LLC. (2008). Missouri assessment program, technical report 2008. Monterey, CA: Author. Retrieved April 4, 2014, from http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/assess/tech/documents/2008MAPTechnicalReport.pdf
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan.
Ebel, R. L. (1954). Procedures for the analysis of classroom tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 14, 352–364.
George, R. (2000). Measuring change in students’ attitudes toward science over time: An application of latent variable growth modeling. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9, 213-225.
Harvard Lecture Demo Team. (2013). Natural sciences lecture demonstrations. Retrieved April 4, 2014, from http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k16940&pageid=icb.page80641
Kaplan, D. (2000). Secondary statistical modeling with the National Assessment of Adult Literacy implications for the design of the background questionnaire. Darby, PA: DIANE Publishing.
Koballa, T. R., & Glynn, S. M. (2007). Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning. In S. Abell & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 75-102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1989). A theory of instruction. NARST Monograph, No. 1.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
McKee, E., Williamson, V. M., & Ruebush, L. E. (2007). Effects of a demonstration laboratory on student learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(5), 395-400. doi:10.1007/s10956-007-9064-4
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
Missouri Department of Elementary & Secondary Education. (2008). Missouri grade-level expectations: Science. Retrieved April 4, 2014, from http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/curriculum/GLE/SCgle.html
Nathans, L. L., Oswald, F. L., & Nimon, K. (2012). Interpreting multiple linear regression: A guidebook of variable importance. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(9), 2.
National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2007). NSTA position statement: The integral role of laboratory investigations in science instruction. Retrieved April 4, 2014, from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/laboratory.aspx
Odom, A. L., Marszalek, J. M., Stoddard, E. R., & Wrobel J. M. (2011). Computers and traditional teaching practices: Factors influencing middle level students’ science achievement and attitudes about science. International Journal of Science Education, 33(17), 2351-2374.
Odom, A. L., Stoddard, E. R., & LaNasa, S. M. (2007). Teacher practices and middle-school science achievements. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1329-1346.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
Price, D. S., & Brooks, D. W. (2012). Extensiveness and perceptions of lecture demonstrations in the high school chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 420-427.
Ricco, R., Pierce, S. S., & Medinilla, C. (2010). Epistemic beliefs and achievement motivation in early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 30(2), 305-340.
Simpson, R. D., Koballa, T. R., Oliver, J. S., & Crawley, F. E. (1994). Research on the affective dimension of science learning. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 211-234). New York: Macmillan.
Turner, S. C. (2012). Changing images of the inclined plane: A case study of a revolution in American science education. Science & Education, 21, 245-270.
Full text PDF
Bilingual (German–English) Molecular Biology Courses in an Out-of-School Lab on a University Campus: Cognitive and Affective Evaluation
Annika Rodenhauser, Angelika Preisfeld
pp. 99-112 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.233a | Article Number: ijese.2015.044
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 1245 | Article Download: 536
Taking into account (German) students’ deficiencies in scientific literacy as well as reading competence and the ‘mother tongue + 2’ objective of the European commission, a bilingual course on molecular biology was developed. It combines CLIL fundamentals and practical experimentation in an out-of-school lab. Cognitive and affective evaluation of 490 students from upper secondary schools followed a quasi-experimental design, including two experimental (bilingual course and monolingual course) and one control group that did not take part in any of the courses. Cognitive achievement concerning molecular biology and self-concept were measured in a pre, post, follow-up test design. The study has shown that cognitive achievement concerning biological content knowledge of students having participated in a bilingual course (English and German) does not differ significantly from cognitive achievement of those that have participated in a monolingual course (German). Regarding biological self-concept, no significant differences between students having assessed themselves as being rather interested and talented in foreign languages and students having assessed themselves as being rather interested and talented in science could be observed. This indicates that bilingual courses in an out-of-school lab are equally beneficial for both of these groups.
Keywords: CLIL, experiments, out-of-school lab, biological self-concept, cognitive load, levels of processing, cognitive achievement.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., BouJaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., … (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. International Journal of Science Education, 88(3), 397-419. doi:10.1002/sce.10118
Albert, S. (1977). Temporal comparison theory. Psychological Review, 84(6), 485–503. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.6.485
Bonnet, A. (2004). Chemie im bilingualen Unterricht: Kompetenzerwerb durch Interaktion. [Chemistry in bilingual education]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
Brandt, A. (2005). Förderung von Motivation und Interesse durch ausserschulische Experimentierlabors [Promotion of motivation and interest through out-of-school labs].. Göttingen: Cuvillier.
Bredenbröker, W. (2000). Förderung der fremdsprachlichen Kompetenz durch bilingualen Unterricht [Promotion of foreign language competence through bilingual education]. Frankfurt a.M., Bern [etc.]: P. Lang.
Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 53–61.
Bryce, T., & Robertson, I. (1985). What can they do? A review of practical assessment in science. Studies in Science Education, 12, 1-24.
Budowle, B., Chakraborty, R., Giusti, A. M., Eisenberg, A. J., & Allen, R. C. (1991). Analysis of the VNTR locus D1S80 by the PCR followed by high-resolution PAGE. American Journal of Human Genetics, 48(1), 137-144.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293-332.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of Processing: A Framework for Memory Research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684.
Damerau, K. (2013). Molekulare und Zell-Biologie im Schülerlabor - Fachliche Optimierung und Evaluation der Wirksamkeit im BeLL Bio (Bergisches Lehr-Lern-Labor Biologie). [Molecular and cell biology in an out-of-school lab]. Wuppertal: Universitätsbibliothek Wuppertal. Retrieved from http://elpub.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/servlets/DerivateServlet/Derivate-3530/dc1231.pdf
Dickhäuser, O. (2006). Fähigkeitsselbstkonzepte: Entstehung, Auswirkung, Förderung.[Self-concepts: formation, impact, promotion]. Zeitschrift für pädagogische Psychologie, 20(1-2), 5-8.
Euler, M. (2004). The role of experiments in the teaching and learning of physics. In E. F. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Research on physics education (pp. 175–221). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Euler, M. (2009). Schülerlabore in Deutschland: Zum Mehrwert authentischer Lernorte in Forschung und Entwicklung [Out-of-school labs in Germany: The added value of authentic learning environments in research and development]. Praxis der Naturwissenschaften - Physik in der Schule, 58(4), 5–9.
European Commission (Ed.). (2004). Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity: An action plan 2004-06. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/doc/official/keydoc/actlang/act_lang_en.pdf
European Commission. (2012). FAQs on multilingualism and language learning. Brussels. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-703_en.pdf
Glowinski, I. (2007). Schülerlabore im Themenbereich Molekularbiologie als Interesse fördernde Lernumgebungen [Student labs in the subject area of molecular biology as learning environments promoting interest]. Dissertation: Kiel.
Glowinski, I., & Bayrhuber, H. (2011). Student Labs on a University Campus as a Type of Out-of-School Learning Environment: Assessing the Potential to Promote Students’ Interest in Science. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 6(4), 371–392.
Großschedl, J., & Harms, U. (2008): Similarity judgments test: Ein Verfahren Zur Erfassung von Wissens strukturen. Erkenntnisweg Biologiedidaktik, 7, 85–100.
Haupt, O. J., Domjahn, J.: Martin, U., Skiebe-Corrette, P., Vorst, S., Zehren, W., & Hempelmann, R. (2013). Schülerlabor - Begriffsschärfung und Kategorisierung [Out-of-school lab: sharpening of the term and categorisation]. MNU, 66(6), 324–330.
Häußler, P., Bünder, W., Duit, R., Gräber, W., & Mayer, J. (Eds.) (1998). Naturwissenschaftsdidaktische Forschung – Perspektiven für die Unterrichtspraxis [Research in Science Education – Perspectives for Teaching Practice]. Kiel: IPN.
Heine, L. (2010). Problem solving in a foreign language: [a study in content and language integrated learning]. Studies on language acquisition: Vol. 41. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science. Towards a personalized approach (1. publ). Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open Univ. Press.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science education, 88(1), 28‐54. doi:10.1002/sce.10106
Kasai, K., Nakamura, Y., & White, R. (1990). Amplification of a Variable Number of Tandem Repeats (VNTR) Locus (pMCT118) by the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and Its Application to Forensic Science. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 35(5), 1196–1200.
Klieme, E., Artelt, C., Hartig, J., Jude, N., Köller, O., Prenzel, M., … (Eds.). (2010). PISA 2009: Bilanz nach einem Jahrzehnt. Münster: Waxmann.
Koch, A., & Bünder, W. (2006). Fachbezogener Wissenserwerb im bilingualen naturwissenschaftlichen Anfangsunterricht [Subject-related knowledge acquisition in bilingual science beginners' classes]. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 12, 67–76.
Leibold, K. (1997). Modelle, Modellbildung und Modelleinsatz [Models, modelling and the use of models]. Dissertation. Bayreuth.
Linn, M. C. (1990). Summary: Establishing a science and engineering of science education. In M. Gardner (Ed.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 323–341). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory. Historical perspectives and contexts for contemporary teaching. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education. Part One (pp. 249–262). Dordrecht, Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Markowitz, D. G. (2004). Evaluation of the Long-Term Impact of a University High School Summer Science Program on Students’ Interest and Perceived Abilities in Science. Journal of science education and technology, 13(3), 395–408.
Marsh, H. W. (1986). Verbal and Math Self-Concepts: An Internal/External Frame of Reference Model. American Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 129–149. doi:10.3102/00028312023001129
Müller-Hartmann, A., & Schocker-von Ditfurth, M. (2004). Introduction to English language teaching (1st ed.). Stuttgart [u.a.]: Klett.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1/2), 1-8.
Resnick, L. B., & Hall, M. W. (1998). Learning organizations for sustainable education reform. DAEDALUS, 127(4), 89–118.
Rost, J. (2004). Lehrbuch Testtheorie - Testkonstruktion [Textbook on test theory and test construction]. Bern u.a: Huber
Scharfenberg, F.-J. (2005). Experimenteller Biologieunterricht zu Aspekten der Gentechnik im Lernort Labor: empirische Untersuchung zu Akzeptanz, Wissenserwerb und Interesse [Experimental biology lessons regarding aspects of gene technology in the learning laboratory]. Dissertation. Bayreuth.
Scharfenberg, F.-J., Bogner, F. X., & Klautke, S. (2006). The Suitability of External Control-Groups for Empirical Control Purposes: a Cautionary Story in Science Education Research. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11(1), 22–36.
Scheersoi, A. (2008). Lernmotivation im bilingualen Biologieunterricht [Learning motivation in bilingual biology classes]. In A. Scheersoi & H. P. Klein (Eds.), Frankfurter Beiträge zur biologischen Bildung: Vol. 6. Bilingualer Biologieunterricht. [Didaktik der Biowissenschaften] (pp. 69-88). Aachen: Shaker.
Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). CLIL learning: Achievement levels and affective factors. Language and Education, 21(4), 328–341.
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-Concept: Validation of Construct Interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407.
Sunal, D. W., Sunal, C. S., Sundberg, C., & Wright, E. (2008). The Importance of Laboratory Work and Technology in Science Teaching. In D. W. Sunal, E. Wright, & C. Sundberg (Eds.), The impact of the laboratory and technology on learning and teaching science K-16 (pp. 1–28). Charlotte, N.C: IAP/Information Age Pub.
Thürmann, E. (2005). Eine eigenständige Methodik für den bilingualen Sachfachunterricht? [An independent methodology for bilingual education?] In G. Bach & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Bilingualer Unterricht. Grundlagen, Methoden, Praxis, Perspektiven (pp. 71–89). Lang, Peter Frankfurt.
Full text PDF
Effect of Scientific Argumentation on the Development of Scientific Process Skills in the Context of Teaching Chemistry
Nejla Gultepe, Ziya Kilic
pp. 111-132 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.234a | Article Number: ijese.2015.045
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 1638 | Article Download: 805
This study was conducted in order to determine the differences in integrated scientific process skills (designing experiments, forming data tables, drawing graphs, graph interpretation, determining the variables and hypothesizing, changing and controlling variables) of students (n = 17) who were taught with an approach based on scientific argumentation and of students (n = 17) who were taught with a traditional teaching approach in Grade 11 chemistry. The study was conducted at a high school in Çankırı, Turkey. A multiformat Scientific Process Skills Scale was administered to both groups as a pre- and posttest; it contained 29 items in 5 modules and consisted of limited and unlimited open-ended, multiple-choice, and paper-pencil performance assessment questions. Repeated t-test and analysis of variance (MANCOVA) were applied to analyze the data. It was found that the integrated scientific process skills of students in both groups improved significantly except skills of “forming a data table” and “graphic interpretation skills” for group. MANCOVA results revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between the groups on the combination of 5 dependent variables. The teaching approach had a significant effect on integrated scientific process skills except for the designing experiments skills. In sum, the scientific argumentation-based teaching approach was more effective in acquiring science process skills than the traditional teaching approach.
Keywords: Scientific argumentation, scientific process skills, chemistry education, secondary education.
Atasoy, B., Akkuş, H., & Kadayıfçı, H. (2009). The effect of a conceptual change approach on understanding of students; chemical equilibrium concepts. Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(3)(267-282).
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: Authors.
Arcidiacona, F., & Kohler, A. (2010). Elements of design for studying argumentation: The case of two on-going research lines. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 1, 65-77.
Aydeniz, M., Pabucu, A., Çetin, P. S., & Kaya, E. (2012). Argumentation and students’ conceptual understanding of properties and behaviors of gases. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 1303-1324.
Bozdoğan, A., Taşdemir, A., & Demirbaş, M. (2006). Fen bilgisi öğretiminde işbirlikli öğrenme yönteminin öğrencilerin bilimsel süreç becerilerini geliştirmeye yönelik etkisi [The impact of cooparative learning to improve students’ scientific process skills in the teaching of science]. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(11), 23–26.
Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92(3), 473-498.
Carr, M. (1999). Being a learner: Five learning dispositions for early childhood. Early Childhood Practice, 1(1), 81–99.
Chang, C., & Weng, Y. (2000). Exploring interrelationship between problem-solving ability and science process skills of tenth-grade earth science students in Taiwan. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 8(1), 35–56.
Colvill, M., & Pattie, I. (2003). Science skills-the building blocks for scientific literacy. Investigating, 19(1), 21-23.
Coştu, B., & Ünal, S. (2004). The use of worksheets in teaching Le Chatelier’s principle. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(1).
Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendrick, S., & Hickey, D. (2008). Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30(6), 837-861.
Celik, A. Y. & Kılıç, Z. (2014). The impact of argumentation on high school chemistry students' conceptual understanding, attitude towards chemistry and argumentativeness. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 6(1).
Çakmakçı, G., & Leach, J. (2005, August-September). Turkish secondary and undergraduate students’ understanding of the effect of temperature on reaction rates. Paper presented at the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) Conference, Barcelona, Spain.
Demircioğlu, G., & Yadigaroğlu, M. (2011). The effect of laboratory method on high school students’ understanding of the reaction rate. Western Anatolia Jornal of Educational Science. Dokuz Eylül Universty Instute, İzmir, Turkey ISSN 1308-8971.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classroom. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
Ebenezer, J. V., & Haggerty, S. M. (1999). Becoming a secondary school science teacher. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Erduran, S., Ardaç, D., & Yakmacı-Güzel, B. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Case study of pre-service secondary science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(2), 1-14.
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88, 915–933.
Ergül, R., Şimşekli, Y., Çalış, S., Özdilek, Z., Göçmençelebi, Ş., & Şanlı, M. (2011). The effects of inquıry-based science teaching on elementary school students’ science process skills and science attitudes. Bulgarian Journal of Science and Education Policy (BJSEP), 5(1), 71-81.
Flores, G. S. (2000). Teaching and assessing science process skills in physics: The “Bubbles” task. Science Activities, 37(1), 31–37.
Fusco, D., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2001). Re-presenting student achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 337–354.
Gültepe, N. (2010). Bilimsel tartışma odaklı öğretimin lise öğrencilerinin bilimsel süreç ve eleştirel düşünme becerilerinin geliştirilmesine etkisi [The impact of argumentation based instruction on improvement of high school students’ scientific process skill and critical thinking ability] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Gültepe, N., & Kılıç, Z. (2013) Argumentation and Conceptual Understanding of High School Student on Solubility Equilibrium and Acids and Bases. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 10(4).
Harlen, W. (1999). Purposes and procedures for assessing science process skills. Assessment in Education, 6(1), 129–144.
Karamustafaoğlu, S. (2011). Improving the science process skills ability of science student teachers using I diagrams. Eurasian J. Phys. Chem. Educ, 3(1), 26–38.
Kaya, E. (2013). Argumentation practices in classroom: Pre-service teachers’ conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Science Education, 35(7), 1139-1158.
Kaya, E., Erduran, S., & Çetin, P. S. (2012). Discourse, argumentation, and science lessons: Match or mismatch between students’ perceptions and understanding? Mevlana International Journal of Education, 2(3), 1-32.
Keys, C. W. (1994). The development of scientific reasoning skills in conjunction with collaborative writing assignments: An interpretive study of six ninth-grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1003–1022.
Kılıç, B. G., Yıldırım, E., & Metin, D. (2010). Ön ve son laboratuar tartışması eklenmiş yönlendirilmiş araştırmaların bilimsel süreç becerilerinin geliştirilmesine etkisi [Effect of guided-inquiry with pre- and post- laboratory discussion on development of science process skills]. 9. Ulusal Sınıf Öğretmenliği Eğitimi Sempozyumu. Elazığ. 310–313.
Kocakülah, A., & Savaş, E. (2013). Effect of the Science Process Skills Laboratory Approach Supported with Peer-Instruction on Some of Science Process Skills of Pre-service Teachers. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(2), 46-77
Koray, Ö., Köksal, Mustafa S., Özdemir, M. & Presley, Arzu İ. (2007). The effect of creative and critical thinking based laboratory applications on academic achievement and science process skills. Elementary Education Online, 6(3), 377–389.
Laugksch, R. C., & Spargo, P. E. (1996). Development of a pool of scientific literacy test-items based on selected AAAS literacy goals. Science Education, 80(2), 121–143.
Lazarou, D. (2009, August-September). Learning to TAP: An effort to scaffold students’ argumentation in science. Paper presented at the biennial conference of the European Science Education Research Association, İstanbul, Turkey.
Lee, O., & Fradd, S. H. (1996). Literacy skills in science performance among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Science Education, 80(6), 651–671.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
MEB (2008). Ortaöğretim 10. Sınıf Kimya Dersi Öğretim Programı [Secondary education 10 grade chemistry curriculum]. Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. Retrieved from http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/program2.aspx
Nussbaum, E. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychological, 28, 384–395.
Osborne, J. (2002). Science without literacy: A ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 203–215.
Osborne, J., Erduran S., & Simon, S. (2004a). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 41(10), 994–1020.
Osborne, J., Erduran S., & Simon, S. (2004b). Ideas, evidence and argument in science.(Inservice Training Pack). London, UK: Nuffield Foundation.
Ostlund, K. (1998). What research says about science process skills: How can teaching science process skills improve student performance in reading, language arts, and mathematics? Electronic Journal of Science Education, 2(4).
Önal, İ. (2005). İlköğretim fen bilgisi öğretiminde performans dayanaklı durum belirleme uygulaması üzerine bir çalışma [A study on the application of performance based due diligence in the teaching of elementary school science] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Önal, İ. (2008). Effects of constructivist instruction on the achievement, attitude, science process skills and retention in science teaching methods II course (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Özdemir, S. M. (2005). Üniversite öğrencilerinin eleştirel düşünme becerilerinin çeşitli etkenler açısından değerlendirilmesi [The evaluation of college students’ critical thinking in terms of various factors]. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(3), 297–316.
Özmen, H., Demircioğlu, G., Burhan, Y., Naseriazar, A., & Demircioğlu, H. (2012). Asia–Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 13(1).
Padilla, M. J. (1990). The science process skills. Research Matters to the Science Teacher, March 1 (No. 9004). Retrieved from http://www.narst.org/publications/research/skill.cfm
Pekmez, E. Ş. (2010). Using analogies to prevent misconceptions about chemical equilibrium. Asia –Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11 (2).
Rezba, R. J., Sprague, C., Fiel, R. L., Funk, H. J., Okey, J. R., & Jaus, H. H. (1995). Learning and assessing science process skills. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
Rothon, C., Stansfeld, S., Mathews, C., Kleinhans, A., Clark, C., Lund, C., & Flisher, A. (2011). Reliability of self report questionnaires for epidemiological investigations of adolescent mental health in Cape Town, South Africa. Journal of Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 23(2), 119–128.
Rothstein, J., & Echternach, J. (1993). Primer on measurement: An ıntroductory guide to measurement ıssues. Alexandria, VA: American Physical Therapy Association.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2011). A control of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups. Research in Science Education, 41(1), 63-97.
Sampson, V., & Gleim, L. (2009). Argument-driven inquiry to promote the understanding of important concepts and practices in biology. The American Biology Teacher, 71(8), 465–472.
Schafersman, S. D. (1991). An introduction to critical thinking. Retrieved from http://smartcollegeplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Critical-Thinking.pdf.
Scherz, Z., Bialer, L., & Eylon, B. S. (2008). Learning about teachers’ accomplishment in ‘learning skills for science’ practice: The use of portfolios in an evidence-based continuous professional development programme. International Journal of Science Education, 30(5), 643–667.
Seferoğlu, S. S., & Akbıyık, C. (2006). Eleştirel düşünme ve öğretimi [Critical thinking and learning]. H.Ü. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30, 193–200.
Serin, G. (2009). The effect of problem based learning instruction on 7th grade students’ science achievement, attitude toward science and scientific process skills (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260.
Skoumois, M. (2009). The effect of sociocognitive conflict on students’ dialogic argumentation about floating and sinking. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(4), 381-399.
Tan, M., & Temiz, B. K. (2003). Fen öğretiminde bilimsel süreç becerilerinin yeri ve önemi [The location and the importance of scientific process skills in teaching science]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1, 89–101.
Temiz, B. K. (2007). Fizik öğretiminde öğrencilerin bilimsel süreç becerilerinin ölçülmesi [The assessment of students’ scientific process skills in teaching physics] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Turpin, T., & Cage, B. N. (2004). The effects of an integrated activity-based science curriculum on student achievement, science process skills and science attitudes. Electronic Journal of Literacy Through Science, 3, 1–15.
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: The role of teachers’ practical knowledge. Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 137–158.
von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2004, April). Argumentation and cognitive processes in science education. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, Canada, April. Available from http://www.narst.org/annualconference/2009_final_program.pdf.
von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131.
Yerrick, R. K. (2000). Lower track science students’ argumentation and open inquiry instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 807–38.
Zachos, P., Hick, T. L., Doane W.illiam E. J., & Sargent, C. (2000). Setting theoretical and empirical foundations for assessing scientific inquiry and discovery in educational programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 938–962.
Full text PDF
Performing Science Teaching Chemistry, Physics and Biology through Drama
pp. 133-134 | DOI: 10.12973/ijese.2015.235a | Article Number: ijese.2015.046
Published Online: January 10, 2015
Article Views: 972 | Article Download: 567
A review of the book "Performing Science Teaching Chemistry, Physics and Biology through Drama" by Ian Abrahams and Martin Braund, ISBN 9781441184528.
Keywords: Book Review
Full text PDF