Journal of Science Education (과학교육연구지)

Science Education Research Institute Kyungpook National University (경북대학교 과학교육연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Developing and Applying the Questionnaire to Measure High School Students' Unskeptical Attitude in Science Inquiry

과학탐구 상황에서 고등학생들의 반회의주의적 태도 측정도구 개발 및 적용

  • Received : 2018.09.27
  • Accepted : 2018.11.29
  • Published : 2018.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to develop a questionnaire that examines unskeptical attitudes in scientific inquiry context. The questionnaire items were developed through literature research, expert review, and statistical analyses for validity and the differences in scores were identified by gender and tracks. A total of 363 high school students participated in the study. To explore the validity evidence of items, the Rasch analysis and the reliability of internal consistency were performed, and the two-way ANOVA was performed to compare the scores of the unskeptical attitudes between gender and academic track. Self-reporting and Likert-scaling 23 items were developed to measure unskeptical attitudes in scientific inquiry context. The items were developed in the sub-domain of scientific inquiry: 'questioning and hypothesis generating,' 'experiment designing,' and 'explaining and interpreting.' Second, the validity and reliability of the unskeptical were identified in a rigorous method. The validity of items were identified by multi-dimensional partial score model analysis through the Rasch model, and all 23 items were found to be fit to model. Various reliability evidences were also found to be appropriate. It was found that there were no significant differences of unskeptical attitude score between the gender and academic track except one comparison. The developed questionnaire could be used to check an unskeptical attitude in the course of scientific inquiry and to compare the effects of scientific inquiry classes.

이 연구는 과학탐구 상황에서 반회의주의적 태도를 조사하는 문항을 개발하는 것이 목적이다. 문헌 연구, 전문가 검토, 통계적 타당도 검증을 거쳐 문항을 개발하고, 성별, 계열별로 점수 차이를 확인하였다. 이 연구를 위하여 363명의 고등학생들이 참여하였다. 문항 타당도 확인을 위하여 라쉬 분석, 내적 일관성 신뢰도 확인 등을 수행하였고, 성별과 계열별 반회의주의적 태도의 점수 비교를 위하여 이원분산분석을 확인하였다. 연구 결과 과학탐구상황에서 반회의주의 태도를 측정할 수 있는 23개 리커트 형태의 자기보고형 검사도구를 개발하였다. 반회의주의적 태도 측정을 위하여 과학탐구 상황을 크게 '문제 인식과 가설 생성', '실험 설계', '관찰', '설명과 해석'으로 구분하여 각 구인별로 측정할 수 있는 다수의 문항을 개발하였다. 둘째, 과학탐구상황에서 반회의주의 태도 측정 문항의 타당도와 신뢰도를 엄격한 방법을 통해 확인하였다. 라쉬 분석을 통해 다차원 부분점수모델의 분석의 적합성을 확인하였으며, 라쉬 분석을 통해 문항 적합도를 확인한 결과 23개 문항 모두 적합으로 나타났다. 다양한 신뢰도 지수도 적합한 것으로 나타났다. 남학생과 여학생, 문과계열과 이과계열별로 구분하여 반회의주의적 태도를 비교한 결과 유의미한 차이를 나타낸 비교는 실험설계에서 계열별 차이를 제외하고 없는 것으로 확인되었다. 개발된 문항들을 활용하여 과학탐구 과정에서 반회의주의적 태도를 점검하고, 과학탐구 수업의 효과를 비교하는데 활용될 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275-314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
  2. Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science Education for Everyday Life: Evidence-based Practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  3. Angner, E. (2006). Economists as experts: Overconfidence in theory and practice. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501780600566271
  4. Baars, M., Vink, S., van Gog, T., de Bruin, A., & Paas, F. (2014). Effects of training self-assessment and using assessment standards on retrospective and prospective monitoring of problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 33, 92-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.04.004
  5. Beyer, B. K. (1995). Critical thinking. Fastback 385. Phi Delta Kappa, 408 N. Union, PO Box 789, Bloomington, IN 47402-0789.
  6. Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2014). Rasch analysis in the human sciences. New York, NY: Springer.
  7. Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., & Unger, C. (1989). 'An experiment is when you try it and see if it works': a study of grade 7 students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 514-529. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069890110504
  8. Chi, M. T. (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts' characteristics. In K. A. Ericson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 21-30). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10001
  10. DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  11. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007005
  12. Fauth, B., Decristan, J., Rieser, S., Klieme, E., & Buttner, G. (2014). Student ratings of teaching quality in primary school: Dimensions and prediction of student outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 29, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.07.001
  13. Gilovich, T. (2008). How we know what isn't so. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
  14. Glaser, E. M. (1941). An experiment in the development of critical thinking (No. 843). New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
  15. Heyman, G. D., Fu, G., & Lee, K. (2007). Evaluating claims people make about themselves: The development of skepticism. Child Development, 78(2), 367-375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01003.x
  16. Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88-140. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067001088
  17. Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  18. Korsgaard, C. M. (1986). Skepticism about practical reason. The Journal of Philosophy, 83(1), 5-25. https://doi.org/10.2307/2026464
  19. Kostons, D., Van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2012). Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cognitive approach to improving self-regulated learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.004
  20. Lipman, M. (1987). Critical thinking: What can it be? Analytic Teaching, 8(1), 5-12.
  21. Macfarlane, B., & Cheng, M. (2008). Communism, universalism and disinterestedness: Reexamining contemporary support among academics for Merton's scientific norms. Journal of Academic Ethics, 6(1), 67-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-008-9055-y
  22. McPeck, J. E. (1981) Critical Thinking and Education. Oxford, UK: Martin Robertson.
  23. Menkhoff, L., Schmeling, M., & Schmidt, U. (2013). Overconfidence, experience, and professionalism: An experimental study. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 86, 92-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2012.12.022
  24. Messick, S. (1995). Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 14(4), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.1995.tb00881.x
  25. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2015). 2015 revised Science National Curriculum. Sejong: Author.
  26. Neumann, I., Neumann, K., & Nehm, R. (2011). Evaluating instrument quality in science education: Rasch-based analyses of a nature of science test. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1373-1405. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.511297
  27. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
  28. Pajares, F., & Graham, L. (1999). Self-efficacy, motivation constructs, and mathematics performance of entering middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(2), 124-139. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0991
  29. Pallier, G. (2003). Gender differences in the self-assessment of accuracy on cognitive tasks. Sex Roles, 48(5), 265-276. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022877405718
  30. Panadero, E., Tapia, J. A., & Huertas, J. A. (2012). Rubrics and self-assessment scripts effects on self-regulation, learning and self-efficacy in secondary education. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 806-813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.04.007
  31. Parascandola, M. (2004). Skepticism, statistical methods, and the cigarette: A historical analysis of a methodological debate. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 47(2), 244-261. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2004.0032
  32. Popkin, R. H. (1967). "Skepticism". In P. Edwards (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (7, pp. 449-461) New York, NY: The Macmillan Company & The Free Press.
  33. Quirk, P. J. (2010). The trouble with experts. Critical Review, 22(4), 449-465. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2010.541699
  34. Sloman, S., Barbey, A. K., & Hotaling, J. M. (2009). A causal model theory of the meaning of cause, enable, and prevent. Cognitive Science, 33(1), 21-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2008.01002.x
  35. Stankov, L. & Lee, J. (2008). Confidence and cognitive test performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 961. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012546
  36. Trout, J. D. (2002). Scientific explanation and the sense of understanding. Philosophy of Science, 69(2), 212-233. https://doi.org/10.1086/341050
  37. Wright, B. D. & Linacre, J. M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square-fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(3), 370.