Archives
Current issue
About
About us
Aims and Scope
Abstracting and Indexing
Editorial Office
Open Access Policy
Publication Ethics
Journal History
Publisher
Follow us: Twitter
Contact
For Authors
Editorial Policy
Peer Review Policy
Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
Copyright & Licencing
Publication Fees
Fee Waiver Policy for Doctoral Students
EJMSTE Language Editing Service
More
Statistics
Special Issues
Special Issue Announcements
Published Special Issues
RESEARCH PAPER
Assessment of Scientific Reasoning: Development and Validation of Scientific Reasoning Assessment Tool
1
Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Addis Ababa University, P. O. Box 1176, Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA
2
Department of Natural Sciences, Hossana College of Teachers Education, P.O. Box 94, Hossana, ETHIOPIA
3
Department of Physics, University of Oslo, NORWAY
Publication date: 2020-12-31
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2020;16(12):em1927
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Studies indicate that the failure of science education to meet the needs of the 21st century is to
some extent due to the inability to incorporate scientific reasoning and higher order assessments
in the school instruction. Though the outcomes of education seek higher-order thinking abilities
there is a lack of high ability assessments in low-income nations. This study aimed to develop and
validate Scientific Reasoning Progress Tool (SRPT) that measures students’ reasoning abilities. In
this study, 40 items were developed, pilot-tested, and administered to 242 students from grade
eight. The SRPT was a valid and reliable instrument. It was also found that the reasoning ability of
grade 8 students’ is limited to the lower levels of reasoning. It is recommended that further study
is essential through the adoption of the framework and the design to develop additional
instruments and investigation of the progression of students’ scientific reasoning ability.
REFERENCES (66)
1.
Alemu, M., Kind, P. Tadesse, M., Atnafu, M., & Michael, K. (2017). Challenges of science teacher education in lowIncome nations - The case of Ethiopia. ESERA-17 conference proceedings, Dublin, Ireland.
2.
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of educational psychology, 103(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1037/a00210....
3.
Anderman, E. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Gray, D. L. (2012). The challenges of teaching and learning about science in the twenty-first century: Exploring the abilities and constraints of adolescent learners. StudieS in Science education, 48(1), 89-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/030572....
4.
Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational researcher, 36(5), 258-267. https://doi.org/10.3102/001318....
5.
Bao, L., Cai, T., Koenig, K., Fang, K., Han, J., Wang, J., . . . Luo, Y. (2009). Learning and scientific reasoning. Science, 323(5914), 586-587. https://doi.org/10.1126/scienc....
6.
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying The Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Science (2nd Ed). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2014). Rasch Analysis in the Human Sciences. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94....
8.
Butler, L. P., & Markman, E. M. (2012). Finding the cause: Verbal framing helps children extract causal evidence embedded in a complex scene. Journal of Cognition and Development, 13(1), 38-66. https://doi.org/10.1080/152483....
9.
Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28(3), 235-251. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326....
10.
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.10....
11.
Corcoran, T. B., Mosher, F. A., Rogat, A. D. (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/cp....
12.
Davies, M. (2013). Critical thinking and the disciplines reconsidered. Higher Education Research & Development, 32(4), 529-544. https://doi.org/10.1080/072943....
13.
DeBoer, G. E. (2011). The globalization of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 567-591. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
14.
Dole, S., Bloom, L., & Kowalske, K. (2016). Transforming pedagogy: Changing perspectives from teacher-centered to learner-centered. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5....
15.
Duschl, R. A., & Grandy, R. E. (2012). Demarcation in science education: Toward an enhanced view of scientific method. In Epistemology and Science Education: Understanding the Evolution vs. Intelligent Design Controversy. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/978020....
16.
Edmondson, K. M., & Novak, J. D. (1993). The interplay of scientific epistemological views, learning strategies, and attitudes of college students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(6), 547-559. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.36....
17.
Embretson S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Maheah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
18.
Erlina, N., Susantini, E., Wasis, W., Wicaksono, I., & Pandiangan, P. (2018). The Effectiveness of evidence-based reasoning in inquiry-based physics teaching to increase students’ scientific reasoning. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(6), 972-985. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/....
19.
Ford, M. J.,& Wargo, B. M. (2012). Dialogic framing of scientific content for conceptual and epistemic understanding. Science Education, 96, 369-391. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20....
20.
Gelman, S. A. (2003). Oxford series in cognitive development. The essential child: Origins of essentialism in everyday thought. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof....
21.
Gelman, S. A., & Noles, N. S. (2011). Domains and naïve theories. WIREs Cognitive Science, 2(5), 490-502. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.12....
22.
Gott, R., Duggan, S., & Roberts, R. (2008). Concepts of evidence. School of education: University of Durham. Retrieved from http://www.dur.ac.uk/rosalyn.r....
23.
Greaney, V., & Kellaghan, T. (2007). Assessing national achievement levels in education: The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-....
24.
Hacking, I. (2012). ‘Language, truth and reason’30 years later. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 43(4), 599-609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shps....
25.
Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied measurement in education, 15(3), 309-333. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324....
26.
Han, J. (2013). Scientific reasoning: Research, development, and assessment. (Electronic Thesis or Dissertation). The Ohio State University. Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/.
27.
Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015). The knowledge capital of nations: Education and the economics of growth: MIT press. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4....
28.
Hewitt, P. G. (2006). Conceptual physics. 10th ed. San Francisco: Pearson Addison Wesley.
29.
Joshi, R. D., & Verspoor, A. (2013). Secondary Education in Ethiopia: Supporting Growth and Transformation. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-....
30.
Kambeyo, L. (2017). Scientific Reasoning Skills: A Theoretical Background on Science Education. NERA Journal, 14, 40-64. Retrieved from http://doktori.bibl.u/.
31.
Kind, P. (2013). Establishing A ssessment S cales U sing a N ovel D isciplinary R ationale for S cientific R easoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(5), 530-560. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21....
32.
Kind, P., & Osborne, J. (2017). Styles of scientific reasoning: A cultural rationale for science education? Science Education, 101(1), 8-31. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21....
33.
Kuhn, D. (2002). What is scientific thinking, and how does it develop? The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (p. 497-523). Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/978047....
34.
Lamb, S., Jackson, J., & Rumberger, R. (2015). ISCY technical paper: Measuring 21st century skills in ISCY. Victoria University, Centre for International Research on Education Systems [report] https://doi.org/10.4226/80/57f....
35.
Lawson, A. E. (2004). The nature and development of scientific reasoning: A synthetic view. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 307-338. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/arti....
36.
Lederman, N. G. (2006). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction. In L. B. Flick, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science. Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 301-318). Dordrecht: Springer.
37.
Lederman, N. G., Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521. https://doi.org/410.1002/tea.1....
38.
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006). Cultivating Model-Based Reasoning in Science Education. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of: The learning sciences (p. 371-387). Cambridge University Press.
39.
Linacre, J. (2016). A user's guide to Winsteps Ministep Rasch-model computer programs 2016. Chicago: Winsteps. com.
40.
Linacre, J. M. (2012). Winsteps® Rasch measurement computer program user’s guide. Beaverton.
41.
Martin, D., & Jamieson-Proctor, R. (2019). Development and validation of a survey instrument for measuring pre-service teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/174372....
42.
Martin, M., Mullis, I., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2016). TIMSS 2015 International Results in Science. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. In. Retrieved from http://timss2015.org/wp-conten....
43.
McNeill, K. L., Krajcik, J. S. (2011). Supporting Grade 5-8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence, and reasoning framework for talk and writing. New York, NY: Pearson.
44.
Meyer, X., & Crawford, B. A. (2011). Teaching science as a cultural way of knowing: Merging authentic inquiry, nature of science, and multicultural strategies. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(3), 525-547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422....
45.
Nagaoka, J., Farrington, C. A., Ehrlich, S. B., & Heath, R. D. (2015). Foundations for Young Adult Success: A Developmental Framework. Concept Paper for Research and Practice. University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research.
46.
Niaz, M. (2017). Evolving nature of objectivity in the history of science and its implications for science education (Vol. 46). New York, NY: Springer.
47.
OECD (2016), Education at a Glance 2016: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.187/eag-201....
48.
Opitz, A., Heene, M., & Fischer, F. (2017). Measuring scientific reasoning-a review of test instruments. Educational Research and Evaluation, 23(3-4), 78-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/138036....
49.
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463-466. https://doi.org/10.1126/scienc....
50.
Osborne, J. (2013). The 21st century challenge for science education: Assessing scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 265-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.....
51.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
52.
Osborne, J., Rafanelli, S., & Kind, P. (2018). Toward a more coherent model for science education than the crosscutting concepts of the next generation science standards: The affordances of styles of reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 962-981. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21....
53.
Özdemir, G. (2007). The effects of the nature of science beliefs on science teaching and learning. Uludag University, Journal of the Faculty of Education, 20(2), 355-372. http://hdl.handle.net/11452/11....
54.
Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Resultsand implications. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 4, 207-230. https://doi.org/10.3102/107699....
55.
Sabanathan, S., Wills, B., & Gladstone, M. (2015). Child development assessment tools in low-income and middle-income countries: how can we use them more appropriately?. Archives of disease in childhood, 100(5), 482-488. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdi....
56.
Senocak, E. (2009). Development of an instrument for assessing undergraduate science students’ perceptions: The problem-based learning environment inventory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(6), 560-569. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10956....
57.
Teshome, N. B. (2017). Classroom Participation and Development of Student Attitudes: A Study of Active Learning Practices in Ethiopian Primary Education. International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE), 4(3), 67-68. https://doi.org/10.20431/2349-....
58.
Tiruneh, D.T., De Cock, M., Weldeslassie, A.G., Elen. J., & Janssen, R. (2017). Measuring critical thinking in physics: Development and validation of a critical thinking test in electricity and magnetism. Int J of Sci and Math Educ, 15(4), 663-682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
59.
Verspoor, A. M. (2008). At the crossroads: choices for secondary education in Sub-Saharan Africa: World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 6537, Juni.
60.
Wilson, M. (2004). Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach: New York, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/978141....
61.
Wright, B. D., & Stone, M. H. (1979). Best Test Design: Rasch Measurement. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.
62.
Wright, B., & Tennant, A. (1996). Sample size again. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 9(4), 468.
63.
Zeineddin, A., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2010). Scientific reasoning and epistemological commitments: Coordination of theory and evidence among college science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1064-1093. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20....
64.
Zhou, S., Han, J., Koenig, K., Raplinger, A., Pi, Y., Li, D., Xiao, H., Fu, Z., & Bao, L. (2016). Assessment of Scientific Reasoning: the Effects of Task Context, Data, and Design on Student Reasoning in Control of Variables. Thinking skills and creativity, 19, 175-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.....
65.
Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20(1), 99-149. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1....
66.
Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27(2), 172-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2....
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1305-8223 |
| ISSN: | 1305-8215 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
