Studierende des Lehramts und anderer bildungsbezogener Studiengänge haben häufig fragwürdige oder falsche Überzeugungen zu Bildungsthemen, die zwar subjektiv plausibel erscheinen, jedoch nicht dem Stand der Forschung entsprechen. Diese bildungsbiografisch erworbenen und teilweise fest verwurzelten Fehlkonzepte können die Auseinandersetzung mit wissenschaftlichem Wissen im Studium behindern. Der vorliegende Artikel berichtet Ergebnisse zur ersten Überprüfung eines Fragebogens, der fragwürdige Überzeugungen zu vier exemplarischen Bildungsthemen erfasst (Effekte der Klassengröße, Klassenwiederholung, direkten Instruktion und der Feminisierung des Elementar-/ Primarbereichs). Hierfür wurden Studierende verschiedener Studiengänge befragt (N = 217). Ergebnisse von Faktorenanalysen fielen konform mit der themenbezogenen Struktur des Fragebogens aus und belegten skalare Messinvarianz über Studierende des Lehramts und anderer Studiengänge. Im Vergleich zu Pädagogik / Psychologie-Studierenden wiesen Lehramtsstudierende unter Kontrolle des Studiensemesters geringer ausgeprägte Fehlkonzepte hinsichtlich direkter Instruktion, jedoch höhere hinsichtlich Klassenwiederholungen auf. Im Vergleich zu Studierenden nicht-bildungsbezogener Studiengänge (Wirtschafts-und Sozialwissenschaften / Sonstige) waren Fehlkonzepte zur Klassengröße und direkten Instruktion bei Lehramtsstudierenden geringer ausgeprägt.
A large variety of misconceptions about learning, teaching, and other educational topics is prevalent in the public but also among educational professionals. Such misconceptions may lead to ill-advised judgments and actions in private life, professional practice, and policymaking. Developing effective correction strategies for these misconceptions hinges on a better understanding of the factors that make individuals susceptible to or resilient against misconceptions. The present study surveyed students from educational and non-educational fields of study to investigate whether the endorsement of four typical educational misconceptions can be predicted by study-related variables (i.e., field of study and study progress) and by students’ cognitive ability (i.e., numeracy), epistemic orientations, general world views (i.e., conservative orientation), and education-related values (i.e., educational goals). A sample of N = 315 undergraduates in teacher education and education- and non-education-related fields of study completed an online survey. Results from structural equation models showed that the pattern of effects strongly varied across the specific misconceptions. The two misconceptions related to teaching factors (i.e., class size and effectiveness of direct instruction as a teaching method) were the most strongly affected by the field of study and had an association with conservative orientation. In contrast, the misconception about the effectiveness of grade retention as an educational intervention was more prevalent among the students emphasizing conventional educational goals, such as discipline. None of the investigated explanatory variables proved predictive of the misconception about the “feminization” of education as an educational-equity topic. Moreover, neither numeracy nor epistemic orientation was found to have any effect on the endorsement of educational misconceptions. These findings emphasize the topic dependency of the factors that make individuals susceptible to misconceptions. Future research and intervention approaches need to consider the topic specificity of educational misconceptions.
No abstract
Redden and Hoch (2009) found that variety in a set of items robustly decreased the perceived quantity of the sum of these items across multiple studies. For example, a set of multicolored M&M’s was estimated to contain fewer M&M’s than an equally large set of single-colored M&M’s (e.g., Redden & Hoch, 2009, Study 3). We conducted six close replication studies of the studies reported by Redden and Hoch and did not find this effect in any of them. A meta-analysis of the four original studies and 6 replication studies (N = 1,383) revealed no evidence for the phenomenon that variety reduces perceived quantity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.