Emotional and motivational outcomes of lab work in the secondary intermediate track: The contribution of a science center outreach lab

Abstract

Students’ interest in science declines in secondary school. Therefore, motivating students to become competent and engaged in science topics that are relevant for their everyday lives is an important goal, so they can be better citizens and decision makers with socioscientific issues (e.g., climate change and waste disposal). The present study contributes to research on activity emotions (state) and motivational outcomes (situational interest and situational competence) in science education. The study compared three experimental groups in a guided inquiry lab work on the chemistry of starch and a control group. The three groups were (i) 13 science classes taught at school; (ii) 14 classes taught in a Science Center Outreach Lab (SCOL) visit; and (iii) 17 classes taught in a combined setting of (i) and (ii); the groups were taught on the same topic. The large sample of classes was randomly assigned to the experimental conditions and a control group and data were analyzed for the theoretical part and the practical part of the intervention. The nested data were analyzed using item response theory and multilevel analyses. The three lab‐work conditions were quite successful in comparison with the control group. There were some differences between the SCOL and school groups; the students experienced higher enjoyment in the theoretical part of the intervention in the school group and higher situational competence in the practical lab work at the combined setting. Especially low achievers profited from the intervention, supposedly because the topic was close to students’ everyday lives. Conscientiousness was a major predictor of emotional and motivational outcomes. In conclusion, experimental lab work at a SCOL can be seen as a supplement to a worthwhile STEM education. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 54: 3–28, 2017

A person‐in‐context approach to student engagement in science: Examining learning activities and choice

“…and "Did you enjoy what you were doing?" These items have been used extensively in prior research (see Hektner, Schmidt, & Csikszentmihalyi, 2007 for a review), and the composite measures are consistent with prior research efforts to measure behavioral, cognitive, and affective engagement using a person-oriented approach (Conner & Pope, 2013).…”

Experimental Workshops in Student Labs and at School – What Influence do Location and Personality Traits have on Learners’ Motivational Variables?

“…Furthermore, there was a difference with respect to gender, with the female adolescents benefitting: they reported more favorable motivational outcomes in the practical part (Itzek-Greulich & Vollmer, 2017). However, other studies revealed no gender difference.…”

“…The gender has an influence on the topics of interest: Male adolescents are more interested in research, dangerous applications in science, physics, and technology, whereas female adolescents are more interested in natural phenomena overall and topics that deal with the body (Holstermann & Bögeholz, 2007). There are also gender effects regarding experiments, with female adolescents reporting more enjoyment, situational interest, competence, and less negative emotions than male adolescents (Itzek-Greulich & Vollmer, 2017). Furthermore, the perception of experiments is gender specific.…”

Gender, complexity, and science for all: Systemizing and its impact on motivation to learn science for different science subjects

“…However, in the literature, many suggestions for better science teaching can be found that clearly involve social activities and thus could activate empathizing skills, like science center outreach labs (Itzek‐Greulich & Vollmer, ), museum visits (Martin, Durksen, Williamson, Kiss, & Ginns, ), collaborative projects (Bryan et al, ), integrating students’ existing interests (Hagay & Baram‐Tsabari, ), science story telling (Polman & Hope, ), fostering autonomy, relatedness and belonging (Andersen & Nielsen, ), preventing feelings of disgust and rejection (Randler, Hummel, & Wüst‐Ackermann, ), knowledgeable, inspiring, enthusiastic, and caring teachers (Bryan et al, ; Keller, Neumann, & Fischer, ) that take students’ emotions into account (King, Ritchie, Sandhu, Henderson & Boland, ), and family and friends that encourage them to study science (Mujtaba & Reiss, ; Simpkins, Price, & Garcia, ).…”