Epistemic belief structures within introductory astronomy

Abstract

The reliability and validity of inventories should be verified in multiple ways. Although the epistemological beliefs about the physical science survey (EBAPS) has been deemed to be reliable and valid by the authors, the axes or factor structure proposed by the authors has not been independently checked. Using data from a study sample we discussed in previous publications, we performed exploratory factor analysis on 1,258 post-test EBAPS surveys. The students in the sample were from an introductory Astronomy course at a mid-sized western university. Inspection suggested the use of either a three-factor model or a five-factor model. Each of the factors is interpreted and discussed, and the factors are compared to the axes proposed by the authors of the EBAPS. We find that the five-factor model extrapolated from our data partially overlaps with the model put forth by the authors of the EBAPS, and that many of the questions did not load onto any factors.

Impact of Bayesian updating activities on student epistemologies

“…These gains are broad in the sense that they appear across all component axes of the EBAPS, including the alternative set of axes identified by Ref. [37]. They are also of pronounced magnitude, generally matching the gains on EBAPS made by any other curricular materials and course designs in the literature.…”

“…Recently, an exploratory factor analysis of student data has identified an alternative set of five dimensions within the EBAPS [37], which are also listed in Table III. These appear similar in some ways to the original five axes, with the major difference that the real-life applicability axis (axis 3) was insignificant in the recorded student response patterns.…”

“…The first five are the original axes from Ref [35],. and the second five (denoted with *) from Ref [37]…”