Students’ Socioscientific Reasoning and Decision-making on Energy-related Issues—Development of a measurement instrument

Sakschewski, Mark; Eggert, Sabina; Schneider, Susanne; Bögeholz, Susanne

doi:10.1080/09500693.2014.920550

Cited by 60 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Eggert, Ostermeyer, Hasselhorn, and Bögeholz () generated a different socio‐scientific decision‐making questionnaire to measure the impact of cooperative and metacognitive learning on high school students’ ability to evaluate SSI and develop solutions to SSI. Most recently, Sakschewski, Eggert, Schneider, and Bögeholz () presented an extension of Eggert and Bögeholz () to decision making around SSI related to energy. As with the 2010 assessment, these items focused on the complexity of decision making around these issues.…”

Section: Scientific Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of scientific literacy: Development and validation of the Quantitative Assessment of Socio-Scientific Reasoning (QuASSR)

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the development and validation of the Quantitative Assessment of Socio‐scientific Reasoning (QuASSR) in a college context. The QuASSR contains 10 polytomous, two‐tiered items crossed between two scenarios, and is based on theory suggesting a four‐pronged structure for SSR (complexity, perspective taking, inquiry, and skepticism). In the context of pre‐post measurement within a 1‐week SSI‐based unit on fracking, we found that the four sub‐constructs represent a one‐dimensional progression of ideas, and that SSR is largely independent of declarative knowledge. In the validation process, we discovered small inconsistencies in item functioning between scenarios in the areas of complexity and perspective‐taking, but determined that resulting biases sat well within the uncertainty in students’ measures. In light of future development and use of the QuASSR, we determined that use of a single scenario is sufficient to produce a measurement reliability of 0.7. Given the time it takes for students to complete a scenario, we consider a 3‐scenario QuASSR, and its accompanying measurement precision of 0.85, to be the practical upper precision limit of the QuASSR when used in experimental contexts. Finally, we found no significant change in SSR due to the SSI‐based intervention. This mirrors prior reports of short‐duration interventions targeting SSR. Our data suggest that as a cognitive construct underpinned by political, moral, and ethical ideologies around SSI, successful efforts to facilitate growth must target SSR as a central focus upon which more basic content knowledge is contextualized, so that sufficient instructional duration can be given to this important construct. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 54: 274–295, 2017

show abstract

Section: Scientific Literacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of scientific literacy: Development and validation of the Quantitative Assessment of Socio-Scientific Reasoning (QuASSR)

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As students have been shown to rather spontaneously add knowledge instead of differentiating it, fostering students' levels of knowledge integration is a goal of ongoing research (Linn et al, 2004). As such, an integrated science understanding is considered beneficial for the critical analysis, evaluation, and decision making in future challenges (Sakschewski, Eggert, Schneider, & Bögeholz, 2014).…”

Section: Energy As a Core Idea And A Crosscutting Concept In Science mentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Students Understand Energy in Biology, Chemistry, and Physics? Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument

Opitz

Neumann

Bernholt

et al. 2017

EURASIA J MATH SCI T

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science standards of different countries introduced disciplinary core ideas and crosscutting concepts-such as energy-to help students develop a more interconnected science understanding. As previous research has mostly addressed energy learning in specific disciplinary contexts, this study targets students' cross-disciplinary understanding of energy. Since no respective test instrument was available, we present the development and validation of an instrument that can be used to compare students' progressing energy understanding across contexts from biology, chemistry, and physics. In a cross-sectional study, we administered the new instrument to N = 752 students at the end of grades 6, 8, and 10. In addition to a detailed discussion of the instrument's reliability and validity, the study findings compare progressing energy understanding in the three disciplinary contexts. With regard to energy as a crosscutting concept, the results are then used to discuss how students' energy understanding may be connected across disciplinary boundaries.

show abstract

“…Recently, an increasing number of studies in science education have focused on students' decision-making process of SSI (e.g. Liu, Lin, & Tsai, 2011;Patronis, Potari, & Spiliotopoulou, 1999;Sadler & Zeidler, 2005b;Sadler, 2005;Sakschewski, Eggert, Schneider, & Bögeholz, 2014). With respect to different positions and solutions to SSI, it is important to build sound arguments on these issues when reaching a decision (Acar et al, 2010;Sakschewski et al, 2014).…”

Section: Instructional Contexts That Can Facilitate the Intersectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Liu, Lin, & Tsai, 2011;Patronis, Potari, & Spiliotopoulou, 1999;Sadler & Zeidler, 2005b;Sadler, 2005;Sakschewski, Eggert, Schneider, & Bögeholz, 2014). With respect to different positions and solutions to SSI, it is important to build sound arguments on these issues when reaching a decision (Acar et al, 2010;Sakschewski et al, 2014). High-quality decision-making about SSI can be attributed to the integration of synthesizing pro-and counter-arguments and weighing different arguments (Sakschewski et al, 2014).…”

Section: Instructional Contexts That Can Facilitate the Intersectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With respect to different positions and solutions to SSI, it is important to build sound arguments on these issues when reaching a decision (Acar et al, 2010;Sakschewski et al, 2014). High-quality decision-making about SSI can be attributed to the integration of synthesizing pro-and counter-arguments and weighing different arguments (Sakschewski et al, 2014). The latter has been shown a common difficulty that students face when reaching an informed decision (Kolstø, 2006;Seethaler & Linn, 2004).…”

Section: Instructional Contexts That Can Facilitate the Intersectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intersection of argumentation and the use of multiple representations in the context of socioscientific issues

Namdar

Shen

2016

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using multiple representations and argumentation are two fundamental processes in science. With the advancements of information communication technologies, these two processes are blended more so than ever before. However, little is known about how these two processes interact with each other in student learning. Hence, we conducted a design-based study in order to distill the relationship between these two processes. Specifically, we designed a learning unit on nuclear energy and implemented it with a group of preservice middle school teachers. The participants used a web-based knowledge organization platform that incorporated three representational modes: textual, concept map, and pictorial. The participants organized their knowledge on nuclear energy by searching, sorting, clustering information through the use of these representational modes and argued about the nuclear energy issue. We found that the use of multiple representations and argumentation interacted with each other in a complex way. Based on our findings, we argue that the complexity can be unfolded in two aspects: (a) the use of multiple representations mediates argumentation in different forms and for different purposes; (b) the type of argumentation that leads to refinement of the use of multiple representations is often nonmediated and drawn from personal experience. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Students’ Socioscientific Reasoning and Decision-making on Energy-related Issues—Development of a measurement instrument

Cited by 60 publications

References 29 publications

Assessment of scientific literacy: Development and validation of the Quantitative Assessment of Socio-Scientific Reasoning (QuASSR)

Assessment of scientific literacy: Development and validation of the Quantitative Assessment of Socio-Scientific Reasoning (QuASSR)

How Do Students Understand Energy in Biology, Chemistry, and Physics? Development and Validation of an Assessment Instrument

Intersection of argumentation and the use of multiple representations in the context of socioscientific issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About