High School Students' Evaluations, Plausibility (Re) Appraisals, and Knowledge about Topics in Earth Science

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: High School Students' Evaluations, Plausibility (Re) Appraisals, and Knowledge about Topics in Earth Science
Language: English
Authors: Lombardi, Doug (ORCID 0000-0002-4172-318X), Bickel, Elliot S., Bailey, Janelle M., Burrell, Shondricka
Source: Science Education. Jan 2018 102(1):153-177.
Availability: Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 25
Publication Date: 2018
Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation (NSF), Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL)
Contract Number: 1316057
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: High Schools
Descriptors: High School Students, Science Instruction, Earth Science, Knowledge Level, Scaffolding (Teaching Technique), Evaluation, Models, Climate, Natural Disasters, Natural Resources, Astronomy, Statistical Analysis, Beliefs, Program Effectiveness, Structural Equation Models, Prior Learning, Critical Thinking, Multivariate Analysis
DOI: 10.1002/sce.21315
ISSN: 0036-8326
Abstract: Evaluation is an important aspect of science and is receiving increasing attention in science education. The present study investigated (1) changes to plausibility judgments and knowledge as a result of a series of instructional scaffolds, called model-evidence link activities, that facilitated evaluation of scientific and alternative models in four different Earth science topics (climate change, fracking and earthquakes, wetlands and land use, and the formation of Earth's Moon) and (2) relations between evaluation, plausibility reappraisal, and knowledge. Repeated measure multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) showed that participants' plausibility judgments shifted toward scientifically accepted explanations and increased their knowledge about relevant Earth science topics after participating in the activities. Structural equation modeling revealed that 10% of the postinstructional knowledge scores were related to participants' evaluations, above and beyond background knowledge, which accounted for 26% of the variance. The activities used in this study may help students develop their critical thinking skills by facilitating evaluation of the validity of explanations based on evidence, a scientific practice that is key to understanding both scientific content and science as a process. However, results from the study were modest and suggest that additional research, from both theoretical and empirical perspectives, may be warranted.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2017
Accession Number: EJ1163561
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Description
Abstract:Evaluation is an important aspect of science and is receiving increasing attention in science education. The present study investigated (1) changes to plausibility judgments and knowledge as a result of a series of instructional scaffolds, called model-evidence link activities, that facilitated evaluation of scientific and alternative models in four different Earth science topics (climate change, fracking and earthquakes, wetlands and land use, and the formation of Earth's Moon) and (2) relations between evaluation, plausibility reappraisal, and knowledge. Repeated measure multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) showed that participants' plausibility judgments shifted toward scientifically accepted explanations and increased their knowledge about relevant Earth science topics after participating in the activities. Structural equation modeling revealed that 10% of the postinstructional knowledge scores were related to participants' evaluations, above and beyond background knowledge, which accounted for 26% of the variance. The activities used in this study may help students develop their critical thinking skills by facilitating evaluation of the validity of explanations based on evidence, a scientific practice that is key to understanding both scientific content and science as a process. However, results from the study were modest and suggest that additional research, from both theoretical and empirical perspectives, may be warranted.
ISSN:0036-8326
DOI:10.1002/sce.21315