Adolescents' declining motivation to learn science: A follow‐up study

Abstract

This is a mix methods follow‐up study in which we reconfirm the findings from an earlier study [Vedder‐Weiss & Fortus [2011] Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 199–216]. The findings indicate that adolescents' declining motivation to learn science, which was found in many previous studies [Galton [2009] Moving to secondary school: Initial encounters and their effects. Perspectives on Education, 2(Primary‐secondary Transfer in Science), 5–21. Retrieved from http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/perspectives; Osborne, Simon, & Collins, [2003] International Journal of Science Education 25(9), 1049–1079], is not an inevitable phenomenon since it appears not to occur in Israeli democratic schools. In addition to reinforcing previous results in a different sample, new results show that the differences between the two school types are also apparent in terms of students' self‐efficacy in science learning, students' perceptions of their teachers' goals emphases, and students' perception of their peers' goals orientation. Quantitative results are accompanied by rich verbal examples of ways in which students view and articulate their own and their teachers' goal emphases. Content analysis of students' interviews showed that students in traditional schools are directed more towards goals that are external and related to the outcome of learning in comparison to democratic school students who are motivated more by goals that are internal and related to the process of learning. Structure analysis of these interviews suggests that democratic school students experience a greater sense of autonomy in their science learning than traditional school students do. Implications for research on students' motivation are discussed, such as considering not only the teacher and the classroom but also the school culture. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 49: 1057–1095, 2012

Engaging learners in STEM education

“…In the beginning, STEM was implemented in undergraduate programs (Sanders, 2009). When we realized that students were losing their interest in science in earlier grades (Osborne & Dillon, 2008;National Research Council, 2012;Vedder-Weiss & Fortus, 2012), STEM gained more momentum by moving into K-12 education, despite the fact that the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (2014) shows that only 50% of the high schools offer calculus, and only 63% offer physics. The report also underlines the lack of access to core courses (e.g.…”

“…Learning science, cognitive science, and educational research have contributed key principles in designing STEM learning environments (Krajcik & Shin, 2014;National Research Council, 2007, 2012Sawyer, 2014). These principles include: 1) support deep learning of key scientific principles; 2) engage students in making sense of phenomena and designing solutions to problems using scientific and engineering practices, 3) create contexts that motivate and challenge learners, 4) build integrated understanding over time, 5) combine the use of scientific ideas and scientific and engineering practices to develop integrated understanding and 6) make students' thinking visible.…”

Assessing Science Motivation for College Students: Validation of the Science Motivation Questionnaire II using the Rasch-Andrich Rating Scale Model

“…U.S. students showed higher levels of motivation to learn science at lower grade levels compared with a lower motivation to learn science at higher grade levels (Vedder-Weiss & Fortus, 2012). Britner (2008) has reported an alarming decline in U.S. student enrollment and motivation in science at both high school and college levels.…”

Õpilaste kaasamine STEM-haridusse

“…Alguses rakendati STEM-haridust bakalaureuseprogrammides (Sanders, 2009). Kui mõisteti, et õpilased kaotavad huvi loodusteaduste vastu juba nooremates klassides (Osborne & Dillon, 2008;National Research Council, 2012;Vedder-Weiss & Fortus, 2012), asuti loodusteaduste populariseeri miseks STEM-õppeainetele enam rõhku panema ka põhi-ja keskkooli astmetes, kuigi USA Haridusministeeriumi inimõiguste ameti (U.S. Department, 2014) hinnangul õpetatakse vaid 50% gümnaasiumitest arvutamist, samas füüsikat õpetatakse 63% koolidest. Lisaks rõhutatakse aruandes, et juurdepääs põhikursustele (nt bioloogia-, keemia-, algebrakursusele) on piiratud.…”

“…Tagasisidet võib sageli olla raske taluda, kuid just see parandab lõpptulemust. Uuringud loodusteaduste õppimise, kognitiiv-ja haridusteaduste valdkonnas on võimaldanud sõnastada peamised põhimõtted, millest tuleks STEM-õpikeskkonna loomisel lähtuda (Krajcik & Shin, 2014;National Research Council, 2007, 2012Sawyer, 2014). Need põhimõtted on järgmised: 1) toetada olulisimate teaduslike põhimõtete sügavat omandamist; 2) innustada õpilasi viisil, mis tekitaks tahtmise nähtusi mõista ja probleemidele lahendusi leida, kasutades selleks loodus-ja inseneriteaduslikke praktikaid, 3) luua õpilasi motiveeriv ja huvi pakkuv õpikeskkond, 4) luua ajapikku asjadest ja nähtustest terviklik arusaamine, 5) ühendada teaduslike ideede ning loodus-ja inseneriteaduslike praktikate kasutamine, et saavutada näh-tuste terviklik mõistmine, ning 6) visualiseerida õpilaste mõttetegevust.…”