Identifying Taiwanese University Students’ Physics Learning Profiles and Their Role in Physics Learning Self-Efficacy

Abstract

The main purposes of this study were to identify Taiwanese university students' physics learning profiles in terms of their critical conceptions of learning physics and to compare their physics learning self-efficacy with the different learning profiles. A total of 250 Taiwanese undergraduates who were majoring in physics participated in this study and were invited to complete two instruments, physics learning profile and physics learning self-efficacy (PLSE). The main results indicated that, first, the two instruments developed in this study had satisfactory validity and reliability. Second, three fundamental physics learning profiles, the reproductive, transitional, and constructive profiles, were characterized based on the cluster analysis. It is also evident that the three learning profiles demonstrated different levels of selfefficacy for the five PLSE dimensions. The students with a reproductive profile tended to possess the lowest PLSE across the five dimensions. The students with a transitional profile may possess higher confidence in higher-order cognitive skills and laboratory activities than those with a reproductive profile. However, only those with a constructive profile, highlighting a comprehensive understanding of physics knowledge/concepts as well as de-emphasizing physics learning as preparing for tests and calculating and practising tutorial problems, possessed stronger PLSE in applying what they learned to real-world contexts as well as in scientifically communicating with others.

Chinese undergraduate students' perceptions of mobile learning: Conceptions, learning profiles, and approaches

“…Overall, this study classified conceptions as reproductive, transitional, and constructive, which were consistent with the results in the study of T. J. Lin et al () that characterized the conceptions of learning physics into three levels based on a cluster analysis. Given that transitional conceptions of m‐learning play an intervening role between reproductive and constructivist conceptions, educators should promote students' m‐learning conceptions of focusing on continuous learning and achieving a higher status.…”

“…For instance, Lee et al () found that reproductive conceptions of learning science (i.e., testing, calculating, and practicing) were tied closely with learners' surface approaches to learning science, whereas constructivist conceptions (i.e., applying, understanding, and seeing in a new way) were highly pertinent to deep approaches. Many researchers drew a similar conclusion from the viewpoint of different subjects, such as physics (T. J. Lin et al, ), biology (Chiou et al, ), and computer science (Liang, Su, & Tsai, ).…”

“…Hence, this study assumes that “m‐learning as capture tools for memorization” and “m‐learning as assessment tools for testing” are reproductive conceptions of m‐learning and that “m‐learning as the application of extended ideas” and “m‐learning as communication for enhancing understanding” are constructive conceptions of m‐learning. However, neither reproductive nor constructive perspectives could exactly explain “m‐learning as efficient tools for achieving a higher status” and “m‐learning as focusing on continuous learning.” These were regarded as both reproductive and constructive conceptions (H. M. Lin & Tsai, ; P. S. Tsai, Tsai, & Hwang, ) and classified as “transitional” conceptions of m‐learning (T. J. Lin et al, ). Therefore, this study proposes a possible hierarchical framework: Reproductive conceptions of m‐learning include “capture tools for memorization” and “assessment tools for testing”; transitional conceptions of m‐learning include “efficient tools for achieving a higher status” and “focusing on continuous learning”; and constructive conceptions include “communication for enhancing understanding” and “application of extended ideas.”…”

“…Several studies have observed that the improvement of students' conceptions of learning is equivalent to a shift from reproductive to constructive conceptions of learning (e.g., Lee, Johanson, & Tsai, ; C. L. Lin, Tsai, & Liang, ; C. C. Tsai, ). T. J. Lin, Liang, and Tsai () characterized conceptions of learning physics into three‐level perceptions based on the results of a cluster analysis, introducing the reproductive, transitional, and constructive profiles. Their study was consistent with past studies (‐Brownlee, Walker, Lennox, Exley, & Pearce, ; Kember, ) that sought a transitional orientation to connect the two primary directions (T. J. Lin et al, ).…”

“…T. J. Lin, Liang, and Tsai () characterized conceptions of learning physics into three‐level perceptions based on the results of a cluster analysis, introducing the reproductive, transitional, and constructive profiles. Their study was consistent with past studies (‐Brownlee, Walker, Lennox, Exley, & Pearce, ; Kember, ) that sought a transitional orientation to connect the two primary directions (T. J. Lin et al, ).…”