Scientific reasoning and views on the nature of scientific inquiry: testing a new framework to understand and model epistemic cognition in science

We investigated the scientific reasoning competencies of pre-service science teachers (PSTs) using a multiple-choice assessment. This assessment targeted seven reasoning skills commonly associated with scientific investigation and scientific modeling. The sample consisted of 112 PSTs enrolled in a secondary teacher education program. A latent class (LC) analysis was conducted to evaluate if there are subgroups with distinct patterns of reasoning skills. The analysis revealed two subgroups, where LC1 (73% of the PSTs) had a statistically higher probability of solving reasoning tasks than LC2. Specific patterns of reasoning emerged within each subgroup. Within LC1, tasks involving analyzing data and drawing conclusions were answered correctly more often than tasks involving formulating research questions and generating hypotheses. Related to modeling, tasks on testing models were solved more often than those requiring judgment on the purpose of models. This study illustrates the benefits of applying person-centered statistical analyses, such as LC analysis, to identify subgroups with distinct patterns of scientific reasoning skills in a larger sample. The findings also suggest that highlighting specific skills in teacher education, such as: formulating research questions, generating hypotheses, and judging the purposes of models, would better enhance the full complement of PSTs’ scientific reasoning competencies.

show abstract

“…Sci. 2021, 11, 647 2 of 9 formulating and evaluating hypotheses, two of several processes regularly invoked in scientific domains [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Scientific Reasoning Skills among Pre-Service Science Teachers: A Latent Class Analysis

Khan

Krell

2021

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The two constructs may be related to each other because SR skills reflect the knowledge of how to pose questions scientifically, whereas NOS beliefs reflect the knowledge of why scientific inquiry proceeds in specific ways [14,54]. Both SR skills and NOS beliefs can be enhanced by appropriate instruction, such as explicit reflection about scientific inquiry [47,55].…”

Section: The Interplay Between Sr Skills and Nos Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although SR skills and NOS beliefs are two separate domains of teachers' professional competence, their interplay is important: Within teachers' professional competence, SR skills and NOS beliefs may be closely related because they both concern the development of scientific knowledge [14]. Whereas SR skills reflect preservice teachers' procedural knowledge about scientific inquiry processes (i.e., knowing how), NOS beliefs reflect their evaluations of how scientific knowledge comes into being (i.e., knowing why; [15]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whereas SR skills reflect preservice teachers' procedural knowledge about scientific inquiry processes (i.e., knowing how), NOS beliefs reflect their evaluations of how scientific knowledge comes into being (i.e., knowing why; [15]). Most research to date, however, was only able to correlate SR skills and NOS beliefs in crosssectional designs [14,16]. Thus, the mutual relationship between SR skills and NOS beliefs and their development over time remains unexplored.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Preservice Biology Teachers’ Scientific Reasoning Skills and Beliefs about Nature of Science: How Do They Develop and Is There a Mutual Relationship during the Development?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific reasoning (SR) skills and nature of science (NOS) beliefs represent important characteristics of biology teachers’ professional competence. In particular, teacher education at university is formative for the professionalization of future teachers and is thus the focus of the current study. Our study aimed to examine the development of SR skills and NOS beliefs and their mutual relationship during teacher education. We applied paper-and-pencil tests to measure SR skills and NOS beliefs of 299 preservice biology teachers from 25 universities in Germany. The results of linear mixed models and planned comparisons revealed that both SR skills and NOS beliefs develop over the course of the study. Nevertheless, the development of SR skills and multiple aspects of NOS beliefs proceeds in different trajectories. Cross-lagged models showed a complex picture concerning the mutual relationship between SR skills and NOS beliefs during their development (both positive and negative). The current study contributes to the existing research because it is based on longitudinal data and allows—in contrast to cross-sectional research—conclusions about the development of SR skills and NOS beliefs.

show abstract

“…The ways in which individuals conceptualize the fundamental nature of how and what they know plays an important role in learning and acquiring knowledge [10], particularly for science education [9] and layperson scientific literacy [11]. For instance, in an attempt to further understand and model epistemic cognition in science, Reith and Nehring tested and confirmed the ScieNo-framework by examining the relationship between key scientific reasoning competencies and views on the nature of scientific inquiry (NOSI) [12]. Empirically, a recent meta-analysis has revealed that epistemic cognition interventions bolstered students' academic achievement in various ways and had the largest average effect size on argumentation among different types of academic achievement outcomes in the reviewed studies (ES = 1.047, p < 0.001) [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High School Students’ Epistemic Cognition and Argumentation Practices during Small-Group Quality Talk Discussions in Science

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For high school students to develop scientific understanding and reasoning, it is essential that they engage in epistemic cognition and scientific argumentation. In the current study, we used the AIR model (i.e., Aims and values, epistemic Ideals, and Reliable processes) to examine high school students’ epistemic cognition and argumentation as evidenced in collaborative discourse in a science classroom. Specifically, we employed a qualitative case study approach to focus on four small-group discussions about scientific phenomena during the Quality Talk Science intervention (QTS), where students regularly received explicit instruction on asking authentic questions and engaging in argumentation. In total, five categories of epistemic ideals and five categories of reliable processes were identified. Students demonstrated more instances of normative epistemic ideals and argumentative responses in the discussions after they received a revised scientific model for discussion and explicit instruction on argumentation. Concomitantly, there were fewer instances of students making decisions based on process of elimination to determine a correct scientific claim. With respect to the relationship of epistemic cognition to authentic questioning and argumentation, the use of epistemic ideals seemed to be associated with the initiation of authentic questions and students’ argumentation appeared to involve the use of epistemic ideals.

show abstract

Scientific reasoning and views on the nature of scientific inquiry: testing a new framework to understand and model epistemic cognition in science

Cited by 16 publications

References 54 publications

Patterns of Scientific Reasoning Skills among Pre-Service Science Teachers: A Latent Class Analysis

Patterns of Scientific Reasoning Skills among Pre-Service Science Teachers: A Latent Class Analysis

Preservice Biology Teachers’ Scientific Reasoning Skills and Beliefs about Nature of Science: How Do They Develop and Is There a Mutual Relationship during the Development?

High School Students’ Epistemic Cognition and Argumentation Practices during Small-Group Quality Talk Discussions in Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About