1981
DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660180107
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The relationship between cognitive style, intelligence, and instructional mode to achievement of college science students

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
4
0

Year Published

1983
1983
1995
1995

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
2
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This result indicates that a student's achievement in chemistry is, to some extent, a function of his/her degree of analytical ability. This finding is in agreement with those of Ramirez (1972), Saracho & Dayton (1980) and Ritchey & LaShier (1981). Indeed, Ritchey & LaShier (1981) not only believe in the linear relationships of science achievement and cognitive style, they provided an explanation for it.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This result indicates that a student's achievement in chemistry is, to some extent, a function of his/her degree of analytical ability. This finding is in agreement with those of Ramirez (1972), Saracho & Dayton (1980) and Ritchey & LaShier (1981). Indeed, Ritchey & LaShier (1981) not only believe in the linear relationships of science achievement and cognitive style, they provided an explanation for it.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…This finding is in agreement with those of Ramirez (1972), Saracho & Dayton (1980) and Ritchey & LaShier (1981). Indeed, Ritchey & LaShier (1981) not only believe in the linear relationships of science achievement and cognitive style, they provided an explanation for it. They argued that since science learning requires an 'analytic' approach, it is to be expected that 'analytical' individuals would perform better than the 'globals'.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Shymansky and Yore (1980) suggested that field-independent university students were more able to handle a low-structure inquiry strategy when dealing with chemistry and physics topics than field-dependent students. Ritchey and LaSheir (1981) found no significant differences or interaction between field-dependent students and field-independent students instructed by a self-study method or a teacher-structured method on knowledge about the anatomy of a fetal pig. Tannenbaum (1982) reported a significant interactions effect between lesson structure and cognitive style for secondary students studying nutrition.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 64%
“…Recent studies have explored the relationship between lesson structure and learner structure represented by cognitive style (Shymansky & Yore, 1980;Ritchey & LaSheir, 1981;Tannenbaum, 1982;Strawitz, 1984aStrawitz, & 1984b. Shymansky and Yore (1980) suggested that field-independent university students were more able to handle a low-structure inquiry strategy when dealing with chemistry and physics topics than field-dependent students.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Those students who were field independent and had a positive attitude toward science scored significantly higher on the final tests than those who were field dependent and had negative attitudes toward science. A recent study (Ritchey & LaShier, 1981) questioned the results of studies relating field independence-dependence to student performance without controlling for intelligence. However, a reading of several intelligence tests indicated that many items could be viewed as field independent.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%