Abstract
Based on the cognitive-affective theory, the present study designed a science inquiry learning model, predict-observe-explain (POE), and implemented it in an app called “WhyWhy” to examine the effectiveness of students’ science inquiry learning practice. To understand how POE can affect the cognitive-affective learning process, as well as the learning progress, a pretest and a posttest were given to 152 grade 5 elementary school students. The students practiced WhyWhy during six sessions over 6 weeks, and data related to interest in learning science (ILS), cognitive anxiety (CA), and extraneous cognitive load (ECL) were collected and analyzed through confirmatory factor analysis with structure equation modeling. The results showed that students with high ILS have low CA and ECL. In addition, the results also indicated that students with a high level of self-confidence enhancement showed significant improvement in the posttest. The implications of this study suggest that by using technology-enhanced science learning, the POE model is a practical approach to motivate students to learn.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ainley, M., & Ainley, J. (2011). Student engagement with science in early adolescence: the contribution of enjoyment to students’ continuing interest in learning about science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(1), 4–12.
Ansari, T. L., & Derakshan, N. (2011). The neural correlates of cognitive effort in anxiety: effects on processing efficiency. Biological Psychology, 86(3), 337–348.
Ayres, P. (2006). Impact of reducing intrinsic cognitive load on learning in a mathematical domain. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 287–298. doi:10.1002/acp.1245.
Bayer, U. C., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Achtziger, A. (2010). Staying on track: planned goal striving is protected from disruptive internal states. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 505–514.
Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students’ understanding of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 487–509.
Bénabou, R. J. M., & Tirole, J. (2002). Self-confidence and personal motivation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 871–915.
Bishop, S. J. (2007). Neurocognitive mechanisms of anxiety: an integrative account. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(7), 307–316.
Bishop, S. J., Jenkins, R., & Lawrence, A. D. (2007). Neural processing of fearful faces: effects of anxiety are gated by perceptual capacity limitations. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 1595–1603.
Boscolo, P., & Mason, L. (2003). Topic knowledge, text coherence, and interest: how they interact in learning from instructional texts. The Journal of Experimental Education, 71(2), 126–148.
Burton, D. (1998). Measuring competitive state anxiety. In J. L. Duda (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 129–148). Morgantown: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.
Clark, R., Howard, K., & Early, S. (2006). Motivational challenges experienced in highly complex learning environments. In J. Elen & R. Clark (Eds.), Handling complexity in learning environments: theory and research (pp. 27–42). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Clinton, V., & van den Broek, P. (2012). Interest, inferences, and learning from texts. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 650–663.
Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 715–730.
Daniels, L. M., & Stupnisky, R. H. (2012). Not that different in theory: Discussing the control-value theory of emotions in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(3), 222–226.
Davis, J. E., & Cox, R. H. (2002). Interpreting direction of anxiety within Hanin’s individual zone of optimal functioning. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14(1), 43–52.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: DC Heath.
Drake, K. E., Lipka, S., Smith, C., & Egan, V. (2013). The effect of cognitive load on faking interrogative suggestibility on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(7), 845–849.
Eysenck, M. W., Derakshan, N., Santos, R., & Calvo, M. G. (2007). Anxiety and cognitive performance: attentional control theory. Emotion, 7(2), 336–353.
Fleeson, W. (2007). Situation-based contingencies underlying trait-content manifestation in behaviour. Journal of Personality, 75, 825–861.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Gilbert, J. K. (2008). Visualization: an emergent field of practice and enquiry in science education. Visualization: theory and practice in science education (pp. 3–24). Dordrecht: Springer.
Goddard, L., Dritschel, B., & Burton, A. (2001). The effects of specific retrieval instruction on social problem-solving in depression. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 40(3), 297–308.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 414–433.
Hanton, S., & Connaughton, D. (2002). Perceived control of anxiety and its relationship to self-confidence and performance: a qualitative inquiry. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 73, 87–97.
Hanton, S., Mellalieu, S. D., & Hall, R. (2004). Self-confidence and anxiety interpretation: a qualitative investigation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5(4), 477–495.
Hoffmann, L. (2002). Promoting girls’ interest and achievement in physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12(4), 447–465.
Hong, J. C., Hwang, M. Y., Liu, M. C., Ho, H. Y., & Chen, Y. L. (2014). Using a "prediction-observation-explanation" inquiry model to enhance student interest and intention to continue science learning predicted by their internet cognitive failure. Computers & Education, 72, 1–11.
Hong, J. C., Lu, C. C. Wang, J. L., Liao, S., Wu, M. R., Hwang, M. Y., & Lin, P. S. (2013). Gender and prior science achievement affect categorization on a procedural learning task. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 92–101.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
Izard, C. E. (2007). Basic emotions, natural kinds, emotion schemas, and a new paradigm. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(3), 260–280.
Jones, G. (1990). A cognitive perspective on the processes underlying the relationship between stress and performance in sport. In G. Jones & L. Hardy (Eds.), Stress and performance in sport (pp. 17–42). Chichester: Wiley.
Jones, A. C., Scanlon, E., & Clough, G. (2013). Mobile learning: two case studies of supporting inquiry learning in informal and semiformal settings. Computers & Education, 61, 21–32.
Jurik, V., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2013). How student characteristics affect girls’ and boys’ verbal engagement in physics instruction. Learning and Instruction, 23, 33–42.
Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory: how many types of load does it really need? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 1–19. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9150-7.
Kleitman, S., & Gibson, J. (2011). Metacognitive beliefs, self-confidence and primary learning environment of sixth grade students. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(6), 728–735.
Köszegi, B. (2006). Ego utility, overconfidence and task choice. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4, 673–707.
Krapp, A. (1999). Interest, motivation and learning: an educational–psychological perspective. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 23–40.
Kröner, S., & Biermann, A. (2007). The relationship between confidence and self-concept: towards a model of response confidence. Intelligence, 35(6), 580–590.
Lazonder, A. W., Wilhelm, P., & Hagemans, M. G. (2008). The influence of domain knowledge on strategy use during simulation-based inquiry learning. Learning and Instruction, 18(6), 580–592.
MacCallum, R. C., & Hong, S. (1997). Power analysis in covariance structure modeling using GFI and AGFI. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(2), 193–210.
Marchionini, G. (2008). Human-information interaction research and development. Library and Information Science Research, 30(3), 165–174.
Martens, R., Burton, D., Vealey, R. S., Bump, L. A., & Smith, D. E. (1990). Development and validation of the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2). In R. Martens, R. S. Vealey, & D. Burton (Eds.), Competitive anxiety in sport (pp. 117–213). Champaign: Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Metz, K. E. (1995). Re-assessment of developmental assumptions in children’s science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 93–127.
Moreno, R. (2006). Does the modality principle hold for different media? A test of the method-affects-learning hypothesis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(3), 149–158.
Moreno, R. (2009). Learning from animated classroom exemplars: the case for guiding student teachers’ observations with metacognitive prompts. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 15, 487–501.
Morony, S., Kleitman, S., Lee, Y. P., & Stankov, L. (2013). Predicting achievement: confidence vs. self-efficacy, anxiety, and self-concept in Confucian and European countries. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 79–96.
Morris, L. W., Davis, M. A., & Hutchings, C. H. (1981). Cognitive and emotional components of anxiety: literature review and a revised worry–emotionality scale. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 541–555.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington: National Academy Press.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38, 63–71. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8.
Paas, F., Renkel, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 1–8.
Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1–12.
Park, B., Plass, J. L., & Brünken, R. (2014). Cognitive and affective processes in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 125–127.
Pegg, J. M. (2006). Developing explanations: student reasoning about science concepts during claims-evidence inquiry lessons. Ph.D. diss. Corvallis, OR: Department of Science and Math Education, Oregon State University.
Roeser, R. W. & Peck, S. C. (2009). An education in awareness: self, motivation, and self-regulated learning in contemplative perspective. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 119–136.
Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., Vollmann, B., & Catrambone, R. (2009). The impact of learner characteristics on information utilization strategies, cognitive load experienced, and performance in hypermedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 19(5), 387–401.
Schiefele, U. (2009). Situational and individual interest. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 197–222). New York/London: Routledge.
Schwan, S., & Riempp, R. (2004). The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: learning to tie nautical knots. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 293–305.
Seufert, T., Jänen, I., & Brünken, R. (2007). The impact of intrinsic cognitive load on the effectiveness of graphical help for coherence formation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1055–1071.
Spielberger, C. (1972). Anxiety as an emotional state. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Anxiety: current trends in theory and research (Vol. 1, pp. 23–49). New York: Academic.
Stankov, L., Lee, J., & Paek, I. (2009). Realism of confidence judgments. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25, 123–130.
Stankov, L., Lee, J., Wenshu, L., & Hogan, D. J. (2012). Confidence: a better predictor of academic achievement than self-efficacy, self-concept and anxiety? Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 747–758.
Stern, C., & West, T. V. (2014). Circumventing anxiety during interpersonal encounters to promote interest in contact: an implementation intention approach. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 82–93.
Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 123–138. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.
Tanaka, A., Takehara, T., & Yamauchi, H. (2006). Achievement goals in a presentation task: performance expectancy, achievement goals, state anxiety, and task performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 16(2), 93–99.
Tüzün, H., Yılmaz-Soylu, M., Karakus, T., Inal, Y., & Kızılkaya, G. (2009). The effects of computer games on primary school students’ achievement and motivation in geography learning. Computers & Education, 52(1), 68–77.
van den Broek, P., Risden, K., & Husebye-Hartmann, E. (1995). The role of readers’ standards for coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In R. F. Lorch & E. J. O’Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading (pp. 353–373). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
van Gog, T., Kester, L., Nievelstein, F., Giesbers, B., & Paas, F. (2009). Uncovering cognitive processes: different techniques that can contribute to cognitive load research and instruction. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 325–331.
Vasey, M. W., & Daleiden, E. L. (1996). Information-processing pathways to cognitive interference in childhood. In I. G. Sarason, G. Pierce, & B. Sarason (Eds.), Cognitive interference: theory, methods, and findings (pp. 117–138). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Vealey, R. S. (1986). Conceptualization of sport-confidence and competitive orientation: preliminary investigation and instrument development. Journal of Sport Psychology, 8, 221–246.
Warwick, P., Mercer, N., & Kershner, R. (2013). ‘Wait, let’s just think about this’: using the interactive whiteboard and talk rules to scaffold learning for co-regulation in collaborative science activities. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2(1), 42–51.
Weinberg, B. A. (2009). A model of overconfidence. Pacific Economic Review, 14, 502–515.
Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2003). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology (3rd ed.). Champaign: Human Kinetics Publishers, Inc.
Wilson, C. D., Taylor, J. A., Kowalski, S. M., & Carlson, J. (2010). The relative effects and equity of inquiry-based and commonplace science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning, and argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(3), 276–301.
Winberg, T., & Berg, C. (2007). Students’ cognitive focus during a chemistry laboratory exercise: effects of a computer-simulated prelab. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1108–1133.
Acknowledgments
This research was partially supported by the “Aim for the Top University Project” of National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU), sponsored by the Ministry of Education, Taiwan, and the “International Research-Intensive Center of Excellence Program” of NTNU and Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST 103-2911-I-003-301 and MOST 101-2511-S-003-056-MY3 and MOST 104-2911-I-003-301).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hong, JC., Hwang, MY., Tai, KH. et al. An Exploration of Students’ Science Learning Interest Related to Their Cognitive Anxiety, Cognitive Load, Self-Confidence and Learning Progress Using Inquiry-Based Learning With an iPad. Res Sci Educ 47, 1193–1212 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9541-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9541-y