Abstract
This article reports on the influence of learning strategy instruction on student teachers’ physics achievement, attitude towards physics, and achievement motivation. A pre-test/post-test quasi-experimental design with matching control group was used in the study. Two groups of student teachers (n = 75) who were enrolled in an introductory physics course participated in the study. In the experimental group, questioning, summarizing, and graphic organizers were taught. The control group did not receive any presentation on strategy learning. Data were collected via the pre- and post-administration of the Physics Course Achievement Test, the Scale of Attitudes towards Physics, and the Achievement Motivation Scale. Univariate and multivariate analyses of variance on the data revealed no significant differences in the attitude and achievement motivation between the strategy and control groups. However, the strategy group students were observed to have a tendency of more positive attitude and motivation than the control group students. Results also showed that explicit learning strategy instruction was more effective than traditional instruction in improving physics achievement of the participating students. The implications of these results for physics education are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amer, A. A. (1994). The effect of knowledge-map and underlining training on the reading comprehension of scientific texts. English for Specific Purposes, 13(1), 35–45.
Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1987). Does text structure/summarization instruction facilitate learning from expository text? Reading Research Quarterly, 22(3), 331–346.
Austin, L. B., & Shore, B. M. (1995). Using concept mapping for assessment in physics. Physics Education, 30(1), 41–45.
Ayaduray, J., & Jacobs, G. M. (1997). Can learner strategy instruction succeed? The case of higher order questions and elaborated responses. System, 25(4), 561–70.
Bean, T. W., & Steenwyk, F. L. (1984). The effect of three forms of summarization instruction on sixth graders’ summary writing and comprehension. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16(4), 297–306.
Bigge, J. L., & Stump, C. S. (1998). Curriculum, assessment, and instruction for students with disabilities. Belmont: Wadsworth.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Boothby, P. R., & Alvermann, D. E. (1984). A classroom training study: the effects of graphic organizer instruction on fourth graders’ comprehension. Reading World, 23(4), 325–339.
Brophy, J. (1987). Synthesis of research on strategies for motivating students to learn. Educational Leadership, 45(2), 40–48.
Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Day, J. (1981). Learning to learn: on training students to learn from texts. Educational Researcher, 10(2), 14–21.
Carroll, L., & Leander, S. (2001). Improving student motivation through the use of active learning strategies. (ED455961). Retrieved December 6, 2003, from http://www.eric.ed.gov.
Chang, S. F., & Huang, S. C. (1999). Language learning motivation and language learning strategies of Taiwanese EFL students. (ED428561). Retrieved December 6, 2003, from http://www.eric.ed.gov.
Ciardiello, A. V. (1998). Did you ask a good question today? Alternative cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(3), 210–219.
Cordero-Ponce, W. L. (2000). Summarization instruction: effects on foreign language comprehension and summarization of expository texts. Reading Research and Instruction, 39(4), 329–350.
Cuccio-Schirripa, S., & Steiner, H. E. (2000). Enhancement and analysis of science question level for middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 210–224.
De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Van De Ven, A. (2001). Improving text comprehension strategies in upper primary school children: a design experiment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(4), 531–559.
DiCecco, V. M., & Gleason, M. M. (2002). Using graphic organizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 306–320.
Dye, G. (2000). Graphic organizers to the rescue! Helping students link-and-remember information. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(3), 72–77.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 1017–1095). New York: Wiley.
Ellez, M. (1999). Faculty members’ stressors and achievement motivation. Dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University, Turkey.
Friend, R. (2000/2001). Teaching summarization as a content area reading strategy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 44(4), 320–329.
Friend, R. (2001). Effects of strategy instruction on summary writing of college students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(1), 3–24.
García, J. N., & de Caso, A. M. (2006). Changes in writing self-efficacy and writing products and processes through specific training in the self-efficacy beliefs of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal., 4(2), 1–27.
Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., & VonSecker, C. (2000). Effects of integrated instruction on motivation and strategy use in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 331–341.
Hamman, D. (1998). Preservice teachers’ value for learning-strategy instruction. The Journal of Experimental Education, 66(3), 209–221.
Harper, K., Etkina, E., & Lin, Y. (2003). Encouraging and analyzing student questions in a large physics course: meaningful patterns for instructors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 776–791.
Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), 549–571.
Huffman, L. E., & Spires, H. A. (1994). Effects of explicit instruction in notetaking on sixth graders’ lecture comprehension and attitudes toward notetaking. Reading Improvement, 31(2), 72–76.
Jonassen, D. H. (1985). Learning strategies: a new educational technology. Programmed Learning and Educational Technology Journal, 22(1), 25–34.
King, A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children’s problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 307–317.
King, A. (1992a). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 111–126.
King, A. (1992b). Comparison of self-questioning, summarizing, and notetaking-review as strategies for learning from lectures. American Educational Research Journal, 29(2), 303–323.
Koch, A., & Eckstein, S. G. (1991). Improvement of reading comprehension of physics texts by students’ question formulation. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 473–486.
Koch, A. (2001). Training in metacognition and comprehension of physics texts. Science Education, 85(6), 758–768.
Lau, K., & Chan, D. W. (2007). The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on Chinese reading comprehension among Hong Kong low achieving students. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 20(8), 833–857.
Luckner, J., Bowen, S., & Carter, K. (2001). Visual teaching strategies for students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(3), 38–44.
Maher, S. (2000). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the impact of content literacy strategy instruction on teaching and learning. Dissertation, University of North Texas, USA.
Malone, L. D., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1992). Reading comprehension instruction: summarization and self-monitoring training for students with learning disabilities. Except Child, 58(3), 270–279.
Marchand-Martella, N. E., Miller, T. L., & MacQueen, C. (1998). Graphic organizers. Teaching PreK-8, 28, 46–48.
Marzano, R., Gaddy, B. B., & Dean, C. (2000). What works in classroom instruction. Aurora: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
Montague, M., & Bos, C. S. (1986). The effect of cognitive strategy training on verbal math problem solving performance of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19(1), 26–33.
Palinscar, A. S., Ransom, K., & Derber, S. (1989). Collaborative research and development of reciprocal teaching. Educational Leadership, 46(4), 37–40.
Pankratius, W. J. (1990). Building an organized knowledge base: concept mapping and achievement in secondary school physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(4), 315–333.
Pressley, M. (2002). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching. New York: Guilford.
Protheroe, N. (2002). More learning strategies for deeper student learning. The Education Digest, 68(4), 25–28.
Raphael, T. E. (1986). Teaching question answer relationships, revisited. The Reading Teacher, 39(6), 516–522.
Rhoder, C. (2002). Mindful reading: strategy training that facilitates transfer. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6), 498–512.
Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: a review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221.
Rouet, J. F., Vidal-Abarca, E., Erboul, A. B., & Millogo, V. (2001). Effects of information search tasks on the comprehension of instructional text. Discourse Processes, 31(2), 163–186.
Serway, R. A., & Beichner, R. J. (2000). Physics for scientists and engineers with modern physics 2 (5th ed.). USA: Saunders College.
Simpson, M. L., & Nist, S. L. (2000). An update on strategic learning: it’s more than textbook reading strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43(6), 528–541.
Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: effects of motivation, interest, and academic achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 323–332.
Sirias, D. (2002). Using graphic organizers to improve the teaching of business statistics. Journal of Education for Business, 78(1), 33–37.
Somuncuoğlu, Y., & Yıldırım, A. (1999). Relationships between achievement goal orientations and use of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Research, 92(5), 267–278.
Stevens, J. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Stipek, D. (1988). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Swanson, P. N., & De La Paz, S. (1998). Teaching effective comprehension strategies to students with learning and reading disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 33(4), 209–226.
Turkish Ministry of National Education. (1992). Retrieved December 6, 2003, from http://www.ttkb.gov.tr.
Vaidya, S. R. (1999). Metacognitive learning strategies for students with learning disabilities. Education, 120(1), 186–190.
Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic.
Vertenten, K. (2002). Learning to learn physics: The implementation of process-oriented instruction in the first year of higher education. Dissertation, Universitaire Instelling Antwerpen, Belgium.
Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315–327). New York: Macmillan.
White, R., & Gunstone, R. (2000). Probing understanding. London and New York: Falmer.
Wittrock, M. C. (1986). Students’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 297–313). New York: MacMillan.
Zieneddine, A., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Doing the right thing versus doing the right thing right: concept mapping in a freshmen physics laboratory. European Journal of Physics, 22(5), 501–511.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Kamile Ün Açıkgöz (retired)
Appendices
Appendix A
The Scale of Attitudes Towards Physics (SAP)
Dear Students,
This scale was prepared to measure students’ attitudes towards physics. For the validity of this research, specifying your personal ideas has special importance. For each item below, please mark your choice by checking the appropriate box. Thank you for participation in this study.
What is the applicability level of the following to you? | Highly Applicable | Applicable | Neutral | Inapplicable | Highly Inapplicable | |
1. | I am afraid of physics courses. | |||||
2. | I am interested in everything related to physics. | |||||
3. | Physics courses are enjoyable for me. | |||||
4. | I don’t like physics courses. | |||||
5. | I study physics willingly. | |||||
6. | Physics courses are boring for me. | |||||
7. | I tend to avoid physics. | |||||
8. | Studying physics relaxes me. | |||||
9. | I spend my free time doing activities related to physics. | |||||
10. | If I had the chance, I would take the physics course off of the curriculum. | |||||
11. | The most interesting of the courses is physics. | |||||
12. | I would be happy if the physics class hours were reduced. | |||||
13. | The physics course is a forced study for me. | |||||
14. | I am usually not aware of how fast time passes in physics class. | |||||
15. | I am interested in the books related to physics. | |||||
16. | Answering a question or solving a problem related to physics gives me comfort. | |||||
17. | If I had the option, I would select another course instead of physics. | |||||
18 | I think physics is important. | |||||
19. | Learning the things related to physics is boring. | |||||
20. | I am usually busy with something else in the physics classes. | |||||
21. | I follow new developments in physics. | |||||
22. | Even hearing the term ‘physics’ bothers me. | |||||
23. | I think the physics course is necessary. | |||||
24. | I pay no attention to the money which I spent for physics books. | |||||
25. | I feel happier in physics classes than the other classes. | |||||
26. | I do not have any enthusiasm for physics class. | |||||
27. | Among all the courses I like physics best. | |||||
28. | Physics scares me. | |||||
29. | I enjoy listening to conversations related to physics. | |||||
30. | I lose my confidence in physics lectures. | |||||
31. | I attend physics classes unwillingly. | |||||
32. | I am not interested in physics except for when I am in class. | |||||
33. | The things I learn in the physics course make my daily life easier. | |||||
34. | I pay no attention to the time I spend in physics classes. | |||||
35. | I think that the time allocated for physics course is not enough. | |||||
36. | I think that physics should not be a compulsory course. | |||||
37. | I think physics is a course that needs to be learned. | |||||
38. | I never wish to study physics. | |||||
39. | Physics is one of my favorite courses. | |||||
40. | The more I learn physics, the more my desire to learn physics increases. |
Appendix B
Achievement Motivation Scale (AMS)
Dear Students,
This scale was prepared to measure students’ achievement motivation. For the validity of this research, specifying your personal opinions has special importance. For each item below, please indicate how frequently you did each activity by checking the appropriate box. Thank you for your participation in this study.
What is the applicability level of the following to you at school as a student? | Highly Applicable | Applicable | Neutral | Inapplicable | Highly Inapplicable | |
1. | When I am not successful in a course, I am alienated from that course. | |||||
2. | I usually finish the tasks I work on. | |||||
3. | Whatever I do, I try to do my best. | |||||
4. | When I am unsuccessful, I study persistently. | |||||
5. | I study too much. | |||||
6. | I attend all the classes whether attandence is obligatory or not. | |||||
7. | If I want, I can study a lot. | |||||
8. | I never start doing a new piece of homework before I finish the previous one. | |||||
9. | I don’t like to be successful at easy topics which everybody can easily do at school. | |||||
10. | I like to be successful at school. | |||||
11. | I only study my lessons during midterm periods. | |||||
12. | I feel good when I am successful at school. | |||||
13. | I want the content of the lessons to be full and satisfactory. | |||||
14. | Wasting class time disturbs me. | |||||
15. | Having higher grades or not is in my power. | |||||
16. | I like to answer difficult questions in the exams. | |||||
17. | I feel anxious when I cannot finish my homework. | |||||
18. | I like to study. | |||||
19. | I feel bored when I start to study. | |||||
20. | It is enough for me to have a satisfactory grade to pass the course. | |||||
21. | I don’t try to learn more than what is taught in the class. | |||||
22. | I begin to study immediately after the class is over. | |||||
23. | I want to live without being compelled to study. | |||||
24. | I try to do my best when carrying out the tasks I assumed. | |||||
25. | Having lower grades makes me sad. | |||||
26. | I always want to get the highest possible grade. | |||||
27. | I do not want to make any mistakes in the exams. | |||||
28. | I try hard to answer very difficult questions. | |||||
29. | I prefer simple topics to be taught instead of difficult ones. | |||||
30. | I go over my class notes even if there is not an exam. | |||||
31. | Besides homework, I do some extra work even if the teacher does not ask for it. | |||||
32. | I try to understand the lectures. | |||||
33. | I try to gain the teacher’s favour. | |||||
34. | Not being able to obtain higher grades makes me sad. | |||||
35. | If I haven’t finished my homework, I don’t feel comfortable. |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sezgin Selçuk, G., Sahin, M. & Açıkgöz, K.Ü. The Effects of Learning Strategy Instruction on Achievement, Attitude, and Achievement Motivation in a Physics Course. Res Sci Educ 41, 39–62 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9145-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9145-x