Influence of Motivating Science Class, Family, and Peer Models on Students’ Approaches to Learning Science: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis

Abstract

Classroom environment, family, and peers are important factors in influencing students’ science learning. The primary aim of this study was to examine the effects of three environmental factors related to science learning (motivating science class, family models, and peer models) on students’ approaches to learning science (deep approach and surface approach). The sample comprised 308 students in grades 8 and 9 from ten secondary schools. Research instruments were Simpson-Troost Attitude Questionnaire-Revised (STAQ-R) (Owen et al. 2008) and Approaches to Learning Science (ALS) questionnaire (Lee et al. 2008). A structural equation modeling analysis procedure indicated that motivating science class and family models were the strongest predictors of students’ deep approaches to learning science. Further, family models were found to have a significant direct and negative relationship with surface approaches to learning science. The results also revealed that motivating science class had a significant direct effect on peer models. In addition, other hypothesized relationships were not statistically significant. Accordingly, motivating science class and peer models had no significant association with surface approaches to learning science. Also, peer models were found to have no significant association with deep approaches to learning science. These pieces of evidence indicate that a motivating science class and a family who have positive attitudes towards science and are somewhat engaged with science may influence students to adopt deeper approaches to learning science. The results also offer implications for science teaching and learning and raise the potential role of science classroom, parents, and siblings in students’ approach to learning science.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Azevedo, F. S. (2011). Lines of practice: a practice-centered theory of interest relationships. Cognition and Instruction, 29, 147–184.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baeten, M., Dochy, F., Struyven, K., Parmentier, E., & Vanderbruggen, A. (2016). Student-centred learning environments: an investigation into student teachers’ instructional preferences and approaches to learning. Learning Environments Research, 19, 43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baeten, M., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2013). Enhancing students’ approaches to learning: the added value of gradually implementing case-based learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 315–336.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baeten, M., Kyndt, M., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5, 243–260.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.

  7. Bembenutty, H., White, M. C., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2016). Applying social cognitive theory in the development of self-regulated competencies throughout K-12 grades. In A. Lipnevich, F. Preckel, & R. Roberts (Eds.), Psychosocial skills and school systems in the 21st century. The Springer series on human exceptionality (pp. 215–239). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bryan, R. R., Glynn, S. M., & Kittleson, J. M. (2011). Motivation, achievement, and advanced placement intent of high school students learning science. Science Education, 95, 1049–1065.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Breakwell, G. M., & Beardsell, S. (1992). Gender, parental and peer influence upon science attitudes and activities. Public Understanding of Science, 1, 183–197.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bruinsma, M., & Jansen, E. P. W. A. (2007). Educational productivity in higher education: an examination of part of the Walberg educational productivity model. School Effectiveness and School Improvement: An International Journal of Research, Policy and Practice, 18, 45–65.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cano, F., & Cardelle-Elawar, M. (2008). Family environment, epistemological beliefs, learning strategies, and academic performance: a path analysis. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs: epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 219–239). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chen, S.-F., Lin, C.-Y., Wang, J.-R., Lin, S.-W., & Kao, H.-L. (2012). A cross-grade comparison to examine the context effect on the relationships among family resources, school climate, learning participation, science attitude, and science achievement based on TIMSS 2003 in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 2089–2106.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2000). Learning in science: a comparison of deep and surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 109–138.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Crowley, K., Callanan, M. A., Jipson, J. L., Galco, J., Topping, K., & Shrager, J. (2001). Shared scientific thinking in everyday parent-child activity. Science Education, 85, 712–732.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dart, B., Burnett, P., Boulton-Lewis, G., Campbell, J., Smith, D., & McCrindle, A. (1999). Classroom learning environments and students’ approaches to learning. Learning Environments Research, 2, 137–156.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dabney, K. P., Chakraverty, D., & Tai, R. H. (2013). The association of family influence and initial interest in science. Science Education, 97, 395–409.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Loyens, S. M. M., Marcq, H., & Gijbel, D. (2016). Deep and surface learning in problem-based learning: a review of the literature. Advances in Health Science Education, 21, 1087–1112.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Duarte, A. A. (2007). Conceptions of learning and approaches to learning in Portuguese students. Higher Education, 54, 781–794.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Eagly, A., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth group/Thomson Learning.

  22. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Efstathiou, N. T., Risvas, G. S., Theodoraki, E.-M. M., Galanaki, E. P., & Zampelas, A. D. (2016). Health education: effects on classroom climate and physical activity. Health Education Journal, 75, 799–810.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Entwistle, N., & Tuit, H. (1995). Approaches to studying and perceptions of the learning environment across disciplines. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1995(64), 93–103.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with observational variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fortus, D., & Vedder-Weiss, D. (2014). Measuring students’ continuing motivation for science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51, 497–522.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Fraser, B. J. (2007). Classroom learning environments. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 103–124). Mahwah.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  29. General Medical Council (2003). Approving educational environments. Retrieved from https://www.gmc-uk.org/Educational_Environments___May_2013.pdf_52096709.pdf

  30. Gennaro, E. D., Hereid, N., & Ostlund, K. (1986). A study of the latent effects of family learning courses in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 771–781.

    Google Scholar 

  31. George, R., & Kaplan, D. (1998). A structural model of parent and teacher influences on science attitudes of eighth graders: evidence from NELS: 88. Science Education, 82, 93–109.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gijbels, D., Donche, V., Richardson, J. T. E., & Vermunt, J. D. (2014). Learning patterns in higher education: dimensions and research perspectives. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gijbels, D., Segers, M., & Struyf, E. (2008). Constructivist learning environments and the (im)possibility to change students’ perceptions of assessment demands and approaches to learning. Instructional Science, 36, 431–443.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1992). Students’ perceptions of teacher behaviors as motivating and demotivating factors in college classes. Communication Quarterly, 40, 239–252.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Grewal, R., Cote, J. A., & Baumgartner, H. (2004). Multicollinearity and measurement error in structural equation models: implications for theory testing. Marketing Science, 23, 519–529.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hair Jr., J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Haladyna, T., Olsen, R., & Shaughnessy, J. (1982). Relations of student, teacher, and learning environment variables to attitudes toward science. Science Education, 66, 671–687.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hall, R. L., & Schaverien, L. (2001). Families’ engagement with young children’s science and technology learning at home. Science Education, 85, 454–481.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Harris, R. D. (2005). Unlocking the learning potential in peer mediation: an evaluation of peer mediator modeling and disputant learning. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 23, 141–164.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ho, E. S. C. (2010). Family influences on science learning among Hong Kong adolescents: what we learned from PISA. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 409–428.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (2009, 1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

  42. Hofstein, A., & Kempa, R. F. (1985). Motivating strategies in science education: attempt at an analysis. European Journal of Science Education, 7, 221–229.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Jamshidi Avanaki, H., & Sadeghi, B. (2014). A comparative study of teacher education in Iran and the UK. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5, 1153–1159.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Jones, M. H., Estell, D. B., & Alexander, J. M. (2008). Friends, classmates, and self-regulated learning: discussions with peers inside and outside the classroom. Metacognition Learning, 3, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL 8.80 for Windows. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.

  46. Kaya, S., & Lundeen, C. (2010). Capturing parents’ individual and institutional interest toward involvement in science education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 825–841.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Kember, D., Biggs, J., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2004). Examining the multidimensionality of approaches to learning through the development of a revised version of the Learning Process Questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 261–279.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kiamanesh, A. R. (2013). Trends in students’ science achievement across TIMSS studies with emphasis on gender differences in 18 countries. Journal of Iranian Curriculum Studies, 7, 93–116 [In Persian].

    Google Scholar 

  49. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Klopfer, L. E. (1971). Evaluation of learning in science. In B. S. Bloom, J. T. Hastings, & G. F. Madaus (Eds.), Handbook of formative and summative evaluation of student learning. London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Koballa, T. R., Jr., & Glynn, S. M. (2007). Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 75–102). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  52. Koballa Jr., T. R., & Crawley, F. E. (1985). The influence of attitude on science teaching and learning. School Science and Mathematics, 85, 222–232.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Kuusisto, E., Gholami, G., & Tirri, K. (2016). Finnish and Iranian teachers’ views on their competence to teach purpose. Journal of Education for Teaching, 42, 541–555.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Lawrenz, F. (1976). The prediction of student attitude toward science from student perception of the classroom learning environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13, 509–515.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Lee, M.-H., Johanson, R. E., & Tsai, C.-C. (2008). Exploring Taiwanese high school students’ conceptions of and approaches to learning science through a structural equation modeling analysis. Science Education, 92, 191–220.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Liem, G. A. D. (2016). The effects of culture and sex on students’ approaches to learning: inspiring insights from David Watkins’ intellectual inquiries. In R. B. King & A. B. I. Bernardo (Eds.), The psychology of Asian learners (pp. 217–233). Singapore: Springer Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). A multi-dimensional instrument for evaluation Taiwanese high school students’ science learning self-efficacy in relation to their approaches to learning science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11, 1275–1301.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Lopez, B. G., Cervero, G. A., Rodriguez, J. M. S., Felix, E. G., & Esteban, P. R. G. (2013). Learning styles and approaches to learning in excellent and average first-year university students. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28, 1361–1379.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Luce, M. R., Goldman, S., & Vea, T. (2017). Designing for family science explorations anytime, anywhere. Science Education, 101, 251–277.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1984). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 39–58). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Marton, F. (1983). Beyond individual differences. Educational Psychology, 3, 289–303.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Minaei, A. (2013). Assessment of structural comparability and analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) and differential test functioning (DTF) of TIMSS 2007 8thgrade science test among Iranian and American students. Educational Measurement, 3, 1–188 [In Persian].

    Google Scholar 

  63. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Goh, S., & Cotter, K. (Eds.) (2016). TIMSS 2015 Encyclopedia: education policy and curriculum in mathematics and science. Retrieved from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center website: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/encyclopedia/

  64. Nolen, S. B. (2003). Learning environment, motivation, and achievement in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 347–368.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Osborne, J. F., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049–1079.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Owen, S. V., Toepperwein, M., Marshall, C. E., Lichtenstein, M. J., Blalock, C. L., Liu, Y., et al. (2008). Finding pearls: psychometric reevaluation of the Simpson-Troost Attitude Questionnaire. Science Education, 92, 1076–1095.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Panizzon, D., & Levins, L. (1997). An analysis of the role of peers in supporting female students’ choices in science subjects. Research in Science Education, 27, 251–270.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E., & Entwistle, N. (2013). Assessing students’ experiences of teaching–learning environments and approaches to learning: validation of a questionnaire in different countries and varying contexts. Learning Environments Research, 16, 201–215.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Komulainen, E., Litmanen, T., & Hirsto, L. (2010). Students’ approaches to learning and their experiences of the teaching–learning environment in different disciplines. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 269–282.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Pascarella, E. T., Walberg, H. J., Junker, L. K., & Heartel, G. D. (1981). Continuing motivation in science for early and late adolescents. American Educational Research Journal, 18, 439–452.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Patrick, H., & Ryan, A. M. (2008). What do students think about when evaluating their classroom’s mastery goal structure? An examination of young adolescents’ explanations. The Journal of Experimental Education, 77, 99–124.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Perera, L. D. H. (2014). Parents’ attitudes towards science and their children’s science achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 3021–3041.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50, 85–129.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Reynolds, A. J., & Walberg, H. J. (1992). A structural model of science achievement and attitude: an extension to high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 371–382.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Richardson, J. T. E. (2015). Approaches to learning or levels of processing: what did Marton and Säljö (1976a) really say? The legacy of the work of the Göteborg group in the 1970s. Interchange, 46, 239–269.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Roman, S., Cuestas, P. J., & Fenollar, P. (2008). An examination of the interrelationships between self-esteem, others’ expectations, family support, learning approaches and academic achievement. Studies in Higher Education, 33, 127–128.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Saab, N., van joolingen, W. R., & van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2009). The relation of learners’ motivation with the process of collaborative scientific discovery learning. Educational Studies, 35, 205–222.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2004). Attitudes toward chemistry among 11th grade students in high schools in Greece. Science Education, 88, 535–547.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Schibeci, R. A. (1983). Selecting appropriate attitudinal objectives for school science. Science Education, 67, 595–603.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Schütte, K., & Köller, O. (2015). ‘Discover, understand, implement, and transfer’: effectiveness of an intervention programme to motivate students for science. International Journal of Science Education, 37, 2306–2325.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1990). A summary of major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education, 74, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Sha, L., Shcunn, C., Bathgate, M., & Ben-Eliyahu, A. (2016). Families support their children’s’ success in science learning by influencing interest and self-efficacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 450–472.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Smith, C. F., & Mathias, H. S. (2010). Medical students’ approaches to learning anatomy: students’ experiences and relations to the learning environment. Clinical Anatomy, 23, 106–114.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Smith, F. M., & Hausafus, C. O. (1998). Relationship of family support and ethnic minority students’ achievement in science and mathematics. Science Education, 82, 111–125.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Struyven, K., Dochy, F., Janssens, S., & Gielen, S. (2006). On the dynamics of students’ approaches to learning: the effects of the teaching/learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16, 279–294.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Swarat, S., Ortony, A., & Revelle, W. (2012). Activity matters: understanding student interest in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 515–537.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2000). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Tait, H., & Entwistle, N. J. (1996). Identifying students at risk through ineffective study strategies. Higher Education, 31, 97–116.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Talton, E. L., & Simpson, R. D. (1985). Relationships between peer and individual attitudes toward science among adolescent students. Science Education, 69, 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Talton, E. L., & Simpson, R. D. (1986). Relationships of attitudes toward self, family, and school with attitude toward science among adolescents. Science Education, 70, 365–374.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Tare, M., French, J., Frazier, B. N., Diamond, J., & Evans, E. M. (2011). Explanatory parent–child conversation predominates at an evolution exhibit. Science Education, 95, 720–744.

    Google Scholar 

  92. The Islamic Republic of Iran Ministry of Education. (2012). National Curriculum of Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran: Author [In Persian].

    Google Scholar 

  93. U.S. Department of Education (2005). Helping your child learn science. Washington, D.C.: Author.

  94. van Aalderen-Smeets, S. I., Walma van der Molen, J. H., & Asma, L. J. F. (2012). Primary teachers' attitude toward science: a new theoretical framework. Science Education, 96, 158–182.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Vedder-Weiss, D., & Fortus, D. (2018). Teachers’ mastery goals: using a self-report survey to study the relations between teaching practices and students’ motivation for science learning. Research in Science Education, 48, 180–206.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Vedder-Weiss, D., & Fortus, D. (2013). School, teacher, peers, and parents’ goals emphases and adolescents’ motivation to learn science in and out of school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 952–988.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Velayutham, S., & Aldridge, J. M. (2013). Influence of psychosocial classroom environment of students’ motivation and self-regulation in science learning: a structural equation modeling approach. Research in Science Education, 43, 507–527.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Walberg, H. J. (1984). Improving the productivity of America’s schools. Educational Leadership, 41, 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Wang, C.-L., & Liou, P.-Y. (2017). Students’ motivational beliefs in science learning, school motivational contexts, and science achievement in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 39, 898–917.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Young, D. J., & Reynolds, A. J. (1996). Science achievement and educational productivity: a hierarchical linear model. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 272–279.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Yuen-Yee, G. C., & Watkins, D. (1994). Classroom environment and approaches to learning: an investigation of the actual and preferred perceptions of Hong Kong secondary school students. Instructional Science, 22, 233–246.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Zeegers, P. (2001). Approaches to learning in science: a longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 115–132.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Zhu, C., Valcke, M., & Schellens, T. (2008). A cross-cultural study of Chinese and Flemish university students: do they differ in learning conceptions and approaches to learning? Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 120–127.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asghar Soltani.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Table 4 Questionnaire items on constructs of science learning environments and approaches to learning science

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Soltani, A. Influence of Motivating Science Class, Family, and Peer Models on Students’ Approaches to Learning Science: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis. Res Sci Educ 50, 1665–1687 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9748-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Motivating science class
  • Family models
  • Peer models
  • Approaches to learning science
  • Structural equation modeling