Abstract
Knowledge about the nature of scientific inquiry (NOSI) is not only an integral part of scientific literacy, but also essential for living and working as responsible citizens in the twenty-first century, and facing the danger of “fake science”. Although various NOSI instruments already exist, they primarily focus either on a different target group, i.e. pupils, place their content-related emphasis on experimentation, and/or are based on open-ended or multiple-choice testing response formats. To address this instrument gap, a closed-ended questionnaire with a dichotomous and a post-decision confidence rating response scale was developed and tested to evaluate the respondents’ understanding of eight NOSI aspects in a detailed yet economical manner. 148 German freshman biology student teachers participated in a sequential cross-sectional pilot study. First results indicate acceptable instrument reliability. There are certain items that seem to be answered correctly rather by coincidence or test intelligence, whereas others seem to suggest participants’ naïve NOSI views, or NOSI misconceptions. These findings imply that there is a need to further explore biology student teachers’ NOSI understanding to improve future university teaching. Moreover, further validity analyses for the newly developed testing instrument should be performed.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ayyavoo, G., Bencze, J., Corry, A., & van Oostveen, R. (2002). Correlational studies in school science: Beyond experimentation. OISE Papers in STSE Education, 3, 221–230.
Bencze, J. L. (1996). Correlational studies in school science: Breaking the science-experiment-certainty connection. School Science Review, 78(282), 95–101.
Copeland, S. (2019). On serendipity in science: Discovery at the intersection of chance and wisdom. Synthese, 196(6), 2385–2406.
Eid, M., Gollwitzer, M., & Schmitt, M. (2017). Statistik und Forschungsmethoden. Beltz Verlagsgruppe.
Fiedler, K., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Questionable research practices revisited. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(1), 45–52.
KMK. (2005). Beschlüsse der Kultusministerkonferenz – Bildungsstandards im Fach Biologie für den Mittleren Schulabschluss. Luchterhand München.
Krishna, A., & Peter, S. M. (2018). Questionable research practices in student final theses – Prevalence, attitudes, and the role of the supervisor’s perceived attitudes. PLoS One, 13(8), e0203470.
Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners’ understandings about scientific inquiry-the views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65–83.
Lederman, J., Lederman, N., Bartels, S., Jimenez, J., Akubo, M., Aly, S., et al. (2019). An international collaborative investigation of beginning seventh grade students’ understandings of scientific inquiry: Establishing a baseline. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(4), 486–515.
Ludwig-Mayerhofer, W. (2017). ILMES – Internet-Lexikon der Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung: Faktorenanalyse. Retrieved 5th October, 2020, from http://wlm.userweb.mwn.de/Ilmes/ilm_f3.htm
Mayer, J. (2007). Erkenntnisgewinnung als wissenschaftliches Problemlösen. In Theorien in der biologiedidaktischen Forschung (pp. 177–186). Springer.
Mesci, G., Çavuş-Güngören, S., & Yesildag-Hasancebi, F. (2020). Investigating the development of pre-service science teachers’ NOSI views and related teaching practices. International Journal of Science Education, 42(1), 50–69.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Retrieved 1 October 2020, from https://www.nextgenscience.org/
Osburn, H. G. (2000). Coefficient alpha and related internal consistency reliability coefficients. Psychological methods, 5(3), 343.
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Retrieved 30 October 2020, from http://www.r-project.org/index.html
Raubenheimer, J. (2004). An item selection procedure to maximise scale reliability and validity. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 30(4), 59–64.
Revelle, W. R. (2020). psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research.
Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2008). An instrument to assess views of scientific inquiry: The VOSI questionnaire. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Baltimore, MD.
Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Abd-el-Khalick, F. (2012). A series of misrepresentations: A response to Allchin’s whole approach to assessing nature of science understandings. Science Education, 96(4), 685–692.
Temiz, B. K., Taşar, M. F., & Tan, M. (2006). Development and validation of a multiple format test of science process skills. International Education Journal, 7(7), 1007–1027.
Thoma, G.-B., & Köller, O. (2018). Test-wiseness: ein unterschätztes Konstrukt? Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 8(1), 63–80.
Wellnitz, N., & Mayer, J. (2013). Erkenntnismethoden in der Biologie – Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Kompetenzmodells. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 19, 315–345.
Zion, M., Schwartz, R. S., Rimerman-Shmueli, E., & Adler, I. (2018). Supporting teachers’ understanding of nature of science and inquiry through personal experience and perception of inquiry as a dynamic process. Research in Science Education, 50(4), 1281–1304.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wacker, C.C., Barth, M., Stahl, C., Schlüter, K. (2022). Toward a Questionnaire to Assess Biology Student Teachers’ Knowledge of the Nature of Scientific Inquiry (NOSI). In: Korfiatis, K., Grace, M. (eds) Current Research in Biology Education. Contributions from Biology Education Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89480-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89480-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-89479-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-89480-1
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)