Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ GENERATED QUESTIONS IN LABORATORY LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

Journal Name:

  • Journal of Technology and Science Education

Publication Year:

  • 2012
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.36

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
In order to attain a reliable laboratory work assessment, we argue taking the Learning Environment as a core concept and a research paradigm that considers the factors affecting the laboratory as a particularly complex educational context. With regard to Laboratory Learning Environments (LLEs), a well known approach is the SLEI (Science Laboratory Environment Inventory). The aim of this research is to design and apply an alternative and qualitative assessment tool to characterize Laboratory Learning Environments in an introductory course of organic chemistry. An alternative and qualitative assessment tool would be useful for providing feed-back for experimental learning improvement; serving as a complementary triangulation tool in educational research on LLEs; and generating meaningful categories in order to design quantitative research instruments. Toward this end, spontaneous questions by students have been chosen as a reliable source of information. To process these questions, a methodology based on the Grounded Theory has been developed to provide a framework for characterizing LLEs. This methodology has been applied in two case studies. The conclusions lead us to argue for using more holistic assessment tools in both everyday practice and research. Likewise, a greater attention should be paid to metacognition to achieve suitable self-perception concerning students’ previous knowledge and manipulative skills.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-analysis-students-generated-questions-laboratory-learning-environments.pdf
  • 1
46-55
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Bravo, A., & Fernández del Valle, J. (2000). La evaluación convencional frente a los nuevos modelos de evaluación auténtica. Psicothema, 12(2), 95-99.
Byrne, M. S. (1990). More effective practical work. Education in Chemistry, 27, 12-13.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03057260701828101
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Struyven, K. (2005). Students’ perceptions of a problem-based learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 8, 41-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10984-005-7948-x
Fraser, B. J. (2002). Learning environments research: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. In Swee Chiew Goh & Myint Swe Khine, (Eds.), Studies in Educational Learning Environments. Perth, Australia: Murdoch University.
Fraser, B., Gidding, G. J., & McRobbie, C. J. (1992). The SLEI forms. In B. J. Fraser et al. (Eds.), Assessing the climate of science laboratory classes. Perth, Australia: Key Centre for School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University of Technology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/9789812777133_0001
Gijbels, D., Van den Watering, G., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, F. (2006). New learning environments and constructivism: The students’ perspective. Instructional Science, 34, 213-226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-3347-z
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2006). Theoretical Sampling. In N. K. Denzin (Eds.), Sociological methods: A Sourcebook. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction publishers.
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, 776-791. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.10111
Hofstein, A. (2004). The laboratory in chemistry education: thirty years of experience with developments, implementation and research. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 5, 247-264.
Hofstein, A., Nahum, T. L., & Shore, R. (2001). Assessment of the learning environment of inquiry-type laboratories in high school chemistry. Learning Environments Research, 4, 193-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1012467417645
Llorens-Molina, J. A. (2008). Design and assessment of an online prelab model in general chemistry: A case study. Journal of the Research Center for Educational Technology, 4(2), 15-31.
O’Neill, H. W. (1967). Response style influence in public opinion surveys. Public Opinion Quartely, 31(1), 95-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/267487
Journal of Technology and Science Education - http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.36
Vol. 2(1), 2012, pp 55
Onwuegbuzie, A., & Leech, N. (2005). On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(5), 375-387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645570500402447
Pedrosa de Jesús, M. H., Neri de Souza, F., Teixeira-Dias, J., & Watts, M. (2004). Students´ questions as organisers for small group learning in chemistry. Proceedings of the 7th ECRICE, 3rd ECCE, Slovenia, Ljubjljana.
Qualitative data analysis (2002-2012). Retrieved January 30, 2012, from http://www.atlasti.com/
Richardson, J. T. E. (2004). Methodological issues in questionnaire-based research on student learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 347-358.
Teixeira-Dias, J., Pedrosa de Jesús, M. H., Neri de Souza, F., & Watts, M. (2005). Teaching for quality learning chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 7, 1123-1137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690500102813
Wilson, B. J. (1995). Why we talk about Learning environments? Educational Technology, 35(5), 25-30.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com