The Effect of Inquiry-Based Laboratory Applications on Students’ Motivation and Learning Strategies

Author :  

Year-Number: 2016-Volume 8, Issue 2
Language : null
Konu : null

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the effects of inquiry-based laboratory applications on students’ motivation and learning strategies. The research was conducted in the form of one group pretest – posttest design. 22 undergraduate students taking the course Chemistry Experiments in Secondary Education in the spring semester of 2014-2015 academic year were included in the research. Chemistry Motivation Questionnaire and Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire were employed in the research as the tool of data collection. Paired-samples t test was used for related samples in order to check whether or not students’ pre-experimental and post-experimental motivations and their learning strategies differed significantly. The findings obtained demonstrated that intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, self-determination and career motivation – which were the sub-dimensions of motivation- apart from grade motivation and organization, elaboration, critical thinking and metacognitive self-regulation – which were the sub-dimensions of learning strategies- developed significantly as a result of laboratory applications based on inquiry.

Keywords

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the effects of inquiry-based laboratory applications on students’ motivation and learning strategies. The research was conducted in the form of one group pretest – posttest design. 22 undergraduate students taking the course Chemistry Experiments in Secondary Education in the spring semester of 2014-2015 academic year were included in the research. Chemistry Motivation Questionnaire and Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire were employed in the research as the tool of data collection. Paired-samples t test was used for related samples in order to check whether or not students’ pre-experimental and post-experimental motivations and their learning strategies differed significantly. The findings obtained demonstrated that intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, self-determination and career motivation – which were the sub-dimensions of motivation- apart from grade motivation and organization, elaboration, critical thinking and metacognitive self-regulation – which were the sub-dimensions of learning strategies- developed significantly as a result of laboratory applications based on inquiry.

Keywords


  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., BouJaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N.G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H.L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88, 397-419. doi: 10.1002/sce.10118

  • Akyol, G., Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2010). The contribution of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to students’science achievement. Educational Research and Evaluation, 16(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1080/13803611003672348

  • Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J. W., Sampson, V. D., Annetta, L.A., & Granger, E. M. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accountability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94, 577-616. doi: 10.1002/sce.20390

  • Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M. & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3), 369–398. doi: 10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139

  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö. E., Demirel, F., & Özkahveci, Ö. (2004). Güdülenme ve öğrenme stratejileri ölçeği’nin Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 4(2), 207-239.

  • Cheung, D. (2008). Facilitating chemistry teachers to implement inquiry-based laboratory work. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,6(1), 107-130. doi: 10.1007/s10763-007-9102-y

  • Cohen, J.W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Das, N., & Sinha, S. (2000). Problem-oriented small-group discussion in the teaching of biochemistry laboratory practicals. Biochemical Education, 28,154-155.

  • Deryakulu, D. (2004). Üniversite öğrencilerinin öğrenme ve ders çalışma stratejileri ile epistemolojik inançları arasındaki ilişki. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 38, 230-249.

  • Deters, K.M. (2005). Student opinions regarding inquiry-based labs. Journal of Chemical Education, 82, 1178- 1180. doi: 10.1021/ed082p1178

  • Domin, D.S. (1999). A review of laboratory instruction styles. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 543-547. doi: 10.1021/ed076p543

  • Dori, Y. J., Sasson, I., Kaberman, Z., & Herscovitz, O. (2004). Integrating case-based computerized laboratories into high school chemistry. The Chemical Educator, 9, 1–5.

  • Eilam, B. (2002). Strata of comprehending ecology: Looking through the prism of feeding relations. Science Education, 86(5), 645–671. doi: 10.1002/sce.10041

  • Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H.H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill.

  • George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

  • Gibson, H., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86, 693–705. doi: 10.1002/sce.10039

  • Glynn, S. M., & Koballa, T. R., Jr. (2006). Motivation to learn college science. In J. J. Mintzes ve W. H. Leonard (Eds.), Handbook of college science teaching (pp. 25-32). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.

  • Glynn, S. M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Science Motivation Questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 11591176. doi: 10.1002/tea.20442

  • Gözütok, D. (1990). Etkili öğrenme için strateji geliştirmede öğrencilere yardım. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(2), 687-692.

  • Hackling, M.W., Goodrum, D. & Rennie, L.J. (2001). The state of science in Australian secondary schools. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 47(4), 6-17.

  • Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 655– 675. doi: 10.1002/1098-2736

  • Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 71(256), 33-40.

  • Hodson, D. (1998). Is this really what scientists do? Seeking a more authentic science in and beyond the school laboratory. In J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science: Which way now? (pp. 93-108). London: Routledge.

  • Hofstein, A., & Lunetta V.N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88 (1), 28-54. doi: 10.1002/sce.10106

  • Hofstein A., & Lunetta, V. N., (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52, 201-217. Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2007). The laboratory in science education: The state of the art. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 8(2), 105-108.

  • Hofstein, A., & Walberg, H. J. (1995). Instructional strategies. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Improving science education (pp. 70-89). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.

  • 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(3), 193-207. doi: 10.1023/A:1012467417645

  • Kadıoğlu, C. (2014). Implementation of self-regulatory instruction based on guided inquiry approach to promote students’ achievement in solubility equilibrium and acids and bases, motivation, and learning strategies. Unpublished Dissertation, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

  • Keller, J.M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 383-434). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Köseoğlu, F., & Tümay, H. (2015). Fen eğitiminde yapılandırmacılık ve yeni öğretim yöntemleri. Ankara: Palme Yayıncılık.

  • Lazarowitz R., & Tamir P. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. In Gabel D. L., Handbook of research on science teaching (pp. 94-127). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

  • Lunetta, V.N. (1998). The school science laboratory: Historical perspectives and contexts for contemporary teaching. In B.J. Fraser & K.G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 249-262). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

  • Lunetta, V.N., & Tamir, P. (1979). Matching lab activities with teaching goals. The Science Teacher, 46(5), 22-24.

  • Millar, R. (1998). Rhetoric and reality: What practical work in science education is really for? In J. Wellington (Ed.). Practical work in science: Which way now? New York: Rutledge.

  • Nakhleh, M.B., Polles, J., & Malina, E. (2002). Learning chemistry in a laboratory Environment. In J.K. Gilbert et al. (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 69-94). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  • Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows (Versions 10 and 11). Buckingham: Open University Press.

  • Parkinson, J. (2004). Improving secondary science teaching. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

  • Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational research review, 14, 47-61. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003

  • Perry, V. R., & C. P. Richardson. (2001). The New Mexico tech Master of Science teaching program: An exemplary model of ınquiry-based learning. 31 st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Reno.

  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991) A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning. Ann Arbor: Michigan. ED 338 122.

  • Pintrich, P.R., & De Groot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.

  • Polman, J.L. (2000). Designing project-based science. New York: Teachers College Press.

  • Salovaara, H. (2005). An exploration of student’s strategy use in inquiry-based computer-supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 39–52. doi: 10.1111/j.13652729.2005.00112.x

  • Sarı, U., & Güven, G. B. (2013). Etkileşimli tahta destekli sorgulamaya dayalı fizik öğretiminin başarı ve motivasyona etkisi ve öğretmen adaylarının öğretime yönelik görüşleri. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(2), 110-143. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/nefmed204

  • Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-139. doi: 10.1007/s11165005-3917-8

  • Shimoda, T.A., White, B.Y. & Frederiksen, J.R. (2002). Students goal orientation in learning inquiry skills with modifiable software advisors. International Science Education Journal, 88, 244–263. doi: 10.1002/sce.10003

  • Stoddart, T., Pinal, A., Latzke, M., & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry science and language development for English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(8), 664– 687. doi: 10.1002/tea.10040

  • Şen, Ş., & Yılmaz, A. (2014). Lise ve üniversite öğrencilerinin kimyaya yönelik motivasyonlarının incelenmesi: karşılaştırmalı bir çalışma. Batı Anadolu Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi (BAED), 5(10), 17-37.

  • Şen, Ş., Yılmaz, A., & Geban, Ö. (2015). The effects of process oriented guided inquiry learning environment on students' self-regulated learning skills. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 66, 54-66.

  • Taraban, R., Box, C., Myers, R., Pollard, R., & Bowen, C.W. (2007). Effects of active-learning experiences and achievement, attitudes, and behaviours in high school biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 960-979. doi: 10.1002/tea.20183

  • Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 403-418. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1990.tb17229.x

  • Tobin, K., & Gallagher, J.J. (1987). What happens in high school science classrooms? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(6), 549-560. doi: 10.1080/0022027870190606

  • Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., Tsai, C. C., & Cheng, S. F. (2005). Investigating the effectiveness of inquiry instruction on the motivation of different learning styles students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(4), 541-566. doi: 10.1007-s10763-004-6827-8

  • Wallace, C.S., Tsoi, M.Y., Calkin, J., & Darley, M. (2003). Learning from inquiry-based laboratories in nonmajor biology: An interpretative study of the relationships among inquiry experience, epistemologies, and conceptual growth. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 986

  • 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 NY: Macmilian Publishing Company.

  • Welch, W.W., Klopfer, L.E., Aikenhead, G.S. & Robinson, J.T. (1981). The role of inquiry in science education: Analysis and recommendations. Science Education, 65(1), 33–50. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730650106

  • Wellington, J. (1998). Practical work in science: Time for a reappraisal. In J. Wellington, (Ed.), Practical work in school science: Which way now? (pp. 3-15). London: Routledge.

  • Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy-use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1),51-59.

  • Zusho, A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Skill and will: The role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1081-1094. doi: 10.1080/0950069032000052207

                                                                                                                                                                                                        
  • Article Statistics