TRACKING GRADE 11 STUDENTS’ LEARNING PATHWAYS OF SCIENTIFIC REASONING THROUGH ADAPTIVE INSTRUCTION IN BIOLOGY การแกะรอยเส้นทางการเรียนรู้ในการให้เหตุผลเชิงวิทยาศาสตร์ของนักเรียนชั้นมัธยมศึกษาปีที่ 5 ที่เรียนด้วยการจัดการเรียนรู้แบบปรับเหมาะในรายวิชาชีววิทยา
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The study aimed to investigate 38 eleventh graders’ learning pathways of scientific reasoning as they went through the adaptive instruction. Data were obtained from the scientific reasoning test consisted of 2 folds of scientific reasoning ability: deduction (Probabilistic Thinking, Control Variables, and Establishing Conclusion) and induction (Enumerative Generalizations, Analogical Comparisons, and Eliminative Causal Reasoning). A content analysis was employed to track students’ learning pathways of the two reasoning abilities. Results indicate 3 learning pathways. The pathways were similar in term of their route on deductive reasoning, and the relationship between deduction and induction reasonings. For instead, the children can develop the eliminative causal reasoning if they already have deductive ability to control variables and propose possible hypotheses (probabilistic thinking). The different point among these 3 pathways was started from the connecting route between deduction and induction. Results of this study suggest an appropriate sequencing step of learning scientific reasoning that could be used in a biology course and curriculum design.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The owner of the article does not copy or violate any of its copyright. If any copyright infringement occurs or prosecution, in any case, the Editorial Board is not involved in all the rights to the owner of the article to be performed.
References
Adadan, E., Trundle, K. C., & Irving, K. E. (2010). Exploring Grade 11 students' conceptual pathways of the particulate nature of matter in the context of metarepresentational instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 1004-1035.
Akerson, V., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). How should I know what scientists do? —I am just a kid: Fourth-grade students’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17, 1-11.
Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2004). Learning trajectories in mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6, 81-89.
Clements, D. H. (2007). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for research-based curricula. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 35-70.
Corcoran, T., & Silander, M. (2009). Instruction in high schools: The evidence and the Challenge. The Future of Children, 19(1), 157-183. doi:10.1353/foc.0.0026.
Inoue, N. (2015). Beyond Action: Psychology of action research for mindful educational improvement. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Kakosimos. K. E. (2015). Example of a micro-adaptive instruction methodology for the improvement of flipped classrooms and adaptive learning based on advanced blended learning tools improvement of flipped-classrooms and adaptive-learning based on advanced blended-learning tools. Education for Chemical Engineers, 12, 1-11.
Lawson, A. E. (1985). A Review of research on formal reasoning and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(7), 569-671.
Lawson, A. E. (2005). What is the role of induction and deduction in reasoning and scientific inquiry? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 716-740.
Lazonder, A. W., & Kamp, E. (2012). Bit by bit or all at once? Splitting up the inquiry task to promote children’s scientific reasoning. Learning and Instruction 22, 458-464.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Overholser, J. C. (1993). Element of the Socratic method: II inductive reasoning. Psychotherapy, 30(1), 75-85.
Shultz, T. R. (2015). Connectionist models of development. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 1-8). Oxford: Elsevier.
Soncha, N., Ketsing, J., & Kongsema, M. (2018). Grade 10th students’ scientific reasoning in biology. In proceedings of 56th Kasetsart University Annual Conference (pp. 116-125). Bangkok: Kasetsart University. [in Thai]
Suchairut, N., Sawekngam, W., & Tanak, E. (2016). Development of an instructional model based on model-based inquiry and context-based learning approaches to promote scientific reasoning and transfer of learning abilities of lower secondary students. Journal of education Naresuan university, 15(1), 106-113. [in Thai]
Sullivan, P., Mousley, J., & Zevenbergen, R. (2004). Describing elements of mathematics lessons that accommodate diversity in student background. In M. J. Joines and A. Fuglestad. (eds.), The 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 4257-4265). Bergen: Norway.
Suttakun, L., & Ladachart, L. (2014). Fourth grade students’ scientific reasoning. Naresuan University Journal: Science and Technology, 21(3), 107-123. [in Thai]
Vaughn, M. 2015. Adaptive teaching: Reflective practice of two elementary teachers’ visions and adaptations during literacy instruction. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 16(1), 43-60.
Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20(1), 99-149.