Does Topic Matter? Investigating Students’ Interest, Emotions and Learning when Writing Stories About Socioscientific Issues

IF 2.2 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Senka Henderson, Louisa Tomas, Donna King
{"title":"Does Topic Matter? Investigating Students’ Interest, Emotions and Learning when Writing Stories About Socioscientific Issues","authors":"Senka Henderson, Louisa Tomas, Donna King","doi":"10.1007/s11165-025-10239-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This case study of a Year 8 science class in South-East Queensland investigated the affective and cognitive experiences of engaging students in a science-writing project. Building on the work of Tomas, Rigano and Ritchie (2016), students wrote a series of short stories across two school terms about the socio-scientific issues (SSIs) of coal seam gas (CSG) mining and skin grafting. Data were collected using an emotion diary (in which students self-reported their interest and emotions at the end of each lesson), written thinking prompts (designed to elicit students’ evolving understanding of each SSI) and semi-structured, end-of-project student interviews. Three main assertions emerged from analysis of these data. First, students’ self-reported interest was statistically higher in relation to skin grafting compared to CSG. Second, interest and positive emotions reported by students in the skin grafting unit were associated mostly with the topic, while in the CSG mining unit, they were related mostly to pedagogical approaches. Thirdly, students could explain the scientific, social, moral and ethical dimensions of each SSI and an evidence-informed position at the end of both units. These assertions support our thesis that topic <i>does matter</i> when engaging students in writing stories about SSIs. At the same time, while the results of this study support the learning affordances of SSIs, they suggest that the teacher’s pedagogical decisions <i>also matter</i> in keeping students cognitively and affectively engaged when learning about a less interesting or relatable topic.</p>","PeriodicalId":47988,"journal":{"name":"Research in Science Education","volume":"67 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-025-10239-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This case study of a Year 8 science class in South-East Queensland investigated the affective and cognitive experiences of engaging students in a science-writing project. Building on the work of Tomas, Rigano and Ritchie (2016), students wrote a series of short stories across two school terms about the socio-scientific issues (SSIs) of coal seam gas (CSG) mining and skin grafting. Data were collected using an emotion diary (in which students self-reported their interest and emotions at the end of each lesson), written thinking prompts (designed to elicit students’ evolving understanding of each SSI) and semi-structured, end-of-project student interviews. Three main assertions emerged from analysis of these data. First, students’ self-reported interest was statistically higher in relation to skin grafting compared to CSG. Second, interest and positive emotions reported by students in the skin grafting unit were associated mostly with the topic, while in the CSG mining unit, they were related mostly to pedagogical approaches. Thirdly, students could explain the scientific, social, moral and ethical dimensions of each SSI and an evidence-informed position at the end of both units. These assertions support our thesis that topic does matter when engaging students in writing stories about SSIs. At the same time, while the results of this study support the learning affordances of SSIs, they suggest that the teacher’s pedagogical decisions also matter in keeping students cognitively and affectively engaged when learning about a less interesting or relatable topic.

话题重要吗?调查学生在写关于社会科学问题的故事时的兴趣、情绪和学习
这个案例研究调查了昆士兰东南部一个八年级科学班学生参与科学写作项目的情感和认知体验。基于Tomas, Rigano和Ritchie(2016)的工作,学生们在两个学期中写了一系列关于煤层气(CSG)开采和皮肤移植的社会科学问题(ssi)的短篇故事。数据收集使用情绪日记(学生在每节课结束时自我报告他们的兴趣和情绪),书面思考提示(旨在引出学生对每个SSI的不断发展的理解)和半结构化的,项目结束时的学生访谈。对这些数据的分析得出了三个主要结论。首先,与CSG相比,学生自我报告的对植皮的兴趣在统计上更高。其次,在植皮单元中,学生报告的兴趣和积极情绪主要与主题相关,而在CSG挖掘单元中,他们主要与教学方法相关。第三,学生可以解释每个SSI的科学、社会、道德和伦理维度,并在两个单元结束时给出证据。这些断言支持了我们的论点,即在吸引学生写关于ssi的故事时,主题确实很重要。与此同时,虽然本研究的结果支持ssi的学习启示,但它们表明,当学习不那么有趣或相关的主题时,教师的教学决策在保持学生的认知和情感参与方面也很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Research in Science Education
Research in Science Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
8.70%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: 2020 Five-Year Impact Factor: 4.021 2020 Impact Factor: 5.439 Ranking: 107/1319 (Education) – Scopus 2020 CiteScore 34.7 – Scopus Research in Science Education (RISE ) is highly regarded and widely recognised as a leading international journal for the promotion of scholarly science education research that is of interest to a wide readership. RISE publishes scholarly work that promotes science education research in all contexts and at all levels of education. This intention is aligned with the goals of Australasian Science Education Research Association (ASERA), the association connected with the journal. You should consider submitting your manscript to RISE if your research: Examines contexts such as early childhood, primary, secondary, tertiary, workplace, and informal learning as they relate to science education; and Advances our knowledge in science education research rather than reproducing what we already know. RISE will consider scholarly works that explore areas such as STEM, health, environment, cognitive science, neuroscience, psychology and higher education where science education is forefronted. The scholarly works of interest published within RISE reflect and speak to a diversity of opinions, approaches and contexts. Additionally, the journal’s editorial team welcomes a diversity of form in relation to science education-focused submissions. With this in mind, RISE seeks to publish empirical research papers. Empircal contributions are: Theoretically or conceptually grounded; Relevant to science education theory and practice; Highlight limitations of the study; and Identify possible future research opportunities. From time to time, we commission independent reviewers to undertake book reviews of recent monographs, edited collections and/or textbooks. Before you submit your manuscript to RISE, please consider the following checklist. Your paper is: No longer than 6000 words, including references. Sufficiently proof read to ensure strong grammar, syntax, coherence and good readability; Explicitly stating the significant and/or innovative contribution to the body of knowledge in your field in science education; Internationalised in the sense that your work has relevance beyond your context to a broader audience; and Making a contribution to the ongoing conversation by engaging substantively with prior research published in RISE. While we encourage authors to submit papers to a maximum length of 6000 words, in rare cases where the authors make a persuasive case that a work makes a highly significant original contribution to knowledge in science education, the editors may choose to publish longer works.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信