Uncovering Student Strategies for Solving Scientific Inquiry Tasks: Insights from Student Process Data in PISA

IF 2.2 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Nani Teig
{"title":"Uncovering Student Strategies for Solving Scientific Inquiry Tasks: Insights from Student Process Data in PISA","authors":"Nani Teig","doi":"10.1007/s11165-023-10134-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The advancement of technology has led to a growing interest in assessing scientific inquiry within digital platforms. This shift towards dynamic and interactive inquiry assessments enables researchers to investigate not only the accuracy of student responses (<i>product data</i>) but also their steps and actions leading to those responses (<i>process data</i>). This is done by analyzing computer-generated log files that capture student activity during the assessment. The present study leverages this opportunity by drawing insights from student log files of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). It demonstrates the potential of process data in uncovering typically unobserved students’ problem-solving processes by focusing on two critical scientific inquiry skills: <i>coordinating the effects of multiple variables</i> and <i>coordinating a theory with evidence</i>. This study presents two examples for analyzing process data. The first example examined data from the PISA field trial study and showcased the advantage of using a process mining approach to visualize the sequence of students’ steps and actions in conducting investigations. The second example linked student log files and questionnaire data from the PISA 2015. It applied latent profile analysis to identify unique patterns of students’ inquiry performance and examined their relationships to their school-based inquiry experiences. Findings from both examples indicate that students often encounter considerable challenges in solving complex inquiry tasks, especially in applying multivariable reasoning and constructing scientific explanations. This study highlights the profound potential of process data in facilitating a deeper understanding of how students interact with scientific inquiry tasks in a digital-based environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":47988,"journal":{"name":"Research in Science Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","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/s11165-023-10134-5","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

The advancement of technology has led to a growing interest in assessing scientific inquiry within digital platforms. This shift towards dynamic and interactive inquiry assessments enables researchers to investigate not only the accuracy of student responses (product data) but also their steps and actions leading to those responses (process data). This is done by analyzing computer-generated log files that capture student activity during the assessment. The present study leverages this opportunity by drawing insights from student log files of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). It demonstrates the potential of process data in uncovering typically unobserved students’ problem-solving processes by focusing on two critical scientific inquiry skills: coordinating the effects of multiple variables and coordinating a theory with evidence. This study presents two examples for analyzing process data. The first example examined data from the PISA field trial study and showcased the advantage of using a process mining approach to visualize the sequence of students’ steps and actions in conducting investigations. The second example linked student log files and questionnaire data from the PISA 2015. It applied latent profile analysis to identify unique patterns of students’ inquiry performance and examined their relationships to their school-based inquiry experiences. Findings from both examples indicate that students often encounter considerable challenges in solving complex inquiry tasks, especially in applying multivariable reasoning and constructing scientific explanations. This study highlights the profound potential of process data in facilitating a deeper understanding of how students interact with scientific inquiry tasks in a digital-based environment.

Abstract Image

揭示学生解决科学探究任务的策略:来自PISA学生过程数据的见解
技术的进步导致人们对在数字平台内评估科学探究越来越感兴趣。这种向动态和交互式探究评估的转变使研究人员不仅能够调查学生反应(产品数据)的准确性,还能够调查他们导致这些反应的步骤和行动(过程数据)。这是通过分析计算机生成的记录评估期间学生活动的日志文件来完成的。本研究利用这一机会,从国际学生评估计划(PISA)的学生日志文件中获得见解。它通过关注两种关键的科学探究技能:协调多个变量的影响和协调理论与证据,展示了过程数据在揭示通常未被观察到的学生解决问题过程中的潜力。本研究提供了两个分析过程数据的例子。第一个例子检查了PISA现场试验研究的数据,并展示了使用过程挖掘方法可视化学生在进行调查时的步骤和行动序列的优势。第二个例子链接了2015年PISA的学生日志文件和问卷数据。它应用潜在特征分析来识别学生探究表现的独特模式,并考察他们与学校探究体验的关系。这两个例子的研究结果表明,学生在解决复杂的探究任务时,尤其是在应用多变量推理和构建科学解释方面,经常会遇到相当大的挑战。这项研究强调了处理数据的巨大潜力,有助于更深入地理解学生如何在基于数字的环境中与科学探究任务互动。
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