考察基于科学史的进化概念评估的有效性,探索概念的语境进展

M. Ha
{"title":"考察基于科学史的进化概念评估的有效性,探索概念的语境进展","authors":"M. Ha","doi":"10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0509","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous studies have investigated the similarity between the development of evolutionary explanations and students’ conceptual developments on evolution. However, the validity and reliability of the assessment method reflecting the similarity have not been quantitatively examined yet. In addition, no study has examined the conceptual progressions of evolution concept based on contexts although literature has addressed the contextual difference of evolutionary explanation in the history of science. This study examined the validity and reliability of history-of-science-based evolution concept assessment using ordered multiple choice (OMC) methods and Rasch analysis and explored conceptual progression by three contexts (e.g., human, animal, and plant). The evolution concept assessment developed by Ha (2007) was used to examine 1711 elementary, middle, and high school students, and pre- and in-service science teachers’ (biology majors and non-majors) evolution concepts. Internal consistency reliability and item response fitness of the OMC method that provide 0- to 4-point scores to creationism, teleology, intentionality, use/disuse, and natural selection respectively met the benchmark based on the Cronbach alpha and MNSQ indices of Rasch analysis. The level of elementary and middle school students’ evolution concepts were located between intentionality and use/disuse while the level of high school and non-biology science teachers’ evolution concepts were located between use/disuse and natural selection. The conceptual progressions of evolution concepts were differentiated according to three contexts. This study provided the quantitative evidence for the similarity between the development of evolutionary explanations and students’ conceptual developments on evolution and suggest new analysis methods (i.e., OMC) of evolution concept assessment.","PeriodicalId":107400,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the Validity of History-of-Science-Based Evolution Concept Assessment and Exploring Conceptual Progressions by Contexts\",\"authors\":\"M. Ha\",\"doi\":\"10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0509\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous studies have investigated the similarity between the development of evolutionary explanations and students’ conceptual developments on evolution. However, the validity and reliability of the assessment method reflecting the similarity have not been quantitatively examined yet. In addition, no study has examined the conceptual progressions of evolution concept based on contexts although literature has addressed the contextual difference of evolutionary explanation in the history of science. This study examined the validity and reliability of history-of-science-based evolution concept assessment using ordered multiple choice (OMC) methods and Rasch analysis and explored conceptual progression by three contexts (e.g., human, animal, and plant). The evolution concept assessment developed by Ha (2007) was used to examine 1711 elementary, middle, and high school students, and pre- and in-service science teachers’ (biology majors and non-majors) evolution concepts. Internal consistency reliability and item response fitness of the OMC method that provide 0- to 4-point scores to creationism, teleology, intentionality, use/disuse, and natural selection respectively met the benchmark based on the Cronbach alpha and MNSQ indices of Rasch analysis. The level of elementary and middle school students’ evolution concepts were located between intentionality and use/disuse while the level of high school and non-biology science teachers’ evolution concepts were located between use/disuse and natural selection. The conceptual progressions of evolution concepts were differentiated according to three contexts. This study provided the quantitative evidence for the similarity between the development of evolutionary explanations and students’ conceptual developments on evolution and suggest new analysis methods (i.e., OMC) of evolution concept assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":107400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0509\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2016.36.3.0509","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

以前的研究已经调查了进化解释的发展与学生对进化的概念发展之间的相似性。然而,反映相似性的评价方法的效度和信度尚未得到定量检验。此外,尽管文献已经解决了科学史上进化解释的语境差异,但没有研究考察了基于语境的进化概念的概念进展。本研究利用有序选择(OMC)方法和Rasch分析检验了基于科学史的进化概念评估的有效性和可靠性,并在三种情境(如人类、动物和植物)中探索了概念进展。采用Ha(2007)开发的进化概念评估方法,对1711名小学、初中和高中学生、职前和在职科学教师(生物专业和非专业)的进化概念进行了测试。基于Cronbach alpha和Rasch分析的MNSQ指标,OMC方法对神创论、目的论、意向性、使用/弃用和自然选择分别提供0 ~ 4分的内部一致性信度和项目反应适应度满足基准。小学和初中学生的进化概念水平处于故意和使用/废弃之间,高中和非生物科学教师的进化概念水平处于使用/废弃和自然选择之间。进化概念的概念进展根据三种语境进行了区分。本研究为进化解释的发展与学生进化概念发展之间的相似性提供了定量证据,并提出了进化概念评估的新分析方法(即OMC)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Examining the Validity of History-of-Science-Based Evolution Concept Assessment and Exploring Conceptual Progressions by Contexts
Previous studies have investigated the similarity between the development of evolutionary explanations and students’ conceptual developments on evolution. However, the validity and reliability of the assessment method reflecting the similarity have not been quantitatively examined yet. In addition, no study has examined the conceptual progressions of evolution concept based on contexts although literature has addressed the contextual difference of evolutionary explanation in the history of science. This study examined the validity and reliability of history-of-science-based evolution concept assessment using ordered multiple choice (OMC) methods and Rasch analysis and explored conceptual progression by three contexts (e.g., human, animal, and plant). The evolution concept assessment developed by Ha (2007) was used to examine 1711 elementary, middle, and high school students, and pre- and in-service science teachers’ (biology majors and non-majors) evolution concepts. Internal consistency reliability and item response fitness of the OMC method that provide 0- to 4-point scores to creationism, teleology, intentionality, use/disuse, and natural selection respectively met the benchmark based on the Cronbach alpha and MNSQ indices of Rasch analysis. The level of elementary and middle school students’ evolution concepts were located between intentionality and use/disuse while the level of high school and non-biology science teachers’ evolution concepts were located between use/disuse and natural selection. The conceptual progressions of evolution concepts were differentiated according to three contexts. This study provided the quantitative evidence for the similarity between the development of evolutionary explanations and students’ conceptual developments on evolution and suggest new analysis methods (i.e., OMC) of evolution concept assessment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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