VI.1. Conclusions
This study is an initial attempt to explore students’ beliefs about science,
metacognition and conceptions of learning and assessment through the nested ecology perspective. In general, this study supports the nested ecology model proposed in section II.6 that there is a complex interaction among students’ beliefs (represented by students’ scientific epistemological beliefs in this study), metacognition (represented by students’ metacognitive awareness regarding science learning in this study), and their conceptions (represented by their conceptions of learning science and science assessment). In sum, by both quantitative and qualitative methods, the results of this study provide a better understanding about students’ nature of science learning for science educators.
Three questionnaires, including Scientific Epistemological Beliefs (SEB) survey, Metacognitive Awareness regarding Science learning Inventory (MASI), and
Conceptions Of Learning Science (COLS) questionnaire, were conducted in the quantitative part of this study. Through analyzing 240 Taiwanese tenth graders’
questionnaire responses, this study found that students having more sophisticated scientific epistemological beliefs tended to show higher metacognitive awareness while learning science and to express more constructivist-oriented conceptions of learning science. In particular, as long as the students have more sophisticated beliefs about the roles of experiments and the scientists’ ideas on scientific knowledge (i.e., the justification of knowledge); they may tend to express much higher metacognitive
154
awareness and to embrace the constructivist conceptions of learning science. Several studies have suggested the associations between the meaningful learning and
conceptions of learning (e.g., Cano, 2005; Cano & Cardelle-Elawar, 2004; Tsai & Kuo, 2008; Lee, Johanson, & Tsai, 2008), and highlighted the importance of metacognition on the successful learning (e.g., Guterman, 2003; Pintrich, 2002; Schraw, 1998). The sophisticated beliefs about the justification of knowledge indicated that scientific knowledge comes from reasoning, thinking, and experimenting (Conley et al., 2004).
Accordingly, to further guide students to meaningful learning, the high-quality reasoning, argumentation and reflection on scientific knowledge and more authentic evidence gained from experiments, which may promote students’ beliefs about the justification of scientific knowledge, should be highlighted in science instructional practice.
Furthermore, this study found that students with naïve beliefs about the source of scientific knowledge tended to express reproductive learning conceptions. The results of this study revealed that the source and justification of knowledge were the
significant predictors to the conceptions of learning science. Hofer and Pintrich (1997) proposed that the personal epistemology concerned with the nature of knowledge and knowing, in which the nature of knowledge included the certainty and simplicity of knowledge and the nature of knowing included the source and justification of
knowledge. Accordingly, this study implies that the students’ beliefs about the nature of knowing may dominantly contribute to their learning conceptions. The results of qualitative part of study also supported this suggestion. In the qualitative part of study, sixty representative students’ scientific epistemological beliefs including the beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing, and their conceptions of learning science were obtained by in-depth interviews and the phenomenographic method respectively.
Through the Pearson Chi-square tests, this study suggested that the beliefs about the
155
nature of knowing seemed to have greater power to explain students’ conceptions of learning science than their beliefs about the nature of knowledge. Hofer and Pintrich (1997) asserted that the process of knowing may be related to the process of learning.
And, the conceptions of learning could be viewed as the reflection of the process of learning (Linder & Marshall, 2003). This study provided the evidence that beliefs about the nature of knowing and conceptions of learning actually had a close connection.
As Tsai (2004) suggested that students’ conceptions of learning, to some extent, should be viewed as their beliefs about learning, this study further proposed that the beliefs about the nature of knowing were closely related to the beliefs about learning.
The debate on whether the beliefs about the learning are part of personal epistemology is still going on today (Elby, 2009). Hofer and Pintrich (1997) asserted that though the nature (process) of knowing may be related to the process of learning, the beliefs about learning are peripheral to the personal epistemology. Elby (2009) suggested that students’ beliefs about the nature of learning should be included in discussing their personal epistemology. The results of this study may provide some insight for (science) educators to reconsider the role of beliefs about learning on personal epistemology.
Furthermore, the MASI was newly developed in this study for assessing students’ metacognitive awareness. As students’ metacognitive awareness was positively related to their epistemological beliefs and constructivist conceptions of learning, to promote students’ thinking about the epistemological issues in science learning, their awareness of metacognition can be considered as a mediator in the process of epistemological development. That is, to improve students’ maturation of scientific epistemological beliefs and conceptions of learning science, educators may have to promote the construction and acquisition of students’ metacognitive
awareness. Schraw (1998) also suggested that the metacognitive knowledge is
156
teachable. To teach and promote students’ metacognitive awareness, educators have to improve students’ self-regulatory skills and promote learning environment that are conducive to the construction and use of metacognition (Schraw, 1998). In addition, this newly developed instrument may contribute to further research about students’
metacognitive awareness of science learning.
The qualitative part of study conducted the in-depth interview to categorize 60 representative students’ scientific epistemological beliefs, conceptions of learning science, and their conceptions of science assessment. Three major patterns of
students’ scientific epistemological beliefs were characterized in this study, including the constructivist beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing, the empiricist beliefs about the nature of knowledge with the constructivist beliefs about the nature of knowing, and the empiricist beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing.
Most students expressed the empiricist beliefs about the nature of knowledge. It
implied that most students still believed the scientific knowledge as certain. Moreover, similar to Tsai’s (2004a) phenomenographic study, this study also categorized seven conceptions of learning science as memorizing, preparing for tests, practicing the experiments, the increase of knowledge, applying, understanding, and seeing in a new way. With respect to the cohesive/fragmented dichotomy, more than half students expressed the fragmented conceptions of learning science (i.e., memorizing, preparing for tests, practicing the experiments, or the increase of knowledge). That is, those students tended to view learning science as accumulation, reproduction and pieces of knowledge.
In addition, this study is an initial attempt to explore high students’ conceptions of science assessment through the phenomenographic method. As a result, six conceptions of science assessment as reproducing knowledge, rehearsing, revealing the learning status, improving learning, applying, and the justification of knowledge
157
were identified through the phenomenographic method. In particular, the rehearsing conceptions may be interpreted by the educational climate in Taiwan which
overemphasizing the high-stakes examinations and the utilization of the
“supplementary trade books.” According to the cohesive/fragmented dichotomy, more than half students embraced the fragmented conceptions of science assessment (i.e., reproducing knowledge, rehearsing, or revealing the learning status). That is, most students viewed science assessment as recalling and revealing the accumulation of scientific knowledge. Previous research agreed that students’ views of assessment are of particular importance because assessment has a significant impact on the quality of learning (Entwistle & Entwistle, 1991; Marton & Saljo, 1997; Ramsden, 1997). Biggs (2003) has also suggested that what students learn and how they learn might depend on what they perceive they will be assessed. Accordingly, it is important for educators to promote students’ maturation of the science assessment conceptions which may have impact on their science learning. In addition, this study further indicated that students’ beliefs about the nature of knowledge seemed to have greater power to explain their conceptions of science assessment than their beliefs about the nature of knowing. And, students with higher awareness on the metastrategy and critical judgment tended to embrace the cohesive conceptions of science assessment. That is, to promote students’ maturation of the science assessment conceptions, science educators, on the one hand, may have to reduce the utilization of the paper-pencil multiple-choice assessment which may reveal the knowledge as certainty, and on the other hand, they may construct the science assessment which can encourage students to critically evaluate information obtained from others and to think of their own strategy while learning science. For example, the usage of peer assessment may be appropriate. Peer assessment can be defined as the process whereby groups of students comment on and judge their colleagues work (Falchikov, 1995).
158
Furthermore, by Pearson Chi-square result, this study implied that students expressing more mature conceptions of learning science tended to hold more cohesive conceptions of science assessment. How assessment is conceived, and how those conceptions relate to conceptions of learning is relatively unexplored (Dahlin, Watkins, & Ekholm, 2001). The relations between students’ conceptions of science assessment and their conceptions of learning science may be first evidenced in this study. To further understand the relations between the conceptions of science
assessment and learning science, future studies conducted by the quantitative method to examine the relations are recommended.
This study contributes to the growing body of research characterizing students’
science learning, specifically high school students’ beliefs about science, conceptions of learning science and science assessment. The in-depth interviews of 60
representative students not only provide further evidence for the interrelations between students’ beliefs and conceptions examined in the quantitative part of study, but also clarified the complex interactions among their belief system (i.e., nature of knowledge and knowing) and conception system (i.e., learning science and science assessment). The major purpose of this study is to deeply investigate students’ nested ecology regarding science learning from multidimensional perspectives. The
qualitative part of this study identified three major forms of students’ nested ecology regarding learning science, that is the complete, partial, and divergent nested ecology.
In particular, nearly half of 60 representative students were categorized as the complete nested ecology. As aforementioned, Tsai (2000) has found that students’
views about the nature of science were nested with their perceptions of learning environments in science. Cano (2005) also revealed the associations between students’
epistemological beliefs and conceptions of learning. Accordingly, beyond Tsai’s (2000) and Cano’s (2005) findings, this study further proved that students’ beliefs about
159
science were nested not only with their views of science learning but also with their views of science assessment. As aforementioned, a series of studies have found that Taiwanese high school students have mixed perceptions concerning both meaningful and rote features of science learning. For example, Lee and Chang (2004) and Chang, Hsiao, and Barufaldi (2006) found that students preferred and perceived both
teacher-centered and student-centered orientated learning environment. To conclude, as the cultural impacts and educational climate may influence the nature of students’
science learning, the various forms of nested ecology revealed by students provided some insights about students’ nature of learning science in such special educational environment in Taiwan.
VI.2. Implications for Science Education
Epistemological beliefs are prominent in various educational experiences, which have been shown to be related to learning, to influence reasoning and judgment throughout lives, and to have implications for teaching (Hofer, 2004). This study deeply investigated the interrelation among students’ scientific epistemological beliefs, metacognitive awareness, conceptions of learning science, and their conceptions of science assessment. Thus, the role of epistemological beliefs on students’ educational experience seems to be revealed. That is, to promote students’ maturation of scientific epistemological beliefs, science educators should focus not only on science learning but also the assessment design and procedures. Accordingly, their maturation of epistemological beliefs may also be improved.
As aforementioned, it is important for science educators to promote students’
maturation of the science assessment conceptions which may have impact on their science learning. In addition, this study further indicated that students’ beliefs about
160
the nature of knowledge seemed to dominantly contribute to their conceptions of science assessment than their beliefs about the nature of knowing. And, students with higher awareness on the metastrategy and critical judgment tended to embrace the cohesive conceptions of science assessment. That is, to promote students’ maturation of the science assessment conceptions, science educators, on the one hand, may have to reduce the utilization of the paper-pencil multiple-choice assessment which may reveal the knowledge as certainty, and on the other hand, they may develop science assessment which can encourage students to critically evaluate information obtained from others and to think of their own strategy while learning science.
Furthermore, the six conceptions of science assessment identified in this study may have implications for teacher preparation and can be put to use in teacher professional development and policy contexts. In present study, most students held fragmented conceptions, which revealed that the performance in science subject and the high-stakes examinations still dominated the school science assessment, such as the summative assessment. Kahn (2000) suggested that teachers needed to assimilate new assessment practices (e.g., constructivist-oriented) into long-standing
transmission, teacher-oriented, accountability type assessment and learning frameworks. That is, science teachers may need to highlight the knowledge construction features of assessment, such as the cohesive assessment conceptions identified in this study. For example, the improvement-oriented assessment (e.g., Brown et al., in press) may be useful to motive students to apply and justify what they have learned. However, the implementation of such innovative assessment may reduce its effectiveness if students’ conceptions of science assessment remain as fragmented, or if students remain unaware of their own conceptions. Science teacher also needs to take into account of students’ pre-existing conceptions about assessment.
In addition, teachers’ views regarding the science assessment are also important while
161
the implementation of constructivist-oriented assessment. To this end, pre-service science teacher program and in-service professional development in the area of assessment need to consider teachers’ conceptions of science assessment and to highlight the cohesive feature of science assessment.
As to the conclusion drawn from this study, students holding sophisticated beliefs about the justification of knowledge tended to express constructivist
conceptions of learning science and mature metacognitive awareness. To further guide students to meaningful learning, science educators should promote the high-quality reasoning, argumentation and reflection on scientific knowledge and more authentic evidence gained from experiments. The inquiry-based instruction proposed by science educators can be viewed as another attempt to extend students’ beliefs about the justification of scientific knowledge (Chinn & Malhotra, 2002; Sandoval, 2005). The study conducted by Khishfe and Abd-El-Khalick (2002) also suggested that the inquiry-based instruction may potentially influence students’ beliefs about scientific knowledge. Creating a learning environment where students have opportunities to reason by using evidence, to challenge, and to question their own ideas as well as others’ ideas or even the teacher’s ideas, can promote their beliefs about justification of knowledge. That is, science educators should, either explicitly or implicitly, make epistemological perceptions as part of routine educational experience (Hammer, 1995).
Altogether, students can have a sophisticated scientific epistemological belief.
Moreover, it follows that they are expected to express more constructivist conceptions of learning science as well as more mature metacognitive awareness regarding
learning science.
Three types of nested ecology identified in this study (i.e., complete, partial, and divergent) may shape some insights for science educators about how the interplay among students’ beliefs and conceptions regarding science learning. In addition, the
162
students categorized as the partial nested ecology may be possible in moving their beliefs and conceptions toward a more sophisticated structure of nested ecology model, that is, constructivist beliefs with cohesive conceptions. The complexity of students’ beliefs systems and conceptions systems may come from their science learning experience. Science educators should note that students' engagement in learning is sensitive to what they understand by learning and to what beliefs about learning they hold. As aforementioned, changing students’ conceptions of learning science and science assessment may be a prerequisite of changing their scientific epistemological beliefs, or vice versa; changing students’ scientific epistemological beliefs may be a prerequisite of changing their conceptions of learning science and science assessment. That is, to enhance students’ nested ecology toward a more sophisticated model, science educators should provide a science learning environment which will ensure that all students experience not only the meaningful learning but also the learning activities with cohesive feature of assessment. The instruction may need to stimulate the learning process as a thinking activity (Cano & Cardelle-Elawar, 2004), which makes learning meaningful within a context, instead of conceiving it as the memorization or reproduction of facts.
VI.3. Recommendations for Further Research
This study is a relational study combining both quantitative and qualitative analyses to examine the interrelationships among students’ scientific epistemological beliefs, metacognitive awareness, conceptions of learning science, and their science assessment. Hence, this study cannot draw strong causal relations among these variables. Further research may need to build on a structural model through structural equation modeling technique to examine the above interrelations. To this end, a
163
quantitative questionnaire for examine students’ conceptions of science assessment is needed. Moreover, a true experimental research design is also needed to further test the above interrelations. In particular, through an experimental research design, further study needs to test whether the improvement of the maturation of students’
conceptions of learning science and science assessment can promote the maturation of their scientific epistemological beliefs. For example, the study can have a treatment group, which receives a long-term instruction stressing a true understanding for scientific knowledge and performing the constructivist assessment (e.g., peer assessment), and then to investigate whether the students in this group reveal more mature beliefs and conceptions.
As to the conclusion drawn from this study, the beliefs about the nature of knowing were closely related to the beliefs about learning. And, the beliefs about the nature of knowledge were correlated to the beliefs about the nature of knowing.
Although Hofer and Pintrich (1997) asserted that the beliefs about learning are peripheral to the personal epistemology, further research focusing on students’
personal epistemology may encourage to consider their beliefs about learning together with their beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing. Furthermore, as the questionnaires which were used to examine students’ personal epistemology only included either the beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing (e.g., Conley et al., 2004) or the beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning (e.g., Schommer, 1990), further study may need an attempt to develop an instrument which including the beliefs about the nature of knowledge, knowing, and learning.
Previous studies have indicated the relations between epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning (e.g., Chan, 2007), and between conceptions of learning
science and approaches to learning science (e.g., Lee, Johanson, & Tsai, 2008).
Moreover, the studies have suggested the relations between views of assessment and
164
approaches to learning (e.g., Biggs, 2003; Tiwari et al., 2005). Thus, the students’
approaches to learning may be associated with their beliefs, and conceptions of learning and assessment. To shed more light on the intricacies of students’ science
approaches to learning may be associated with their beliefs, and conceptions of learning and assessment. To shed more light on the intricacies of students’ science