How to measure scientific reasoning in primary school: A comparison of different test modalities

Kristin Nyberg 1 * , Susanne Koerber 1, Christopher Osterhaus 2
More Detail
1 Freiburg University of Education, Department of Psychology, Germany
2 Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Department of Psychology, Germany
* Corresponding Author
EUR J SCI MATH ED, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp. 136-144. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9552
OPEN ACCESS   1607 Views   1235 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Investigating scientific reasoning comprehensively with large sample sizes is a challenge, especially in young children where there is little evidence showing that paper-and-pencil instruments can be used to reliably measure competencies. The present study with 122 third graders compares three test modalities: an established interview (Science-K Interview), a novel group test (Science-K Group Test), and an established paper-and-pencil test (Science-P Reasoning Inventory), asking how scientific reasoning can be reliably measured in primary school. The children were presented with 15 items from the Science-K Interview, 15 parallel items from the Science-K Group Test, and 5 items from the Science-P Reasoning Inventory. The interview was presented first, followed by the group test and Science-P items. The Rasch model revealed a good fit of 23 items to the unidimensional model indicating that there is a single underlying ability involved in primary-school scientific reasoning that can be measured with both interview and group test. Although students performed significantly better in the group test than in the interview, the difference was not substantial and might partially be explained by the sequence of the tests. As expected, children solved more Science-K items correctly compared to the Science-P items, which assesses more advanced aspects of scientific reasoning. The important finding of the study is that group tests can reliably capture scientific reasoning in third graders. The use of group tests in primary school can facilitate conducting studies with large sample sizes and can be used for diagnostic purposes, especially in the context of science education in schools.

CITATION

Nyberg, K., Koerber, S., & Osterhaus, C. (2020). How to measure scientific reasoning in primary school: A comparison of different test modalities. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 136-144. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9552

REFERENCES

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Lederman, N.G., Bell, R.L., & Schwartz, R.S. (2002). Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire (VNOS): Toward Valid and Meaningful Assessment of Learners' Conceptions of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497-521. doi:10.1002/tea.10034
  • Aikenhead, G. (1973). The measurement of high school students’ knowledge about science and scientists. Science Education, 57, 359-349.
  • Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K‐2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32, 97–124. doi:10.1080/09500690902717283
  • Bullock, M., Sodian, B., & Koerber, S. (2009). Doing experiments and understanding science: Development of scientific reasoning from childhood to adulthood. In W. Schneider & M. Bullock (Eds.), Human Development from Early Childhood to Early Adulthood: Findings from a 20 year Longitudinal Study. (pp. 183–208). New York: Psychology Press.
  • Bullock, M., & Ziegler, A. (1999). Scientific reasoning: Developmental and individual differences. In F. E. Weinert & W. Schneider (Eds.), Individual Development from 3 to 12: Findings from the Munich Longitudinal Study (pp. 38–54). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., & Unger, C. (1989). An experiment is when you try it and see if it works’: A study of grade 7 students’ understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 514–529. doi:10.1080/0950069890110504
  • Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development, 70, 1098–1120. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00081
  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 155–159.
  • Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books. doi:10.1037/10034-000
  • Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1–48. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1201_1
  • Klopfer, L.E. (1969). The teaching of science and the history of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 87-95.
  • Koerber, S., Mayer, D., Osterhaus, C., Schwippert, K., & Sodian, B. (2015). The development of scientific thinking in elementary school: A comprehensive inventory. Child Development, 86, 327–336. doi:10.1111/cdev.12298
  • Koerber, S., & Osterhaus, C. (2019). Individual differences in early scientific thinking: assessment, cognitive influences, and their relevance for science learning. Journal of Cognition and Development, 20, 510–533. doi:10.1080/15248372.2019.1620232
  • Koerber, S., Osterhaus, C., & Sodian, B. (2015). Testing primary-school children’s understanding of the nature of science. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 33, 57–72. doi:10.1111/bjdp.12067
  • Koerber, S., & Sodian, B. (2009). Reasoning from graphs in young children. Preschoolers’ ability to interpret and evaluate covariation data from graphs. Journal of Psychology of Science & Technology, 2, 73–86. doi:10.1891/1939-7054.2.2.73
  • Koerber, S., Sodian, B., Thoermer, C., & Nett, U. (2005). Scientific reasoning in young children: Preschoolers’ ability to evaluate covariation evidence. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 64, 141–152. doi:10.1024/1421-0185.64.3.141
  • Kuhn, D. (2010). What is scientific thinking and how does it develop? In U. Goswani (Ed.), Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development (pp. 497–523). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
  • Kuhn, D., Garcia-Mila, M., Zohar, A., Andersen, C, White, S.H, Klahr, D., & Craver, S.M. (1995). Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60, 1–157. doi:10.1207/s15327647jcd0703_1
  • Kuhn, D., & Pease, M. (2008). What needs to develop in the development of inquiry skills? Cognition and Instruction, 26, 512–559. doi:10.1080/07370000802391745
  • Lawson, A.E. (1978). The development and validation of a classroom test of formal reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 11-24. doi:10.1002/tea.3660150103
  • Lederman, N.G., Lederman, J.S., & Antink, A. (2013. Nature of science and scientific inquiry as contexts for the learning of science and achievement of scientific literacy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1, 138-147. doi:10.46328/ijemst.v1i3.19
  • Lenhard, W., & Schneider, W. (2006). ELFE 1-6: Ein Leseverständnistest für Erst- bis Sechstklässler. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
  • Lüke, T., Ritterfeld, U., & Tröster, H. (2016). Erprobung eines Gruppentests zur Überprüfung des Grammatikverständnisses auf der Basis des TROG-D. Diagnostica, 62, 242–254. doi:10.1026/0012-1924/a000157
  • Mayer, D., Sodian, B., Koerber, S., & Schwippert, K. (2014). Scientific reasoning in elementary school children: Assessment and relations with cognitive abilities. Learning and Instruction, 29, 43–55. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.07.005
  • Mey, G. (2003). Zugänge zur kindlichen Perspektive: Methoden der Kindheitsforschung. Forschungsbericht. Berlin: Technische Universität, Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, Abteilung Psychologie.
  • Osterhaus, C., Koerber, S., & Sodian, B. (2017). Scientific thinking in elementary school: Children’s social cognition and their epistemological understanding promote experimentation skills. Developmental Psychology, 53, 450–462. doi:10.1037/dev0000260
  • Osterhaus, C., Koerber, S., & Sodian B. (2020). The Science-P Reasoning Inventory (SPR-I): Measuring emerging scientific-reasoning skills in primary school. International Journal of Science Education. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1080/09500693.2020.174825
  • Piaget, J. (1978). Das Weltbild des Kindes. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
  • Piekny, J., & Maehler, C. (2013). Scientific reasoning in early and middle childhood: The development of domain-general evidence evaluation, experimentation, and hypothesis generation skills. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31, 153–179. doi:10.1111/j.2044-835X.2012.02082.x
  • Samarapungavan, A., Mantzicopoulos, P., Patrick, H., & French, B. (2009). The development and validation of the science learning assessment (SLA): A measure of kindergarten science learning. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20, 502–535. doi:10.1177/1932202X0902000306
  • Schwartz, R.S., Lederman, N.G, & Lederman, J.S. (2008). An Instrument To Assess Views of Scientific Inquiry: The VOSI Questionnaire, Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • Sodian, B. (2018). The development of scientific thinking in preschool and elementary school age. A conceptual model. In F. Fischer, C.A. Chinn, K. Engelmann, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Scientific reasoning and argumentation. The roles of domain-specific and domain-general knowledge (pp. 227-250). New York: Routledge.
  • Sodian, B., Zaitchik, D., & Carey, S. (1991). Young children’s differentiation of hypothetical beliefs from evidence. Child Development, 62, 753–766. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01567
  • Town, C. H. (1922). A mass mental test for use with kindergarten and first grade children. Journal of Applied Psychology, 6, 89–102.
  • Van der Graaf, J., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2015). Scientific reasoning abilities in kindergarten: Dynamic assessment of the control of variables strategy. Instructional Science, 43, 381–400. doi:10.1007/s11251-015-9344-y
  • Wu, M. L., Adams, R. J., Wilson, M. R., & Haldane, S. A. (2007). ACER ConQuest version 2.0: Generalised item response modelling software. Camberwell, Victoria: ACER Press.
  • Zimmermann, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172–223. doi:10.1016/j.dr2006.12.001