Relations between Scientific Reasoning, Culture of Problem Solving and Pupil's School Performance

Authors

  • Eva Hejnová Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Jan Evangelista Purkyně in Ústí nad Labem
  • Petr Eisenmann Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, University of Jan Evangelista Purkyně in Ústí nad Labem
  • Jiří Cihlář Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, University of Jan Evangelista Purkyně in Ústí nad Labem
  • Jiří Přibyl Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, University of Jan Evangelista Purkyně in Ústí nad Labem

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2018.110203

Keywords:

Culture of problem solving, mathematics education, primary school, scientific reasoning

Abstract

The article reports the results of a study, the main aim of which was to find out correlations among the three components of the Culture of problem solving (reading comprehension, creativity and ability to use the existing knowledge) and six dimensions of Scientific reasoning (conservation of matter and volume, proportional reasoning, control of variables, probability reasoning, correlation reasoning and hypothetical-deductive reasoning). Further, we present the correlations among individual components of the Culture of problem-solving and individual dimensions of Scientific reasoning with pupils’ school performance in mathematics and physics. We conducted our survey among 23 pupils aged between 14–15 years in the Ústí nad Labem Region. The results have shown that one component of the Culture of problem-solving – the ability to use the existing knowledge – strongly correlates with three dimensions of the Scientific reasoning structure: proportional reasoning, control of variables and probability reasoning. However, no correlation was proved between the creativity and the dimensions of Scientific reasoning. We have found out also that the indicators of the Culture of problem-solving and the Scientific reasoning largely do not correlate with school performance either in mathematics or in physics.

References

  • Bahar, A.L. and Maker, C.J. (2011) ‘Exploring the relationship between mathematical creativity and mathematical achievement’, Asia-Pacific Journal of Gifted and Talented Education, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 33–48.

  • Bao, L., Cai, T., Koenig, K., Fang, K., Han, J., Wang, J., Liu, Q., Ding, L., Cui, L., Luo, Y., Wang, Y., Li, L. and Wu, N. (2009) ‘Learning and Scientific Reasoning’, Science, vol. 323, no. 5914, pp. 586–587. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1167740

  • Chamberlin, S.A. and Moon, S.M. (2005) ‘Model-eliciting activities as a tool to develop and identify creatively gifted mathematicians’, Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 37–47. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-392

  • Clarke, D., Goos, M. and Morony, W. (2007) ‘Problem solving and working mathematically: an Australian perspective’, ZDM Mathematics Education, vol. 39, pp. 475–490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-007-0045-0

  • Coletta, V.P. and Phillips, J.A. (2005) ‘Interpreting FCI scores: Normalized gain, preinstruction scores, and scientific reasoning ability’, American Journal of Physics, vol. 73, no. 12, pp. 1172–1182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.2117109

  • Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushfors, P. and Wood-Robinson, V. (2003) ‘Making Sense of Secondary Science’, New York: Routledge Falmer.

  • Dvořáková, I. (2016) Vědecké myšlení žáků – jak ho lze rozvíjet a testovat [Scientific reasoning of pupils – How to develop and test it], [Online], Available: http://kdf.mff.cuni.cz/lide/dvorakova/Plzen_prispevek_Dvorakova.pdf [4 Jan 2017].

  • Eisenmann, P., Novotná, J., Přibyl, J. and Břehovský, J. (2015) ‘The development of a culture of problem solving with secondary students through heuristic strategies’, Mathematics Education Research Journal, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 535–562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015-0150-2

  • Eisenmann, P., Cihlář, J., Hejnová, E. and Přibyl, J. (2017) ‘Science Reasoning and Culture of Problem Solving’, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2017), Prague, pp. 33–40.

  • Han J. (2013) Scientific Reasoning: Research, Development, and Assessment, [Thesis], Ohio: The Ohio State University.

  • Hawkins, J. and Pea, R.D. (1987). ‘Tools for bridging the cultures of everyday and scientific thinking’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660240404

  • Herl, H.E. et al. (1999) Final report for validation of problem-solving measures: CSE technical report 501, Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.

  • Hite, S. (2009) Improving problem solving by improving reading skills, [Thesis], Grant: University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

  • Inhelder, B. and Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence: An essay on the construction of formal operational structures. New York Basic Books. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10034-000

  • Lawson, A.E. (1978) ‘The development and validation of a classroom test of formal reasoning’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 11–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660150103

  • Lawson, A.E. (1982) ‘The nature of advanced reasoning and science instruction’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 19, no. 9, pp.743–760. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660190904

  • Lawson, A.E. (2005) ‘What is the role of induction and deduction in reasoning and scientific inquiry?’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 716–740. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20067

  • Nadjafikhah, M. Yaftian, N. and Bakhshalizadeh, S. (2012) ‘Mathematical creativity: some definitions and characteristics’, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 31, pp. 285–291. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.12.056

  • Novotná, J., Eisenmann, P., Přibyl, J., Ondrušová, J. and Břehovský, J. (2014) ‘Problem solving in school mathematics based on heuristic strategies’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2014.070101

  • Novotná, J., Eisenmann, P. and Přibyl, J. (2015) ‘Impact of heuristic strategies on pupils’ attitudes to problem solving’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 15–23. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2015.080103

  • Opitz, A., Heene, M. and Fischer, F. (2017) ‘Measuring scientific reasoning – a review of test instruments’, Educational Research and Evaluation, vol. 23, no. 3–4, 78-101, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2017.1338586

  • Papáček, M. (2010) ‘Badatelsky orientované přírodovědné vyučování – cesta pro biologické vzdělávání generací Y, Z a alfa? [Inquiry based science education: A way for the biology education of generations Y, Z, and alpha?]’, Scientia in Educatione, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 33–49.

  • Pape, S.J. (2004) ‘Middle school children’s problem-solving behavior: A cognitive analysis from a reading comprehension perspective’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 187–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/30034912

  • Piaget, J. (1965) The child's conception of number, London: Routledge & Kegan.

  • Pólya, G. (2004) How to solve it: a new aspect of mathematical method (Expanded Princeton Science Library ed.), Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  • Reiss, K. and Törner, G. (2007) ‘Problem solving in the mathematics classroom: the German perspective’, ZDM Mathematics Education, vol. 39, pp. 431–441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-007-0040-5

  • Schoenfeld, A.H. (1982) ‘Measures of problem-solving performance and of problem-solving instruction’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 31–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/748435

  • Schoenfeld, A.H. (1992) ‘Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics’, in Grouws, D. A. (ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, New York: Macmillan, pp. 334–370.

  • Shayer, M. and Adey, P.S. (1993) ‘Accelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students IV: three years after a two-year intervention’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 351–366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660300404

  • Sternberg, R.J. (2005) ‘Creativity or creativities?’, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 63, no. 4–5, pp. 370–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.003

  • Sriraman, B. (2005) ‘Are Giftedness and creativity synonyms in mathematics?’, The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 20–36. https://dx.doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-389

  • Stepans, J. (2003) Targeting Students´ Science Miskonceptions, Tampa: Showboard.

  • Szetela, W. (1987) ‘The problem of evaluation in problem solving: can we find solutions?’, Arithmetic Teacher, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 36–41.

  • Szetela, W. and Nicol, C. (1992) ‘Evaluating problem solving in mathematics’, Educational Leadership, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 42–45.

  • Wenke, D., Frensch, P.A. and Funke, J. (2005) ‘Complex problem solving and intelligence’, in Sternberg, R.J. and Pretz, J.E. (eds.) Cognition and Intelligence: Identifying the Mechanisms of the Mind, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 160–187.

  • Wu, M. and Adams, R. (2006) ‘Modelling mathematics problem solving item responses using a multidimensional IRT model’, Mathematics Education Research Journal, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 93–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03217438

  • Zimmerman, C. (2007) ‘The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school’, Developmental Review vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 172–223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.12.001

    • Additional Files

    Published

    2018-06-28

    How to Cite

    Hejnová, E., Eisenmann, P., Cihlář, J. and Přibyl, J. (2018) ’Relations between Scientific Reasoning, Culture of Problem Solving and Pupil’s School Performance’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 38–44. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2018.110203

    Issue

    Vol. 11 No. 2 (2018)

    Section

    Research Paper

    License

    Copyright (c) 2018 Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science

    Creative Commons License

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

    Authors declare with this manuscript intended for publication to ERIES Journal that:

    • all co-authors agree with the publication of the manuscript even after amendments arising from peer review;
    • all co-authors agree with the posting of the full text of this work on the web page of ERIES Journal and to the inclusion of references in databases accessible on the internet;
    • no results of other researchers were used in the submitted manuscript without their consent, proper citation, or acknowledgement of their cooperation or material provided;
    • the results (or any part of them) used in the manuscript have not been sent for publication to any other journal nor have they already been published (or if so, that the relevant works are cited in this manuscript);
    • submission of the manuscript for publication was completed in accordance with the publishing regulations pertaining to place of work;
    • experiments performed comply with current laws and written consent of the Scientific Ethics Committee / National Animal Care Authority (as is mentioned in the manuscript submitted);
    • grant holders confirm that they have been informed of the submitted manuscript and they agree to its publication.

    Authors retain copyright and grant ERIES Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the published work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. Moreover, authors are able to post the published work in an institutional repository with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. In addition, authors are permitted and encouraged to post the published work online (e.g. institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.