Education and science undergraduate students' conceptions of inquiry: relationship to perceptions of strategic demands of inquiry learning and instruction, and epistemic beliefs
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The primary purpose of this study was to investigate education and science undergraduate students' conceptions of inquiry and their relationship to epistemic beliefs and to fields/programs of study. The secondary purpose was to examine differences in the students' perceptions of strategic demands of inquiry learning and instruction based on their levels of inquiry conception as well as fields of study. Data were obtained from 145 education and 67 science majors using three questionnaires: an open ended questionnaire, McGill Strategic Demands of Inquiry Questionnaire (MSDIQ), and Schommer's Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire. Open coding and constant comparison analysis of the participants' inquiry definitions yielded 13 categories of inquiry conceptions which could be grouped into three superordinate categories: inquiry as a learning process (three subcategories), inquiry as an instructional process (five subcategories), and inquiry as a research/scientific process (five subcategories). Frequency counts revealed inquiry as a learning process as the most prevalent and inquiry as a research/scientific process as the least prevalent of the superordinate categories. Data analysis also revealed that participants with sophisticated epistemic beliefs have well informed and multidimensional conceptions of inquiry compared to those with naive epistemic beliefs. Moreover, more indistinct definitions (vague and/or ‘I don't know' responses) were found in the naïve epistemic belief group's definitions than in the sophisticated epistemic belief group's definitions. Field of study related differences were also observed in inquiry conceptions. While education majors emphasized on describing inquiry as an instructional process and mostly as an endeavor in a school/classroom context, those of the science majors emphasized on describing it as a learning process and mostly as an out of school/classroom endeavor. The students' perceptions of strategic demands of inquiry learning and instruction were measured using the three sub-scales of the MSDIQ: planning, enactment, and reflection which respectively comprised of six, six, and two factors. Series of one-sample t-tests revealed that the students had in general a good deal of awareness as they perceived 11 of the 14 factors as highly important strategic demands. Further ranking of the means of the factors indicated time and task organization, expanding data or information search, and social context of the solving the problem as the top ranked and co-construction, linking ideas including view of the future, and communication of results as the bottom ranked strategic demands. From MANOVA analysis, no differences in the participants' perceptions of strategic demands were evident for students at different levels of inquiry conceptions. But, MANOVA analysis based on the participants' fields of study revealed that education majors had better perception of strategic demands pertaining to the factors of the enactment and the reflection sub-scales than the science majors. The study has implications for the practice of inquiry-based teaching and learning in higher education in general and for teacher education programs in particular.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,025 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».