Students' Views of Science: A Comparison between Tertiary and Secondary School Students.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is relatively tittle research evidence that documents current students' views of science - particularly a comparison of secondary and tertiary science. Further, tittle is known about how students' views of science differ according to level of study. This study provides evidence of students' view of science from both school and university students. study uses a qualitative approach to examine how the views of secondary and tertiary students may be influenced by factors such as motivation, interest and career aspirations. Forty Australian students from a high school and a university completed an open-ended questionnaire to capture their view of science. questionnaire results suggested that whilst the majority of students viewed science positively, with female students being more positive than males, their interest declined as they progressed to tertiary education. Keywords: Students' views of science; open-ended questionnaire; science interest; Motivation; career in science. Introduction development of scientifically Uterate students remains one of the most important objectives in all domains and levels of science (Laugksch, 2000). However, a progressive decline in student enrolments in the sciences at both secondary school and university levels in industrialised nations is well-documented in Australia (Ainley, 1993; Fullerton, Walker, Ainley, & Hillman, 2003; Tytler, 2007), England and Wales (Brown, 2001), Germany (Riess, 2000), Japan (Goto, 2001), Canada (Bordt, De Broucker, Read, Harris, & Zhang, 2001) and the USA (National Science Foundation, 2002; 2004). This study will confine itself to Australia. In Australia, the Australian Council of Educational Research (ACER) found that Australia faces significant challenges in boosting participation in science and mathematics studies at school and tertiary levels (Ainley, Kos, & Nicholas, 2008). Australian Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST, 2003), revealed that there has been an overall decline in enrolment in undergraduate courses in the physical and natural sciences between 1997 and 2002. decline has occurred against massive growth in higher education with student numbers doubling over the same period. Victorian Parliament Education and Training Committee (VPETC, 2006) also expressed concerns about the declining enrolment of school graduates in mathematics - and sciencebased university and trade studies. A number of Australian studies over the last two decades have shown a general decline in students' interest and enjoyment of science across the compulsory secondary school years, with a particularly sharp decline across the primary to secondary school transition (e.g. Adams, Doig, & Rosier, 1991 ; Goodrum, Hackling, & Rennie, 2001). In a recent report, Masters (2009) revealed that: The average interest of Australian 15-year-olds in learning science is well below the OECD average and among the lowest levels of interest in the world. Queensland students' interest in science is below the Australian mean for each of the six science topics (physics, chemistry, plant biology, human biology, astronomy and geology) and lower than in any of the 41 countries participating in PISA 2006. (Masters, 2009, p. 27). According to Speering and Rennie (1996), this decline in interest in science in the early years of secondary school is particularly of concern, since it is in these years that attitudes to the pursuit of science subjects and careers are formed. At a time when Australia most needs them to carry the nation into a technologically-driven future, there are fewer students studying science. Despite the growth in the tertiary student population, the number of students studying STEM courses have decreased over the past decade (Birrell, Edwards, Dobson, & Smith, 2005; Dekkers & De Laeter, 2001) compared with the number of students studying arts and business courses. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it