Twelfth Grade Students’ Understandings of Scientific Inquiry: An International Collaborative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although understandings of scientific inquiry (as opposed to conducting inquiry) is included in science education reform documents around the world, little is known about what students have learned about inquiry during their elementary and secondary school years. The purpose of this large scale international project was to collect the first baseline data on what twelfth grade students have learned during their elementary and secondary school years. Twenty nine countries/regions spanning six continents including 3,597 students participated in the study. It is important to note that collecting data from each of the 300+ countries globally was not humanly possible, a concerted effort was made, however, to provide a relatively representative picture of each country and the world. The results from this study show that most of the 12 th grade students from Canada generally held informed and mixed understanding of SI. On an international level students hold naive views about Science Inquiry. Some countries do show some understandings in certain aspects. In this presentation we will discuss findings from the international study and we will provide more detailed findings from the Canadian students.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".