Does More Inquiry Mean Better Literacy and Engagement in Science? An Analysis of Australia, Canada and New Zealand using PISA
Author(s):
Andrew McConney (submitting) Mary Oliver (presenting)
Amanda Woods-McConney (presenting)
Dorit Maor
Conference:
ECER 2016
Format:
Paper

Session Information

09 SES 02 B, Relating Student Attitudes and Teaching Practices to Science Achievement

Paper Session

Time:
2016-08-23
15:15-16:45
Room:
NM-F103a
Chair:
Trude Nilsen

Contribution

Increasingly, science education communities have adopted the view that promoting and implementing inquiry-oriented science in the schools encourages higher science achievement, and more positive attitudes toward science (e.g., Bell, Urhahne, Schanze, & Ploetzner, 2009; Furtak, Seidel, Iverson, & Briggs, 2012; Minner, Levy, & Century, 2010; Tamir, Stavi & Ratner, 1998). Inquiry-oriented science education is commonly identified as “the method of choice” to improve both student interest and achievement (PRIMAS, 2011, p. 4) because it is seen as authentically mirroring what scientists do in the real world, and therefore conceptually and pedagogically effective for improving science learning.

The US National Science Education Standards (NRC 1996; 2012) have underscored the central role of inquiry in achieving the purposes of school science with extensive references to students “describing objects, asking questions, constructing explanations and testing explanations against current scientific knowledge” (NRC, 1996, p. 2). Further, a recent synthesis of research on inquiry-based science (Minner, Levy and Century, 2010) highlighted the substantial investments made in countries like England and Australia to “encourage teachers to use scientific inquiry in their instruction as a means to advance students’ understanding of scientific concepts and procedures” (p. 474). The science content of the Australian curriculum includes Science Inquiry Skills wherein students are “challenged to explore science, its concepts, nature and uses through clearly described inquiry processes” (see http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/science/content-structure).

Our purpose in this paper is to investigate these widely‑held understandings about relationships among science inquiry, and students’ interest (engagement) and literacy (achievement) in science. To achieve this purpose, we empirically examine the extent to which students who report high frequencies of inquiry-oriented learning activities in their high school science classes could also be characterised as having higher than average levels of science literacy and/or higher than average levels of engagement in science. In other words, we examined the common assumption that if students are frequently involved in inquiry-oriented science learning activities, they will do better in, and be more positive about science. To investigate this assertion, we used student data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) for Aotearoa New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. We intentionally chose these three member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) because they share similar socio-cultural roots, market‑based economies and systems of secondary education, and all three have performed strongly and consistently in science on international comparative assessments like PISA.

Specifically, the questions we posed for this retrospective analysis are:

  1. To what extent do 15-year-old students—in Australia, Canada and New Zealand—report experiencing high levels of inquiry oriented learning in their science classes? Conversely, to what extent do students in these countries report low levels of inquiry learning activities in science?
  2. For 15-year-old students who report high levels of inquiry learning activities in science, what levels or patterns of science literacy and/or engagement in science are discernible? If evident, to what extent are these consistent across three countries with similar education systems and socio-cultural histories?
  3. Similarly, what levels or patterns of science literacy and/or engagement in science are discernible for 15-year-old students who report low levels of inquiry learning activities in their science classrooms? If evident, to what extent are these consistent across the three countries in this study?

Method

In this paper, we use retrospective, secondary analyses of the 2006 round of OECD’s PISA to examine relationships among the frequency of inquiry oriented activities in secondary science, and students’ science literacy and engagement in science. PISA is an international standardized assessment of the literacy performance of 15-year-old students in reading, mathematics, and science conducted on a 3-year cycle that began in 2000. Each round of PISA assesses all three subjects and also focuses in considerable depth on one of the three, which in 2006 was science. (The next round intended to focus on science was conducted in 2015, and these data will be publically available at the end of 2016). For New Zealand, the 2006 PISA dataset included 170 schools and 4,823 students; Australia’s sample included 356 schools and 14,216 students; and, Canada’s comprised 896 schools and 22,646 students In addition to being assessed for science literacy as defined by PISA's conceptual frameworks, students also respond to a short questionnaire about their background details (family, home life), science classroom experiences, and a broad suite of affective variables (self-concept, self-efficacy, enjoyment of science, interest in science, valuing of science, motivations with regard science, etc.).To achieve our purpose in identifying those students in each country who experienced high and low levels of inquiry-based learning in their science subjects, we used students’ responses to Question 34 on PISA’s Student Questionnaire which asks students to rate how frequently they experience a wide variety of classroom strategies for learning science. Further, we conducted comparative analyses of science literacy and interest in learning science across six student groups organized by country and level of inquiry in science (low or high). To achieve these analyses we used the BRR procedure (Fay variant) with 80 replication estimates and 5 plausible values for science literacy and interest in science, to construct means and standard errors, in keeping with guidelines provided by PISA (OECD, 2009). We also comparatively examined students’ levels of engagement in science for the six groups (three countries, two levels of inquiry in school science). To accomplish this we statistically compared the groups on a suite of six variables that we previously argued reflect a comprehensive, multi-dimensional measure of students’ engagement in science (Woods-McConney, et al., 2013; 2014). These six “engagement in science” variables include students’ general interest in science; enjoyment of science; personal and general valuing of science; science self-efficacy; and science self concept.

Expected Outcomes

Using retrospective analysis of PISA 2006, which focused on science, our intention in this paper is to: 1) describe the relative frequencies of inquiry-based learning in science, across 3 countries, reported by students themselves; 2) compare students’ literacy and engagement in science, across 3 countries and across levels of inquiry-based classroom activity. Consistently, our findings show that science students who report experiencing low levels of inquiry-oriented learning are found to have above average levels of science literacy, but below average levels of interest in science, and below average levels on six variables that reflect students’ engagement in science. Our findings show that the corollary is also true. Across the three countries, students who report high levels of inquiry-oriented learning activities in science are observed to have below average levels of science literacy, but above average levels of interest in learning science, and above average engagement in science. These findings appear to run counter to science education orthodoxy that the more students experience inquiry oriented teaching and learning, the more likely they are to have stronger science literacy, as well as more positive affect towards science. Faced with many methods and models of teaching and learning in science, it undoubtedly can be confusing for science teachers and science educators to identify research-supported practice. Although this study’s findings and those from other recent research seem to challenge the orthodoxy of inquiry-oriented science, one sensible response to addressing this challenge would be to garner evidence that identifies those aspects of inquiry that best promote science learning while positively engaging students. Rather than uncritically endorsing inquiry, science educators would best serve the needs of prospective teachers by identifying and developing those features of inquiry-oriented teaching and learning that promote both positive engagement in science and sound scientific literacy.

References

Bell, T., Urhahne, D., Schanze, S., & Ploetzner, R. (2009). Collaborative Inquiry Learning: Models, tools, and challenges. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 349-377. Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching. A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300-329. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496. National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. OECD. (2009). PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do. Student performance in reading, Mathematics and science. Paris: Author. PRIMAS (2011) Promoting inquiry-based learning in mathematics and science education across Europe. IPN Kiel. Retrieved from http://www.primas-project.eu/ Tamir, P., Stavy, R., & Ratner, N. (1998). Teaching science by inquiry: Assessment and learning. Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 27–32. Woods McConney, A., Oliver, M., McConney, A., Maor, D., & Schibeci, R. (2013). Science Engagement and Literacy: A Retrospective Analysis for Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Students in Aotearoa New Zealand and Australia. Research in Science Education. 43: 233–252. First published on: 19 October 2011 Online First http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9265-y Woods-McConney, A., Oliver, M. C., McConney, A., Schibeci, R., & Maor, D. (2014). Science Engagement and Literacy: A retrospective analysis for students in Canada and Australia. International Journal of Science Education. 36(10), 1588-1608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.871658.

Author Information

Andrew McConney (submitting)
Murdoch University
Lesmurdie
Mary Oliver (presenting)
University of Nottingham, UK
Amanda Woods-McConney (presenting)
Murdoch University
Education
Murdoch
Murdoch University, Australia

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.