An Instrument for Assessing Students' Mental State and the Learning Environment in Science Education

  • Chia-ju Liu
  • David F. Treagust


The purpose of this research was to develop and validate a new instrument, the Mental State in Learning Environment Questionnaire (MSLEQ), to assess student's mental state in a given learning environment. The MSLEQ has high internal consistency reliability values between 0.70–0.92 as well as good construct validity and predictive validity. After conducting a factor analysis, four main factors were extracted and were described as ‘emotion’, ‘intention’, ‘internal mental representation’ and ‘external mental representation’. The important feature of this study is the construction of an economical questionnaire on the mental state in a given learning environment. The questionnaire yielded important information that can be concretely applied to science teaching and learning.


learning environment mental state 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arbuckle, J.L. & Wothke, W. (1999). Amos 4.0 user's guide. Chicago: SPSS Inc. Google Scholar
  2. Bagozz, R.P. & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Academic of Marketing Science, 16, 76–94. Google Scholar
  3. Bentler, P.M. & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. Google Scholar
  4. Bull, S. & Solity, J. (1993). Classroom management. New York: Croom Helm. Google Scholar
  5. Carmines, E.G. & Mclver, J.P. (1981). Analyzing models with unobserved variables: Analysis of covariance structure. In G.W. Bohmstedt and E.F. Borgatta (Eds.), Social measurement: Current issues (pp. 65–115). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  6. Chiu, M.H., Chun, C.C. & Liu, C.J. (2002). Dynamic processes of conceptual change: Analysis of constructing mental models of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(8), 688–712. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davitz, J.R. (1969). Terminology and concepts in mental retardation. New York: Teachers College Press. Google Scholar
  8. Davitz, J.R. (1970). Effects of sensitivity training on identification of emotional meaning with and without the use of an electronic band-pass filter. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Google Scholar
  9. Dienes, Z. & Perner, J. (1999). A theory of implicit and explicit knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(5), 735–808. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doane, S.M., Mannes, S.M., Kintsch, W. & Polson, P.G. (1992). Modeling user command production: A comprehension-based approach. User Modeling and User Adapted Interaction, 2, 249–285. Google Scholar
  11. Doane, S.M., Sohn, Y.W., Adams, D. & McNamara, D.S. (1994). Learning from instruction: A comprehension-based approach. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 254–259). Atlanta, GA: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  12. Doane, S.M., Sohn, Y.W., Adams, D. & Barnes, M.J. (2000). Modeling the intuitive commander. ARL Technical Report, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Ft. Huachuca, AZ. Google Scholar
  13. Fraser, B.J., Giddings, G.J. & McRobbie, C.J. (1995). Evolution and validation of a personal form of an instrument for assessing science laboratory classroom environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 399–422. Google Scholar
  14. Fraser, B.J. (1998). Science learning environments: Assessment, effects and determinants. In B.J. Fraser & K.G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 53–66). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
  15. Fraser, B.J. (2003). Research in learning environment. Presented in the Conference of Learning Environment, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Google Scholar
  16. Gifford, R. (1997). Environmental psychology: Principles and practice (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Google Scholar
  17. Graetz, K.A. & Goliber, M.J. (2002). Designing collaborative learning places: Psychological foundations and new frontiers. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 92. Winter. Google Scholar
  18. Gussarsky, E. & Gorodetsky, M. (1990). On the concept “chemical equilibrium”: The associative framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 197–204. Google Scholar
  19. Husserl, E. (1984). Logische untersuchungen (Zweiter Band Zweiter Teil) (Logical investigation (Vol. 2, Part 2)). Berlin: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher. Google Scholar
  20. Liu, C.J. (2002). The effect of mental state in learning science concept. Presented in the 41th Annual Conference in Psychology, Taiwan. Google Scholar
  21. Liu, C.J. (2003). The study on the relationship between student's mental state and the learning environment. Presented in Third International Conference on Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, South Africa. Google Scholar
  22. Liu, C.J. & Hou, I.L. (2004). The study in mental states of the ninth grade students in learning about the concepts of plate tectonics. Journal of Science Education (Chinese) (in press). Google Scholar
  23. Mason, L. (2003). Personal epistemologies and intentional conceptual change. In G.M. Sinatra & P.L. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 199–236). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Inc. Google Scholar
  24. McKendree, J., Small, C., Stenning, K. & Conlon, T. (2002). The role of representation in teaching and learning critical thinking. Educational Review, 54(1), 57–67. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ministry of Education, Taiwan (2002). Principles of K-9 integrated science curriculum. Taipei: Author. Google Scholar
  26. Perner, J. (1991). Understanding representational mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  27. Purton, A.J. (1998). Mental state attribution. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Dalhousie University. Google Scholar
  28. Robert, S. & Pashler, H. (2000). How persuasive in a good fit? A comment on theory testing. Psychological Review, 107, 358–367. Google Scholar
  29. Simon, H.A. & Kaplan, C.A. (1991). Foundations of cognitive science. In M.I. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 1–47). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
  30. Thagard, P. & Zhu, R. (2003). Acupuncture, incommensurability, and conceptual change. In G.M. Sinatra & P.L. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 79–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Inc. Google Scholar
  31. Tobias, A. (1979). Environment Inflation. Environmental Science and Technology, 13(4), 400–404. Google Scholar
  32. Weinstein, C.S. (1981). Classroom design as an external condition for learning. Educational Technology, 21, 12–19. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Science EducationNational Kaohsiung Normal UniversityYuan Cha TownshipTaiwan
  2. 2.Science and Mathematics Education CentreCurtin University of TechnologyAustralia

Personalised recommendations