Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of Metacognitive Scaffolds on Low Achievers’ Laboratory Learning

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explored the influence of experimental goal setting and planning on the attitudes toward science, self-efficacy, inquiry performance, and achievement of students with low academic performance. A total of 71 students aged 16–18 were randomly divided into a treatment group (with goal setting and planning) and a control group (without goal setting and planning). A microcomputer-based laboratory focused on Boyle’s Law, coupled with an inquiry worksheet, was assigned. Based on Winne and Hadwin’s model of self-regulated learning, scaffolding was offered to the treatment group to promote goal setting and planning. Data were collected from the worksheet, the Attitudes toward Science Scale, the Self-efficacy of Scientific Inquiry scale, and the Boyle’s Law Conceptual Test. The results showed that both the treatment and control groups improved significantly from the pre- to post-conceptual tests. In the treatment group, the male students gained significantly more conceptual knowledge than the female students. Regarding attitudes toward science, the male students’ scores on the post-test were higher than those of the females. It is concluded that the male students were more positive regarding goal setting and planning in the inquiry activity, whereas the female students did not benefit as much.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abell, S. K. & Lederman, N. G. (2007). Handbook of research on science education. New York, NY: Routledge.

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blonder, R., Rap, S., Mamlok-Naaman, R. & Hofstein, A. (2015). Questioning behavior of students in the inquiry chemistry laboratory: Differences between sectors and genders in the Israeli context. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 705–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R. & Zeidner, M. (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. New York, NY: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buccheri, G., Gürber, N. A. & Brühwiler, C. (2011). The impact of gender on interest in science topics and the choice of scientific and technical vocations. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 159–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkam, D. T., Lee, V. E. & Smerdon, B. A. (1997). Gender and science learning early in high school: Subject matter and laboratory experiences. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 297–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. & McCrae, B. (2011). Scientific literacy and student attitudes: Perspectives from PISA 2006 science. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavallo, A. M. L., Potter, W. H. & Rozman, M. (2004). Gender differences in learning constructs, shifts in learning constructs, and their relationship to course achievement in a structured inquiry, yearlong college physics course for life science majors. School Science and Mathematics, 104(6), 288–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., Chang, W. H., Lai, C. H. & Tsai, C. Y. (2014). A comparison of students’ approaches to inquiry, conceptual learning, and attitudes in simulation-based and microcomputer-based laboratories. Science Education, 98, 905--935.

  • Chien, K. P., Tsai, C.Y., Chen, H. L., Chang, W. H. & Chen, S. (2015). Learning differences and eye fixation patterns in virtual and physical science laboratories. Computers & Education, 82, 191--201.

  • DiBenedetto, M. K. & Zimmerman, B. J. (2010). Differences in self-regulatory processes among students studying science: A microanalytic investigation. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 5, 2–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., Tobin, K. G. & McRobbie, C. J. (2012). Second international handbook of science education (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Springer.

  • Freedman, M. P. (2002). The influence of laboratory instruction on science achievement and attitude toward science across gender differences. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8, 191–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gogolin, L. & Swartz, F. (1992). A quantitative and qualitative inquiry into the attitudes toward science of non science college students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 487–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, B. A. (2015). Measuring cognitive engagement with self-report scales: Reflections from over 20 years of research. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. A. & Azevedo, R. (2007). A theoretical review of Winne and Hadwin's model of self-regulated learning: New perspectives and directions. Review of Educational Research, 77(3), 334–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield, T. A. (1997). Gender- and grade-level differences in science interest and participation. Science Education, 81, 259–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannover, B. & Kessels, U. (2011). Are boys left behind at school? Reviewing and explaining education-related gender disparities. Zeitschrift Fur Padagogische Psychologie, 25(2), 89–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical working school science. School Science Review, 71(256), 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A. & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 28–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, Y. S., Yen, M. H., Chang, W. H., Wang, C. Y. & Chen, S. (2015). Content analysis of 1998–2012 empirical studies in science reading using a self-regulated learning lens. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-014-9574-5

  • Kjærnsli, M. & Lie, S. (2011). Students’ preference for science careers: International comparisons based on PISA 2006. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 121–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, V. E. & Burkam, D. T. (1996). Gender differences in middle grade science achievement: Subject domain, ability level, and course emphasis. Science Education, 80, 613–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, D. C. & Azevedo, R. (2009). Self-efficacy and prior domain knowledge: To what extent does monitoring mediate their relationship with hypermedia learning? Metacognition and Learning, 4(3), 197–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). PISA 2006. Science competencies for tomorrow’s world, vol. 1: Analysis. Paris: Author.

  • Ojediran, I. A., Oludipe, D. I. & Ehindero, O. J. (2014). Impact of laboratory-based instructional intervention on the learning outcomes of low performing senior secondary students in physics. Creative Education, 5, 197–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Simon, S. & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raes, A., Schellens, T., De Weyer, B. & Vanderhoven, E. (2012). Scaffolding information problem solving in web-based collaborative inquiry learning. Computers & Education, 59(1), 82–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roelle, J., Berthold, K. & Fries, S. (2013). Effects of feedback on learning strategies in learning journals: Learner-expertise matters. In R. Zheng (Ed.), Evolving psychological and educational perspectives on cyber behavior. Hershey, PA: Informational Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabourin, J., Mott, B., & Lester, J. (2013). Discovering behavior patterns of self-regulated learners in an inquiry-based learning environment. In H. C. Lane, K. Yacef, J. Mostow., & P. Pavlik (Eds) . Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 209–218). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

  • Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C. & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K. G. (1986). Student task involvement and achievement in process-oriented science activities. Science Education, 70, 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velayutham, S., Aldridge, J. M. & Fraser, B. (2012). Gender differences in student motivation and self-regulation in science learning: A multi-group structural equation modeling analysis. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(6), 1347–1368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virtanen, P. & Nevgi, A. (2010). Disciplinary and gender differences among higher education students in self-regulated learning strategies. Educational Psychology, 30(3), 323–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinburgh, M. (1995). Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 387–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Wolf, S. J. & Fraser, B. J. (2008). learning environment, attitudes and achievement among middle-school science students using inquiry-based laboratory activities. Research in Science Education, 38, 321–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yerdelen-Damar, S. & Pesman, H. (2013). Relations of gender and socioeconomic status to physics through metacognition and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Research, 106(4), 280–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A. & Dori, Y. J. (2012). Metacognition in science education: Trends in current research. New York, NY: Springer.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China

    Sufen Chen, Chih-Chi Huang & Te-Lien Chou

Authors
  1. Sufen Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chih-Chi Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Te-Lien Chou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sufen Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, S., Huang, CC. & Chou, TL. The Effect of Metacognitive Scaffolds on Low Achievers’ Laboratory Learning. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 14, 281–296 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9691-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9691-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation