Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Examining Low and Non-low Achievers’ Motivation Towards Science Learning Under Inquiry-Based Instruction

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

Abstract

This study aimed to explore low and non-low achievers’ motivation towards science learning among 8th graders in two public schools in central Taiwan under inquiry-based instruction. Mixed design research methods were adopted, and students were divided into experimental (n = 56) and control groups (n = 45). Six non-consecutive inquiry units (90–180 minutes each) were taught to the experimental group during one semester, while same topic units were instructed traditionally in the control group. A questionnaire measuring students’ motivation towards science learning [MILS] was implemented as pre- and post-tests in both the experimental and control groups. Moreover, the teachers and 12 non-low achievers, and six low achievers from each group were interviewed four times in this semester. ANCOVA were used to analyze quantitative data in the questionnaire, and the interview data were coded. The results showed that statistically non-low achievers’ achievement goals and perception of their learning environment in the experimental group significantly improved more than those in the control group. Practically, non-low achievers’ expectancy and learning strategies and low achievers’ confidence, value of science learning, achievement goals, learning strategies, and perception of learning environment in the experimental group were better than those in the control group. Low achievers still needed to use more learning strategies. Additionally, in the experimental group, hands-on activities and conceptual understanding motivated both achievers, various learning strategies motivated non-low achievers, and teachers and peers’ assistance motivated low achievers. However, both achievers under intervention had more exam anxiety than those under traditional teaching due to their weak ability to calculate.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abraham, J., & Barker, K. (2014). Sustaining young people’s enrolment intentions in relation to Physics: Development and validation of a tool. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 14, 93–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banchi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruder, R., & Prescott, A. (2013). Research evidence on the benefits of IBL. ZDM, 45(6), 811–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgin, S. R., McConnell, W. J., & Flowers III, A. M. (2015). ‘I actually contributed to their research’: The influence of an abbreviated summer apprenticeship program in science and engineering for diverse high-school learners. International Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 411–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Scotter, P. V., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins, effectiveness, and applications. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carreira, J. M. (2011). Relationship between motivation for learning EFL and intrinsic motivation for learning in general among Japanese elementary school students. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 39(1), 90–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Wang, H., Lin, H., Lawrenz, F. P., & Hong, Z. (2014). Longitudinal study of an after-school, inquiry-based science intervention on low-achieving children’s affective perceptions of learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(13), 2133–2156. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1548679203?accountid=10046.

  • Chen, S., Huang, C., & Chou, T. (2016). The effect of metacognitive scaffolds on low achievers’ laboratory learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(2), 281–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliot, A. J., & Covington, M. V. (2001). Approach and avoidance motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 13(2), 73–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fakayode, S. O., King, A. G., Yakubu, M., Mohammed, A. K., & Pollard, D. A. (2011). Determination of Fe content of some food items by flame atomic absorption spectroscopy (FAAS): A guided-inquiry learning experience in instrumental analysis laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(1), 109–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C. J., & Salinas, I. (2009). Authentic science learning in primary and secondary classrooms. In M. I. Saleh & M. S. Khine (Eds.), Fostering scientific habits of mind: Pedagogical knowledge and best practices in science education (pp. 125–144). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayden, K., Ouyang, Y., Scinski, L., Olszewski, B., & Bielefeldt, T. (2011). Increasing student interest and attitudes in STEM: Professional development and activities to engage and inspire learners. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 11(1), 47–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., & Karstensson, L. (2002). Antecedents of state test anxiety. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(2), 348–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hushman, C. J., & Marley, S. C. (2015). Guided instruction improves elementary student learning and self-efficacy in science. The Journal of Educational Research, 108(5), 371–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, A., Aulls, M., & Shore, B. (2017). Teachers’ roles, students’ personalities, inquiry learning outcomes, and practices of science and engineering: The development and validation of the McGill attainment value for inquiry engagement survey in STEM disciplines. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(7), 1195–1215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jen, C. S., & Yong, B. C. S. (2013). Secondary school students’ motivation and achievement in combined science. US-China Education Review, 3(4), 213–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, D. E., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2010). The impact of a project-based science curriculum on minority student achievement, attitudes, and careers: The effects of teacher content and pedagogical content knowledge and inquiry-based practices. Science Education, 94(5), 855–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance. New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kingir, S., Geban, O., & Gunel, M. (2012). How does the science writing heuristic approach affect students' performances of different academic achievement levels? A case for high school chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 428–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulo, V., & Bodzin, A. (2013). The impact of a geospatial technology-supported energy curriculum on middle school students’ science achievement. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(1), 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavoie, R. D. (2008). The motivation breakthrough: 6 secrets to turning on the tuned-out child. New York, NY: Touchstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, I.-S., Byeon, J.-H., & Kwon, Y.-J. (2013). Convergent inquiry in science & engineering: The use of atomic force microscopy in a biology class. The American Biology Teacher, 75(2), 121–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manolopoulou-Sergi, E. (2004). Motivation within the information processing model of foreign language learning. System, 32(3), 427–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marle, P. D., Decker, L., Taylor, V., Fitzpatrick, K., Khaliqi, D., Owens, J. E., & Henry, R. M. (2014). CSI–chocolate science investigation and the case of the recipe rip-off: Using an extended problem-based scenario to enhance high school students’ science engagement. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(3), 345–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R., & Tal, R. T. (2004). Inquiry-based science in the middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1063–1080.

  • Meyer, X. S., & Crawford, B. A. (2015). Multicultural inquiry toward demystifying scientific culture and learning science. Science Education, 99(4), 617–637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education (2012). Primary and junior high schools remedial teaching implementation plan. Taiwan: Ministry of Education. Retrieved December 18, 2017 from http://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/.

  • Moote, J. K., Williams, J. M., & Sproule, J. (2013). When students take control: Investigating the impact of the CREST inquiry-based learning program on self-regulated processes and related motivations in young science students. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 12(2), 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.12.2.178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J., Roth McDuffie, A., & French, B. (2015). Identifying key components of teaching and learning in a STEM school. School Science and Mathematics, 115(5), 244–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: NAP.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. M., & DeBacker, T. K. (2008). Achievement motivation in adolescents: The role of peer climate and best friends. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(2), 170–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickens, M., & Eick, C. J. (2009). Studying motivational strategies used by two teachers in differently tracked science courses. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(5), 349–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., García, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahayu, S., Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., Kita, M., & Ibnu, S. (2011). Understanding acid–base concepts: Evaluating the efficacy of a senior high school student-centered instructional program in Indonesia. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(6), 1439–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeve, J. (2009). Understanding motivation and emotion. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schick, H., & Phillipson, S. N. (2009). Learning motivation and performance excellence in adolescents with high intellectual potential: What really matters? High Ability Studies, 20(1), 15–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research and application. Columbus, OH: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scogin, S. C. (2016). Identifying the factors leading to success: How an innovative science curriculum cultivates student motivation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(3), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9600-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sevinc, B., Ozmen, H., & Yigit, N. (2011). Investigation of primary students’ motivation levels towards science learning. Science Education International, 22(3), 218–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegle, D., & McCoach, D. B. (2005). Making a difference: Motivating gifted students who are not achieving. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 22–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegle, D., & McCoach, D. B. (2007). Increasing student mathematics self-efficacy through teacher training. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(2), 278–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trifone, J. D. (2006). To what extent can concept mapping motivate students to take a more meaningful approach to learning biology? Science Education Review, 5(4), 122.1–122.23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C.-C. (1999). “Laboratory exercises help me memorize the scientific truths”: A study of eighth graders’ scientific epistemological views and learning in laboratory activities. Science Education, 83(6), 654–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The development of a questionniare to measure students' motivation toward science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 639-654.

  • Wang, Y.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2016). Taiwanese students’ science learning self-efficacy and teacher and student science hardiness: A multilevel model approach. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 537–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0285-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilhelm, J. D., & Wilhelm, P. J. (2010). Inquiring minds learn to read, write, and think: Reaching all learners through inquiry. Middle School Journal, 41(5), 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, T. Y., Tuan, H. L., Hsieh, C. H., & Chin, C. C. (2013). The validation of the questionnaire of science teacher's perception on low-achiever's need. Paper presented at the Third International Conference of East-Asian Association for Science Education, Hong-Kong, China.

Download references

Funding

Special thanks for the financial support from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, under grant number NSC101-2511-S-018-006-MY3.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Changhua University of Education, 1 Jin-De Road, Changhua City, 500, Taiwan

    Yen-Ruey Kuo & Hsiao-Lin Tuan

  2. Department of Science Education and Application, National Taichung University of Education, 140 Min-Shen Road, Taichung City, 40306, Taiwan

    Chi-Chin Chin

Authors
  1. Yen-Ruey Kuo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hsiao-Lin Tuan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chi-Chin Chin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hsiao-Lin Tuan.

Additional information

Yen-Ruey Kuo is the first author

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kuo, YR., Tuan, HL. & Chin, CC. Examining Low and Non-low Achievers’ Motivation Towards Science Learning Under Inquiry-Based Instruction. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 17, 845–862 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9908-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9908-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation