Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

High School Students’ Reasons for Their Science Dispositions: Community-Based Innovative Technology-Embedded Environmental Research Projects

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 25 October 2018

This article has been updated

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to qualitatively describe high school students’ reasons for their science dispositions (attitude, perception, and self-confidence) based on their long-term experience with innovative technology-embedded environmental research projects. Students in small groups conducted research projects in and out of school with the help of their teachers and community experts (scientists and engineers). During the 3-year period of this nationally funded project, a total of 135 students from five schools in a mid-west State participated in research activities. Of the 135 students, 53 students were individually interviewed to explore reasons for their science dispositions. Students’ reasons for each disposition were grouped into categories, and corresponding frequency was converted to a percentage. The categories of reasons were not only attributed to the use of innovative technologies in environmental research but also the contexts and events that surrounded it. The reasons that influenced students’ science dispositions positively were because engaging in environmental research projects with technology contributed to easing fear and difficulty, building a research team, disseminating findings, communicating with the community, researching with scientists, training by teachers, and acknowledging teachers’ knowledge. These results advanced how and why students develop science dispositions in the positive direction, which are as follows: building science teacher capacity, developing a community of inquirers, and committing to improve pedagogical practices.

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

Change history

  • 25 October 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The name of “Dima Kassab” was incorrectly spelled as “Dimma Kasab”.

References

  • Achieve Inc. (2013). Next generation science standards. Washington, D.C.

  • Alsop, S., & Watts, M. (2003). Science education and affect. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1043–1047.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anders, C., Berg, R., Christina, V., Bergendahl, B., Lundberg, B., & Tibell, L. (2003). Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open inquiry version of the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education, 25(3), 351–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, L. A., Osborn, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). “Doing” science versus “being” a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren's constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 564–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bak, H. J. (2001). Education and public attitudes toward science: Implications for the “deficit model” of education and support for science and technology. Social Science Quarterly, 82(4), 779–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT impact report: A review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe. EuropeanSchoolnet: Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/pdf/doc254_en.pdf

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72(91), 187–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barmby, P., Kind, P. M., & Jones, K. (2008). Examining changing attitudes in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(8), 1075–1093.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M., Lord, C., Strauss, E., Rosca, C., Langford, H., Chavez, D., & Deni, L. (2006). Using the urban environment to engage youths in urban ecology field studies. Journal of Environmental Education, 37(2), 3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basu, S. J., & Barton, A. C. (2007). Developing a sustained interest in science among urban minority youth. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(3), 466–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouillion, L. M., & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Connecting school and community with science learning: Real world problems and school community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 878–898.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, A., Maguire, S., Martin, A., Milsom, C., Nash, R., Rawlison, S., Turner, A., Wurthman, S., & Conchie, S. (2007). Fieldwork is good: The student perception and the affective domain. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 31(2), 299–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Mind, brain, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braund, M. & Reiss, M. (2005). Beyond the classroom: The case for out-of-school contexts and authentic learning of science. In Kasanda, C., Muhammed, L., Akpo S. & Nogolo, E. (Eds) Proceedings of the 13th Annual South African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (SAARMSTE) Conference, 10–14 January 2005, University of Namibia, Windhoek, pp. 68–75.

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlow, S., Jacobi, T., & Rogers, M. (2000). Science anxiety as a function of gender and experience. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 42(1–2), 119–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2002). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, R., Knezek, G., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2014). Student perceptions of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) content and careers. Computers in Human Behavior, 34(5), 173–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning and argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, E., & Goedhart, M. (2011). Evaluation of authentic science projects on climate change in secondary schools: A focus on gender differences. Research in Science and Technological Education, 29(2), 131–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebenezer, J., Kaya, O. N., & Ebenezer, D. L. (2011). Engaging students in environmental research projects: Perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 94–116.

  • Ebenezer, J., Columbus, R., Kaya, O. N., Zhang, L., & Ebenezer, D. L. (2012). One science teacher’s professional development experience: A case study exploring changes in students’ perceptions of their fluency with innovative technologies. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9277-9.

  • Entwistle, N., & Smith, C. (2002). Personal understanding and target understanding: Mapping influences on the outcomes of learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(3), 321–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falloon, G., & Trewern, A. (2013). Developing school-scientist partnerships: Lessons for scientists from Forests-of-Life. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(1), 11–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortus, D. (2014). Editorial: Attending to affect. Journal of Research in Science Teaching., 51(7), 821–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (1996). Turning systemic thinking on its head. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(6), 420–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gebbels, S., Evans, S. M., & Delany, J. E. (2011). Promoting environmental citizenship and corporate social responsibility through a school/industry/university partnership. Journal of Biological Education, 45(1), 13–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, H. L., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86(5), 693–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, A. R., & Carter, G. (2008). Uncovering the potential: The role of technologies on science learning of middle school students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(2), 329–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilgenkamp, K., & Livingston, M. (2002). Tomboys, masculine characteristics, and self-ratings of confidence in career success. Psychological Reports, 90(3), 743–749.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. (2011). Inquiry-based science and technology enrichment program: Green earth enhanced with inquiry and technology. Journal of Science Education Technology, 20(6), 803–814.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klop, T., Severiens, S. E., Knippels, M. C. P. J., van Mil, M. H. W., & Ten Dam, G. T. M. (2010). Effects of a science education module on attitudes towards modern biotechnology of secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1127–1150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koballa, T. R., & Glynn, S. M. (2007). Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 75–102). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey, G., & Kleiner, B. (2005). Nurse residency program: An effective tool for recruitment and retention. Journal of Health Care Finance, 31(3), 25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, S., & Bryan, L. (2014). Supporting the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) through research: Introduction to NARST position papers. Retrieved from https://narst.org/ngsspapers/

  • Margolis, H., & McCabe, P. P. (2006). Improving self-efficacy and motivation what to do, what to say. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(4), 218–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Means, B. (1998). Melding authentic science, technology, and inquiry-based teaching: Experiences of the GLOBE program. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(1), 97–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalf, S. J., & Tinker, R. F. (2004). Probeware and handhelds in elementary and middle school science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 43–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, C., Anderman, E., & Hicks, L. (1995). Differences between elementary and middle school teachers and students: A goal theory approach. Journal of Early Adolescence, 15(1), 90–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, A. P. (1998). Students and scientists take a “lichen” to air quality assessment in Ireland. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(1), 107–113.

    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 

  • National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2016). NSTA Position Statement. Virginia: The National Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieswandt, M. (2007). Student affect and conceptual understanding in learning chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 908–937.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oh, P. S., & Yager, R. E. (2004). Development of constructivist science classrooms and changes in student attitudes toward science. Science Education International, 15(2), 105–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: A focus-group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J. F., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Tytler, R. (2009). Attitudes towards science: An update. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

  • Papanastasiou, C., & Papanastasiou, E. C. (2004). Major influences on attitudes toward science. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(3), 239–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty-years of research (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrier, F., & Nsengiyumva, J.-B. (2003). Active science as a contribution to the trauma recovery process: Preliminary indications with orphans for the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1111–1128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches. Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piburn, M. D., & Baker, D. R. (1993). If I were the teacher… Qualitative study of attitude toward science. Science Education, 77(4), 393–406.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: A systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raved, L., & Assaraf, O. B. Z. (2010). Attitudes towards science learning among 10th-grade students: A qualitative look. International Journal of Science Education, 33(9), 1219–1243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, M. J. (2004). Students’ attitudes towards science: A long term perspective. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(1), 97–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, M. J. (2005). The importance of affect in science education. In S. Alsop (Ed.), Beyond Cartesian Dualism: Encountering affect in the teaching and learning of Science (pp. 17–25). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, L. J., Venville, G. J., & Wallace, J. (2012). Knowledge that counts in a global community: Exploring the contribution of integrated curriculum. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riegle-Crumb, C., Morton, K., Moore, C., Chimonidou, A., Labrake, C., & Kopp, S. (2015). Do inquiring minds have positive attitudes? The science education of preservice elementary teachers. Science Education, 99(5), 819–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2004). Attitudes toward chemistry among 11th grade students in high schools in Greece. Science Education, 88(4), 535–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2006). Competence and control beliefs: Distinguishing the means and ends. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 349–367). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, E., Hunter, A.-B., Laursen, S. L., & DeAntoni, T. (2004). Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Science Education, 88(4), 493–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepardson, D. P., & Pizzini, E. L. (1993). A comparison of student perceptions of science activities within three instructional approaches. School Science and Mathematics, 93(3), 127–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, R. D., Koballa, T. R., Oliver, J. S., & Crawley, F. E. (1994). Research on the affective dimension of science learning. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjøberg, S. (2002). Science for the children. Retrieved from http://folk.uio.no/sveinsj/sas_report_new%20.pdf

  • Snow, R. E., Corno, L., & Jackson, D. (1996). Individual differences in affective and conative functions. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 243–310). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting communities and classrooms. Great Barrington: The Orion Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, J. E., & Mares, K. R. (2001). Science enrichment programs for gifted high school girls and boys: Predictors of program impact on science confidence and motivation. Journal Research in Science Teaching, 38(10), 1065–1088.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, J. E., & Mares, K. R. (2005). Evaluating the impact of science-enrichment programs on adolescents’ science motivation and confidence: The splashdown effect. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4), 359–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teach- ing practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963–980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, E., Barton, A. C., Turner, E., & Gutiérrez, M. V. (2012). Empowering science and mathematics education in urban schools. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titsworth, S. (2004). Students’ note taking: The effects of teacher immediacy and clarity. Communication Education, 53(4), 305–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomas, L., Ritchie, S. M., & Tones, M. (2011). Attitudinal impact of hybridized writing about a socioscientific issue. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 878–900.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tran, N. A. (2010). The relationship between students’ connections to out-of-school experiences and factors associated with science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 33(12), 1625–1651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R., & Osborne, J. (2012). Student attitudes and aspirations towards science. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of research in science education (pp. 597–625). Dordrech: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wee, B., Fast, J., Shepardson, D., & Harbor, J. (2004). Students’ perceptions of environmental based inquiry experiences. School Science and Mathematics, 104(3), 112–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager, R. E., Simmons, P. E., & Penick, J. E. (1989). Student perception of the usefulness of school science experiences. School Science and Mathematics, 89(4), 313–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yung, B. H. W., & Tao, P. K. (2004). Prioritising the affective: An analysis of classroom discourse of a junior secondary science lesson. Teaching Science, 50(4), 6–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zacharia, Z., & Barton, A. C. (2004). Urban middle-school students’ attitudes toward a defined science. Science Education, 88(2), 197–222.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research reported is being undertaken as part of the project Translating Innovative Technologies into Classrooms (TITiC): Student-Teacher Scientific Research in Lake Erie Water Sheds. This study funded by the NSF-ITEST-TITiC under Project No. ESIE 0423387.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Teacher Education Division, College of Education, Wayne State University, Room 299, 5425 Gullen Mall, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA

    Jazlin Ebenezer

  2. Faculty of Education, Usak University, 1 Eylul Campus, 64200, Usak, Turkey

    Osman Nafiz Kaya

  3. Teacher Education Division, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA

    Dima Kassab

Authors
  1. Jazlin Ebenezer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Osman Nafiz Kaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dima Kassab
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jazlin Ebenezer.

Additional information

The original version of this article was revised: The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The name of “Dima Kassab” was incorrectly spelled as “Dimma Kasab”. The correct name is now shown here.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ebenezer, J., Kaya, O.N. & Kassab, D. High School Students’ Reasons for Their Science Dispositions: Community-Based Innovative Technology-Embedded Environmental Research Projects. Res Sci Educ 50, 1341–1365 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9735-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9735-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation