dealing with learners diversity in performance during ...hc0237/downloads/esera2017/kirstein.pdf ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Contact
University of Duisburg-Essen
Chemistry Education
Schützenbahn 70
47127 Essen
Germany
Theoretical Framework
Design of the Pre-Study
Literature:
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). The Nature of Science. [May 17th 2016]. http://www.project2061.org/publications/sfaa/online/chap1.htm
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswick: Aldine.
Gröhlich, C., Scharenberg, K., & Bos, W. (2009). Wirkt sich Leistungsheterogenität in Schulklassen auf den individuellen Lernerfolg in der Sekundarstufe aus? [Does Diversity in Performance influence the individual Learning Achievement in Secondary Schools?] Journal für Bildungsforschung Online (1), 86-105
Habig, S., van Vorst, H., & Sumfleth, E. (2016). The Effect of Context Characteristics on Students‘ Situational Interest when Learning Chemistry. International Journal of Psychology, 51, 468
Knobloch, R., Sumfleth, E., & Walpuski, M. (2012). How does the qualitity of content-related communication influence the learning outcome in small-groups? Giornale di Didattica e Cultura della Società Chimica Italiana, 34(3), 175-178
Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & Spence, J. (2000). Effects of Within-Class Grouping on Student Achievement: An Explanatory Model. Journal of Educational Research, 94, 101-112.
Lunetta, V. N., Hofstein, A., & Clough, M. P. (2007). Learning and Teaching in the School Science Laboratory: An Analysis of Research, Theory and Practice. (S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman, publ.) Handbook of Research on Science Education, 393–441.
National Research Council (NRC). (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states.
Reiss, K., Sälzer, C., Schiepe-Tiska, A., Klieme, E., & Köller, O. (2016). PISA 2015-Eine Study zwischen Kontinuität und Innovation. [PISA 2015-A Study between Continuity and Innovation]. Münster: Waxmann.
Ständige Konferenz der Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK). (2004). Bildungsstandards im Fach Chemie für den Mittleren Schulabschluss. [Educational Standards for Chemistry at Middle School Level]. München: Wolters Kluwer.
Walpuski, M., Wahser, I., & Sumfleth, E. (2008). Improvement of Inquiry-Learning Using Collaborative Tasks. In: B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.): Promoting Successful Science Education – The Worth of Science Education Research (pp. 197-201). Shaker, Aachen.
Walpuski, M., & Sumfleth, E. (2009). The Use of Video Data to Evaluate Inquiry-Learning Using Collaborative Tasks. In B. Ralle & I. Eilks (Eds.): Promoting Successful Science Education-The Worth of Science Education Research (pp. 197-201). Aachen: Shaker
Weinert, F. E. (2001). Leistungsmessung in Schulen. [Measuring Performance in Schools]. Weinheim: Beltz.
Literature Research
Quantitative Analysis
Differential Analysis of Test Data
Preliminary Work
Development of Learning Material & Test Instruments
Development of Suitable Guidance Stratgies
Quantitative Analysis
Evaluation of Guidance Strategies
01/2016 07/2016 10/2016 03/2018 05/2018
PRE-STUDY STUDY 1 STUDY 2
Qualitative Analysis
Analysis of Process Data
08/2016
Qualitative Analysis
Differential Analysis of Difficulties during Learning
09/2017
Results of the Pre-Study
Discussion and Consequences
▪ Similiar trend for the effect of various guidance strategies (no support, Structuring Aid, Feedback,
Communication Support) within different small-group compositions on learning achievement
▪ Small-groups supported by feedback are more succesful with regard to ‚structuring the process‘ and
‚using chemical knowledge‘
Limitations:
▪ Small sample size of homogenous small-groups with low prior knowledge
▪ Current Data set considers only students from a higher knowledge range (only one school type)
further studies: gathering data from students from a larger knowledge range
▪ Combined design of quantitative and qualitative methods
▪ Reanalysis of existing data (test data and video data) about
experimental inquiry-learning tasks about ‚acids and bases‘
(Walpuski, Wahser, & Sumfleth, 2008; Knobloch, Sumfleth, & Walpuski, 2012)
Qualitative Reanalysis: ▪ Reanalysis of existing process data (video data)
▪ Method: Grounded Theory (Glaser & Strauss, 2009)
▪ Detailed view on inquiry process: process plots (Walpuski & Sumfleth, 2009)
Quantitative Reanalysis:
▪ Analysis of existing guidance strategies in different small-group
compositions
▪ Small-group characterization on basis of prior knowledge test:
Homogenous small-groups
with low prior knowledge
(n = 12)
Homogenous small-groups with average prior
knowledge and high cognitive abilities
(n = 43)
Heterogenous small groups
(n = 43)
different guidance strategies (Walpuski et al., 2008; Knobloch et al., 2012) different small-group compositions
Edu
cati
on
al S
tan
dar
ds
Ind
ivid
ual
Diff
ere
nce
s
Homogenous small-groups
with low prior knowledge
Homogenous small-groups
with average prior knowledge
and high cognitive abilities
Heterogenous small-groups
Working Material Students receive all material necessary to solve the problem
Research Question Does the effect of different guidance strategies depend on a small-groups‘ compostion?
Communication Support
Helps students to talk about the task and their results
in a seperate phase.
Helps students to overcome uncertainties.
Feedback during and at the end of lesson.
Feedback
Structuring Aid
Helps students to structure the process of
Scientific Inquiry (card based)
Students‘ need of suitable guidance strategies (Lunetta et al., 2007)
Overall positive effect on learning with experimental inquiry-learning tasks (Walpuski et al., 2008; Knobloch et al., 2012)
Important aspects of diversity: prior knowledge and cognitive abilities (e. g. Weinert, 2001)
A small-groups‘ composition influences learning processes (e. g. Lou et al., 2000; Gröhlich et al., 2009)
Example: How can we neutralise an acid?
H1: Homogenous small-groups with low prior knowledge are best supported by structuring aid.
H2: Homogenous small-groups with average prior knowledge and high cognitive abilities
are best supported by feedback.
H3: Heterogenous small-groups are supported best by communication support.
idea experiment conclusion
correct
wrong
homogenous
Rgroup ≤ iqr Rgroup > iqr
low (Mgroup < q1)
average (q1 ≤ Mgroup ≤ q3)
high (Mgroup > q3)
Small-groups that received feedback formulate ideas more often, use experiments to prove the ideas and make conclusions on the basis of the experiments (structure of Scientific Inquiry) Small-groups that received feedback integrate chemical knowledge more often
Experimental Inquiry-Learning in Chemistry (Walpuski et al., 2008; Knobloch et al., 2012; Habig et al., 2016)
International agreement about obligatory learning goals
Lesson planning: educational standards as a basis
▪ Scientific Literacy as a general educational aim for every student (AAAS, 1990; KMK, 2004; NRC, 2013)
▪ Knowledge about important facts and concepts
(content knowledge)
▪ Knowledge about Scientific Practices
(Scientific Inquiry)
▪ Knowledge about Science
(Nature of Science)
Students with different prerequisites (e. g. prior knowledge)
Lesson planning: integration of different individual abilities
Students from lower school type
Students from upper school type le
vel o
f p
rofi
cien
cy
Total of all students
Dealing with Learners’ Diversity in Performance during Experimental Inquiry-Learning in Chemistry
Dennis Kirstein, Sebastian Habig, & Maik Walpuski
Learning Task Students work on a scientific problem in small-groups
Content-related Information Students can look up useful information related to the task
heterogenous Small groups‘ composition
Mgroup = mean q1= lower 25 % quartile q3= upper 25 % quartile
Rgroup = range iqr = interquartile range
Structuring Aid Guidance Strategies no support Feedback Communication Support F(3, 8) = 2.322; p = .152; η2 = .465 n. s.
F(3, 39) = 4.128; p = .012; η2 = .241 ** **
F(3, 39) = 4.254; p = .011; η2 = .247
Timeline
PISA 2015: Students‘ Performance in Science in Germany (Reiss et al., 2016, p. 86)