Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

The effects of a Full-Year Pedagogical Treatment Based on a Collaborative Learning Environment on 7th Graders’ Interest in Science and Technology and Conceptual Change

Eric Durocher 1 * ,
Patrice Potvin 1
1 Université du Québec à Montréal* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 3, Issue 3, September 2020, pp. 107-124
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 803 DOWNLOADS: 385 Publication date: 15 Sep 2020
ABSTRACT
The growing popularity of collaboration in our school and its possible educational potential has led us to  carry out comparative research with 7th grade students. Using a longitudinal approach over an entire school year and  using a cross-lag design, we were able to test the effects of this learning environment on science misconceptions and interest. Using two questionnaires, we were able to perform  an analysis of the results showing a possible positive causal link between collaborative learning and the development of scientific conception. However, we found no direct connection between collaborative learning and interest.  The analysis of the cross -lag leads us to see conceptual change as a mediator of the students' interest in science.
KEYWORDS
Collaboration learning, Conceptual change, Interest.
CITATION (APA)
Durocher, E., & Potvin, P. (2020). The effects of a Full-Year Pedagogical Treatment Based on a Collaborative Learning Environment on 7th Graders’ Interest in Science and Technology and Conceptual Change. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(3), 107-124. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.331
REFERENCES
  1. Akinbobola, A. O. (2009). Enhancing students' attitude towards nigerian senior secondary school physics through the use of cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning strategies. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 1-9.
  2. Areepattamannil, S. (2012). Effects of inquiry-based science instruction on science achievement and interest in science: Evidence from Qatar. The Journal of Educational Research, 105(2), 134-146.
  3. Asghar, A., Huang, Y.-S., Elliott, K., Novak, J., & Richie, P. (2016). Assessing secondary students’ conceptual understanding of technology. Paper presented at the Supporting Active Learning & Technological Innovation in Studies of Education (SALTISE) conference, Montréal, Canada.
  4. Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer-to-peer dialog. Cognitive Science, 33(3), 374-400. doi:10.1111/j.15516709.2009.01017.x
  5. Baser, M. (2006). Fostering conceptual change by cognitive conflict based instruction on students’ understanding of heat and temperature concepts. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(2), 96-114.
  6. Braund, M., & Driver, M. (2005). Pupils' attitudes to practical science around the KS2/3 transition. Education 3-13, 33(2), 20-26.
  7. Bryan, J. S., & Jan, K. (2000). Instructional strategies for promoting conceptual change: Supporting middle school students. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 16(2), 139-161.
  8. Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241-1257.
  9. Diakidoy, I.-A. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(3), 335-356.
  10. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00039-5
  11. DiSessa, A. A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research: threads and fault lines. In The Cambridge handbook of: The learning sciences (pp. 265-281). Cambridge University Press.
  12. Durocher, É. (2016). Learning science in a collaborative and technological environment. In M. Riopel & Z. Smyrnaiou (Eds.), New developments in science and technology education (pp. 11-17). Springer International Publishing.
  13. Eryilmaz, A. (2002). Effects of conceptual assignments and conceptual change discussions on students' misconceptions and achievement regarding force and motion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 1001-1015. doi:10.1002/tea.10054
  14. Eymur, G., & Geban, Ö. (2016). The collaboration of cooperative learning and conceptual change: enhancing the
  15. students’ understanding of chemical bonding concepts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1-19.
  16. Furberg, A., & Arnseth, H. C. (2009). Reconsidering conceptual change from a socio-cultural perspective: analyzing students' meaning making in genetics in collaborative learning activities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(1), 157-191. doi:10.1007/s11422-008-9161-6
  17. Gottfried, A. E., Marcoulides, G. A., Gottfried, A. W., & Oliver, P. H. (2009). A latent curve model of parental motivational practices and developmental decline in math and science academic intrinsic motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 729.
  18. Harrison, A. G., Grayson, D. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1999). Investigating a grade 11 student's evolving conceptions of heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 55-87.
  19. Hasni, A., & Potvin, P. (2015). Student's interest in science and technology and its relationships with teaching methods, family context and self-efficacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(3), 337-366.
  20. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
  21. Henri, F., & Lundgren-Cayrol, K. (1998). Apprentissage collaboratif et nouvelles technologies: Centre de recherche LICEF.
  22. Hestenes, D., & Halloun, I. (1995). Interpreting the force concept inventory: A response to March 1995 critique by Huffman and Heller. The Physics Teacher, 33(8), 502-502.
  23. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
  24. Hynd, C. R., McWhorter, J. Y., Phares, V. L., & Suttles, C. W. (1994). The role of instructional variables in conceptual change in high school physics topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 933-946.
  25. Kang, H., Scharmann, L. C., Kang, S., & Noh, T. (2010). Cognitive conflict and situational interest as factors influencing conceptual change. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 5(4), 383405.
  26. Kingsbury, F. (2012). Le projet SCALE-UP une révolution pédagogique qui nous vient du sud. PÉDAGOGIE COLLÉGIALE, 25(3).
  27. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009). Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks: Effects on retention and transfer efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 306-314.
  28. Krapp, A. (2007). An educational–psychological conceptualisation of interest. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 7(1), 5-21.
  29. Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 27-50.
  30. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computersupported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335-353.
  31. Küçüközer, H. (2013). Designing a powerful learning environment to promote durable conceptual change. Computers & Education, 68(0), 482-494. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.06.012
  32. Leman, P. J., Skipper, Y., Watling, D., & Rutland, A. (2016). Conceptual change in science is facilitated through peer collaboration for boys but not for girls. Child Development, 87(1), 176-183. doi:10.1111/cdev.12481
  33. Nolen, S. B. (2003). Learning environment, motivation, and achievement in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 347-368.
  34. Nussbaum, J., & Novick, S. (1982). Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and accommodation: Toward a principled teaching strategy. Instructional Science, 11(3), 183-200.
  35. Osborne, J., 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.
  36. Palincsar, A. S., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (2002). Designing collaborative learning contexts. Theory into Practice, 41(1), 26-32.
  37. Pan, Y., & Gauvain, M. (2012). The continuity of college students’ autonomous learning motivation and its predictors: A three-year longitudinal study. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(1), 92-99.
  38. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
  39. Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014a). Analysis of the decline in interest towards school science and technology from grades 5 through 11. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 784-802. doi:10.1007/s10956-014-9512x
  40. Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014b). 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. doi:10.1080/03057267.2014.881626
  41. Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2016). Une CAP qui s’inspire des résultats de recherche et qui en produit dans le but de favoriser l’intérêt des élèves à l’égard des sciences et de la technologie. Paper presented at the 84e congrès de l’ACFAS, Université du Québec à Montréal, Québec. .
  42. Potvin, P., Mercier, J., Charland, P., & Riopel, M. (2012). Does classroom explicitation of initial conceptions favour conceptual change or is it counter-productive? Research in Science Education, 42(3), 401-414. doi:10.1007/s11165-010-9203-4
  43. Reid, N., & Skryabina, E. A. (2002). Attitudes towards physics. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(1), 67-81.
  44. Reuter, Y., Cohen-Azria, C., & Cairn. (2013). Dictionnaire des concepts fondamentaux des didactiques (3e éd. actualisée. Ed.) De Boeck.
  45. Rojas-Drummond, S., & Mercer, N. (2003). Scaffolding the development of effective collaboration and learning.
  46. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1), 99-111.
  47. Sawilowsky, S. S. (2009). New effect size rules of thumb. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 8(2), 26.
  48. Shachar, H., & Fischer, S. (2004). Cooperative learning and the achievement of motivation and perceptions of students in 11th grade chemistry classes. Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 69-87. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.003
  49. Sorge, C. (2007). What happens? Relationship of age and gender with science attitudes from elementary to middle school. Science Educator, 16(2), 33-37.
  50. Tao †, P. K. (2004). Developing understanding of image formation by lenses through collaborative learning mediated by multimedia computer‐assisted learning programs. International Journal of Science Education, 26(10), 1171-1197. doi:10.1080/0950069032000138879
  51. Tao, P.-K., & Gunstone, R. F. (1999). Conceptual change in science through collaborative learning at the computer. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 39-57. doi:10.1080/095006999290822
  52. Türkmen, H. (2008). Turkish primary students' perceptions about scientist and what factors affecting the image of the scientists. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(1).
  53. Van Boxtel, C. (2000). Collaborative concept learning. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Twente, Enschede.
  54. Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning and Instruction, 11(4–5), 381-419. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00038-4
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.