Do Student Attitudes toward Science Change ... - ACS Publications

Research: Science and Education edited by

Chemical Education Research

Diane M. Bunce

Do Student Attitudes toward Science Change during a General Education Chemistry Course?

The Catholic University of America Washington, DC 20064

Mary M. Walczak Department of Chemistry, St. Olaf College, Northfield, MN 55057; [email protected] Daniel E. Walczak MLE Analytics, Eagan, MN 55122

The importance of educating people to live in our increasingly science- and technology-rich society is well established (1, 2). In addition to training the next generation of scientists, it is increasingly important to teach students who are not science majors the scientific vocabulary and skills for conversing, reading, and writing coherently about science in a nontechnical context. These skills of functional scientific literacy (3, 4) are essential components of conscientious citizenship (5). Many institutions require students to take one or more courses in science. Some nonscience majors are intrigued by this opportunity, while others are less inclined to take science classes. Sometimes science courses offered for general education credit are designed especially for nonscience majors. While this approach offers flexibility in that the content requirements of courses for science majors are relaxed, it is not clear whether these courses change students’ attitudes toward science. Making chemistry interesting and engaging to nonscience majors can present unique challenges. In order to develop functional scientific literacy skills, students must become engaged to a reasonable extent in the course.

(e.g., feelings toward or beliefs about scientific topics such as global warming). Student attitudes toward science are the focus of this study. Chemistry instructors have taken a number of approaches to motivate students to learn chemistry and to improve student attitudes towards chemistry. Several approaches involve incorporating “real world” components into course and laboratory experiences (16–18). Investigators report that including these components led to a deeper level of student–student involvement, greater confidence about reasoning, greater metacognitive awareness, and better mastery of general concept knowledge than their counterparts in traditional courses and laboratories. Other authors report gains in adopting cooperative learning techniques (19–21). Students participating in cooperative learning activities had a stronger perception of the relevance of chemistry in their lives, greater enjoyment of chemistry, and had more positive attitudes toward learning chemistry than those participating in traditional courses.

Research on Student Attitudes toward Science

The examples cited above describe strategies used in courses for chemistry majors. Because the focus of the present study is general education students, demonstrating the relevance of chemistry is probably even more important than for chemistry majors. The news assignment project implemented in these classes was designed to help general education chemistry students develop scientific understanding and the skills needed to locate and evaluate scientific and technological information. An earlier paper (22) describes the assignments designed to engage students in contemporary scientific issues. List 1 shows the topics explored. Briefly, the news assignments were designed to increase functional scientific literacy by using information sources readily available to foster independent research and analysis by incorporating multiple assignments and a decreasing amount of

Several studies in science education have investigated the relationship between student attitudes toward science and their achievement in science (6–9). In general, these investigations have found conflicting correlations between attitude and achievement in science. Cukrowska et al. report a positive relationship between attitudes and academic achievement in first-year chemistry (7). Tuan et al. also report that achievement correlates with both attitude and motivation toward learning science based on their study of junior high school students (8). However, Rennie and Punch report a borderline significant correlation between subsequent achievement and student attitudes towards science in 8th grade students (9). They conclude that students’ past performance is a primary predictor of subsequent achievement. These examples illustrate the inconsistency among reports in the literature. A thorough discussion of the reasons attributed to the inconclusive results is beyond the scope of this paper, but interested readers are directed to published reviews (9–12). Briefly, the chief concerns about “attitude research” are problems with the instruments used to measure student attitudes and a lack of clarity about the definition of attitude (13–15). Some instruments are designed to measure scientific attitudes (e.g., characteristics of scientists such as open-mindedness) while other instruments seek to learn about attitudes towards science

Changing Nonmajors’ Attitudes toward Science

List 1. Example News Assignment Topics from Semester 2 Should healthcare workers be immunized against influenza? Should food be irradiated as a means to control E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks? Should I replace incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs? Antidepressants and adolescents: Is Prozac safe for teenagers?

© Division of Chemical Education • www.JCE.DivCHED.org • Vol. 86 No. 8 August 2009 • Journal of Chemical Education

985

Research: Science and Education

in-class discussion, and to develop student understanding of and means of assessing source reliability by asking students to evaluate their information sources. These student learning goals were translated into several research questions. This paper addresses the question: Do general education students’ attitudes toward science, technology and society change as a result of taking a chemistry class that includes emphasis on contemporary issues? Other questions are articulated and addressed elsewhere (22, 23). Methods This project employed a mixed-methods approach (24) that involved both survey response data (quantitative) and student interviews (qualitative). The survey was followed by the interviews in order to learn more about the reasons behind students’ responses on the survey. The study was conducted during the fall semester 2004 and spring semester 2007. In the fall semester (semester 1) a pilot study was conducted with ten students enrolled in A Matter of the Environment, an environmental chemistry course taken as an elective by environmental studies majors and taken to fulfill the college general education requirements by nonscience majors. Two of the students enrolled were environ-

mental studies majors and 70% of the students were in the first two years of college (20% first year, 50% second year). In the spring semester (semester 2) a more comprehensive study was conducted involving 36 students enrolled in Chemistry and the World, a general education (nonmajors) chemistry course taken by nursing majors and other nonscience majors. Approximately 90% of the students enrolled semester 2 were nursing majors and 86% of the students were in the first two years of college (72% first year, 14% second year). Neither course had any prerequisites and no students enrolled in both courses. In both courses, students signed an informed consent form (see the online supplement) agreeing to be part of this study and completed the Views on Science–Technology–Society (VOSTS, see the online supplement) survey (25) on the first day of class (pretest). The same survey was administered during the final class meeting (posttest). Although online administration of the survey was possible, students were asked to complete it on paper in class to ensure a higher return rate. On our campus, surveys completed by students online on their own time have return rates of up to 70% (26). The requirement that students complete these surveys in class resulted in return rates of at least 90%.

Table 1. Statements Selected from the Views on Science–Technology–Society Survey Item

No.a

Statement

Topic

20151

Politics in America affects American scientists, because scientists are very much a part of American society (that is, scientists are not isolated from society).

Politics and Science/Scientists

20521

The success of science and technology in America depends on how much support the public gives to scientists, engineers and technicians. This support depends on college students—the future public—learning how science and technology are used in America.

Public support for Science/ Technology

40141

When engineers come upon a dangerous idea or product in their work, they actually do inform the public authorities, no matter if it means losing their job or being demoted.

Science and Ethics

40161

Heavy industry has greatly polluted North America. Therefore, it is a responsible decision to move heavy industry to underdeveloped countries where pollution is not so widespread.

Contributions of science/technology to decisions about pollutionb

40211

Scientists and engineers should be the ones to decide what types of energy America will use in the future (for example, nuclear, hydro, solar, or coal burning) because scientists and engineers are the people who know the facts best.

Contributions of science/ technology to decisions about future energy sourcesb

40215

Scientists and engineers should be the ones to decide whether or not to build a nuclear reactor and where it should be built, because scientists and engineers are the people who know the facts best.

Contributions of science/ technology to decisions about nuclear energy

40231

Science and technology can NOT help people make legal decisions; for example, deciding if a person is guilty or not guilty in a court of law.

Contributions of science/ technology to legal decisions

40413

Science and technology offer a great deal of help in resolving such social problems as pollution and overpopulation.

Role of science/technology in overcoming social problemsb

40421

In your everyday life, knowledge of science and technology helps you personally solve practical problems (for example, getting a car out of a snowdrift, cooking, or caring for a pet).

Utility of science/technology in citizens solving everyday problems

50111

There seems to be two kinds of people, those who understand the sciences and those who understand the arts (for example, literature, history, business, law). But if everyone studied more science, then everyone would understand the sciences.

Human ability to understand science/technology

50211

Science classes have given me the confidence to figure things out and decide if something (for example, an advertisement) is true or not. Because of my science classes I have become a better shopper.

Role of science classes in becoming a better consumerb

50313

Comparison of the views of The mass media in general (TV, newspapers, magazines, movies, etc.) give a more accurate picture of what science really is in America, compared to the picture offered by science science/technology presented by the media and by science classes classes.

aThe

five-digit numbers represent coding developed by the authors (see ref 25).

986

bThese

items were specifically discussed in the semester 2 course.

Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 86 No. 8 August 2009 • www.JCE.DivCHED.org • © Division of Chemical Education


The VOSTS survey was used with permission of the authors (25). The goal in utilizing this survey was to measure student attitudes toward science in relation to technology and society before and after the course experiences. Of the 114 total items of the VOSTS instrument 12 were selected for the survey. Selected items were from the “influence of society on science/ technology”, “influence of science/technology on society”, and “influence of school science on society” categories (25). The VOSTS questions include a number of possible multiple-choice responses (e.g., A through J) and are not based on a Likert scale. Students were given adequate time in class to complete the survey. Pre- and postcourse student responses were de-identified in order to guard students’ privacy, yet codified in a fashion so that paired statistical analysis (27) could be conducted at the conclusion of the course. Student interviews and open-ended survey responses were collected at the end of semester 2. The relevant open-ended survey questions were part of the online end-of-course evaluation completed by 31 of the class members. The purpose of the interviews was to determine how attitudes toward science are influenced, whether attitudes toward science changed over the semester, and what aspects of the course, if any, led to attitudinal changes. All students in the course were invited to participate in an interview via e-mail. The instructor conducted the interviews with one or two students at a time, interviewing (and recording) a total of 10 students. The average academic achievement in the course (i.e., course grade) of the interviewed students was representative of the entire class ( p value = 0.80). This study was conducted with students in a general education class at a private liberal arts college; most of the students were nursing majors. The results are not necessarily generalizable to other student populations. Results and Discussion Views on Science–Technology–Society Survey The empirically derived VOSTS survey includes 114 multiple-choice items relating to the relationships between science, technology and society (25). From this collection of items and multiple-choice answers, 12 were chosen to assess the attitudes of students enrolled in Chemistry and the World in semester 2. The authors of the tool recommended selecting items for use with student groups. The statements used in this study are summarized in Table 1 and the multiple-choice responses are included in the online supplement. In addition to the wording of the VOSTS statement, a corresponding classification (Topic) is included in Table 1 for each statement. The topics denoted with a superscript “b” were directly discussed as part of the class, whether in the context of a news assignment or simply as part of the course. A quantitative scoring scheme for the VOSTS survey has been devised (28, 29) that allows statistical analysis of paired student responses. Six faculty from different disciplines (biology, biomolecular science, chemistry, physics, psychology, and statistics) classified each of the multiple-choice responses for the 12 survey items as either “realistic”, “having merit”, or “naïve.” When the faculty classifications differed, we discussed our classification rationale and came to a consensus regarding the label for each response. Using this scheme, the student answers were collapsed into three categories via a continuous integer scale. Statistical analysis was done on the collapsed data after assigning

an integer value to each category (2 = realistic, 1 = has merit, and 0 = naïve). Two levels of statistical analysis were employed. First, agreement between the pre- and posttests was analyzed using Cohen’s Kappa (κ) statistic (30–32), a measure of inter-rater reliability. Cohen’s Kappa is defined as (31): O − Ea (1) κ = a N − Ea where Oa is the observed count of agreement, Ea is the expected count of agreement, and N is the number of respondent pairs. In this context, it measures the extent to which the student responses on the pre- and posttest exceed what is expected if all students randomly selected choices on the tests. The results are compiled in Table 2. Table 2 contains a p value for a test of the null hypothesis, the calculated κ value and an interpretation of the level of agreement based on the κ value for each item. The null hypothesis states that no agreement exists between the pre- and postassessment for each item. For two items (20151 and 50111) the results are statistically significant and the null hypothesis is rejected. For these items, students generally had consistent responses on the pre- and posttests. These two items pertain to the relationship between politics and science, and the human ability to understand science, respectively. Neither of these topics were included explicitly in the course, even in a tangential way. The other items did not exhibit the same level of consistency on the pre- and posttests. In these cases the κ values reported in the table are a measurement of the level of intra-rater reliability for that item. The weighted κ values also take into account the degree of change for an item. For example, a student choosing a “naïve” response on the pretest and a “realistic” response on the posttest would have a greater effect on the κ statistic than a student response changing from “naïve” to “has merit”. A high κ value indicates that the categories (realistic, etc.) of individual Table 2. Comparison of Changes in Student Responses from the Beginning to End of the Semester 2 Weighted Statistic

κ

κ Interpretation (Level of Agreement)

VOSTS Item

Test Statistic Valuea

20151

0.0003

0.5352

moderate

20521

0.4513

0.1325

slight

40141

0.5714

0.0712

slight

40161

0.2055

0.1907

slight

40211

0.4691

0.1143

slight

40215

0.6631

0.0634

slight

40231

0.7010

‒0.0690

less than chance

40413

0.9997

n/ab

n/a

40421

0.9824

‒0.0035

less than chance

50111

0.0034

0.4542

moderate

50211

0.1039

0.1671

slight

50313

0.2127

0.1507

slight

aThe

null hypothesis was tested using this expression: two-sided Pr > |Z|. agreement statistic is not reported for this item because of the number of non-missing levels for postcourse student responses. bAn


987

Research: Science and Education Table 3. Comparison of Average Differences between Student Responses on the Semester 2 Pre- and Posttest Using Categorized Responses VOSTS Item

N

Average Difference, Pretest–Posttest

t Value

Pr > |t|

20151

32

0.0303

0.44

0.6617

20521

31

0.0313

0.33

0.7446

40141

29

‒0.1330

‒0.78

0.4421

40161

32

0.0303

0.27

0.7863

40211

30

0.2258

2.04

0.0505

40215

31

‒0.2500

‒1.39

0.1738

40231

30

0.0000

0.00

1.0000

40413

32

‒0.2420

‒2.10

0.0436

40421

31

0.0625

0.44

0.6619

50111

30

‒0.0650

‒0.53

0.6012

50211

28

‒0.3790

‒4.14

0.0003

50313

30

0.1290

0.94

0.3542

Note: Rows displayed in bold type are significant at p ≤ 0.05.

student responses did not change much from the beginning to the end of the course. The highest κ values correspond to the two cases in which the null hypothesis is rejected. If some students changed their responses to an item from pre- to posttest, a lower κ would result. Most of the items resulted in “slight” agreement between the responses on the pretest and the posttest.

realistic

Response Choices for VOSTS Item 40211

Number of Responses

25

has merit

20

has merit

A Scientists and engineers should decide because they have the training and facts that give them a better understanding of the issue.

naive

B Scientists and engineers should decide because they have the knowledge and can make better decisions than government bureaucrats or private companies, both of whom have vested interests.

15

10

pre post

5

0

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

Response Choices Figure 1. Distribution of responses on VOSTS item 40211, with classification by the faculty expert group.

Statement for Student Response, VOSTS Item 40211 Scientists and engineers should be the ones to decide what types of energy America will use in the future (for example, nuclear, hydro, solar, or coal burning) because scientists and engineers are the people who know the facts best.

988

Second, the categorized student responses to the 12 items from the VOSTS survey were used to calculate a paired t statistic to determine whether the pre- and posttest responses are statistically significantly different ( p ≤ 0.05). The results are shown in Table 3. The number of responders varied between the different items because students choosing the “None of these choices fits my basic viewpoint” response were not classified as “realistic”, “having merit”, or “naïve”. The averages were calculated by finding the difference between the pre- and posttest responses for each student and calculating the average of these differences for all respondents. Because the differences were defined as pretest minus posttest, items with a negative average correspond to situations where more student responses increased from “naïve” or “has merit” to “has merit” or “realistic”. Positive averages represent situations where student responses moved in the opposite direction. Five of the items have negative averages, indicating “improved” responses. To determine whether the changes in responses from the pre- to posttest were statistically significant, a paired t statistic and a corresponding p value were calculated for each item. Three items, with bold type in the rows in Table 3, had statistically significant p values. Each of these items will be examined in more detail. The specific pre- and posttest responses, and their characterizations, are shown Figures 1–3. Each of these figures includes the VOSTS item statement and the possible multiple-choice responses. The white bars correspond to the pretest responses and the black to the posttest. The “realistic”, “has merit”, and “naïve” labels indicate the classification by the faculty experts.

C Scientists and engineers should decide because they have the training and facts that give them a better understanding; BUT the public should be involved—either informed or consulted. D The decision should be made equally; viewpoints of scientists and engineers, other specialists, and the informed public should all be considered in decisions that affect our society. E The government should decide because the issue is basically a political one; BUT scientists and engineers should give advice. F The public should decide because the decision affects everyone; BUT scientists and engineers should give advice. G The public should decide because the public serves as a check on the scientists and engineers. Scientists and engineers have idealistic and narrow views on the issue and thus pay little attention to consequences. H I don’t understand. I I don’t know enough about this subject to make a choice. J None of these choices fits my basic viewpoint.



Item 40211, illustrated in Figure 1, pertains to decision makers regarding future energy sources in America. Several students changed their response from D to C, effectively giving more say to scientists and engineers. In the pilot study (semester 1), very little change emerged in student responses for this item, although the sample size precluded statistical analysis of that study’s data. Student opinions on this topic now may be influenced by the campus conversation about sustainability beginning in 2005–2006 and the newly erected wind turbine.1

Item 40413, shown in Figure 2, asks students to consider the role of science and technology in overcoming social problems such as pollution and overpopulation. Most students chose an initial “realistic” response for this item, but the few “naïve” responders changed to “realistic” at the end of the semester. In the pilot study most student responses were also in the “realistic” category. Although we didn’t talk about the specific social problems mentioned in the item, we did discuss other social problems (see Table 1).

Number of Responses

25

Response Choices for VOSTS Item 40413 realistic

20

A Science and technology can certainly help to resolve these problems. The problems could use new ideas from science and new inventions from technology.

naive

B Science and technology can help resolve some social problems but not others.

15

10

pre post

5

0

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

Response Choices Figure 2. Distribution of responses on VOSTS item 40413, with classification by the faculty expert group.

C Science and technology solve many social problems, but science and technology also cause many of these problems. D It’s not a question of science and technology helping, but rather it’s a question of people using science and technology wisely. E It’s hard to see how science and technology could help very much in resolving these social problems. Social problems concern human nature; these problems have little to do with science and technology. F Science and technology only make social problems worse. It’s the price we pay for advances in science and technology. G I don’t understand.

Statement for Student Response, VOSTS Item 40413 Science and technology offer a great deal of help in resolving such social problems as pollution and overpopulation.

H I don’t know enough about this subject to make a choice. I

Response Choices for VOSTS Item 50211

Number of Responses

25

has merit

20

A Science classes have helped me become a better shopper, because science has given me valuable facts and ideas.

naive

B Science classes have helped me become a better shopper, because science teaches the scientific method for figuring things out.

15

10

pre post

5

0

None of these choices fits my basic viewpoint.

C Science classes have helped me become a better shopper, because science teaches valuable facts and the scientific method for figuring things out. D Because learning about products in the marketplace is part of what we do in science class. E Science classes have NOT helped me become a better shopper, even though science teaches valuable facts and the scientific method.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

Response Choices Figure 3. Distribution of responses on VOSTS item 50211, with classification by the faculty expert group. Statement for Student Response, VOSTS Item 50211 Science classes have given me the confidence to figure things out and decide if something (for example, an advertisement) is true or not. Because of my science classes, I have become a better shopper.

F Science classes have NOT helped me become a better shopper, because consumers are influenced by their upbringing, their family, or what they hear or see. Consumers are not influenced by science.

G Science classes have NOT helped me become a better shopper, because science classes have nothing to do with consumers or the real world. For example, photosynthesis, atoms, and density do not help me make better consumer decisions. H I don’t understand. I I don’t know enough about this subject to make a choice. J None of these choices fits my basic viewpoint.


989

Research: Science and Education Table 4. Distribution of Changes in Interviewed Students’ Attitudes toward Science during the Semester 2 Course Initial Attitude Positive (N ) Positive (N ) Final Neutral (N ) Attitude Negative (N )

Neutral (N ) Negative (N )

4

3

1

1

—

—

—

1

—

Item 50211 asks students to consider how their science classes have influenced them as consumers. The pretest responses, displayed in Figure 3, were about evenly split between “has merit” (17) and “naïve” (14). Several students (11) changed their responses from “naïve” ones to ones classified “has merit” and three students chose the same “naïve” response on the posttest. In the pilot study student responses were also heavily weighted toward the “has merit” category. Although the news assignments didn’t address consumer practices directly, the food irradiation assignment (Table 1) touched on consumer issues such as whether to buy irradiated food. Another course component, unrelated to the news assignments, involved critically evaluating claims made by advertisements and individuals, and this may have indirectly influenced student responses to this item. In the pilot study, different results were also found for item 40215: Scientists and engineers should be the ones to decide whether or not to build a nuclear reactor and where it should be built, because scientists and engineers are the people who know the facts best. All (n = 9) pretest responses in the earlier study were “naïve” and the posttest results were either “has merit” (n = 2) or “realistic” (n = 7). In that course, however, one of the news assignments was about the expansion of dry cask storage at the Prairie Island nuclear power plant, located about 50 miles from campus. In semester 2 a news assignment directly related to nuclear power was not used and the corresponding results were not statistically significant for this item. The topics of the items not detailed here that did not show statistically significant changes from pre- to posttest were politics, students learning about science, ethics, pollution, legal decisions, everyday problem solving, different kinds of people, and the role of the media in presenting science to the public. None of these topics were a significant focus of this course, as seen in Table 1. Taken together, there seems to be a correlation between the topics addressed in the news assignments or in the course and the student responses to the VOSTS items. Items related to the news assignments or some other course component (e.g., critical thinking exercises) are more likely to result in a statistically significant change in student responses on the pre- and posttest. Interviews Students were invited to voluntarily participate in an interview at the end of the semester 2 course; 10 students self-selected to participate and were representative of the entire class as far as their grades in the course. Students were asked questions about how one’s attitudes towards science are influenced in general, whether their attitudes changed over the semester and what, if any, aspects of the course contributed to those changes.

990

Students cited a variety of factors and experiences as responsible for influencing attitudes toward science, including teachers, parents and family members, earlier science courses, success in science courses, and the media. Of the 10 students interviewed, 8 reported positive attitudes at the end of the course, as shown in Table 4. Students reporting a positive attitude towards science at the end of the semester cited the news assignments and ties to daily life and the “real world” as factors influencing their attitudes. The two students who reported a neutral or negative attitude at the end of the semester cited frustration with their own ability and performance as the reasons behind their decreased attitude toward science. These results are consistent with those reported by Hume et al. (16) for students participating in a Chemistry Is in the News course. In their study, the authors found correlation between students’ expectations at the beginning of a course and their outcomes. Students who expected that connections between organic chemistry and contemporary issues would make the course more interesting were more likely to report the realization of these connections. Most students (7/10) spontaneously cited the news assignments during the interview without prompting from the interviewer. When asked “How did the news assignments influence your attitude towards science?” students reported that the assignments “opened my mind”, “opened my eyes”, or “piqued my interest”. They repeatedly expressed amazement at how chemistry is related to everyday things and how surprised they were that there was more than one position for an issue. Implications for Chemistry Teachers Instructors who have a course goal of changing student’s attitudes toward science may choose to incorporate contemporary scientific issues into the course. This study shows that attitudes can be positively affected and the news assignments played a significant role in doing so. Conclusions Students enrolled in Chemistry and the World exhibited some statistically significant changes in attitudes towards science when comparing their responses to the VOSTS pre- and posttest. Only 2 of the 12 items showed high levels of agreement between the pre- and posttest (κ statistic), indicating that for most items students changed their responses during the course. Of the remaining 10 items, 4 had a negative average of the pretest minus posttest responses, indicating an “improvement” in attitude during the course. In addition, 3 items showed a statistically significant difference in the responses on the pre- and posttests. Two of these items also had a negative average, indicating higher posttest scores (i.e., “improvement”). The VOSTS items that showed significant changes were on topics related to either the news assignments or another component of the course. Items that did not exhibit a difference were only tangentially related to the course. Interview data gave insight into which aspects of the course students thought influenced their attitudes toward science. The news assignments and the relevance of the topics to daily life were important factors. Students who reported a neutral or negative attitude were dissatisfied with their performance in the course, not with the course or components of the course.



The purpose of this paper was to address the research question articulated above. Based on the attitudinal survey used in this study, the answer is yes, attitudes about course-related topics change as a consequence of the course. In particular, statistically significant changes in student attitudes were observed for topics that were closely related to topics covered in the course. This result is consistent with the findings of White et al. (33). In a senior capstone course student opinions about contemporary topics were influenced when they attended a peer presentation about the topic. Future Directions Incorporating news assignments into general education chemistry courses was originally conceived as a way to increase functional scientific literacy. Students taking these courses should be able to demonstrate independent research and analysis skills and assess the reliability of publicly available information sources. Central to a student’s ability to grapple with contemporary issues with a scientific or technological underpinning is their ability to communicate their position on an issue and support their position with evaluated evidence. The next step in this project is to analyze student position papers to determine whether conducting several news assignments over the course of a semester improves student abilities in these areas. Acknowledgments Participation of the students enrolled in the courses involved in this study is acknowledged. Participation of faculty colleagues as experts is appreciated. Funding from the Bush Foundation Grant for Faculty Development supported this work. Note 1. St. Olaf College designated the academic year 2005–2006 theme as “sustainability”. A series of year-long events highlighting issues of sustainability occurred and a Web site featuring many of the sustainability efforts on campus was developed: http://www.stolaf.edu/green/ (accessed Apr 2009).

Literature Cited 1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Science for All Americans: Project 2061; Oxford University Press: New York, 1990. 2. National Research Council. From Analysis to Action: Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, Report of a Convocation; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 1996. 3. Laugksch, R. C. Science Education 2000, 84, 71–94. 4. Shamos, M. H. The Myth of Scientific Literacy; Rutgers University Press: New Brunswick, NJ, 1995. 5. Tro, N. J. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81, 54–57. 6. Papanastasiou, E. C.; Zembylas, M. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2004, 26, 259–280. 7. Cukrowska, E.; Staskun, M. G.; Schoeman, H. S. South African J. Chem. 1999, 52, 8–15.

8. Tuan, H-L.; Chin, C-C.; Shieh, S-H. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2005, 27, 639–654. 9. Rennie, L. J.; Punch, K. F. J. Res. Sci. Teach.1991, 28, 193–209. 10. Gardner, P. L. Studies in Science Education 1975, 2, 1–41. 11. Shrigley, R. L. Science Education 1983, 67, 425–442. 12. Shrigley, R. L.; Koballa, T. R., Jr. Science Education 1992, 76, 17–42. 13. Krynowsky, B. A. Science Education 1988, 72, 575–584. 14. Dulski, R. E.; Raven, R. J. J. Research Dev. in Educ. 1994, 27 (4), 232–243. 15. Dulski, R. E.; Raven, R. J. Science Education 1995, 79 (2), 167–187. 16. Henderleiter, J.; Pringle, D. L. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 100– 107. 17. Miller, L. S.; Nakhleh, M. B.; Nash, J. J.; Meyer, J. A. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81, 1801–1808. 18. Hume, D. L.; Carson, K. M.; Hodgen, B.; Glaser, R. E. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 662–667. 19. King, J. R.; Hunter, W. J. F.; Szczepura, L. F. Chem. Educator 2002, 7, 329–333. 20. Shibley, I. A., Jr.; Zimmaro, D. M. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79, 745–748. 21. Oliver-Hoyo, M. T.; Allen, D. J. Chem. Educ. 2005, 82, 944– 949. 22. Walczak, M. M. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 961–966. 23. Walczak, M. M., in preparation. 24. Creswell, J. W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 2nd ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, 2003. 25. Aikenhead, G.; Ryan, A. Science Education 1992, 76, 477–492. 26. Canon, S., Director of Institutional Research and Planning. St. Olaf College, personal communication, Dec 12, 2005. 27. Snedecor, G. W.; Cochrane, W. G. Statistical Methods, 8th edition; Iowa State University Press: Ames, Iowa, 1989. 28. Schoneweg, C.; Rubba, P. A. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Atlanta, GA, April 15–19, 1993. 29. Vázquez-Alonso, Á.; Manassero-Mas, M. A. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1999, 21, 231–247. 30. Viera, A. J.; Garrett, J. M. Family Medicine 2005, 37 (5), 360– 363. 31. Cohen, J. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960, 20 (1), 37–46. 32 Landis, J. R.; Koch, G. G. Biometrics 1977, 33, 159–174. 33. White, H. B., III; Brown, S. D.; Johnston, M. V. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1590–1596.

Supporting JCE Online Material

http://www.jce.divched.org/Journal/Issues/2009/Aug/abs985.html Abstract and keywords Full text (PDF) Links to cited URLs and JCE articles Supplement Informed consent form used in the semester 2 course

Complete set of VOSTS statements used, including the possible multiple-choice responses


991

Do Student Attitudes toward Science Change ... - ACS Publications

Recommend Documents