Pedagogical beliefs and learning assessment in science: Teacher’s experiences anchored on theory of reasoned action
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36681/Keywords:
Assessment for learning, pedagogical beliefs, science subjects, Philippine secondary school teachers, theory of reasoned actionAbstract
Employing the phenomenological qualitative research design, this study explores the prevailing pedagogical belief and experiences of six secondary school teachers concerning
their practices related to assessment of learning in science subjects among the public secondary school students in the Division of Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines. Anchored
on the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) argument that additional factors, referred to as external, which in the case of this study pertain to pedagogical beliefs and mandate from
the curriculum guide issued by the Department of Education, can influence the behavior of the teachers towards assessment strategy choices. This study has been done to verify
whether external factors play a role with the teacher’s behavior. Employing the directed content analysis, the data were analyzed in the framework of TRA. Employing the directed
content analysis approach, findings of this study suggest that the assessment of learning practices of the teachers are shaped by their pedagogical beliefs, social norms and
intentions. This study contributes to an understanding whether external factors directly shape the teacher’s behavioral intention to carry out a certain assessment strategy to
measure student’s learning.
Downloads
References
Alsamadani, H. (2011). The effect the 3-2-1 reading strategy on EFL reading comprehension. Journal of English Language Teaching,4(3),184-191.
Armbruster et al. (1991). Teaching text structure to improve reading and writing. Science Education, 26(8), 130-137.
Apeng, B. (2009). Penyediaan bacaan berbentuk refutation text untuk meremediasi kesalahan konsep Siswa tentang pemantulan cahaya pada cermin di kelas VIII SMP Negeri 6 Pontianak. Skripsi. Pontianak: FKIP Untan.
Barton, M.L., & Jordan, D.L. (2001). Teaching reading in science: A Supplement toteaching reading in the content areas: If not me, then who?.2nd Edition. McREL (Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning).
Besson, U. (2004). Students’ conceptions of fluids. International Journal of Science Education, 26(14),16831714.
Bond et al. (1994). Reading Difficulties: Their Diagnosis and Correction, Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
Broughton, S. H., Sinatra, G. M., & Reynolds, R. E. (2010). The nature of the refutation text effect: An investigation of attention allocation. The Journal of Educational Research, 9(103), 407-423.
Cavas, B. (2015). Research trends in science education international: A content analysis for the last five years (2011-2015). Science Education International,25(4),573-588.
Chang, Y.H. & Chang, C.Y. (2010). Trends of science education research: An automatic content analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology,19(4),315–331.
Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Common sense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. The Journal of The Learning Sciences, (2),161–199.
Chrzanowski, M. M., Grajkowski, W., Żuchowski, S., Spalik, K., & Ostrowska, E.B. (2018). Vernacular misconceptions in teaching science –types and causes. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15(4),29-54.
Coetzee, A. & Imenda, S. N. (2012). Alternative conceptions held by first year physics students at a South African University of Technology concerning interference and diffraction of waves. Research in Higher Education Journal, 9(4), 112-120.
Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (3rd ed. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Gunstone, R. F. & White, R. T. (1981). Understanding of gravity. Science Education,65(3),291-299.
Graesser, A.C. (2007). An Introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D. McNamara (ed.), Reading Comprehension Strategies: Theories, Interventions, and Technologies (pp. 3-26). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hanson, R. & Seheri-Jele, N. (2018). Assessing conceptual change instruction accompanied with concept maps and analogies: A case of acid-base strengths. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15(4), 55-64.
Harniyati, M. (2015). Remediasi miskonsepsi siswa pada fluida statis menggunakan pembelajaran Predict, Observe, dan Explain di SMA. Skripsi. Pontianak: FKIP Untan.
Kendeou, P. &van den Broek, P. (2007). The effects of prior knowledge and text structure on comprehension processes during reading of scientific texts. Memory andCognition,3(7),15671577.
Kostons, D. &Van der Werf, G. (2015). The Effects of activating prior topic and metacognitive knowledge on text comprehension scores. British Journal of Educational Psychology,85(3),264275.
Kural, M. &Kocakülah, M.S. (2016). Teaching for hot conceptual change: Towards a new model, beyond the cold and warm ones.European Journal of Education Studies, 2(8),1-40.
Laidlaw et al. (1993). The Effects of notetaking and self-questioning on quiz performance. Science Education, 77(9).75-82.
Lassonde et al. (2016). Refutation texts overcoming psychology misconceptions that resistant to change. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Psychology,2(1),62-67.
Mulyani, R. (2015). Pengaruh penerapan model pembelajaran Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) berbantuan refutation text terhadap peningkatan pemahaman konsep dan penurunan kuantitas miskonsepsi siswa SMP pada materi fluida statis. Disertasi. Bandung: SPs-UPI.
Nussbaum et al. (2017). Refutation texts for effective climate change education. Journal of Geoscience Education, 3(1), 23-24.
Palk, S., Song, G., Kim, S. & Ha, M.(2017). Developing a four-level learning progression and assessment for the concept of buoyancy. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education, 3(8),4965–4986.
Palmer, D.H. (2003). Investigating the relationship between refutational text and conceptual change. Science Education, 8(5),663-684.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Towards a theory of a conceptual change, Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
Putri, A.N., Apen, R. & Wahyuni, D. (2017). The effect of using 3-2-1 strategy toward students’ reading comprehension ability at SMPN 34 Padang. Journal of English Language Teaching, 6(1), 12-19.
Radovanović, J., Sliško, J. & Stepanović Ilić, I. (2019). Active learning of buoyancy: An effective way to change students’ alternative conceptions about floating and sinking. Journal of Physics Conference Series. 1286:012011. Childrens’ misconceptions and conceptual change in science education. [Online]. http://www. acell.chem.usyd.ceo/conceptual-change.cfm
Savinainen, A., &Scott, P. (2002). The force concept inventory: A Tool for monitoring student learning. Physics Education, 3(1), 45-52.
Saavedra, A., & Opfer, V. (2012). Teaching and learning 21th century skills: Lessons from the learning sciences.Asia Society: A Global Cities Education Network Report.
Schroeder, N. L. (2016). A Preliminary investigation of the influences of refutation text and instructional design. Technology, Knowledge, and Learning,21(3),325–340.
Sesilia, S. (2016). The effectiveness of 3-2-1 Strategy in teaching reading comprehension on narrative text. Skripsi. Pontianak: FKIP Untan.
Siegel, S. (1997). Statistik Nonparametrik untuk Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial. (Penterjemah: Suyuti, Z. & Simatupang, L.). Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Sinatra, G. M. & Broughton, S. H. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4),374-393.
Snow, C., Burns, S. & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. National Academy Press.
Spiegel, G.F & Barufaldi, J.P. (1994), The effects of combination of text structure awareness and graphics post organizers on recall and retention of science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4),913-932.
Stylos et al. (2008). Misconceptions on classical mechanics by freshman university students: A case study in a physics department in Greece. Science and Technology Education, 1(2),157-177.
Suparno, P. (2013). Miskonsepsi dan Perubahan Konsep dalam Pendidikan Fisika.Grasindo.
Suskavcevic, G.R. (2005). Understanding of static of fluids. Paper Presented at SUN Conference, El Paso TX, March 3-5, 2005.
Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6),951-970.
Torgesen, J.K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early intervention in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 15(1), 55-64.
Treagust, D. F. (2007). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159-169.
Utami, R. (2014). Remediasi miskonsepsi pada fluida statis melalui model pembelajaran TGT berbantuan Mind Mapping di SMA. Skripsi.Pontianak: FKIP Untan.
Weimer, M. (2014). Getting Students to do the reading. [Online]. http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/effective-teaching-strategies/getting -students-to-do-thereading/
Westwood, P. (2007). Reading and Learning Difficulties: Approaches to Teaching and Assessment. ACER Press.
Yin, Y., Tomita, M. K., & Shavelson, R. J. (2008). Diagnosing and dealing with students’ misconception: Floating and sinking. Science Scope, 31(8), 34-39.
Zygouris-Coe, V., Wiggins, M. B., & Smith. L. H. (2005). Engaging students with texts: The 3-2-1 strategy. The Reading Teacher, 58(4), 381-384.
Downloads
Issue
Section
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2021 TUSED
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
