Abstract
The key factor in science education is motivation. Suitable motivation can simplify the educational process, it can involve pupils in studied phenomena, support the knowledge retention, etc. Basic knowledge related to motivation in case of some specific areas of education can help make education more effective and interesting. To employ motivational potential of suitably selected factors (i.e., connection with real life, employment of ICT, . . . ) in class effectively, it is valuable to know the motivation orientation of pupils as well as the factors which influence it. The article is focused on the study and evaluation of pupils’ motivational orientations when performing IBSE (Inquire based science education) activities with implemented MBL (probeware). An important motivation element is connecting the objectives of the activities to “real life” problems. For studying and evaluation of the motivational orientations, pupils filled in two questionnaires (pre- and post-) based on two validated tools: (i) Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) and (ii) Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI). The questionnaires were statistically evaluated via the reliability test (Cronbach’s alpha), the analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA) and cluster analysis. The results showed that the majority of pupils were highly motivated before the course and their motivation increased after the laboratory course. The activities themselves were also evaluated positively, especially those focused on human body (effectivity of antacids) or medialized current affairs (gas chromatography — methanol affair). ANOVA testing showed that the key factor influencing motivational orientations are both the school attended and the chemistry teacher. On the contrary, motivational orientations are not very affected by gender or by the activity performed. Overall, pupils enjoyed the activities and work with MBL and they are in favour of implementing MBL into secondary school laboratories.References
Aksela, M. (2005). Supporting meaningful chemistry learning and higher-order thinking through computer-assisted inquiry: A design research approach. [Disertační práce] Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
Atar, H. Y. (2002). Chemistry students' challenges in using MBL's in science laboratories. In
Proceedings of Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. Charlotte: Association for the Education of Teachers in Science.
Barise, A. (1998). The effectiveness of case-based instruction vs. the lecture-discussion method in multicultural social work. [Disertační práce] Montreal: McGill University.
Barton, R. (1997). How do computers affect graphical interpretation? School Science Review, 79(287), 55-60.
Boone, H. N. J. & Boone, D. A. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2).
Brasell, H. (1987). The effect of real-time laboratory graphing on learning graphic representations of distance and velocity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(4), 385-395.
Campbell, M. M. (2001). Motivational strategies, learning strategies and the academic performance of African-American students in a college business environment: A correlation study. Dissertation Abstracts International, 62(2-A), 432.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
Duda, J. L. (1992). Motivation in sport settings: A goal perspective approach. In Roberts, G. C.(Ed) Motivation in sport and exercise. (57-91) Champaign, IL (USA): Human Kinetics.
Hamne, P. & Bernhard, J. (2001). Educating pre-service teachers using hands-on and microcomputer based labs as tools for concept substitution. In R. Pinto, & S. Surinach (Eds.) Physics Teacher Education Beyond 2000 (663-666). Paris: Elsevier.
Hood, B. J. (1994). Research on computers in chemistry education: reflections and predictions March 29, 1993. Journal of Chemical Education, 71(3), 196-200.
Kekule, M., Zak. V. et al. (2014). Inquiry based science education and collecting evidence about its impact on students (Establish project approach). In C. P. Constantinou, N. Papadouris & A. Hadjigeorgiou (Eds.), E-Book Proceedings of the ESERA 2013 Conference: Science Education Research For Evidence-based Teaching and Coherence in Learning. Part 14 (co-ed. Couso, D., Louca, L.), (pp.11) Nicosia, Cyprus: European Science Education Research Association.
Kráľ, P., Kanderová, M., Kaščáková, A. et al. (2009). Viacrozmerné štatistické metódy so zameraním na riešenie problémov ekonomickej praxe. Banská Bystrica: Ekonomická fakulta UMB.
Laws, P. W. (1991). Calculus-based physics without lectures. Physics Today, 44(12), 24-31.
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology, 22(140), 1-55.
Linn, M. C. (1988). Curriculum reformation: Incorporating technology into science instruction. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans.
Lustig, F., Lustigová, Z. & Vlášek, P. (1992) ISES - příručka k soupravě Školní experimentální systém, Učební pomůcky PC-IN/OUT. Praha.
Markland, D. & Hardy, L. (1997). On the factorial and construct validity of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory: Conceptual and operational concerns. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 68(1), 20-32.
McAuley, E., Duncan, T. & Tammen, V. V. (1989). Psychometric properties of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in a competitive sport setting: A confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 60, 48-58.
Mokros, J. R. & Tinker, R. F. (1987). The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children's ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(4), 369- 383.
Monetti, D. M. (2002). A multiple regression analysis of self-regulated learning, epistemology and student achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(10-A), 3294.
Nachmias, R. & Linn, M.C. (1987). Evaluations of science laboratory data: The role of computer-presented information. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(5), 491-506.
Nakhleh, M. B. (1994). A review of microcomputer-based labs: how have they affected science learning? Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 13(4), 368-381.
Niemi, H., Nevgi, A. & Virtanen, P. I. (2003). Towards self-regulation in web-based learning. Journal of Educational Media, 28(1), 49-71.
Pintrich, P. R. et al. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Michigan (US): Ann Arbor, National Centre for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
Plant, R. W. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and the effects of self-consciousness, self-awareness, and ego-involvement: An investigation of internally controlling styles. Journal of Personality, 53(3), 435-449.
Rotgans, J. I. & Schmidt, H. G. (2010). The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire: A measure for students' general motivational beliefs and learning strategies? The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 19(2), 357-381.
Russell, D. W., Lucas, K. B. & McRobbie, C. J. (2003). The role of the microcomputer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in kinematics. Research in Science Education, 33(2), 217-243.
Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of personality and social psychology, 43(3), 450-461.
Skoršepa, M., Stratilová Urválková, E., Šmejkal, P., Tortosa, M. M. & Urban-Woldron, H. (2014). Activities with sensors in laboratory of biology: Students’ motivation and understanding the activities. In Nodzyńska, M., Cieśla, P. & Kania, A. (Eds.) Experiments in teaching and learning natural sciences (25-33). Kraków: Pedagogická univerzita.
Skoršepa, M. & Šmejkal, P. (2015). Psychometrické vlastnosti nástrojov na zisťovanie motivačnej orientácie žiakov v digitálnom prírodovednom laboratóriu. In: Didaktika chemie a její kontexty“ (180-186). Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
Skoršepa, M. (2015). Počítačom podporované experimenty v prírodovednom vzdelávaní. Banská Bystrica: Belianum (Vydavateľstvo UMB).
SPSS INC. PASW Statistics for Windows. Verze 18.0. Chicago: SPSS Inc., Vydání 2009.
Stein, J. S. (1987). The computer as laboratory partner: Classroom experience gleaned from one year of microcomputer-based laboratory use. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 15(3), 225-236.
Stratilová Urválková, E., Šmejkal, P., Skoršepa, M., Teplý, P. & Tortosa, M. (2014). MBL Activities Using IBSE: Learning biology in context. In Cieśla, P. & Michniewska, A. (Eds.)Teaching and Learning Science at all Levels of Education (131-134). Kraków: Pedagogická univerzita.
Stratilová Urválková, E., Šmejkal, P., Teplý, P., Skoršepa, M., Tortosa, M., Urban-Woldron, H. (2014). New IBSE oriented activities for biology – design and evaluation. In Bílek, M. (Ed.) Science And Technology Education For The 21st Century, Research and Research Oriented Studies, Proceedings of the 9th IOSTE Symposium for Central and Eastern Europe (274-285). Hradec Králové: Gaudeamus.
Svec, M. (1999). Improving graphing intrepretation skills and understanding of motion using microcomputer based laboratories. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(4).
Thornton, R. K. (1989). Using the microcomputer-based laboratory to improve student conceptual understanding in Physics. In Microcomputers in Physics Education. Proceedings of a Symposium. Adana, Turkey.
Thornton, R. K. & Sokoloff, D. R. (1990). Learning motion concepts using real-time microcomputer-based laboratory tools. American Journal of Physics, 58(9), 858-867.
Tinker, R. (1996). Microcomputer-based labs: educational research and standards. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Tinker, R. F. (1984). Microcomputers in the lab: Techniques and applications. Cambridge: Technical Educational Research Center.
Ward, J. H. J. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301), 236-244.
White, R. T. & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing Understanding. Great Britain: Falmer Press.
Whitehead, J. R. & Corbin, C. B. (1991). Effects of fitness test type, teacher, and gender on exercise intrinsic motivation and physical self-worth. Journal of School Health, 61(1), 11-16.
Urban-Woldron, H., Tortosa, M. & Skoršepa, M. (2013). Implementing learning with sensors in science education: Students’ motivational orientations toward using MBL. In C. P. Constantinou, N. Papadouris & A. Hadjigeorgiou (Eds.), E-Book Proceedings of the ESERA 2013 Conference: Science Education Research For Evidence-based Teaching and Coherence in Learning (848-854). Strand 4. Nicosia, Cyprus: European Science Education Research Association.
Wolters, C. A. (2004) Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structures and goal orientations to predict students' motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of educational psychology, 96(2), 236-250.