Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2012

Vol.11, No.
4, 2012
ISSN 1648-3898
Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2012
Editorial Board ISSN 1648–3898
Editor-in-Chief
Prof., Dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas Siauliai University, Lithuania
Deputy Editor-in-Chief
Prof., Dr. Andris Broks University of Latvia, Latvia
Deputy Editor-in-Chief
Prof., Dr. habil. Aarne Tõldsepp Estonian Chemistry Teachers Association, Estonia
Executive Secretary
Dr. Laima Railienė Scientific Methodical Center “Scientia Educologica”, Lithuania
Editors:
Prof., Dr. Agnaldo Arroio University of Sao Paulo, Brazil
Prof., Dr. Martin Bilek University of Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
Dr. Bulent Cavas Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey
Prof., Dr. Hana Čtrnáctová Charles University, Czech Republic
Dr. Peter Demkanin Comenius University, Slovakia
Prof., Dr. Jānis Gedrovics Riga Teacher Training and Educational Management
Academy, Latvia
Prof., Dr. Ryszard M. Janiuk Maria Curie Sklodowska University, Poland
Dr. Rita Makarskaitė-Petkevičienė Lithuanian University of Educational Sciences, Lithuania
Dr. Todar Lakhvich Belarusian State Pedagogical University named after Maxim
Tank, Republic of Belarus
Prof., Dr. Jari Lavonen University of Helsinki, Finland
Prof., Dr. Aadu Ott Göteborg University, Sweden
Dr. Paul Pace Malta University, Malta
Prof., Dr. Valfrids Paškevičs Daugavpils University, Latvia
Prof., Dr. Jongwon Park Chonnam National University, Korea
Dr. Raffaele Pisano European Society for the History of Science, Italy
Dr. Pavol Prokop Institute of Zoology, Bratislava, Slovakia
Dr. Miia Rannikmäe Tartu University, Estonia
Dr. Alona Rauckienė Klaipėda University, Lithuania
Prof., Dr. Heimo Saarikko Helsinki University, Finland
Dr. Uladzimir K. Slabin University of Oregon, USA
Prof., Dr. Valery P. Solomin Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia, Russia
Prof., Dr. Borislav V. Toshev Sofia University, Bulgaria
Dr. Georgios Tsaparlis University of Ioannina, Greece
Dr. Muhammet Usak Zirve University, Turkey
A scientific journal JBSE issued by the SMC Scientia Educologica in cooperation with Scientia Socialis,
Lithuania, emphasizes theoretical, experimental and methodical studies in the field of science educa-
tion. JBSE is an international academic journal. In order to maintain the high standards appropriate to
such a journal, all contributions received are submitted for anonymous review by two experts, addi-
tionally to review by the Editor. The decision of the Editor on the acceptance of articles is final and no
correspondence can be entered into on reasons for rejection of a submitted contribution.
Published since 2002
The journal is published four times per year in March, June, September and December.
IF-0.226 (2010), 0.425 (2011)
Address:
Scientific Methodical Center “Scientia Educologica”
Donelaičio Street 29, LT-78115 Siauliai, Lithuania
E-mail: mail.jbse@gmail.com
Phone: +370 687 95668
Home page: http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt
© Scientific Methodical Center „Scientia Educologica“, Lithuania,
ISSN 1648–3898 The Associated Member of Lithuanian Scientific Society,
European Society for the History of Science (ESHS) and ICASE
The articles appearing in this journal are indexed/abstracted in British Education Index
(http://www.leeds.ac.uk/bei/bei.htm), Copernicus Index (http://journals.indexcopernicus.com), The Asian
Education Index (http://www.asian-education-index.com/sciences_index.php), EBSCO: Academic Search Premier
298 (http://search.ebscohost.com), Social Scisearch (Thomson Reuters) (http://science.thomsonreuters.com/index.html),
Journal Citation Reports / Social Sciences Edition (Thomson Reuters)
(http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/scientific/Journal_Citation_Reports),
and SCOPUS (http://www.scopus.com)
ISSN 1648–3898 Contents
Contents
Editorial

A PROBLEM OF SCIENCE LITERACY ENCOUNTERED BY
PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS AND LEARNERS
Vincentas Lamanauskas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
Articles
SCIENCE TEACHERS’ BELIEFS AS BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF

CONSTRUCTIVIST-BASED EDUCATION REFORM
Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
STRUCTURAL PATTERNS AND REPRESENTATION FORMS OF

UNIVERSITY PHYSICS TEACHERS: BIOT-SAVART LAW AND AMPÈRE’S LAW
Sharareh Majidi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318
A COMPARISON OF CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ AND GRADE 11 STUDENTS’ ALTERNATIVE

CONCEPTIONS OF ‘RATE OF REACTION’
Ali Kolomuç, Muammer Çalık . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ ORGANIC CHEMISTRY ANXIETY,

CHEMISTRY ATTITUDES, AND SELF-EFFICACY: A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL
Namudar İzzet Kurbanoğlu, Ahmet Akin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
THE IMPACT OF A SCIENCE MUSEUM INVOKED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (SMILE) ON

STUDENTS
Chun-Yen Chang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357
INVESTIGATING THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON THE

CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING ENVIRONMENT AND THEIR ACADEMIC SUCCESS
IN SCIENCE COURSE WITH PATH ANALYSIS
Gokhan Bas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
67
MOTIVATIONAL ORIENTATIONS IN PHYSICS LEARNING:
A SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY APPROACH
Reijo Byman, Jari Lavonen, Kalle Juuti, Veijo Meisalo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
ASSESSING PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS (DIS) LIKING OF SOME ANIMAL SPECIES

Gregor Torkar, Milan Kubiatko, Barbara Bajd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393
Information
INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
PROBLEMS OF PSYCHOLOGY IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404
QUALITY ISSUES AND INSIGHTS IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
PROBLEMS OF MANAGEMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY IN

NATURAL SCIENCE EDUCATION - 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407
299
ISSN 1648–3898
A PROBLEM OF SCIENCE LITERACY ENCOUNTERED BY PRIMARY SCHOOL

TEACHERS AND LEARNERS
Vincentas Lamanauskas
University of Siauliai, Siauliai, Lithuania
Science education is one of the key areas of general education in comprehensive school (Lamanaus-
kas, 2009). The major argument for defining the relevancy of the introduced subject is the universality
and integrity of science education. For the last two decades, particularly this field of education has faced
a number of different changes in the majority of countries: variations in the content of education, search
for efficient forms and methods of teaching, innovative approaches, etc. are only a few questions that
must be properly discussed. On the other hand, needs for the quality of provided services necessary
for modern society are emphasized. The present community finds knowledge of science and ability to
apply the acquired information in practice as the main priorities. The fields of exploitation of natural
recourses and nature protection as well as the problems of ecology, biotechnology, genetically modi-
fied organisms, etc. have become everyday reality, i.e. the relationship between human and nature has
grown into a complex and controversial process as never before, whereas human interests often oppose
nature. The formation of responsibility for an impact on nature frequently accepts sciences as the core
area of the educational process. However, this is totally impossible ignoring the nature and natural
laws of evolution. Knowledge of nature is crucial, particularly at the young age. The main emphasis on
education in primary school, in general, should be placed on assistance for schoolchildren to achieve a
certain level of competencies such as moral values, knowledge, abilities. To acquire and develop skills,
yet in primary school, the learners should observe, research and conduct experiments on both animate
and inanimate nature. R. Makarskaitė makes a remark that ‘research helps with acknowledging variety in
animate nature and establishing relationships with inanimate nature as every component of the environ-
ment plays an important role. This is how an attitude towards nature protection and responsibility for the
destiny of nature are formed’ (Makarskaitė, 1996). Observations, experiments and research are efficient
activities and help the children with a correct understanding of natural processes, human adaptation
to the processes taking place in nature, perceiving troubled relationships between human and nature,
etc. The information obtained in primary school should assist the learners in applying the method of
scientific research observing and analysing phenomena emerging in nature, developing the ability to
collect and use data, knowing the ways to admit natural facts and phenomena, employ schemes, tables,
diagrams, etc. and demonstrating skills at predicting the sequence of the actions taken, including the
necessity for making corrections. To increase the level of science literacy, the students should know
how to effectively combine methods and techniques for nature acquisition.
In this case, a more detailed discussion that science literacy achieved in primary school causes prob-
lems in the majority of countries is not required. For example, according to the results of the conducted
international research PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) focusing on the abilities
of 15 year old students to deal with reading, math and science tasks, the results achieved by Lithuanian
representatives are slightly lower than the international average (http://www.smm.lt/svietimo_bukle/
docs/pr_analize/SPA(6)_Penkiolikmeciu_rastingumas.pdf ). An idea that these results have been directly
determined by the situation of science education in primary school cannot be accepted. On the other
hand, we cannot completely agree that science education acquired in primary school will have no impact
on the students‘ achievements at other stages of the educational process.
300
ISSN 1648–3898
To achieve an adequate level of science literacy in primary school, the questions addressed to the
education of science teachers must be seriously considered. If the main teacher‘s activity focused on
gaining information about nature is based on interpretation and reading books, then, this activity will
reflect a traditional educational methodology; in this case, the students will operate only theoretical
knowledge and will frequently fail to understand processes taking part in nature, i.e. in general, they
will not be engaged in sciences at higher levels of comprehensive school. Optimal results can only be
achieved it the teacher him/herself really likes his/her job, is constantly involved in research activities,
encourages and helps children with a deeper understanding of nature and is particularly interested in the
problems of sciences. An important point is that primary school builds foundations for science education
the quality of which will have a powerful impact on further education of the young generation.
Thus, to meet the needs of all students and society, in terms of science education (competen-
cies), the system of training/preparing science teachers, particularly that of primary school teachers
(educational curricula, organization and content of pedagogical practice, etc.), must be upgraded. The
evaluation of a number of parameters discloses that the science literacy of primary school teachers is
not sufficient (for example, teachers frequently avoid trips to nature because have a poor knowledge
of local natural area, have no skills at using special instruments, etc.). A primary school teacher must
have enough knowledge and abilities of physics, chemistry, engineering and technology, ecology, etc.
Systemic integral science preparation also plays a crucial role for primary school teachers. Nevertheless,
obviously, only cosmetic changes in training teachers will not be effective. Researchers representing
several countries notice a lack of motivation in primary school and call this phenomenon “crisis” (Wang,
2004; Bennell, Mukyanuzi, 2005; Bhatti, Rawat, Hamid, 2012). This is common not only to developing
but also to the developed and economically-strong countries. In this particular case, the motivation
of primary school teachers for pedagogical activities is generally taken into account. Discussions on
science education show this problem particularly burning, because, traditionally, primary school teach-
ers are not adequately prepared for teaching science and technology topics at an appropriate level.
To deal with this question, withdrawal or avoidance are most frequently chosen. Attention is paid to
social education. Some researchers accept (Goodwin, Orlik, 2012) it is vital that the teacher should be
personally interested in the subject to be taught. Only the teacher able to develop students‘ ingenuity
and creativity, encourage their curiosity and initiative and stimulate exploration, search and discovery
can expect for good results of science education.
References
Bennell, P., Mukyanuzi, F. (2005). Is There a Teacher Motivation Crisis in Tanzania? Brighton: Knowledge and Skills
for Development.
Goodwin, A., Orlik, Y. (2012). Communicating Science: between people, countries and cultures. Journal of Science
Education, 13 (1), 3.
Lamanauskas, V. (2009). Gamtamokslinio ugdymo stiprinimo svarba ir būtinumas pradinėje mokykloje. Gamtamokslinis
ugdymas / Natural Science Education, Nr. 1 (24), p. 4-7.
Makarskaitė R. (1996). Aplinkotyrinės Vinco Ruzgo idėjos ir šiuolaikinė mokykla. Kn. Gamtamokslinis ugdymas
pagrindinėje bendrojo lavinimo mokykloje. Vilnius.
Wang, H. (2004). Why teach science? Graduate science students’ perceived motivations for choosing teaching as a
career in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (1), 113-128.
Bhatti, T., Rawat, K. J., Hamid, S. (2012). Motivation Crisis among Primary School Teachers: A Descriptive Study.
American Journal of Scientific Research, 51, 122-131.
Received: October 15, 2012 Accepted: November 25, 2012
Vincentas PhD, (HP), Professor, Natural Science Education Research Centre,

Lamanauskas University of Siauliai, 25-119 P. Vi inskio Street, LT- 76351, Siauliai,
Lithuania.
E-mail: lamanauskas@lamanauskas.puslapiai.lt
Website: http://www.lamanauskas.puslapiai.lt/
301
Science Teachers’
Beliefs as Barriers
to Implementation of
Constructivist-Based
Education Reform
Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu
Abstract. A new Science and Technol- Introduction

ogy program had been applied in Turkey
since 2005. Constructivism has been the For many years, science educators have recognized the limits
predominant influence on the program. of traditional teaching methods, therefore, in many nations world-
Accordingly, science teachers are expected wide; science education is affected by reform movements (Cheung,
to have beliefs that are consistent with 2007; van Driel, Beijaard & Verloop, 2001). The basic emphasis of
constructivism. However, the question of these movements is constructivist learning, an approach bringing
“what are the Turkish science teachers’ a new perspective to learning. For instance, Fosnot (1996) states
beliefs” is important because, the success that the US National Council for Teachers of Mathematics and the
of the program is dependent upon the National Science Teachers Association advocates reforms that are
teachers’ beliefs. This paper reports on mostly constructivist. In the Netherlands, a new curriculum reform
the investigation of the science teachers’ whose central issue was promoting active and autonomous learn-
beliefs about teaching science, learning ing was launched in 1998 for upper secondary education (van der
science and managing behavior problems Valk & de Jong, 2009). The notion of constructivism has become
and any relationships among these belief an organizing framework in curriculum in many jurisdictions,
systems. Data were collected through including British Columbia (Wideen, O’Shea, Pye & Ivany, 1997).
interviews with 18 science teachers. Results Another example of using constructivism in science education is
indicated that most of the science teach- Korea; constructivist approaches have been reflected in the science
ers held transitive beliefs about teaching curriculum and teachers’ guide to this curriculum since 1982 (Kim,
science, and traditional beliefs about Fisher & Fraser, 1999). Whereas traditional learning emphasizes
learning science and managing behavior conveying ideas to the minds of students from teacher or textbook
problems. While teachers with 1-10 years (Hawkins, 1994; Treagust, Duit & Fraser, 1996), constructivist learn-
experiences held a constructivist belief, ing asserts that children actively construct their own concepts
this belief gave way to traditional belief as through interaction with physical and social environment sur-
the teaching experience advanced. Beliefs roinding them (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996; Treagust et al., 1996;
of teachers were both interrelated and Lunenburg, 1998; Marlow & Page, 1998, Fosnot, 1998). Therefore,
nested. curriculums adjusted in accordance with constructivism allow
Key words: classroom management, students to engage in scientific activities in which they can make
constructivism, learning science, teacher sense of their learning (Kift & Nelson, 2005).
beliefs, teaching science. These advances achieved at international level regarding
student learning in science education had broad responses in
Turkey in 2005, when many reasons emerged regarding the need
for changes the Turkish curriculum. Various studies, including the
Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu Third International Mathematics and Science Study (1999) and
Adnan Menderes University, Programme for International Student Assessment (2009), reported
Aydın, Turkey
that when compared with other countries, students in Turkey were
less successful in science and mathematics in international exams
302
ISSN 1648–3898 Science Teachers’ Beliefs as Barriers to Implementation of
Constructivist-Based Education Reform
(P. 302-317)
(Bağcı-Kılıç, 2002). It was also found that the attitudes of students became more negative together with
the increases in grades (Külçe, 2005; Çakır, Şenler & Taşkın, 2007; Akpınar, Yıldız, Tatar & Ergin, 2008); and
classes had teacher-centered structure (Ünal & Akpınar, 2006). Eventually, after reviewing many science
curriculums currently used in developed countries and international science education literature, the
National Ministry of Education has put a program into practice in 2005-2006 academic year. The curricu-
lum basically regards constructivism as a learning theory (Ünder, 2010) and teaching strategies, and also
teachers are supported to use constructivism in science lessons (Özdemir & Güneysu, 2008). In this way,
targeted changes by the program were expected to be reflected to the classrooms by the teachers.
Despite the positive contributions of these changes encountered in Turkey and in other countries
due to reform movements related to the curriculum, researchers should discuss these changes in order
to understand whether the new curriculum is as successful as expected by reformers. The common view
of this evaluation process is that reform efforts should take the beliefs of teachers into consideration
since a teacher belief can lead a dynamic expression of reform in the classroom (van Driel et al., 2001;
Powell & Anderson, 2002). Since a new curriculum had been applied in Turkey since 2005, teachers
are expected to have beliefs that are consistent with constructivism; however, this raises the ques-
tion; “what are the beliefs of teachers in reality?” This research reports on the investigation of science
teachers’ beliefs about teaching science, learning science and managing behavior problems in Turkey.
Furthermore, any relationships between teachers’ belief systems are determined. Additionally, this study
investigates the difficulties teachers encounter with during the implementation of the new program. In
this respect, many studies have focused on developing a variety of instruments for measuring teachers’
educational beliefs (Tondeur, Hermans, van Braak & Valcke, 2008). Some researchers have advocated
empirically assessing and describing teachers’ beliefs is more general through using a Likert-type scale
(e.g. Smith, 1997; Hermans, van Braak &Van Keer, 2008). Other researchers qualitatively have focused
on revealing different categories of teacher beliefs that generally grounded in the research tradition of
phenomenography (e.g. Koballa, Graber, Coleman & Kemp, 2000; Boulton-Lewis et al., 2001; Brown &
Melear, 2006). This study could be viewed as an attemp to measure and classify teacher beliefs using a
qualitative instrument. In this way, I think that teachers are given an opportunity to present examples
of their beliefs with one-to-one classroom experiences.
Problem of Research
The following research questions are addressed in this study:
1. What are teachers’ beliefs about teaching science, learning science and managing behavior
problems held by the Turkish science teachers?
2. What relationships exist among science teachers’ beliefs about teaching science, learning
science and managing behavior problems?
3. What is the relationship between teachers’ beliefs about teaching science, learning science
and managing behavior problems according to their professional experiences?
Teacher Beliefs
Bandura (1997) asserts that beliefs are the best indicators of decisions people make throughout
their lives. While Koballa et al. (2000) suggest that “teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching were not
addressed as separate science subjects” in 1990s; literature includes several studies focusing on science
teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning as different items in 2000s. Pajares (1992:327) states as
follows: “It is important to think in terms of connections among beliefs instead of beliefs of independent
subsystems”. He defined belief as an “individual’s judgment of the truth or falsity of a proposition, a
judgment that can only be inferred from a collective understanding of what human beings say, intend,
and do” (p. 316). As a result, the term belief refers to all mental representations that are held by teach-
ers consciously or unconsciously. (Markic, Eilks & Valanides, 2008). Although Rokeach (1972) suggests
that all beliefs have a cognitive component, representing a person’s attitudes towards what is true or
303
Science Teachers’ Beliefs as Barriers to Implementation of
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 302-317)
false, desirable or undesirable; Nespor (1987) highlights the differences between knowledge and be-
lief. According to him, beliefs have stronger affective and evaluative components than knowledge and
typically operate independently from the cognition associated with knowledge (cited in Pajares, 1992
p.309). Similar to Nespor, Pajares (1992) argues that beliefs are “far more influential than knowledge in
determining how individuals organize and define tasks and problems and are stronger predictors of
behavior” (p. 311). The importance of teachers’ beliefs is recognized but van Driel, Bulte and Verloop
(2007) have argued that there is a lack of studies of teachers’ domain specific beliefs, for instance, about
the importance of teaching specific topics or curricular goals, and, in particular, the relation of such
domain specific beliefs with general beliefs.
Researchers have identified a number of categories to describe teachers’ beliefs regarding the
domain specific beliefs such as learning and teaching of science. The results determine that traditional
and constructivist beliefs are the most common categories. Teachers in the traditional category perceive
teaching science as transferring knowledge from the teacher or textbook to students, learning science
seen as acquiring or reproducing knowledge from credible sources (Prawat, 1992; Howard, McGee,
Schwartz & Purcell, 2000; Kang & Keys, 2000). For instance, they believed that “for successful learning
science, students, first, need to memorize relevant scientific formulas and definitions” (Tsai, 2002). Labo-
ratories are used to obtain the confirmed facts or to visualize a concepts (Tsai, 2003). Before conducting
the laboratory work, the teacher explains the processes of the experiment. The only purpose of school
laboratory exercises is seen as to help students memorize the scientific truths (Tsai, 1999). As a result,
students ritualistically follow the tasks which are listed in laboratory guides like a “cookbook” (Hofstein &
Lunetta, 2003). The existing knowledge of students has little relevance with such learning environments
(Windschitl, 2002). On the other hand, the teachers in the constructivist category perceive science as
helping students construct knowledge, learning science through creating new understandings for them
(Roehrig & Luft, 2004). Adams and Krockover (1997) defined a constructivist teacher with the following
features; (a) negotiation of understanding of key ideas with students; (b) student-generated investiga-
tions; (c) leading students to reconstruct how evidence has been used to formulate scientific ideas; (d)
utilization of student-centered methods such as group work, concept mapping, and writing to represent
ideas; and (e) use of multiple forms of assessment that integrate with instruction. For instance Hashweh
(1996) investigated science teachers’ beliefs and found that when faced with alternative conception
constructivist teachers’ revealed richer and more effective teaching strategies than traditional teachers.
Students are responsible for generating research questions, designing investigations and explaining
results of their laboratory tasks in constructivist learning environments (Chinn & Malhotra, 2001).
Relationships among Teachers’ Beliefs Systems
The findings of classroom observations and interviews with teachers by researchers revealed that
most of the teachers had consistent beliefs about teaching and learning. These closely aligned beliefs
are defined as nested beliefs (Bryan, 2003; Tsai, 2002). Nested traditional beliefs tend to transferring
knowledge from teacher to pupils, and imply a more passive or rote view about learning science. On the
other hand, nested constructivist beliefs tend to focus on the involvement of the teacher and student to
the process, and working together to construct personal meaning during the teaching process. These
beliefs also focus on the active involvement of the students in thinking, questioning, discussing and
take account of what the student already knows in building new knowledge (Martin & Shoho, 1999;
Koballa et al., 2000; Boulton-Lewis et al., 2001).
Researchers also noted the existence of teachers with inconsistent beliefs of teaching and learning
(Tsai, 2002; Bryan, 2003; Ogan-Bekiroğlu & Akkoç, 2009), which means that a teacher with a construc-
tivist belief about teaching science may have a traditional belief about learning science. In their study
including six high school teachers, Wallace et al. (2004) found that while one of the teachers often used
a student-centered approach as an integral part of physics education, the same teacher conducted a
teacher-centered class in the chemistry lessons. These differences between the clusters which form the
belief system of the teachers indicate that teachers’ beliefs within a system do not require internal consis-
tency (Nespor, 1987) unless they are examined comparatively (Green, 1971). Therefore, it can logically be
304
(P. 302-317)
deduced the inconsistent beliefs of these teachers about teaching and learning may have resulted from
their perception of their beliefs about science teaching and science learning as unrelated clusters.
Linking between Beliefs and Classroom Management
Classroom management seeks to establish and sustain an orderly environment so students can
engage in meaningful academic, social and moral learning (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006 p.4). Since it is
argued that teachers’ management strategies in the classroom have effects on student achievement
and learning (Marzano & Marzano, 2003), researchers have addressed the question that what kind of
approaches teachers adopt for classroom management.
Approaches to classroom management are based on constructivist or behaviorist theories (Bran-
non, 2010). Given these theories, it is recommended that classroom management approaches are
categorized according to the level of teacher’s or student’s control over classroom issues (Yaşar, 2008).
Dollard and Christensen (1996) stated that the constructivist approach is student-centered and allows
students to have a voice in the structure and to participate in the control of the classroom, as well as in
control of themselves and their own behavior (cited in Brannon, 2010). For instance, in the case of the
learning cycle treatment, Lavoie (1999) concludes that learning cycle treatment involves dealing with
management problems, using more wait time, using more probing/inquiry questioning techniques,
and facilitating small-group discussion and work. In these classes, it is possible for students start and
continue a discussion process rather than quietly sitting, listening or answering only when they are asked
a question. They are both physically and mentally active in the class and they establish communication
with their friends.
From this respect, these roles of the students in constructivist classrooms are in stark contrast to the
center position of teacher’s authority in the traditional approach, which supports that teachers have the
primary responsibility for the control and they put the rules (Wolfgang & Glickman, 1986). In a traditional
classroom the teacher is the authority and has a fixed way of doing the lesson; he generally began a unit
by explaining to students what they will be doing over the next few lessons. Then he places on the board
an hypothesis, a list of materials, and a list of steps to be followed. Once the students undertake the set
activities, the teacher puts the expected results on the board and students copy these into their science
books, regardless of their own findings or understandings (Peers, Diezmann & Watters, 2003). In such
teacher centered classrooms, teaching strategies seem easy to manage for teacher (Bryan, 2003; Roehrig
& Luft, 2004) but, in fact, this approach hinders student cooperation, and open-endedness of laboratory
activities (Tsai, 2003). Therefore, teacher is expected to apply a student-centered classroom management
approach when he/she encounters a behavior causing a problem in the class in order for students to achieve
meaningful learning. Eventually, this can indicate a possible relationship between teacher’s beliefs related
to his/her managing behavior problems and his/her beliefs about teaching or learning.
Methodology of Research
For the purposes of investigating beliefs, descriptive method was used to describe the teacher
beliefs about teaching, learning and managing behavior problems in science (Verma & Mallick, 1999).
A semi-structured interview was selected to elicit teachers’ beliefs.
Sample of Research
Participants were selected by the purposive sampling from 15 state primary schools in Turkey. A total
of 18 teachers (8 female and 10 male) volunteered to participate in the study. Professional experiences
of the teachers varied from 3 to 27 years. Fields in which participants had graduated were the primary
science education program of faculties of education (n=10) and the physics, chemistry and biology
programs of faculties of science and art (n=8). The teachers participating in the study taught science
courses in the sixth, seventh and eighth grades in primary schools. On average the classes contain 30
students. All the schools in which the teachers worked there was a separate science laboratory.
305
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 302-317)
Instrument and Procedures
The researcher interviewed each of the teachers individually to examine their beliefs. Three main
areas were questioned in this study: beliefs about teaching, learning and managing behavior problems.
In order to obtain better understanding of teachers’ beliefs the use of direct or indirect questions is
suggested (Kang & Wallace, 2005; Nott & Wellington, 1998). Direct questions were used in exploring
teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching science. While forming these questions, six questions were
included regarding the beliefs about teaching science and five questions were included regarding the
beliefs about learning science in the interview form. These questions were collected from the studies
in the literature (Tsai, 1998; Tsai, 2002; Kang & Wallace, 2005; Luft & Roehrig, 2007) and then translated
from English to Turkish. The questions were selected to elicit teacher beliefs about teaching methods
that the teacher employed, the impact of these methods on the students, the features of roles adopted
by the teacher and the learning environment. The questions about learning science covered how learn-
ing in science occurres, role of the learner and indicators of learning.
In terms of indirect questions, I used critical incidents for that questions that explored the teacher’s
beliefs about managing behavior problems. Four critical incidents were created, the first being how the
teacher would handle a student with a misconception who resisted accepting new knowledge at the
end of a teaching event. The other three incidents concerned how the teacher would manage problems
encountered in a class where experiments or practical activities were being conducted by student
groups. (See Appendix for illustrative example of the critical incidents). Each interview lasted almost
40 minutes. All interviews were audio-recorded. Interviews were transcribed and these transcriptions
were checked by comparison with the audio recordings.
Data Analysis

Teachers’ beliefs were analyzed regarding the principles of qualitative content analysis (Chi, 1997).
Schadewitz and Jachna (2007) argue that researcher might start with an inductive coding, trying to iden-
tify patterns in the data and establish categories by which the remaining data is coded. In this research,
without developing any categories, the whole data was reviewed. Then, codes were generated from
the thoughts of teachers that were similar. Some of the sample codes for teaching science were as fol-
lows: teacher-centered teaching, question-answer, lecturing, demonstration, closed-ended experiment,
relationship between science and everyday life, discovery, associating the concepts, student-centered
teaching, individual and group work assessment, open-ended experiment. Sample codes related to
learning science were as follows: hands on learning, authority, transfer, scientific curiosity, repetition,
listening and being hard working. Sample codes related to problem behaviors were: carefully listening
to the lesson, noise, disrupting the class, directing the student, interest of the student, motivation of
the student and monitoring the student.
Following this stage, the codes were merged and clustered basing on the perceived connections.
The deductive approach was used to identify codes. In a deductive approach, researchers use some cat-
egorical scheme suggested by a theoretical perspective (Moretti et al., 2011). Four studies were selected
to analyse (Keys, 2005; Brown & Melear, 2006; Ünal & Akpınar, 2006; Luft & Roehrig, 2007). According to
the existing frameworks, constructivist, transitive and traditional categories were re-formulated. How
each category specific to this study was defined and how the analysis applied to the interviews accord-
ing to the teachers’ views is presented in Table 1. In sum, although the categories reached by using
inductive approach in content analysis show the theoretical perspective of four studies, the definition
of the categories are modified in the light of this study’s data. The reliability of coding categories before
analyzing the data was ensured through presenting to the second researcher the transcriptions. The
levels of agreement between researchers for the independent assessment were: beliefs about teaching
‘0.86’, beliefs about learning ‘0.90’ and beliefs about managing behavior problems ‘0.86’. The names of
teachers were not revealed in the analyses and the teachers were labeled as T1, T2, T3…T18.
306
(P. 302-317)
Table 1. Traditional, transitive and constructivist categories defined in this study and sample
interview transcripts.
Traditional Transitive Constructivist
Teaching Science Teacher is at the center and Although teacher does not desire It provides first-hand experi-
knowledge is transferred from to be at the center and transfer ences for students to discover the
teacher to student knowledge, it becomes impor- knowledge.
tant due to the aforementioned
obstacles
Sample Interview When the teacher lectures the In fact, I must be guide, but I am Knowledge becomes more perma-
Transcript lesson; science concepts are still in the position of covering the nent when the student compiles it in
learnt very well… I conduct the topics rather than guiding (T-1). his mind through self-comprehen-
experiment step by step before sion process via discovery (T-2).
the class (T-11).
Learning Science Obtaining knowledge from reli- Although it is accepted that stu- The student is mentally active while
able resources or repeating the dent is mentally active, knowledge he/she is building the knowledge
knowledge gained from these transfer becomes important due to individually or socially.
resources. the aforementioned obstacles.
Sample Interview Science concepts are learnt best Learning is better achieved when Science is learnt best via hands on
Transcript through repetition; underlying I cover the topic and support it learning and by using the sense
and writing (T-6). visually… The best way is when organs (T-3).
students learn by themselves
(T-9).
Managing Behavior Teacher holds the authority and The control is sometimes held by Autonomy and self-control of the
Problems control. Attention is given to the teacher and sometimes by the student is a priority. The focus is
inappropriateness of the problem student. The authority and control on causes of the problem behavior.
behavior and the focus is on is taken by the teacher when Student opinions are applied to
stopping the behavior as soon as problem behaviors emerge. resolve the problem behavior.
it emerges.
Sample Interview When we get them to conduct When there are many students While students are conducting
Transcript the experiments individually, making noise during the experi- an activity they definitely to each
this leads to the noise we do not ment, it would just me who would other, ask each other questions…
desire (T-12). conduct this experiment and I let let the students interact with
would ask them to watch me (T-7). each another, but let them learn
something (T-1).
Results of Research
Teachers’ Beliefs about Teaching Science, Learning Science and Managing Behavior Problems:
An Overview
The categories in which beliefs of science teachers about teaching science, learning science and
managing behavior problems is shown in Table 2. In teaching science, the transitive category included
the highest number of teachers, which means that they have neither constructivist nor traditional beliefs,
but the belief between them regarding teaching.
307
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 302-317)
Table 2. The number of teachers with traditional, transitive and constructivist beliefs about teach-
ing science, learning science and managing problem behavior.
Traditional N Transitive N Constructivist N
Teaching Science T11, T12, T14, T18 4 T5, T6, T7, T8, T9, T10, 9 T1, T2, T3, T4, T13 5
T15, T16, T17
Learning Science T5, T6, T7, T10, T11, 8 T1, T9, T17, T18 4 T2, T3, T4, T8, T13, 6
T12, T15, T16 T14
Managing Behavior Problems T5, T6, T8, T9, T12, 8 T7, T10, T11, T13, T15, 6 T1, T2, T3, T4 4
T14, T17, T18 T16
At this point, in order to understand teachers’ transitive beliefs about teaching science, it is more ben-
eficial to review the difficulties encountered by them during the implementation of the program. Teachers
stated that their classes were crowded, there were insufficient equipment to conduct experiments at the
school and students had difficulty in performing the task since they were used to multiple choice exams.
Moreover, they encountered other difficulties such as lack of time. While the teachers appreciated con-
structivist teaching strategies in the new program, they also stated that these difficulties they encountered
during the implementation prevented them from constructivist applications. In this situation, although
teaching activities in the science program seem to have impacted the beliefs of teachers about teaching
science in a constructivist way, it can be said that impacts of traditional beliefs still exist.
In learning science, the traditional category has the highest number of teachers. It can be concluded
that beliefs of teachers about “learning science” are old-fashioned compared to their beliefs about teach-
ing. This indicates that teachers with transitive beliefs in “teaching science” shifts to the traditional belief.
In a similar way, in their “managing problem behavior”, the traditional category has the highest number
of teachers, which means that when teachers encounter a problem in classroom management, they still
approach the solution to the problem from a traditional perspective. The following sections contain more
detailed beliefs about teaching science, learning science and approach to the problem behaviors in each
category and Table 3 presents examples of the teachers’ thoughts. The following sections contain more
detailed for each category.
Beliefs of Science Teachers in the Traditional Category about Teaching Science, Learning Science and
Managing Behavior Problems
Teachers in the traditional category believed that science teaching is the transfer of knowledge from
teacher to student. For example, a teacher with a 27 years experience stated “When we do the lesson with
the activities in the science text-book, science concepts are learned better by the students”. Accordingly,
teachers mentioned that they generally prefer the demonstration, that is to say, first they conduct the ex-
periment in front of the class and then students carry out the experiment by repeating what their teachers
did. A teacher with 20 years experience explained “I don’t do a lot of experiments in my lesson. If I do an
experiment I define my own rules and ask students to obey those rules. I do the experiment step by step
in front of the classroom. When the students do the experiment by following me…”. According to these
teachers, students must be good listeners in order to learn the knowledge conveyed from these resources
and they must regularly repeat what they learn so as not to forget it. A teacher with 27 years experience
said “student must note down regularly the concepts s/he learned and s/he must often repeat them. Unless
you revise newly learned information, you forget it in a short time. Thus, you must often repeat I say.
According to beliefs about managing behavior problems, teachers stated that students must listen to
them carefully while they are lecturing the topic and they must be silent during the lesson. A 13 year teacher
said “In the laboratory slackness is observed. There is certainly an uproar among them, what they talk about
is off topic. That is unwanted noisy so I take the experiment materials from the laboratory to the class and
try to do the experiment in there”. They asserted that when the teacher repeats the scientific knowledge,
they expect that this student has eliminated this misconception. A teacher with 15 years explained “If the
students insist on not understanding the concept this is because of his/her misbehavior and this is not
308
(P. 302-317)
something good. Although you show the right one and the student insist on not understanding, there is
nothing to do. In other words, this student must understand the right concept. When you teach the right
concept this student will understand it in time anyhow”. They selected teacher-centered activities, which
were demonstrated by the teacher or closed ended experiments, in order to prevent chaos emerging be-
cause of the noise. For example a teacher with 12 years experience stated “They (students) did not listen
to me while I was lecturing. In this case instead of making them work as a group, I would have liked them
to follow me first and then repeat what I have done”.
Beliefs of Science Teachers in Transitive Category about Teaching Science, Learning Science and
These group teachers expressed dual ideas in teaching science. While they attached importance to
the concepts of hands on learning, conducting experiments, guidance of teacher, student participation,
relationship between science and everyday life; the examples they gave from the classroom practices
did not support these ideas due to the above-mentioned difficulties. In this situation, while teachers ap-
preciate constructivist teaching approach suggested in science program, the physical conditions prevent
the realization of these beliefs. For example, a teacher with 14 years experience stated “Actually I should
have been directing students but instead of directing I am still lecturing. For example I try to make them
brainstorm but students cannot show this skill. Thus, most of the time I lecture. I sometimes try to make
student centered activities but most of the time it’s me who is talking”. They focused on the importance
of scientific curiosity, and establishing a relationship between science and everyday life for learning. From
this aspect, the emphasis on meaningful learning, which was focused on the Science and technology
program in Turkey, showed its effect on the beliefs of the teachers. On the other hand, in a similar way to
the traditional belief, while explaining their beliefs about learning, they emphasized that the teacher is
the one who transfers knowledge and the student is the passive recipient of knowledge. A teacher with 3
years experience said “Students should be curious. They need to believe what they learn is useful for them
and they need to do some research. Furthermore, they should often repeat what they learnt because the
more frequently they repeat the more permanent the information is”.
In a similar way, these teachers regarded the situations in which student’s misconceptions as a com-
ponent that can disrupt the class and are therefore, problem behaviors. In cases where students had mis-
conceptions, teachers focused on the reason for the students having these misconceptions were because
they had not followed the teacher carefully. A 12-year teacher explained “The student did not understand
the aim of the experiment as he did not listen to me carefully. On that day presumably I myself repeated
the experiment. I should do the experiment again in the class and give them why that is important here”
or “what it should be here” or “what we should expect” step by step”. On the other hand, regarding the
experiments or practical activities, they acknowledged the noise generated by group working but they
concluded that this noise resulted from the inadequacy in the teacher’s control or from lack of homogeneity
in groups. For example a teacher with 14 years experience stated “Sometimes during group work students
need to talk among themselves but I call this as noise. To prevent this noise you need to walk among the
groups or form heterogeneous groups”. Again in parallel with teachers in the traditional category, they
switched to teacher-centered teaching methods in order to overcome classroom management problems.
The same teacher continiued “While doing the experiment I remember that I have to cover the content
and I stop group work and start lecturing”.
Beliefs of Science Teachers in Constructivist Category about Teaching Science and Learning Science and
According to teachers who held constructivist belief, the main focus in teaching science is on the
active participation of student in the lesson. They described the role of teacher as preparing learning envi-
ronments where students are active, guiding the students rather than directly transferring the concepts to
them. Teachers pointed out that they preferred the teaching methods suggested in the program in order
for students to construct the knowledge by themselves. For example a 4-year teacher explained:
309
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 302-317)
“As a teacher I see myself like a guide. This is the aim of the new program. You (teacher) stay in the
background while learning students do everything. When a student had a problem in a subject or did
not understand something you will help him/her with questions or some clues. In other words you will
not directly give the knowledge when a student does not understand something. You will help him to
discover it. That means you will not give them fish but you will teach them how to fish”.
Also these teachers commented that the student is mentally active in learning. They emphasized
the importance of establishing relationship between what the students’ learnt and their everyday lives
and associating the concepts with one another. In addition, teachers explained the experiments, which
enabled students to have first-hand experience about the concept to be learnt, within a scope where the
student is active. A teacher with 5-years experience said:
“If you are learning something by doing this is the most permanent learning. You (the teacher) say when
you blow lime water it blurs but you want the student to learn that there is CO2 by doing. When the stu-
dent see the lime water blurs as s/he blows both you and the student will never forget this. The child will
always remember the activity all the time….. Associating concepts by using concept maps what I mean
when you say “heat” if the child can write the concepts about heat on a piece of paper and associate their
relationships with arrows. I believe that s/he can learn the concepts”.
These teachers noted that the fact that students have misconceptions is something to be expected
in the classroom. They stated that in order to overcome these misconceptions, students should conduct
the experiment themselves via different trials or methods. Students also should compare the result they
obtained from their misconceptions. For examle a teacher with 4 years experience stated “In this situation
the best thing to do is to make the student who has a misconception do the experiment himself again.
When the student does the experiment again s/he will see where s/he makes a mistake and will understand
the subject better”. Teachers stated that they determined rules before conducting the experiment in the
laboratory and they did not start the experiment before motivating their students. Teachers described
their roles during the experiments as monitoring the groups’ progress and offering guidance about the
problems they experienced in the learning process. A 5-years teacher stated “Before I started carrying out
the experiment, first of all by asking them why the subject was important and where they would come
across this in real life. I would get their attention and motivate them. After the experiment I ask questions
appropriate to each student’s levels. By this way, I wanted them to feel that they had understood the
subject and they could succeed”. Those teachers aimed to decrease the possible problems during the
experiment by enabling students to understand the aims of the experiment. More importantly they are
more tolerant of the student talk that occurs during group work. Teachers think that these talks provide
a discussion atmosphere to share students’ ideas so they improve their learning. For example a teacher
with 3 years’ experience stated:
“When you are doing an activity in the classroom students certainly speak among themselves. In a silent
classroom environment you (the teacher) lecture and students listen to you and they think they understand.
In my opinion thus there might be noise but there should be learning too. Instead of a quite classroom
without learning the class can be noisy; students can interact among themselves as long as they learn
something. Eventually students’ each behavior there (in the group) helps them to learn. They will run the
cable and break the lamp there, put the batteries in the wrong directions, discuss, ask but in each step
they will learn something. When the batteries are places it won’t work in the same way when the lamp
blows it won’t work, when they run the cable in the wrong order it won’t work and students will see this.
In each step children will discuss and this is a cause to learn a new thing”.
310
(P. 302-317)
Distributions of Beliefs of Teachers about Teaching Science, Learning Science and Managing Behavior
Problems According to Professional Experiences
The distribution of the beliefs of teachers about teaching science, learning science and managing
behavior problems according to the professional experiences of teachers is shown in Table 3.
Table 3. The number of teachers’ beliefs about teaching science, learning science and managing
behavior problems according to the teaching experiences.
Teaching Managing Behavior

Learning Science
Science Problems
Traditional - - -
1–10 year
Transitive 1 2 2
Constructivist 5 4 4
Traditional 1 3 4
11–20 year
Transitive 5 - 2
Constructivist - 3 -
Traditional 3 2 3
20 and more
Transitive 3 3 3
Constructivist - 1 -

According to Table 3, while 1-10 year teachers held a constructivist belief in their teaching science,
none of the teachers with 10 and more years of professional experiences had constructivist beliefs. This
can be interpreted as “teaching science” beliefs of teachers, who can be considered newcomers to the
profession, are in more accordance with constructivism; and as professional experience of the teachers
increase, they move further away from teaching applications based on constructivism. Except for two
teachers having transitive belief, all the teachers with 1-10 years professional experience held construc-
tivist beliefs towards “learning science”. These teachers mentioned that they participated in instructional
activities suggested in the program during their pre-service training. Therefore, it can be said that the
impact of undergraduate university education still continues among these teachers. Three of the teachers
with 11-20 years professional experience, held constructivist and traditional beliefs. To sum up, teachers
consider learning as an individual or social construction of information in the first years of their profes-
sions and believe that the student is mentally active in learning. On the other hand, as they advance in
their professional experience, they regard learning as obtaining knowledge from reliable resources or
repeating the knowledge obtained from these resources. Examining the beliefs about their “managing
behavior problems”, it is seen that teachers with 1-10 years professional experience considered the
autonomy of the students, through focusing on the reason for the behavior and attempted to ask the
student’s opinion as to the cause of a problem. It was seen that after 10 years’ experience, belief in the
teacher control rather than student control and a traditional belief begin to attach importance to the
inappropriateness of the problem behaviors.
Combinations between Beliefs of Teachers about Teaching Science, Learning Science and
The distributions of the relationships among teachers’ beliefs about “teaching science”, “learning
science” and “managing behavior problems” is shown in Table 4.
311
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 302-317)
Table 4. The number of the relationships among teachers’ beliefs about teaching science, learning
science and managing behavior problems.
Teaching Managing Behavior

Relationships Learning Science N Total
Science Problems
C C C 3
Nested Ts Ts Ts 1 5
Tr Tr Tr 1
Tr Tr Ts 1
C Ts C 1
Ts Tr Ts 2
C C Ts 1
Related Tr C Tr 1 12
Ts C Ts 1
Tr Ts Tr 1
Ts Tr Tr 3
Tr Tr Ts 1
Divergent Ts C Tr 1 1
Note. C: Constructivist, Ts: Transitive, Tr: Traditional
While 3 of these teachers had constructivist beliefs in relation to “teaching science”, “learning science”
and “managing behavior problems”, 1 teacher had a traditional and 1 teacher had a transitive belief. The
compliance of the beliefs of these teachers indicates that they consider teaching, learning and manag-
ing behavior problems as a whole. It was seen that, in dual categories, 12 of the teachers had believes
complying with each other’s’, but there was no belief in accordance with this belief in the third category.
Apart from this similarity seen in these dual beliefs, 1 teacher was totally divergent among three beliefs.
The number of the relationships among teachers’ beliefs is shown in Figure 1. Where the balloons inter-
sect show teachers have the same belief about science teaching, science learning, or problem behavior.
The most remarkable number is 8 because two of his beliefs in three areas are both transitive and both
traditional. Consequently, it can be said that, constructivism emphasis which appeared in Turkey with
renewed program hasn’t come into prominence in teachers beliefs.
Figure 1: T he distributions of the relationships among teachers’ beliefs.

Note. C: Constructivist, Ts: Transitive, Tr: Traditional, the numbers in the parentheses represent the numbers of teachers
312
(P. 302-317)
Discussion
This study investigated teachers’ beliefs about teaching, learning and managing behavior problems
of science teachers’ and also established the relationships among teachers’ beliefs systems. Firstly, the
teachers’ beliefs identified in this study were found to be similar to the findings in other studies on beliefs
about teaching (Koballa et al., 2000; Levitt, 2001; Tsai, 2002; Roehrig & Luft, 2004; Ünal & Akpınar, 2006).
Although some of these studies indicated that science teachers held traditional beliefs (Koballa et al.,
2000; Tsai, 2002; Ünal & Akpınar, 2006) most of the science teachers in this study held transitive beliefs
about teaching science. This finding indicates that, although teachers emphasize the importance of hands
on and minds on science as suggested in the science program, they shift to teacher-centered teach-
ing when they encounter difficulties in the classroom. This finding seems to confirm the idea of Levitt
(2001) that at least some of the beliefs expressed by the teachers emerged as a result of implementing
a program of science education reform (p.19). Accordingly, it can be concluded that although teachers
appreciate the constructivist teaching approach of new program, they do not completely comply with
the teacher role suggested by the program because of the problems they encounter in practice.
Findings related to the beliefs about “learning science” indicated that traditional category has the
highest number of teachers. The interesting point is that one teacher, who held constructivist belief
in teaching science, and four teachers, who held transitive beliefs in learning science, shifted to the
traditional belief, which means that since teachers displaying constructivist beliefs in science teaching
could not acutally internalize this belief (Haney & McArthur, 2002). Contrary to this finding, Koballa et
al. (2000) revealed that in some cases the development of advanced conceptions of teaching may not
comply with the development of conceptions of learning. Considering the finding by Koballa et al., which
offers a different perspective, it can be concluded that science teachers are exposed to the language
of constructivism in the context of teaching, but they are not reflecting constructivist beliefs on their
own personal learning. In other words, although the emphasis made on constructivist teaching in the
program seems to have affected teachers’ beliefs about teaching, this emphasis did not lead their beliefs
about learning to a constructivist one. The adoption of any innovation within an educational system is a
lengthy and complex process, it is suggested that teachers must be given sufficient time and opportunity
to understand, become comfortable with, and finally internalize the proposed belief change (Sakui &
Gaies, 1999 p. 487). Therefore, science teachers in Turkey need to appreciate and feel confident about
the new program and then they are expected to internalize constructivist beliefs in learning.
The third finding of the present study shows that, in managing problem behaviors, adoption of
the traditional belief is numerically higher among teachers. This finding suggests that they return to
traditional classroom management approaches, because they think that they have difficulty in the ar-
rangement of classroom management. That teachers have difficulty in classroom management while
implementing constructivist teaching strategies is a general finding also obtained from previous studies
(e.g. Haney & McArthur, 2002; Tsai, 2002; 2003; Bryan, 2003; Pea, 2004; Roehrig & Luft, 2004; Brown &
Melear, 2006; Cheung, 2007). Teachers’ management beliefs in a constructivist manner such as control
without closed-ended experiments or not perceiving misconceptions or laboratory works of students
as a component disrupting the class are among the problems that need to be solved in order that a
teacher can successfully implement a new curriculum (Bryan, 2003).
Another finding of this study was that while teachers with 1-10 years experiences, who can be
considered as newcomers to the profession, held a constructivist belief in “teaching science”, “learning
science” and “managing behavior problems”, this belief shifted to traditional belief as the professional
experience advanced. Tsai (2002) suggested that the fact that these newer science teachers may have
encountered more constructivist ideas in teacher education program or relevant workshops may be
influential on their constructivist beliefs in early years of their professional life. Similar to Tsai, many
researchers concluded that pre-service teacher education programs play a role in the development of
teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning (e.g. Northfield, 1998; Hancock & Gallard, 2004). The belief
of teachers with 10 and over 10 years’ experience shifted from constructivist to traditional. The reason
of this shift makes us think that they may lack knowledge about new activities and because of this lack
they couldn’t overcome the difficulties they came across in the class. In Turkey findings of Nazlıçiçek and
313
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 302-317)
Akarsu (2008) justifies this finding. Unfortunately teachers knowledge about “traditional “ teaching and
assessment methods based on transferring information to the student is higher than their knowledge
about constructivist methods proposed in the program. Therefore, although the program changed with
a constructivist emphasis teachers’ beliefs fell behind this change.
It is seen that beliefs of teachers about “teaching science”, “learning science” and “managing behav-
ior problems” are interrelated. However, the interrelatedness of teachers in two belief groups is more
than their nestedness. The finding related to both the interrelated and the nested situation in beliefs of
teachers was similar to the findings in other studies investigating relationships between beliefs (Boulton-
Lewis et al., 2001; Tsai, 2002; Haney & McArthur, 2002; Bryan, 2003; Ogan-Bekiroglu & Akkoç, 2009). These
results re-emphasized that if teachers hold in isolated beliefs about teaching, learning and problem
behavior; these beliefs are not expected to be a completely congruent (Boulton et al., 2001; Mewborn,
2002). It may be possible that since the constructivist approach is emphasized in the program in rela-
tion to the teaching, therefore the teachers displayed a constructivist belief in teaching, but they did
not associate this belief with the dimensions of learning and the way to managing behavior problems.
Thus, it is concluded that the teachers considered teaching, learning and classroom management as
different clusters. Therefore, while trying to solve contradictory situations he/she encountered during
the implementation of constructivist teaching, teacher may have made his/her belief congruent with
these conflicts rather than attempting to overcome these conflicts in contradictory situations which
he/she encountered in learning or in the problem behaviors.
Conclusions
This study is the first attempt to identify science teachers’ beliefs in Turkey. Although it has the
limitations of consisting of a small sample from two cities in Turkey and without any data triangulation,
the beliefs held by the teachers in this study are similar to those reported by various researchers. Re-
sults of the present study show that these three beliefs fall behind the constructivist belies suggested
by the program and teachers’ adherence to traditional beliefs still continues. Therefore, researchers or
program developers should implement professional development programs considering that many
teachers still hold traditional belief. Considering that it is highly unlikely that there will be a rapid and
immediate transition in teachers’ beliefs from a traditional to constructivist, professional development
programs in collaboration with teachers and researchers would be beneficial to lead about the change
in teachers’ beliefs about teaching.
At this point, an answer is expected for the question as whether professional development through
formal in-service training is not sufficient for teachers with advanced professional experience to be
convinced to adopt a constructivist belief. The present study aimed to carry out the first stage of the
process; diagnosing the teachers’ existing beliefs about teaching, learning and problem behavior. The
following purpose should be to promote disequilibrium and conceptual change in traditional beliefs of
teachers and then to launch an in-service training program to assist the teachers in the reconstruction
and reform of their beliefs.
Although the science teachers in this study provided many experiences from the classroom en-
vironment in the interview, these relatively small experiences do not give direct evidence of what is
happening in the classroom. Finally, the success of program reform depends on both in-service teach-
ers and pre-service teachers. For that reason, besides informing pre-service teachers about ideal class
environments, their awareness should also be raised in terms of the lack of equipment, over-crowded
classes and the problems they will face in terms of classroom management. By discussing these issues
and helping pre-service teachers to find ways of dealing with these situations, teachers may retain their
constructivist beliefs rather than given them up when they encounter difficulties in their teaching.
314
(P. 302-317)
Appendix
The topic of this week is that frictional force is independent of the surface area. Firstly, teacher dis-
tributes worksheets to the students. Secondly, the teacher elicits predictions from student groups about
the relationship between friction and a surface area. The teacher distributes materials to the students
for them to carry out the experiment. If this is not possible he/she conducts demonstration experiment.
The teacher asks students to interpret the experiment results. Towards the end of the class, a naughty
student in the class not listening to the lesson argues that material with higher surface area has a higher
friction force. Under these circumstances, what would you do if you were this teacher?
References
Adams, P. E., & Krockover, G. H. (1997). Beginning Science Teacher Cognition and its Origins in the Preservice Science
Teacher Program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 633-653.
Alger, C. (2009). Secondary Teachers’ Conceptual Metaphors of Teaching and Learning: Changes over the Career
Span. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 743-751.
Bağcı-Kılıç, G. (2002). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Fen Öğretimi [World and Science Teaching in Turkey]. Paper presented
at the Fifth National Congress of Science and Mathematics Education, Ankara, Turkey.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Boulton-Lewis, G. M., Smith, D. J. H., McCrindle, A. R., Burnett, P. C., & Campbell, K. J. (2001). Secondary Teachers’
Conceptions of Teaching and Learning. Learning and Instruction, 36 (1), 35-51.
Brannon, T. S. (2010). The Effects of Classroom Management Beliefs/Ideologies on Student Academic Success. Un-
published doctoral dissertation, California State University, Fresno.
Brown, S. L., & Melear, C. T. (2006). Investigation of Secondary Science Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices After Authentic
Inquiry-Based Experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43 (9), 938-962.
Bryan, L. A. (2003). Nestedness of Beliefs: Examining a Prospective Elementary Teacher’s Belief System about Science
Teaching and Learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (9), 835-868.
Çakır, N. K., Şenler, B., & Taşkın, B. G. (2007). İlköğretim II. Kademe Öğrencilerinin Fen Bilgisi Dersine Yönelik
Tutumlarınınn Belirlenmesi [Determining the Attitudes towards Science Course of Second Grade Students in
Primary School]. Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 5 (4), 637-655.
Cheung, D. (2007). Facilitating Chemistry Teachers to Implement Inquiry-Based Laboratory Work. International Journal
of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 107-130.
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying Qualitative Analyses of Verbal Data: A Practical Guide. The Journal of the Learning
Sciences, 6 (3), 271-315.
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2001). Epistemologically Authentic Scientific Reasoning. In K. Crowley, C. D. Schunn,
& T. Okada (Eds. ), Designing for Science: Implications From Everyday, Classroom, And Professional Settings (pp.
351-392). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Evertson, C., & Weinstein, C. (2006). Handbook of Classroom Management: Research, Practice, And Contemporary Is-
sues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fosnot, C. (1996). Constructivism: A Psychological Theory of Learning. In C. Fosnot (Ed. ) Constructivism: Theory,
Perspectives, and Practice, (pp. 8-33). New York: Teachers College Press.
Green, T. F. (1971). The Activities of Teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hancock, E. S., & Gallard, A. J. (2004). Preservice Science Teachers’ Beliefs about Teaching and Learning: The Influence
of K-12 Field Experiences. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15 (4), 281-291.
Haney, J. J., & McArthur, J. (2002). Four Case Studies of Prospective Science Teachers’ Beliefs Concerning Constructivist
Teaching Practices. Science Education, 86, 783-802.
Hashweh, M. (1996). Effects of Science Teachers’ Epistemological Beliefs in Teaching. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 33 (1), 47-63.
Hermans, R., Van Braak, J., & Van Keer, H. (2008). Development of the Beliefs about Primary Education scale: Distin-
guishing a Developmental and Transmissive Dimension. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24 (1), 127-139.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2003). The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty First Century.
Science Education, 88, 28-54.
Howard, B. C., McGee, S., Schwartz, N. H., & Purcell, S. (2000). The experience of constructivism: Transforming teacher
epistemology. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32 (4), 455-465.
Kagan, D. M. (1990). Ways of Evaluating Teacher Cognition: Inferences Concerning the Goldilocks Principle. Review
of Educational Research, 60, 419-469.
Kang, N. H., & Keys, C. W. (2000) An Investigation of Secondary School Science Teachers’ Beliefs About and the Prac-
tices of Hands-on Activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research
in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
315
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 302-317)
Kang, N. H., & Wallace, C. S. (2005). Secondary Science Teachers’ Use of Laboratory Activities: Linking Epistemic Beliefs,
Goals, and Practices. Science Education, 89 (1), 140-165.
Keys, P. (2005). Are Teachers Walking the Walk or Just Talking the Talk in Science Education? Teachers and Teaching:
Theory and Practice, 11 (5), 499-516.
Kift, S., & Nelson, K. (2005). Beyond Curriculum Reform: Embedding the Transition Experience. In Brew, A. & Asmar, C.
(Eds. ), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Higher Education and Research Development Society of Australia Con-
ference: Vol 28. Higher Education in a Changing World (pp. 225-235). Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney.
Kim, H. B., Fisher D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). Assessment and Investigation of Constructivist Science Learning Environ-
ments in Korea. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17 (2), 239-249.
Koballa, Th., Jr., Graber, W., Coleman, D. C., & Kemp, A. (2000). Prospective Gymnasium Teachers’ Conceptions of
Chemistry Learning and Teaching. International Journal for Science Education, 22 (2), 209-224.
Külçe, C. (2005). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Fen Bilgisi Dersine Yönelik Tutumları. [Students’ Attitudes Toward Sci-
ence Lesson in Second Grade of Elemantary Education]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Pamukkale University,
Denizli.
Lavoie, D. R. (1999). Effects of Emphasizing Hypothetico-Predictive Reasoning within the Science Learning Cycle on
High School Student’s Process Skills and Conceptual Understandings in Biology. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 36 (10), 1127-1147.
Levitt, K. E. (2001). An Analysis of Elementary Teachers’ Beliefs Regarding the Teaching and Learning of Science.
Luft, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2007). Capturing Science Teachers’ Epistemological Beliefs: The Development of the
Teacher Beliefs Interview. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11 (2), 38-63.
Markic, S., Eilks, I., & Valinides, N. (2008). Developing a Tool to Evaluate Differences in Beliefs about Science Teaching
and Learning among Freshman Science Student Teachers from Different Science Teaching Domains: A Case
Study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4 (2), 109-120.
Martin, N. K., & Shoho, A. R. (1999, April). Beliefs regarding classroom management style: differences between tradi-
tional and alternative certification teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 432544).
Marzano, R., & Marzano, J. (2003). The Key to Classroom Management. Educational Leadership, 61 (1), 6-13.
Mewborn, D. S. (2002, April). Examining Mathematics Teachers’ Beliefs through Multiple Lenses. Paper presented
at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED465526).
Moretti, F., Van Vliet, L., Bensing, J., Deledda, G., Mazzi, M., Rimondini, M., Zimmermann, C., & Fletcher, I. (2011). A
Standardized Approach to Qualitative Content Analysis of Focus Group Discussions from Different Countries.
Patient Education and Counseling, 82 (3), 420-428.
Nazlıçiçek, N., & Akarsu, F. (2008). Fizik, Kimya ve Matematik Öğretmenlerinin Değerlendirme Araçlarıyla İlgili
Yaklaşımları ve Uygulamaları [Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics Teachers’ Approaches to Assessment Tools
and Their Assessment Practices]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 33 (149), 18-29.
Nespor, J. (1987). The Role of Beliefs in the Practice of Teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19 (4), 317-328.
Northfield, J. (1998). Teacher Educators and the Practice of Science Teacher Education. In B. J. Fraser, & K. G. Tobin
(Eds. ), International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 695-706). London: Kluwer.
Nott, M., & Wellington, J. (1998). Eliciting, Interpreting and Developing Teachers’ Understandings of Science. Science
and Education, 7, 579-594.
Ogan-Bekiroğlu, F., & Akkoç, H. (2009). Pre-service Teachers’ Instructional Beliefs and Examination of Consistency
Between Beliefs and Practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 1173-1199.
Özdemir, P., & Güneysu, S. (2008). Perceptions of Primary School Teachers Regarding New Science and Technology
Curriculum in Terms of Teaching and Assesment Methods [Special Edition]. Essays in Education, 124 -141.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ Beliefs and Educational Research: Cleaning Up a Messy Construct. Review of Educational
Research, 62 (3), 307-332.
Pea, C. (2004). Teachers’ Beliefs about Science Teaching and Context Factors: Implications for Teaching and Learning
Science at the Middle School. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Mason University, Virginia.
Peers, C. E., Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2003). Supports and Concerns for Teacher Professional Growth During
the Implementation of a Science Curriculum Innovation. Research in Science Education, 33, 89-110.
Powell, J. C., & Anderson, R. D. (2002). Changing Teachers’ Practice: Curriculum Materials and Science Education
Reform in the USA. Studies in Science Education, 37 (1), 107-135.
Prawat, R. S. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs about teaching and learning: a constructivist perspective. American Journal of
Education, 100 (3), 354-395.
Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A. (2004). Constraints Experienced by Beginning Secondary Science Teachers Implementing
Scientific Inquiry Lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (1), 3-24.
Rokeach, M. (1972). Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values: A Theory of Organization and Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sakui, K., & Gaies, S. (1999). Investigating Japanese Learners’ Beliefs about Language Learning. System, 27, 473-
492.
316
(P. 302-317)
Schadewitz, N., & Jachna, T. (2007). Comparing Inductive and Deductive Methodologies for Design Patterns Identifi-
cation and Articulation. In: International Design Research Conference IADSR 2007 Emerging Trends in Design
Research, 12-15 November 2007, Hong Kong.
Simmons, P. E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., & Crockett, D. (1999). Beginning Teachers: Beliefs and
Classroom Actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (8), 930-954.
Smith, K. E. (1997). Student Teachers’ Beliefs about Developmentally Appropriate Practice: Pattern, Stability, and the
Inﬂuence of Locus of Control. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 221-243.
Tondeur, J., Hermans, R., Van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). Exploring the Link between Teachers Educational Beliefs
Profiles and Different Types of Computer Use in the Classroom: The impact of Teacher Beliefs. Computers in
Human Behavior, 24, 2541-2553.
Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., & Fraser, B. J. (Eds. ). (1996). Improving Teaching and Learning in Science and Mathematics. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Tsai, C. C. (1998). An Analysis of Scientific Epistemological Beliefs and Learning Orientations of Taiwanese Eighth
Graders. Science Education, 82, 473-489.
Tsai, C. C. (1999). Laboratory Exercises Help me Memorize the Scientific Truths: A Study of Eight Graders’ Scientific
Epistemological Views and Learning in Laboratory Activities. Science Education, 83, 654-674.
Tsai, C. C. (2002). Nested Epistemologies: Science Teachers’ Beliefs of Teaching, Learning and Science. International
Journal of Science Education, 24 (8), 771-783.
Tsai, C. C. (2003). Taiwanese Science Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of the Laboratory Learning Environments:
Exploring Epistemological Gaps. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 847-860.
Ünal, G., & Akpınar, E. (2006). To What Extent Science Teachers are Constructivist in Their Classrooms. Journal of Baltic
Science Education, 2 (10), 40-50.
Ünder, H. (2010). Yapılandırmacılığın Epistemolojik Savlarının Türkiye’de Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Programında Görünüm-
leri [Manifestations of Epistemological Thesis of Constructivism in the Science and Technology Programs of
Turkish Elementary Education]. Education and Science, 35 (158), 199-214.
Van Der Valk, T., & De Jong, O. (2009). Scaffolding Science Teachers in Open-inquiry Teaching. International Journal
of Science Education, 31 (6), 829-850.
Van Driel, J., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional Development and Reform in Science Education: The Role
of Teachers’ Practical Knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38 (2), 137-158.
Van Driel, J. H., Bulte, A. M. W., & Verloop, N. (2007). The Relationships between Teachers’ General Beliefs about Teach-
ing and Learning and Their Domain-Specific Curricular Beliefs. Learning and Instruction, 17, 156-171.
Verma, G. K., & Mallick. K. (1999). Researching Education: Perfectives and Techniques. Philadelphia: Open University
Press.
Wallace, C. S., & Kang, N. (2004). An Investigation of Experienced Secondary Science Teachers’ Beliefs about Inquiry:
An Examination of Competing Belief Sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 939-960.
Wideen, M. F., O’Shea, T., Pye, I., & Ivany, G. (1997). High-Stakes Testing and the Teaching of Science. Canadian Journal
of Education, 22 (4), 428-444.
Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing Constructivism as the Negotiation of Dilemmas: An Analysis of the Conceptual, Peda-
gogical, Cultural, and Political Challenges Facing Teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72 (2), 131-175.
Wolfgang, C. H., & Glickman, C. D. (1986). Solving Discipline Problems: Strategies for Classroom Teachers (2th ed).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Yaşar, S. (2008). Classroom Management Approaches of Primary School Teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Zohar, A., Degani, A., & Vaaknin, E. (2001). Teachers’ Beliefs about Low-Achieving Students and Higher Order Thinking.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 469-485.
Received: January 20, 2012 Accepted: July 30, 2012
Eylem Yildiz Feyzioglu PhD. in Science Education, Adnan Menderes University, Faculty of
Education, Department of Elementary Education
Adnan Menderes University, Faculty of Education, Department of
Elementary Education, 09100, Aydın, Turkey.
Phone: +90 (256) 2142023/1587.
E-mail: eylemyildiz@adu.edu.tr, eyfeyzioglu@gmail.com
317
STRUCTURAL PATTERNS
AND REPRESENTATION
FORMS OF
UNIVERSITY PHYSICS
TEACHERS: BIOT-SAVART
LAW AND AMPÈRE’S LAW
Abstract. The way teachers organize Sharareh Majidi

and transfer their subject matter knowl-
edge has played a crucial role in science
education. However, it seems that more
attention should be paid on the forms of
representation and knowledge organi- Introduction
zation of teachers that they apply for
transferring their knowledge. Therefore, In science teacher education teachers’ subject matter
teachers’ knowledge organization and knowledge (SMK) is a key factor, on which pedagogically suc-
representation forms were investigated cessful approaches are based. Of course, there are many equally
with an emphasis on the topics of Biot- important aspects, like paying attention on students’ qualitative
Savart law and Ampère’s law. Four physics understanding, pre-conceptions, motivation and context of
teachers of introductory-level University teaching (Duit et al., 2007) but it is very difficult to imagine suc-
who used, concept cards and concept cessful and well-planned teaching, which does not pay attention
maps were interviewed, and finally an to the organization of the subject content. However, taking into
interpretative analysis was performed. account the important role of SMK as starting point for didacti-
The results showed teachers’ knowledge cal and pedagogical solutions, relatively little attention has been
organization was strongly connected only paid on how teachers organize and conceive the structure of the
for the topic of Biot-Savart law. Moreover, subject content.
descriptive and explanatory mathematical First category of teachers’ disciplinary knowledge, which is of
models were the most applied forms of interest, is teachers’ SMK. In 1986, Shulman described teachers’ sub-
representation that teachers used for rep- ject matter knowledge (SMK) in terms of substantive knowledge
resenting their knowledge. The possibility and syntactic knowledge. Substantive knowledge concerns teach-
to recognize the differences in knowledge ers’ knowledge of concepts, principles, and facts in the disciplines
organization and representation forms of as well as different ways of relating and organizing these concepts
different teachers is the first step towards and facts. On the other hand, syntactic knowledge focuses on a
developing more effective teaching and set of rules that determine the knowledge of scientific inquiry e.g.
learning solution. recognizing a problem, and knowledge of science process e.g.
Key words: Ampère’s law, Biot-Savart law, control of variables. Of the studies focusing on SMK, several are in
concept maps, knowledge organization, physics. It seems that most of the studies about physics teachers’
representation forms. SMK have been accumulated by the concepts of light and shad-
ows, electricity, sound, force and motion, heat and temperature,
energy, thermal properties of materials, gravity, and air pressure
(Abell, 2007). As a result, there are few studies about substantive
and syntactic structure of teachers’ SMK that concern the concepts
Sharareh Majidi of magnetism or magnetostatics. Although SMK is a central theme
University of Helsinki, Finland
in science education research, few studies, have concentrated on
the structure and organization of physics teachers’ knowledge
for the purposes of teaching. Studies on teachers’ understanding
318
ISSN 1648–3898 STRUCTURAL PATTERNS AND REPRESENTATION FORMS OF
(P. 318-332)
of organization and relation between concepts in physics are “a largely unmapped field of study in the
domain of SMK of teachers” (Abell, 2007, p. 1117). Understanding the structure of subject content is
especially important in subject matter areas where knowledge is supposedly complex, basic concepts
and laws are interconnected and students (and teachers) are known to struggle to form a picture of
subject content. One area where all these aspects are realized is magnetism. Therefore, it is of interest
to investigate how teachers organize and conceive their knowledge of the subject of magnetostatics.
For these reasons, we have here selected two basic topics – the Biot-Savart’s law and Ampère’s law - of
magnetism as a context, and we studied the SMK of expert teachers.
Second category of teacher’s disciplinary knowledge, which is of interest in this study, is PCK. PCK
concerns the most important part of teaching: representation of knowledge. Shulman (1986, 1987)
stated that teachers should be able to represent their SMK that is pedagogically powerful and com-
prehensible for students. Therefore, a teacher with high ability of teaching possesses the knowledge of
content and knowledge of pedagogy, which is called PCK. According to Shulman (1986), PCK includes
(a) teacher knowledge of representation such as analogies, examples, and explanations; (b) knowledge
of students’ learning difficulties and also strategies to conquer those difficulties. Thus far, the focus of
researchers in case of PCK has been on students’ learning and their difficulties for learning rather than
teachers’ representation forms and strategies.
Here the knowledge representation of subject matter for teaching purposes of university physics
teachers for the topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law was examined from the viewpoints of 1)
teachers’ forms of representation that is pointed by Shulman (1986, 1987) as an important element of
PCK, 2) teachers’ knowledge organizations and structures, which according to Shulman belongs to the
substantive structure of SMK 3) possible relation between representation forms and knowledge organi-
zation. In this regard, the theoretical background closely follows Shulman’s framework for discussing
the aspects of the teachers’ SMK with a focus on their knowledge organization and teacher’s PCK with
an emphasis on their representation forms. It is worthy to mention that PCK of teachers is strongly in-
fluenced by SMK; though sometimes SMK is assumed as a category of their PCK (e.g. Grossman, 1990).
Nevertheless, the relations between SMK and PCK and their components are discussed in the next
section in theoretical background.
Since one of the purposes of this study is to investigate the structure and organization of teachers’
knowledge, suitable portrayal tool for representing the structure is needed. Concept maps have been
successfully used in some previous similarly oriented studies. For example, Ferry (1996) found concept
maps as a useful tool for examining teachers SMK. Consequently, in this study, concept maps were used
as a tool for visualizing and evaluating the organization of the SMK of teachers.
The empirical approach of the research is based on teachers’ interviews and the interpretative
analysis of the interviews. There are different kinds of interviews such as structured, non-structures, non-
directive, and focus interviews. The interview that performed in this study was somewhat non-directive
interview. So, the interviewer had minimal control and teachers were free to express the representation
forms of their SMK and to show their knowledge organization. In this, the interviewer asked few ques-
tions either to clarify the answers when they were ambiguities or to check the confirmation of answers
(Moser & Kalton, 1977). Since this article concentrates on structural patterns, knowledge organization
of teachers, and their representation forms, using non-directive interviews appeared to be more ap-
plicable than other qualitative analysis such as questionnaires or videotaping the lessons. So, teachers
could sketch their concept maps, represent their SMK, and present their knowledge organization in
the designed interviews. The interviewed teachers here were experienced physics teachers who teach
introductory first year of university level.
In carrying out the analysis, first, through interpretative analysis different forms that teachers use for
representing and connecting their SMK were identified as a part of their PCK (see also Majidi & Mäntylä,
2011). These categorizations were emerged from the data analysis and they were motivated by the
notions that models and experiments are two key components of knowledge construction (Mäntylä,
2011): models and modelling have a prominent role to construct and justify the knowledge in science
education (Koponen, 2007); experiments are important in physical knowledge construction and hold
a generative role on teaching physics (Koponen & Mäntylä, 2006). The analysis showed that the identi-
319
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 318-332)
fied categories regarding teachers’ representation forms include: mathematical representation which
is a category of physics knowledge that helps students and teachers to construct representation of a
physical process and reason about the process (see also Van Heuvelen, 1991); Analogies which play a
role in learning and teaching as mapping tools (see also Glynn and Takahashi, 1998); visual models in
the perspective of science education where figures and photos (two-dimensional structure) are very
capable of to developing the visualization (see also Gilbert, 2005); Reasoning that concerns successful
knowledge that encompasses comprehensive representation (see also Brachman & Levesque, 2004).
Second, the knowledge organization of interviewed teachers were pictured as the main part of
their SMK. The results showed that university teachers’ organization of knowledge in case of Biot-Savart
law was richer and more connected than teachers’ SMK in the case of Ampère´s law. Also teachers’
representation forms contain interesting and relevant differences for both cases of Biot-Savart law and
Ampère’s law. Third and finally, the results show how PCK and SMK of teachers including their compo-
nents can be related together. It is encouraging to find how the present method of analysis is capable
of revealing differences in teachers’ ways of organizing SMK. The possibility to reveal such differences
is a first step towards finding out whether or not such aspects of SMK and representation forms have
any consequences to students’ learning.
The aim of this research was to study the organization of SMK of university physics teachers and
representation forms of their PCK for teaching purposes with the focus on two topics of Biot-Savart law
and Ampère’s law. In order to reach the goal, following research questions were formulated:
1. What is the representation forms (as a component of PCK) that teachers’ use in representing
and connecting their SMK of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law?
2. What are the characteristics of the relational structures or organizations of the content ele-
ments (as a part of SMK) which construct the topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law?
3. What is the relation between representation forms (as a part of PCK) to their knowledge
organization (as a part of SMK) for the topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law?
These questions were investigated and answered for the subject of magnetostatics with two specific
topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère´s law. First question examined teachers’ representation forms such
as models and reasoning that they use to formulate and connect their content knowledge. Second ques-
tion evaluated teachers’ knowledge organization, which somewhat describes substantive knowledge of
teachers and shows how different parts of teachers’ knowledge relate together. Third question reveals
the answer to the question of how components of SMK and PCK, which are knowledge organization
and representation forms, are correlated to each other. Finally, the answers of these questions reveal
the characteristics of teachers’ SMK and their representation as a whole.
As mentioned earlier, knowledge organization is very important part of teachers’ SMK but it an
unmapped domain of study (Abell, 2007); on the other hand, representation forms is a very crucial no-
tion concerning PCK, nevertheless a great deal of interest has been focused on students’ misconceptions
and their learning difficulties rather than teachers’ representation forms (Abell, 2007). Therefore, it is
quite motivating to examine different forms of representation that teachers apply to transfer their SMK
with an emphasis on the organization of SMK. Further, the design of the study and research methods
are developed and discussed.
Topic of Study: Biot-Savart Law and Ampère’s Law
The Biot-Savart’s law is described in terms of either moving electric charges or current elements
which are assumed as origin of magnetic fields. According to some experiments and referring to inter-
national textbooks, Biot-Savart law and thus magnetic fields obey the superposition principle. So it is
quite feasible to calculate magnetic fields of any current distribution using superposition principle and
Biot-Savart law. The most popular examples of magnetic fields that have been calculated from Biot-Savart
law are magnetic fields of long wire, current loop, and coil (Knight, 2008; Walker, et al. 2008).
320
(P. 318-332)
Ampère’s law describes the relation between electric current enclosed by a closed loop and cor-
responding total magnetic flux through the loop. Ampère’s law, which is driven from Biot-Savart law
for the magnetic field of long wire, can be employed for calculating current distributions which are
highly symmetrical. The most common examples that their current distribution are symmetrical and can
be calculated from Ampère’s law are magnetic field of solenoid, inside wire, and toroid (Knight, 2008;
Walker, et al. 2008). In summary, selected topics in this study are quite interesting because they can be
organized in terms of many well motivated ways for knowledge organization.
Concept Cards and Concept Maps
The most important concepts relating to the studied topics differed along several dimensions:
concepts relating to sources of magnetic field (Current length element, Electric current, Charge); typi-
cal concepts relating to Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law (Superposition principle, Magnetic field of
long wire, Magnetic field of current in arc of wire, Magnetic field of solenoid, Magnetic field inside wire,
Magnetic field outside wire, Ampèrian loop, Magnetic field of toroid, Magnetic dipole, Magnetic field
line, Magnetic field of current loop); electrostatic concepts that could be used as analogies to studied
topics (Electric field, Gauss’s law, Coulomb’s law); advanced concepts and laws (Vector potential, Stokes
theorem , Maxwell equations) relating to studied topics. So, these concepts were chosen from the
content of three introductory university physics textbooks chapters (Knight, 2008; Walker et al. 2008;
Feynman et al. 2006) and they were written on concept cards (post-it notes). The ways to choose these
concepts were studied and validated in another study (see Majidi & Mäntylä, 2011). There were also
empty cards, where the interviewed teacher could write any concept that was missing from the given
set of concepts during the interview.
In the interview room, there was a whiteboard, on which the concept maps were drawn. Teach-
ers selected the concept cards and drew the lines between the concepts piece by piece. At the same
time teachers explained and described the construction of the concept maps. In other words, teachers’
concept maps consisted of concept cards as well as the connections (lines) between the concept cards.
Teachers’ explanations and reasons for connecting the concept cards were videotaped. The concept maps
were redrawn in electronic format using CmapTools and the numbers reflecting the order of teachers’
presentations were added to the concept boxes. The concept maps made by teachers enabled us to
identify the key features of teachers’ ways to organize the SMK and, consequently, the key features of
substantive structure of SMK. Moreover, the accompanying explanations and justification that teachers
utilized to represent and connect their SMK enabled us to recognize the characteristics of representa-
tion forms as a part their PCK.
Interviews and Interviewees
The teacher interviews of four male physics teachers were conducted in autumn 2010. Each teacher
was interviewed separately and the interviews were videotaped. As Table 1 shows, the duration of inter-
views varied from 40 to 45 minutes. All teachers had PhD in physics and they have taught the subject
of magnetostatics for at least 5 semesters (Table 1).
Table 1. Information of interviewed teachers.
David John Nigel Chris
Degree of education PhD in Physics PhD in Physics PhD in Physics PhD in Physics
Graduation year 2000 1986 1998 1992
Teaching magnetostatics 8 semesters 12 semesters 12 semesters 5 semesters
Duration of interview 45´ 40´ 40´ 45´
321
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 318-332)
In the interviews, teachers were asked to make concept maps depicting the way and order how
they present the selected topics in their teaching. In the beginning of the interview, the aims of this
study were discussed and then the purpose and way of using concept maps was explained to the
interviewees. During interviews, teachers simultaneously presented their SMK by means of selecting
concept cards; connecting those concepts; describing forms of representation as a part of their PCK; and
finally explaining how they constructed their concept maps. Thus in the end of the interview there was
a concept map on the white board with its construction and explanations that were videotaped.
During interviews, the task for the teachers was to present their forms of representations and
knowledge organization for the topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law. The way of interviewing and
posing questions were practised in advance in order to test the interview method. Teachers were asked
to “think out loud” and verbalize their thinking during the interview. When necessary, the interviewer
asked more detailed questions, otherwise the structure of the interview was quite open, though the
interviewer attended to keep the interview in focus. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and the
concepts in the concept maps were coded to the interview transcripts.
Procedures
In this study, the data consist of four videotaped interviews and four concept maps. First the vide-
otaped interviews were transcripted and the chronological orders of the concepts were added into
related concept maps.
In order to give structure to the analysis, the transcripts were classified into four different domains,
which are: 1) introduction of Biot-Savart law, 2) applications of Biot-Savart law, 3) introduction of Am-
père’s law, and 4) applications of Ampère’s law (see also Oser & Baeriswyl, 2001).
As the first task, teachers described their representation forms and reasoned on what basis they
connect content elements. These forms showed how they represent and formulate their SMK and
revealed the properties and characteristics of connections between content elements. In order to
recognize the representation forms teachers’ statements were identified through the transcripts. Next,
the results of analysis were compared to the results of another researcher. Then attention was paid to
the emerged categories of representation forms in each statement, and finally, the results were trian-
gulated.So the categories concerning representation forms of teachers were driven from the content
analysis. However, the categories were inspired by representation forms that Shulman (1987) pointed
out as the components of transformation of SMK into PCK. He argued that representation repertoire
includes analogies, metaphors, examples, explanation, and so forth. In this study, the categories included
experiments, different models (including visual, analogy, mathematical), reasoning, and statement of
fact. However, the choice of models and experiments were motivated by the notion that they were im-
portant in physical knowledge construction (Mäntylä, 2011, Koponen & Mäntylä, 2006; Koponen, 2007).
In this study, the identified models contained visual models such as figures and diagrams that teachers
utilize to represent the SMK (Gilbert, 2005), mathematical models such as equations and formulas that
physics teachers apply during their teaching (van Heuvelen, 1999), and finally analogy as a mapping
tool between relevant contexts (Glynn and Takahashi, 1998). In addition to models and experiments,
teachers employed a wide range of inductive and deductive reasoning in order to justify the relation
between the magnetostatics concepts (Brachman & Levesque, 2004).
Then, each statement was sorted and categorized as a specific category in a parallel manner (Miles
& Huberman, 1996). In this stage of comparison, consistency values of identified categories ranged from
75% to 80% for interviewed teachers; the measurements of consistency values were 75% for the case
of David, 78% for John, 80% for Nigel, and 79% for Chris. Although measured values suggested good
reliability, in order to improve the reliability, the identified categories were compared until authors
reached to a consensus (Kvale, 1996). Finally, triangulation was achieved through the interpretations
and categorization. As the second task, teachers’ SMK with the focus on their knowledge organization
have been investigated where concept maps were utilized to picture their knowledge arrangements.
322
(P. 318-332)
Results of Research
Teachers’ SMK was studied with an emphasis on its knowledge organization. Moreover, teachers’
representation forms were analyzed as an important element of teachers’ PCK. First, representation forms
of teachers were identified and compared for different teachers. Next, the characteristics of teacher’s
SMK were analyzed and compared on the basis of organization of selected concepts in order to see how
they correlate and differences exist between them.
Representation Forms
It is of interest to investigate what are different forms of representation that teachers use as a part of
their PCK to formulate their SMK. The results of analysis of the content of interviews showed that teach-
ers used representation forms such as experiment, analogy, statement of fact, reasoning, and models
including descriptive- and explanatory mathematical model and visual model. Teachers used these forms
in order to represent and formulate their SMK. A short description of each form is given as follow:
Experiment: The information of observations, evidences, and discoveries.
“The first thing we look is the magnetic interaction outside of conducting wire. In a way, it is the
old experiment by Ørsted.” (Chris)
Analogy: A similar role, when it is seen from the perspective of mapping between similar
concepts.
“Ampere’s law is connected to magnetic field in a similar way as Gauss’s law is connected to electric
field.” (Chris)
Descriptive mathematical model: A mathematical model that connects concepts with

mathematical format to describe new laws.
“Magnetic field of wire and magnetic dipole interact to each other for calculations to derive this
field [Ampere’s law].” (Nigel)
Explanatory mathematical model: A mathematical model that explains the applications or

examples of those described laws.
“Ampere’s law is then used as a basis to again calculate magnetic field inside wire and magnetic
field of toroid.” (John)
Statement of fact: The declarative knowledge that describes the facts.
“We have a moving charge as the source of magnetic field. Magnetic dipoles come from moving
charges.” (John)
Visual model: About illustrations and visual perceptions.
“A magnetic field line… is very closely related to magnetic field is used as visualization of magnetic
field.” (Nigel)
Reasoning: Modes of presentation that gives reasons or explanations or interpretations to

justify the connections between concepts.
323
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 318-332)
“The shape of magnetic fields lines is interpreted so that the magnetic field for itself must originate
from magnetic dipole.” (David)
Teachers applied different forms in order to represent and connect the concept elements of Biot-
Savart law and Ampère’s law while they were describing the introduction and application to these topics.
For this reason, here the representation forms are presented in terms of four domains that introduced
before (Oser & Baeriswyl, 2001). These forms were used with different frequencies. The frequencies of
using representation forms in four domains are presented in Table 2.
Table 2. The different domains and frequencies of using representation forms in each domain (the
numbers of cases is in the parentheses).
Introduction of Applications of Introduction of Application of

Category Biot-Savart law Biot-Savart law Ampère’s law Ampère’s law
(N = 20) (N= 11) (N= 20) (N= 17)
Experiment (3) - (1) (2)

Analogy (1) (3) (1) (4)
Des- math model* (6) - (4) (4)
Exp- math model* (3) (7) (1) (6)
Statement of fact (3) - (4) (1)
Visual model - (1) (3) -
Reasoning (4) - (6) -
*Des: descriptive; Exp: explanatory
The analysis of representation forms in the first domain indicated that these forms were homog-
enously distributed (Table 2). The most applied form for introducing Biot-Savart law was descriptive
mathematical model (30%); but visual model was not used in this domain.
The representation forms in second domain were not homogenously distributed (Table 2) but
they were rather accumulated by explanatory mathematical model (63%). Experiment, descriptive
mathematical model, statement of fact, and reasoning were not applied in this domain.
The representation forms that teachers used to introduce Ampère’s law (third domain) were
somehow uniformly distributed (Table 2). The leading form in this domain was reasoning (30%) but
experiment, analogy, and explanatory math models were rarely used in this domain.
The overall view of last domain in Table 2 shows that representation forms were not uniformly
distributed. The most crucial form was explanatory mathematical model (35%). Visual model and rea-
soning are not employed in this domain.
Organization of Subject Matter Knowledge
The results of this section reveal how teachers organize their SMK. They applied different approaches
in order to arrange their SMK. As illustrated in the previous section, teachers’ representation forms were
recognized and analyzed in respect to four domains. The results of this section were also presented and
evaluated using those four domains.
Teachers’ concept maps revealed the structural and relational features of their SMK. Teachers’ con-
cept maps differed in terms of connectedness of knowledge. The number of loops and cycles somewhat
indicate the level of connectedness of knowledge. Because when concepts tie together, they construct
interwoven structure. By assuming A, B, and C as three concepts, the notation of a loop or cycle would be
written as ABCA, which means these three concepts are bound together (Koponen & Pehkonen,
2010). The loop starts from A and after its connection to B and C it again returns to A. Thus, concepts
of A, B, and C produce a connected and meaningful structure Loops could be larger and include more
324
(P. 318-332)
concepts but the minimum number of concepts to make a loop is three. Therefore, teachers’ concept
maps were classified in respect to the connectedness of their knowledge organizations:
Strongly connected: There are many loops and cycles in teachers’ concept maps and no
dead-ended concepts.
Moderately connected: In contrast to the strongly connected organization, there are fewer
loops in teachers’ concept maps. Moreover, there are few dead-ended concepts.
Loosely connected: There are limited numbers of loops in teachers’ concept maps. Besides,
there are many dead-ended concepts.
First, David’s knowledge organization is illustrated; next, the knowledge organization of John
and Nigel is introduced, and finally, the knowledge organization of Chris is presented. The
number of concepts refers to the relating figures. In analyzing the concept maps directions
are not considered; instead the focus is on existence of the links between concepts. In other
words, concepts maps in this study represent undirected graphs.
Knowledge organization of David: Figure 1 shows how David organized his SMK concerning
two studied topics. In the first step, he described Biot-Savart law (first and second domains).
In the next step, he expressed Ampère´s law (third and fourth domains).
Figure 1: Concept map of David (numbers show the chronological order of the concepts). Dashed
concepts were added by teacher.
An overall view of David’s concept maps reveals that concepts C8, C10, C13, C15, and C17 in Figure
1 are dead-ended, which are not connected to other parts of the structure. However, his concept map
has clear loops in his arrangement, which indicate the interconnectedness and integration between the
concepts. In order to deepen the evaluation of David’s knowledge organization, the structure of each
domain is sketched individually in Table 3.
Table 3. Structural patterns of each domain in the concept map of David with an emphasis on
loops and dead-ended concepts. Numbers refer to concept map of John in Figure 1.
Domains Dead-ended concepts Loops and cycles
First domain - (1541)
Second domain 13, 17 (11162 1 11)
Third domain - (2 136 72)
(21 6718 1921), (20 61420),

Last domain 8, 10, 15
(6911 206)
325
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 318-332)
As Table 3 shows, the structure of first domain includes one loop but no dead-ended concepts, so
its structure is strongly connected. The organization of second domain includes one loop, but there are
two dead-ended concepts that decrease the integration and coherency of the structure, consequently it
is moderately connected. On one hand, third domain includes one loop; on the other hand it excludes
dead-ended concepts, so its structure is strongly connected. Last domain includes three loop and it
contains three dead-ended concepts, so its structure is moderately connected. Roughly speaking,
David’s overall knowledge organization is moderately connected. He utilized different but not mutual
concepts to arrange his knowledge.
Knowledge organization of John and Nigel: The knowledge organizations of John and Nigel are
somehow similar, because they followed the same steps to organize their SMK (Figures 2-3). They intro-
duced and explained the introduction and applications of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law, respectively.
Although John and Nigel organized their SMK in a similar way, they selected different concepts so they
made different loops and interconnections in their knowledge arrangements. Concepts of magnetic
field (2), Amperian loop (6), and symmetry (20) were emphasized in David’s map.
Figure 2: Concept map of John (numbers show the chronological order of concepts). Dashed con-
cepts are added by teacher.
The concept map of John reveals that the concepts C4/6, C14, C15, C16, C17, C18, C21, and C22
in Figure 2 are dead-ended, which are not connected to other parts of the structure. However, his con-
cept map has clear loops and cycles, which are strongly connected. In order to extent the analysis, the
knowledge structure of John is drawn on the basis of four domains (Figure 2).
Table 4. Structural patterns of each domain in the concept map of John with an emphasis on loops
and dead-ended concepts. Numbers refer to concept map of John in Figure 2.
Domains Dead-ended concepts Loops and cycles
First domain - -
Second domain 21, 22 (18101), (17101), (1731),

(1831), (13101), (37103),
(38103), (110731), (110831),
(17891), (173101), (1108971),
(11089731)
Third domain - 1113201411
Last domain 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 -
326
(P. 318-332)
As Table 4 shows, the structure of the first domain includes no loops and is has one dead-ended
concepts, so its structure is moderately connected. Although, the organization of second domain in-
cludes two dead-ended concepts, its structure contains many strongly connected loops, and therefore
its structure is interpreted as strongly connected. The structure of the third domain has one loop and
no dead-ended concepts; hence its structure is strongly connected. There are no loops or cycles within
the last domain and nearly all concepts are dead-ended, thus its structure is with no doubt loosely
connected. In conclusion, John’s overall knowledge organization is more or less moderately connected.
As Table 4 shows, most of the loops and cycles in his knowledge organization contained the common
concepts of magnetic field (3), magnetic field of long wire (8), magnetic field of current loop (7), and
superposition principle (10).
Figure 3. Concept map of Nigel (numbers show the chronological order of the concepts). Dashed
Nigel’s concept map reveals that the concepts C9, C11, C12, C16, and C17 in Figure 3 are disjointed.
These concepts are not connected to other parts of the structure (Figure 3). In order to deepen the
analysis of knowledge organization of Nigel, Table 5 is given.
Table 5. Structural patterns of each domain in the concept map of Nigel with an emphasis on loops
and dead-ended concepts. Numbers refer to concept map of John in Figure 3.
Domain Dead-ended concepts Loops and cycles
First domain - 1231, 1341, 12341
Second domain 17 12131, 15131, 17131, 126131,

127131, 125131, 126131,
125151, 121561, 11361
Third domain 12 -
Last domain 9, 11, 16 82158, 5810145
As Table 5 shows, the structure of the first domain includes three loops and no dead-ended
concepts, so its structure is strongly connected. The organization of second domain consists of many
loops, even though the structure contains one dead-ended concept, its organization is interpreted
as strongly connected. The structure of third domain is loosely connected because it has no loop and
327
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 318-332)
it contains one dead-ended concept. Finally, the last domain includes one loop and there are some
dead-ended concepts, thus its structure is moderately connected.
According to Table 5, Nigel mainly utilized the concepts of magnetic field (2), superposition posi-
tion (13), magnetic field of long wire (5), and charge (3) to create loops and cycles in his knowledge
organization. In conclusion, Nigel’s overall knowledge organization is approximately moderately
connected.
Knowledge organization of Chris: In contrast to other teachers, Chris started to organize his
knowledge with the subject of electrostatics rather than magnetostatics (Figure 4). He introduced
and explained the application of Biot-Savart and Ampère’s law, respectively.
Figure 4: Concept map of Chris (numbers show the chronological order of the concepts). Dashed
Unlike other teachers who started their knowledge organization with the concept of Biot-Savart
law, Chris utilized the concept of electric current (1 in Figure 4) as a starting point. First, he completed
the description of the subject of electrostatics. He continued to introduce Biot-Savart law and then
explained the examples and applications of that law. In the same way, he presented Ampère’s law.
Meanwhile, he enlightened the interconnections between other concepts. It appears that the concept
map of Chris includes many cycles and excludes disjointed concepts. There are only two disjointed
concepts (19 and 23) in his concept map (Figure 4). Again, the structure of each domain is shown
individually in Table 6.
Table 6. Structural patterns of each domain in the concept map of Chris with an emphasis on loops
and dead-ended concepts. Numbers refer to concept map of Chris in Figure 4.
Domains Dead-ended Concept Loops and cycles
First domain - 38213, 1214b2, 17814b1,

123814b2, 12378121,
123814b1, 123781
Second domain - 17131, 127812, 810118,
891611108, 8181378
Third domain 23 812148
Last domain 19 12221412
328
(P. 318-332)
As Table 6 shows, first domain of the knowledge organization of Chris includes many loops and no
dead-ended concepts, so its knowledge structure is undeniably strongly connected. In a similar way, the
organization of a second domain is also strongly connected. The structure of third domain is moderately
connected because it includes one loop and one dead-ended concept. Lastly, the organization of last
domain is much similar to the third domain.
Consequently, the overall knowledge organization of Chris in term of its structure is moderately
connected. He emphasized the concepts of charge (2), coulomb’s law (3), magnetic field of long wire
(7), magnetic field (12), current-length element (14b), and superposition principle (21) in his knowledge
arrangement.
Relation of Representation Forms to Knowledge Organization
The result of this section show how representation forms, which is an important part of PCK, is
related to knowledge organization as a part of teachers’ SMK. The differences between different teachers
in their use of representation forms and in their organization of their SMK are summarized in Table 7.
Table 7. Relation of representation forms to teachers’ knowledge organization for each domain
(numbers represent the frequency of using forms).
Domains Representation forms Knowledge organization
1. Introduction of Descriptive math model David, Nigel, Chris: strongly connected

Biot-Savart law 30 % John: moderately connected
2. Application of Explanatory math model Chris, John, Nigel: strongly connected
Biot-Savart law 63 % David: moderately connected
3. Introduction of Reasoning John, David: strongly connected
Ampère’s law 30 % Chris: moderately connected
Nigel: loosely connected
4. Application of Explanatory math model David, Nigel, Chris: moderately connected
Biot-Savart law 35 % John: loosely connected
SC: Strongly Connected, MC: Moderately Connected, LC: Loosely Connected
Table 7 is quite revealing in several ways such as representation forms and knowledge organization
of interviewed teachers as a whole. According to Table 7, teachers can construct well organized SMK
by employing mathematical models (explanatory and descriptive) for expressing the introduction and
application of Biot-Savart law.
As third and last domains of Table 7 indicate, using representation form of reasoning does not
lead to well-organized SMK. Moreover, the knowledge arrangement of teacher for either introduction
or applications of Ampère’s law were not as well-connected as the case of Biot-Savart law.
In summary, the overall SMK of teachers regarding both introduction and application of Ampère’s
were not as well structured as the case of Biot-Savart law. In contrast to the context of Biot-Savart law
where mathematical models were the dominant representation forms, reasoning is considered as a
governing representation form in the context of Ampère’s law.
Discussion
This research put an effort to visualize the SMK of teachers with an emphasis on their knowl-
edge organization. So far only few researchers have been studied the SMK of teachers, concerning
magnetostatics with the focus on two sub-topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law. On the other
hand, scholars have been focused on understanding physics concepts rather than investigating the
organization of knowledge (Abell, 2007). In this study, we have investigated and compared the SMK of
four physics university teachers from the viewpoint of 1) representation forms as the main component
of their PCK for formulating the SMK (Shulman, 1986; 1987); 2) the relational and structural differences
329
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 318-332)
in teachers’ knowledge organizations that belongs to teachers’ substantive structure of their SMK that
also influences teachers’ PCK (Shulman, 1986); and 3) the relation of representation forms to knowledge
organization of teachers’ SMK. The relational connections between the notions of SMK and PCK as
well as their components were illustrated within the theoretical framework of this study.
The results of the analysis indicate that teachers used seven forms to connect and represent their
SMK. These forms were emerged from the content analysis of teaching interviews, and then validated
by doing parallel analysis where the results were triangulated (Kvale, 1996; Miles & Huberman, 1996).
The identified representation forms that emerged from the analysis include: experiments, models
(including descriptive- and explanatory mathematical model, visual model, and analogies), reason-
ing, and statement of fact. Nevertheless, the choice of representation forms including models and
experiments were motivated by other studies (Koponen, 2007; Koponen & Pehkonen, 2010; Majidi &
Mäntylä, 2011; Mäntylä, 2011).
The results concerning the frequencies of using representation forms indicate that teachers mostly
used descriptive and explanatory mathematical model for describing Biot-Savart law (Table 2, Table
7). Since teachers SMK of Biot-Savart law featured a broad coverage of concepts and well-organized
structure, it can be suggested that using mathematical model somewhat leads to an integrated and
well-connected SMK for the physics university teachers. Also, findings of this research indicate that
concepts of magnetic field, magnetic fields of long wire and current loop, symmetry, Amperian loop,
superposition principle, current length element, Coulomb’s law, and charge are the most dominant
elements to describe and explain the studied topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law in the con-
text of magnetostatics.
As seen in Table 2 and Table 7, teachers applied reasoning and mathematical models for describ-
ing Ampère’s law. The reason might be because Ampère’s law is deduced from theory (Knight, 2008;
Walker et al. 2008). Results showed, instead of mathematical models, reasoning played a prominent role
in representing teachers’ SMK of introducing the topic of Ampère’s law. In the domain of applications
of Ampère’s law, teachers’ concept maps were moderately connected where there were some dead-
ended concepts which disconnect teachers’ knowledge organization into some untied parts. In brief,
one might expect that using more mathematical models might have been better worked here.
This study visualized the knowledge organization of teachers’ SMK, which was somewhat an
unmapped field of study specifically for the case of physics (see Abell, 2007). The results revealed the
similarities and differences in teachers’ knowledge organization. Here concept maps were utilized as a
tool to contrast and evaluate the differences between teachers’ knowledge organizations. Here, loops
and cycles indicate the connectedness of teachers’ knowledge. Similarly, cyclical paths between concepts
were studied where the structural analysis of the concept maps of physics teacher students were based on
the operationalisation of important structural features (Koponen & Pehkonen, 2010). According to what
Shulman (1986) stated, teachers should be able to organize their content elements, properly. However,
the results of this study showed that in some cases the knowledge organization of teachers were not
well-connected, while in some other cases the structure of their SMK was highly connected.
The results, when taken together, show that there are many similarities in the university teachers’
way to organize their SMK, but there are also clear differences. Nevertheless, the study shows that
such differences can be detected and provides some new tools to represent these differences.
Furthermore, studying the representation forms of teachers clarifies one of the most important
elements of their PCK (Shulman, 1986; 1987). Consequently, this study identifies and describes experi-
enced teachers’ SMK and makes explicit the representational components of experienced teachers.
It appears that more attention should be devoted to investigate the SMK of teachers on the ba-
sis of describing and explaining Ampère’s law, with the focus on teachers’ knowledge organizations
and representation forms. On the other hand, it seems more studies should be conducted in order
to investigate the possible impacts of mathematical models, as a dominant representation forms, on
teachers’ PCK. Moreover, the impact of mathematical models on teachers’ SMK and their knowledge
organization must be further investigated. There might be some obstacles that teachers experience
while they describe and organize their SMK of Ampère’s law. As a result, further studies are needed
to be done in order to suggest appropriate approaches to overcome such obstacles.
330
(P. 318-332)
Conclusions
In this study, teachers’ representation forms are analysed, which reveal howthey apply to formulate
and connect their SMK as the main category of their PCK. Their representation forms consist of seven
different forms including: descriptive- explanatory mathematical models, visual models, analogies, state-
ment of fact, and experiment. Descriptive- explanatory mathematical models were the most applied
representation forms for the case of Biot-Savart law. However, explanatory mathematical model and
reasoning found an essential role in teachers’ representation forms for the case of Ampère’s law.
Also, the SMK of university physics teachers is examined with the focus on their knowledge orga-
nization concerning two topics of Biot-Savart law and Ampère’s law that influence PCK. In contrast to
knowledge organization of teachers for the topic of Biot-Savart law which was strongly connected, their
knowledge was moderately connected concerning Ampère’s law.
The results concerning the relation of representation forms and knowledge organization, for the
topic of Biot-Savart law, revealed that employing mathematical models generates strongly connected
knowledge. In conclusion, the possibility to recognize the differences in teachers’ knowledge organiza-
tion and representation forms appears to develop more effective teaching and learning solutions and
curriculum plans.
Acknowledgments
I would like to strongly acknowledge the valuable assistance of Dr. Terhi Mäntylä in the design of
this research. This work was supported by Academy of Finland, grant SA 1136582.
References
Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on Science Teacher Knowledge. In Abell, S. K., Lederman, N. G. (Ed.), Research on Science
Education, Ed., Chapter 36, (pp. 1103-1149). New York: Routledge.
Brachman, R. J., & Levesque, H. J. (2004). Knowledge representation and reasoning, San Francisco: Elsevier.
Duit, R., Niedderer, H., & Schecker, H. (2007). Teaching Physics. In Abell, S. K., Lederman, N. G. (Ed.), Research on Science
Education, Ed., Chapter 21, (pp. 599-629). New York: Routledge.
Ferry, B. (1996). Probing Personal Knowledge: The use of a computer-based tool to help preservice teachers map
subject matter knowledge. Research in Science Education, 26, 233-245.
Feynman, R. P., Leighton, R. B., & Sands, M. L. (1964). The Feynman lectures on physics. California: Addison-Wesley.
Geddis, A. N. (1993). Transforming subject-matter knowledge: The role of pedagogical content knowledge in learn-
ing to reflect on teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 673-683.
Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Visualization: A metacognitive skill in science and science education. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visual-
ization in Science Education (pp. 9-27). Dordrecht: Springer.
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews. An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publica-
tions.
Knight, R. D. (2008). Physics for Scientists and Engineers: A Strategic Approach with Modern Physics. San Francisco:
Pearson Addison-Wesley.
Koponen, I. T. (2007). Models and modelling in physics education: a critical reanalysis of philosophical underpinnings
and suggestions for revisions. Science & Education, 16, 751-773.
Koponen, I. T., & Mäntylä, T. (2006). Generative Role of Experiments in Physics and in Teaching Physics: A Suggestion
for Epistemological Reconstruction. Science & Education, 15, 31-54.
Koponen, I. T., & Pehkonen, M. (2010). Coherent Knowledge Structures of Physics Represented as Concept Networks
in Teacher Education. Science & Education, 19, 259-282.
Majidi, S., & Mäntylä, T. (2011). The knowledge organization in physics textbooks: A case study of magnetostatics.
Journal of Baltic Science Education, 10 (4), 285-299.
Mäntylä, T. (2012). Didactical reconstruction of processes in knowledge construction: Pre-service physics teachers
learning the law of electromagnetic induction. Research in Science Education, 42 (4), 791-812.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1996). Qualitative data analysis. An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications.
Moser, C., & Kalton, G. (1977). Survey Methods in Social Investigation. London: Heinemann.
Oser, F. K., & Baeriswyl, F. J. (2001). Choreographies of teaching: bridging instruction to learning. In V. Richardson
(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th Ed., pp. 1031–1065). Washington: American Educational Research
Association.
331
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 318-332)
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57,
1-22.
Van Heuvelen, A. (1991). Learning to think like a physicist: A view of research-based instructional strategies. American
Journal of Physics, 59 (10), 898-907.
Walker, J., Halliday, D., & Resnick, R. (2008). Fundamentals of Physics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Received: June 05, 2012 Accepted: September 15, 2012
Sharareh Majidi MSc., PhD Student, Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, P. O.
Box 64, Gustaf Hällströmin katu 2, FI-00014 University of Helsinki,
Finland.
E-mail: sharareh.majidi@helsinki.fi
Website: https://tuhat.halvi.helsinki.fi/portal/en/persons/sharareh-
majidi(0640edb3-53bc-48ce-b0fb-3fb6aadd14b1).html
332
A COMPARISON OF
CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’
AND GRADE 11
STUDENTS’ ALTERNATIVE
CONCEPTIONS OF ‘RATE OF
REACTION’
Ali Kolomuç,
Muammer Çalık
Introduction Abstract. The purpose of this study is to

compare alternative conceptions of chem-
Constructivist learning theory suggests that students’ learning istry teachers and Grade 11 students on
is active rather than that they be passive recipients of learning (e.g. the subject of ‘rate of reaction’. This study
Fensham, 1992). It also claims that students (or people), construct was conducted with a total of seventy
their own knowledge in their minds as a result of interaction with chemistry teachers and seventy two grade
the environment (e.g. Brooks & Brooks, 1999). From this perspec- 11 students. To collect data, a ‘rate of reac-
tive, if the students construct chemical facts or concepts or phe- tion’ concept test comprising 9 lead and 10
nomena in their mind by help of their pre-existing knowledge, sub-questions (in total 19 items) were em-
then grasping scientific understanding has a great importance ployed. Also, a structured interview session
for further learning. However, related literature indicates that the was conducted with 10 chemistry teachers
students’ pre-existing knowledge or pre-conceptions are different and 13 grade 11 students. Since the
from scientifically accepted ones (e.g. Nakhleh, 1992; Nicoll, 2001). chemistry teachers and grade 11 students
These studies have reported that they may result from exposure possessed similar alternative concep-
to several factors, i.e. teacher, TV, friends, social environment etc. tions, it can be deduced that the chemistry
(Hand & Treagust, 1991; Nakhleh, 1992). In fact, these factors seem teachers seem to have been principal
to be outcomes of social aspect of constructivism. source at transmitting their alternative
The topic ‘rate of reaction’ involves in several concepts like conceptions to the grade 11 students. It is
rate of reaction, collision theory, reaction mechanism, factors af- recommended that, a common database
fecting rate of reaction, the effect of the catalyst on the reaction or website should be created to afford the
rate, enthalpy and activation energy. For this reason, all these current chemistry teachers to easily access
concepts are necessary for the understanding of the topic ‘rate of to improved teaching materials and/or
reaction’ and generally included in the teaching/learning of the instruments in chemistry education.
topic. Since these concepts are interrelated with other subsequent Key words: alternative conception,
chemistry concepts, ‘rate of reaction’ is a cornerstone for chemistry chemistry teacher, grade 11 students, rate
arguments. Phrased differently, if alternative conceptions emerge of reaction.
in the subject of ‘rate of reaction’, it will affect other interrelated
chemistry subjects. Because of the importance of ‘rate of reaction’,
a few studies have been conducted within three perspectives: (i) Ali Kolomuç
determining students’ alternative conceptions (Cakmakci, 2005; Artvin Çoruh University, Turkey
Nakipoğlu, Benlikaya & Kalın, 2002; Taştan, Yalçınkaya & Boz, 2010), Muammer Çalık
and (ii) conducting conceptual change approaches to overcome Karadeniz Technical University, Turkey
their alternative conceptions (Akkaya, 2003; Balcı, 2006; Bozkoyun,
333
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 333-346)
2004; Çalik, Kolomuç & Karagölge, 2010; Tezcan & Yılmaz, 2003; Van Driel, 2002), and (iii) comparing stu-
dents’ ideas of the concept ‘rate’ at different contexts (Bektaşlı & Çakmakcı, 2011). Within these studies,
Taştan et al. (2010) determined pre-service chemistry teachers’ ideas about reaction mechanism, while
Cakmakci (2005) carried out a cross-sectional study of the understanding of chemical kinetics among
Turkish secondary and undergraduate students. Meanwhile, to accomplish conceptual change, differ-
ent methods have been used: laboratory activities (Akkaya, 2003), conceptual change texts (Bozkoyun,
2004), group discussions, hands-on activities (Van Driel, 2002), package programs for computer-aided
instruction (Tezcan & Yılmaz 2003) and conceptual change pedagogy including animations and work-
sheets (Çalik et al., 2010). Moreover, Bektaşlı and Çakmakcı (2011) investigated consistency of grade 11
students’ ideas of the concept ‘rate’, i.e. velocity of an object in physics and rate of reaction in chemistry.
However, none of the foregoing studies has concentrated on comparing the chemistry teachers’ alter-
native conceptions of ‘rate of reaction’ with grade 11 students’ conceptions to directly reject or accept
whether the teachers are the principal source for the alternative conceptions. Indeed, although Cakmakci
(2005), Nakipoğlu et al. (2002) and Taştan et al. (2010) reported that student teachers as well as students
at different stages have difficulty conceptualizing the ‘rate of reaction’ concepts or hold some alternative
conceptions, there is an important omission about a comparison between chemistry teachers and their
students. Some studies such as Çalık and Ayas (2005), Ebenezer and Gaskell (1995), Ginns and Watters
(1995), Goodwin (1995), Taber and Tan (2011) and Valanides (2000) hypothesized that students’ alterna-
tive conceptions may be derived from their teachers. Therein, such a speculative hypothesis needs to be
investigated in order to provide new evidence regarding sources of alternative conceptions.
Context of the Study
Secondary education, is of four years duration, and free in public schools in an aim to facilitate
students to capture the following features: (1) general culture knowledge (2) scientific literacy (3) partici-
pating in the economic, social and cultural development of the country and (4) preparing the students
for institutions of higher education (Çalik, 2010). At grade 9 students are introduced to general courses
such as chemistry, physics, mathematics, biology, Modern Turkish History and Principles of Atatürk and
English language. Later they are divided into three main disciplines depending on their interests/talents:
(1) social science, (2) science and (3) equal weight (social science and science) (Çalik, 2010). Students who
select the science stream attend a grade 11 chemistry course which includes: Chemical Reactions and
Energy, Rate of Reaction and Chemical Equilibrium, Solubility Equilibrium, Electrochemistry and Radio-
activity. The students in the social science and equal weight (social science and science) programmes
do not take any chemistry topic and/or course.
For the undergraduate chemistry education program, up until 1998 the department of chemistry
education ran a four-year undergraduate program with the aim of preparing chemistry teachers for
secondary schools. After 1998, project ‘Reconstruction of Faculty of Education’ changed it into a five-year
undergraduate program. Thereby, chemistry subject matter courses are taught by the members of Sci-
ence and Literature Faculty while pedagogical content courses (i.e. Special Teaching Method (Chemistry
Teaching) I-II, Measurement and Assessment, Instructional Technology and Material Development) are
taught by the Faculty of Education. By 2010, chemistry students wishing to become chemistry teach-
ers after graduating from Department of Chemistry must have attended a three semester pedagogical
course (called graduate program without thesis). However, the Higher Education Council decided to
alter these teacher education programmes and gave an opportunity for the students from Department
of Chemistry to take teaching certification by completing short-term weekend pedagogical courses
similar to earlier courses such as ‘Reconstruction of Faculty of Education’. Due to decreasing number of
undergraduate students at Department of Chemistry, the Higher Education Council, with demands of
these departments, attempted to make them appeal by creating alternative employment opportuni-
ties, i.e. chemistry teacher. In brief, a two-headed chemistry education has appeared again. Also, the
Department of Chemistry Education has been continuing to run a five-year undergraduate program.
Chemistry student teachers must attend General Chemistry II, Analytical Chemistry II, Physical Chemistry
II and Biochemistry related to ‘rate of reaction’ concepts.
334
ISSN 1648–3898 A COMPARISON OF CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ AND GRADE 11 STUDENTS’ ALTERNATIVE
(P. 333-346)
The Purpose
The purpose of this study is to compare the chemistry teachers’ alternative conceptions of ‘rate of
reaction’ with those of grade 11 students.
Because the current study intended to determine the nature and degree of existing cases i.e.
alternative conceptions of the chemistry teachers and grade 11 students, its general charecteristic fits
with descriptive research design (i.e. Kurnaz & Calik, 2009). The descriptive research design provides an
answer to such questions as “What is happening?”, “How is happening? “and “Why is happening?”
Sample
Since the first author participated in several in-service education programmes on “Introduction
of Newly Released Chemistry Curriculum”, he handed ‘Rate of Reaction’ Concept Test out about 300
chemistry teachers. However, only 70 chemistry teachers filled in the instrument and handed it in the
first author. To achieve sample variation for the grade 11 students, each teacher was asked to find at
least three students at different levels (average, above average and under average) from his/her own
class. Unfortunately, a few teachers followed this procedure and then delivered the instruments to the
authors. In brief, the research covers seventy chemistry teachers (whose experiences ranged from 10 to 25
years) and seventy-two grade 11 students (aged 16–18 years) in Turkey. The researchers chose grade 11
students as the study sample, because the topic ‘rate of reaction’ is formally introduced at this grade.
The sample was selected using convenience sampling method because the first author tried to
directly reach all participants at in-service education programmes. Turkey consists of seven geographi-
cal regions with totally 81 cities. In context of the present study, the chemistry teachers were from 28
different cities at seven geographical regions while the students came from 9 different cities in three
different geographical regions (Black Sea, Marmara and Eastern Anatolia Regions). The students had
very similar socio-economic and educational backgrounds. That is, all students possessed average socio-
economic condition. All teachers under investigation were master chemistry teachers that deployed to
train the chemistry teachers in their own cities. In other words, after in-service professional development
on innovative technologies or curricula, it was expected that these chemistry teachers would actively
play a significiant role to help teachers at the same city understand innovations and developments (e.g.
Çalik & Ayas, 2008).
Data Collection
Çalik et al. (2010) adapted A ‘Rate of Reaction’ Concept Test (9 lead and 10 sub-questions - in
total 19 items - see the following link at http://ktu.academia.edu/MUAMMERCALIK/Teaching/39398/
Rate_of_Reaction_Concept_Test) from Cakmakci’s (2005) study, and translated it into Turkish. Further,
they pilot-tested it with 32 grade 11 students, apart from the main study, to measure the reliability of the
Rate of Reaction Concept Test. Also, a group of experts, three chemistry educators and three chemistry
teachers, confirmed construct and face validity of the instrument. Cronbach’s alpha reliability of the
instrument translated version was found 0.94. This means that the instrument’s reliability was higher
than the acceptable reliability value suggested by Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson and Tatham (2006).
To triangulate data, the first author called the teachers and grade 11 students for conducting a phone
or ‘face to face’ interview protocols. Even though most of the teachers were reluctant to take part in such
an interview session, the authors convinced some of them to participate in interview session and to find
three students at different levels (average, above average and under average) from their own classes.
To sum up, 10 chemistry teachers (aged 32-55 years—6 males and 6 females) and 13 grade 11 students
(aged 16-17 years—7 females and 6 males) participated in structured interview sessions (either ‘face to
335
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 333-346)
face’ or phone interview). Each session took about 10-15 minutes. The interviewee chemistry teachers
depicted that nine out of them did not attend any course of alternative conceptions in chemistry and of
conceptual change in in-service education. Three of them noted that they were aware of these alterna-
tive conceptions and conceptual change strategies because of some common undergraduate courses
in pre-service education. The interview questions are presented in Appendix A.
Data Analysis
In analyzing survey data, the authors followed the criteria suggested by Abraham, Williamson and
Westbrook (1994) to label grade 11 student and the chemistry teacher responses: Sound Understand-
ing (SU) for responses that included all components of the validated answers, Partial Understanding
(PU) for responses that included at least one of the components of a validated response, but not all the
components, Partial Understanding with Specific Alternative Conception (PUSAC) for responses that
showed understanding of the concept, but also made statements which demonstrated a misunderstand-
ing, Specific Alternative Conceptions (SAC) for responses that included illogical or incorrect information
only, and No Understanding (NU) for responses that consisted of the repeating question; irrelevant or
unclear response; or no response. Before classifying the grade 11 student and the chemistry teacher
responses, the authors met with six chemistry teachers to debate the criteria, and all agreed on the ap-
propriate answers for the questions. Then, the researchers scored draft data responses separately and
negotiated the categorization. There was a high agreement (about 90%) for most items in categorizing
the data. All disagreements were resolved by negotiation. Furthermore, they re-examined and recalcu-
lated principal items and their sub-questions in regard to an alternative conception thematic schema
created by Çalik et al. (2010). A sample categorizing procedure for Item 2 is presented as follows:
Table 1. A sample categorizing procedure for Item 1.

Sound Understanding An increase in the temperature increases the kinetic energy of particles, which causes more
collisions between particles per unit of time. Thereby, collision probability amongst the hot
water pipe, oxygen and water increases to pass threshold (activation) energy. For this reason,
the outside of the hot water pipe was more rusty than the outside of the cold water pipe. To
sum up, increasing temperature usually increases the rate of a reaction whether the reaction
is exothermic or endothermic.
Partial Understanding Because temperature increases rate of reaction, the outside of the hot water pipe was more
rusty than the outside of the cold water pipe
Partial Understanding with Spe- Temperature affects rate of reaction because heat acts as a catalyst and causes to rust
cific Alternative Conception outside of the hot water pipe more
Specific Alternative Conceptions The fact that hot water melts the water pipe made of iron more boosts its rusty environment
In analyzing interview protocols, firstly each session was classified in regard to similarities and dif-
ferences (Merriam, 1988; Yin, 1994). Later, themes and codes emerged were presented in tables using
simple frequency technique.
Results of Research
As seen in Table 2, percentages of the chemistry teachers’ responses labeled under SU were be-
tween 31% (Item 3d) and 100% (Item 7b) while those for grade 11 students were between 1% (Item
7a) and 77% (Item 7b). Percentages of the students’ and chemistry teachers’ responses to each item
are presented in Table 2.
336
(P. 333-346)
Table 2. Percentages of the chemistry teachers’ and the grade 11 students’ responses to each
item.
PUSAC
Expected Sound Understanding response
Item No. SU PU SAC NU
(Adapted from Cakmakci (2005)
1a S 8 36 11 6 39 Reaction rate can be defined as the change in concentration of a particular

T 71 - 14 15 - reactant or product per unit of time. The rate of a reaction is commonly em-
ployed in three different forms: the average rate of reaction, the instantaneous
rate of reaction, and the initial rate of reaction.
1b S 8 36 33 16 7 The higher the concentration of molecules, the greater the number of colli-
T 73 - 20 7 - sions in unit time and hence the faster the reaction. As reac-
tants are consumed, their concentrations drop, collisions occur less
frequently, and reaction rate decreases. However, this is not the
case for zero order reactions in which reaction rate is independent
of the concentrations of reactants, and accordingly reaction rate is constant
during the reaction.
2 S 8 38 22 13 19 An increase in the temperature increases the kinetic energy of particles, which
T 60 19 10 11 - causes more collisions between particles per unit of time. Thereby, collision
probability amongst the hot water pipe, oxygen and water increases to pass
threshold (activation) energy. For this reason, the outside of the hot water pipe
was more rusty than the outside of the cold water pipe. To sum up, increasing
temperature usually increases the rate of a reaction whether the reaction is
exothermic or endothermic.
3a S 13 38 29 10 10 The reaction rate is the slope of the concentration versus time graph. As the
T 71 - 10 19 - slope of the graph is constant, it can be concluded that this reaction is a zero
order reaction with respect to NO.
3b S 17 26 29 11 17 The reaction rate is not affected by the changes in the concentration of NO.
T 55 26 7 - 12 Because, the reaction is a zero order reaction and its rate only depends on
the rate constant.
3c S 16 26 13 5 40 Increasing the temperature of a reaction mixture increases the kinetic
T 59 20 21 - - energy of particles, which causes more collisions between particles per
unit of time. Increasing temperature usually increases the rate of a
reaction whether the reaction is exothermic or endothermic. Reaction
rates increase with temperature because a higher temperature means
a greater proportion of reactant molecules have enough energy to over-
come the activation energy barrier per unit of time. A small
increase in temperature may produce a large increase in the rate of a
reaction, since there is a large increase in the proportion of molecules which
possess the activation energy. For example, a small input of energy is
usually required to initiate some reactions such as fuels and explosives
which are exceedingly exothermic reactions.
3d S 17 38 26 - 19 The surface of a solid catalyst is important to the reaction rate. The reaction
T 31 26 27 16 - occurs on the surface of the solid catalyst, therefore rate increases with
increasing the amount of solid catalyst.
4a S - 5 63 8 24
T 55 13 13 - 19
4b S 4 31 36 10 19 The reaction rate (Rxn) would decrease, because the higher the concentra-
T 57 - 24 - 19 tion of molecules, the greater the number of collisions in unit time and hence
the faster the reaction. As reactants are consumed, their concentrations drop,
collisions occur less frequently, and the reaction rate decreases.
337
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 333-346)
PUSAC
Expected Sound Understanding response
Item No. SU PU SAC NU
(Adapted from Cakmakci (2005)
5a S 10 27 19 5 39 This reaction probably proceeds via formation of J, followed by consumption

T 57 - 20 - 23 of J and formation of the final product, Q:
X→ J (fast)
J→ Q (slow)
From this proposed mechanism, the second step, the formation of Q
step, is the rate-determining step.
5b 16 28 12 12 32 The second step is the slowest, because according to the graph consumption
50 - 20 - 30 of [X] in unit time and formation of [J] in unit time is faster. J is an intermediate
product. The rate of production of J is greater than the rate of its consumption.
The slowest reaction determines the reaction rate; in that case the second
step is the rate-determining step.
6 16 7 28 12 37 Rates of reactions cannot be compared by using information provided in the
34 - 30 13 23 probe. In other words, some variables, i.e. activation energy, concentration,
rate constant (k) should be given.
7a 1 8 64 10 17 The powdered MgO has a greater surface area. Increasing surface area
97 - 3 - - increases interaction between reactant molecules. Thus, powdered MgO
reacts faster with HCl.
7b 77 - 8 7 8 I would tell these students that one of the factors affecting reaction rate is to
100 - - - - grind solid substances. Therefore powdered MgO reacts with hydrochloric
acid faster.
8a 77 - 5 3 15 Activation energy is the energy barrier that reactant particles must have
86 7 - - 7 to overcome for a reaction. Further, the activation energy is the minimum
energy amount to form an activated complex in a reaction.
8b 35 10 5 18 32 The first reaction occurs faster than the second reaction does, because the
86 5 - - 9 energy barrier for the first one is lower. Therefore, the reaction with the lower
activation energy occurs faster.
9a 47 13 7 5 28 1. A catalyst increases the rate of a reaction by providing an alternative
66 17 11 - 6 path having lower activation energy. A catalyst lowers activation energy
of a reaction, as a result the reaction proceeds faster.
2. A catalyst decreases the activation energy of a reaction with an
alternative path possessing lower activation energy. A catalyst
increases the rate of a reaction by lowering activation energy of the
reaction.
3. A catalyst does not affect or does not change the yield of products. The
catalyst will not affect the yield, because it is not used up during the
reaction.
4. A catalyst changes the mechanisms of a reaction. The catalyst reacts
with one or more of the reactants. Thus, the catalysed reaction occurs
in more than one step
9b 10 36 31 13 10
87 - - 4 9
9c 5 28 20 4 43 A catalyst decreases the activation energy of the reaction by providing an

86 - - - 14 alternative path with lower activation energy.
T: Chemistry Teacher, S: Grade 11 Student
Since our main aim was to draw out the chemistry teachers’ and the grade 11 students’ alternative con-
ceptions of ‘rate of reaction’, their alternative conceptions and their percentages are displayed in Table 3.
338
(P. 333-346)
Table 3. Percentages of the chemistry teachers’ and the grade 11 students’ alternative conceptions
of ‘Rate of Reaction’.
Response Chemistry Grade 11

Categories of alternative conceptions
criteria teachers students
PUSAC 18 28
Inability to define the ‘rate of reaction’
SAC 12 15
Misunderstanding/misapplying of the relationship between tem- PUSAC 10 29

perature and the ‘rate of reaction’
SAC 11 10
Misunderstanding/misapplying of the relationship between con- PUSAC 17 33
centration and the ‘rate of reaction’ SAC 9 6
Lack of understanding of reaction mechanism or which step, if the PUSAC 21 21
reaction consists of more than one step, determines the ‘rate of
reaction’ SAC 21 25
Lack of understanding of how enthalpy influences the ‘rate of PUSAC 30 64
reaction’ SAC 13 10
Lack of understanding of the effect of ‘surface area’ on the ‘rate PUSAC 2 7

of reaction’
SAC - 5
PUSAC 11 31
Misinterpretation of effect of a catalyst on the ‘rate of reaction’
SAC - 13
* Since the test included sub-questions, students’ alternative conceptions were recalculated and also decimals were
rounded.
As seen in Table 3, percentages of the responses categorized under PUSAC were between 2% and
30% for the chemistry teachers, whilst those for grade 11 students were between 7% and 64%. Likewise,
percentages for the responses classified at SAC ranged from zero to 21% whereas those for grade 11
students fell between 5% and 25%.
Since some of the items required the chemistry teachers and grade 11 students to draw graphics
of rate of reaction versus time, some samples are illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Some sample graphics for rate of reaction versus time (T: Chemistry Teacher, S: Grade 11
Student; ‘Reaksiyon hızı’ means ‘Rate of reaction’; ‘Zaman’ means ‘time’).
339
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 333-346)
Some sample diagrams for uncatalysed and catalysed drawn by the sample under investigation
are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Energy diagram for a reaction in the absence and presence of a catalyst (T: Chemistry
Teacher, S: Grade 11 student; ‘Enerji’ means ‘Energy’ and ‘Reaksiyon koordinatı’ means
‘Reaction Coordinate’).
As seen in Table 4, frequencies of possible sources concerning alternative conceptions varied in

regard to given category. However, majority of the interviewees’ responses to first question fell into
three principal codes, i.e. textbook, teacher and student. Few chemistry teachers and grade 11 students
mentioned about several other codes, e.g. topic order in curriculum (T1), peer (S1) and society (T1).
Table 4. Frequencies of the chemistry teachers’and the grade 11 students’views of possible sources
concerning relevant alternative conceptions.
Possible
Categories of alternative conceptions Teacher Code f Student Code f
sources
Textbook T1, T6, T10, T12 4 S1, S5, S7, S10-S13 7

Inability to define the ‘rate of reaction’ Teacher T2, T6, T10, T11 4 S9 1
Student T3-T5, T7, T8 5 S2-S4, S6, S8 5
Textbook T6, T10 2 S5, S7, S8, S13 4
Misunderstanding/misapplying of the relation-
ship between temperature and the ‘rate of Teacher T1-T3, T9, T10, T11 6 S11-S12 2
reaction’
Student T4, T5, T7, T8, T12 5 S1-S4, S6, S9, S10 7
Textbook T1, T6, T10-T12 5 S9, S11-S13 4
Misunderstanding/misapplying of the relation- Teacher T2, T3, T5, T6, T10 5 S1, S5, S7, S10 4
ship between concentration and the ‘rate of Student T4, T7-T9 4 S2-S4, S6, S8 5
reaction’
Topic order in
T1 1 -- --
curriculum
340
(P. 333-346)
Textbook T1, T5, T6, T10-T12 6 S8, S10 2

Lack of understanding of reaction mecha-
nism or which step, if the reaction consists Teacher T1-T3, T9, T10 5 S9, S11-13 4
of more than one step, determines the ‘rate
of reaction’ Student T4, T7, T8 3 S1-S7 7
Textbook T6, T10-T12 4 -- --

Lack of understanding of how enthalpy influ-
Teacher T2, T3, T6, T10, T11 5 -- --
ences the ‘rate of reaction’
Student T1, T4, T7-T9 5 S1-S13 13
Textbook T6, T10 2 S4-S7, S9, S10 6
Lack of understanding of the effect of ‘sur- T1-T3, T6, T9,

Teacher 8 S8, S11-S13 4
face area’ on the ‘rate of reaction’ T10-T12
Student T4, T5, T7, T8 4 S1-S3 3
Textbook T6, T10-T12 4 S13 1

Teacher T2, T6, T9-T11 5 S7, S10 2
Misinterpretation of effect of a catalyst on the
Student T3-T5, T7, T8 5 S2-S6, S8, S9, S11, S12 9
‘rate of reaction’
Peer -- -- S1 1
Society T1 1 -- --
T: Chemistry Teacher, S: Grade 11 Student
As can be seen in Table 5, nearly half of the chemistry teachers depicted they had encountered
with the alternative conceptions during their teaching carriers. Further, they employed several dealing
procedure for alternative conceptions, i.e. making the issue concrete and/or linking with daily life (T1,
T4, T7-T10), repeating/revising the topic (T3, T5, T9, T11-T12). Only two grade 11 students (S1 and S11)
addressed that they had encountered with these alternative conceptions and solved them by help of
textbook and teacher. Also, most of the grade 11 students thought they had not encountered with the
alternative conceptions while their teachers were teaching ‘rate of reaction’ topic.
Table 5. Frequencies of the chemistry teachers’ and grade 11 students’ responses to second inter-
view question.
Categories Dealing procedure Teacher/Student Code f
Making the issue concrete and/or linking with daily life T1, T4, T7-T10 6
Implementing experiments in laboratory T1 1
I have encountered Consulting to experienced teachers T2 1

with them Repeating/revising the topic T3, T5, T9, T11-T12 5
Animation/Simulation T4 1
Working out the issues by help of textbook and teacher S1, S11 2
I have not encountered with them T6, S2-S10, S12, S13 12
As seen in Table 6, most of the chemistry teachers emphasized various elements of learning en-
vironment, i.e. overloaded curriculum (T6), lack of concrete example (T5), inability to use laboratory
(T6) while majority of the grade 11 students (S2, S3, S5, S6, S8-S10) stressed teacher’s principal role in
knowledge construction.
341
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 333-346)
Table 6. Frequencies of the chemistry teachers’and grade 11 students’ responses to third interview
question.
Categories Reasons Teacher Code f Student Code f
A lack of concrete example T5 1 - -

Overloaded curriculum T6 1 - -
Strongly agree
Inability to use laboratory T6 1 - -
Teacher’s principal role in knowledge construction T10 1 S2, S3, S5, S6, S8-S10 7
Limited teaching hours per week T1 1 - -
More detailed topics in curriculum T1, T12 1 - -
Conventional teaching methods T1, T11, T12 1 - -
A lack of student pre-existing knowledge T1, T2, T9 3 - -
Agree
Concentration problem in teaching / learning
T3, T7 2 - -
chemistry
A lack of concrete example T4 1 - -
Impact of chemistry teacher on student learning - - S4 1
Student’s principal role in knowledge construction - - S1, S11-S13 4
Disagree
No reason T8 1 - -
Discussion
As seen in Tables 2-3, it was drawn out that although the chemistry teachers offered some types of
alternative conceptions less frequently than grade 11 students, they retained high levels of alternative
conceptions commonly found among the grade 11 students. This is in a harmony with Taber and Tan
(2011)’s findings. Especially, alternative conceptions of ‘Inability to define the ‘rate of reaction’ category
may result from inability to distinguish the ‘rate of reaction’ concept from the ‘time of reaction’ one
(e.g. Cakmakci, 2005; Çalik et al., 2010; Nakipoğlu et al., 2002). Further, this may stem from the concept
‘rate’ at different context. That is, students generally learn the concept ‘rate’ as a velocity of an object in
physics and rate of reaction in chemistry. This means that students may have confused the meanings
of the concept ‘rate’ with each other. The alternative conception ‘Misunderstanding/misapplying of the
relationship between temperature and the ‘rate of reaction’ was also very common for both the chem-
istry teachers and grade 11 students. In this case, the chemistry teachers and the grade 11 students
were unable to explain the relationship between temperature and rate of reaction nor to relate them
to daily life events. This situation may stem from a lack of grade 11 students’ and chemistry teachers’
contextual learning. Otherwise they may have stored the concepts in a fragmented structure in their
mind (e.g. Çalık & Ayas, 2005; Haidar & Abraham, 1991). In other words, the chemistry teachers and the
grade 11 students have difficulties explaining the reasons behind the phenomena even though they
know what the chemical phenomena are (e.g. Karslı & Çalik, 2012; Özmen, Demircioğlu & Demircioğlu,
2009; Tezcan & Yılmaz, 2003).
The category ‘misunderstanding/misapplying of the relationship between concentration and the
‘rate of reaction’ may stem from the function of the catalyst. As seen in Table 3, an increase in the amount
of the catalyst seems to have confused both the chemistry teachers’ and grade 11 students’ views. For
the category ‘Lack of understanding of how enthalpy influences the ‘rate of reaction’ the chemistry
teachers and the grade 11 students generally evaluated how temperature changed the rate of reaction.
Such deficiency may stem from inability to comprehend transformation of the reactants into products.
That is, the chemistry teachers and the grade 11 students may have disregarded transformation of the
reactants into products. Furthermore, they may have confused this item with previous ones. For the
category ‘Lack of understanding of the effect of ‘surface area’ on the ‘rate of reaction’, the majority of
342
(P. 333-346)
the chemistry teachers and grade 11 students grasped this notion scientifically. This may stem from
the concept of surface area which is also covered while presenting solubility concept (e.g. Çalık, Ayas
& Ebenezer, 2009).
Drawings of the chemistry teachers’ and the grade 11 students are very similar to each other in
terms of rate of reaction versus time (see Figure 1). This may come from their difficulties with algorith-
mic, conceptual and graphical understandings (i.e. Coştu, 2010). Similarly, for the category ‘Lack of
understanding of the reaction mechanism, or which step if the reaction consists of more than one step,
determines the ‘rate of reaction’ a minority of the chemistry teachers and grade 11 students responded
sufficiently to this question. This may come from their inability to interpret graphical knowledge (i.e.
Coştu, 2010; Çalik et al., 2010). As seen in Figures 1-2, graphs of rate of reaction versus time and energy
diagrams seem to pose problems for the grade 11 students and the chemistry teachers. For example,
some grade 11 students and chemistry teachers drew that time versus rate of reaction gradually reached
at a constant vertical line. They might think that rate of reaction increases on the course of time even if
Item 4a depicts that concentration of Chemical A decreases with time. Also, most of the grade 11 students
and the chemistry teachers at Figure 1 drew an inverse half-U shaped developmental curve meaning
rate of reaction rapidly increases and then slowly increases or decreases. Overall of these issues shows
that they may have misinterpreted the given graph. In other words, they have some pitfalls integrating
their graph knowledge into conceptual understanding.
For the category ‘Misinterpretation of effect of a catalyst on the ‘rate of reaction’, even though the
chemistry teachers and the grade 11 students addressed what the catalyst was through the reaction
equation, they showed some deficiencies in discriminating the catalyzed reactions from the uncatalyzed
ones (see Figure 2). Further, their alternative conceptions of the effect of the catalyst on the ‘rate of reac-
tion’ may stem from confusion about the function of the catalyst. That is, both the chemistry teachers
and the grade 11 students may have thought that the presence of the catalyst in a reaction may form
various products which differ from the uncatalysted. Further, they may have lacked of comprehending
the scientific idea “the catalyst does not commence and end any chemical reaction”.
The interviewees’ responses to the first question (see Table 4) reinforce the idea ‘alternative concep-
tions are outputs of complex learning variables’ (e.g. Çalik, Ayas & Coll, 2009; Hand & Treagust, 1991;
Nakhleh, 1992). However, the interactive learning environment amongst textbook, teacher and student
seems to be principal sources of the alternative conceptions. In other words, such results somewhat
support our speculative hypothesis.
The chemistry teachers’ responses to the second question (see Table 5), except for animation/
simulation, also prove that they have lacked of proper pre-service or in-service education background
concerning conceptual change strategies. Phrased differently they have had very limited awareness of
conceptual change theories/strategies/models. Moreover, most of the grade 11 students thought they
had not encountered with the alternative conceptions while their teachers were teaching ‘rate of reac-
tion’ topic. Indeed, this reflects cultural norms for young Turkish people. That is, they may have refrained
from commenting their teachers’ instruction styles.
As seen in Table 6, a significant number of the grade 11 students stressed teacher’s principal role
in knowledge construction. This means that the grade 11 students viewed the teachers as a principal
source of alternative conceptions. Other words, they see the teachers as principal source in knowledge
construction. For example, S7 stated what the teachers taught was always accepted as a correct knowl-
edge and trusted the teacher knowledge. Further, this reveals a pitfall of scientific habits of mind (i.e.
mistrust of arguments from authority) (e.g. Çalik & Coll, 2012). The grade 11 students’ responses highly
prove our speculative hypothesis. Furthermore, the chemistry teachers’ responses indicate different
elements of the learning environment. As a matter of fact, they tended to blame other issues for the
the possible sources of alternative conceptions. In fact, each teacher may commonly see himself/herself
as a perfect qualified teacher, i.e. subject matter knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge. Such an
idea may have led them to answer the questions subjectively. In brief, they may have focused on other
deficiencies rather than their roles in knowledge construction.
Since one of the tenets of constructivism is that learning is an interaction between preexisting and
new knowledge (e.g. Çalik, Ayas & Coll, 2010; Taylor & Coll, 1997), prior knowledge plays a significant
343
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 333-346)
role in further learning (see, e.g. Pines & West 1986). In other words, teacher training programs and
teaching experiences for some teachers under investigation have not helped the chemistry teachers
overcome their own alternative conceptions. Furthermore, this proves that their alternative conceptions
are robust, and highly resistant to change through traditional teaching approaches (e.g. Çalık & Ayas,
2005; Nakhleh, 1992). In fact, even though chemistry educators emphasize contemporary trends in
chemistry education in their courses, scientists are generally far away from these notions and commonly
use didactic learning in their courses of subject matter knowledge (e.g. Calik, 2011). As a consequence,
scientists who have been employed in teacher training programs should be informed about the current
trends in chemistry education, so that much more collaborative work between scientists and science
educators may emerge. Otherwise, the fact that the grade 11 students and the chemistry teachers have
similar alternative conceptions shows that some of the chemistry teachers have been unconscious of
the students’ difficulties or alternative conceptions (e.g. Kind, 2009). If they had been aware of them,
they would have possessed a chance to overcome their own alternative conceptions. On the contrary,
if the teachers have similar alternative conceptions as their students, it is likely that they may not take
notice of their students’ alternative conceptions at all.
Conclusion and Implications for Practice
To sum up, since the chemistry teachers and grade 11 students possessed similar alternative
conceptions, it can be deduced that the chemistry teachers seem to have been a principal source for
transmitting their certain insidious alternative conceptions to the grade 11 students (e.g. Çalık & Ayas,
2005; Taber & Tan, 2011). The intuitive appeal of certain alternative conceptions offers that the chem-
istry teachers can readily be reproduced down ‘generations’ of learners (i.e. Taber & Tan, 2011). But this
does not mean that there is only one possible source engendering alternative conceptions because
the learning process is very complicated and involved for several other reasons, i.e. teaching method,
textbook, procedural learning and so forth (e.g. Çalik et al., 2009; Hand & Treagust, 1991; Nakhleh,
1992). Further, the chemistry teachers’ reactions to the alternative conceptions point out an inability
to notice conceptual change strategies.
Since Reconstruction of Faculty of Education in Turkey, there has been a great effort on getting the
student teachers to become aware of the students’ alternative conceptions and to practice how to treat
them. However, such a result shows that much more are needed to result in better conceptual under-
standing. Moreover, a common database or website should be created to afford the current chemistry
teachers to easily access to improved teaching materials and/or instruments in chemistry education.
Such a database or website will give an opportunity for the chemistry teachers to implement these
materials and/or instruments in their classes.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Susan Buchanan from New Zealand for her kind help in language
polishing.
References
Abraham, M. R., Williamson, V. M., & Westbrook, S. L. (1994). A cross-age study of the understanding of five chemistry
concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31 (2), 147-165.
Akkaya, C. G. (2003). Comparison of teaching the reaction rate course using the traditional and the experimental train-
ing methods on students success in lycee 2 classes. Unpublished Master Thesis, Marmara University, Istanbul,
Turkey.
Balcı, C. (2006). Conceptual change text oriented instruction to facilitate conceptual change in rate of reaction concepts.
Unpublished Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Bektaşlı, O., & Çakmakcı, G. (2011). Consistency of students’ ideas about the concept of rate across different
contexts. Education and Science, 36 (162), 273-287.
Bozkoyun, Y. (2004). Facilitating conceptual change in learning rate of reaction concepts. Unpublished Master Thesis,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
344
(P. 333-346)
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria,
Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Cakmakci, G. (2005). A cross-sectional study of the understanding of chemical kinetics among Turkish secondary and
undergraduate students. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Calik, M. (2011). How did creating constructivist learning environment influence graduate students’ views? Energy,
Education, Science and Technology Part B Social and Educational Studies, 3 (1), 1-13.
Coştu, B. (2010). Algorithmic, conceptual and graphical chemistry problems: A revisited study. Asian Journal of
Chemistry, 22 (8), 6013-6025.
Çalık, M., & Ayas, A. (2005). A comparison of level of understanding of grade 8 students and science student teachers
related to selected chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42 (6), 638-667.
Çalik, M., & Ayas, A. (2008). A critical review of the development of the Turkish science curriculum. In R. K. Coll and
N. Taylor (Eds.), Science education in context: An international examination of the influence of context on science
curriculum development and implementation (pp. 161–174), AW Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers
B.V.
Çalik, M., & Coll, R. K. (2012). Investigating socioscientific issues via scientific habits of mind: Development and vali-
dation of the scientific habits of mind survey. International Journal of Science Education, 34 (12), 1909-1930.
Çalik, M. (2010). A critical evaluation of the University Entrance Examination (ÖSS) in Turkey: A two-edged sword. In
B. Vlaardingerbroek and N. Taylor (Eds.), Getting Into Varsity – Comparability, Convergence and Congruence (pp.
187-196), New York, USA: Cambria Press Inc.
Çalik, M., Ayas, A., & Coll, R. K. (2009). Investigating the effectiveness of an analogy activity in improving students’
conceptual change for solution chemistry concepts. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education,
7 (4), 651-676.
Çalik, M., Ayas, A., & Coll, R. K. (2010). Investigating the effectiveness of usage of different methods embedded with
four-step constructivist teaching strategy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19 (1), 32-48.
Çalık, M., Ayas, A., & Ebenezer, J. V. (2009). Analogical reasoning for understanding solution rates: Students’ conceptual
change and chemical explanations. Research in Science & Technological Education, 27 (3), 283-308.
Çalik, M., Kolomuç, A., & Karagölge, Z. (2010). The effect of conceptual change pedagogy on students’conceptions
of rate of reaction. Journal Science Education and Technology, 19 (5), 422-433.
Ebenezer, J. V., & Gaskell, P. J. (1995). Relational conceptual change in solution chemistry. Science Education, 79,
1-17.
Fensham, P. J., (1992). Science and technology. In PW Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 789-
829), NewYork: Macmillan.
Ginns, I. S., & Watters, J. J. (1995). An analysis of scientific understandings of pre-service elementary teacher educa-
tion students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 205-222.
Goodwin, A. (1995). Is salt melting when it dissolves in water? Journal of Chemical Education, 79, 393-396.
Haidar, H. A., & Abraham, R. M. (1991). A comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concept based on the
particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28 (10), 919-938.
Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., &Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis, 6th Ed., New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall International.
Hand, B., & Treagust, D. F. (1991). Student achievement and science curriculum development using a constructive
framework. School Science and Mathematics, 91 (4), 172-176.
Karslı, F., & Çalik, M. (2012). Can freshman science student teachers’ alternative conceptions of ‘electrochemical cells’
be fully diminished? Asian Journal of Chemistry, 24 (2), 485-491.
Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies
in Science Education, 45 (2), 169-204.
Kurnaz, M. A., & Calik, M. (2009). A thematic review of ‘energy’ teaching studies: Focuses, needs, methods, general
knowledge claims and implications. Energy, Education, Science and Technology Part B Social and Educational
Studies, 1 (1), 1-26.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry? Journal of Chemical Education, 69 (3), 191-196.
Nakipoglu, C., Benlikaya, R., & Kalın, S. (2002). Usage of V-diagrams in eliciting pre-service chemistry teachers’ misun-
derstanding of ‘chemical kinetic’. Retrieved March 30, 2009 from http://www.fedu.metu.edu.tr/ufbmek-5-
/b_kitabi/PDF/Kimya/Bildiri/t179d.pdf
Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates’ bonding misconception. International Journal of Science Education, 23
(7), 707-730.
Özmen, H., Demircioğlu H., & Demircioğlu, G. (2009). The effects of conceptual change texts accompanied with
animations on overcoming 11th grade students’ alternative conceptions of chemical bonding. Computers &
Education, 52 (3), 681-695.
Pines, A. L., & West, L. H. T. (1986). Conceptual understanding and science learning: An interpretation of research
within a source of knowledge framework. Science Education, 70, 583-604.
345
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 333-346)
Taber, K. S., & Tan, K. C. D. (2011). The ınsidious nature of ‘hard‐core’ alternative conceptions: Implications for the
constructivist research programme of patterns in high school students’ and pre‐service teachers’ thinking
about ionisation energy. International Journal of Science Education, 33 (2), 259-297.
Taştan, Ö., Yalçınkaya, E., & Boz, Y. (2010). Pre-service chemistry teachers’ ideas about reaction mechanism. Journal
of Turkish Science Education (TUSED), 7 (1), 47-60.
Taylor, N., & Coll, R. (1997). The use of analogy in the teaching of solubility to pre-service primary teachers. Australian
Science Teachers’ Journal, 43, 58-64.
Tezcan, H., & Yılmaz, U. (2003). The effect of conceptual computer animations and traditional instruction in teaching
chemistry on student achievement. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 14 (2), 18-32.
Valanides, N. (2000). Primary student teachers’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter and its transforma-
tions during dissolving. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1, 249-262.
Van Driel, J. H. (2002). Students’ corpuscular conceptions in the context of chemical equilibrium and chemical kinet-
ics. Chemical Education Research Practice in Europe, 3 (2), 201-213.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Appendix A. The interview questions for chemistry teachers and grade 11 students
1. Please address what possible sources of the following alternative conceptions are.
Categories of alternative conceptions Possible sources
Misunderstanding/misapplying of the relation-

ship between concentration and the ‘rate of
reaction’
Lack of understanding of reaction mechanism
or which step, if the reaction consists of more
than one step, determines the ‘rate of reaction’
Lack of understanding of how enthalpy influ-
ences the ‘rate of reaction’
Lack of understanding of the effect of ‘surface

area’ on the ‘rate of reaction’
Misinterpretation of effect of a catalyst on the
‘rate of reaction’
2. Have you encountered such alternative conceptions during your teaching carrier (for teach-
ers) or while your chemistry teachers were teaching ‘Rate of Reaction’ topic (for grade 11
students)? If ok, how did you deal with them?
3. At which level do you agree the idea ‘the teachers transmit their alternative conceptions to
the students?’ Please defend your response.
Received: June 10, 2012 Accepted: October 10, 2012
Ali Kolomuç PhD, Assistant Professor of Chemistry Education, Artvin Çoruh

University, Faculty of Education, Department of Primary Teacher
Education, Artvin, Turkey.
E-mail: alikolomucscr@hotmail.com
Muammer Çalık PhD, Associate Professor of Chemistry Education, Karadeniz Technical
University, Fatih Faculty of Education, Department of Primary Teacher
Education, Trabzon, Turkey.
E-mail: muammer38@hotmail.com
Website: http://ktu.academia.edu/MUAMMERCALIK
346
THE RELATIONSHIPS
BETWEEN UNIVERSITY
STUDENTS’ ORGANIC
CHEMISTRY ANXIETY,
CHEMISTRY ATTITUDES,
AND SELF-EFFICACY: A
STRUCTURAL EQUATION
MODEL
Namudar İzzet Kurbanoğlu,

Ahmet Akin
Introduction Abstract. The purpose of this study is

to examine the relationships between
Organic chemistry is simply defined as the study of the physi- organic chemistry anxiety, chemistry at-
cal and chemical properties of organic compounds that take place titudes, and self-efficacy. Participants were
in the chemistry and it affects every aspect of our daily life from 368 sophomore undergraduate students.
life-saving drugs to exciting new materials in technology. It is a In this study, the Organic Chemistry Anxi-
dynamic field in chemical science. Therefore, organic chemistry ety Scale (O-CAS), the Chemistry Attitudes
is an important course taught in the field of agriculture, biology, Scale, and the Self-efficacy Scale were
health sciences, medical school, veterinary medicine, pharmacy used. Pearson correlation coefficient and
and medical chemistry in many universities. From the viewpoint structural equation modeling was utilized
of many university students’ studying in these areas, organic to determine the relationships between
chemistry course seems to be difficult and also academic achieve- organic chemistry anxiety, chemistry
ment of these students is probably low (Mahajan & Singh, 2005; attitudes, and self-efficacy. In correla-
Turner & Lindsay, 2003). According to Seymour and Hewitt (1997), tion analysis, organic chemistry anxiety
the difficulties of the course and the negative image arising from was found negatively (r=-0.52) related
these difficulties create an important problem for those who are to chemistry attitudes and self-efficacy
interested in increasing the number of science students. In order (r=-0.36). According to path analysis
to achieve this goal, educators should be aware of factors that af- results, chemistry attitudes were predicted
fect students’ organic chemistry achievements (Turner & Lindsay, positively (β=0.44) and organic chemistry
2003). Students’ achievements in organic chemistry depends on anxiety predicted negatively (β= -0.16)
general chemistry achievements, high school chemistry course by self-efficacy. Also chemistry attitudes
performance, test scores and cognitive variables such as spatial predicted organic chemistry anxiety in a
visual performance (Krylova, 1997; Pribyl & Bodner, 1987; Rixse & negative way (β=-0.44). The results were
Pickering, 1985; Sevenair, Carmichael, O’Connor, & Hunter, 1987). discussed in the light of literature.
In addition, students’ achievement in organic chemistry Key words: chemistry attitudes, organic
was influenced from students’ attitudes toward chemistry and chemistry anxiety, path analysis and self-
non-cognitive variables such as anxiety levels and self-efficacy efficacy.
beliefs (Turner & Lindsay, 2003). Eddy (2000), chemistry anxiety
has generally defined as fear of chemicals and chemistry courses Namudar İzzet Kurbanoğlu,
(McCarthy & Widanski, 2009). More specifically, Turner and Lindsay Ahmet Akin
(2003) have defined chemistry anxiety as students’ feelings such Sakarya University, Turkey
as timidity towards chemistry, nervousness and physical mani-
festations of these emotions. Researches in chemistry education
347
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 347-356)
has shown that organic chemistry anxiety negatively affects students’ success and learning processes,
and was also a frequent problem that educators face (Turner & Lindsay, 2003) and that there was a
negative relationship between the students’ organic chemistry anxiety and achievement (Berdonosov,
Kurzmenko, & Kharisov, 1999; Black & Deci, 2000; Chiarelott & Czerniak, 1987; Eddy, 2000). Regarding
this issue, Mahajan and Singh (2001) stated that the presence of anxiety affects students’ understand-
ing related to the subject. Thus, anxiety was the factor that reduces the performance in the organic
chemistry course (Mahajan & Singh, 2005).
Organic chemistry anxiety is closely related to a broad spectrum of cognitive, psychological, and
behavioral problems. This anxiety cause consequences like feeling impotence in organic chemistry
operations, avoiding organic chemistry class, feeling of shame and guilt, terminating organic chemistry
learning even though having the capacity, developing negative attitudes towards activities and opera-
tions related to organic chemistry, evading branches and occupations that necessitate quantitative
knowledge and skills, and dislike for organic chemistry class when the individual becomes a teacher
(Turner & Lindsay, 2003). Therefore it is a reality that organic chemistry anxiety is also closely related to
attitudes. Eagly and Chaiken (1993) expressed attitude as “psychological tendency which measures the
degree of favor or disfavor a particular case”. Attitudes towards science were defined by Koballa and
Crawley (1985) as liking-disliking science or negative-positive feelings towards science.
There is a great agreement among science theorists and practitioners on the importance of students’
attitudes toward chemistry lessons in school (Osborne, Simon, & Collins, 2003). Steiner and Sullivan
(1984) pointed out that there was a relationship between students’ perceptions and attitudes towards
chemistry course and their course achievements. Accordingly, they expressed that more successful
students defined their approaches towards the lesson like that “relevant”, “coordinate”, “have confidence”,
“enthusiastic”, and it was also common among these students that chemistry was useful and opens new
prospects. Enhancement of students’ positive attitudes to chemistry is very important considering two
main reasons. First of all, research on the link between attitudes and academic achievements discovered
that these variables were closely related to each other (Bennett, Rollnick, Green, & White, 2001; Cheung,
2009; Freedman, 1997; Salta & Tzougraki, 2004; Weinburgh, 1995). The second reason that makes attitudes
important is that attitudes predict behaviors (Glasman & Albarracín 2006). Another constrain related to
organic chemistry anxiety is self-efficacy. Self-efficacy expectations are a person’s beliefs concerning
his or her ability to successfully perform a given task or behavior, are a major determinant of whether
a person will attempt a given task, how much effort will be expended, and how much persistence will
be displayed in pursuing the task in the face of obstacles. Perceived self-efficacy influences, is in turn
influenced by, thought patterns, affective arousal, and choice behavior as well as task performance
(Bandura, 1977, 1986). Researchers typically assume that students’ belief in their ability to succeed
in chemistry tasks, courses, or activities, or their sense of self-efficacy, has a powerful impact on their
choices of science-related activities, and at the same time on the effort they expend on those activities,
the perseverance they show when encountering difficulties, and the ultimate success they experience
(Bandura, 1997; Britner & Pajares, 2001; Zeldin & Pajares, 2000). Students who have a strong belief that
they can succeed in chemistry-related tasks and activities will be more likely to select such tasks and
activities, and work hard to complete them successfully (Britner & Pajares, 2006). As a matter of choice,
students who do not believe that they can succeed in chemistry-related activities will avoid them if they
can and will put forth minimal effort if they cannot. When confronted with the typical challenges that
science involves, they will be more likely to give up and to experience the stresses and anxieties that
help ensure the erosion of their efforts (Britner & Pajares, 2006). Thus, self-efficacy is proposed to be an
important factor influencing attitudes toward chemistry and organic chemistry anxiety.
The Present Study
Self-efficacy can be regarded as a significant factor which plays an important role on chemistry at-
titudes and organic chemistry anxiety. Also, organic chemistry anxiety may be influenced by chemistry
attitudes. Although studies typically have focused on science and chemistry anxiety (Eddy, 2000; Lauken-
348
ISSN 1648–3898 THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ ORGANIC CHEMISTRY ANXIETY,
(P. 347-356)
mann et al., 2003), organic chemistry anxiety has received relatively little attention in the science education
literature. For this reason, the present research aims to analyze the relationships between organic chemistry
anxiety, chemistry attitudes, and self-efficacy. Based on the relationships of self-efficacy with attitudes
and anxiety (Bandura, 1977; Hackett & Betz, 1981; McCarthy & Widanski, 2009; Turner & Lindsay, 2003),
we hypothesized that organic chemistry anxiety would be associated negatively and chemistry attitudes
positively with self-efficacy. Also, since studies (Betz, 1978; Bourquin, 1999; Meece, Wigfield & Eccles, 1990;
Pajares & Miller, 1994; Ramirez & Dockweiler, 1987; Richardson & Suinn, 1972; Wigfield & Meece, 1988) display
a negative relationship between anxiety and attitudes we assumed that organic chemistry anxiety would
be related negatively to chemistry attitudes. This model is represented schematically in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Hypothesized model of the relationship among self-efficacy, chemistry attitudes, and
organic chemistry anxiety.
Participants
Participants were 368 sophomore undergraduate students (230 female and 138 male) who were
enrolled in Organic Chemistry I from four different state universities Chemistry Department, in Turkey.
Their ages ranged from 19 to 22 years and the mean age of the participants was 20.5 years. The course
under investigation was Organic Chemistry, the first course in a two-course sequence designed for
chemistry majors in Turkey. The Chemistry Department at the University of Turkey ordinarily offers two
sections of Organic Chemistry I and II per year, with one section offered in the fall and another in the
summer. Consequently, all applications were performed at the end of the fall.
Measures
The Organic Chemistry Anxiety Scale (O-CAS; Akın & Kurbanoglu, 2011). This scale is a 24-item self-
report measurement and consists of three factors; (1) writing bond type of carbon compounds, formu-
las and naming carbon compounds (seven items, e. g., write the type of carbon atom bond in organic
molecules), (2) writing the types of carbon compounds and their isomers (ten items, e. g., write the
type of isomer of an organic molecule), and (3) writing the reaction mechanism of carbon compounds
(seven items, e. g., write the steps of the reaction mechanism). Each item is rated on a 5-point Likert
scale ranging from 1 (never makes me anxious) to 5 (always makes me anxious). The Cronbach-alpha
reliability values for writing bond type of carbon compounds, formulas and naming carbon compounds
was 0.87, for writing the types of carbon compounds and their isomers was 0.92, for writing the reaction
mechanism of carbon compounds was .90, and for overall scale was 0.95.
349
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 347-356)
The Chemistry Attitudes Scale (Geban, Ertepınar, Yılmaz, Altın, & Şahbaz, 1994). This scale contains
15 items; 5 of them negatively keyed (items 3, 6, 9, 13 and 14). Example, during chemistry lessons, I am
bored (negatively-keyed), I like chemistry course more than the others (positively-keyed). Each item
was rated on a 5-point Likert type scale (from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Higher scores
indicate higher positive attitudes towards chemistry. The internal consistency reliability coefficient of
the scale was 0.83.
Self-efficacy Scale. Self-efficacy was measured by using the Turkish version of the Self-efficacy
subscale of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, &
McKeachie, 1991). Turkish adaptation of this scale had been done by Büyüköztürk, Akgün, Özkahveci, &
Demirel (2004). The Self-efficacy subscale consists of eight items and each item was rated on a 7-point
scale (1= not at all true for me to 7= very true for me). As a result of factor analysis in construct validity, it
was found that factor loadings of items were between 0.52 to 0.65. In the reliability study, the internal
consistency alpha coefficient was calculated 0.86.
Procedure of the Study and Data Analysis
A survey methodology was adopted for this study. Convenience sampling was used in the selection
of participants. Convenience sampling is a nonprobability sampling technique in which the partici-
pants are selected because of their convenient accessibility and proximity to the researcher (Bryman,
2004). For this reason, the results of this study did not make inferences from the population, which
led to a decrease in external validity. Participants voluntarily participated and were free to fill out the
questionnaires without pressure. Completion of the questionnaires was anonymous, and there was a
guarantee of confidentiality. The instruments were administered to the students in groups in the class-
rooms. The measures were counterbalanced in administration. Before the administration of measures,
all participants were told about the purposes of the study. Three hundred and eighty-three students
participated in the study. However, 15 students were excluded from the study, because 7 of them did
not respond to the instruments as required, and 8 were found to produce extreme scores. Therefore, the
data obtained from 368 students were statistically analyzed. To determine the relationships between
organic chemistry anxiety, chemistry attitudes, and self-efficacy the Pearson correlation coefficient and
structural equation modeling (SEM) were used. These analyses were carried out via LISREL 8.54 (Jöreskog
& Sorbom, 1996) and SPSS 11.5.
Results of Research
Descriptive Data and Inter-correlations
Table 1 shows the means, descriptive statistics, inter-correlations, and internal consistency coef-
ficients of the variables used.
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, Alphas, and Inter-correlations of the Variables.
Variables 1 2 3
1. Self-efficacy 1.00
2. Chemistry attitudes 0.44** 1.00
3. Organic chemistry anxiety -0.36** -0.52** 1.00
Mean 36.33 49.30 69.83
Standard deviation 10.47 11.47 16.91
Cronbach’s α 0.80 0.82 0.87
**p<0.01
350
(P. 347-356)
When Table 1 is examined, it is seen that there are significant correlations between self-efficacy,
chemistry attitudes, and organic chemistry anxiety. Organic chemistry anxiety related negatively to
chemistry attitudes (r = - 0 .52) and to self-efficacy (r = - 0 .36). On the other hand chemistry attitudes
were found positively associated with self-efficacy (r = 0 .44).
Structural Equation Modeling
SEM was used for testing the hypothesis model [(a) organic chemistry anxiety would be associated
negatively and chemistry attitudes positively with self-efficacy. (b) Organic chemistry anxiety would be
related negatively to chemistry attitudes]. Through using SEM, all the parameters of models could be
tested simultaneously in one step. The specifications on the model were for direct paths from self-efficacy
to chemistry attitudes and to organic chemistry anxiety. The results of testing whether self-efficacy has
a direct effect on chemistry attitudes and to organic chemistry anxiety and whether chemistry attitudes
have a direct effect on organic chemistry anxiety are presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Path analysis between self-efficacy, chemistry attitudes, and organic chemistry anxiety.
Figure 2 showed that the model is saturated (i.e., there are no unused degrees of freedom). Con-
sequently, the fit of the model is necessarily perfect (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The model accounted for
19% of the chemistry attitudes and 28% of the organic chemistry anxiety variances. The standardized
coefficients in Figure 2 clearly showed that chemistry attitudes were predicted positively (β=0.44) and
organic chemistry anxiety predicted negatively (β= -0.16) by self-efficacy. Also chemistry attitudes
predicted organic chemistry anxiety in a negative way (β=-0.44).
Discussion
In this study the relationships between organic chemistry anxiety, chemistry attitudes, and self-
efficacy were examined using structural equation modeling. Findings have demonstrated that there
are significant relationships between these variables. Moreover, the goodness of fit indexes indicated
that correlations among measures were explained by the model and that its formulation was psycho-
metrically acceptable (Hu & Bentler, 1999).
Firstly, as hypothesized, the model showed that self-efficacy has explained organic chemistry anxiety
in a negative way. This result is in agreement with previous studies (Britner, 2008; Britner & Pajares, 2006;
Eddy, 2000; Kurbanoglu & Akın, 2010; Usher & Pajares, 2006) which indicate that anxiety and self-efficacy
351
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 347-356)
are two closely related constructs and with Bandura’s social cognitive theory (1986) which states that
anxiety has a negative effect on self-efficacy. Social learning theory also suggests that anxiety can be
considered as a result of low self-efficacy and individuals only experience anxiety when they believe
themselves to be incapable of managing potentially detrimental events (Bandura, 1997). This result fur-
ther support Bandura’s (1986, 1997) claims that efficacy beliefs play a central role in regulating anxiety.
In addition, the negative relationship between self-efficacy and organic chemistry anxiety which was
found in the present study supports Hackett’s (1995, p. 248) suggestion that “it is possible, that lowered
anxiety not only enhances self-efficacy directly but also facilitates successful performance attempts in
occupationally related areas.” Furthermore, there is a common view in much of the scientific literature
which claims that feelings of anxiety toward academic tasks work to undermine students’ beliefs in
their academic capability (Usher & Pajares, 2006). Namely, a student who feels anxious about organic
chemistry almost cannot feel capable of doing organic chemistry activities. Thus, self-efficacy could be
a negative predictor of organic chemistry anxiety and higher anxiety in organic chemistry is related to
lower reported levels of self-efficacy.
Secondly, as expected and consistent with previous research findings (Kurbanoglu & Akın, 2010;
Liu, Hsieh, Cho, & Schallert, 2006; Smist & Owen, 1994) path analysis revealed that chemistry attitudes
were predicted positively by self-efficacy. In addition, self-efficacy reduced indirectly organic chemistry
anxiety through chemistry attitudes. In other words, chemistry attitudes served as a mediator in linking
self-efficacy and organic chemistry anxiety. Students’ chemistry attitudes are important factors highly
associated with chemistry success and motivation. Students with positive attitudes towards chemistry
are more likely to sustain their efforts and have the desire to be involved in the learning tasks. Similarly
students’ self-efficacy beliefs play an integral role in their academic motivation, learning, and achieve-
ment (Pajares & Schunk, 2005). Students who believe they can succeed academically tend to show
greater interest in academic work, set higher goals, put forth greater effort, and show more resilience
when they encounter difficulties (Bandura, 1997; Pajares, 1997).
Correspondingly according to Bandura (1986), self-efficacy is one’s belief in his/her capacity to
perform a specific task. Individuals may assess their skills and capabilities prior to performing certain
actions or activities. If individuals have high self-efficacy for carrying out certain activities, they are more
likely to attempt doing those activities and to develop positive attitudes toward them. On the contrary,
if individuals have low self-efficacy for carrying out some activities, they are less likely to attempt doing
those activities and they develop negative attitudes toward them (Bandura, Adams, & Beyer, 1977). When
thought in this context, the correlations found in this research seem understandable.
Thirdly, as anticipated, results demonstrated that organic chemistry anxiety was predicted by chem-
istry attitudes, negatively. This finding is in agreement with the results of earlier investigations (Keeves &
Morgenstern, 1992; Kurbanoglu & Akın, 2010; Kurbanoglu et al., 2009; Meece, Wigfield, & Eccles, 1990).
In general, there is a widespread agreement that the students’ attitudes are related to expectations of
success and will ultimately have some effect on his/her level of anxiety (Child, Duffy, Kirkley, & Hubbard,
1997). Supporting this view, Keeves and Morgenstern (1992) pointed out that anxiety towards the learn-
ing of chemistry had a strong and negative impact on the development of positive attitudes towards
chemistry. In other words, negative attitudes can produce negative results in chemistry and thus creates
organic chemistry anxiety. When it was considered that chemistry anxiety is a state of discomfort oc-
curring in response to situations regarding chemistry tasks which can often create a negative attitude
toward the subject (Eddy, 2000), the relationships between organic chemistry anxiety and chemistry
attitudes are easily understandable. That is negative attitudes towards chemistry are promoted while
positive attitudes are decreased by organic chemistry anxiety.
This study has several implications for future research. Firstly, further researches investigating
the relationships between organic chemistry anxiety, chemistry attitudes, self-efficacy, and other psy-
chological constructs are needed to reinforce the findings of this study. Second, studies can examine
these relationships with structural equation modeling by establishing a mediating or latent variable.
Third, we urge researchers to use qualitative methodology to complement findings from quantitative
perspectives.
This study has also several implications for chemistry educators. First of all, reducing or controlling
352
(P. 347-356)
anxiety in organic chemistry lessons potentially may enhance learning of complex organic chemistry
topics and problem-solving skills. Helping students to control anxieties and fears related to organic
chemistry studies can facilitate the development of positive self-efficacy beliefs, which will in turn, lead
to more positive attitudes toward chemistry. As Pajares (2005) has pointed out, students can get a fairly
good sense of their confidence by the emotional feelings they experience as they contemplate an action.
Negative feelings provide cues that something is amiss, even when one is unaware that such is the case.
Students who approach an organic chemistry activity with apprehension likely lack confidence in their
science skills. Moreover, those negative feelings can themselves trigger additional stress and agitation
that help ensure the inadequate performance feared. Worse yet, anxiety and dread can be paralyzing.
A chemistry teacher is encouraged to help students read their emotional feelings and understand that
these feelings should not be ignored (Britner & Pajares, 2006).
There are some interventions that might be used by any chemistry educator to reduce or optimize
the anxiety of a student. For example, incorporating more cooperative learning strategies may help
foster a more positive attitude toward the course and reduce debilitating anxiety (VanZile-Tamsen &
Boes, 1997). Mealey and Host (1992) suggest that cooperative learning can provide a sense of social
support for students which can decrease feelings of isolation and the belief that everyone understands
this but me. In addition, Feldmann, Martinez-Pons, and Shaham (1995) found that collaborative learn-
ing is related to self-regulated learning. Those students who are more effective self-regulated learners
tend to have less evaluation anxiety in courses (Kleijn, van der Ploeg, & Topman, 1994). Another way
to decrease anxiety is to increase a student’s attention to the task at hand. Since attention has limited
capacity, a mind well focused on the dynamics of a particular activity cannot easily shift that focus to
its fears and apprehensions (Britner & Pajares, 2006).
Another implication for chemistry educators is to create organic chemistry experiences whereby
students can improve their sense of self-efficacy. As suggested by Bandura (1997), students develop
efficacy beliefs based on authentic accomplishments. Thus, if students have low sense of self-efficacy,
educators may spend more instructional time in performing chemistry experiments. In this way, students
will have more evidence about their success and their sense of efficacy will be enhanced accordingly.
Similarly, for students with weak self-efficacy in everyday applications, educators may design instruc-
tion in such a way that develop students’ abilities to cope with the application of chemistry in daily life
issues. For instance, students can be encouraged to involve in chemistry projects. It is also found that
majors having more experience with chemistry tasks were more efficacious than non-major students
(Uzuntiryaki & Capa Aydin, 2009). Moreover, instructional strategies such as inquiry-based instruction in
which students are mentally and physically active in their learning environment can be implemented.
Such instruction would also help students become more self-aware of their improvement (Uzuntiryaki
& Capa Aydin, 2009).
Although the results of the present study have implications for interventions that could decrease
students’ organic chemistry anxiety and increase their self-efficacy, limitations of the study may be
acknowledged. First, participants were university students and replication of this study for targeting
other student populations should be made in order to generate a more solid relationship among con-
structs examined in this study, because generalization of the results is somewhat limited. Second, the
self-report instruments used in this study may not appropriately capture the participants’ perceptions
and feelings. Finally, since the proportions of variance explained were low, it is difficult to make any firm
conclusions about the findings.
Conclusion and Implications
In conclusion, this investigation reports that self-efficacy affects organic chemistry anxiety and
chemistry attitudes, directly. Students’ lows in self-efficacy are more likely to vulnerability to organic
chemistry anxiety and negative chemistry attitudes. So, the current findings may increase our under-
standing of the relationships between self-efficacy, organic chemistry anxiety, and chemistry attitudes.
This study has several implications for future research. Firstly, further research investigating the relation-
ships between organic chemistry anxiety, chemistry attitudes, and self-efficacy, and other psychological
353
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 347-356)
constructs are needed to reinforce the findings of this study. Second, studies can examine these relation-
ships with structural equation modelling by establishing a mediating or latent variable. Third, we urge
researchers to use quantitative methodology to complement findings from qualitative perspectives.
This study has also several implications for chemistry educators. First of all, reducing or controlling
organic chemistry anxiety potentially may enhance learning of complex organic chemistry topics and
problem-solving skills. Helping students to control anxieties and fears related to organic chemistry
can facilitate the development of positive self-efficacy beliefs, which will in turn, lead to more positive
attitudes toward chemistry. As Pajares (2005) has pointed out, students can get a fairly good sense of
their confidence by the emotional feelings they experience as they contemplate an action. Negative
feelings provide cues that something is amiss, even when one is unaware that such is the case. Students
who approach an organic chemistry lesson with apprehension likely lack confidence in their science
skills. Moreover, those negative feelings can themselves trigger additional stress and agitation that help
ensure the inadequate performance feared. Worse yet, anxiety and dread can be paralysing. A chemistry
teacher can help students read their emotional feelings and understand that these feelings should not
be ignored (Britner & Pajares, 2006).
References
Akın, A., & Kurbanoglu, N. İ. (2011, July). Development and validation of a scale to measure Organic Chemistry Anxi-
ety. Poster session presented at the 32th International Conference of the Stress and Anxiety Research Society
(STAR), July, 18-20, Münster, Germany.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., & Beyer, J. (1977). Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 35, 125-139.
Bennett, J., Rollnick, M., Green, G., & White, M. (2001). The development and use of an instrument to assess students’
attitude to the study of chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (8), 833-845.
Berdonosov, S. S., Kurzmenko, N. E., & Kharisov, B. I. (1999). Experience in chemical education in Russia: How to at-
tract the young generation to chemistry under conditions of “chemophobia” Journal of Chemical Education,
76 (8), 1086-1088.
Betz, N. E. (1978). Prevalence, distribution, and correlates of math anxiety in college students. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 25, 441-448.
Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ autonomous motivation
on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory Perspective, Science Education, 84, 740-756.
Britner, S. L. (2008). Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical,
and earth science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45 (8), 955-970.
Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal
of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 271-285.
Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 43 (5), 485-499.
Bryman, A. (2004). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bourquin, S. D. (1999). The relationship among math anxiety, math self-efficacy, gender, and math achievement among
college students at an open admissions commuter institution. Dissertation Abstracts International, Section A:
Humanities and Social Sciences, 60 (3-A): 0679.
Cheung, D. (2009). Students’ attitudes toward chemistry lessons: The interaction effect between grade level and
gender. Research in Science Education, 39, 75-91.
Chiarelott, L., & Czerniak, C. (1987, January). Science anxiety: Implications for science curriculum and teaching. The
clearing house for the contemporary educator in middle and secondary schools, 60 (5), 202-205.
Child, D. A., Duffy, T. M., Kirkley, S., & Hubbard, L. (1997). Issues in adopting a laser disk based science curriculum.
Journal of Science Education and Technology, 6 (3), 161-171.
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, FL: Harcourt Brace & Company.
Eddy, R. M. (2000). Chemophobia in the college classroom: Extent, sources, and student characteristics, Journal of
Chemical Education, 77, 514-517.
Freedman, M. P. (1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction, attitude toward science, and achievement in
science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34 (4), 343-357.
354
(P. 347-356)
Geban, Ö., Ertepınar, H., Yılmaz, G., Altın, A., & Şahbaz, F. (1994, September). The effect of the computer based educa-
tion on students’ science course achievements and science interest. Paper presented at the 1th National Science
Education Congress, İzmir, Turkey.
Glasman, L. R., & Albarracin, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-
behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 778-822.
Hackett, G. (1995). Self-efficacy in career choice and development. In: A. Bandura, Editor, Self-efficacy in changing
societies. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 232-258.
Hackett, G., & Betz N. E. (1981). A self-efficacy approach to the career development of women. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 18, 326-339.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structural analysis: Conventional criteria
versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8 reference guide. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
Keeves, J. P., & Morgenstern, C. (1992). Attitudes toward science: Measures and effects. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), The IEA Study
of Science III: Changes in science Education and Achievement: 1970-1984 (pp. 122-140). New York: Pergamon.
Koballa, T. R., Jr., & Crawley, F. E. (1985). The influence of attitude on science teaching and learning. School Science
and Mathematics, 85, 222-232.
Krylova, I. (1997). Investigation of causes of differences in student performance on the topics of stereochemistry and
reaction mechanisms in an undergraduate organic chemistry course. Ph.D. Thesis. Catholic University of America,
Washington, D.C.
Kurbanoglu, N. İ., & Akın, A. (2010). The relationships between university students’ chemistry laboratory anxiety,
attitudes, and self-efficacy beliefs. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35 (8), 48-59.
Kurbanoglu, N. İ., Akın, A., & Takunyacı, M. (2009, July). The relationships between chemistry laboratory anxiety and
chemistry attitudes. Paper presented at the 30th International Conference of the Stress and Anxiety Research
Society (STAR), July, 16-18, Budapest, Hungary.
Laukenmann, M., Bleicher, M., Fu, S., Glaser-Zikuda, M., Mayring, P., & Von Rhöneck, C. (2003). An investigation of the
influence of emotional factors on learning in physics instruction. International Journal of Science Education,
25 (4), 489-507.
Liu, M., Hsieh, P., Cho, Y., & Schallert, D. (2006). Middle school students’ self-efficacy, attitudes, and achievement in
a computer-enhanced problem-based learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17 (3),
223-242.
McCarthy, W. C., & Widanski, B. B. (2009). Assessment of chemistry anxiety in a two-year college. Journal of Chemical.
Education, 86 (12), 1447-1449.
Mahajan, D. S., & Singh, G. S. (2001). Phobia towards organic chemistry in year one students at the university of
Botswana. Lonaka: Bulletin of the Center for Academic Development University of Botswana, 3, 22.
Mahajan, D. S., & Singh, G. S. (2005). University students’ performance in organic chemistry at undergraduate level:
Perception of instructors from Universities in the SADC region. Chemistry, 14 (1), 25-36.
McCarthy, W. C., & Widanski, B. B. (2009). Assessment of chemistry anxiety in a two year college. Journal of. Chemical.
Education, 86 (12), 1447-1449.
Meece, J. L., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1990). Predictors of math anxiety and its influence on young adolescents’
course enrollment intentions and performance in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 60-70.
Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in self-efficacy research. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motiva-
tion and achievement (Vol. 10, pp. 1-49). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
Pajares, F. (2005). Self-efficacy beliefs during adolescence: Implications for teachers and parents. In F. Pajares & T.
Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education (Vol. 5, pp. 339-366). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). The role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem-solving:
A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 193-203.
Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2005). Self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs: Jointly contributing to the quality of human
life. In H. Marsh, R. Craven, & D. McInerney (Eds.), International Advances in Self Research (Vol. 2, pp. 95-121).
Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for
learning. Michigan: School of Education Building, The University of Michigan. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED338122).
Pribyl, J. R., & Bodner, G. M. (1987). Spatial ability and its role in organic chemistry: A study of four organic courses.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 229-240.
Ramirez, O.M., & Dockweiler, C.J. (1987). Mathematics anxiety: a systematic review. In R. Schwarzer, H.M. Van Der
Ploeg, C.D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advanced in test anxiety research (Vol 5, pp. 157-175). Berwyn, PA: Swetz North
America.
Richardson, R., & Suinn, R. (1972). The Mathematic anxiety rating scale. Psychometric data. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 19, 551-554.
Rixse, J. S., & Pickering, M. (1985). Freshman chemistry as a predictor of future academic success. Journal of Chemical
Education, 62 (4), 313-315.
355
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 347-356)
Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2004). Attitudes toward chemistry among 11th grade students in high schools in Greece.
Sevenair, J. P., Carmichael, J. W., O’Connor, S. E., & Hunter, J. T. (1987). Predictors of organic chemistry grades for black
Americans. Xavier University, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 286 974, Washington, D.C.
Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences, Westview Press:
Boulder, CO.
Smist, J. M., & Owen, S. V. (1994, April). Explaining science self-efficacy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.
Steiner, R., & Sullivan, J. (1984). Variables correlating with student success in organic chemistry, Journal of Chemical
Education, 61 (12), 1072-1074.
Turner, R. C., & Lindsay, H. A. (2003). Gender differences in cognitive and non-cognitive factors related to achieve-
ment in organic chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 80 (5), 563-568.
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.
Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of academic and self-regulatory efficacy beliefs of entering middle school
students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 125-141.
Uzuntiryaki, E., & Capa Aydin, Y. (2009). Development and validation of Chemistry Self-efficacy Scale for college
students. Research in Science Education, 39 (4), 539-551.
Weinburgh, M. (1995). Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta-analysis of the literature from
1970 to 1991. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 387-398.
Wigfield, A., & Meece, J. L. (1988). Math anxiety in elementary and secondary school students. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 80, 210–216.
Zeldin, A. L., & Pajares, F. (2000). Against the odds: Self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific, and
technological careers. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 215-246.
Received: June 13, 2011 Accepted: September 30, 2012
Namudar İzzet Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Sakarya University, Faculty of Education,

Kurbanoğlu Department of Science Education, 54300 Hendek/Sakarya, Turkey.
E-mail: kurbanoglu@sakarya.edu.tr
Website: http://www.sakarya.edu.tr/
Ahmet Akin Ph.D., Associate Professor, Sakarya University, Faculty of Education,
Department of Psychological Counseling and Guidance, 54300
Hendek/Sakarya, Turkey.
E-mail: aakin@sakarya.edu.tr
356
THE IMPACT OF A SCIENCE
MUSEUM INVOKED
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
Abstract. This study aims to develop an

Chun-Yen Chang ESSMIM (Earth System-Science Museum
Instructional Module) and evaluate
its impacts on 11th grade high-school
students’ expected and actual perceptions
of a Science Museum invoked Learning
Environment (SMiLE). The ESSMIM was
designed following the principles of the
“Earth System Education (ESE) learn-
ing cycle mode” (Chang, 2005): Engage,
Introduction Explore, Analysis/Explain, as well as Apply
and Evaluate. In terms of research design,
Students trained under text based learning methods are a one group pretest posttest research
often forced to use their imaginations when learning about earth design was adopted. The research subjects
science curriculum (ESC). Chang (2005) findings propose that earth were a group of 11th grade students from
science instruction in the secondary schools which bridge the gap a national senior high-school in Taiwan.
between students’ perceived, and actual learning environments Students’ expected and actual percep-
serve to enhance their learning outcomes. Other alternative learn- tions of SMiLE were investigated through
ing environments, such as museums, may help students to extend the “SMiLE Inventory”. The results of this
themselves from the confines of in school text based learning study showed that: (1) students’ scores,
methods; direct contact with objects can inspire students to come of expected SMiLE Inventory, both before
up with different as well as new ideas (Hein, 1998). and after the experimental teaching were
In an earlier study, Roberts (1997) arranged for students higher than their actual SMiLE scores, (2)
to visit museums, reasoning that teaching activities where par- compared with previous actual experi-
ticipants had direct contact with “objects,” would help students to ences, ESSMIM created a SMiLE which was
utilize multiple senses rather than learning simply from listening closer to students’ expectation, and (3) af-
and reading. Other studies in museum learning have highlighted ter experiencing the ESSMIM, the difference
characteristics of museum’s functions. Tunnicliffe (1996a) explored between students’ expectations and their
different categories of biological content between museums, zoos, actual experience of SMiLE was reduced.
and botanical gardens. In his studies, Tunnicliffe made a quantita- Key words: earth science curriculum;
tive analysis using a systemic network, designed specifically for learning environment; perception; science
a learning task. Research by Tunnicliffe and his colleagues found museum teaching.
that, in natural history museums, a critical element of interest and
engagement for participants is that of narrative descriptions (Tun-
nicliffe, 1996b; Tunnicliffe et al., 1997). Several studies suggest that Chun-Yen Chang
science museum resources are broadly underused by the teachers National Taiwan Normal University,
Taiwan
they hope to serve (Bevan, 2007; Finkelstein, 2005; Phillips et al.,
2007). Furthermore, teacher and school participation are likely
357
THE IMPACT OF A SCIENCE MUSEUM INVOKED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 357-366)
influenced by external factors such as accountability concerns and rising costs (Anderson et al., 2006;
DeWitt & Storksdieck, 2008). Taken together, these prior museum studies have provided beneficial science
learning experiences but reveal a significant need for more detailed examinations of what influences
science museum learning.
The main purpose of science education is to improve the science literacy of all people. This purpose
is usually carried out through formal and informal science education. The means to achieve the goals of
science education include science curriculums in schools and social resources such as assistance from
science museums. Jin (1995) believed that mediums used to deliver science education ideals between
school education and society are the social and educational functions of museums (Figure 1).
Figure 1: The relationships between museums, schools, and society in the aspect of promoting
science education (Jin, 1995).
Thus, there is a common goal for both museums and schools, which is to provide learning envi-
ronments for students (Chang, 1987). Therefore, museums are considered learning places for informal
education outside schools. Museums’ social education institution function not only complements school
education, but also promotes the improvement of people’s science literacy (Chang, 1987). Therefore,
schools often arrange students visiting museums in groups to make up for the insufficiency of knowl-
edge taught in schools. Museum exhibitions are considered tools for outside-school learning. In order
to make sure resources provided by museums can be well used, partnerships must be built between
museum users and educational institutions so that they can complement each other and be used by
the social system, science education workers and learners in schools (Hamilton & Hardesty, 1987, Lord
& May, 1996).
Through the integration of a series of curriculums visits, our hope is to design teaching content
utilizing the abundant informal education resources found in science museums. This study targeted
developing integrated curriculums for junior high-schools in Taiwan. Further reaching objectives include
increasing students’ flexibility in terms of applying academic knowledge into their daily lives.
The aim of research is to promote students’ learning with their senses and create their own learning
experiences. The learning and exploring environments of this module are science museums. This study
proposes experiment research methods to understand the impacts of the teaching design, through
integrated curriculums, with regard to second-grade high-school students.
The following research questions were formed based on students’ learning perceptions. How do
students’ preferences and perception of the Science Museum Invoked Learning Environment (hereinafter
“SMiLE”) experiences differ before and after experiencing the ESSMIM? Furthermore, how do students’
expected and actual experiences differ before and after experiencing the ESSMIM?
358
ISSN 1648–3898 THE IMPACT OF A SCIENCE MUSEUM INVOKED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
(P. 357-366)
Data analysis for this study was performed using SPSS for Windows Version. SPSS is an approach
similar to LISREL, where the covariance structure derived from observed data is used in the model.
Such covariance-based approaches are appropriate for areas with strong a priori theory. Data analysis
proceeded in two stages: the descriptive statistic was first examined for validating and refining the
research instrument, followed by an analysis of the inferential statistic for testing the association’s
quantification in the research.
Research Participants
This study designs a curriculum for (the earth science chapter) part of the current science material
for second graders in senior high-schools. According to the design of this curriculum, a half-day is spent
in the exhibition area of the National Science Museum for teaching. The goal of The National Museum
of Natural Science is to provide practicable science education and to collect and preserve the biological
and cultural diversity in neighboring areas.
After considering the traffic time and teachers’ class schedules, a convenience sample is used. A
national senior high-school in Taichung is picked. The sample is separated into three groups. The first
group, who major in social science, takes the Earth Science Course (ESC). Hence, 38 students from a
normal second-grade class of the first academic group participate in the experimental teaching class
of this study. Due to the attendance conditions of the students, the effective sample contains only 34
males with the average age being 17.
Teaching Module
As for the integrated teaching content of the ESSMIM, three exhibition areas including “The Origins
of Life”, “Life Landing”, and “The Age of Dinosaurs”, from the Life Science Hall of the National Museum of
Natural Science, are chosen as the themes of “earth history” for this experimental teaching. As shown in
figure 2, in the strategic aspect, the four-stage “learning cycle model” (Chang and Lai, 2001) and the “ESE
learning cycle model” (Chang, 2005) are adopted as the main structure. In the aspect of the essence of
the curriculum design, the reference is the idea of “earth system education” proposed by Mayer (1991
and 1995), which states that the learning of earth system education is not only about the pursuit of
knowledge, but also about the development of sentiment. The validity of the content of ESSMIM was
examined by two current high-school teachers and a professor (whose specialty is science education).
This study is the research result of the “science museum chapter”.
Research Tool
The “SMiLE Inventory” is mainly based on the “Science Outdoor Learning Environment Inventory,”
proposed by Tsai (2002), and is used to explore the students’ perception of a SMiLE through their attitudes
and reactions during outdoor teaching. This inventory was modified according to the characteristics
of science museum learning. The inventory includes 5 aspects with 30 questions to find out the differ-
ences between the students’ perception of a SMiLE experience that they expect and those they actually
experience. By referencing the form of the “Attitudes toward Earth Science Inventory” developed by Li
and Chang (2004), every question of a SMiLE inventory is divided into a question for each expected
condition and a question for actual conditions according to the students’ learning experiences in the
science museum. Based on the assumption that the congruence between the preferred learning en-
vironment and the actual perceived learning environment would affect students’ learning outcomes
(Fraser & Fisher, 1983a, 1983b); it was hypothesized that students’ learning achievement in ESC and their
attitudes toward ESC would be enhanced when they actually perceived the instruction activities were
congruent with their learning environment preferences.
359
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 357-366)
Therefore, this study, conducted through a quasi-experimental research design, has 60 questions in
total. The 30 questions can be categorized into 5 aspects: (1) degree of integration with the curriculum (the
relationship between classroom learning and science museum learning), (2) interpersonal relationship
learning in classes, (3) knowledge of learning goals, (4) preparation and degree of curriculum organiza-
tion, and (5) usage of relation assisting tools. The 5-point Likert-type scale is applied to this inventory, to
reflect each student’s degree of agreeing with the questions. The extent of their responses are shown in
5 rating scales: (A) “almost never” (B) “seldom” (C) “sometimes” (D) “often” (E) “almost always.”
The tentative ESSMIM was validated using a focus group technique to collect qualitative data.
Two focus groups with 54 participants in total were conducted, with a national senior high-school
in Taiwan. Gender and age were not related to any of the outcome variables. Therefore, males and
females of all ages were grouped together. The validity of this inventory was examined by one Profes-
sor (whose specialty is science education) and two high-school teachers. These experts checked the
alignment between textbook content and test items and confirmed that the test items were coherent
to important concepts introduced in the textbook. After the trial test and the formal test, the reliability
was analyzed. The Cronbach’s alpha values for the expected SMiLE were 0.84 and 0.85, while those in
the actual SMiLE were 0.79 and 0.87.
Figure 2: The design and planning for the teaching strategies and 4-stage learning cycle.
360
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
(P. 357-366)
Results of Research
Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics before and after a SMiLE test.
Table 1. The descriptive statistics of a SMiLE (unit: question).
Difference between the

Expected Actual expected value and the
actual value
n=34
Average S.D. Average S.D. Average S.D.
SMiLE pre-test (30 questions) 3.70 0.41 3.06 0.47 0.64 0.66
Degree of integration with the cur-

3.90 0.55 3.10 0.63 0.80 0.76
riculum (6 questions)
Interpersonal relationship learning
3.61 0.57 3.12 0.61 0.50 0.62
(6 questions)
Knowledge of learning goals
3.71 0.52 3.13 0.53 0.59 0.81
(8 questions)
Preparation (5 questions) 3.21 0.54 2.94 0.54 0.27 0.70
Usage of relation assisting tools
3.76 0.64 2.98 0.57 0.78 0.76
(5 questions)
SMILE post-test (30 questions) 3.82 0.36 3.43 0.40 0.38 0.35
Degree of integration with the cur-
3.87 0.48 3.47 0.45 0.41 0.43
riculum (6 questions)
Interpersonal relationship learning
3.72 0.43 3.48 0.41 0.24 0.42
(6 questions)
Knowledge of learning goals
3.92 0.50 3.49 0.51 0.43 0.43
(8 questions)
Preparation (5 questions) 3.28 0.62 3.33 0.58 -0.05 0.52
Usage of relation assisting tools
3.91 0.40 3.36 0.62 0.55 0.66
(5 questions)
S.D. = standard deviation
The tables, from Table 2 to Table 6, show the results of the paired sample t-tests performed for the
differences between expected perception and actual perception of the experiences in a SMiLE. Cohen’s
effect size index d (1988, p. 20) was also used to illustrate the degrees to which the difference in the
pre–post-test mean is present for each measure. This value of Cohen d is not between 0 – 1, which was
indicated on page 8 by Chang (2004).
Table 1 shows the pretest average expected perception of a SMiLE (3.70) and the average actually
perception of a SMiLE (3.06). For all the learning environment aspects except for “preparation,” there
are statistically significant differences between the perception of a SMiLE expected and those actually
experienced by the students, which means the students expect a SMiLE to be better than a SMiLE they
actually experience.
361
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 357-366)
Table 2. The paired sample t-tests performed for the differences between expected perception
and actual perception of the experiences in a SMiLE in the pretest.
MD(SD) Cohen’s
Expected value t value P value CI95%
n=34 d
– actual value
SMiLE pre-test 0.64( 0.45) 5.61* .000 1.33 ( 0.41, 0.87)

Degree of integration with the 0.80( 0.77) 6.10** .000 1.14 ( 0.53, 1.07)
curriculum
Interpersonal relationship learning 0.50( 0.59) 4.67** .000 1.16 ( 0.28, 0.71)
Knowledge of learning goals 0.59( 0.52) 4.25** .000 1.03 ( 0.31, 0.87)
Preparation 0.27( 0.54) 2..24 .032 0.54 ( 0.02, 0.52)
Usage of relation assisting tools 0.78( 0.60) 5.95** .000 1.47 ( 0.51, 1.04)
Overall * p < 0.05 Aspect ** p < 0.01 MD: difference between both averages SD: standard deviation of both averages
After experiencing the ESSMIM (Table 3), there is still a significant difference between the aver-
age of the students’ expected overall perception of the experience in a SMiLE (3.82) and the average
of their actual perception of the experience (3.43). Both the students’ expected overall perception of
the experience in a SMiLE and their actual one have increased, which means the ESSMIM has a positive
influence on both the students’ expected overall perception of the experience in a SMiLE and their
actual perception of the experience.
Table 3. The paired sample t-tests performed for the differences between expected perception
and actual perception of the experiences in a SMiLE in the posttest.
MD(SD) Cohen’s
Expected value t value p value CI95%
n=34 d
– actual value
SMiLE post-test 0.38( 0.38) 6.35** 0.000 1.54 ( 0.26, 0.50)

Degree of integration with the 0.41( 0.46) 5.56** 0.000 1.37 ( 0.56, 0.56)
curriculum
Interpersonal relationship learning 0.24( 0.42) 3.28** 0.002 0.80 ( 0.09, 0.38)
Knowledge of learning goals 0.43( 0.50) 5.85** 0.000 1.46 ( 0.28, 0.57)
Preparation -0.05( 0.60) -.524 0.604 0.13 (-0.23, 0.14)
Usage of relation assisting tools 0.55( 0.51) 4.853** 0.000 1.23 ( 0.32, 0.78)
Table 2 and 3 shows that both the students expected perception and actual perception of their
experience in a SMiLE in the posttest are higher than those in the pretest. It is inferred that the percep-
tion of the experience in the ESSMIM SMiLE is significantly different than that of the previous experience
in science museum teaching.
362
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
(P. 357-366)
Table 4. The paired sample t-tests performed for the differences in the expected perception of
students’ experiences in a SMiLE.
MD(SD) Cohen’s
n=34 D
– actual value
SMiLE 0.12( 0.39) 2.23* 0.031 0.57 ( 0.01, 0.22)

Degree of integration with the -0.03( 0.51) -.28 0.784 0.07 (-0.25, 0.19)
curriculum
Interpersonal relationship learning 0.10( 0.50) 1.01 0.318 0.24 (-0.10, 0.31)
Knowledge of learning goals 0.21( 0.51) 2.45 0.020 0.87 ( 0.03, 0.38)
Preparation 0.08( 0.34) 0.72 0.476 0.27 ( 0.14, 0.29)
Usage of relation assisting tools 0.15( 0.53) 1.49 0.145 0.36 (-0.06, 0.36)
About the changes in the students’ expected perception, Table 4 shows that the average of the
students’ expected overall perception of the experience in a SMiLE (3.82) in the posttest is significantly
higher than that in the pretest (3.70). This means after experiencing a SMiLE, the students’ expected
perception of the experience in a SMiLE gets higher.
Table 5. The paired sample t-tests performed for the differences of the actual perception of the
experiences in a SMiLE.
MD(SD) Cohen’s
Expected value t value P value CI95%
n=34 d
– actual value
SMiLE 0.37( 0.44) 3.77* 0.001 0.90 ( 0.17, 0.57)
Degree of integration with the 0.36( 0.55) 2.80** 0.008 0.67 ( 0.10, 0.63)
curriculum
Interpersonal relationship learning 0.36( 0.52) 2.84** 0.008 0.65 ( 0.10, 0.62)
Knowledge of learning goals 0.37( 0.52) 2.82** 0.008 0.40 ( 0.10, 0.63)
Preparation 0.39( 0.56) 3.26** 0.003 0.80 ( 0.15, 0.64)
Usage of relation assisting tools 0.38( 0.59) 2.89** 0.007 0.71 ( 0.11, 0.64)
Table 6 shows that the difference between the expected perception and the actual perception of
experience in a SMiLE in the posttest (0.38) is smaller than that in the pretest (.64). It is found from the
statistical analysis that the difference between the expected perception and the actual perception of
experience in a SMiLE in the posttest is smaller than that in the pretest. This means, the difference be-
tween the expected perception and the actual perception of experience in a SMiLE is reduced through
the ESSMIM teaching.
363
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 357-366)
Table 6. The paired sample t-tests performed for the differences between the expected perception
and the actual perception of experience in a SMiLE.
MD(SD) Cohen’s
n=34 d
– actual value
SMiLE -0.26( 0.53) -2.61* 0.014 0.70 (-0.46, -0.06)

Degree of integration with the -0.39( 0.62) -3.11** 0.004 0.78 (-0.65, -0.14)
curriculum
Interpersonal relationship -0.26( 0.53) -2.29 0.028 0.56 (-0.49, -0.03)
learning
Knowledge of learning goals -0.16( 0.65) -1.20 0.239 0.30 (-0.44, 0.11)
Preparation -0.32( 0.62) -2.43 0.021 0.60 (-0.58, -0.05)
Usage of relation assisting tools -0.22( 0.79) -1.87 0.070 0.41 (-0.47, 0.02)
Figure 3: The averages of the aspects of a SMiLE.
Figure 3 shows the average values of the aspects. For most of the aspects: the expected value in
the posttest > the expected value in the pretest > the actual value in the posttest > the actual value in
the pretest. However, in the aspect of preparation: the actual value in the posttest > the expected value
in the posttest > the expected value in the pretest > the actual value in the pretest.
Discussion
This study aimed to investigate students’ expected and actual perceptions of a SMiLE during stu-
dents’ learning by ESSMIM in 11th grade earth science classes. The results showed that the averages of
this aspect are similar to the first experimental teaching class. The actual value in the posttest is higher
than the expected value in the pretest, and the expected and actual values in the pretest are the lowest
in all the aspects. This means the students barely did any preparation in their previous experiences in
a SMiLE. Through the module, the students learn to collect related information before their visits. And
during their visits, they can integrate the information with the information provided in the museum.
364
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
(P. 357-366)
Results shown by this method are found to be in good agreement with the previous opinion (Hein, 1998;
Roberts, 1997). In cases where the number of our convenience sampling in the data are relative small,
any inferences made may be more reliable with small-sized for future effort, and hence the effect that
the explanatory variables are expected to have on the response probability could be valid. Finally, the
research limitation is that gender, and age were not related to any of the outcome variables.
The result of demonstrating the effectiveness of the ESSMIM is not surprising, since the outdoor
ESC, with plenty of materials to choose from, should have some positive impacts on student achieve-
ment. Moreover, the ESSMIM, which integrated the hardware and software into ESC and instruction,
would certainly provide some excellent narrative guidance for students through the available media
resources, therefore, leading to considerable score gains on student achievement. Several students
have expressed optimism towards this type of simple and portable instructional approach after they
experience the kind of outdoor teaching module of earth science. It can be drawn, as a result of the
study, that the development and integrative use of SMiLE with interactive whole-class teaching was
successful in improving student achievement and attitudes towards the subject matter. It is therefore
suggested that this type of teaching approach could serve as a significant alternative in teaching basic
science concepts.
In order to situate students in real-world learning environments, which refers to direct experiences
that take place within the context of practice, it is significant to place the students in a series of learning
activities that include both real and virtual-learning environments. Real-world learning environments aim
to develop such a learning environment to provide students with real-world experiences and knowledge
(Chang et al., 2007; Chiou et al., 2010). The results show the ES is useful in achieving museum learning
experiences. Furthermore, the results of a posttest survey revealed that most students’ testing scores
improved significantly, further indicating the effectiveness of the ESSMIM; these results are also backed
by a previous study (Chen & Huang, 2012). It is concluded that the innovative approach is helpful to the
students to utilize the learning resources and achieve better learning efficacy, both more effectively
and efficiently (Chiou et al., 2010).
Conclusions
It is found that there are “positive” changes in the students’ expected perception and actual percep-
tion of the experience in a SMiLE after going through the ESSMIM. The change in the aspect of “prepara-
tion” is rather large. However, the aspect of learning perception is the lowest among all the aspects.
The Ministry of Education promotes “actively exploring and studying” as part of the 10 fundamen-
tal abilities required for the nine-year compulsory educational system in Taiwan. Indeed, past science
curricula in the high-schools around the world mainly focused on traditional classrooms. This research
contends that the science curriculum should be taught in union with a SMiLE. The resultant statistical
analysis shows solid agreement: that the ESSMIM reached objectives for increasing students’ flexibility
in terms of applying academic knowledge into their daily lives. The questionnaire survey also showed
that the proposed approach was able to provide more interesting learning scenarios to high school
students, fostering a positive attitude toward learning that improved significantly.
This empirical study has several limitations. First, sampling was conducted only in one Senior High
School of Taichung City, an area in central Taiwan. We recommend that the scope of future studies be
expanded to include more people, genders as well as other races to avoid the concerns that resulted
from this sample. Second, we should consider having two classes, one experimental and one control
group, to examine in this research. Finally, further statistical analysis of this study is recommended.
References
Anderson, D., Kisiel, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2006). School field trip visits: Understanding the teacher’s world through
the lens of three international studies. Curator, 49 (3), 365-386.
Bevan, B. (2007, May/June). When schools meet museums: Finding a third way. ASTC Dimensions, 3-6.
Chang, A., Chang, M., & Heh, J. S. (December 14–16, 2007). Implementing a context-aware learning path planner for
learning in museum. In 6th WSEAS international conference on E-ACTIVITIES, Tenerife, Spain.
365
(SMILE) ON STUDENTS
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 357-366)
Chang, C. Y., & Lai, L. C. (2001). Does it Work? A Study on the Earth-System Integrated Instructional Module. Chinese
Journal of Science Education, 9 (4), 323-350.
Chang, C. Y. (2004). Could a laptop computer plus the liquid crystal display projector amount to improved multimedia
geoscience instruction? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20 (1), 4-10.
Chang, Y. T. (1987). Science Museum Education Activities: Theories and Practice. Taipei: Lapen Publishing.
Chang, C. Y. (2005) Taiwanese Science and Life Technology Curriculum Standards and Earth Systems Education.
International Journal of Science Education, 27 (5), 625-638.
Chang, C. Y., Hsiao, C. H., & Barufaldi, James P. (2006) Preferred Actual Learning Environment ‘‘Spaces’’ and Earth Sci-
ence Outcomes in Taiwan. Science Education, 90 (3), 420-433.
Chen, C. C., & Huang, T. C. (2012). Learning in a u-Museum: Developing a context-aware ubiquitous learning environ-
ment. Computers & Education, 59, 873-883.
Chin, C. C. (1995). The Role Science Education Research Plays in Science Museums. Museology Quarterly, 9 (1), 79-
85.
Chiou, C. K., Tseng, J. C. R., Hwang, G. J., & Heller, S. (2010). An adaptive navigation support system for conducting
context-aware ubiquitous learning in museums. Computers & Education, 55, 834-845.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
DeWitt, J., & Storksdieck, M. (2008). A short review of school field trips: Key findings from the past and implications
for the future. Visitor Studies, 11 (2), 181-197.
Finkelstein, D. (2005). ISIs and schools: A landscape study. Retrieved April 14, 2006, from http://www.exploratorium.
org/cils/landscape/index.html
Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1983a). Student achievement as a function of person-environment fit: A regression surface
analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 89-99.
Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1983b). Use of actual and preferred classroom environment scales in person-environment
fit research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 303-313.
Hamilton, W. B., & Hardesty V. D. (1987). Museum university partnerships. College Board Review, 145, 22-25, 33-34
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ365028).
Hein, G. E. (1998). Learning in the Museum. New York: Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data.
Lee, M. H., & Chang, C. Y. (2004). Development and Exploration of the Earth Science Classroom Learning Environment
Instrument. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 12 (4), 421-443.
Lord, G. D., & May, M. (1996). Planning for museum on campus. Planning for Higher Education, 24 (2), 13-18.
Mao, S. L., Li, T. I., Fan, K. L., Chen, T. J., & Hsu, J. J. (2003). General Earth Science. Taichung: KangHsi Books.
Mayer, V. J. (1991). Earth system science. Science Teacher, 58, 34-39.
Mayer, V. J. (1995). Using the earth system for integrating science curriculum. Science Education, 79 (4), 375-391.
Phillips, M., Finkelstein, D., & Wever-Frerichs, S. (2007). School site to museum floor: How informal science institutions
work with schools. International Journal of Science Education, 29 (12), 1489-1507.
Roberts, L. C. (1997). From Knowledge to Narrative: Educators and the Changing Museum. Washington, D.C.: Smith-
sonian Institution. Science Education, 79 (4), 375-391.
Tsai, W. Y. (2002). The Study of the Outdoor Teaching Module of Earth Science. Master dissertation, Institute of Earth
Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University.
Tunnicliffe, S.D. (1996a). Conversations with primary school parties visiting animal specimens in a museum and zoo.
Journal of Biological Education, 30, 130-141.
Tunnicliffe, S. (1996b). The relationship between pupils’ age and the content of conversations generated at three
types of animal exhibits. Research in Science Education, 26, 461-480.
Tunnicliffe, S. D., Lucas, A. M., & Osborne, J. (1997). School visits to zoos and museums: A missed educational op-
portunity. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 1039-1056.
Received: June 19, 2012 Accepted: November 10, 2012
Chun-Yen Chang Ph.D., Research Chair Professor of National Taiwan Normal

University (NTNU), Adjunct Professor of Graduate Institute of Science
Education & Department of Earth Sciences, No. 88, Sec. 4, Ting-Chou
Rd., Wenshan Chiu, Taipei, 116, R.O.C., Taiwan.
Phone: + 886-2-2935-4393.
E-mail: changcy@ntnu.edu.tw
Website: http:/w1.ceels.org/chunyen/
366
INVESTIGATING THE
CORRELATION BETWEEN
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS
ON THE CONSTRUCTIVIST
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT Abstract. The purpose of this study was
to investigate the correlation between the
AND THEIR ACADEMIC perceptions on the constructivist learn-
SUCCESS IN SCIENCE ing environment and academic success
of elementary students in science course
COURSE WITH PATH with structural equation modelling. The
correlative investigation model was
ANALYSIS adopted in the research. The sample of the
research consisted of 195 students from
six public elementary schools, chosen
according to random sampling method.
In order to answer the research question,
Gokhan Bas “The constructivist learning environment
survey” (Taylor, Fraser & Fisher, 1997) was
used in the study. Also, the data in relation
with students’ academic success in science
Introduction course were gathered from their school
report cards regarding the spring semester.
The way how people learn is a most complex phenomenon In this research, LISREL 8.51 structural
and many theories have been put forward on this very issue equation software was used in model
establishing by using the observed vari-
(Schunk, 2008). Each theory of learning defines the concept of
ables. According to the findings obtained
learning from its own perspective and brings a different approach
in the research, it was found out that the
to the learning process (Senemoğlu, 2004). In this regard, learning compatibility index results of the con-
theories can be categorised as objectivist and constructivist. The structed equation model, the model-data
traditional learning theories can be called as objectivist and this compatibility was found out to be high
approach states that knowledge depends on an objective reality enough [χ2/df=1.46; GFI=0.86; CFI=0.93;
and is an absolute entity. On the other hand, unlike the objectivist RMSEA=0.048; RMR=0.078; SRMR=0.056;
approach, constructivist approach emphasises that learning is the NFI=0.81; NNFI=0.92] in the research. In
learners’ construction of his/her own knowledge in his/her mind the regression equation, it was found out
(Arısoy, 2007). Constructivism is one of the most popular learning that the variable best predicting students’
theories which tries to explain the nature of learning (Brooks & academic success in science course was the
variable personal relevance in relation to
Brooks, 1999). The way in which people try to make sense of situ-
the constructivist learning environment.
ations or, in other words, how people create meaning, is the main
On the other hand, it was understood
concern of the constructivist learning theory (Loyens & Gijbels, that all five predictor variables that were
2008). According to some (Brooks & Brooks, 1999; Özden, 2005; included in the regression equation ac-
Karadağ, 2007), constructivism is a paradigm shift in learning, count for 76% of the overall variance of the
education and schooling today. academic success in science course in the
As a result of the reform efforts in education all over the world, research.
the practice of constructivism is viewed as an effective paradigm Key words: Constructivist learning envi-
in the twenty-first century (Özgür, 2008). However, constructivism ronment, correlation, elementary students,
is not a new concept as it is viewed in the literature (Terhart, 2003). science course.
Many traces of constructivist thought can be found in history
(Kinnucan-Welsch & Jenlink, 1998). It is a common belief that the
concept constructivism was derived from Piaget’s (1955) reference Gokhan Bas
to his as constructivist, as well as Bruner’s (1966) description of Necmettin Erbakan University, Turkey
discovery learning and from Vytgotsky’s (1978) views on social-
cultural learning.
367
INVESTIGATING THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS
ON THE CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING ENVIRONMENT AND THEIR ACADEMIC
ISSN 1648–3898
SUCCESS IN SCIENCE COURSE WITH PATH ANALYSIS
(P. 367-378)
Constructivist learning is a philosophical view which is interested in arriving at knowledge rather

than as another independent learning approach (Savery & Duffy, 1996). Constructivism as an episte-
mological philosophical view of knowledge acquisition emphasises knowledge construction rather
than knowledge transmission (Fosnot, 1996). According to constructivism, knowledge construction
is based upon learners’ previous knowledge experiences. So, new knowledge is integrated with the
previous intellectual constructs (Schunk, 2008). The general sense of constructivism is that it is a theory
of learning or meaning making, that individuals create their own new understandings on their prior
knowledge (Richardson, 2003). Thus, constructivism can be stated to be a view of learning that consid-
ers the learner as a responsible active agent in his/her knowledge acquisition process (Abbott & Ryan,
1999). In other words, constructivism is a learning theory contending that learners construct their own
understanding based on prior learning and social interaction (Brooks & Brooks, 1999). Therefore, it is
possible to state that constructivism is one of these theories which tries to explain the nature of learning
(Brooks & Brooks, 1999). Constructivism is a psychological and philosophical perspective contending
that individuals form or construct much of what they learn and understand (Schunk, 2008). The way in
which people try to make sense of situations or how people create meaning is the main concern of the
constructivist learning theory (Wilson, 1996).
Constructivism is an epistemological view of learning rather than teaching (Bodner, 1986). Therefore,
constructivist learning applications predict a rich and interactive learning environment which supplies
learner requires to reach knowledge, get and analyse it, arrange and use it in order to solve the prob-
lems (Gagnon & Collay, 2001). Constructivist learning is grounded in learners’ active participation in the
problem-solving, critical and creative thinking (Fer & Cırık, 2007). So, knowledge cannot be transferred
from teachers to learners, it has to conceived (Von Glasserfeld, 1996). The essence of constructivism
is that learners actively construct knowledge (Cunnigham, 1992). In the learning process, learners are
expected to produce their own products by searching, doing decisions, collaborating, using high level
of thinking skills and using their own creativeness (Demirel, 2005). Hence, constructivists believe that
certain activities and enrichments in the environment can enhance the meaning-making process, such
as active learning, using kinaesthetic, visual and auditory modalities, creating opportunities for dialogue,
fostering creativity and providing rich, safe and engaging environments (Brooks & Brooks, 1999).
In the constructivist learning environment, learners are asked deliberately take action to create
meaning from what they are studying. In other words, learners adopt the role of seekers and problem
solvers while teachers become facilitators and guides rather than presenters of knowledge, learners
learn how to use and apply information in diverse contexts (Dunlop & Grabinger, 1996). Also, the con-
structivist learning environment is a place where learners may work together and support each other
as they use a variety of tools and information resources in their guided pursuit of learning goals and
problem-solving activities (Wilson, 1996). The constructivist learning environment requires manipulation
space that provides learners a sufficient area to research, experiment, and pose hypotheses with the
problem (Jonassen, 1999). The activities in the constructivist learning environment are learner-centred
and learners are encouraged to ask their own questions, carry out their own experiments, make their
own analogies, and come to their own conclusions (Brooks and Brooks, 1999). The constructivist learning
environment sustains an atmosphere which makes learners have lifelike experiences, flexible time and
place for their effective learning in the classroom (Aygören, 2009). As with the constructivist learning
environment, learners’ needs, expectations and interests are met and learners’ active participation in
the learning process and social interaction amongst peers are promoted (Brooks & Brooks, 1999; Saban,
2004; Fer & Cırık, 2007; Karadağ & Korkmaz, 2007). In this regard, as the constructivists see the learners
as the co-constructors of knowledge, they give importance to the perceptions of the learners about the
learning environment to see the extent to which the constructivist approaches are met in the learning
environment (Özkal, 2007).
In Turkey, the learning environment is usually teacher-oriented and follows a traditional route,
where learners are usually passive receivers of knowledge and the teacher is the purveyor of it. In contrast
to this view, constructivist educational design involves purposeful knowledge construction, multiple
368
ISSN 1648–3898 INVESTIGATING THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS
(P. 367-378)
representations of reality, and case-based learning environments rather than pre-determined instruc-
tional sequences and social interaction. Therefore as an alternative to traditional learning, constructivist
learning has to be fostered in education (Altun & Büyükduman, 2007). During the 1990s, considerable
interest has been generated in the design of constructivist learning environments (Land & Hannafin,
2000). In this context, it is seen that there are many studies on the constructivist learning environment
(Taylor & Fraser, 1991; Honabein, Duffy & Fishman, 1993; Taylor, Fraser & White, 1994; DeVries & Betty,
1995; Honabein, 1996; Wilson, 1996; Taylor, Fraser & Fisher, 1997; Jonassen, 1999; Kim, Fisher & Fraser,
1999; Brooks & Brooks, 1999; Alridge et al., 2000; Tsai, 2000; Ziegler, 2000; Margianti, Fraser & Aldridge,
2001; Yurdakul, 2004; Yılmaz, 2006; Dündar, 2008; Özgür, 2008; Aygören, 2009; Bal & Doğanay, 2009; Acat,
Anılan & Anagün, 2010; Anagün & Anılan, 2010; Argün & Aşkar, 2010; Aybek & Ağlagül, 2011; Narlı, 2011;
Gökçe, İşcan & Erdem, 2012; Tatlı & Ayas, 2012) in the related literature. However, these studies focused on
the descriptive aspect of the constructivist learning environments especially from the views of teachers.
The studies carried out for the views of students on the constructivist learning environment are very
limited and they also focused on the descriptive aspect of this learning environment (Altun & Büyükdu-
man, 2007; Özgür, 2008; Özkal, Tekkaya & Çakıroğlu, 2009; Acat, Anılan & Anagun, 2010; İlgen, 2010). The
research studies have provided consistent and convincing evidence that the quality of the classroom
environment is a significant determinant of student learning (Fraser, 1994). It has been established that
a positive learning environment is influential in student academic achievement and attitudes (Fisher,
Henderson & Fraser, 1995). Previous researches have indicated that students’ perceptions of learning
environment are an important factor in explaining their cognitive and affective outcomes (Fraser, 1994).
As far the previous researches on the constructivist learning environment are concerned, the number of
the studies focused on the perceptions of the constructivist learning environment and academic success
regarding science course has not been studied extensively in the related literature. On the other hand,
the researches on the issue in Turkey have not been as intense as in abroad.
This research tried to investigate the correlation between students’ perceptions on the constructivist
learning environment and their academic success in science course with structural equation modelling.
The research reported here also aimed to determine whether there were direct or indirect correlations
between students’ perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and academic success of
elementary students in science course. The investigation of the correlation between students’ percep-
tions on the constructivist learning environment and academic success of elementary students in sci-
ence course is believed to contribute to policymakers, curriculum developers and teachers in order to
design better elementary science curriculum.
Problem of Research
This research sought to improve the understanding of teachers on the constructivist learning en-
vironment in elementary schools. Hence, the findings obtained in the study may provide information
for policymakers, educational administrators and curriculum developers as well as insights that may be
relevant to similar studies elsewhere. In this regard, the purpose of this research was to investigate the
correlation between the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and academic success
of elementary students in science course with structural equation modelling. Hence, the problem state-
ment of the research was posed as, “What is the general structural equation model accounting for the
correlations between elementary students’ perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and
their academic success in science course?” in the study. In order to investigate the correlations between
elementary students’ perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and their academic success
in science course, the following research questions were posed in the study:
1. Is there a significant correlation between elementary students’ perceptions on the construc-
tivist learning environment and their academic success in science course?
2. What is the prediction level of elementary students’ perceptions on the constructivist learn-
ing environment for their academic success in science course?
369
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 367-378)
General Background of Research
The correlative investigation model was used in the research (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006). This
model is one of the most commonly applied models in the related literature (Cohen, Manion & Mor-
rison, 2003). The correlative investigation model is used to determine the correlation between different
variables in educational and social research (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000) and aims to identify the existence
or level of coordinated change between two or more variables (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006). A struc
tural equation model was formed in order to better illustrate the correlation between variables in the
research (Brown, 2006). Structural equation model connects the predictive structural correlations hold-
ing between the variables in the regression model to the covered factor structures in the factor analysis
through a comprehensive analysis (Sümer, 2000).
Sample of Research
The population of this study consisted of students in elementary schools within the borders of Nigde
province of Turkey. Elementary schools are structured in two different parts. The classes from 1-5 are
accepted as primary part of the elementary education, the classes from 6-8 are accepted as secondary
part of the elementary education in Turkey. This study was carried out in the secondary part (classes from
6-8) of the elementary education. In order to detect the sampling of the study from elementary schools
in cosmos, 195 students from six public elementary schools were chosen according to random sampling
method (Karasar, 2005). In order to detect the sampling of the study, elementary schools in cosmos
were chosen according to three-layer group sampling method according to socio-economic structure
(high-middle-low) of their region (McMillan & Schumacher, 2006). The participants were assured for the
anonymity and confidentiality for their responses in the study. Of the total, 93 (47.70%) of the students
were females and 102 (52.30%) of the students were males. Also, 63 students (32.30%) were in the 6th
grade, 71 of the students (36.21%) were in the 7th grade and 61 students (31.28%) were in the 8th grade
in the research. The students participated in the research were between the ages of 12 to 14.
Instrument and Procedures
In this study, “the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey”, developed by Taylor, Fraser and
Fisher (1997) and translated and adapted into Turkish by Küçüközer et al. (2012) was used in order to
collect data to answer the research questions in the research. The version used in this study had five
sub-dimensions; (i) personal relevance, (ii) uncertainty, (iii) shared control, (iv) critical voice, and (v) stu-
dent negotiation. The Cronbach Alpha’s reliability coefficient was found as 0.84 and confirmatory factor
analysis verified that the scale was compatible with the original form (χ2/df=2.34; GFI=0.92; AGFI=0.92;
CFI=0.92; RMSEA=0.048). Additionally, it was detected that the corrected item-total correlations of the
scale varied between 0.334 and 0.547. Also, the data in relation with students’ academic success in science
course were gathered from their school report cards regarding the spring semester of 2011-2012 academic
year. The survey was anonymous and confidentiality of the students was ensured. Before administrati-
on, the purpose of the study was explained and the students were asked to be as fair as possible while
responding to the items. Participation in this survey study was realised in the voluntary basis, and no
promotion was given to the students. The necessary permission was obtained from students’ parents
and the parents of the students participated in the research were informed about the purpose of the
research.
Data Analysis

In this research, LISREL 8.51 structural equation programme was used in model establishing by
using the observed variables. In determining to what extent the suggested correlation patterns in the
370
(P. 367-378)
research are compatible with the real data, chi-square (χ2) suitability test, Root Mean Square Error of
Approximation (RMSEA), Root Mean Square Residual (RMR), Standardised Root Mean Square Residual
(SRMR), Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), and Non-Normed
Fit Index (NNFI) values were used in the current research.
Results of Research
In this part of the research, the correlation between students’ perceptions on the constructivist
learning environment and their academic success was presented. In this regard, the problem statement
of the research was “What is the general structural equation model accounting for the correlations be-
tween elementary students’ perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and their academic
success in science course?” In order to answer the problem statement, perceptions on the constructivist
learning environment were accepted as exogenous variable and academic success in science course
was perceived as endogenous variable in the research. For this purpose, the linear correlations between
students’ perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and their academic success in science
course were analysed with path analysis in the study. The path analysis in relation to the correlation be-
tween perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and academic success in science course
was presented in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Path analysis in relation to the constructivist learning environment and academic success
in science course.
371
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 367-378)
As looked at Figure 1 above, it can be seen that there are five latent variables in relation to per-
ceptions on the constructivist learning environment. On examining the compatibility index results of
the constructed equation model, the model-data compatibility was found out to be high enough. As a
result of path analysis, χ2/df ratio was 1.46 (χ2/df=394.25/270). In the study, GFI value was found out as
0.86 so that it can be perceived as sufficient. In this research, RMSEA value was found as 0.048 so that
it is considered as an excellent goodness of fit. Besides, RMR value was found as 0.078 and SRMR value
was found as 0.056 in the study. In this study, CFI value was found out as 0.93. Lastly, NFI value was 0.81
and NNFI value was found as 0.92 in this study.
On examining the structural equation modelling, it was seen that the variable best predicting
elementary students’ academic success in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning envi-
ronment was personal relevance sub-dimension. It was found a linear positive significant high correlation
between personal relevance sub-dimension to academic success in science course, where the correlation
connection coefficient value was found as γ=0.95 in the research. It became evident that the second
most crucial factor determining academic success in science course was critical voice sub-dimension in
relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment. The connection coefficient value
was γ=0.90 in regard of critical voice sub-dimension of the perceptions on the constructivist learning
environment. Besides, a linear positive correlation was found out between uncertainty sub-dimension in
relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and academic success in science
course, where the connection coefficient value was found as γ=0.85 in the research. It was found a linear
positive significant high correlation between student negotiation sub-dimension to academic success in
science course, where the correlation connection coefficient value was found as γ=0.83 in the study. Also,
a positive significant linear correlation which was determined between academic success and shared
control sub-dimension in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment in the
model. The connection coefficient value was found out to be γ=0.82 in the model created. On the other
hand, to determine the direct effect of the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment on
academic success in science course at the level of sub-dimensions, a regression analysis was used. On
examining the regression equation of the covered variables predicted by variables that were included
in the structural equation model, the statement coefficient value of the model was found as 0.76 in the
study. The model created [Academic Success= 0.89*Personal Relevance+0.90*Critical Voice+0.85*Unc
ertainity+0.83*Student Negotiation+0.82*Shared Control, Error var. = 0.24, R²= 0.76] was found out to
be statistically significant at p<.01 level in the research. In this regard, it can be well understood that all
five predictor variables that were included in the regression equation accounted for 76% of the overall
variance of the academic success in science course in the research. As can also be seen in the regression
equation, the variable best predicting students’ academic success in science course was the variable of
personal relevance sub-dimension in relation to the constructivist learning environment. In addition, it
can also be possibly said that critical voice, uncertainty, student negotiation, and shared control variables
in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment predicted students’ academic
success in science course in a greater extend in the research.
Discussion
The purpose of this research was to investigate the correlation between perceptions on the con-
structivist learning environment and academic success of elementary students in science course. This
research also aimed at constructing a structural equation model between perceptions on the construc-
tivist learning environment and academic success in science course.
The findings of this research are crucial to note in two aspects. Firstly, the review of research
on science course revealed that there are no comprehensive studies of students’ perceptions on the
constructivist learning environment and their academic success both in Turkey and abroad. From this
aspect, the current study revealed the correlation between students’ perceptions on the constructivist
learning environment and their academic success in science course. However, previous researches also
focused on the effects of constructivist learning approach on students’ academic success. Unlike to the
previous studies (Yurdakul, 2004; Çetin & Günay, 2007; Türker, 2010; Temiz, 2010; Yalçın & Bayrakçeken,
372
(P. 367-378)
2010; Akyol, 2011), the correlation between perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and
academic success in science course was firstly investigated together. In this regard, on examining the
compatibility index results of the constructed structural equation model, the model-data compatibility
was found out to be high enough in the research. According to the findings obtained in the research,
it was found that χ2/df ratio was 1.46 (χ2/df=394.25/270) in the research. It is stated that a ratio equal to
or lower than 2.5 in small samples (Kline, 2005) and a ratio equal to greater than 3 in large samples cor-
respond to excellent goodness of fit in the related literature (Sümer, 2000). Besides this, it is stated that
GFI and AGFI indexes equal to 1 means excellent goodness of fit in the literature (Schumacher & Lomax,
1996). In the study, GFI value was found out 0.86 so that it can be perceived as sufficient. RMSEA value
equal to or lower than 0.05 means excellent goodness of fit (Brown, 2006; Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993;
Schumacher & Lomax, 1996; Çokluk, Şekercioğlu & Büyüköztürk, 2010). In this research, RMSEA value
was found as 0.048 so that it is considered as an excellent goodness of fit. RMR and SRMR values are
lower than 0.05 displays perfect model-data compatibility (Brown, 2006). In the study, RMR value was
found out to be 0.078 and SRMR value was found as 0.056 so that it can be stated that they were the
indicators of sufficient goodness of fit. CFI value equal to or greater than 0.95 means excellent goodness
of fit (Thompson, 2004). In this study, CFI value was found out as 0.93 so that it can be considered as suf-
ficient goodness of fit. NFI and NNFI values equal to or greater than 0.95 mean excellent goodness of fit
in the related literature (Tabashnick & Fidell, 2001). Besides, NFI value was found as 0.81 and NNFI value
was found as 0.92 in the research. Hence, these values can be perceived as sufficient goodness of fit.
On the other hand, on examining the structural equation modelling it was seen that the variable
best predicting elementary students’ academic success in relation to the perceptions on the construc-
tivist learning environment was personal relevance sub-dimension. It became evident that the second
most crucial factor determining academic success in science course was critical voice sub-dimension
in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment. Besides, a linear positive
correlation was found out between uncertainty sub-dimension in relation to the perceptions on the
constructivist learning environment and academic success in science course. A positive significant
linear correlation was determined between academic success and student negotiation sub-dimension
in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment in the model. Also, a positive
significant linear correlation which was determined between academic success and shared control sub-
dimension in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment in the model. On
examining the regression equation of the covered variables predicted by variables that were included
in the structural equation model, the statement coefficient value of the model was found as (R2) 0.76.
It can be well understood that all five predictor variables that were included in the regression equation
accounted for 76% of the overall variance of the academic success in science course in the research. As
can also be seen in the regression equation, the variable best predicting students’ academic success in
science course was the variable of personal relevance in relation to the perceptions on the constructiv-
ist learning environment.
The association between learning environment variables and student outcomes has provided a
particular rationale and focus for the application of learning environment (Fisher & Churach, 1998). In
recent years science educators have led the way in investigating the effect of learning environment on
student behaviour and academic success in school setting (Fraser & Walberg, 1991). In this context, it has
been determined that a positive learning environment is influential in students’ academic success (Fisher,
Henderson & Fraser, 1995). Also, previous researches indicated that students’ perceptions of learning
environment are an important factor in explaining their cognitive and affective outcomes (Fraser, 1994,
1998). Besides, the use of student perceptions of classroom environment as predictor variables in several
different countries established consisted correlations between the nature of the classroom environment
and various student cognitive and affective outcomes (Haertel, Walberg & Haertel, 1981; Fraser & Fisher,
1982; Fraser, 1986; McRobbie & Fraser, 1993; Parker, 2009). Similarly, there are further studies indicating
that a constructivist learning environment is associated with a variety of desirable student outcomes, such
as academic success and attitudes (Fraser and Tobin, 1989; Tobin and Fraser, 1990; Fraser, 1994; Huffman,
Lawrenz & Minger, 1997; Oh & Yager, 2004). Hence, it can possibly be stated that several studies indicated
that the perception on the constructivist learning environment is a strong factor in determining and
373
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 367-378)
predicting students’ academic success at school (Fraser, 1994; Fisher, Henderson & Fraser, 1995). In other
words, the constructivist learning environment generally shows a positive correlation with academic
success at school. Thus, as can be seen from the findings obtained in the related literature in regard of
the constructivist learning environment, there are significant correlations between perceptions on the
constructivist learning environment and academic success of students. In general, the results obtained
here indicated that the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment and academic success
amongst Turkish students can be considered as rather positive. In this context, the results obtained in
the literature can be said to be paralleled to the findings obtained in the current research.
The studies carried out in the related literature emphasised the importance of the correlations
between constructivist learning environment and academic success. Students’ perceptions on the con-
structivist learning environment are an important factor in explaining their cognitive outcomes (Fraser,
1994). It has been established that positive learning environment is influential in students’ academic
success in the classroom (Fisher, Henderson & Fraser, 1995). According to Sunal and Haas (2002), the
classroom environment for meaningful learning can be obtained through joining the principles of con-
structivist learning with the roles of teachers and learners. Grounded constructivist learning environment,
therefore, support individual or groups as they attempt to negotiate multiple rather than singular point
of view, reconcile competing and conflicting perspectives and beliefs, and construct personally relevant
meaning accordingly (Hannafin & Land, 1997). In typical constructivist learning environments, students
establish learning goals and needs, navigate through and evaluate a variety of potentially relevant re-
sources, generate and test hypotheses, and so forth (Land & Hannafin, 2000). In such an environment, the
learner brings his/her social life experiences to the classroom, gathers evidence, establishes associations
between his/her experiences, able to see his/her newly gained knowledge, skills and experiences from
another perspectives. Additionally, the learners in such an environment feel confident and enrich their
learning with adequate materials and experiences (Karaduman & Gültekin, 2007). Therefore, it might
be suggested that activities should be done to raise students’ perceptions on the constructivist learn-
ing environment at school. As a result of the current research carried out, it can be said that a positive
linear correlation was determined between academic success and the perceptions on the constructivist
learning environment in the model. In other words, it was found that academic success in science course
increased in parallel to the increase in the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment. Hence,
it might be recommended that teachers should design the teaching-learning environments according
to the principles of constructivist learning approach. They should design a learning environment which
supports collaborative study, face-to-face interaction, exploratory and project-based studies, discussion,
etc. in the classroom. Further studies should also be carried out in order to better understand the role
of the constructivist learning environment on the academic success in high school and/or university
level of education with or without a comparison to elementary education.
Conclusions
According to the findings obtained in the study that, on examining the compatibility index results
of the constructed structural equation model, the model-data compatibility was found out to be high
enough [χ2/df=1.46; GFI=0.86; CFI=0.93; RMSEA=0.048; RMR=0.078; SRMR=0.056; NFI=0.81; NNFI=0.92]
in the research. On examining the structural equation modelling it was seen that the variable best
predicting elementary students’ academic success in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist
learning environment was personal relevance sub-dimension. It became evident that the second most
crucial factor determining academic success in science course was critical voice sub-dimension in rela-
tion to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment. Besides, a linear positive correlation
was found out between uncertainty sub-dimension in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist
learning environment and academic success in science course. A positive significant linear correlation
was determined between academic success and student negotiation sub-dimension in relation to the
perceptions on the constructivist learning environment in the model. Also, a positive significant linear
correlation which was determined between academic success and shared control sub-dimension in
relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environment in the model. In conclusion, it
374
(P. 367-378)
was understood that the variable best predicting students’ academic success in science course was the
variable of personal relevance in relation to the perceptions on the constructivist learning environ-
ment. On the other hand, on examining the regression equation of the covered variables predicted by
variables that were included in the structural equation model, the statement coefficient value of the
model was found as 0.76. It can be well understood that all five predictor variables that were included
in the regression equation accounted for 76% of the overall variance of the academic success in science
course in the research.
References
Abbott, J., & Ryan, T. (1999). Constructing knowledge, reconstructing schooling. Educational Leadership, 57 (3), 66-
69.
Acat, B., Anılan, H., & Anagün, S. S. (2010). The problems encountered in designing constructivist learning environ-
ments in science education and practical suggestions. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology,
9 (2), 212-220.
Akyol, S. (2011). Sosyal yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamı tasarımının öğrenenlerin akademik başarılarına ve öğrenmenin
kalıcılığına etkisi (İlköğretim 5. sınıf fen ve teknoloji dersi). Unpublished master’s thesis, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., Taylor, P. C., & Chen, C. C. (2000). Constructivist learning environments in a cross-national
study in Taiwan and Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 37-55.
Altun, S., & Büyükduman, İ. (2007). Yapılandırmacı öğretim tasarımı uygulamasına ilişkin öğrenci ve öğretmen
görüşlerine ilişkin bir örnek çalışma. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 7 (1), 30-39.
Anagün, Ş. S., & Anılan, H. (2010). The Turkish adaptation study results of constructivist learning environments scale:
Confirmatory factor analysis results. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1482-1487.
Arısoy, N. (2007). Examining 8th grade students’ perception of learning environment of science classrooms in relation to
motivational beliefs and attitudes. Unpublished master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University the Graduate
School of Social Sciences, Ankara.
Aybek, B., & Ağlagül, D. (2011). Beşinci sınıf sosyal bilgiler dersinde sınıf öğretmenlerinin yapılandırmacı öğrenme
ortamı düzenleme becerilerinin değerlendidilmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3 (40), 1-18.
Aygören, F. (2009). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamlarının sınıf öğretmenlerinin ve okul yöneticilerinin görüşlerine göre
değerlendirilmesi (Çine ilçesi örneği). Unpublished master’s thesis, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler
Enstitüsü, Aydın.
Bal, A. P., & Doğanay, A. (2009). İlköğretim beşinci sınıf öğrenilerinin matematik dersinde yapılandırmacı öğrenme
ortamına bakış açıları. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18 (2), 156-171.
Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education, 63, 873-878.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. (Revised Ed.).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Publications.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. New York: W.W. Norton.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education. London: Routledge Falmer.
Cunningham, D. J. (1992). Beyond educational psychology: Steps toward an educational semiotic. Educational
Psychology Review, 4, 165-194.
Çetin, O., & Günay, Y. (2007). Fen öğretiminde yapılandırmacılık kuramının öğrencilerin başarılarına ve bilgiyi
yapılandırmalarına olan etkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 146, 24-38.
Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik. Ankara: Pegem Aka-
demi Yayınları.
Demirel, Ö. (2005). Eğitimde program geliştirme: Kuramdan uygulamaya. (8th Ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
DeVries, R., & Betty, Z. (1995). Creating a constructivist classroom atmosphere. Young Children, 51 (1), 4-13.
Dunlop, J. C., & Grabinger, R. S. (1996). Rich environments for the active learning in higher education. In Wilson, G.
B. (Ed.), Constructing learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Educational Technology Publications.
Dündar, Ş. (2008). İlköğretim sosyal bilgiler dersi öğrenme ortamlarının yapılandırmacı özellikler açısından değerlendirilmesi.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
Fer, S., & Cırık, I. (2007). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme: Kuramdan uygulamaya. İstanbul: Morpa Yayınları.
Fisher, D. L., & Churach, D. (1998). The internet and secondary science. Effects on constructivist classroom environ-
ments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Sydney.
Retrieved from: http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/fis98024.htm (15.06.2009).
Fisher, D., Henderson, D., & Fraser, B. (1995). Interpersonal behaviour in senior high school biology classes. Research
in Science Education, 25 (2), 25-133.
375
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 367-378)
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fraser, B. J. (1998). Science learning environments: Assessments, effects and determinants. In Fraser, B. J. & Tobin, K.
G. (Eds.), International handbook of science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Publications.
Fraser, B. J. (1994). Research on classroom and school climate. In Gabel, D. (Ed.), Handbook of research on science
teaching and learning. New York: Macmillan.
Fraser, B. J., & Walberg, H. J. (1991). Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and consequences. Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
Fraser, B. J. (1986). Classroom environment. London: Croom Helm.
Fraser, B. J. (1989). Assessing and improving classroom environment: What research says? Perth, Australia: Curtin
University of Technology.
Fraser, B. J., & Tobin, K. (1989). Student perceptions of psychosocial environments in classrooms of exemplary science
teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 19-34.
Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1982). Predicting students’ outcomes from their perceptions of classroom psychosocial
environments. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 498-518.
Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory,
perspectives and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gagnon, G. W., & Collay, M. (2001). Designing for learning: Six elements in constructivist classrooms. Thousand Oaks,
California: Corwin Press.
Gökçe, E., İşcan, C. D., & Erdem, A. (2012). Öğretmen adaylarının sınıf ortamında yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma uygun
çalışmalar gerçekleştirilmesine ilişkin gözlemleri. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1 (1), 111-127.
Haertel, G. D., Walberg, H., G., & Haertel, E. H. (1981). Socio-psychological environments and learning: A quantitative
synthesis. British Educational Research Journal, 7, 27-36.
Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced, student-centered
learning environments. Instructional Science, 25, 167-202.
Honabein, P. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments. In Wilson, G. B. (Ed.), Con-
structing learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational
Technology Publications.
Honabein, P. C., Duffy, T. M., & Fishman, B. J. (1993). Constructivism and the design of learning environments: Context
and authentic activities for learning. In Duffy, T. M., Lowyck, J. & Jonassen, D. H. (Eds.), Designing environments
for constructivist learning. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Huffman, D., Lawrenz, F., & Minger, M. (1997). Within-class analysis of ninth-grade students’ perceptions of the learn-
ing environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34 (8), 791-804.
İlgen, H. (2010). Sınıf öğretmenlerinin ve ilköğretim öğrencilerinin yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamını değerlendirmesi.
Unpublished master’s thesis, Yeditepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.), Instructional design
and theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erl-
baum Associates.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the simple command language. Lin-
colnwood: Scientific Software International, Inc.
Karadağ, E. (2007). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme ile ilgili öğretmen yeterliği ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik
analizleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 7 (1), 167-175.
Karadağ, E., & Korkmaz, T. (2007). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme yaklaşımı: Kuramdan uygulamaya. Ankara: Kök Yayıncılık.
Karaduman, H., & Gültekin, M. (2007). The effects of constructivist learning principles based learning materials to
students’ attitudes, success and retention in social studies. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technol-
ogy, 6 (3), 98-112.
Karasar, N. (2005). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi. (15th Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
Kim, H., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). Assessment and investigation of constructivist science learning environ-
ments. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17, 239-249.
Kinnucan-Welsch, K., & Jenlink, P. M. (1998). Challenging assumptions about teaching and learning: three case studies
in constructivist pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14 (4), 413-427.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications, Inc.
Küçüközer, H., Ad, V. N. K., Ayverdi, L., & Eğdir, S. (2012). Turkish adaptation of constructivist learning environment
survey. Elementary Education Online, 11 (3), 671-688.
Land, S. M., & Hannafin, M. J. (2000). Student-centred learning environments. Jonassen, D. H. & Land, S. M. (Eds.),
Theoretical foundations of learning environments. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Loyens, S. M. M., & Gijbels, D. (2008). Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: Introducing
a multi-directional approach. Instructional Science, 36, 351-357.
Margianti, E. S., Fraser, B. J., & Aldridge, J. M. (2001). Investigating the learning environment and students’ outcomes at
the university level in Indonesia. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Australian Association for research
in education, Fremantle, Western Australia.
376
(P. 367-378)
McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence based inquiry. Boston: Brown and Com-
pany.
McRobbie, C. J., & Fraser, B. J. (1993). Associations between student outcomes and psychosocial science laboratory
environments. Journal of Educational Research, 87, 78-85.
Narlı, S. (2011). Is constructivist learning environment really effective on learning and long-term knowledge retention
in mathematics? Example of the infinity concept. Educational Research and Reviews, 6 (1), 36-49.
Oh. P. S., & Yager, R. E. (2004). Development of constructivist science classrooms and changes in student attitudes
toward science learning. Science Education International, 15 (2), 105-113.
Özden, Y. (2005). Eğitimde yeni değerler: Eğitimde dönüşüm. (6th Ed.). Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
Özgür, B. (2008). Perceptions of 4th and 5th grade primary school students and their teachers about constructivist learn-
ing environments in science and technology courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Middle East Technical
University Graduate School of Social Sciences, Ankara.
Özkal, K., Tekkaya, C., & Çakıroğlu, J. (2009). Investigating 8th grade students’ perceptions of constructivist science
learning environment. Education and Science, 34 (153), 38-46.
Özkal, K. (2007). Scientific epistemological beliefs, perceptions of constructivist learning environment and attitude towards
science as determinants of students’ approaches to learning. Unpublished master’s thesis, Middle East Technical
University the Graduate School of Social Sciences, Ankara.
Parker, K. (2009). Constructivist learning design: A qualitative study of learning theory and at-risk students’ academic suc-
cess. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Capella University the Institute of Educational Sciences, Minnesota.
Piaget, J. (1955). The language and thought of the child. Cleveland, Ohio: World Publishing.
Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105 (9), 1623-1640.
Saban, A. (2004). Öğrenme-öğretme süreci: Yeni teori ve yaklaşımlar. (3rd Ed.). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1996). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework.
In Wilson, B. (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Schunk, D. H. (2008). Learning theories: An educational perspective. (5th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson
Education, Inc.
Senemoğlu, N. (2004). Gelişim, öğrenme ve öğretim: Kuramdan uygulamaya. (4th Ed.). Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
Sunal, C. S., & Haas, M. E. (2008). Social studies for the elementary and middle grades: A constructivist approaches.
Boston: Pearson Education Limited.
Sümer, N. (2000). Yapısal eşitlik modelleri: Temel kavramlar ve örnek uygulamalar. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 3 (6), 49-74.
Tabachnick B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. (4th Ed.). MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Tatlı, Z., & Ayas, A. (2012). Virtual chemistry laboratory: Effects of constructivist learning environment. Turkish Online
Journal of Distance Education, 13 (1), 183-199.
Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1997). Monitoring constructivist classroom learning environments. International
Journal of Educational Research, 27 (4), 293-302.
Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B., & White, L. R. (1994). CLES an instrument for monitoring the development of constructivist
learning environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American educational research association,
New Orleans, LA.
Taylor, P. C., & Fraser, B. J. (1991). Development of an instrument for assessing constructivist learning environments. Pa-
per presented at the annual meeting of the of the American educational research association, New Orleans, LA.
Temiz, B. (2010). İlköğretim 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin “vücudumuzdaki sistemler” ünitesindeki akademik başarı ve fene karşı
tutumlarına örnek olay destekli 5E öğretim modelinin etkisi. Unpublished master’s thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim
Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Terhart, E. (2003). Constructivism and teaching: A new paradigm in general didactics? Journal of Curriculum Studies,
35 (1), 25-44.
Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Wash-
ington: American Psychological Association.
Tsai, C. C. (2000). Relationships between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perceptions of constructivist
learning environments. Educational Research, 42, 193-205.
Tobin, K., & Fraser, B.J. (1990). What does it mean to be an exemplary teacher? Journal of Research in Science Teach-
ing, 27 (1), 13-25.
Türker, H., H. (2009). Kuvvet kavramına yönelik 5E öğrenme döngüsü modelinin anlamlı öğrenmeye etkisinin incelenmesi.
Unpublished master’s thesis, Niğde Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Niğde.
Von Glasserfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In Fosnot, C. (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspec-
tives and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Thought and language. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Wilson, D. (1996). Introduction: What is a constructivist learning environment? In Wilson, D. (Ed.), Constructivist learn-
ing environments. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
377
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 367-378)
Yalçın, F. A., & Bayrakçeken, S. (2010). The effect of 5E learning model on pre-service science teachers’ achievement
of acid-bases subject. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2 (2), 508-531.
Yılmaz, B. (2006). Beşinci sınıf öğretmenlerinin fen ve teknoloji dersinde yapılandırmacı öğrenme ortamı dğzenleme
becerileri. Unpublished master’s thesis, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
Yurdakul, B. (2004). Yapılandırmacı öğrenme yaklaşımının öğrenenlerin problem çözme becerilerine, bilişötesi farkındalık
ve derse yönelik tutum düzeylerine etkisi ile öğrenme sürecine katkıları. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hacet-
tepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Ziegler, J. F. (2000). Constructivist views of teaching, learning, and supervising held by public school teachers and their
influence on student achievement in mathematics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of
Pennsylvania the Graduate School, Indiana.
Received: June 25, 2012 Accepted: October 25, 2012
Gokhan Bas PhD Student, Curriculum and Instruction Department, Necmettin

Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey.
E-mail: gokhanbas51@gmail.com
378
Motivational
Orientations in Physics
Learning:
A Self-Determination
Theory Approach
Reijo Byman,
Jari Lavonen,
Kalle Juuti,
Veijo Meisalo
Introduction Abstract. The first objective of the present

study was to test the factorial validity
Since the 1960s onwards student motivation and attitudes of the inventory designed to measure
(‘student voice’) towards physics learning has been actively studied students’ motivation to study physics in
(for a review, see Osborne, Simon & Collins, 2003). However, rela- school. Based on self-determination theory
tively few studies have a clear and consistent theoretical orienta- (SDT), it was hypothesised that the four
tion which connects the problems of physics learning to a broader factors of External Regulation, Introjected
theoretical framework of motivation. Moreover, the structure of Regulation, Identified Regulation and
female and male students’ motivation to learn physics has been Intrinsic Motivation account for the covari-
seldom discussed and systematically analysed, although several ances among the items of the inventory. It
studies have shown that male and female students have many was also expected that gender moderates
differences in their motivation to learn physics (see e.g., Lavonen, the factorial validity of the inventory. A
Byman, Juuti, Meisalo & Uitto, 2005; Stokking, 2000). sample of 3626 Finnish comprehensive
In the present study, the conceptualisation of motivation is school students was used. A multilevel
based on the theory proposed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan. confirmatory factor analysis (MLCFA) was
This theory is called the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Central to used to investigate the fit of the hypothe-
SDT is the concept of basic psychological needs that are assumed to sised four-factor model. The second objec-
be innate and universal. These needs are the need for competence, tive of the present study was to investigate
the need for autonomy, and the need for relatedness. According to different educational correlates of the four
Ryan and Deci (2002), motivation is a process in which a person’s motivation factors. Girls had a statistically
way of thinking has an important role. Motivated behaviour may higher mean score than did boys for all
be self-determined or controlled. These two types of motivated be- four factors. Otherwise only minor gender
haviour involve different reasons for behaving. By self-determined differences were found. Implications for
or autonomous behaviour, Deci and Ryan (1985) meant freely physics teaching are discussed.
chosen behaviour which arises from one’s self. To be autonomous Key words: motivational orientations,
means to study with a full sense of volition because the studying multilevel confirmatory factor analysis, sci-
itself is interesting or personally important. Controlled behaviour, ence learning, self-determination theory.
in contrast, means that the behaviour is ”controlled by some inter-
personal or intrapsychic force” (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan,
1991, p. 326). This means that a person has a feeling of pressure,
Reijo Byman, Jari Lavonen, Kalle Juuti,
that is, he or she has a ”should do” or a ”must do” feeling.
Veijo Meisalo
Ryan and Deci (2002) have suggested that two primary cogni- University of Helsinki, Finland
tive processes affect motivation. They are a change in the perceived
locus of causality and a change in perceived competence. When the
379
Motivational Orientations in Physics Learning:
A Self-Determination Theory Approach
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 379-392)
perceived locus of causality changes toward a more internally perceived locus, the intrinsic motivation
or the more self-determined forms of extrinsic motivation will be enhanced. When students are extrin-
sically motivated, they perceive the locus of causality and the regulation of their studying activities to
be external to themselves, whereas when students are intrinsically motivated they perceive the locus
to be within themselves. Change in perceived competence is related to the psychological need for
competence. Events that increase perceived competence enhance intrinsic motivation, whereas events
which reduce perceived competence tend to undermine intrinsic motivation.
According to Ryan and Deci (2000, p. 70), intrinsic motivation can be described as an “inherent
tendency to seek out novelty, and challenges, to extend and exercise one’s capacities, to explore and to
learn.” Intrinsically motivated behaviour is characterised by concentration and engagement; it occurs
spontaneously and people become wholly absorbed in it. Emotions, such as “interest”, “excitement,”
and “enjoyment” are distinctive marks of intrinsically motivated activity. Intrinsically motivated behav-
iours are based on the need to feel competent and self-determined. Moreover, teachers who support
autonomy have been shown to have more intrinsically motivated students with higher levels of self-
esteem, compared to the students of teachers who are control oriented (Deci, Nezlek, & Sheinman, 1981).
Thus, providing choice rather than control and acknowledging students’ inner experiences enhances
intrinsic motivation and the students learning improves (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Vallerand, Pelletier, Blais,
Brière, Senècal, and Vallières (1992) have split intrinsic motivation (IM) into three types: IM to know, IM
to accomplish things, and to experience stimulation.
Several studies (see e.g., Deci, 1975; Deci & Ryan, 1985) have shown that intrinsic motivation has
several positive effects on learning. However, it is unrealistic to imagine that all physics learning can
be intrinsically motivated. That is, it is not possible to make all the goals of the curriculum intrinsically
motivating, and in a classroom situation it is not always possible to give students choices about what
they should learn (see Byman & Kansanen, 2008). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation were first described
as a dichotomy, and extrinsic motivation was even said to be disastrous to intrinsic motivation (Deci,
1975). However, later Deci and Ryan (1985) limited the idea of the antagonistic nature of intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation. Through internalization process, extrinsically motivated behaviours can become
increasingly self-determined or autonomous. When the internalization process succeeds, students will
identify with the importance of the aims of the curriculum and will assimilate the aims into their inte-
grated sense of self, and thus fully accept them as their own.
Self-determination theory draws distinctions between four types of extrinsic motivation based on
how self-determined each type is, namely external, introjected, identified, and integrated forms of regu
lation. External and introjected regulation are considered to be relatively controlled forms of extrinsic
motivation, whereas identified and integrated regulation are considered to be relatively autonomous.
External regulation refers to intentional behaviours that are performed to earn some expected re-
ward or to avoid a threatened punishment. Externally regulated behaviours are the least self-determined
behaviours because the underlying values have not been internalized. A student who does homework
to avoid parental reproach is externally regulated. Working only if the teacher is in the area is also an
example of this form of motivated studying. Externally regulated studying is expected to show poor
maintenance and transfer once the teacher’s control is withdrawn.
By introjected regulation Deci and Ryan (1985) meant studying activities that are motivated by
internal prods and pressures that are connected to the student’s self-esteem. The student can feel that
he or she should do something or else suffer from negative feelings such as guilt. For example, student
learning in small groups during practical work or projects can have a positive influence to student
self-esteem and feelings. According to Deci and Ryan (2000, p. 236), “introjected represents a partial
internalization in which regulations are in the person but have not really become part of the integrated
set of motivations, cognitions, and affects that constitute the self. ” Thus, introjected regulation is not
self-determined. However, introjected regulations are expected to maintain over time better than totally
externally regulated studying activities.
Identified regulation occurs when the regulation has become a part of the self. Thus, a student feels it
to be personally important or valuable and participates in the studying activity more willingly. A student
may, for example, be interested in a science-, technology- or engineering-related occupation. Therefore,
380
ISSN 1648–3898 Motivational Orientations in Physics Learning:
(P. 379-392)
a physics teacher might support identified regulation if he or she acts as a kind of career counsellor. An
appropriate context, for example, the science, technology or engineering context, or an activity such
as a site visit might lead to this type of extrinsic motivation. In comparison to introjected regulation,
identification makes it possible to feel a sense of choice or volition about studying. In identifying the
value of a learning goal, students study more volitionally. An example would be a student who willingly
does extra work in physics because the student believes it is important for continued success in that
subject. The internalization has been more complete than with introjection, and this kind of studying
becomes more a part of the student’s identity. Studying that has a regulation based on identification
is expected to be better maintained and to be associated with higher commitment and performance
(Deci & Ryan, 2000).
The most self-determined form of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation, which appears pri-
marily in adult stages of development. The regulatory process is now fully integrated with the student’s
self and the student does the activity wholly volitionally. Integrated regulation results when “particular
values and actions that one has identified with have been fully reconciled with one’s other values and
actions, as well as with one’s organismic experience (Ryan et al., 1996, p. 12).” Integrated regulation re-
sembles intrinsic motivation in that both are self-determined. However, they are not the same. Intrinsic
motivation is characterised by interest in the studying activity itself, whereas integrated regulation is
characterised by the activity’s personal importance to a valued outcome. Integrated regulation, is sup-
posed to have positive effects on learning similar to those of intrinsic motivation.
Research Objectives
The first research objective of the present study was to test the factorial validity of an inventory
designed to measure students’ motivation to study physics in school. Based on the SDT, it was hypot-
hesised that the four factors of External Regulation, Introjected Regulation, Identified Regulation and
Intrinsic Motivation would account for the covariances among the items of the inventory. According
to SDT, regulation resulting from integration appears only in adult stages of development. Thus, the
designed inventory did not include integrated regulation sub-scale (cf. Ryan & Connell, 1989).
The second research objective was to investigate different educational correlates of the four mo-
tivation factors. As Cronbach and Meehl (1955) first suggested, the nomological network of a construct
is an important step in its construct validation. Some theoretical and empirical evidence suggests that
intrinsic motivation and identified regulation of extrinsic motivation have a positive impact on school
performance and attitudes to physic learning (see e.g., Koestner & Losier, 2002; Reeve & Jang, 2006;
Vansteenkiste, Lens & Deci, 2006).
Regarding the educational correlates of the four motivational orientation factors, the present
research focused on the relationship between teacher’s style of teaching and the motivational orienta-
tion of their students. According to Deci and Ryan (2000, p. 238; see also Reeve, 2009), when teachers
are “both autonomy supportive and involved, natural states of intrinsic motivation are less likely to
be undermined, and the internalization and integration of extrinsically motivated behaviors will be
facilitated.” The study of Reeve and Jang (2006; see also Ryan & Deci, 2009) has confirmed that teacher’s
style of teaching and motivating students correlate with students’ perceptions of autonomy. Such in-
structional behaviours as for instance listening to students, creating time for independent work, giving
student opportunity to talk, and being responsive to the student’s questions and experience correlated
positively with students’ perceptions of autonomy. Likewise, such instructional styles as monopolising
the learning materials, physically and exhibiting worked-out solutions and answers before the student
had time to work on the problem independently, directly telling the student a right answer instead of
allowing the student time and opportunity to discover it, and using controlling questions as a way of
directing the student’s work correlated negatively with students’ experience of autonomy. Thus, it was
hypothesised that teacher’s autonomy supportive motivating and teaching style correlates positively
to intrinsic motivation and identified regulation of extrinsic motivation. Respectively, it was postulated
that teacher’s controlling teaching style had a negative correlation to intrinsic motivation and identified
regulation of extrinsic motivation.
381
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 379-392)
Previous studies (see e.g., Häussler & Hoffman, 2002; Kerger, Martin & Brunner, 2011) have shown
that gender specific differences in motivation and achievement in physics exist. Physics is considered
to be genuinely masculine. Being interested in physics may threaten the self-perception of girls as well
as the femininity of their self-image. Thus, in the present study, it was also expected that gender would
moderate the factorial validity of the inventory (see e.g., Carlson & Mulaik, 1993; Mulaik, 2010). There can
be no valid comparison of the means for girls and boys if the measurement instrument is not invariant. As
Hoyle and Smith (1994) have noted, the comparison of means when the measurement is non-invariant
is like “comparing apples and oranges. “A great deal of evidence from several studies (see e.g., Gilbert &
Calvert, 2003; Häussler & Hoffman, 2002; Lavonen, Byman, Juuti, Meisalo & Uitto, 2005) indicates that boys
and girls show both qualitative and quantitative differences in orientation to learning physics. However,
before firm conclusions can be drawn about these gender differences, it is necessary to first confirm that
the differences observed are not due to differently valid measuring instruments. For example, when a
written instrument, such as a self-report inventory, is used, it is even likely that gender differences exist
in understanding the meaning of the words and sentences that are used (Groves, 1989). The factorial
validity of the developed scale was investigated both at the student and school levels.
Data Gathering
The data of the present study was gathered randomly for cluster sampling from the selected 75
schools from the list of Finnish-speaking comprehensive schools in Finland. A total of 4954 students
were selected for the survey and 3626 students answered, which corresponds to 73% of the students in
81% of the selected schools. The survey data of 9th grade students were collected in spring 2003.
Questionnaire
The Physics Learning Orientation Scale (PLOS) used in the present study was based on the 32-item
Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A) developed by Ryan and Connell (1989). The PLOS
was modified to measure students’ motivational orientations to study physics. For the PLOS, the items
of the SRQ-A were modified and also new items to measure intrinsic motivation (INT) and three kinds
of extrinsic motivation, namely external regulation, introjected regulation, and identified regulation
was designed. A deductive approach (see e.g., Burisch, 1984) was used in constructing new items for
the PLOS. To check the translation, techniques recommended by Brislin (1986) were used. The Finnish
translations of the items were translated back into English by an outside expert and then compared
to the original items. In the content validation process, the content of the inventory items was also
evaluated to ensure that they represented and covered intended motivational orientations. Numerous
revisions were made after this evaluation until a consensus about the item contents was obtained. The
final inventory included 24 items (see Appendix A). The items were rated with a Likert-type scale that
included four categories: always, almost always, sometimes, and never.
To research teachers motivating and teaching style (controlling or autonomy supportive) four
items where used. These items (e.g., “Teacher takes account of the ideas and suggestions made by the
students when the lesson is planned and implemented”) based on the Learning Climate Questionnaire
(LCQ) developed by Williams, Wiener, Markakis, Reeve and Deci (1994). For all these items students
rated their teachers teaching style on a five point Likert-type scale never – very often. Performance in
physics learning was measured with the last mark in physics (scale from 4 to 10) and attitude to physics
learning with three items. The first attitude item was an item where students had to choose what is the
most important subject in school (mathematics and mother tongue as “instrument subjects” where
eliminated from the list). The other two attitude items were five point scales “Physics is unnecessary-
important subject” and “Physics is unpleasant-pleasing subject”.
382
(P. 379-392)
Data Analyses
The data set of the present study had the classical hierarchical structure: scores are nested within
students, and students are nested within schools. Hence, a two-level multilevel confirmatory factor
analysis (MLCFA) was used to investigate the fit of the hypothetical model (Hox, 1995). The use of the
MLCFA made it possible to simultaneously examine the factor structure at the school and student levels.
In this kind of two-level analysis, the student level structure is often more complicated than that of the
school level (see e.g., Kuhlemeier, Van den Bergh and Rijlaarsdam, 2002). Correlations of the between-
student factor are interpreted in the same way as in a unilevel factor analysis whereas between-school
correlations represent the relationships between the factor means of the schools. In the MLCFA, the
total factor variance can be decomposed into a between-schools component and a between-student
component. Thus, a relatively large between-schools component suggests that the measurement is
strongly affected by classroom and school characteristics.
In the present study, the testing procedure at the student level started with the four-step logic
suggested by Mulaik (2010). According to this view, testing should start from an unrestricted factor
model, and then proceed to more restricted factor models. The first-step model tests whether the a
priori postulated number of latent variables can account for the covariances among the observed vari-
ables (Mulaik & Millsap, 2000; see also Byman, 2005). All unrestricted models with the same number of
factors will yield the same fit to the data. In the present study, the invariance of the factor structures
across gender was tested at the student level through a sequence of nested multigroup models. Ap-
plying a suggestion by Byrne (1998; see also Martin & Marsh, 2006), the hypothesis-testing strategy of
the present study was as follows:
Hypothesis I: Testing for the validity of factor structure (Hform)
Hypothesis II: Testing for the invariance of factor loadings (Hλ)
Hypothesis III: Testing for invariant factor variances and covariances (Hλφ)
Byrne et al. (1989; see also Byrne, 1998) have noted that most measuring instruments are actually
only partially invariant across groups. Byrne et al. also demonstrated that a meaningful comparison of
means is possible in situations where only partial measurement invariance is present. More recently,
Steenkamp and Baumgartner (1998) have argued that comparisons of factor means are meaningful if
at least one item (other than the reference item) is metrically invariant. By “metrical invariance” Steen-
kamp and Baumgartner meant the invariance of factor loadings (Hλ). Thus, the last invariance test of
the present study was as follows:
Hypothesis IV: Testing for invariant factor mean structure (Hλνκ).
The different educational correlates (teachers teaching style, performance, attitude and impor-
tance) of the four motivation factors were investigated with zero and partial correlations. To control for
collinearity of the educational correlates, partial correlations were conducted in which other correlates
were included as covariates in the analysis (see e.g., Martin & Marsh, 2006).
Assessment of Model Fit
In the present study, three types of fit indices were used. First, the Satorra-Bentler scaled chi-square
(S-Bχ2) was used as an absolute fit indice. Second, the Incremental Fit Index (IFI) was used as a type 2 fit
index. Third, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) was utilised as a type 3 fit index. All three types of incre-
mental fit indices are based on different rationales, and each describes somewhat different aspects of
fit (see e.g., Hoyle & Panter, 1995).
In the present study, a conventional 0.90 cut-off or “rule of thumb” criterion for the IFI and CFI indices
was used for restricted factor models. On the other hand, a value of at least 0.93 was expected in order
for a model to be considered well-fitting (Byrne, 1994). Due to the fact that the unrestricted model is
very liberal, it is important to have strong statistical support for it. Thus, following Mulaik and Millsap’s
(2000) suggestions, a 0.95 cut-off criterion for the CFI and IFI was used for unrestricted factor models.
The Steiger-Lind Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) index was used to investigate how
well individual models fit the statistical population. According to Browne and Cudeck (1993), a RMSEA
383
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 379-392)
index value below 0.05 indicates a good fit. However, in practice, RMSEA values of about 0.08 or less
indicate a reasonable error of approximation.
Results of Research
In the present study, the number of observations on the student level was 3626 (1794 girls and
1832 boys), while on the school level the number was only 68. Thus, it made sense to start the analysis
on the student level (cf. Hox, 1995). However, before proceeding to the model testing phase estimates of
internal consistency were calculated for all subscales used. The resulting alpha coefficients are presented
in Table 1. The coefficients confirmed that all four scales are internally consistent.
The Within-Group Model
To test the hypothesis that four factors account for the observed covariances, an equivalent unre-
stricted factor model (Model 1u) was constructed for both gender groups. Following Jöreskog’s (1979)
suggestion, Item 14 was postulated to load only on Factor 1, Item 9 only on Factor 2, Item 23 only on
Factor 3, and Item 21 only on Factor 4. These four reference variables were expected to be pure in their
respective factors and very close to the meaning of the concept. Thus, each column of the factor pat-
tern matrix contained three fixed values of 0 and one fixed value of 1. The other elements of the factor
pattern matrix were estimated freely. The factor-covariance matrix contained factor variances in the
diagonal. This model was tested simultaneously for both gender groups. As Table 2 shows, the statistical
fit of Model 1u was very good for both gender groups.
Next a four-factor restricted CFA model was constructed. According to the conceptual model pre-
sented by Ryan and Connell (1989), four factors, namely External Regulation (EXT), Introjected Regulation
(INTRO), Identified Regulation (ID), and Intrinsic Motivation (INT) were expected to reduce the data in
both gender groups. As shown in Table 2, the goodness of
Table 1. Alpha coefficients for the self-report inventories used.
Sample
Scalea Girls Boys

(N=1614) (N=1641)
EXT (5) 0.78 0.83
INTRO (6) 0.72 0.65
ID (6) 0.88 0.88
INT (7) 0.87 0.82
Table 2. Goodness-of-fit statistics for the individual level models.
Model df S-Bχ2 CFI IFI RMSEA
Girls
1 Model 1u 186 1573 0.98 0.98 0.067
2 Model 2 246 4158 0.93 0.93 0.099
3 Model 3 199 1792 0.97 0.97 0.070
Boys
1 Model 1u 186 1073 0.99 0.99 0.054
2 Model 2 246 2813 0.97 0.97 0.080
3 Model 3 199 1508 0.98 0.98 0.063
384
(P. 379-392)
fit for Model 2 was on an acceptable level for both girls and boys. However, a detailed inspection
of the results showed that the model had discriminant validity problems in both gender groups. The ID
and INT factors were highly correlated (ϕGirls=0.97 and ϕBoys=0.99), which suggests that these two latent
variables may not be distinct constructs. To test the post hoc hypothesis that the two latent variables
are not distinct, a method suggested by Schumacker and Lomax (1996) was used. The chi-square value
of Model 2 was compared to the values of two restricted models in which the correlations between the
problematic factors was fixed to value 1. The resulting ∆χ2 was statistically significant for both gender
groups thus indicating that the fixed model did not fit better than the original model, S-B∆χ2(1)Girls=11.54,
p<0.001 and S-B∆χ2(1)Boys=11.83, p<0.001. This result meant that, although the correlation between ID
and INT factors was high in both gender groups, the four-factor model did not completely reverted to
a three-factor model.
The result that ID and INT factors almost collapsed into a single factor resembles the results pre-
sented by Norwich (1999). On the other hand, in the present study one reason for the collapse of the
factors seemed to be wrong item specification. According to the Academic Self-Regulation Question-
naire (Ryan & Connell, 1989), Item 3 “I learn physics, because I want to learn new things” and Item 18 “I
study physics, because I want to understand things in physics” should load on the ID factor and thus
measure Identified Regulation. However, the results of both Model 1u and Model 2 showed that the
students in the present study interpreted these items differently than they did in Ryan and Connelly’s
study. In the present study, Items 3 and 18 seemed to measure Intrinsic Motivation instead of Identified
Regulation. There are also theoretical foundations for this change in relations between the latent and
observed variables. Vallerand, Pelletier, Blais, Brière, Senècal, and Vallières (1992) split intrinsic motiva-
tion (IM) into three types: IM to know, IM to accomplish things, and IM to experience stimulation. The
first type of IM, IM to know or IM knowledge refers to the “motivation for doing an activity for the feel-
ings associated with exploring new ideas and developing knowledge (see Noels, Pelletier, Clément &
Vallerand, 2003, p. 38).” Based on this interpretation of intrinsic motivation, it seemed reasonable that
Items 3 and 18 of the present inventory measure INT instead of ID. Thus, the specification of these two
items was changed to correspond to the interpretation held by Noels et al. After this change, a post hoc
CFA model (Model 2a) was constructed where the correlation between the ID and INT factors was fixed
to 0. In both gender groups the correlations among other factors were set free. Using the modification
indices (MI) of this model, it was possible to find the two items which most increase the correlation be-
tween the ID and INT factors. These items were Items 13 and 22. Both these items had a high MI for the
ID or the INT factor, MIItem 13=42 and MIItem 22=56. Moreover, Item 22 was also badly formulated and could
have been interpreted in two ways. Thus, Items 13 and 22 were eliminated from the model. The results
from Model 2 also show that a substantively meaningful error terms exist between Items 7 and 9. The
most plausible explanation for this finding seemed to be the similarity in item wording. Byrne (1994),
for instance, has argued that highly overlapping item content can lead to systematic error variance and
correlating measurement errors. Thus, these items were suggested to have a special meaning for certain
groups of students. Two gender-specific finding also emerged. For girls only, the MIs suggested that a
substantial improvement in model fit would be gained by an additional specifying of an error covari-
ance between successive Items 2 and 3. For boys only, the MIs suggested a correlated error between
Items 2 and 3. These two item pairs may not be totally locally independent. The results from Model 2a
also suggested that Items 10 and 16 have theoretically reasonable secondary loadings. Hayduk (1987,
pp. 191-193; 1996, p. 31) has suggested that, when the errors are correlated and the correlations are
substantially meaningful, it is doubtful that these are “errors.” In such cases a better way to proceed is
to replace the measurement errors with concepts and bring them into the model as model segments.
Based on this logic, a new model was developed with the boys’ data and then fitted to the girls’ data.
As shown in Table 2, the fit of the resulting 22-item model (Model 3) was acceptable for both gender
groups. The final within-group model is presented in Figure 1.
Next, the invariance of the factor structures across gender was tested through a sequence of nested
multigroup models. First, a multigroup baseline model was estimated. Because an acceptable reason for
the misfit of the initial model had been found, Model 3 was used as a baseline model for both gender
groups. Thus, a corresponding multigroup confirmatory factor analysis Model Hform was constructed
385
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 379-392)
first. Because the chi-square is summative, the fit of this model was acceptable, S-Bχ2(398) = 3215.62,
CFI = 0.98, IFI = 0.98 and RMSEA=0.066. Having received support for the preliminary test of invariance
(Model Hform), the testing of gender effects proceeded in a hierarchical fashion.
The invariance hypothesis, HΛ, proposed that the two gender groups have equal factor loadings. All
factor loadings were constrained to be equal across gender. This model was then compared to Model
Hform, in which no equality constraints existed. The result of the ∆χ2 test
Girls’ model Boy’s model
Figure 1: The final student level models for girls and boys.
was statistically significant, thereby supporting the rejection of the hypothesis of invariant factor
loadings (S-B∆χ2(24) = 433.41, p < 0.001). The examination of MIs suggested that the factor loadings of
Items 6, 19 and 24 were not invariant across gender. The contents of these items describe behaviour
that is not stereotypically considered to be feminine. Thus, relaxing these three factor loadings made
theoretical sense. A new model was estimated were loadings of Items 6, 19 and 24 were estimated in-
variant across gender. Successively relaxing the constraints of Items 6, 19 and 24 yielded a substantial
and statistically highly significant improvement in fit as compared to Model HΛ, where all loadings were
constrained as invariant (S-B∆χ2(3) = 181.63). On the other hand, when the final model was compared
to the Model HForm, the ∆χ2-test still supported rejection of the model, thus indicating that the model
still has some unjustifiable restrictions, S-B∆χ2(21)=251.78, p<0.001. However, because all additional
respecifications suggested by MIs were theoretically questionable and in order to avoid capitalising
on chance, no further respecifications were made. In addition, both the type-2 and type-3 fit indices
of Model HΛ* were on an acceptable level, CFI = 0.98 and IFI = 0.98. Moreover, the RMSEA estimate was
0.067 and its 90 percent confidence interval from 0.065 to 0.069, thus supporting the conclusion that
HΛ* was a good population model.
The next step was to test the invariance of the factor variances and covariances (HΛφ). The result of
the omnibus test (S-B∆χ2(6) = 35, p<0.001) supported the hypothesis of non-invariant factor variances
and covariances. However, the goodness-of-fit measures remained quite high (e.g., CFI = 0.98 and IFI =
0.98). Moreover, the RMSEA estimates were the same as in model HΛ*, thus supporting the conclusion
that HΛφ was a good population model. Examination of MIs suggested that the factor variances were
not invariant across gender. However, because of the relatively small MIs and to avoid capitalisation
386
(P. 379-392)
on chance, the hypothesis of invariant factor covariances and variances was accepted with caution (cf.
Steenkamp & Baumgartner, 1998).
Having obtained evidence for the partially invariant factor loadings and covariances, it made sense
to compare the means of the four orientation factors (Model HΛνκ). This was done using the method
suggested by Byrne (1998). According to the fit indices, the model fitted the data quite well, S-B∆χ2(437)
= 2873.78, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.98 and IFI = 0.98. In addition, the RMSEA estimate was 0.059 and had a 90
percent confidence interval from 0.057 to 0.061 which supported the partial scalar invariance. Thus, no
further modifications were made to the model. A comparison of the factor means revealed that girls
had a statistically higher mean score than did boys for all four factors, EXT (t=8.17), INTRO (t=11.58), ID
(t = 18.22) and IM (t = 16.17).
The Between-Group Model
The next step was the specification of a school-level model for both gender groups. For this, the
covariance matrices within and between schools were analysed using a multigroup procedure. As a first
step towards the development of the school-level model, the four-factor student-level base model was
expected to exist also on the school level. Then the full multilevel model was set up as a two-sample
multiple-groups problem separately for girls and boys. However, the estimation procedure for this model
did not converge. According to preliminary results from this model, the reason for this result seemed to
be the high correlation among all four postulated factors. All correlations seemed to be near 1, and the
factors collapsed into one new factor that can be interpreted as a General Motivational Orientation to
study physics. That is, one general factor was enough to capture all between-class variation.Thus, a new
model was constructed were only one general motivation factor was estimated at the school level. This
multiple group model had a reasonable fit. The REMSA values were at an acceptable level, RMSEAGirls=0.070
and RMSEABoys=0.076 (cf. Browne & Cudeck, 1993). Items 5 and 16 had the highest loadings on this General
Motivational Orientation factor in girls’ sample (λItem 5=-0.47 and λItem 16=0.23). In the boys’ sample, Items
7 and 2 had the highest loading on this general factor (λItem 5=-0.72 and λItem 16=0.69).
Educational Correlates of the Four Motivation Factors
The boys and girls data were first analysed separately. However, the results of the boys’ and girls’
data were so similar that the data was decided to pool. As detailed in Table 3 (see Appendix B), teach-
ers motivating and teaching style had expected connections to students’ motivational orientations.
Teacher’s autonomy supportive teaching style correlated positively to all motivation factors whereas
teacher’s controlling teaching style had a weak negative or zero correlation to students’ motivational
orientations. Table 3 also shows that the more self-determined motivation the student has the better
performance he or she has in physics learning. The connection was also almost linear between the mo-
tivational orientation and attitude to physics learning. That is, the more self-determined motivational
orientation the student has the more positive attitude he or she has to physics learning.
Discussion
Self-determination theory (SDT) is one of the leading theories for understanding human motiva-
tion. SDT describes motivation as a continuum from amotivation to intrinsic motivation. Four extrinsic
motivation categories lie between amotivation and intrinsic motivation. The main purpose of the
present study was to test if the Physics Learning Orientation Scale (PLOS) measures four motivational
orientations to study physics. According to the SDT, these four motivational orientations were intrinsic
motivation (INT) and three kinds of extrinsic motivation, namely external regulation (EXT), introjected
regulation (INTRO), and identified regulation (ID). The testing procedure was performed at two levels,
at the student level and at the school level. A multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MLCFA) was used
to investigate the fit of the hypothesised four-factor model.
The results of the present study gave partial support to the hypothesised factor structure. However,
387
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 379-392)
when the original set of items was used, the correlation between the factors Identified Regulation (ID)
and Intrinsic Motivation (INT) was very high in both gender groups and the omnibus tests indicated that
the correlation may even be 1 at the student level. This finding means that Identified Regulation and
Intrinsic Motivation may be the same factors in the population. On the other hand, high or even perfect
correlations between two dimensions do not necessarily mean that the concept behind the measure-
ment is unidimensional rather than bidimensional. What this kind of finding means is that empirically
the conceptually distinct concepts are almost perfectly correlated. According to Norwich (1999), it may
also be possible that students cannot define intrinsic motivation without terms of identified regulation
and intrinsic reasons for studying activities do not seem to be incompatible with extrinsic ones.
In the present study it was, however, possible to find item combinations where the correlation
between Identified Regulation and Intrinsic Motivation factors was only high. This was done by using a
post hoc CFA with both orthogonal and oblique factors and by eliminating two items from the scale. In
general, the results of the revised PLOS revealed that in general boys seemed to have more difficulties
making distinctions among the different motivational orientations than girls. For the boys’ data, the
factor correlations range from 0.56 to 0.86 with the mean correlation 0.72. For the girls’ data, the factor
correlations range from 0.25 to 0.74 with the mean correlation 0.52. Juuti, Lavonen, Uitto, Byman and
Meisalo (2004) have found a similar tendency in gender differences in students’ interest in physics in
different contexts; girls were more sensitive than boys to changes in context. Physics as a discipline and
school subject is claimed to be highly male-dominated. It may be that, girls are forced to conceptualise
their relation to physics. Girls who are motivated and interested in physics are in the minority and have
to rationalise their orientation. Meanwhile, boys follow the stereotype and are not subjected to thinking
about their relationship to physics. At the school level, all factor correlations were one, and the a priori
postulated four-factor model reverted to a general one-factor model. Thus, one general factor was suf-
ficient to explain the covariances among motivation measures. This result means that the differences
between schools are very small. This result is in line with the PISA results (see Lavonen & Laaksonen, 2009),
which have shown that there are only minor differences between schools in different parts of Finland.
The possible variance components of instruments using written language are multiple. According
to Johnson (1997), “pragmatic rules are implicit social conventions about meaning that can vary across
subcultures who share the same language” (p. 81). Groves (1989, p. 450) differentiated three types of
measurement errors associated with words. First, because different groups use different vocabularies, it
is possible that the respondent can assign no meaning to used word. Second, a word can have different
meanings to the same respondent. Third, a word can have different meanings for different respondents.
In the present study, students interpreted criteria Items 3 and 18 differently than the way suggested by
Ryan and Connell (1989). In the present study these two items measured INT instead of ID, or especially
what Noels et al. (2003) called IM to know or IM knowledge. Because of this new specification and the
elimination of two items, the ID factor was narrow, consisting only of three items. Two of these three
items were new if compared to the items of the SRQ-A, and they measured how important students felt
that physics was to their future plans.
In the present study, the invariance of the factor structures across gender was tested at the student
level through a sequence of nested multigroup models. The results of this systematic testing procedure
revealed that the factor loadings, factor variances and covariances were largely parallel for boys as well
as for girls. Taken together, our Finnish data suggests that in terms of measure of motivational orienta-
tion to physics learning, boys and girls are not substantially different. However, after this systematic
invariance testing, the comparison of the factor means revealed that girls had a statistically higher mean
score than did boys for all four motivational orientation factors.
The second objective of the present study was to investigate different educational correlates of the
four motivation factors. The resulted correlations of our study confirmed that identified regulation and
intrinsic motivation correlates positively to performance in physics learning. These two motivational
orientations had also a strong positive relationship with the attitude to physics learning. Relating to this
topic, the results of our study gave further support to the results of Reeve and Jang (2006) according
to which teacher’s style of teaching and motivating students correlates with students’ perceptions of
autonomy.
388
(P. 379-392)
Conclusions
According the results of the present study, the difference between the ID and INT dimensions of
PLOS needs further clarification. Thus, more precise and more differentiated items are needed to measure
the ID dimension. On the other hand, Hayduk (1996) has strongly emphasised that two or three items per
factor are sufficient enough to measure a concept, otherwise confusion results instead of clarification.
The surprising result that girls had a statistically higher mean score than did boys for all four mo-
tivational orientation factors may reflect a difference in conscientiousness. That is, several studies (e.g.,
Colquitt & Simmering, 1998; Komarraju & Karau, 2005) have shown that girls are more conscientious
than boys and that conscientiousness is positively related to the motivation to learn.
According to present study, both intrinsic motivation and also identified regulation of extrinsic mo-
tivation seem to be optimal motivational orientations to physics learning. Such instructional behaviours
as for instance listening to students and joint-planning of lessons correlated positively with students’
perceptions of autonomy and all four motivational orientation factors. Likewise, such instructional styles
as monopolising the learning materials and directly telling the student a right answer instead of allow-
ing the student time and opportunity to discover it correlated negatively with students’ experience of
autonomy. Thus, teacher’s autonomy supportive teaching and motivating style produces academic and
developmental benefits for their students also in physics learning (Reeve, 2002; see also Reeve, Jang,
Carrell, Jeon & Barch, 2004).
References
Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. J. Lonner & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Field
methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137-164). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, Inc.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing
structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park: Sage Publications, Inc.
Burisch, M. (1984). Approaches to personality inventory construction. A comparison of merits. American Psycholo-
gist, 39, 214-227.
Byman, R. (2005). Curiosity and sensation seeking: a conceptual and empirical examination. Personality and Individual
Differences, 38, 1365-1379.
Byman, R., & Kansanen, P. (2008). Pedagogical thinking in a student’s mind: A conceptual clarification on the basis of
self-determination and volition theories. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 52, 603-621.
Byrne, B. M. (1994). Testing for the factorial validity, replication, and invariance of a measuring instrument: A para-
digmatic application based on the Maslac Burnout inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 289-311.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and
programming. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures:
The issues of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456-466.
Carlson, M., & Mulaik, S. A. (1993). Trait ratings from descriptions of behavior as mediated by components of mean-
ing. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 111-159.
Colquitt, J. A., & Simmering, M. J. (1998). Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn during the
learning process: A longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 654-665.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281-302.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., Nezlek, J., & Sheinman, L. (1981). Characteristics of the rewarder and intrinsic motivation of the rewardee.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 1-10.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum
Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and self-determination of
behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination
perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325-346.
Gilbert, J., & Calvert, S. (2003). Challenging accepted wisdom: looking at the gender and science education question
through a different lens. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 861-878.
Groves, R. M. (1989). Survey errors and survey costs. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hayduk, L. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hayduk, L. A. (1996). LISREL issues, debates, and strategies. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
389
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 379-392)
Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R.H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equating
modeling (pp. 158-176). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Hoyle, R. H., & Smith, G. T. (1994). Formulating clinical research hypotheses as structural equation models: A concep-
tual overview. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 429-440.
Hox, J. J. (1995). Applied multilevel analysis. Amsterdam: TT-Publikaties.
Häussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2002). An intervention study to enhance girls’ interest, self-consept, and achievement
in physics classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 870-888.
Johnson, J. A. (1997). Units of analysis for the description and explanation of personality. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, &
S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 73-93). San Diego, California: Academic Press.
Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., Uitto, A., Byman, R., & Meisalo, V. (2004). Boys and girls interest in physics in different contexts:
A Finnish survey. In A. Laine, J. Lavonen, & V. Meisalo (Eds.), Current research on mathematics and science edu-
cation. (Research Report 253, pp. 55-79). Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Applied Sciences of
Education.
Jöreskog, K. G. (1979). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. In J. Magidson (Ed.),
Advances in factor analysis and structural equation models (pp. 21-43). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Abt Books.
Kerger, S., Martin, R., & Brunner, M. (2011). How can we enhance girls’ interest in scientific topics? British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 81, 606-628.
Koestner, R., & Losier, G. F. (2002). Distinguishing three ways of being internally motivated: a closer look at introjection,
identification, and intrinsic motivation. In Deci, E.L & Ryan, R.M. (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research
(pp. 101-121). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Komarraju, M., & Karau, S. J. (2005). The relationship between the big five personality traits and academic motivation.
Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 557-567.
Kuhlemeier, H., van den Berg, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2002). The dimensionality of speaking and writing: A multilevel
factor analysis of situational, task and school effects. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 467-482.
Lavonen, J., Byman, R, Juuti, K. Meisalo, V., & Uitto, A. (2005). Pupil interest in physics: A survey in Finland. NorDiNa,
1, 72-85.
Lavonen, J., & Laaksonen, S. (2009). Context of teaching and learning school science in Finland: Reflections on PISA
2006 Results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 46, 922-944.
Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. W. (2006). Academic resilience and its psychological and educational correlates: A construct
validity approach. Psychology in Schools, 43, 267-281.
Mulaik, S. A. (2010). Foundations of factor analysis. (2 nd. ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor &. Francis.
Mulaik, S. A., & Millsap, R. E. (2000). Doing the four-step right. Structural Equation Modeling, 7, 36-73.
Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational
orientations and self-determination theory. In Z. Dörnyei (Ed.), Attitudes, orientations and motivations in language
learning: Advances in theory, research and applications (pp. 33-63). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Norwich, B. (1999). Pupils’ reasons for learning and behaving and for not learning and behaving in English and maths
lessons in a secondary school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 547-569.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications.
International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079.
Reeve, J. (2002). Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In E.L. Deci & R.M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook
of self-determination research (pp.183-203). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.
Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become
more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44, 159-178.
Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What teachers say and do to support students’ autonomy during a learning activity.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 209-218.
Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’
autonomy support engagement refers to the behavioral intensity and emotional. Motivation and Emotion,
28, 147-169.
Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in
two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-761.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contem-
porary Educational Psychology 25, 54-67.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In
E. L. Deci & R.M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: The University
of Rochester Press.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Promoting self-determined school engagement: Motivation, learning, and well-being.
In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook on motivation at school (pp. 171-196). New York: Routledge.
Ryan, R. M., Sheldon, K. M., Kasser, T., & Deci, E. L. (1996). All goals are not created equal: An organismic perspective
on the nature of goals and their regulation. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action:
Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 7–26). New York: Guilford.
390
(P. 379-392)
Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Steenkamp, H. B., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research.
Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 78-90.
Stokking, K. M. (2000). Predicting the choice of physics in secondary education. International Journal of Science
Education 22, 1261-1283.
Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briére, N. M., Senécal, C., & Valliéres, E. F. (1992). The academic motivation
scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation in education. Educational and Psychological Measure-
ment, 52, 1003-1017.
Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory:
Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41, 19-31.
Williams, G. C., Wiener, M. W., Markakis, K. M., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (1994). Medical student motivation for internal
medicine. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 9, 327-333.
APPENDIX A
Physics Learning Orientation Scale (PLOS)
1. I try to do my best in physics learning because I will feel really bad about myself if I do not
do well.
2. Learning physics is fun.
3. I learn physics because I want to learn new things.
4. I learn physics because that is what I am supposed to do.
5. I learn physics so that the teacher will not reproach me.
6. I try to answer difficult questions in class because I want the other students to think I am
smart.
7. I learn physics because I want the teacher to think I am a good student.
8. I try to answer hard questions in class because I feel ashamed of myself when I do not try.
9. I try to succeed in physics learning because I want my teacher to think that I am a good
student.
10. I try to answer difficult questions in class because it is fun to answer difficult questions.
11. I learn physics because I will be ashamed of myself if it did not get done.
12. I try to answer difficult questions in class because that’s what I am supposed to do.
13. I try to answer difficult questions in class because I like to find out if I am right or wrong.
14. I try to do well in physics because that is what I am supposed to do.
15. I learn physics because it is fun.
16. I try to do well in physics and that is why I try to do my school work well.
17. I try to do well in physics because I will get in trouble if I do not do well.
18. I learn physics because I want to understand the subject.
19. I also think and read about things related to physics at home, because they interest me.
20. I learn physics because I can plan and decide myself about things which are related to
school.
21. I learn physics because I am interested in it.
22. I do experiments related to physics at home and I discuss the experiments in school with
other students.
23. I learn physics because I am going to study physics.
24. I learn physics because in the future I am going to choose an occupation where it is advanta-
geous if I have studied physics.
391
ISSN 1648–3898
(P. 379-392)
APPENDIX B
Table 3. Educational Correlates of Motivational Orientations.
External Introjected Identified Intrinsic
Educational correlates
Zero Zero Zero Zero
Partial r Partial r Partial r Partial r
order r order r order r order r
Teaching style (autonomy sup-

0.064** 0.015 0.116** 0.062** 0.140** 0.093** 0.193** 0.141**
portive), Item 1
Teaching style (autonomy sup-
0.127** 0.106** 0.171** 0.131** 0.154** 0.101** 0.163** 0.086**
portive), Item 2
Teaching style (controlling), Item 1 -.0038* -0.041* -0.052** -0.036* -0.031 -0.025 -0.019 -0.040*
Teaching style (controlling), Item 2 0.006 0.014 -0.025 0.027 -0.007 0.023 0.030 0.006
Performance 0.068** - 0.214** - 0.295** - 0.310** -
Importance 0.014 -0.007 0.142** 0.039* 0.319** 0.187** 0.296** 0.120**
Physics is unnecessary-important 0.072** 0.050** 0.271** 0.052** 0.432** 0.105** 0.524** 0.111**
Physics is unpleasant-pleasing 0.053** 0.002 0.326** 0.190** 0.499** 0.278** 0.640** 0.430**
*
p<0.05, two-tailed. **p<0.01, two-tailed.
Received: July 03, 2012 Accepted: October 10, 2012
Reijo Byman PhD., Principal Investigator, Department of Teacher Education,

University of Helsinki, P. O. Box 9 (Siltavuorenpenger 5 A), Helsinki,
FIN-00014 Finland.
E-mail: reijo.byman@helsinki.fi
Jari Lavonen PhD., Professor, Head of the Department of Teacher Education,
University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 9 (Siltavuorenpenger 5), Helsinki, FIN-
00014 Finland.
E-mail: jari.lavonen@helsinki.fi
Website: http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/lavonen/
Kalle Juuti PhD., Principal Investigator, Department of Teacher Education,
University of Helsinki, P. O. Box 9 (Siltavuorenpenger 5 A), Helsinki,
FIN-00014 Finland.
E-mail: Kalle.Juuti@helsinki.fi
Veijo Meisalo Professor Emeritus, University of Helsinki, P. O. Box 9
(Siltavuorenpenger 5 A), Helsinki, FIN-00014 Finland.
392
ASSESSING PRE-SERVICE
TEACHERS (DIS) LIKING OF
SOME ANIMAL SPECIES
Gregor Torkar,
Milan Kubiatko,
Barbara Bajd
Introduction
Different animals can evoke positive or negative emotional Abstract. The purpose of this study was
responses in humans, although there is great variance in the quality to investigate attitudes of students, in
and strength of the accompanying feelings (Jacobs 2009). Human particular primary school and biology
perception of animals is partially subjective and it is affected by pre-service teachers, towards specific
contextual cues, and may change over time. For instance, a change animals in order to determine principal
in knowledge and understanding may influence human’s percep-
reasons for (dis) liking them. The sample
tion of animals (Batt 2009). The particular physical and behavioural
characteristics of organisms undoubtedly shape people’s attitudes consisted of 309 university students. Two
toward them. There were many studies conducted in this field factors were extracted termed “pleas-
over the last decades. An overview shows that some findings are ant animals” and “unpleasant animals”.
more, other less, consistent. It is generally presumed that humans “Unpleasant animals” were characterised
will prefer species’ that are perceived to be similar to them (Plous by certain commonly perceived features
1993). Additionally, if animals were perceived to be more physically
such as being dirty, dangerous, distinctive
similar to humans, this led to the assumption that they are more
similar mentally to humans (Knight et al. 2003). On the other hand, and fear evoking while “pleasant animals”
Beatson and Halloran (2007) found a converse effect. After the were typically beautiful, clean, pleas-
subjects watched a video of bonobos mating they experienced ant to touch, intelligent and responsive.
negative feelings towards this species. It is suggested that rec- Students with more positive attitudes
ognition of similarities between humans and animals may make toward the Biology subject also expressed
humans uncomfortable and consequently less disposed to have
more positive attitudes toward animals,
positive feelings towards them.
In an international study, Kellert (1993a), found that adults especially toward “unpleasant” animals.
particularly liked large animals, especially those with considerable And students with more frequent exposure
intelligence and the capacity for social bonding. Bjerke and Østdahl to natural environments had more positive
(2004) found that Norwegians living in an urban environment attitudes to “pleasant animals”.
liked small animals such as small birds, squirrels, dogs, etc. Kellert Key words: animals, attitudes, biology
(1993b) hypothesized that one factor, that may cause humans to
education, experiences, pre-service, pri-
avoid invertebrates “is the possible alienation from creatures so
morphologically and behaviourally unlike our own species” (Kel- mary school education, teacher.
lert 1993b, p. 852). Wagler & Wagler (2011) found that pre-service
elementary teachers that received frequent direct contact with Gregor Torkar,
University of Ljubljana & University of
Madagascar hissing cockroaches in an educational setting during Nova Gorica, Slovenia
their pre-service training programs had their attitudes and beliefs Milan Kubiatko,
changed in a positive way toward that arthropod but not toward Masaryk University, Czech Republic
other arthropods. Bjerke & Østdahl (2004) found that, in addition to Barbara Bajd
invertebrates, people dislike bats, rats and mice. Furthermore, birds University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
393
(P. 393-402)
ISSN 1648–3898
and mammals had greater support for conservation over reptiles and invertebrates (Czech et al. 1998).
Torkar et al. (2007) found that the main influences for Slovenian students’ attitudinal differentiation for
animals were: “humanlike” characteristics, prejudice towards certain animal, animal’s living environment
and fear towards potentially dangerous animal.
A considerable number of studies on attitudes towards animals have recorded gender differences.
Lindemann-Matthies (2005) showed males generally like wild and exotic animals whilst females rather
prefer pets. Kellert & Berry (1987) found that women were more humane and moralistic about animals
than men, but they were also more negative in attitudes toward some animals than men. In another
study, less liked animal species were found to be more interesting for males and those that were liked
were more popular for females (Bjerke & Østdahl 2004). Similar gender differences were also documented
relating to humans’ fears of large carnivores; females were expressing greater fear to phobic animals
than males (Røskaftet al. 2003).
Information concerning students’ interests may help teachers to devise strategies to enhance
students’ engagement in biology (Uitto et al, 2006). Only a few studies focused on pupils’ and students’
attitudes toward biology as a formative influence on their attitudes. We are not aware of studies which
investigate a relationship between attitudes towards biology correlated with attitudes towards animals.
There are, however, studies which investigate attitudes to biology only (Prokop et al. 2007b) and we
know of some studies evaluating peoples’ knowledge of certain animals or group of animals that have
related this to their attitudes toward them (Prokop et al. 2009, Torkar et al. 2010).
Scientific information sources also shows that care for the environment in adulthood is frequently
associated with experiences and time spent in nature, particularly in childhood (i.e. Chawla 1998, 1999,
Palmer et al. 1998, 1999, Tanner 1980). Direct contact with animals changes peoples’ attitudes toward
different types of animals (i.e. Barney et al. 2005, Wagler 2010, Wagler & Wagler 2011). Also Wagler (2010)
proved that pre-service elementary teacher’s attitude toward an animal affected their belief about using
that animal in their future science curriculum. Specifically, if a teacher had a positive attitude toward an
animal they were more likely to believe they would use that animal in their future science curriculum.
Conversely, if a teacher had a negative attitude toward an animal they were much more likely to believe
they would not use that animal in their future science curriculum. Therefore, it is of great interest to study
attitudes towards animals among teachers. School teachers are aware of social pressures on them to be
model citizens and that their actions help establish the next generation’s moral compass (Jacobson et
al. 2006). Teachers influence pupils’ attitudes towards science subjects (Lederman-Matthies 2008) and
they are often role models in the pupil’s formation of environmental attitudes (Chawla, 1998, 1999,
Chawla & Flanders Cushing 2007).
Purpose of the Study
The aim of the study was to investigate attitudes of students, pre-service primary school and biol-
ogy teachers, towards specific animals in order to determine principal reasons for (dis) liking them. This
study has provided some evidence of pre-service teachers’ attitudes and discusses the effects of different
pre-service training programs for primary school teachers and biology teachers. It also determined how
the gender, biology education (years of biology in secondary education, attitudes toward subject biol-
ogy) and students’ frequency of experiences in natural environments influenced their attitudes towards
animals. Effects of students’ experiences within nature and with biology education on perceptions of
specific animals were also measured.
Construction of Questionnaire
Students’ attitudes to animals were measured by a questionnaire. In the first question students
expressed their (dis) liking towards 27 relatively common animals on a 5-point Likert scale (1-very un-
pleasant feelings, 2-unpleasant feelings, 3-neutral, 4-pleasant feelings, 5-very pleasant feelings). The list
394
ISSN 1648–3898 ASSESSING PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS (DIS) LIKING OF SOME ANIMAL SPECIES
(P. 393-402)
of 27 animals has been developed based on our previous study (Torkar et al., 2007). The second question
was connected with the first. Students were asked to choose an animal (from first question) that well
represents one of eight perceptions of animals: dirty, dangerous, disgusting, fearful, beautiful, clean,
pleasant to touch and intelligent. Every animal could be included in more than one category. The third
question focused on frequencies of students’ experiences in natural environments: fresh water environ-
ments, marine coastline, meadows, woods, parks and mountain habitats. They had to choose between
options: never, rarely (at least once a year), occasionally (at least once a week) and often (at least once a
week) for each environment. The last two questions focused on biological education, more specifically,
on how long students had been taught biology in their secondary school and their attitude toward the
Biology subject was measured on 5-point Likert scale. At the end of the questionnaire students provided
some demographic variables such as gender, age and place of permanent residence. The original form
of the questionnaire was developed in the Slovenian language, translated into the Czech language and
then translated into English for publication purposes. The construct validity of the questionnaire was
established through review by authoritative subject specialists in zoology (researchers in the Faculty
of Education and also in the Faculty of Natural Sciences) and also by explorative factor analysis (see
Statistical procedure). Reviewers were asked whether the items were relevant to the aims of the study,
and revisions, based on their comments and suggestions, were incorporated into the final version.
Participants
The study was conducted during the spring semester 2009. A total of 309 students from two uni-
versities (from Slovenia and Czech Republic) participated in the study. The total number of participants
equals the number of students attending university courses at the time of the study. Students’ ages
ranged between 18 and 33 (x = 20.45; SD = 1.97). The sample size consisted of 150 pre-service primary
school teachers and 159 pre-service biology teachers. There were 30 males and 279 females. Comparisons
based on country and gender were performed. The dependent variable (students’ attitudes to animals)
was controlled by age as a covariate. There was a disequilibrium in distribution of males and females
within the sample, but the result of the Levene’s test for the homogeneity of variances (F = 0.10; p =
0.75) allows the use of analysis of variance.
Procedure
Questionnaires were administered in two universities. Students were reassured that the question-
naire was anonymous, that it was not a test, but rather a research attempt to explore their attitudes
toward animals. No time limit was given during completion of questionnaire, but the longest time
taken to complete it was approximately 15 minutes. The distribution of the questionnaire was done by
researchers or by teachers who were instructed on its distribution. In one case, the teacher was present
during the session when a researcher distributed the questionnaires among students.
Statistical Procedure
The attitude scores (n = 27 items – in this case animals) were subsequently submitted to factor
analysis with Varimax rotation and two factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were derived. One
of factor represented a group of “unpleasant animals” and the other represented a group of “pleasant
animals”. These two factors explained 41 % of the total variance. According to Reckase (1979), the prime
factor should explain at least 20 % of the total variance. In agreement with this suggestion, the first factor
“unpleasant animals” explained 31.57 % of total variance and the second (“pleasant animals”) factor 9.43
% of the total variance. The “unpleasant animals” category included 15 animals and the “pleasant animals”
category included 9 animals. Three animals with factor scores of more than 0.35 loaded in more than
one factor and were excluded from the subsequent analyses (Anastasi, 1990). The suitability of factor
analysis as an approach for analysing the data was evaluated by the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure
395
(P. 393-402)
ISSN 1648–3898
(the index for comparing the magnitude of the observed correlation coefficients to that of the partial
correlation coefficients). The value was 0.91, which allowed us to apply factor analysis. Bartlett’s test of
sphericity was used to test the null hypothesis that variables in the population correlation matrix are
uncorrelated. The observed significance level is high (χ2 = 3405.98; df = 351; p < 0.001). On the basis of
this result we rejected the null hypothesis. The strength of the relationship among variables was strong.
These indicators thus allowed us to use factor analysis for the data.
Reliability of the questionnaire was also evaluated. Cronbach’s alpha for the whole instrument was
0.92, which indicates high questionnaire reliability (Nunnaly, 1978). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and
multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) were used for investigating differences in results, and
finally Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient was used for exploring the relationships between
the results. Demographic variables (country, gender), data from questions about attitudes to biology
and years of biology undertaken in high school were treated as independent variables. The dependent
variables were the students’ attitudes to animals and their experiences within the natural environment.
The dependent variable students’ attitudes to animals were controlled by age as a covariate.
Results of Research
Figure 1 described the influences of different variables on students’ attitudes to animals. Pre-service
biology teachers had statistically significant higher scores (F (1, 306) = 9.18; p < 0.05). This means that
biology teachers had more positive attitudes toward animals than primary school teachers. Gender is
known to have a major influence on individual views about animals. Gender differences in the overall
mean score were not statistically significant (F (1, 306) = 2.69; p = 0.10). Results also showed that the
number of years studying Biology taken during secondary school education did not have any significant
influence on attitudes towards animals (F(3, 290) = 0.43; p = 0.73). But the last variable, presented in
Figure 1, showed that students’ positive attitudes to Biology is in correlation with their positive attitudes
to animals (F(4, 303) = 4.10; p < 0.05). Tukey’s post-hoc test showed statistically significant differences
between students with more positive attitudes towards Biology and those with neutral attitudes to the
subject (p < 0.05), and those who dislike the subject (p < 0.001).
Figure 1: Differences in attitudes toward animals by variables (country, gender, years of biology,
and attitudes to biology). (* p < 0.05, NS = not significant).
396
(P. 393-402)
Using factor analysis with Varimax rotation two factors were extracted, explaining 41 % of the total
variance. After careful examination of the factor table three items were excluded from further analysis
(otter, bear, snail), because their scores in both factors were more than 0.35. Table 1 shows the distribu-
tion of animals in the categories. In the first category are animals for which students expressed negative
attitudes, and in the second category are those for which they expressed positive attitudes.
Table 1. Factor analysis with Varimax rotation for attitudes to animals.
Unpleasant animals Pleasant animals
Snake 0.61 0.02

Earthworm 0.58 0.17
Spider 0.64 -0.05
Fly 0.57 0.02
Rat 0.66 0.07
Frog 0.73 0.24
Pig 0.53 0.33
Scorpion 0.72 -0.03
Bee 0.45 0.22
Cockroach 0.65 0.04
Shark 0.61 0.13
Wolf 0.64 0.23
Salamander 0.74 0.20
Lizard 0.77 0.14
Octopus 0.63 0.21
Horse -0.07 0.49

Rabbit 0.05 0.63
Fish 0.23 0.47
Squirrel 0.17 0.72
Dog 0.13 0.38
Bird 0.31 0.65
Cat 0.02 0.48
Dolphin 0.01 0.59
Parrot 0.23 0.64
Eigenvalues 8.55 2.55
The description of the categories was conducted on the basis of the second question in the ques-
tionnaire where students were asked to characterize animal species from the list of question 1. Students
wrote one animal’s name under characteristics: dirty, dangerous, distinctive, frightening, beautiful, clean,
pleasant to touch and intelligent. “Unpleasant animals” were characterised by certain common features
such as being dirty, dangerous, distinctive and evoke fear while “pleasant animals” are typically beautiful,
clean, pleasant to touch, intelligent and responsive. In our study the highest scores were achieved by
dolphin, dog and horse, and the lowest scores by cockroach, spider and bat.
397
(P. 393-402)
ISSN 1648–3898
Table 2 shows that animals, categorised as “unpleasant”, achieved lower attitudes scores in com-
parison with “pleasant” animals. Detailed examination of the variables (using Tukey’s post-hoc test)
showed some statistically significant differences in the “unpleasant animals” category for the variables.
In the first two variables the value was p < 0.05. Males and pre-service biology teachers disliked the
“unpleasant” animals less. There were some significant differences in the variable “number of years of
biology undertaken in secondary education”; statistically significant difference between groups of
students with one year and those with three years of biology in secondary school (p < 0.05) in favour of
the first group. And between those with three and four years of biology in secondary school (p < 0.001)
in favour of the later. These results show no pattern and confirm our previous findings, that the amount
of biology taught during secondary education does not predict students’ attitudes towards animals (see
Figure 1). Attitudes to Biology were found to be a significant variable. There were statistically significant
differences in attitudes towards “unpleasant” animals between those claiming that they like or strongly
like the subject Biology and those who dislike or strongly dislike the subject (p < 0.05). There was also
a significant difference in attitudes towards “unpleasant” animals between those who like and strongly
like the subject (p < 0.05) in favour of later. The results also show that students with positive attitudes
toward subject biology less dislike “unpleasant” animals.
Table 2. Mean score of the factors (categories) for each variable and values of MANCOVA.
Unpleasant Pleasant
Variable F (age) F W
animals animals
Pre-service primary school

Students 3.06* 16.89** 0.98 2.25 4.20
teachers
Pre-service biology
2.87 4.15
teachers
Gender 20.22** 8.63** 0.95 Male 3.13 4.06
Female 2.51 4.19
Years of biology 11.44** 2.65* 0.95 1 year 2.77 4.22
2 years 2.38 4.12
3 years 2.30 4.23
4 years 2.76 4.13
Attitudes to biology 22.94** 2.06* 0.95 Strongly dislike 2.04 4.11
Dislike 2.18 4.08
Neither like or dislike 2.59 4.19
Like 2.55 4.14
Strongly like 2.82 4.26

* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.001
Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between
animal scores and the total scores for frequency of experiences in natural environments. Overall, the
animal scores were very poorly correlated with experiences (r = 0.07; p = 0.21). However, more detailed
examination revealed that the category “unpleasant animals” displayed a low correlation with the fre-
quency of experiences in natural environments (r = 0.04; p = 0.48), but the “pleasant animals” category
was more significantly correlated (r = 0.17; p < 0.01). Results presented in Figure 2 show that students with
more frequent experiences in natural environments had more positive attitudes to “pleasant animals”.
398
(P. 393-402)
Figure 2: Correlation between mean score of pleasant animals and mean score of frequency of
experiences in natural environments.
Discussion
The main focus of this study was to investigate attitudes of students, pre-service primary and
biology teachers, towards specific animals in order to determine principal reasons for (dis) liking them.
Other questions explored or qualified attitudes revealed by the response to the first question. Our find-
ings show that pre-service biology teachers had more positive attitudes toward animals than primary
school teachers. The differences between two groups of pre-service teachers could be affected by
different pre-service training programs. The pre-service training program for biology teachers is based
on systematic zoology and botany. Pre-service biology teachers have frequent and systematic contacts
with various animal species (live and dead specimens) that they study scientifically. While, pre-service
primary school teachers have less and unfrequented contacts with animals in pre-service training pro-
gram, limited to only two courses (Science and Science Didactics). Another important factor that should
be also mentioned is student’s motivation. Pre-service biology teachers are probably more motivated
toward studying biology – the study of life and of living organisms.
The group of male students in the sample was very small and this could have an effect on the results,
whereas we found no significant differences in attitudes to animals among genders. Other studies, such
as Bjerke & Østdahl 2004, found some significant gender differences in attitudes to animals. Therefore,
this finding should be further investigated in the future with a more gender balanced sample.
Animals for which students expressed their attitudes, were extracted into two factors, named
“pleasant” and “unpleasant” animals. For the first they expressed positive characteristics, like beautiful,
clean, pleasant to touch, intelligent and responsive, and for the second factor they expressed more
negative, like dirty, dangerous, distinctive and evoke fear. The results confirm that people have positive
attitudes toward “cute” animals, especially pets such as cats, dogs and horses, and exotic species like
dolphins, tigers and lions (Lindemann-Matthies 2005). Bjerke & Østdahl (2004) noted in their study that
people generally dislike invertebrates, bats, rats and mice, which is evident also from our results (Table
2). These animals are small, behaviourally and morphologically clearly dissimilar to humans (Bjerke &
Østdahl 2004, Kellert 1993b, Prokop & Tunnicliffe 2008).
In the previous studies it was found that care for the environment in adulthood is frequently as-
399
(P. 393-402)
ISSN 1648–3898
sociated with positive experiences and time spent in nature, particularly during childhood (i.e. Chawla
1998, 1999, Palmer et al. 1998, 1999, Tanner 1980). Our findings confirm positive effects of people’s
experiences in nature, but it also shows that mainly this has an effect on students’ attitudes towards
‘pleasant’ animals. Students with positive attitudes toward the subject, Biology, expressed more positive
attitudes toward animals, especially toward “unpleasant” animals. It is essential that a quality science
education experience begins in the primary school with curriculum that exposes students to different
animals (e.g. AAAS 1993, Krek (ed.) 2011, NAAEE 2004). In particular, the quality of biology teaching
could be improved by working with living organisms (Myers et al. 2003). Direct contact with living or-
ganisms provides information and experiences that are not obtainable by reading, viewing pictures, or
examining models (Strgar, 2007) and thus changes peoples’ attitudes toward animals (e.g. Barney et al.
2005, Dimopoulos & Pantis 2003, Tomažič 2011, Wagler 2010, Wagler & Wagler 2011). Teachers should,
accordingly, encourage their pupils to more often explore natural environments and various organisms
outside the classroom.
Lastly, a comparison of results with discussed studies has also shown that certain negative atti-
tudes and perceptions toward animal species have the same patterns in different studied groups. These
negative attitudes might reflect the lack of direct contact with animals and/or poor knowledge about
the animals concerned. Several studies report on students’ misconceptions about animals (i.e. Barrow
2002, Prokop et al. 2007a, Torkar & Bajd 2006). Usually, such misconceptions have a negative influence
on pupils’ attitudes, and thus teachers should investigate them in the classroom and prepare educational
interventions in order to reduce their influence on students’ knowledge and attitudes to animals.
Conclusion
The present study explored the attitudes of pre-service primary and biology teachers, towards
specific animals in order to determine principal reasons for (dis) liking them. It was also examined
whether, and to what extent, gender, biological education and students’ frequency of experiences
in natural environments influenced their attitudes towards animals. Results showed some significant
differences in attitudes toward animals among pre-service primary teachers and biology teachers in
favour of later. Students with positive attitudes toward the subject, Biology, also expressed more posi-
tive attitudes toward animals, especially toward “unpleasant” animals. Frequent direct contacts with
animals are important factors positively affecting attitudes toward animals, especially toward “pleasant
animals”. The findings of this study provide useful information for those that prepare future teachers
and can contribute to social changes in relation to animals and nature.
Results are limited to two groups of pre-school teachers from two universities and to a relatively
small sample size. Therefore, future comparative research across different universities and countries
would provide a deeper understanding of teacher’s attitudes to animals and provide more detailed
data for educational implications.
Acknowledgements
Authors would like to thank anonymous referees that made very insightful comments on earlier
drafts.
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Anastasi, A. (1990). Psychological testing (7th Ed.). New York, Macmillan.
Barney, E. C., Mintzes, J. J., Yen, C. (2005). Assessing knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward charismatic mega-
fauna: the case of dolphins. The Journal of Environmental Education, 36 (2), 41-56.
Barrow, L. H. (2002). What Do Elementary Students Know About Insects? Journal of Elementary Science Education,
14 (2), 51-56.
400
(P. 393-402)
Batt, S. (2009). Human attitudes towards animals in relation to species similarity to humans: a multivariate approach.
Bioscience Horizons, 2 (2), 180-190.
Beatson, R. M., & Halloran, M. J. (2007). Humans rule! The effects of creatureliness reminders, mortality salience and
self-esteem on attitudes towards animals. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 619-632.
Bjerke, T., & Østdahl, T. (2004). Animal-related attitudes and activities in an urban population. Anthrozoö, 17 (2),
109-129.
Chawla, L. (1998). Significant Life Experiences Revisited: A Review of Research on Sources of Environmental Sensitiv-
ity. The Journal of Environmental Education, 29 (3), 11-21.
Chawla, L. (1999). Life Paths into Effective Environmental Action. The Journal of Environmental Education, 31 (1),
15-26.
Chawla, L., Flanders Cushing, D. (2007). Education for strategic environmental behaviour. Environmental Education
Research, 13 (4), 437-452.
Czech, B., Krausman, P. R., & Borkhataria, R. (1998). Social construction, political power, and the allocation of benefits
to endangered species. Conservation Biology, 12, 1103-1112.
Jacobs, M. H. (2009). ‘Why Do We Like or Dislike Animals?’ Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 14 (1), 1-11.
Jacobson, S. K., McDuff, M. D., & Monroe, M. C. (2006). Conservation education and outreach techniques. Oxford Uni-
versity Press, New York,
Kellert, S. R. (1993a). Attitudes, knowledge, and behaviour toward wildlife among the industrial superpowers: United
States, Japan, and Germany. Journal of Social Issues, 49, 53-69.
Kellert, S. R. (1993b). Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conservation Biology, 7 (4), 845-855.
Kellert, S. R., & Berry, J. K. (1987). Attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors toward wildlife as affected by gender. Wildlife
Society Bulletin, 13, 363-371.
Knight, S., Nunkoosing, K., Vrij, A., & Cherryman, J. (2003). Using grounded theory to examine people’s attitudes
toward how animals are used. Society & Animals, 11 (4), 307-327.
Krek, J. (Ed.) (2011). White Paper on Education in the Republic of Slovenia. Ministry of Education and Sport, Lju-
bljana.
Lindemann-Matthies, P. (2005). ‘Loveable’ mammals and ‘lifeless’ plants: how children’s interest in common local
organisms can be enhanced through observation of nature. International Journal of Science Education, 27 (6),
655-677.
Myers, O. E., Saunders, C. D., & Garrett, E. (2003). What Do Children Think Animals Need? Aesthetic and Psycho-social
Conceptions. Environmental Education Research, 9, 305-325.
North American Association for Environmental Education (NAAEE). (2004). North American association for environ-
mental education standards for the initial preparation of environmental educators (NAAEES). Retrieved June
15, 2012 from http://www.naaee.org/
Nunnaly, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Palmer, J. J., Suggate, B., Bajd, & E. Tsaliki (1998). Significant Influences on the Development of Adults’ Environmental
Awareness in the UK, Slovenia and Greece. Environmental Education Research, 4 (4), 429-444.
Palmer, J., J. Suggate, I. Robottom, & P. Hart (1999). Significant Life Experiences and Formative Influences on the
Development of Adults’ Environmental Awareness in the UK, Australia and Canada. Environmental Education
Research, 5 (2), 181-200.
Plous, S. (1993). Psychological mechanisms in the human use of animals. Journal of Social Issues, 49, 11-52.
Prokop, P., Kubiatko, M., Fančovičova, J. (2007a). Why Do Cocks Crow? Children’s Concepts About Birds. Research in
Science Education, 37, 393-405
Prokop, P., Prokop, M., & Tunnicliffe, S.D. (2007b). Is biology boring? Students’ attitudes toward biology. Journal of
Biological Education, 42 (1), 36-39.
Prokop, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2008). ‘Disgusting’ animals: Primary school children’s attitudes and myths of bats and
spiders. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4 (2), 87-97.
Prokop, P., Özel, M., & Usak, M. (2009). Cross-Cultural Comparison of Student Attitudes toward Snakes. Society &
Animals, 17, 224-240.
Reckase, M. D. (1979). Unifactor latent trait models applied to multifactor tests: Results and implications. Journal of
Educational Statistics, 4 (3), 207-230.
Røskaft, E., Bjerke, T., Kaltenborn, B. P., Linnell, J. D. C., & Andersen, R. (2003). Patterns of self-reported fear towards
large carnivores among the Norwegian public. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24 (3), 184-198.
Strgar, J. (2007). Increasing the interest of students in plants. Journal of Biological Education, 42 (1), 19-23.
Tanner, T. (1980). Significant Life Experiences: A New Research Area in Environmental Education. Journal of Environ-
mental Education, 11 (4), 20-24.
Tomažič, I. (2011). Reported Experiences Enhance Favourable Attitudes Toward Toads. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics,
Science & Technology Education, 7 (4), 253-262.
Torkar, G., & Bajd, B. (2006). Trainee teachers’ ideas about endangered birds. Journal of Biological Education, 41 (1),
5-8.
401
(P. 393-402)
ISSN 1648–3898
Torkar, G., Praprotnik, L., & Bajd, B. (2007). Future teacher‘s relationship to animals. Didacta Slovenica, 22 (1-2), 136-
149.
Torkar, G., Mohar, P., Gregorc, T., Nekrep, I., & Hönigsfeld Adamič, M. (2010). The conservation knowledge and at-
titudes of teenagers in Slovenia toward the Eurasian Otter. International Journal of Environmental & Science
Education, 5 (3), 341-352.
Uitto, A., Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., & Meisalo, V. (2006). Students’ interest in biology and their out-of-school experiences.
Journal of Biological Education, 40 (3), 124-129.
Wagler, R. (2010). The association between preservice elementary teacher animal attitude and likelihood of animal
incorporation in future science curriculum. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 5 (3),
353-375.
Wagler, R., & Wagler, A. (2011). Arthropods: Attitude and incorporation in preservice elementary teachers. Interna-
tional Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 6 (3), 229-250.
Received: July 12, 2012 Accepted: September 30, 2012
Gregor Torkar Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, Chemistry and Home
Economics, Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana, Kardeljeva
ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
University of Nova Gorica, Laboratory for Environmental Research,
Vipavska 13, 5000 Nova Gorica, Slovenia.
E-mail: gregor.torkar@pef.uni-lj.si
Website: http://www.pef.uni-lj.si
Milan Kubiatko Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Institute for Research in School Education,
Masaryk University, Faculty of Education, Porici 31, 603 00 Brno, Czech
Republic.
E-mail: mkubiatko@gmail.com
Website: http://www.kubiatko.eu/
Barbara Bajd Ph.D., Professor, Department of Biology, Chemistry and Home
Economics, Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana, Kardeljeva
ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
E-mail: barbara.bajd@pef.uni-lj.si
Website: http://www.pef.uni-lj.si
402
ISSN 1648–3898
INFORMATION
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
EDITORIAL AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Journal of Baltic Science Education (JBSE) publishes original scientific research articles in the field of Natural Science Education
and related areas for all educational levels in the Baltic countries. It is possible to publish special (thematic) issues of JBSE. The papers
should be submitted and will be published in English. JBSE will promote to establish contacts between researchers and practical
educators both in the Baltic countries and countries around.
The authors of the manuscripts are responsible for the scientific content and novelty of the research materials. Articles, published
before in other international journals or papers’ collections will not be accepted for publication in JBSE.
As a publication that represents a variety of cross-disciplinary interests, both theoretical and practical, the JBSE invites manuscripts
on a wide range of topics, especially in the following areas:
• Didactics of natural sciences. • Philosophical, political, economical and social aspects of
• Theory and practice in natural science teacher natural science education.
education. • The supplementary natural science education.
• Integrated natural science education. • ICT in natural science education.
• Natural science and technological literacy. • The standardisation of natural science education etc.
• General and professional natural science education.
MANUSCRIPTS GUIDELINES
The structure of the research paper presented to the Journal of Baltic Science Education should be as follows: abstract - short report
of the investigation; introduction inc. aim and subject of the research; research methodologies and methods; results of the research incl.
discussion; conclusions; list of references in APA style.
The papers should be submitted in English. If English is a second language for the author, please consider having the manuscript
proof read and edited before submitting. The preliminary text of the article can be sent as a.doc file in the attachment by e-mail:
mail.jbse@gmail.com
The text must be elaborated in Word for Windows, using 12 point Times New Roman letters. An article should not exceed 7-10 A4
pages, included figures, tables and bibliography. Publishing of longer articles should be negotiated separately. Texts margins: top and
bottom 20mm, left - 25mm, right - 20mm. The title: capital letters, 14pt, bold; space between the title and the author’s name is one line
interval. Author’s name and surname: small letters, 12pt, bold. Under the name, institution: 11 pt, italics; space between the title and the
text: 1 line interval. Abstract – about 100-150 words - precedes the text. The text: 12pt Single or Auto spacing, in one column. Key words:
no more than five words. The language must be clear and accurate. The authors have to present the results, propositions and conclusions
in a form that can suit scientists from different countries.
Titles of the tables and figures: 11 pt, small letters. Space between figures or tables and the text: 1 line interval. Introduction, titles of
chapters and subchapters: 12pt, bold, small letters. Numbers: Arabic, subchapters numbered by two figures (1.1, 1.2, etc.). Figures, tables
and captions should be inserted within the manuscript at their appropriate locations. Diagrams and graphs should be provided as finished
black and white line artwork or electronic images. When there are a number of illustrations, the author should endeavour to reduce the
amount of text to accommodate the illustrations in the limited space available for any article.
References in the text should be presented in brackets (Knox, 1988; Martin, 1995). If necessary, the page can be indicated:
(Martin, 1995, p.48). The list of references should be presented after the text. The Words List of References: 11pt, bold, small letters.
The references should be listed in full at the end of the paper in the following standard form:
For books: Saxe, G.B. (1991). Cultural and Cognitive Development: Studies in Mathematical Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
For articles: Bekerian, D.A. (1993). In Search of the Typical Eyewitness. American Psychologist, 48, 574-576.
For chapters within books: Bjork, R.A. (1989). Retrieval Inhibition as an Adaptive Mechanism in Human Memory. In: H.L. Roediger III
& F.I.M. Craik (Eds.), Varieties of Memory & Consciousness (pp. 309-330). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
On a separate page, author - related data should be presented in English: name, surname, degree and academic title, institution,
full correspondence address in the clearest and most complete form /ordinary post and e-mail addresses /, position (to ensure anonymity
in the review process). The author (authors) should confirm in writing, that the manuscript has not been published in other
journal or handed over (transferred) to other journal for publication.
EDITORIAL AND REVIEW PROCEDURES

Manuscripts will be sent anonymously to reviewers with expertise in the appropriate area. All manuscripts will be rewieved by
two experts before JBSE’s accept them for publication. This process usually takes about two months. The journal co-editors will make
minor editorial changes; major changes will be made by the author(s) prior to publication if necessary. JBSE’s redaction will sent
to author(s) only one correcture which must be sent back within 2 weeks. JBSE will not review submissions previously published
elsewhere through print or electronic medium.
Manuscripts submitted to the JBSE cannot be returned to authors. Authors should be sure to keep a copy for themselves.
Authors’ signatures should be at the end of the paper and its second checked proofs.
Manuscripts, editorial correspondence (and other correspondence for subscription and exchange), and any questions should
be sent to editor-in-chief or to regional redactors.
Mailing Addresses
Prof., Dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas, editor-in-chief, Dr. Naglis Švickus, co-editor, Lithuania
Siauliai University SMC ”Scientia Educologica”
P. Vishinskio Str. 25; LT-76351 Siauliai, Lithuania Kretingos Str. 55-10; LT-92300 Klaipėda, Lithuania
E-mail: v.lamanauskas@ef.su.lt E-mail: naglis.svickus@nbgroup.lt
Phone: + 370 687 95668 Phone: +370 687 89985
Prof., Dr. Janis Gedrovics, co-editor, Latvia Prof., Dr. habil. Aarne Tõldsepp, co-editor, Estonia
Riga Teacher Training and Educational Management Academy Tungla 7,
Imantas 7 linija No 1; Riga, LV-1083, Latvia Tartu, EE-51006, Estonia
E-mail: janis.gedrovics@rpiva.lv E-mail: toots@tdl.ee
Phone: +371 29162147 Phone: + 372 7 422241
403
ISSN 1648–3898
JBSE
Problems of Psychology in the 21st

Century is an international, periodical,
peer reviewed scientific journal, issued by
the Scientia Socialis, UAB in cooperation
with SMC “Scientia Educologica”.
Editor-in-Chief
Prof. dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific

Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“,
Republic of Lithuania
Problems of Psychology in the 21st Century

(ISSN 2029-8587) is abstracted and/or indexed
in:
Index Copernicus -
http://journals.indexcopernicus.com
EBSCO - http://search.ebscohost.com
Editorial Board
Dr., prof. Ferda Aysan, Dokuz Eylul University, Turkey

Dr., prof. Serhiy Boltivets, Grigory Kostyuk Psychological Institute of the Ukrainian National
Academy of Pedagogical Sciences, Ukraine
Dr., assoc. prof. Irena Gailiene, SMC "Scientia Educologica", Republic of Lithuania
Dr., prof. Irakli Imedadze, Dimitri Uznadze Georgian Psychological National Society, Georgia
Dr. Julia Lakhvich, Belarusian State University, Republic of Belarus
Dr., prof. Vladimir S. Karapetyan, Armenian State Pedagogical University named after Kh.
Abovyan, Armenia
Dr., prof. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“, Republic of
Lithuania (Editor-in-Chief)
Dr., prof. Maria LedziĔska, University of Warsaw, Poland
Dr., prof. Aleksandr Lobanov, Belarusian State Pedagogical University, Republic of Belarus
Dr., prof. Guna Svence, Riga Teacher Training and Educational Management Academy, Latvia
Website: http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/PPC/Problems_of_Psychology.htm
404
ISSN 1648–3898
JBSE
Quality Issues and Insights in the 21st
Century is an international, periodical,
peer reviewed scientific journal, issued by
the Scientia Socialis, UAB in cooperation
with SMC “Scientia Educologica”.
Editor-in-Chief
Prof. dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific

Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“,
Republic of Lithuania
Quality Issues and Insights in the 21st Century

(ISSN 2029-9575) is abstracted and/or indexed
in:
Index Copernicus -
Electronic Serials in Lithuania -

http://www.eperiodika.lt/index.php?id=moksl
Editorial Board
MSc., Renata Bilbokaitơ, University of Siauliai, Republic of Lithuania (Editorial Assistant)

Dr., Andrea Bernhard, Universities Austria, Austria
Dr., Prof. John Gowland Mwangi, Egerton University, Kenya
Dr., Prof. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“, Republic of
Lithuania (Editor-in-Chief)
Dr., Prof. Liviu Moldovan, „Petru Maior” University of Tirgu Mures, Romania
Dr., Prof. Kestutis Pukelis, Vytautas Magnus University, Republic of Lithuania
Prof. Ramayah Thurasamy, University of Science Malaysia, Malaysia
Dr., Assoc. Prof. Dalius Serafinas, Vilnius University, Republic of Lithuania
Dr., Assoc. Prof. Adriana Tafrova-Grigorova, Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Bulgaria
Website: http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/QIIC/Quality_Issues_Insights.htm
405
ISSN 1648–3898
JBSE
Problems of Management in the

21st Century is an international,
periodical, peer reviewed
scientific journal, issued by the
Scientia Socialis in cooperation
with SMC “Scientia
Educologica”.
Editor-in-Chief
Prof.dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas,

Scientific Methodical Centre
„Scientia Educologica“, Republic of
Lithuania
Problems of Management in the

21st Century (ISSN 2029-6932) is
abstracted and/or indexed in:
Index Copernicus -
/karta.php?action=masterlist&id=61
17
EBSCO: Business Source Complete

- http://search.ebscohost.com
Editor-in-Chief
Prof.dr. Vincentas Lamanauskas, Scientific Methodical Centre „Scientia Educologica“, Republic of

Lithuania
Editorial Board
Prof., dr. Constantin Bratianu, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania
Assoc. prof., dr. Tsai-Hsin Chu, National Chiayi University, Taiwan
Assoc. prof., dr. Dana Egerova, University of West Bohemia, Czech Republic
Assoc. prof., dr. Marek Franek, University of Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic
Prof., dr. Ivars Muzis, Riga Teacher Training and Educational Management Academy, Latvia
Prof., dr. Stephen Nzuve, University of Nairobi, Kenya
Asst. prof., dr. Ivona Orzea, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania
Prof., dr. Sonia Teresinha de Sousa Penin, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil
Prof., dr. Chris Rensleigh, University of Johannesburg, South Africa
Asst. prof., dr. Nikhil Chandra Shil, American International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Website: http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/PMC/Problems_of_Management.htm
406
ISSN 1648–3898
JBSE
International Scientific Conference
„INFORMATION &
COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY IN
NATURAL SCIENCE EDUCATION –
2013“
23-26 October 2013, Siauliai, Lithuania
Dear Colleagues,
We invite you to take part in the international scientific conference "Information &
Communication Technology in Natural Science Education - 2013", which will take place
23 – 26 October 2013 in the Conference centre of Siauliai University in Siauliai.
Organizer of the Conference
Siauliai University, Faculty of Education, Natural Science Education Research Centre,

Lithuania, http://www.gutc.su.lt/
Ways of Participation All contributions, which meets the criteria of originality and
scientific quality, will be published in „Problems of Education
x Paper Presentation in the 21st Century“ /ISSN 1822-7864/
(http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/Problems_of_Education.htm)
x Oral Presentation and
x Interactive Poster Presentation Gamtamokslinis ugdymas / Natural Science Education (ISSN
x Workshop 1648-939X)
x Listener http://gu.puslapiai.lt/GUwww/indeks.htm
Important Dates
Early-Bird Registration Deadline 30 June 2013

Late Registration Deadline 30 September 2013
Submitting of Abstracts and/or Full Papers 30 September 2013
Reviewing Abstracts and / or Full Papers and 06 October 2013
Contacting Authors
Transfering Conference Fee From 01 June 2013 to 10 October 2013
Final Confirmation of Participation 15 October 2013
Announcement of the Final Conference Program 16 October 2013
Conference Dates 24 – 25 October 2013
(22/23 - arrival; 26/27 - departure)
Conference Website: http://www.gutc.su.lt/ICT.2013/ICT_conference_2013.htm

E-mail: ict2013lithuania@gmail.com
Phone: +370 41 595736; Fax: +370 41 595710
© NSERC, Siauliai University, 2012
407
Compiled by: Vincentas Lamanauskas

Linguistic Editors: Gintaras Vaidogas
Cover design by: Jurgina Jankauskienė
Layout design by : Linas Janonis
Contact person: Laima Railienė
10 December 2012. Publishing in Quires 8. Edition 200
Publisher SMC „Scientia Educologica“ in cooperation with Scientia Socialis,

Donelaicio Street 29, LT-78115 Siauliai, Lithuania
E-mail: gu@projektas.lt
Phone: +370 687 95668
http://www.jbse.webinfo.lt/centras.htm
http://www.scientiasocialis.lt

Printing K. J. Vasiliauskas`s enterprise Lucilijus,
14 lyros Street, apt. 25, LT–78288 Šiauliai, Lithuania
E-mail: orfis@svi.lt, phone/fax +370 41 595 518.
http://www.lucilijus.lt

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 11, No. 4, 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Vol.11, No.

SCIENCE TEACHERS’ BELIEFS AS BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION OF

STRUCTURAL PATTERNS AND REPRESENTATION FORMS OF

A COMPARISON OF CHEMISTRY TEACHERS’ AND GRADE 11 STUDENTS’ ALTERNATIVE

THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ ORGANIC CHEMISTRY ANXIETY,

THE IMPACT OF A SCIENCE MUSEUM INVOKED LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (SMILE) ON

INVESTIGATING THE CORRELATION BETWEEN STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ON THE

ASSESSING PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS (DIS) LIKING OF SOME ANIMAL SPECIES

INFORMATION FOR CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403

PROBLEMS OF PSYCHOLOGY IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404

QUALITY ISSUES AND INSIGHTS IN THE 21ST CENTURY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405

PROBLEMS OF MANAGEMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406

INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY IN

A PROBLEM OF SCIENCE LITERACY ENCOUNTERED BY PRIMARY SCHOOL

Received: October 15, 2012 Accepted: November 25, 2012

Vincentas PhD, (HP), Professor, Natural Science Education Research Centre,

Eylem Yıldız Feyzioğlu

Abstract. A new Science and Technol- Introduction

The following research questions are addressed in this study:

Relationships among Teachers’ Beliefs Systems

Linking between Beliefs and Classroom Management

Instrument and Procedures

Traditional Transitive Constructivist

Traditional N Transitive N Constructivist N

Teaching Managing Behavior

Teaching Managing Behavior

Figure 1: T he distributions of the relationships among teachers’ beliefs.

Received: January 20, 2012 Accepted: July 30, 2012

Abstract. The way teachers organize Sharareh Majidi

Topic of Study: Biot-Savart Law and Ampère’s Law

Concept Cards and Concept Maps

Interviews and Interviewees

Table 1. Information of interviewed teachers.

David John Nigel Chris

Experiment: The information of observations, evidences, and discoveries.

Descriptive mathematical model: A mathematical model that connects concepts with

Explanatory mathematical model: A mathematical model that explains the applications or

Statement of fact: The declarative knowledge that describes the facts.

Visual model: About illustrations and visual perceptions.

Reasoning: Modes of presentation that gives reasons or explanations or interpretations to

Introduction of Applications of Introduction of Application of

Experiment (3) - (1) (2)

Organization of Subject Matter Knowledge

Domains Dead-ended concepts Loops and cycles

First domain - (1541)

Second domain 13, 17 (11162 1 11)

Third domain - (2 136 72)

(21 6718 1921), (20 61420),

Domains Dead-ended concepts Loops and cycles

Second domain 21, 22 (18101), (17101), (1731),

Third domain - 1113201411

Last domain 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 -

Domain Dead-ended concepts Loops and cycles

First domain - 1231, 1341, 12341

Second domain 17 12131, 15131, 17131, 126131,

Last domain 9, 11, 16 82158, 5810145

Domains Dead-ended Concept Loops and cycles

First domain - 38213, 1214b2, 17814b1,

Relation of Representation Forms to Knowledge Organization

Domains Representation forms Knowledge organization

1. Introduction of Descriptive math model David, Nigel, Chris: strongly connected

Received: June 05, 2012 Accepted: September 15, 2012

Introduction Abstract. The purpose of this study is to

Context of the Study

Table 1. A sample categorizing procedure for Item 1.

1a S 8 36 11 6 39 Reaction rate can be defined as the change in concentration of a particular

5a S 10 27 19 5 39 This reaction probably proceeds via formation of J, followed by consumption

Performance 0.068 - 0.214 - 0.295 - 0.310 -

Importance 0.014 -0.007 0.142** 0.039* 0.319 0.187 0.296 0.120