Koerber Susanne, Osterhaus Christopher, Sodian Beate
Freiburg University of Education, Freiburg, Germany.
Br J Dev Psychol. 2015 Mar;33(1):57-72. doi: 10.1111/bjdp.12067. Epub 2014 Oct 8.
Understanding the nature of science (NOS) is a critical aspect of scientific reasoning, yet few studies have investigated its developmental beginnings and initial structure. One contributing reason is the lack of an adequate instrument. Two studies assessed NOS understanding among third graders using a multiple-select (MS) paper-and-pencil test. Study 1 investigated the validity of the MS test by presenting the items to 68 third graders (9-year-olds) and subsequently interviewing them on their underlying NOS conception of the items. All items were significantly related between formats, indicating that the test was valid. Study 2 applied the same instrument to a larger sample of 243 third graders, and their performance was compared to a multiple-choice (MC) version of the test. Although the MC format inflated the guessing probability, there was a significant relation between the two formats. In summary, the MS format was a valid method revealing third graders' NOS understanding, thereby representing an economical test instrument. A latent class analysis identified three groups of children with expertise in qualitatively different aspects of NOS, suggesting that there is not a single common starting point for the development of NOS understanding; instead, multiple developmental pathways may exist.
理解科学本质（NOS）是科学推理的一个关键方面，但很少有研究探讨其发展起源和初始结构。一个促成因素是缺乏适当的工具。两项研究使用多项选择（MS）纸笔测试评估了三年级学生对NOS的理解。研究1通过向68名三年级学生（9岁）展示题目并随后就他们对题目的潜在NOS概念进行访谈，来调查MS测试的有效性。所有题目在两种形式之间都存在显著相关性，表明该测试是有效的。研究2将同一工具应用于243名三年级学生的更大样本，并将他们的表现与该测试的多项选择（MC）版本进行比较。尽管MC形式增加了猜测概率，但两种形式之间存在显著相关性。总之，MS形式是揭示三年级学生对NOS理解的有效方法，从而代表了一种经济的测试工具。潜在类别分析确定了三组在NOS不同质性方面具有专长的儿童，这表明NOS理解的发展并非有一个单一的共同起点；相反可能存在多种发展路径。
