Development of Attitude Assessment Instruments Towards Socio-Scientific Issues in Chemistry Learning
A socio-scientific issue is one of the learning techniques used today, which uses various scientific sources to make students think scientifically to .
- Pub. date: October 15, 2022
- Pages: 1947-1958
- 831 Downloads
- 1152 Views
- 2 Citations
A socio-scientific issue is one of the learning techniques used today, which uses various scientific sources to make students think scientifically to conduct a dialogue and discuss solving a problem. Various problems in socio-scientific are controversial, requiring reasoning, and ethical evaluation in the decision-making process. A conflict between chemical reason and students' social point of view will cause students' different assessments and attitudes towards the socio-scientific issue. This study is a research and development (R&D) that focuses on the instrument's validity with the factor analysis technique to assess attitudes towards the socio-scientific issue in chemistry learning. CFA and EFA analysis found five factors in the tool: anxiety, interests, likes, benefits, confidence, validity, and reliability. The total reliability coefficient is .853. Of the eight instrument feasibility analysis requirements, seven instruments were declared fit to meet construct validity.
Keywords: Attitude, chemistry learning, factor analysis, socio-scientific issue.
References
Akbas, A., & Kan, A. (2007). Affective factors that influence chemistry achievement (motivation and anxiety) and the power of these factors to predict chemistry achievement-II. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(1), 10-19. https://bit.ly/3zpWw1A
Akram, T. M., Ijaz, A., & Ikram, H. (2017). Exploring the factors responsible for declining students' interest in chemistry. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(2), 88-94. https://doi.org/h7fg
Albarracín, D., Wang, W., Li, H., & Noguchi, K. (2008). Structure of attitudes judgments, memory, and implications for change. In W. D. Crano & R. Prislin (Eds.), Attitudes and attitude change (pp. 19–40). Psychology Press.
Arbuckle, J. L. (1997). Amos user's guide version 3.6. SmallWaters Corporation.
Bohner, G., & Dickel, N. (2011). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 391–417. https://doi.org/c9t7c5
Cha, J., Kim, H. B., Kan, S. Y., Foo, W. Y., Low, X. Y., Ow, J. Y., Chandran, P. D. B., Lee, E. L., Yong, J. W. H., & Chia, P. W. (2021). Integrating organic chemical-based socio-scientific issues comics into chemistry classroom: Expanding chemists’ toolbox. Green Chemistry Letters and Reviews, 14(4), 689-699. https://doi.org/gn77km
Chang, H. Y., Hsu, Y. S., Wu, H. K., & Tsai, C. C. (2018). Students’ development of socio-scientific reasoning in a mobile augmented reality learning environment. International Journal of Science Education, 40(12), 1410-1431. https://doi.org/gdkxg9
Eastwood, J. L., Sadler, T. D., Zeidler, D. L., Lewis, A., Amiri, L., & Applebaum, S. (2012). Contextualizing nature of science instruction in socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(15), 2289-2315. https://doi.org/h7fh
Ferdinand, A. (2002). Structural equation modeling dalam penelitian manajemen [Structural equation modeling in management research]. Diponegoro University Publishing Agency.
Goretzko, D., Pham, T. T. H., & Bühner, M. (2021). Exploratory factor analysis: Current use, methodological developments and recommendations for good practice. Current Psychology, 40(7), 3510-3521. https://doi.org/gf835r
Hanton, S., Mellalieu, S. D., & Hall, R. (2004). Self-confidence and anxiety interpretation: A qualitative investigation. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 5(4), 477-495. https://doi.org/bm6prc
Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), 549-571. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543060004549
Hong, J. C., Hwang, M. Y., Tai, K. H., & Tsai, C. R. (2017). An exploration of students' science learning interest related to their cognitive anxiety, cognitive load, self-confidence and learning progress using inquiry-based learning with an iPad. Research in Science Education, 47(6), 1193-1212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9541-y
Ke, L., Sadler, T. D., Zangori, L., & Friedrichsen, P. J. (2020). Students’ perceptions of socio-scientific issue-based learning and their appropriation of epistemic tools for systems thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 42(8), 1339-1361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1759843
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x
Lee, Y. C., & Grace, M. (2012). Students' reasoning and decision making about a socioscientific issue: A cross‐context comparison. Science Education, 96(5), 787-807. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21021
Mardapi, D. (2017). Pengukuran, penilaian dan evaluasi pendidikan [Measurement, assessment and evaluation of education]. Parama Publishing.
McIntyre, M. M., Gundlach, J. L., & Graziano, W. G. (2021). Liking guides learning: The role of interest in memory for STEM topics. Learning and Individual Differences, 85(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101960
Mustafa, M. B., Nordin, M. B., & Razzaq, A. B. A. (2020). Structural equation modelling using AMOS: Confirmatory factor analysis for taskload of special education integration program teachers. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 127-133. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080115
Mvududu, N. H., & Sink, C. A. (2013). Factor analysis in counseling research and practice. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 4(2), 75-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/2150137813494766
Namdar, B., Aydin, B., & Raven, S. (2020). Preservice science teachers' informal reasoning about hydroelectric power issue: The effect of attitudes towards socio-scientific issues and media literacy. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 6(4), 551-567. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijres.v6i4.1204
Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction. Wadsworth.
Peltier, J. W., Chennamaneni, P. R., & Barber, K. N. (2021). Student anxiety, preparation, and learning framework for responding to external crises: The moderating role of self-efficacy as a coping mechanism. Journal of Marketing Education, 43(1),1-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753211036500
Retnawati, H. (2017). Validitas reliabilitas dan karakteristik butir [Validity, reliability and item characteristics]. Parama Publishing.
Roosevelt, F. D. (2008). A knowledge base for training diversity: Some specific issues. In P. Clements & J. Jones (Eds.), The diversity training handbook a practical guide to understanding & changing attitudes (3rd ed., pp. 68–83). Kogan Page.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45(1), 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260802681839
Sadler, T. D. (2011). Socio-scientific issues-based education: What we know about science education in the context of SSI. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom (pp. 355–371). Springer Science+Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1159-4_20
Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9
Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 387-409. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000119456
Santoso, S. (2002). Statistik dengan SPSS [Statistics with SPSS]. Elex Media Komputindo.
Sarwono, Y. (2010). Pengertian dasar structural equation modeling (SEM) [Basic understanding of structural equation modeling (SEM)]. Ilmiah Manajemen Bisnis.
Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(4), 299-323. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653136
Sharma, A. M., & Srivastav, A. (2021). Study to assess attitudes towards statistics of business school students: An application of the SATS-36 in India. International Journal of Instruction, 14(3), 207-222. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14312a
Subiantoro, A. W., & Treagust, D. F. (2020). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing high-school students’ perceptions of socio-scientific issues-based learning in biology. Learning Environments Research, 24(2), 223-237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-020-09332-z
Susilawati, Aznam, N., Paidi, & Irwanto, I. (2021). Socio-scientific issues as a vehicle to promote soft skills and environmental awareness. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(1), 161-174. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.1.161
Topcu, M. S. (2010). Development of attitudes towards socioscientific issues scale for undergraduate students. Evaluation and Research in Education, 23(1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500791003628187
Xu, X., & Lewis, J. E. (2011). Refinement of a chemistry attitude measure for college students. Journal of Chemical Education, 88(5), 561-568. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed900071q
Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner's guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 9(2), 79-94. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.09.2.p079
Zeidler, D. L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education. In D. L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 7-38). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4996-X_2
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048