A Three-Tier Diagnostic Test to Assess Pre-Service Teachers' Misconceptions about Global Warming, Greenhouse Effect, Ozone Layer Depletion, and Acid Rain PDF

Preview

Summary

This art icle was downloaded by: [ At ilim Universit y] On: 16 January 2013, At : 06: 48 Publisher: Rout ledge I nform a Lt d Regist ered in England and Wales Regist ered Num ber: 1072954 Regist ered office: Mort im er House, 37- 41 Mort im er St reet , London W1T 3JH, UK International Journal of Sc...

Description

This art icle was downloaded by: [ At ilim Universit y] On: 16 January 2013, At : 06: 48 Publisher: Rout ledge I nform a Lt d Regist ered in England and Wales Regist ered Num ber: 1072954 Regist ered office: Mort im er House, 37- 41 Mort im er St reet , London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Science Education Publicat ion det ails, including inst ruct ions f or aut hors and subscript ion inf ormat ion: ht t p: / / www. t andf online. com/ loi/ t sed20

A Three-Tier Diagnostic Test to Assess Pre-Service Teachers’ Misconceptions about Global Warming, Greenhouse Effect, Ozone Layer Depletion, and Acid Rain Harika Ozge Arslan

a b

, Ceyhan Cigdemoglu

c

& Christ ine Moseley

d a

Depart ment of Secondary Science and Mat hemat ics Educat ion, Yuzuncu Yil Universit y, Van, Turkey b

Depart ment of Secondary Science and Mat hemat ics Educat ion, Middle East Technical Universit y, Ankara, Turkey c

Depart ment of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemist ry, At ilim Universit y, Ankara, Turkey d

Depart ment of Int erdisciplinary St udies, Universit y of Texas at San Ant onio, San Ant onio, TX, USA Version of record f irst published: 08 May 2012.

To cite this article: Harika Ozge Arslan , Ceyhan Cigdemoglu & Christ ine Moseley (2012): A Three-Tier Diagnost ic Test t o Assess Pre-Service Teachers’ Misconcept ions about Global Warming, Greenhouse Ef f ect , Ozone Layer Deplet ion, and Acid Rain, Int ernat ional Journal of Science Educat ion, 34: 11, 1667-1686 To link to this article: ht t p: / / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09500693. 2012. 680618

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTI CLE Full t erm s and condit ions of use: ht t p: / / www.t andfonline.com / page/ t erm s- andcondit ions This art icle m ay be used for research, t eaching, and privat e st udy purposes. Any subst ant ial or syst em at ic reproduct ion, redist ribut ion, reselling, loan, sub- licensing, syst em at ic supply, or dist ribut ion in any form t o anyone is expressly forbidden.

Downloaded by [Atilim University] at 06:48 16 January 2013

The publisher does not give any warrant y express or im plied or m ake any represent at ion t hat t he cont ent s will be com plet e or accurat e or up t o dat e. The accuracy of any inst ruct ions, form ulae, and drug doses should be independent ly verified wit h prim ary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, act ions, claim s, proceedings, dem and, or cost s or dam ages what soever or howsoever caused arising direct ly or indirect ly in connect ion wit h or arising out of t he use of t his m at erial.

Downloaded by [Atilim University] at 06:48 16 January 2013

International Journal of Science Education Vol. 34, No. 11, July 2012, pp. 1667–1686

A Three-Tier Diagnostic Test to Assess Pre-Service Teachers’ Misconceptions about Global Warming, Greenhouse Effect, Ozone Layer Depletion, and Acid Rain Harika Ozge Arslana,b∗ , Ceyhan Cigdemogluc and Christine Moseleyd a

Department of Secondary Science and Mathematics Education, Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkey; bDepartment of Secondary Science and Mathematics Education, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey; cDepartment of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, Atilim University, Ankara, Turkey; dDepartment of Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA

This study describes the development and validation of a three-tier multiple-choice diagnostic test, the atmosphere-related environmental problems diagnostic test (AREPDiT), to reveal common misconceptions of global warming (GW), greenhouse effect (GE), ozone layer depletion (OLD), and acid rain (AR). The development of a two-tier diagnostic test procedure as described by Treagust constitutes the framework for this study. To differentiate a lack of knowledge from a misconception, a certainty response index is added as a third tier to each item. Based on propositional knowledge statements, related literature, and the identified misconceptions gathered initially from 157 pre-service teachers, the AREPDiT was constructed and administered to 256 pre-service teachers. The Cronbach alpha reliability coefficient of the pre-service teachers’ scores was estimated to be 0.74. Content and face validations were established by senior experts. A moderate positive correlation between the participants’ both-tiers scores and their certainty scores indicated evidence for construct validity. Therefore, the AREPDiT is a reliable and valid instrument not only to identify pre-service teachers’ misconceptions about GW, GE, OLD, and AR but also to differentiate these misconceptions from lack of knowledge. The results also reveal that a majority of the respondents demonstrated limited understandings about atmosphererelated environmental problems and held six common misconceptions. Future studies could test Corresponding author: Department of Secondary Science and Mathematics Education, Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkey. Email: [email protected] or [email protected]

∗

ISSN 0950-0693 (print)/ISSN 1464-5289 (online)/12/111667–20 # 2012 Taylor & Francis http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.680618

1668 H. O. Arslan et al. the AREPDiT as a tool for assessing the misconceptions held by pre-service teachers from different programs as well as in-service teachers and high school students.

Keywords: Three-tier diagnostic assessment; Misconceptions; Environmental education; Global warming; Ozone layer depletion; Acid rain

Downloaded by [Atilim University] at 06:48 16 January 2013

Introduction Since the mid-1970s, a dramatic increase in the number of studies about students’ understandings of scientific concepts has occurred. Researchers have conducted hundreds of studies identifying pre-instructional ideas held by students at different grade levels and in different content areas. This interest in understanding about these ideas and their causes and effects on student learning and achievement continues today. Although researchers have referred to these pre-instructional ideas with different terms, including alternative conceptions, misconceptions, alternative frameworks, naive beliefs, preconceptions, naive notions, and pre-scientific notions, they are in agreement that many of these ideas are different from those generally accepted by the scientific community (Clement, Brown, & Zietsman, 1989; Driver, 1988; Hammer, 1996; Odom & Barrow, 1995; Treagust, 1988). For this particular study, the term misconception is used when referring to students’ incompatible ideas with scientific views. Research-based evidence indicates that misconceptions create a barrier to knowledge restructuring, are often held strongly resistant to change, and need to be overcome (Clough & Driver, 1985; Hammer, 1996; Osborne, Bell, & Gilbert, 1983; Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog, 1982). Therefore, identifying misconceptions and their causes prior to teaching becomes important in developing lessons that ultimately result in the reconceptualization of learning (Clough & Driver, 1985; Odom & Barrow, 1995; West & Pines, 1985). If teachers have such misconceptions, how will this affect the teaching–learning environment? Hashweh (1987) found that teachers sometimes hold the same misconceptions that their students hold. Many of these misconceptions appear in their lesson planning and teaching and result in reinforcing students’ misconceptions instead of remediating them with scientific facts. Dove (1996) and Groves and Pugh (1999) highlighted the importance of identifying misconceptions about environmental issues in undergraduate courses; otherwise, the pre-service teachers might pass on false information to, or fail to correct, the children they will eventually teach. The environmental issues of global warming (GW) and climate change caused by the industrialization and expansion of urban environments are complex and interrelated. Because of this complex and multi-layered interrelationship, many times in the media and literature these environmental issues tend to be referred to in a rather synonymous way even though these terms each possess different meanings. Seymour explained GW within the context of climate change as ‘a “warming” is only one phase of the larger climate system on Earth that naturally features change’ (2008, p. 12). Thus, climate change includes GW and other factors caused by the

Downloaded by [Atilim University] at 06:48 16 January 2013

Three-Tier Test on Atmosphere-Related Problems 1669 increase of atmospheric greenhouse gases. Therefore, in this study the term GW is used because of the complex nature of climate change. As a result of the science community unravelling alarming trends and patterns regarding changes in the composition of the atmosphere, GW, greenhouse effect (GE), ozone layer depletion (OLD), and acid rain (AR) have became critical elements of discussion and study among scientists, politicians, and the general public. Consequently, substantial research in education has concentrated on students’ conceptualization of these topics (Boyes & Stanisstreet, 1992, 1993; Cordero, 2001; Francis, Boyes, Qualter, & Stanisstreet, 1993; Seymour, 2008). However, limited research has been conducted to identify pre-service or in-service teachers’ misconceptions regarding these environmental problems. In the last decade, studies focusing on diagnosing pre-service and in-service teachers’ misconceptions about the atmosphere-related environmental problems of GW, GE, OLD, and AR have emerged (Boyes, Chambers, & Stanisstreet, 1995; Daskolia, Flogaitis, & Papageorgiou, 2006; Dove, 1996; Groves & Pugh, 1999, 2002; Khalid, 2001, 2003; Papadimitriou, 2004; Summers, Kruger, Childs, & Mant, 2000). The results of these studies have indicated that teachers hold prevalent misconceptions on these particular topics and most are the same as their students’ misconceptions. The studies revealed a widespread confusion between GE and OLD. Over half of the participants from all of these studies held the misconception that OLD directly increases GW by letting in more sunrays. The most common misconceptions identified in these previous studies included the following: (a) GW will cause skin cancer; (b) carbon dioxide is the main contributing factor towards these environmental problems; (c) the ozone layer helps to keep the earth warm, and (d) AR occurs because of OLD or GE. Moreover, studies have indicated interlinked misconceptions between GW, GE, and OLD (Boyes & Stanisstreet, 1992; Boyes, Chuckran, & Stanisstreet, 1993; Groves & Pugh, 2002); GW and AR (Boyes et al., 1993); and OLD and AR (Pekel & Ozay, 2005). The interrelatedness of atmosphere-related environmental problems triggered this study to focus on these four environmental problems together. The methodologies of the aforementioned research studies used to identify teachers’ misconceptions about environmental problems varied and included interviews (Summers et al., 2000), free word association tasks (Daskolia et al., 2006), openended questionnaires (Papadimitriou, 2004), close-ended questionnaires (Boyes et al., 1995; Groves & Pugh, 1999, 2002; Michail, Stamou, & Stamou, 2007), and questionnaires with open-response items (Dove, 1996; Khalid, 2001, 2003). A large number of studies on determining students’ or teachers’ misconceptions have used close-ended questionnaires adopted from the works of Boyes and Stanisstreet (1993) and/or Dove (1996). However, despite the easy usage of close-ended questionnaires for both participants and researchers, one can draw misleading conclusions because of the limited range of options. Dove (1996) and Khalid (2001, 2003) added open-ended questions to collect data on pre-service teachers’ reasons for their responses to close-ended questionnaires. However, many of the participants did not provide any reason for their responses in the space provided (Dove, 1996). Moreover, Groves and Pugh (2002) found that many pre-service teachers avoided taking a definite position by choosing the middle ‘I don’t know’ choice.

Downloaded by [Atilim University] at 06:48 16 January 2013

1670 H. O. Arslan et al. Over the past three decades, diagnostics tests have become a relatively prominent assessment tool in science education for data collection concerning the misconceptions on domain-specific knowledge of students or teachers. Treagust (1988), as an initiator of designing two-tier diagnostic instruments that specifically identify misconceptions, suggested the addition of a reason tier derived from actual students’ misconceptions. In science education, two-tier diagnostic tests have been used in several studies in different content areas (Chu, Treagust, & Chandrasegaran, 2009; Griffard & Wandersee, 2001; Odom & Barrow, 1995; Tsui & Treagust, 2010; Wang, 2004). Although two-tier tests provide more information than other commonly applied methods for efficiently collecting data from large populations, some limitations have been identified. The presence of guessing may result due to overestimating the participants’ levels of knowledge as well as misconceptions as these tests do not discriminate lack of knowledge from misconceptions (Caleon & Subramaniam, 2010; Pesman & Eryilmaz, 2010). An additional tier, which contains a certainty of response index, has been proposed to compensate for the likely weakness of the diagnostic tests (Hasan, Bagayoko, & Kelley, 1999; Pesman & Eryilmaz, 2010). To date, only a few studies that use three-tier diagnostic tests have been conducted in science education (Caleon & Subramaniam, 2010; Eryilmaz & Surmeli, 2002; Pesman & Eryilmaz, 2010) and none of these studies have focused on environmental issues. In educational research, studies that both diagnose misconceptions and differentiate them from a lack of knowledge are limited. Therefore, the study reported in this article has the potential to contribute to the literature by developing a valid and reliable three-tier diagnostic test to assess pre-service teachers’ misconceptions on atmosphere-related environmental problems. Specifically, this study aims to (1) develop and validate a reliable three-tier diagnostic test on GW, GE, OLD, and AR and (2) contribute to the environmental education literature by distinguishing predetermined findings as misconceptions or lack of knowledge on the above-mentioned environmental problems.

Method and Procedures Development of the Test The procedure as described by Treagust (1988) constitutes the methodological framework for the development of the atmosphere-related environmental problems diagnostic test (AREPDiT). First, concept boundaries regarding the topics of GW, GE, OLD, and AR are formed along with the identification of 18 propositional knowledge statements (Table 1) as well as a concept map pertaining to basic knowledge needed by pre-service teachers as derived from textbooks and expert opinions. Two professors, one majoring in environmental education and one majoring in chemistry, reviewed the identified list of propositional knowledge statements and the concept map. Content validation, confirmation of the accuracy, and appropriateness of the content was established upon expert agreement.

Three-Tier Test on Atmosphere-Related Problems 1671 Table 1. Content area

Downloaded by [Atilim University] at 06:48 16 January 2013

GW

GE

OLD

AR

Propositional knowledge statements

Propositional knowledge statements GW is a periodic increase in atmospheric temperature due to an increase in the concentration of the greenhouse gases Human activities such as deforestation and burning of fossil fuels initiate an increase in the greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), etc.), thus giving rise to GW An increase in global temperature will result in extreme events and expansion of deserts Melting of snow and ice and rising global sea levels are also consequences of GW Reducing greenhouse gas emissions directly reduces GW Forestation decreases CO2 concentrations. Therefore, it is one of the solutions for GW GE is the absorption of some of the infrared radiation that is reflected from the Earth by various gases Greenhouse gases are CO2, water vapour (H2O(g)), CH4, ozone (O3), chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and carbon monoxide (CO) GE occurs naturally. However, it becomes harmful when the average concentration of greenhouse gases rises above the normal level The O3 layer filters the Sun’s high-frequency ultraviolet (UV) light These high-frequency UV rays have potential to damage life on the Earth CFCs deplete the O3 layer that protects the Earth’s surface from damaging UV radiation OLD can cause a range of health hazards such as skin cancer and cataracts A reduction in consuming aerosol sprays with CFCs decreases OLD Pollutants such as sulphur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) react with water molecules in the atmosphere to form AR Fossil fuels generate SO2 and NOx emissions, leading to formation of AR. AR can have harmful effects on plants, aquatic life along with buildings, monuments, and sculptures Reducing the use of fossil fuels as energy sources is one of the precautions that can be taken against AR formation

Question (Q) Q1 Q1

Q2 Q2 Q5 Q6 Q3 Q1, Q3 Q3, Q4 Q7 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q12 Q13

At a later stage, 13 open-ended questions were written based on the concept boundaries and in accordance with the extensive related literature on GW, GE, OLD, and AR to identify pre-service teachers’ conceptions and misconceptions. This open-ended questionnaire was initially administered to 157 undergraduate pre-service teachers. An analysis of the responses revealed their difficulties in comprehending the above-mentioned environmental problems. For each question, the identified misconceptions were sorted according to their frequencies for later use in the development of the instrument.

Downloaded by [Atilim University] at 06:48 16 January 2013

1672 H. O. Arslan et al. Subsequently, the propositional knowledge statements and misconceptions collected were used to construct the first version of a two-tier multiple-choice test. The most frequently stated misconceptions (Table 2) were used to form the alternatives in the multiple-choice questions. A third tier, the certainty of response (yes or no), was then added to this version of the test. As described by Treagust (1988), the first part of each item on the test is a multiple-choice content question having usually two to five choices (first tier). The second part contains a set of possible reasons for the answers given in the first part, with one blank choice to express any personal reason (second tier). The third part of each item is a confidence tier, which investigates whether or not the subjects are confident about their responses (third tier). Five graduate students in science education, a professor from the chemistry department, and two professors in environmental education examined the first version of the AREPDiT. Additionally, a native English language expert reviewed the test for sentence construction. The first version of the AREPDiT was piloted with 126 pre-service teachers (23% male and 77% female). The data were typed into the SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) program and dichotomized based on an answer key. All correct answers to the first- and second-tier questions along with being certain (that is, selecting the ‘Yes’ alternative in the third tier) were coded as 1 and 0 otherwise. Responses to the open-ended second-tier questions were categorized based on the alternatives provided in the reason tier. Unclear or ambiguous responses were coded as incorrect answers. Cronbach alpha reliability, item difficulties, and point biserial correlation coefficients were used for item analysis. The item difficulty and point biserial correlation (the correlation of an item score with total score) of each question showed that item revisions were needed. Following an evaluation based on the item analysi...