Undergraduate science research projects and students - School of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Undergraduate Learning in Science Project Working Paper 55.2 Characterisation of the nature of longitudinal differences5.2.1 Longitudinal differences in reasoning about the nature of scientificknowledge claimsThe responses of the students in the sample were very diverse in this area.Some students (B, G, L) stated sophisticated positions about the conjecturaland model-like nature of scientific knowledge at the beginning of theirproject. It is interesting to note that two of these students were EarthScientists, and that the department of Earth Sciences addresses the nature ofscientific knowledge explicitly in the curriculum. By contrast, the majorityof other students viewed scientific knowledge claims as empirically provablein a straightforward way. Some students also mentioned the role of thescientific community in validating scientific knowledge.There were few differences in students’ reasoning in this area between thefirst and third interviews. Because different aspects of the nature of scientificknowledge claims tended to be raised in the first and third interviews, simplecomparisons of entries on the epistemological profiles yields littleinformation about students’ reasoning. A more fruitful approach is tocompare students’ discussions of this issue qualitatively. Few qualitativedifferences of this kind were noted.5.2.2 Longitudinal differences in reasoning about the nature of lines of scientificenquiryIn this area, the responses of some students in the first and third interviewdiffered significantly, both in quality and content. This was particularlyapparent for students A, C, E, F, I and J, when profiles and transcripts fromthe interviews are compared. In a number of cases, these students referredexplicitly to the influence of their research projects as extending theirknowledge of the factors influencing lines of scientific research. Inparticular, more students referred to the ways in which specific projects areembedded in broader lines of scientific research in the third interviews. Thischange is also evident in our question-by-question analysis. Table 4 insection 3.4 shows a big increase in the number of students discussing a‘coherent field’ in response to a question about why some scientific workstands the test of time.5.2.3 Longitudinal differences in reasoning about the nature of science as acommunityA number of students mentioned the existence of a community of scientistswhich interact over particular areas of research. However, surprisingly fewstudents made reference to the role of this community and its institutions invalidating public knowledge.56
Undergraduate Learning in Science Project Working Paper 5In general, there were few longitudinal differences in students’ reasoningabout the nature of science as a community between interviews 1 and 3(though see Student E as a notable exception).5.2.4 Some discipline-specific issuesIt is interesting to note some of the more obvious differences in the types ofresearch carried out by students in the sample on their projects. In somecases, the purpose of projects was to produce a theoretical model to accountfor a data set. In these projects, the relationship of data and theoreticalknowledge claims was the focus of interest. Some data sets were collectedby students, whereas others used secondary data. Other projects involvedstudents in refining established laboratory procedures in new contexts. Suchprojects were not about the relationship between theoretical knowledgeclaims and data. Rather, the focus was upon developing techniques to tacklespecific problems in the laboratory. The purpose of some projects laysomewhere in between these positions.It is important to recognise that projects of both these types make differentintellectual demands upon researchers. Modelling projects require creativethinking about the relationship between theory and data, whereas projectswhich involve developing techniques require researchers to think creativelyabout substantive factors that might influence the outcome of a particularlaboratory procedure.The types of knowledge claims that result from projects of these types arealso different. For example, models intended to be of general applicabilityresult from some projects, such as models of the chaotic behaviour ofreaction systems. Other projects may produce specific outcomes, such as thesequence of a particular protein from specific cells in a given species.In looking at students’ epistemological profiles, it is important to recognisethat different scientific knowledge claims relate to data in different ways, andthat it may be relevant to use different aspects of an epistemological profilein different contexts. The implications of this diversity in the nature ofscientific research for pedagogy at the undergraduate level is discussed insection 7.57
Page 1 and 2:
Undergraduate Learning in Science P
Page 3 and 4:
Undergraduate Learning in Science P
Page 5 and 6: Undergraduate Learning in Science P
Page 55: Undergraduate Learning in Science P
show all

Undergraduate science research projects and students - School of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?