Natural Scientific Thinking in Foreign Students of Pre-University Courses in the Context of Integration into the Russian Educational Environment
Abstract
This article is the result of a two-year-long experiment conducted by the authors. The purpose of the research was to study the natural scientific thinking of foreign students of preparatory departments in the context of integrative processes. The quantitative and qualitative analysis of the regulatory framework governing the educational process at the stage of pre-university training, including syllabi and steering documents of faculties of pre-university training, formed the methodological basis of the research. The modified criteria-focused TEM-11 test was used as a diagnostic tool. The method of expert evaluations ensured the reliability and validity of the research. The study provided evidence of the feasibility of including an integration course in “biophysics” along with biology, physics, and chemistry in the curricula of preparatory departments that prepare foreign students for admission to medical, agricultural, veterinary, and biological faculties. It does not appear reasonable to include an online course in the training system for foreign students who are residents since they already developed the differential-synthetic and synthetic stages of natural scientific thinking while they were learning the trade. It is concluded that the Biophysics integrative online course studied by foreign students of faculties of pre-university training, develops a special type of natural scientific thinking, which will be the basis for framing professional thinking in the future. A total of 374 people took part in the experiment (188 people were included in the experimental group and 186 people became part of the control group). The comparative analysis of the stages of development of natural scientific thinking in the control and experimental groups showed significant progress in the experimental group. After the experiment, the number of respondents at the common empirical stage of development of natural scientific thinking was 11.2 % of the entire sample; the number of respondents at the scientific empirical stage was 32.8 %, at the synthetic differential stage – 44.7 % and at the synthetic stage – 27.6 %.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Akanwa, U. N., & Ovute, A. O. (2014). The effect of constructivist teaching model on SSS Physics students’ achievement and interest. Journal of Research and Method in Education, 4(1), 35-38.
Alekseev, V.I., & Cherednichenko, A.I. (2012) Intellectual development and training on the basis of information educational technologies. Russian Journal of Education and Psychology, (12).
Artemenko, O.N. (2011) Scientific Approaches to Determining the Interdependence of Mental Development and Achievements in Learning Activities of Younger School Children. Stavropol State University Herald, 2, 133-138.
Berulava G.A. (1993). Thinking Diagnostics and Development in Adolescents. Biysk. Scientific Publishing Center of the Biysk Pedagogical Institute, 240.
Broks, A. (2014). Scientific thinking: The backbone of modern science and technology education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 764.
Das, M. K. (2014). Elements for development of scientific thinking. Journal of Research & Method in Education. 4(5), 28-32.
Dorfner, T., Förtsch, C., Germ, M., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2018). Biology instruction using a generic framework of scientific reasoning and argumentation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 232-243.
Faikhamta, C. (2013). The development of in-service science teachers’ understandings of and orientations to teaching the nature of science within a PCK-based NOS course. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 847-869.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1972). In 30 volumes. Chief editor Prokhorov, A.M. Moscow: Sovetskaya Entsyklopediya, V. 9, 664.
Grigoryeva, Ye.V. (2015) Methodology of Teaching Natural Science in Elementary School: Textbook for Students of Pedagogical Universities. Grigoryeva, Ye.V. – 2nd edition, revised and updated – Chelyabinsk: Publishing House of Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University, 283.
Gunstone, R. (2015). Encyclopedia of science education. Springer Reference.
Holzkamp, K., & Sloan, T. (2013). Psychology from the standpoint of the subject: Selected writings of Klaus Holzkamp. Palgrave Macmillan.
Ivan, M., & Šulcová, R. (2017). Mathematics, chemistry and science connection as a basis of scientific thinking. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 37, p. 01017). EDP Sciences.
Jasso, G. (1988). Principles of theoretical analysis. Sociological Theory, 1-20.
Kang, H., Windschitl, M., Stroupe, D., & Thompson, J. (2016). Designing, launching, and implementing high quality learning opportunities for students that advance scientific thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(9), 1316-1340.
Kiley, M. (2019). Threshold concepts of research in teaching scientific thinking. In Redefining scientific thinking for higher education (pp. 139-155). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Klahr, D., Zimmerman, C., & Matlen, B.J. (2019). Improving students' scientific thinking. The Cambridge handbook of cognition and education. Cambridge University, 67–99.
Koerber, S., Mayer, D., Osterhaus, C., Schwippert, K., & Sodian, B. (2015). The development of scientific thinking in elementary school: A comprehensive inventory. Child Development, 86(1), 327-336.
Koerber, S., & Osterhaus, C. (2019). Individual differences in early scientific thinking: assessment, cognitive influences, and their relevance for science learning. Journal of Cognition and Development, 20(4), 510-533.
Kremer, K., Specht, C., Urhahne, D., & Mayer, J. (2014). The relationship in biology between the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Biological Education, 48(1), 1-8.
Kubaisi, A. (2011). The effect of using constructivist learning model on the achievement of intermediate stage in mathematics and systematic thinking. Basrah Journal for humanities, 32(1), 106-126.
Lasch, C., Wolff, J. J., & Elison, J. T. (2020). Examining criterion-oriented validity of the repetitive behavior scales for early childhood (RBS-EC) and the video-referenced rating of reciprocal social behavior (vrRSB). Development and psychopathology, 32(3), 779-789.
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2015). The Development of Scientific Thinking. Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science, 1-44.
McComas, W. F. (Ed.). (2013). The language of science education: an expanded glossary of key terms and concepts in science teaching and learning. Springer Science & Business Media.
Murtonen, M., & Salmento, H. (2019). Broadening the theory of scientific thinking for higher education. In Redefining Scientific Thinking for Higher Education (pp. 3-29). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Özden В., & Yenice N. (2021) The Relationship between Scientific Inquiry and Communication Skills with Beliefs about the Nature of Science of Pre-Service Science Teachers’. Participatory Educational Research, 9(1), 192-213.
Pechnikov, A. N., & Pechnikov, D. A. (2015). Solving Problems of Current Pedagogical Control by Analyzing Criterion-Oriented Testing Results. Educational Technologies and Society, 18(2), 489–513.
Philosophical Dictionary (1991). Ado, A.V., et al]; under the editorship Frolov, I.Т. – 6th edition, revised and updated, 559.
Purnami, W., Sarwanto, S., Suranto, S., Suyanti, R., & Mocerino, M. (2021). Investigation of Science Technology Ecocultural Society (STEcS) Model to Enhance Eco Critical Thinking Skills. Journal of Innovation in Educational and Cultural Research, 2(2), 77-85.
Qarareh, A. O. (2016). The Effect of Using the Constructivist Learning Model in Teaching Science on the Achievement and Scientific Thinking of 8th Grade Students. International Education Studies, 9(7), 178-196.
Rastopchina, O.M. (2015) Criteria of Diagnostics of Levels of Knowledge and Competences of Students. Eurasian Union of Scientists, 5(14), 105-109.
Shamina S.V. (2011). Diagnosing Natural Scientific Thinking of Students in the Context of Integration of Physical and Biological Education Content (the Case of a Veterinary University). [PhD in Pedagogy Thesis]. Chelyabinsk, 212.
Shamina, S.V. (2018). Didactic Modeling of Diagnostics of Natural Scientific Thinking of University Students. Current Challenges of Science and Education, 1, 36.
Starchenko, S.A., & Starchenko, V.A. (2005). Development of Natural Scientific Thinking among Lyceum Students. Chelyabinsk. Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University, 61.
Surovikina, S.A. (2005). Development of Students’ Natural Scientific Thinking in the Process of Teaching Physics.
Taber, K. S. (2012). The Natures of Scientific Thinking: Creativity as the Handmaiden to Logic in the Development of Public and Personal Knowledge. Advances in Nature of Science Research Concepts and Methodologies, 51-74
Taber, K. S., Ruthven, K., Mercer, N., Hofmann, R., Billingsley, F. R. B., & Luthman, S. (2016). Developing teaching with an explicit focus on scientific thinking. School Science Review, 97(361), 75-85.
Vasilyeva, N.A. (2008). Development of Natural Science Education in Russia in the 18th–First Half of the 19th Century. (Before the Reforms of the 60s.) (Doctoral dissertation, Chelyabinsk, 2008).
Zimmerman, C., & Klahr, D. (2018). Development of scientific thinking. Stevens' handbook of experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience, 4, 1-25.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
