The Development of an Instrument to Assess Visuo-Semiotic Reasoning in Biology

Year 2019, Volume: 19 Issue: 82, 121 - 136, 31.07.2019

Lindelani Mngunı

Abstract

Purpose: The
significance of visuo-semiotic
models in biology education has increased.
Students have to develop visuo-semiotic skills, which could enable them to
learn biology effectively. However, a lack of a universal theory of visual
literacy has made it challenging to develop and assess visualization skills,
including visuo-semiotic skills. The aim of the present research, therefore,
was to develop an instrument for assessing visuo-semiotic reasoning in biology
(VSR-b) in the context of amino acid structures. The research question guiding the research was “how could an instrument for
assessing visuo-semiotic reasoning in biology be developed?”

Methods: Guided by a theoretical framework, the VSR-b
Test was developed using a mixed-methods approach, by first identifying VSR-b
Skills through a panel of nine experts after which items were designed and
validated through the same panel of experts and pilot participants (n=18). The
VSR-b Test was then tested on a group of molecular biology students (n=30).

Findings: Results showed satisfactory reliability and
inter-item correlation. However, further research is required to corroborate
findings of the present research in other contexts, with particular emphasis on
assessment and development of visuo-semiotic reasoning among students.

Implications for research & practice: The current research has shown
that VSR-b can be understood and assessed within the context of the theoretical
cognitive process of visualization. It provides teachers and researchers a
starting point in understanding how learning occurs through visuo-semiotic models. Instructional and curriculum designers, therefore, can use
findings of this research as a guide to support student development in biology.

Keywords

Molecular biology, Visual literacy

References

• Aboraya, A., France, C., Young, J., Curci, K., & LePage, J. (2005). The Validity of Psychiatric Diagnosis Revisited: The Clinician’s Guide to Improve the Validity of Psychiatric Diagnosis. Psychiatry (Edgmont), 2(9), 48–55.
• Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical constellation of modes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27–49.
• Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., ... & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, abridged edition. White Plains, NY: Longman.
• Arneson, J. B., & Offerdahl, E. G. (2018). Visual literacy in bloom: Using bloom’s taxonomy to support visual learning skills. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(1), 1–8. doi: 10.1187/cbe.17-08-0178.
• Arsad, N. M., Osman, K., & Soh, T. M. T. (2011). Instrument development for 21st century skills in Biology. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1470-1474.
• Avgerinou, M. D., & Pettersson, R. (2011). Toward a Cohesive Theory of Visual Literacy. Journal of Visual Literacy, 30(2), 1-19. doi: 10.1080/23796529.2011.11674687.
• Avgerinou, M. D., & Quinn Knight, E. (2005). Assessing the Visual Literacy Skills And Perceptions Of Pre-Service Math Teachers. International Visual Literacy Conference, Orlando, Florida. October 17-2. 2005. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313469975_Assessing_The_Visual_Literacy_Skills_And_Perceptions_Of_Pre-Service_Math_Teachers.
• Avgerinou, M., & Ericson, J. (1997). A review of the concept of visual literacy. British Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4), 280-291.
• Bloom, B. S., Krathwohl, D. R., & Masia, B. B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: McKay.
• Hyrkäs, K., Appelqvist-Schmidlechner, K., & Oksa, L. (2003). Validating an instrument for clinical supervision using an expert panel. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 40(6), 619-625.
• Kawahara, J. I., & Yokosawa, K. (2001). Pre-attentive perception of multiple illusory line-motion: A formal model of parallel independent-detection in visual search. The Journal of General Psychology, 128(4), 357-383.
• Khodor, J., Halme, D. G., & Walker, G. C. (2004). A hierarchical biology concept framework: a tool for course design. Cell Biology Education, 3(2), 111-121.
• Krauss, S. E. (2005). Research paradigms and meaning-making: A primer. The Qualitative Report, 10(4), 758–770.
• Linenberger, K. J., & Holme, T. (2015). Biochemistry Instructors’ Views toward Developing and Assessing Visual Literacy in Their Courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(1), 23-31. doi: 10.1021/ed500420r.
• McKee, T., & McKee, J. R. (2017). Biochemistry: the molecular basis of life. International 6th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Mnguni, L. (2018). A description of visual literacy among third year biochemistry students. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(3), 486-495
• Mnguni, L. E. (2014). The theoretical cognitive process of visualization for science education. SpringerPlus, 3(1). doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-184.
• Nitz, S., Ainsworth, S. E., Nerdel, C., & Prechtl, H. (2014). Do student perceptions of teaching predict the development of representational competence and biological knowledge? Learning and Instruction, 31, 13-22.
• Offerdahl, E. G., Arneson, J. B., & Byrne, N. (2017). Lighten the load: Scaffolding visual literacy in biochemistry and molecular biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 16(1), 1-11. doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-06-0193.
• Schönborn, K. J., & Anderson, T. R. (2009). A Model of Factors Determining Students’ Ability to Interpret External Representations in Biochemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 193–232.
• Van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. New York: Routledge
• Walsh, G. (2014). Proteins: Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 2nd Ed. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Weliweriya, N., Sayre, E. C., & Zollman, D. (2018). Case Study: Coordinating Among Multiple Semiotic Resources to Solve Complex Physics Problems. European Journal of Physics, 40(2), 1-26.