THE PREDICTIVE EFFECTS OF ENGAGEMENT IN SCIENCE LESSONS AND ATTITUDES TOWARD SCIENCE ON SOUTHEAST ASIAN GRADE 8 STUDENTS’ SCIENCE ACHIEVEMENT IN TIMSS 2015

Abstract

This study explored the predictive effects of students’ engagement in science lessons and attitudes toward science on science achievement among Southeast Asian eighth graders in TIMSS 2015. In this study, students’ views on engaging teaching in science lessons, students’ interest in and liking of learning science, understanding about the importance of and the usefulness of the subjects (attainment value and utility value), and  self-confidence or self-concept in their ability to learn science were measured. Data were obtained from 9,726 Malaysian students, 6,116 Singaporean students, and 6,482 Thai students who participated in TIMSS 2015. The results of the present study indicated that Southeast Asian eighth graders’ views on engaging teaching in science lessons, liking, valuing, and confidence in learning science were positively and significantly associated with their science achievement in TIMSS 2015 except for the relationship between students confidence in science with science achievement for Malaysian samples. Southeast Asian eighth graders’ liking, valuing, and confidence in science also showed significant predictive effects on their science achievement except for Malaysian grade 8 students’ confidence in science which showed an inverse contribution to science achievement. On the other hand, Malaysian and Thai female students scored significantly higher than their male counterparts on the TIMSS 2015 science assessment. This study provides information on prerequisites of Southeast Asian students’ science learning. Implications of the findings for educational policy and practice are discussed.   

Keywords

• Engagement in science lessons,attitudes toward science; science achievement,TIMSS

References

1. Aida Suraya, M.Y. (1997). Creating constructivist environment in the teaching of decimals. Paper presented and compiled in the proceedings of International Conference on Cooperative Learning and Constructivism (CLAC) in Science and Mathematics Education, 1 to 4 April at SEAMEO RECSAM. Atkinson, R. L., Atkinson, R. C., Smith, E. E. & Bem, D .J. (1993). Introduction to Psychology. 11th Edition. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanich, Inc. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman. Chapman, E. (2005). Assessing student engagement rates. Eric Digest Online. Retrieved 5 March 2006 from http://www.ericdigests.org/2005-2/engagement.html Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Finn, J.D., Pannozzo, G.M. & Voekl, K.E. (1995). Disruptive and inattentive-withdrawn behaviour and achievement among fourth graders. Elementary School Journal, 95, 421-454. Garton, A.F. (2004). Exploring cognitive development: The child as problem solver. Victoria, Australia: Blackwell Publishing. Glynn, S.M., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Brickman, P. (2007). Nonscience majors learning science: A theoretical model of motivation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1088-1107. Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research. March 2007, 77(1), 81-112. Krajcik, J, & Merritt, J. (2012). Engaging student in scientific practices: What does constructing and revising models look like in the science classroom? March 2012 issues of NSTA’s K-12 journals. Retrieved June 25, 2015 from http://nstahosted.org/pdfs/ngss/resources/201203_framework-krajcikandmerritt.pdf Krathwohl, D., Bloom, B., & Masia, B. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay. Lefton, L. A. (1991). Psychology. Fourth edition. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19(2), 119-137. McLaughlin, M., McGrath, D.J., Burian-Fitzgerald, A., Lanahan, L., Scotchmer, M., Enyeart, C., & Salganik, L. (2005). Student content engagement as a construct for the measurement of effective classroom instruction and teacher knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.air.org/files/AERA2005 Student_Content_Engagement11.pdf. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., Foy, P., & Stanco, G. M. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Results in Science. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Martin, R.E., Sexton, C., Wagner, K. & Gerlovich, J. (1994). Teaching science for all children. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Mislevy, R. J., & Sheehan, K. M. (1987). Marginal estimation procedures. In A. E. Beaton (Ed.), The NAEP 1983/84 Technical Report (NAEP Report 15-TR-20, pp. 121–211) Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Mislevy, R. J., & Sheehan, K. M. (1989). Information matrices in latent-variable models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 14(4), 335-350. Natriello, G. (1984). Problems in the evaluation of students and student disengagement from secondary schools. Journal of research and development in education, 17, 14-24. Nolen, S. B. (2003). Learning environment, motivation, and achievement in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 347-368. Ong, S. L., & Gonzalez, E. J. (2012). TIMSS 2007: What can we learn? (Eds.). Penang: SEAMEO-RECSAM. Ong, S. L., Gonzalez, E. J., & Shanmugam, S.K.S. (2013). TIMSS 2011: What can we learn together in reaching greater heights? (Eds.). Penang: SEAMEO-RECSAM. Palmer, D. (2007). What is the best way to motivate students in science? Teaching Science: The Journal of the Australian Science Teachers Association. 53(1), 38-42. Phillips, J. A. (2007). HMEF 5043: Psychology of learning and instruction. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: UNITEM Sdn. Bhd. Piaget, J. (1964). Judgment and reasoning in child. Paterson N.J.: Litlefield Adams. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of educational Psychology, 95(4), 667. Quick, M. & Anderson, L. (2005). Engaging students in the learning of science. USC College. Retrieved June 25, 2015 from http://cet.usc.edu/resources/teaching_learning/docs/learningscience_oct05.pdf Reeve, J.M. (2005). Understanding motivation and emotion. 4th edition. Iowa: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Rubin, D. B. (1987).Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley. Schlechty, P. C. (2001). Shaking up the schoolhouse. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 323-332. Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. Victoria, Australia: Australia Council for Educational Research. Retrieved June 25, 2015 from http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=aer Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 3-25. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.