Adaptation of scale “Working Like Scientists” (WLS) A Turkish-language version: validation and reliability

Year 2016, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 54 - 65, 01.04.2016

Güntay Taşçı Maike Looss Halil Yurdugül Dagmar Hilfert Ruppell Ali Sülün Dagmar Hinrichs Sedat Aydoğdu Konstantin Klingenberg Fehime Şeyma Taş

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.16.03.3.1

Abstract

The
aim of this study was to validate an instrument implemented by Höner et al.
(2010) called “Working Like Scientists”, which was designed according to German
culture. The translation of the items from German to Turkish and back to German
again was performed by Turkish and German working groups in an iterative
process, eliminating incomprehensibilities and misfits of specific words. In a
first step, the Turkish and German questionnaires were completed in a week by a
total of 44 Turkish prospective teachers. So in this way, the data of
statistical evidence of equivalence in both languages were collected (r=0. 74;
p=0. 00). To establish the factorial construct for the Turkish instrument, the
data set obtained from 304 Turkish prospective teachers was analysed by the CFA
using a Lisrel 8.8 program. To prove the evidence of discriminant and
convergent validity of the established model of the study, AVE (average
variance extracted) values and the square roots of AVE value were calculated.
In addition, the scale’s prediction status of epistemological beliefs as a
higher construct was examined by the secondary-level CFA. Furthermore, the
evidence for the scale’s reliability was examined by total item correlations
(> .30); internal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha: between 0.694 and 0.805),
and construct reliability (McDonald´s Omega: between 0.694 and 0.806), and
later the suitable values for both sub-dimensions and the whole scale.

Keywords

scientific epistemological beliefs, prospective teacher, scale adaptation

Supporting Institution

This study was supported by Erzincan University department of coordination of research projects. The research was presented as oral presentation at the third International Instructional Tecnologies and Teacher Education Symposium in Turkey.

References

• Aikenhead, G. S., & Ryan, A. G. (1992). The Development of a New Instrument: “Views on Science- Technology-Society” (VOSTS). Science Education, 76(5), 477–491. http://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760503
• Aikenhead, G. S., Ryan, A. G., & Fleming, R. W. (1989). Views on science-technology society. Retrieved from http://www.usask.ca/education/profiles /aikenhead/webpage/vosts.pdf
• Bybee, R. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 20–46). Washington: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
• DeBacker, T. K., Crowson, H. M., Beesley, A. D., Thoma, S. J., & Hestevold, N. L. (2008). The Challenge of Measuring Epistemic Beliefs: An Analysis of Three Self-Report Instruments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(3), 281–312. http://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.76.3.281-314
• Deryakulu, D., & Bıkmaz, H. F. (2003). Bilimsel Epistemolojik İnançlar Ölçeğinin Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması [The Validity And Reliability Study Of The Scientific Epistemological Beliefs Survey]. Eğitim Bilimleri ve Uygulama Dergisi, 2(4), 243–257.
• Hofer, B. K. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353–383.
• Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The develop- ment of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88 – 140.
• Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18 (1), 39-50.
• Hambleton, R.K., & Patsula, L. (1999). Increasing the validity of adapted tests: Myths to be avoided and guidelines for improving test adaptation practices. Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 1(1), 1-30.
• Höner, K, Strahl, A., Müller, R., Eghtessad, A., Pietzner, V., Looß, M., Klingenberg, K. & E. Gläser (2010). Das Wissenschaftsverständnis von Lehramtsstudierenden [Epistemological Belifs of Teacher Candidates], chim. & ct. did., 103 (36). Jg., 39-66.
• Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39 (6), 497–521. http://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
• [National Research Council], NRC. (1996). National Science Education Standards. National Academies Press.
• Neumann, I., & Kremer, K. (2013). Nature of Science und epistemologische Überzeugungen Ähnlichkeiten und Unterschiede. Zeitschrift Für Didaktik Der Naturwissenschaften, 19, 211–234.
• Nunnally, J. C. & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. 3rd Edition. McGraw-Hill: New York.
• Ordonez, X. G., Ponsoda, V., Abad, F. J., & Romero, S. J. (2008). Measurement of Epistemological Beliefs: Psychometric Properties of the EQEBI Test Scores. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69 (2), 287–302. http://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323226
• Pomeroy, D. (1993). Implications of teachers' beliefs about the nature of science: Comparison of the beliefs of scientists, secondary science teachers, and elementary teachers. Science Education, 77 (3), 261-278.
• Schommer, M. A. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (3), 498 – 504.
• Schraw, G. (2013). Conceptual Integration and Measurement of Epistemological and Ontological Beliefs in Educational Research. ISRN Education, 19. http://doi.org/10.1155/2013/327680
• Schraw, G., Bendixen L.D. & Dunkle M.E. (2002). Development and validation of the epistemic belief inventory (EBI). In: Hofer BK, Pintrich PR, Eds. Personal Epistemology: The Psychology of Beliefs About Knowledge and Knowing. 1st ed. New Jersey: Erlbaum, 261-75.
• Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2008). An Instrument To Assess Views Of Scientific Inquiry: The VOSI Questionnaire. Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 1–24. Retrieved from http://homepages.wmich.edu/~rschwart/
• Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88 (4), 610–645. http://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10128
• Stahl, E. & R. Bromme, R. (2007). “CAEB: an instrument for measuring connotative aspects of epistemological beliefs,” Learning and Instruction, 17 (6), 773 - 785.
• Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25 (2), 173-80.
• Tsai, C. (2000). Relationships between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perceptions of constructivist learning environments. Educational Research, 42 (2), 193–205. http://doi.org/10.1080/001318800363836
• Welch, A. G., Roy, C. M., & Ray, C. M. (2012). A preliminary report of the psychometric properties of the Epistemic Beliefs Inventory. The European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 2301–2218. http://doi.org/10.15405/ FutureAcademy/ejsbs(2301-2218).2012.2.12
• Wood, P., & Kardash, C. (2002). Critical elements in the design and analysis of studies of epistemology. In B. . Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 231–260). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Yıldırım, C. (2007). Bilim Felsefesi[Philosophy of Science]. 11. Ed., İstanbul: Remzi Kitapevi.