The Predictive Power of Reading Comprehension, Attitude Toward Sciences, Test Technique, And Science Subject Matter Knowledge In Predicting Pisa Scientific Literacy Test Total Score
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to identify to what extent that the reading comprehension, question types, attitude toward science, test method, and subject matter knowledge predict the PISA scientific literacy scores of the students. The study uses the method of correlational research, which is a type of quantitative research method. We reached out to 321 students who were randomly chosen using the method of cluster sampling. Five separate tests were used in the study: PISA 2015 science literacy test, 12 gap-filling exercises were asked to determine the students’ level of surface reading comprehension, Five open-ended questions were asked to determine the in-depth reading comprehension level of the students, 5-point Likert scale composed of 13 items was used to determine the students’ attitude toward sciences, 20 multiple-choice questions with 5 choices, regarding four units of the eighth-grade sciences curriculum and a 5-point Likert scale composed of 10 items was used to determine to what degree students use clues to guess the correct answer when solving multiple-choice tests. The research showed that the students’ PISA scientific literacy scores, and the scores that they got in the multiple-choice and open-ended questions of PISA scientific literacy test were strongly positively correlated with the independent variables of the research (surface reading comprehension, in-depth reading comprehension, scientific subject matter knowledge, attitude toward sciences, using test techniques).The independent variables of the research set forth the 43% of the variance of the PISA scientific literacy test total scores, 46% of the variance of the success score in open-ended questions, and 34% of the variance of the success score in multiple-choice questions. The research also reached the conclusion that the students performed much better in multiple-choice questions compared to the open-ended questions about the same text (situation/problem).
Keywords
PISA, scientific literacy, scientific literacy and reading comprehension, PISA test of scientific literacy question types
Thanks
Akademik çalışmalara verdiğiniz destek için teşekkür eder, saygılarımı sunarım.
References
- Akyol, H. (2014). Turkish Teaching. Ankara: PegemA.
- Altınok, H. (2004). Teacher candidates’ evaluation of their teaching competencies. Hacettepe University Educational Faculty Journal, (26), 1-8.
- Aslanoğlu, A. E. (2007). Factors related to the reading comprehension skills of 4th grade students according to data of pirls 2001 turkey. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Ankara University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
- Aydin, U. & Bulgan, G. (2017). Adaptation of children’s test anxiety scale to turkish. Elementary Education Online, 16(2), 887-899.
- Başaran, M. (2013-a). Reading fluency as an indicator of reading comprehension. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(4), 1303-0485.
- Başaran, M. (2013-b) Measurement of reading comprehension using meaning-based paragraphs with multiple-choice questions. Journal of Educational Sciences Research, 3(2),107-121.
- Bayat, N., Şekercioğlu, G. & Bakır, S. (2014). The relationship between reading comprehension and success in science. Education and Science, 39(176), 457-466.
- Bell, R. L. & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the Nature of Science and Decision Making on Science and Technology Based Issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352–377.
- Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2016). Thoughts on exams - expert evaluation on the current situation on the assessment and evaluation system in turkey. Kalem Education and Human Sciences Journal, 6(2), 345-356.
- Cain, K., Oakhill, J. & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31-42.
