katerina malamitsa, ph.d. panagiotis kokkotas, professor michael kasoutas, ph.d. student efthymios...

Katerina Malamitsa, Ph.D. Panagiotis Kokkotas, Professor

Michael Kasoutas, Ph.D. student Efthymios Stamoulis, Ph.D. student

Faculty of Primary EducationNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens

Greece

Ninth International History, Philosophy & Science Teaching Conference,June 24th - 28th 2007, Calgary, Canada

1

Critical Thinking Conceptualization

as logical fallacies(Dreyfus & Jungwirth, 1980; Jungwirth & Dreyfus, 1990; Jungwirth, 1987)

as formal reasoning processes or skills(Blair & Johnson, 1980; Lawson, 1982, 1985; Obed, 1997)

as scientific reasoning in general(Friedler, Nachmias & Linn, 1990)

2

9th IHPST Conference, June 24th - 28th 2007, Calgary, Canada

Critical Thinking Conceptualization

An historical benchmark in conceptualizing critical thinking is the consensus of a panel of 46 leading

theoreticians, teachers and critical thinking assessment specialists from several disciplines as it

is described in the conference proceedings of the American Philosophical Association (APA) widely

known as the “Delphi Report”(Facione, 1990a)

3


Critical Thinking &History Of Science

Issues of History of Science (HOS) can be incorporated to Science courses to promote students’ Critical Thinking

HOS can provide content material which could be used in Science Teaching

Aspects of Nature of Science (NOS) can engage students in Critical Thinking

although,

History & Philosophy of Science isn’t a unified field

The agenda between Critical Thinking and Science Education is conflicting

(Zemplèn, 2007; Matthews, 1994; 1998a; 1998b; Stinner et al, 2003; Stinner & Williams,

1998; Mc Commas et al., 1998; Lederman, 1992)

4


Science Education& Critical Thinking

Science Education promotes Critical Thinking skills by:

Stimulating critical reflection on the knowledge and the experience gained inside and outside the classroom

Promoting the awareness of subjective and ideological biases

Developing the ability to analyze evidence expressed in rational argumentation

5


Purpose of our ResearchExamine whether the exploitation of issues of HOS

in science teaching contributes towards the development of students’ Critical Thinking Skills

A project was developed on electromagnetism concepts which incorporated some historical aspects (i.e. Galvani-Volta controversy, Oerstead experiments)

A between groups experimental design was applied in order to explore whether HOS incorporation significantly affected students’ Critical Thinking Skills

6


Rationale of the Project:incorporate selected material from HOS (i.e. Volta’s

electrical pile, Oerstead experiments)address directly both student’s alternative

frameworks and the historical and sociocultural context of the scientist to whom the discovery is attributed

engage of students in the reflective examination and comparison between their own frameworks and the scientific models

aspects of NOS were also incorporatedpronouncedly non-authoritarian and student-centred

7


About the Project:30h duration (26h teaching, 4h evaluation)12 worksheets‘hands on and minds on activities’ / experiments /

practical workfocused on Critical Thinking Skills

e.g. Categorization, Examining Ideas, Identifying and Analyzing Arguments, Assessing Claim, Drawing Conclusions, Justifying Procedures

students were engaged to discussion with questions e.g. ‘How..?’, ‘Why…?’, ‘What If…?’

students developed argumentationvideotaped

8


A Worksheet of the Project

9


Project Video 1

10


Project Video 2

11


Research DesignCritical Thinking Skills were evaluated:

with ‘Test of Everyday Reasoning (TER)’ for both groups

with assessment sheets for the experimental group

12


“Test of Everyday Reasoning” (TER)

based on the APA Delphi Reportit is a 35-item multiple choice testassesses an individual's or group's reasoning

and critical thinking skillsgathers program evaluation on reasoning and

critical thinking skills research dataassesses educational learning outcomeswe translated the TER (into Greek) and

standardized it

13


“Test of Everyday Reasoning” (TER)

TER provides six scores from an individual’s completed test: (a)an Overall Score which ranges from 0 to 35(b)three Sub-scales:

i. “Analysis”, ranging from 0 to 9,ii. “Evaluation” , ranging from 0 to 11iii. “Inference”, ranging from 0 to 15

(c) two more Sub-scales :i. “Deductive Reasoning”, ranging from 0 to 19ii. “Inductive Reasoning”, ranging from 0 to 16

each of the items of TER is assigned to only one of the three sub-scales: “Analysis”, “Evaluation” or “Inference”

the same items are reclassified to only one of the two other Sub-scales: “Deductive Reasoning” or “Inductive Reasoning”

(Facione, 2001: 11-12, 25)

14


Assessment Sheetfor the evaluation of the project’s teaching objectivesincluded multiple choice questions, open ended

questions (sentence completion and completely unstructured), concept map construction

was completed individually by students of the experimental group

15


Research Designa within-groups design was employed

(experimental & control group)each group had 22 studentseach group had the same initial level of Critical

Thinking Skillsinvestigated with an independent samples t-test for

TER Overall Scoreno significant differences were found [t(21) = 0,859;

p = 0,4 (> 0,05)]

16


Experimental Hypothesis

students after the project would have significantly better results in TER scores than before the project in Overall Score and Sub-scale scores signifying the

improvement in their critical thinking skills.

17


Research Results

18


Box plot of TER Overall Score and Sub-scale Scores, before and after the project for the experimental group

Paired Samples t-tests (Pre – Post)

For the Experimental Group:were found statistically significant for the Overall Score and all sub-

scale scores the effect sizes were:

much larger than typical (d >1) or larger than typical (0,80 < d < 1)

For the Control Group:were found statistically non significant for the sub-scale scores of

“Analysis” “Evaluation” & “Inference”,were found statistically significant for the Overall Score and the sub-

scale scores of “Deductive Reasoning” & “Inductive Reasoning” but: the effect sizes were:

much smaller than typical (d < 0,20)(Cohen, 1988)

19


Assessment Sheet Results

20


Histogram of Assessment Sheet Overall Scorewith normal curve

Discussion

there is a need to create opportunities for students which:develop their understanding on how scientific ideas

are accepted and/or rejected on the basis of empirical evidence

develop their understanding on how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting such evidence

students generally respond positively to the integration of History of Science

21


The incorporation of aspects of HOS:supports the development of instructional toolssupports learning by engaging students to discuss,

argue and build consensus as members of a community

contributes towards students’ Critical Thinking Skills development

22


Discussion

we reject the null hypothesisthus, the project implementation led to statistically

significant results concerning the critical thinking skills development

23


Discussion

THANK YOU

24


Presenter: Katerina MalamitsaFaculty of Primary Education

National and Kapodistrian University of AthensGreece

Ninth International History, Philosophy & Science Teaching Conference,June 24th - 28th 2007, Calgary, Canada

25

katerina malamitsa, ph.d. panagiotis kokkotas, professor michael kasoutas, ph.d. student efthymios...

Documents

th ihpst conference

students critical thinking

science hos

critical reflection

science nos

canada slide

science courses

conference proceedings