Relations of the understanding of science to other constructs

After presenting the conceptualization of the understanding of science and its de-velopment, relations to other constructs (personality traits, cognitive abilities, and inves-tigative interests) that might have an impact on students’ understanding of science are described in the following. Such relations are relevant for the theoretical conceptualiza-tion (to distinguish the construct from related constructs) and for the measurement of the understanding of science (i.e., with regard to its construct validity, which is described in

Chapter 1.2.1.). Such relations are furthermore important in the context of interventions on students’ understanding of science. It can thereby be investigated if an intervention affects not only the understanding of science, but also related constructs, which might then be considered as outcome variables (see Chapter 1.3.1.).

Personality Traits: Need for Cognition and Epistemic Curiosity

Engaging in scientific inquiry requires active thinking and reasoning (Kuhn, 2002;

Lawson, 2005) and might therefore be closely related to the constructs need for cognition (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982; Hofer, 2004) and epistemic curiosity (Hofer, 2004; Litman, 2008). Need for cognition is defined as the “tendency of an individual to engage in and enjoy thinking” (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982, p. 116). People with a high level of need for cognition show a pronounced willingness to solve problems through thinking and reflect-ing. People with a low need for cognition tend to avoid cognitively demanding activities (Oschatz, 2011). Specifically, a need for cognition has been considered an epistemic mo-tive , an individual disposition for the willingness to engage in thinking (Oschatz, 2011).

Need for cognition has been found to positively affect cognitive behavior such as elabo-rating on, evaluating, and recalling information (i.e., Peltier & Schibrowsky, 1994) as well as problem solving and decision making (e.g., Nair & Ramnarayan, 2000).

Epistemic curiosity is the desire for knowledge that motivates individuals to learn new ideas, to eliminate information gaps, and to solve intellectual problems (Litman, 2008; Litman & Spielberger, 2003). It has been found to be positively related to epistemic beliefs (Richter & Schmid, 2010), exploratory behavior, and the closure of gaps in knowledge (Litman, Hutchins, & Russon, 2005). There is evidence that need for cognition and epistemic curiosity positively affect problem solving and motivate individuals to learn new things (e.g., Fleischhauer, 2010; Litman, 2008; Litman et al., 2005; Nair &

Ramnarayan, 2000; Peltier & Schibrowsky, 1994; Richter & Schmid, 2010). High levels of need for cognition and epistemic curiosity might be important prerequisites for making an effort to examine and solve scientific problems.

Cognitive Abilities

There are contradictory findings regarding the relation of certain aspects of the understanding of science and cognitive abilities. Scientific inquiry requires farsighted

thinking and planning and involves a variety of cognitive and metacognitive abilities (e.g., Kuhn, 2002; Morris et al., 2012; Zimmerman, 2007).

From a theoretical point of view, it can be derived that cognitive as well as meta-cognitive abilities are involved and required for engaging in the SIC (the suitability of the theme in the context of gifted education is described in Chapter 1.3.3.). It can be assumed that deductive as well as inductive reasoning processes are involved in the SIC (see Figure 4). In particular, deductive processes are required in connection with the derivation of hypotheses from theory, and inductive processes are involved in the generalization of findings or the derivation of theories and laws (Lawson, 2005; McComas, 1998).

Figure 4. Embedding of deductive and inductive reasoning in the process of scientific inquiry (according to McComas, 1998, p. 59).

Relations between epistemic beliefs and intelligence as well as relations between scientific reasoning and different cognitive abilities have rather rarely been investigated empirically (e.g., Mayer et al., 2014). Results differ in part but point to positive relations between scientific reasoning and measures of general intelligence across different age groups (moderate positive correlations have been found at the elementary school level;

Mayer et al., 2014). The scientific reasoning abilities of elementary school children have also been found to be positively related to additional cognitive abilities such as reading skills, problem-solving skills, and spatial abilities (Mayer et al., 2014). Few studies have investigated the relations between epistemic beliefs and cognitive abilities. Empirical re-sults have primarily focused on secondary or university students and have pointed to low to moderate positive correlations (e.g., Trautwein & Lüdtke, 2007).

Theory

Deduction

Inquiry/

Empiricism Induction

Investigative Interests

Vocational interests play an important role in students’ achievement in STEM dis-ciplines and can predict later career decisions (Kahn & Scott, 1997; Lapan, Shaughnessy,

& Boggs, 1996; Leibham, Alexander, & Johnson, 2013). According to Holland’s theory (1997), vocational interests are classified as realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enter-prising, and conventional (RIASEC model). Students with a high level of investigative interests prefer activities that involve thought, observation, investigation, exploration, and discovery. They like to solve problems, perform experiments, and conduct research (Hol-land, 1997). Investigative interests are thus relevant for the development of STEM knowledge and skills (Carnevale et al., 2011).

Empirical evidence has shown positive relations between investigative interests and abilities in math and science (see Ackerman & Heggestad, 1997). Thereby, reciprocal relations between the constructs are theoretically assumed in the following way: On the one hand, it is expected that students’ prior achievement influence their interests. Accord-ingly, students with high achievement in science show high interest in this domain (Ackerman, 1996; Carnevale et al., 2011). On the other hand, students with a high level of investigative interests prefer activities related to science and engage in scientific activ-ities (Holland, 1997). Consequently, they engage more intensely and frequently in such tasks (Ackerman, 1996), which improve students’ knowledge and skills, and in the long-term, their science achievement (Carnevale et al., 2011).

Thus, investigative interests might lead to more practical activities that are part of scientific inquiry and might therefore be important for the development and fostering of students’ understanding of science. It can be assumed that investigative interests and var-ious scientific activities lead to a deeper understanding of how “the scientific enterprise operates (McComas et al., 1998) and how scientific knowledge develops (Lederman, 1992, 2007).