Exploring undergraduate students’ scientific reasoning in the force and motion concept

References

• Avargil, S., Lavi, R., & Dori, Y. J. (2018). Students’ metacognition and metacognitive strategies in science education. In Y. J. Dori, Z. R. Mevarech, & D. R. Baker (Eds.), Cognition, metacognition, and culture in STEM education: Learning, teaching and assessment (pp. 33–64). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66659-4_3
   Google Scholar
• Awofala, A. O. A., & Lawani, A. O. (2020). Increasing mathematics achievement of senior secondary school students through differentiated instruction. Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.31258/jes.4.1.p.1-19
   Google Scholar
• Bao, L., Koenig, K., Xiao, Y., Fritchman, J., Zhou, S., & Chen, C. (2022). Theoretical model and quantitative assessment of scientific thinking and reasoning. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18(1), 010115. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.010115
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bezci, F., & Sungur, S. (2021). How is middle school students’ scientific reasoning ability associated with gender and learning environment? Science Education International, 32(2), 96–106. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v32.i2.2
   Google Scholar
• Boğar, Y. (2019). Evaluation of the scientific reasoning skills of 7th grade students in science course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(6), 1430–1441. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070610
   Google Scholar
• Bolger, M. S., Osness, J. B., Gouvea, J. S., & Cooper, A. C. (2021). Supporting scientific practice through model-based inquiry: A students’-eye view of grappling with data, uncertainty, and community in a laboratory experience. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(4), ar57. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-05-0128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choowong, K., & Worapun, W. (2021). The development of scientific reasoning ability on the concept of light and image of grade 9 students by using inquiry-based learning 5E with prediction observation and explanation strategy. Journal of Education and Learning, 10(5), 152–162. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v10n5p152
   Google Scholar
• Dolan, E., & Grady, J. (2010). Recognizing students’ scientific reasoning: A tool for categorizing complexity of reasoning during teaching by inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(1), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9154-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dunbar, K., & Klahr, D. (2013). Developmental differences in scientific discovery processes. In J. St. B. T. Evans, & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 337–356). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203761618-9
   Google Scholar
• Engelmann, K., Neuhaus, B. J., & Fischer, F. (2016). Fostering scientific reasoning in education – Meta-analytic evidence from intervention studies. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22(5–6), 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2016.1240089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erlangga, S. Y., Winingsih, P. H., & Saputro, H. (2021). Identification of student misconceptions using four-tier diagnostic instruments on straight motion materials. Compton: Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika, 8(2), 65–67. https://jurnal.ustjogja.ac.id/index.php/COMPTON/article/view/12923 https://doi.org/10.30738/cjipf.v8i2.12923
   Google Scholar
• Erlina, N., Susantini, E., Wasis, W., Wicaksono, I., & Pandiangan, P. (2018). Evidence-based reasoning in inquiry-based physics teaching to increase students’ scientific. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(6), 972–985. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/18.17.972
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, F., Chinn, C. A., Engelmann, K., & Osborne, J. (2018). Scientific reasoning and argumentation: The roles of domain-specific and domain-general knowledge. In K. S. Taber, & B. Akpan (Eds.), Science education (pp. 89–104). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58685-4_6
   Google Scholar
• Hasson, U., Chen, J., & Honey, C. J. (2015). Hierarchical process memory: Memory as an integral component of information processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(6), 304–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.04.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidayatulloh, W., Kuswanto, H., Santoso, P. H., Susilowati, E., & Hidayatullah, Z. (2021). Exploring students’ misconception in the frame of graphic and figural representation on projectile motion regarding the COVID-19 constraints. JIPF (Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Fisika), 6(3), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.26737/jipf.v6i3.2157
   Google Scholar
• Iramaneerat, C., Smith, E. V., Jr, & Smith, R. M. (2008). An introduction to Rasch measurement. In J. W. Osborne (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods (pp. 50–71). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kersey, A. J., Braham, E. J., Csumitta, K. D., Libertus, M. E., & Cantlon, J. F. (2018). No intrinsic gender differences in children’s earliest numerical abilities. Npj Science of Learning, 3(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0028-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuhn, D., & Pearsall, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1(1), 113–129. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327647JCD0101N_11
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, A. E. (1985). A review of research on formal reasoning and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(7), 569–617. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660220702
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, A. E. (2004). The nature and development of scientific reasoning: A synthetic view. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 307–338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-004-3224-2
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, A. E. (2010). Basic inferences of scientific reasoning, argumentation, and discovery. Science Education, 94(2), 336–364. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20357
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, A. E., Clark, B., Cramer-Meldrum, E., Falconer, K. A., Sequist, J. M., & Kwon, Y. J. (2000). Development of scientific reasoning in college biology: Do two levels of general hypothesis-testing skills exist? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(1), 81–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200001)37:1<81::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-I
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazonder, A. W., & Egberink, A. (2014). Children’s acquisition and use of the control-of-variables strategy: Effects of explicit and implicit instructional guidance. Instructional Science, 42(2), 291–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9284-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin, I., Siegler, R. S., & Druyan, S. (1990). Misconceptions about motion: Development and training effects. Child Development, 61(5), 1544–1557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1990.tb02882.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linacre, J. M. (2012). Winsteps® Rasch measurement computer program user’s guide. Winsteps.com.
   Google Scholar
• Lourenço, O. M. (2016). Developmental stages, Piagetian stages in particular: A critical review. New Ideas in Psychology, 40, 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2015.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludwin-Peery, E., Bramley, N. R., Davis, E., & Gureckis, T. M. (2020). Broken physics: A conjunction-fallacy effect in intuitive physical reasoning. Psychological Science, 31(12), 1602–1611. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620957610
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo, M., Sun, D., Zhu, L., & Yang, Y. (2021). Evaluating scientific reasoning ability: Student performance and the interaction effects between grade level, gender, and academic achievement level. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 41, 100899. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187121001140 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100899
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo, M., Wang, Z., Sun, D., Wan, Z. H., & Zhu, L. (2020). Evaluating scientific reasoning ability: The design and validation of an assessment with a focus on reasoning and the use of evidence. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(2), 261–275. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Misnasanti, M., Utami, R. W., & Suwanto, F. R. (2017 Problem based learning to improve proportional reasoning of students in mathematics learning [Paper presentation]. In AIP Conference Proceedings, August (Vol. 1868). AIP Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Nasir, N. A. M., Singh, P., Narayanan, G., Han, C. T., Rasid, N. S., & Hoon, T. S. (2021). An analysis of undergraduate students’ ability in solving non-routine problems. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 11(4), 861–872. https://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.8006800
   Google Scholar
• Nieminen, P., Savinainen, A., & Viiri, J. (2013). Gender differences in learning of the concept of force, representational consistency, and scientific reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(5), 1137–1156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9363-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novia, N., & Riandi, R. (2017). The analysis of students’ scientific reasoning ability in solving the modified Lawson classroom test of scientific reasoning (MLCTSR) problems by applying the levels of inquiry. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(1), 116–122. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v6i1.9600
   Google Scholar
• O’Connor, J., Penney, D., Alfrey, L., Phillipson, S., Phillipson, S., & Jeanes, R. (2016). The development of the stereotypical attitudes in HPE scale. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(7), 70–87. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n7.5
   Google Scholar
• Omarchevska, Y., Lachner, A., Richter, J., & Scheiter, K. (2022). Do video modeling and metacognitive prompts improve self-regulated scientific inquiry? Educational Psychology Review, 34(2), 1025–1061. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09652-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pezzuti, L., Tommasi, M., Saggino, A., Dawe, J., & Lauriola, M. (2020). Gender differences and measurement bias in the assessment of adult intelligence: Evidence from the Italian WAIS-IV and WAIS-R standardizations. Intelligence, 79, 101436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2020.101436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piraksa, C., Srisawasdi, N., & Koul, R. (2014). Effect of gender on student’s scientific reasoning ability: A case study in Thailand. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 486–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.245
   Google Scholar
• Radulović, B., & Stojanović, M. (2019). Research and evaluating of hypothetically-deductive student reasoning in Republic Serbia. Facta Universitatis, Series: Physics, Chemistry and Technology, 16(3), 249–256.
   Google Scholar
• Reith, M., & Nehring, A. (2020). Scientific reasoning and views on the nature of scientific inquiry: Testing a new framework to understand and model epistemic cognition in science. International Journal of Science Education, 42(16), 2716–2741. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1834168
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sagala, R., Umam, R., Thahir, A., Saregar, A., & Wardani, I. (2019). The effectiveness of STEM-based on gender differences: The impact of physics concept understanding. European Journal of Educational Research, 8 (3), 753–761. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.753
   Google Scholar
• Sari, D. I., Budayasa, I. K., & Juniati, D. (2017). The analysis of probability task completion; taxonomy of probabilistic thinking-based across gender in elementary school students [Paper presentation]. In AIP Conference Proceedings, August (Vol. 1868). AIP Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Schlatter, E., Molenaar, I., & Lazonder, A. W. (2021). Learning scientific reasoning: A latent transition analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 92, 102043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sumintono, B., & Widhiarso, W. (2014). Aplikasi model Rasch untuk penelitian ilmu-ilmu sosial (edisi revisi). Trim Komunikata Publishing House.
   Google Scholar
• Sutiani, A., Situmorang, M., & Silalahi, A. (2021). Implementation of an inquiry learning model with science literacy to improve student critical thinking skills. International Journal of Instruction, 14(2), 117–138. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85101769206&partnerID=40&md5=a023ff175c9e8e4e83e9400b010b7cbc https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.1428a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tairab, H. H. (2015). Assessing students’ understanding of control of variables across three grade levels and gender. International Education Studies, 9(1), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n1p44
   Google Scholar
• Tomara, M., Tselfes, V., & Gouscos, D. (2017). Instructional strategies to promote conceptual change about force and motion: A review of the literature. Themes in Science & Technology Education, 10(1), 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Valanides, N. C. (1996). Formal reasoning and science. In P. Davies (Ed.), Ethnographies of reason (pp. 99–107). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315580555-2
   Google Scholar
• Van Vo, D., & Csapó, B. (2021). Development of scientific reasoning test measuring control of variables strategy in physics for high school students: Evidence of validity and latent predictors of item difficulty. International Journal of Science Education, 43(13), 2185–2205. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1957515
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wancham, K., Tangdhanakanond, K., & Kanjanawasee, S. (2023). Sex and grade issues in influencing misconceptions about force and laws of motion: An application of cognitively diagnostic assessment. International Journal of Instruction, 16(2), 437–456. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16224a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waschl, N., & Burns, N. R. (2020). Sex differences in inductive reasoning: A research synthesis using meta-analytic techniques. Personality and Individual Differences, 164, 109959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.109959
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winne, P. H. (2013). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement (pp. 145–178). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, F. Y. (2004). Exploring high school students’ use of theory and evidence in an everyday context: The role of scientific thinking in environmental science decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1345–1364. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000205404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yenilmez, A., Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2005). Investigating students’ logical thinking abilities: The effects of gender and grade level. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28, 219–225.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20(1), 99–149. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1999.0497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, C., Olsho, A., Brahmia, S. W., Loverude, M., Boudreaux, A., & Smith, T. (2019 Towards understanding and characterizing expert covariational reasoning in physics [Paper presentation]. In Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings (pp. 693–698). https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2019.pr.Zimmerman
   Google Scholar