Abstract
This paper is a revision of the paper titled Association Between Scientific
Cognition and Scientific Literacy: Implications for Learning Science (Hale, Sloss,
& Lawson, 2017). In the context of
the current research scientific literacy is synonymous with general scientific
knowledge. Scientific cognition is different than scientific literacy;
scientific cognition involves multiple components and sub-components. At the
very least, scientific cognition involves philosophy of science, research
methodology, probabilistic reasoning and logic (deductive and inductive). The
primary interests in the study were whether or not scientific cognition and
scientific literacy scores would be associated, and whether or not there would
be gender differences for total scores for each scale. A bivariate
analysis was conducted to test the hypothesis that there would be an
association between scientific cognition and scientific literacy. Independent
samples t-tests were conducted to test whether or not there was gender
differences on scores from the scientific cognition and scientific literacy
scale. The scientific literacy and scientific
cognition assessment consisted of mostly questions derived from measuring
devices used in the past. The assessments were administered as part of an
online survey. The participants were 202 university students. The study was
approved by the university's Institutional Review Board. The results indicate a positive relationship /
correlation between scientific literacy and scientific cognition, and no gender
differences for total scores from the scales. Additional analyses indicate
there was gender differences for some of the questions. There was gender
differences for one item from the scientific literacy assessment and for two
items from the scientific cognition assessment. The research report includes a
discussion on limitations of the study, implications for science education and
future directions for relevant research.
Science is a large enterprise consisting
of multiple components. Science is a systematic
approach to knowledge. Proper use of scientific processes lead to rationalism
(basing conclusion on intellect, logic and evidence). Science combats dogmatism
(adherence to doctrine over rational and enlightened inquiry, or basing
conclusion on authority rather than evidence) and provides a better
understanding of the world. Scientific processes/ methods are unmistakably the
most successful.
processes available for describing, predicting and explaining
phenomena in the observable universe.
The
general scientific approach to knowledge is based on systematic empiricism (Stanovich,
2007). Observation itself is necessary in acquiring scientific
knowledge, but unstructured observation of the natural world
does not lead to an increased understanding of the world. “Write down every observation you make from the
time you get up in the morning to the time you go to bed on a given day. When
you finish, you will have a great number of facts, but you will not have a
greater understanding of the world” (Stanovich & Stanovich, 2003, p. 12).
Systematic Empiricism is
systematic because it is structured in a way that allows us to learn more
precisely about the world. After careful
systematic observations, such as those in controlled studies, relationships are
supported while others are rejected. Extending these observations, scientists
propose general descriptions, predictions, explanations, models and inferential
strategies that support observations.
“We could observe end-less pieces of data, adding to the content of
science, but our observations would be of limited use without general
principles to structure them” (Myers & Hansen, 2002, p. 10)....
Method
Participants
Results
A bivariate analysis was conducted
to test the hypothesis that there would be an association between scientific
cognition and scientific literacy. The results of the analysis support the
hypothesis, r (200)= +.33, p < .01 (two-tailed), r2 = .11. Independent samples t-tests were conducted to
test whether or not there was gender differences on scores from the scientific
cognition and scientific literacy scale. The results of the independent samples
t-test, for men (M = 9.36, SD = 2.63) and women (M = 9.60, SD = 2.31) using total scores on scientific cognition as the
dependent variable was not statistically significant, t (200) = .59, p > .05
(two-tailed), d = .10. The results of the independent samples
t-test, for men (M = 10.52, SD = 1.69) and women (M = 10.31, SD =
1.64) using total scores on scientific literacy as the dependent variable were
not statistically significant, t (200)
= .76, p > .05 (two-tailed), d = .13....
Discussion
The results show a positive association between scientific
cognition and scientific literacy. The association was moderate in strength.
The differences between men and women for total scores on scientific cognition
and scientific literacy were not significant. The results indicate gender (men
vs. women) differences (correct vs. incorrect) for three items from the online
survey; one of the items from the scientific literacy assessment and two of the
items from the scientific cognition assessment....
References are available upon request
Full paper -PDF- is available upon request.
Posts
