Self-concept research in science and technology education – theoretical foundation, measurement instruments, and main findings

IF 4.7 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Science Education Pub Date : 2019-01-02 DOI:10.1080/03057267.2019.1645533
Lilith Rüschenpöhler, S. Markic
{"title":"Self-concept research in science and technology education – theoretical foundation, measurement instruments, and main findings","authors":"Lilith Rüschenpöhler, S. Markic","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2019.1645533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article gives an overview of the current state of science and technology self-concept research. Following a defined selection process, we analysed 74 peer-reviewed journal articles published from 1998 to 2017, which are indexed in the ERIC database and that deal with science and technology self-concepts (STSC) of school children and adolescents. In our analysis, we focus on the theoretical foundations, measurement instruments, and main findings from this area. (i) Theoretical foundations: today’s research on STSC is mainly based on the Shavelson and Marsh models of self-concept, i.e. it follows the tradition of educational psychology. (ii) Measurement instruments: a number of established and validated measurement instruments are available. However, the existing methodological resources should be employed more rigorously. (iii) Main findings: Some findings are well documented, such as the positive relation with achievement, the gender gap, and the fact that students of non-dominant ethnic groups tend to have lower STSCs. Recommendations: in order to gain a deeper understanding of these phenomena, it could be fruitful to further elaborate connections with science identity research and to enrich STSC research with qualitative data.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"55 1","pages":"37 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2019.1645533","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2019.1645533","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article gives an overview of the current state of science and technology self-concept research. Following a defined selection process, we analysed 74 peer-reviewed journal articles published from 1998 to 2017, which are indexed in the ERIC database and that deal with science and technology self-concepts (STSC) of school children and adolescents. In our analysis, we focus on the theoretical foundations, measurement instruments, and main findings from this area. (i) Theoretical foundations: today’s research on STSC is mainly based on the Shavelson and Marsh models of self-concept, i.e. it follows the tradition of educational psychology. (ii) Measurement instruments: a number of established and validated measurement instruments are available. However, the existing methodological resources should be employed more rigorously. (iii) Main findings: Some findings are well documented, such as the positive relation with achievement, the gender gap, and the fact that students of non-dominant ethnic groups tend to have lower STSCs. Recommendations: in order to gain a deeper understanding of these phenomena, it could be fruitful to further elaborate connections with science identity research and to enrich STSC research with qualitative data.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科技教育中的自我概念研究——理论基础、测量工具和主要发现
摘要本文综述了科技自我概念研究的现状。在经过明确的筛选过程后,我们分析了1998年至2017年发表的74篇同行评审期刊文章,这些文章被编入ERIC数据库,涉及在校儿童和青少年的科学和技术自我概念(STSC)。在我们的分析中,我们重点关注这一领域的理论基础、测量工具和主要发现。(i) 理论基础:目前对STSC的研究主要基于Shavelson和Marsh的自我概念模型,即遵循教育心理学的传统。(ii)测量仪器:有许多已建立和验证的测量仪器。但是,应当更加严格地利用现有的方法资源。(iii)主要调查结果:一些调查结果得到了充分的证明,例如与成绩的正相关关系、性别差距,以及非优势种族群体的学生往往STSC较低的事实。建议:为了更深入地了解这些现象,进一步阐述与科学身份研究的联系,并用定性数据丰富STSC的研究,可能会富有成效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Science Education
Studies in Science Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
15.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The central aim of Studies in Science Education is to publish review articles of the highest quality which provide analytical syntheses of research into key topics and issues in science education. In addressing this aim, the Editor and Editorial Advisory Board, are guided by a commitment to: maintaining and developing the highest standards of scholarship associated with the journal; publishing articles from as wide a range of authors as possible, in relation both to professional background and country of origin; publishing articles which serve both to consolidate and reflect upon existing fields of study and to promote new areas for research activity. Studies in Science Education will be of interest to all those involved in science education including: science education researchers, doctoral and masters students; science teachers at elementary, high school and university levels; science education policy makers; science education curriculum developers and text book writers. Articles featured in Studies in Science Education have been made available either following invitation from the Editor or through potential contributors offering pieces. Given the substantial nature of the review articles, the Editor is willing to give informal feedback on the suitability of proposals though all contributions, whether invited or not, are subject to full peer review. A limited number of books of special interest and concern to those involved in science education are normally reviewed in each volume.
期刊最新文献
Students’ ideas about the scientific underpinnings of climate change: a systematic review of the literature Queer individuals’ experiences in STEM learning and working environments Inquiry-based chemistry education: a systematic review Metacognitively ALERT in science: literature synthesis of a hierarchical framework for metacognition and preliminary evidence of its viability Inquiry-based science education in science teacher education: a systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1