School Students’ Intrinsic Motivation for Learning Science in RRI Activity: the Influence of Perceived Competence and Relatedness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18662/rrem/144Keywords:
Responsible research and innovation, intrinsic motivation, competence, relatednessAbstract
The article deals with the influences of perceived competence and relatedness on school students‘ intrinsic motivation for learning science (IMLS) in responsible research and innovation (RRI) activity. RRI activity in the science classroom discloses the positive and negative impact of research and innovation discoveries for the society. The evaluation of the negative and positive sides of the research and innovation involves school students in discussion and gives a possibility to feel competent and related with others. 5E model is used in this research. It encompasses formal and informal science education. The purpose of the study is to explore the influence of perceived competence and relatedness on school students‘ intrinsic motivation for learning science in RRI activity. The data presented in the current study are a part of the 7BP ENGAGE project, implemented in Lithuania (2014-2017). The participants chosen for this study were 8th-10th grade school students from different schools of Lithuania. Multiple regression analysis was used to test if the two basic psychological needs (perceived competence and relatedness) significantly predicted students' intrinsic motivation for learning science. Our research revealed that school students‘ motivation for learning science was simultaneously influenced by perceived competence and relatedness in RRI activity. We established a statistically significant relation between the students‘ motivation for learning science and their perceived competence and relatedness. Perceived competence influenced the school students‘ motivation for learning science more than perceived relatedness in RRI.References
Anderson, R. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.
Archer, L., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). ―Doing‖ Science Versus ―Being‖a Scientist: Examining 10/11-Year-Old Schoolchildren‘s Constructions of Science Through the Lens of Identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617-639. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1588
Bayram-Jacobs, D., Henze, I., Evagorou, M., et al. (2019). Science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge development during enactment of socioscientific curriculum materials. J Res Sci Teach. 2019, 1–27. doi:10.1002/tea.21550
Bayram-Jacobs, D. (2015). Responsible Research and Innovation: What is it? How to Integrate in Science Education. Presented at International Congress on Education for the Future: Issues and Challenges (ICEFIC 2015) Conference, Ankara University, 13-15 May 201, Ankara, Turkey.
Bybee, R. W., Carlson-Powell, J., & Trowbridge, L. W. (2008). Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing scientific literacy. Columbus, OH: Pearson.
Canvas, B. (2015). A new challenge by the European Union has already started: Responsible research and innovation. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14(3), 292-294.
Constantinou, C.P., & Tsivitanidou, O.E (2018). Introduction: What is Inquiry-based science teaching and learning? In the Tsivitanidou, O.E. et al. (eds.) Professional Development for Inquiry-Based Science Teaching and Learning (pp.1-23).
Davis, M., & Laas, K. (2014). 'Broader impacts' or 'responsible research and innovation'? A comparison of two criteria for funding research in science and engineering. Science & Engineering Ethics, 20(4), 963-983. doi:10.1007/s11948-013-9480-1
deCharms, R. (1968). Personal Causation: The Internal Affective Determinants of Behavior. New York: Academic.
Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory. In The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation (pp. 85–107).
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002), ―Motivational Beliefs, Values, and Goals,‖. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 1, 109–32.
Griffiths, R. (2004). Knowledge production and the research-teaching nexus: the case of the built environment disciplines. Studies in Higher Education, 29(6), 709-726.
Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In R. Barnett (Ed.), Reshaping the University: New relationships between research, scholarship and teaching (pp. 67–78). London: McGraw Hill and Open University Press.
Hebb, D.O. (1955). Drive sand the C.N.S. (conceptual nervous system). Psychol. Rev. 62, 243– 54.
Jurik, V., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2014). Predicting students' cognitive learning activity and intrinsic learning motivation: How powerful are teacher statements, student profiles, and gender? Learning and Individual Differences, 32, 132–139.
Leeuwis, C., & Aarts, N. (2010). Rethinking communication in innovation processes: creating space for change in complex systems. Paper presented at the 9th European IFSA Symposium, 4‐7 July 2010, Vienna (Austria).
Leeuwis, C., & Aarts, N. (2016). ‗Communication as intermediation for sociotechnical innovation‘. JCOM 15 (06), C02.
Leong, K.E, Tan, P.P., Lau, P.L., & Yong, S.L. (2018). Exploring the Relationship between Motivation and Science Achievement of Secondary Students. Pertanika J. Soc. Sci. & Hum., 26(4), 2243 – 2258.
Linn, M.C., Davis, E.A., & Bell, P. (2004). Inquiry and technology. In M. Linn, E. Davis & P. Bell (eds.) Internet environments for science education. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, (pp. 3-28).
Loukomies, A. Pnevmatikos, D., Lavonen, J., Spyrtou, A., Byman, R., Kariotoglou, P., & Juuti, K. (2013). Promoting Students‘ Interest and Motivation Towards Science Learning: the Role of Personal Needs and Motivation Orientations. Research in Science Education. 43(6), 2517-2539.
Lyons, T. (2006). Different countries, same science classes: Students‘ experience of school science classes in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591 – 613.
Minner, D.D., Levy, A.J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry‐based science instruction— what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of research in science teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
Nolen, S.B. (2003). Learning environment, motivation, and achievement in high school science. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 40, 347–368.
Okada, A. (Ed.). (2016). Engaging Science: Innovative Teaching for responsible citizenship. Milton Keynes: The Open University – Knowledge Media Institute.
Okada, A., & Sherborne, T. (2018). Equipping the Next Generation for Responsible Research and Innovation with Open Educational Resources, Open Courses, Open Communities and Open Schooling: An Impact Case Study in Brazil. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2018(1), p. 18. doi:http://doi.org/10.5334/jime.482
Okada, A., Young, G., & Sanders, J. (2015). Fostering Communities of Practices for teachers' professional development integrating OER and MOOC, EC-TEL. The 10th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning.
Okada, A. (2016). Engaging Science: Innovative Teaching for Responsible Citizenship. ENGAGE. Milton Keynes: The Open University UK.
Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections. London: The Nuffield Foundation.
Osborne, J., & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils‘ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: A focus-group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441 – 467.
Owen, R. (2015). Responsible Research and Innovation: options for research and innovation policy in the EU. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/innovationunion/pdf/expert-groups/Responsible_Research_and_Innovation.pdf
Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science & Public Policy (SPP), 39(6), 751-760. DOI:10.1093/scipol/scs093
Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henriksson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Rocard report: “Science education now: A new pedagogy for the future of Europe”. EU 22845, European Commission.
Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, S. (2003 ). Science Education as/for Participation in the Community. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 88, 263-291. doi:10.1002/sce.10113
Ryan, R. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality. 63(3), 397–427. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 6494.1995.tb00501.x. PMID 7562360
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York: Guilford Publishing.
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. CiteSeerX10.1.1.529.4370. doi:10.1037/0003- 066x.55.1.68
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2002). An overview of self-determination theory: an organismic–dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). Rochester: The University of Rochester Press.
Ryan, R., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.
Sahin, I. (2006). Detailed review of Rogers‘ diffusion of innovations theory and educational technology-related studies based on Rogers‘ theory. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – TOJET, 5(2), 14-23.
Sarwono, J. (2018). Path Analysis: Data Analysis Application: Second Edition - Using IBM SPSS and Stata (Paperback or Softback). United States: Amazon Create Space.
Savin-Baden, M. (2016). The Impact of Transdisciplinary Threshold Concepts on Student Engagement in Problem-Based Learning: A Conceptual Synthesis. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(2). Available at: https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1588
Sherborne, T., et al. (2014). ENGAGE: Equipping the Next Generation for Active Engagement in Science. Retrieved from: http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/111469_en.html .
Shin, M.-H. (2018). Effects of project-based learning on students‘ motivation and self-efficacy. English Teaching, 73(1), 95-114. DOI: 10.15858/engtea.73.1.201803.95
Stahl, B.C. (2013). Responsible research and innovation: The role of privacy in an emerging framework. Science & Public Policy (SPP), 40(6), 708–716.
Sutcliffe, H. (2011). A report on Responsible Research and Innovation for the European Commission. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/research/sciencesociety/document_library/pdf_06/rri-report-hilary-sutcliffe_en.pdf accessed 08 January 2015.
Van der Sanden, M.C.A., &. de Vries, M.J. (2016). Science and Technology Education and Communication: Seeking the Connections. In: Van der Sanden, M.C.A., &. de Vries, M.J. (eds.). Science and Technology Education and Communication (pp. 1–6).
Van Breukelen, D.H.J., de Vries, M.J., & Schure, F.A. (2016). Concept learning by direct current design challenges in secondary education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. DOI:10.1007/S10798-016-9357-0
Von Schomberg, R. (2011). Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation. In M. Dusseldorp, & R. Beecroft (Eds.), Technikfolgen abschätzen lehren. Bildungspotenziale transdisziplinärer Methoden (pp. 39–61). Wiesbaden: Vs Verlag.
White, R.H. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: the concept of competence. Psychol. Rev., 66:297–333.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant this journalright of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work, with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g. post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as an earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala Journal has an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs
CC BY-NC-ND
