SCIENTIFIC REASONING SKILLS DEVELOPMENT IN THE INTRODUCTORY BIOLOGY COURSES FOR UNDERGRADUATES DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Melissa S. Schen, M.S. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2007 Dissertation Committee Approved by Professor Anita Roychoudhury, Co-Advisor ______________________________ Co-Advisor Professor Arthur L. White, Co-Advisor ______________________________ Professor David Haury Co -Advisor Graduate Program in Education Copyright by Melissa S. Schen 2007 ABSTRACT Scientific reasoning is a skill of critical importance to those students who seek to become professional scientists. Yet, there is little research on the development of such reasoning in science majors. In addition, scientific reasoning is often investigated as two separate entities: hypothetico-deductive reasoning and argumentation, even though these skills may be linked. With regard to argumentation, most investigations look at its use in discussing socioscientific issues, not in analyzing scientific data. As scientists often use the same argumentation skills to develop and support conclusions, this avenue needs to be investigated. This study seeks to address these issues and establish a baseline of both hypothetico-deductive reasoning and argumentation of scientific data of biology majors through their engagement in introductory biology coursework. This descriptive study investigated the development of undergraduates’ scientific reasoning skills by assessing them multiple times throughout a two-quarter introductory biology course sequence for majors. Participants were assessed at the beginning of the first quarter, end of the first quarter, and end of the second quarter. A split-half version of the revised Lawson Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR) and a paper and pencil argumentation instrument developed for this study were utilized to assess student hypothetico-deductive reasoning and argumentation skills, respectively. To identify ii factors that may influence scientific reasoning development, demographic information regarding age, gender, science coursework completed, and future plans was collected. Evidence for course emphasis on scientific reasoning was found in lecture notes, assignments, and laboratory exercises. This study did not find any trends of improvement in the students’ hypothetico- deductive reasoning or argumentation skills either during the first quarter or over both quarters. Specific difficulties in the control of variables and direct hypothetico-deductive reasoning were found through analysis of the LCTSR data. Students were also found to have trouble identifying and rebutting counterarguments, compared to generating initial arguments from scientific data sets. Although no overall improvement was found, a moderate, positive relationship was detected between LCTSR and argumentation scores at each administration, affirming the predicted association. Lastly, no difference was determined between biology majors and other students also enrolled in the courses. Overall, the results found here are similar to those classified in the literature for both hypothetico-deductive reasoning and argumentation, indicating that biology majors may be similar to other populations studied. Also, as no explicit attention was paid to scientific reasoning skills in the two courses, these findings complement those that illustrate a need for direct attention to foster the development of these skills. These results suggest the need to develop direct and explicit methods in order to improve the scientific reasoning skills of future biological scientists early in their undergraduate years. iii DEDICATION Dedicated to my grandfather iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my co-advisor, Arthur White, for his steady support, patient editing, and sharing the plethora of his statistical knowledge. I am also grateful to my co-advisor, Anita Roychoudhury, for her constant encouragement and guidance - modeling both good teaching and good research. I want to thank David Haury for his continuous support and guidance as a committee member, teacher, and section head. I would like to thank the faculty and staff of the Introductory Biology Program, especially Judy Ridgway, John Cogan, and Amy Kovach for their support of this research and providing access to the students. I am also thankful for the logistical support provided by Rosemarie Thornton and the teaching assistants. Without their patience and help, it would have been impossible to collect data. I also wish to thank the students who participated in this study, particularly those students who completed the instruments in all three administrations. Lastly, I thank my friends and family for their love and support through this journey. I am especially grateful for Denny, Scott, Kristi, Tim, and Helen Schen, as well as Jessica Auman, Cynthia Bill, and Rhiannon Light. v VITA March 15, 1976 .....................Born – Canton, Ohio 1998......................................B.A. Biology, Case Western Reserve University 2000......................................M.S. Biology, Case Western Reserve University 2000 – 2003 ..........................Lecturer, Case Western Reserve University 2006 – 2007 ..........................Adjunct Instructor, Columbus State Community College FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Education Minor Field: Research Methods vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract...........................................................................................................................ii Dedication......................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgments...........................................................................................................v Vita ................................................................................................................................vi List of tables....................................................................................................................x List of figures...............................................................................................................xiii Chapter 1: Introduction....................................................................................................1 Background and setting .............................................................................................1 The call................................................................................................................1 Scientific reasoning overview ..............................................................................4 Scientific reasoning in education..........................................................................5 Scientific reasoning in college biology.................................................................7 Statement of problem.................................................................................................9 Research questions ..................................................................................................11 Definition of terms ..................................................................................................12 Argumentation (dialogic)...................................................................................12 Constitutive definition....................................................................................12 Operational definition ....................................................................................12 Deductive reasoning ..........................................................................................12 Constitutive definition....................................................................................12 Operational definition ....................................................................................12 Inductive reasoning............................................................................................13 Constitutive definition....................................................................................13 Operational definition ....................................................................................13 Hypothetico-deductive reasoning.......................................................................13 Constitutive definition....................................................................................13 Operational definition ....................................................................................13 Scientific reasoning............................................................................................13 Constitutive definition....................................................................................13 Operational definition ....................................................................................13 vii Chapter 2: Literature Review.........................................................................................15 Scientific reasoning................................................................................................15 Deductive aspects of science..............................................................................16 The philosophy of Karl Popper. .....................................................................16 Deduction and hypothetico-deductive reasoning. ...........................................18 Inductive aspects of science ...............................................................................20