Teaching Level and Specialization Variables in King Saud University - Research Proposal Example

?The Scientific Reasoning Level In the Faculty of Science in King Saud According To Teaching Level and Specialization Variables Introduction Science is a body of knowledge that entails developing or inventing new ideas and validating the ideas using scientific methodology or scientific reasoning. By scientific reasoning, I mean the principles of reasoning such as experimental design, testing of hypothesis as well as data interpretation, which are applicable to the quest of scientific knowledge (Mintzes, 2006, p. 150-155). Science involves inquiry, integration of different theories with scientific knowledge, developing scientific methods, and understanding the nature of science. It is important to establish how scientific reasoning capability affect the way students choose the subjects to specialize in. Students within the faculty of science in King Saudi University can choose to specialize in Biology, Chemistry, or Physics. It is also important to establish the scientific reasoning capability of students in the four learning levels in King Saud University to determine whether their understanding of different scientific concepts is progressing or not. Literature Review A lot of research has been done on factors that determine performance of students in science and the scientific reasoning. Such studies have shown that scientific reasoning is imperative and it enables students predict and apply different scientific theories. A study conducted by Bell, Maeng & Peters (2010, p. 8) showed that students enjoy challenges posed by scientific inquiry and take part more devotedly when supported. The study also showed that most teachers do not exhibit natural ability in providing instructions and teaching on the nature of science thus students interest in science and scientific reasoning capability tends to depreciate as they proceed to higher teaching levels. Schen (2007, p. 86-88) did a study to investigate development of scientific reasoning among undergraduate students majoring in Biology. The study made use of Lawson Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR) to assess student’s scientific reasoning capability. The study results showed that there is need to foster development of reasoning skills among undergraduate biology students to improve the reasoning skills of future scientists. Schen concluded that undergraduate students pursuing biology may be having difficulty in understanding scientific methods well since they are not evolving their mental reasoning skills (Schen, 2007, p.142). Moore and Rubbo (2011, p.3) did another research to determine scientific reasoning abilities of non-science majors in physics-based courses. The study results showed that students in non-scientific physics based courses, which included conceptual physics and astronomy courses score considerably lower on the LCTSR compared to students enrolled in courses with science majors (Moore & Rubbo, 2011, p.8-11). Another study was done by Benford and Russell (2001, p.2) and aimed at examining the connection between scientific methodologies and biological inquiry methods in college biology laboratories. The study established a negative relationship between lecturer or instructor inquiry and student understanding of nature of science. The study also showed that most biology students have low scientific reasoning capability. Little research has been done on how scientific reasoning differs in different scientific specialization such as Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Additionally, there is less literature comparing the trend of scientific reasoning across different levels of study. This study is thus important since it aims at establishing if there is any difference in scientific reasoning in the different specialization as well as in the different levels of study. Background and Objective The level of scientific reasoning determines how student perceive different aspects of science, which in turn determine the science subject they choose to major in. The scientific concepts vary from one level of study to another and across the different specializations such as chemistry, biology and physics (Crowley, Schunn, & Okada, 2001, p.72-75). My study intends to find out if scientific reasoning varies across different study levels or and specializations and by answering certain questions, which include; a) What is the scientific reasoning level for students in the Faculty of Science in King Saud University?  b) Does the scientific reasoning level differ according to the difference in subjects (Biology, Chemistry, or Physics)?  c) Does the scientific reasoning level differ according to the difference in learning levels?  This study is important since it will help establish whether the level of study affects the scientific reasoning capability amongst students in King Saudi University. Additionally it establish on the relationship between the subject specialization and scientific reasoning level. Overall, this study will open a study area for researchers to explore on scientific reasoning abilities, which will help in developing an instructional model that can be used to enhance students' level of scientific reasoning in the faculty of science in King Saud University. The Hypothesis of My Study Will Be; i. The scientific reasoning level for students in the Faculty of Science in King Saud University is lower than required level.  ii. There is no statistically significant difference in the scientific reasoning level for  students in the Faculty of Science in King Saud University, a significant difference is due to learning level variable  iii. There is no statistically significant difference in the scientific reasoning level for students in the Faculty of Science in King Saud University; a significant difference is due to subject variable. Study Design My study will entail use of qualitative research methodology based on perceptions and experiences of the participants. Credibility of results obtained using qualitative methodology is influenced by commitment and the research capability of the researcher to pinpoint rather than challenge the perceptions of participants (Mintzes, 2006, p. 375-380). I choose to use qualitative inquiry to ensure that the findings portray the views of participants. The methodology will also enable me to select the sample that best characterizes the phenomenon under study hence address the research question appropriately without being subjective (The Association for Educational and Technology, 2001; Crowley, Schunn, & Okada, 2001, p.70). Study Population and Sampling There are four levels of study and three departments in the faculty of science in King Saud University. The three departments are Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Since the study is qualitative, it will involve large numbers of students studying Biology, Chemistry and physics but at different levels of study. Over twenty students from each level and in each of the science department chosen randomly will form part of the sample. Data Collection Methods and Instruments The collection of the data will be done within one year. The methodology of my study will rely on a specific examination using Lawson Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR) developed in 1990 (Lawson, & Weser, 1990, p. 589-600). In this study, the students will be grouped according to their study levels and subject variations. The study will entail assessing the level of scientific reasoning in Biology, Physics, and Chemistry students. The research will involve use of questionnaires given to students at different levels of learning to determine if students are able to apply scientific reasoning in their scientific studies, and the factors that they consider when choosing the science subjects to major in. The research will mainly be concerned in what individuals understand scientific inquiry in domains such as biology, Physics, and Chemistry and how the understanding of scientific methodologies changes across different levels of teaching (Mintzes, 2006, p. 370-373). Data Analysis Methods The qualitative data analysis will mainly involve examining the trend of change in scientific reasoning among students at different study levels in the three departments to determine the general change in trend of scientific reasoning of students move from one level to the next. The analysis will be divided into two parts. The first part will analyze the scientific reasoning on basis of the three areas of specialization, which include Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. The second part will analyze data based on reasoning capability demonstrated by students depending on their level of study. The method of data analysis that I will make use of is the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). This will be used to establish the relationship between the dependent and independent variables and compare if there is any significant difference in scientific reasoning between the students majoring in biology, Chemistry, and physics. SPSS will also be used to analyze data to find if there is any difference in scientific reasoning among students in the different study levels. Mechanisms to Assure the Quality of the Study To prevent biasness, the information given by students on their understanding of different scientific concepts will be verified by comparing it with LCTSR findings. Participants in the Study The study will involve students specializing in Biology, Chemistry or Physics who will give views on their understanding of different scientific concepts. The students will be drawn from different levels of study. Ethical Consideration Some of the ethical principles that will guide my study include honesty, whereby I will ensure that the research report portrays the views of the participants, no fabrication of data or deception of the interviewees. I will also strive to evade biasness in data collection, analysis and other features of research. I will ensure carefulness in data collection, recording, and storage. Another ethic that I will uphold is integrity by ensuring that I keep promises such as appointments. I will be open to positive criticism from my supervisor as well as lecturers. Additionally, I will honor and respect copyrights by avoiding publication of data of any kind without due permission. During the study, I will practice responsible mentoring, non-discrimination and promote competence for my own professional growth and the entire field of science (Resnik, 2011). References Bell, R., Maeng, J., & Peters, E. (2010). Scientific Inquiry and the Nature of Science Task Force Report. Virginia: Virginia Mathematics and Science Coalation. P. 1-20. Benford, R. & Anton, Lawson. (2001). “Relationships between Effective Inquiry Use and the Development of Scientific Reasoning Skills in College Biology Labs,” MS Thesis, Arizona State University. Retrieved 13 July 2012 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED456157&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED456157 Crowley, K., Schunn, C., & Okada, T. (2001). Designing for Science: Implications From Everyday, Classroom, and Professional Settings. London: Routledge. P. 70-80. Lawson, A. E., & Weser, J. (1990). The rejection of nonscientific beliefs about life: Effects of instruction and reasoning skills. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(6), p. 589-606. Mintzes, J. (2006). Handbook of College Science Teaching. New York: NSTA Press. P. 150-160, 370-380. Moore, C., & Rubbo, L. (2011). Scientific reasoning abilities of non-science majors in physics-based courses. Retrieved July 18, 2012, from http://arxiv.org/pdf/1110.2764.pdf. P. 1-27,120-129. Resnik, D. (2011, October 26). What is Ethics in Research & Why is it Important? Retrieved July 13, 2012, from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/ Schen, M. (2007). Scientific Reasoning Skills Development in the Introductory Biology Courses for Undergraduate. Retrieved July 18, 2012, from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf.cgi/Schen%20Melissa.pdf?osu1187063957. P. 1-15. The Association for Educational and Technology. (2001, August 3). QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS. Retrieved July 13, 2012, from AECT: http://www.aect.org/edtech/ed1/40/40-02.html Read More