Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychological modeling of preservice science teachers’ argumentativeness, achievement goals, and epistemological beliefs: a mixed design

  • Published:
European Journal of Psychology of Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate the relationships among Turkish preservice science teachers’ argumentativeness, epistemological beliefs, and achievement goals, as well as the reasons for coherencies and incoherencies among these variables. A sequential explanatory research design was applied within the 2 following studies. In Study I, the data from 930 preservice science teachers were investigated with structural equation modeling analysis. This analysis presented evidence regarding the relationships among the variables of the study. For example, preservice science teachers’ scientific epistemological beliefs significantly predicted their argumentativeness and goal orientations. In Study II, 2 students were selected for each argument approach and argument avoidance cases. Data were collected through semistructured interviews and analyzed via a content analysis. The results of this study showed that participants’ self-construal impacted the relationships among their argumentativeness, goal orientations and scientific epistemological beliefs. An investigation of a more comprehensive belief system model including preservice science teachers’ self-construal is suggested considering the overall results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261–271.

  • Arbuckle, J. L. (2012). IBM SPSS Amos 21 user’s guide. Chicago: SPSS Corporation.

  • Aslan, S. (2016). Argümantasyona dayalı laboratuar uygulamaları: Bilimsel süreç becerilerine ve laboratuar dersine yönelik tutuma etkisi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31(4), 762–777.

  • Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Transformation of robust misconceptions through peer argumentation. In B. B. Schwarz, T. Dreyfus, & R. Hershkowitz (Eds.), Transformation of knowledge through classroom interaction (pp. 159–172). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203879276.

  • Atkinson, J. W. (1964). Introduction to motivation. Van Nostrand.

  • Bahcivan, E. (2014). Examining relationships among Turkishpre-service science teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning, scientific epistemological beliefs and science teaching efficacy beliefs. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 870–882.

  • Bahcivan, E., & Cobern, W. W. (2016). Investigating coherence among Turkish elementary science teachers’ teaching belief systems, pedagogical content knowledge and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(10), 62–86.

  • Bahçivan, E., Doruk, B. K., & Köse, İ. A. (2017). The path that a Turkish preservice teacher follows: A teaching belief system approach including ‘self’. Kalem International Journal of Education and Human Sciences, 7(1), 41–65.

  • Bahcivan, E. (2019). Examining the Structural Relations among PSTs’ Scientific Epistemological Beliefs, Epistemic Emotions and Argumentativeness: Sample from Turkey. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 7(3), 271–280.

  • Belenky, M. R., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self voice and mind. Basic Books.

  • Bjørnebekk, G. (2009). Mediators and moderators of approach performance and avoidance-performance relationships in children: Theoretical and experimental aspects. In S. A. Karabenick, P. Nenninger, A. Efklides, & M. Wosnitza (Eds.), Contemporary motivation research: From global to local perspectives (pp. 185–205).

  • Bjørnebekk, G., Gjesme, T., & Ulriksen, R. (2011). Achievement motives and emotional processes in children during problem-solving: Two experimental studies of their relation to performance in different achievement goal conditions. Motivation and Emotion, 35(4), 351–367.

  • Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2004). Epistemological beliefs and implicit theories of intelligence as predictors of achievement goals. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 371–388.

  • Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92(3), 473–498.

  • Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2006). Examining the dual nature of epistemological beliefs. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(1-2), 28–42.

  • Buehl, M. M., Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Beliefs about schooled knowledge: domain specific or domain general? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(3), 415–449.

  • Butler, R., & Shibaz, L. (2008). Achievement goals for teaching as predictors of students' perceptions of instructional practices and students' help seeking and cheating. Learning and Instruction, 18(5), 453–467.

  • Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 203–221.

  • Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336–371.

  • Chan, K. W., & Elliott, R. G. (2004). Relational analysis of personal epistemology and conceptions about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(8), 817–831.

  • Chen, J. A. (2012). Implicit theories, epistemic beliefs, and science motivation: A person-centered approach. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 724–735.

  • Conley, A. M., Pintrich, P. R., Vekiri, I., & Harrison, D. (2004). Changes in epistemological beliefs in elementary science students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(2), 186–204.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Sage.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Sage.

  • Dagher, Z. R., & Erduran, S. (2016). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education. Science & Education, 25(1-2), 147–164.

  • DeBacker, T. K., & Crowson, H. M. (2006). Influences on cognitive engagement: Epistemological beliefs and need for closure. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(3), 535–551.

  • Demirbag, M., & Gunel, M. (2014). Integrating argument-based science inquiry with modal representations: Impact on science achievement, argumentation, and writing skills. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14, 386–391. 

  • Duffy, M. C., & Azevedo, R. (2015). Motivation matters: Interactions between achievement goals and agent scaffolding for self-regulated learning within an intelligent tutoring system. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 338–348.

  • Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: s powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688.

  • Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Issues and Trends, 85, 554–567.

  • Elliot, A. J., & Hulleman, C. S. (2017). Achievement goals. In A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation: Theory and application (p. 43–60). The Guilford Press.

  • Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2× 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501–519.

  • Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933.

  • Güneş, E., & Bahçivan, E. (2018). A mixed research-based model for pre-service science teachers’ digital literacy: Responses to “which beliefs” and “how and why they interact” questions. Computers & Education, 118, 96–106.

  • Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 378–405.

  • Hofer, B. K. (2008). Personal epistemology and culture. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, Knowledge and Beliefs. Epistemological Studies across Diverse Cultures (pp. 3-22). Springer Science + Business Media B.V.

  • Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88–140.

  • Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422–449.

  • Infante, D. A. (1987). Aggressiveness. In J. C. McCroskey & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Personality and interpersonal communication (pp. 157-192). Sage.

  • Infante, D. A., & Rancer, A. S. (1982). A conceptualization and measure of argumentativeness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 46(1), 72–80.

  • Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065–1084.

  • King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. Jossey-Bass.

  • Kizilgunes, B., Tekkaya, C., & Sungur, S. (2009). Modeling the relations among students' epistemological beliefs, motivation, learning approach, and achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(4), 243–256.

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Sage.

  • Kuhn, D., & Dean Jr., D. (2004). Metacognition: A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory Into Practice, 43(4), 268–273.

  • Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296–316.

  • Lin, T. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2017). Developing instruments concerning scientific epistemic beliefs and goal orientations in learning science: a validation study. International Journal of Science Education, 39(17), 2382–2401.

  • Madjar, N., Weinstock, M., & Kaplan, A. (2017). Epistemic beliefs and achievement goal orientations: Relations between constructs versus personal profiles. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(1), 32–49.

  • Mason, L., Boscolo, P., Tornatora, M. C., & Ronconi, L. (2013). Besides knowledge: A cross-sectional study on the relations between epistemic beliefs, achievement goals, self-beliefs, and achievement in science. Instructional Science, 41(1), 49–79.

  • McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153–191.

  • Muis, K. R. (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 173–190.

  • Muis, K. R. (2008). Epistemic profiles and self-regulated learning: Examining relations in the context of mathematics problem solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(2), 177–208.

  • Muis, K. R., & Foy, M. J. (2010). The effects of teachers’ beliefs on elementary students’ beliefs, motivation, and achievement in mathematics. In L. D. Bendixen & F. Feucht (Eds.), Personal epistemology in the classroom: Theory, research, and implications for practice (pp. 435–469). Cambridge University Press.

  • Muis, K. R., & Franco, G. M. (2009). Epistemic beliefs: Setting the standards for self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(4), 306–318.

  • Muis, K. R., & Franco, G. M. (2010). Epistemic profiles and metacognition: support for the consistency hypothesis. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 27–45.

  • Muis, K. R., Bendixen, L. D., & Haerle, F. C. (2006). Domain-generality and domain specificity in personal epistemology research: Philosophical and empirical reflections in the development of a theoretical framework. Educational Psychology Review, 18(1), 3–54.

  • Muis, K. R., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M., Azevedo, R., Trevors, G., Meier, E., & Heddy, B. C. (2015). The curious case of climate change: Testing a theoretical model of epistemic beliefs, epistemic emotions, and complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 39, 168–183.

  • Namdar, B., & Shen, J. (2016). Intersection of argumentation and the use of multiple representations in the context of socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 38(7), 1100–1132.

  • Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91(3), 328–346.

  • Nussbaum, E. M., & Bendixen, L. D. (2003). Approaching and avoiding arguments: The role of epistemological beliefs, need for cognition, and extraverted personality traits. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(4), 573–595.

  • Palmer, B., & Marra, R. M. (2008). Individual domain-specific epistemologies: Implications for educational practice. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, Knowledge and Beliefs. Epistemological Studies across Diverse Cultures (pp. 325-350). Springer Science + Business Media B.V.

  • Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

  • Qian, G., & Alvermann, D. (1995). Role of epistemological beliefs and learned helplessness in secondary school students’ learning science concepts from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 282–292.

  • Ravindran, B., Greene, B. A., & DeBacker, T. K. (2005). Predicting preservice teachers' cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(4), 222–233.

  • Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes and values. Jossey-Bass Inc..

  • Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536.

  • Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2011). Argument-Driven Inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217–257.

  • Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504.

  • Schommer-Aikins, M. (2004). Explaining the epistemological belief system: Introducing the embedded systemic model and coordinated research approach. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 19–29.

  • Şenler, B. (2011). Pre-service science teachers’ self-efficacy in relation to personality traits and academic self-regulation (Doctoral Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey).

  • Shevlin, M., & Miles, J. N. (1998). Effects of sample size, model specification and factor loadings on the GFI in confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(1), 85–90.

  • Sinatra, G. M., Kienhues, D., & Hofer, B. K. (2014). Addressing challenges to public understanding of science: Epistemic cognition, motivated reasoning, and conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 123–138.

  • Stathopoulou, C., & Vosniadou, S. (2007). Exploring the relationship between physics-related epistemological beliefs and physics understanding. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 255–281.

  • Szu, E., & Osborne, J. (2012). Scientific reasoning and argumentation from a Bayesian perspective. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives in scientific argumentation (pp. 55–71). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. 

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

  • Trevors, G. J., Muis, K. R., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M., & Muijselaar, M. M. (2016). Exploring the relations between epistemic beliefs, emotions, and learning from texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 48, 116–132.

  • Valle, A., Cabanach, R. G., Nunez, J. C., Gonzalez-Pienda, J., Rodriguez, S., & Pieniro, I. (2003). Cognitive, motivational, and volitional dimension of learning. Research in Higher Education, 44(5), 557–580.

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach (Vol. 14). Cambridge University Press.

  • Vedder-Weiss, D., & Fortus, D. (2011). Adolescents' declining motivation to learn science: Inevitable or not? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 199–216.

  • Walker, K. A., & Zeidler, D. L. (2007). Promoting discourse about socioscientific issues through scaffolded inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1387–1410.

  • Won, S., Wolters, C. A., & Mueller, S. A. (2018). Sense of belonging and self-regulated learning: Testing achievement goals as mediators. The Journal of Experimental Education, 86(3), 402–418

  • Zohar, A. (2004). Elements of teachers' pedagogical knowledge regarding instruction of higher order thinking. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(4), 293–312.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Science Education, Bursa Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey

    Mehmet Demirbag

  2. Department of Science Education, Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University, Bolu, Turkey

    Eralp Bahcivan

Authors
  1. Mehmet Demirbag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eralp Bahcivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Demirbag.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Mehmet Demirbağ

Current themes of research:

Self-regulation. Argumentation. Teacher beliefs. Risk perception.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:

Demirbag and Bahcivan (2020). Comprehensive exploration of digital literacy: Embedded with self-regulation and epistemological beliefs. Journal of Science Education and Technology https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09887-9

Eralp Bahçivan

Current themes of research:

Epistemological beliefs. Self-construal. Conceptions of learning. Depressive beliefs.

Most relevant publications in the field of Psychology of Education:

Bahçivan, E., & Aydin, Y. (2020). Pre-service science teachers’ teaching beliefs: Responding to ‘which’,‘how’and ‘why’ questions. Action in Teacher Education, 42(2), 120–136

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Demirbag, M., Bahcivan, E. Psychological modeling of preservice science teachers’ argumentativeness, achievement goals, and epistemological beliefs: a mixed design. Eur J Psychol Educ 37, 257–278 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00558-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-021-00558-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation