A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Scientific Literacy Model’s General Science Student Teachers at Rajabhat University in Thailand.
Keywords:
Scientific Literacy, Confirmatory Factor Analysis, General Science Student TeacherAbstract
Scientific literacy is a crucial need for understanding the phenomenon and problem-solving of general science student teachers and necessary to prepare for work in school. This research developed a model of scientific literacy for general science student teachers at Rajabhat University, which consisted of 4 components, namely scientific attitude, understanding the nature of science, scientific inquiry ability, and application of science to contexts, including 12 indicators. It aimed to confirm the model with empirical data. The samples were 400 second-year general science student teachers of 16 Rajabhat Universities, selected by two-stage random sampling. Data collection was conducted through a questionnaire with 36 questions. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as mean, standard deviation, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The research finding revealed that the four elements confirmed the model of scientific literacy components’ general science teacher students. The model was confirmed by the second-order CFA, in which the factors were consistent with empirical data (Chi-Square=55.201, df=43, p=0.100, relative Chi-Square =1.284, GFI=0.978, AGFI=0.961, NFI=0.987, RMR=0.006, SRMR=0.0251, RMSEA=0.027). In addition, the standardized scores loading of four components were in the range of 0.788-0.860, the AVE was in the range of 0.746-0.878, and the CR was in the range of 0.898-0.951. The highest score loading was the scientific inquiry ability, followed by understanding the nature of science, application of science to context, and scientific attitude (standardized scores loading 0.860, 0.826, 0.8925, and 0.788, respectively). These results were employed to develop a scientific literacy test for assessing general science student teachers at Rajabhat University’s skills and develop an instructional model for promoting their abilities.
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. and Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education. 22(7), 665–701.
Agustiani, E.D., Rustaman, N. and Wulan, A.R. (2020). Elementary School Teachers' Scientific Competence and Their Teaching Experiences. Journal Basicedu. 4(2), 306-313.
Al Sultan, A., Henson, H. J., & Fadde, P. J. (2018). Pre-service elementary teachers’ scientific literacy and self-efficacy in teaching science. IAFOR Journal of Education, 6(1), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.6.1.02
Barber, M. & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world's best-performing school systems come out on top. McKinsey and Company.
Bollen, A. K. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: A Wiley Inter science publication.
BouJaoude, S. (2002). Balance of scientific literacy themes in science curricula: The case of Lebanon. International Journal of Science Education. 24(2), 139–156.
Champagne, A.B. & Klopfer, L.E. (1982), Actions in a time of crisis. Science Education. 66(4), 503-514.
Costa, A. M., Ferreira M. E. & M Joaquim da Silva Loureiro. (2021). Scientific literacy: the conceptual framework prevailing over the first decade of the twenty-first century. Revista Colombiana de Educación, 81, 195-228,
DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 37(6), 582-601.
Dirks C. & Knight J. K. (2016). Measuring college learning in biology. In Arum R., Roksa J., Cook A. (Eds.), Improving quality in American higher education: Learning outcomes and assessments for the 21st century (pp. 225–260). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Fives, H., Nicolich, M., Birnbaum, A. & Huber, W. (2014). Developing a measure of scientific literacy for middle school students. Science Education, 98(4), 549–580.
Gagne, P., & Hancock, G. R. (2006). Measurement model quality, sample size, and solution propriety in confirmatory factor model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 65-83.
Gumjudpai, S. (2019). A Model for Developing Student Teacher’s Competency on The Teaching Practicum Preparation Based on Empowerment and Active Learning Instruction: A Case Study in Sakon Nakhon Rajabhat University. Journal of Graduate School, Pitchayatat, Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University, 14(1), 151–161. Retrieved from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/Pitchayatat/article/ view/221612 .
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., and Tatham, R.L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Hanushek, E. A.; Piopiunik, M. & Wiederhold, S. (2019). The Value of Smarter Teachers: International Evidence on Teacher Cognitive Skills and Student Performance. The Journal of Human Resources. 54(4), 858-899.
Hermita, N., Alpusari, M., Alim, J. A.and Suanto, E., (2020). Extracting indigenous Riau-Malays’ Scientific literacy through Lancang Kuning Folklore with thematic learning in the primary school context. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning. 5(1), 59-66.
Holbrook, J and Rannikmae, M. (2007). The nature of science education for enhancing scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education. 29(11), 1347-1362.
Hurd, D. (1958). Scientific literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational Leadership, 16(1), 13-16, 52.
IPST. (2021). PISA 2018 Results: Reading, mathematics and science. IPST publication.
Jaruanlikitkawin, W., & Chaikit, N. (2021). Scientific Literacy of Science Teacher Students. Journal of Education Thaksin University, 20(2), 154–165. Retrieved from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/eduthu/article/view/240542
Jituafua, A., Pongsophon, P., Visetson, S., & Kanchanawarin, C. (2015). Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Understanding of Nature of Science and Ability to Integrate Nature of Science into Teaching. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 36(2), 308–321. Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/kjss/article/view/243312
Khumraksa, B. & Rakbumrung. P. (2020). A Study of the Understanding of Scientific Method of Science Teacher Students Who Experienced in Research-Based Learning Activity. Kasetsart Educational Review. 35(1), 48-56. . Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/eduku/article/view/188580
Kitkeukool, S. (2013). Nature of Science and Its Learning Benchmarks. Journal of Education, Naresuan University. 15(2), 137-142. Retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ edujournal_nu/article/view/9236
Ladachart, L. & Ladachart, L. (2018). From scientific literacy and inquiry to stem education and design. Journal of Education Naresuan University, 20(1), 246–260. Retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/edujournal_nu/article/view/115593
Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71-94.
Mali, S. (2019). Transforming into an organization that is ready to change in an era of transformative change. OCSC e-Journal. 61(2), 8-10.
Meyers, L. S.; Glenn, G.; & Guarino, A. J. (2006). Applied Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation. Thousand Oaks; London; New Delhi: Sage
NRC. (2006). Systems for state science assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
OECD. (2019). Assessment and analytical framework, PISA. OECD Publishing.
Office of the Basic Education Commission. (2017). Indicators and core learning content of science learning. (Revised 2017) according to the Basic Education Core Curriculum 2008. Thailand Agricultural Cooperative Assembly Printing House.
Office of the Royal Society (ORST). (2019). Why we need to be Literate: studying from phenomena and predicting the future. Office of the Royal Society.
Pella, M. O., O’Hearn, G. T., & Gale, C. W. (1965). Referents to Scientific literacy. Journal of Research in science Teaching. 4, 199-208.
Rangabthuk, W. (2020). Thai Learners’ Key Competencies in a VUCA World. Journal of Teacher Professional Development, 1(1), 8-18.
Safkolam, R. & Thiangchanthathip, K. (2021). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Understanding of the Nature of Science. Journal of Yala Rajabhat University. 16(2), 276-286. Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/yru_human/article/view/248861
Sawatmool, S. (2002). A study of the characteristics of scientific knowledge. Khon Kaen University.
Sairattanain, S. (2015). Student teachers' understanding of nature of science: Case study of forth year students, majoring in science, Sisaket Rajabhat University, Proceedings of 53rd Kasetsart University Annual Conference: Education, Economics and Business Administration, Humanities and Social, p. 305-312. Kasetsart University.
Supprakob, S., Faikhamta, C., & Suwanruji, P. (2017). Science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38(3), 704–716. Retrieved from https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/kjss/article/ view/242785
Wansudon, S., Yamrung, R., Dansirisuk, W. and Pratoomtong, W. (2017). The scenario of pre-service science teacher education in next decade (B.E.2017-2026). Journal of education. 18(2), 170-186.
Yore, Larry & Pimm, David & Tuan, Hsiao-Lin. (2007). The Literacy Component of Mathematical and Scientific Literacy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 5, 559-589. 10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of Information
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
บทความ ข้อความ ภาพประกอบ และตารางประกอบที่ลงพิมพ์ในวารสารเป็นความคิดเห็นส่วนตัวของผู้นิพนธ์ กองบรรณาธิการไม่จำเป็นต้องเห็นตามเสมอไป และไม่มีส่วนรับผิดชอบใดๆ ถือเป็นความรับผิดชอบของผู้นิพนธ์เพียงผู้เดียว
