Why most definitions of modeling competence in science education fall short: Analyzing the relevance of volition for modeling

5Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Definitions of modeling competence in science education do not yet include noncognitive factors. However, noncognitive factors are central to competence and might thus substantially improve our understanding of modeling competence. In this article, we analyze volition during preservice science teachers' engagement with a black-box modeling task and its relation to established aspects of modeling competence: metamodeling knowledge, modeling process, and modeling product. A cluster analysis of the occurrence of volition categories resulted in three clusters of volitional behavior. The clusters describe three different volition types: one action-oriented type applying a self-regulative strategy and two state-oriented types applying self-controlling strategies. Correlation analyses between clusters, volition categories and modeling process variables indicate benefits of the self-regulative strategy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ammoneit, R., Göhner, M. F., Bielik, T., & Krell, M. (2024). Why most definitions of modeling competence in science education fall short: Analyzing the relevance of volition for modeling. Science Education, 108(2), 443–466. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21841

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free