How Did Japanese Students How Did Japanese Students Respond to Respond to

the Questionnaires ofthe Questionnaires of “The Relevance of Science “The Relevance of Science

Education”?Education”?

Masakata Ogawa Masakata Ogawa & &

ShokoShoko ShimodeShimode

Kobe University, JapanKobe University, Japan

Purpose of the Purpose of the PresentationPresentation

• Not to Intend to Show an Not to Intend to Show an Overview of Japanese Students’ Overview of Japanese Students’ Responses to Each ItemsResponses to Each Items

• But But to Show an Analytical to Show an Analytical Framework for the Use of Framework for the Use of Prospective Comparative Studies Prospective Comparative Studies among Various Countriesamong Various Countries

• To Appreciate Discussion on the To Appreciate Discussion on the UsabilityUsability

Japanese Educators’ Japanese Educators’ ConcernConcern

• Rapid Underway in Rapid Underway in Bipolarization of Bipolarization of Students’ AchievementsStudents’ Achievements – Good Achievers Getting Better & BetterGood Achievers Getting Better & Better– Poor Achievers Getting Worse & WorsePoor Achievers Getting Worse & Worse

• Possible Reason (An Issue)Possible Reason (An Issue)– Socio-Economic StratificationSocio-Economic Stratification

• Also Also Differentiation in Attitudes?Differentiation in Attitudes? • Are Japanese Students Are Japanese Students

Heterogeneous?Heterogeneous?– How to IdentifyHow to Identify Such Sub-Groups? Such Sub-Groups?

Are There Any Ways to Classify Are There Any Ways to Classify Students into Several Groups Students into Several Groups in terms of their Differential in terms of their Differential Attitudes toward Science Attitudes toward Science

by Utilizing ROSE?by Utilizing ROSE?

Preliminary Research QuestionPreliminary Research Question

An Analytical Framework An Analytical Framework (1)(1)

• Pre-Supposed ValuablesPre-Supposed Valuables– Nationality, Sex or Number of BooksNationality, Sex or Number of Books

• How to Reflect Students’ How to Reflect Students’ Differential Attitudes toward Differential Attitudes toward Science in the Analysis of ROSE Science in the Analysis of ROSE Data?Data?

• Are There Any Appropriate Items Are There Any Appropriate Items in the ROSE to Construct a New in the ROSE to Construct a New Valuable?Valuable?

An Analytical Framework An Analytical Framework (2)(2)

• Cross-TabulationCross-Tabulation– F2 (‘School science is interesting’) F2 (‘School science is interesting’) – F5 (‘I like school science better F5 (‘I like school science better

than most other subjects’)than most other subjects’) – (Agree + lo Agree) VS (Disagree + Lo Disagree)(Agree + lo Agree) VS (Disagree + Lo Disagree)

• Absolute InterestsAbsolute Interests in School Science VS in School Science VS RRelative Likenesselative Likeness of School Science among of School Science among School SubjectsSchool Subjects

Loving School ScienceLoving School Science

Loving other SubjectsLoving other Subjects

No InterestNo Interest

InterestInterest

Specific PrioritySpecific Priority

Other PriorityOther PriorityPoor PriorityPoor Priority

Not-Positive PriorityNot-Positive Priority

Survey for Japanese Survey for Japanese Sample (1)Sample (1)

• ROSE Questionnaires for ROSE Questionnaires for Japanese SampleJapanese Sample– Translation into Japanese by Translation into Japanese by

Ogawa Checked Its Readability Ogawa Checked Its Readability by Two Pre-Service Elementary by Two Pre-Service Elementary TeachersTeachers

– Printed into a BookletPrinted into a Booklet

Survey for Japanese Survey for Japanese Sample (2)Sample (2)

• Sample StudentsSample Students– 50 Lower-Secondary Schools50 Lower-Secondary Schools Selected Selected

Randomly Randomly among 11203among 11203 Schools Schools Listed in the School Directory by MOEListed in the School Directory by MOE

– 19 Schools among the 50 Schools19 Schools among the 50 Schools Were Successfully Involved inWere Successfully Involved in

– Total 19 Classes with 560 StudentsTotal 19 Classes with 560 Students (268 Girls, 291 Boys with one (268 Girls, 291 Boys with one unknown)unknown)

• SurveySurvey– Administered by Each Classroom Administered by Each Classroom

Teacher in March 2003Teacher in March 2003

Sample Schools in JapanSample Schools in Japan

sex

F5. I like school science better than most other subjects total

disagree lo disagree lo agree agree

girl

F2. School science is

interesting

disagree 34 3 0 0 37

lo disagree 46 26 5 1 78

lo agree 28 23 16 2 69

agree 13 18 21 31 83

total 121 70 42 34 267

boy

F2. School science is

interesting

disagree 24 3 1 0 28

lo disagree 29 16 5 1 51

lo agree 25 44 19 2 90

agree 5 18 42 48 113

total 83 81 67 51 282

Cross-Tabulation between F2 and F5among Japanese Samples

Classification of Classification of Japanese Students in terms of Japanese Students in terms of

School Science PreferenceSchool Science Preference

SpecifiSpecific c

PrioritPriorityy

Other Other PrioritPriorit

yy

Poor Poor PrioritPriorit

yy

Non-Non-Positive Positive PriorityPriority

TotalTotal

GirlGirlss

7070

26.226.2%%

8282

30.7%30.7%

109109

40.840.8%%

66

2.2%2.2%

267267

100%100%

BoyBoyss

111111

39.439.4%%

9292

32.6%32.6%

7272

25.525.5%%

77

2.5%2.5%

282282

100%100%

TotTotalal

181181

33.033.0%%

174(5174(5))

31.7%31.7%

181181

33.033.0%%

1313

2.4%2.4%

549549

100%100%

Big QuestionsBig Questions

• How and By What Do Students How and By What Do Students Differentiate into such Groups?Differentiate into such Groups?

• What’s the Characteristics of the What’s the Characteristics of the ‘Other Priority’ Group?‘Other Priority’ Group?

• How to Develop Appropriate Curricula How to Develop Appropriate Curricula and Instructions for Respective Groups and Instructions for Respective Groups in order to Cultivate (Respective) in order to Cultivate (Respective) ‘Science Literacy’?‘Science Literacy’?

• Is It Possible to Turn the ‘Other’ Is It Possible to Turn the ‘Other’ Priority Group into the ‘Specific’ Priority Group into the ‘Specific’ Priority Group?Priority Group?

General Characteristics General Characteristics of of

Three Major Groups of Three Major Groups of Japanese SamplesJapanese Samples

Things to Learn About Things to Learn About

• Specific Priority GroupSpecific Priority Group Has Much Has Much More Interests in Broader Range of More Interests in Broader Range of the Itemsthe Items

• Other Priority GroupOther Priority Group Shows Interests Shows Interests in Narrower Range of the items in Narrower Range of the items

• Poor Priority GroupPoor Priority Group Responses Responses Negatively to Most of the ItemsNegatively to Most of the Items

sex A36. How the eye can see light and coloursTotal

not

interestedlo not

interestedlo very

interestedvery

interested

girl

Poor Frequency 34 42 22 11 109

Adjusted Residue 3.1 1.6 -2.1 -2.8

Specific Frequency 11 16 25 17 69

Adjusted Residue -1.4 -2.0 2.0 1.7

Other Frequency 12 28 23 19 82

Adjusted Residue -1.9 .2 .3 1.4

Total Frequency 57 86 70 47 260

boy Poor Frequency 27 31 9 5 72

Adjusted Residue 3.3 1.1 -3.1 -1.7

Specific Frequency 17 32 39 23 111

Adjusted Residue -2.6 -2.4 2.7 3.3

Other Frequency 20 40 25 7 92

Adjusted Residue -.4 1.5 .2 -1.8

Total Frequency 64 103 73 35 275

Typical Example Pattern of Typical Example Pattern of Response Distribution Response Distribution

My Future JobMy Future Job

• No Significant Differences of Response No Significant Differences of Response Patterns among the Three Groups in Patterns among the Three Groups in Most of the ItemsMost of the Items

• The Items the The Items the ‘Specific’‘Specific’ Group Group Showing Much More Preference to are:Showing Much More Preference to are:– B6: Building or repairing objects using my B6: Building or repairing objects using my

handshands– B7: Working with machines or toolsB7: Working with machines or tools– B11: Coming up with new ideasB11: Coming up with new ideas– B15:Working with something I find B15:Working with something I find

important and meaningfulimportant and meaningful– B25:Developing or improving my B25:Developing or improving my

knowledge and abilitiesknowledge and abilities

Me and the EnvironmentMe and the Environment• No Significant Difference Found among the No Significant Difference Found among the

Three Groups’ Response Distribution in Three Groups’ Response Distribution in Most of the Items Except Most of the Items Except – D1: Threats to the environment are not my D1: Threats to the environment are not my

business (Almost Everybody Negative)business (Almost Everybody Negative)– D3: Environmental problems are exaggerated D3: Environmental problems are exaggerated

(Mostly Negative Except Boys in the ‘Specific’)(Mostly Negative Except Boys in the ‘Specific’)– D7: We can still find solutions to our D7: We can still find solutions to our

environmental problems (Almost Everybody environmental problems (Almost Everybody Positive)Positive)

– D10: People should care more about protection D10: People should care more about protection of the environment (Almost Everybody Positive)of the environment (Almost Everybody Positive)

• Japanese Students’ Views toward Japanese Students’ Views toward Environmental Issues are Well-Balanced Environmental Issues are Well-Balanced but Negative to the Extremely Optimistic but Negative to the Extremely Optimistic OnesOnes

My Opinions about S & TMy Opinions about S & T

• Items the ‘Items the ‘Specific’Specific’ Group React Group React PositivelyPositively and the and the ‘Poor’‘Poor’ Group Do Group Do NegativelyNegatively are; are;– G2, G4, G5, G6, G9, G12 G2, G4, G5, G6, G9, G12 (Positive Aspects of S & T)(Positive Aspects of S & T)

• Fundamentally, Japanese Students are Fundamentally, Japanese Students are AAmbivalenmbivalent and Skeptical to S & T and t and Skeptical to S & T and Scientists Scientists

Out-Of-School Out-Of-School ExperiencesExperiences

• No Clear Tendencies Found No Clear Tendencies Found • Preliminary Cluster Analysis PerformedPreliminary Cluster Analysis Performed

– Techno-Scientific ItemsTechno-Scientific Items (Common) (Common)– Modern-Techno Items (TV, Radio) Modern-Techno Items (TV, Radio) (Common)(Common)– Outdoor Experiences (I) (Camping) Outdoor Experiences (I) (Camping) (Common)(Common)– Outdoor Experiences (2) (Hunting-Gathering) Outdoor Experiences (2) (Hunting-Gathering)

(‘Specific’ and ‘Other’)(‘Specific’ and ‘Other’)– Collections & Science Class Tools Collections & Science Class Tools (‘Specific’ )(‘Specific’ )– Primitive Technical Tools and Items Primitive Technical Tools and Items (Few)(Few)– Nomadic Items Nomadic Items (None)(None)

Hunting-Gathering Way of Life(JOMON Way of Life)

Agricultural-Nomadic Way of Life(YAYOI Way of Life)

Manufacturing-Industrial Way of Life

Techno-Informatic Way of Life

Activities and Knowledge Derived from

Amalgamated Activities And Knowledge

in Contemporary Way of Life

A Stratified Model of A Stratified Model of ActivitiesActivities and and KnowledgeKnowledge

Amalgamation Amalgamation for Contemporary Japanese People for Contemporary Japanese People

　　　　　　 　　　　　　　 　 (Ogawa, (Ogawa, 2002)2002)

Out-Of-School Out-Of-School ExperiencesExperiences

• No Clear Tendencies Found No Clear Tendencies Found • Preliminary Cluster Analysis PerformedPreliminary Cluster Analysis Performed

– Techno-Scientific ItemsTechno-Scientific Items (Common) (Common)– Modern-Techno Items (TV, Radio) Modern-Techno Items (TV, Radio) (Common)(Common)– Outdoor Experiences (I) (Camping) Outdoor Experiences (I) (Camping) (Common)(Common)– Outdoor Experiences (2) (Hunting-Gathering) Outdoor Experiences (2) (Hunting-Gathering)

(‘Specific’ and ‘Other’)(‘Specific’ and ‘Other’)– Collections & Science Class Tools Collections & Science Class Tools (‘Specific’ )(‘Specific’ )– Primitive Technical Tools and ItemsPrimitive Technical Tools and Items (Few)(Few)– Nomadic ItemsNomadic Items (None)(None)

Japanese Students’ Japanese Students’ Responses to Techno-Responses to Techno-Scientific Life Style (1)Scientific Life Style (1)

• Girls in the ‘Poor’ GroupGirls in the ‘Poor’ Group are Heavier are Heavier User of Mobile Phones than Boys in User of Mobile Phones than Boys in Any Other GroupsAny Other Groups

• Girls in the ‘Poor’ GroupGirls in the ‘Poor’ Group are also are also Much More enjoying SMG, while Much More enjoying SMG, while among Boys in the Three Groups No among Boys in the Three Groups No Significant Differences FoundSignificant Differences Found

• Preference of Computer Games are Preference of Computer Games are No Significant Differences among the No Significant Differences among the Three GroupsThree Groups

sex H44. used a mobile phone total

neverlo

never lo often often

girl Group_3

Poor Frequency 4 7 11 87 109Adjusted Residue -1.0 -1.0 -2.2 2.9

Specific

Frequency 6 8 12 44 70

Adjusted Residue 1.4 1.1 .3 -1.6

Other Frequency 4 7 19 52 82Adjusted Residue -.2 .0 2.1 -1.6

total Frequency 14 22 42 183 261boy Group_

3Poor Frequency 9 14 12 36 71

Adjusted Residue -.7 .1 -.8 1.1

Specific

Frequency 15 25 21 48 109

Adjusted Residue -.5 1.2 -.3 -.3

Other Frequency 17 14 22 39 92Adjusted Residue 1.1 -1.3 1.1 -.7

total Frequency 41 53 55 123 272

H44. used a mobile phone * sexH44. used a mobile phone * sex

Japanese Students’ Japanese Students’ Responses to Techno-Responses to Techno-Scientific Life Style (2)Scientific Life Style (2)

• Experience in Internet Information Search : Experience in Internet Information Search : No Differences among Girls, but Found is No Differences among Girls, but Found is Significance among Boys: Significance among Boys: The ‘Other’The ‘Other’ and and the ‘Specific’the ‘Specific’ Groups are More Groups are More ExperiencedExperienced

• Boys inBoys in the ‘Specific’ Groupthe ‘Specific’ Group are Most Used are Most Used Dictionaries, Encyclopedia on ComputerDictionaries, Encyclopedia on Computer

• Experiences in Downloading Music from Experiences in Downloading Music from the Internet and in the E-mails are No the Internet and in the E-mails are No Difference among the Three Groups and Difference among the Three Groups and SexSex

• Word Processor in the Computer is less Word Processor in the Computer is less Frequently Used by Frequently Used by the ‘Poor’ Groupthe ‘Poor’ Group

One Symbolic LessonOne Symbolic Lesson

• Girls in the ‘Poor’ GroupGirls in the ‘Poor’ Group– The Least LoverThe Least Lover of School Science with of School Science with

IndifferenceIndifference to Science & Technology to Science & Technology– Heavy User of Mobile PhonesHeavy User of Mobile Phones and of and of

SMGSMG

– InterestsInterests in the Possible Radiation in the Possible Radiation Dangers of Mobile Phones and Dangers of Mobile Phones and Computers (No S. D.)Computers (No S. D.)

– InterestsInterests in ‘How Mobile Phones Can in ‘How Mobile Phones Can Send and Receive Messages?’ (No S.D.)Send and Receive Messages?’ (No S.D.)

Implications & Way Implications & Way ForwardForward

• Do We Identify Four Groups of Do We Identify Four Groups of Students in Any Countries?Students in Any Countries?

• What are the Relative Ratios among What are the Relative Ratios among the Groups in Respective Countries?the Groups in Respective Countries?

• What Kinds of Characteristics Does What Kinds of Characteristics Does Each Group Have in terms of Each Group Have in terms of Attitudes toward Science or Science Attitudes toward Science or Science Classes?Classes?

• How Do Students Differentiate into How Do Students Differentiate into such Groups?such Groups?

• Can the ‘Other’ and ‘Poor’ Groups Can the ‘Other’ and ‘Poor’ Groups Turn to be the ‘Specific’ Group?Turn to be the ‘Specific’ Group?

How about Sharing the Framework?How about Sharing the Framework?

ContactContact

Ogawam@Kobe-u.ac.jpOgawam@Kobe-u.ac.jp