Date of Award
Spring 5-29-2020
Degree Type
Dissertation
Degree Name
Doctor of Education in Secondary Education
Department
Education
Committee Chair
Dr. Michelle Head
First Committee Member
Dr. Kimberly Cortes
Second Committee Member
Dr. Jihye Kim
Abstract
This study uncovers how secondary high school chemistry process-oriented motivation is altered after implementation of Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI). ADI is a laboratory instructional model that utilizes four Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs) in a student-centered lab experience. The SEPs are embedded to the current curriculum to help motivate students to learn chemistry (NRC, 2012). This study utilized eleven total chemistry classes, five on-level chemistry and six honors chemistry, with a total of 243 students participating in some facet of the study. Data sources included were View About Scientific Inquiry (VASI), the newly developed Process-Oriented Motivation Instrument (POMI), and student lab reports (achievement). Two goals were necessary to examine student-process-oriented motivation for the control and experimental group. Based on current science education literature, a valid and reliable POMI does not currently exist. Thus, Goal 1 purpose was to create an instrument, POMI, while generating valid and reliable data. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis along with other forms of validity and reliability were completed to find the most valid and reliable model, the revised POMI model. Thus, Goal 2 utilized this revised POMI model to find the effect ADI had on student-process oriented motivation for both groups. The control group, honors chemistry students, utilized a traditional lab. However, the experimental group, on-level chemistry students, participated in the ADI lab to determine if the type of lab implementation caused a significant difference in process-oriented motivation among the groups. Normalized gain scores were used to compare if there was significant difference between the control and experimental groups. Finally, mediation path analysis discovered if process-oriented motivation factors influence how the experimental group or control performed on their lab report. Two conclusions were drawn as a result of Goal 2: (1) after ADI implementation both groups experienced statistically similar changes in each POMI motivation factor and (2) no POMI factor possessed a significant influence on the lab report scores of either group.