Premium
A comparison of the classroom dynamics of a problem‐solving and traditional laboratory model of instruction using path analysis
Author(s) -
Pizzini Edward L.,
Shepardson Daniel P.
Publication year - 1992
Publication title -
journal of research in science teaching
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.067
H-Index - 131
eISSN - 1098-2736
pISSN - 0022-4308
DOI - 10.1002/tea.3660290305
Subject(s) - path analysis (statistics) , mathematics education , class (philosophy) , psychology , causal model , path (computing) , computer science , mathematics , statistics , artificial intelligence , machine learning , programming language
The classroom dynamics (class setting, lesson structure, student interactions, and student behaviors) of a traditional laboratory and a problem‐solving Search, Solve, Create, and Share (SSCS) model of instruction were compared using path analysis. Class setting was based on small‐group/large‐group settings. Lesson structure variables were problem finding/refining, research designing, data collecting, data analyzing, and evaluating. The student‐student interactions variable was determined by student‐student responding, student‐student initiating, and student (self‐) interaction; while the teacher‐student interaction variable was based on teacher‐student initiating and teacher‐student responding. The dependent variables of student behavior consisted of attending, responding, following, soliciting, and giving. A causal model was hypothesized for both instructional models based on the independent and dependent variables. The hypothesized causal model was tested using path‐analysis procedures described by Pedhazur (1982). The hypothesized causal models were adjusted based on path coefficients with levels of significance greater than p = 0.05. While the descriptive data indicated a similarity in the classroom dynamics of the two instructional models, path analysis indicated a difference in the classroom dynamics. In the traditional laboratory model, student behaviors did not correlate to lesson structure, class setting, or student interactions, whereas in the SSCS problem‐solving model student behaviors correlated to aspects of the lesson structure, class setting, and student interactions.