Inquiry Learning in The Singaporean

This article was downloaded by: ["University at Buffalo Libraries"]
On: 04 October 2014, At: 06:50

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Science

Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20
Inquiry Learning in the Singaporean

Context: Factors affecting student
interest in school science
a b a
Jennifer Ann Jocz , Junqing Zhai & Aik Ling Tan
a
Natural Sciences and Science Education, National Institute of
Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
b
College of Education, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
Published online: 10 Apr 2014.
To cite this article: Jennifer Ann Jocz, Junqing Zhai & Aik Ling Tan (2014) Inquiry Learning in the
Singaporean Context: Factors affecting student interest in school science, International Journal of
Science Education, 36:15, 2596-2618, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2014.908327
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.908327
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by ["University at Buffalo Libraries"] at 06:50 04 October 2014
International Journal of Science Education, 2014
Vol. 36, No. 15, 2596– 2618, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.908327
Inquiry Learning in the Singaporean

Context: Factors affecting student
interest in school science
Jennifer Ann Jocza, Junqing Zhaib and Aik Ling Tana∗

a
Natural Sciences and Science Education, National Institute of Education,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; bCollege of Education, Zhejiang
University, Hangzhou, China
Recent research reveals that students’ interest in school science begins to decline at an early age. As
this lack of interest could result in fewer individuals qualified for scientific careers and a population
unprepared to engage with scientific societal issues, it is imperative to investigate ways in which
interest in school science can be increased. Studies have suggested that inquiry learning is one
way to increase interest in science. Inquiry learning forms the core of the primary syllabus in
Singapore; as such, we examine how inquiry practices may shape students’ perceptions of science
and school science. This study investigates how classroom inquiry activities relate to students’
interest in school science. Data were collected from 425 grade 4 students who responded to a
questionnaire and 27 students who participated in follow-up focus group interviews conducted in
14 classrooms in Singapore. Results indicate that students have a high interest in science class.
Additionally, self-efficacy and leisure-time science activities, but not gender, were significantly
associated with an increased interest in school science. Interestingly, while hands-on activities are
viewed as fun and interesting, connecting learning to real-life and discussing ideas with their
peers had a greater relation to student interest in school science. These findings suggest that
inquiry learning can increase Singaporean students’ interest in school science; however, simply
engaging students in hands-on activities is insufficient. Instead, student interest may be increased
by ensuring that classroom activities emphasize the everyday applications of science and allow for
peer discussion.
Keywords: Interest; Inquiry; Primary Science; Class Activities; Student-centred

Curriculum
∗
Corresponding author. Natural Sciences and Science Education, National Institute of Education,
Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616, Singapore. Email: aikling.
tan@nie.edu.sg
# 2014 Taylor & Francis

Factors Affecting Interest in School Science 2597
Introduction
Recent studies have revealed that students’ interest in science, especially in the school
setting, begins to decrease at an early age (Lyons, 2006; Renninger & Hidi, 2011).
This decrease in science interest may be especially pronounced for girls (Bennett &
Hoggarth, 2009); however, recent studies have suggested that gender differences
related to science interest may be closing (Krapp & Prenzel, 2011). This decrease
in science interest is concerning as a lack of interest in science threatens to reduce
the number of students choosing to pursue science-related careers (Maltese & Tai,
2010; Tai, Liu, Maltese, & Revelle, 2006). Additionally, interest has been shown to
be positively related to various learning outcomes (Krapp, Hidi, & Renninger,
1992), which suggests that a lack of interest in science may inhibit the production
of scientifically literate citizens capable of understanding and engaging with socio-
scientific issues. In light of these concerns, researchers have sought to identify ways
to increase interest in school science. However, the question remains as to what
aspects of instruction aid in the maintenance or development of interest (Krapp &
Prenzel, 2011). Thus, in this paper we investigate what personal and classroom
factors are related to students’ interest in school science.
Theoretical Models of Interest

Dewey (1913) was one of the first to recognize that interest can be described as result-
ing from the interaction between a person and his or her environment, a definition that
is still the most widely used (Hidi & Renninger, 2006). This can be seen as the basis
for the person—object theory of interest, which states that interest stems from the
relationships between individuals and objects (e.g. concrete objects, topics, and
abstract concepts) in their surroundings (Krapp, 2002a, 2002b). It has also generally
been accepted that interest can be divided into two forms, situational interest and
individual (or personal) interest (Ainley, Hidi, & Berndorff, 2002; Hidi & Renninger,
2006; Silvia, 2006). Situational interest refers to a transient interest caused by external
stimuli, while individual interest involves a long-term interest in a certain topic or field
of study (Hidi, 1990). Additionally, situational and individual interest can each influ-
ence the development of the other. For example, a person with an individual interest
in a topic may respond differently to a stimulus than someone without an individual
interest (Hidi, 1990). Furthermore, research has shown that although situational
interest is transient, repeated exposure to activities with situational interest can lead
to a subsequent increase in individual interest in a topic (Mitchell & Gilson, 1997).
Hidi and Renninger (2006) extended this idea by suggesting a four-phase model of
interest development. The first two phases (triggered situational interest and main-
tained situational interest) are usually evoked by an external stimulus. Triggered situa-
tional interest is a short-term change in interest, which can develop into maintained
situational interest if the individual continues to engage in the topic for an extended
episode. In the latter two phases (emerging individual interest and well-developed
individual interest), interest is usually self-generated with the individual seeking
2598 J.A. Jocz et al.
answers to their own questions and persisting despite difficulties. During the emerging
individual interest phase, an individual chooses to re-engage with a particular topic. If
this engagement continues over time, the individual is said to have a well-developed
individual interest. It is important to note that even at the individual interest stage,
a lack of proper support and opportunities to explore an interest can lead to regression
to a previous phase (Hidi & Renninger, 2006).
Research on Students’ Situational Interest

It is difficult to take into consideration the individual interests held by all students in a
class (Hidi & Anderson, 1992). Thus many researchers have chosen to focus on situa-
tional interest as it describes how various aspects of a topic or instructional task

impacts the interest of all students.
External Factors Related to Interest

Many studies of situational interest have focused on effects of interest on learning and
the characteristics of text that increase interest in reading. These studies revealed that
an individual’s ability to comprehend, infer, and retain information from text was
increased when reading passages written about high interest topics. It was also
reported that the quality of learning was influenced by interest since it is related to
a deeper processing of passages. Numerous characteristics were found to influence
interest in text. These characteristics include examples such as novelty, surprising
information, visual imagery, ease of comprehension, and prior knowledge (Hidi,
2001).
Given the relationship found between interest and learning, it is important to look
at the characteristics of other subject matter that arouse interest in students. Although
limited, some research has explored the factors affecting interest in math and science.
In a survey on 13-year-old students’ interest in physical science topics, Qualter (1993)
found that both boys and girls preferred topics that dealt with application of a concept
as opposed to more abstract statements. However, Swarat, Ortony, and Revelle’s
(2012) survey of 533 middle school students’ interest in school biology indicated
that the form of the activity (hands-on) was much more important than the content
topic or the learning goal. Mitchell (1993) found that group work and interaction
with puzzles and computers lead to triggered situational interest in a high-school
mathematics class; however, factors such as meaningfulness and involvement were
necessary to cause maintained situational interest. Similarly, in a longitudinal study
by Logan and Skamp (2012), factors influencing students’ interest in school
science were tracked from grades 7 –10. Again, the ability to participate in peer discus-
sion and an emphasis on the relevance of the science content were found to affect
student interest in science. Finally, a study by Palmer (2009) revealed that novelty
was the major factor influencing grade 9 students’ interest in an inquiry science
lesson; however, factors such as choice, physical activity, and social involvement
also played a role. These findings echo the notion that an inquiry-based curriculum
that allows students to actively participate in activities similar to those of actual scien-
tists may promote student interest (Blumenfeld, Kempler, & Krajcik, 2006).
Internal Factors Related to Interest

Sansone and Thoman (2005) noted that both internal and/or external factors may
influence interest during a learning activity, thus it is necessary to control for personal
factors that can have an impact on interest. Research has suggested that interest may
be preceded by perceived competence in a given subject (Marsh, Trautwein, Ludtke,
Koller, & Baumert, 2005; Silvia, 2003). Bandura and Schunk (1981) studied self-
motivation in young children who were poor at math and found the subject uninter-
esting. Their results showed that students who set proximal goals exhibited an
increase in self-efficacy over the course of the study, which was positively related to
an intrinsic interest in mathematical activities. Another study tested path models of
academic interest and found that the perceived self-efficacy of high-school mathemat-
ics students predicted interest in the subject matter (Lopez, Lent, Brown, & Gore,
1997). Similarly, a study by Haussler and Hoffman (2000) revealed that self-efficacy
was the major contributing factor to interest in physics as a school subject.
As previously mentioned, gender can be a factor in school science interest (Bennett
& Hoggarth, 2009). A study of sixth graders revealed that girls and boys have different
scientific interests and perceptions of science (Jones, Howe, & Rua, 2000). Girls
tended to be interested in science topics involving the environment or helping
people, while boys were more interested in technology. Additionally, girls viewed
science as being more difficult to understand. However, studies have suggested that
this gap is less pronounced in primary school students and begins to widen signifi-
cantly after grade 6 (Baram-Tsabari & Yarden, 2011).
Finally, personal interest in science has been shown to relate to interest in science
class. In a longitudinal study of students’ leisure-time activities, Simpkins, Davis-
Kean, and Eccles (2006) found that students’ participation in math- and science-
related activities (e.g. playing math games, going to a museum, and reading books
about science) in grade 5 predict their interest in high-school science as measured
by their enrolment in science courses. Furthermore, a study of adolescents participat-
ing in a summer science programme showed that situational interest was positively
related to students’ individual science interest (Linnenbrink-Garcia, Patall, & Messer-
smith, 2012). In this study, we use engagement in leisure-time activities that involve
science (e.g. reading about science, visiting a science centre, etc.) to measure students’
personal interest in science.
Research Context and Purpose of the Study

In line with reform efforts in the USA promoting inquiry as a means of making science
learning more authentic (National Research Council, 1996), an inquiry-based
primary science syllabus was implemented in Singapore in 2008 (Ministry of Edu-
cation, 2007). These documents highlight many factors, such as activity, autonomy,
and social interactions, which have been shown to increase interest in science. Accord-
ing to the 2008 primary science syllabus, the curriculum is founded on three domains:
knowledge, understanding and application; skills and processes; and ethics and atti-
tudes. It is hoped that students will gain knowledge of scientific phenomena, instru-
ments, and application, attain skills such as predicting, evaluating, and
communicating, and develop curious and creative attitudes. In short, the aim of the
curriculum is ‘to enable students to view the pursuit of science as meaningful and
useful’ by grounding inquiry ‘in knowledge, issues and questions that relate to the
roles played by science in daily life, society and the environment’ (Ministry of Edu-
cation, 2007, p. 1).
The Singapore science syllabus does not provide a specific definition of inquiry
teaching. Instead it recognizes that the inquiry approach used is dependent on the
teaching goal such that ‘student-directed inquiry will provide the best opportunities
for cognitive development and scientific reasoning’, while ‘teacher-guided inquiry
can best focus learning on the development of particular science concepts’ (Ministry
of Education, 2007, p. 15). However, a study by Kim, Tan, and Talaue (2013) found
that the nature of assessment practices in Singapore, which largely takes the form of
paper-and-pencil format and focuses on canonical content knowledge, likely steers
teachers’ perceptions of inquiry towards a teacher-guided approach. In an examin-
ation of actual science inquiry practices carried out in Singaporean primary school
classrooms, Poon, Lee, Tan, and Lim (2012) observed that teachers place importance
on (1) preparing students for the investigation cognitively (by eliciting prior knowl-
edge and reviewing relevant concepts) and procedurally (by reviewing skills for inves-
tigation, equipment use, and group work); (2) addressing learning problems as they
arise by modifying the investigation or introducing new activities; and (3) synthesizing
concepts. Thus, in the context of this study, science inquiry is defined as guided
inquiry since that is the predominant perception and practice of inquiry held by tea-
chers in Singapore.
Results from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Studies 2007
showed that 36% of fourth-grade students in Singapore achieved the advanced bench-
mark, making it the top-ranked country (Martin, Mullis, & Foy, 2008). While these
achievements are valued internationally, we wonder whether this good performance
also reflects a positive interest experience and genuine inquiry-based learning in the
classroom. In a recent study, data collected from 161 grade 4 students in Singapore
revealed that 94% of students believe that their primary role in the classroom is to
be quiet and listen to the teacher Zhai, Jocz, and Tan (2014). While these studies
suggest that students may be receptive to an inquiry approach to learning, more
research needs to be done to understand how students in the Singaporean context
will respond to a more student-centred curriculum. Additionally, knowledge of
what happens in the context of Singaporean education can provide the basis for
comparative studies across other Asian countries with a Confucian-based classroom
culture.
Finally, the studies on interest in school science have focused on students in middle
and high school, with few research studies investigating factors that influence primary
school students’ interest in school science. Through interviews conducted with 116
scientists and science graduate students it was found that the majority (65%) devel-
oped an interest in science before middle school (Maltese & Tai, 2010). Additionally,
Maltese and Tai (2010) found that females were highly likely to report that their inter-
est in science began as a result of school-related activities. Thus, in order to promote
long-term interest in science, more research is needed to identify factors of primary
science classes that affect student interest in school science. As such, our study
aimed to answer the questions:
(1) To what extent are primary students in Singapore interested in science class?
(2) What perceptions do students have about activities that take place during science
class?
(3) What personal factors (gender, self-efficacy, and individual science interest)
relate to interest in school science?
(4) Do curriculum factors associated with inquiry contribute significantly to the
model of interest in school science?
We addressed these questions by examining students’ interest in school science and
students’ perceptions of activities in their science class. By focusing on students’ inter-
est in school science in general, the results of this study will shed light on factors that
influence situational interest in school science in the context of Singaporean
classrooms.
Methods
This research is informed by a multi-level and multi-method approach that is largely
interpretive in nature (Tobin, 2012). In this study, we recognize that students’
responses to their interest in science are complex and multi-faceted. As such, the
use of multi-level (whereby the statistical analysis of questionnaire data helped us
determine what questions to focus on for student interviews, and responses to inter-
view questions helped us interpret the statistical analysis) analyses allows us to trian-
gulate, formulate, and understand the different influences to students’ interest in
science through their perception of science activities that they are exposed to. We
have chosen to use the idea of multi-method (use of questionnaire and interviews)
research rather than mixed-method research because at each level we obtain infor-
mation from which we can learn about what interests students in their learning of
science. That is, the relationships and contradictions that are visible at each level
are informative in a standalone sense as well as in an integrated/synthesized across
levels sense.
As reflected in Figure 1, the largely quantitative level is comprised of a student
survey that aims to illuminate the relationship between students’ perception of
science class and their interest in school science. Analysis of results from students’
responses will enable us to establish some form of analytical generalization about
the factors that potentially affect students’ interest. To augment our understanding
Figure 1. Research design
of the factors surfaced by the questionnaire, we proceeded with interviews with

selected groups of students. Student interviews allow for multiple views of realities
and contradictions (even those that did not surface from statistical analysis of ques-
tionnaire responses) to be articulated. This level of analysis provides a means to
surface the voices and anomalous behaviour of individual participants that might
have been missed or buried under statistical averages (Creswell & Clark, 2007).
In this study, grade 4 (primary 4) Singaporean students were given a questionnaire
to measure their interest in school science and their perception of activities in their
science class. This is followed by interviews with students to provide additional quali-
tative indicators of students’ perceptions of science and school science that could then
be related to the survey findings.
This study is part of a larger investigation into inquiry science in Singapore. As part
of the larger data corpus, classroom observations were carried out over two units of
work (approximately two to three weeks). Although detailed analysis of observation
data is beyond the scope of this paper, it is worth noting that classes generally followed
the pattern of (1) prepare to investigate; (2) investigate; and (3) explain, described by
Poon et al. (2012). Thus, we believe these classes represent inquiry practice typical of
Singaporean teachers.
The questionnaire was administered during normal class time near the beginning of
the third term of the 2011–2012 academic year to 425 students (55% female and
45% male) in 14 grade 4 classrooms at 6 schools in Singapore. This sample included
students of all abilities from three average schools and three popular schools with high
demand, including one all-female school. The designations ‘popular’ and ‘average’
refer to the school’s performance on the national Primary School Leaving Examin-
ation, which is a placement examination for grade 6 students to be emplaced in
secondary school. The popular schools are those that receive the highest scores on
this exam. Students were given approximately 20 minutes to complete the
questionnaire.
The questionnaire measured interest in school science (1) by asking students to
select their favourite subject and to explain their choice and (2) through a series of
four Likert-scale items (DeWitt et al., 2013) (Table 1). Likert-scale items were
used to measure participation in science-related activities outside of school and
science self-efficacy (DeWitt et al., 2013). We chose to change from a five-point
Likert scale used in the DeWitt study to a four-point Likert scale because it has
been found that a midpoint option could be different things to different people
(Worchester & Burns, 1975). Additionally, subjects may use the midpoint to avoid
giving negative responses, thus artificially inflating the mean score (Garland, 1991).
Students’ reasons for choosing science as their favourite subject provide some infor-
mation as to how they perceive classroom activities. To gather students’ perceptions of
classroom experiences specifically related to inquiry practices, the survey also
included seven Likert-scale items asking about the frequency of various teacher and
student actions related to guided inquiry learning (Table 2). Note that two items
(‘Directs a discussion about our science topic’ and ‘Does an experiment rather than
us’) are meant to represent more traditional, teacher-led classrooms. These items
were adapted from the 2006 Programme for International Student Assessment ques-
tionnaire and tested for face validity through interviews with two groups of grade 4
students for a total of 10 students. Questions were re-phrased when necessary to
ensure clarity.
Follow-up semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted to allow stu-
dents to further explain their thoughts on science and school science. Five groups
of students from three different schools participated in the focus groups a few
weeks after completing the survey. The same interviewer ran all five focus groups.
Table 1. Student survey questions—attitudes
Scale Questions
School Science Interest I learn interesting things in science lessons

I look forward to my science lessons
Science lessons are exciting
I would like to do more science in school
Science Self-efficacy Science is one of my best subjects
I understand everything in my science lessons
I do well in science
I get good grades in science
Leisure-Time Science I often visit websites about science on my own
Activities I often visit a science centre, botanic garden, or zoo outside school
hours
I often watch TV programmes about science
Note: Answer choices included: strongly agree (4), agree (3), disagree (2), and strongly disagree (1).
Table 2. Student survey questions—classroom activities
Student actions Teacher actions
During our science lessons, my classmates and I During our science lessons, our teacher . . .
have the chance to . . .
Explain our ideas Directs a discussion about our science topic
Investigate problems that are NOT written in our Allows us to discuss our ideas about science
book or given by our teacher topics with classmates
Do experiments Relates/connects what we are learning to our
daily lives
Come up with conclusions from an experiment we Does experiments rather than us
conduct
Note: Answer choices included: in all lessons (4), in most lessons (3), in some lessons (2), and never
or hardly ever (1).
Teachers were asked to select five to six students of varying abilities and ethnicities to
participate in the focus group. In total, 27 students participated in the focus group
interviews (18 girls and 9 boys). The large number of girls interviewed is due to the
fact that two classes were from an all-female school. The teachers were given the
choice as to whether or not they wished to sit in on the focus group. Two of the tea-
chers chose to be present. Focus group interviews took place in a quiet area of the
school and lasted approximately 30 minutes. Some of the questions included:
‘What are your favourite/least favourite things about science class and why?’ ‘What
was your favourite/least favourite activity that you did this year and why?’ ‘Do you
think you are like a scientist in science class? Why or why not?’
Analyses and Findings

Questionnaire data were entered manually and analysed using SPSS v.20.0. All
Likert-scale items were coded on a scale from 1 to 4. Students were excluded from
the analysis if they were missing any data on the questionnaire. This resulted in a
final sample consisting of 348 grade 4 students (56% female and 44% male).
Principal component factor analysis carried out using the promax rotation
extracted three distinct components with an eigenvalue greater than 1 explaining
68.9% of the variance. Indicators of factorability were good (KMO ¼ .850; Bartlett’s
test p , .001). The three components corresponded exactly with the three scales
given in Table 1. The reliability of scales was determined to be high with Cronbach’s
alpha ranging from .649 to .868 (Table 3). Scores for each scale were computed for
every student by adding together the score for each item in the scale. Descriptive stat-
istics can be found in Table 3.
Subsequently, the student interviews were analysed and the themes that emerged
supported the notion that relevant topics and group discussions can enhance interest
in classroom activities. In all interviews, students were quick to mention that exper-
iments are their favourite part of science class; however, when prompted, they
Table 3. Descriptive and reliability statistics (n ¼ 348)
Range
Scale M SD a Potential Actual
Interest in school science 13.6 2.58 .868 4– 16 4 –16

Science self-efficacy 11.9 2.90 .853 4– 16 4 –16
Leisure-time science activities 8.2 2.08 .649 3– 12 3 –12
Perception of Inquiry 22.9 3.11 .743 8– 32 14–31
revealed that their reasons for enjoying experiments and science class in general went
beyond the hands-on component and included factors such as learning, discovering,
making connections to everyday life, and working in effective groups. In the next few
paragraphs, we present the results from both the questionnaire and student
interviews.
Science as a Favourite Subject

As shown in Table 3, the mean score on the School Science Interest scale was high (M
¼ 13.6, SD ¼ 2.58), indicating that most students are interested in school science.
Consistent with this finding is the fact that 37% of students (n ¼ 126) chose
science as their favourite subject.
Reasons for choosing a favourite subject were coded into the categories given in
Table 4. A second coder coded 30% of the responses and inter-rater reliability was
found to be high (Cohen’s k ranged from 0.735 to 1.00, percentage agreement
ranged from 94% to 100%). Any discrepancies were corrected through discussion.
Of the students who chose science as their favourite subject, 39% (n ¼ 43) men-
tioned experiments when explaining why they chose this subject their favourite.
However, a large percentage (30%, n ¼ 32) also reported that they enjoyed learning
about the various topics in science, often mentioning that they were able to discover or
learn about many new topics. For example, one student mentioned: ‘I can learn new
Table 4. Coding categories—why science is my favourite subject
% of students reporting science as

Code n their favourite subject
General enjoyment/fun/interesting 71 56.3

Experiments/project 49 38.9
Learn/discover/novel/challenging 37 29.4
Important/connection to real world 8 6.3
Easy/good at it 8 6.3
Other 7 5.6
Note: The total percentage adds up to .100% because a response could be coded in .1 category.
and interesting things.’ Of these students, nearly one-fifth (n ¼ 7, 19%) mentioned

that their learning was connected to real life. For example, one student stated: ‘It is
full of discoveries and helps me learn more about the world around me.’
Consistent with reasons for choosing science as their favourite subject, students in
the focus groups also mentioned that they enjoyed the experiments because they got to
learn. As one group described:
Interviewer: So you like doing experiments. What in particular do you like about doing the
experiments? What’s your favourite part of doing an experiment?
Sarah1: We get to learn something from it.
Michelle: The discovering part.
Susan: We learn new things.
In another class, a female student mentioned that a particular experiment was her
favourite because she learned something surprising:
Emily: I like the one about light. The black box. And you had to see through a hole and
then you can’t see anything without light and then when we turned on the light
we could see things.
Interviewer: Why was that your favourite?
Emily: ‘Cause I learned that without light we can’t see.
Interviewer: ‘Cause you learned something from it. Yeah. Were you surprised by that result?
Emily: Yeah.
Student Perception of the Frequency of Classroom Inquiry Activities

Figure 2 shows the frequencies of guided inquiry activities as perceived by students. In
general, all of these activities took place in at least some of the lessons; however,
‘teacher does experiments’ and ‘students investigate own problem’ are perceived to
Figure 2. Frequencies of school science activities as perceived by students (n ¼ 348)

occur with a slightly lower frequency. In order to further examine how the classroom
environment relates to school science interest, the frequencies of these activities were
summed in order to create a Perception of Inquiry score (Table 3). This score reflects
the level of guided inquiry activities as perceived by the student. Note that since two
questions reflect a more teacher-fronted classroom (‘During our science lessons, our
teacher does experiments rather than us’ and ‘During our science lessons, our teacher
directs a discussion about our science topic’), answers to these questions were reverse
coded so that a score of 4 means ‘never or hardly ever’ and a score of 1 means ‘in all
lessons’. The mean Perception of Inquiry score was 22.8 (SD ¼ 3.11) out of a poss-
ible 32 points. Students were then grouped into two groups, the low interest group
(lowest 25% of interest scores) and the high interest group (upper 25% of interest
scores). As shown in Figure 3 the high interest group had a significantly higher Percep-
tion of Inquiry score than the low interest group (21.8 and 24.3, respectively), t(226)
¼ 6.46, p , .001. This suggests that a more inquiry based the classroom environment
is related to an increase in student interest.
In the student interviews, they also mentioned that they liked working in groups as
long as the groups were able to work together without quarrelling. They reported that
they liked discussions because it allowed them to check their answers and communi-
cate their ideas:
Interviewer: What do you like about working in groups?
Kyle: You are more efficient if you have those who are cooperative.
Derek: And if you’re not sure about something you can ask.
All: Yeah.
Sam: You can always check with them.
Iris: And you can communicate with them.
Interviewer: So what types of things do you communicate with them about?
Iris: Talk about the experiment. Discuss it.
Figure 3. Comparison of the Perception of Inquiry activities in the classroom reported by students
with high and low interest in school science
Another group also mentioned that they enjoyed group discussions because they
could share ideas and learn from others:
Interviewer: And you said discussions. How many of you like discussions?
(All raise hands)
Interviewer: So why do you like discussions?
Steven: We can share what we know.
Michael: We can share our thoughts and get to know more about our daily life.
John: You can check your answer with your friends.
Ashley: You can give your own opinion and see if it’s correct.
The views expressed by the students during the interview augmented our understand-
ing of how an inquiry-based classroom can help to promote interest in science learn-
ing. Discussions with peers help students to raise as well as clarify their ideas about the
science that they are exposed to. Furthermore, communication and discussion with
others is one science inquiry process skill that is largely social in nature and has
great value in helping to establish a common understanding and agreement in the
process of knowledge construction in science.
Personal and Classroom Factors Related to Interest in School Science

In order to examine how specific classroom activities relate to school science interest,
linear regression using the enter method was carried out using the School Science
Interest score as the dependent variable. Independent variables were entered in two
blocks. The first block consisted of student variables: gender, leisure-time science
activities, and science self-efficacy (Table 1). The second block consisted of the
seven survey items measuring students’ perceptions of their science lessons (Table
2). Using this method, a significant model emerged: F (11, 347) ¼ 23.385, p ,
.001. The model explains 41.5% of the variance (adjusted R2 ¼ .415). A test of multi-
collinearity indicated no significant correlations between predictor variables (toler-
ance ranged from .605 to .968 and VIF ranged from 1.033 to 1.653).
As shown in Table 5, participation in science-related activities outside of school,
science self-efficacy, peer discussion, and connecting learning with daily life were
shown to be significant predictors of interest in school science. As shown in Model
1, personal factors have a large effect size (R2 ¼ .366), indicating that they have a
large practical significance (Cohen, 1988). The classroom factors added in Model 2
contribute significantly to the final model (adjusted R2 change ¼ .049, F change ¼
4.610, p , .001). The effect size for the change in R2 between Model 1 and Model
2 is small (f 2 ¼ .0838). This means that, after taking into account personal factors,
the practical significance of classroom factors is small, but non-trivial (Cohen, 1988).
During the student interviews, while most students were unable to describe an
experiment that they did not enjoy, one girl was very vocal in describing how exper-
iments dealing with magnets were not interesting because they were ‘so easy’.
When probed further, it was discovered that the only part of the magnet topic that
she liked did not revolve around a hands-on activity, but instead involved her
teacher relating the topic to everyday life:
Table 5. Linear regression analysis for predictors of school science interest
School science interest
Model 1 Model 2
B SE B b B SE B b
Gender 2.594 .223∗ 2.114 2.419 .216 2.081

Science self-efficacy .336 .039∗∗ .377 .284 .041 .319∗∗∗
Leisure-time science activities .473 .055∗∗ .381 .415 .055 .334∗∗∗
Students explain ideas .168 .152 .055
Students investigate own problems .034 .130 .013
Students do experiments .126 .166 .038

Students draw conclusions from 2.213 .156 2.068
experiments
Teacher directs discussion .063 .170 .018
Teacher allows peer discussion .436 .173 .132∗
Teacher relates learning to daily life .431 .162 .140∗∗
Teacher does experiments 2.081 .107 2.033
Adjusted R2 .366 .415
F 67.76∗∗ 23.39∗∗
Adjusted DR2 .049
DF 4.610
∗
p , .05.
∗∗
p , .01.
∗∗∗
p , .001.
Interviewer: So were there any other experiments that you didn’t like so much?
Kate: The most hated experiment is everything that involves magnets.
Interviewer: So what didn’t you like about those?
Kate: They’re not difficult! They’re so easy! The magnet will repel and attract. And
then you just have to spend two more days just keep on revising it and revising
and revising and revising.
Interviewer: Was there any magnet experiment that you liked?
Kate: I think one. The refrigerator.
Interviewer: What did you do in that one?
Kate: Miss L. [the teacher] told us about the refrigerator because there’s one there . . .
that there’s magnets to keep it sealed. And it’s interesting because there’s food
inside . . . how it keeps cool. The magnet keeps it tight.
Relating science to the real world was mentioned by all groups, with many students
chiming in that they find this one of the most interesting things about science class:
Interviewer: Is there anything else you like about science class?
Iris: It’s very interesting.
Kyle 1: Yeah.
Interviewer: What’s interesting about it?
Iris: It involves everything around us.
Derek: It involves, like, yes, everything around us. Everyday objects. Everyday things.
Interviewer: So can you give an example of how it relates to your life?

Derek: Like, why do they need gaps in the train tracks. In the rails.
Thus, the interview findings are consistent with the questionnaire results suggesting
that although students are quick to point out that experiments are their favourite
part of science class, further discussion reveals that learning, group discussions, and
connections to real life are important factors for stimulating student interest in science.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to investigate students’ interest in school science and
their perception of activities in their science classroom. The study also aimed to ident-
ify factors affecting primary students’ interest in school science in Singapore. The
results indicate that, in general, students in Singapore are interested in science class
and report that guided inquiry activities take place in at least some of their lessons.
Additionally, it was found that certain personal characteristics of students as well as
particular classroom features were associated with interest in school science.
Gender, Self-efficacy, and Leisure-Time Activities

Similar to the work of others (Haussler & Hoffman, 2000; Simpkins et al. 2006),
results of this study indicated that those students with higher self-efficacy and those
who participated in more leisure-time activities related to science exhibited higher
levels of interest in school science. Gender, however, was not a significant predictor
of interest in school science. This is not surprising as the gender gap tends to
become more pronounced during middle and high school (Lyons, 2006; Renninger
& Hidi, 2011) and the students in this study were in grade 4. Additionally, some
studies have indicated that the gender difference may be decreasing even for older stu-
dents (Krapp & Prenzel, 2011; Osborne, Simon, & Collins, 2003).
Learning and Novelty

Learning and discovering, particularly about new concepts, was often mentioned
by students for whom science was their favourite class. As Anderman, Noar,
Zimmerman, & Donohew (2004) point out, numerous studies have established a
biological need for novelty. This is consistent with findings from Palmer (2009)
who found that students involved in an inquiry lesson most frequently mentioned
learning as a source of situational interest. Palmer (2009) hypothesized that novelty
was the main reason for this finding, a result that is supported by the results of our
study. This was particularly evident during one of the focus group interviews in
which a student (Kate) mentioned that her ‘most hated experiment’ was actually
a set of experiments in which she did not learn anything new. She stated:
‘They’re not difficult! They’re so easy! The magnet will repel and attract. And
then you just have to spend two more days just keep on revising it and revising
and revising and revising.’ Thus, the novelty of learning new information seems to
be an important factor in both triggered situational interest (as evidenced by this
study as well as Palmer, 2009) and maintained situational interest (as shown by
the results of this study).
Additionally, novelty may help to explain why ‘teacher directs discussion’, ‘students
draw conclusions’, and ‘students explain ideas’ were not significant predictors of
interest in school science. These three activities are a part of the PIE pattern of
inquiry teaching that is typical of Singaporean classrooms (Poon et al., 2012). As
the classes in this study also tended to follow this pattern, it is possible that students
have become accustomed to these types of activities such that they no longer relate
directly to students’ interest in science class.
Peer Discussion
Students who perceived that they engaged in a lot of peer discussion during science
class tended to have a higher interest in school science. Social interactions have
shown to be an important factor in both triggered and maintained situational interest
(Logan & Skamp, 2012; Mitchell, 1993; Palmer, 2009). Deci (1992) argued that
humans have a basic need for social interaction, thus group work can spark interest.
While this can explain why students would find a particular group activity interesting
(triggered situational interest), further theories are needed to explain how it can lead
to maintained situational interest.
As discussed in a review of cooperative learning by Slavin (1996), the developmental
perspective on cooperative learning assumes that social interaction during an appropri-
ate task can enhance learning. Citing Vygotsky (1978), Slavin (1996) states that ‘ . . .
collaborative activity among children promotes growth because children of similar
ages are likely to be operating within one another’s proximal zones of development,
modelling in the collaborative group behaviours more advanced than those they
could perform as individuals’ (pp. 48–49). An alternative, but complementary
theory, the cognitive elaborative perspective on cooperative learning suggests that
explaining ideas to someone else can aid in learning (Slavin, 1996).
In this study, learning from others through the sharing of information and ideas was
often mentioned when students explained why they enjoyed group discussions. Stu-
dents mentioned that when teams work well they can check with other students if
they do not understand something, enjoy having discussions about the experiment,
and appreciate being able to express their ideas and opinions and receive feedback.
For example, students stated that during peer discussions: ‘You can give your own
opinion and see if it’s correct.’ ‘ . . . if you’re not sure about something you can ask.’
‘We can share our thoughts and get to know more about our daily life.’
As noted earlier, science self-efficacy was also a factor contributing to student inter-
est in school science. Thus it is possible that, in addition to the initial interest triggered
by group work, maintained situational interest can be achieved as students see peer
discussions as a means of increasing their science knowledge by sharing their opinions
and learning from peers.
Connecting Science Topics to RealLife

Additionally, students who felt that their teacher often connected what they were
learning to real—life situations also tended to be more interested in school science.
This is consistent with other studies that showed that relevance was important in
both triggered and maintained situational interest (Logan & Skamp, 2012; Mitchell,
1993). As noted by Qualter (1993), both boys and girls prefer to learn about the appli-
cation of a topic as opposed to abstract concepts.
In this study, relevance to real life was noted both when students described why
science was their favourite subject and during group interviews. Especially note-
worthy is the comment made by Kate described previously. Kate noted that she did
not like any experiments having to do with magnets because it was ‘too easy’.
However, the one thing that she did like was when her teacher described how
magnets are used in refrigerators, using the refrigerator in the lab room as an
example. Thus, even if certain topics are unappealing to a student, making connec-
tions to real life provides one method for increasing their interest.
Choice
Choice, another factor shown by Palmer (2009) to be associated with interest in
inquiry activities, was not found to be a significant predictor of interest in school
science in our study. Palmer (2009) suggests that ‘the actual source of interest was
probably not choice alone, but choice in combination with other factors such as
their level of background knowledge and the opportunity to experience novelty’
(p. 160). Since students in grade 4 have little experience carrying out experiments
in school, virtually any experiment they do is likely to be a novel occurrence that
would arouse interest. This is evidenced by the fact that hardly any student could
think of an experiment they did not like. This may also explain why ‘students inves-
tigate own problems’ was not a significant predictor of interest in school science.
Thus, choice may not be as important to students at this level as virtually any activity
they do, whether chosen by them or by their teacher, will be a new experience.
Hands-on Experiments
Interestingly, the amount of perceived experimentation, either conducted by the stu-
dents or demonstrated by the teacher, was also not a significant predictor of interest in
science in the classroom. This is in contrast to finding by Swarat et al. (2012), who
reported that hands-on activities were important to student interest in school
biology. Hofstein and Lunetta (2004) state that students need ‘to interact intellectually
as well as physically, involving hands-on investigation and minds-on reflection’ (p. 49;
emphasis in original). This is consistent with Mitchell’s (1993) suggestion that phys-
ical tasks must be accompanied by a cognitive component in order to spark interest.
This was also noted by Palmer (2009), who suggested that although physical activity
seemed to play a role in the situational interest generated during an inquiry science
lesson, a cognitive component, along with other factors such as social involvement,
learning, autonomy, novelty, and variety, was also likely necessary.
Our study further extended Palmer’s argument that factors such as learning,
novelty, and social involvement were all found to be triggers of interest in school
science. Referring back to the conversation with Kate, it is interesting to note that
she did not find any of the hands-on science activities involving magnets to be inter-
esting because they were not cognitively challenging. However, the discussion of the
use of magnets in refrigerators was both a learning experience and connected the topic
of magnets to everyday life. For these reasons, although it was not hands-on in nature,
it was seen as more interesting than the experiments that were carried out in class.
However, unlike the study by Palmer (2009) which examined triggered situational
interest in an inquiry science lesson which was carried out outside of the context of
their normal classroom, this study also looked at maintained situational interest in
the students’ natural class setting. Thus, the fact that participation in hands-on exper-
iments was found to not be associated with interest in school science in this study
strongly suggests that the design of activities should focus on other factors such as
novelty, opportunities for discussion, and connections to real life.
While we confirm the findings of others, this paper shows the practical significance
of the factors associated with interest. We found that personal factors have a large
practical significance. Classroom factors add significantly to the model and although
the effect size is small, it is non-trivial. Thus, this paper confirms that the inquiry prac-
tices noted in the other studies do play a role in interest. However, our findings add
that the practical effect is small after taking into consideration personal factors.
Implications for Teaching and Learning

The results of this study have a direct implication for the teaching of science as they
suggest that an inquiry (or guided inquiry) approach to learning can increase students’
interest in science class in the Singaporean context. It is important to note that exper-
iments alone do not correlate with an increased interest in school science. Rather, in
order to promote long-term personal interest in science class, activities, whether
hands-on or not, must demonstrate real-life applications when learning about novel
science content and allow students to discuss their ideas with their classmates. There-
fore, curriculum materials should be designed to incorporate these types of learning
experiences.
The evidence we presented highlights the fact that personal factors are highly
associated with interest. As such, elementary science teachers should aim to increase
self-efficacy of students (Haussler & Hoffman, 2000) so as to increase students’ inter-
est in school science. Also, as mentioned in the introduction, it is believed that
repeated exposure to activities with situational interest can lead to the development
of personal interest (Hidi & Renninger, 2006). While teachers have little control
over students’ personal interest, they can have an impact on situational interest
during science class. For this reason, the classroom factors highlighted in this study
are important. Increasing situational interest in the classroom (through peer
discussion and real-life connections) may lead to students developing a greater per-
sonal interest in science. Of additional concern is the fact that personal interest is
not permanent; it can decrease over time. Thus school science activities that are inter-
esting to students can offer continuous stimuli to both capture and hold students’
interest.
The results we presented here are also important for teacher professional develop-
ment as it has been shown that many teachers feel that hands-on activities alone
promote interest (Zahorik, 1996). This was also noted during our focus group inter-
views as one of the teachers mentioned that she was surprised that her students did not
talk about an activity in which they were very active. She stated:
Do you remember during the system lessons that we had this data logger as well and you
guys were jumping and running around the room so that you could see your heart beat on
the instrument? I thought that was very interesting to my class. They were very excited
during that session . . . For me I thought that was one of those that they were very
engaged.
This teacher felt that just because her students were ‘jumping and running around the
room’ that they were interested in the activity. However, results of this study revealed
that even for primary school students, active experiments should also be coupled with
opportunities to learn, see connections to real life, and allow for peer discussion. It
was shown that activities that are not hands-on in nature can be interesting to students
as long as they include these factors. Therefore, teacher professional development
should emphasize inquiry activities that go beyond hands-on interactions and focus
on helping teachers to connect learning to the real world and to facilitate meaningful
student—student discussions.
Conclusion and Limitations

Unlike previous studies that examined mostly triggered situational interest during a
particular activity, this study also examined maintained situational interest in school
science. It also controlled for other factors that can affect interest such as gender,
self-efficacy, and personal interest as measured by participation in leisure-time
science-related activities. Finally, it is one of the first studies to examine primary stu-
dents interest in school science, which is important given the fact that many students
who go on to pursue science careers report developing their interest prior to middle
school (Maltese & Tai, 2010). Results indicate that, for grade 4 students in Singapore,
inquiry learning was associated with an increase in interest in school science. Further-
more, it was found that self-efficacy and participation in science-related leisure-time
activities were positively associated with interest in school science. Furthermore, a
classroom environment that encourages peer discussion and explains how science
concepts connect to everyday life also relates to higher interest in school science. Stu-
dents were also likely to report that they enjoyed science because they could learn or
discover new information. The ability to participate in experiments and student
choice of activities were not found to be associated with interest in school science,
suggesting that the focus should be on group activities that allow students to learn new
things and relate them to the real world.
The main limitation of this study is that it relies on student self-reports, which
may not allow students to fully express their interest or views of school science.
However, the results are strengthened by the variety of data sources used and the
fact that results from quantitative measures were supportive of qualitative findings.
As part of our data corpus, we also have videos of a number of lessons from each
classroom, thus we hope to analyse the different classroom environments from a
researcher’s perspective in order to add to the findings of this study. Although all
classes in the study were observed to generally follow the same pattern of inquiry,
a detailed comparison of inquiry practices between teachers would allow for triangu-
lation with the student perspective and would help to provide information about the
impact of inquiry learning.
Future studies could also further explore the relationship between situational and
personal interest. In this study we used participation in leisure-time science activities
as a measure of personal interest in science and enjoyment of science class as a
measure of situational interest. We hope to explore other facets of personal interest
and situational interest and how they impact one another. Furthermore, it would
be of interest to investigate how our findings compare with how inquiry plays out in
other Asian contexts.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by a grant from the Singapore Millennium Foundation
Limited (SMF-Sci Learning Env). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or rec-
ommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the position, policy, or endorsement of the funding agency.
The authors acknowledge the contribution of research team members Ms Tan Poh
Hiang, Mr Frederick Talaue and Ms Joanna Ong. The authors especially thank the
students who participated in the research.
Note
1. All names are pseudonyms.
References
Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that
mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 545–561.
Anderman, E. M., Noar, S. M., Zimmerman, R. S., & Donohew, L. (2004). The need for sensation
as a prerequisite for motivation to engage in academic tasks. In P. R. Pintrich & M. L. Maehr
(Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement, Volume 13, motivating students, improving schools:
The legacy of Carol Midgley (pp. 1 –26). Boston, MA: Elsevier.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest
through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586–598.
Baram-Tsabari, A., & Yarden, A. (2011). Quantifying the gender gap in science interests.
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 523 –550.
Bennett, J., & Hogarth, S. (2009). Would you want to talk to a scientist at a party? High school
students’ attitudes to school science and to science. International Journal of Science Education,
31(14), 1975– 1998.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in
learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences
(pp. 475–488). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Earlbaum Associates.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, W. L. P. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Deci, E. L. (1992). The relation of interest to the motivation of behaviour: A self-determination

theory perspective. In A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning
and development (pp. 43–70). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education. Cambridge, MA: Riverside Press.
DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Archer, L., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2013). Young children’s
aspirations in science: The unequivocal, the uncertain and the unthinkable. International
Journal of Science Education, 35, 1037–1063.
Garland, R. (1991). The mid-point on a rating scale: Is it desirable? Marketing Bulletin, 2, 66–70.
Haussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2000). A curricular frame for physics education: Development, com-
parison with students’ interests, and impact on students’ achievement and self-concept. Science
Education, 84(6), 689 –705.
Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational
Research, 60(4), 549 –571.
Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Edu-
cational Psychology Review, 13, 191–209.
Hidi, S., & Anderson, V. (1992). Situational interest and its impact on reading and expository
writing. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and devel-
opment (pp. 215– 238). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational
Psychologist, 41(2), 111– 127.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the
twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.
Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students’ experiences, interests,
and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84(2), 180–192.
Kim, M., Tan, A. -L., & Talaue, F. (2013). New vision and challenges in inquiry-based curriculum
change in Singapore. International Journal of Science Education, 35(2), 289–311.
Krapp, A. (2002a). An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to self-
determination theory. In E. Deci & R. Ryan (Eds.), The handbook of self-determination research
(pp. 405–427). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Krapp, A. (2002b). Structural and dynamic aspects of interest development: Theoretical consider-
ations from an ontogenetic perspective. Learning and Instruction, 12(4), 383–409.
Krapp, A., Hidi. S., & Renninger, K. A. (1992). Interest, learning and development. In Renninger,
A., Hidi, S., and Krapp, A. (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3 –25).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings.
International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 27– 50.
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Patall, E. A., & Messersmith, E. E. (2012). Antecedents and consequences
of situational interest. British Journal of Educational Psychology. doi:10.1111/j.2044– 8279.2012.
02080.x
Logan, M. R., & Skamp, K. R. (2012). The impact of teachers and their science teaching on stu-
dents’ ‘science interest’: A four-year study. International Journal of Science Education, 1 –26,
iFirst Article. doi:10.1080/09500693.2012.667167
Lopez, F. G., Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Gore, P. A. (1997). Role of social-cognitive expectations
in high school students’ mathematics-related interest and performance. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 44(1), 44–52.
Lyons, T. (2006). Different countries, same science classes: Students’ experiences of school science
in their own words. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 591 –613.
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2010). Eyeballs in the fridge: Sources of early interest in science. Inter-
national Journal of Science Education, 32(5), 669–685.
Marsh, H. W., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2005). Academic self-concept,
interest, grades, and standardized test scores: Reciprocal effects models of causal ordering.
Child Development, 76, 397 –416.

Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Foy, P. (2008). TIMSS 2007 international science report: Findings
from IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the fourth and eighth grades.
Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Centre.
Ministry of Education. (2007). Primary science syllabus. Singapore: Author.
Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school
mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 424 –436.
Mitchell, M., & Gilson, J. (1997). Interest and anxiety in mathematics. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Chicago, IL.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature
and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049– 1079.
Palmer, D. H. (2009). Student interest generated during an inquiry skills lesson. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 46, 147 –165.
Poon, C. L., Lee, Y. J., Tan, A. L., & Lim, S. S. L. (2012). Knowing inquiry as practice and theory:
Developing a pedagogical framework with elementary school teachers. Research in Science
Education, 42(2), 303 –327.
Qualter, A. (1993). I would like to know more about that: A study of the interest shown by girls and
boys in scientific topics. International Journal of Science Education, 15(3), 307 –317.
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2011). Revisiting the conceptualization, measurement, and gener-
ation of interest. Educational Psychologist, 46(2), 168– 184.
Sansone, C., & Thoman, D. B. (2005). Interest as the missing motivator in self-regulation. European
Psychologist, 10, 175 –186.
Silvia, P. J. (2003). Self-efficacy and interest: Experimental studies of optimal incompetence. Journal
of Vocational Behaviour, 62(2), 237–249.
Silvia, P. J. (2006). Exploring the psychology of interest. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Simpkins, S. D., Davis-Kean, P. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Math and science motivation: A longi-
tudinal examination of the links between choices and beliefs. Developmental Psychology, 42(1),
70–83.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we
need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43– 69.
Swarat, A., Ortony, A., & Revelle, W. (2012). Activity matters: Understanding student interest in
school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(4), 515 –537.
Tai, R. T., Liu, C., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. T. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science,
312(5777), 1143–1144.
Tobin, K. (2012). Interpretive approaches to multi-level, multi-method, multi-theoretic research. In
G. S. Cannella & S. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Critical qualitative research reader (pp. 116–128).
New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Worchester, R. M., & Burns, T. R. (1975). A statistical examination of the relative precision of
verbal scales. Journal of the Market Research Society, 17(3), 181 –197.
Zahorik, J. A. (1996). Elementary and secondary teachers’ reports of how they make learning inter-
esting. The Elementary School Journal, 96(5), 551 –564.
Zhai, J., Jocz, J. A., & Tan, A.-L. (2014). ‘Am i like a scientist?’: Primary children’s images of doing
science in school. International Journal of Science Education, 36(4), 553–576.

Inquiry Learning in The Singaporean

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Inquiry Learning in The Singaporean

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inquiry Learning in The Singaporean

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: ["University at Buffalo Libraries"]

On: 04 October 2014, At: 06:50

International Journal of Science

Inquiry Learning in the Singaporean

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.908327

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Inquiry Learning in the Singaporean

Jennifer Ann Jocza, Junqing Zhaib and Aik Ling Tana∗

Keywords: Interest; Inquiry; Primary Science; Class Activities; Student-centred

# 2014 Taylor & Francis

Theoretical Models of Interest

Research on Students’ Situational Interest

tional interest as it describes how various aspects of a topic or instructional task

External Factors Related to Interest

Internal Factors Related to Interest

Research Context and Purpose of the Study

Figure 1. Research design

of the factors surfaced by the questionnaire, we proceeded with interviews with

Table 1. Student survey questions—attitudes

School Science Interest I learn interesting things in science lessons

Table 2. Student survey questions—classroom activities

Student actions Teacher actions

Analyses and Findings

Table 3. Descriptive and reliability statistics (n ¼ 348)

Scale M SD a Potential Actual

Interest in school science 13.6 2.58 .868 4– 16 4 –16

Science as a Favourite Subject

Table 4. Coding categories—why science is my favourite subject

% of students reporting science as

General enjoyment/fun/interesting 71 56.3

and interesting things.’ Of these students, nearly one-fifth (n ¼ 7, 19%) mentioned

Student Perception of the Frequency of Classroom Inquiry Activities

Figure 2. Frequencies of school science activities as perceived by students (n ¼ 348)

Personal and Classroom Factors Related to Interest in School Science

Table 5. Linear regression analysis for predictors of school science interest

School science interest

Gender 2.594 .223∗ 2.114 2.419 .216 2.081

Students do experiments .126 .166 .038

Interviewer: So can you give an example of how it relates to your life?

Gender, Self-efficacy, and Leisure-Time Activities

Learning and Novelty

Connecting Science Topics to RealLife

Implications for Teaching and Learning

Conclusion and Limitations

Deci, E. L. (1992). The relation of interest to the motivation of behaviour: A self-determination

Child Development, 76, 397 –416.

You might also like