IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/injoed/v62y2018icp136-147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Warning! Increases in interest without enjoyment may not be trend predictive of genuine interest in learning science

Author

Listed:
  • Jack, Brady Michael
  • Lin, Huann-shyang

Abstract

Utilizing PISA 2006/2015 datasets for Japan and Taiwan, the multi-group analysis results show significant predictive increases in science interest and scientific competency, and for science interest and environmental awareness; however, revealed significant predictive decreases for science enjoyment and scientific competency, and for science enjoyment and environmental awareness between PISA cycles for both countries. Results signal divergent predictive trends regarding how interest and enjoyment impact students’ scientific competency, which may reflect instructional approaches that impede students from experiencing genuine interest in learning science. Why these results should sound an alarm to science and environment educators and policy makers is also forwarded.

Suggested Citation

  • Jack, Brady Michael & Lin, Huann-shyang, 2018. "Warning! Increases in interest without enjoyment may not be trend predictive of genuine interest in learning science," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 136-147.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:injoed:v:62:y:2018:i:c:p:136-147
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2018.03.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0738059317304832
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2018.03.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Valenzuela, Juan Pablo & Gómez Vera, Gabriela & Sotomayor, Carmen, 2015. "The role of reading engagement in improving national achievement: An analysis of Chile's 2000–2009 PISA results," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 28-39.
    2. Han, Seong Won, 2016. "National education systems and gender gaps in STEM occupational expectations," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 175-187.
    3. Kazuya Nakayachi & Hiromi M. Yokoyama & Satoko Oki, 2015. "Public anxiety after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake: fluctuations in hazard perception after catastrophe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 156-169, February.
    4. Tsunoda Katsuya, 2001. "Public Response to the Tokai Nuclear Accident," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(6), pages 1039-1046, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alistair Munro & Shunsuke Managi, 2017. "Going Back: Radiation and Intentions to Return amongst Households Evacuated after the Great Tohoku Earthquake," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 77-93, June.
    2. Jinshu Cui & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2018. "Public Response to a Near‐Miss Nuclear Accident Scenario Varying in Causal Attributions and Outcome Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 947-961, May.
    3. Sefa Mızrak & Ahmet Özdemir & Ramazan Aslan, 2021. "Adaptation of hurricane risk perception scale to earthquake risk perception and determining the factors affecting women's earthquake risk perception," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 109(3), pages 2241-2259, December.
    4. Han, Y. & Lam, J. & Guo, P. & Gou, Z., 2019. "What Predicts Government Trustworthiness in Cross-border HK-Guangdong Nuclear Safety Emergency Governance?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1989, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Lissitsa, Sabina & Ben-Zamara, Rinat-Tamar & Chachashvili-Bolotin, Svetlana, 2023. "Gender and/or Religiosity? – Intersectional approach to the challenges of religious women in STEM fields," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. Bart Vyncke & Tanja Perko & Baldwin Van Gorp, 2017. "Information Sources as Explanatory Variables for the Belgian Health‐Related Risk Perception of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 570-582, March.
    7. Lavaei Adaryani, Rasool & Palouj, Mojtaba & Karbasioun, Mostafa & Asadi, Ali & Gholami, Hesamedin & Kianirad, Ali & Joodi Damirchi, Milad, 2024. "Antecedents of blockchain adoption in the poultry supply chain: An extended UTAUT model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    8. Byoung Joon Kim & Seoyong Kim & Youngcheoul Kang & Sohee Kim, 2022. "Searching for the New Behavioral Model in Energy Transition Age: Analyzing the Forward and Reverse Causal Relationships between Belief, Attitude, and Behavior in Nuclear Policy across Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-24, June.
    9. Lingyi Zhou & Yixin Dai, 2019. "The Influencing Factors of Haze Tolerance in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-23, January.
    10. Alex Greer & Hao-Che Wu & Haley Murphy, 2018. "A serendipitous, quasi-natural experiment: earthquake risk perceptions and hazard adjustments among college students," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 93(2), pages 987-1011, September.
    11. Xi Du & Zhijiao Zhang & Lei Dong & Jing Liu & Alistair G. L. Borthwick & Renzhi Liu, 2017. "Acceptable Risk Analysis for Abrupt Environmental Pollution Accidents in Zhangjiakou City, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, April.
    12. Timo Goeschl & Shunsuke Managi, 2019. "Public in-Kind Relief and Private Self-Insurance," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 3-21, April.
    13. Michio Murakami & Masaharu Tsubokura & Kyoko Ono & Shuhei Nomura & Tomoyoshi Oikawa, 2017. "Additional risk of diabetes exceeds the increased risk of cancer caused by radiation exposure after the Fukushima disaster," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-14, September.
    14. Huang, Lei & He, Ruoying & Yang, Qianqi & Chen, Jin & Zhou, Ying & Hammitt, James K. & Lu, Xi & Bi, Jun & Liu, Yang, 2018. "The changing risk perception towards nuclear power in China after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 294-301.
    15. Kazuya Nakayachi & Kazuhisa Nagaya, 2016. "The Effects of the Passage of Time from the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake on the Public’s Anxiety about a Variety of Hazards," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, August.
    16. Bjoern Hagen & Adenike Opejin & K. David Pijawka, 2022. "Risk Perceptions and Amplification Effects over Time: Evaluating Fukushima Longitudinal Surveys," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    17. Seoyong Kim & Jae Eun Lee & Donggeun Kim, 2019. "Searching for the Next New Energy in Energy Transition: Comparing the Impacts of Economic Incentives on Local Acceptance of Fossil Fuels, Renewable, and Nuclear Energies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-32, April.
    18. Yoshitake Takebayashi & Yuliya Lyamzina & Yuriko Suzuki & Michio Murakami, 2017. "Risk Perception and Anxiety Regarding Radiation after the 2011 Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident: A Systematic Qualitative Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-13, October.
    19. Chung, William & Yeung, Iris M.H., 2013. "Attitudes of Hong Kong residents toward the Daya Bay nuclear power plant," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1172-1186.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:injoed:v:62:y:2018:i:c:p:136-147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-educational-development .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.