Scientific reasoning abilities of non-science majors in physics-based courses

TL;DR

This study reveals that non-STEM majors in physics and astronomy courses exhibit lower scientific reasoning skills than STEM majors, with significant challenges in theoretical reasoning, highlighting the need for tailored instructional strategies.

Contribution

It provides new insights into the reasoning abilities of non-STEM students and emphasizes the importance of explicit reasoning instruction to improve scientific thinking.

Findings

Non-STEM students score lower on LCTSR than STEM majors.

Non-STEM students predominantly use concrete or transitional reasoning.

Explicit reasoning instruction is necessary for significant gains.

Abstract

We have found that non-STEM majors taking either a conceptual physics or astronomy course at two regional comprehensive institutions score significantly lower pre-instruction on the Lawson's Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR) in comparison to national average STEM majors. The majority of non-STEM students can be classified as either concrete operational or transitional reasoners in Piaget's theory of cognitive development, whereas in the STEM population formal operational reasoners are far more prevalent. In particular, non-STEM students demonstrate significant difficulty with proportional and hypothetico-deductive reasoning. Pre-scores on the LCTSR are correlated with normalized learning gains on various concept inventories. The correlation is strongest for content that can be categorized as mostly theoretical, meaning a lack of directly observable exemplars, and weakest for content categorized as mostly descriptive, where directly observable exemplars are abundant. Although the implementation of research-verified, interactive engagement pedagogy can lead to gains in content knowledge, significant gains in theoretical content (such as force and energy) are more difficult with non-STEM students. We also observe no significant gains on the LCTSR without explicit instruction in scientific reasoning patterns. These results further demonstrate that differences in student populations are important when comparing normalized gains on concept inventories, and the achievement of significant gains in scientific reasoning requires a re-evaluation of the traditional approach to physics for non-STEM students.