The purpose of this research project is to investigate the effect of online argumentation and decision making on Taiwanese undergraduates’ information literacy and thinking of earth and environmental controversial issues. This research project included three series of studies and five sub studies. Series Study 1: “Developing the online argumentation activities which focus on the earth and environmental controversial issues (i.e., opening the arctic sea routes)” The research findings indicated that the issue about “opening the arctic sea routes” is an appropriate topic for undergraduates’ online argumentation activity. Series Study 2: the sub-study “The Relations among Undergraduate Students' Sourcing, Anxiety, and Perceived Trustworthiness of Online Information” had established the validity and reliability of the sourcing of online information questionnaire. And, the SEM results indicated that students’ sourcing of online information related to their anxiety and perceived trustworthiness of online information. More specially, students who justified online information by their personal understanding and multiple sources tend to embrace the metacognitive and searching strategies. Moreover, this study identified that students who justified the online sources by authority through the behavioral searching strategies seem to have less anxiety and much more perceived trustworthiness of online information. The other sub-study “Exploring the relationships between undergraduates’ scientific epistemic views and perceived self-efficacy for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) knowledge” indicated that undergraduate students’ scientific epistemic views played an important role in their perceived self-efficacy for STEM knowledge and their attitudes toward STEM education. In particular, students who emphasized on the justification of science knowledge tended to express advanced self-efficacy for STEM knowledge and their attitudes toward STEM education. In addition, students who viewed science knowledge as uncertainty may perceived less self-efficacy for STEM knowledge and attitudes toward STEM education. In addition, students who viewed science knowledge as uncertainty may perceived less self-efficacy for STEM knowledge and attitudes toward STEM education. Series Study 3: The sub-studies included “Developed a series of online argumentation and decision making activities on the Knowledge Forum through a design-based research” and “Investigated undergraduate students' Knowledge Forum activities and the relations with decision making and sourcing, anxiety, and perceived trustworthiness of online information.” Through the design-based research method, the online argumentation and decision-making course activities on the Knowledge Forum developed in this study can enhance the students' rational decision-making style. This study also found that before the semester, students’ personal prior knowledge plays an important role in their sourcing of online information and decision-making. However, students of higher-level online information search strategies will increase information anxiety and reduce information. The biggest change after students experience a semester Knowledge Forum argumentation and decision-making course activities is that students with Justification beliefs tend to judge information based on multiple sources and personal prior knowledge, but also tend to make online information judgments based on the authority of expert’s sources, and students not rely on information sources based on their own prior knowledge to make rational decisions, but rely on multiple and expert information sources.
|Effective start/end date||2017/08/01 → 2020/07/31|
- Online argumentation
- Decision Making
- Knowledge Forum
- Scientific Epistemic views
- perceived self-efficacy for STEM knowledge
- Sourcing of online information
- Anxiety of online information
- Trustworthiness of online information
- Socio-Scientific issue
Explore the research topics touched on by this project. These labels are generated based on the underlying awards/grants. Together they form a unique fingerprint.