Views on Science and Education (VOSE)

The Views on Science and Education Questionnaire (VOSE) was designed to assess attitudes towards and knowledge of the nature of science (NOS) as well as the teaching practices related to NOS.

Average Review: (3.0)

Supplemental Information:

n/a

Assessment Type:

Self-assessment

Scale:

Publication Date:

Oct 11, 2006

Respondent:

302 college students

Domain(s) Evaluated:

Attitude / Behavior

Sample items:

The science course in high school should investigate the definitions of and the relationships between hypothesis, theory, and law.

A. Yes, because they represent the structure of scientific knowledge.
B. Yes, because they are the fundamentals of scientific inquiry.
C. No, knowing the definition of and relationships between these terms does not help much in learning scientific knowledge.
D. No, because hypothesis, theory, and law lack definite meaning.

Reliability:

Cronbach's alpha ranged = 0.34 to 0.81.

Validity:

Correlation coefficient = 0.82.

Frequency:

Rarely

Administration time:

0 minutes

Requires a Computer:

Requires Internet Access:

Primary reference:

Chen, Sufen. (2006). Views on Science and Educaiton (VOSE) Questionnaire. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 7(2).

Comments:

The survey is appropriate for pre-service teachers, college students, and the general adult population. The 15 questions ask respondents to either answer "yes" or "no" to statements or claims, as well as provide their reasoning behind their opinion by selecting from a set of predetermined answers.

Other Reference:
Sumranwanich, W. & Yuenyong, C (2013). Graduate students' concepts of nature of science (NOS) and attitudes toward teaching NOS. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2443-2452.

The study used an adapted version of VOSE. The study reported reliable results for VOSE, with the test-reliability being high. The correlation coefficient was 0.82. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.34 to 0.81 and was used as a basis for not retaining some items from the pilot study. The content and interpretation of the items were validated by two different panels of experts.