Students home alone—profiles of internal and external conditions associated with mathematics learning from home

European Journal of Psychology of Education - This study aims at describing differences in internal and external resources of students to handle mathematics learning from home. Based on data from...     

Addressing Challenges to Public Understanding of Science: Epistemic Cognition,Motivated Reasoning,and Conceptual Change

Science is of critical importance to daily life in a knowledge society and has a significant influence on many everyday decisions. As scientific problems increase in their number and complexity, so do the challenges facing the public in understanding these issues. Our objective is to focus on 3 of those challenges: the challenge of reasoning about knowledge and the processes of knowing, the challenge of overcoming biases in that reasoning, and the challenge of overcoming misconceptions. We propose that research in epistemic cognition, motivated reasoning, and conceptual change can help to identify, understand, and address these obstacles for public understanding of science. We explain the contributions of each of these areas in providing insights into the public's understandings and misunderstandings about knowledge, the nature of science, and the content of science. We close with educational recommendations for promoting scientific literacy.     

Dimensionality and Disciplinary Differences in Personal Epistemology

A growing body of work addresses the nature of epistemological development and epistemological beliefs: how individuals come to know, the theories and beliefs they hold about knowing, and the manner in which such epistemological premises are a part of and an influence on the cognitive processes of thinking and reasoning. This study investigates the dimensionality of personal epistemology as hypothesized in a recent review of the literature as well as the nature of disciplinary differences. First-year college students responded to a set of questionnaires that included an adaptation of a domain-general epistemological instrument and a discipline-focused questionnaire. Results suggest that there is an underlying dimensionality to epistemological theories that cuts across disciplinary domains, but that students, at least by the 1st year of college, discriminate as to how these theories differ by discipline. Disciplinary differences were strong, suggesting that 1st-year college students see knowledge in science as more certain and unchanging than in psychology, are more likely to regard personal knowledge and firsthand experience as a basis for justification of knowing in psychology than in science, view authority and expertise as the source of knowledge more in science than in psychology, and perceive that in science, more than in psychology, truth is attainable by experts. This contradicts existing research that suggests that epistemological development is domain general and that epistemological beliefs do not differ by discipline.     

Betreuung und Bewertung wissenschaftlicher (Doktor-)Arbeiten

Das UnivG 2002 sieht keine ausdrücklichen Bestimmungen betreffend die Betreuung und Beurteilung wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten mehr vor, sondern stellt die Regelung dessen dem autonomen Satzungsgeber anheim. Bei der Gestaltung der betreffenden Satzungsinhalte spielen Aspekte der Gesetzeskonformit?t, Treffsicherheit und Sachgerechtigkeit eine wesentliche Rolle. Dies gilt vor allem für Dissertationen, die eine besondere Betreuungs- bzw Beurteilungsintensit?t aufweisen sowie vermehrten Zulauf aus dem FH-Bereich verzeichnen und jüngst zunehmend ins Zentrum hochschulpolitischer Reformerw?gungen gerückt sind. Vor diesem Hintergrund kommt auch der Frage nach der M?glichkeit und Zul?ssigkeit externer Dissertations-Betreuer besondere Bedeutung zu.