Call for Paper

CAE solicits original research papers for the July 2021 Edition. Last date of manuscript submission is June 30, 2021.

Read More

Study about Nature of Science in Undergraduate Research Training

Mazen Alrahili. Published in Information Sciences.

Communications on Applied Electronics
Year of Publication: 2016
Publisher: Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Authors: Mazen Alrahili

Mazen Alrahili. Study about Nature of Science in Undergraduate Research Training. Communications on Applied Electronics 6(4):27-31, December 2016. BibTeX

	author = {Mazen Alrahili},
	title = {Study about Nature of Science in Undergraduate Research Training},
	journal = {Communications on Applied Electronics},
	issue_date = {December 2016},
	volume = {6},
	number = {4},
	month = {Dec},
	year = {2016},
	issn = {2394-4714},
	pages = {27-31},
	numpages = {5},
	url = {},
	doi = {10.5120/cae2016652463},
	publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
	address = {New York, USA}


Undergrad research can bolster understudies' more focal investment in material science. We dissect markers of two coupled moves in interest: changes in understudies' perspectives about the way of science coupled with moves in self-viability toward material science investigate. Understudies in the study worked with personnel and graduate understudy coaches on research ventures while likewise taking an interest in a workshop where they found out about look into and thought about their encounters. In classroom talks and clinical meetings, understudies portrayed increasing more nuanced perspectives about the way of science, particularly identified with who can take an interest in research and what support in research resembles. This move was coupled to picks up in self-efficacy toward their capacity to add to research; they felt like their commitments as fledglings mattered. We show two contextual analyses of understudies who experienced coupled moves in self-adequacy and perspectives about nature-of-science movements, and a contextual investigation of an understudy for whom we didn't see either move, to represent both the presence of the coupling and the diverse ways it can play out. After presenting the defense that this coupling happens, we talk about some potential basic components. At long last, we utilize these outcomes to contend for additional nuanced translations of self-adequacy estimations.


  1. P. W. Irving and E. C. Sayre, Conditions for building a community of practice in an advanced physics laboratory, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 010109 (2014).
  2. S. Olson and D. G. Riordan, Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees, in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Report to the President (Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC, 2012).
  3. Business-Higher Education Forum (BHEF), The U.S. STEM Undergraduate Model: Applying System Dynamics to Help Meet President Obamas Goals for One Million STEM Graduates and the U.S. Navys Civilian STEM Workforce Needs, Tech. Rep. (2013).
  4. E. Seymour, A.-B. Hunter, S. L. Laursen, and T. DeAntoni, Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study, Sci. Educ. 88, 493 (2004).
  5. R. Taraban and E. Logue, Academic factors that affect undergraduate research experiences J. Educ. Psychol. 104, 499 (2012).
  6. D. Lopatto, Survey of Undergraduate Research Experiences (SURE): First findings, Cell Biol. Educ. 3, 270 (2004).
  7. R. E. Landrum and L. R. Nelsen, The undergraduate research assistantship: An analysis of the benefits, Teach. Psychol. 29, 15 (2002).
  8. A.-B. Hunter, S. L. Laursen, and E. Seymour, Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional development, Sci. Educ. 91, 36 (2007).
  9. S. Laursen, A.-B. Hunter, E. Seymour, H. Thiry, and G. Melton, Undergraduate Research in the Sciences: Engaging Students in Real Science (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2010).
  10. R. Taraban and R. L. Blanton, Creating Effective Undergraduate Research Programs In Science: The Transformation from Student to Scientist (Teachers College Press, New York, NY, 2008).
  11. S. E. Branch, A. Woodcock, and W. G. Graziano, Person orientation and encouragement: Predicting interest in engineering research, J. Eng. Educ. 104, 119 (2015).
  12. D. Lopatto and S. Tobias, Science in Solution: The Impact of Undergraduate Research on Student Learning (Research Corporation for Science Advancement, Tucson, AZ 2009), 1st ed.
  13. V. Sawtelle, E. Brewer, and L. H. Kramer Exploring the relationship between self-efficacy and retention in introductory physics, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 49, 1096 (2012).
  14. M. Bong, Role of self-efficacy and task-value in predicting college students’ course performance and future enrollment intentions, Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 26, 553 (2001).
  15. K. D. Multon, S. D. Brown, and R. W. Lent, Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A metaanalytic investigation., J. Counsel. Psychol. 38, 30 (1991).
  16. A. Bandura, Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control (Freeman, New York, 1997).
  17. S. L. Britner and F. Pajares, Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 43, 485 (2006).
  18. H. Fencl and K. Scheel, Engaging students: And examination of the effects of teaching strategies on self-efficacy and course climate in a nonmajors physics course, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 35, 20 (2005).
  19. V. Sawtelle, Ph.D. thesis, Florida International University, 2011.
  20. N. G. Lederman, Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 29, 331 (1992). [21] N. G. Lederman, F. Abd-El-Khalick, R. L. Bell, and R. S. Schwartz, Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 39, 497 (2002).
  21. A. Elby, C. Macrander, and D. Hammer, Epistemic cognition in science, Handbook Epistemic Cognition (Routledge, New York, NY, 2016). CONNECTING SELF-EFFICACY AND VIEWS … PHYS. REV. PHYS. EDUC. RES. 12, 020140 (2016) 020140-13
  22. K. Dunbar, How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories, Nature of Insight (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995).
  23. K. K. Cetina, Laboratory studies: The cultural approach to the study of science, Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (Los Angeles, CA, 1995).
  24. B. Latour, Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987).
  25. G. J. Kelly and J. Green, The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction, Perspectives on Conceptual Change: Multiple Ways to Understand Knowing and Learning in a Complex World (Routledge, Mahwah, NJ, 1998). [27] D. Papineau, Philosophy of Science (Wiley Online Library, 1996).
  26. B. Latour and S. Woolgar, Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2013).
  27. S. Shapin, Here and everywhere: Sociology of scientific knowledge, Annu. Rev. Sociol. 21, 289 (1995).
  28. M. Zenzen and S. Restivo, The mysterious morphology of immiscible liquids: A study of scientific practice, Social science information / International Social Science Council 21, 447 (1982).


Undergraduate Training. Nature of Science