Abstract

Using a sample of 282 Norwegian upper secondary students, we examined whether two dimensions of topic‐specific epistemic beliefs, concerning the certainty of knowledge and the justification for knowing, predicted students' understanding of seven texts representing partly conflicting views on climate change. Text comprehension was measured at three different levels. Topic knowledge and topic interest were included in the analyses as control variables. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that students' beliefs about justification for knowledge positively predicted text comprehension at all three levels. That is, students believing that knowledge claims about climate change should be based on rules of inquiry and the evaluation and integration of multiple information sources did better on the three comprehension measures.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.