[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-596670-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-596670-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","examining-undergraduate-studentsconceptions-of-inquiry-in-terms-of-epistemic-belief-differences","Examining Undergraduate Students’Conceptions of Inquiry in Terms of Epistemic Belief Differences","","Study investigates undergraduate students’ conceptions of inquiry and how these conceptions relate to epistemic beliefs. Data come from 107 university students using an open-ended questionnaire and Schommer’s Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire to classify participants as naïve or sophisticated. Analyses show that sophisticated believers hold multidimensional, conceptually rich views and definitions. Naïve believers present simpler, indistinct conceptions, sometimes without adequate knowledge. Overall results indicate a relationship, suggesting that interventions should consider students’ epistemic beliefs when targeting inquiry conceptualization.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/examining-undergraduate-studentsconceptions-of-inquiry-in-terms-of-epistemic-belief-differences/596670/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/examining-undergraduate-studentsconceptions-of-inquiry-in-terms-of-epistemic-belief-differences/596670.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Muffet","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-01","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the main purpose of the study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To examine undergraduate students’ conceptions of inquiry and determine how these conceptions relate to their epistemic beliefs.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were participants grouped in the research?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Students completed an open-ended questionnaire and Schommer’s Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire, which classified them as naïve or sophisticated in their epistemic beliefs.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What differences did the analysis find between naïve and sophisticated epistemic beliefs?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Sophisticated believers showed multidimensional, conceptually rich conceptions of inquiry, while naïve believers showed more simplistic, indistinct conceptions and sometimes limited knowledge about inquiry.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},596670,1792166503,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},962090768927,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","CSSHE  \nSCÉES  \nCanadian Journal of Higher Education Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur Volume 46, No. 2, 2016, pages 181-205  \nExamining Undergraduate Students’Conceptions of Inquiry in Terms of Epistemic Belief Differences  \nDawitAsrat Getahun Bahir Dar University  \nAlenoush Saroyan McGill University  \nMark W. Aulls McGill University  \nAbstract  \nThe purpose of the study was to examine undergraduate students’ conceptions of inquiry and the relationship of inquiry conceptions to epistemic beliefs.  \nData were obtained from 107 university students (80 female, 27 male) using an open-ended questionnaire to examine their conceptions of inquiry and Schommer’s Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire to group participants as naïve or sophisticated in their epistemic beliefs. Data analyses revealed that participants with sophisticated epistemic beliefs had multidimensional conceptions of inquiry and provided conceptually rich definitions. Students with naïve beliefs, on the other hand, revealed more simplistic and indistinct conceptions of inquiry and either described it with few details or stated that they did not know about it. The study in general indicated the presence of a relationship between epistemic beliefs and inquiry conceptions, implying that any practical effort to change the way students conceptualize a phenomenon in general and inquiry in particular needs to take into account their epistemic beliefs.  \nRésumé  \nLa présente étude avait pour objectif d’examiner les conceptions de la recherche scientifique d’étudiants universitaires de premier cycle et la relation entre ces conceptions et leurs croyances épistémiques. Les données de la recherche scientifique de 107 étudiants (80 femmes et 27 hommes) ont été obtenues à l’aide d’un questionnaire à réponses libres servant à  \nCJHE / RCES Volume 46, No. 2, 2016  \nConceptions of Inquiry and Epistemic Beliefs / D. A. Getahun, A. Saroyan, & M. W. Aulls 182  \nexaminer les conceptions des participants, ainsi que d’un questionnaire sur les croyances épistémiques de Schommer, servant à catégoriser les croyances des participants comme étant naïves ou sophistiquées. L’analyse des donnéesa révélé que les participants ayant des croyances épistémiques sophistiquéesavaient également une conception multidimensionnelle de la recherche scientifique et avaient fourni des réponses conceptuellement riches. À l’inverse, les étudiants ayant des croyances épistémiques naïves avaientune conception plus simpliste et indistincte de la recherche scientifique, qu’ils ont décrite soit avec parcimonie, soit en déclarant qu’ils n’en savaient rien. En outre, l’étude révèle une relation entre les croyances épistémiqueset les conceptions de la recherche scientifique des étudiants, indiquant que tout effort pour changer la façon dont les étudiants conceptualisent tout phénomène général, et toute recherche en particulier, devrait tenir compte de leurs croyances épistémiques.  \nIntroduction  \nIn the context of learning and instruction, inquiry is a form of self-directed learning that makes students become more responsible for determining what they need to learn, identifying and using resources that can help them learn in the most efficient and effective way, as well as assessing and reporting self-progress in learning (Henson, 1986; MartinHansen, 2002; Roy, Kustra, & Borin, 2003). As learning becomes more self-directed, it seems logical to assume that beliefs will play an essential role. Beliefs are instrumental in defining tasks and behaviour: the ways by which individuals interpret, plan, and make decisions about what they do (Kuzborska, 2011; Pajares, 1992; Stipek, Givvin, Salmon,& MacGyvers, 2001) . Hence, they have the potential to promote or impede self-directed learning. Bearing in mind that inquiry is a form of self-directed learning, the way individuals believe about the nature of knowledge likely determines their decisions and actual engagement in inquiry tasks. For example, having an attitude to","cbCair9AxCebzco9","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCair9AxCebzco9","pdf",280423,25,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction","[{\"question\":\"What was the main purpose of the study?\",\"answer\":\"To examine undergraduate students’ conceptions of inquiry and determine how these conceptions relate to their epistemic beliefs.\"},{\"question\":\"How were participants grouped in the research?\",\"answer\":\"Students completed an open-ended questionnaire and Schommer’s Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire, which classified them as naïve or sophisticated in their epistemic beliefs.\"},{\"question\":\"What differences did the analysis find between naïve and sophisticated epistemic beliefs?\",\"answer\":\"Sophisticated believers showed multidimensional, conceptually rich conceptions of inquiry, while naïve believers showed more simplistic, indistinct conceptions and sometimes limited knowledge about inquiry.\"}]","Examining Undergraduate Students’Conceptions of Inquiry in Terms of Epistemic Belief Differences | PDF",1792083509,63]