<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rauno Neito</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Elisa Vilhunen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kaido Reivelt</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PREDICTING SITUATIONAL INTEREST BY INDIVIDUAL INTEREST AND INSTRUCTIONAL ACTIVITIES IN PHYSICS LESSONS: AN EXPERIENCE SAMPLING APPROACH</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">experience sampling method</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">instructional activities</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">lower secondary school physics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">physics education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">situational interest</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2023</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">December/2023</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://oaji.net/articles/2023/987-1702729135.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">22</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Enhancing interest in physics learning has been an important component of education policy and policy implementation for decades. However, in many countries, student interest in physics has not increased. The aim of this study was to predict situational interest using individual interest and the instructional activities students engaged in. Also, the suitability of the data collection approach to measure situational interest was assessed. A teaching module about real-world oscillations was implemented to 179 Estonian lower secondary school students. Data about situational interest were collected using the experience sampling method (ESM), which was measured three times during the module. The results indicated that gender, grade, and instructional activities did not predict situational interest. Individual interest was a significant predictor and correlation with situational interest increased with time, contrary to previous findings. The ESM approach used in this study was considered to be effective in disturbing students’ study flow minimally but may have affected the amount of missing data. This study contributes to the research done on student interest in a classroom setting by indicating a more complex relationship between situational and individual interest than previously suggested. </style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1063-1073</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CLIMATE EDUCATION: A GRAND CHALLENGE</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">climate change</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">climate education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">engineering</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">social sciences</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2022</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">April/2022</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://oaji.net/articles/2022/987-1652121994.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">21</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Climate change and its mitigation represent a major global challenge, alongside biodiversity loss, global pandemics, and shortages of fresh water and food. It has the power to shape the environment and future; however, policymakers seek to prevent undesirable changes through environmental and education policies. Hinesjeffrey et al. (2013) consider climate education to be a major challenge. For example, the mitigation of climate change requires an understanding of climate change as a multidisciplinary phenomenon that must be considered in addition to the natural sciences, at least from the perspective of the social sciences, engineering, economics and education. This mitigation requires individuals to have a wide range of competences, such as creative and critical thinking and socioemotional skills (Hestness, 2015).</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Editorial</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">176-178</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ADOPTING IDEAS FROM CURRENT NORDIC TEACHER EDUCATION STRATEGIES TO INITIAL SCIENCE TEACHER EDUCATION</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">post-secondary programme</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">professional learning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">teacher education</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">August/2019</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2019/987-1564685609.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">18</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A key goal of initial teacher education in all countries is to educate quality teachers through a quality post-secondary programme and then support them in their careers through professional learning. However, there are different definitions and interpretations of a quality teacher or a quality teacher education programme. Several terms are used to describe a quality teacher, such as professional, effective, competent, expert, or ideal (Stronge &amp; Hindman, 2003; Goel, Bell, &amp; Little, 2008). Furthermore, the definition of a quality teacher changes continuously and follows the current trends of society and working life. Consequently, national-level teacher education strategies and teacher education programmes are continuously improved. In the Nordic region, all countries have been developing initial teacher education at the national and institutional levels over the last five years. In this editorial, I will briefly analyse the aims of new Finnish, Norwegian, and Swedish national-level teacher education strategies. Then I will briefly discuss how we can improve science teacher education according to the new strategies.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Editorial</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">488-489</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reijo Byman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kalle Juuti</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Veijo Meisalo</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MOTIVATIONAL ORIENTATIONS IN PHYSICS LEARNING: A SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY APPROACH</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">motivational orientations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">multilevel confirmatory factor analysis</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science learning</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">self-determination theory</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">December/2012</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2014/987-1419169253.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The first objective of the present study was to test the factorial validity of the inventory designed to measure students’ motivation to study physics in school. Based on self-determination theory (SDT), it was hypothesised that the four factors of External Regulation, Introjected Regulation, Identified Regulation and Intrinsic Motivation account for the covariances among the items of the inventory. It was also expected that gender moderates the factorial validity of the inventory. A sample of 3626 Finnish comprehensive school students was used. A multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MLCFA) was used to investigate the fit of the hypothesised four-factor model. The second objective of the present study was to investigate different educational correlates of the four motivation factors. Girls had a statistically higher mean score than did boys for all four factors. Otherwise only minor gender differences were found. Implications for physics teaching are discussed.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">379-392 </style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">DIFFERENT WAYS OF DESCRIBING EXPECTED STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES IN SCIENCE</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">learning outcomes</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science education</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">March/2011</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2014/987-1405173157.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The best way of describing what and how a teacher should teach science or what a student should learn in a national level curriculum is not self-evident. Descriptions of “learning outcomes” are increasingly used and have been considered as an important basis for the quality of science education. However, there are variations in the descriptions and also whether they are written as a form of teacher behaviour or as a form of student learning. For example, in the UK the descriptions in the beginning of 1990 in the National Curriculum were written in the form of what students should learn. But the policy has changed and the new curriculum will describe what topics a teacher should introduce to students.
In Europe, the Bologna Process has put the focus on learning outcomes in terms of this concept being a “common language” to describe the curricula in countries throughout the world. The general idea behind transforming the educational aims into the form of learning outcomes is to enhance transparency and accountability of learning outcomes, and to increase the quality of learning. Moreover, the description of learning outcomes of a learning sequence is assumed to enable learners to have an active role in the learning process alongside their teachers. Learning outcomes are typically described in a way they could be used or modified for assessment criteria and for designing items for national level external examinations. Therefore, use of learning outcomes has a direct link to teacher and national level assessment.
Several countries, like the UK, Germany and Finland, are preparing or are planning to prepare in the near future national level curricula. It will be interesting to follow how different demands, like quality assurance, EU harmonising policy, research on teaching, learning and assessment, are realised in 2010 or 2020 curricula.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Editorial</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4-5 </style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Janis Gedrovics</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reijo Byman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Veijo Meisalo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kalle Juuti</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anna Uitto</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">STUDENTS’ MOTIVATIONAL ORIENTATIONS AND CAREER CHOICE IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: A COMPARATIVE INVESTIGATION IN FINLAND AND LATVIA</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">career choice</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">comparative study</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">motivation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science and technology education</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2008</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">August/2008</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2014/987-1404719696.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">7</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This paper examines lower secondary school students’ motivational orientations on the characteristics of science and technology occupations. The survey data of 9th grade students were collected in spring 2003, in Finland from 75 schools (3626 students) and in Latvia from 39 schools (1065 students). An exploratory factor analysis was used to describe the students’ orientations towards the characteristics of or activities typical to occupations. The multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used for the simultaneous analysis of Finnish and Latvian data and the factorial invariance across the two separate data was confirmed. The factors were named: Personally meaningful, Leadership, Craft, Nature, Innovation, and Social orientation. Characteristics related especially to Personally meaningful orientation, and also to Innovation and Social orientations appeared most important for choice of future occupations. Boys, on the average, were much more oriented towards conventional technology than girls, whereas girls had much stronger Personally meaningful, Nature, and Social orientations than boys reflecting traditional role models. </style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">86-102</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Veijo Meisalo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kalle Juuti</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">THE ROLE OF RESEARCHERS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EDUCATIONAL POLICIES: THE FINNISH LUMA PROGRAMME (1996-2002) AS A CASE STUDY</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">adoption of educational innovations</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">educational policy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">in-service training of science teachers</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2004</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">March/2003</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Finnish LUMA Joint National Action (1996–2002) and related action, organised by the National Board of Education are introduced in general. A number of professional development projects for science teachers have been run through the Department of Applied Sciences of Education at the University of Helsinki in the context of the LUMA programme. Properties that made these projects successful are discussed and compared to previous research on how educational innovations are adopted for general use. 
Based on the official LUMA evaluation and our experiences in the PD-projects, some conclusions may be drawn. It is important that enough time be allocated for co-planning the whole project and each phase of the project. Teachers' beliefs, current practices (teaching or learning methods used), and open questions should be identified and discussed during the goal-setting process of the PD-project. Meetings or training situations should be designed together with the teachers and organised in interesting places, such as factories or other places of work where principles can be demonstrated in a practical way. Moreover, the project itself should be run long-term.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">34-42</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ellen K. Henriksen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carl Angell</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jari Lavonen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anders Isnes</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">WHY CHOOSE PHYSICS – IN NORWAY AND FINLAND ?</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">educational choices</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">educational policy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">school physics</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2004</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">March/2003</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2016/987-1482419239.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Questionnaire data from Norway and Finland were compared to explore the factors that influence upper secondary school students' choice of subjects (notably physics). Results indicate that personal and emotional factors (interest, abilities), but also practical factors (entrance requirements, usefulness) are keywords for students' choice. Although both Finnish and Norwegian students claim to base their educational choice mainly on personal interest and ability, there is a tendency for Norwegians to be relatively more influenced by background and Finns to be more influenced by the educational system (teachers, entrance requirements). These differences are discussed in light of educational policy and sociological theory.

Thus, our recommendations based on this small study are:

·      More attention should be given to educational choice guidance in secondary school – probably particularly so in Norway. Physics in particular might profit from this, and physics teachers should take an active role as &quot;ambassadors&quot; for their subject.

·      If recruitment is to be improved, physics needs to get away from the image of being difficult and work-intensive; probably also from the prevailing culture of the subject (which is likely to be even harder to change).

·      Finally, there is a need for more research exploring the interaction between students’ socioeconomic background, their interest and performance in various school subjects (notably physics), and their actual educational choices.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5-12</style></section></record></records></xml>