Assessment of language in authentic Science inquiry reveals putative differences in epistemology

Science epistemology, or beliefs about what it means to do science and how science knowledge is generated, is an integral part of authentic science inquiry. Although the development of a sophisticated science epistemology is critical for attaining science literacy, epistemology remains an elusive construct to precisely and quantitatively evaluate. Previous work has suggested that analysis of student practices in science inquiry, such as their use of language, may be reflective of their underlying epistemologies. Here we describe the usage of a learning analytics tool, TAALES, and keyness analysis to analyze the concluding statements made by students at the end of a computer-based authentic science inquiry experience. Preliminary results indicate that linguistic analysis reveals differences in domain-general lexical sophistication and in domain-specific verb usage that are consistent with the expertise level of the participant. For example, experts tend to use more hedging language such as "may" and "support" during conclusions whereas novices use stronger language such as "cause." Using these differences, a simple, rulebased prediction algorithm with LOOCV achieved prediction accuracies of greater than 80%. These data underscore the potential for the use of learning analytics in simulated authentic inquiry to provide a novel and valuable method of assessing inquiry practices and related epistemologies.