In the last forty years, research in science education has focused on investigating students’ ingenuous and intuitive views across a wide range of scientific domains and ages. The majority of these studies have reported that children form ideas about several physical phenomena at a very early age, before receiving any formal education. These naive views and meanings are initially formed from events that children experience and observe every day in the natural world. As Driver and others pointed out, these ideas usually go against the scientific views and are in conflict with them. Those kinds of students’ perspectives are known as alternative conceptions, preconceptions, alternative frameworks and misconceptions.
Research in this domain has, also, offered explanations about the origin of these naive ideas. These explanations could be broadly categorized into two theoretical groups. The first one refers to the Piagetian notion of learning while the other derives from a Vygotskian perspective. Several books have been written regarding differences between Piaget’s points of view about learning and Vygotsky’s ideas. However, as Sjoberg (2007) pointed out, they both can be seen as constructivists. In agreement with this statement, Pass (2004) noted that the two perspectives offer different paths on the way to constructivism. Vygotsky has placed greater emphasis in the social and cultural factors, whereas Piaget believed that knowledge is constructed from experiences as the individual gradually grows and develops. Thus, for the latter constructivist view of learning is the result of natural and spontaneous knowledge (personal constructivism, Piaget, 1960), while the former perceives it as a social interaction.
The majority of studies have been based on these two theories of learning. In the present study, these two viewpoints are adopted. According to these approaches, individuals construct their own ideas and understandings from inputs which have as a result the form of a wide range of conceptions. As Vosniadou and Brewer (1987) argued, knowledge is acquired and restructured when naive ideas encounter dissimilar and, in some cases, competing views. Students usually confront such conflict situations in their everyday life when observing nature and discussing with their peers or when asked to deal with different ideas in classroom settings.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Literature review
Methodology
Results
Discussion
Implications
References
Research Objectives and Themes
This study investigates the intuitive and often alternative scientific conceptions held by primary school students regarding the day/night cycle and the alteration of seasons. By analyzing written questionnaires and drawing tasks, the research aims to understand how students at different developmental stages reconstruct their personal mental models when confronted with formal scientific instruction versus everyday observations.
- Investigation of students' alternative conceptions in astronomy.
- Examination of the developmental progression of mental models.
- Influence of formal instruction on student understanding.
- Role of daily observations and language in forming misconceptions.
- Comparison of fifth and sixth-grade students' conceptualizations.
Excerpt from the Book
Introduction
In the last forty years, research in science education has focused on investigating students’ ingenuous and intuitive views across a wide range of scientific domains and ages. The majority of these studies have reported that children form ideas about several physical phenomena at a very early age, before receiving any formal education. These naive views and meanings are initially formed from events that children experience and observe every day in the natural world (Baxter, 1989). As Driver and others (2000) pointed out, these ideas usually go against the scientific views and are in conflict with them. Those kinds of students’ perspectives are known as alternative conceptions, preconceptions, alternative frameworks and misconceptions (Wandersee et al., 1994).
Research in this domain has, also, offered explanations about the origin of these naive ideas. These explanations could be broadly categorized into two theoretical groups. The first one refers to the Piagetian notion of learning while the other derives from a Vygotskian perspective. Several books have been written regarding differences between Piaget’s points of view about learning and Vygotsky’s ideas. However, as Sjoberg (2007) pointed out, they both can be seen as constructivists. In agreement with this statement, Pass (2004) noted that the two perspectives offer different paths on the way to constructivism. Vygotsky has placed greater emphasis in the social and cultural factors, whereas Piaget believed that knowledge is constructed from experiences as the individual gradually grows and develops.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides the theoretical background on students' naive views in science and sets the stage for investigating day/night and seasonal cycles.
Literature review: Surveys existing research on children's astronomical ideas, focusing on Piagetian stages and subsequent models of the Earth, Sun, and Moon relationship.
Methodology: Details the qualitative, open-ended questionnaire design and drawing tasks used to elicit students' mental models, along with the ethical considerations taken.
Results: Presents the classification of students' explanations into distinct categories and illustrates them with typical drawings and student statements.
Discussion: Interprets the findings by comparing them with prior studies and analyzing how cognitive levels and formal schooling influence students' persistent misconceptions.
Implications: Offers recommendations for improved teaching practices, emphasizing the need for modeling activities and meta-awareness of students' prior conceptions.
References: Lists the academic literature and curricula sources cited throughout the investigation.
Keywords
Science education, Astronomy, Alternative conceptions, Misconceptions, Mental models, Day/night cycle, Season alteration, Primary school, Constructivism, Cognitive development, Student drawings, Pedagogical approach, Scientific reasoning, Geocentric model, Heliocentric model.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this study?
This study examines the intuitive and alternative ideas that Greek primary school students (grades 5 and 6) hold regarding the day/night cycle and the change of seasons.
What are the central thematic fields?
The study centers on science education, specifically elementary astronomy, focusing on how children reconcile their personal observations with information provided by formal education.
What is the research goal?
The primary goal is to identify the common mental models and misconceptions students use to explain physical phenomena and to determine how their thinking evolves through educational experiences.
Which scientific methods are applied?
The researcher utilizes a qualitative approach, employing 5-item open-ended questionnaires and drawing tasks, supplemented by classroom group discussions to clarify students' expressed beliefs.
What does the main body of the work cover?
The main body covers the literature on children's astronomical understanding, the detailed methodology of the current research, a comprehensive classification of the identified explanation patterns, and a critical discussion of these results.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include alternative conceptions, mental models, astronomy, day/night cycle, seasons, constructivism, and student misconceptions.
How do 5th and 6th-grade students differ in their explanations?
6th-grade students often attempt to incorporate terminology from formal instruction, yet they frequently struggle to apply these terms correctly, whereas 5th-grade students rely more heavily on immediate personal observations and everyday life experiences.
Why is the "tilt of the Earth's axis" concept often problematic for students?
Even when students recall the tilt as a "scientific fact," they typically fail to explain the mechanism (how the tilt leads to varying radiation intensity) and often conflate it with the idea that the Earth gets physically closer to the Sun.
What role do student drawings play in this research?
Drawings serve as a critical diagnostic tool, providing visual evidence of students' mental models that might be obscured or ambiguous in written explanations, allowing for a more nuanced categorization of their reasoning.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Nikolaos Fotou (Autor:in), 2012, The day/night cycle and the alteration of seasons. Greek primary school children's conceptions, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/316700
