Research into student learning in science: Implications for curriculum and classroom practice

Russell Tytler

Deakin University

Synopsis of the talkThe use of conceptual trajectory research to frame curriculum sequences

The use of reasoning research to think about scientific investigations and procedural knowledge

The complexity of the sequence for individuals

Aesthetics and individual narratives

Narratives of the self - the nature of learning

Second generation cognitive psychology

Learning and literacy — thinking as representation

Difficulties with science learning

A vast literature on student ‘conceptions’ and ‘conceptual change’

Learning science involves new ways of conceptualising phenomena which may offend intuitive ideas

Bridging the gap has been problematic

What is the nature of these ‘conceptions’?

The stuff of thinking

The structure of children’s explanations - evidence from a number of studies:

Students’ thinking about changes to matter

Students’ thinking about evaporation, mainly explored in a longitudinal study of 15 children’s thinking in science.

Students’ thinking about air pressure phenomena

Case study 1: Students’ views of changes to matterAndersson (1986, 1990):

1. It is just like that: No explanation is given for the disappearance of substances.

2. Displacement: A substance appears at a given place because it has been displaced from elsewhere.

3. Modification: What appears to be a new substance is in actual fact the same substance as before.

4. Transmutation: A given substance is transformed into a new one.

5. Chemical interaction: The original substance can interact with another one to form a new substance.

Studies of students’ conceptions of changes to matter.Rahayu & Tytler (1999)

Proposed conceptual trajectoryInitial conception of material kind:

Substances have an ongoing identity separate from the objects they comprise.

Conservation of substance:

Change is conceived of as displacement / mixing / separation of substances, and / or modification.

Transformation:

New substances are formed in some types of changes to matter.

Other models & associations:Idea of heat or flame as the source of new substances.Idea that the flame is the prior cause of change.

Rudimentary chemical reactions view:Substances interact and reconfigure to make new

substances with different properties.

Chemical reactions view:Based on a particle model showing the relationship of elements to compounds, new substances to old.

Preservation of identity of materials, through physical change, becomes more confidently understood.

Idea of substance defined by their history gradually diminishes as instances of reformulation into new substances accumulate.

Increasing understanding of how substances can reformulate. Elements retain their integrity through chemical change, while substances do not.

Victorian curriculum: 2006: changes to matter

At Level 3 students classify a range of materials such as solids, liquids and gases according to observable properties, and understand that this system of classification of substances is sometimes problematic. Students describe examples of reversible and non-reversible changes in substances.

At Level 4 students explain the characteristics of physical and chemical change, and describe the types of change/s substances have experienced.

At Level 5 students use the particle model to explain structure and properties of matter, chemical reactions and factors that influence rate.

Case 3: Student reasoning in science, followed in a longitudinal study of 15 children

There were many activities asking the children to explore phenomena and suggest investigative designs to answer questions.

Categories were generated using NUD*IST and the coding was done by two researchers to ensure reliability.

The examples here are from prep children

Mealworms

Esther interprets experimenting with mealworms as discovering what they like to do. She is active in observing the mealworms, but there seems little purpose to her explorations.

Esther: I like beetles. These are nice aren’t they? …

Int: This girl called Fiona said she thought they went down in there because they liked eating the bran. What do you think? How could we check if her theory….

Esther: Because I can see one eating.

Int: So you think she might be right. So you think they might be going down there to hide or to eat? What do you think?

Esther: To eat …. They’re cute.

Theo, on the other hand, is more purposeful in observing and interpreting.

Theo: Cos I think they like dark. Look. Have they got legs all the way to tail?

SP: They haven’t have they?

Theo: They look a bit like worms actually.

SP: But they do have some legs don’t they? They seem to have little segments a bit like a slater.

Theo: He’s just curling under.

SP: Look he didn’t fall off: he can go right on the edge.

Theo: Spiders can do that too because they have very sharp claws. I know this one has sharp claws because I can see a point.

Karen, with challenging, is able to suggest tests that suggest a distinction between darkness, and food needs, by separating the two conditions.

RT: How could we find out if that was right?.any ideas?

Karen: We could get some dark and see when we opened it! We would see them all go under.

Dimensions of reasoningChildren approach exploration differently

lead with ideas and then try them out, or

look and offer interpretations, or

just describe and respond in an ad hoc manner.

Their explanations are at different levels, that match these ‘approaches to exploration’

They deal with competing knowledge claims quite differently, sometimes

not acknowledging, or

proposing sophisticated tests.

Approach to exploration: 4 levels

1. Ad hoc exploration

2. Inference searching

3. Hypothesis checking

4. Hypothesis exploring

Growth in ‘approach to exploration’Mealworm

Apr

Fl&Sink

Apr Prep

W’bird

Nov Prep

Parachute

June Gd 1

Snail

Nov Gd 1

W’bird

Nov Gd 2

Anna 2 2 1 2 2

Calum - 3 2.5 2.5 3.5 3

Elle 1 2 1 2 2

Emily - 2 - 3

Esther 1 1 1 1.5 1.5 2.5

Jeremy - - 3 3 3 4

Karen 2 - 3 3 3

Larry 2 3 2 3 3 3

Miles 1 1 2 2 - -

Rae - - 3 2 3

Roslyn 1 2 1.5

Sonya 2 2 2 2.5 3

Theo 2 2 2 2 - 3

Walter 2.5 2 3 3 3.5 3

Mean 1.7 2.0 2.1 2.4 2.9 2.9

Implications of this research into reasoning:A. A ‘ critique of ‘fair testing’

‘Fair testing’ involves the control of variables based on the idea of ‘fairness’.

It’s ascendancy in the UK has led to a reduction in the types of practical investigation, now restricted to a small number of classic explorations (e.g. which running shoe has the best grip?)

It is argued that:

This leads to formulaic versions of science

It restricts the approach to exploration to ‘pattern seeking’ and discourages the playing with ideas that is central to science.

B. The Victorian Curriculum and Standards Framework 2001

Level 1: Describe, using appropriate language, scientific explorations of the physical, chemical and natural world.

Level 2: Identify simple patterns in observations arising from explorations of readily observable phenomena

Level 3 in each strand then deals with specific conceptual ideas

C. Use of these ideas to support primary school teachers e.g. For the dissolving concept related to use of tea bags:

Level 1: is able to describe the fact that the tea or sugar is “going into the water’ and uses the term ‘dissolving’ appropriately. Is able to make sensible and relevant observations in relation to what is happening but is not looking for patterns and is not readily able to see the relevance of testing for these. Is able to refer to other experiences with dissolving (eg. Coffee making)

Level 2: Is able to identify patterns in what is happening: that the larger crystals are taking longer to dissolve; that what happens with dissolving is the grains get smaller and smaller. Is able to suggest a sensible reason (perhaps by referring to experience) as to why hot water might dissolve things better

For science investigative procedures: Design

Level 1: Can carry out simple observation sequences to answer the questions posed by the teacher. Ie. Observe what is happening to the tea, and sugar, in a way that is relevant to the questions being asked.

Level 2Pose appropriate questions and sensibly predict, and suggest observations that might lead to an answer to a question about comparative speed of dissolving

Can make sense of and respond to the need to control variables without necessarily being able to make these decisions themselves. Can comment on why it was done.

Case study 2. Students’ explanatory ideas about evaporation followed through a longitudinal study

1. It’s just like that: Refers to responses that explain on the basis that this always happens, like "the puddle dried up in the sun"

2. Associations: Refers to associative thinking that is offered as an explanation; for example an association between coldness and moistness, or anecdotal appeals to other phenomena.

3. Displacement (local): The liquid changes position eg. dripping to the ground, soaking into the ground or clothes, or soaking through a can.

4. Displacement (water cycle): Refers to responses that mention the water going to the sky, or the sun, or the clouds.

5. Air: Water goes into or comes from the air or atmosphere.

6. Change in form: Water changes to or from another form.

Children’s changing explanations of evaporation

Things to noteChildren’s explanatory ideas are not stable

They use the first four ‘conceptions’ interchangeably, more like interpretive / explanatory tools than fixed ideas.

‘Air’ became increasingly accessible as an explanatory element from grade 2.

The associative explanations were common. In a separate study of year 1 and 6 students’ explanations, 25% of evaporation and 50% of condensation explanations involved associative thinking, rather than an identifiable ‘conception’.

The conceptual and the personal/aesthetic: Children’s narratives of the self

Revisiting children’s air pressure explanations

In this study, children’s explanatory moves were categorized to generate a relatively complete, hierarchical set.

They were referred to at the time as ‘conceptions’, but …

Explaining air pressure phenomena

Pre-explanatory conceptionsHuman agent (because we blew hard)

Personification of objects (the air wanted to escape)

Intermediate conceptions ‘Trapped’ image (the air and water were trapped in the can)

Advanced conceptionsCompetition for space (the water can’t get out unless air can get in to take its place)

Suction effect (the air under the dart sucks it onto the surface)

Action of outside air (the air pushed against the dart, the pressure from the outside air held the card in place)

Differential pressure (the outside air presses harder than the air and water inside)

How were these ideas used?Children used these ideas inconsistently

Children would use more than one conception to produce an explanation - a multi-perspectival understanding?

Naïve conceptions (trapped, personification) seemed to appear alongside more sophisticated conceptions as ‘phenomenological markers’

The ‘suction’ conception often appeared alongside the ‘outside air pressing’ conception, perhaps operating as a cueing device.

Unpacking explanationThese ‘conceptions’ coexist in the construction of an explanation, as a web of associative elements.

They are not stable, transcendent entities, but rather operate as the discursive tools by which thinking occurs

The construction of an explanation occurs through associative, intuitive means - it is not a strictly rational process, and is personally inflected

These elements are discursively produced, involving verbal, diagrammatic or embodied representations; suction, trapped, water cycle

The higher order conceptions (competition for space, differential pressure) involve narrative control over these multiple elements. They are not singular entities.

These representational elements are the discursive tools by which thinking occurs

Air pressure study: Children would use more than one conception to produce an explanation - a multi-perspectival understanding?

Naïve conceptions (trapped, personification, suction) seemed to appear alongside more sophisticated conceptions as ‘phenomenological markers’ or cueing devices.

Associative explanations: In a separate study of year 1 and 6 students’ explanations, 25% of evaporation and 50% of condensation explanations involved associative thinking, rather than an identifiable ‘conception’.

Conceptions and explanation

Implications for classroom teaching

The need to allow a rich flow of ideas in classroom discussions

The need to challenge students with multiple instances of science conceptions

The need to be flexible in allowing students to voice their explanations in different ways and to recognise less sophisticated ideas as stepping stones to a scientific understanding.

The need to support multiple representations of the same idea.

The need to encourage students to associate phenomena and explanations with their outside school experiences.

The need for a new psychology of learning

I argue that these findings, while not discounting the validity of the idea of conceptions, offer a challenge to the idea that concepts/conceptions are resolved entities that can be approached through purely rational means.

The findings pose a challenge to the way teachers should think about concepts as the objects of learning.

They point towards a more complex and personally framed psychology of learning and meaning-making.

A number of contemporary writers are exploring these ideas.

Klein: 1st & 2nd generation cognitive science

First generation Second generation

Construction of meaning

Modelled on science text Personal, different from science text.

Elements of knowledge

Resolved, well defined concepts, invariant across contexts, linked by a propositional structure.

Thought and language are ‘expressive’, with fuzzy, contextual, perceptually based concepts.

Thinking Logic based, involving symbol manipulation.

Pattern recognition and completion, associative thinking using analogy and metaphor.

Language Language is denotative, a by product of thought which is the fundamental unit

Thought and language are intertwined. Centrality of metaphor, narrative structures.

Mind Mirrors, represents, interprets reality An adaptive organ, cognition is shared with the environment.

Aesthetic, emotional

Conceptual and aesthetic are separated Conceptual and aesthetic are intertwined.

The importance of the personal and episodic in the construction of science explanations

From a longitudinal study of children’s ideas about evaporation, and reasoning.

Anna Grade 2: Evaporating handprint

Anna: It’s drying up….Because the sun’s shining in through that window.

SP: How does that make it dry up?

Anna: Because the sun takes water.... I forgot the reason why it takes water but the sun takes water up and umm .... and it dries up.

SP: What’s happening to the water?

Anna: It’s evaporating.

SP: What do you mean by evaporating?

Anna: Drying up.

…

SP: What had happened to the drink?

Anna: Because it had been in the sun for a few minutes it came up, it went.... it came through the air in tiny droplets that you can’t see them and ..um.... they evaporated up into the air and the sun took them.

Calum: Grade 2 Evaporating handprint

Calum: If it was on a beach and say it was high tide .... let’s just say the sand wasn’t there maybe concrete.... .and it’s high tide and when the tide goes out if there be wet patches like that it would evaporate and go back into the air and there’s a cycle of rain. It rains and then ...

RT: If its in the air.... look you can see some of it’s gone already.... so where would that bit be now?

Calum: That would be rising up.

RT: When it’s rising up would it still be in the room?

Calum: Yeah.

RT: And what would happen eventually?

Calum: If this room wasn’t there it would go back and when all this rain comes together I read in a book it makes it actually makes cloud and then the cloud gets grown and it rains in streams and then they evaporate and the cycle starts again.

Children’s narratives of the selfCalum is speculative, flexible in his interpretations. He exercises ‘narrative control’ over the ideas. He shows some mastery over the explanatory, investigative discourse of science. He is curious about mechanisms for things.

Anna has ideas and is a well regarded student, but focuses on ‘schooled’ versions of explanations which makes her less flexible in explanatory constructions. She is preoccupied with her own performance as a student, and with her friends.

Other children construct equally individual narratives of themselves as imaginative story tellers, lovers of animals, boisterous no nonsense thinkers …

The personal and episodicLongitudinal studies by their nature access the personal / affective / aesthetic aspects of conceptual learning

A longitudinal study of 15 children’s science ideas from Year P-6:

Children’s approach to tasks was shot through with aesthetic / affective elements

Children science explanations reflected very individual approaches that reflected their ‘narratives of the self’

Gustav Hellden: change and continuity

Individuals’ explanatory references had fixed elements amidst development of ideas, relating to childhood episodes

Individuals had characteristic ways of thinking that coloured their explanatory accounts over a long term

Some propositionsThinking occurs through the use of publicly available discursive elements or representations

These representations do not coincide with formal concepts, which nevertheless embody them

The construction of personal meaning inevitably involves the individual inflection of these representations

Personal meaning involves more than just ‘ways of talking’ but embodies and transforms these public discursive elements

The conceptual and the aesthetic / affective are continuous

Representation as a key to understanding the personal / public

In teaching grade 5 students a molecular representation of evaporation, we noticed that students tended to over determine the role of molecules.

Piaget had found this difficulty with using a random distribution in a causal explanation.

We resolved to explore this as a representational issue (Tytler, Prain, Peterson)

Learning as representation

Research design

Introductory classroom activities with modeling of particle ideas (Grade 5)

Teacher led follow up activities

Interview with 9 children involved in a longitudinal study, two weeks later

Puddle evaporation, drop of alcohol

•Calum alcohol evaporation - 03

The dots along the top were drawn first.

Research proposal

We are keen to explore a representational approach to help resolve learning difficulties associated with key science topic areas:

Changes to matter (concept of substance)

Animal and plant adaptation

The genetic basis of inheritance

Astronomy

Force and motion and energy