Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 21, Issue 6, pp 826–834

Students’ Conceptions About ‘Radiation’: Results from an Explorative Interview Study of 9th Grade Students

Article

Abstract

One basis of good teaching is to know about your students’ preconceptions. Studies about typical ideas that students bring to the science classroom have been and continue to be a major field in science education research. This study aims to explore associations and ideas that students have regarding ‘radiation’, a term widely used in various fields and necessary to understand fundamental ideas in science. In an explorative study, the perceptions of 50 high school students were examined using semi-structured interviews. The students were 14–16 years old and were chosen from 7 different high schools in an urban area in Austria. Following an interview guideline, students were asked about their general associations with the term ‘radiation’ as well as about their general understanding of different types of radiation. A qualitative analysis of these interviews following the method of Flick (2009) revealed that the students’ associations were, to a great extent, very different from the scientific use of the term. Several conceptions that could inhibit students’ learning processes could be identified. Consequences for the teaching of the topic ‘radiation’ in science lessons, which are based on these preconceptions, are presented in the conclusion.

Keywords

Radiation Students’ conceptions Interviews UV Infrared 

References

  1. Acar Sesen B, Ince E (2010) Internet as a source of misconception: “radiation and radioactivity”. Turk Online J Educ Technol TOJET 9(4):94–100Google Scholar
  2. Boyes E, Stanisstreet M (1994) Children’s ideas about radioactivity and radiation: sources, modes of travel, uses and dangers. Res Sci Technol Educ 12(2):145–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bybee RW (1987) Science education and the science-technology-society (S-T-S) theme. Sci Educ 71(5):667–683. doi:10.1002/sce.3730710504 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. DeBoer GE (2000) Scientific literacy: another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. J Res Sci Teach 37(6):582–601. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582:aid-tea5>3.0.co;2-l CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Duit R (2009) Bibliography—students’ alternative frameworks and science education. http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html
  6. Duit R, Treagust DF (2003) Conceptual change: a powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. Int J Sci Educ 25(6):671–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eijkelhof H, Klaassen K, Lijnse P, Scholte RLJ (1990) Perceived incidence and importance of lay-ideas on ionizing radiation: results of a Delphi-study among radiation-experts. Sci Educ 74(2):183–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flick U (2009) An introduction to qualitative research. SAGE, Los Angeles, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Galili I, Hazan A (2000) Learners′ knowledge in optics: interpretations, structure and analysis. Int J Sci Edu 22(1):57–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gropengießer H (2008) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse in der fachdidaktischen Lehr-Lernforschung. In: Mayring P, Glaeser-Zikuda M (eds) Die Praxis der qualitativen inhaltsanalyse, 2nd edn. Beltz, Weinheim, Basel, pp 172–189Google Scholar
  11. Guesne E (1985) Light. In: Driver R, Guesne E, Tiberghien A (eds), Children’s ideas in science (pp 10–33). Open University Press, Milton KeynesGoogle Scholar
  12. Hewson PW, Hennessey MG (1992) Making status explicit: a case study of conceptual change. In: Duit R, Goldberg F, Niedderer H (eds) Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp 176–187). IPN, KielGoogle Scholar
  13. Jung W (1987) Understanding students’ understanding: the case of elementary optics. In: Novak J (ed) Proceedings of the 2nd international seminar “Misconceptions and educational strategies in science and mathematics”, vol III. Ithaca: Cornell University, pp 268–277Google Scholar
  14. Libarkin J, Anila A, Crockett C, Sadler P (2011) Invisible misconceptions: student understanding of ultraviolet and infrared radiation. Astron Educ Rev 10(1)Google Scholar
  15. Lijnse PL, Eijkelhof HMC, Klaassen CWJM, Scholte RLJ (1990) Pupils’ and mass-media ideas about radioactivity. Int J Sci Educ 12(1):67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mayring P (2010) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken, 11th edn. Beltz, WeinheimGoogle Scholar
  17. Millar R, Jarnail Singh G (1996) School students’ understanding of processes involving radioactive substances and ionizing radiation. Phys Educ 31(1):27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Millar R, Klaassen K, Eijkelhof H (1990) Teaching about radioactivity and ionising radiation: an alternative approach. Phys Educ 25(6):338–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Neumann S, Hopf M (2011) Was verbinden Schüler/innen mit dem Begriff ‚Strahlung‘? Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften (17)Google Scholar
  20. Posner GJ, Strike KA, Hewson PW, Gertzog WA (1982) Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci Educ 66:211–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rego F, Peralta L (2006) Portuguese students’ knowledge of radiation physics. Phys Educ 41(3):259–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Riesch W, Westphal W (1975) Modellhafte Schülervorstellungen zur Ausbreitung radioaktiver Strahlung. Der Physikunterricht 9:75–85Google Scholar
  23. Treagust DF, Duit R (2008) Conceptual change: a discussion of theoretical, methodological and practical challenges of science education. Cult Stud Sci Educ 3(2):297–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tsui C-Y, Treagust DF (2007) Understanding genetics: analysis of secondary students’ conceptual status. J Res Sci Teach 44(2):205–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wandersee JH, Mintzes JJ, Novak JD (1994) Research on alternative conceptions in science. In: Gabel D (ed) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. Macmillan, New York, pp 177–210Google Scholar
  26. Watts M (1985) Students’ conceptions of light—a case study. Phys Educ 20:183–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zembylas M (2005) Three perspectives on linking the cognitive and the emotional in science learning: conceptual change, socio-constructivism and poststructuralism. Stud Sci Educ 41(1):91–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Vienna, Austrian Educational Competence Centre PhysicsViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations