Research in Science Education

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 729–752 | Cite as

Young Children’s Knowledge About the Moon: A Complex Dynamic System

  • Grady J. Venville
  • Robert D. Louisell
  • Jennifer A. Wilhelm


The purpose of this research was to use a multidimensional theoretical framework to examine young children’s knowledge about the Moon. The research was conducted in the interpretive paradigm and the design was a multiple case study of ten children between the ages of three and eight from the USA and Australia. A detailed, semi-structured interview was conducted with each child. In addition, each child’s parents were interviewed to determine possible social and cultural influences on the child’s knowledge. We sought evidence about how the social and cultural experiences of the children might have influenced the development of their ideas. From a cognitive perspective we were interested in whether the children’s ideas were constructed in a theory like form or whether the knowledge was the result of gradual accumulation of fragments of isolated cultural information. Findings reflected the strong and complex relationship between individual children, their social and cultural milieu, and the way they construct ideas about the Moon and astronomy. Findings are presented around four themes including ontology, creatures and artefacts, animism, and permanence. The findings support a complex dynamic system view of students’ knowledge that integrates the framework theory perspective and the knowledge in fragments perspective. An initial model of a complex dynamic system of young children’s knowledge about the Moon is presented.


Astronomy Conceptual understanding Early childhood Moon Sociocultural 


  1. Applebee, A. (1978). The child’s concept of story: Ages two to seventeen. Chicago: University Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baxter, J. (1989). Children’s understandings of familiar astronomical events. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 502–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baxter, J. (1995). Children’s understanding of astronomy and the earth sciences. In S. M. Glynn & R. Duit (Eds.), Learning sciences in the schools (pp. 155–171). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Bliss, J. (1995). Piaget and after: the case of learning science. Studies in Science Education, 25, 139–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blown, E. J., & Bryce, T. G. K. (2006). Knowledge restructuring in the development of children’s cosmologies. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1411–1462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, D. E. (2010, March). Students’ conceptions—Coherent or fragmented? And what difference does it make? A paper presented at the annual international conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, D. E., & Hammer, D. (2008). Conceptual change in physics. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 127–154). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  9. Carle, E. (1986). Papa, please get the Moon for me. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  12. diSessa, A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2), 105–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. diSessa, A. (2008). A bird’s-eye view of the “pieces” vs. “coherence” controversy (from the “pieces” side of the fence). In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 35–60). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Haupt, G. W. (1950). First grade concepts of the moon. Science Education, 34(4), 224–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hobson, S., Trundle, K., & Saçkes, M. (2010). Using a planetarium software program to promote conceptual change with young children. Journal of Science Education Technology, 19, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoffman, J. (Director), & Henson, L., & Belson, K. (Producer) (2003). Good boy [Motion picture]. United States: Jim Henson Pictures and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.Google Scholar
  17. Holmelund Minarik, E., & Sendak, M. (1985). Little bear goes to the Moon. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
  18. Louisell, R., Kazemek, F., & Wellik, J. (2009, April). Children’s stories about their natural worlds: An exploration from multiple perspectives. A paper in the proceedings of the NARST 2009 annual conference.Google Scholar
  19. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  20. Mertens, D. M. (1998). Research methods in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative and qualitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Moll, L. C. (1990). Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Naylor, P. R. (1997). Shiloh. New York: Scholastic.Google Scholar
  23. Nobes, G., Moore, D. G., Martin, A. E., Clifford, B. R., Butterworth, G., Panagiotaki, G., et al. (2003). Children’s understanding of the earth in a multicultural community: mental models or fragments of knowledge? Developmental Science, 6(1), 72–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Piaget, J. (1929). The child’s conception of the world. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  25. Ravetz, J. R. (2005). The no nonsense guide to science. Oxford: New Internationalist.Google Scholar
  26. Samarapungavan, A., Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. (1996). Mental models of the earth, sun, and moon: Indian children’s cosmologies. Cognitive Development, 11, 491–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schoon, K. (1992). Students’ alternative conceptions of earth and space. Journal of Geological Education, 40, 209–214.Google Scholar
  28. Schoultz, J., Säljö, R., & Wyndhamn, J. (2001). Heavenly talk: discourse, artifacts, and children’s understanding of elementary astronomy. Human Development, 44, 103–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Siegal, M., Butterworth, G., & Newcombe, P. A. (2004). Culture and children’s cosmology. Developmental Science, 7(3), 308–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Stake, R. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York: Guildford.Google Scholar
  32. Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., & Christopher, J. E. (2007). Fourth grade elementary students’ conceptions of standards-based lunar concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 29(5), 595–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Trundle, K. C., Troland, T. H., & Pritchard, T. G. (2008). Representations of the moon in children’s literature: an analysis of written and visual text. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(1), 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tsai, C.-C., & Wen, M. L. (2005). Research and trends in social science education from 1998 to 2002: a content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Venville, G. (2004). Young children learning about living things: a case study of conceptual change from ontological and social perspectives. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 449–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Venville, G. (2009, April). A Sociocultural perspective of young children’s conceptions of the Moon: Two case studies from Australia. A paper in the proceedings of the NARST 2009 annual conference.Google Scholar
  37. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Universal and culture specific properties of children’s models of the earth. In L. A. Hirschfield & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind (pp. 412–430). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vosniadou, S. (1999). Conceptual change research: State of art and future directions. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 3–13). Oxford: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  39. Vosniadou, S. (2003). Exploring the relationships between conceptual change and intentional learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 377–406). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  40. Vosniadou, S. (2008). Conceptual change research: An introduction. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. xii–xxviii). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1990). A cross-cultural investigation of children’s conceptions about the earth, the sun and the moon: Greek and American data. Technical Report No. 497. Illinois University. Urbana. Center for the Study of Reading. ED 318 627.Google Scholar
  42. Vosniadou, S., Vamvakoussi, X., & Skopeliti, I. (2008). The framework theory approach to the problem of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 3–34). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Wilhelm, J. (2009). A case study of three children’s original interpretations of the moon’s changing appearance. School Science and Mathematics, 109(5), 258–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yaccarino, D. (2002). Zoom! Zoom! Zoom! I’m off to the moon. New York: Scholastic Press.Google Scholar
  45. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Grady J. Venville
    • 1
  • Robert D. Louisell
    • 2
  • Jennifer A. Wilhelm
    • 3
  1. 1.Graduate School of Education (M428)University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Teacher DevelopmentSt Cloud State UniversitySt. CloudUSA
  3. 3.Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics Education DepartmentUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations