Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 276–285 | Cite as

“The sun is sleeping now”: Early learning about light and shadows

  • Gilda Segal
  • Mark Cosgrove
Article

Abstract

To keep intuitive knowledge fluid for an extended time, we wish to encourage young children to examine continuously those intuitive explanations for natural phenomena which later become hard wired, highly resistant to development or change. To assist this we designed a learning package which integrated three extensively researched educational strategies (cooperative learning, informal inquiry and familiar context) for children to explore their notions about the topiclight. Children in a kindergarten class were encouraged to share their ideas about shadows and shadow formation with peers, as they took part in explorations of shadow formation inside and outside their classroom. Whole class discussions, small group conversations and final conversations between researcher and small groups provide insights into social and individual construction of knowledge, young children's abilities to be scientific and the social construction of gender.

Keywords

Natural Phenomenon Social Construction Extended Time Cooperative Learning Class Discussion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ausubel, D. (1968).Educational psychology: a cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  2. Bunge, M., & Ardila, R. (1987).Philosophy of psychology. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  3. Cosgrove, M., Osborne, R., & Carr, M. (1983). Regression — An issue for science education. Paper presented at 14th Annual Conference of the Australian Science Education Research Association, Hamilton, N.Z.Google Scholar
  4. Feher, E., & Rice, K. (1988). Shadows and anti-images: Children's conceptions of light and vision II.Science Education, 72, (5), 637–649.Google Scholar
  5. Fleer, M. (1990). Gender issues in early childhood science and technology education in Australia.International Journal of Science Education, 12(4), 355–367.Google Scholar
  6. Guesne, E. (1985). Light. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.),Children's ideas in science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (1987). Young children's spontaneous personification as analogy.Child Development, 58, 1013–1020.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Holubec, E.J. (1990).Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina: The Interaction Book Company.Google Scholar
  9. Kelly, A. (1987). The construction of masculine science. In A. Kelly (Ed.),Science for girls? Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Maehr, M.L., Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. (1992). School leader as motivator.Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(3), 410–429.Google Scholar
  11. Osborne, J.F., & Black, P. (1993). Young children's ideas about light and their development.International Journal of Science Education, 15(1), 83–93.Google Scholar
  12. Osborne, R., & Freyberg P. (1985).Learning in science: the implications of children's science. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  13. Piaget, J. (1970).The child's conception of physical causality. (M. Gabain, Trans.) London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published in 1930).Google Scholar
  14. Qualter, A. (1993). I would like to know more about that: a study of the interest shown by girls and boys in scientific topics.International Journal of Science Education, 15(3), 307–317.Google Scholar
  15. Resnick, L. (1991). Shared cognition: thinking as social practice. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine & S.D. Teasley (Eds.),Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  16. Siegal, M. (1991).Knowing children: Experiments in conversation and cognition. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Smail, B. (1987). Organising the curriculum to fit girls' interests. In A. Kelly (Ed.),Science for girls? Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Suggett, D. (1987). Inclusive curriculum: a gain or loss for girls?Curriculum Perspectives, 7(1), 69–74.Google Scholar
  19. Thagard, P. (1988).Computational philosophy of science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Yates, L. (1987). Point and counterpoint. Inclusive curriculum.Curriculum Perspectives, 7(1), 57–58.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian Science Education Research Association 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gilda Segal
    • 1
  • Mark Cosgrove
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Teacher EducationUniversity of Technology, SydneyLindfield

Personalised recommendations