Advertisement

Following Young Students’ Understanding of Three Phenomena in which Transformations of Matter Occur

  • Lena LöfgrenEmail author
  • Gustav Helldén
Article

Abstract

In order to develop successful teaching approaches to transformations of matter, we need to know more about how young students develop an understanding of these processes. In this longitudinal study, we followed 25 students from 7 to 13 years of age in their reasoning about transformations of matter. The questions addressed included how the students’ understanding of transformations of matter changed and how we can make sense of individual learning pathways. In interviews performed once or twice every year the students described and explained three situations: fading leaves left on the ground, a burning candle, and a glass of water covered with a glass plate on which some mist had formed. When analysing the interviews, we found a common pathway of how the students’ ideas changed over the years in each one of the situations. When analysing individual student’s interviews with Ausubel’s assimilation theory we could discern subordinate, superordinate and combinatorial learning. How these findings can contribute to an improvement of teaching about transformations of matter is discussed.

Key words

longitudinal study primary education science learning transformations of matter 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersson, B. (1990). Pupils’ conceptions of matter and its transformations (age 12–16). Studies in Science Education, 18, 53–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arzi, H. (1988). From short- to long-term: Studying science education longitudinally. Studies in Science Education, 15, 17–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ausubel, D.P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge. A cognitive view. Dortrecht: Kluwer Academics Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Bar, V. (1989). Children’s views about the water cycle. Science Education, 73(4), 481–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bar, V. & Galili, I. (1994). Stages of childrens’ views about evaporation. International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), 157–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. BouJaoude, S.B. (1991). A study of the nature of students’ understanding about the concept of burning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 689–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Driver, R., Guense, E. & Tiberghien, A. (Eds.) (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Duit, R., Treagust, D.F. & Mansfield, H. (1996). Investigating student understanding as a prerequisite to improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics. In D.F. Treagust, R. Duit, & B.J. Fraser (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics (pp. 17–31). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ginsburg, H.P. (1997). Entering the child’s mind. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Helldén, G. (1995). Environmental education and pupils’ conceptions of matter. Environmental Education Research, 1(3), 267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Helldén, G. (1999). A longitudinal study of pupils’ understanding of conditions for life, growth, and decomposition. In M. Bandiera, S. Caravita, E. Torracca & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Science education research in Europe. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  12. Helldén, G. (2001). Personal context and continuity of human thought; recurrent themes in a longitudinal study of pupils’ understanding of scientific phenomena. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit, W. Gräber, M. Komarek, A. Kross & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education-past, present and future. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Helldén, G. (2005). Exploring understandings and responses to science: A program of longitudinal studies. Research in Science Education, 35, 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holgersson, I. & Löfgren, L. (2004). A long-term study of students’ explanations of transformations of matter. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(1), 77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson, P. (2002). Children’s understanding of substances, Part 2: explaining chemical change. International Journal of Science Education, 24(10), 1037–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krnel, D., Watson, R. & Glazar, S.A. (1998). Survey of research related to the development of the concept of ‘matter’. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 257–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Novak, J.D. (1993). Human constructivism: A unification of psychological and epistemological phenomena in meaning making. International Journal of Personal Construct Psychology, 6, 167–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Novak, J.D. & Musonda, D. (1991). A twelve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning. American Educational Research Journal, 28(1), 117–153.Google Scholar
  19. Osborne, R. & Cosgrove, M. (1983). Childrens’ conceptions of the changes of state of water. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(9), 825–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1974). The child’s construction of quantities. Conservation and atomism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Rahayu, S. & Tytler, R. (1999). Progression in primary school children’s conceptions of burning: Toward an understanding of the concept of substance. Research in Science Education, 29(3), 295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tytler, R. (2000). A comparison of year 1 and year 6 students’ conceptions of evaporation and condensation: dimensions of conceptual progression. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 447–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tytler, R. & Peterson, S. (2005). A longitudinal study of children’s developing knowledge and reasoning in science. Research in Science Education, 35, 63–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. White, R. (2001). The revolution in research on science teaching. In V. Richardsson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics and ScienceKristianstad UniversityKristianstadSweden

Personalised recommendations