• Jen-Min Chang
  • Huei LeeEmail author
  • Chiung-Fen Yen


The purpose of this study was to investigate the alternative conceptions about burning phenomena among Atayal indigene elementary school students in Taiwan. The main difference from other relevant research is that this study assesses Atayal people’s worldview by means of a questionnaire developed specifically for this purpose. There were three stages in this study: First, three Atayal elders were interviewed to access their traditional knowledge about nature, naturally occurring events, and burning. Second, this knowledge was used to develop an open-ended questionnaire that was administered to 37 students at the third to sixth grade levels (ages 9 to 12); eight respondents were interviewed to document their worldviews. Third, a two-tier diagnostic questionnaire developed from these results was administered to 228 students with 44 respondents interviewed about the burning events assessed by the instrument. Results suggested that students held alternative conceptions about the five burning events: candles burning, factors of burning, fire extinguishment, material changes in burning, and traditional meanings of burning. In contrast with previous studies on burning, this study demonstrated the existence of other alternative conceptions. The origin of these alternative conceptions may be grounded in traditional culture, knowledge, environment, economy, medicine, and personal thinking.


alternative conceptions burning indigene students worldview 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Academica Sinica Institute of Ethnology. (1996). Original works of the provisional council for the investigation of old habits of Taiwan: Investigative report on old savage habits, volume I: Atayal tribe. Taipei: Academica Sinica Institute of Ethnology (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  2. Aikenhead, G.S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27, 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Integrating Western and indigenous sciences: Cross-cultural science teaching. Research in Science Education, 31, 337–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aikenhead, G. S., & Jegede, O. J. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 269–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aikenhead, G. S., & Ogawa, M. (2007). Indigenous knowledge and science revisited. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2, 539–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. New York: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
  7. Andersson, B. (1986). Pupils’ explanations of some aspects of chemical reactions. Science Education, 70, 549–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Andersson, B. (1990). Pupils’ conceptions of matter and its transformations (age 12–16). Studies in Science Education, 18, 53–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. BouJaoude, S. B. (1991). A study of the nature of students’ understandings about the concept of burning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 689–704.Google Scholar
  10. Chinn, P. W. U. (2007). Decolonizing methodologies and indigenous knowledge: The role of culture, place and personal experience in professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9), 1247–1268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chinn, P. W. U., Hand, B. M., & Yore, L. D. (2008). Culture, language, knowledge about nature and naturally occurring events, and science literacy for all: She says, he says, they say. L1—Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 8(1), 149–171.Google Scholar
  12. Cobern, W. W. (1991). World view theory and science education research, NARST monograph no. 3. Manhattan: National Association for Research in Science Teaching.Google Scholar
  13. Cobern, W. W. (1996a). Constructivism and non-Western science education research. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cobern, W. W. (1996b). Worldview theory and conceptual change in science education. Science Education, 80, 579–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Driver, R. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberhien (Eds.), Children in science (pp. 124–144). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 671–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Florence, M. K., & Yore, L.D. (2004). Learning to write like a scientist: Coauthoring as an enculturation task. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 637–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. George, J. (1999). Worldview analysis of knowledge in a rural village: Implications for science education. Science Education, 83, 77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guo, C.-J. (2007). Issues in science learning: An international perspective. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 227–256). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Guo, C-J. (2008). Science learning in the contexts of culture and language practices: Taiwanese perspective. L1Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 8(1), 95–107.Google Scholar
  21. Haslam, F., & Treagust, D. F. (1987). Diagnosing secondary students’ misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two tier multiple-choice instrument. Journal of Biological Education, 21, 203–211.Google Scholar
  22. Hewson M. G., & Hewson P. W. (1981). Effect of instruction using students’ prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Hodson, D. (1998). Towards a curriculum framework for multicultural science and technology education. In D. Hodson (Ed.), Science and technology education and ethnicity: An Aotearoa/New Zealand Perspective (pp. 11–20). Wellington, New Zealand: The Royal Society of New Zealand.Google Scholar
  24. Kearney, M. (1988). World view. Navato: Chandler & Sharp.Google Scholar
  25. McKinley, E. (2005). Locating the global: Culture, language and science education for Indigenous students. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Meheut, M., Saltiel, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Pupils’ (11–12 year olds) conceptions of burning. European Journal of Science Education, 7, 83–93.Google Scholar
  27. Mou, Z. Y. (1996). Report on Indigenous education reform. Taipei: Educational Reform Review Commission (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  28. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K–8. Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten through Eighth Grade. In R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, & A. W. Shouse (Eds.). Board on science education, center for education, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington: National Academies.Google Scholar
  29. National Science Teachers Association. (2004). Position statement. Multicultural science education. Retrieved August 1, 2005, from:
  30. Osborne, R. J., & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implication of children’s science. Auckland: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  31. Petrie, H. G. (1976). Evolutionary rationality; Or can learning theory survive in the jungle of conceptual change? Philosophy of Education, 1976: Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Annual Society of the Philosophy of Education Society. Urbana, IL: Philosophy of Education Society.Google Scholar
  32. Prieto, T., Watson, R., & Dillon, J. S. (1992). Pupils’ understanding of burning. Research in Science Education, 22(1), 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Reiss, M. J. (1993). Science education for a pluralist society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Schollum, B., & Happs, J. C. (1982). Learners’ views about burning. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 28(3), 84–88.Google Scholar
  35. Snively, G. J., & Williams, L. B. (2008). “Coming to know”: Weaving indigenous and Western science knowledge, language, and literacy into the science classroom. L1—Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 8(1), 109–133.Google Scholar
  36. Sutherland, D., & Dennick, R. (2002). Exploring culture, language and the perception of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). Development and application of a two-tier multiple choice diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding of inorganic chemistry qualitative analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Treagust, D. F. (1988). The development and use of diagnostic instruments to evaluate students’ misconception in science. International Journal of Science Education, 10, 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Treagust, D. F. & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2007). The Taiwan national science concept learning study in an international perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 391–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tsai, C-C. (2001). Ideas about earthquakes after experiencing a natural disaster in Taiwan: An analysis of students’ worldviews. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1007–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). Constructivism in Education (pp.3–15). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT (Translation newly revised & edited by Alex Kozulin).Google Scholar
  44. Watson, R., Prieto, T., & Dillon, J. S. (1995). The effect of practical work on students’ understanding of burning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 487–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Watson, R., Prieto, T., & Dillon, J. S. (1998). Consistency of students’ explanations about burning. Science Education, 81, 425-443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yore, L. D. (2008). Science literacy for all students: Language, culture, and knowledge about nature and naturally occurring events. L1—Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 8(1), 5–21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Science EducationNational Dong Hwa UniversityTaiwanRepublic of China
  2. 2.Department of EcologyProvidence UniversityTaiwanRepublic of China

Personalised recommendations