Advertisement

THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING ABLE TO DEAL WITH VARIABLES IN LEARNING SCIENCE

  • Peter BryantEmail author
  • Terezinha Nunes
  • Judith Hillier
  • Claire Gilroy
  • Rossana Barros
Article

Abstract

In a large-scale longitudinal study, 11-year-old schoolchildren were given a control-of-variables task, and their scores in this were related to their progress in learning about science at school over the next 3 years. The aim of the control-of-variables task was to measure children’s understanding that in a properly controlled scientific comparison one variable is tested at a time, while other variables are held constant. There were 2 kinds of question in the task. In one, the pupils were asked to judge whether particular comparisons between 2 situations were valid ones, in which all variables apart from the one being tested were held constant. In the other, they were asked to set up a valid comparison themselves. The pupils’ scores for both kinds of item successfully predicted their progress in science at school later on, even after controls for the effects of differences in age and IQ. Their success in setting up valid comparisons was a better predictor in the long term than the choices that they made in judging whether given comparisons were valid or not.

Key words

ALSPAC cognitive development and science achievement longitudinal study of science achievement predicting science achievement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

10763_2013_9469_MOESM1_ESM.docx (19 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J. & Wittrock, M. C. (2000). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  2. Bitner, B. L. (1991). Formal operational reasoning modes: Predictors of critical thinking abilities and grades assigned by teachers in science and mathematics for students in grades nine through twelve. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 265–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.Google Scholar
  4. Bullock, M., Sodian, B. & Koerber, S. (2009). Doing experiments and understanding science: Development of scientific reasoning from childhood to adulthood. In W. Schneider & M. Bullock (Eds.), Human development from early childhood to early adulthood. Findings from the Munich Longitudinal Study (pp. pp. 173–197). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Bullock, M. & Ziegler, A. (1999). Scientific reasoning: Developmental and individual differences. In F. E. Weinert & W. Schneider (Eds.), Individual development from 3 to 12 (pp. 38–54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Chen, Z. & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development, 70, 1098–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Inhelder, B. & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kanari, Z. & Millar, R. (2004). Reasoning from data: How students collect and interpret data in science investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 748–769.Google Scholar
  9. Klahr, D., Fay, A. & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 111–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kuhn, D. (2011). What is scientific reasoning and how does it develop? In U. Goswami (Ed.), Child cognitive development (2nd ed., pp. 497–523). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E. & O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  13. Lawson, A. E. (1978). The development and validation of a classroom test of formal reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lawson, A. E. (1983). Predicting science achievement: The role of developmental level, disembedding ability, mental capacity, prior knowledge and beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 117–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nunes, T. & Bryant, P. (2003). Mathematical and scientific thinking. In A. Grayson & J. Oates (Eds.), Cognition and language development in children (pp. 242–278). Milton Keynes, Bucks: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Shayer, M. (1999). Cognitive acceleration through science education II: Its effects and scope. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 883–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Shayer, M. & Adey, P. S. (1993). Accelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students IV: Three years on after a two-year intervention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 351–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Strand-Cary, M. & Klahr, D. (2008). Developing elementary science skills: Instructional effectiveness and path independence. Cognitive Development, 23, 488–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wechsler, D. (1992). WISC-III UK manual. Sidcup, Kent: The Psychological Corporation, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  20. Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20, 99–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Bryant
    • 1
    Email author
  • Terezinha Nunes
    • 1
  • Judith Hillier
    • 1
  • Claire Gilroy
    • 1
  • Rossana Barros
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations