Examining Elementary School Students’ Mental Models of Sun-Earth Relationships as a Result of Engaging in Engineering Design

  • Chelsey Dankenbring
  • Brenda M. CapobiancoEmail author


Current reform efforts in science education in the United States call for students to learn science through the integration of science and engineering practices. Studies have examined the effect of engineering design on students’ understanding of engineering, technology, and science concepts. However, the majority of studies emphasize the accuracy of students’ scientific thinking instead of what students’ conceptions are. The aim of this study was to examine elementary school students’ conceptions of sun-Earth relationships as a result of engaging in an engineering design-based science task. Two independent fifth grade classrooms were identified. Each classroom teacher had 2 groups of students: 1 group engaged in traditional science lessons (control) and 1 group engaged in engineering design-based science lessons (treatment). Data were collected via multiple choice knowledge assessments, a draw-and-explain item, and semi-structured interviews designed to elicit students’ working mental models of the relationship between the sun and Earth. Results indicated a range of five different mental models expressed by students in both the control and treatment groups. These findings suggest that students still harbor alternate conceptions and possibly conflicting ideas regarding various sun-Earth relationships. If teachers are expected to implement science and engineering practices, attention must be given to not only what students’ misconceptions are but, more importantly, how best to implement design-based science lessons that facilitate students’ application and understanding of related science concepts.


Elementary Science conceptions Engineering design Mental models 



This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant #0962840. Any opinions, findings, and conclusion or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.


  1. Apedoe, X. S., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M. R. & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: The heating/cooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atwood, R. K. & Atwood, V. A. (1996). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of the causes of seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 553–563.Google Scholar
  3. Bakas, C. & Mikropoulos, T. (2003). Design of virtual environments for the comprehension of planetary phenomena based on students’ ideas. International Journal of Science Education, 25(8), 949–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banilower, E.R., Smith, P.S., Weiss, I.R. & Pasley, J.D. (2006). The status of K-12 science teaching in the United States. In D.W. Sunal, & E.L. Wright (Eds.), The impact of state and national standards on K-12 science teaching (pp. 83–122). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Barraza, L. (1999). Children’s drawings about the environment. Environmental Education Research, 5(1), 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baxter, J. (1989). Children’s understanding of familiar astronomical events. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 502–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cantrell, P., Peckan, G., Itani, A. & Velasquez-Bryant, N. (2005). The effects of engineering modules on students learning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 301–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Capobianco, B. M., Nyquist, C. & Tyrie, N. (2013). Shedding light on engineering design. Science and Children, 50(5), 58–64.Google Scholar
  9. Chiras, A. & Valanides, N. (2008). Day/Night cycle: Mental models of primary school children. Science Education International, 19(1), 65–83.Google Scholar
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approached. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Dove, J. E., Everett, L. A. & Preece, P. F. W. (1999). Exploring a hydrological concept through children’s drawings. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 485–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Driver, R., Guesne, E. & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes, Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Driver, R. & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13(1), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duit, R. & Treagust, D. F. (1995). Students’ conceptions and constructivist teaching approaches. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Improving science education (pp. 46–69). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Dykstra, D. I., Boyle, C. F. & Monarch, I. A. (1992). Studying conceptual change in learning physics. Science Education, 76(6), 615–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W. & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Franco, C. & Colinvaux, D. (2000). Grasping mental models. In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 93–118). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glynn, S. M. & Duit, R. (1995). Learning science meaningfully: Constructing conceptual models. In S. M. Glynn & R. Duit (Eds.), Learning science in the schools: Researching reforming practice (pp. 3–34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  19. Greca, I. M. & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modeling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Greca, I. M. & Moreira, M. A. (2001). Mental, physical, and mathematical models in the teaching and learning of physics. Science Education, 86(1), 106–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Halford, G. S. (1993). Children’s understanding: The development of mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  22. Hsu, Y. S. (2008). Learning about seasons in a technologically enhanced environment: The impact of teacher-guided and student-centered instructional approaches on the process of students’ conceptual change. Science Education, 92(2), 320–344.Google Scholar
  23. Hynes, M. M. (2012). Middle-school teachers’ understanding and teaching of the engineering design process: A look at subject matter and pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Design Education, 22(3), 345–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Indiana Department of Education (2011). Indiana science academic standards. Retrieved March 23, 2011 from Accessed 23 March 2011.
  25. Johnson, R. B. & Christensen, L. B. (2012). Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Koulaidis, V. & Christidou, V. (1999). Models of students’ thinking concerning the greenhouse effect and teaching implications. Science Education, 83(5), 559–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Küçüközer, H., Korkusuz, M.E., Küçüközer, H.A. & Yürümezoğlu, K. (2009, December). The effect of 3D computer modeling and observation-based instruction on the conceptual change regarding basic concepts of astronomy in elementary school students. Astronomy Education Review, 8(1). Retrieved from
  29. Lemons, G., Carberry, A., Rogers, C. & Jarvin, L. (2010). The benefits of model building in teaching engineering design. Design Studies, 31(3), 288–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mann, M. & Treagust, D. F. (2010). Students’ conceptions about energy and the human body. Science Education International, 21(3), 144–159.Google Scholar
  31. National Research Council (2008). Ready, set, science: Putting research to work in the K-8 science classrooms. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  32. National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  33. NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  34. Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 7–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  35. O-saki, O. M. & Samiroden, W. D. (1990). Children’s conceptions of ‘living’ and ‘dead’. Journal of Biological Education, 24(3), 199–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Osborne, R. & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children’s science. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Google Scholar
  37. Pope, M. L. (1982). Personal construction of formal knowledge. Interchange, 13(4), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ruane, J. M. (2005). Essentials of research methods: A guide to social science research. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  39. Schneps, M. H. & Sadler, P. (1988). A private universe [Motion picture]. Santa Monica, CA: Pyramid Film & Video.Google Scholar
  40. Sharp, J. G. (1996). Children’s astronomical beliefs: A preliminary study of Year 6 children in south‐west England. International Journal of Science Education, 18(6), 685–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tamir, P. (1990). Justifying the selection of answers in multiple choice items. International Journal of Science Education, 12(5), 563–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Trumper, R. (2001). A cross-age study of junior high school students’ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 23(11), 1111–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tsai, C. C. & Chang, C. Y. (2005). Lasting effects of instruction guided by the conflict map: Experimental study of learning about the causes of the seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1089–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Woodburry, S. & Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). Overcoming the paradox of change without difference: A model of change in the arena of fundamental school reform. Educational Policy, 16(5), 763–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Purdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations