Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of Previous Knowledge, Language Skills and Domain-specific Interest on Observation Competency

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many epoch-making biological discoveries (e.g. Darwinian Theory) were based upon observations. Nevertheless, observation is often regarded as ‘just looking’ rather than a basic scientific skill. As observation is one of the main research methods in biological sciences, it must be considered as an independent research method and systematic practice of this method is necessary. Because observation skills form the basis of further scientific methods (e.g. experiments or comparisons) and children from the age of 4 years are able to independently generate questions and hypotheses, it seems possible to foster observation competency at a preschool level. To be able to provide development-adequate individual fostering of this competency, it is first necessary to assess each child’s competency. Therefore, drawing on the recent literature, we developed in this study a competency model that was empirically evaluated within learners (N = 110) from different age groups, from kindergarten to university. In addition, we collected data on language skills, domain-specific interest and previous knowledge to analyse coherence between these skills and observation competency. The study showed as expected that previous knowledge had a high impact on observation competency, whereas the influence of domain-specific interest was nonexistent. Language skills were shown to have a weak influence. By utilising the empirically validated model consisting of three dimensions (‘Describing’, ‘Scientific reasoning’ and ‘Interpreting’) and three skill levels, it was possible to assess each child’s competency level and to develop and evaluate guided play activities to individually foster a child’s observation competency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aram DM, Ekelman BL, Nation JE (1984) Preschoolers with language disorders 10 years later. J Speech Hear Res 27:232–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuckle JL (2009) Amos (Version 18.0) [Computer Program]. SPSS, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel D, Novak J, Hanesian H (1978) Educational psychology: A cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 107(2):238–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blurton C (1985) M-capacity, developmental ability, field dependence/independence, prior knowledge and success in junior high school genetics. (Doctoral dissertation, Arizona State University, 1985). Diss Abstr Int 46:2647-A

  • Bollen KA, Stine RA (1992) Bootstrapping goodness-of-fit measures in structural equation models. Sociol Methods Res 21:205–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortz J, Döring N (1995) Forschungsmethoden und evaluation. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne MW, Cudeck R (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS (eds) Testing structural equation models. Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp 136–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne BM (1989) A primer of LISREL. Basic applications and programming for confirmatory factor analytic models. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cito Deutschland GmbH (2008) Cito Sprachtest (Version 2.0) [Computer Program]. Cito Deutschland GmbH, Butzbach

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bóo M (2006) Science in the early years. In: Harlen W (ed) ASE guide to primary science education. ASE, Hatfield, pp 124–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempster AP, Laird NM, Rubin DB (1977) Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM-algorithm. J R Stat Soc B 39:1–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Denissen J, Zarrett NR, Eccles J (2007) I like to do it, i’m able, and i know i am: longitudinal couplings between domain-specific achievement, self-concept, and interest. Child Dev 78(2):430–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gooding C, Swift J, Schell R, Swift P, McCroskery J (1990) A causal analysis relating previous achievement, attitudes, discourse, and intervention to achievement in biology and chemistry. J Res Sci Teach 27:789–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harlen W (2000) The teaching of science in primary schools. David Fulton, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlen W, Symington D (1985) Helping children to observe. In: Harlen W (ed) Primary science: Taking the plunge. Heinemann, London, pp 21–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Harms U, Mayer J, Hammann M, Bayrhuber H, Kattmann U (2004) Kerncurriculum und Standards für den Biologieunterricht in der gymnasialen Oberstufe In Tenorth H-E (Hrsg) Kerncurriculum Oberstufe II. Biologie, Chemie, Physik, Geschichte, Politik. Expertisen—im Auftrag der KMK (S. 22–84). Beltz, Weinheim

  • Hegarty-Hazel E, Prosser M (1991a) Relationship between students’ conceptual knowledge and study strategies—part 1: student learning in physics. Int J Sci Educ 13:303–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegarty-Hazel E, Prosser M (1991b) Relationship between students’ conceptual knowledge and study strategies—part 2: student learning in biology. Int J Sci Educ 13:421–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson D (1986) The nature of scientific observation. School Sci Rev 68(242):17–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu LT, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MA, Lawson AE (1998) What are the relative effects of reasoning ability. And prior knowledge on biology achievement in expository and inquiry classes? J Res Sci Teach 35(1):89–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston JS (2009) What does the skill of observation look like in young children? Int J Sci Educ 31(18):2511–2525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kastner J, May W, Hildman L (2001) Relationship between language skills and academic achievement in first grade. Percept Mot Skills 92(2):381–390

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohlhauf L, Rutke U, Neuhaus B (in press) Entwicklung eines Kompetenzmodells zum biologischen Beobachten ab dem Vorschulalter. Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften

  • Lawson AE (1983) Predicting science achievement: the role of developmental level, disembedding ability, mental capacity, prior knowledge, and beliefs. J Res Sci Teach 20(2):117–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mardia KV (1970) Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika 57:519–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin M (1972) Concepts of science education: A philosophic analysis. Scott Forseman, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin E, Wawrinowski U (2006) Beobachtungslehre. Theorie und Praxis reflektierter Beobachtung und Beurteilung. Juventa, Weinheim

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar R (1994) What is scientific method? In: Levinson R (ed) Teaching science. Routledge, London, pp 41–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Naguib M (2006) Methoden der Verhaltensbiologie. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory. Mc Graw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Oerter R (1996) Spielendes Lernen, gibt es das? Vom Widerspruch zwischen Spiel und Lernen und wie man ihn überwinden kann. Praxis Schule 4:6–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Oguz A, Yurumezoglu K (2007) The primacy of observation in inquiry-based science teaching. Paper presented at the International Workshop: Science Education in School (Bucharest, 1–14 Oct 2007)

  • Pullen PC, Justice LM (2003) Enhancing phonological awareness, print awareness, and oral language skills in preschool children. Interv School Clin 39(2):87–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renninger KA, Hidi S, Krapp A (1992) The role of interest in learning and development. Lawrence Erlbaum, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefele U (1991) Interest, learning and motivation. Educ Psychol 26(3):299–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster D, Leland C (2008) Considering context: encouraging students to consider the context of an observation can invite further inquiry. Sci Child 45:22–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer DG, Golinkoff RM, Hirsh-Pasek K (2006) Play equals learning. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smits JAJ, Telch MJ, Randall PK (2002) An examination of the decline in fear and disgust during exposure-based treatment. Behav Res Ther 40:1243–1253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sodian B, Thoermer C (2006) Theory of mind. In: Schneider W, Sodian B (eds) Kognitive Entwicklung. Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Entwicklungspsychologie Bd. 2. Hogrefe, Göttingen, pp 495–579

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS Inc (2009) SPSS for Windows (Version 18.0) [Computer Program]. SPSS, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomkins S, Tunnicliffe SD (2001) Looking for ideas: observation, interpretation and hypothesis-making by 12 year-old pupils undertaking science investigations. Int J Sci Educ 23(8):791–813

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomkins S, Tunnicliffe SD (2007) Nature tables: stimulating children’s interest in natural objects. J Biol Educ 41(4):150–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky LS (1986) Thought and language. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson J (1995) Direct observation. In: Breakwell G, Hammond SM, Fife-Shaw C (eds) Research methods in psychology. Sage, London, pp 224–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Yurumezoglu K (2006) Changing interpretations of the scientific observation: observations without seeing. Sci Utopia 12(145):44–47

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Biology Education, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Winzererstrasse 45/II, 80797, Munich, Germany

    Lucia Kohlhauf, Ulrike Rutke & Birgit Neuhaus

Authors
  1. Lucia Kohlhauf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ulrike Rutke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Birgit Neuhaus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucia Kohlhauf.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Test on Previous Knowledge

Answer the questions briefly! Most of the times one single word is sufficient…

The Roman snail:

  1. 1.

    How many tentacles does a Roman snail have?

  2. 2.

    Where exactly are the eyes of a Roman snail located?

  3. 3.

    Which part of the body does the Roman snail use to breathe?

  4. 4.

    Name the material, the housing of Roman snails consists of!

  5. 5.

    How do Roman snails chop their food?

The mouse:

  1. 1.

    What are the enlarged incisors of mice called?

  2. 2.

    How many of these enlarged incisors do mice possess?

  3. 3.

    On what do newborn mice feed?

  4. 4.

    How many toes do mice have at their hind feet (per foot)?

  5. 5.

    Name the sense organs which help the mouse not to collide with something in the dark!

  6. 6.

    State the task of the mouse tail!

Fishes:

  1. 1.

    Name the organ that helps fishes not to collide with other fishes within the shoal!

  2. 2.

    What do most fishes use for breathing?

  3. 3.

    State the reason for the fact that fishes never close their eyes!

  4. 4.

    Name one of the tasks of the swim bladder of fishes!

  5. 5.

    How many fins do most of the fishes have?

  6. 6.

    What is the backmost fin of fishes called?

  7. 7.

    How do you call the small bone tiles that cover the body of most fishes?

Appendix 2: Questionnaire on Interest

Tick the correct answer! Please always decide for one answer and do not place any crosses between the boxes!

 

Not interested

Slightly interested

Quite interested

Very interested

1. I am interested in animals

    

2. I am interested in fishes

    

3. I like to observe animals

    

4. I am interested in snails

    

5. I like to engage myself in wildlife

    

6. I am interested in mice

    

Appendix 3: Exemplary Coding Manual (Roman Snail)

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kohlhauf, L., Rutke, U. & Neuhaus, B. Influence of Previous Knowledge, Language Skills and Domain-specific Interest on Observation Competency. J Sci Educ Technol 20, 667–678 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9322-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9322-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation