Research in Science Education

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 529–550 | Cite as

“Pluto Has Been a Planet My Whole Life!” Emotions, Attitudes, and Conceptual Change in Elementary Students’ Learning about Pluto’s Reclassification

  • Suzanne H. Broughton
  • Gale M. Sinatra
  • E. Michael Nussbaum
Article

Abstract

Learning about certain scientific topics has potential to spark strong emotions among students. We investigated whether emotions predicted students’ attitudes after engaging in independent rereading and/or rereading plus discussion about Pluto’s reclassification. Fifth and sixth grade students read a refutation text on Pluto’s reclassification. Participants were randomly assigned to either the reread independently or the reread plus discussion group. Results showed that students in both groups experienced attitude change and that change was sustained over time. Students reported experiencing more negative than positive emotions at pretest. Emotions, which became more positive after intervention, were predictive of students’ attitudes and attitude change. Implications for the role of emotions when learning about controversial topics are discussed.

Keywords

Emotions Attitudes Refutation text Elementary science learning Small group discussions 

References

  1. Adler, J. (2006). Astronomers fight for Pluto’s planetary status: some astronomers want to reclaim the status of planet for the distant ball of rock and ice. Newsweek. Retrieved November 6, 2006, from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15460884/site/newsweek/.
  2. Alexander, P. A., Murphy, P. K., Buehl, M. M., & Sperl, C. T. (1997). The influence of prior knowledge, beliefs, and interest in learning from persuasive text. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference.Google Scholar
  3. Alexander, P. A., Buehl, M. M., & Sperl, C. T. (2001). The persuasiveness of persuasive discourse. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 651–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amlund, J. T., Kardash, C. M., & Kulhavy, R. W. (1986). Repetitive reading and recall of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001). Inviting students into the pursuit of meaning. Educational Psychologist Review, 13, 225–241.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2006). Improving comprehension with Questioning the Author: a fresh and expanded view of a powerful approach. New York: Scholastic.Google Scholar
  7. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Sandora, C., Kucan, L., & Worthy, J. (1996). Questioning the author: a year-long classroom implementation to engage students with text. The Elementary School Journal, 96, 385–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bless, H. B. (2000). The interplay of affect and cognition: the mediating role of general knowledge structures. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking: the role of affect in social cognition (pp. 201–222). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Broughton, S. H. (2008). The Pluto debate: influence of emotions on belief, attitude, and knowledge change (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nevada, Las Vegas; Nevada.Google Scholar
  10. Broughton, S. H., & Sinatra, G. M. (2010). Text in the science classroom: promoting engagement to facilitate conceptual change. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading researchers to life: essays in honor of Isabelle Beck (pp. 232–256). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, M. (2010). How I killed Pluto and why it had it coming. New York: Spiegel & Grau.Google Scholar
  12. Chambliss, M. J., & Garner, R. (1996). Do adults change their minds after reading persuasive text? Written Communication, 13, 291–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61–82). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: a theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1–49.Google Scholar
  15. Crano, W. D., & Prislin, R. (2006). Attitudes and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 345–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. D’Mellow, S. K., & Graesser, A. C. (2011). A synthesis of research on emotions during complex learning. New Orleans: Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  17. Diakodoy, I. N., Mousknounti, T., & Iaonnides, C. (2011). Comprehension and learning from refutation and expository texts. Reading Research Quarterly, 46, 22–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 33, 109–128.Google Scholar
  19. Ekman, P. (2003). Emotions revealed: recognizing faces and feelings to improve communication and emotional life (2nd ed.). New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC.Google Scholar
  20. Frenzel, A., Goetz, T., Ludtke, O., Pekrun, R., & Sutton, R. E. (2009). Emotional transmission the classroom: exploring the relationship between teacher and student enjoyment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 705–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Pekrun, R., & Hall, N. C. (2006). The domain specificity of academic emotional experiences. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goetz, T., Frenzel, A. C., Hall, N. C., & Pekrun, R. (2008). Antecedents of academic emotions: testing the internal/external frame of reference model for academic enjoyment. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 9–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gregoire, M. (2003). Is it a challenge or a threat? A dual-process model of teachers’ cognition and appraisal processes during conceptual change. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 147–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: a comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 117–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (2003). When is conceptual change intended? A cognitive-sociocultural view. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 407–428). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Hynd, C. (2001). Refutational texts and the change process. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 699–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hynd, C. (2003). Conceptual change in response to persuasive messages. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 1–18). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  28. International Astronomical Union Press Release (2006, August 24). Retrieved April 19, 2007, from http://www.iau2006.org/mirror/www.iau.org/iau0603/index.html.
  29. Kagan, J. (2007). What is emotion?: History, measures, and meanings. Binghamton, NY: Vail-Ballou Press.Google Scholar
  30. Kardash, C. M., & Scholes, R. J. (1996). Effects of preexisting beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and need for cognition on interpretation on controversial issues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 260–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Krug, D., Davis, T. B., & Glover, J. A. (1990). Massed versus distributed repeated reading: a case of forgetting helping recall? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 366–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lazarus, R. S. (1984). On the primacy of cognition. American Psychologist, 39, 124–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Limon, M., & Carretero. (1998). Evidence evaluation and reasoning abilities in the domain of history: An empirical study. In J. F. Voss & M. Carretero (Eds.), Learning and reasoning in history (pp. 252–271). London: The Woburn Press.Google Scholar
  34. Linnenbrink, E. A. (2006). Emotion research in education: theoretical and methodological perspectives on the integration of affect, motivation, and cognition. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 307–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of motivational beliefs in conceptual change. In M. Limon & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: issues in theory and practice (pp. 115–135). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2004). Role of affect in cognitive processing in academic contexts. In D. Y. Dai (Ed.), Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual development and functioning (pp. 57–87). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved March 21, 2007, from http:/site.ebrary.com/lib/unlv/Doc?id=10084632&ppg=72.Google Scholar
  37. Linnenbrink-Garcia, E. A., & Pekrun, R. (2011). Students’ emotions and academic engagement: introduction to the special issue. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mason, L. (2001). Responses to anomalous data on controversial topics and theory change. Learning and Instruction, 11, 453–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mason, L., & Gava, M. (2007). Effects of epistemological beliefs and learning text structure on conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou, A. Baltas, & X. Vamvakoussi (Eds.), Reframing the problem of conceptual change in learning and instruction (pp. 165–196). Oxford: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  40. Mason, L., Gava, M., & Boldrin, A. (2008). On warm conceptual change: the interplay of text, epistemological beliefs, and topic interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2, 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McKeown, M. B., Beck, I. L., & Worthy, M. J. (1993). Grappling with text ideas: questioning the author. The Reading Teacher, 46, 560–566.Google Scholar
  42. Morrow, L. M., & Gambrell, L. B. (2000). Literature-based reading instruction. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, vol. 3 (pp. 563–586). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  43. Murphy, P. K. (2001). Teaching as persuasion: a new metaphor for a new decade. Theory into Practice, 40, 224–227.Google Scholar
  44. Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2008). The role of knowledge, beliefs, and interest in the conceptual change process: a synthesis and meta-analysis of the research. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 583–617). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. Murphy, P. K., & Mason, L. (2006). Changing knowledge and beliefs. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 305–323). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  46. National Geographic News (2006, August 24). Retrieved June 12, 2007, from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060824-pluto-planet.html.
  47. National Research Council (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  48. Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 315341.Google Scholar
  49. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002a). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37, 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002b). Positive emotions in education. In E. Frydenberg (Ed.), Beyond coping: meeting goals, visions, and challenges (pp. 149–173). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  51. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2005). Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ). User’s Manual. (Available from R. Pekrun, Department of Psychology, University of Munich, Leopoldstrasse 13, D-80802 Muenchen).Google Scholar
  52. Pekrun, R., Frenzel, A. C., Goetz, T., & Perry, R. P. (2007). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: an integrative approach to emotions in education. In P. A. Schutz & R. Pekrun (Eds.), Emotion in education (pp. 13–36). Burlington: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pekrun, R., Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2009). Achievement goals and achievement emotions: testing a model of their joint relations with academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115–135.Google Scholar
  54. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 123–205). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  55. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: the role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167–199.Google Scholar
  56. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Raphael, T. E. (1998). Balanced instruction and the role of classroom discourse. In J. Osborn & F. Lehr (Eds.), Literacy for all: issues in teaching and learning (pp. 134–169). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  58. Rosenberg, E. L. (1998). Levels of analysis and the organization of affect. Review of General Psychology, 2, 247–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scientific American (2006, December 16). Retrieved January 6, 2007, from http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=93299D91-E7F2-99DF-3893FFA651C8CE4E.
  60. Sinatra, G. M. (2005). The warming trend in conceptual change research: the legacy of Paul Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40, 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sinatra, G. M., & Mason, L. (2008). Beyond knowledge: learner characteristics influencing conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 560–582). Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  62. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147–176). New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  63. Time for Kids (2006, September 1). Retrieved June 12, 2007, from http://www.timeforkids.com/TFK/news/printout/0,9187,1333579,00.html.
  64. Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: a review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Math Education, 8(6), 951–970.Google Scholar
  65. Tyson, N. D. (2009). The Pluto files: the rise and fall of America’s favorite planet. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  66. Vosniadou, S. (2001). What can persuasion research tell us about conceptual change that we did not already know? International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 731–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vosniadou, S. (2002). On the nature of naïve physics. In M. Limon & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: issues in theory and practice (pp. 61–76). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vosniadou, S. (2003). Exploring the relationships between conceptual change and intentional learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 377–406). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  69. Vosniadou, S. (2004). Extending the conceptual change approach to mathematics learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 14, 445–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: a study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Vosniadou, S. & Skopeliti, I. (2005). Developmental shifts in children’s categorization of the earth. In B. G. Bara, L. Barsalou, & M. Bucciarelli (Eds.), Proceedings of the XXVII Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2325–2330).Google Scholar
  72. Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Suzanne H. Broughton
    • 1
  • Gale M. Sinatra
    • 2
  • E. Michael Nussbaum
    • 2
  1. 1.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.University of NevadaLas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations