Alternative Conceptions of Astronomy: How Irish Secondary Students Understand Gravity, Seasons, and the Big Bang

Cardinot, Adriana; Fairfield, Jessamyn A.

doi:10.29333/ejmste/10780

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 72 publications

(128 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The explanatory difference between Model A and Model C is subtle-the expansion of space itself versus an explosion of matter into existing space, respectively. Because of the apparent similarity of these two models, students may not have fully understood the details in some of the lines of scientific evidence that provide greater support for the Big Bang (Aretz et al, 2016;Cardinot and Fairfield, 2021;Hansson and Redfors, 2006;Prather et al, 2002;Trouille et al, 2013). These results suggest that it is easier to make a distinction between explanations when there is a greater contrast and greater plausibility gap (Lombardi et al, 2016c).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Students’ Scientific Evaluations of Astronomical Origins

Dobaria

Bailey

Klavon

et al. 2022

AEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students often encounter alternative explanations about astronomical phenomena. However, inconsistent with astronomers’ practices, students may not be scientific, critical, and evaluative when comparing alternatives. Instructional scaffolds, such as the Model-Evidence Link (MEL) diagram, where students weigh connections between lines of evidence and alternative explanations, may help facilitate students’ scientific evaluation and deepen their learning about astronomy. Our research team has developed two forms of the MEL: (a) the preconstructed MEL (pcMEL), where students are given four lines of evidence and two alternative explanatory models about the formation of Earth’s Moon and (b) the build-a-MEL (baMEL), where students construct their own diagrams by choosing four lines scientific evidence out of eight choices and two alternative explanatory model out of three choices, about the origins of the Universe. The present study compared the more autonomy-supportive baMEL to the less autonomy-supportive pcMEL and found that both scaffolds shifted high school student and preservice teacher participants’ plausibility judgments toward a more scientific stance and increased their knowledge about the topics. Additional analyses revealed that the baMEL resulted in deeper evaluations and had stronger relations between levels of evaluation and post-instructional plausibility judgements and knowledge compared to the pcMEL. This present study, focused on astronomical topics, supports our team’s earlier research that scaffolds such as the MELs in combination with more autonomy-supportive classrooms may be one way to deepen students’ scientific thinking and increase their knowledge of complex scientific phenomena.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Students’ Scientific Evaluations of Astronomical Origins

Dobaria

Bailey

Klavon

et al. 2022

AEJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comets and constellations (comets are falling stars; constellations are stars that connect through lines and represent animal figures) [57,58].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Misconceptions in the Learning of Natural Sciences: A Systematic Review

Guerra-Reyes,

Guerra-Dávila,

Naranjo-Toro

et al. 2024

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The determination of misconceptions among students is a prerequisite to driving conceptual, procedural, and attitudinal changes. This study aimed to investigate the causes and effects that misconceptions generate in the learning of natural sciences, as well as the basic categories of misconceptions in the learning of physics held by high school students. Under the PRISMA guidelines, the research consisted of a systematic literature review in three databases: Scopus, WoS, and Dimensions. Data visualization and analysis were supported by the following tools: VOSviewer, Bibliometrix, and ATLAS.ti. It was concluded that misconceptions do not solely depend on students’ behavior; teacher training and preparation also have a direct influence on this issue. The main factors include persistent use of the didactic model of transmission–reception, the influences of students’ daily experiences, decontextualization of the addressed content, limited development of research skills, usage of inadequate teaching methods, texts full of formulas, and exaggerated schemas. Physics stands out as the most studied discipline, in terms of misconceptions. Several topics were identified that contained misconceptions grouped into four main subject areas: thermodynamics, waves and sound, mechanics, and radiation and light.

show abstract

Reflecting on the relevance of drawing as a tool in eliciting pre-service teachers’ preconceptions of human organs and organ systems

Canlas

Molino-Magtolis

2022

Journal of Biological Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alternative Conceptions of Astronomy: How Irish Secondary Students Understand Gravity, Seasons, and the Big Bang

Cited by 5 publications

References 72 publications

Students’ Scientific Evaluations of Astronomical Origins

Students’ Scientific Evaluations of Astronomical Origins

Misconceptions in the Learning of Natural Sciences: A Systematic Review

Reflecting on the relevance of drawing as a tool in eliciting pre-service teachers’ preconceptions of human organs and organ systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About