Monthly Archives: January 2017

Common Misconceptions

Watching the video on common misconceptions about the causes of the seasons and the phases of the moon, I was reminded of when I taught Biology 12 this summer and just how challenging it was for students to grasp the mental model I was trying to communicate.  I tried to be creative in how I delivered my lessons by using analogies and manipulatives but still I found many students would erroneously add details or fill in gaps with incorrect information.  Why weren’t they able to acknowledge gaps in their understanding and ask for clarification?  Why did they invent facts?  I don’t believe they were simply too embarrassed to acknowledge their misconception.  Our brains are great at finding patterns and filling in for missed information.  In the image below, it is difficult not to see the unbordered white triangle in the middle.  Our brain fills in what it can’t see.  I feel like this is analogous to how students fill in missing information in order  to complete a mental model of a particular process.  Unfortunately in science, if these assumptions go unchecked, students risk carrying the burden of their false assumptions year after year.  I no longer rely solely on written output to find out what my students understand.  I have long since adopted oral assessments whereby students are asked to explain their understanding of processes fundamental to the unit of study.

In many cases, the students are actually taught misconceptions.  There is mounting research that shows that misconceptions concerning science are prevalent among teachers.  Nancy J. Pelaez et al. (2005) for instance, investigated the prevalence of blood circulation misconception  among prospective elementary teacher in the US and found that “70% of prospective elementary teachers did not understand the dual blood circulation pathway, 33% were confused about blood vessels, 55% had wrong ideas about gas exchange, 19% had trouble with gas transport and utilization, and 20% did not understand lung function”.  I would be curious to see how many of my colleagues would agree that veins in their wrists are blue because they carry deoxygenated blood (deoxygenated blood is still red). My hope is that through greater inquiry based education, teachers will be less required to the absolute bearers of all knowledge and can focus on teaching students the skills required to consolidate, criticize and explain information.

“Kanizsa Triangle.” Optics For Kids – Optical Illusions. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2017.

Pelaez, N. J. “Prevalence of blood circulation misconceptions among prospective elementary teachers.” AJP: Advances in Physiology Education 29.3 (2005): 172-81. Web.

Watching A Private Universe (Shneps & Sadler, 1987) I was astounded that not only did so many of the graduate and high school students have misconceptions about the seasons, but also that they all seemed to have the same misconception. It was then that I started to question my own knowledge and understanding of the reason for seasons, checking my information by researching the question. The information that the students were giving about the reason we have seasons was logical and made sense given their initial information and the representative drawing from the text. I was enlightened when the video manipulated the drawing from the text from the side view to the bird’s eye view, demonstrating how the elliptical orbit could be misconstrued. I had never thought about this aspect before now.

Not being a particularly strong student in math or science, I have always felt that I would not be a very strong teacher of these subjects also. “Teachers cannot help children learn things they themselves do not understand” (Ball, 1991). As an elementary school teacher I am required to teach both of these and cover quite a quantity of concepts within the year. In science we cover chemistry, physics, matter & energy, and biology within two terms, which can be daunting for someone who made it through most of high school and university with little or no math and science instruction. In my early years of teaching I relied heavily on the science text books, trusting that they would allow me to impart the information and knowledge that the students were required to know. As I read the articles and watch the video I am left wondering how much my teaching contributed to some of the misconceptions my students may have had regarding science and math. Since then, I have developed my own knowledge through experimentation, research, and additional courses.  I have realized some of my own misconceptions and with that have been able to identify some of my student’s misconceptions. Now that I am much more competent in my science and math teaching, it is easier for me to seek out student misconceptions in order to design lessons and activities to help students adjust their thinking.

In a research paper conducted by Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, the relationship between teacher knowledge and student learning was studied, and concluding that student learning is directly related to teacher knowledge. “If teachers hold such misconceptions themselves or simply are unaware that their students have such ideas, their attempts at teaching important concepts may be compromised” (Sadler et al, 2013). These leads me to two questions: How can teachers identify their own misconceptions and how can they better understand and identify misconceptions of their students?

Confrey notes that “children develop ideas about their world, develop meanings for words used in science, and develop strategies to obtain explanations of how and why things behave as they do, and that these naive ideas cannot be easily ignored or replaced” (Confrey, 1990). It is important for teachers to be able to tease out these misconceptions by probing a student’s conceptual framework using direct questioning allowing them to develop effective lessons and activities to provide opportunities for students to discover new information and correct their misconceptions. Previous research on student’s misconceptions shows that student’s have difficulty assimilating and acquiring scientific knowledge if their misconceptions are ignored or not adequately addressed. One way for teachers to address this gap is to consider that an emphasis on identifying and remediating holes in the teacher’s knowledge may be more helpful for the science teacher’s effectiveness in the classroom (Sadler et al).

Providing hands on activities and experiments for students to work through will allow them to interpret their results as opposed to arriving at an expected result. Technology such as virtual experiments, could be used in a classroom setting where the resources are inadequate for real experimentation. Programs such as Skype can be used to visit high school or college labs and see experiments performed live and allow the students to ask questions directly to the teacher or students performing the experiment. I have done this with our local high school science teacher, who was very enthusiastic about participating, and the students were fascinated with the results. The key is to allow the student to discover the science in order to add to their knowledge and understanding to help dispel misconceptions.

References

Students conceptual understandings and ideas are likely long established prior to entering the classroom. While these can be based on personal experiences or long-held beliefs, these ideas are, unfortunately not always correct. These overall themes are evident in the short documentary, A Private Universe (1987), as well as presented in the readings on constructivism (Fosnot, 2013). Both the video and reading establish that students have their own pre-existing concepts and notions, which ultimately need to be “straightened out” as new concepts emerge and compete. Fosnot further argues that the role of educators is to change not necessarily “dispense knowledge” but also to provide “opportunities and incentives” to construct learning.

The article selected for further examination studies several different misconceptions held by both teacher and students in regards to the physical sciences (Burgoon, Heddle, & Duran, 2010). The misunderstanding of particular interest is one regarding the general concept of gravity. The article discusses the common confusion with the concept in which objects at different heights experience a different force of gravity. The study confirmed a general belief and association by both teachers and students alike that objects at a higher elevation are experiencing “more gravity” wherein fact gravity is always present regardless of height or elevation. The article addresses some of the concerns raised in educating students if teachers themselves held misconceptions but proposed some solutions such as increasing awareness and professional development.

In regards to digital technologies and instructional activities to help nurture student understanding, there are online simulations, phet labs, and video clips. Fosnot, however, would argue that students need opportunities to change and construct their learning, to help my own students overcome the gravitational misconceptions explored by Burgoon, Heddle, and Duran (2010), I use a combination of digital motion detectors linked to graphing to allowing students to create their own explorations on relationship between gravity and height. By dropping objects from various elevations, students are able to examine and confirm the notion that the force of gravity and acceleration remain constant.

References:

Burgoon, J., Heddle, M., & Duran, E. (2010). Re-examining the similarities between teacher and

student conceptions about physical science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7),

859-872. http://10.1007/s10972-009-9177-0

Fosnot, C.T. (2013). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed.). New

York: Teachers College Press

Sahiner, A. (Producer), & Schneps, M. (Director). (1987). A private universe [Documentary].

United States: Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

After watching the video the concepts within it rang true to me. In my experiences in science, many concepts were taught only once and models, simulations and hands-on experience were limited to what resources were available, which were often slim to none. If models were available, the educators usually stood at the front of the class with the model in front of them as they “taught” us the concept. We did not handle or construct the models. One thing I found interesting was how strongly the students held on to their personal scientific theories. It seems that early experiences learning scientific concepts are fraught with misconceptions that may not be challenged and thus taken as the ultimate truth. I wonder if this is because as children we were not taught to question what we saw in books or what we were taught. We implicitly trusted these sources, including our understanding of 3 dimensional phenomenon which was more often than not, represented in 2-D form (in drawings, graphs, etc.).

A common misconception I have is how our ears “hear” sound. I know it has something to do with vibrations hitting our eardrums, and that the hairs in the ears are called cilia and that the hairs are very delicate and if you damage them you will damage your hearing. Beyond that my lack of full understanding comes to the fore. I remember finding the concept fascinating as I read about it in a science book I had in my home book collection. I read it over and over again as a child. But now that I reflect, I never had a chance in my formal education to revisit the concept; so much of it was lost from my memory. I learned about the parts of the body and some of their rudimentary functions but not in depth. No concepts in biology were hands-on or taught so that we could actually experience the ideas or sensations. No simulations were provided. I do remember watching one video in health class which showed how our digestive system works. I remember it to this day because I could actually “see” inside the body with the use of a mini camera. WOW! powerful stuff.

When I searched for an article about hearing, I found the following information which you can access in the link provided:

https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/how-do-we-hear

So, after reading the information I still had many unanswered questions namely:

What is a sound wave?

How do bones amplify or increase sound? (An analogy might help)

What does it mean when it says hair cells “ride the wave”?

And so on….

Digital technology would allow scientific concepts to “leap from the page” and become more interactive. Simulations, for example, can help students to understand concepts more fully. Being able to take virtual field trips to talk to and learn from scientists around the globe could deepen understanding and allow students to ask important and unanswered questions. Allowing students time to use technology to research a subject area of interest and to use information from a variety of sources including Blogs, videos, simulations, interactive games etc. could also lead to engagement and deeper understandings.

So the question is how can we use digital technology and instructional activities to help children address these conceptions? Kozma (2003) looked at patterns of innovative classroom practices supported by technology, which included the primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary grades. In many of the case studies, science was the subject area.  The case studies found that when students use technology to solve complex, authentic problems that cross disciplinary boundaries, and when educators facilitate this through technology, students are engaged and successful. This constructivist approach promotes knowledge building and moves the students from vessels into which information is imparted into constructors of their own knowledge. The stated impact of the innovation on students was quite broad. The largest number of cases claimed that students acquired ICT skills as a result of the innovation (75%). A large majority of cases claimed students developed positive attitudes toward learning or school (68%), acquired new subject matter knowledge (63%), or acquired collaborative skills (63%) (Kozma, 2003).

Many of these cases from around the world had qualities in common including working collaboratively, using technological tools to research, publish work and create new products. In addition, educators moved more toward facilitation as opposed to being in the “traditional” role of teacher as imparter of knowledge. In fact, Kozma (2003) found that when students used technology to research, solve, design and self- assess they improved their problem solving skills, information management skills, collaboration and communication skills. So, it seems that technology can help us with conceptual understandings, but it also depends on how the educator allows the technology to be used.

References

How do we hear? (2015, July 20). Retrieved from https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/how-do-we-hear.

Robert B. Kozma (2003) Technology and Classroom Practices, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36:1, 1-14, DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2003.10782399

Heather’s challenges involved logical yet inaccurate theories, confusion that occurred when she blended new concepts with pre-existing knowledge and unawareness of private theories.

When I was watching the video of Heather, I had this realization that I also have misconceptions in the science and math disciplines as a learner. I recall myself generating logical reasonings to explain scientific phenomenons. Furthermore, as an elementary teacher, I am responsible for delivering accurate knowledge to my students. This lingering thought provoked me to look at teacher misconceptions and how they compare with student misconceptions in science, specifically. I came across an article by Burgoon, Heddle and Duran (2011) that was quite recent and focused on comparing the misconceptions about physical science between elementary teachers and students. Elementary science teachers were assessed on their physical science knowledge. The results showed the elementary science teachers shared similar misconceptions in topics of temperature, gases, magnetism and gravity. Of course, these results cannot be generalized to the entire population of science teachers, but it does indicate some concern as teachers who have misconceptions, can contribute to further misconceptions for their students. For instance, a possible source of student misconception comes from an unreliable source (like a teacher)!

I found this article relevant to Paul Cobb’s article titled “Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development”. The chapter discussed the similarities and differences between two trends in constructivist-based research in education: a cognitive theory that emphasizes self-organization of knowledge process within the learner and a sociocultural theory that focuses on the sociohistorical aspect of knowledge construction. This is relevant to Burgoon et al. (2011)’s article because it indicates the importance of students and teachers being able to demonstrate awareness of misconceptions within themselves but also to point out misconceptions of others through participation in discussions and collaborative learning. Specifically, Cobb (1994) emphasizes that learning occurs both from self-organization of knowledge as well as through participation in cultural practices (i.e. formal schooling).

The other article I chose to read was from Confrey (1990) that discussed various student misconceptions in mathematics. At the end, several propositions for implications were mentioned. It sheds insight on Burgoon et al. (2011)’s article because these suggestions for minimizing misconceptions for students can possibly be applied to teachers. Particularly, teachers should take opportunities to reflect on their own misconceptions using those strategies.

Digital technology can help children and teachers address these conceptions in various ways. More hands-on learning where students directly manipulate objects will help them visualize their conceptions. https://phet.colorado.edu/en/ is a website that has virtual simulations of all topics in science. Students can explore them prior to hands-on experimentation. Online discussion forums can also help students address misconceptions because they can reflect on their learning on them and others can make comments on their knowledge. These forums should be monitored by educators who can also express their knowledge.

Burgoon, J. N., Heddle, M. L., & Duran, E. (2011). Re-examining the similarities between teacher and student conceptions about physical science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(2), 101-114. doi:10.1007/s10972-010-9196-x

Cobb, Paul. “Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development.” Educational researcher 23, no. 7 (1994): 13-20.