Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
again from understanding the most widely accepted theories of evolution (a com-
plex argument coordinating a wide range of considerations which together offer a
viable explanatory account of the diversity of life on Earth) or appreciating the eth-
ical issues involved in pre-natal testing for genetic disease (considering how people
with diverse value systems may make different judgements about the social impli-
cations of science). Certainly, concepts taught in the humanities and social sciences
have much in common with at least some of what is studied in many natural science
classes.
Student Learning Difficulties in Science Subjects
There has been a substantial research effort to explore student thinking about topics
taught in the sciences (Taber, 2006, 2009). The motivation for this work may be
seen as the need to respond to students' difficulties in learning science that have
commonly been found.
Science concepts tend to be considered hierarchical in the sense that it is usually
possible to identify clear prerequisite knowledge needed for making sense of any
new ideas introduced. This offered a basis for considering students' problems in
learning science—clearly it was important for learning to be “programmed” in the
sense of making sure students met concepts in a logical order, so that they were not
expected to understand the more advanced concepts before those on which such con-
cepts were built (Herron, Cantu, Ward, & Srinivasan, 1977). So if a perfectly elastic
collision is one where kinetic energy is conserved, there is little point attempting to
teach the concept of an elastic collision before the students have been introduced to
the concept of kinetic energy.
Unfortunately, clear and careful concept analysis designed to avoid such prob-
lems was found to be insufficient to avoid many of the learning difficulties common
among learners. It became clear that understanding the structure of the subject mat-
ter was not enough to design effective teaching, and that it was necessary to also
understand more about the learning process.
Jean Piaget's (1972) work suggested that abstract concepts could only be effec-
tively learnt once students' brains had matured sufficiently to attain a level of
cognitive development that was not found until at least adolescence. Certainly this
approach brought useful insights (Shayer & Adey, 1981). However this again did
not seem to be the whole story. For one thing, it was found that advanced con-
cepts did seem to be within the grasp of younger learners if teaching took into
account the need to present the ideas in sufficiently concrete ways (Bruner, 1960).
Conversely, older students who had clearly demonstrated the higher levels of cog-
nition, still commonly had difficulties attaining some of the scientific concepts
commonly taught in school and college. Levels of cognitive development might be
important, but could not explain why so often students failed to learn the concepts
they met in science as taught.
The focus in science education shifted to exploring the nature of the ideas stu-
dents did have. It was soon recognised both that (a) often in science lessons students
Search WWH ::




Custom Search