Investigating in the school science laboratory: conceptual and procedural knowledge and their influence on performance

Millar, Robin; Lubben, Fred; Got, Richard; Duggan, Sandra

doi:10.1080/0267152940090205

Cited by 109 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In current attempts to reform science education, it is often argued that students should be given more opportunities to learn actively, in particular to be involved in researchlike or inquiry activities (e.g., De Vos & Genseberger, 2000;Millar, Lubben, Gott, & Duggan, 1994;NRC (National Research Council), 2000). Moreover, curriculum innovations focusing on the public understanding of science (e.g., De Vos & Reiding, 1999; NEAB (Northern Examinations and Assessment Board), 1998) have drawn attention to reflection on science, that is, increasing students' awareness of how scientific knowledge is constructed and applied, rather than focusing exclusively on the content of scientific ideas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common Characteristics of Models in Present-day Scientific Practice

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teaching the use of models in scientific research requires a description, in general terms, of how scientists actually use models in their research activities. This paper aims to arrive at defining common characteristics of models that are used in present-day scientific research. Initially, a list of common features of models and modelling, based on the literature was compiled. Next, a questionnaire was developed, which consisted of 10 statements with which the common features of models were probed. A sample of 77 research papers from 'hard science' journals was drawn. The questionnaire was sent to the first author of the selected articles. The useful response was 24 (31%). From an analysis of the results, it was concluded that the consulted scientists more or less agreed with the initial list of common features of models and modelling. However, some characteristics were perceived differently by the respondents, or formulated in different terms. This has led us to revise some of the features in our list. It is recommended that in science curricula and science text books, more attention should be paid to modern uses of models (e.g., in the context of computer simulation and technological design), and that aspects of the nature of models (e.g., the relation between model and target, and possible limitations of a model), which are underexposed in education, are addressed more explicitly.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common Characteristics of Models in Present-day Scientific Practice

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, it could be argued that some pupils in the current study were similarly behaving robotically and did not recognise that their data were indeed inaccurate, so were excessively data-laden. Millar, Lubben, Gott and Duggan (1994) found that 10% of students in their study could not 'see' any patterns in quantitative data, and seemed to take measuring in school science as a kind of mindless ritual, with no clear purpose other than to obtain sets of numbers that actually mean nothing to them. In the current study, since 292 out of 297 reported temperatures were exact to the degree, many pupils were rounding up or down when recording their results, which is scientifically acceptable.…”

Section: Overly Data-laden Experimentingmentioning

confidence: 93%

The Experimenter Expectancy Effect: An Inevitable Component of School Science?

Allen¹

2015

Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:A medium-scale quantitative study (n=99) found that 10-11 year-old pupils dealt with theory and evidence in notably different ways, depending on how the same science practical task was delivered. Under the auspices of a part-randomised and part-quasi experimental design, pupils were asked to complete a brief, apparently simple task involving scientific measurement. One half of the sample carried out the task in a naturalistic whole class context; the other half worked as lone experimenters in solitary conditions where accuracy of measurement was promoted. In the whole class setting pupils exposed to an illustrative lesson displayed behaviour indicative of experimenter expectancy, tending to differentiate theory and evidence to a lesser degree than pupils who experienced an enquiry lesson. In addition, during the illustrative lesson many of the pupils were biased towards their theories in ways that lay well beyond those intended by the research design. In the solitary setting pupils performed equally well with both illustrative and enquiry treatments.Implications are discussed in the light of the problems of excessive pupil theory/dataladeness. Finally, the advantages and disadvantages of exposing young learners to more authentic versions of professional science are considered.

show abstract

“…Recipe-like instructions keep most students away from thinking about the purpose of the experimental design or about how many times to repeat a measurement (Schauble 1996;Schauble et al 1995). This is mirrored in the difficulty students have with the understanding of the nature of theory and experiments (Duveen et al 1993) or with using a scientific attitude towards investigative tasks (Millar et al 1994). Chin and Brown (2000) taped US grade 8 students during class group laboratory activities.…”

Section: Quality Of Open-ended Investigationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…investigations in which there is not one 'correct' answer and there are many routes to a valid solution), substantive content knowledge as well as procedural understanding appears necessary to succeed (Glaesser et al 2009b). When students carry out open-ended investigations in biology education, they will have to draw on their substantive knowledge of the subject investigated, on their ability to use practical skills and on their procedural understanding, for instance, about how to construct a fair test or how to use evidence in reasoning (Millar et al 1994), something that Klahr and Dunbar (1988) call 'dual-space searching'.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Students work hard, but the quality of their work is often poor. It lacks understanding of criteria for gathering and evaluating the quality of empirical evidence, the understanding of how to proceed, the so-called 'procedural understanding' (Millar et al 1994;Glaesser et al 2009b). Procedural understanding can be seen as having a knowledgebase upon which scientists draw when they design and evaluate (evidence coming from) experiments, and therefore understanding plays an important role in scientific reasoning (Roberts 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Development of Understanding of Evidence in Pre-University Biology Education in the Netherlands

Schalk¹,

Schee²,

Boersma

2011

Res Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ensuring the quality of investigations requires the understanding of procedures by which empirical evidence is obtained. This can be interpreted as becoming aware of and using criteria for evidence in one's mental structure. The question is whether this process can be observed in practice. In two schools for pre-university education where 11th grade students were working in small groups on open investigations in biology, all conversations in class -with or without the teacher participating-of eight groups (17 students) were audiotaped and transcribed. All utterances concerning the quality of investigations (3943 in total) were analyzed using five categories: problematization, description, explanation, generalization and application. Half of the students received written feedback twice, the other half paused their own investigations to carry out four specially designed reflection tasks. Talking about the reflection tasks as well as having the teacher present in conversations about investigations have shown to stimulate the spiral of description, explanation and generalization. Students who did the reflection tasks explained and generalized significantly more than students who did not. Still, the majority of the explanations and generalizations came from the teacher. Implications for the role of reflection and the role of the teacher in developing procedural understanding are discussed.

show abstract

Investigating in the school science laboratory: conceptual and procedural knowledge and their influence on performance

Cited by 109 publications

References 2 publications

Common Characteristics of Models in Present-day Scientific Practice

Common Characteristics of Models in Present-day Scientific Practice

The Experimenter Expectancy Effect: An Inevitable Component of School Science?

The Development of Understanding of Evidence in Pre-University Biology Education in the Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About