2019
DOI: 10.1002/ppp3.52
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding students' conceptions of plant reproduction to better teach plant biology in schools

Abstract: Societal Impact Statement It is critical that people understand the importance of plants to all life on Earth, and this must be taught in an understandable and engaging way at an early age. Plant reproduction provides useful real‐life examples for teaching students about the biology of plants. However, what do students actually know about this process? We asked students to complete one of three writing tasks to ascertain their understanding of plant reproduction. Their responses provide useful insight into the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, the argument put forward by Sanders (2019), that the apparent "slowness" of plants could be one reason for not noticing them, might also be a factor. This mirrors much of the research work in educational science that concerns questions of preference for animals or plants (e.g., Wandersee, 1986;Kinchin, 1999); student responses to diverse plant education interventions (e.g., Lindemann-Mathies, 2005;Fančovičová, & Prokop, 2011;Nyberg & Sanders, 2014;Krosnick, Baker, & Moore, 2018;Pany et al, 2019); student reactions to specific plant displays in botanic gardens (e.g., Tunnicliffe, 2001;Sanders, 2007); considerations of plants in science curricula content (e.g., Hershey, 2002;Galbraith, 2003;Ebert-May & Holt, 2014); and the relatively few visual cognition studies concerned with plants (e.g., Schussler and Olzak, 2008;Balas & Momsen, 2014). Furthermore, a large body of educational research has concerned itself with the identification of plants and the perceived connections between knowledge of, and attitudes to, plants (e.g., Bebbington, 2005;Frisch, Unwin, & Saunders, 2010).…”
Section: Introduction and Backg Roundmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…In addition, the argument put forward by Sanders (2019), that the apparent "slowness" of plants could be one reason for not noticing them, might also be a factor. This mirrors much of the research work in educational science that concerns questions of preference for animals or plants (e.g., Wandersee, 1986;Kinchin, 1999); student responses to diverse plant education interventions (e.g., Lindemann-Mathies, 2005;Fančovičová, & Prokop, 2011;Nyberg & Sanders, 2014;Krosnick, Baker, & Moore, 2018;Pany et al, 2019); student reactions to specific plant displays in botanic gardens (e.g., Tunnicliffe, 2001;Sanders, 2007); considerations of plants in science curricula content (e.g., Hershey, 2002;Galbraith, 2003;Ebert-May & Holt, 2014); and the relatively few visual cognition studies concerned with plants (e.g., Schussler and Olzak, 2008;Balas & Momsen, 2014). Furthermore, a large body of educational research has concerned itself with the identification of plants and the perceived connections between knowledge of, and attitudes to, plants (e.g., Bebbington, 2005;Frisch, Unwin, & Saunders, 2010).…”
Section: Introduction and Backg Roundmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…Attention has been paid in the field to the use of botanical gardens for this purpose (Sanders, 2007), and it seems evident that gardens can be incorporated into schools, offering regular experiences of contact, growing, observation, caring, and experimentation with plants, and, particularly, with plants that are significant to us, as they provide us with food. It is important to reflect on what strategies to use: for instance, to use students' interests (Lampert et al, 2019) to trigger affective and meaningful experiences. Drawing may be incorporated both to promote the construction of scientific concepts and to assess them (Eisner, 2004;Sanders, 2007;Anderson et al, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The preliminary tasks were tested with four students using think-aloud protocols (Konrad 2010), and further tested in five classes to see how students responded to the tasks. Three open-ended writing tasks were selected after this testing phase (Lampert et al 2019).…”
Section: Design Of the Studymentioning
confidence: 99%