Scientific Conceptions of Photosynthesis among Primary School Pupils and Student Teachers of Biology
Abstract
Photosynthesis is the most important biochemical process on Earth. Most living beings depend on it directly or indirectly. Knowledge about photosynthesis enables us to understand how the world functions as an ecosystem and how photosynthesis acts as a bridge between the non-living and living worlds. It is, therefore, understandable that photosynthesis is included in national curricula around the world. The practice unfortunately shows that students at all school levels mostly learn about photosynthesis by rote. Consequently, they have difficulties understanding this vital process. Research also shows many misconceptions in relation to photosynthesis among students of different ages. Based on these, the main aim of our study was to explore the scientific conceptions about photosynthesis held by primary school pupils and student teachers of biology. Data were collected using a questionnaire containing seven biology content questions.
The sample consisted of 634 participants, 427 primary school pupils (aged 11–14), and 207 student teachers of biology (aged 20–23). We found that the populations of primary school pupils and student teachers of biology differ greatly concerning scientific conceptions of photosynthesis. The student teachers showed good and complex understanding of photosynthesis, while pupils showed some misconceptions (location of chlorophyll and photosynthesis in a plant, transformation of energy in photosynthesis). Analysis of the development of scientific conceptions about photosynthesis with age showed that there is very little progress among primary school pupils and none among biology student teachers. More involvement of student teachers of biology in practical work at primary schools during their study was suggested to make student teachers aware of, and better understand pupils’ misconceptions.
Downloads
References
Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction. Effective and efficient teaching. New York, London: The Guilford Press.
Barker, M., & Carr, M. (1989a). Teaching and learning about photosynthesis. Part 1: An assessment in terms of students’ prior knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11(1), 49–56.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Carlson Powell, J., & Westbrook A. (2006). The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Origins and Effectiveness. Biological Sciences Curriculum Study. Colorado Springs. Retrieved 4. 6. 2016 from http://sharepoint.svsd410.org/mshs/ramseyerd/Science%20Inquiry%201%2020112012/What%20is%20Inquiry%20Sciecne%20(long%20version).pdf.
Çepni, S., Taș, E., & Köse, S. (2006). The effects of computer-assisted material on students’ cognitive levels, misconceptions and attitudes towards science. Computer & Education, 46(2), 192–205.
da Silva, C., Mellado, V., Ruiz, C., & Porlán, R. (2007). Evolution of the conceptions of a secondary education biology teacher: longitudinal analysis using cognitive maps. Science Education, 91(3), 461–91.
Deshmukh, N. D. (2015). Why Do School Students Have Misconceptions About Life Processes? In E. Gnanamalar Sarojini Daniel (Ed.), Biology Education and Research in a Changing Planet (pp. 31–43). Singapore: Springer Science +Business Media.
Dolenc Orbanić, N., Skribe Dimec, D., & CenciÄ, M. (2016). The effectiveness of a constructivist teaching model on students’ understanding of photosynthesis. Journal of Baltic science education, 15(6), 575–587.
Domingos-Grilo, P., Reis-Grilo, C., Ruiz, C., & Mellado, V. (2012). An action-research programme with secondary education teachers on teaching and learning photosynthesis. Journal of Biological Education, 46(2), 72–80.
Driver, R. et al. (1992). Nutrition. Leeds national curriculum science support project. Leeds: City Council and the University of Leeds.
Holubova, R. (2008). Effective teaching methods – project-based learning in physics. US-China Education Review, 5(12), 27–36.
Keleş, E., & Kefeli, P. (2010). Determination of student misconceptions in ‘photosynthesis and respiration’ unit and correcting them with the help of CAI material. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3111–3118.
Koballa, T. R., & Glynn, S. M. (2010). Attitudinal and Motivational Constructs in Science Learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 75–102). New York: Routledge.
Kolar, M., Krnel, D., & Velkavrh, A. (2011). Spoznavanje okolja. UÄni naÄrt [Getting to know the environment. National curriculum]. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za Å¡olstvo in Å¡port, Zavod RS za Å¡olstvo.
Leeds national curriculum science support project (1992). Leeds: City Council and the University of Leeds.
Marmaroti, P., & Galanopoulou, D. (2006). Pupils’ Understanding of Photosynthesis: A questionnaire for the simultaneous assessment of all aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 383–403.
National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington: National Academy Press.
Next generation science standards (2013). Retrieved 4. 6. 2017 from http://www.nextgenscience.org/dci-arrangement/ms-ls1-molecules-organisms-structures-and-processes.
Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools for schools and corporations. Mahwah, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum & Assoc.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ritchie, S. M. (2008). Editorial: The next phase in scholarship and innovative research in science education. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 1–2.
Rode, S., & Skribe Dimec, D. (2012). Pojmovanje fotosinteze [Understanding of photosynthesis]. Naravoslovna solnica, 16(3), 4–7.
SkvarÄ, M., Glažar, S. A., Marhl, M., Skribe Dimec, D., Zupan, A., & Cvahte, M. (2011). UÄni naÄrt. Program osnovna Å¡ola. Naravoslovje [National curriculum. Programme of basic education. Science.]. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za Å¡olstvo in Å¡port, Zavod RS za Å¡olstvo.
Taber, K. S. (2011). Constructivism as educational theory: Contingency in learning, and optimally guided instruction. In J. Hassaskhah (Ed.), Educational Theory (pp. 39–61). New York: Nova.
Vilhar, B., ZupanÄiÄ, G., GilÄvert Berdnik, D., ViÄar, M., Zupan, A., & SoboÄan, V. (2011). UÄni naÄrt. Program osnovna Å¡ola. Biologija [National curriculum. Programme of basic education. Biology]. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za Å¡olstvo in Å¡port, Zavod RS za Å¡olstvo.
Vodopivec, I., Papotnik, A., GostinÄar BlagotinÅ¡ek, A., Skribe Dimec, D., & Balon, A. (2011). Naravoslovje in tehnika. UÄni naÄrt [Science and technics. National curriculum]. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo RS za Å¡olstvo in Å¡port, Zavod RS za Å¡olstvo.
Wang, T. H. (2010). Web-based dynamic assessment: Taking assessment as teaching and learning strategy for improving student’s e-Learning effectiveness. Computer & Education, 54(4), 1157–1166.
Yenilmez, A., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Enhancing students’ understanding of photosynthesis and respiration in plant through conceptual change approach. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 81–87.
In order to ensure both the widest dissemination and protection of material published in CEPS Journal, we ask Authors to transfer to the Publisher (Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana) the rights of copyright in the Articles they contribute. This enables the Publisher to ensure protection against infringement.
