Building+Science+Concepts

back to Science readings [] Published papers on BSC : [|nzare2000_e.doc], [|moepaper_e[1.doc]], [|asera99_e.doc] 

Concept templates (from the books)

Background to the Building Science Concepts project
Funded by the New Zealand Ministry of Education, this project has as its focus the production of sixty-four science resource booklets for primary schoolteachers. The sixty-four booklets are all context based, and the titles have been chosen for their relevance to the interests and experiences of a wide range of New Zealand children and teachers. Each booklet has three main sections. Central to each is the concept template, where the 'big science ideas' are broken down into smaller learning steps, or 'foothills'. Its purpose is to help teachers focus on the conceptual understandings involved in a science topic (English and Hipkins, 1999; Hipkins and English, 2000). The other two sections of each booklet - background notes for teachers and suggested learning activities - reflect this tight conceptual focus. ... The lesson for the planning team was that imposing specific concepts will not work if they do not logically “fit” the context. We think this poses real issues where teachers are encouraged to plan by beginning with contexts that will interest their children, subsequently imposing a somewhat contrived relationship between these contexts and the generic curriculum concepts specified via the achievement aims and objectives. It is an issue that some teachers have already commented on, when discussing their experiences of working with the curriculum document (Baker, 1999).. Where the match was ‘forced’ the interactions between context and concepts caused problems. With our awareness thus raised, we also began discussing instances where some of us had observed secondary level student teachers struggling to make meaningful connections for their learners when they ‘took for granted’ details of contexts that they themselves knew very well. We envisage an iterative process whereby children are given many opportunities to repeat the context based cycle of learning outlined in Fig. Three. As their experiences of the world expand, so the number and complexity of the scientific concepts to which they are introduced can grow. However, it is also important to recognise the need for growth in the organisation of __contextual__ knowledge. Begin with a familiar context - explore its features in a manner that engages the children/ consolidates familiarity (stories, direct exploration etc). || Step Two Identify relevant patterns within the context, drawing attention to salient features and building vocabulary that will be needed for the intended conceptual focus. || Step Four Where appropriate, continue on to develop a more advanced conceptual understanding (but often this stage will be skipped with young children). Return to the context to check new understandings and/or apply new ideas to other contexts. || Step Three Introduce the provisional concepts (the 'foothills for learning') that make sense of these patterns within a theoretical science framework. Return to the context again (if not proceeding to step four). ||
 * Progressing from the worlds of //children's science// towards //scientists science// **
 * Step One

** Figure Three: A model for cycles of learning that integrate contextual ** We do not want our model to be seen as just another version of **discovery learning**. It seems to us that discovery learning, as it has been envisaged and used in several cycles of fashion over the last century (DeBoer, 1991) asks too much of children. On our model, it would require a direct leap from Step One to Step Four. Such leaps are certainly possible for some working scientists, steeped in their knowledge of both the relevant concepts and the context that they are currently exploring. While the new patterns revealed may subsequently come to seem 'obvious' to the scientifically literate, they are rightly celebrated as intellectual achievements of great merit. Why should children be expected to achieve these sorts of leaps of understanding when they lack both the conceptual 'toolbox' and the more extended knowledge of contexts that adult scientists possess?
 * and conceptual knowledge **
 * A comparison with other learning models **

Teaching by **applications** is another familiar approach. On our model such teaching begins at Step Four. The learner is required to leap directly into the conceptual pond, without any intentional contextual support. Having been exposed to the abstract ideas, they are then taken (backwards on our model) to Step Two. The application is presented with a //see look - it works in the real world// vindication, which will supposedly convince the leaner that what they have been told is true. We suggest that this type of approach is likely only to work for those children whose cultural background has provided opportunities for this very specific type of thinking from a young age (see for example Aikenhead's analysis of different types of backgrounds students bring to their science learning, Aikenhead, 1996). For quite different reasons, Albury (1983) critiques this approach as imparting a //specious obviousness// to the theoretical systems of science, leaving learners with no understanding of the intellectual endeavour originally involved.