Challenging the Science Curriculum Paradigm: Teaching Primary Children Atomic-Molecular Theory

Solutions to global issues demand the involvement of scientists, yet concern exists about retention rates in science as students pass through school into University. Young children are curious about science, yet are considered incapable of grappling with abstract and microscopic concepts such as atoms, sub-atomic particles, molecules and DNA. School curricula for primary (elementary) aged children reflect this by their limitation to examining only what phenomena are without providing any explanatory frameworks for how or why they occur. This research challenges the assumption that atomic-molecular theory is too difficult for young children, examining new ways of introducing atomic theory to 9 year olds and seeks to verify their efficacy in producing genuine learning in the participants. Early results in three cases in different schools indicate these novel methods fostered further interest in science, allowed diverse children to engage and learn aspects of atomic theory, and satisfied the children’s desire for intellectual challenge. Learning exceeded expectations as demonstrated in the post-interview findings. Learning was also remarkably robust, as demonstrated in two schools 8 weeks after the intervention and, in one school, 1 year after their first exposure to ideas about atoms, elements and molecules.

[1]  Aytekin Cokelez Junior High School Students’ Ideas about the Shape and Size of the Atom , 2012 .

[2]  J. Osborne,et al.  Pupils' views of the role and value of the science curriculum: A focus-group study , 2001 .

[3]  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh,et al.  Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis , 2005, Qualitative health research.

[4]  R. Siegler,et al.  The rebirth of children's learning. , 2000, Child development.

[5]  Kenneth Tobin,et al.  Second international handbook of science education , 2012 .

[6]  R. Whannell,et al.  Improving mathematics and science education in rural Australia: A practice report , 2015, Australian and International Journal of Rural Education.

[7]  Alan Ovens,et al.  The New Zealand Curriculum: emergent insights and complex renderings , 2010 .

[8]  Emily Dawson,et al.  “Science capital”: A conceptual, methodological, and empirical argument for extending bourdieusian notions of capital beyond the arts , 2015 .

[9]  K. Taber,et al.  Learners’ Mental Models of the Particle Nature of Matter: A study of 16‐year‐old Swedish science students , 2009 .

[10]  Robert S. Siegler,et al.  Children's thinking, 2nd ed. , 1991 .

[11]  M. Alibali,et al.  Children's Thinking , 1986 .

[12]  R. Siegler Microgenetic Analyses of Learning , 2007 .

[13]  J. Osborne,et al.  Nerdy, Brainy and Normal: Children’s and Parents’ Constructions of Those Who Are Highly Engaged with Science , 2013 .

[14]  Sue Thomson,et al.  Challenges for Australian education , 2011 .

[15]  Jonathan Osborne,et al.  Science Aspirations, Capital, and Family Habitus , 2012 .

[16]  M. Nakhleh,et al.  Elementary school children's beliefs about matter , 1999 .

[17]  Carol L. Smith,et al.  Learning and Teaching about Matter in Grades K–8: When Should the Atomic-Molecular Theory be Introduced? , 2009 .

[18]  Stella Vosniadou,et al.  Conceptual Change from the Framework Theory Side of the Fence , 2014 .

[19]  Frances Quinn,et al.  Understanding declining science participation in Australia: A systemic perspective , 2015 .

[20]  B. Eylon,et al.  A longitudinal study of junior high school students' conceptions of the structure of materials , 2008 .

[21]  Carole Haeusler,et al.  Developing Scientific Literacy: Introducing Primary-Aged Children to Atomic-Molecular Theory , 2015 .

[22]  Grady Venville,et al.  Blood and Bones: The Influence of the Mass Media on Australian Primary School Children’s Understandings of Genes and DNA , 2012, Science & Education.

[23]  Sophie Pfeifer,et al.  Taking Science To School Learning And Teaching Science In Grades K 8 , 2016 .

[24]  Patrice Potvin,et al.  Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research , 2014 .

[25]  Daniel T. Willingham,et al.  Developmentally Appropriate Practice , 2021, Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders.

[26]  D. Treagust,et al.  Science Teacher Education in Australia: Initiatives and Challenges to Improve the Quality of Teaching , 2015 .

[27]  Ngss Lead States Next generation science standards : for states, by states , 2013 .

[28]  Alipaşa Ayas,et al.  STUDENTS DIFFICULTIES IN UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONSERVATION OF MATTER IN OPEN AND CLOSED-SYSTEM CHEMICAL REACTIONS , 2003 .

[29]  Russell Tytler,et al.  Student Attitudes and Aspirations Towards Science , 2012 .

[30]  Robert H. Tai,et al.  Planning Early for Careers in Science , 2006, Science.

[31]  M. Demi̇r Third Grade Elementary Students' Perception of Science. , 2015 .

[32]  Adam V. Maltese,et al.  Eyeballs in the Fridge: Sources of early interest in science , 2010 .

[33]  J. Osborne,et al.  Is Science for Us? Black Students’ and Parents’ Views of Science and Science Careers , 2015, Science education.

[34]  Louise Archer,et al.  Who Aspires to a Science Career? A comparison of survey responses from primary and secondary school students , 2015 .

[35]  P. Fensham The Future Curriculum for School Science: What Can Be Learnt from the Past? , 2016, Research in Science Education.

[36]  R. Schibeci,et al.  Primary Student Teachers' Conceptions of the Nature of Science. , 1999 .

[37]  L. Rennie,et al.  Scientists Reflect on Why They Chose to Study Science , 2013 .

[38]  Tom Brown,et al.  Mighty Molecule Models. , 2008 .

[39]  S. Thomson,et al.  TIMSS 2007: Taking a closer look at mathematics and science in Australia , 2008 .

[40]  H. Boon Regional Queensland parents’ views of science education: some unexpected perceptions , 2012 .

[41]  Colette Murphy Vygotsky and Primary Science , 2012 .

[42]  Cheryl Jakab,et al.  Small Talk: Children’s Everyday ‘Molecule’ Ideas , 2013 .

[43]  Robert S Siegler,et al.  Children's learning. , 2005, The American psychologist.

[44]  J. DeWitt,et al.  Spheres of influence: what shapes young people’s aspirations at age 12/13 and what are the implications for education policy? , 2014 .

[45]  Marianne Logan,et al.  Engaging Students in Science Across the Primary Secondary Interface: Listening to the Students’ Voice , 2008 .

[46]  L. Guttman A basis for scaling qualitative data. , 1944 .

[47]  Andrés Acher,et al.  Modeling as a teaching learning process for understanding materials: A case study in primary education , 2007 .

[48]  Gregory Light,et al.  Identifying Atomic Structure as a Threshold Concept: Student mental models and troublesomeness , 2009 .

[49]  K. Fischer,et al.  Dynamic Development of Action and Thought , 2007 .

[50]  S. Vosniadou Mental Models in Conceptual Development , 2002 .

[51]  Haluk Özmen,et al.  Some Student Misconceptions in Chemistry: A Literature Review of Chemical Bonding , 2004 .

[52]  S. Vosniadou Model based reasoning and the learning of counter-intuitive science concepts , 2013 .

[53]  Charles R. Barman,et al.  A study of common beliefs and misconceptions in physical science , 2008 .

[54]  Russell Tytler,et al.  STEM: country comparisons: international comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Final report. , 2013 .

[55]  Jonathan Osborne,et al.  ‘Not girly, not sexy, not glamorous’: primary school girls’ and parents’ constructions of science aspirations 1 , 2013 .

[56]  S. Simon,et al.  Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications , 2003 .

[57]  Grady Venville,et al.  Exploring the influence of the mass media on primary students’ conceptual understanding of genetics , 2012 .

[58]  The Pre-service Science Teachers’ Mental Models for Concept of Atoms and Learning Difficulties , 2016 .

[59]  Alain Dumon,et al.  Atom and molecule: upper secondary school French students’ representations in long-term memory , 2005 .

[60]  Acer PISA 2012 : how Australia measures up , 2013 .

[61]  M. Kossut,et al.  [Brain plasticity]. , 2000, Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska.

[62]  R. Tytler Ways forward for primary science education : a review commissioned by the Swedish National Agency for Education , 2010 .

[63]  Philip Johnson,et al.  Rethinking the introduction of particle theory: A substance‐based framework , 2009 .

[64]  Robert S Siegler,et al.  Cognitive variability. , 2007, Developmental science.

[65]  B. Reiser,et al.  Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners , 2009 .

[66]  Julie Kos,et al.  Participation in science, mathematics and technology in Australian education , 2008 .

[67]  J. DeWitt,et al.  Dimensions of science capital: exploring its potential for understanding students’ science participation , 2016 .

[68]  Russell Tytler,et al.  Deconstructing learning in science—Young children's responses to a classroom sequence on evaporation , 2000 .

[69]  Susana Maria Halpine,et al.  Introducing Molecular Visualization to Primary Schools in California: The STArt! teaching Science Through Art Program , 2004 .

[70]  Marilyn Fleer,et al.  Understanding the Dialectical Relations Between Everyday Concepts and Scientific Concepts Within Play-Based Programs , 2009 .

[71]  S. Thomson,et al.  TIMSS 2015: a first look at Australia's results , 2016 .

[72]  Rani George,et al.  A Cross‐domain Analysis of Change in Students’ Attitudes toward Science and Attitudes about the Utility of Science , 2006 .

[73]  Louise Archer,et al.  Adolescent boys’ science aspirations: Masculinity, capital and power , 2014 .

[74]  David A Sousa,et al.  How the Brain Learns , 2000 .

[75]  Sacit Köse,et al.  Diagnosing Student Misconceptions: Using Drawings as a Research Method , 2008 .

[76]  Anna Chadwick The Scientist in the Crib -- Minds, Brains, and How Children Learn , 2001 .

[77]  David E. Brown Students’ Conceptions as Dynamically Emergent Structures , 2014 .

[78]  I. Chubb The importance of advanced biological science to the Australian economy , 2016 .

[79]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[80]  Justin Dillon,et al.  Understanding Student Participation and Choice in Science and Technology Education , 2015 .

[81]  Patrice Potvin,et al.  Analysis of the Decline in Interest Towards School Science and Technology from Grades 5 Through 11 , 2014 .

[82]  Stella Vosniadou,et al.  Reframing the Classical Approach to Conceptual Change: Preconceptions, Misconceptions and Synthetic Models , 2012 .

[83]  T. Lyons,et al.  Different Countries, Same Science Classes: Students’ experiences of school science in their own words , 2006 .

[84]  R. Siegler Emerging Minds: The Process of Change in Children's Thinking , 1996 .