 |
Eliciting
children's misconceptions of particle theory
to support their literacy
development in
Science |
|
|
| |
 |
School:
Islington Arts and Media School |
|
Fellow: Leyla Di-Bellonia |
|
Email: leyladb@fsmail.net |
|
|
|
|
Final report: |
|
|
| |
As a teacher and Key Stage 3 coordinator, I have always been surprised by the poor motivation of year 7 pupils in learning science and the difficulty they demonstrate in using keywords that they have learnt in year 6. Research previously conducted on transition has found that pupils experience big changes in their learning environment and teaching styles. The impact of this is a dip in the enjoyment of science lessons. In addition half the pupils do not appear to improve their attainment in science in year 7. There are many reasons for this including the transfer of language and differences in curriculum structure. |
| |
|
| |
I had decided to focus on particle theory as it is an abstract concept that many pupils have difficulty understanding. Furthermore there is a big difference in the vocabulary used in the teaching and learning of particle theory at key stage 2 and key stage 3. As pupils cannot see particles there are common misconceptions associated with the topic. Currently there is not a consistent set of keywords used between key stage 2 and 3. New keywords are introduced in year 7 and pupils are expected to firstly learn new keywords, secondly be able to understand concepts, thirdly know when to use them appropriately when describing concepts and then fourthly move immediately to more advanced science words. The logical progression that the QCA has set from KS2 to KS3 and the development of literacy and skills is clear yet unrealistic. It is also questionable whether a level 5 at KS2 is the same as level 5 at KS3 from the analysis of the descriptors and expectation. I believe that if pupils are to understand the abstract concept of particle theory at key stage 3 their ideas about states of matter and dissolving must be concrete at key stage 2. In addition they must be using keywords appropriately in order to build up a more complex vocabulary. |
| |
|
| |
This project will demonstrate how pupils associate keywords with particle theory. Furthermore it will attempt to develop their thinking and understanding of concepts, using appropriate keywords to explain phenomena. This happened through a transition project conducted after the SATs in May. My outcomes for the pupils involved in the project were: |
| |
|
| |
|
To elicit
common misconceptions of particle theory |
|
To improve terminology used at KS2 and KS3 |
|
To improve the understanding of abstract
concepts |
|
To link terminology to concepts |
|
| |
|
| |
In addition, I wanted to develop the pedagogy of the primary and secondary teachers in their delivery of science lessons. |
| |
|
| |
I conducted research on a group of year 6 pupils from a feeder school from September to January. Firstly I gave them a questionnaire asking them to comment on their feelings and opinions of science. Pupils gave positive responses. They were generally motivated and excited about learning science. I compared their results to a group of year 7 pupils. The opinions were more mixed. Some still enjoyed science and were motivated in lessons however others felt science was boring and wasn’t relevant for their future careers. I tested the year 6 pupils and measured their understanding about what happens to particles in various phenomena they would come across in year 7. I interviewed pupils to determine their use of keywords in describing what happens to particles during melting, evaporating, freezing and dissolving. I found that pupils thought particles had popped, melted or disappeared when a solid melted (this accounted for 70% of the pupils interviewed). When asked to a describe a phenomena, such as heating a metal ball, pupils thought the particles moved to the sides of the ball as the ball expanded or the particles themselves expand. The majority of the class had however correctly drawn and attempted to explain what happened to particles as sugar or salt dissolved. I compared these results to a group of year 7 pupils at similar attainment levels. Unlike the pupils in year 6 they incorrectly drew sugar dissolving or used the wrong terminology in their explanations. This implies that the pupils were not confident in their terminology when trying to describe a concept by drawing and there was a weak link between concept and keywords. |
| |
|
| |
After many discussions with primary school teachers as to the issues which arise in teaching particle theory I discovered it was felt that, due to pressures of SATs, teachers could not spend enough time on practical science and on the terminology associated with key concepts. The primary school teacher observed secondary science lessons. I used the first lesson from the QCA scheme of work, unit 7G. The pupils struggled to use keywords which were taught at KS2. The lesson observations instantly resulted in the primary school teacher become increasingly aware of the need to focus on keywords at KS2. She was also surprised at how short science lessons are at secondary level. It was agreed that literacy skills were important in reviewing and concluding a scientific concept. |
| |
|
| |
In January we decided to look for aspects of the national curriculum and QCA where there was a gap in teaching of particle theory. In the beginning I had thought I would design an investigation based on solutions and dissolving. From the initial testing it was clear that to conduct a project on dissolving I would be repeating pupils learning in year 6. The primary school teacher and myself decided to focus on melting as this would develop understanding at KS2. By year 6 pupils need to know that melting is a reversible process and that ice melts into water. At KS3 the focus was using the particle model to explain differences between solids, liquids and gases and using the model to explain other phenomena, none which were to do with melting. When I discussed this with the secondary Science department there were misconceptions from the teachers that melting using particle theory was taught at KS2, confirming this topic to be a good choice. |
| |
|
| |
Our focus for the investigation was ‘to find out at what temperature does chocolate melt’. This related to an everyday experience for the children, so therefore was aimed to be relevant and interesting. Furthermore this taught pupils how and why chocolate melts. We were assisted by the literacy consultant for the Borough in designing activities which would develop the pupils’ skills in speaking about chocolate melting. |
| |
|
| |
During the development of the scheme of work for the transition project, secondary school teachers visited the primary school for half a day of lesson observations. The focus for the lesson observations was the teaching and learning strategies used in the lesson. The language pupils were using when writing and speaking about science impressed the teachers. Strategies such as talk partners was the most impressive for the teachers and half of them have decided it is something they plan to use with year 7s in the future. The secondary teachers, as reported through questionnaires and lesson evaluations, did not realise how well pupils used simple science terminology at KS2. Their expectation of pupils entering secondary school had increased. Originally in my action plan I wanted teachers to team teach with the primary staff, however due to cover costs and time commitments for extra secondary revision classes, the secondary teachers could not be released. |
| |
|
| |
We had designed the project by May 2008, which consisted of four lessons. The questions to be answered in the lessons by the students were: |
| |
|
| |
| 1. |
To elicit
common misconceptions of particle theory |
| 2. |
To improve terminology used at KS2 and KS3 |
| 3. |
To improve the understanding of abstract
concepts |
| 4. |
To link terminology to concepts |
|
| |
|
| |
I used literacy strategies which were currently being used at primary but the scientific content was KS3 level. The strategies developed were: |
| |
|
| |
|
A washing line of terms |
|
Card organising to make a sentence to explain something |
|
Trump cards of terminology, and |
|
Modelling |
|
| |
|
| |
Two lessons were taught at the primary school and two at secondary school. In the second lesson pupils were given the opportunity to measure at what temperature chocolate melts using Bunsen burners and thermometers. |
| |
|
| |
At the end of each lesson teachers were asked to evaluate what went well and what could be improved. In the first lesson, pupils were asked to recall the properties of solids and liquids onto a washing line of terms, to model their predictions of what happens to chocolate as it melts and then to plan how they would investigate this. The secondary teachers were interested and enjoyed the use of talk partners and washing lines. The pupils modelled what they thought happened to particles when chocolate melts (the pupils had mainly shown particles moving apart but then falling to the floor as if ‘melted’). The teachers felt that extension work needed to be provided for the pupils. In the second lesson, pupils were asked to understand safety rules in conducting a practical, and evaluate how they would conduct the practical (in terms of accuracy and reliability) to record at what temperature chocolate melts. The teachers felt the lesson was good and exciting as the pupils were very motivated. However the pupils did not find the melting point of chocolate as they were enjoying watching chocolate melt and so recorded temperatures up to 80ºC. Pupils evaluated the practical and learned what accuracy and reliability means. As a result of the pupils not finding the melting point we reviewed this in the third lesson. Pupils had to describe melting in terms of particle arrangement and review their initial ideas. Teachers felt that the card organising of sentences was too easy for the children but the lesson created very good discussion of what happens to particles. In the final lesson pupils were asked to explain why particles move during melting and the effect of heat energy on particles. They then presented what they had learnt ensuring correct use of keywords. Their understanding of the effect of heat energy on particles was evaluated by them applying their knowledge to new phenomena in the plenary such as, heating a metal ball; why jelly solidifies in the fridge, solubility of salt, heating water and why aerosol cans are not placed next to heat. Pupils had made excellent presentations to explain what happens to chocolate at its melting point. Pupils used themselves to model particles vibrating and moving apart and use good terminology. Some pupils made a physical model out of paper and card of what happens, including good scientific explanations and good terminology. The plenary worked well at highlighting what pupils did and did not understand and how much they could apply what they had learnt about participles. Pupils could confidently explain what happens to particles as jelly solidifies, however one misconception had arisen that particles do not move or vibrate at all in fixed positions. Only half the pupils who observed the solubility of salt could explain what happens to the particles, most simply described what they saw. Heating water was explained well by pupils; however two misconceptions were brought to my attention. Firstly some pupils thought particles get bigger and secondly that the bubbles were particles. The two most difficult concepts, heating a metal ball and the aerosol can, were not so well understood. Most of the pupils still had the misconception that particles expand or move to the sides as the metal ball is heated. However there was a significant improvement in the terminology used. Only one pupil correctly explained why aerosol cans are not kept near heat. The teachers were impressed by the presentations but the plenary needed further differentiation for the children who had struggled with the concepts. |
| |
|
| |
Since the project finished I have conducted questionnaires and evaluations of the teachers and pupils. Over half the pupils enjoyed some of or the entire project, and felt more confident in learning science. This is also reflected in the comments some pupils had said to me at the end of the project, for example ‘I love science’. Pupils feel more confident in explaining why solids melt, how liquids evaporate and the effect of heat on particles. Most children’s ideas about particles had changed, for example ‘I can explain melting and freezing better’ or ‘I know that particles vibrate more when heated in a solid’. In terms of new keywords learned, most pupils recalled accuracy, reliability, vibrate and collide. In addition half felt confident to explain these words or use them in a sentence. I provided pupils with a concept cartoon in which the four pupils in the sheet had their own ideas of what happens to chocolate as it melts. For each statement pupils had to write if they agreed or disagreed and explain why. When I analysed the pupil responses all pupils except 4 had correctly agreed or disagreed with the statements. When asked to explain they had used good terminology and had linked the correct terminology with the concept. They were able to identify the pupil misconceptions and correct the statements. The four who did not had misconceptions such as when particles are heated they burn or that particles only spread apart when heated. |
| |
|
| |
The teacher evaluations were also interesting. All secondary teachers except one agreed that this project had had an impact on their teaching and learning strategies. The most common strategies teachers mentioned were talk partners, discussion starters, sentence starters for speaking and the differentiated card sorting activities. One trainee teacher said “I am definitely going to use sentence starters and frames for oral purposes. I’ve been using them for writing but didn’t realise how valuable they are for talking”. All teachers agreed their expectations of pupils in year 7 had increased in their attitude, behaviour and presentation of work. They were impressed by the way in which pupils quickly recalled knowledge from previous lessons and their ability to construct sentences. They all felt they had learnt new methods to improve pupil literacy in their lessons and would increase the focus on linking keywords to concepts. They all agreed they had misconceptions of what was taught at KS2 in terms of particles and were now more aware of pupil misconceptions as they enter year 7 across all topics. They had all felt the project had made an impact on their teaching in three key areas: questioning pupils understanding of a topic beforehand to elicit misconceptions; new strategies to make transition of pupils easier in terms of scientific concepts and literacy; and finally behaviour. When I analysed the primary school teachers’ evaluation, she had found the project valuable in her development of teaching and learning skills. This included developing abstract concepts more in her teaching, developing her own practical skills and new ways to improve use of keywords. She wants to challenge her pupils more, especially with regard to how pupils apply terminology in a concept. She was impressed how her class had used the scientific vocabulary, yet felt some still had difficulty in understanding abstract concepts. It has helped her review her own science practice and she now wants to help children develop the theory side of science concepts. Surprisingly she felt that the project should be taught to a younger audience as it may be too late at the end of year 6. Her suggestion was possibly at end of year 4 where pupils begin developing their understanding of concepts related to particles. |
| |
|
| |
I am happy with the achievements I have made during this project both for the pupils and the teachers. Through working with consultants on developing this project, I am now presenting my findings at a transition conference for the Borough. This has an open invite to all teachers at both primary and secondary level. I hope that teachers in other schools in Islington see the need for a good transition for staff and pupils. In addition I hope it will make teachers more aware of the benefits of peer-observations across key stages and designing a project whereby they equally team-teach. Furthermore I wish to follow up on the year 6 pupils when they enter year 7 from September and assess how well they can apply their understanding of particles in science lessons, their literacy and their attitudes towards science. |
| |
|
| |
I am already in discussions with the primary school to run this project next year for year 4 pupils, and would like to disseminate this project borough-wide and include more feeder schools after developing the project further next year. I am currently working on how to embed this project into the new KS3 curriculum. |
