concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science: an evaluation

This article was downloaded by: [University of Texas Libraries]On: 05 December 2014, At: 04:06Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal ofScience EducationPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

Concept cartoons,teaching and learning inscience: an evaluationBrenda Keogh & Stuart NaylorPublished online: 29 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Brenda Keogh & Stuart Naylor (1999) Concept cartoons,teaching and learning in science: an evaluation, International Journal ofScience Education, 21:4, 431-446, DOI: 10.1080/095006999290642

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095006999290642

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy ofall the information (the “Content”) contained in the publicationson our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to theaccuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content.Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed byTaylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directlyor indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the useof the Content.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/095006999290642

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095006999290642

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

INT. J. SCI. EDUC., 1999, VOL. 21, NO. 4, 431– 446

Concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science:an evaluation

Brenda Keogh and Stuart Naylor, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

Concept cartoons were created in an attempt to develop an innovative teaching and learning strategywhich took account of constructivist views on learning in science. The nature and development ofconcept cartoons is described. The article reports the results of an evaluation of the use of conceptcartoons in a range of teaching situations. Data sources were teachers, student teachers and pupils acrossthe primary and secondary age ranges. The data indicate that the response of teachers and learners tothe concept cartoons was generally highly positive. Suggestions are put forward for possible mechan-isms by which the concept cartoons might be effective.

Introduction

Concept cartoons had their genesis in 1992. At that time, research into learners’alternative conceptions was having an impact on the beliefs and practice of teachersand teacher educators. Although the research into learners’ understanding ofscience concepts was extensive, the literature revealed few teaching strategieswhich took account of this research. Millar (1989: 588) concluded that:

. . . many teachers are now persuaded of the value of knowing about the prior ideastheir pupils are likely to have about a given science topic . . . but are much less sureabout how to act on this knowledge when teaching a class of 25 or more learners.

Claxton (1986) and Trumper (1990) pointed to the limited attention which hadbeen paid to the application of the research in the classroom. More recently, White(1994: 225) has alluded to the same issue in claiming that

. . . although the literature on alternative conceptions has sparked an interest in con-tent, it has not yielded clear advice on how to teach different topics.

The concept cartoons discussed in this article were developed in a search forstrategies which could help to clarify the relationship between constructivist mod-els of learning, scientific epistemology and classroom practice. The article reportsthe findings of research into the use of concept cartoons in order to evaluate theireffectiveness in supporting teaching and learning in science.

The nature of concept cartoons

Cartoons have been employed in a variety of ways for educational purposes. Theseinclude the development of reading skills (Demetrulias 1982) and vocabulary(Goldstein 1986); problem solving (Jones 1987) and thinking skills (De Fren1988); enhancing motivation (Heintzmann 1989); resolving conflict (Naylor and

0950–0693/99 $12 00 Ñ 1999 Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

McMurdo 1990); eliciting tacit scientific knowledge (Guttierrez and Ogborn 1992)and making scientific ideas accessible (Peacock 1995).

The label ’ cartoon’ may be potentially misleading, since many individualsexpect a strong association to exist between cartoons and humour. Theconcept cartoons do not employ humour or satire. They follow the form ofa multiple choice question, but unlike most multiple choice questions, theconcept cartoons integrate written text in dialogue form with a visual stimulus.The nature of concept cartoons is illustrated in the examples given in figures 1and 2.

In some ways, the concept cartoons have much in common with some ofthe strategies used by researchers to explore children’ s scientific conceptions(e.g. Osborne and Gilbert 1980, Stavy and Berkovitz 1980, Stead andOsborne 1980, Nussbaum 1985, Russell et al. 1989). In each of these strategies,common elements exist which include minimal use of written language,utilization of a visual image and often the presentation of alternative concepts orquestions relating to one central idea or word. Extensive use has been made of theabove strategies as conceptual probes in research. White and Gunstone (1992)discuss the effectiveness of some of these strategies in a classroom context inrelation to assessment. Although concept cartoons are intended to elicit learners’concepts, assessment of understanding is not their only or prime purpose. Theywere intended primarily as an aid to teaching and learning. As Gunstone (1988: 90)notes:

The methods used to probe students’ ideas/beliefs are also, almost by definition,excellent teaching/learning strategies.

The concept cartoons developed markedly in the early stages of their use.Some of the draft concept cartoons involved a single character starting amisconception. While these concept cartoons proved stimulating and challengingto some learners, it became clear that for others there was a possibility ofreinforcing inappropriate ideas. Recognizing the effectiveness of the use of agroup of characters engaged in dialogue was a significant point in the develop-ment of the concept cartoons. The use of dialogue creates the opportunity topresent alternative ideas, including one or more views which are scientificallyacceptable.

The research literature provides an extensive source of alternative conceptswhich learners are likely to hold, enabling the ’mountain of examples of children’ s’ ’ alternative frameworks’ ’ ’ (Claxton 1986) to be fed into classroom practice. Forexample, the snowman concept cartoon (figure 1) takes into account research byTiberghien (1985) which indicates that children may believe that differentmaterials have the property of being hot or cold. Other concept cartoons drawon ideas identified through interactions with learners in our own teaching experi-ence.

The concept cartoons are located in a familiar context in order to causelearners to reflect on the science located within their everyday experience, sogiving relevance to the ideas being considered. The significance of the place ofthe familiar in influencing students’ learning is identified by Wittrock (1994: 30),who expresses the view that ’ familiar believable contexts and problems facilitategenerative learning’ .

432 B. KEOGH AND S. NAYLOR

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Research methodology

A set of concept cartoons was made available to a group of teachers and studentteachers who were asked to use those which they felt were most appropriate forthe particular learning needs of their pupils. Wherever possible, the concept car-toons were to be used within a normal teaching sequence. In the event, due totimetabling difficulties, 12 of the student teachers used the concept cartoons out-side the normal science programme of their schools. Each concept cartoon wasused on at least two occasions, either on its own or grouped with other relatedcartoons.

The concept cartoons were selected from a sample of approximately 50. Thesefocused mainly on light, sound, forces, change of state and living things. Someadditional concept cartoons were created during the course of the data collection tosatisfy particular curriculum demands.

Guidance on the utilization of the concept cartoons was provided. The guid-ance material also included an explicit invitation to the teachers to use the conceptcartoons in any additional ways which they felt were appropriate. Typically, alesson based on the concept cartoons involved:

� a brief introduction to the activity;

� an invitation to the learners to reflect on the concept cartoons and to discussin groups what they think and why;

� interaction and intervention by the teacher as appropriate during the teach-ing session;

� practical investigation or research-based activity to follow up the learnersideas as appropriate, encouraged and supported by the teacher as necessary;

� a whole class plenary to share and challenge ideas.

CONCEPT CARTOONS 433

Figure 1. From Keogh and Naylor (1997).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Data collection

The data was obtained through four main sources

� Questionnaires completed by 51 teachers working in a range of teachingcontexts. Of these six were higher education teacher education tutors (onein a non-British university), 19 taught in secondary schools, 21 taught inprimary schools, two taught in special education at secondary level, onegave advisory support for English as a second language with primary-aged children, one was working with nursery-aged children and one in aninteractive science centre.

� Questionnaires and more detailed reports completed by 85 primary studentteachers engaged in school-based research. This was a compulsory part oftheir course carried out towards the end of their final year of training, aftertheir final school experience.

� Interviews to probe the interpretation of the data conducted towards theend of the research period. They involved three of the above teachers, fivepupils from one of the primary classes and two groups of five studentteachers.

� Two case studies involving classroom observation of Year 7 pupils in asecondary school (Case Study A) and physics graduates on a one yearPGCE course (Case Study B).

The teachers were all volunteers, identified through conferences and profes-sional networks. The student teachers were included to broaden the samplebeyond volunteers and to evaluate the use of the concept cartoons by noviceteachers. Prior to conducting the research, the students were introduced to theuse of the concept cartoons by tutors other than the researchers. The two casestudies were selected on the basis that the learners, in each situation, were per-


Figure 2. From Keogh and Naylor (1997).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

ceived by their teacher as being difficult or challenging. In case study A, the classof 11–12 year olds in an inner city secondary school was described by their teacheras demotivated and lacking in interest. Some of the physics graduates in case studyB were perceived as being over-confident and challenging. In each case study, theconcept cartoons were included in the normal teaching programme.

The case studies provided an important opportunity for a degree of triangula-tion of the data (Denzin 1970). Each case study allowed methodological triangula-tion through the use of different data collection strategies, in this case classroomobservation, interviews with the teacher, oral and written feedback from learners,and interviews with learners. Investigator triangulation was effected by thelearners, the teachers and the authors each reporting on the same events in thecase studies.

Response was requested to the following questions, with exemplification to beincluded where possible:

� How involved were the learners when using the concept cartoons?

� How useful were the concept cartoons for finding out the learners’ existingideas?

� How effective were the concept cartoons at challenging and developinglearners’ ideas?

� How effective were the concept cartoons in relating the process of findingout the pupils’ ideas with the process of developing their ideas?

� How useful were the concept cartoons for helping learners to decide whichwould be an appropriate investigation to test their ideas?

� How easy was it for you to use the concept cartoons?

� Are there other issues you see as relevant when using the concept cartoons?

These criteria were consistent with issues emerging from early pilot studiesusing the concept cartoons. They appeared to be relevant to the practical concernsof teachers and to concerns about the relationship between theory and practice inthe teaching of science.

Information was also collected about the purposes for which the concept car-toons were employed, the age, nature and size of the teaching group involved, theconcept cartons used, the context in which they were used and the approachadopted.

Each of the 85 student teachers responded in detail to the above questions.Detailed written responses, including fully completed questionnaires and someexamples of work, were received from 34 teachers. The positive nature of theseresponses raised concern that only those teachers who felt highly motivated by theapproach had responded. Consequently, a follow-up evaluation form was devised,setting the first five questions against a Likert Scale to minimize the time requiredto respond. An additional question was included about the value of the conceptcartoons in promoting differentiated learning, an issue which emerged through theinitial responses. This questionnaire was sent to those teachers who had notreturned to the original questionnaire. Of these n 25 , 17 completed theLikert Scale, some adding brief additional comments to exemplify their grading.On the Likert Scale (1–6), a score of 1 indicated little or no value and 6 indicatedexceptional value.

The data are based on 149 teaching sessions.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Data and data analysis

The data presented an unexpectedly positive account of the use of the conceptcartoons. While problems were identified, many of the criticisms and concernstended to be at the micro level (e.g. drawing style or style of writing). It is reason-able to assume that volunteer teachers are likely to view innovation in their ownteaching favourably. The students, however, were not volunteers, some being verysceptical about the use of the concept cartoons in their research with nothing togain by discounting the shortcomings in the concept cartoons.

The data from the teachers and student teachers are discussed together, exceptwhere it is pertinent to draw a distinction.

Learner motivation and involvement

In all 149 teaching sessions high or exceptionally high levels of motivation andinterest amongst most or all learners were recorded. The 17 teachers completingthe 1–6 Likert Scales scored motivation at either 5 n 5 or 6 n 12 . Factorssuch as the age, ability or purpose for using the concept cartoons appeared to havelittle influence on the nature of the pupils’ response.

The Year 7 class in case study A appeared to typify the reported response ofthe majority of learners to the use of the concept cartoons. The pupils wereobserved engaging in deep discussion for long periods of time. In an interviewwith four of the pupils, they noted their own increased involvement and interest,and concluded that:

. . . even Dennis, the naughtiest boy in our class, wants to stay in at play time to carryon discussing. (secondary pupil, case study A 1995)

This perception was confirmed in a separate interview with the teacher. Shestressed the importance of the concept cartoons in focusing the thinking of herpupils, an aspect of motivation which had been problematic.

Seventeen respondents noted that the amount of time where the learners wereon task was longer than they would normally have expected for the particulargroup of learners. A teacher of children with emotional and behavioural difficultiesobserved that ’ the involvement was immediate and sustained’ (secondary EBDteacher 1995). Seven respondents referred to the apparent increased interest ofnormally quiet children. One teacher reflected on a usually timid child’ s involve-ment, ’The concept cartoons seemed to make her feel comfortable and confident’(primary teacher 1997). Another found the strategy helped reluctant talkersbecause there was ’nothing to intimidate them and it (the concept cartoon) gavethem ideas to start from’ (student teacher 1997). The high quality of the pupils’written work and an improvement in the quality of the pupils’ discussions werealso reported as significant outcomes.

Respondents attempted to give reasons for the high level of learner involve-ment. Many pointed to the visual appeal of the cartoon-style format. Five specu-lated that the ’novelty value’ when first using the concept cartoons could besignificant. However, repeated use of the concept cartoon strategy did not appearto diminish the level of interest, as evidenced in case study A where they were usedregularly in the teaching programme over a year. Some teachers speculated thatinviting engagement in argument about science is highly motivating ’ since it pre-


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

sents a view of science where all ideas are of worth’ (secondary teacher 1996). Itwas also suggested that, for pupils reluctant to put forward their own ideas, ’havingvoices speaking for them gives them the confidence to discuss the ideas’ (EBDteacher 1996).

Not all learners are instantly motivated by the concept cartoons. Observationsof the pupils using concept cartoons in case study A revealed two instances whereone pupil’ s domination of the discussion about the concept cartoon left the otherpupils uninvolved. Similarly, in case study B, dominant students sometimes wereable to inhibit discussion within groups. In the later case, tutor intervention had apositive impact on the nature of the group interactions. The choice of conceptcartoons outside the conceptual level of learner was also seen as problematic. Aprimary teacher noted one group of his pupils failing to make progress with aconcept cartoon which was too demanding for them.

It is likely that there was more instances where lack of motivation for somelearners occurred. Perhaps this was perceived as normal and was therefore not feltnoteworthy. The teacher in case study B added weight to this view, saying thatreluctance to participate was not unusual for the students and that it was worthconsidering why the problematic groups, discussed above, had ultimately engagedso actively. It is also possible that some of the novice teachers may have attributedlack of motivation due to their lack of experience.

Elicitation

The data can be separated in two aspects: elicitation for the teacher and elicitationfor the learner.

Elicitation for the teacher. All respondents felt that the concept cartoons had somevalue in making learners’ ideas more accessible to them during teaching sessions.On the 1–6 Likert Scales, scores of 6 n 10 and 5 n 7 were given. Typicalcomments were

I feel it is important to know where the children are coming from. The cartoons wereideal indicators of where the children were in their understanding. (primary teacher1996)

I did not have to spend time trying to encourage them to explain their thinking and sowas able to concentrate on challenging and supporting learning. (student teacher1997)

An EBD teacher observed that ’EBD children are very territorial with theirideas – the concept cartoons encouraged sharing and discussion’ . She went on tonote how much easier it was to access ideas ’when pupils are engaged in active andpurposeful discussion’ (secondary EBD teacher 1995).

Thirty-six of the respondents made reference to the value of the conceptcartoons in relation to assessment of understanding. Eight indicated that theirmain purpose for using the concept cartoons had been the assessment of learners’ideas. In both case studies, the teachers were observed actively responding to ideaswhilst the learners were engaged in using the concept cartoons. In later interviews,both teachers highlighted the ease of access to ideas as a positive aspect of theconcept cartoons. Four of the student teachers expressed concern that so muchdiscussion was occurring that they were missing important opportunities to gain


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

access to learners’ ideas and felt it necessary to limit the number of groups usingthe concept cartoons.

Elicitation for the learner. The importance of learners being aware of their ownideas and/or the ideas of their peers was identified by 17 respondents.

It is a little community of enquiry because they are all giving their opinions. Simplyby articulating an idea, well, it makes it clearer for them. (primary teacher 1997)

One teacher explained how the concept cartoons had caused her to reflect onmetacognition and its role in children’ s learning.

I don’ t think we talk to children enough about their own learning. I realised it wasn’ tjust presenting a nice cartoon but actually a way to tell them this is one way of findingout what you know and to use that for yourself. (student teacher 1997)

In interviews, pupils commented on their use of the concept cartoons in theirown learning.

They made us think about our ideas and when we talked about it (the concept cartoon)we learnt a lot from each other’ s ideas. (primary pupil interview 1997)

The teacher in this school also noted that the children seemed to be moreaware of their own ideas and the changes in their ideas when using the conceptcartoons.

In case study A, the pupils talked readily about their own ideas and those oftheir peers. The teacher noted that being aware that there was more than one ideaabout a particular situation seemed to be a revelation to her pupils. The more theyused the concept cartoons, the more they gave credence to each others ideas, andhence the better the discussion.

Challenging and developing learners’ ideas

This question was felt to be difficult to answer by some teachers. Although mostteachers expressed the belief that learners’ ideas were developed, few of them couldoffer evidence about the nature of the change in ideas. It is therefore not possibleto use these data in any meaningful way. On the Likert Scale, developing learners’ideas was scored at 5 n 5 or 6 n 8 with one teacher giving it a score of 4; theremaining two respondents did not give a score. No additional comments weremade to justify these scores.

In case studies A and B, observation of groups using the concept cartoonsrevealed a constant shifting of ideas, introduction of new ideas to the discussion,realigning of positions and introduction of justification to support ideas. Learnersappeared to go through a period of conflict, before discussion, research or inves-tigation caused them to settle, sometimes a little tentatively, on a solution. Evenwhere learners felt confident about the subject matter being considered, in mostinstances the alternative ideas presented in the concept cartoons seemed to createthe need to question thinking and argue about the ideas.

This is exemplified by a learner in case study B. His initial ideas seemed verypersistent. He was reluctant to accept any of the alternative ideas, but theyappeared compelling. Later, he discussed the impact of the concept cartoon onhis own thinking about light.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

I thought ’ I know this one, it’ s too easy’ . I was tending to think in text book explana-tions. This was unhelpful. Suddenly there was more than one idea. Initially they allseemed plausible. I had never realised the importance of the scattering of light before.In this situation it is important. It really challenged my thinking. (student 1995)

In summarizing their discussions, the pupils in case study A were insistentthat the concept cartoons had helped them to learn ’ something new’ . By discussingthe ideas presented in the concept cartoons they had been encouraged to thinkcarefully about their understanding of the situation presented. Transcripts of theirconversations confirmed this in many instances. Furthermore, most pupils wereable to justify their new ideas and give explanations for why they had changed theirviews. However, the ’ something new’ was not always more scientifically accuratethan the original view expressed. Nevertheless, there was, overall, a noticeablemovement towards more scientifically acceptable understanding, though the dataavailable do not indicate the relationship between the concept cartoons and thismovement.

Central to all the comments and observations about challenge and learningwere ideas about questioning, discussion and argument. It appeared that the alter-natives presented in the concept cartoons gave a purpose for engaging in debate.Questions were asked by the concept cartoon, not by the teacher. Arguments were,therefore, legitimated and had a clear focus.

Drawing together elicitation and restructuring

In completing the questionnaires, some teachers reflected on the relationshipbetween elicitation and restructuring. This issue was probed further in the inter-views. Some teachers firmly held the view that effective science teaching meant theseparation of these two processes in a teaching sequence.

I thought that taking children’ s ideas into account was important . . . The problem isthe time involved between finding out what they know and actually setting it (the nextlesson) up. It is not realistic when there is so much to be covered. (secondary teacher1996)

In some cases, where teachers held this naive view of constructivism, the use ofthe concept cartoons appears to have caused them to question this understanding.

At first I wondered if I was using them (the concept cartoons) properly because I wastrying to assess the children’ s ideas and I couldn’ t stop them (the children) learning!(primary teacher 1997)

In other instances, teachers felt that the concept cartoons were enabling themto put into practice the principle of taking learners ideas into account, in a way thatwas ’ realistic, purposeful and manageable’ (secondary teacher 1996). One notedher changed role in the learning process.

I was able to sit back and take a different role. The children were in control of theirown learning. It wasn’ t necessary to go away and plan how to follow-up their ideas, itjust naturally followed from their discussion. (student teacher 1997)

Evidence gained through interviews and observation of learner behaviour inthe case studies reinforced the notion of how elicitation and restructuring werestrongly connected when pupils were engaged in using the concept cartoons.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Promoting investigations

In 91 of the teaching sessions, the concept cartoons were viewed as effective inproviding a stimulus for scientific investigations (in 41 sessions they were not usedfor this purpose and there was not any information given about this aspect inrelation to the other 17 sessions). On the Likert Scale, the majority of teachersscored this aspect at either 5 n 4 or 6 n 8 . Two teachers gave a score of 3;one of these used the concept cartoons for assessment purposes at the end of ablock of work and the other teacher only to find out children’ s ideas at the start of atopic. Our own observations noted the ease with which many of the learnersadvanced onto practical activity from their discussions.

Examples were quoted of the concept cartoons creating a powerful desire inlearners to investigate their ideas. One situation was described where ’within10minutes the whole group was engaged in active investigations’ (primary teacher1995). Another teacher remarked on how the concept cartoons led to pupils testingout their ideas with ’no further prompting’ (secondary teacher 1995). A teacherworking with older children with behavioural difficulties described how, unusuallyfor them, the pupils started their own investigations without any support from her.’ I didn’ t need to tell them what to do or what they needed’ (EBD teacher 1995).Interviews with learners also highlighted this aspect of the concept cartoons.Primary children talked about being ’unable to wait’ to investigate their ideas.The pupils in case study A discussed how they ’ just had to try their ideas out’to find out what would happen and moved purposefully from discussion to inves-tigation.

Two instances were identified where an individual or group seemed reluctantto engage in practical work, even though an investigation seemed necessary toenable a discussion to progress. In both situations, the teacher attempted to inter-vene. One group reluctantly became involved but ignored any evidence whichwould cause a change in their thinking. The other group was content to continuetheir discussion and remained open-minded about the outcome until the plenarysession.

Manageability

All respondents commented favourably on the ease of use of the concept cartoons.On the Likert Scales, 10 respondents scored manageability at 6 and the remainder5 n 17 .

The approach was very easy to use as most of the children were on task and working ata good level, leaving me free to cope with those who were experiencing difficulty or inneed of a focusing challenge. (primary teacher 1996)

Some teachers were honest about their management of science teaching,recognizing a tension between what they would ideally like to do in order torespond to individuals’ ideas and what they saw as realistic

We know what we want to do for each child but for simplicity we take them allthrough the same activity regardless of what we know their ideas are. (primary teacher1996)

Use of the concept cartoons seems to offer the possibility of reconciling thisdilemma.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

The reality is that I normally get them to do more or less the same thing. It’ s the onlyway to cope. The concept cartoons still mean they do the same thing but they havedifferent reasons, so it’ s easy for me and good for them! (secondary teacher 1996)

The teacher used the pupils’ response to the snowman concept cartoon toexemplify this (figure 1).

Whichever of the ideas was held by the pupils they still needed to carry out the sameactivity of modelling putting coats on snowmen. (ibid)

Differentiation

Analysis of the use of the concept cartoons revealed that many (but not all) of theconcept cartoons were used with learners across a wide age and ability range.Student teachers noted that often the same concept cartoon had been utilizedeffectively across the whole primary age range. Inclusion of differentiation onthe Likert Scale revealed that generally the teachers perceived value in the conceptcartoons in supporting differentiation, giving scores of 6 n 7 , 5 n 6 and4 n 4 . The teachers giving a high score to this aspect had used those conceptcartoons which had been used most frequently with a range of age groups.

In discussing research into student teachers’ understanding of science con-cepts, Carre (1993) notes similarities between the level of understanding held byprimary-aged children and that held by adult teacher trainees. This could offer apartial explanation for the broad accessibility of many of the concept cartoons.However, this explanation does not fully account for the many instances where thesame concept cartoons have been used effectively with groups from primary-agedpupils through to science graduates.

In case studies A and B, some of the same concept cartoons were observedbeing used. The learners appeared to discuss the concept cartoon at the level oftheir own current understanding of the concept being explored. Learners withmore sophisticated ideas were able to look beyond the basic scientific conceptand consider a range of factors which could influence the particular situation.However, students in case study B helped to confirm Carre’ s findings. Despitehaving degrees in physics, some of the students expressed the same misconceptionsas the 11-year-old pupils in case study A. One student tried to explain this bycommenting that:

. . . you know the theory behind it but never related it to everyday situations. (physicsgraduate 1995)

The range of uses of concept cartoons

Most of the teachers engaged in the research project used the concept cartoons togenerate discussion, to encourage investigation and to challenge learners’ under-standing within normal teaching sessions or for assessment. However, respondentsidentified a much broader range of uses which included:

� material for homework;

� consolidation and extension material;

� help to teach English as a second or foreign language;

� as research material to explore learners’ scientific thinking;

� summarizing at the end of a topic;


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

� making worksheets more interesting;

� presenting children’ s own ideas to them (in the speech bubbles) in a non-threatening form;

� enabling pupils to summarize their own views by drawing cartoons;

� assessment by inviting pupils to fill in blank speech bubbles;

� illustrating that the nature of science includes alternative viewpoints;

� helping the pupils to ask more questions on their own;

� display material in interactive science centres;

� material to enhance the public understanding of science.

Discussion

This study was designed to evaluate the use of concept cartoons as a tool forteaching and learning in science in a range of typical situations. The data indicatethat teachers and learners had strongly-held and consistent views as to the efficacyof the concept cartoons against the selected criteria. Triangulation of data in thetwo case studies generally confirmed this view. Observation of these teachingsituations provided additional evidence of learner behaviour which revealed, in asmall number of instances, the impact of the lack of motivation of groups and theinfluence of dominant individuals. Teacher intervention was able to modify thisresponse, but not in all circumstances. However, the overwhelming impression inboth case studies was of learners positively engaged in discussion about the con-cept cartoons, with a firm desire to explore their understandings through investi-gation and research.

If, as the data suggest, the concept cartoons are perceived by teachers andlearners to have some value in the teaching of science, which aspects of themmight be influential in forming that judgement?

Capturing the learners’ attention in promoting learning is considered to beimportant in the model of generative learning put forward by Wittrock (1994). Theconcept cartoons appear to provide a powerful stimulus to learners to focus theirattention on constructing meaningful explanations in a similar manner to enigmasand problems identified by Wittrock. Learners responded positively in the major-ity of instances. Even in situations where the pupils were normally considered tobe lacking in motivation, typified by Dennis in case study A, higher than expectedlevels of involvement and interest were reported.

The presentation of the ideas in a visual form seems to be significant in theprocess of capturing attention. Bliss et al. (1989) noted the motivating factor ofcartoon-style material in their research, and Arnheim (1969), Barlex and Carre(1985), and Fisher (1990) point to the importance of visual communication. As onechild explained

You can climb inside the picture and you can see the discussion. It helps you to holdthe ideas inside your head and you can look again if you need to. (Year 4 child 1997)

In engaging with the concept cartoons, learners appear to experience cognitiveconflict by being presented with conflicting but apparently plausible ideas. Thestudent in case study B, developing his ideas about scattered light, goes some wayto illustrate the nature of the conflict generated by the concept cartoons. Posner etal. (1982) describe conditions for conceptual change as dissatisfaction with existingideas, with the new ideas being more intelligible, plausible and fruitful. They, like


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Hammrich’ s (1997) description of cooperative controversy as a strategy whichengages learners in debate about opposing views on an issue, provide a usefulparallel with the debate generated by the concept cartoons.

Parallels can also be drawn with Chinn and Brewers’ (1993) discussion ofanomalous data and the factors involved in enabling students to learn from theuse of such data. They conclude that deep processing can be encouraged by pro-moting personal involvement of the learners with issues and encouraging the jus-tification of their reasoning. They identify the importance of competing theories inthis process. An identifiable strength of the concept cartoons is a similar presenta-tion of competing theories or ideas in which the learners’ notions are challenged bythe ’multiple lines of data that are provided’ (Chinn and Brewer 1993). In thisrespect, there are similarities between the utilization of concept cartoons and otheractive learning techniques which endeavour to promote conceptual change (e.g.Roth and Anderson 1988, White and Gunstone 1992, Chinn and Brewer 1993).

That the learners engage in discussion when using the concept cartoons isevident. The high quality and prolonged nature of much of the discussion wasnoted. Pupils were talking, sometimes pupils who were otherwise reluctant to talkor to express their personal views. Carr et al. (1994) identify conversation as ’ themost important feature of an approach to science classes’ . Some of the teachersinvolved in the research and the pupils in case study A referred to the word ’ argue’rather than ’discuss’ . The concept cartoons legitimized argument by presentingthe learners with an argument in visual form, inviting observers of the conceptcartoon to engage in and extend the argument. The pupils in case study A enjoyedbeing allowed to ’ argue in class’ .

Although the concept cartoons do not provide alternative theories as such,they do provide illustrations of how alternative theories may apply in specificsituations. In this respect, they might move some way to addressing the concernabout how access to scientifically acceptable ideas (Osborne 1996) can be provided.Of course, in many of the concept cartoons there will be more than one scientifi-cally acceptable view of the situation, or ’ It all depends on . . .’ may be the onlyaccurate view. This seems to come much closer to the view of science as tentativeand provisional than the ’ frog-marched discovery’ (Solomon 1980) which some-times occurs in some classrooms. However, the data do not enable conclusions tobe drawn as to whether concept cartoons are any more or less effective than anyother strategies at leading learners towards more scientifically acceptable ideas.Although the data revealed examples of learning, identified from the point ofview of the teacher and the learner, a more detailed study would be required toestablish the extent and stability of that learning.

Millar (1989: 588) suggested that:

for some teachers the constructivist model of learning has (invalidly) become associ-ated with a particular model of instruction.

This view was supported by the evidence from some of the teachers in theresearch who attached value to concept cartoons in helping to make some of theprinciples of constructivism more manageable. Whilst committed to constructivistideas, principally those of taking learners ideas into account, they felt that in realitythis was unmanageable. Central to this appeared to be the issue of the separation ofelicitation and restructuring. The teachers’ discussion reflected models of instruc-tion which had been explored earlier by some constructivist writers (Cosgrove and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Osborne 1985, Driver and Oldham 1986, Needham 1987, Russell and Watt 1990).Although Harlen (1996) describes elicitation and restructuring as part of a con-tinuous process, the notion of separation was strongly held within our samplegroup. The evidence reveals that the drawing together of these two processeswhen using the concept cartoons gave the teachers a more manageable way totake ideas of the learners into account. Teachers were aware of the ideas of lear-ners, not only at the start of the teaching sequence, but throughout the lesson inwhich the concept cartoons were being used. They found that the separation ofelicitation and restructuring was neither desirable or necessary.

This aspect of the research has had significant implications for our own teach-ing and that of colleagues, leading us to reflect on how to challenge a naive view ofconstructivism which seems to exist for some teachers. The use of the conceptcartoons, and other strategies which enable elicitation and restructuring to beclearly connected, appears to provide a tool which may challenge not only teachers’and student teachers’ understanding of science concepts, but also their conceptsabout effective teaching in science. Perhaps this is one way in which the ’ tunnelvision’ which Solomon (1994) describes in relation to constructivism may begin tobe reduced.

Concerns raised about the use of the concept cartoons centred on issues relat-ing to the dominance of individuals’ ideas within group work and lack of motiva-tion of some learners. The selection of the concept cartoon had some bearing onthese issues, for whilst many do work effectively across a wide age range, matchingto the learners’ needs is still important. The nature of teacher intervention is alsosignificant. However, no single teaching strategy is likely to completely resolvethese issues.

Of greater significance is the impact of the concept cartoons on learners’understanding. We know that the early concept cartoons, in which a single char-acter presented a single misconception, created conditions which were misleadingto some learners. Although the research has identified no such concerns sincedialogue was introduced into the concept cartoons, we still do not have sufficientevidence to know quite what is the impact on the learner of being confronted witha range of alternative ideas. There is strong evidence that concept cartoons opendiscussion for many learners and appear to encourage reluctant learners to engagein debate. Evidence exists of learners developing ideas which were more scienti-fically acceptable. As Wittrock (1994: 30) claims:

Conventional methods of covering subject matter and presenting only the scientists’view of scientific phenomena clearly do not effectively teach science to all students.

However, we do not know whether the format might inhibit the thinking ofsome learners nor how the concept cartoons compare with other strategies in thisrespect.

This study has indicated a number of ways in which the use of concept car-toons has been found to be valuable in typical classroom teaching situations. As thedata reveal, the range of uses extended beyond those which were our originalintention. Chambers and Andre (1997) recognize that any useful approach canlose its effectiveness if it is used on every occasion, and concept cartoons are noexception to this. It is also important to acknowledge the need for a range ofapproaches to meet different learning needs. There is much we have yet to learnabout concept cartoons and how they function. Ultimately, they must be viewed


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

alongside other strategies which attempt to provide opportunities for active learn-ing and promote conceptual development.

References

Arnheim, R. (1969) Visual Thinking (Berkeley: University of California Press).Barlex, D. and CarrE, C. (1985) Visual Communication in Science (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press).Bliss, J., Ogborn, J. and Whitelock, D. (1989) Secondary pupils’ commonsense theories of

motion. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 261–272.Carr, M., Barker, M., Bell, B., Biddulph, F., Jones, A., Kirkwood, B., Pearson, J. and

Symington, D. (1994) The constructivist paradigm and some implications for sciencecontent and pedagogy. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone and R. White (eds), The Contentof Science (London: Falmer), pp. 147–160.

CarrE, C. (1993) Subject matter knowledge in science. In N. Bennett and C. Carre (eds),Learning to Teach (London: Routledge).

Chambers, S. and Andre, T. (1997) Gender, prior knowledge, interest and experience inelectricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 107–123.

Chinn, C. and Brewer, W. (1993) The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: atheoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of EducationalResearch, 63, 1–49.

Claxton, G. (1986) The alternative conceivers’ conceptions. Studies in Science Education,13, 123–130.

Cosgrove, M. and Osborne, R. (1985) Lesson frameworks for changing children’ s ideas. InR. Osborne and P. Freyberg (eds), Learning in Science: The Implications of Children’sScience (Auckland: Heinemann), pp. 101–111.

De Fren, M. (1988) Using cartoons to develop writing and thinking skills. Social StudiesJournal, 79, 221–224.

Demetrulias, D. (1982) Gags, giggles, guffaws: using cartoons in the classroom. Journal ofReading, 26, 66–68.

Denzin, N. K. (1970) The Research Act in Sociology: A Theoretical Introduction toSociological Methods (London: The Butterworth Group).

Driver, R. and Oldham, V. (1986) A constructivist approach to curriculum development.Studies in Science Education, 13, 105–122.

Fisher, R. (1990) Teaching Children to Think (Oxford: Blackwell Science).Goldstein, B. (1986) Looking at cartoons and comics in a new way. Journal of Reading, 29,

657–661.Gunstone, R. (1988) Learners in science education. In P. Fensham (ed.), Development and

Dilemmas in Science Education (Lewes: Falmer), pp. 73–95.Guttierrez, R. and Ogborn, J. (1992) A causal framework for analysing alternative con-

ceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 201–220.Hammrich, P. (1997) Confronting teacher candidates’ conceptions of the nature of science.

Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 141–151.Harlen, W. (1996) The Teaching of Science in Primary Schools (2nd edn) (London: David

Fulton).Heintzmann, W. (1989) Historical cartoons: opportunities to motivate and educate. Journal

of the Middle States Council for Social Studies, 11, 9–13.Jones, D. (1987) Problem solving through cartoon drawing. In R. Fisher (ed.), Problem

Solving in Primary Schools (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).Keogh, B. and Naylor, S. (1997) Starting Points for Science (Sandbach: Millgate House).Millar, R. (1989) Constructive criticisms. International Journal of Science Education, 11,

587–596.Naylor, S. and McMurdo, A. (1990) Supporting Science in Schools (Timperley:

Breakthrough Educational Publications).Needham, R. (1987) Teaching Strategies for Developing Understanding in Science (Leeds:

Children’ s Learning in Science Project, University of Leeds).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Nussbaum, J. (1985) The earth as a cosmic body. In R. Driver, E. Guesne and A.Tiberghien (eds), Children’s Ideas in Science (Milton Keynes: Open UniversityPress), pp. 170–192.

Osborne, J. (1996) Beyond constructivism. Science Education, 80, 53–82.Osborne, R. and Gilbert, J. (1980) A method for investigating concept understanding in

science. European Journal of Science Education, 2, 311–321.Peacock, A. (1995) An agenda for research on text material in primary science for second

language learners of English in developing countries. Journal of Multilingual andMulticultural Development, 16, 389–401.

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982) Accommodation ofa scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66,211–227.

Roth, K. and Anderson, C. (1988) Promoting conceptual change learning from sciencetextbooks. In P. Ramsden (ed.), Improving Learning: New Perspectives (London:Kogan Page), pp. 109–141.

Russell, T., Harlen, W. and Watt, D. (1989) Children’ s ideas about evaporation andcondensation. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 566–576.

Russell, T. and Watt, D. (1990) Primary SPACE Project Research Report: Evaporationand Condensation (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press).

Solomon, J. (1980) Teaching Children in the Laboratory (London: Croom Helm).Solomon, J. (1994) The rise and fall of constructivism. Studies in Science Education, 23,

1–19.Stavy, R. and Berkovitz, B. (1980) Cognitive conflict as a basis for teaching quantitative

aspects of the concept of temperature. Science Education, 64, 679–692.Stead, B. F. and Osborne, R. (1980) Exploring science students’ concepts of light.

Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 26, 84–90.Tiberghien, A. (1985) The development of ideas with teaching. In R. Driver, E. Guesne

and A. Tiberghien (eds), Children’s Ideas in Science (Milton Keynes: Open UniversityPress), pp. 67–84.

Trumper, R. (1990) Being constructive: an alternative approach to the teaching of the energyconcept. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 343–354.

White, R. (1994) Dimensions of content. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone and R. White (eds),The Content of Science (London: Falmer), pp. 255–262.

White, R. and Gunstone, R. (1992) Probing Understanding (London: Falmer).Wittrock, M. (1994) Generative science teaching. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone and

R. White (eds), The Content of Science (London: Falmer) pp. 29–38.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f T

exas

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

4:06

05

Dec

embe

r 20

14

concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science: an evaluation

Documents