students’ alternative conceptions in earth science: a review of research and implications for...

This article was downloaded by: [Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola]On: 11 October 2014, At: 19:44Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Research Papers in EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rred20

Students’ alternative conceptionsin Earth science: a review ofresearch and implications forteaching and learningJ. E. DovePublished online: 09 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: J. E. Dove (1998) Students’ alternative conceptions in Earth science:a review of research and implications for teaching and learning, Research Papers inEducation, 13:2, 183-201, DOI: 10.1080/0267152980130205

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267152980130205

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purposeof the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are theopinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francisshall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arisingdirectly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rred20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/0267152980130205

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267152980130205

forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

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

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

Students' alternative conceptionsin Earth science: a review ofresearch and implications for

teaching and learning

J. E. Dove

ABSTRACT

A considerable amount of information is now available about alternative conceptions in thephysical and biological sciences and their implications for teaching and learning. However, agrowing number of publications have also appeared which have investigated alternativeconceptions about Earth science. Some of these studies have addressed topics taught ingeology, geography and science such as conceptions about rocks, earthquakes, volcanoes, theEarth's structure, landforms, weathering and erosion, and soil. This paper reviews theliterature on these topics, hereto reported across a broad spectrum of papers in science,geological and geographical journals, and presents some new findings. While there are manypossible origins for the alternative conceptions identified, it is argued that some of these ideasare founded on various pedagogical practices, such as the imprecise use of language,oversimplification of concepts, use of rote learning, and stereotyping of landforms, as well ason the inadequate use of prerequisite knowledge of students, and the abstract nature of someof the subject matter in Earth science. Moreover, it is suggested that an awareness of, andattention to, these matters would improve teaching and student learning significantly.

Keywords: alternative conceptions; Earth science; geographical education; geologicaleducation; ideas; misconceptions.

INTRODUCTION

A considerable volume of research in the last two decades has been generated on primary,secondary and tertiary students' understanding of concepts in science. These studies haverevealed that students' conceptions are often inconsistent with scientific thinking (Driver,

Jane Dove is a Lecturer in Education at the University of Exeter.

Research Papers in Education 13(2) 1998, pp. 183-201 © 1998 Routledge 0267-1522

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

1989; Gilbert et al.t 1982). Moreover, it has been argued that such conceptions onceembedded in a conceptual framework are difficult to change and can affect subsequentlearning (Novak, 1988; Nussbaum and Novick, 1982). Furthermore, it has been suggestedthat such conceptions can only be altered if they are presented in a more intelligible, plausibleand fruitful way (Hewson, 1982).

These conceptions have been variously referred to as 'misconceptions' (Novak, 1988),'children's science' (Osborne et al., 1983), 'alternative frameworks' (Driver and Easley, 1978),'preconceptions' (Osborne and Freyberg, 1985), 'untutored beliefs' (Hills, 1989), 'intuitivenotions' (Bar, 1989), 'alternative conceptions' (Atwood and Atwood, 1996) and 'ideas'(Kuiper, 1994). Although debate about which term is most appropriate has been extensive,there has been no agreement on a suitable terminology (Sanders, 1993). Nevertheless, therehas been some level of consensus, for example the term 'misconception' has tended to be usedin studies where pupils have been exposed to some formal model or theory and haveassimilated this incorrectly (Driver and Easley, 1978; Kuiper, 1994), whereas 'preconception'has been reserved for an incomplete naive notion held about a topic before any formalteaching has taken place (Kuiper, 1994 ). The term 'error' has been interpreted as an answerwhich scientists consider incorrect, whereas a 'misconception' has been regarded as anincorrect mental construct (Fisher and Lipson, 1986; Sanders, 1993). In this paper I will usethe term 'alternative conception' to mean a conception which differs significantly from thatwhich is commonly agreed by the scientific community (Osborne et al., 1983).

Although recent literature has highlighted some of the limitations of constructivism(Solomon, 1994), particularly in relation to the validity and reliability of the evidence(Johnson and Gott, 1996), a considerable amount of information is, nevertheless, nowavailable about alternative conceptions in the physical and biological sciences and about theirimplications for teaching and learning. Moreover, a growing number of publications havealso appeared which have investigated alternative conceptions about Earth science. Some ofthese studies have addressed topics taught in astronomy or meteorology, but an increasingnumber have also focused on aspects of geology and geomorphology such as conceptionsabout rocks, earthquakes, volcanoes, the Earth's structure, landforms, weathering and erosion,and soil. This paper reviews the literature on these topics, hereto reported across a broadspectrum of papers in science, geological and geographical journals. From the review it isintended to develop some recommendations for improving students' learning of these topics.

While there are many possible origins for the alternative conceptions identified, I arguethat some of these ideas are founded on various pedagogical practices, such as the impreciseuse of language and textbook stereotyping of landforms, as well as the abstract nature of someof the subject matter in Earth science. Moreover, I suggest that an awareness of, and attentionto, these matters would improve student learning significantly. Such observations reflectingsimilar arguments about other subject matter are identified by Garnett et al. (1995) in a reviewof alternative conceptions in chemistry.

A REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTIONS INEARTH SCIENCE

This section includes a review of research about alternative conceptions in Earth science inthe following topics: rocks, earthquakes, volcanoes, the Earth's structure, landforms,weathering and erosion, and soil.

184 Research Papers in Education Volume 13 Number 2

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Rocks

As part of a wide-ranging study of children's understanding of natural phenomena, Piaget(1929) discussed the origins of earth and stones with children aged 5 to 11 years living inSwitzerland. He found that children aged 7 to 8 believed that stones were created by men orGod. Moreover, some children believed that the stones grew from seeds planted in the soil.However, by the age of 9—10 the children thought that the rocks formed naturally.Moreover, some suggested that 'dirt' or 'earth' gradually changed into sand, which in turnhardened into rock.

Since this early work, several studies have documented students' understanding of rocks(Dove, 1996; Happs, 1982a, 1983, 1985; Russell et al, 1993). Table 1 collates alternativeconceptions documented in these studies. Many of these studies revealed that pupils of all agesperceived rock as a dull, heavy, large, dark material (Dove, 1996; Happs, 1982a; Russell et al.,1993). For example, Happs (1982a) found that when 11- to 17-year-old students in NewZealand were shown a collection of specimens, those most confidently regarded as rocks werelarge, jagged, dull and heavy. Russell et al. (1993), interviewing children aged 5—11 in theUnited Kingdom about a variety of specimens, found that colour was also an importantcriterion in determining if a specimen was a rock. Dove (1996), in a study of UnitedKingdom undergraduate primary science and humanities student-teachers' identifications ofrock types, also found that colour was considered important in identifying specific rock typessuch as limestone and sandstone. In this study, sandstone was perceived as orange in colourand consequently brown and white varieties went unrecognized. Similarly, a grey limestonewas not identified because students thought this rock type should have been yellow or white.Such findings suggest that a wide variety of specimens of limestone and sandstone should beavailable for students to examine, to challenge their stereotypical images of these rock types.

Table 1: Students' alternative conceptions about rocks

1. Rocks are heavy, large, dull and dark2. Volcanic scoria is sedimentary3. Slate is metamorphic4. Minerals and rocks are the same thing5. Brick is natural6. Marble is man-made7. Conglomerate is a type of cement8. Coal is a fuel not a rock9. Polished granite is a form of marble

A study by Westerback et al. (1985), conducted in the United States, noted that teachersfound that elementary (primary) student-teachers taking science courses memorized rockspecimens provided in the laboratory, rather than observing the characteristics of thespecimens, which would enable unknown samples to be identified. Consequently, student-teachers became anxious when they were given unknown specimens in practicalexaminations. Learning by rote is known to lead to error because knowledge which isacquired but not fully understood or connected with pre-existing knowledge is difficult toretrieve or apply to other situations (Fisher and Lipson, 1986). Rote learning of rock typesoften results in misidentifications because specimens vary both in colour and texture.

Students' Alternative Conceptions in Earth Science 185

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Consequently, keys that rely too heavily on these criteria for identification have beencriticized (Harwood, 1987). Moreover, as Westerback and Azer (1991) have noted, rocks areby nature gradational and therefore assigning specimens that occur near class boundaries issubjective. If students are unaware that rocks are gradational, they are likely to becomeanxious about assigning rocks to the correct category.

Incorrect classification of rocks based on misinterpretation of rock structures and textureshas been identified as another source of student alternative conceptions. For example, Happs(1983) found that the holes in volcanic scoria were incorrectly interpreted as suggesting thatthe rock formed in the sea, and consequently the specimen was classified as sedimentary,rather than volcanic. Similarly, Dove (1996) found that slate was regarded as a sedimentary,rather than a metamorphic, rock because the layering suggested to the students that thesediments had been laid down in water.

Further difficulties have been identified in the tendency to confuse minerals with rocks.Happs (1982a) found that when 11- to 17-year-olds in New Zealand were shown stimuluscards on which were written terms such as 'rock' and 'quartz', several students in explainingthese words applied the word 'rock' to a mineral. In a follow-up study to assess the effect ofinstruction on preconceptions, Happs (1985) found that some students still believed thatrocks such as granite, schist and pumice were all minerals. Russell et al. (1993), in theirinvestigations of 5- to 11-year-olds in the United Kingdom, found that young childrenregarded stone, pebbles, sand and rock as separate entities, rather than materials sharingattributes of a common parent material. Oversby (1996), in a study also conducted in theUnited Kingdom of postgraduate science student-teachers' understanding of terms used inEarth science, found that some students regarded 'stone' as a 'soft rock'.

Studies have also revealed that students confuse natural with human-made materials.Happs (1982a) found that, although brick was widely recognized, only one-third of thestudents realized it was not naturally occurring. Instead, brick was considered a rock, becauseit contained natural materials. In a later study he found that polished marble was not regardedas rock because it appeared human-made, rather than natural (Happs, 1985).

Dove (1996) found that when student-teachers were asked to recall the names of any rocksthey knew, hardly any mentioned slate, marble, coal, and pumice, but hand specimens weresubsequently widely recognized. In contrast, limestone was readily recalled as a rock, butsubsequent recognition proved difficult. Moreover, conglomerate was identified as cement,and coal was commonly regarded as a fuel not a rock. Additionally, photographs of polishedgranite headstones were called marble.

These findings suggest that students should be introduced to the concept that rocks can beobserved in the home and the urban environment, as well as the countryside. Towns andcities are 'open-air geological museums', which contain a variety of rock types preserved inpavements, buildings and statues. Moreover, greater effort should be made to clarify termswhere rocks are used as materials. For example, a stonemason refers to any polished stone as'marble', whereas a geologist restricts the meaning to a metamorphic limestone.

Volcanoes, earthquakes, Earth structure

Table 2 summarizes alternative conceptions about volcanoes, earthquakes and the Earth'sstructure. Two studies have revealed uncertainly about where earthquakes occur (Leather,1987; Schoon, 1992). A study conducted in the United Kingdom of 11- to 17-year-olds'


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Table 2: Students' alternative conceptions about earthquakes, volcanoes, and theEarth's structure

1. Earthquakes do not happen in the UK2. Earthquakes do not happen in the USA3. Earthquakes occur in hot countries4. Earthquakes occur when the sun heats the Earth's surface causing cracks5. Earthquakes occur when shaken by volcanoes6. Earthquakes 'erupt'7. Volcanoes do not have snow on them8. Volcanoes are not found in cold climates9. Magma flows from the centre of the Earth

10. A magnet is found at the centre of the Earth

understanding of earthquakes revealed that over half of the children aged 11, and a quarter ofthose aged 16, believed that earthquakes did not happen in Britain (Leather, 1987). Similarly,Schoon (1992), in a wide-ranging study conducted in the United States involving over 1000undergraduates and schoolchildren aged 5—18, found that 36 per cent thought that Chicagowas unlikely to be affected by an earthquake.

Further alternative conceptions have been identified in students' understanding of whyearthquakes occur. A study in the United States by Ross and Shuell (1993) revealed that,although 11-year-old children appeared to have little difficulty explaining that an earthquakewas a shaking of the ground, many could not explain why this occurred. A few suggested thatan earthquake happened when the core and the crust collided, but none was able to explainthat it was a consequence of plate movement.

Leather's (1987) study found that almost half of 11- to 14-year-olds thought thatearthquakes occurred in hot countries, many suggesting that the dry climate caused theEarth's surface to crack. However, beyond the age of 14 there was a sharp decline in thisalternative conception, and many instead related the activity to movement along plate andfault boundaries. Sharp et al. (1995), in a small study of 9- to 10-year-olds' understanding ofearthquakes in the United Kingdom, also found that some children thought that earthquakeswere found in hot countries.

Several studies have noted the tendency for students to confuse earthquake with volcanicactivity. For example, Sharp et al. (1995) found that some children thought an earthquakeoccurred when a volcano became hot and shook the ground. Ross and Schuell (1993) notedthat earthquakes were sometimes referred to as 'erupting'. Leather (1987) found that some11- to 14-year-olds believed that lava flowed from cracks produced by earthquakes. Happs(1982b), in a study of 11- to 17-year-olds' knowledge of mountains in New Zealand,found that some students believed that mountains could become volcanoes if shaken byearthquakes.

These alternative conceptions may arise because students confuse closely overlappingconcepts. Both earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are violent events and occur in similarareas, that is, along major plate margins. As one lithospheric plate subducts under another,friction occurs resulting in earthquake activity. About a 100 km below the surface thedescending plate begins to melt and magma escapes through cracks to the surface producingvolcanoes. In other situations the relationship is closer, for example some earthquakes arecaused by changes in the magma level in the chamber beneath a volcano. However, only a


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

minority of earthquakes are caused in this way. Moreover, lava rarely issues from the crackscreated by earthquakes.

Alternative conceptions have also been found in students' understanding of wherevolcanoes occur, and about the origin of the magma. Happs (1982b) found that when NewZealand students aged 11—17 were shown a colour photograph of Mount Egmont, 40 percent failed to recognize that this was a volcano. Happs suggested that perhaps this was becausethe mountain was not active at the time. However, some students were of the opinion that amountain with snow on the top could not be a volcano. Moreover, this led some students tosuggest that volcanoes were not found in cold climates.

A study by Lillo (1994) in Spain revealed that when 11- to 15-year-old children wereasked to draw a cross-section of the Earth, many depicted a hot, melted centre from whichmagma flowed out to volcanoes on the surface. In reality, virtually all magma is thought tooriginate in the upper portion of the mantle or crust (Weyman, 1988). The notion thatmagma comes from the core may have its origins in the fact that both terms are associatedwith heat. Lillo's study also revealed that, although most students correctly portrayed theinternal structure of the Earth as a series of concentric layers, some children falsely believedthat a magnet was found at the centre. A small-scale study by Sharp et al. (1995) aboutchildren's conceptions of the Earth's internal structure revealed that 9- to 10-year-olds weredivided as to whether the Earth was hotter or colder at the centre. Some children suggestedthat it was colder at the centre because the sun's rays could not warm it up. Another idea wasthat cold water in the sea seeped into the ground and lowered the temperatures. A furtheralternative conception was that the centre of the Earth was colder in winter than in summer.Such findings reveal that students experience considerable difficulty with concepts which areimpossible to observe in the field.

Landforms

Research on children's perceptions of landforms has been limited. Milburn (1972) asked 1000primary and secondary schoolchildren in the United Kingdom to provide definitions of awide range of geographical terms. Words which 10- to 11-year-old children found difficultto define included: 'basin', 'canal', 'confluence', 'estuary', 'gorge', 'lake', 'marsh', 'mountain','mouth', 'plain' and 'valley'. For example, a valley was variously defined as 'the bottom of amountain,' 'a dip between two hills' and 'a river chiselled ditch'. Some children also falselysuggested that a valley was 'a little town', 'a low village' and 'lots of houses'.

By the age of 16 some students were still having difficulty providing correct definitions ofwords such as 'flood plain', 'water-table' and 'basin'. A common alternative conception wasto equate a river basin with either the lowland area liable to flooding or the flood plain itself.Other difficulties arose where geographical terms were themselves imprecise, such as 'gorge'and 'canyon'. The structure of thinking was that if a gorge was formed by a river, then acanyon, because it had a different name, must be formed by some other process.

Milburn (1972) also observed that children of primary age encountered difficulty withhomonyms, for example the term 'fault' was interpreted as 'it is your fault'. Whereas somesecondary pupils, although able to provide some excellent physical descriptions of, forexample the Rhine rift valley, gave explanations which were false, such as attributing thefeature to glacial erosion and the stepped sides to soil creep. Milburn concluded byrecommending that geographical terms which were common to everyday speech should be


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

carefully presented in their geographical context, particularly if they were homonymic.Moreover, teachers should bear in mind that, although children might be aware of a term,they might not understand what it means.

In a smaller study, also conducted in the United Kingdom, Platten (1995) interviewed 50children aged 7 to discover their understanding of 30 geographical terms which includedwords such as 'river', 'beach', 'waterfall' and 'mountain'. She found that a higher percentageof children were able to provide a definition of the terms than children of a similar age in theMilbum (1972) study, although many still had difficulty with words such as 'canal' and'valley'. Platten attributed the higher success rate to the fact that in her study children wereprovided with the word and a pictorial image of each term, whereas Milbum simply asked fora verbal definition. Similarly, Lunnon (1969), in a study of 140 5- to 12-year-olds' knowledgeof a range of physical terms, found that some children were better able to communicate theirunderstanding using activities which involved picture recognition than through verbaltechniques.

Other studies have identified alternative conceptions about specific landforms such asmountains (Happs, 1982b; Piaget, 1929), and rivers ( Dove et al., 1998a; May,1996; Piaget,1929, 1930; Wilson and Goodwin, 1981). Table 3 collates alternative conceptions about thesefeatures.

Table 3: Students' alternative conceptions about mountains and rivers

1. Mountains are created by God or man2. Mountains grow from stones3. Rivers are dug out by God or man4. River flow is caused by people swimming or rowing5. River flow is caused by the wind6. Towns were built before rivers7. Rivers flow inland from the sea8. Rivers are clean environments

Piaget (1929) asked 5- to 11-year-olds in Switzerland to explain how mountains wereformed. He found children aged 8 thought that mountains were made by God or man, whopiled up earth, or in some cases planted stones which subsequently grew into mountains. Bythe age of 9-10 the children realized that mountains were natural and had in some way risenup.

Happs (1982b) found that New Zealand students aged 11—17 variously described amountain as 'a large hill', 'a big rocky structure' and 'a volcano'. Similarly, Milbum (1972)noted that 5- to 15-year-olds commonly used the concept of a hill as the basis for describ-ing a mountain. Happs (1982b) noted that about 60 per cent of the students in his studyunderstood that the term 'range' referred to a row of mountains, although several falselyinterpreted the word to mean 'a large expanse of grazing land'. The students in this studywere also asked to explain how mountains formed. About a third thought that mountainshad always been present, although some mentioned faulting, folding and the build up ofmagma. Over 80 per cent could not relate the theory of mountain building to platetectonics. Moreover, some falsely suggested that God had created the mountains or that thesehad been formed by tides removing material around the edges of the feature to leave behindan upstanding mass.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Studies of alternative conceptions about rivers have either explored ideas about riverformation and water currents, or investigated perceptions about fluvial environments. Pioneerwork on children's understanding of rivers and lakes was conducted by Piaget (1929, 1930).The children's perceptions were based on their knowledge of rivers and lakes in Switzerland.He found that the children's conceptual development of rivers and lakes proceeded througha number of stages. For example, children aged 7-8 thought that rivers and lakes were dug byGod or man, who in turn also filled them with water. By the age of 9—11 children stillbelieved that the depressions or channels were created artificially, but they were fillednaturally with rainwater. Finally, by the age of 11, children realized that both the channel orhollow, and the water within it formed naturally.

Piaget (1930) also asked children to explain what caused the water in the river to move.He found that children aged 5 believed that the current was caused by men rowing with oarsor by people swimming. Another explanation was that God or man had compelled thecurrent to flow because it would benefit humankind. Most children also believed that riversflowed downslope, but a few also thought that water could flow uphill. By the age of 7-8 thecurrent was attributed to the wind, waves or stones in the river. For example, some childrensuggested that the River Rhone flowed because the stones in it make the water go up anddown producing a current. Others suggested that the wind created the current; some alsoperceived the wind literally passing into the water. By the age of 9, children attributed theflow to the slope, rather than to any external force. However, it was not until the age of10—11 that children fully understood that it was the weight of the water moving across theslope which was responsible for the movement.

Piaget was also interested in children's understanding of the flow of water in towns. Hefound that young children thought that towns were built before rivers. It appeared that youngchildren believed that bridges were constructed before rivers so that people could cross overthe empty channels which only later were filled with rainwater.

Some of Piaget's early findings have been supported by a more recent, small-scale study of10-year-olds' perceptions of rivers conducted in the South-West of England (May, 1996). Forexample, she found that some children believed that rivers were made by humans, and thatthe wind caused the current. The study also revealed that, although a majority of childrenthought rivers started in hills or lakes, a few believed that rivers flowed inland from the sea.However, it should be noted that the sample size was small and only a minority of thechildren held these views, which suggests such alternative conceptions are the exception,rather than the rule at this age.

Perceptions of river environments have been investigated by Dove et al. (1997a, b), May(1996), and Wilson and Goodwin (1981). The study by Wilson and Goodwin (1981) into 10-to 12-year-olds' perceptions of rivers, conducted in Queensland, Australia, revealed thatimages were closely based on a local example of a river which was natural, wide, gentlyflowing, cold, muddy, surrounded by trees and used for a variety of recreational purposes. Asa consequence, few children perceived rivers which were polluted or human-controlled.Children also falsely believed that a wide, deep river was also something which flowed slowly.

May (1996) asked 10-year-old children in the South-West of England to sort a selectionof photographs into examples of 'a river' and 'not a river'. Photographs of large riversmeandering through rural settings were regarded as rivers, while small channels, or thosewhich included signs of human intervention such as walls or pollution, were rejected.Similarly, Dove et al. (1998a) in a larger study found that when 9- to 11-year-olds living ina city were asked to identify photographic images which appeared 'most like', and 'least like'


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

a river, those selected were in rural rather than urban settings. Moreover, the children had aclear conception of what constituted a river in terms of its size. Further perceptions wererevealed in another study where children were asked to draw a river showing where it startedand ended (Dove et al., 1998b). Most children drew water which moved from left to right,or flowed down the page. Significantly more children were able to suggest where riversended than where they began. A common feature included in the drawings was a waterfall,although some children drew these descending over cliffs into the sea, rather than located inmountains.

Weathering/erosion

Studies into alternative conceptions about weathering and erosion have been conducted byDove (1997) and Russell by et al. (1993). Table 4(a) collates students' alternative conceptionsabout this topic. Children in the study by Russell et al. conducted in the United Kingdomexamined the effects of weathering on buildings and tombstones and were asked to sketchwhat they saw. They were also asked if they considered that the building or tombstone hadalways looked like this. The study revealed that, although most children recognized thatchange had occurred and could offer reasons for this, they could not explain the processesinvolved. Humans, wind and rain were identified as the main agents of change, although ideaswere vague. For example, rain was perceived as washing the shiny parts away and making therocks soft. Heat from the sun was incorrectly identified as causing the letters on the tombstoneto fade.

Table 4: Students' alternative conceptions about (a) weathering and erosion and(b) soils

(a) Weathering and erosion1. The sun's heat causes the lettering on tombstones to fade2. 'Wind abrasion' is a type of weathering not erosion3. 'Rain-splash erosion' is a type of weathering

(b) Soil1. Soil is brown and homogeneous2. Soil does not contain air3. Twigs, leaf mould, stones are found within the soil, and not an integral part of it3. Soil is unchanging4. Soil formed when the Earth formed5. Soil can extend for several miles under the Earth's surface

A more detailed investigation into ideas about weathering and erosion has been conductedby Dove (1997). In this study, 16- to 19-year-old students in the United Kingdom wereasked to explain the differences between the terms 'weathering' and 'erosion' and then toassign specific types, for example sulphation, to one of these categories. A majority of studentsappreciated that weathering occurred in situ, whereas erosion usually involved movementof the agent and/or the material it carried away. However, several weathering processeswere incorrectly classified as erosion because they had nothing to do with the weather.Similarly, several students incorrectly classified processes such as 'wind laden with debris


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

sandblasting a cliff as weathering, because wind was linked with the weather. Furtheralternative conceptions were revealed in the way students discriminated between the twoterms. For example, some believed that erosion happened all the time, whereas weatheringwas intermittent. Others thought that weathering could not really be prevented, but erosioncould. Several also suggested that weathering took place at a slower rate than erosion.

Clearly there is a need for further research in this area. One problem is that weathering anderosional processes often act together. Another is that textbook definitions of the terms vary(Wyatt, 1986). Furthermore, the processes included under the term 'weathering' havebroadened over time (Trudgill, 1983). Moreover, some primary and secondary textbooks, inan effort to simplify terms, present information which is misleading (Dove, 1997). All of thesefactors are a potential source of students' alternative conceptions.

Soil

Table 4(b) collates students' alternative conceptions about soil. Students have demonstrateddifficulties conceptualizing soil composition, depth and age. The main areas of confusion areconcerned with what constitutes a soil, how far it extends, and its age. Studies have revealedthat students of all ages tend to rename soil something else such as 'earth', 'dirt', 'mud','stones', or 'compost' (Happs, 1981; Russell et al., 1993). Both these studies also found thatsoil was widely regarded as a medium to support plant life, but as a consequence somechildren linked the origin of soil to garden centres (Russell et al, 1993). This study into 5- to11-year-olds' perceptions of soil, conducted in the United Kingdom, also revealed that therewas a widespread tendency to regard 'real soil' as homogeneous and brown. Twigs, stones,bark, leaf mould, sand and clay were considered as found within a soil, rather an integral partof it. Many children also thought that soil did not contain air. Samples regarded as soilincluded garden soil and damp compost, but sand from a sand pit, small pebbles, and chalkysoil were all rejected. These decisions were often based on the colour of the soil.

The studies by Happs (1981, 1984) into 11- to 18-year-olds' understanding of soil in NewZealand revealed that soil was perceived as unchanging and had been in existence since thebeginning of the Earth. The only changes were via additions and losses. Where soil didchange, one view was that it was compressed into clay and then rock. The study by Russellet al. (1993) found that when children from the United Kingdom were asked if rock couldchange into soil, some accepted that rock could break into smaller fragments, whereas othersthought that rock was too hard to be broken down into a soil.

Happs (1981, 1984) found that there were widespread differences in estimations of how farsoil extended, ranging from a few inches to several miles. Given that fresh soil profiles areuncommon, it is not surprising that students have difficulties conceptualizing soil depth.

IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING

The identification of students' alternative conceptions in Earth science has the potential toimprove teaching and learning significantly in this subject. It can help teachers to identify andcorrect common alternative conceptions which otherwise might act as barriers to furtherlearning. Moreover, the information gathered can be used to determine what, and in whichorder, concepts should be taught in the curriculum.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Few attempts have been made to use alternative conceptions' research in the developmentof Earth science curriculum-sequencing decisions or the design of curriculum materials.However, the research findings are now particularly significant as weathering, rocks and soilsare all required study at Key stages 2 and 3 in science, and rivers, mountains, volcanoes andearthquakes feature in geography in the National Curriculum for England and Wales (DfE,1995a, b).

Although it is recognized that students bring to instruction their own private world of'informal knowledge', the research reviewed suggests that some of the alternative conceptionsheld by students result from various pedagogical practices such as the imprecise use oflanguage and the oversimplification of concepts, as well as from the abstract nature of some ofthe subject matter in Earth science. I believe that careful attention to some of these matterscould lead to significant improvements in students' understanding. The discussion whichfollows addresses some of the teaching implications arising from this review of research.

Use of everyday language in a scientific context

The use of everyday language in a scientific context in Earth science has been identified inseveral studies as a potential source of students' alternative conceptions (Dove, 1996; Happs,1982a; Milburn, 1972; Russell et al, 1993). For example, it was noted by Dove (1996) thatstudent-teachers often referred to any polished rock as 'marble', rather than restricting thisterm to a metamorphosed limestone. Similarly, Russell et al. (1993) noted that the term'pebble' was applied to a variety of specimens. The term 'pebble' in common usage refers toa rounded piece of rock, whereas in geology it is generally regarded as a clastic stony materialwith a diameter on the Wentworth scale between 2 to 64 mm, placing it between smallergravel and larger cobble-sized materials (Whittow, 1984).

Many other examples can be found in the literature. For example, the term 'alluvium'generally refers to all unconsolidated material from rivers, but a more restricted view held bygeologists is that it includes particle sizes which range from 0.006 to 0.02 mm (Whittow,1984) . Similarly, the term 'stone' refers to a small piece of rock or a gemstone, but morestrictly should be used only as a suffix, for example in sandstone or limestone (Happs, 1982a).

Clearly, language creates different images for different students. Educators need both toconfront everyday language in the classroom and to ensure they themselves use words andexpressions which accurately describe the subject matter under consideration.

Changing definitions

Failure to recognize that definitions can change over time can be another potential source ofstudents' alternative conceptions. For example, early definitions of weathering were directlylinked to atmospheric processes, but more recently the concept has broadened to encompassthe view that rocks decay chemically and physically in response to a range of environmentalconditions (Trudgill, 1983). However, evidence suggests that students failing to recognize thismay perceive as erosion several weathering processes which are not related to the weather(Dove, 1997).

Further examples can be identified of definitions which have broadened. For example, theterm 'periglacial' originally applied to processes operating in the cold, dry zone adjacent to a


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Pleistocene ice sheet, but now it includes non-glacial processes and features of climates,regardless of age or proximity to ice sheets. Similarly, the term 'desert' was originally confinedto hot, arid areas, but now encompasses mid-latitude basins and cold areas with lowtemperatures and physiological drought, rather than any deficiency in precipitation. Teachersneed to be aware, and communicate to their students, that definitions may change over time.Furthermore, they should remind students that often such changes are controversial.

Oversimplification of concepts and the use of unqualified, generalized state-ments

Alternative conceptions can also arise when educators, in attempting to simplify concepts,provide descriptions which are limited or misleading. The study by Milburn (1972) intochildren's understanding of geographical terms noted that sometimes textbook definitionsbordered on the incorrect. He noted, for example, a delta had been variously described as 'ariver with nine channels', or a 'mangrove swamp'. Dove (1997) observed that attempts tosimplify definitions of weathering and erosion in primary and secondary textbooks had alsoresulted in misleading information.

The tendency for unqualified, generalized statements to lead to alternative conceptions hasbeen noted by Nelson et al. (1992). For example, in a list of common alternative conceptionsabout Earth science identified from teaching undergraduates in the United States, they notedthat students often assumed that water always flowed downhill. In reality this is not always thecase, as in limestone scenery where water is held within a closed system and responds to asubterranean fissure system rather than to a unified regional groundwater pattern.

Challenging assumptions such as this can help to reduce alternative conceptions. Forexample, primary children could be questioned as to whether they thought all rivers ended inthe sea. Posing questions such as these reinforces the importance of discovering pre-conceptions in Earth science before concepts are taught to avoid students trying to attach newknowledge to existing false ideas. For meaningful learning to take place, students must be ableto incorporate new material into an existing cognitive structure (Ausubel, 1968).

Overlapping concepts

The tendency to confuse closely related concepts has been reported as another significantsource of difficulty for students (Dove, 1996; Happs, 1982a). For example, problems mightbe anticipated with such closely associated concepts as 'porous' and 'permeable'. Permeablerefers to the ease with which a liquid/gas can pass through a rock or soil, whereas porousrefers to the volume of water which can be held within a rock/soil expressed as a ratio of thevoids (pores) to the total volume of the material (Whittow, 1984). Confusing these terms mayresult in students experiencing difficulty in accepting, for example, that clay is both porousand impermeable.

Another area in which concepts closely overlap and consequently may be confusedconcerns the processes that operate on limestone scenery. The breakdown and removal ofcalcium carbonate from limestone pavements is often described as a type of weathering(Waugh, 1990). However, the preferred term is denudation, because both weathering (break-down in situ) and erosion (removal of debris in solution) are involved (Goudie, 1995;


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Trudgill, 1985; Viles, 1993). Furthermore, confusion is likely to surround the actual processesinvolved because some textbooks refer to the breakdown and removal of calcium carbonatefrom limestone pavements as 'carbonation' (Clowes and Comfort, 1982; Waugh, 1990),whereas carbonation only refers to the action of carbonic acid with the limestone. Beforecarbonation, carbonic acid has to be created, and after carbonation, the calcium hydrogencarbonate and the calcium ions are removed in solution. For this reason, many writers preferto conceive the whole process as one of solution (Bunnett, 1987; Viles, 1993). Clearly,educators need to be aware that closely overlapping concepts can result in alternativeconceptions and that textbooks may not clarify the situation.

Rote application of concepts

Rote learning is another factor which can lead to alternative conceptions. For example,students who resorted to rote learning of rock specimens, in preparation for identifyingunseen examples in a practical examination, frequently found this strategy failed because rocksof a similar type varied in colour. Educators need to encourage students to identify specimensbased on evidence rather than rote learning. The use of identification keys, as advocated byHarwood (1987), is a useful way in which students can logically deduce the identification ofan unknown specimen through a series of steps.

Endowing objects with human/animal characteristics

Evidence that young children endow objects with human/animal characteristics wasidentified in early studies by Piaget (1929, 1930). More recently, Happs (1982b) also detectedthis tendency in 11- to 17-year-old students' understanding of mountains.

It is likely that textbooks that refer to mountains which 'grow' and meanders which 'findthe path of least resistance to the sea' may exacerbate this tendency. Moreover, early theoriesof river development which perceived mountain streams as 'youthful', meandering riverswhich filled valleys as 'mature', and very broad rivers winding across featureless floodplains as'old' (Davis, 1899) have undoubtedly also contributed to the problem.

Textbook stereotyping

Personal, prior experiences influence perceptions of landforms. For example, Wilson andGoodwin (1981) found that students' images of a river were largely based on a local example.These experiences can be a source of alternative conceptions because they lead tostereotyping.

Stereotypical images of landforms in textbooks can also lead to alternative conceptions. Forexample, photographs of mountains with pointed peaks and deserts full of sand may leadstudents to believe falsely that all mountain and desert landscapes are like this. Moreover, evenrelatively straightforward features, such as rivers and hills, can appear in a variety of forms(Wiegand, 1993). Teachers need to explore with students their images of landforms, beforethese features are taught. Students should also be presented with a variety of different imagesof one landform to reduce stereotyping. Moreover, teachers should remind students that


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

photographic images can be incorrectly interpreted. For example, Antarctica might be viewedas an area receiving heavy snowfall, whereas in fact it is a cold desert. Similarly, images of largeexpanses of flat snow obscure the fact that Antarctica is underlain by a landmass.

Inadequate prerequisite knowledge

Lack of prerequisite knowledge can be another potential source of alternative conceptions.For example, students are likely to experience difficulty accepting that soils with shallowprofiles can be very old, unless they understand that in desert areas where these are foundweathering processes are limited. Similarly, students with an inadequate knowledge of therelation between the discharge and hydraulic radius of a river are unlikely to accept that theaverage velocity of a river increases downstream. Teachers need to identify what studentsknow and understand before such topics are taught, as alternative preconceptions can act as abarrier to further learning (Ausubel, 1968).

Students' inability to perceive changes in rocks, soils and landforms over time

Inability to visualize that rocks, soil and landforms change over time represents a majordifficulty in developing students' conceptual understanding of the evolution of landscapes.For example, failure to understand that soil is derived from rock fragments (Russell et at,1993), or that soil is unchanging (Happs, 1984), would make it difficult for students toappreciate that soil profiles deepen over time. One problem is that soil and weatheringprocesses take place over a long timescale. Students may observe the results of weathering ona gravestone, but the processes responsible are more difficult to conceptualize. Furthermore,weathering processes interact, which makes it difficult to evaluate the contribution ofindividual activities such as freeze—thaw to the overall result.

Further difficulties may occur where students are unable to conceptualize that somelandforms are the result of processes which are no longer in operation. For example, glacialcirques in Britain formed under very different climatic conditions to those of today. Studentunderstanding can be improved by providing students with examples of locations wherecirques are actively forming today.

Another problem in conceptualizing change is that often explanations of alterations tolandforms are linked to broader, abstract concepts such as cycles of erosion. For example, onecycle envisages that land is uplifted and a drainage pattern develops which gradually reducesthe surface to a featureless peneplain, and then uplift occurs again and the process is repeated(Davis, 1899). Although this concept has been criticized, the principles have been applied tothe evolution of glacial, coastal and limestone scenery. The difficulty is that not only are suchconcepts abstract but the processes take place over a very long time period.

Conceptualization can be aided by hardware models. For example, a model simulatingcoastal erosion of a cliffline could be used to demonstrate the concept that increased frictionwith a widening wave-cut platform eventually reduces wave action and coastal erosion.Video and computer simulations could also demonstrate this concept. Hardware models orcomputer simulations can also be used to demonstrate feedback mechanisms. For example, amodel could demonstrate the concept that increased stream run-off results in greater erosionand increased channel width, which in turn results in an increased hydraulic radius which


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

slows down stream velocity. Negative feedback mechanisms such as this are common inphysical geography and promote self-regulation, but such abstract concepts are difficult forstudents to conceptualize, again because they take place over a long timescale.

Students' inability to visualize cross-sections

Failure to visualize what lies below the Earth's surface has been reported as a significant sourceof difficulty for students ( Lillo, 1994; Russell et al., 1993; Sharp et al., 1995). Conceptualizingsoil depth is difficult because fresh soil profiles are not easily observed, and the boundarybetween the lowest soil horizon and the underlying country rock is often indistinct.Moreover, soils can vary in depth from a few centimetres to several metres.

Similarly, conceptions of the Earth's internal structure present difficulties because it cannotbe directly observed. Layering is instead determined by seismic evidence. Three-dimensionalmodels are useful, but students still need help conceptualizing scale. For example, they needto be able to compare the depth of each internal layer with a distance they can visualize inreality. Teachers also need to probe student perceptions about earthquake and volcanicactivity before these topics are taught, to identify alternative conceptions such as the idea thatmagma originates from the core.

Students' inability to recognize that features of similar appearance havediffering origins

Alternative conceptions also arise when students assume that landforms and rocks which aresimilar in appearance have similar origins. For example, students identified slate as asedimentary, rather than a metamorphic, rock because it contained layers (Dove, 1996).Similarly, Happs (1983) found that volcanic scoria was considered a sandstone because itcontained holes.

Teachers should encourage students to question whether landforms and rocks of similarappearance have common origins. For example, not all steep-sided mountains are volcanic;they might be oil or salt domes, steep anticlines or cockpit karst scenery. Similarly, not all tors(steep-sided residual hills) are granitic; they also form in sandstone.

Students also need to be aware that landforms which appear similar in shape may havebeen created artificially rather than naturally. For example, students need to be able todiscriminate between a disused railway cutting and a valley, and between a weir and awaterfall.

Failure to recognize change and controversy in explanations of landformevolution

Theories proposed to explain landforms change as new evidence is produced. For example,early explanations of mountain formation were linked to the suggestion that as the interior ofthe Earth cooled, the crust shrank causing mountains to form. Moreover, it is only in the last30 years that the concept of plate tectonics has become widely established. Furthermore,controversy still surrounds the origin of landforms such as tors, meanders and dry valleys.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

Educators need to make students aware of these debates. Students aged 16 and beyond shouldbe aware that new evidence can refute current theories and concepts of landform evolution.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper has reviewed research on alternative conceptions in Earth science and summarizedsome of the most common alternative conceptions students hold about rocks, earthquakes,volcanoes, the Earth's structure, weathering and erosion and soil. The research suggests thatstudents' alternative conceptions are widespread, but also indicates that pedagogical factorsmay contribute to their formation. If teachers, curriculum designers, and textbook writersare aware of commonly held alternative conceptions and the origins of these views, then itshould be possible to improve students' understandings of Earth science concepts. The useof everyday language in scientific contexts, changing definitions, oversimplification ofconcepts, overlapping similar concepts, rote learning, students' preconceptions from privateworld experiences, textbook stereotyping, and inadequate prerequisite knowledge may allcontribute to students' lack of understanding of concepts in Earth science.

Moreover, students may experience difficulties with concepts which are abstract and/ordifficult to observe. These difficulties represent significant problems for Earth scienceeducators, but hardware models and audiovisual technologies, including computer graphics,provide opportunities to present students with acceptable concrete representations of thechanging nature of landforms, rocks and soil.

Further research is needed to identify alternative conceptions in Earth science, but themethodology employed needs to address current concerns about the constructivist approach.Finding out what children know rests on the interpretation of their responses. Children maybe answering different questions to those researchers think they have asked. Moreover,researchers may interpret children's responses in ways which children did not intend. AsJohnson and Gott (1996) suggest, monitoring children's thinking is not straightforward, but Iwould argue that carefully planned research can nevertheless make a valuable contribution toour understanding of children's alternative conceptions in Earth science. The results of suchresearch could be used to devise teaching methods and materials which would help studentsof all ages overcome their alternative conceptions of Earth Science.

REFERENCES

ATWOOD, R. K. and ATWOOD, V. A. (1996). 'Preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of thecauses of seasons', Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 5, 553-63.

AUSUBEL, D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart andWinston.

BAR, V. (1989). 'Children's views about the water cycle', Science Education, 73, 4, 481-500.BUNNETT, R. B. (1987). Physical Geography in Diagrams. London: Longman.CLOWES, A. and COMFORT, P. (1982). Process and Landform. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.DAVIS, W. H. (1899). 'The geographical cycle', Geographical Journal, 14, 481-504.DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION (1995a). Science in the National Curriculum. London:

HMSO.DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION (1995b). Geography in the National Curriculum. London:

HMSO.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

DOVE, J. E. (1996). 'Student identification of rock types', Journal of Geoscience Education, 44, 3, 266-9.DOVE, J. E. (1997). 'Student ideas about weathering and erosion', International Journal of Science

Education 19, 8, 971-80.DOVE, J. E., EVERETT, L. A. and PREECE, P. F. W. (1998a). 'The urban child's concept of a

river', Unpublished manuscript. Exeter: University of Exeter.DOVE, J. E., EVERETT, L. A. and PREECE, P. F. W. (1998b). 'Exploring a hydrological concept

through children's drawing', Unpublished manuscript. Exeter: University of Exeter.DRIVER, R. (1989). 'Students' conceptions and the learning of science', International Journal of Science

Education, 11, 481-490.DRIVER, R. and EASLEY, J. (1978). 'Pupils and paradigms: a review of literature related to concept

development in adolescent science students', Studies in Science Education, 5, 61—84.FISHER, K. and LIPSON, J. (1986). 'Twenty questions about student errors', Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 23, 783-803.GARNETT, P. J., GARNETT, P. J. and HACKING, M. W. (1995). 'Students' alternative concep-

tions in chemistry: a review of research and implications for teaching and learning', Studies in ScienceEducation, 25, 69-95.

GILBERT, J. K., OSBORNE, R. J. and FENSHAM, P. J. (1982). 'Children's science and itsconsequences for teaching', Science Education, 66, 623—33.

GOUDIE, A. (1995). The Changing Earth: Rates of Geomorphological Processes. Oxford: Blackwell.HAPPS, J. C. (1981). Soils (Science Education Research Unit Working Paper 201). Hamilton:

University of Waikato, New Zealand.HAPPS, J. C. (1982a). Rocks and Minerals (Science Education Research Unit Working Paper 204).

Hamilton: University of Waikato, New Zealand.HAPPS, J. C. (1982b). Mountains (Science Education Research Unit Working Paper 202). Hamilton:

University of Waikato, New Zealand.HAPPS, J. C. (1983). 'Using socio-cognitive conflict to establish an understanding of the scientific

meaning of rock', Research in Science Education, 13, 61-71.HAPPS, J. C. (1984). 'Soil genesis and development: views held by New Zealand students', Journal of

Geography, 83, 4, 177-80.HAPPS, J. C. (1985). 'Regression on learning outcomes: some examples from the earth sciences',

European Journal of Science Education, 7, 4, 431-43.HARWOOD, D. (1987). 'Rock identification: an appropriate skill for ten and eleven year olds?',

Teaching Earth Sciences, 12, 2, 58—67.

HEWSON, P. W. (1982). 'A case study of conceptual change in special relativity, the influence ofprior knowledge in learning', European Journal of Science Education, 4, 1, 61-78.

HILLS, G. L. C. (1989). 'Students' "untutored" beliefs about natural phenomena: primitive science orcommon sense?', Science Education, 73, 155—86.

JOHNSON, P. and GOTT, R. (1996). 'Constructivism and evidence from children's ideas', ScienceEducation, 80, 5, 561-77.

KUIPER, J. (1994). 'Student ideas of science concepts: alternative frameworks', International Journal ofScience Education, 16, 3, 279-92.

LEATHER, A. D. (1987). 'Views of the nature and origin of earthquakes and oil held by eleven toseventeen year olds', Geology Teaching, 12, 3, 102—8.

LILLO, J. (1994). 'An analysis of the annotated drawings of the internal structure of the Earth madeby students aged 10-15 from primary and secondary schools in Spain', Teaching Earth Sciences, 19,3, 83-7.

LUNNON, A. J. (1969). The understanding of certain geographical concepts by primary school chil-dren. Unpublished MEd dissertation, University of Birmingham.

MAY, T. (1996). 'Children's ideas about rivers', Primary Geographer, 25, 12-13.MILBURN, D. (1972). 'Children's vocabulary'. In: GRAVES, N. (Ed) New Movements in the Study

and Teaching of Geography. London: Maurice Temple Smith.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

NELSON, B. D., A R O N , R. H. and FRANCEK, M. A. (1992). 'Clarification of selected mis-conceptions in physical geography', Journal of Geography, 91, 2, 76—80.

NOVAK, J. D. (1988). 'Learning science and the science of learning', Studies in Science Education, 15,77-101.

NUSSBAUM, J. and NOVICK, S. (1982). 'Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and accom-modation: towards a principled teaching strategy', Instructional Science, 11, 183-200.

OSBORNE, R. J. and FREYBERG, P. (1985). Learning in Science: The Implications of Children's Science.

Auckland: Heinemann.OSBORNE, R. J., BELL, B. F. and GILBERT, J. K. (1983). 'Science teaching and children's views

of the world', European Journal of Science Education, 5, 1—14.OVERSBY, J. (1996). 'Knowledge of earth science and the potential for its development', School

Science Review, 78, 283, 91-7.PIAGET, J. (1929). The Child's Conception of the World. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.PIAGET, J. (1930). The Child's Conception of Physical Causality. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner

and Co.PLATTEN, L. (1995). 'Talking Geography: an investigation into young children's understanding of

geographical terms', International Journal of Early Years Education, 3, 1, 74—92.ROSS, K. E. K. and SHUELL, T. J. (1993). 'Children's beliefs about earthquakes', Science Education,

11, 2, 191-205.RUSSELL, T., BELL, D., LONGDEN, K. and McGUIGAN, L. (1993). Rocks, Soil and Weather

(Primary SPACE Project Research Report). Liverpool University Press.SANDERS, M. (1993). 'Erroneous ideas about respiration: the teacher factor', Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 30, 8, 919-34.SCHOON, K. J. (1992). 'Students' alternative conceptions of Earth and space', Journal of Geological

Education, 40, 209-14.SHARP, J. G., MACKINTOCH, M. A. P. and SEEDHOUSE, P. (1995). 'Some comments on

children's ideas about Earth structure, volcanoes, earthquakes and plates', Teaching Earth Sciences, 20,1, 28-30.

SOLOMON, J. (1994). 'The rise and fall of constructivism', Studies in Science Education, 22, 1-19.TRUDGILL, S. T. (1983). Weathering and Erosion. London: Butterworths.TRUDGILL, S. T. (1985). Limestone Geomorphology. London: Longman.VILES, H. (1993). 'Caves, cones and carbonation', Geography Review, 6, 5, 17—21.WAUGH, D. (1990). Geography, an Integrated Approach. Windsor: Nelson.WESTERBACK, M. E. and AZER, N . (1991). 'Realistic expectations for rock identification', Journal

of Geological Education, 39, 325—30.WESTERBACK, M. E., GONZALEZ, C. and PRIMAVERA, L H. (1985). 'Comparison of

preservice elementary teachers anxiety about teaching students to identify minerals and rocks andstudents in geology courses anxiety about identification of minerals and rocks', Journal of Research

in Science Teaching, 22, 1, 63—79.WEYMAN, R. D. (1988). Tectonic Processes. London: Unwin Hyman.W H I T T O W , J. (1984). Dictionary of Physical Geography. London: Penguin.WIEGAND, P. (1993). Children and Primary Geography. London: Cassell.WILSON, P. and GOODWIN, M. (1981). 'How do twelve and ten-year old students perceive

rivers?', Geographical Education, 4, 5—16.WYATT, A. (1986). Challinor's Dictionary of Geology. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

CORRESPONDENCE

Dr Jane Dove, School of Education, University of Exeter, Heavitree Rd, Exeter EX1 2LU,United Kingdom

Fax: 01392 264736; Tel: 01392 264759email: [email protected]


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Kun

glig

a T

ekni

ska

Hog

skol

a] a

t 19:

44 1

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

students’ alternative conceptions in earth science: a review of research and implications for...

Documents