A small scale investigation into children’s understanding of scientific concepts. This study aimed to investigate what type of understanding children are using in relation to what sinks and what floats, where this knowledge comes from and how it relates to the scientific knowledge which they encounter at school. Recorded interviews were employed to gather the data from two participants, one male aged 7 and one female aged 12. The participant’s explanations to why objects sink and float were derived from a structured interview and were later classified into a coding scheme.
The interviews were conducted individually with each participant and were structured into three parts. Part A and B were to assess the participant’s initial understanding which objects float and sink and Part C was dedicated to developing the children’s understanding. It was found the older participant was able demonstrate conceptual change when faced with conflicting evidence and benefit from scaffolding. The younger participant was unable to think in an abstract way and did not benefit from scaffolding.
Thus this research concluded that reaching the formal operation stage is necessary to develop a better understanding of scientific concepts. Introduction Inhelder and Piaget (1958) hypothesised that is was necessary to reach the formal operation stage in order to master scientific concepts (Nunes and Bryant, 2006). In Piaget’s view conceptual change was induced when conflict arose in ones understanding, creating disequilibrium which caused a need to create a process of equilibration.
Researchers like Willem Doise and Gabriel Mugny (1981) have produced research which demonstrates that “peer collaboration is most effective when there is an element of socio-cognitive conflict involved” (Oates and Grayson, 2006). Christine Howe carried out some research which leant support to Piaget’s theory. During some studies carried out in 1991 and 1992 she found that when conflict was resolved through group discussions this lead to better progress in understanding scientific concepts (Nunes and Bryant, 2006).
Vygotsky addressed the social nature of cognitive change through a concept he called “the zone of proximal development”. This zone was “the difference between what a child can accomplish in solving a problem working independently and what can be accomplished by the same child with adult help” (Nunes and Bryant, 2006, p. 294). David Wood (1988) developed the concept of scaffolding where by “adults and more able peers can provide structured support to a learner to help them operate their ZPD” (Oates and Grayson, 2006, P.
19). Newman et al. (1989) produced research demonstrating the zone of proximal development through learning as appropriation. Mia Lherpiniere X7374356 TMA06 Scientific knowledge is not about just learning facts but about ways of thinking. Nussbaum and Novack (1976) demonstrated that the two don’t always come hand in hand. This research endorses the ideas of both Piaget and Vygotsky in that it demonstrated a model of leaning as appropriation (Vygotsky), discovery learning (Piaget) and collaborative learning.
It integrates the process of scaffolding suggested by David Wood (1988) and incorporated the notion of how children may learn scientific facts without necessarily thinking in a scientific way. The attractive features of this research lied in its potential to include aspects from the two main theories proposed by Piaget and Vygotsky and their followers. The outcome prediction was that through peer collaboration and scaffolding the children would develop a better understanding of scientific concepts.
This study aimed to investigate what type of understanding children are using in relation to what sinks and what floats, where this knowledge comes from and how it relates to the scientific knowledge which they encounter at school. The investigation was carried out through recorded interviews which were then coded. Coding the participant’s answers enabled us to measure what kind of understanding they had of why objects float and sink, where this knowledge came from and if they were able to relate it to scientific concepts they had learnt at school.