DOCUMENT RESUME ED 236'032 SE 043 313 AUTHOR Happs, John C. TITLE Mountains. Science Education. Research Unit.Working Paper No. 202. 'INSTITUTION Waikato Univ., Hamilton (New Zealand). PUB DATE Mar 82 - NOTE 34p.;.For related documents, see ED 226976, ED 229 442, ED 230 594, ED 235 011-030, SE 043285-302, and SE 043 305-315. 'AVAILABLE FROM Unver5ity of Waikato, Science EducationResearch Unit, Hamilton, New Zealand. PUB TYPE / Reports Evaluative/Feasibility (142)-- Reports Research/Technical (143) EDRS PRICE MFO1 Plui Postagd. PC Not Available fiom I S. DESCRIPTORS Comprehension; *Concept Formation; *Curricul Development; *Earth Science; Elementary School Science; Elementary Secondary Education; Interviews4 -Learning; Science Education; *ScienceInstruction; *Secondary School Science IDENTIFIERS *Learning in Science Project; Mountains;'. *New_ Zealand; Science Education. Research ABSTRACT The Learning in SciencefProject has adoptedthe view that science teaching might be improvedif,teachers can be given.some appreciation of students' views of theworld and the beliefs, expectations, and language that learners biingto new learning situations. This investigationcompares and contrasts views that children and scientists haveon landforms, particularly on two New Zealand mountains (Mounts Egmont and Cook).Individual interviews were conducted with 37 students during which they observedcolored photographs of'various, well-known New Zealandlandforms and described what they saw. Questioningwas then directed toward eliciting their ideas concerningprocesses behind the appearances of mountains. Sample responses are-presentedrelated to such, questions as: What is a mountmin? Is Mount.Egmont a volcano? When did Mount. Egmont. appear? How do volcanb-es develop?What is a range? How did Mount Cook develop? Responses indicatethat children/adolescents hold views about the two mountains whichare likely to be different from scientifically accepted ideas. For example',approximately 63 percent were not aware that Mount Egmont hes thepotential to erupt again. In addition, the majority of studentshad not attained an appreciation of plate tectonics,even at an elementary level of understanding. (JN) ****-******************************************************************* * _Reproductions supplied by EARS are the bestthat can be made from the original document. ,***************************************-******************************** TIM I WINIAL INS I ITUTE OF EDUCATION E CATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as received horn the person or organization originating it. IIMinor chanties have been made to improve reproduction quality. ''',.,,,, ... # Points of viewor opinions stated in this dace- ment do not necessarily represent official NIE poslinn or policy. SCIENCE EDUCATIONRESEARCH UNIT tr- MOUNTAINS "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL INMICROFICHE ONLY HAS BEEN GRANTED BY University of Waikato TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES Hamilton, N. Z. INFORMATION CENTER (E 2 WORKING PAPER 202 . The Science Education Research Unit at the University of Waikato emerged 'from theresearch activity generated by the original Learning in Science Project (1979-1982). The aim of the unit is to facilitate and encourage Science Education Research. One of the most successful innovations ot the Learning in Science Project was the productionof working papersvhereby research findings couldbe shared with practising teachers and-curriculum developers. This present series of papers (the 200 series) continues that tradition for .research undertaken by members of the Unitbut which does not form pait of the Learning in Science Project. We would welcome comment or information related to the topic of this paper. Roger Osborne DIRECTOR, S.E.R.U. MOUNTAINS John C. Happs, Science EducationResearch Unit, University of liaikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. March 1982 Working Paper 202 1 :INTRODUCTION : 4 The Learning in ScienceProject (rRr YBERG, OSBORNE and TASKER,1980) has adopted the view that science teaching,at, all levels might be improved if teachers can be givensome appreciation of students' views ofthe world and the beliefs, expectationsand language that -- learners bring to thenew learning situation. The emphasis throughout the L.I.S.Project hasbeen in the probing of difficulties by means ofsmall-scale, in-depth situdieS that can be relatedto science teaching. The majority of these investigations have beenidentified with the Forms 1 4 science programmes. Many of thd_earlierin-depth stUdiep, . from the L.I:S.Project havetended to concentrate on areas of biology(STEAD, 1980(a); STEAD, 1980(b)) physics(OSBORNE, 980; STEAD and OSBORNE,'1980) and chemistry (HAPPS,1980; scliciuum,ipal). Research into students'concepts and understanding in areas within theearth sciences, has beenundertaken (MOYLE, 1980; HAPPS, 1981(a)) and thispaper contin- ues.to add to our understanding Of teaching and. learnirig problems in thisarea. .This investigationlooks at the,topic.-landforms" and, in particular,focuses attention on two ofNew Zealand's better known mountains, i.e. MountEgmont and Mount Cook. This paper considers these landforms whilst comparingand contrasting 'the views that childrenand adolescents hold, regarding these mountains,with the scientifically acceptable /views. In this way, it is hopedthat a satisfactory 'base-line' can beconstructed so that later teaching can more readilymodify, students' existing knowledge. The topic ,11andformsthas been identified asan important teachingarea, by practising earth scientistsand, secondary teachers, (see HAPPS, 1981(b)) andis included in sections 4(level 4) and 8 (level 5) of the Science: Forms 1 4 Draft Syllabus. The relevant extracts from this syllabusare shown in AppendiX A. WHY STUDY. MOUNTAINS? Ndw Zealand hasexperienced volcanic activity since the mid-Tertiary Iperiod. This activity has been largely concentrated inthe North Island, including Northland,Coromandel, Auckland,Taupo and Taranaki. In the SOuth Island,volcanism has occurred in theDunedin area and Banks Peninsula. Numerous volcanic landforms 1. The glossary, in Appendix B, offers an explanatiortof those terms-thatare commonly used by theearth scientist. - 2 - , . are.to,be fo d in the North_Island and, the con-entration ofa number of dormant and active ce tres,calls for an awareness andvigilance, in terms of selecting sites forth an settlement and commercialactivities., Present day landforms, in the South Island,are dominated by activity alang the Alpine Fault which extends from Lake Rotoroa,near the Marlborough Sounds'in the North East, to Fiordland,in the South West. This fault, which has beendis- placed a distance of 480km represents a geologically interesting feature withina landmass where two major lithospheric plates interactand form a common boundary. THE EARTH SCIENTISTS' VIEW OF VOLCANISM AND MOUNTAIN BUILDINGIN NEW ZEALAND Prior to any consideration of the ideas and viewsthat children and adolescents may have, concerning Mount Egmont and Mount-Cook, it shouldprove useful and appro- priate to look at theways in which the earth scientist might regard thosesame itwo land forms. ( ") A common mechanism : : It is now generaly acceptedthat almost all volcanic activity, earthquakes and mountain building (collectivelytermed tectonic activity)is located close to plate margins. Where theseplates interact much of the present day geological activity is taking place. New Zealand is situated astride the boundary where two lithospheric platesmeet, The theory. of plate tectonics proposes that the earth's lithosphereis 'broken' intoa number of large 'plates'. Theseldates range in size fromseveral hundred to several thoutand km across, moving at velocities of severalcm per.year. As the plates are in motion, so too..-are the continents. Tlates are able to _change both their size and shape with time, thusnew plates can form as origi- nal ones breakup. or plates may be 'fused' together during'collision. Some platetcanidisappear completely as one plate underridesanother and, at times, the plates have become stationary. (ii) Mount Egmont : This feature is a stratovolcano(significantly larger than Mount St Helens,-in the U.S.A.) which has been built up,fromalternating deposits of lava and ash.to a height of 2,518 metres. Activity probably started at theMount Egmont siteikeout.70,900years before present (B.P.) witha substantial cone having been developed by 2 35,000 years B.P. At about this time a large eruptionled to the collapse : 2. More detailed inforMation, concerningthe.I.hstory' of Mount Egmont, Mount Cook and the plate tectonic theory,can be obtained from the list of further reading, at theend of this paper. of the main cone, resulting in a massive mud,and debris flow (lahar). This .deposit covered an:area of 200 kmato a depth of at least 30 metres and this.H'. kind of 'event'has taken place severaltimes since. Four eruptions have occurred during, the last 500years with the most recent activity, from Mount.. Egmont', taking place in 1755. Future eruptions are highly likely, with the present main crater being the most probable site. Such an eruption would most likely be towardshe west and thereis ample evidence to show that largegmud and debris flows'havc, in thepast, reached Inglewood, Kapuni, Cape EgMont and Opunake. The type of plate margin which isassociated with volcanism in the North. Island of New Zealand,3is destructive, i.e. atanocean trench, two plates approach each other with one'underriding theother.' This process is repre- sented,in Figure