The Development of Science Concepts Emergent from Science Museum and Post-Visit Activity Experiences: Students' Construction of Knowledge By David Anderson, B.App.Sc., Grad.Dip.Ed., M.Ed. A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Centre for Mathematics and Science Education of the Queensland University of Technology. September, 1999. N.B. This reproduction of the thesis contains only black andwhite copies of the original colour graphics. GUT QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY THESIS EXAMINA TION CANDIDA TE NAME David Anderson CENTRE/RESEARCH CONCENTRA TION Mathematics & Science Education PRINCIPAL SUPERVISOR AlProf Keith Lucas ASSOCIA TE SUPERVISOR(S) Dr lan Ginns Dr Lynn Dierking THESIS TITLE The Development of Science Concepts Emergent from Science Museum and Post-VisitActivity Experiences: Students' Construction of Knowledge Under the requirements of PhD regulation 9.2, the above candidate was examined orally by the Faculty. The members of the panel set up for this examination recommend that the thesis be accepted by the University and forwarded to the appointed Committee for examination. L�L � Name: ......................................................... Signature ...........................£�e_-........................... Panel Chairperson (Principal Supervisor) Signature . ...... �.f.�r �...................... .... Name: .....�.�. f...... /:!:�.f�.� .................... Signature ...... .... Panel Member Name pt'!,�!;,:��:� .r.t.��............... Signature... ../It .. ..... ............. ..... .... H. Under the requirements of PhD regulation 9.15, it is hereby certified that the thesis of the above­ named candidate has been examined. I recommend on behalf of the Thesis Examination Committee that the thesis be accepted in fulfil/ment of the conditions for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. �� .�ry.f!S( � ·ff@; Name . .1Jf.L.�1 Signature .... 0. Date ....'$.�. q.�.'J.q Chair of Examiners (External Thesis Examination Committee) . : Key Words Constructivism, Informal Learning, Knowledge Construction, Learning, Post-visit Activities, Science Museum, Science Centre iv Abstract This research investigated students' construction of knowledge about the topics of magnetism and electricity emergent from a visit to an interactive science centre and subsequent classroom-based activities linked to the science centre exhibits. The significance of this study is that it analyses critically an aspect of school visits to informal learning centres that has been neglected by researchers in the past, namely the influence of post-visit activities in the classroom on subsequent learning and knowledge construction. Employing an interpretive methodology, the study fo cused on three areas of endeavour. Firstly, the establishment of a set of principles fo r the development of post-visit activities, froma constructivist framework, to facilitate students' learning of science. Secondly, to describe and interpret students' scientific understandings: prior to a visit to a science museum; fo llowing a visit to a science museum; and fo llowing post-visit activities that were related to their museum experiences. Finally, to describe and interpret the ways in which students constructed their understandings: prior to a visit to a science museum; fo llowing a visit to a science museum; and fo llowing post-visit activities directly related to their museum experiences. The study was designed and implemented in three stages: 1) identification and establishment of the principles fo r design and evaluation of post-visit activities; 2) a pilot study of specific post-visit activities and data gathering strategies related to student construction of knowledge; and 3) interpretation of students' construction of knowledge from a visit to a science museum and subsequent completion of post-visit activities, which constituted the main study. Twelve students were selected from a year 7 class to participate in the study. This study provides evidence that the series of post-visit activities, related to the museum experiences, resulted in students constructing and reconstructing their personal knowledge of science concepts and principles represented in the science museum exhibits, sometimes towards the accepted scientificunderstanding and v sometimes in different and surprising ways. Findings demonstrate the interrelationships between learning that occurs at school, at home and in informal learning settings. The study also underscores fo r teachers and staff of science museums and similar centres the importance of planning pre- and post-visit activities, not only to support the development of scientific conceptions, but also to detect and respond to alternative conceptions that may be produced or strengthened during a visit to an informal learning centre. Consistent with contemporary views of constructivism, the study strongly supports the views that: 1) knowledge is uniquely structured by the individual; 2) the processes of knowledge construction are gradual, incremental, and assimilative in nature; 3) changes in conceptual understanding are can be interpreted in the light of prior knowledge and understanding; and 4) knowledge and understanding develop idiosyncratically, progressing and sometimes appearing to regress when compared with contemporary science. This study has implications fo r teachers, students, museum educators, and the science education community given the lack of research into the processes of knowledge construction in informal contexts and the roles that post-visit activities play in the overall process of learning. vi Table of Contents Certificate 111 Key words IV Abstract V Table of Contents vu List of Tables XlV List of Figures XVI List of Appendices XV1I List of Abbreviations XV111 Declaration XlX Acknowledgments xx Publications XXI Chapter 1: Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 The Construction of Knowledge: An Epistemological Framework for Investigating Learning in Informal Settings 3 1.2.1 A framework for students' construction of knowledge 3 1.2.2 A framework for the researchers' interpretation of knowledge 8 1.3 The Researcher 9 1.4 ResearchObj ectives andMethodology 12 1.5 Summaryof Interpreta tions 13 l.6 Overviewof Thesis 14 1.7 Glossary 17 Chapter 2: Review of the Literature 19 2.1 Introduction 19 2.2 A HistoricalPerspec tive ofLearning Paradigms 19 2.3 Variations of Constructi vis m 23 2.4 Theories of Knowledge Construction: Constructivist Views 24 2.4.1 Defining knowledge, understanding, and learning 25 2.4.1.1 Knowledge 25 2.4.l.2 Understanding 27 2.4.l.3 Learning 29 2.4.2 Theoretical views of knowledge construction 30 2.4.2.1 Piagetian views 30 2.4.2.2 Ausubelian views 31 2.4.2.3 Synthesisised views of knowledge construction: Valsiner and Leung's views 34 2.4.2.4 Conceptual change: Posner, Strike, Hewson, and Gertzog's views 36 2.4.2.5 Human constructivism: Novakian views 39 2.4.3 Summary of views on learning 41 vii 2.5 The Influence of Context: Factors InfluencingKnowledge Construction 42 2.5.1 The effect of the social context on learning 44 2.5.2 The effect of the physical context on learning 48 2.5.3 The effect of the personal context on learning 55 2.5.3.1 Prior knowledge as a component of the personal context on learning 55 2.5.3.2 Personal relevance as a component of the personal context on learning 56 2.5.3.3 The affective domain as a component of the personal context on learning 57 2.6 Studiesof Knowledge Construction andLearning 59 2.6.1 Extended term learning effects from museum experiences 60 2.6.2 Knowledge construction emergent from informal settings 63 2.6.3 Knowledge construction emergent from formal contexts 67 2.7 Post-Visit Activity and Informal LearningExper iences 70 2.8 Summary 75 Chapter 3: Methodology, Methods, and Procedure 79 3.1 Introduction 79 3.2 ResearchObj ectives 80 3.3 ResearchMethodology 81 3.3.1 Differentiating methodology and methods 81 3.3.2 Theepistemological location of the study 82 3.3.3 Themethodology 86 3.4 ResearchMethods 89 3.5 Probes and Instruments: Revealing Student Knowledge 93 3.5.1 Concept mapping 93 3.5.1.1 Definition and application 93 3.5.1.2 Rationale for the use of concept maps 94 3.5.1.3 The evaluation of concept maps 95 3.5.1.4 Application of concept maps in the context of the research 98 3.5.2 The probing interview 98 3.5.2.1 Definition and application 98 3.5.2.2 Selection, rationale, and justification for use of different types of interview 99 3.5.2.3 Issues of trustworthiness 101 3.5.2.4 Application of interviews in the context of the research 102 3.6 Schedule and Process: Stages One, Two, andThree 103 3.6.1 Schedule and process of Stage One: Establishing the principles for the development of post-visit activities 103 3.6.2 Schedule and process of Stage Two: Pilot study of methods, data gathering, and data analysis strategies 104 3.6.2.1 Scheduling 104 3.6.2.2 Concept mapping procedures 105 3.6.2.3 Interviewing procedures 107 3.6.2.4 Analysis procedures 108 3.6.3 Schedule and process of Stage Three: Interpretation of students' construction of knowledge from a visit to the Sciencentre and subsequent completion of post-visit activities 109 3.7 Context andParticipants of the Main Study 112 3.7.1 The school and teacher 112 3.7.2 The students 114 3.7.3 The Sciencentre 115 3.8 Interventions fo r the Main Study 118 viii 3.8.1 Naturalistic interventions 118 3.8.1.1 Museum pre-orientation 118 3.8.1.2 Field trip visit to the Sciencentre 119 3.8.l.3 Field trip de-briefing 120 3.8.1.4 The post-visit