What do elementary students know about insects?



An interview study of 56 elementary students (grades K-6) was conducted during the summer. The purpose of the study was to determine the students’ understanding about insect characteristics, their life cycles, environmental conditions, and their impacts on humans. Third graders and older students had a broader understanding about insects’ characteristics than K-2 students. Overall, students lacked an understanding of insects’ life cycle which differs from Shepardson’s (1997) three-stage model that omitted the egg. Students had greater personal knowledge about the harmful than about the helpful aspects of insects for humans. Suggestions are made on building units of instruction using students’ personal questions about insects.


Student Understanding Elementary Student Elementary Child Elementary Science Method Complete Metamorphosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Adams, J. (1992).Insect potpourri: Adventures in entomology. Gainesville, FL: Sandhill Crane.Google Scholar
  2. Barrow, L., Kim, Y., & Brent, B. (2002). Determining preservice students understanding about electricity with K-W-L.CESI, 35(1), 10–12.Google Scholar
  3. Borror, D., Triplehorn, C., & Johnson, N. (1989).Study of insects (6th ed.). Philadelphia: Saunders College Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Braund, M. (1998). Trends in children’s concepts of vertebrates and invertebrates.Journal of Biological Education, 32, 112–118.Google Scholar
  5. Carey, S. (1985).Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom.Educational Researcher, 25, 5–12.Google Scholar
  7. Matthews, R., Koballa, T., Flage, L., & Pyle, E. (1996).WOW BUGS TM:New life for life science. Athens, GA: Riverview Press.Google Scholar
  8. National Research Council. (1996).National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ogle, D. (1986). K-W-L:A teaching strategy that develops active reading of expository text.The Reading Teacher, 39(6), 564–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pursuing excellence: A study of U.S. fourth-grade mathematics and science achievement in international context. (1997). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  11. Shepardson, D. (1997). Of butterflies and beetles: First graders’ ways of seeing and talking about insect life cycles.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 873–890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Strommen, E. (1995). Lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Children’s conceptions of forests and their inhabitantes.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 683–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Tamir, P., Gal-Chappin, R., & Nussnovitz, R. (1981). How do junior high students conceptualize intermediate and living and nonliving?Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18, 241–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Tunnicliffe, S., & Reiss, A. (1999). Learning about skeletons and other organ systems of vertebrate animals.Science Education International, 10(1), 29–33.Google Scholar
  15. Wandersee, J., Mintzes, J., & Novak, J. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In D. Gabel (Ed.),Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 177–210). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  16. Wilson, E. (1992).The diversity of life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Netherlands 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Missouri-ColumbiaColumbia

Personalised recommendations