Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 41, Issue 2, pp 261–282 | Cite as

Inquiry-based Instruction with Archived, Online Data: An Intervention Study with Preservice Teachers

  • Sedat Ucar
  • Kathy Cabe Trundle
  • Lawrence Krissek
Article

Abstract

This mixed methods study described preservice teachers’ conceptions of tides and explored the efficacy of integrating online data into inquiry-based instruction. Data sources included a multiple-choice assessment and in-depth interviews. A total of 79 participants in secondary, middle, and early childhood teacher education programs completed the multiple-choice assessment of their baseline knowledge of tides-related concepts. A sub-group of 29 participants also was interviewed to explore their understanding of tides in more detail before instruction. Eighteen of those 29 teachers participated in the instruction, were interviewed again after the instruction, and completed the multiple-choice assessment as a posttest. The interview data sets were analyzed via a constant comparative method in order to produce profiles of each participant’s pre- and post-instruction conceptual understandings of tides. Additional quantitative analysis consisted of a paired-sample t-test, which investigated the changes in scores before and after the instructional intervention. Before instruction, all participants held alternative or alternative fragments as their conceptual understandings of tides. After completing the inquiry-based instruction that integrated online tidal data, participants were more likely to hold a scientific conceptual understanding. After instruction, some preservice teachers continued to hold on to the conception that the rotation of the moon around the Earth during one 24-hour period causes the tides to move with the moon. The quantitative results, however, indicated that pre- to post-instruction gains were significant. The findings of this study provide evidence that integrating Web-based archived data into inquiry-based instruction can be used to effectively promote conceptual change among preservice teachers.

Keywords

Conceptual change Inquiry-based Online data Preservice teachers Tides 

References

  1. Adadan, E., Irving, K., & Trundle, K. C. (2009). Impacts of multi-representational instruction on high school students' conceptual understandings of the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 31(13), 17431–41775.Google Scholar
  2. Atwood, V. A., & Atwood, R. K. (1995). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of what causes night and day. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 290–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atwood, R. K., & Atwood, V. A. (1996). Preservice elementary teachers conceptions of the causes of seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 553–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baxter, J. (1989). Children’s understanding of familiar astronomical events. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell, R. L., & Trundle, K. C. (2008). The use of a computer simulation to promote scientific conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 346–372.Google Scholar
  7. Bisard, W. J., Arons, R. H., Francek, M. A., & Nelson, B. D. (1994). Assessing selected physical science and earth science misconceptions of middle school through university preservice teachers: breaking the science ‘Misconception Cycle’. Journal of College Science Teaching, 24, 38–42.Google Scholar
  8. Boeije, H. (2002). A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Quality & Quantity, 36, 391–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bozdin, A. (2002). Teaching science methods courses with web-enhanced activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, Charlotte, NC (January).Google Scholar
  10. Calik, M., & Ayas, A. (2005). A comparison of level of understanding of eight-grade students and science student teachers related to selected chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 638–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. de La Beaujardiere, J.-F., Cavallo, J., Hasler, A. F., Mitchell, H., O’Handley, C., Shiri, R., et al. (1997). The GLOBE visualization project: using www in the classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 6, 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Driver, R. (1989). Student’s conceptions and learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning-for-use: a framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 355–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Etkina, E., Matilsky, T., & Lawrence, M. (2003). Pushing to the edge: Rutgers astrophysics institute motivates talented high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 958–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ferguson, G. A. (1966). Statistical analysis in psychology and education. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  19. Galili, I., & Lehavi, Y. (2003). The importance of weightlessness and tides in teaching gravity. American Journal of Physics, 71, 1127–1135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gay, L. R. (1996). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application (5th ed.). Upper Saddler River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Georghiades, P. (2000). Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: focusing on transfer, durability, and metalearning. Educational Research, 42, 119–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12, 436–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Hawthorne: Aldine.Google Scholar
  24. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  25. Hartel, H. (2000). The tides—a neglected topic. Physics Education, 35, 40–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hoffman, J. L., Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2003). The nature of middle school learner’s science content understandings with the use of on-line resources. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 323–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Keating, T., Barnett, M., Barab, S. A., & Hay, K. E. (2002). The virtual solar system project: developing conceptual understanding of astronomical concepts through building three-dimensional computational models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11, 261–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Krajcik, J. S., Simmons, P. S., & Lunetta, V. N. (1988). A research strategy for the dynamic study of students concepts and problem solving strategies using science software. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30, 411–433.Google Scholar
  30. Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005). The web as an information resource in K-12 education: strategies for supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75, 285–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee, C., & Krapfl, L. (2002). Teaching as you would have to teach: an effective elementary science teacher preparation program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 247–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee, H.-S., & Songer, N. B. (2003). Making authentic science accessible to students. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 923–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lenk, C. (1992). The network science experience: Learning from three major projects. In R. Tinker (Ed.), Prospects for educational telecomputing: Selected readings. Cambridge: Technical Education Research Center.Google Scholar
  34. Lin, C., Cheng, Y., Chang, Y., & Hu, R. (2002). The use of internet-based learning in biology. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39, 237–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  36. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, C. C. (2002). Content analysis in mass communication: assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability. Human Communication Research, 28, 587–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lumpe, A. T., & Butler, K. (2002). The information seeking strategies of high school science students. Research in Science Education, 32, 549–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mali, G. B., & Howe, A. (1979). Development of Earth and gravity concept among Nepali children. Science Education, 63, 685–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Means, B., & Olson K. (1995, April). Technology’s role within constructivist classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  40. Mistler-Jackson, M., & Songer, B. (2000). Student motivation and internet technology: are students empowered to learn science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 459–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moore, C. J., & Huber, R. (2001). Internet tools for facilitating inquiry. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1, 451–464.Google Scholar
  42. National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  43. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  44. Ng, W., & Gunstone, R. (2002). Students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the worldwide web as a research and teaching tool in science learning. Research in Science Education, 32, 489–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nussbaum, J. (1979). Children conception of the earth as a cosmic body: a cross age study. Science Education, 63, 83–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Post-Zwicker, A. P., Davis, W., Grip, R., McKay, M., Pfaff, R., & Stotler, D. P. (1999). Teaching contemporary physics topics using real-time data obtained via the World Wide Web. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 273–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Skamp, K. (1994). Determining misconceptions about astronomy. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 40, 63–67.Google Scholar
  48. Sneider, C. I., & Pulos, S. (1983). Children’s cosmographies: understanding the Earth’s shape and gravity. Science Education, 67, 205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Songer, N. B. (1996). Exploring learning opportunities in coordinated network-enhanced classrooms: a case of kids as global scientist. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 297–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Songer, N. B. (1998). Can technology bring students closer to science? In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 333–347). Great Britain: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  51. Songer, N. B., Lee, H.-S., & Kam, R. (2002). Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms: what are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 128–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Taylor, I., Barker, M., & Jones, A. (2003). Promoting mental model building in astronomy education. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1205–1225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Trundle, K. (2007). Acquiring online data for scientific analysis. In R. L. Bell, J. Gess-Newsome & J. Luft (Eds.), Technology in the secondary science classroom (pp. 53–61). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.Google Scholar
  54. Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., & Christopher, J. E. (2002). Preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of moon phases before and after instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 633–655.Google Scholar
  55. Trundle, K. C., & Krissek, L. A. (2005). Discovering tidal patterns. In R. L. Bell & J. Garofale (Eds.), Science units for grade 9–12 (pp. 159–175). Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
  56. Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., & Christopher, J. E. (2007a). Fourth grade elementary students’ conceptions of standards-based lunar concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 595–616.Google Scholar
  57. Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., & Christopher, J. E. (2007b). A longitudinal study of conceptual change: Preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 303–326.Google Scholar
  58. Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., Christopher, J. E., & Sackes, M. (2009). The effect of guided inquiry-based instruction on middle school students’ understanding of lunar concepts. Research in Science Education (Online).Google Scholar
  59. Ucar, S., Trundle, K. C., & Krissek, L. (2006, January). Preservice teachers’ understanding of standard-based Earth science content for grades K-4. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Science Teacher Education, Portland, OR.Google Scholar
  60. Viiri, J. (2000). Students’ understanding of tides. Physics Education, 35, 105–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Viiri, J., & Saari, H. (2004). Research-based teaching unit on the tides. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 463–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Vosniadou, S. (1991). Designing curricula for conceptual restructuring: lessons from the study of knowledge acquisition in astronomy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 23, 219–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: a study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18, 123–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wallace, R. M. (2002). The internet as a site for changing practice: the case of Ms. Owens. Research in Science Education, 32, 465–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wallace, R. M., Kupperman, J., & Krajcik, J. (2000). Science on the web: students on-line in a sixth-grade classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 75–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Windschitl, M. (1998). Independent student inquiry: unlocking the resources of the World Wide Web. NASSP Bulletin, 82, 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sedat Ucar
    • 1
  • Kathy Cabe Trundle
    • 2
  • Lawrence Krissek
    • 3
  1. 1.Faculty of Education, Elementary Science EducationCukurova UniversityAdanaTurkey
  2. 2.College of Education and Human EcologyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  3. 3.The School of Earth SciencesThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations