The effect of explicit instruction in science process skills on conceptual change: The case of photosynthesis.

摘要

It has been shown that many students come to the classroom with misconceptions in science which can only be altered by a process called conceptual change. This occurs when students become sufficiently dissatisfied with preexisting concepts to abandon them, and adopt the new explanation. Researchers have noted that students with higher reasoning skills have fewer misconceptions and better science process skills. A correlation between the skill of prediction and lack of misconceptions has been described.;This study was designed to test the hypotheses that there is a significant positive correlation between science process skills and correct understanding in photosynthesis, and that students who received explicit instruction in science process skills, then used these skills in a laboratory exercise designed to promote conceptual change would have fewer misconceptions than students who did not.;Pretests in photosynthesis understanding and science process skills were administered to 211 introductory biology students and 58 upper class biology majors. To determine the effects of treatment, a 2 by 2 factorial design was used. Laboratory sections were given one of four treatments. Students either received explicit instruction in science process skills or an alternative laboratory, and either performed a guided-inquiry laboratory targetting areas of misconceptions or another laboratory exercise that did not pertain to areas of misconceptions. Treatment was followed by a posttest.;Results indicated that there was a significant positive correlation between science process skills and understanding of photosynthesis. The science process skill of hypothesizing showed the strongest correlation while that of prediction had the weakest. Correlation coefficients, while significant, only explained approximately 11% of the variability.;The author found no significant effect on understanding of the concepts of photosynthesis due to either explicit instruction in science process skills or to performing an inquiry-based laboratory designed to point out these misconceptions. There was also no interaction effect between the two treatments. The one exception was in the case of the students who were high in science process skills prior to treatment and low in understanding of photosynthesis, for whom the inquiry laboratory had an important impact.