Preschool children's explanations of plant growth and rain formation: A comparative analysis

Research in Science Education

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 187-210

  Christidou, Vasilia ^a   Hatzinikita, Vassilia ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY   (Greece)

^b HELLENIC OPEN UNIVERSITY   (Greece)

Author keywords

Animism; Causal agent; Metaphysical explanation; Naturalistic explanation; Non naturalistic explanation; Plant growth; Rain formation; Synthetic explanation; Teleology

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745108494     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-005-9006-1     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Andersson, B. (1990). Pupils' conception of matter and its transformations (age 12-16). Studies in Science Education, 18, 53-85.
2. Backscheider, A. G., Shatz, M., & Gelman, S. A. (1993). Preschoolers' ability to distinguish living kinds as a function of regrowth. Child Development, 64, 1242-1257.
3. Bar, V. (1989). Children's views about the water cycle. Science Education, 73(4), 481-500.
4. Barker, M. (1995). A plant is an animal standing on its head. Journal of Biological Education, 29(3), 201-208.
5. Bell, B. (1985). Students' ideas about plant nutrition: What are they? Journal of Biological Education, 19(3), 213-218.
6. Berzonsky, M. D. (1971). The role of familiarity in children's explanations of physical causality. Child Development, 42, 705-715.
7. Blalock, H. M. (1987). Social statistics. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
8. Brewer, W. F., Chinn, C. A., & Samarapungavan, A. (1998). Explanation in scientists and children. Minds and Machines, 8, 119-136.
9. Brosnan, T. (1990). Categorising macro and micro explanations of natural change. In P. L. Lijnse, P. Light, W. de Vos & A. J. Waarlo (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seminar Relating Macroscopic Phenomena to Microscopic Particles. A Central Problem in Secondary Science Education (pp. 198-211). Utrecht: CD-β Press.
10. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge: The MIT.
11. Carey, S., & Spelke, E. (1994). Domain-specific knowledge and conceptual change. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 169-200). New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Cumming, J. (2003). Do runner beans really make you run fast? Young children learning about science-related food concepts in informal settings. Research in Science Education, 33(4), 483-501.
13. Donaldson, M. L., & Elliot, A. (1990). Children's explanations. In R. Grieve & M. Hughes (Eds.), Understanding children. Oxford: Blackwell Ltd.
14. Erickson, B., & Nosanchuk, T. (1985). Understanding data. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
15. Fleer, M. (1993). Science education in child care. Science Education, 77(6), 561-573.
16. Fleer, M., & Robbins, J. (2003). Understanding our youngest scientific and technological thinkers: International developments in Early Childhood Science Education (Editorial). Research in Science Education, 33, 399-404.
17. Gelman, S. A., & Kremer, K. E. (1991). Understanding natural cause: Children's explanations of how objects and their properties originate. Child Development, 62, 396-414.
18. Haslam, F., & Treagust, D. (1987). Diagnosing secondary students' misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two-tier multiple choice instrument. Journal of Biological Education, 21(3), 203-211.
19. Hatzinikita, V. (1995). Pupils' representations on changes of matter: Types, causal relations, and mechanisms. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Patras (Greece): University of Patras, Department of Education.
20. Henriques, L. (2000). Children's misconceptions about weather: A review of the literature. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA, April 29.
21. Hickling, A. K., & Wellman, H. M. (2001). The emergence of children's causal explanations and theories: Evidence from everyday conversation. Developmental Psychology, 37(5), 668-683.
22. Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (1993). Young children's understanding of the mind-body distinction. Child Development, 64, 1534-1549.
23. Kelemen, D. (1999a). Why are rocks pointy? Children's preference for teleological explanations of the natural world. Developmental Psychology, 35(6), 1440-1452.
24. Kelemen, D. (1999b). The scope of teleological thinking in preschool children. Cognition, 70, 241-272.
25. Koslowski, B., & Okagaki, L. (1986). Non-Humean indices of causation in problem-solving situations: Causal mechanism, analogous effects, and the status of rival alternative accounts. Child Development, 57, 1100-1108.
26. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
27. Metz, K. (1991). Development of explanation: Incremental and fundamental change in children's physics knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 785-797.
28. Metz, K. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children's science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 62, 93-127.
29. Ministry of National Education and Religious Affairs - Pedagogical Institute (2001). Diathematiko Eniaio Plesio Programmatos Spoudon (DEPPS). Retrieved June 6, 2003 from http://www.pi-schools.gr/programs/ depps/index.html.
30. Murayama, I. (1994). Role of agency in causal understanding of natural phenomena. Human Development, 37, 198-206.
31. Nakhleh, M. B., & Samarapungavan, A. (1999). Elementary school children's beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 777-805.
32. Nass, M. L. (1956). The effects of three variables on children's concepts of physical causality. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 53, 191-196.
33. Newton, D. P., & Newton, L. D. (2000). Do teachers support causal understanding through their discourse when teaching primary science? British Educational Research Journal, 26(5), 599-613.
34. Newton, D. P., Newton, L. D., Blake, A., & Brown, K. (2002). Do primary school science books for children show a concern for explanatory understanding? Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 227-240.
35. OECD (2004). Learning for tomorrow's world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD.
36. Ogborn, J. (1985). Understanding students' understandings: An example from dynamics. European Journal of Science Education, 7, 141-150.
37. O'Loughlin, M. (1992). Rethinking science education; Beyond Piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(8), 791-820.
38. Piaget, J. (1929). The child's conception of the world. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
39. Piaget, J. (1930). The child's conception of physical causality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
40. Pramling, N., & Pramling-Samuelson, I. (2001). "It is floating 'cause there is a hole": A young child's experience of natural science. Early Years, 21(2), 139-149.
41. Schult, C. A., & Wellman, H. M. (1997). Explaining human movements and actions: Children's understanding of the limits of psychological explanation. Cognition, 62, 291-324.
42. Springer, K., & Keil, F. C. (1991). Early differentiation of causal mechanisms appropriate to biological and nonbiological kinds. Child Development, 62, 767-781.
43. Stavy, R., Eisen, Y., & Yaakobi, D. (1987). How students aged 13-15 understand photosynthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 105-115.
44. Stepans, J. & Kuehn, C. (1985). Children's conceptions of weather. Science and Children September, 44-47.
45. Tytler, R., & Peterson, S. (2003). Tracing young children's scientific reasoning. Research in Science Education, 33, 433-465.
46. Venville, G., Adey, P., Larkin, S., & Robertson, A. (2003). Fostering thinking through science in the early years of schooling. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1313-1331.
47. Wandersee, J. (1983). Students misconceptions about photosynthesis: A cross age study. In H. Helm & J. Novak (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Seminar of Misconceptions in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca: Cornel University Press.
48. Wolfinger, D. M. (1982). Effect of science teaching on the young child's concept of Piagetian physical causality: Animism and dynamism. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(7), 595-602.