Search

A learning cycle consists of three phases: exploration; conceptual invention; and expansion of an idea. These phases parallel Piaget's functioning model of assimilation, disequilibrium and accomodation, and organization respectively. The learning cycle perceives students as actors rather than reactors to the environment. Inherent in that perception are three assumptions, that: (1) each of the three phases is necessary; (2) the sequence of phases must be exploration, conceptual invention, and expansion of the idea; and (3) the form of the exploration is student investigation with materials. Seven experiments were conducted to ascertain the impact of each assumption on students' achievement of conceptual understanding of and attitudes toward selected concepts. Concepts and principal variables (assumptions) tested were: physical and chemical change (sequence); conservation of weight and atoms (necessity); simple chemical reactions (form-lesson control); redox reactions (necessity); reaction rates (form-data presentation); heat laws (sequence); and Arrhenius acids and bases (form-lesson control). Among the conclusions drawn are those indicating that the sequence of an activity appears to be important, the laboratory as an instructional format for the learning cycle is effective and highly thought of by students, and that teachers utilizing reading with learning cycles shouldn't expect them to be effective. (JN)

This review for 1976 has been issued to analyze and synthesize research related to the teaching and learning of science completed during the year. The review is intended to provide research information for development personnel, ideas for future research, and an indication of trends in research in science education. Research has been listed in general categories of: (1) Learning and Development; (2) Teaching Methods and Procedures; (3) The Education of Teachers; (4) Evaluation in Science Education; (5) The Use of Media in Science Education; (6) The Concepts, Processes and Content of Science; and (7) College Level Research. In all, 327 separate studies are cited in the bibliography and most are mentioned in the text. Many intermediate summations and generalizations are included at the end of sections and subsections. (HM)

Students (N=49) enrolled in a physics course for elementary teachers were evaluated for their abilities to use: (1) combinatorial logic; (2) separation and control of variables; (3) proportional reasoning; and (4) reciprocal implications. Performance of four Piagetian tasks during interviews was treated as a measure of the degree to which students could function with these four formal thought characteristics. Students were also evaluated for their abilities to use the four formal thought characterstics in problem-solving situations. Students' responses to items inserted into five course examinations were treated as measures of their abilities to use the charactertistics of formal thought in problem-solving. These items focused on six physics concepts dealing with torque, electricity, optics, and heat (since understanding these concepts requires use of one or more characteristics of formal thought). Results suggest that a non-significant relationship exists between formal thought characteristics required to solve a problem and demonstrating the possession of those characteristics. When success on each of the interview tasks was correlated with success on each of the other tasks, all correlation coefficients obtained were significant and moderately high, suggesting that success on a problem which requires formal thought depends on an overall formal thought structure. (Author/JN)

Students (N=22) enrolled in secondary school biology were evaluated for their abilities to use: combinatorial logic; correlational reasoning; separation and control of variables; exclusion of irrelevant variables; proportional reasoning; and probabilistic reasoning. Each student responded individually to six Piagetian tasks designed to measure their levels of function on the six variables. Students were then asked two questions. The first question (which tested understanding of the concept "Plant growth is not affected by chemicals.") required correlational reasoning, combinatorial logic, separation and control of variables, and exclusion reasoning. Although the 22 students could have shown formal thought 88 times, only 24 such instances were found. The second question (which tested understanding of the concept "Heredity and environment interact in the expression of traits.") required combinatorial, probabilistic reasoning, proportional reasoning, and separation of variables. Again, although it was possible to demonstrate formal thought 88 times, only 25 instances were found. These and other findings indicate that using specific formal operations with which students demonstrate they can function, is not a good predictor of success on a question whose satisfactory response requires those specific formal operation. Thus, the exact formal operations necessary to understand a formal concept need not be isolated. (Author/JN)

Determined which of 10 rational thinking powers are measured by 12 commercially-available standardized science tests. One result reported is that 90 percent of the test items required only recall. The conclusion was drawn that the producers of standardized tests are not concerned with measuring student achievement of the rational powers. (Author/JN)

A learning cycle consists of three phases: exploration; conceptual invention; and expansion of an idea. These phases parallel Piaget's functioning model of assimilation, disequilibrium and accommodation, and organization respectively. The learning cycle perceives students as actors rather than reactors to the environment. Inherent in that perception are three assumptions, that: (1) each of the three phases is necessary; (2) the sequence of phases must be exploration, conceptual invention, and expansion of the idea; and (3) that the form of the exploration is student investigation with materials. Reported are seven experiments conducted to ascertain the impact of each on students' achievement of conceptual understanding and attitudes toward the concept. Concepts and principal variable (assumption) tested included: motion (form); falling bodies (sequence); mass (necessity); measuring heat in solids (necessity); some properties of an electric circuit (necessity); electricity at rest (form); and currents and magnetism (form). Methodology, results, and conclusions are reported. In addition, data related to student attitudes about laboratory work are reported and discussed. Among the supporting documentation in appendices are materials related to each experiment. These include teacher's guide, student materials used with experimental and control groups, evaluation materials, and evaluation results. (JN)

Members of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) were asked to list specific priorities for research in science education. A total of 101 members, approximately 13% of the NARST membership, responded with a total of 398 statements placed into one of six general research categories: (1) Teacher Education; (2) Science Curriculum; (3) The Learner; (4) Classroom Variables; (5) The Teacher; and (6) Research Methodology and Focus. In addition, responses were placed into distinct classes within each general category. The following list of 12 research suggestions (in order of priority) represents a framework from which research possibilities for dissertations and proposals could be drawn: (1) Learning Strategies; (2) Learning and Development Not Related to Piaget Model; (3) Student Attitudes and Values Concerning Science; (4) Learning and Development According to Piagetian Model; (5) Identification of Content (Concepts and Processes); (6) Goals of Science Education; (7) Placement and Sequence of Content; (8) Content of Teacher Education Programs in Science and Education; (9) Unified or Integrated Curriculum; (10) Students' Inherent and Cultural Characteristics; (11) Implementation of Research; and (12) Instructional Materials and Technology. (Author/DS)

This research investigated the value students attached to the laboratory activities while studying physics using the learning cycle curriculum construction and teaching procedures. Among the procedures used to supply students laboratory data were video-taped demonstrations, "live" teacher demonstration, presenting data in written form someone else had gathered, being lectured to about the data, or taking data from a textbook. Before each learning cycle began and after each learning cycle phase (a total of four times) six students were interviewed to determine their knowledge of content, how their understandings of physics were changing, and their feelings regarding the laboratory activities being used. Approximately 150 such interviews were conducted. The naturalistic data from the interviews (samples of which are provided) demonstrate that students are enthusiastic about what and how they learn in the laboratory. They believe that learning in the laboratory is superior to other procedures used to supply them data. This suggests that the laboratory is essential if physics is to be experienced as science. (JN)

A teaching procedure and a curriculum construction model known as the learning cycle is described in this paper and research findings are discussed. Questions investigated include: (1) would students achieve more content understanding if taught with the learning cycle or exposition?; (2) would more content retention be evident if measurements were of a multiple choice or of an essay format?; and (3) how would the learning cycle procedures affect the I.Q. measurements of the students? Research findings suggested that the concrete teaching procedure was superior to the formal teacher procedure employed with ninth grade students. Related research results are also reviewed which indicate that students taught by the learning cycle significantly outgained the comparison groups in intellectual development. Explanations are suggested for why the learning cycle functions successfully. References transparencies, and graphs of experimental results are also provided. (ML)