CHAPTER 4. RESULTS
4.3 The Hierarchical Structure of Young Children's Conceptions of Learning
Follow-up studies (e.g., Marton et al., 1993; Tsai, 2004) have used various terminologies to describe the taxonomy of hierarchical relations among these
conceptions (e.g., reproductive vs. transitive; lower-level vs. higher-level; fragmented vs. cohesive). Therefore, the current study further refers to the previous studies and identified these conceptions of learning science as shown in Table 4.7. Conceptions of learning science as listening to the teacher and memorizing correspond to Tsai’s
conceptions of memorizing. Looking, reading, discussion, and doing are superior to listening and memorizing. Moreover, doing can correspond to Tsai’s calculating and
practicing tutorial problems. Through the scientific approach of observation and recording, young children can increase their knowledge. Measurement and
comparison are used to apply the learned knowledge; therefore, these can correspond to conceptions of applying. Comparison and prediction need prior understanding;
hence, these can accord with the conceptions of understanding. Finally, thinking accords with the conceptions of seeing in a new way.
Table 4.7 The hierarchical structure of conceptions of learning science proposed by the current study
Range of conceptions
Tsai, 2004a
(particularly for the subject of science)
Preparing for the test
Memorizing
Listening to the teacher
4.4 The correlations between the Major Learning Activities and the Learning Symbols Wang et al. (2012) defined a framework to analyze elementary pupils’ depictions of learning. They categorized stationery, desk and chair, chalkboard, bookshelf, and
technology tools as “Symbols of study,” while books and learning content are categorized as “Symbols of knowledge.” Young children’s drawings of conceptions
of learning science are relatively simpler than those of older students; therefore, the
current study modified Wang and Tsai’s category and categorized the technology tools, books and pictures as “General learning symbols” (GLS), and the magnifying
glasses, objects, specimens, and inspection boxes which appeared especially for science learning as “Scientific learning symbols” (SLS). Table 4.8 shows the results
of the combination of these learning symbols.
Table 4.8 The combined category of symbols of learning Symbols of learning
k1 Technology tools General learning symbols (GLS)
k2 Books
k3 Pictures
k4 Magnifying glass Scientific learning symbols (SLS)
k5 Object
k6 Specimens
k7 Inspection box
Pearson’s correlation was used to show the relationships between the young children’s major learning activities and learning symbols. The results are shown in
Table 4.9. It was found that listening to the teacher, memorizing, looking, reading,
observation and thinking were significantly and positively related to the general learning symbols identified by the children. For example, the correlation coefficient for the relationships between listening to the teacher and general learning symbols was 0.64 (p<0.01), while the correlation coefficient for the relationships between looking and observation and general learning symbols were 0.45 (p<0.01) and 0.44 (p<0.01), respectively. The major learning activities, such as discussion,
measurement, comparison, and prediction are not significantly related to the general learning symbols. That is, lower level scientific learning activities had reciprocal correlations with general learning symbols. Interestingly, the correlation coefficient for the relationships between doing and general learning symbols was -0.23 (p<.01).
Table 4.9 The inter-correlation matrix of the major learning activities and general learning symbols (GLS).
Table 4.10 presents the relationships between the major learning activities and scientific learning symbols. It reveals that there are only significant correlations
among the learning activities of doing and observation for the scientific learning symbols. The correlation coefficient for the relationships between young children’s
learning activities of observation and scientific learning symbols was 0.58 (p<0.01).
However, it has correlations with young children’s doing and scientific learning symbols (r=0.21, p<0.01). It deserves mention that listening to the teacher and looking were significantly related to the scientific learning symbols with correlation coefficients of -0.40 (p<0.01) and -0.39 (p<0.01), respectively. The correlations show a significant and negative relationship between memorizing and the scientific learning symbols (r=-0.17, p<0.01). These results indicate that young children with more doing and observation activities in their science learning were inclined to use scientific learning symbols.
Table 4.10 The inter-correlation matrix of the major learning activities and scientific learning symbols.
4.5 Multiple Stepwise Regression Analysis of Predicting Young Children’s Major Learning Activities Using Their Learning Symbols
Through stepwise multiple regression analyses, this study attempted to predict the young children’s learning activities by using the general learning symbols and
scientific learning symbols they drew as predictors. That is, for the regression
analyses, the dependent variables were listening to the teacher, memorizing, looking, reading, discussion, doing, observing, recording, measuring, comparing, predicting, and thinking. The young children’s general learning symbols and scientific learning
symbols were processed as the predicting variables. Therefore, kindergarten teachers can provide various learning materials to enhance young children’s scientific learning
activities. In Table 4.11, the stepwise regression model showed that the general learning symbols the children drew were significant predictors of the scientific learning activities of listening to the teacher (t=14.06, p<0.001), memorizing (t=3.47, p<0.01), looking (t=7.36, p<0.001), doing (t=3.43, p<0.01), observing (t=6.02,
p<0.001), and thinking (t=3.47, p<0.01). The scientific learning symbols the children
drew were significant predictors of the scientific learning activities of listening to the teacher (t=4.50, p<0.001), looking (t=5.47, p<0.001), and observing (t=11.32,
p<0.001). The results show that the general learning symbols (technology tools, books
and pictures) played a very powerful role in the children’s scientific learning activities
of listening to the teacher, memorizing, looking, doing, observing, and thinking. In
other words, those children provided with technology tools, books and pictures as learning materials in their science education would be more likely to believe that learning science involves listening to the teacher, memorizing, looking, doing, observing, and thinking. If the children drew scientific learning symbols (magnifying glass, objects, specimens, and inspection boxes) in their conceptions of learning science, they tended to express learning science as listening to the teacher, looking, and observing.
Table 4.11 Multiple regression analyses for predicting children’s learning activities
4.6 The Cluster Analysis of the Young Children’s Conceptions of Learning Science To further discover the possible features of Taiwanese young children’s
conceptions of learning science, the presented cluster patterns in their drawings were
explored by cluster analysis. However, as Table 4.6 shows, the percentage of the children’s major learning activities and symbols of science knowledge are both low.
Therefore, the major learning activities were combined into several new categories, as well as the symbols of science knowledge. Moreover, referring to the related theories (Tsai, 2004; Wang et al., 2012) and the hierarchical structure defined previously, three
categories of major learning activities were developed in this study. For example, young children’s major learning activities in their drawings such as listening to the
teacher (a1), memorizing (a2), looking (a3), reading (a4), and discussing were combined as a single new category, named “General learning activities” (GLA).
Doing (a6), observing (a7), and recording (a8) were combined as a new category, labeled “General scientific activities” (GSA). Finally, measuring (a9), comparing
(a10), predicting (a11), and thinking (a12) were united as a new category, tagged
“Advanced learning activities” (ALS).
Table 4.12. shows the results of the combination of those major learning
activities. The cluster analysis was conducted based on the three combined indicators
of the young children’s major learning activities and two combined indicators of their
symbols of learning.
Table 4.12 The combined categories of the major learning activities
Code Behavior Combined Category
Major Learning Activities
a1 Listening to the teacher General learning activities (GLA) a2 Memorizing
a3 Looking
a4 Reading
a5 Discussing
a6 Doing General scientific activities (GSA)
a7 Observing
a8 Recording
a9 Measuring Advanced scientific activities (ASA) a10 Comparing
a11 Predicting a12 Thinking
A two-phase cluster analysis was then adopted to ensure the accuracy of the clusters. Therefore, a Hierarchical Cluster Analysis with the Ward Method was firstly conducted to determine the appropriate number of clusters according to its
dendrogram. In the first step of the cluster analysis, the number of clusters was determined as three. Secondly, K-Means Cluster Analysis was then conducted according to the cluster number. According to the generated dendrogram, it is appropriate to identify three groups of clusters to represent the Taiwanese young children’s conceptions of learning science.
Group 1 (n=126) presented the highest frequency of the general learning
activities (e.g., listening to the teacher, memorizing, looking, reading, and discussing) and general learning symbols (technology tools, books, and pictures). Obviously, the results reflect that the young children in group 1 believed that learning science is through school activities such as listening to the teacher, memorizing the content of the curriculum, looking at something (such as animal pictures), reading the textbook or activity book, and circle time discussion with the teacher and other children.
Therefore, the present study proposes characterizing the general learning activities (GLA) and general learning symbols depicted by group 1 as “Traditional conceptions of learning science.” On the contrary, the highest frequency of the young children’s
general scientific activities (GSA) and scientific learning symbols (SLS) are displayed by group 2 (n=277). In contrast to the major learning activities and the learning
symbols of the young children in group 1, the children in group 2 predominantly
depicted scientific learning activities and scientific learning symbols. The conceptions of learning science of group 2 are accordingly featured as “Operational conceptions of learning science.” In addition, Table 4.7 shows that the participants in group 3 (n=46)
expressed an average frequency of general learning activities (GLA) and general scientific activities (GSA), as well as the two learning symbol categories. It deserves to be mentioned that the young children in this group expressed the highest frequency
of advanced scientific activities (ASA) compared with the other groups. When
focusing on the major learning activities, in this study, group 3 is characterized as
“Mixed conceptions of learning science.” Table 4.13 revealed that three groups of the
young children’s conceptions of learning science can be identified.
Table 4.13 The cluster analysis of the young children’s conceptions of learning science
young children’s conceptions of learning science
Type 1: (n=126) Type 2: (n=227) Type 3: (n=46)
GLA: General learning activities, GSA: General scientific activities, ASA=Advanced scientific activities, GLS: General learning symbols, SLS: Scientific learning symbols
In addition, to draw a clear distinction between different conceptions of learning science patterns, an ANOVA analysis was employed to compare the young children’s
conceptions of learning science in different clusters. Once a significant F-value is obtained in an ANOVA analysis, post hoc tests are widely used to examine the significances of all possible pair-wise comparisons among groups. Table 4.14 shows the numbers of participants’ mean values of the young children’s conceptions of
learning science in each cluster and the comparisons of the post hoc tests.
The group of “Traditional” conceptions of learning science cluster revealed significantly higher frequencies of the “general learning activities” than the group of
operational and mixed conceptions of learning science cluster (1.83 versus 1.59 and
0.07).
Both the “Operational” and “Mixed” cluster had significantly higher frequencies than the “Traditional” cluster for the indicators of “general scientific activities” (1.32
versus 0.02) (1.24 versus 0.02), “advanced scientific activities” (0.12 versus 0.00) (0.22 versus 0.00), and “scientific learning symbols” (1.07 versus 0.32) (1.15 versus 0.32). Furthermore, the “Mixed” cluster was significantly higher than the
“Operational” and “Traditional” clusters in the indicator of “general learning symbols.”
In addition, the results indicate that the young children in the “Traditional”
cluster received more general learning activities (e.g., listening to the teacher,
memorizing, looking, reading, discussing) than others in the “Operational” and
“Mixed” clusters. The young children in the “Operational” and “Mixed” clusters took
part in more general scientific activities and advanced scientific activities, as well as using the general learning symbols and scientific learning symbols. It is suggested that the learning activities which the children were involved in and perceived should be important for triggering their learning symbols. The “Operational” cluster depicted
the lowest frequency in both general learning activities (GLA) and general learning symbols (GLS). It is revealed that young children who hold operational conceptions of learning science do not depict listening to the teacher, memorizing, looking,
reading, or discussing, and their learning symbols are not TV, video, books or pictures. Undoubtedly, the “Traditional” cluster demonstrated more general learning
activities than the other two groups; that is, they tended to agree that learning science is through the activities of listening to the teacher, memorizing, looking, reading, and
discussing, which are all common in Taiwanese kindergartens. Surprisingly, the
“Mixed” cluster illustrated more general learning symbols than both the “Traditional”
cluster and the “Operational” cluster. This result shows that the “Mixed” cluster
deemed both general learning symbols and scientific learning symbols as crucial in early science learning.
Table 4.14 The comparisons of the young children’s conceptions of learning science by the different clusters
Group GLA
Scheffé test 1>3>2 2>1 3>1
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to provide a detailed description of the
conceptions of learning science that Taiwanese young children hold in kindergartens, and to look for patterns in their conceptions of learning science. The investigation was carried out based on the draw-and-tell outcome, that is, the children’s drawings of their conceptions of learning science, and their narrations of their conceptions.
The draw-and-tell data were gathered from 399 young children enrolled in 15 kindergartens in northern Taiwan, and were analyzed using content analysis, descriptive statistics, regression analysis, and cluster analysis.
According to the research questions, this chapter presents the conclusions regarding the findings, the limitations, and the implications of the study, as well as recommendations for further research in the area.
5.1 Conclusion
The use of the draw-and-tell technique to probe Taiwanese young children’s conceptions of learning science
Drawings have been used to elicit young children’s views, experiences and
understanding by listening to them as they draw and by studying their narratives and interpretations (Einarsdottir, Dockett, & Perry, 2009). The drawing method, especially
conjoined with interviews, has been successfully used to explore children’s ideas
about abstract conceptions such as technology (Rennie & Jarvis, 1995). The draw-and-tell approach has few limits for young children, and allows them to reveal their ideas or perspectives that remain hidden when other methods are implemented
(Scherz et al., 2006). Moreover, previous studies of early science education have paid little attention to the examination of young children’s conceptions of learning science
in any depth (Tsai, 2004; Tsai et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2008; Lin et al., 2008; Lin et al., 2012).
Therefore, the first research question of the current study is: To what extent is the draw-and-tell technique beneficial to producing Taiwanese young children’s conceptions of learning science? The result shows that 66.8% of all of the young children in the current study could draw and narrate their conceptions of learning
science. This result suggests that the draw-and-tell technique is a potential way of understanding Taiwanese young children’s conceptions of learning science. Both
“learning” and “science” are abstract concepts which are difficult for young children
to describe clearly. It will encourage researchers to adopt this technique to probe young children’s conceptions of learning science as it provides another perspective of
conceptions of learning from those conducted with other qualitative or quantitative methods. It could also be an effective and promising method of probing young
children’s conceptions of learning. Therefore, by using this technique, young
children’s conceptions of learning science could be further investigated in the future.
Taiwanese young children’s conceptions of learning science
The comprehension of young children’s conceptions of learning science will help
educators to scrutinize and improve their existing pedagogical practices and design better learning environments for young children.
Consequently, according to the drawings elicited from Taiwanese young children
and the follow-up narrative phase, their conceptions of learning science and the relationships among the young children’s conceptions of learning science were
explored.
In this study, the five top conceptions of learning science were: observation, listening to the teacher, doing, looking and memorizing.
Observation constituted the highest percentage (55.4%) of the children’s conceptions of learning science. Observation has been recognized as an important initial skill and is essential in early years and primary science (Harlen &Winter, 2004;
Johnston, 2005). All scientific inquiry begins with the skill of observation. It is therefore not surprising that these children demonstrated their conception of learning science as observation. In science education, observation is the foundation of all of the other skills; without properly observing phenomena, a scientist cannot adequately
communicate, classify, measure, infer or predict his/her findings. Observation is more
than simply noticing something, however; it involves perception (becoming aware of something by means of the senses) and the recognition of the subject’s importance or
significance.
In the current study, Taiwanese young children observed creatures, plants,
natural phenomena and so on. Moreover, the observation can be regarded as the initial scientific learning activity which leads to other activities. For example, in the drawing and narration of child# B16, she made observation records after her observation. In the drawing and narration of child# I15, he gained knowledge about how to fly a kite after his scientific observation. These examples give an account of scientific
observation as being vital to early science education, and it may contribute to follow-up and advanced scientific learning activities.
What also deserves to be mentioned is that looking also constituted 27.8% of the young children’s conceptions of learning science. It is worth considering the
difference between observation and looking. Looking is passively looking at
phenomena, while observing is actively looking at phenomena and paying attention to the details (Matthews, 1993). In the study, the children could clearly discriminate these two conceptions of learning science. For example, consider the comment of child# O11, “We just went to the rice field to look at the rice. We didn’t do anything,
just looked. Learning science is to look.” However, observation for young children is
a learning process; they have to focus on the details and change in objects in their
science learning. Child# B21 drew some people visiting the garden and pool on campus. He said, “In science learning, the teacher took us to the garden and pool to look at the flowers and fish.” Yet, the teacher of child# B21 explained that she let the children observe the garden and pool frequently. Apparently, young children’s conceptions of learning science are not necessarily equal to their teacher’s
conceptions of teaching science.
Listening to the teacher is the second highest frequency of Taiwanese young children’s conceptions of learning science. Listening to the teacher is a form of formal
instruction; that is, it is an academic talk to a class of students to communicate a body of knowledge and to guide them through an area of study. It is still the most common means of learning in traditional classrooms and is particularly relied on to deal with teaching large classes. According to curriculum theory, listening to the teacher (i.e.,
lecturing) is especially useful for conveying knowledge, and is the basic level of Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956). Also,
listening to the teacher is probably the oldest learning method and still the method most widely used throughout the world (Vartuli & Rohs, 2009), even in early childhood settings. In this study, 35.6% of the children’s conceptions of learning
science involved listening to the teacher. Although some children demonstrated many conceptions of learning science in their drawings, listening to the teacher is the crucial conception. For example, the child# B16 demonstrated doing, reading and thinking in her drawing, but the conception of listening to the teacher is still emphasized. The Preschool Curriculum Outline (2012) puts less emphasis on listening to the teacher
and more on exploration, questioning, and hand-on activities. The factors contributing to young children’s conceptions of learning science as listening to the teacher deserve
consideration.
The scientific method is a way to ask and answer scientific questions by making
The scientific method is a way to ask and answer scientific questions by making