![]() ![]() Since the task incorrectly indicates that experts in the field have fundamental misconceptions, it is likely also to have led to substantial underestimates of children’s scientific understanding. This may well explain many children’s responses, too. The astronomers’ comments revealed the main reasons why the original task lacks validity: they found many questions confusing and ambiguous. Comparison with children’s responses to a rephrased and disambiguated task indicated that even 6–7-year-olds gave more scientific answers. Many gave two or more seemingly contradictory answers to the same questions and, even when only their ‘most scientific’ responses were considered, fewer than 50% of these expert scientists were classified as having coherent scientific mental models. ![]() Many astronomers gave responses that, if given by young children, would have been considered non-scientific and as evidence of naïve mental models. In this study we tested the construct validity of these methods by asking expert astronomers to complete the same test originally used with 5-year-olds. Recent studies have challenged this view, focusing on the original researchers’ methods of testing (drawing and open questions) and coding. Previous researchers (e.g., Vosniadou and Brewer, Cognitive Psychology 24:535–585, 1992) have claimed that children have naïve, but coherent, mental models of the earth, such as the flat earth and the hollow sphere.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |