Teaching and learning in science: a new perspective

Brenda Keogh and Stuart Naylor

Manchester Metropolitan University
Presented at the BERA Conference, Lancaster, September 1996

Introduction
Constructivist views of learning in science suggest that learners can only make
sense of new situations in terms of their existing understanding . Prior knowledge
is used by learners to interpret observations; meaning is constructed by individuals
in a process of adding to or modifying their existing ideas (Driver, 1983; Osborne
and Freyberg, 1985; Scott, 1987).
The implications of such a view are that teachers need to find out the learners'
ideas in order to take these into account in their teaching. Teachers then need to
provide experiences which challenge the learners' current understanding in order to
help them restructure their ideas. One example of a teaching and learning sequence
which describes this kind of approach is shown in Appendix 1 (Driver and
Oldham, 1986).
Constructivist perspectives have had a significant impact on recent research in
science education in the UK and elsewhere. Much recent research has been
concerned with finding out the ideas which learners typically hold in order to
inform teaching. Many science teacher educators are persuaded of the value of a
constructivist viewpoint and actively promote a constructivist philosophy. As a
consequence it is now commonplace to find that teachers have been exposed to
constructivist ideas, have a commitment to constructivist principles and have made
some attempt to modify their practice to take these principles into account.
Recently curriculum materials have begun to emerge which adopt an explicit
constructivist approach, Nuffield Primary Science (1993a) being a prominent
example.
Bentley and Watts (1991) claim that there is a distinction between what they
characterise as the "strong" theoretical version of what is involved in
constructivism and the "weak" version of constructivism in practice which many
teachers implement in their classrooms. It may be that teachers have misunderstood
what the researchers are saying and that any modification to their practice is based
on a misinterpretation of constructivist principles.

Alternatively the distinction claimed by Bentley and Watts may be evidence of a

more significant issue. Our belief is that the model of constructivism generally put
forward is one which is based largely on methods which work for researchers
rather than methods which work for teachers in typical classrooms. The
discrepancy between the version put forward by researchers and the version
applied in the classroom may therefore be indicative of a realistic response by
teachers, who may be committed to a constructivist approach in principle but have
to find ways of making this manageable in practice. We believe that a number of
significant issues about how to make constructivism applicable to classrooms have
not yet been addressed by the various research groups.
Issues relating to constructivist approaches to teaching and learning
One issue is that of the separation of the phases of the constructivist teaching and
learning sequence. Although it is recognised that the elicitation phase may provoke
learners to reconsider their thinking (Needham, 1987), the phases are generally
described as separate and distinct (Driver and Oldham 1986; Needham, 1987;
Scott, 1987). Teachers commonly perceive these phases as separate, and Nuffield
Primary Science (1993b) suggests that teachers may have difficulty in switching
from one phase to the other. Curriculum materials produced by Leeds (1992)
describe how teachers will find it easier to plan activities after the learner's ideas
have been identified. However as a model for teaching this separation is not
helpful. The practicalities of timing and planning for teaching make this model,
which works well as part of a research programme, very difficult to implement.
The separation of the two phases also means that the purpose of the elicitation
phase is only evident to the teacher and not to the learner.
Precisely how the learner's ideas can be taken into account in planning suitable
restructuring activities is also a cause for concern. In principle the suggestion that
teachers should plan activities on the basis of what the learner already knows and
understands seems like an obvious way to proceed. The problem comes with the
sheer practicality of attempting to do that with a class of 30 or even 40 or more
pupils. Even if the teacher has adequate information about the learners' initial
ideas, attempting to respond to their individual ideas can become an impossible
exercise in classroom management. We know many teachers and student teachers
who have made a commitment to a constructivist approach but feel guilty because
they are unable to manage to implement this in their practice.
Guidance is readily available on the ideas which learners hold and on the range of
methods which researchers have used to elicit the learners' ideas (Driver et al,
1985; White and Gunstone, 1992; Driver et al, 1994). However the guidance
available to teachers on how to promote restructuring of the learners' ideas is much
more limited. Claxton (1986) described the "mountain of examples of children's
alternative conceptions" (p126) which were available at that time and noted that

the guidance for teachers on how to restructure the learners' ideas was less
prominent in the literature. The balance in more recent research remains weighted
towards elicitation rather than restructuring, and the comments made by Claxton
have been reiterated by Trumper (1990), White (1994) and Prideaux (1995).
Research into the ideas that learners hold is relatively "safe" research, in that it is
located within a well-documented paradigm, it is easy to manage, and it is very
difficult to challenge since it makes no attempt to predict or to prescribe what
practice will be effective. By contrast research into how to restructure the learners'
ideas has few advantages, even though it may be more valuable for teachers.
Underpinning these concerns is the issue of the relevance of the research to
teachers. There seems to be little doubt that researchers frequently are concerned
about the classroom relevance of their research. For example, Driver and Oldham
(1986) make it clear that the aim of the Children's Learning in Science Project is to
"devise, implement and evaluate teaching materials and strategies which attempt to
promote conceptual change" (p108), and the Nuffield Primary Science (1993a)
materials are a direct outcome of the SPACE Research Project. In both of these
major UK projects teachers have had a central role in researching, developing and
trialling teaching materials. However Webb (1990) notes the difficulty for teachers
working within a research group to question the values, paradigms and frameworks
to which that group is committed and points out the danger of
teachers being channelled into certain ways of interpreting their world in forms of
research which specifically set out to "emancipate" them (p26).
Thus the involvement of teachers in research projects is no guarantee that the
outcomes of the research will be viewed as relevant by teachers outside the
research groups. There is no doubt that research into the alternative conceptions
held by learners is valuable, but it is unfortunate that much of the research does not
take the next step of putting forward specific strategies for developing their ideas.
This may help to explain why many teachers have made only limited use of the
research data. From an action research perspective (Elliot 1991) it appears that the
the priority for much of the research has been to improve understanding of the
situation in which practice occurs rather than to improve practice directly (Carr and
Kemmis, 1986).
Concept cartoons as an approach to teaching and learning in science
It was in response to issues such as these that we developed our cartoon-style
drawings as a means of presenting alternative conceptions in science. On the first
occasion that they were used we were looking for alternative approaches to engage
a group of students in thinking about science concepts. We hoped that by
presenting alternative ideas in a visually accessible and appealing format we would
be able to elicit the students' ideas and provide suitable challenges which might

lead to their ideas being developed further. Typical examples of the concept
cartoons which were generated are shown in Figures 1 and 2 (Keogh and Naylor,
1996).
Figure
1

Figure
2

A positive response from the students concerned led to the decision to research the
use of these concept cartoons systematically. The concept cartoons appeared to
provide an innovative and effective approach to teaching and learning in science,
with considerable potential value for teachers. They also appeared to address some
of the issues mentioned above, raising the possibility of offering an approach to
teaching and learning in science which took account of the central principles of
constructivist perspectives and which was firmly based on typical classroom
practice.
Research literature provided a ready source of possible alternative viewpoints
which could be presented in a cartoon-style format. Driver et al (1985), SPACE
Research Reports (1990-2) and Driver et al (1994) were particularly useful as
sources of alternative conceptions. Other sources of inspiration were our own
teaching experience, suggestions from colleagues and everyday life experience.
There are some limited references to cartoons and annotated drawings in the
science education literature. They have been used for eliciting the learner's ideas
(White and Gunstone, 1992; Hayes et al, 1994), for illustrating scientific ideas

(Gonick and Huffman, 1990) and as a stimulus to reflection on attitudes in science

(Lock, 1991). However the approaches described in the literature do not attempt to
explore the use of cartoon-style drawings as a teaching and learning approach in
science in a systematic way.
In contrast to much educational research, which is sometimes criticised on the
grounds that it is frequently of little practical benefit to teachers (Hopkins, 1987;
Day, 1995; Hargreaves, 1996), we believed that the concept cartoons could have a
direct and immediate impact in the classroom. They also seemed to promote a
purposeful approach to practical work - a "hands-on, minds-on" approach
(Lorsbach and Tobin, 1992) - rather than the more mechanical approach to
practical work which is sometimes adopted (Woolnough and Allsop, 1985;
Hodson, 1990).
Research methodology
An evaluation of the use of concept cartoons was carried out by teachers and
researchers working in a variety of educational settings. These included school
teachers covering the 5-18 age range, college lecturers, teachers working with
children with special educational needs, teachers of English as a second language
and in-service providers. These teacher-researchers were invited to use the cartoons
and to evaluate them critically.
Data was collected by a combination of participant and non-participant
observation, tape recordings, questionnaires completed by the researchers, oral and
written feedback from the learners involved, interviews with some of the
researchers and interviews with some of the learners. The groups observed have
included primary and secondary pupils, higher education students, parents and
teachers. In many cases authentication of the data was possible using a
combination of investigator and methodological triangulation (Denzin 1970).
Action research with our own teaching groups allowed us to discuss alternative
formats for the concept cartoons with students and teachers as well as providing
further evaluation data. This led to a number of developments in the format of the
concept cartoons. These include a shift from negatively-worded to positivelyworded statements, a shift from statements to questions and a shift from single
alternatives to multiple alternatives.
The concept cartoons have also been presented to a variety of audiences at local,
regional, national and international Conferences. This has been helpful in gauging
the views of a larger cross-section of the teaching population, since our main
sample of about 80 teacher-researchers consisted of volunteers who were interested
in using the concept cartoons.

Evaluating the use of the concept cartoons

Elicitation
The concept cartoons were intended to stimulate discussion and to make the
learners' ideas explicit through this discussion. The data consistently indicated that
the concept cartoons were very effective in this elicitation process. Many teachers
commented on how the concept cartoons readily gave them access to the learners'
ideas and revealed the learners' conceptual development - "the ideas are so explicit
they do not require further probing" was one teacher's comment. One instance of
this was an eight-year old child's description of why snow is bright - "Sun pings
onto snow, then pings off again into your eyes". A teacher working with children
with behavioural difficulties noted that "the children were less inhibited than when
asked questions verbally" and other teachers commented on how the concept
cartoons were particularly useful for encouraging discussion amongst pupils who
are reluctant to reveal their own thinking.
Restructuring
Many of the teachers involved observed examples of restructuring in a range of
teaching situations. Teachers commented on how the concept cartoons promoted
cognitive development in the learners. Learners mentioned sometimes changing
their minds when they discussed the concept cartoons - how they "had thought one
thing but now believed something else". The concept cartoons appeared to provide
a stimulus which frequently led to the learner's ideas being modified and
developed.
Linking together elicitation and restructuring
There is evidence that the concept cartoons have drawn together the elicitation and
restructuring phases of the constructivist teaching sequence. Several clear
examples were observed where ideas were being expressed and then modified
during the discussions and investigations which emerged from the use of the
concept cartoons. In each instance the concept cartoon was the starting point for
the discussion and in many no further input to stimulate change in ideas was made
by the teacher.
One group of 7-8 year olds quickly agreed that there would be no light if clouds
covered the sun (see Figure 3) and then modified their ideas through discussion
within the group - "the sun goes behind the clouds so it goes duller not dark" and
"the sun is powerful so the light goes through the clouds". Learners were
frequently able to make explicit the process which they had gone through in
developing their ideas. One student wrote about how the concept cartoons "really

made me change my mind" after discussing some concept cartoons with fellow
students.

Figure 3
Promoting investigation
Several examples were quoted of the concept cartoons acting as a stimulus for
investigation. One situation was described where "within 10 minutes the whole
group were engaged in active investigations". Another teacher remarked on how
the concept cartoons led to pupils testing out their ideas with "no further
prompting". Pupils noted that "you can see what the problem is" and talked about
being "unable to wait" to investigate their ideas. Although there were rare instances
where the individual or group involved seemed reluctant to engage in
investigation, a ready progression from discussion to investigation was the usual
response.

Motivation and involvement

Without exception teachers using the concept cartoons commented on the high
levels of involvement of the learners. This was evident across the whole range of
teaching situations observed. It was particularly notable that the concept cartoons
encouraged involvement amongst pupils who are normally reluctant to get
involved in discussion, enabling pupils who do not normally converse much about
science to articulate their ideas more readily.
The level of motivation in each situation evaluated was described as high. Teachers
remarked on the speed and ease with which discussions started. The success of the
concept cartoons in enthusing pupils with low levels of motivation was noted by
both pupils and teachers - "There are lots of naughty children in our class but we
are busy and better behaved . . . even Dennis, the naughtiest boy in our class,
wanted to stay in at the end of the lesson to carry on with the cartoons" was the
comment from some 12 year old pupils in an inner city school. The visual impact
of the concept cartoons was emphasised by one pupil's comment that "it beats
written work any day!"
Transferability
The initial judgements about the value of this approach in our own teaching have
been replicated with a variety of groups in many different teaching situations.
These include primary and secondary schools, pupils with special educational
needs, pupils learning English as a second language, undergraduate and
postgraduate students, primary and secondary school teachers and parents.
Although the clarity of some of the concept cartoons has had to be improved,
teachers generally found them remarkably easy to use and effective in their
outcomes. "You just photocopy and go!" was how one teacher described the
process.
Other outcomes
Other outcomes have emerged from the research to extend the potential value for
the concept cartoons. Differentiation was one significant issue. Although an
attempt had been made to produce material which was accessible at a range of
levels, we had not anticipated enabling such a wide degree of access as was shown
with many of the cartoons. In some instances (Figure 4) the same concept cartoon
generated considerable interest in groups ranging from young children to adults
holding degrees in physics! One teacher also noted how it was possible to illustrate
progression of ideas within her class through the pupils' responses to the concept
cartoons.

Figure
4

Discussion
The use of concept cartoons as a means of enabling restructuring of ideas to occur
seems particularly significant. As noted earlier, guidance on how to restructure the
learners' ideas is less well documented than the ideas that they hold and how to
elicit them. Concept cartoons which illustrate alternative viewpoints appear to
provide an important extension to the range of strategies currently available to
teachers. They appear to offer a valuable strategy in a variety of teaching situations
and with pupils covering a wide range of ages and capabilities.
Another significant point is the way that the concept cartoons frequently enabled
the elicitation and restructuring phases of the constructivist teaching sequence to
go on concurrently or consecutively without the need for teacher intervention.
Bentley and Watts (1991) recognise that the linearity of the sequence form
elicitation to restructuring is problematic. The use of the concept cartoons provides
one means by which the time interval between these two phases may be reduced,
enabling the elicitation and restructuring phases to be part of a more continuous
process. From the learner's perspective this is probably a more valuable approach

than one in which elicitation is separated temporally and procedurally from

restructuring.
The concept cartoons enabled learners to become more aware of their own ideas
and of possible alternative viewpoints so that the need for further investigation
became evident to them. Deciding what kind of investigation would be most
appropriate therefore became a matter of judgement for the learner rather than for
the teacher. In this way the concept cartoons helped to minimise the problem of
teachers having to respond to learners individually in the light of their ideas. The
purpose of elicitation was to help map out the context for an investigation rather
than simply to provide teachers with information about the learner's current level
of understanding. Elicitation therefore became a more purposeful part of the
procedure for the learners. The concept cartoons were viewed by many of the
teacher-researchers as providing a more realistic perspective on how the
constructivist teaching and learning framework might be applied in the classroom.
It is significant that development and restructuring of ideas did not always require
practical activity as a stimulus. Although it is recognised that activity on its own
does not guarantee learning (Driver, 1983; Hodson, 1990; Keogh and Naylor,
1993), the belief persists in many teachers that practical activity is necessary for
learning in science to take place. The use of the concept cartoons illustrates an
approach to learning in science in which practical activity may not always be
necessary, providing a useful example of a context for learning which "engages the
intellect . . and fires the imagination" (Millar and Driver, 1987, p56).
The use of concept cartoons is consistent with the model of generative science
teaching put forward by Wittrock (1994), in which he notes the significance of the
learner's attention in promoting learning. They appear to provide a powerful
stimulus to learners to focus their attention on constructing meaningful
explanations for the situations described in the drawings. In this way they promote
the active engagement of the learner, which is a vital part of the learning process
(Millar and Driver, 1987; Somekh and Davies, 1991). The element of cognitive
conflict built into the concept cartoons provides an important parallel with the
more typical use of cartoons for humour (Larson 1989) and appears to have an
impact on motivation. The effect of the use of the concept cartoons on the
motivation of learners must be one of the most important factors in evaluating their
use in the classroom. Woolnough (1994) notes that
if students are motivated and if they are given the freedom and the opportunity,
they will find ways of learning. If they are not, they will not bother (page 111).
The focus of this research has been on the value of concept cartoons as a teaching
and learning approach in science. We have been conscious in the research of the
need to ensure that teachers have been fully involved, not only in the evaluation of

the cartoons but also in constructing the evaluation criteria. Much of the evaluation
has been unrestricted, with teachers making their own decisions about how they
chose to evaluate the use of the concept cartoons. In every case the extent to which
the concept cartoons have had a positive impact in the classroom has been a central
feature of the evaluation process.
One unanticipated outcome of the research has been the impact on our own
practice. The use of the concept cartoons with our own teaching groups has
encouraged us to reflect on our own practice and has led to significant
developments in our practice and in our understanding of how best to implement a
constructivist approach in the classroom. Areas where our practice has changed
significantly have included the purpose of elicitation, the link between elicitation
and restructuring and how the learners' ideas can be taken into account.
We recognise that our views about constructivist principles and practice may be
based on a misunderstanding of some aspects of the relevant literature. However
we have first-hand evidence that our views about the difficulty of putting
constructivist ideas into practice are shared by many teachers. If we have
misunderstood the implications of the literature then we suspect that many teachers
share our misunderstanding, and we would see it as a priority for research groups
to attempt to minimise any possible misunderstandings of the implications of their
work. It is encouraging Nuffield Primary Science, which is based firmly on the
SPACE Research Project, has recognised the importance of the issues that we have
raised and has begun to address them in its most recent publication (Nuffield
1996), pointing out the distinction between research and teaching. We hope that
our research will help to promote further development of constructivist frameworks
in the future.
References
Bentley, D. and Watts, M. (1991) Constructivism in the curriculum. Can we close
the gap between the strong theoretical version and the weak version of theory in
practice? The Curriculum Journal, 2, 2, 171-182.
Carr, W. and Kemmis, S. (1986) Becoming critical: knowing through action
research. Victoria, Deakin University.
Claxton, G. (1986) The alternative conceivers' conceptions. Studies in Science
Education, 13, 123-130
Day, C. (1995) Qualitative research, professional development and the role of
teacher educators: fitness for purpose. British Educational Research Journal, 21, 3,
357-369.

Denzin, N.K. (1970) The research act in sociology: a theoretical introduction to

sociological methods. London, The Butterworth Group.
Driver, R. (1983). The Pupil as Scientist? Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
Driver, R., Guesne, E., and Tiberghien, A. (Eds) (1985). Children's Ideas in
Science. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
Driver, R., and Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum
development. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.
Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., and Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making
Sense of Secondary Science. London, Routledge.
Elliot, J. (1991) Action Research for Educational Change. Milton Keynes, Open
University Press.
Gonick, L., and Huffman, A. (1990). The Cartoon Guide to Physics. New York,
Harper Perennial.
Hargreaves, D. (1996). Teaching as a Research-based Profession: Possibilities and
Prospects. Teacher Training Agency Annual Lecture, London.
Hayes, D., Symington, D., and Martin, M. (1994). Drawing during science
activities in the primary school. International Journal of Science Education, 16, 3,
265-277.
Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School
Science Review, 70, 256, 33-40.
Hopkins, D. (1987) Teacher research as a basis for staff development. in Wideen,
M. and Andrews, I. (Eds) Staff development for school improvement (pp111-128).
Lewes, Falmer.
Keogh, B., and Naylor, S. (1993). Learning in science: another way in. Primary
Science Review, 26, 22-23.
Keogh, B., and Naylor, S. (1996). Scientists and Primary Schools. Sandbach,
Millgate House Publishers.
Larson, G. (1989). The Pre-History of THE FAR SIDE. Kansas City, Andrews and
McMeel.
Leeds (1992). Leeds National Curriculum Science Support Project. Leeds, Leeds
City Council and University of Leeds.

Lock, R. (1991). Creative work in Biology. School Science Review, 72, 260, 39-46.
Lorsbach , A., and Tobin, K. (1992). Constructivism as a Referent for Science
Teaching. NARST Research Matters, 30.
Millar, R., and Driver, R. (1987). Beyond Processes. Studies in Science Education,
14, 33-62.
Needham, R. (1987). Teaching Strategies for Developing Understanding in
Science. Leeds, Children's Learning in Science Project, University of Leeds.
Nuffield Primary Science (1993a). Nuffield Primary Science Teachers' Guides
(various titles). London, Collins Educational.
Nuffield Primary Science (1993b). Nuffield Primary Science Teachers' Handbook.
London, Collins Educational.
Nuffield Primary Science(1996). Nuffield
Handbook. London, Collins Educational.

Primary

Science

Coordinators'

Osborne, R., and Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in Science. Auckland, Heinemann.

Prideaux, N. (1995). Different approaches to the teaching of the energy
concept. School Science Review, 77, 278, 49-57.
Scott, P. (1987). A Constructivist View of Teaching and Learning. Leeds, Children's
Learning in Science Project, University of Leeds.
Science Processes and Concept Exploration (SPACE) (1990-2). Research Reports,
various titles. Liverpool, Liverpool University Press.
Somekh, B. and Davies, R. (1991) Towards a pedagogy for information
technology. The Curriculum Journal, 2, 2, 153-170.
Trumper, R. (1990). Being constructive: an alternative approach to the teaching of
the energy concept. International Journal of Science Education, 12 , 4, 343-354.
Webb, R. (1990) The origins and aspirations of practitioner research. in Webb, R.
(Ed), Practitioner research in the primary school (pp12-33). London, Falmer.
White, R. (1994). Dimensions of content. in Fensham, P., Gunstone, R., and White,
R. (Eds.), The Content of Science (pp255-262). London, Falmer.
White, R., and Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing Understanding. London, Falmer.

Wittrock, M. (1994). Generative Science Teaching. in Fensham, P., Gunstone, R.,

and White, R. (Eds.), The Content of Science (pp29-38). London, Falmer .
Woolnough, B. (1994). Effective Science Teaching. Milton Keynes, Open
University Press.
Woolnough, B., and Allsop, T. (1985). Practical Work in Science. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
Brenda Keogh Stuart Naylor
Crewe School of Education Didsbury School of Education
Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester Metropolitan University
Crewe Campus 799 Wilmslow Road
Crewe Green Road Didsbury
Crewe Manchester
Cheshire CW1 5DU M20 2RR
Tel 0161 247 5033 Tel 0161 247 2306
e-mail b.keogh@mmu.ac.uk e-mail s.naylor@mmu.ac.uk

AARE NZARE 1999

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA

Accessing science in the primary school:

meeting the challenges of children with
learning difficulties.
Dr Derek Bell
Bishop Grosseteste College,
Lincoln, LN1 3DY, England.
Telephone 01522 527347
Email d.bell@bgc.ac.uk

Work in progress please do not cite without permission of the author.

Accessing science in the primary school: meeting the challenges of children

with learning difficulties.*
Derek Bell,
Bishop Grosseteste College, Lincoln

Abstract
The principle of education for all is one which few people, if any, would argue
against but putting it into practice is one of the biggest challenges facing everyone
involved in education. Internationally, nationally and locally attempts are being
made to develop and put in place policies and structures which will lead to an
inclusivity of education which meets the needs of all students. Children with
learning difficulties are only one group for whom access to many aspects of
education have been denied. Despite the obstacles, however, there has been much
progress in opening up opportunities for them. However, unless teachers are able
to help these children access the curriculum, the policies and structures that have
been put in place are of little value.
This paper examines some of the challenges facing teachers of children with
learning difficulties in primary schools as they try to make science accessible to
their pupils. Traditionally such children have been given little in the way of
scientific problems to explore but, it is argued, that science can make a significant
contribution to the education of children with learning difficulties. The value and
effectiveness of the contribution will be realised only if teachers can recognise the
barriers to learning that these children face and have the skills to help their pupils
overcome these difficulties. Examples of teacher-pupil interactions are used to
illustrate the issues raised and some implications for mainstream teaching
suggested.
Key words: learning difficulties; primary science; special needs; inclusion.

Introduction
It is widely acknowledged that science can, and does, make a significant
contribution to the learning experiences of children with learning difficulties (see
for example , not only in terms of the development of science knowledge, concepts
and skills but also through the opportunities for children to increase their selfesteem and develop many of the elements of self-advocacy . Despite such
recognition of the value of science to the education of children with learning
difficulties, research in the area is not extensive. Few studies have looked
specifically at teaching and learning in science of primary age children with
learning difficulties. This paper reports some outcomes of a research project,
funded by the Nuffield Foundation and undertaken in the UK, to explore some
aspects of teaching and learning in science for primary school children with
learning difficulties.
The project was set up as a result of a conversation with two teachers from a
special school who felt that they could be doing more to help the children in their
school benefit from the science work they were doing. More specifically the
teachers felt that the children understood more than they were able to show.
Furthermore, if, as teachers, they were able to help the children express their ideas
more completely and clearly then it would be possible to build on this and increase
the access these children have to the science curriculum itself as well as
maximising the other perceived benefits of having science in the curriculum for
such children. This paper therefore sets out to:
provide an overview of the contribution science can make to the education
of children with learning difficulties;
identify some of the challenges faced by teachers and children in
maximising the benefits of science in the curriculum;
report the findings, and consider some of the implications, that have arisen
from an examination of conversations between children and their teachers in
relation to a number of science topics studied during the current project.
Science and children with learning difficulties
The 1988 Education Act and the National Curriculum Statutory Orders, which
followed in the UK, have clearly stated that children with Special Educational
Needs should follow the National Curriculum to the maximum extent possible. The
publication of the Code of Practice on SEN provision further emphasised the
responsibility of teachers to provide appropriate learning opportunities for children
with SEN. Although the Code of Practice refers to eight types of special
educational need - learning difficulties, specific learning difficulties, emotional and

behavioural difficulties, physical disabilities, hearing difficulties, visual

difficulties, speech and language difficulties and medical conditions - the reality is
not as clear cut. Thus, although the work of the project mainly involves children
who are statemented as having moderate learning difficulties, some of the children
have other special educational needs which have to be catered for.
In many respects it is difficult to define precisely what constitutes moderate
learning difficulties because of the range and complexity of problems faced by
each individual child. The difficulties they encounter may also vary according to
the curriculum area being investigated, however, such pupils, to a lesser or greater
extent, will have difficulty in, among other things:
gaining access to the curriculum through normal teaching and learning
approaches
acquiring concepts and achieving the standards expected in terms of
National Curriculum level descriptors
processing language and instructions
expressing their own ideas
retaining and applying previous learning.
In addition the behaviour of such children may be attention seeking, inattentive and
disruptive with shows of frustration and a general lack of motivation. These
outward expressions of behaviour may result directly from the difficulties an
individual child has or from a mismatch between the learning provision available
and the needs of the child in question.
One of the key issues for debate in relation to teaching and learning for children
with special needs in general and learning difficulties in particularly as been clearly
articulated by in his consideration of the Code of Practice . He argues that
assessment of childrens performance and their failure to learn is automatically the
result of a learning difficulty and goes on to suggest that,
The critical issue which needs to be addressed is whether starting
from the assumption that children will learn with appropriate
teaching, will lead to different educational outcomes for children
than when starting from the assumption that low attainments reflect a
difficulty in learning.
Picks up this theme when he argues from work of that schools which are,

Orientated to promoting pupil effort, with continuous emphasis on

strategic learning behaviour, and embody a belief in each child's
ability, are more likely to be associated with success. {and}..that
teachers in such schools are more prone to believe that they can
successfully teach each child and also view themselves as learners.
They, thus, treat teaching as a competency to be continuously
developed, and a child's failure to learn as a problem to be solved by
teaching.
It is against this wider background that the present study was undertaken and the
findings considered.
Whilst there is a wealth of material available relating to special educational needs
generally and children with learning difficulties more specifically there is little
available which examines teaching and learning of children with learning
difficulties in particular subject domains; science is no exception. Yet there is some
evidence which suggests that childrens perceptions of their academic abilities are
specific to different content areas and that it is not unreasonable to suggest that
they may be more able to succeed academically in some content areas than in
others.
In a series of articles over the last ten years Mastropieri and Scruggs (see for
example have drawn together much of the literature and evidence base that
supports the generally accepted view that students with learning difficulties and
other special needs can benefit significantly from the inclusion of science in their
education. Much of this work has been carried out in the USA and supports the
stance that science can develop background knowledge, promote concrete learning
experiences and develop problem-solving and reasoning skills. . Maximising the
potential of science work for pupils with learning difficulties, however, is not
entirely straight forward. On the contrary it is a major challenge for even the most
accomplished teacher.
Studies which have considered teaching and learning in science for children with
learning difficulties have focussed on three main issues - the appropriateness of
hands-on science (e.g. ; the implications of constructivist approaches to learning ;
and forms of assessment - which reflect the main trends that have developed in
mainstream science education over recent years and remain part of a continuing
debate . Although each of the three issues will be briefly considered in turn below,
it should be emphasised that they are not separate matters, rather they are very
much overlapping and intertwined.
Appropriateness of hands-on science

The term hands-on science is used as a shorthand expression to characterise an

approach to teaching and learning in science that has developed, particularly in the
primary school, in which children are able to gain first hand experience of objects,
situations and scientific phenomena. Other terms such as inquiry-based and
investigative science perhaps better emphasise the fact that such an approach has
a purpose in developing understanding of science concepts as well as developing
expertise in the processes and skills of science. As suggested by Champagne et
al in their analysis of trends in science education,
...changes focus on getting students to participate actively in doing
science and on creating learning environments that reflect science as
it is practised. Specific trends are to (1) engage students in
investigations of the natural world that reflect the ways in which
scientists inquire; (2) provide students with opportunities to work in
small groups; (3) involve students in tasks that reflect the ways in
which people use scientific information and inquiry processes to
make personal and social decisions; and (4) help students to know
that science is for everyone.
Clearly such an approach would appear to be very appropriate for children with
learning difficulties. in their analysis start from this premise and argue that handson approaches are more likely to succeed for children with learning disabilities
because of the reduced emphasis on the use of texts and abstract textual learning in
favour of more concrete experiences and physical interaction with the scientific
phenomena. Indeed in their study in which they compared the relative effects of
textbook-based and inquiry-based approaches to science learning in special
education classrooms, Scruggs and Mastropieri found that,
... hands-on science activities were greatly favoured over textbook
activities by students who had experienced both. {and hands-on
activities were considered by the students to be}.. more facilitative of
learning, more motivating, and more enjoyable than the more
traditional textbook activities. {furthermore in the context of the
study}... when students were taught by experimental, more indirect
methods, they learned more, remembered more, and enjoyed learning
more than when they were taught by more direct instructional
methods.
Despite such positive findings, the use of inquiry-based approaches is not a
panacea for teaching children with learning difficulties. Teachers need to adapt
their approach and organisation to meet the wide variety of childrens needs they
encounter. This was followed up in a subsequent studies in which, first,
characteristics shown by children with learning difficulties impact on the success
or otherwise of inquiry-based approaches, and , second, the effectiveness of such

approaches on the learning that actually takes place. In the first of these studies
considered the four characteristics - (a) attention, (b) semantic memory, (c) logical
reasoning, and (d) outerdirectedness - which appear to be particularly relevant to
science education.

(a) Attention
The ability of a child to focus on a task over a sustained period of time is often
something which children with learning difficulties find difficult but more
specifically such children do not readily recognise features that are relevant to the
task in hand. They frequently focus on things which are irrelevant thereby
hindering the learning process. Such pupils do concentrate on the appropriate
points may appear to progress in a similar manner to that of pupils with normal
ability. Although lack of attention and the ability to recognise relevant details can
present barriers to learning during investigations evidence provided by indicates
that these can be successfully addressed by teachers. This supports the findings of
our own work reported in this article and elsewhere
(b) Semantic memory
Although engagement in hands-on activities reduces the demands on childrens
verbal memory and their ability to recall particular words and phrases, scientific
investigations do require children to communicate ideas and for them to understand
the meanings of words. Science has its own technical vocabulary and it also shares
words with everyday language, both of which place demands on childrens
learning in science. Scruggs and Mastropieri found that teachers needed to rehearse
words frequently, encourage children to link the words to familiar experiences
through multiple presentations of the terms as well as reducing the demands of
vocabulary for the children. In these situations the use of more direct instructional
approaches, such as mnemonic instruction, appear to be necessary .
(c) Logical reasoning
Scientific enquiry requires engagement with the processes of science such as
predicting, inferring and problem solving all of which place demands on childrens
ability to reason in a logical manner. For children with learning difficulties such
reasoning does not come easily and as such can be an inhibitor to their learning
through enquiry based approaches. This is not to say that they cannot achieve some
success in developing their reasoning abilities. Indeed, as reported,
recent investigations have suggested that students with LD {learning
difficulties} who are coached to actively reason through certain types

of academic content both remember and understand that information

better than control condition students.

(d) Outerdirectedness
Use the term outerdirectedness to refer to the way in which children with learning
difficulties attempt to use and rely on external cues they pick up from their
surroundings in order to respond to questions. This may involve repeating things
said or done by other children, responding to teacher actions, and taking
information from pictures and other objects in the room regardless of their
relevance. The ability to use external cues can be very productive and in many
situations is to be encouraged. Children with learning difficulties, however, appear
to become over reliant on the opinions and behaviours of others and very reluctant
to use their own judgement and reasoning . A tendency towards outerdirectedness,
at least in part, would appear to suggest a lack of self confidence in such children.
Although not always straight forward the study indicated that the use of a hands-on
approach to science provided teachers with the opportunities to build in positive
experiences for children. These along with the emphasis on the scientific process
skills - observing, comparing, predicting and inferring - increased the likelihood of
children having more confidence in their own ability.

Implications of constructivist approaches to learning

Science education over the last ten years has been strongly influenced by what can
be described as constructivist approaches to teaching and learning in which
learners are considered to be actively involved in the construction of meaning of
concepts for themselves. Detailed discussions of the range of constructivist views
can be found elsewhere in the literature . Essentially interpretation of constructivist
views range from that of personal constructivism in which individuals construct
their own knowledge and understanding of the world, to that of social
constructivism in which tends to view the learning process as one of enculturation
in which the learner becomes part of the learning community. Social
constructivism does not dismiss the idea that individuals come to make sense of
their own learning rather it builds on this view adding further dimensions to the
learning process. Broadly these are: the role of interaction with others during the
learning process through discourse and dialogue; the existence of shared
knowledge and the incorporation of this into both personal and community

understanding of the concepts in question; and the need to access the knowledge
systems of science itself.
More recently there has been increased emphasis on the role of the teacher in
helping children construct meanings based on their existing ideas and experiences
with a view to developing their understanding of the world around them. The
renewed interest in the work of Vygotsky has added support to both thinking and
research into approaches to teaching. In particular the concept of scaffolding, a
term which according to was first used by , provides a powerful tool for teachers to
use in creating opportunities for children to engage with new ideas. It also provides
support for children to cope with tasks which are too complex for them to manage
on their own. Although not specifically in science , claim that scaffolding
o is multilevel, aimed at curriculum, the classroom, and the individual
learner.
o is inclusive, helping individual students to learn in appropriate ways.
o is aimed at promoting higher-level thinking.
o is dynamic and evolving.
o {and} can move the entire class forward, ensuring that individual
students with disabilities fully participate, contribute, and learn.
(p 165)
Although they are more cautious in their claims for teaching based on
constructivist approaches linked to coaching argue that in science,
students with disabilities have been seen to benefit from appropriately
sequenced activities that require inductive and deductive thinking.
{and}... that interventions that require students with disabilities to
actively reason through academic content often do facilitate memory
and comprehension objectives.
Forms of assessment
Assessment has long been an area of concern in all phases and areas of education.
The literature is full of debates around the purposes and practices of assessment.
Science education is no exception. Three broad areas of science need to be
assessed - conceptual understanding; science processes, reasoning and practical
skills; and the application of concepts to new situations - each of which present
particular challenges in terms of the means of assessment. There is a vast amount

of literature which debates these issues and it can be argued that all forms of
assessment can be of value providing the limitations are recognised and
interpretation is undertaken with caution. Formative assessment, however, is
pivotal to any approach to teaching and learning that gives value to childrens
ideas, since finding out their ideas initially and then frequently checking to find out
how they have changed is a pre-requisite to teaching for understanding. Black and
Wiliams recent review of literature on formative assessment concludes that,
There is a body of firm evidence that formative assessment is an
essential feature of classroom work and that development of it can
raise standards. We know of no other way of raising standards for
which such a strong prima facie case can be made on the basis of
evidence of such large learning gains.
There is evidence that for children with learning difficulties the form and format of
the assessment being used will significantly influence the outcome. , for example
showed that children were able to access and use their knowledge better using a
constructed diagram format than when they were faced with an open-ended
questionnaire. In a subsequent study they present additional evidence that the
format of assessment influences childrens performance and the need for multiple
assessment tools to provide a more comprehensive picture of the childrens
understanding and abilities. Particularly for children with learning difficulties
assessment should not be simply about determining their achievements in terms of
the subject matter (both content and skills) it should also look to support their
learning in other aspects of their development. present evidence to show how the
use of student journals as part of the assessment process offered the opportunity
to note childrens progress in terms of their improved mastery of the discourse of
science (p59) and the development of a sense of personal agency or efficacy
(p59).
Although there is a substantial body of research (see for example available which
has explored ways of accessing childrens ideas in science, many of the techniques
do not appear to be completely applicable to children with learning difficulties.
Most of the techniques require some degree of modification and often a change in
the way elicitation of ideas is conceived and practised. It is, however, essential that
attempts are made to investigate modified or new approaches if the abilities of
children with learning difficulties are to be fully recognised. Perhaps, more
importantly, it is necessary to find ways in which such assessments can be used
formatively in order to further childrens learning.
This brief discussion of trends in science education in relation to children with
learning difficulties provides good evidence that science does have a significant
contribution to make to the curriculum for such children. It also indicates that there
are significant challenges that have to be faced if the potential of children with

learning difficulties is to be realised. It was with this background in mind that the
present project was developed and the outcome interpreted. There was a substantial
amount of anecdotal evidence from teachers of children with learning difficulties
to suggest that there was a need to explore a range of teaching strategies that could
help children express their ideas about science concepts more clearly. Thus the
ASSEN (Accessing Science for Special Educational Needs) Project was set up.

Title: Part I: Cognitive Development in Children--Piaget Development and

Learning
Authors:

Piaget, Jean

Descriptors: Developmental Stages; Cognitive Development; Developmental

Psychology; Child Development; Piagetian Theory; Schemata (Cognition);
Learning Theories; Children; Cognitive Structures; Performance Factors;
Cognitive Mapping
Source:

Journal of Research in Science Teaching, v40 nS1 pS8-S18 2003

Peer-Reviewed:

Yes

Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Subscription Department, 111 River Street,
Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774. Tel: 800-825-7550; Tel: 201-748-6645; Fax: 201-7486021;
e-mail:
subinfo@wiley.com;
Web
site:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/browse/?type=JOURNAL
Publication Date:

2003-00-00

Pages:11
Pub Types: Journal Articles; Opinion Papers
Abstract:
In this article, the author gives a general introduction of a few ideas
on cognitive development in children. In the first part, he deals with the topic of
development, a process which concerns the totality of the structures of knowledge.
He reviews the stages of development of operational structures, distinguishes four
main stages of development, and discusses four factors that can be called upon to
explain the development from one set of structures to another. In the second part,
he deals with the topic of learning, which, according to him, is based on the
stimulus-response schema. He thinks the stimulus-response schema, while not
false, is in any case entirely incapable of explaining cognitive learning because

when a person thinks of a stimulus-response schema, he thinks usually that first of

all there is a stimulus and then a response is set off by this stimulus. For his part, he
is convinced that the response was there first. He also shows that learning is
possible in the case of logical-mathematical structures, but on one condition--that
is, that the structure which one wants to teach to the subjects can be supported by
simpler, more elementary, logical-mathematical structures. He concludes that
learning of structures seems to obey the same laws as the natural development of
these structures and that the fundamental relation involved in all development and
all learning is not the relation of association.
Abstractor: ERIC
Reference Count: 0
Note: N/A
Identifiers: N/A
Record Type:

Journal

Level: N/A
Institutions: N/A
Sponsors:

N/A

ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-0022-4308
Audiences: N/A
Languages: English
Education Level:

Early Childhood Education

Direct Link: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jtoc/31817/2003

Differences between Bruner and Piaget

Obviously there are similarities between Piaget and Bruner, but an important
difference is that Bruners modes are not related in terms which presuppose the one
that precedes it. Whilst sometimes one mode may dominate in usage the modes coexist. Bruner states that what determines the level of intellectual development is the
extent to which the child has been given appropriate instruction together with
practice or experience. So, the right way of presentation and the right explanation
will enable a child to grasp a concept usually only understood by an adult. His theory
stresses the role of education and the adult. Although Bruner proposes stages of
cognitive development, he doesnt see them as representing different separate
modes of thought at different points of development (like Piaget). Instead, he sees a
gradual development of cognitive skills and techniques into more integrated adult
cognitive techniques. Bruner views symbolic representation as crucial for cognitive
development and since language is our primary means of symbolising the world; he
attachs great importance to language in determining cognitive development.

Esler, W. K. & Esler, M. K. (2001). Teaching elementary science (8 th ed.)

Washington: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Martin, R.; Sexton, C.; Gerlovich, J. (2002). Teaching science for all childrenMethods for constructing understanding. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Abruscato, J. (2004). Teaching children science: A discovery approach. (5 th edn.).

Boston: Allyn & Bacon.