A Case Study of Teacher Knowledge Regarding Phases of the Moon
Author(s):
Ali Sağdıç (presenting / submitting) Elvan Sahin
Conference:
ECER 2017
Format:
Paper

Session Information

ERG SES E 07, Context and Content in Education

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-21
15:30-17:00
Room:
W3.15
Chair:
Petra Grell

Contribution

Phases of the moon is a challenging topic to teach and learn in the context of middle school science education. Considering the previous research studies, profound agreement about the existence of misconceptions belonging to many students and teachers has been indicated. Looking at various studies, it is revealed that these misconceptions in phases of the moon have generally emerged due to the characteristic of the subject matter regardless of the cultural differences (Bayraktar, 2009; Driver, 1991). Accordingly, visualization of relationship between the earth, the sun and the moon in three dimension and explaining the role of the position of observer while observing the moon are among the challenging steps which make this concept difficult to learn (Suzuki, 2002). In addition, distance among and sizes of astronomical objects do not seem to be very familiar for us while considering our daily life experiences. In order to acquire sound conceptual understanding regarding many astronomy concepts, students should be well equipped with the adequate spatial ability to visualize, rotate and transform objects in their mind (Vosniadou & Brewer, 1987). Students’ lack of these abilities were declared as one of the sources of students’ learning difficulty in astronomy including phases of the moon issue (Heyer, Slater, & Slater, 2013).  

 

Based on descriptive findings, some studies were conducted to find out appropriate teaching strategies for overcoming learning difficulties. Their results revealed that approaches stemming from constructivist learning theory were more effective than traditional teaching. In other words, teaching approaches such as inquiry, model based teaching, and combination of different techniques which facilitate students to construct their own knowledge were appropriate for students’ learning in the phases of the moon (Callison & Wright, 1993; Hobson, Trundle, & Saçkes, 2010; Trundle & Bell, 2010; Ucar, 2008). However, previously Cohen (1982) pointed out that even appropriate teaching techniques might cause misconceptions. Thus, teachers were pointed out to have critical responsibilities in detecting misconceptions of students and ensuring sound understandings regarding phases of the moon. In order to achieve this goal, teachers should be aware of not only appropriate ways to teach but also the characteristics of the topic and difficulties students face. In this aspect, this study aimed to delving into a beginning science teacher’s knowledge of curriculum, knowledge of student, and knowledge of teaching strategies. Thus, the following research questions guided the current study;

 

i) What is the middle school science teacher’s knowledge of curriculum in phases of the moon?

ii) What is the middle school science teacher’s knowledge of student with respect to phases of the moon?

iii) What is the middle school science teacher’s knowledge of teaching strategy for teaching phases of the moon?

Method

Qualitative case study method was selected in order to obtain rich information from a beginning science teacher regarding his knowledge of teaching, curriculum and instructional strategies. The participant (Deniz as pseudo name) refers to the case of the current study. Deniz has science education undergraduate degree and four years teaching experience with teaching all different grade levels (5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th) at a public, rural, middle school. However, he taught the phases of the moon concept only one year to 5th grade students. In order to obtain participants knowledge of curriculum, teaching strategy and students, semi-structured interview was conducted. Interview questions including eleven questions was developed considering previous studies (e.g., Henze, van Driel, & Verloop, 2008; Magnusson, Krajcik, & Borko, 1999) on teacher knowledge research on science education. Interview lasted forty-three minutes and audio recorded during the process. In addition, during the interview, Deniz was asked to draw figures in order to validate his responses when necessary. Data were transcribed and analyzed by MAXQDA 12 qualitative analysis program.

Expected Outcomes

Deniz’s statements on knowledge of curriculum were evaluated considering national science education curriculum and science course book. The objectives of the Turkish middle school science curriculum regarding phases of the moon refer to four specific requirements. Accordingly, students should be aware of the fact that the moon reflects the sunlight and the moon revolves around the earth. In addition, students are expected to explain why the moon appears with different shapes and they should state the names of these shapes. The analyses indicated that Deniz has partial knowledge about curriculum. He could not remember specific curriculum objective but explained that objectives cover two main points such as sequence and names of each phases. Comparing with the objective of curriculum, it is revealed that statement of the participant reflect only one of these four requirements. With respect to knowledge of the students, teacher explained that size concept, revolution of the moon around the earth, rotation of the moon and solar and lunar eclipse was requirement in order to understand phases of the moon concept. However, he could not explain why these concepts were prerequisite for students’ learning or how understanding these concepts facilitate students learning. On the other hand, it was revealed that direct instruction and questioning techniques were preferred by Deniz for teaching phases of the moon. He stated that his science courses proceed with questions directed to students and students’ responses to these questions. However, these questions were limited with only appearance and the sequence of lunar phases. Responses reflects that teachers instructional, curricular and learner knowledge regarding phases of the moon is not sufficient. He ignores role of the spatial reasoning skills and potential problems students may face. These results support that Deniz is not well equipped with astronomy issues, which might cause alternative conceptions for his students.

References

Bayraktar, Ş. ̧. (2009). Pre-service primary teachers’ ideas about lunar phases. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(2), 12–23. Callison, P. L., & Wright, E. L. (1993). The effect of teaching strategies using models on preservice elementary teachers conceptions about Earth-Sun-Moon relationships. Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Atlanta, Georgia. Cohen, H. G. (1982). Relationship between locus of control and the development of spatial conceptual abilities. Science Education, 66(4), 635–642. Driver, R. (1991). Culture clash: children and science. New Scientist, 1775(46). Henze, I., van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2008). Development of Experienced Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Models of the Solar System and the Universe. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1321–1342. Heyer, I., Slater, S. J., & Slater, T. F. (2013). Establishing the emprical relationship between non-science majoring undergraduate learners ’ spatial thinking skills and their conceptual astronomy knowledge. Latin-American Journal of Astronomy Education, (16), 45–61. Hobson, S. M., Trundle, K. C., & Saçkes, M. (2010). Using a planetarium software program to promote conceptual change with young children. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(2), 165–176. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Suzuki, M. (2002). Conversations about the Moon with Prospective Teachers in Japan. Science Education, 87, 892–910. Trundle, K. C., & Bell, R. L. (2010). The use of a computer simulation to promote conceptual change: A quasi-experimental study. Computers and Education, 54(4), 1078–1088. Ucar, S. (2008). The effect of simulation-based and model-based education on the transfer of teaching with reagard to moon phases. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(3), 327–338. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, F. (1987). Theories of knowledge restructuring in development. Review of Educational Research, 57(1), 51–67.

Author Information

Ali Sağdıç (presenting / submitting)
Middle East Technical University, Turkey
Middle East Technical University, Turkey

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.