Adey, P. 2001. "Changing Minds," Inaugural Lecture on becoming
Director of the "Centre for the Advancement of Thinking," 22
October; online at
<http://www.smd.kcl.ac.uk//depsta/education/hpages/padey.html>: "The
world of science education research appears to be full to bursting
with studies of conceptual change but when one looks at it closely it
turns out to be very weak on the matter of how concepts change. There
is more detail in this literature than anyone could possibly want
about the conceptions of some basic ideas such as density, pressure,
respiration, and chemical change that
students hold, how they are systematically different from scientists'
ideas, and how resistant they are to change. There is also plenty of
theoretical speculation about how misconceptions might possibly be
converted to scientific conceptions. BUT THERE IS PRECIOUS LITTLE
EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF
ANYONE ACTUALLY ACHIEVING THIS GOAL . . . .[Is Adey aware of Physics
Education Research? For a reviews see Redish (1999) and Hake (2002)].
. . . And that is pretty scary when you think about it: after a good
20 years of research this approach has brought us no nearer knowing
how to bring about conceptual change. It may be this dismal failure
which has driven so many researchers - who themselves have had a
respectable science education - to turn to post-modern and
relativistic views of the nature of reality. If we cannot get the
average 16 year old to understand the cellular processes involved in
photosynthesis, maybe we should just believe that the student's
misconception is actually a perfectly valid way of interpreting the
world. That, in my opinion, is a cop-out. I CONTEND THAT THE FAILURE
OF SCIENCE EDUCATION RESEARCH TO DISCOVER HOW TO CHANGE CONCEPTS
OCCURS BECAUSE RESEARCHERS IN THE FIELD (with some honourable
exceptions, one of whom you will hear from later this evening) HAVE
WILFULLY CHOSEN TO IGNORE ALL THAT HAS BEEN KNOWN SINCE THE 1930S
ABOUT THE PROCESS OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT - THE PROCESS BY WHICH
INFORMATION PROCESSING ABILITY DEVELOPS." (My CAPS.)
Adey, P., M. Shayer, & C. Yates. 2001. "Thinking Science: The
curriculum materials onf the CASE project." (3rd ed.). Nelson Thornes
(London). See also the CASE website
<http://www.case-network.org/index.html>, Adey & Shayer (1994), and
Adey (1999, 2001, 2002).
**American Mathematical Society Staff, American Institute of Physics
Staff, American Chemical Society. 2001. "The Best of Wonder Science:
Elementary Science Activities, Volume 2." Wadsworth Publishing.
**Asimov, I. and R.A. Galant (1973). Ginn Science Program. Ginn &
Company. For elementary schools - many volumes, out of print. Hubisz
et al. (2001) comment: "Has what is missing from most of the books in
this report."
Benezet, L. P. 1935/36. "The Teaching of Arithmetic I, II, III: The
Story of an Experiment, " Humanistic Mathematics Newsletter #6, May
1991, pp. 2-14 (reprinted from The Journal of the National Education
Association, Nov. 1935, Dec. 1935, Jan. 1936); on the web at the
Benezet Centre <http://wol.ra.phy.cam.ac.uk/sanjoy/benezet>. See also
Mahajan and Hake (2000).
Hake, R.R. 1987. "Promoting student crossover to the Newtonian
world," Am J. Phys. 55, 878-884 (1987).
Hake, R.R. 2002. "Lessons from the physics education reform effort."
Conservation Ecology 5(2): 28; online at
<http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss2/art28>. "Conservation Ecology," is
a FREE "peer-reviewed journal of integrative science and fundamental
policy research" with about 11,000 subscribers in about 108 countries.
**Hargan, J.D.D. and M.S. Rivkin (1999). Science Experiences in the
Early Childhood Years: An Integrated Approach. Prentice-Hall.
Hubisz, J.L. et al. 2001. [The reviewers included Phys-L's own Herb
Gottlieb from New York City, where they don't object to misstatements
regarding the results of their reports ;-) .] "Report on a Study of
Middle School Science Texts," Phys. Teach. 39(5), 304-309. In the
section "Suggestions for Middle School Teachers", some favorable
comments are made on the "**" texts in this list even though they
were not popular enough to warrant a formal review.
Hubisz, J.L. et al. Undated (2000?). "Final Report to the David &
Lucile Packard Foundation, Review of Middle School Texts," Online at
<http://www.psrc-online.org/> / "Curriculum" / "Middle School
Physical Science" / "Review of Middle School Science Texts" (where
"/" means "click on").
Mahajan, S. & Hake R.R. 2000. "Is It Time for a Science Counterpart
of the Benezet-Berman Mathematics Teaching Experiment of the 1930's?"
Physics Education Research Conference 2000: Teacher Education; online
as ref. 6 at <http://wol.ra.phy.cam.ac.uk/sanjoy/benezet>.
Raloff. J. 2001 "Where's the Book? Science education is redefining
texts." Science News 159(12), March 24, 2001; online at http://www.sciencenews.org/20010324/bob12.asp (Second in a two-part
series on middle-school science curricula.) This article extols
Haber-Schaim et al. (1999).
Shayer, M. & P. Adey, eds. 2002. "Learning Intelligence: Cognitive
Acceleration Across the Curriculum from 5 to 15 years ," Open
University Press - see
<http://195.89.185.89/bd.cgi/openup/isb?0335211364> for details.
Swartz, C.E. 1964. "Elementary School Science" Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, volume 2.
**Swartz, C.E. 1969. "Measure and find out: A quantitative approach
to science." Scott, Foresman, & Company. 3 volumes. Hubisz et. al
(2001) comment: 'Has what is missing from most of the books in this
report'. See also Swartz (1964, 1993).
Whimbey, A., J. Lochhead, and P.B. Potter. 1999. "Thinking Through
Math Word Problems: Strategies for Intermediate Elementary School
Students." Erlbaum. See also at
<http://www.whimbey.com/Books/books.htm>.
THE END !
This posting is the position of the writer, not that of SUNY-BSC, NAU or the AAPT.