Subject-Specific Correctness of Students’ Conceptions and Factors of Influence: Empirical Findings from a Quantitative Study with Grade 7 Students in Germany Regarding the Formation and Location of Deserts

Abstract

Students’ conceptions are a central learning condition. Until now there have only been qualitative results regarding the important geographical area of the desert, especially its location and formation. Therefore this study surveys students’ conceptions (N = 585; n = 448 without pre-instruction on deserts and n = 137 with pre-instruction on deserts) with the help of a questionnaire containing open and closed questions. The descriptive as well as inferential statistical analysis shows that both subject-specific correct as well as subject-specific unfounded explanations regarding the location and formation of deserts are frequently found. At the same time, the conception about deserts being just sandy deserts is strongly connected with the subject-specific correctness of the conceptions regarding the location and formation of deserts. Based on the discussion of the results, information about the possibility of future research is given. 

Keywords

• Students’ Preconceptions,Desert Formation,Desert Location,Quantitative Study,Secondary Geography Education

References

1. Adamina, M. (2008). Vorstellungen von Schülerinnen und Schülern zu raum-, zeit- und geschichtsbezogenen Themen. Eine explorative Studie in Klassen des 1., 3., 5. und 7. Schuljahres im Kanton Bern [Preconceptions of students on space-, time- and history- related topics. An exploratory study in classes 1, 3, 5 and 7 in the Canton of Bern]. Muenster: University of Muenster.
2. Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (2006). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation für Human- und Sozialwissenschaftler [Research methods and evaluation for human and social scientists]. Heidelberg: Springer.
3. Böwing-Schmalenbrock, M., & Jurczok, A. (2012). Multiple Imputation in der Praxis: Ein sozialwissenschaftliches Anwendungsbeispiel [Multiple imputation in practice: An example of application from social science]. Online via: URN urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus- 58111.
4. Bühner, M. (Ed.) (2006). Einführung in die Test- und Fragebogenkonstruktion [Introduction to the construction of tests and questionnaires]. München: Pearson.
5. Dove, J. (1999). Theory into practice. Immaculate misconceptions. Sheffield: Geographical Association.
6. Duit, R. (2006). Schülervorstellungen und Lernen von Physik – Forschungsergebnisse und die Realität der Unterrichtspraxis [Student’s preconceptions and learning of Physics – research results and the reality of teaching practice] . In R. Girwidz, M. Gläser-Zikuda, M. Laukenmann, & T. Rubitzko (Eds.), Lernen im Physikunterricht. Festschrift für Prof. Dr. Christoph von Rhöneck [Learning in Physics lessons. Commemorative publication for Prof. Dr. Christoph von Rhöneck] (pp. 13–22). Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac.
7. Duit, R. (2010). Schülervorstellungen und Lernen von Physik [Student’s preconceptions and learning of Physics]. In PIKO-Brief (1) Online via: http://www.ipn.uni- kiel.de/projekte/piko/pikobriefe032010.pdf. Gerstenmaier, J., & Mandl, H. (1995). Wissenserwerb unter konstruktivistischer Perspektive [Knowledge acquisition from a constructivst perspective]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 41(6), pp. 867–888.
8. Gropengießer, H. (2007). Didaktische Rekonstruktion des Sehens. Wissenschaftliche Theorien und die Sicht der Schüler in der Perspektive der Vermittlung [Didactical reconstruction of seeing. Scientific theories and the view of students on the perspective of mediation]. Oldenburg: Didaktisches Zentrum Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg.

9. Gropengießer, H. (2010). Biologie unterrichten [Teaching biology]. In J. Markl (Ed.), Markl Biologie - Lehrbuch Oberstufe [Markl biology – course book senior classes] (pp. 5–82). Stuttgart: Klett.
10. Helmke, A., & Schrader, F. (2010). Determinanten der Schulleistung [Determinants of school perfomance] In D. H. Rost (Ed.), Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie [Pocket dictionary educational psychology] (pp. 90–102). Weinheim, Basel: Beltz.
11. Johannsen, M., & Krüger, D. (2005). Schülervorstellungen zur Evolution – eine quantitative Studie [Student’s preconceptions on evolution – a quantitative study]. Berichte des Institutes für Didaktik der Biologie der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster [Chronicles of the Institue of Didactics of Biology at the Westphalian Wilhelms-University Münster], 14, pp. 23–48.
12. Jonas, C., Riemeier, T., & Krüger, D. (2004). Häufigkeit von Lernervorstellungen zur Zellteilung [Frequency of learner’s preconceptions on cell division]. Erkenntnisweg Biologiedidaktik 3, pp. 79–94.
13. Lienert, G. A., & Raatz, U. (Eds.) (1998). Testaufbau und Testanalyse [Test setup and test analysis]. Weinheim: Beltz.
14. Ministerium für Schule und Weiterbildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (Ed.). (2008). Kernlehrplan für das Gymnasium – Sekundarstufe I in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Biologie [Core curriculum for German secondary schools – secondary level I in Northrhine- Westphalia. Biology]. Frechen: Ritterbach Verlag.
15. Mohn, A. (2015). Das Interesse von Schülerinnen und Schülern am Thema Wüste [Student’s interests on the topic desert]. In J. C. Schubert & K. Wrenger, (Eds.), Wüsten und Desertifikation im Geographieunterricht. Empirische Studien zu Vorstellungen und Interessen von Schülerinnen und Schülern [Deserts and desertification in Geography lessons. Empirical studies on the preconceptions and interests of students] (pp. 265-295). Münster: Monsenstein-und Vannerdat-Verlag.
16. Moosbrugger, H., & Kelava, A. (Eds.) (2012). Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion [Test theory and questionnaire construction]. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
17. Newman, D. A. (2014). Missing data: Five practical guidelines. Organizational Research Methods, 17(4), pp. 372–411.
18. Niedderer, H., & Schecker, H. (1992). Towards an explicit description of cognitive systems for research in physics learning. In R. Duit, F. M. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer, (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies; proceedings of an international workshop (pp. 74–98). Kiel: IPN.
19. Peugh, J. L., & Enders, C. K. (2004). Missing data in educational research: A review of reporting practices and suggestions for improvement. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), pp. 525–556.
20. Prüfer, P., & Rexroth, M. (2000). Zwei-Phasen-Pretesting [Pretesting in two stages]. ZUMA- Arbeitsbericht, 8, pp. 1–21.
21. Reinfried, S. (2007). Alltagsvorstellungen und Lernen im Fach Geographie. Zur Bedeutung der konstruktivistischen Lehr-Lern-Theorie am Beispiel des Conceptual Change [Everyday preconceptions and learning in Geography. On the importance of the constructivist teaching and learning theory by the example of conceptual change]. Geographie und Schule 29(168), pp. 19–28.
22. Reinmann, G., & Mandl, H. (2006). Unterrichten und Lernumgebung gestalten [Teaching and the development of learning environments]. In A. Krapp, & B. Weidenmann (Eds.), Pädagogische Psychologie. Ein Lehrbuch [Educational psychology. A course book] (pp. 613-658). Basel: Weinheim.
23. Riemeier, T. (2007). Moderater Konstruktivismus [Moderate constructivism]. In D. Krüger, & H. Vogt (Ed.), Theorien in der biologiedidaktischen Forschung – Ein Handbuch für Lehramtsstudenten und Doktoranden [Theories in the research of the didactis of Biology – a handbook for students of teaching and PhD students] (pp. 69–79). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
24. Rubin, D. B. (Ed.) (1987). Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley & Sons.
25. Schafer, J. L., & Olsen, M. K. (1998). Multiple imputation for multivariate missing-data problems: A data analyst's perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33(4), pp. 545– 571.
26. Schubert, J. C. (2012). Schülervorstellungen zu Wüsten und Desertifikation – Eine empirische Untersuchung zu einem zentralen Thema des Geographieunterrichts [Students’ conceptions on the topic of deserts and desertification – An empirical research project on a crucial topic of geography classrooms]. Muenster: University of Muenster.
27. Schubert, J. C. (2014). Students’ preconceptions of the formation and location of deserts. Results of a qualitative interview study with grade 7 students in Germany. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 4(2), pp. 102–119.
28. Schubert, J.C. (2015): Causes, processes and consequences of “desertification”: Results of a qualitative study about the conceptions of 12- and 13-year-old students in Germany. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, DOI: 10.1080/10382046.2014.993172.
29. Van Ginkel, J. R. & Kroonenberg, P. M. (2014). Analysis of variance of multiply imputed data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 49(1), pp. 78–91.