Understanding student weaknesses: Best science teachers can predict their pupils' misconceptions, study says

May 01, 2013 by Peter Reuell
As part of an unusual study, Philip Sadler, the Frances W. Wright Senior Lecturer in the Department of Astronomy, and colleagues tested 181 middle school physical science teachers and nearly 10,000 of their students, and showed that while most of the teachers were well-versed in their subject, those better able to predict their students’ wrong answers on standardized tests helped students learn the most. Credit: Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer

If you had to explain what causes the change in seasons, could you? Surprisingly, studies have shown that as many as 95 percent of people—including most college graduates—hold the incorrect belief that the seasons are the result of the Earth moving closer to or further from the sun.

The real answer, scientists say, is that as Earth's axis is tilted with respect to its orbit, when on its journey it is angled inward, the sun rises higher in the sky, and that results in more direct sunlight, longer days, and warmer temperatures. Distance plays no role; we are actually closest to the sun in the dead of winter, during the first week of January.

Why do so many people continue to hold the wrong idea? The answer, said Philip Sadler, the Frances W. Wright Senior Lecturer in the Department of Astronomy and director of the science education department at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA), may be found in what know.

As part of an unusual study, Sadler and colleagues tested 181 middle school physical science teachers and nearly 10,000 of their , and showed that while most of the teachers were well-versed in their subject, those better able to predict their students' wrong answers on helped students learn the most. The findings are described in a paper published last month in the American Educational Research Journal titled "The Influence of Teachers' Knowledge on Student Learning in Middle-School Physical Science Classrooms."

"What our research group found was that for the science that people considered factual, teacher knowledge was very important. If the teachers didn't know the facts, they couldn't convey them to the students," Sadler said. "But for the kinds of questions that measure conceptual understanding, even if the teacher knew the , that wasn't enough to guarantee that their students would actually learn the science."

Sadler pointed to the question of what happens to a lamp when the power cord is squeezed.

"Middle school students say if you squeeze hard you will see the light gets dimmer, even though they've stepped on that cord before, or they've put the corner of their chair on that cord before, and nothing has happened," he said. "Their theoretical understanding of the way the world works includes the idea that electricity is like water flowing through a garden hose. If you put some pressure on the cord, you will get less electricity out the other end. It turns out that for most major scientific concepts, kids come into the classroom—even in middle school—with a whole set of beliefs that are commonly at odds with what scientists, and their science teachers, know to be true."

If teachers are to help students change their incorrect beliefs, they first need to know what those are. That's where the standardized tests developed by Sadler and his colleagues come in. Multiple-choice answers were gleaned from hundreds of research studies examining students' ideas, particularly those that are common—such as electricity behaving like water.

For the study described in their paper, Sadler and his colleagues asked teachers to answer each question twice, once to give the scientifically correct answer, and the second time to predict which wrong answer their students were likeliest to choose. Students were then given the tests three times throughout the year to determine whether their knowledge improved.

The results showed that students' scores showed the most improvement when teachers were able to predict their students' wrong answers.

"Nobody has quite used test questions before in this way," Sadler said. "What I had noticed, even before we did this study, was that the most amazing science teachers actually know what their students' wrong ideas are. It occurred to us that there might be a way to measure this kind of teacher knowledge easily without needing to spend long periods of time observing teachers in their classrooms."

To help teachers hone this knowledge, Sadler and his colleagues have made the kind of tests used in their study publicly available. More than a dozen tests covering kindergarten through grade 12 are downloadable here, after completing a tutorial on their development and interpretation.

Going forward, Sadler said he hopes to conduct similar studies in the life sciences, particularly around concepts such as evolution and heredity. He also plans to study what types of professional development and new teacher preparation programs help improve instructors' facility in knowing what their students know.

Ultimately, Sadler said, he hopes teachers will be able to use the tests to help design lessons that change students' incorrect ideas and help them learn science more quickly and easily. This is particularly important as states adopt the recently released Next Generation Science Standards.

"State certification for teaching science might well include making sure that new teachers are aware of the common student misconceptions that they will encounter, as well as being proficient in the underlying science," said Sadler. "Prior to this, there has never been an easy way to measure teachers' knowledge of student thinking, while we have probably been placing too much emphasis on testing for advanced scientific knowledge.

"Everyone has had a teacher or professor who is incredibly knowledgeable about their field, yet some of them are less-than-stellar teachers," he continued. "One of the reasons for this is that teachers can be unaware of what is going on in their students' heads, even though they may have had exactly the same ideas when they were students themselves. Knowledge of student misconceptions is a critical tool for science teachers. It can help teachers to decide which demonstration to do in class, and to start the lesson by asking students to predict what's going to happen. If a teacher doesn't have this special kind of knowledge, though, it's nearly impossible to change students' ideas.

"The best base their lessons on what the American humorist-philosopher Will Rogers observed: It ain't what they don't know that gives them trouble, it's what they know that ain't so."

Explore further: Consumer loyalty driven by aesthetics over functionality

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Washington takes on Uber with its own taxi app

5 hours ago

Washington is developing a smartphone app to enable its taxis to compete head-on with Uber and other ride-sharing services, the US capital's taxi commission said Friday.

Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko in living color

5 hours ago

Rosetta's OSIRIS team have produced a color image of Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko as it would be seen by the human eye. As anticipated, the comet turns out to be very grey indeed, with only slight, subtle ...

EU clean air, waste laws at risk

5 hours ago

EU Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker faces a clash with lawmakers after leaked documents Friday revealed his plans to drop laws on clean air and waste recycling.

Recommended for you

Why are UK teenagers skipping school?

10 hours ago

Analysis of the results of a large-scale survey reveals the extent of truancy in English secondary schools and sheds light on the mental health of the country's teens.

Fewer lectures, more group work

10 hours ago

Professor Cees van der Vleuten from Maastricht University is a Visiting Professor at Wits University who believes that learning should be student centred.

How to teach all students to think critically

11 hours ago

All first year students at the University of Technology Sydney could soon be required to take a compulsory maths course in an attempt to give them some numerical thinking skills. ...

Consumer loyalty driven by aesthetics over functionality

Dec 17, 2014

When designing a new car, manufacturers might try to attract consumers with more horsepower, increased fuel efficiency or a lower price point. But new research from San Francisco State University shows consumers' loyalty ...

User comments : 10

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

2.7 / 5 (7) May 01, 2013
It is interesting that an article on misconceptions in science should contain one in the opening paragraph. It is not true that "we are actually closest to the sun in the dead of winter, during the first week of January". In the first week of January half the planet is in the dead of summer, not winter.

In other words there are no global seasons, a misconception of the author of the above article.

...Oh dear...
2.3 / 5 (6) May 01, 2013
Perihelion does occur in January. In January ya are closer to the Sun than at any other time during the year.

The seasons are caused by the tilt, but only in that the sun shined on the northern hemisphere more directly, so longer each day during the summer months.

In the winter months, in the northern hemisphere, ya are actually closer to the sun, but the light is more indirect, and shorter duration.

So speaking of the middle school kids in America, he was entirely correct. (And that was who he was referring to.)
1.7 / 5 (6) May 01, 2013
Why is this a surprise to anyone? 'Education' is now indoctrination.

"The failure of our educational system goes beyond what they fail to teach. It includes what they do teach, or rather indoctrinate, and the graduates they send out into the world, incapable of seriously weighing alternatives for themselves or for American society. "

Read more: http://www.realcl...S5hhmxLV
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter

And Harvard is one of the many indoctrination centers. Their staff forced a president to resign for making a rational observation.
1 / 5 (1) May 01, 2013
Yes he (Dr. Sadler) is correct as he is talking to US Kidz, but the ARTICLE is international and Sadler didn't write it, Peter Reuell did and he was not quoting Sadler when he made his mistake.

Sorry to Dr.Sadler for any misunderstanding...
2 / 5 (4) May 02, 2013
Yes he (Dr. Sadler) is correct as he is talking to US Kidz,

Ah, hah.

but the ARTICLE is international and Sadler didn't write it, Peter Reuell did and he was not quoting Sadler when he made his mistake.

Peter Reuell writes for an American STUDENT newspaper. The HARVARD GAZETTE. This article was published in the HARVARD GAZETTE. Not an international paper,

So the article was written by an American college student, published in an American college newspaper, about an American researcher, who was working with American school children, and published his findings in the American Educational Research Journal.

Misconceptions is a very germane topic for your comments.

1 / 5 (1) May 02, 2013
Q-Star, it is published in Physorg, which is an international news service, so someone screwed up somewhere...the only questions is who...
1 / 5 (3) May 02, 2013
Q-Star, it is published in Physorg, which is an international news service, so someone screwed up somewhere...the only questions is who...

First it was the guy who did the study. Then it was the guy who wrote the article. Now it is physorg who doesn't write the stories they post, they just pass them on as written.

Hmm, I wonder if maybe at some point one might expect that the reader take responsibility to read the entire article, see who wrote it That way the "reader" won't have to waste his time looking for some silly thing to use to make himself look smart.

Psst, if ya are going to post a "I'm smarter the article" type of comment. Ya should see who wrote the article (It's there for all to see.) Look for the source of the article (Harvard Gazette there for all to see). And who the article is addressing, and the context of the reporting (there for all to see.) I only had to read it the one time & I got all that out of it. After reading it 3 times ya still,,,,,,,,,,,,
2 / 5 (4) May 04, 2013
It's interesting that people commenting seem to have missed the brilliant idea which is presented by these researchers -- that we can use the force concept inventory test not just as a means of evaluating student comprehension, but also to rate the effectiveness of science educators.

This would seem to take us one step closer towards redefining the endeavor of science education as ultimately a process of correcting misconceptions. It's another nail in the coffin of the conventional lecture-and-problem set approach, and -- if we were all rational and aware of the larger body of research which precedes this idea -- we'd logically respond by taking a second look at David Ausubel's theory of assimilation, as well as Joseph Novak's numerous books on how to actually correct misconceptions.

If misconceptions are indeed the future of science education, then it's not hard to see that online universities will seize upon this as a way to attack the university's dominance in science education.
1 / 5 (1) May 05, 2013
The parsimony principle is basic to all science and tells us to choose the simplest scientific explanation that fits the evidence.


The parsimony principle is applicable to misconceptions. You only have to subtract the ingredients of science and bake with an insufficient amount of evidence.

If people ask you to eat what they bake you can decline by saying you are on a diet.
1 / 5 (2) May 06, 2013
For more info on the seasons misconception, see the first 20-minute video below. Harvard grads were asked on the day of their commencement what causes the seasons. You decide whether to laugh or cry ...


The best part is that the focus of the short video, Heather, went on to get a bachelors in physics!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.