One of the many difficulties that science have is to tackle misconceptions students have before they even enter the classroom.
As science teachers, our goal is not only to teach the basics of science but also to equip our students with the necessary tools to comprehend the world around them. We want them to develop the ability to absorb information, process it based on their prior knowledge, and draw accurate conclusions without getting trapped by common misconceptions, a pitfall that even many adults encounter.
In its most simple terms, a misconception is a wrong it incorrect idea. It’s quite a broad concept that has a lot of scope.
A common misconception that particularly bothers me relates to terminology: using of “weight” and “mass” synonymously.
This misconception arises because we often use the term “weigh” when referring to determining our “weight,” but in reality, we are measuring our mass. Similarly, when measuring ingredients, we are actually measuring their mass rather than weighing them. This misconception can be particularly frustrating for science teachers, who may need to correct it repeatedly, such as pencil ‘lead‘ when teaching allotropes of carbon or the ‘theory‘ of evolution being a scientific fact.
We clarify the reason behind the differences in language and make it clear why we use certain terminology. Our goal is to communicate effectively, so we use the language that best suits the audience we are addressing. For example, when communicating outside a lab, using the word “weight” is easily understood by most people. However, inside a lab, the word “weight” may have a specific technical meaning that differs from its everyday usage. Therefore, we pay close attention to the context in which we communicate.
We explicitly teach about the meaning of our language to help tackle these misconceptions.
This is how we should tackle every misconception — a fact I realised this at the beginning of my career after a disastrous ‘discovery learning’ lesson on electrical conductivity.
Here’s the scene: Pupils were given a power pack, wires, a beaker of deionised water and some table salt. They placed the wires into the deionised water and the bulb didn’t light up. They then poured salt into their beakers, gave them a stir and viola, the bulb lit up. Their minds were blown and their conclusions were made. Water doesn’t conduct electricity, salt water does.
At no point in the entire practical did a pupil say what I expected them to say:
“But sir, water does conduct electricity”
They should have, surely! I was convinced they were going to! They have seen people get electrocuted when standing in an inch of water in movies, they even get told to not touch an outlet with wet hands for fear of death! Why didn’t they challenge what they saw?
I taught it terribly and I did not combat their misconception.
Again, students do not know what they do not know, so we must tell them. We should never assume a pupil will tell you their misconceptions because they often won’t.
Do not give things that ‘blow their minds’ to get buy-in that you then have to tackle afterwards. All this achieves is an increase in cognitive load and confusion, teachers then have to work twice as hard to navigate them through it.
Just tell them.
Yes, I could have repeated the experiment again and again and waited for them to make the connection, but it is just faster and much more effective to tell them the potential misconception from the outset.
These types of misconceptions arise all the time. I have been teaching many a topic and expected pupils to say something, but they often don’t. For example, looking at images of deoxygenated and oxygenated blood. I have never had a pupil say that deoxygenated blood is blue unless I draw attention to their own wrists. Nor have I ever heard a pupil mention the density of water getting lower when it freezes being weird!
Unless I make the hard link between what they see and the reality, I am not actually combatting their misconception. All I am doing is adding to their confusion and limiting their learning.
Then there are the more nefarious misconceptions: misinformation. Combatting these is difficult, science teacher must flex their understanding of science and do what they do best. Explain.
The science curriculum has been slow to adapt and change for the world around it. The curriculum just isn’t there to give them the understanding they need, so it is up to us to build them into the curriculum through effective hinterland and good explanations.
There are many of these, but here are some I have covered in the last few weeks:
- Sugar doesn’t cause hyperactivity
- The sun is white, not yellow
- Rust doesn’t cause tetanus
- Cracking your knuckles doesn’t give you arthritis
- Stretching doesn’t reduce the effects of DOMS
- People who are drowning do not kick and scream
- 5G did not cause Covid-19
- You cannot remove an IUD yourself
- Vaccines do not cause autism
Whilst each of these vary in the severity of misinformation it is still important to combat them. Tell them the misinformation, highlight the misconceptions and use science to explain why.
It is by far the best thing we do as science teachers and it should not be understated the impact we science teachers can have on a student’s understanding of the world. But we must explicitly mention the misconceptions to achieve this and discuss why these are incorrect and why people make these incorrect assertions.
Misconceptions arise for a variety of reasons but all must be tackled in a similar way. Highlight to pupils these misconceptions, challenge them, explain why they are incorrect and explicitly show them the scientific reasoning.
Do not allow pupils to combat misconceptions themselves because, for the most part, if they could do that, they wouldn’t have the misconception to begin with.
inquestion. 