Scientific Model of Plant Nutrition: epistemological analysis and a proposed learning progression
Downloads
- PDF (Español (España)) 886
- EPUB (Español (España)) 35
- VISOR (Español (España))
- MÓVIL (Español (España))
- XML (Español (España)) 30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2023.v20.i3.3102Info
Abstract
La enseñanza/aprendizaje del Modelo Científico de la Nutrición Vegetal (MCNV) es un tema fundamental en la enseñanza de las ciencias. Sin embargo, se trata de uno de los contenidos más difíciles tanto de enseñar como de aprender. Con el objetivo de guiar al profesorado en el diseño de secuencias de enseñanza/aprendizaje y en la construcción de ambientes de aprendizaje efectivos, este estudio consta de tres secciones. En la primera se realiza un análisis epistemológico del MCNV para definir las ideas clave que han de ser trabajadas durante el recorrido académico. En la segunda se define el modelo escolar que debería alcanzar el alumnado al finalizar la educación secundaria tomando como base la investigación didáctica y el análisis del contexto y del currículum. En la última sección se configura una propuesta de progresión de aprendizaje que explicita una secuenciación del contenido del modelo tomando en consideración las dificultades de enseñanza/aprendizaje de la temática, propuestas de progresión previas, así como orientaciones curriculares internacionales.
Palabras clave: Modelos; Nutrición vegetal; Ideas clave; Progresión de aprendizaje.
Scientific Model of Plant Nutrition: epistemological analysis and a proposed learning progression
Abstract: The teaching and learning of the Scientific Model of Plant Nutrition (SMPN) is a pivotal topic in science education. However, it is also one of the most difficult contents to both teach and learn. With the aim of guiding teachers in the design of teaching/learning sequences and the construction of effective learning environments, this study consists of three sections. First, an epistemological analysis of the SMPN is performed in order to define the key ideas that must be worked on during schooling. In the second, considering the didactic research and the analysis of the context and school curriculum, it is defined the school science model students should construct by the end of secondary education. In the last section a proposed learning progression which describes a hypothetical sequencing of the contents of the model is articulated by taking into account the teaching/learning difficulties of the topic, previously proposed learning progressions, and international curricular orientations.
Keywords: Models; Plant nutrition; Key ideas, Learning progression.
Keywords
Downloads
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Oier Pedrera, Oihana Barrutia, José Ramón Díez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Require authors to agree to Copyright Notice as part of the submission process. This allow the / o authors / is non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in an open access archive. In addition, Creative Commons is available on flexible copyright licenses (Creative Commons).
Reconocimiento-NoComercial
CC BY-NC
References
Acevedo-Díaz, J. A., García-Carmona, A., Aragón-Méndez, M. del M., y Oliva-Martínez, J. M. (2017). Modelos científicos: Significado y papel en la práctica científica. Revista científica, 3(30), 155. https://doi.org/10.14483/23448350.12288
Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2012). Algunas características clave de los modelos científicos relevantes para la educación química. Educación Química, 23, 248-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(17)30151-9
Akçay, S. (2017). Prospective elementary science teachers’ understanding of photosynthesis and cellular respiration in the context of multiple biological levels as nested systems. Journal of Biological Education, 51(1), 52-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2016.1170067
Alonzo, A. C., Benus, M., Bennett, W., y Pinney, B. (2009). A learning progression for elementary school students’ understanding of plant nutrition. 323-332.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (Ed.). (2001). Atlas of science literacy. American Association for the Advancement of Science: National Science Teachers Association.
Angosto Sánchez, I., y Morcillo Ortega, J. G. (2020). Teaching vegetable nutrition: From the problem to the proposal. Journal of Biological Education, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2020.1808514
Arnon, D. I. (1982). Sunlight, Earth, Life: The grand design of photosynthesis. The Sciences, 22(7), 22-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2326-1951.1982.tb02101.x
BOPV. (2015, diciembre 22). Por el que se establece el currículo de Educación Básica y se implanta en la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco. Decreto 236/2015.
BOPV. (2016, septiembre 6). Por el que se establece el currículo del Bachillerato y se implanta en la Comunidad Autónoma del País Vasco. Decreto 127/2016.
Brown, M. H., y Schwartz, R. S. (2009). Connecting photosynthesis and cellular respiration: Preservice teachers’ conceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(7), 791-812. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20287
Bryce, C. M., Baliga, V. B., De Nesnera, K. L., Fiack, D., Goetz, K., Tarjan, L. M., Wade, C. E., Yovovich, V., Baumgart, S., Bard, D. G., Ash, D., Parker, I. M., y Gilbert, G. S. (2016). Exploring models in the biology classroom. The American Biology Teacher, 78(1), 35-42. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2016.78.1.35
Campbell, T., Schwarz, C., y Windschitl, M. (2016). What we call misconceptions may be necessary stepping-stones toward making sense of the world. Science and Children, 53(7). https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc16_053_07_28
Cañal, P. (1990). La enseñanza en el campo conceptual de la nutrición de las plantas verdes: Un estudio didáctico en la Educación Básica. Universidad de Sevilla.
Cañal, P. (2005). La nutrición de las plantas: Enseñanza y aprendizaje. Síntesis.
Charrier Melillán, M., Cañal, P., y Rodrigo Vega, M. (2007). Student’s alternative conceptions on photosynthesis and respiration: A bibliographical revision in relation to plant nutrition researches and learning. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 24(3), 401-409. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.3790
Crowe, A., Dirks, C., y Wenderoth, M. P. (2008). Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom’s taxonomy to enhance student learning in Biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 7, 368-381 https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024
Dauer, J. M., Doherty, J. H., Freed, A. L., y Anderson, C. W. (2014). Connections between student explanations and arguments from evidence about plant growth. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 397-409. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-02-0028
Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., Kattmann, U., Komorek, M., y Parchmann, I. (2012). The model of educational reconstruction – a framework for improving teaching and learning science. En D. Jorde y J. Dillon (Eds.), Science Education Research and Practice in Europe (pp. 13-37). SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-900-8_2
Duncan, R. G., y Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2009). Learning progressions: Aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 606-609. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20316
Duschl, R., Maeng, S., y Sezen, A. (2011). Learning progressions and teaching sequences: A review and analysis. Studies in Science Education, 47(2), 123-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2011.604476
Galagovsky, L. R., y Adúriz-Bravo, A. (2001). Modelos y analogías en la enseñanza de las ciencias naturales. El concepto de modelo didáctico analógico. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 19(2), 231-242. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.4000
Giere, R. N. (2004). How models are used to represent reality. Philosophy of Science, 71(5), 742-752. https://doi.org/10.1086/425063
Gilbert, J. K. (1998). Explaining with models. En ASE guide to secondary science education (M.
Ratcliffe, pp. 159-166). Stanley Thornes.
Gilbert, J. K., y Boulter, C. J. (Eds.). (2000). Developing models in science education. Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0876-1
Gilbert, J. K., y Justi, R. (2016). Modelling-based teaching in science education (Vol. 9). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29039-3
González Rodríguez, C. (2009). Problemática de la nutrición vegetal en la educación obligatoria. Una propuesta de secuencia. Revista de Educación en Biología, 12(2), 36-43.
González Rodríguez, C. (2018). ¿Han mejorado las ciencias de la naturaleza en los currículos de la E.S.O. desde L.O.G.S.E hasta la L.O.M.C.E: la nutrición vegetal? En C. Martínez Losada y S. García
Barros (Eds.), 28 Encuentros de didáctica de las ciencias experimentales: Iluminando el cambio educativo (pp. 697-702). Universidade da Coruña.
González Rodríguez, C., García Barros, S., y Martínez Losada, C. (2012). La nutrición vegetal desde el pensamiento docente. Revista Eureka sobre enseñanza y divulgación de las ciencias., 9(1), 93-105. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2012.v9.i1.07
González Rodríguez, C., Martínez Losada, C., y García Barros, S. (2014). El modelo de nutrición vegetal a través de la historia. Revista Eureka sobre enseñanza y divulgación de las ciencias, 11(1), 2-12. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2014.v11.i1.02
González-Rodríguez, C., García-Barrios, S., y Martínez-Lozada, C. (2009). Plant nutrition in Spanish secondary textbooks. Journal of Biological Education, 43(4), 152-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2009.9656175
Gotwals, A. W., y Songer, N. B. (2009). Reasoning up and down a food chain: Using an assessment framework to investigate students’ middle knowledge. Science Education, 259-281. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20368
Greca, I. M., y Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289976
Guisasola, J., Ametller, J., y Zuza, K. (2021). Investigación basada en el diseño de Secuencias de Enseñanza-Aprendizaje: Una línea de investigación emergente en Enseñanza de las Ciencias. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 18(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.25267/Rev_Eureka_ensen_divulg_cienc.2021.v18.i1.1801
Guisasola, J., Montero, A., y Fernández, M. (2008). La historia del concepto de fuerza electromotriz en circuitos eléctricos y la elección de indicadores de aprendizaje comprensivo. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Física, 30(1), 1604.1-1604.8. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-11172008000100018
Guisasola, J., Zuza, K., Ametller, J., y Gutierrez-Berraondo, J. (2017). Evaluating and redesigning teaching learning sequences at the introductory physics level. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(2), 020139. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.020139
Harlen, W. (2015). Principles and big ideas of science education. Association for science education.
Hartley, L. M., Wilke, B. J., Schramm, J. W., D’Avanzo, C., y Anderson, C. W. (2011). College students’ understanding of the carbon cycle: Contrasting principle-based and informal reasoning. BioScience, 61(1), 65-75. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.1.12
Jin, H., Mikeska, J. N., Hokayem, H., y Mavronikolas, E. (2019). Toward coherence in curriculum, instruction, and assessment: A review of learning progression literature. Science Education, 103(5), 1206-1234. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21525
Jin, H., Zhan, L., y Anderson, C. W. (2013). Developing a fine-grained learning progression framework for carbon-transforming processes. International Journal of Science Education, 35(10), 1663-1697. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.782453
Justi, R. (2007). La enseñanza de ciencias basada en la elaboración de modelos. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 24(2), 173-184. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.3798
Kuhn, T. S. (1984). La estructura de las revoluciones científicas. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Lambers, H., Chapin, F. S., y Pons, T. L. (2008). Plant physiological ecology. Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-78341-3
Lewis, J. (2009). Can theoretical constructs in science be generalised across disciplines?: Eduactional Research. Journal of Biological Education, 44(1), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2009.9656185
Lin, C., y Hu, R. (2003). Students’ understanding of energy flow and matter cycling in the context of the food chain, photosynthesis, and respiration. International Journal of Science Education, 25(12), 1529-1544. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000052045
Matthews, M. R. (2004). Thomas Kuhn’s impact on science education: What lessons can be learned? Science Education, 88(1), 90-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10111
Meidner, H. (1985). Historical Sketches 11. Journal of Experimental Botany, 36(11), 1831-1832. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/36.11.1831
Métioui, A., Matoussi, F., y Trudel, L. (2016). The teaching of photosynthesis in secondary school: A history of the science approach. Journal of Biological Education, 50(3), 275-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2015.1085427
Mohan, L., Chen, J., y Anderson, C. W. (2009). Developing a multi-year learning progression for carbon cycling in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 675-698. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20314
Morrison, M., y Morgan, M. S. (1999). Models as mediating instruments. En M. S. Morgan y M. Morrison (Eds.), Models as mediators (1.a ed., pp. 10-37). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511660108.003
Oh, P. S., y Oh, S. J. (2011). What teachers of science need to know about models: An overview. International Journal of Science Education, 33(8), 1109-1130. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.502191
Oliva, J. M. (2019). Distintas acepciones para la idea de modelización en la enseñanza de las ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 37(2), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.2648
Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9384-1
Parker, J. M., Anderson, C. W., Heidemann, M., Merrill, J., Merritt, B., Richmond, G., y Urban-Lurain, M. (2012). Exploring undergraduates’ understanding of photosynthesis using diagnostic question clusters. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(1), 47-57. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-07-0054
Parker, J. M., de los Santos, E. X., y Anderson, C. W. (2013). What learning progressions on carbon-transforming processes tell us about how students learn to use the laws of conservation of matter and energy. Educación Química, 24(4), 399-406. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-
X(13)72493-5
Parker, J. M., Santos, E. X. de los, y Anderson, C. W. (2015). Learning progressions y climate change. The American Biology Teacher, 77(4), 232-238. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2015.77.4.2
Pedrera, O., Barrutia, O., y Díez, J. R. (2023). Teaching/learning difficulties of the Scientific Model of Plant Nutrition – a systematic literature review (2000-2022). [Manuscrito enviado para publicación]
Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific Literacy/Science Literacy. En S. K. Abell y N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schramm, J. W., Jin, H., Keeling, E. G., Johnson, M., y Shin, H. J. (2018). Improved student reasoning about carbon-transforming processes through inquiry-based learning activities derived from an empirically validated learning progression. Research in Science Education, 48(5), 887-911. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9584-0
Stern, L., y Roseman, J. E. (2004). Can middle-school science textbooks help students learn important ideas? Findings from Project 2061’s curriculum evaluation study: life science. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 538-568. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20019
Taber, K. S. (2000). Finding the optimum level of simplification: The case of teaching about heat and temperature. Physics Education, 35(5), 320-325. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/35/5/301
Taber, K. S., y Akpan, B. (Eds.). (2017). Science education: An international course companion. Sense Publishers.
Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G., y Mamiala, T. L. (2002). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 357-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110066485
Ummels, M. H. J., Kamp, M. J. A., De Kroon, H., y Boersma, K. Th. (2015). Promoting conceptual coherence within context-based biology education. Science Education, 99(5), 958-985. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21179
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA). (2015). Victorian curriculum: Foundation-10. Victorian curriculum: Foundation-10. https://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/
Vosniadou, S. (2019). The development of students’ understanding of science. Frontiers in Education, 4(32). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00032
Wandersee, J. H. (1986). Can the history of science help science educators anticipate students’ misconceptions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(7), 581-597. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660230703
Willard, T. (2020). The NTSA atlas of the three dimensions. National Science Teaching Association.
Zuza, K., van Kampen, P., De Cock, M., Kelly, T., y Guisasola, J. (2018). Introductory university physics students’ understanding of some key characteristics of classical theory of the electromagnetic field. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(2), 020117. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.020117