ArticlePloS one2024
Mapping lower secondary school students' conceptions of three aspects critical for understanding the nervous system.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the nervous system is an important but perhaps ambitious goal, particularly for students in lower secondary education. It is important because of its' direct role in both mental and physical health, and it is ambitious because instruction focuses on the human nervous system, which is extremely complex, and subject to numerous misconceptions. Despite its' complexity, the science curricula, both nationally and internationally, emphasize an understanding of the system, and not just knowledge of isolated facts. But what does it mean to understand this system, and what content knowledge is critical for understanding it? Unfortunately, the curricula are usually too general to answer these questions, therefore other sources of information are needed. Using the science literature, the present study defines the system level of the nervous system and proposes three basic aspects necessary to understand it: 1) neural circuit architecture, 2) synaptic action, and 3) nerve signal origin. With this background, the aim of the present study is to identify lower secondary school students' conceptions of these three aspects, and to determine how they impact students' understanding of the system. To reach this aim, the study used a questionary which allowed for a mixed method design, and the results show that many students have an immediate conception of the brain as the origin of nerve signals. In addition, many students hold the alternative conceptions that 1) synaptic action is exclusively excitatory, and that 2) neural circuits consists of neurons connected in a chain, one single neuron after another. These alternative conceptions prevent students from understanding the system. Implications for instruction are discussed in the context of conceptual learning theories, and teaching strategies are proposed. Since similar curricula goals and textbook content exist in several countries, the present results may be representative across nations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.