Understanding Students Ideas about Animal Classification
More details
Hide details
Department of Nature Education and Conservation, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, POLAND
Online publish date: 2018-03-12
Publish date: 2018-03-12
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(6):2145–2155
Classification is the arrangement of objects such as e.g. organisms, ideas, or information into groups. Its purpose is to make things easier to identify, describe, organize, find and study. Although classification itself is meant to help people to unify or clarify objects they are interested in, publications show that students might find it difficult to classify plants, animals and other organisms. The goal of the study has been to investigate Polish students’ conceptions and attitudes towards animal classification and reveal the gaps between these and current scientific knowledge. The study has been conducted by surveys and in-depth interviews of 34 pupils, from primary schools. The research shows that students have similar conceptions about animal classification and also that children see the purpose behind animal classification but find it hard to apply in practice. Moreover, students were using different factors to distinguish animal classes from the ones used by scientific community. For example, they differentiated animals on the basis of: food they consume, respiratory system and utility for humans. Authors suggest that more stress should be put on these aspects during designing lessons about animal classification.
1. Arends, D., & Kilcher, A. (2010). Teaching for student learning: Becoming an accomplished teacher. London: Routledge.
2. Atran, S. (1998). Folk biology and the anthropology of science: Cognitive universals and cultural particulars. Behavioral and brain sciences, 21(04), 547-569.
3. Balmford, A., Clegg, L., Coulson, T., & Taylor, J. (2002). Why conservationists should heed Pokémon. Science, 295(5564), 2367-2367.
4. Baron-Cohen, S. (2002). The extreme male brain theory of autism. Trends in cognitive sciences, 6(6), 248-254.
5. Barrow, L. H. (2002). What do elementary students know about insects? Journal of Elementary Science Education, 53-60.
6. Bell, B. F. (1981). When is an animal, not an animal? Journal of Biological Education, 15(3), 213-218.
7. Bizzo, N., & Caravita, S. (2012): School textbooks and updated sound science: narrowing the gap between classrooms and cutting edge science, Journal of Biological Education, 46(1), 1-3.
8. Bizzo, N., Monteiro, P. H. N., Lucas, M. B., & Bianco, A. A. G. (2012). Corrected Science Textbooks and Snakebite Casualties in Brazil: 1993-2007. Science Education International, 23(3), 286-298.
9. Cardak, O. (2009). Science students’ misconceptions about birds. Scientific Research and Essay, 4(12), 1518-1522. Retrieved from
10. Dorward, L. J., Mittermeier, J. C., Sandbrook, C., & Spooner, F. (2017). Pokémon go: benefits, costs, and lessons for the conservation movement. Conservation Letters, 10(1), 160-165.
11. Doyle, W. (1977). Paradigms for Research on Teacher Effectiveness. Review of research in education, 5(1), 163-198.
12. Eco, U. (2009). The Infinity of Lists (A. McEwen, Trans.). USA: Rizzoli.
13. Gelman, S. A. (2009). Essentialist reasoning about the biological world. Neurobiology of “Umwelt”, 7-16.
14. Gericke, N. (2009). Science versus School-science: Multiple models in genetics-The depiction of gene function in upper secondary textbooks and its influence on students’ understanding (Doctoral dissertation), Karlstads universitet, Sweden.
15. Gould, S. J. (1977). Ontogeny and phylogeny. Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard University Press.
16. Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (1993). Young children’s understanding of the mind-body distinction. Child development, 1534-1549.
17. Kattmann, U. (2001). Aquatics, Flyers, Creepers and Terrestrials — students’ conceptions of animal classification, Journal of Biological Education, 35(3), 141-147.
18. Kean, H. (2012). Challenges for Historians Writing Animal–Human History: What Is Really Enough? Anthrozoös, 25(sup1), 57-72.
19. Kolenda, K. (2011). Amphibians in perypherial pound in Ostrów Wielkopolski - condition, threats, protection. In Latowski K, ed. Problemy biologiczne współczesnego świata. Wydawnictwo Kontekst, 123-127.
20. Kolenda, K. (2014). Protecting local nature. Edukacja Biologiczna i Środowiskowa, (4/2014), 110-112.
21. Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Lewandowska, D. (2013). Amphibians protection in Turek forest district. Studia i Materiały Centrum Edukacji Przyrodniczo-Leśnej, 15(3[36]).
23. Linquist, S., Machery, E., Griffiths, P. E., & Stotz, K. (2011). Exploring the folkbiological conception of human nature. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 366(1563), 444-453.
24. Marsh, H. W., & Roche, L. A. (1997). Making students’ evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility. American Psychologist, 52(11), 1187.
25. Medin, D. L., & Atran, S. (1999). Folkbiology. Cambridge, UK: Mit Press.
26. Mji, A., & Makgato, M. (2006). Factors associated with high school learners’ poor performance: a spotlight on mathematics and physical science. South African journal of education, 26(2), 253-266.
27. Prokop, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2008). “Disgusting” animals: Primary school children’s attitudes and myths of bats and spiders. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(2), 87-97.
28. Prokop, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2010). Effects of having pets at home on children’s attitudes toward popular and unpopular animals. Anthrozoös, 23(1), 21-35.
29. Rabinowitz, J. D., & Vastag, L. (2012). Teaching the design principles of metabolism. Nature chemical biology, 8(6), 497-501.
30. Reiss, M. J., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (1999). Conceptual development. Journal of Biological Education, 34(1), 13-16.
31. Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive psychology, 8(3), 382-439.
32. Ruiz-Mallen, I., Barraza, L., Bodenhorn, B., & Reyes-García, V. (2009). Evaluating the impact of an environmental education program: An empirical study in Mexico. Environmental Education Research, 15(3), 371-387.
33. Rybska, E., Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Sajkowska, Z. A. (2014). Young children’s ideas about snail internal anatomy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 828-838.
34. Rybska, E., Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Sajkowska, Z. A. (2015). Children’s ideas about internal structure of an earthworm. Part 15 Strand 15 Early years science education ESERA 2015 Proceedings, 2616-2626.
35. Rybska, E., Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Sajkowska, Z. A. (2017). Children’s ideas about the internal structure of trees: cross-age studies. Journal of Biological Education, 51(4), 375-390.
36. Sajkowska, Z. A., & Rybska, E. (2014). Does amphibians and reptiles are the same family? Herpetology in Polish textbooks. Edukacja Biologiczna i Środowiskowa, (s1), 92-98.
37. Skejo, J. O. S. I. P., & Caballero, J. H. S. (2016). A hidden pygmy devil from the Philippines: Arulenus miae sp. nov.—a new species serendipitously discovered in an amateur Facebook post (Tetrigidae: Discotettiginae). Zootaxa, 4067(3), 383-393.
38. Spelke, E. S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science?: a critical review. American Psychologist, 60(9), 950.
39. Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the self: The making of the modern identity. Cambridge, UK: Harvard University Press.
40. Trowbridge, J. E., & Mintzes, J. J. (1988). Alternative conceptions in animal classification: A cross-age study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(7), 547-571.
41. Trzebinski, J. (1985). Action-oriented representations of implicit personality theories. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 48(5), 1266.
42. Yen, C. F., Yao, T. W., & Chiu, Y. C. (2004). Alternative conceptions in animal classification focusing on amphibians and reptiles: A cross-age study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 159-174.
43. Zeyer, A. (2010). Motivation to learn science and cognitive style. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 6(2), 121-128.
44. Zielinski, P. (2007). Why it is important to protect firebelly toads Bombina bombina and their environments of living? Studia i Materiały Centrum Edukacji Przyrodniczo-Leśnej, 9(2-3 [16] cz. 2).