chapter 7shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/5037/13/13... · 2015-12-04 · year-olds, and...
TRANSCRIPT
238
CHAPTER 7
Children’s Conceptions of Matter
In the last two chapters findings pertaining to the contexts of curriculum and
pedagogy were presented. This last chapter of findings presents children’s
conceptions of matter which were explored through a variety of tasks, written
worksheets and activities carried out in groups, and clinical interviews. The chapter
is divided into four sections. Section one presents an overview of literature and
findings pertaining to the concept of matter as relevant to this thesis. Sections 2
discusses the findings pertaining to the concept of ‘padartham’ (substance), and
section3 discusses children’s conceptions of solid, liquid and gas. Section 4
explores an investigation into classification of materials. The chapter concludes
with a discussion of the findings.
Matter is a fundamental concept in science and a central concept in school
science textbooks, the development of which is one of the aims of school science
curriculum. Appropriate understanding of matter is considered essential to
understand the principle and theories of physical and chemical changes; also
the kinetic theory of matter (Smith, Grosslight & Davis, 1997). The middle
school science lessons deals with the properties and states of matter, pure
substance and mixtures, elements and compounds, physical and chemical
changes, particulate nature of matter and finally proceeds to the atomic
hypothesis in high school, which is believed to be one of the most salient
conceptions of modern science (Feynman et al, 1963). Matter is also a concept
that is related to the everyday world of the child. The everyday world of children
is filled with a wide variety of materials and objects from which they develop
their initial conceptions of matter. Children recognize, identify, distinguish and
use these objects and materials for different purposes.
The chapter attempt to understand middle school children’s conceptions
of matter and addresses the questions a) what are children’s understanding and
explanations related to the concept of matter? b) What are children’s ideas of
matter that are formed in relation to the curriculum, textbook, classroom and
everyday understanding of the concept of matter?
239
7.1 The Concept of Matter: Previous Studies
Children’s learning the concept of matter is essential to understand the principles
and theories behind a vast array of chemical and physical phenomena. The concept
of matter is central to explain properties of materials, state of matter, phase,
physical and chemical changes, chemical reaction, water cycle, diffusion, kinetic
theory, atomic structure, structure of universe, ions, atoms, bonding, molecules,
much of solution chemistry, chemical reactions, equilibrium etc. Students should
learn this concept in two domains: the macroscopic domain and the microscopic
domain. The macroscopic domain deals with substances and their properties,
processes and phenomena. The micro-domain deals mainly with atoms models,
molecules, ions, electrons etc. The major concepts that come under the title matter
are a) object, b) substance, c) form, d) state and its change, e) physical and chemical
properties and change, f) classification, g) conservation, h) composition and i)
structure and particulate theory of matter.
This section is an attempt to survey existing finding and the literature on
chidlren’s conceptions of ‘matter’ on the following aspects: substance, object,
object-matter differentiation, matter and its classification.
One of the observations that need to be mentioned while surveying the
literature on matter conceptions among children is that there exist a wide range
of studies related to children’s conceptions of object and matter. The literature
on matter is incoherent and dispersed as noted by Krnel, Watson and Glazar
(1998); also several studies were conducted among infants to university level
students, as also student teachers. The present survey mentions the findings on
infants and younger children to set the background, but mainly focus on the
studies that were conducted among children of the age group 9 to 13. These
studies basically examine school children’s conceptions of matter related to
various aspects of matter learned from science classroom.
Major studies on the concept of ‘object’ was conducted among children in
their infancy and early years (i.e. 2 months to 5 year old) following a Piagetian
tradition (Lovell, 1971; Baillargeon, Spelke, & Wasserman, 1985;
Baillergeon1987) whereas the concept of matter, substance, their physical and
chemical properties, atomic ideas etc. were done among school children, university
students and student teachers to examine their conceptions developed as a result
of science learning (Driver et al, 1994; K renel et al., 1998; Krenel et al., 2005).
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
240
Infants and young preschool children don’t have any explicit explanatory
concepts of matter or material kind. In order to have such concepts, children
need to distinguish object and matter. But there is evidence that very young
infants have a robust concept of physical object that they understand as a
bounded entity, that is solid, permanent and enduring, and that has characteristic
properties and functions (Baillargeon, 2002; Spelke, 1991). In addition, there
is evidence that, by 8 months, infants make a distinction between discrete objects
(that are countable) and continuous entities such as liquids and aggregates (that
are not) (Huntley-Fenner, Carey & Solimando, 2002). This distinction plays an
important role in early word learning. Children hold general concept of matter
as shown in a small-scale study by Carey (1991) in which 4-, 6-, 10-, and 12-
year-old children were explicitly asked to sort entities into different piles: one
pile for things that were made of some kind of physical stuff, one pile for
things that were not made of some kind of stuff. Children were given a wide
range of entities: solids (both inanimate physical objects and biological kinds),
liquids (water, coca-cola), powders (sugar), gases (air, steam), nonmaterial
physical entities (heat, electricity, shadows, echo) and mental entities (wish,
idea). Carey found that about half of the 4-year-olds, three quarters of the 6-
year-olds, and all the older children grouped some solids, liquids, and powders
as alike in being made of some kind of stuff. The study proposed that, the fact
that children were making some sensible groupings at a level broader than
solid physical object is an evidence for preschoolers developing a broader
concept of matter. They not only recognized that these entities are things that
can be seen, touched, or produce some physical effect but they use these
properties as evidence that they are all “made of some kind of stuff.”
7.1.1 Initial Conceptions of Matter and Object-matter Differentiation
Children’s initial conceptions of matter are formed from the wide range of
everyday objects that are present in children’s everyday life and children in their
early years develop common conception about substances as inert objects from
their everyday world (Russell, Longden & McGuigan, 1991). Children initially
learn the name of objects and raw materials (the substance’s family names), and
then they develop representations of substances as objects, based on materials
“function” which can be considered as the materials property of common use
One of the key features in the early development of the concept of matter is
that children learn how to distinguish between matter and objects (Krnel, Watson
241
& Glazar, 2003). The study explored how the ability to recognize a substance in
various objects changed with age among children aged 3 to 13 in Slovenia, also
the development of the concept of matter. The authors focused on two aspects,
the first was whether the differentiation was based mainly on intensive properties
or on a mixture of intensive properties that characterize matter and extensive
properties that characterize object. Intensive properties do not change with size,
shape, or quantity of objects, and are identical in each part of the object. Therefore,
intensive properties characterize the substance of which the object is made. By
contrast, extensive properties are changed when objects are divided or the number
of objects is changed. The second aspect examined was the role of action in
developing a scheme that leads to differentiation of matter and object.
The results of the above study showed that younger children tended to
classify using a mixture of extensive properties and intensive properties, whereas
older children (above 9 years old) tended to use intensive properties most of the
time. A second key feature argued by the authors in the formation of matter concept
is that children learn the differentiation of such interlinked concepts by acting
upon and observing the natural world. Through their actions children gradually
develop more elaborated schema which enable them to distinguish between
extensive and intensive properties and hence distinction between object and
matter. The study concluded that distinction of such interlinked concepts is seen
as a key process in the formation of differentiated and stable scientific concepts.
In a case study done among 3 to 9 year old children’s concept of size,
weight, density, matter and material kind (Smith, Carey & Wiser, 1985), it was
proposed that young children had a theoretical system which included distinct
concepts of size, weight, and material kind and were beginning to form
generalizations relating these concepts (e.g., size is crudely correlated with
weight, steel objects are typically heavy). Material kinds were defined in terms
of properties which characterize large scale chunks of stuff. Slightly older
children (5-7-year olds) had made modifications to their concepts of material
kind. At these ages, they were coming to see weight differences as important in
distinguishing whether large-scale objects were made of the same kind of stuff.
However, the core of their concept of material kinds were defined in terms of
properties of large scale objects. Finally, still older children (8-9 year-olds)
had a theoretical system in which material kinds were reconceptualized as the
fundamental constituents of objects. The study concluded that in early years
children differentiate objects and matter according to natural (ill-defined)
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
242
criteria, that an undifferentiated alternative “object–matter” concept is formed
in early childhood and that this concept can persist in spite of the science
education received.
The above study also proposed a ‘universal grinding test’ to distinguish
kinds of objects and kinds of matter (stuff). Intensive properties are those which
are conserved during breaking or taking away. These are: density, hardness,
temperature, chemical reactivity, conductivity, malleability, ductility, state of
matter and a number of other physical and chemical properties; if the object is
made of a homogeneous substance, the intensive properties also include taste,
smell and colour. By contrast, the extensive properties are those which change
during breaking or taking away: mass, volume, size, etc.
There exist few other studies that show that from early childhood an
undifferentiated alternative conception of ‘object-matter’ persist in children. Even
schoolchildren in the primary grade; also from age 11 to age 14 do not differentiate
between the concepts of object and the concept of matter (Johnson 1998,
Solomonidou and Stavridou, 2000, Solomonidou et al. 1993, Vogezelang 1987)
and this alternative concept can persist in spite of the science education received
(for example, Driver et al. 1989, 1994, Mortimer 1993).
The major conclusion that we can derive from the above studies is that for
a clear conceptual understanding of matter, children need to differentiate the
object concept from the matter concept. They should also be able to distinguish
the intensive and extensive properties of matter.
7.1.2 Conceptions of Matter in School Science
The concept of matter in school science begins from its nature, properties
and states and progresses towards understanding the structural theory of matter
and applying the theory in describing and explaining various forms and
changes of matter.
Nature of matter: The SPACE project (Russell, Longden & McGuigan, 1991)
documented primary children’s understanding of materials. It probed in particular
children’s ideas about the properties and nature of materials. The results have shown
that children do not hold similar views as in their science textbooks about the nature
of matter, and these ‘alternate conceptions’ make it difficult to understand the concept.
Also children did not clearly distinguish between solids, liquids and gases. There are
243
substances at the boundaries of each set. Children counted free flowing solids such
as salt as liquid. It was therefore proposed it was difficult for children to develop hard
and fast rules about what counts as solid, liquid or gas.
Development of the concept: Based on a review study of research on
conceptions of matter, Krenel, Watson and Glazar (1998) proposed that the
development of matter in children originates from actions such as holding, breaking,
pouring, blowing etc. Primitive actions, prototypes, schemes and laws may be used
by children to develop a hypothesis about the concept of matter. Actions on matter
lead to the development of prototypes that represent particular types of matter such
as water for liquid and air for gas. When children combine primitive actions with
prototypes of matter, understanding of the process of physical change such as
dissolving is developed. The understanding of laws such as, matter occupies volume
is formed when children combine action with matter. The study also proposed that
the key to children’s development towards the particle model of matter depends on
their ability to differentiate objects and substances. The clarity with which children
understand the distinction between matter and objects also influences their
explanations of composition and phenomena.
A theoretical framework for the development of the concept of matter via
‘action’ was also given in the above review, which provided an explanation of
how children develop the concept of matter and is used to discuss literature
concerning children’s classification of matter, their explanations of the
composition of matter, and their explanations of physical and chemical change.
The study also shows possible implications of the development of this concept
for learning and teaching.
Macroscopic and microscopic aspects: A review study by Andersson
(1990) on student’s conceptions of matter among the age groups of 12 to 16
years, examined four aspects of the concept matter among students–chemical
reactions, change of state, conservation, atoms, molecules and system of
particles. Students’ reasoning at 12 to 16 years of age begins at the macroscopic
with microscopic reasoning to follow later. The study proposed that student’s
conceptions of matter could be described by the following categories a)
disappearance b) displacement c) modification d) transmutation into energy or
a substance and e) chemical interaction.
The aim of the study conducted by Renström, Andersson & Ference
(1990) was to examine how upper level school students (13 to 16 years old)
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
244
conceptualized matter. Six distinctively different conceptions were found. Matter
can be understood as (a) homogeneous substance, (b) substance units, (c)
substance units with “small atoms,” (d) aggregate of particles, (e) particle units,
or (f) systems of particles. The different conceptions, their varying internal
structures, and the alternative forms of conceptions found were logically
interrelated in a system, called the “outcome space,” which depicts how thinking
about matter may vary qualitatively between and within students.
Progression in matter conception according to grades: In a study done
on student’s conceptions of matter from elementary to high school (Liu & Lesniak,
2005) it was proposed that student’s conceptions of matter can be described by
the existence forms and the properties of matter. The existence forms of matter
are in the order of natural characteristics, natural phenomena, physical properties
and chemical properties. The combination of the property and existence of matter
are in seven progressive levels and the study claims students conceptual
understanding from elementary to high school and beyond follows these seven
levels. But the study didn’t identify the age or age groups for each of the
hierarchical conceptual levels.
Liu & Lesniak (2006) extended the above study adopting a neo-Piagetian
conceptual framework and a phenomenographic approach, identified students’
conceptual progression pattern on matter from elementary to high school. The
study interviewed 54 students from Grade 1 to Grade 10 chemistry on their
conceptions of substances (i.e., water, vinegar, and baking soda) and the combining
of the substances. The study found that progression of students’ conceptions on
matter from elementary to high school is multifaceted. For any aspect examined,
from spontaneous description of substances to chemical reaction of baking soda
with vinegar, there was a unique progression pattern. Different conceptual
progression patterns existed for different substances (i.e., water, baking soda,
and vinegar) as well. Further, there is no clear conceptual difference observed
between different grade levels in conceptual progression; that is, there is
tremendous overlap in conceptions among students of different grades.
(Gómez Crespo & Pozo, 2004) analyzed the representations held by
adolescents and university students in relation to the mechanism for explaining
changes in matter (changes of state, dissolutions, expansions and chemical
reactions) in terms of the kinetic theory. The main conception that competes
with the kinetic model is the attribution to the particles of the changes observed,
at a macroscopic level. This is more evident in changes of state and expansions
245
than in other changes. This confusion results from a failure to differentiate properly
between the represented reality and the model that represents it. In conclusion,
analysis has shown students’ difficulties in going beyond apparent reality or
integrating the data obtained from it into the scientific models they learn at school.
Yilmaz & Alp (2006) investigated the effect of grade level on students’
achievement in matter concept and reasoning abilities. The data was collected
from 8th, 10th and 11th grade students. The results revealed that there was a
significant effect of grade level on students’ achievement in favor of 11th
grade
students and the linear combination of reasoning abilities was significantly related
to students’ achievement. In the Matter Concept Test, the 10th graders did better
than 8th graders and the 11th graders did better than either. The only exception to
this general observation was the 8th graders’ better performance on a small number
of questions, which related to topics that were taught and nationally examined in
the 8th grade. It seems likely, therefore, that the more chemistry a student is
taught the better he/she is likely to be, except that if a topic is examined while it
is reasonably fresh in a student’s mind the results are likely to be better than if
the test is carried out 2-3 years later
Substance: Johnson (1996) pointed out that “substance” does not stand
alone as a concept, but relates to other component ideas such as material/object,
purity and chemical change. According to his study 11-14 year olds misapply
these component ideas and so do not have a chemist’s view of substance.
Sannmartý et al. (1994) analyzed the explanations of 13-year old students
regarding the properties of substances and their changes. A significant number
of pupils use explanations which have been categorized as ‘substantialisation of
properties’. It is said that students substantialize a particular property when they
treat the property as a material substance. For instance, when sugar is dissolved
in water, students believe that sugar disappears, but only the taste remains. The
authors classified students’ answers according to three categories: substantializers,
non-substantializers and not-expressing-a-model.
Solomonidou and Stavridou (2000) conducted a study among 168 Greek
students aged 13-14, to elucidate students’ conceptions about the chemical
substance concept. More specifically, the study analyzed specific problems related
to the construction of the chemical substance concept, as well as the primitive
ideas children form about substances in everyday life. The study also investigated
students’ conceptual development about substances during an introductory
experimental chemistry sequence. The study proposed that a major problem
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
246
concerning substances is that, in the context of everyday life, people and children
conceive of them as inert objects, on the basis of their common experiences,
practices, and use of language. The everyday life context poses so many restrictions
that it is not possible to promote the development of conceptions about substances
to more scientific ones. The students’ initial ideas corresponded to a pre-concept
of substance, because they considered the various substances as concrete
substances having one or two perceptible properties, a conception very similar
to the inert object idea. A number of students progressed to an intermediate state,
because they conceived substances as unknown substances having perceptible
properties, as well as some “relative” or “reactive” ones.
The study suggested that chemistry teaching should help students to
conceive substances as unknown ones, each having a range of physical and
chemical properties. The outcomes of this study support the idea that the teaching
of chemistry should begin with a “chemical substance approach,” involving
students in appropriate activities and conceptual tasks and giving them the
opportunity to develop a more scientific language to express their ideas on matter
and its transformations. The conclusion was that the construction of the chemical
substance concept should precede the introduction of concepts related to atomic
structure. This is a necessary condition for helping students operationally connect
the entities of the empirical level and the entities of the atomic level (i.e., substance
and molecule, new substance, and new molecule).
7.1.3. Discussion
Research in science education continues to emphasize the significance of
concept matter for learning science especially as it is the subject matter of
physics and chemistry. Science curricula consider matter to be a fundamental
concept and appropriate understanding of the matter concept is a key feature
and aim of the school science lessons. This understanding is also essential to
grasping the nature and importance of many of the everyday physical and
chemical phenomena. This learning progression on matter encompasses several
fundamental and broad ranges of interrelated concepts-not only matter and
substance, but also weight, volume, density, solid, liquid and gas. The concept
of matter is generally introduced in science curricula in the middle school
science lessons starting from properties of matter, as well as learning of states
of matter. The concept progress to changes of state, physical and chemical
changes, and the changes associated with heating and cooling of a substance,
247
such as thermal expansion and eventually to particle theory of matter and atomic
theory. Atomic theory marks the end of the learning progression, according to
which matter consists of tiny particles, atoms and molecules, in never ending
motion and interaction provides a basis for understanding the invisible
microscopic events underlying natural phenomena.
The concept of matter does not develop in isolation but rather in close
interaction with the concepts of weight, density, mass, and material kind and,
later on, with the concepts of atoms and molecules.
Given that young children’s initial concepts of matter and material kind
are quite different from the concepts of matter and chemical substance that are
the target of elementary and middle school science curricula, how do children
develop the concept of matter from school science. Young children’s initial
understanding of matter and materials is very much based on perception and
action—which is based on objects (broadly defined) which are “seeable” and
tangible (matter), and they exist in a variety of kinds of stuff with certain clusters
of perceptually accessible properties (material kinds). Scientific theory of matter,
both at the macroscopic and atomic level, is far removed from everyday
experience. The concepts that they develop from everyday experience do not
provide a framework that allows developing either macroscopic or microscopic
understanding of matter. The disparity between observed phenomena and
microscopic aspects are more complex. Moreover, the thinking involved in
understanding the relation between the properties of atoms and molecules and
the macroscopic properties of material kinds and of physical and chemical
transformations requires a major shift from the “process” type of causal reasoning
students are familiar with to one that acknowledges emergent properties and
constraint-based interactions (Chi & Roscoe, 2002). Although physical and
chemical changes are visible as changes of the states of matter or changes in
other properties of the substance, like color, the microscopic aspects of matter
concepts cannot be taught merely by showing an example. It is difficult to
demonstrate atoms, molecules, ions, bonding between these particles, or elements
and compounds and their chemical characteristics. It needs a lot of instructional
planning and design to introduce these chemical concepts for a meaningful
learning to happen. As proposed by Novick & Nussbaum (1981) students’
understanding of basic aspects of matter concept increases as the amount of
relevant information presented increases, hence these aspects of pedagogy and
learning difficulties to understand various aspects of matter concepts should be
taken into consideration while preparing curriculum materials for school children.
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
248
7.2 The Investigation: Children’s Conceptions of Substance,Solid, Liquid and Gas
This section examines children’s understanding of the key conceptual categories
relating to the concept of matter which are: - (1) substance (2) solid (3) liquid
and (4) gas. The initial part examines the examples that children from 5th to 8th
grade named for substance, solid, liquid and gas, and the characteristics features
of these examples to get an initial understanding of children’s conceptions and
later it presents the findings based on the definition and characteristics children
gave for the above concepts, also presents the results of the Piagetian Clinical
interview. (The term ‘children’s conception’ is used in this chapter to denote the
conceptions expressed by children.).
This section reports the results of following five tasks conducted with
children from Grade V to Grade VIII
1. Writing tasks
a. Instantiating ‘padartham’, ‘solid’, ‘liquid’ and ‘gas’
b. Listing the characteristics of ‘padartham’, ‘solid’, ‘liquid’ and ‘gas’
c. Noting the definition of ‘padartham’, ‘solid’, ‘liquid’ and ‘gas’
2. Piagetian Clinical interview
a. to elicit children’s conception of Padartham, solid, liquid and gas
3. Classification of materials followed by Piagetian Clinical Interview.
In the above, first three tasks were a paper pencil task or a writing task
where children from grade V to grade VIII in the whole class setting during a free
period were asked to note down examples, characteristics and definition of the
concepts under study. The very first one among the three was making a list of
examples for ‘padartham’ on a sheet of paper (which had space to note down
name, date, time, name of the task- examples for padartham and ample space to
write as many as 100 examples) . Children were initially asked to write five
examples of padartham. After writing five examples they were encouraged to
write as many as they could. The time taken to write examples ranged from two
minutes to twenty minutes as there were children who cited only two examples;
also children who cited nearly 60 examples. Once this task was over they were
then asked to list out characteristics of padartham and write a definition for
padartham. The task was conducted at each grade in their respective classroom.
In the case of writing characteristics also children were initially asked to write
five, later encouraged to add on if they knew more than five characteristics. The
249
final one was telling children to give a definition for ‘padartham’. Three of these
tasks (writing examples, characteristics and definition) took 45 minutes or one
period in each grade. A total of 122 Children from V to VIII grade wrote definition
and characteristics for substance.
After the writing tasks, Piagetian clinical interview was conducted with a
total of 53 children from (grade V to grade VIII) in groups comprising of two or
three children in each group. Through the clinical interviews, children’s ideas
related to substance were probed in more detail. In addition to enquiring about
what they had written in the worksheets, the interview also discussed new
examples, non-examples, the contexts from which children got familiar with the
word substance, and their ideas of object and substance. A total of 27 such groups
(two/three children in each group) from grades V to VII were interviewed. During
the course of the interview there were a few groups who invoked the idea of
atom, molecules etc. and in such cases they were probed in the direction of the
microscopic aspects of matter. The interview generally attempted to probe and
trace children’s line of thinking of the ideas regarding substance in detail.
The same procedure as the above was followed in the case of other
concepts-solid, liquid and gas in which children in their whole class room setting
listed out examples, characteristics and definition for solid, liquid and gas.
Afterwards children were clinical interviewed to understand their ideas related
to solid, liquid and gas. In this case also children were probed regarding
definition, properties, and examples of solid, liquid and gas; as also difference
between solid, liquid and a gas.
The final task was a Piagetian clinical interview combined with a
classification task conducted around a wide range of concrete materials designed
to examine the manner in which children classify a collection of everyday and
esoteric materials. The aim of this task was to elicit children’s conception of
various aspects of matter in detail, examine children’s classification of everyday
familiar and unfamiliar materials, probe their knowledge, reasoning and
description of the material world; also the rules and strategies children use to
classify materials. A wide range of materials with multiple attributes that were in
different states, form, made up of different substances, with different properties
and functions, were given to a total of 64 children from grade V to grade VIII to
perform an open ended classification. The task was conducted in group comprising
of two or three members and was designed to invoke detailed conversation among
children, in turn map their knowledge and conceptions about materials. The task
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
250
was conducted at two contexts: the context of the school along with peers and at
the context of home along with elders, siblings or friends, to examine the manner
in which context of the home, school, peers, and adults influence children’s
thinking; also examine whether there is any difference in manner in which they
reason out about materials at the two contexts.
The task eventually focused on eliciting children’s understanding of various
aspects of the concept of matter as a basis of understanding the concept from the
everyday world and science classroom. The materials were chose chosen in such
a manner that it has relevance to the everyday world and classroom context of
the child. After assigning categories to the entire materials, clinical interview
was conducted with the group around the name and characteristics of the categories
formed, and characteristics of materials in each category etc. The task was video
and audio recorded and took an average of 45 minutes to an hour.
7.3 Conception of ‘Padartham’ (Substance)
The concepts of substance, element, compound and mixtures form the basic
concepts in order to explain the composition and behavior of matter. It provides
the initial framework to explain the physical and chemical changes of matter.
In chemistry, substance is taken as the basic chemical species and is a
homogenous basic material such as gold (Brakel, 1977)1. Substance cannot be
separated by chemical means and distinct substances are the starting and end
points of chemical reactions.
In the Kerala Science Text Book the chapter which corresponds to
‘introduction to substance’ in grade V used the terms ‘padartham’ and ‘vasthu’.
‘Vasthu’ may be translated loosely to correspond to ‘material/object’. The term
‘padartham’ corresponds roughly to ‘substance/matter’. As was discussed in Chapter
five, the concept of padartham was introduced to children in the fifth grade with
the aim of bringing in a ‘chemical approach’ of material characterization and
classification in later grades. This led to the systematic investigation of chemical
properties of substance and chemical sign language in grade VIII. The associated
concepts pure substance, mixtures, elements, compounds, molecules, and atoms
were introduced in grade VI and VII.
The attempt here is to explore the children’s conceptions related to the
term ‘padartham’. In order to examine children’s understanding of the term
‘padartham’, a writing task followed by a clinical interview was used.
251
In the writing task children were asked to
(1) give examples of padartham
(2) list characteristics of padartham
(3) define padartham
A total of 113 children answered the writing task on the example for substance.
Table 7.1: Details of children who wrote example for substance
The responses of children were categorized and analyzed based on their
grade, gender and caste. The chapter is organized around each question, and an
analysis of the responses it evoked.
7.3.1 Instantiating ‘Padartham’
The first task given to children in the whole class setting was a writing task
in which they were asked to write examples for ‘padartham’. The task was
provided to all children from grade V to grade VIII (in their respective
classrooms during a free period) and a total of 113 children answered.
Directions were given to children at the time of task to the whole class. They
were asked to first write five examples on an A4 sheet provided to them,
(that had space to write the examples, name, grade, date, time, page no.).
After this they were asked to write as many examples as they could. The time
taken by children varied from one minute to 20 minutes to list examples, the
number of examples ranged from 2 to 10 to 60. The examples given by 113
children were aggregated together for the purpose of analysis. Their responses
to this question were also later pursued through a clinical interview in which
children were asked to define substance. A total of 53 children from Grade V
to VIII were interviewed.
Grade Boys Girls No. of Children
V 4 5 9
VI 22 13 35
VII 15 17 32
VIII 19 18 37
60 53 113
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
252
a) Exemplars for ‘padartham’:
A total of 2007 different examples were named by the 113 children. The
maximum number of examples given by an individual child was 57, the
minimum was 2. The examples ranged from water, sugar, kerosene to table,
chair, leaf, human body etc. The most frequently occurring examples included
water, stone, wood, iron, salt
Example 1 (Child 1, grade7, girl): (1) Sugar (2) Salt (3) Soda (4)
Copper (5) Soap Solution (6) Lemon Juice (6) Petrol (7) Oil (8) Water (9)
Alcohol (10) Iron (11) Iron Rod (12) Lock (13) Key
Example 2 (Child 2, grade7, girl): (1) Wood (2) Water (3) Smoke
(4) Paper (5) Pen (6) Book (7) Pencil (8) (Chair (9) Door (10) Table (11)
Duster (12) Bulb (13) Chart Sheet (14) Plastic cover (15) Coat (16)
Window (17) Cloth (18) Iron (19) Aluminum (20) Cement (21) Leaf (22)
Flower (23) Paint (24) Chocolate (25) Vegetables (26) Fruits (27) Gold
(28) Silver (29) Hair (30) Milk
b) Analyzing the children’s examples:
The examples of all 113 children were entered into a spread sheet along with the
name, grade, and gender of the child in the first three columns. Given the vast
number of different things being named, a strategy had to be evolved in order to
initiate analysis. Initial focus was on getting a feel for the data, to understand if
there was any structure or pattern which could then provide a way of systematically
analyzing all the children’s examples. The analysis initially looked at which
examples children were citing most frequently. For this, the first examples, the
first five examples, and all examples were analyzed. Following this, in order to
study the types of examples that children were giving, the analysis was based on
taking up to 15 examples provided by children, 15 being the median of number
of examples (see graph provided in end note 1). No examples were judged ‘right’
or ‘wrong’. All examples were treated equally as emerging from children’s attempt
to instantiate ‘padartham’ and hence were kept within the analysis.
c) Most frequently cited examples—part (i).
Table 7.2 provides the counts of various examples provided by children, based
on the first example they cited (total of 113 examples from 113 children), the
253
counts of examples in the first five (total of 559 examples, as some children
wrote less than five examples) and finally based on all examples cited (2005
examples). In the case of the first example, the most frequently cited first example
was ‘stone’ (17 cases) followed by sugar (13 children) and water (13 children).
From among the first five examples, the most frequently occurring example was
‘water’ (39 counts) followed by stone (34 counts) and then sugar (26 counts).
Among all examples cited, again water (86 counts) and stone (62 counts) were
among the most frequently cited examples, followed by iron (49 counts), table
(46 counts) and sugar (46 counts).
Table 7.2: Counts of first ten frequently cited examples-Column1, 1 to 5, 1 to 57
First example Five examples All examples(113 examples) (559 examples) (2005 examples)
Rank Example Counts Example Counts Example Counts
1 Stone 17 Water 39 Water 85
2 Sugar 13 Stone 34 Stone 62
3 Water 13 Sugar 26 Iron 49
4 Solid 10 Salt 21 Table 49
5 Iron 4 Iron 17 Sugar 46
6 Wood 4 Wood 14 Kerosene 41
7 Air 3 Solid 13 Salt 41
8 Pen 3 Liquid 13 Pen 39
9 Salt 3 Gas 13 Copper 38
10 Acid 2 Table 13 Gold 35
Initial Finding
" On the whole, water, stone, iron, sugar, salt etc.were more frequently
cited examples for ‘padartham’.
" Children cited not only substance/materials kinds, but also objects such
as table, pen, chair, also fruits, leaf as examples for ‘padartham’.
" In the total of the 2005 examples 55% were examples of ‘padartham’
and 45% were non examples for ‘padartham’
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
254
Table 7.3: Examples of ‘padartham’ in the total examples
Everyday Substance (like salt, sugar, honey etc.)+ 488+145=633
chemical substances (like oxygen, carbon, hydrogen,
potassium etc.)
Material kind (like iron, copper, gold, steel etc.)+ 437+29=466
Powders (Chalk powder, chilly powder etc)
1099=55%
(out of 2005)
" Non-examples for ‘padartham’
Table 7.4: Non examples for Padartham
Objects (table, chair, pen, pencil etc.)+( Natural 717+82=799
Kinds (fruit, flower, leaf etc.+Edible items+ Cereals
(rice, pulses, etc.))
Solid/Liquid/Gas (the general scientific terms) 90
Miscellenous (human body, hand, heart, hair, etc) 17
908=45%
(out of 2005)
Children cited a wide range of materials/objects etc. as the examples for
substance. Either we can conclude children don’t have the concept of
‘padartham’ or we can proceed to closely examine these examples to understand
the details of the children’s existing conception of padartham. Hence the analysis
was done further to understand the characteristics of these examples to infer
children’s conception of ‘padartham’.
d) Deciding on a ‘cut off’
The next step was to decide the numbers of examples per child which could be
taken into consideration for detailed analysis. For this purpose the median value
was found (see end note 1 for a spread of number of children and no of examples).
The median value was found to be 15. While deciding to use ‘15’ as a cut off to
analyze in more detail the types of examples being cited by children, the examples
occurring in the 16 column onwards were examined. It was found that generally
255
there were examples such as bench, pen, etc. all with very low frequency of
occurrence (as shown in table …).
Example Frequency occurrence
Column16 Bench 2
Column17 Pen 3
Column18 Chair 3
Column19 Bag 2
Column20 Aluminum 3
The trend observed in the examples of children who wrote more than 15
were that they kept on naming the objects in their vicinity or examples that were
of less relevance. The examples that were occurring low in number were found
to be difficult to categorize. Based on the above details and analysis of the spread
of the examples by each child, it was decided to consider examples up to 15 for
the further analysis. The rest of the findings reported below pertain to the analysis
of up to 15 examples provided by the children which were deemed to be more
relevant to understanding how children were instantiating the term ‘padartham’.
The total number of such examples was 1352. These were then treated as a group
and analyzed for patterns including most frequently cited examples and types of
examples cited, variation with grade and with gender, etc.
e) Most frequently cited examples—part (ii)
The first ten most frequently cited examples are provided in the table 7.5
Water at 57.5% is the most frequently cited example for padartham. This is
followed by stone (45.1%). Sugar, wood, iron and salt seem to follow as the next
group of most frequently cited, with occurrences between 32% and 28% in all
examples. Kerosene, table, copper and pen and the next more frequent, (with
percentage occurrences between 25% and 22%).
We can see from the above list that these are substances/materials/objects
that are common in children’s everyday life, and significantly also mentioned
frequently in children’s textbook, and also mentioned by teachers in the classroom.
we can also note children citing materials, objects. The invocation of stone, wood,
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
256
iron, copper etc. in this group is interesting as this seems to correspond with a
sense of materiality of substance-as that of which things are made up. Sugar and
salt are among the most common ‘active’ materials/chemical used in a number
of activities especially mixtures and dissolution. A significantly high level of
mention of common classroom objects—table and pen—may be noted.
f) Typology
Based on studying the actual 1352 examples cited, a typology was evolved to
bring out the key characteristics of these examples, which could account or explain
or contribute to understanding the basis on which they were being invoked as
examples. The examples named were both objects and materials. All the examples
(except the miscellaneous examples like human body, organ, etc. which are few
in number) seem to fall into one of the following 4 groups:
Type 1: Generic everyday-textbook substances/materials: these were
examples of everyday substances materials, but which were of a generic
character and cited in science textbooks. (discussed in chapter 5).
Type2: Objects in the vicinity of the classroom
Type3: Everyday world Objects/functional items
Type4: Chemical substances/materials
Table 7.5: Count of top occurring examples of first 15 Columns and % out of 113
Rank Examples Counts %
1 Water 65 57.5
2 Stone 51 45.1
3 Sugar 36 31.8
4 Wood 36 31.8
5 Iron 32 28.3
6 Salt 32 28.3
7 Kerosene 29 25.6
8 Table 29 25.6
9 Copper 26 23.0
10 Pen 25 22.1
257
Type1: Everyday substances/materials which are also cited in the science
text book (generic everyday materials).
We can see from table 8 that the most cited examples such as water, sugar,
stone, wood etc. are substances that are common in children’s everyday world,
and significantly also mentioned frequently in the science textbooks, and by
teacher in the science classroom.
There were also material kinds especially solids such as iron, gold, silver,
copper, etc. Science text book and classroom draws a variety of examples such
as stone, sugar, alt, iron, gold, water etc. from children’s everyday world to
explain various concepts in science. The majority of examples written for
substance belonged to this category i.e. familiar everyday material that is also
used by the science textbook and teacher. The examples ranged from solid:
stones, metals, non-metals, soluble materials, brittle materials; liquids and gas.
A significant number of these were also materials from the everyday world—
both materials which are commonly used such as paper, plastic, and also
‘chemicals’ such as soap, washing soda etc.; also powders such as turmeric
powder, talcum powder, iron powder, rice powder etc.
The table 7.6 gives the details of the examples that came under this
category. Firstly the examples have been placed in rank order. More
characteristics of these materials have also been noted in the detailed cross
tabulated table in endnote 233
Rank Material Count %Order named by
children
I Water 65 57.52
II Stone 54 47.78
III Wood 36 31.85
IV Sugar 36 31.85
V Salt 34 30.08
VI Iron 32 28.31
VII Kerosene 29 25.66
VIII Copper 26 23.00
Table 7.6: Type1-Everyday substance/materials
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
258
IX Aluminum 19 16.81
X Gold 19 16.81
Petrol 19 16.81
Soil 18 15.92
Powders 18 15.92
Glass 17 15.04
Coconut Oil 17 15.04
Lemon Juice 16 14.15
Paper 16 14.15
Plastic 15 13.27
Chalk 14 12.38
Milk 14 12.38
Fruit Juice 13 11.50(apple juice,orange juice)
Metals (lead, 11 9.73zinc etc.)
Diesel 10 8.84
Everyday 10 8.84chemicals(pesticide,syrup etc.)
Camphor 9 7.96
Cooking Oil 9 7.96
Smoke 9 7.96
Soap 9 7.96
Silver 8 7.07
Soda 8 7.07
Salt Solution 7 6.19
Air 7 6.19
Charcoal 6 5.30
Soap Solution 6 5.30
Coffee/Tea 6 5.30
259
Sand 5 4.42
Brick 5 4.42
Cement 5 4.42
Machine Oil 5 4.42
Washing Soda 5 4.42
Curd 5 4.42
Steel 4 3.53
Ice 4 3.53
Sugar Solution 4 3.53
Soap Powder 4 3.53
Ink 4 3.53
Butter 4 3.53
Honey 3 2.65
Rubber 3 2.65
Sponge 3 2.65
Wax 3 2.65
Calcium 2 1.76Carbonate
Medicine 2 1.76
Paint 2 1.76
Butter Milk 2 1.76
Cardboard 2 1.76
Vapor 1 0.884
Type 2: Objects in the vicinity of the Class Room
The second type was the classroom objects that were present in children’s vicinity
of the classroom. A total of 232 examples belonged to this group and following
table gives the details of the examples.
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
260
Rank Example Count %
I Table 29 25.66
II Pen 25 22.12
III Bench 20 17.7
IV Chair 17 15.04
V Note Book 15 13.27
VI Box 15 13.27
VII Pencil 14 12.39
VIII Fan 14 12.38
IX Alma rah 11 9.73
X Door 9 7.96
Text Book 9 7.96
Bottle 9 7.96
Window 8 7.08
Board 7 6.19
Roof tiles 5 4.42
Chart 4 3.54
Bag 4 3.54
Bulb 4 3.53
Others 13 11.5
Table 7.7: Type 2 example, classroom objects
Type 3: Everyday World objects or functional items
This category consists of functional materials and objects from children’s everyday
lives, which are manmade and natural materials/objects. A large number off
materials that were written also came from the kitchen and could be considered
261
ingredients for cooking; also edible. The final group was objects rather than
materials, and included electronic equipments, cloths, etc. All these were familiar
and common, but not mentioned in the textbook, and hence were from the child’s
everyday world.
Table 7.8: Everyday World Objects
Rank Material/object Count %
I Electronic Equipments 17 15.04
II Cloths (as shirt, sari etc.) 17 15.04
III House hold Objects 13 11.50
IV Vessels 13 11.50
V Jewelry 10 8.84
VI Rubber objects 8 7.07
Wooden objects 6 5.30
VIII Plastic objects 6 5.30
IX Iron objects 5 4.42
Natural kinds (Fruits
and vegetables) 18 15.92
Edible items 14 12.38
Groceries 11 9.73
Type 4: Scientific categories (chemical substances and general terms)
This group included those examples which has specific scientific names and
which children could have encountered only in relation to the school/science
textbook knowledge. This category consists of scientific terms, specific names
and name of materials that are learned from the science class. As can be seen, a
number of these had t do with common elements that are named in the initial
science grades, such as oxygen hydrogen. Acid was also well known to children.
A significant number of the names were ‘solid, liquid gas’ which cannot be
considered examples, and are really scientific terms being recalled by children,
which seem to have a close association with the topic ‘padartham’.
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
262
Table 7.9: Type 4, science categories-chemical substance and general
science terms
Chemical Counts % General Counts %Substances science terms
Acid 18 15.93 Solid 18 15.93
Oxygen 15 13.27 Liquid 17 15.04
Hydrogen 11 9.73 Gas 18 15.93
Nitrogen 10 8.85 Mixtures 5 4.42
Carbon dioxide 6 5.31 Alkali 4
Coal 5 4.42 Pure Substance 2 1.77
Carbon 4 3.54 Others 16 14.16
Chlorine 3 3.54
Lead 3 2.65 Lab objects 3
Magnesium 3 2.65 83
Zinc 3 2.65
Spirit 3 2.65
Copper Sulphate 2 2.65
Helium 2 1.77
PotassiumPermanganate 2 1.77
Sodium 2 1.77
Alcohol 2 1.77
Rust 1 1.77
Citric Acid 1 0.88
Others 10 0.88
263Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
Occ
urre
nce
of t
ypes
of
exam
ples
in t
he f
irst
, com
bina
tion
of
five
and
fif
teen
col
umns
Tabl
e be
low
pro
vide
s a
sum
mar
y of
the
occu
rren
ces
of th
ese
diff
eren
t typ
es o
f ex
ampl
es in
the
wor
kshe
ets
of 1
13 c
hild
ren.
Tabl
e 7.
10:
Type
cou
nts
of c
olum
n1, 1
to 5
, 1 to
15
In th
e ab
ove
the
type
1 ex
ampl
es a
nd ty
pe4
exam
ples
(ch
emic
al s
ubst
ance
s) c
an b
e co
nsid
ered
as
exam
ples
for
pad
arth
am
C
olum
n1C
olum
n 1
to 5
Col
umn
1 to
15
C
ount
% (
113)
Cou
nt%
(55
9)C
ount
% (
1352
)
Typ
e1:E
very
day
subs
tanc
es a
nd m
ater
ial
83(4
5+38
)73
.45
364(
204+
160)
65.1
276
2(40
8+35
4)56
.28
kind
s, a
lso
cite
d in
Sci
ence
tex
tboo
k
Type
2:C
lass
Roo
m O
bjec
ts6
5.31
519.
1216
412
.11
Type
3:E
very
day
Wor
ld F
unct
iona
l Ite
ms
21.
7751
9.12
239
17.6
5
Type
4:Sc
ienc
e ca
tego
ries
Gen
eral
term
s13
11.5
529.
379
6.9
(sol
id,e
lem
ent e
tc.)
Che
mic
al S
ubst
ance
s8
7.07
393.
498
8.6
Mis
cella
neou
s (h
uman
bod
y, h
eart
etc
.)1
0.88
20.
3612
0.89
11
355
913
52
264
g) Trends
From the types of examples children given for substance it is evident that children
consider both category material and object under the concept of substance.
Everyday substances which were also mentioned in the textbook had the highest
recall value for children. This was followed by citing everyday materials. The
third most common category was the everyday and classroom object world, and
finally the world of science as learnt through the textbook.
Examining which type of example dominated the list of first examples,
(see table 7.10), it the textbook basis dominated. While everyday examples from
the textbook accounted for 73% of what children wrote, the textbook related
science materials accounted for a significant 12%.
Examples and non-Examples for Padartham in the first, combination
of five and fifteen columns
Table 7.11: Examples and non-examples for ‘padartham’
In First In First five In First In Totalexample fifteen examples examples(out of 113) examples (out of (out of 2005)
(out of 559) 1352)
Examples 91=80.5% 403=72.09% 860=63.6% 1099=55%
Non-Examples 22=19.4% 156=27.9% 492=36.4% 908=45%
What can be noted is a reduction in the right examples of substances when
children were citing more and more examples.
Majority of the children recalled an example from the science textbook
and salt and sugar seemed to be a prototype example for substance. Stone and
water which are the examples given by text book for solid and liquid; and metals
such as iron, gold and copper were also of high in occurrence. In summary,
majority of the children started with an example such as stone, salt, gold, water,
kerosene, lemon juice, paint, milk,metal etc., (type1), few began with the
classification of substance in terms of Solid, Liquid and Gas and others began
with specific scientific names such as hydrogen, oxygen, sodium etc. There were
also children who began with everyday objects such as, table, bench, chair which
were present in their immediate vicinity.
265
In the combination of first five examples, i.e. aggregate of Column 1 to
Column5, again everyday materials from science text book (type1) was of high
in occurrence (65%) followed by type2&3 i.e. everyday objects and functional
items (19%). But in comparison to Column1 there is a decrease in type1
examples (74% to 65%); whereas the everyday functional items and class room
objects (type2&3) began to show an increase (from 7% to 19%). The occurrence
of Science category (type4) decreased in the aggregate of column1 to 5 from
column1 (from 19% to 13%).
In the combination of 15 examples i.e. aggregate of column1 to column15,
56% were type1 (everyday materials also cited in the science text book), 30%
were type2&3 (objects and everyday useful items), 15% were science materials.
More of everyday functional and classroom objects began to appear as children
began to cite more and more examples from which we can infer that children
weren’t able to distinguish the substance and object.
Everyday Examples such as water, stone, sugar, wood, iron that are citedin the science textbook were high in their occurence in all of the above analysis(first column, combination of five columns and fifteen columns). Moreover theabove analysis also shows that as children began to cite more and moreexamples, more of everyday objects began to appear more frequently.
h) Variation in types of examples according to Grades
Table 7.12: Variation in substance examples according to grades
Total of 15 Examples (percentage calculated out of total 1352 examples)
Grade V(9) Grade VI(35) Grade VII(32) Grade VIII(37)
Counts % Counts % Counts % Counts %
T1:Everyday substances/materials 39 2.8 221 16.34 204 15.08 298 22.04
T2:Class Room Objects 44 3.25 31 2.29 37 2.73 52 3.8
T3:Everyday World Objects 44 3.25 48 3.55 76 5.62 73 5.3
T4: Scientific categoriesGeneral terms 29 2.14 20 1.47 30 2.2Chemical substance —- —- 41 3.03 27 1.99 30 2.2
Miscellaneous —- —- 2 .14 —- —- 10 .74
127 372 364 493
What can be noted in the above table is that that the trend in examples
cited by children from all the grades is found to be similar except the fact
that science category is found to be absent in Grade V.
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
266
In all the grades except grade V, type 1 is found to be of high in occurrence.
The occurrence of everyday world/functional items (type2&3 combined) was found
to be same in all the grades. The science category (Type4) was absent in grade V.
In grade V, objects were found to be highest in occurrence followed by
examples cited in the science textbook. In grade V children are introduced to the
topic substance through familiar everyday materials. Children learn the scientific
terms for substance from grade VI onwards.
Type 4, the science category was found to be high in occurrence in gradeVI.
It is the grade VI children who named more of everyday materials cited in the
textbook and science category. They learned two topics related to substance,
“Pure Substance and Mixture” and “Elements and Compounds” in grade VI.
Also they recalled, more of the science terms such as solid, liquid, gas, pure
substance, mixtures etc and chemical substance or names such as hydrogen,
nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide etc.
i) Variation in the types according to gender
Table 7.13: Variation in the substance examples according to gender
Boys % Girls %
55 (1352) 58 (1352)
T1:Everyday Examples 358 26.47 405 29.95
in the STB
T2:Class Room Objects 76 5.62 88 6.50
T3:Everyday World 117 8.65 120 8.87
Functional Items
T4:Science categories
General names 51 3.77 28 2.07
Chemical substances 71 5.25 27 1.99
Miscellaneous 4 0.295 9 0.66
677 677
There is no major difference observed in the category of examples cited by
girls or boys. The one difference observed was in the science materials (type4),
where boys cited far many more examples of scientific materials as compared to
267
the girls. The citing of everyday world functional examples from girls was slightly
higher than of boys. In other categories, the difference was far less.
j) Some observations regarding the examples:
(1) Prototype Examples: The examples, sugar/salt, iron, stone and water,
(refer Table 7.2, 7.5, 7.6) seem to be akin to ‘prototype’ examples for
substance (Mervis and Rosch,1984). They were also from among the
frequently invoked examples in the textbook. They were cited not only
as examples for substance, but they also recurred later when children
were asked to provide examples of solid, liquid, gas, and in exploration
of properties, etc. Later I will discuss how trying to find commonalities
between these examples may have been operating in children’s attempts
to define substance.
(2) Typology that Exemplify Substance: Of the four types suggested by the
range of examples given by children, only two, i.e. everyday materials also
cited in the Science Text Book (type1) and chemical susbtances cited in STB
(type4) can be regarded as exemplifying ‘substance’. Type2 and type3 are
‘objects’; while they are ‘made up of substance’, they are not themselves
examples of substance. The incidence of type1 went up from 2.8% in grade
V to 22% in grade VIII, suggesting that children do seem to be increasingly
naming appropriate everyday examples. The naming of everyday familiar
objects remained at the same level of significance and the incidence of naming
scientific materials also cited in the Science textbook decreased.
(3) Highly cited examples: In all the grades except grade V, everyday materials
cited in the science text book (type1) are found to be high in occurrence.
The occurrence of everyday functional objects/materials (type3) is found
to be almost same in all the classes. In grade V, classroom objects were
found to be highest in occurrence followed by materials cited in the science
textbook and everyday functional items. Science terms are found to be
absent in gradeV. In gradeV children are introduced to the topic substance
through familiar everyday materials and learn the scientific terms for
substance from grade VI onwards.
(4) Examples cited by children from different grades: It is the grade VI
children who named examples of type1 and type 4 i.e. everyday examples
cited in the textbook and science terms. Type 4, the science terms was
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
268
found to be high in occurrence in grade VI. It is in Grade VI, two major
topics and formal concepts related to substance are introduced (“Pure
Substance and Mixture” and “Elements and Compounds”). It seemed that
children from Grade VI, who were also studying these topics in their
science textbooks, provided the most appropriate examples for substance.
The occurrence of objects as the examples for substance was also
prominent among the grade VIII children which is evident from the
Table 7.12. Grade VIII children also found it difficult to meaningfully
understand the idea of substance with regard to the science classroom,
which was also indicated in the clinical interviews with this group. This
suggests children learn and remembers substance conceptions for the sake
of science classroom at that particular grade and the conceptions are not
retained by the children for the requirement further learning of higher
grades or to the needs of everyday world.
(5) Difficulty in distinguishing between substance and object: We could
understand the high level of citing objects as a failure of children to
distinguish the idea of substance from the idea of objects which are made
up of substance. But as will be discussed in the next section on defining
substance, there is a confusion that is created on account of the two
connotations of ‘vasthu’ in everyday Malayalam, which denotes both object
and the material of which an object is made.
7.3.2 Definition of Padartham
The present section examines the ideas that children brought into explain the
concept “substance/padartham”. After naming of examples for substance
children were asked to list characteristics and provide a definition for substance.
A total of 122 Children from V to VIII grade wrote definition and characteristics
for substance.
Piagetian clinical interview was conducted with a total of 53 children in
groups comprising of two or three children in each group. Through the clinical
interviews, children’s ideas related to substance were probed in more detail. In
addition to enquiring about what they had written in the worksheets, the
interview also discussed new examples, non-examples, the contexts from which
children got familiar with the word substance, and their ideas of object and
substance. A total of 27 such groups (two/three children in each group) from
269
grades V to VII were interviewed. During the course of the interview there
were a few groups who invoked the idea of atom, molecules etc. and in such
cases they were probed in the direction of the microscopic aspects of matter.
The interview generally attempted to probe and trace children’s line of thinking
of the ideas regarding substance in detail. Thus the section will addresses the
following questions
1. What are the contexts from which children got familiar with the
word substance?
2. What are the meanings that children gave to the word substance? How
did they define it? What are the explanations children brought around
the word substance?
3. How they defined object and substance?
4. What are the text books ideas children invoked to explain substance? What
are the everyday ideas children invoked to explain substance? How they
connected the two?
a) Types of definitions of ‘padartham’
The second writing task on the worksheet required children to define ‘padartham’.
Substance which translates to “Padartham” in Malayalam is a word that
children were introduced to in their science classroom and the word is formally
introduced in the fifth standard science lesson. Children considered “padartham”
to be a formal scientific term.
Children’s written responses of definition for substance fall into three types
which are a) any material, object or a thing is called substance b) solid, liquid
and gas is called substance and c) based on the textbook definition of substance-
that which has one component or it is pure substance or mixtures etc. This
definition was told based on the contents of unit of substance, but in most case
was an incomplete formulation in which children seemed to be drawing on the
contents and ideas from the lessons related to substance in a rote manner.
Defnition1: Vasthu is called Padartham/Padartham is another name for
Vasthu/ Padartham is a sadhanam (thing)/any object is called
a ‘padartham’
Defntion2: Substance is Solid, liquid and gas.
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
270
Defntion 3: Substance is pure substance, mixture, compounds, atoms,
molecules, acid, alkali, solution, solvent etc. / combination of atoms,
molecules etc. / it is like water
Eg 1: (Student 1, Grade 6, and Girl) I heard this word from the text book.
Substance is pure substance. Gold, lemon juices etc. are something that
has only one component and it is a substance.
Eg 2: (Student 2, grade 8, boy) Substance are materials that are made up
of the same molecules
Eg 3: (Student 1, Grade 6, and Girl): whatever made from molecules
are padartham
There was also a fourth category, who didn’t know how to define substance
but knew its examples.
In the first type of definition, it seems that children were trying to reconcile
their everyday term ‘vasthu’ with the formal science textbook term Padartham.
Children were seen to systematically connect their own everyday term ‘Vasthu’
with the formal science textbook term ‘Padartham’ and assert, apparently
tautologically that vasthu is padartham i.e. substance is a material or object.
“Vasthu” is a word that is used in Malayalam simultaneously for an object or the
material from which an object is made. “Padartham” in contrast was the terms
used in the science text book. The children who gave definition1 considered
object and material as synonymous
In the second type of definition, children seemed to recall a fact that
substances may be in three states, solid, liquid or gas which is a science textbook
definition. Children who gave defntion 2 considered all solids, including objects
such as chair, table, cup etc. as padartham.
In the case of the third type of definition seemed to be trying to recall terms
from the textbook and examples cited in the textbook to define ‘padartham’and
type 3 seems to be more advanced.
Among the 122 children who wrote the definition for substance, 44 children
wrote definition of type1 or considered padartham as a material/thing/an object
that is found around them; 22 of them defined substance as solid, liquid and gas
271
and 36 of them gave definition of the third kind. 20 of them didn’t know how to
define a substance; rather knew the examples for substance.
All children from grade5 gave definition of the first kind i.e. substance is a
material, object or a thing. It is the grade6 children who were major in number to
give definition of the second kind.
Grade7 and grade8 children stand high in giving definition of the third kind.
There is not much difference observed in the definition given by girls and boys.
Table 7.14: Counts of defntion1, 2 & 3 written for substance and % out of 122
b) Examples in relation to definitions
The types of examples named by children were analyzed in light of the definition.
Type1 i.e. everyday substance and materials was the dominant category of example
provided by all children across all three types of definition i.e., whether they
wrote defntion1, defntion 2 or defntion 3.
The examples of children who wrote defntion1 and defntion2 included
all the four types, since they considered any material/object/thing as a substance
and named text book examples, objects/materials in their vicinity or from
everyday world; similar the case with children who considered solid, liquid
and gas as substance. Children who considered the definition of substance as
solid, liquid and gas systematically wrote examples for solid followed by
examples for liquid and examples for gas. For e.g. Stone, Wood, Pen, Pencil,
Book, Text Book, Bench, Desk, Table, Chair; Water, Coconut Oil, Kerosene,
Milk, honey, Juice, Rice Water, Tender coconut Water; Smoke, Gas, Vapor,
Children Defntion1 % Defntion2 % Defntion3 % Don’t %Know
41 14 11.48 6 4.92 17 13.93 4 3.28
35 16 13.11 4 3.28 13 10.66 2 1.64
33 5 4.10 12 9.84 6 4.92 10 8.20
13 9 7.38 0 0.00 0 0.00 4 3.28
Total 122 44 36.07 22 18.03 36 29.51 20 16.39
Girls 62 21 17.21 12 9.84 18 14.75 11 9.02
Boys 60 23 18.85 10 8.20 18 14.75 9 7.38
Total 122 44 36.07 22 18.03 36 29.51 20 16.39
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
GradeVIII
GradeVII
GradeVI
GradeV
272
Air, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, Oxygen, Carbon dioxide, Biogas, Wind. The number
of examples named by children who wrote defntion1 and defntion2 were also
more in number as they considered any material/object and any solid, liquid,
gas as the examples for substance. They began their examples with the textbook
examples especially the category 1 examples and continued to name examples
of similar type from their everyday world.
Children who wrote defntion3 attempted to connect ‘substance’ to the
scientific ideas given in the chapters related to substance in the science textbook.
They gave intuitive definition or ideas for substance by recalling the textbooks
terms, but still did not seem to be making any meaningful connection. Children
who defined substance by recalling the science textbook ideas also tended to be
the ones who gave examples from the science textbook—both type1 and type4,
i.e. everyday examples that are cited in the Science Text book (category1), and
scientific categories, names and terms (category4). They seemed to be confident
that sugar, salt, lemon juice, gold, iron, were examples of substance, yet they
were not able to explain this based on a definition. It seemed that they began by
naming familiar objects named in the textbook and then moved on to the scientific
materials names in the book, thus drawing all their examples from the textbook.
They also did not name ‘objects’. But still it seemed that the idea of ‘substance’
seemed to be an inert scientific term, lacking meaning. They invoked several
connected ideas including molecules, elements, compounds, pure substance,
mixture, heterogeneous substance, homogenous substance, elements, acid, alkali,
molecules, etc. with substance. Still they gave disconnected pieces of explanation
and were not able to articulate a definition for a substance in a meaningful manner.
They seemed to be constructing and reconstructing definitions of ‘substance’
within the framework of the science textbook.
The case of definition 3 could be interpreted as one produced by a rote
memorization and forgetting, an incomplete recollection of the textbook. Yet,
both based on the examples given by this group of children, as well as clinical
interviewing with them, there was something more significant taking place there—
the possibility that this is on account of children making a conceptual transition
and trying to ‘grasp’ the meaning of a scientific concept through the use non-
everyday school science vocabulary.
The definitions that children gave were probed further through clinical
interviews. During these interviews these additional aspects were confirmed
and explored further.
273
c) Object and substance
Children who considered padartham as a vasthu or solid, liquid and gas found it
difficult to differentiate object concept from the substance concept. They cognized
the relation between substance, material, object, or a thing, but weren’t able to
explain the relation in a clearer manner. They considered padartham and vasthu
as synonyms, considered both table and wood as Vasthu. But the third category
of children who recalled textbook terms or who didn’t gave a definition for
padartham, cognized substance through an example such as iron, sugar, lemon
juice and intuitively understood that there is difference between padartham and
vasthu, but weren’t able to articulate it in a meaningful manner. Children who
subscribed to the third category of definition gave the right example for substance
though they weren’t able to tell about substance in meaningful manner. There is
only one group i.e. two children among the 27 groups interviewed explicitly
talked about the materiality of objects and connected the substance idea with
materiality. Following excerpt gives a picture of the major ideas children were
expressing during the interview.
Episode 1: (Gokul and Sachin, Grade 6)
Q: Can you tell me what “Padartham” is?
Gokul: Solid, liquid, gas
Sachin: No. Substances are seen in those three states. Substance is that
which is found in the solid, liquid and gaseous state.
Q: where did you hear the word “padartham” first?
Gokul: I heard about it in the 5th standard science lesson.
Q: (to S) What about you?
Sachin: Me too in the 5th standard science class, I heard about it when
teacher taught.
Q: So you haven’t heard it before that? Have you heard this word
anywhere else? at home? Or any other place?
Quiet
You know about substance only from the lesson teacher
taught you?
C: yes
Q: Can you tell me some examples of “substance”?
Quiet
Q: Is there any substance in this room
Gokul: All are substances
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
274
Q: Which are those?
(Looking around the room and telling)
C: Bench, Computer, Tube light, Window, Metal Rods (kambi),
alamarah.
Q: So all these are substances?
C: Yes
S: Also glass, keys, bottles, box.
Q: that means, you have seen a lot of substances, in that case you
heard about it only in the science class?
C: We learned the name substance (padartham) in the science
class, before that we didn’t know these are substances
(padartham) also. We knew these were objects(vasthuckal), but
never knew these were substances (padartham) also.
Q: So is there any difference between an object (vasthu) and a
substance (padartham)?
G: Both are same.
Q: what do you think Sachin? Is there any difference between an
object and a substance?
S: both are same
Q: Is this table a substance (padartham)?
G: yes
Q: What about wood?
S: It is also a substance.
Q: Is this table an object (vasthu)?
C: yes
Q: What about wood?
G: yes, that is an object (vasthu) also, object is another name. It is
both substance and an object. Both are same
Q: Can you tell me the names of ten substances (padartham)?
C: Table, chair, steel glass, window, steel rod, computer, almarah,
key, lock, stick, TV, VCD, DVD
Q: With what we make all these?
Quiet
After a while
G: From the materials (vasthu) that we obtain from nature.
Q: Consider this table. From what it is being made?
S: wood from the tree.
G: All these are obtained from nature only.
275
S: is table available in nature?
G: yeah, it is made from the things obtained from nature.
S: Then, What about Fan?
G: the material from which it is made is basically available in
nature.
Q: Ghee? Is it an object or a substance?
Quiet and doubtful
Q: What about sugar?
G: Substance
Q: Why?
Quiet
S: I will tell, all these are objects, also substance
G: yes, all these are objects, and then all are substance also
Q: What about salt?
Substance, Then object also
Q: What is water?
Substance and object.
Q: What about air?
G: it is a substance, Air is also a mixture
Q: What about gold?
G: object and substance;
S: it is also an element
As we can see in this above interview, on several occasions’ children asserted
that substance and object are the same, and that padartham ie ‘substance’ was a
new name for vasthu ie ‘object’.
(Episode 2, grade 8, Keerthi, Riya, Rinu-girls groups)
Q: can you tell me what a padartham (substance) is?
Rinu: padartham is not man made, it is natural, vasthu (here-object)
is man made
Riya: no, Sometimes there may be man made padartham also, for
example paint is also a padartham, and it is made by man
Q: can you tell me some more examples for padartham that are
man made and natural?
Keerthi: gold, metals, salt, sugar, copper, iron,
Q: what is the difference between padartham and vasthu?
Quiet
Q: is table a substance?
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
276
All three: No, it is a vasthu (here object).
Q: is chair a substance?
C: no, it is a vasthu
Q: then which is a padartham?
Keerthi: sugar
….
Q: how about wood?
Rinu: it is a vasthu (here material)
Riya: it is also a padartham
Q: is pen a padartham?
C: vasthu (here object)
Q: table?
C: vasthu (here object)
Q: ice
C: vasthu
Q: Stone?
C: vasthu (material)
Q: glass
C: vasthu (material)
Q: copper?
C: vasthu (material)
Q: soil?
C: Padartham
Q: water?
C: padartham
Q: Brick?
C: vasthu ( here object)
Rinu: soil is the padartham, brick is made from soil. So soil is the
padartham and brick is the vasthu (object)
Keerthi: whatever we make from padartham is a vasthu
Rinu: so soil is a padartham
Keerthi: soil is made by nature, it exists there naturally. what is natural
is padartham and what is made by man is vasthu.
Riya: also sugar, lemon juice, gold, copper ….all these are padartham
Q: why you think lemon juice is also a padartham?
No response
…………………….
277
Q: you know many examples for substances. So what is a definition
that all of three of you will give for padartham?
Thinking…and no response
Q: When I say the word padartham, what is it that comes to your
mind?
Rinu: A thing (oru sadhanam)
Q; which thing?
Quiet
Q: (to Riya) so which is the thing that came to your mind?
Riya: solid, liquid and gas
Keerthi: also pure substances and mixtures.
Rinu: A thing that is solid or liquid or a gas, for example gold copper
Keerthi: also sugar
Q: how about liquid?
Rinu: yes, liquid state is also a padartham, water is a padartham
Q: how about air?
C: yes, it is also a padartham
Rinu: oxygen is a padartham that is in the gaseous state, also air
and hydrogen
Riya: (to others) can we say juice?
Rinu: it is a mixture
Keerthi: pure substance is that which don’t have anything else. We
learned this in a chemistry lesson. I am not able to remember
which lesson
Riya: Pure substance is a substance that is pure like water, milk
There is nothing else in water. There is only water.
Rinu: there is hydrogen and oxygen……
Keerthi: then think about the case of juice. It contains water, orange
and sugar. But in the case of milk there is only milk. Similarly
in the case of water there is only water. But juice has several
things in it.
Riya: pure substance is a padartham that does not contain any other
pdartham. It has only one thing in it. If water is mixed
with sugar it will become sugar solution and it will become a
mixture. Similarly lemon juice, tea, squash, all these are
mixtures. Also soda….
Rinu: soda is made by injecting carbon dioxide into water and it will
become mixture
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
278
Keerthi; then water has hydrogen and oxygen. It is then similar to carbon
dioxide in soda
Then what is difference between soda and water. Water is also
a mixture.
Riya: I know soda is a mixture and water is a pure substance. Soda
also has soda powder in it;
Keerthi: is water a pure substance? Which is the mixture in this? Or
both are mixtures or both are pure substances
Riya: soda is the mixture, water is the pure substance. Soda has
carbon dioxide and water. Water has only water
(Children very doubtful)
Rinu: do they add any powders also in soda?
Riya: yes, they add soda powder also to it
But water doesn’t have any powders in it…..
Q: so what is a definition that you will give for padartham?
Rinu: padartham are those which are found around us, What is found
in nature are ‘padaartham’. But there are natural padartham
and manmade padarthams. But vasthu is manmade.
Q: is it riya?
Riya: yes, also we can say solid, liquid and gas is padartham. The
vasthu that are solid, liquid or gases are padartham.
Q: what are the characteristics of padartham?
C: it has color, smell, we can see it
Q: what is the difference between padartham and vasthu?
Rinu: vasthu is man made, but padartham is found in nature
Riya: vasthu is made using padartham
Rinu: (recalling what she told about wood previously) we told wood
is a vasthu, it is also a padartham, it is found in nature and it is
used to make table, chair etc. . So wood is a vasthu and
padartham
Similarly gold, copper, iron, sugar, salt, metals all these are
padartham
Riya: also soil and air
Keerthi: petrol, coal, diesel, jaggery,
The above was an interview with a three eighth grade children in a group.
What can be noted in the above episode is the children’s familiarity with a wide
279
range of examples for padartham, also ability to distinguish object from substance.
But still there is an obscurity existing between the words vasthu (object/material)
and padartham.
d) Emergence of multiple definitions for substance “padartham”
What is noted in the clinical interview is that though children found it easy to
give examples for substances and they found it difficult to define substance, they
in fact seemed to shift and use all the three kinds of definitions during the course
of the interview.
In the first episode what can be noted is that, while at the intuitive level
children’s attempt was to explain substance with the help of an example and
formulating a definition based on these examples; but accommodating a new
example seemed to put them on slippery grounds.
In the second episode children intuitively explained what a substance is by
recalling examples from the textbook and by connecting examples to the definition
of a substance. They formulated a definition for substance based on the examples
that were discussed at the time. When more examples are introduced children
tried to formulate a new idea to accommodate the examples introduced.
It was also noted in the interviews that definition for substance also evolved
from a consideration of examples and non-examples. Children didn’t consider
living things or anything that has life or can move as examples for substance.
Children were also clear about the distinction of it terms of solid, liquid and gas;
also examples for solid, liquid and gas.
e) Conceptions of substance
What is evident is that children’s initial understanding of substance is very much
based on perception—seeable and tangible matter. These initial conceptions are
quite different from the concept of chemical substance that is the target of the
middle school science curriculum. Children’s initial thoughts are characterized
by a lack of appropriate categories of substance and their interaction. In retrospect,
seen through the eyes of the children, this concept also in fact seems to be far
more abstract than at first sight. The concept of ‘substance’ seems to be akin to a
super ordinate concept (Smith &Medin, 1984) which itself has limited scope
for direct meaningful conceptual engagement. While it seems to be the logically
basic level term in the scientific development of the concept, psychologically it
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
280
seems to be limited in allowing children to grasp its meaning or finding it useful
in organizing their experience of the material world. There is no clear conceptual
leap between different grade levels in conceptual progression; that is, there is
tremendous overlap in conceptions among students of different grade. Further
more children find it difficult to distinguish between the ideas of object and
materiality—perhaps this difficulty was compounded by the fact that in Malayalam
there is only one term vasthu for both material and object.
7.4 Conceptions of ‘Solid’ ‘Liquid’ and ‘gas’
The section focuses on children’s understanding of the concepts of solid. The
attempt here is to explore children’s conception by studying the explanations,
definitions, examples and characteristics of the solid, liquid and gas according
to children. In the worksheet, children were asked to (i) give an example for
solid (ii) define solid (iii) give the characteristics of solid. This was followed
by a Piagetian Clinical interview. The same was also carried out for ‘liquid’
and for ‘gas’.
The concept of solid along with the topic of change of state matter takes an
important place in the middle school science curriculum. The topic is introduced
in the fourth grade which progresses to an introduction to the particle theory of
matter in the eighth grade. The physical attributes of the concept of solid, liquid
and gas serve as part of the phenomena on which the particle theory is based.
The grade IV and grade V school textbooks assert that matter can exist in three
different states: solid, liquid or gas. Solids are defined as having a definite volume
and shape emphasizing that a common attribute of all solids is that they are hard,
rigid and needs space to exist. Liquids are defined as having definite volume but
no definite shape and as flowing from one place to another and gas as having
neither volume nor definite shape. It is also mentioned that all matter share some
attributes: that it has mass (weight) and occupies space. These physical attributes,
in turn, the eight standard textbook explain with the particulate theory of matter.
7.4.1 The Concept of ‘Solid’
The worksheet question first asked children to provide five examples of solid.
After this they were encouraged to write as many as they could. Data was
gathered from 95 children. A total of 2466 examples were named by 95
children and the examples ranged from materials such as stone, iron, gold,
281
wood, steel, copper etc. and also various objects that were present in their
day to day life. The maximum numbers of example named by a child was
102 and the minimum was 2.
The following five examples give an idea of the kinds of examples that
children wrote. They wrote many examples. This is likely because of their
familiarity with this abundantly found state of matter. All the examples provided
by the children were everyday in their character. No scientific names were used.
It seems that children seem to have a ‘confidence’ that they understood this concept
and could give examples without resorting to scientific names.
Table 7.15: Sample of examples written for solid
Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5(Grade 8 (Grade 8 (Grade7 (Grade6 Grade 5/girl) /girl) /girl) /Boy) (/Boy)
1. Stone2. Glass3. Wood4. Ice5. Salt6. Sugar7. Pen8. Paper9. Book10. Chalk11. Glass12. Marble
Sand
1. Ice2. Stone3. Wood4. Rock5. Glass6. Copper7. Knife8. Vessel9. Iron cube10. Charcoal11. Gold12. Hollow
Bricks13. Iron Rod
Brick
1. Iron2. Stone3. Aluminum4. Copper5. Iron Rod6. Plastic7. Wood8. Pen9. Steel10. Table11. Stool12. Bench13. Stick14. Glass15. Paper16. Cloth17. Box
Brick
1. Stone2. Wood3. Lock4. Bench5. Pen6. Pencil7. Table8. Iron rod9. Key10. Book11. Alamrah12. Bag13. Iron14. Nail15. Stick16. Bottle17. Glass18. Scale19. Fan20. Bulb21. Switch22. Pipe23. Computer24. Umbrella25. Statue26. Door27. Thread28. Mat29. Window30. Watch31. Rubber32. Box33. Text Book34. Bucket35. Cup
1. Wood2. Iron3. Vehicle4. Pen5. Mobile6. Stone7. Vessels8. Fan9. Watch10.Train11. Plane12. Rocket13. Window14. Stool15. Black Board16. Glass17. Switch
Board18. Lunch Box19. Pebbles20. Rock21. Fridge22. Washing
Machine23. TV24. Coat25. Chair26. Candle
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
282
36. Bangles37. Chain38. Ring39. Plastic40. Cardboard41. Black board42. Vessel43. Chalk44. Earring45. Aluminum46. Roof tiles47. Brick48. Paper49. Bat50. Ball51. Gold52. Compass53. Protector54. Hat55. Sharpener56. Cloth57. Soil58. Cement59. Sand60. CD61. TV62. Tyre63. Brick64. Hammer65. Teeth66. Nail67. Zinc68. Doll69. Metal70. Silver71. Copper72. Toy73. Pot
Materials: 11 Materials: 5 Materials: 5 Materials:14 Materials:6
Objects: 2 Objects: 9 Objects: 13 Objects:59 Objects:20
(a) Most frequently occurring examples in the total examples:
The prominence of stone as the example of solid is very evident in the first
example. This was also the case when a count was taken over the first five
examples given by children. ‘Stone’ accounted for close to 60% of first examples.
Over 95% of children named ‘stone’ among the first five examples. This was
followed by ‘wood’ and ‘iron’.
283
Table 7.16: Count over first examples and first five examples written by
95 children for solid
The examples children named for solid can be categorized into two
types—those which are materials, and such as wood, iron, gold, glass etc. and
those which are objects such as table, chair, bench, box, etc. In the first example,
first five examples and total examples named, frequency of occurrence of stone,
wood, iron are high and is the mostly cited examples. The group of stone,
wood and iron functions as archetypal examples for solid. Stone has both the
characteristics of ‘material’ and ‘object’ simultaneously. As shown in the table
below, out of the 61 unique examples that were significantly cited (with a count
over 9), only 16_5=21 could be considered as materials (5 among these being
a little ambiguous, as it was not clear if the child was thinking of materiality or
object while naming stone, rock, soap, glass and iron rod). A total of 40 of
these examples were solid objects.
Column1 Column1to5
Stone 62 Stone 90 Nail 6 Plate 2
Wood 14 Wood 49 Box 6 Chain 2
Iron 5 Iron 48 Window 5 Door 2
Gold 2 Table 22 Sand 5 Copper Cube 2
Ice 2 Pen 19 Lock 5 Board 2
Board 1 Gold 15 Iron Rod 5 Steel Spoon 2
Chair 1 Soil 14 Ice 5 Others 31
Box 1 Bench 14 Chair 5
Iron Cube 1 Copper 13 Book 7
Soil 1 Pencil 11 Roof tiles 4
Nail 1 Silver 9 Plastic 4
Tar 1 Brick 9 Paper 4
Weight Gram 1 Glass 8 Bottle 3
Bangle 1 Chalk 8 Alma rah 3
Watch 1 Aluminum 7 Vehicle 2
Soap 6 Sandals 2
Total 95 456
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
284
Table 7.17: Total examples named by 95 children (objects and materials seperated)
rank material count rank material/object count rank material count
I Wood 93 I Stone 95 I Table 64
II Iron 69 II Glass 49 II Pen 62
III Copper 48 III Iron rod 31 III Box 54
IV Gold 44 IV Rock 18 IV Bench 43
V Aluminum 34 V Soap 12 V Pencil 43
VI Chalk 31 5' VI Book 41
VII Paper 31 VII Brick 41
VIII Plastic 30 VIII Fan 39
IX Silver 30 IX Roof tiles 39
X Soil 29 X Watch 32
Sand 19 Nail 29
Rubber 18 Bangles 27
Cloth 15 Board 26
Metal 13 Chair 25
Marble 11 Door 25
Steel 10 Vessels 24
16' Window 24
Bottle 23
Ear Ring 23
Chain 23
Almarah 22
Bag 22
Sandals 20
Key 20
Scale 19
TV 19
Lock 18
Bulb 15
Compass 14
Computer 14
Vehicle 12
Anklet 11
285
Bucket 10
Teeth 10
Umbrella 10
CD 9
Ring 9
Pearl 9
Switch 9Board
Tyre 9
40'
The absence of powders and least occurrence of soft materials, pliable
materials are noticeable. The essential property seems to have been considered
by children when naming an example seems to be those that have a shape and
that which is rigid. The rigid solids were successfully named by majority of the
children as an example for solid, but left out the non-rigid solids. Materials or
objects that are heavy, hard, rigid and have a definite shape are the ones that are
mostly named by children as examples for solid.
The reason for the citing of stone by majority of children is also due its
frequent usage in the textbook and classroom. Stone is the example through
which middle school science textbook introduced the concept of solid. Examples
such as stone, chalk, brick, glass, ice etc. are extensively used by the science
textbook to introduce various concepts related to matter to children.
(b) Defining solid: salient properties
Children defined solids based on certain properties which they considered to be
essential to the idea of ‘solidity’. These essential properties include shape
(aakrithi), ie having a definite shape, heavy (khanam), and hard (katti/kadinyam).
The following are some examples of definitions provided by children:
Response 1 (Student 1, Boy, Grade 5)
Materials which are rigid are called solids. Solids sink in water and are
hard. We construct building with solids materials which are hard.
Response 2 (Student 2, Girl, Grade 6)
Solid has shape, strength, weight, and is unbreakable
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
286
Response 3 (Student 3, Girl, Grade 7)
Solids Materials has weight, shape, has density more than water, sink
in water, can’t move, it is visible, has color, immobile, has color and is
non-living.
Response 4 (Student 4, Boy, Grade 8)
Molecules in a solid are arranged very near to each other and are tightly
packed, it has less energy, it doesn’t has life, it has a definite shape, it has
color, it can change its shape, it can be touched, the vibration of the
molecules is less, the uses of solid are more, it is heavy, it is dense, mass is
more, it sinks in water, salt floats in liquids which are very dense.
Following are the significant properties used by children to define
the concept of solid
Has a definite shape (Nishchitha Akrithi) 57%
Hard (Katti/Kadinyam) 37%
Sinks in water 34%
Heavy (Khanam) 33%
Has weight (Bharam) 23%
Has color 21%
Insoluble in water 20%
Use 20%
Visible 20%
Strong (Bhalam) 15%
Won’t Flow 15%
Other properties that have been used by children to define solid were that
it has form, floats in water, needs space, it is a substance (padartham), immobile,
know by touch/hold, malleability, density, rigid, unbreakable, smell, won’t flow,
won’t fly, not slippery, like stone, has power, conduct electricity and heat, sound,
it is natural/artificial, can’t destroy, etc.
It is evident that children cognized the concept of solid through certain salient
properties which included having a particular fixed shape, hardness, and heaviness.
Concept of solid through a prototypical property: The core of the
children’s conception of solid is based on few properties; an entity is a solid if it
is hard, has shape, heavy, has weight, sinks in water etc.. Among these “having a
shape”, “hardness” and “heavy/has weight” seemed to serve as prototypical
287
properties for children to consider an entity under solid. In later tasks they used
this to check as a necessary and sufficient property to include a given example
under the category ‘solid’.
Concept of solid through a prototypical example: Another way in which
they seemed to understand the concept of solid was through a prototypical
example. In the case of solid, materials such as stone and next, iron served as
the prototypical examples. These materials seemed to have the essential qualities
associated with the idea of solidity. A prototype is an example of a class to
which children attribute a limited range of properties (Rosch & Mervis, 1984).
Prototypes help to link different examples of matter into different classes. When
children describe unknown substances they often give them the name of the
prototype ‘because what something looks like is an excellent cue to what it
actually is’ (Rosch & Mervis, 1984).
It may be noted that the prototypic property is sensorial in its character as
opposed to other salient properties which are abstract. So also, the prototypic
example is everyday and generic.
Particulate theory of matter: A total of 12 children from grade8 defined
solid using the particulate theory of matter and based on molecular arrangement.
(see example 4 above).
(c) Grading solids based on properties
It was noticed during the Piagetian Clinical Interview on the concept of solid,
that children tend to regard any rigid material as a solid, but non-rigid material
such as sponge, cloth, paper, powder etc as “like solid” i.e. they tend to put non-
rigid solids, powders, soft, pliable, thin solids under a new category of ‘like solids’.
A worksheet based task was provided to children in which they were asked
to categorize a range of materials into solid, like solid, and not solid. The name
of the material were read to the children and they were directed to write the name
under any of the above category. After the worksheet based task, Piagetian clinical
interview was conducted in which they were provided with a range of solids
(rigid, non-rigid, pliable, soft, thin, brittle materials) and asked to pick the best
solid from the given group of materials.
Children considered that non-rigid, soft, pliable materials are not good
solids and preferred to put them under the category of “like solid”.
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
288
Identification and reasoning process associated with correct classification of
these materials that are not consistent with the everyday or real life conceptions
seemed to be more demanding for children. Children found it quite difficult
to bring together an iron cube/copper cube and a sponge/thermo Cole to a
single category called “Solid”
Following interview excerpt provides an idea of children’s reasoning behind
assigning material to a solid. A range of solids (rigid, non-rigid, pliable, soft,
thin, brittle materials) was provided and the child was directed to pick examples
of best solid from the group of materials.
Episode 1 (Boy, Grade 8)
Q: Can you pick the examples for solids from these materials?
Picking the solids and telling the names
R: iron, iron cube, iron rod, nail, hammer, stone and rock.
Q: Which is the best example for solid?
R: Iron
Q: Why you think so?
R: it is hard, strong and heavy.
Q: How about that thermo cole?
R: It is ‘like solid’
Q: Why?
R: it has shape; it is not heavy, not strong, and also not rigid
Q: Are there any more solids in that group?
Picking up Copper cube, brass cube, iron cube.
Q: How about this metal wire?
R: like solid, it is hard, but not heavy; also it bends
Q: How about this Ceramic cup lid?
R: like solid, it has weight, it has a shape, it is rigid, but it can be powdered.
Q: aluminum sheet?
R: this is like solid; this is hard, but not heavy
Q: (pointing at the group of solids picked) Why you think all these are solids?
R: all of them are hard, heavy, rigid and can’t be powdered.
Q: How bout this stone? Can it be powdered?
R: Yes
Q: is it a solid then?
R: (to me) so it is also like solid? And not solid?
289
Iron cube is a solid, since it is hard, heavy, rigid and has weight; also we
can’t powder it
Looks to be confused about stone
Q: so what you think about this stone?
R: Like solid, it can be powdered.
Q: But in the worksheet for the examples for solid, you have written stone as
the first example for solid. Now you are telling it is not solid. So which one
you think is right?
R: I think anything that can be powdered is not solid. it is like solid.
(taking the tile piece) So this tile is also like solid, can be powdered.
Glass piece is also like solid, it can be also powdered. Rubber rod is also
like solid. It can’t be powdered also it is strong, but it bends.
Q: but it will go back to its original shape even if bends, right?
R: still, It is like solid. It doesn’t have weight. it can be cut into pieces. It will
also melt if we put it in fire
Q: is there anymore solid in the group? How about carbon rod?
R: (To me) can it be powdered?
Q: if it powders?
R: then not a solid, if it can be powdered it is like solid
Q: which else are the good solids? How about this aluminum cube?
R: It is solid. it is hard, it has weight, it is rigid.
Q: how about the iron powder?
R: it is not a solid, it is in the powder state
Q: how about that Sponge?
R: Not solid, can cut it apart, not heavy, doesn’t have weight, not hard.
Q: How about this charcoal?
R: Not solid, it can be powdered, it is not heavy, doesn’t have weight,
not hard.
Q: Tablet?
R: Not solid, doesn’t have weight, also not hard and it dissolves in water
Q: Sugar crystals?
R: Not solid, it can be powdered, it doesn’t have weight, and also it dissolves
in water.
Q: Plastic cover?
R: like solid, it is not strong, doesn’t have weight, it tears apart, melts in fire,
floats in water; also fly away in the wind
Q: Cotton?
R: Not strong, rigid, it flies in air and floats in water
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
290
Q: soap?
R: not solid. It dissolves in water
Q: so what definition will you give for solid
R: the substances those are hard, heavy, strong, that can’t be powdered,
rigid, unbreakable are solids.
Q: what is the difference between these like solid and not solid? Why you say
some are like solid and some are not solid?
R: the one that are like solids doesn’t have any quality of a solid. For example
this charcoal doesn’t have any characteristics of a solid. It is not heavy,
also not hard, that can be powered easily. So it is like solid
(d) Discussion
Children experience solids by acting upon them for example checking its
breakability, solubility, whether can be powered etc. and tend to represent
solids as something that has a shape, hard, rigid and is unbreakable.
Assignment of non-rigid solids and powders into solid category is found to
be difficult for children. Rigid solids such as stone, iron were correctly
classified as solid whereas non-rigid solids elastic and plastic objects, e.g.,
clay, cotton, sponge, cloth were less successfully classified. Classification of
powders seems to be even more problematic. The concept labels essential to
the description of solid are hard, that which has a shape, and rigid– terms
which relate to direct tactile sensing. Among all the several properties
described hard is the most distinct property children considered essential to
idea of solidity. Hard means difficult to break distort or bend as distinct from
soft which describes things which can be broken easily, squashed or deformed
in the hand. We can say that children consider solid as a subcategory of hard
things that have a continuity of substance throughout as distinct from things
which have a hollow space inside, brittle, soluble, thin, light in weight etc.
Thus we can say that the word solid is being used by children as an adjective
to describe the extent of the hard substance in an object.
An everyday conception of solid, which was formed in children based on
its property, hence seemed to be interfering with the scientific conception of
solid which they learned in school.
291
7.5 Children’s Conception of Liquids
As was done for solids, in the case of liquids also, children were asked to give
examples and define and this was followed by clinical interviews. The first thing
that could be noticed was that the number of examples cited by children for
liquid was far less in number compared to substance or solid. A total of 1042
examples were written by 92 children. The maximum number of examples cited
by a child was 37. Among the 92 children who attempted the task, 57%
(53)children wrote only 10 examples for liquid, 22 % (21) were able to write
more than15 examples, 14% (13) were able to write more than 20, only 4 children
were able to write more than 25 example and only 2 children were able to write
more than 30 examples (endnote 3).
(a) Examples of liquids
In the total of 1042 examples written by 92 children the everyday example like
water, juice, coconut oil, kerosene, milk, petrol, lemon Juice, soda, diesel, tea etc
ranked high in their frequency of occurrence. Not surprisingly, water was the most
frequently cited example and featured first in the list of examples for close to 60%
of the children, and within the first five examples of over 80% of all children.
What can be noted in the examples cited for liquid is that all the examples
cited belong to the everyday world category of liquids. Acid and mercury are the
only two examples cited from the science textbook; otherwise all other examples
belonged to that of everyday world.
Table 7.18: Counts of the first example for liquid
Column 1
Example Count %
Water 54 58.70
Kerosene 7 7.61
Coconut Oil 8 8.70
Milk 7 7.61
Mercury 2 2.17
Petrol 3 3.26
Others 11 11.9
Total 92
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
292
Tabl
e 7.
19:
Exa
mpl
es f
or li
quid
: Agg
rega
te o
f fi
rst f
ive
exam
ples
, fir
st f
ifte
en a
nd to
tal e
xam
ples
by
92 c
hild
ren
Agg
rega
te C
olum
n 1
to 5
Agg
rega
te C
olum
n 1
to 1
5
Agg
rega
te to
tal
Exa
mpl
eC
ount
%E
xam
ple
Cou
nt%
Exa
mpl
eC
ount
%
Wat
er80
86.9
6W
ater
9097
.83
Wat
er92
100
Coc
onut
Oil
4447
.83
Juic
e65
68.4
8Ju
ice
8491
.30
Ker
osen
e43
46.7
4C
ocon
ut O
il63
58.7
0C
ocon
ut O
il66
71.7
4
Petr
ol26
28.2
6K
eros
ene
5452
.17
Ker
osen
e57
61.9
6
Juic
e26
26.0
9M
ilk48
46.7
4M
ilk52
56.5
2
Milk
2425
.00
Petr
ol43
44.5
7Pe
trol
4852
.17
Die
sel
2318
.48
Lem
on J
uice
4142
.39
Lem
on J
uice
4447
.83
Lem
on J
uice
1516
.30
Die
sel
3841
.30
Soda
4447
.83
Soda
1213
.04
Soda
3639
.13
Die
sel
4043
.48
Tea
1111
.96
Tea
3335
.87
Tea
3335
.87
Salt
solu
tion
99.
78C
oke/
Peps
i23
28.2
6Sa
lt so
lutio
n29
31.5
2
Hon
ey6
9.78
Salt
wat
er21
25.0
0C
oke/
Peps
i26
28.2
6
Palm
Oil
66.
52B
utte
r M
ilk19
22.8
3B
utte
r M
ilk25
27.1
7
293
Cok
e/Pe
psi
66.
52M
edic
ine
(syr
up)
1820
.65
Med
icin
e20
21.7
4
Cof
fee
46.
52Pa
lm O
il18
19.5
7Pa
lm O
il19
20.6
5
Ghe
e4
4.35
Cof
fee
1419
.57
Cur
d18
19.5
7
Mer
cury
44.
35C
urd
1415
.22
Ink
1819
.57
Squa
sh4
4.35
Ink
1415
.22
Squa
sh17
18.4
8
Med
icin
e (s
yrup
)4
4.35
Pow
der (
Salt/
Chi
lly/
1315
.22
Cof
fee
1617
.39
whe
at/R
ice/
sand
)
Blo
od3
4.35
Hon
ey12
16.3
0H
oney
1617
.39
Gre
ase
33.
26Sq
uash
1213
.04
Hot
Wat
er16
17.3
9
Ice
crea
m3
3.26
Ghe
e10
13.0
4R
ice
Wat
er16
17.3
9
Ink
33.
26H
ot W
ater
1010
.87
Suga
r So
lutio
n14
15.2
2
Cas
tor
Oil
33.
26B
lood
910
.87
Aci
d13
14.1
3
But
ter
Milk
33.
26C
asto
r O
il9
9.78
Pain
t13
14.1
3
Hot
Wat
er3
3.26
Ric
e W
ater
99.
78Po
wde
r (C
hilly
/cha
lk)
1314
.13
Suga
r So
lutio
n3
3.26
Suga
r So
lutio
n9
9.78
Mac
hine
oil
1213
.04
Aci
d2
3.26
Pain
t8
9.78
Blo
od10
10.8
7
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
294
Cur
d2
2.17
Aci
d7
8.70
Ghe
e10
10.8
7
Frui
ty2
2.17
Ice
crea
m7
7.61
Coc
onut
wat
er9
9.78
Gel
22.
17M
ercu
ry7
7.61
Frui
ty8
8.70
Pain
t2
2.17
Mac
hine
Oil
77.
61Sa
liva
88.
70
Saliv
a2
2.17
Coo
l Dri
nks
77.
61A
lcoh
ol7
7.61
Ice
22.
17Fr
uity
77.
61Ic
e cr
eam
77.
61
Mol
ten
wax
22.
17R
ain
Wat
er6
7.61
Mer
cury
77.
61
Oil
22.
17Sa
liva
66.
52Sw
eat
77.
61
Mac
hine
oil
22.
17Sw
eat
56.
52
Soda
22.
17C
urry
45.
43C
urry
66.
52
Oth
ers
1213
.04
Gre
ase
44.
35Ic
e6
6.52
40
9Te
ars
44.
35R
ain
Wat
er6
6.52
Coc
onut
wat
er4
4.35
Col
d w
ater
66.
52
Cre
am4
4.35
Tear
s5
5.43
Oth
ers
5046
.74
Win
e5
5.43
882
Fevi
col
44.
35
Gre
ase
44.
35
295
Sp
irit
44.
35
Syru
p4
4.35
Vin
egar
44.
35
Cre
am3
3.26
Gel
33.
26
Jam
33.
26
Mud
dy W
ater
33.
26
Soap
sol
utio
n3
3.26
Veh
icle
Oil
33.
26
Det
tol
22.
17
Nai
l Pol
ish
22.
17
Ros
e w
ater
22.
17
Rub
ber
Lat
ex2
2.17
Sham
poo
22.
17
Tar
22.
17
Wax
22.
17
Oth
ers
1913
.04
10
42
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
296
(b) Defining liquid: Through salient features
Student 1 (grade 8, boy): It doesn’t have a definite shape. It flows. It
is a solvent.
Student 2 (grade 6, girl):: Liquids doesn’t have a definite shape, takes the
shape of the vessel in which it is kept, it flows down, and there are liquids
that are obtained from nature; also there are manmade liquids. It doesn’t
have a color
Student 3 (grade 5, boy): Take the shape of the vessel in which it is kept.
Doesn’t have a shape. It has weight. Water, Diesel, Petrol, etc are examples
of liquids. The best Example for Liquid is water
Table 7.20: Definition for liquid written by 63 children
The most important feature identified by the children was that liquids flow.
This was followed by absence of definite shape and finally by taking the shape of
the container in which they are placed.
This was followed by properties such as no colour, cannot be held, not hard,
drinkable, has weight, needs space, can’t fly. Children also seemed to be using
‘water’ like a prototype and they used this in definitions saying ‘like water’. Only
one child among the 63, wrote that in liquids molecules have freedom of movement.
7.6 Children’s Conception of Gas
a) Examples
In order to understand children’s conceptions of ‘gas’, again, they were asked to
provide examples and they were asked to define. The total number of examples
Definition Count Percentage
Flows 38 60.31
Doesn’t have a 26 41.27definite shape
Takes the shape of the 20 31.75container in whichit is kept
297
Tabl
e 7.
21:
Exa
mpl
e fo
r ga
s w
ritte
n in
col
umn1
, col
umn
1 to
5 a
nd c
olum
n 1
to 1
4 by
64
child
ren
Col
umn1
Col
umn
1 to
5C
olum
n 1
to 1
4
Exa
mpl
eC
ount
% E
xam
ple
Cou
nt%
Exa
mpl
eC
ount
%
Smok
e16
25.0
0O
xyge
n43
67.1
9C
arbo
n di
oxid
e48
75.0
0
Air
1218
.75
Car
bon
diox
ide
4164
.06
Oxy
gen
4875
.00
Oxy
gen
1218
.75
Hyd
roge
n32
50.0
0H
ydro
gen
4164
.06
Hyd
roge
n8
12.5
0N
itrog
en30
46.8
8N
itrog
en38
59.3
8
Car
bon
diox
ide
710
.94
Smok
e30
46.8
8A
ir34
53.1
3
LPG
46.
25A
ir29
45.3
1Sm
oke
3250
.00
Car
bon
11.
56C
arbo
n18
28.1
3C
arbo
n24
37.5
0
Car
bon
Mon
oxid
e1
1.56
Gas
1015
.63
Hel
ium
1726
.56
Dus
t Par
ticle
s1
1.56
Hel
ium
914
.06
Vap
or17
26.5
6
Nitr
ogen
11.
56V
apor
914
.06
Gas
1421
.88
Vap
or1
1.56
Dus
t Par
ticle
s6
9.38
Dus
t Par
ticle
s11
17.1
9
64
W
ind
69.
38N
eon
1015
.63
Neo
n3
4.69
Arg
on8
12.5
0
Arg
on2
3.13
Win
d8
12.5
0
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
298
Sky
23.
13C
hlor
ine
46.
25
Snow
23.
13A
mm
onia
34.
69
Oth
ers
1320
.31
Bor
on3
4.69
28
5
Car
bon
Mon
oxid
e3
4.69
Lith
ium
34.
69
Phos
phor
ous
34.
69
Snow
34.
69
Sulp
hur
34.
69
Ber
ylliu
m2
3.13
Fluo
rine
23.
13
Kry
pton
23.
13
Silic
on2
3.13
Sky
23.
13
Spra
y2
3.13
Sulp
hur
diox
ide
23.
13
Xen
on2
3.13
Oth
ers
26
41
7
299
given by 64 children for this was far less than those for liquids, with a total of
417 examples being cited (endnote 4). It is interesting to note that the most
cited first example was ‘smoke’ followed by ‘air’, both everyday examples
of gas. Children clearly related to this concept through these everyday
examples. These were almost the only everyday examples in the list of all
examples of gas. After this almost only scientific names that children had
clearly learnt through their science class were cited.
b) Definitions for gas
Only 35 children were able to give definitions and invoke characteristics of a
gas. The key characteristics for gas was that it lacks shape. Others were
properties that seemed to suggest how elusive ‘gas’ was this was for them to
experience—being colourless, with no smell. Several other characteristics were
more to do with establishing that gas exists (it is everywhere) and that it is
Total children 35
Doesn’t have a definite shape 20
Invisible 19
No color 12
No smell 11
Floats/Fly 11
Can breathe 8
Spreads everywhere 7
Essential for the existence of life 6
Doesn’t need space to exist 6
Found in the atmosphere 5
Vapor form 4
Can’t hold 4
Less Dense 4
Can be filled in tyre/balloon 4
Molecules flows freely 3
Has weight 3
Doesn’t have weight 3
Not hard 3
Table 7.22: Definition for gas
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
300
‘useful’ (it is essential for life), etc. However, this was clearly a very difficult
concept for them to grasp. Only one child asserted that gas also has molecules
and that the attraction between molecules is much less. Many of the statements
were assertions and did not describe properties or try to define. (for full list of
properties described, see end note 5.
7.7 Discussion of Children’s Conceptions of ‘Padartham’, Solid,Liquid and Gas
The concept of ‘substance’ which is the key concept focused on, is elusive
for children, having the characteristic of a super ordinate concept, rather than
a basic one. Children have difficultly separating the idea of materiality from
object which is key to the conception of substance and of matter. The examples
that children provided seemed to be dominated by those everyday examples
that were also in the science textbook, and with science examples following
as the second most frequently cited examples. A very large number of everyday
objects featured in children’s examples, especially in the grades V and VI
and it was only in grade VIII that the object notion of substance was less
significant than the materiality aspect. As shown by the attempts that children
were making to define ‘substance’ they did not find adequate everyday
language to capture the idea of padartham. Instead they tried to use textbook
language. Those children who provided more appropriate examples for
padartham were also found to be the same children using textbook language
to define the concept. Rather than interpreting this as rote memorization, we
suggest that given the abstract character of the concept and its irrelevance to
everyday life, the science language from the textbook was necessary for
children to be able to convey their understanding of the concept. This was
especially so, given that in the everyday language, there is insufficient
distinction between the ideas of object, materiality and substance.
With regards the conceptions of solid, liquid and gas, solid was by far the
concept with which students related most easily. Stone seemed to be a prototypic
solid with ‘hardness’ being a prototypic property. The properties that dominated
children’s thinking of solid were everyday experiential properties and they did
not support the children in differentiating the idea of solid from the idea of object.
The idea of ‘liquid’ seemed to draw from ‘water’. Liquid was also a very everyday
experiential conception. Gas was by far the most elusive concept, with hardly
any real life examples that children could give for it.
301
7.8 Classification
This part of the chapter VII focuses on an analysis of the ways in which children
classified a collection of everyday and esoteric materials. The exploration of
how children classify has been used in educational research in the study of
children’s development of specific scientific concepts. The present classification
task was designed to explore children’s knowledge and understanding of the
concept matter. It also enabled the examination of the natural criteria and reasoning
children employ to classify materials. The task also aimed to examine the social
interactional process involved when children work in a team, shared thinking,
and how they discuss and find strategies towards the final classification
The proposal of Cognitive anthropologists is that each culture has its own
system of classification and one of the sources of cultural variation in the cognitive
process is in the ways of classifying the world that characterize the given cultural
group (Cole and Scribner, 1974; Luria, 1974). According to them the process of
classification may vary with the attributes of things in question, the context in
which the act of classifying occurs and the skills and knowledge possessed. These
studies also stressed progression from a kind of thinking that is concrete and
context bound to thinking that is abstract and rule governed. Research on the
influence of social interaction on cognitive development has emphasized the
role of adults and peers in influencing a cognitive activity (Gauvian, 2000).
Children may learn more from doing a task in a group, because joint planning
may encourage them to give more thought in advance to what they need to do to
coordinate their own and their partners actions. By coordinating responsibility
for planning and organizing a task, children may have opportunities to specify
their knowledge in interaction with their partners. Individuals who are experienced
in a cognitive activity may support a child’s participation in a task by structuring
the problem and by guiding the child’s participation in its solution. Research has
also suggested that peer interaction facilitates the cognitive task. Peer interaction
and collaborative problem solving can advance performance on a task.
7.8.1 Children’s Classification of Materials
A task was designed to examine the manner in which children classify a collection
of everyday and esoteric materials. This task of examining children’s classification
of everyday familiar and unfamiliar materials, was aimed at probing their
knowledge, reasoning and description of the material world; and also to discover
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
302
rules and strategies children use to classify materials. A wide range of materials
with multiple attributes that were in different states, form, made up of different
substances, with different properties and functions were given to a total of 64
children from grade V to grade VIII to perform an open ended classification. The
task was conducted in groups comprising of two or three members and was
designed to invoke detailed conversation among children, in turn map their
knowledge and conceptions about materials. The task was conducted at two
contexts: the context of the school along with peers and at the context of home
along with elders, siblings or friends, to examine the manner in which context of
the home, school, peers, and adults influence children’s thinking; also examine
whether there is any difference in manner in which they reason out about materials
at two contexts. The task eventually focused on eliciting children’s understanding
of various aspects of the concept of matter as a basis of understanding the concept
from the everyday world and the science classroom. The following table provides
the details of the materials that were given for classification. The materials were
chose chosen in such a manner that it has relevance to the everyday world and
classroom context of the child.
Table 7.23: Materials given for classification
Iron Balls Plastic (diff Charcoal Gheeshape/function)
Iron Cube Rubber Soap Butter
Iron Cylinder Wax Sandal Gel candy
Iron Mesh Carbon rod Moth Balls Peanut Butter
Iron Nails Ebonite rod and cube Brick Cheese
Iron Spring Card board Sand Hair gel
Iron filings and Ceramic and clay Stone (diff types) Fabric Paintturnings
Weight Grams Cotton/cloth Sugar Agar Agar
Iron Wire Seeds Flour Water
Iron rod Marble (Sphere Turmeric Powder Shampooand Bar)
Iron sheet Papers (diff type) Custard Powder Honey
Brass (diff shape/ Pebbles Salt Crystals Coconut Oilfunction)
Copper (diff shape Sponge Baking Powder Ink/function)
303
Lead (diff shape) Tablets Sugar Cubes Water
Glass (diff shape/ Salt Powder Brown Syrupfunction)
Steel (diff shape/ Iron/copper Filings Pink syrupfunction)
Wood (diff shape/ Iron/Copper turningsfunction)
Thermo Cole(diff shape)
Method
The study included 64 children from middle school divided into 27 groups.
The groups were organized by grades: V, VI, VII and VIII. The method for
probing was the Piagetian Clinical interview. The materials to be classified
were laid on a table and children were directed to take one material or object
at a time, discuss its name and classify it according to the criterion they decide
upon after discussing with the group members. They were left alone while
doing the task without asking question or providing any clues and care was
taken not to influence their thinking and criteria to be decided for classifying
the materials. As they started to form the groups they were asked how they
were deciding which went together. After assigning categories to the entire
materials, clinical interview was conducted with the group around the name
and characteristics of the categories formed, and characteristics of materials
in each category etc. The task was video and audio recorded and took an
average of 45 minutes to an hour. Notes were taken during the task for the
purpose of framing questions for Piagetian Clinical Interview conducted at
the end of the task. The way in which children grouped the materials were
also recorded.
Data Analysis
The videos of the classification task were analyzed to examine the categories
formed, method of classification, how children tested or acted on each material
and remarks made by children while classifying the materials etc. Categories for
developing themes from children’s response were developed from the
transcriptions and how they grouped the objects. The process of developing the
categories was also from the research questions. The themes were used to group
children’s classified groups and explanations
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
304
Following are the themes for which the video and interviews were
analyzed for
Categories: The categories formed and the names given, prominent
characteristics and criteria chosen to form the categories, basis of group formation
and the defining criteria of the group.
Method of classification: How did each group approach the task? Whether
the method of classification was by using concrete or abstract reasoning? Whether
they approached it from school/ text book categories or experiential categories?
Material under consideration: description made during new encounters
with a material/ object, reasoning about a material that belonged to more than
one category, interesting materials, the materials that were categorized easily
and materials that have posed problems. How each material was approached by
different groups of children, or stories and course of each material in each
classification, naming and description of the material, properties discussed, action
and method of testing performed on the material, comparisons made, how children
reasoned and identified about a material of a new and unknown kind. How did
they test it and assign a category?
The social dimension: Peer group interaction and its role, how discussion
between children and shared thinking influenced the task, is there any variation
in the process of classification according to the context in which the
classification happened i.e. how the context of the classroom and home influence
the task, How was the school and the home classification systems and categories
different? Role of adults and peers during the task, adult support and guidance
towards the task.
An analysis sheet was maintained for the transcripts of the classification
which has the categories:- Name, Material taken, Action, Method of testing, Remarks
7.8.2 Classification: A Task Specific to School Context
Children seemed to consider the activity of classification as a task that is specific
to school context. In everyday life we do not always classify intentionally or
form categories as a main goal of an act; we form categories for some kind of use
i.e. we often make implicit, not explicit classifications. Classification can be
intentional classification and incidental classification (Estwes,1994). Intentional
305
classification occurs when one is explicitly aware of the classification task, such
that it becomes the primary goal. Incidental classification is performed in support
of some other goal and it is implicit. When probed about children’s previous
experience of doing classification it was obvious that children performed
intentional classification only at school or children viewed the act of classification
as peculiar to school, not to everyday life where incidental classifications are
performed implicitly. Before the task children were asked to guess what they
think the materials are for, majority of them responded that it may be to do an
experiment or do a classification.
To classify, e.g.
Episode1 (Amrutha and Anju, Grade V, 29/02/08)
Children sat around the materials that were spread on a piece of chart paper;
began to pick, examine and talk to each other about the materials
Q: Can you guess what are we going to do with all these materials?
Amrutha: is it for classification?
Q: is it? Why do you think so?
Anju: there are many items here. There are also items that are similar
Q: have you done classification earlier?
Anju: yes
Q: when?
Anju: at school
Q: what did you classify?
Anju: We classified as solid, liquid etc.
Amrutha: (to Anju) also transparent object, opaque object etc
Q: what else do you think we can do with these? We can classify,
then what else?
Children: may be we can do some experiment
Q: what experiment can we do with this?
Both looking at the materials and thinking
To do an experiment e.g.
Episode 2 (Riyaz Rasheed and Abdul Samad, Grade VIII, 23/02/2008)
Q: what do you think these materials are for?
Samad: to do some experiments
Q: what do you think Riyaz?
Riyaz: same, to do an experiment
M: What experiment can be done with these materials?
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
306
Samad: (taking the copper cube) to find the mass of this, also other
materials.
Riyaz taking the copper cube from samad, keeping it above the glass cube,
both of them picking all the cubes from the group and kept one above the
other, also picked the small metal spheres
Q: what experiment can be done with that sphere?
Riyaz: may be to find the atoms in this
M: how?
Riyaz: using a microscope
Children used multiple strategies for classifying and linking the materials
together. They do not rely solely on one manner of category formation but were
flexible in the types of categories they formed and used i.e. they formed categories,
not based on a single rule rather multiple rules and criteria were used. They used
both abstract and concrete categories towards the formation of groups. The
categories children formed included textbook categories such as solid, liquid,
gas; perceptual categories such as shape, color, form; certain properties such as
solubility, sinking, floating etc.; and functional categories such as used in the
kitchen, decorative items.
Materiality, a major criterion for classification was present with a majority
of the groups. Children’s grouped the materials through the categories “iron,
wood, wax, paper, rubber” etc.
Children identified materials by acting upon them, by seeing what they can
be used for, or what happens to them when an action is performed on them.
Examples of such actions include smelling, listening to the sound, feeling in
hand, touching, holding and weighing, checking material for its breakability,
solubility in water, floating and sinking in water, heating the material, burning
etc. The association of materials with water such as solubility in water, floating
and sinking in water was noted among a significant number of groups.
A quick and successful way of classifying was possible by comparing an
object or material with a familiar material/object, which is one of the methods in
which children identified a material.
Solids, especially those which are rigid, heavy and have a shape are the
materials that got primary attention in almost all groups for primary classification.
Examples of such materials include cubes, marbles bars, spheres, rods, cylinders,
307
pebbles and stones, rubber balls etc. Liquids were the most easiest to form a group.
All the liquids kept in the bottle was grouped together by majority of the groups to
liquid. The materials that posed challenge for identification and classification were
gels, creams, powders, cotton, soft materials ebonite rod, carbon rod etc.
Children easily identified materials made up of wood, rubber, stone, metals,
marbles, brick etc. whereas materials such as carbon rod, ebonite rod, certain
liquids, fabric paint, gels etc. turned out to be unfamiliar material for them.
The important themes that got elaborated during the discussions are
properties of materials, definition of solid, liquid and gas, best solid and its
characteristics, the characteristics and identification of gels, powders and its
classification. Powders got a distinct group and children found it difficult to put
it under the group of solids.
The task primarily generated insightful discussion and explanations
regarding the nature, characteristics of the materials. This was evident in the
manner in which children approached, examined and identified a variety of
everyday materials. Some of the significant attributes of the materials that were
employed by children to assign a category and establish the identity of a material,
also extensively discussed by majority of the groups during the course of the
task, included the following:
1. Materiality: - it is made of wood, or iron, or plastic, or cotton, etc.
2. Color, Shape:-definite shape, that changes shape, bend etc.
3. Solubility and Insolubility
4. Floating and sinking in water
5. Heaviness, hardness, softness, smoothness, and brittleness
6. Breakability and that which can be powered
7. Natural and man-made
8. Function of materials
9. Those that melts, and burns
10. Sticky and Viscous materials
11. Transparent, Translucent and Opaque
7.8.3 Final Categories of Classification Task
The final categories formed by the 27 groups (64 children) were based
primarily on three criteria: (1) materiality, (2) properties and functions and (3)
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
308
a general category name, such as solid, liquid, gas etc. There were secondary
multiple criterion, characteristics and associations employed during the course of
the task. Children formed different intermediate loose groupings or collections in
between to reach at the above final categories at the end of the task. Children used
simultaneously both categorical and other kinds of relations and cross classified
during the course of the task. Following table provides the details of the final
criteria on which 27 groups of children based the classification of materials.
(1) Materiality:-
No. of Groups
that chose the
criteria to classify
1 Wood 15
2 Wax 16
3 Glass 13
4 Paper 13
5 Rubber 11
6 Copper/Brass 10
7 Iron 9
8 Plastic 9
9 Cloth/cotton 9
10 Stone 7
11 Marble 6
12 Thermo Cole/sponge 6
13 Aluminum 5
14 Steel 5
15 Shell 5
16 Threads 5
17 Made from clay 4
18 Fiber 4
309
(2) General category name: -
No. of Groups that chosethe criteria to classify
Liquid 19
Gels 11
Solid 10
Gas 9
Manmade items 8
Powders 7
Seeds 7
Cubes 5
Metal 5
Natural Products 5
Edible items 4
Sphere/cylinders 4
others 6
(3) Properties and functions:-
No. of Groups that chosethe criteria to classify
Soluble 18
Brittle 9
Floats in water 7
That can be powdered 3
Can’t be powdered 3
Sink in water 4
Soft 2
Viscous items/sticky 2
Transparent 2
Functions 12To tie (thread), 2Used in the kitchen 2Used to write 2Decorative items 2Others 4
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
310
7.8.4 Methods Adopted for Classification
While classifying the primary attempt by the children, while approaching a
material was to identify the material, which was followed by assigning of it
to a group. Initially children formed loose groupings or collections in which
they used a variety of characteristics and associations among the items.
Gradually children worked towards groupings based on some single common
feature that characterize all the items included within the group. What was
noted was before reaching to the above stable final categories children formed
intermediate categories and associations (which will be discussed in detail
in the following section). Finally children reached to a single criterion to
include an item to a group. But the progression of the formation of group
didn’t follow any patterns or orderly progression. But the above was the
general trend observed.
The way in which children reached to a final group category was through
multiple methods and criterion. The major criterion followed was
1. Picking an object/material that has some striking characteristics or that
strike the attention of one of the child/all children of the group and taking
out more of similar items and grouping them into a single group
2. Deciding a category name (inventing a rule/strategy) and picking materials
according to the predetermined category or rule (Hypothesis Testing)
3. Based on the property
a) Based on property
One of the manner in which children approached the classification task and initial
criterion for group formation was decided based on the prominent characteristics
of a familiar material and picking more materials having that property. Children
paid close attention to the external form and characteristics of the material, and
group formation was done based on taking out similar materials having the
properties of the material under consideration.
For e.g.
1. Formation of category based on shape:- with some of the groups, cubes
happened to be the first material that came to their initial attention of children
which prompted them to categories based on the shape of the materials, which
was followed by taking other materials also based on its shape.
311
So the children started grouping the materials from the category those that have
a shape and that don’t have a shape
For e.g. Cubes, Cylinders, Spheres, Balls, Marble bars, metal rods etc. are
the categories formed by a group of children who started their classification based
on a wooded cube; followed by using other criterion such as heavy,
Episode 3 (Riyaz and Samad; Grade VIII; 23/02/2008)
Categories formed
(1) Cubes (heavy and not heavy),
(2) Cylinders (heavy and not heavy),
(3) Spheres (heavy and not heavy),
(4) Liquids,
(5) Creams and gels,
(6) That doesn’t have a definite shape (which again getting separated based
on materiality):- (a) Soap, (b) Cotton, (c) Wax, (d) Plastic, (e) Wood, (f)
Glass, (g) Steel, (h) Paper, (i) Plastic, (j) Ceramic, (k) Stones, (l) Shells,
(m) Thread, (n) Edible items
In the above, towards the end of the classification multiple criterion such
as shape, property, states, and materiality were used by children to classify the
materials. Also in this case, the classification was a fairly straightforward process
with children deciding g on the six major major categories.
1. Formation of category based on materiality:-With a second group
of children, an iron spring was the material that got their initial attention and in
turn the first material chosen for category formation. They decided to keep
iron spring under the category iron (based on material). After deciding the
category iron all other materials made of iron were picked out to form category
iron (which remained as a stable category till the end of the classification in
this case). The formation of the group based on the materiality of iron prompted
this particular group of children to consider the materiality of the other items
also for classifying. So one of the major criteria on which children of this
group classified all the items were based on the materials. Following are criteria
of group formation used
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
312
Episode 3 (Haris Rasheed, Yedhu Krishnan, and Muhammed Hassan;
Grade V 26/02/2008)
Categories formed
Though materiality was the major explicit criteria for the above group of
children to approach the classification task, certain other criteria such as solubility
also got into consideration for category formation. When they encountered with
the material salt, they found it difficult to group it based on materiality, the apparent
property that got noticed for salt was its solubility in water which prompted
them to pick other materials such as sugar, salt crystal, soap etc. that are soluble
in water to form category based on property
b) Deciding a category name and picking materials accordingly
(Hypothesis testing)
Another manner in which children approached the materials was by deciding a
general category or class name in the beginning and picking the materials based
on the category or class name which was a hypothesis testing. The category name
given by most children who approached classification according to this manner
was solid, liquid and gas; transparent, translucent and opaque which are the
categories drawn from their science text book.
An example
The approach and classification of materials based on textbook category/
hypothesis testing: The group began the classification task by determining the
category names Solid, liquid and gas
(1) Iron
(2) Copper
(3) Brass
(4) Aluminum
(5) Steel
(6) Wood
(7) Glass
(8) Plastic
(9) Sponge
(10) Stone
(11) Paper
(12) Rubber (bounces)
(13) Chalk (brittle items)
(14) Wax
(15) Cloth
(16) Sticky materials
(17) the group of water
(all liquids)
(18) those that are soluble in water
(19) Powders
313
Episode 5 (Aparna, Reshma and Sumi; Grade VII; 2/09/07)
Q: Can you guess what are we going to do with these materials?
Reshma: we may be doing an experiment with these
Aparna: this is to classify
Sumi remains quiet
Q: (to reshma) why you think this is for an experiment?
Reshma quiet
Q: (to Aparna) why do you think this is to classify?
R&A: by seeing these many items
Q: what about you Sumi? What is your guess?
Sumi: it may be to take all the vessels used at home and like that to
take out each
Aparna: yes, all these can be classified into groups
Q: like you said, we have to classify all these materials, Can you
do that?
Three of them looking at the materials
Aparna: there is solid, there is liquid and there is gas in these.
So we can classify this as solid liquid and gas,
(to me) Is that the way you want this to be classified?
Q: you can classify however you want, classify it in any way
you like
Aparna: We can classify as solid, liquid and gas. First we will take
all solids
c) First materials to be classified
Aparna took the metal cubes one after another (Iron, Copper, steel, aluminum)
while Reshma and Sumi began to take out other solid materials and handed over
to Aparna to keep it along with the cubes. Sumi and Reshma picked all the solids
out, while Aparna arranged it. The materials that were taken are metal cubes,
marble, glass and plastic cube, brick, wooden glass, the clay vessel, brass pensted,
steel spoon, tiles, clay pensted, glass tumbler, aluminum rod, wood, glass spoon,
key, metal blade, iron wire, ….etc.
Also it was fairly easy for children to groups all the liquids into one group.
The material type’s powder, gel and creams (ghee) posed problem to
continue the classification according to the category name solid, liquid and gas
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
314
d) Categorizing powder
Aparna: While seeing the (flour) can we take these powders?
Sumi: is it solid?
(Three of them taking out all the powders from the group of materials)
Reshma: We can keep all the powders separately at one place
Aparna: Will it be possible to sort powders into solid, liquid or gas?
Reshma: Where does powder belongs to solid or liquid?
Taking out all the powders and keeping them separately without assigning
a category name initially and deciding to consider it later. Towards the end
of the classification, after separating other materials children returned to
the powders that were separately kept
Q: So you have three groups now
Children: yes, Solid, Liquid and Gas.
(Pointing at the groups) all solid here, all liquid here and gas
there (fully blown balloon).
Q: then how about these ones? What group is this?
Reshma: that is the group of powders
Aparna: that is of a different type, may be gas or is it plasma?
Sumi: That may another type of gas
Aparna: No, I think this one may be plasma
Sumi: do you mean plasma group?
Aparna: plasma is that without bones;
isn’t right? Plasma is that without bones right?
Reshma: plasma is that without any shape.
Sumi: does turmeric powder has a shape?
Reshma: every cubes has shape, but powders doesn’t have a shape
Aparna: if powders do not have a shape, then is it plasma. something
which doesn’t has a shape is called plasma
Sumi: do you want to call this group plasma? That is ok, and then
what is the specialty of plasma?
Aparna: no shape
Sumi then?
Aparna: will dissolve and is found in the form of powders, there is
no shape
315
The group decided on a category name ‘Plasma’ for powders and continued
to work with it till the end of the classification. The point that is to be noted here
is that powders got a distinct state of matter and is not considered as solid, the
comparison of powder to gas was also made by this group.
The above observation that powders (Sugar, Salt, turmeric powder, Flour
etc) doesn’t belong to solid, liquid or gas was noted among many other groups.
Powders are a distinct state of matter from child’s point of view.
e) Difficult to classify all the given materials according to the category
name solid, liquid and gas: - Children found it difficult to classify all the items
into categories such of solid, liquid and gas. One of the observations made from
the above example and from those who opted to do the classification according
to the category solid, liquid and gas was that it was difficult to classify all the
materials using the above category names i.e. they weren’t able to stick on to the
same category till the end of the classification. Material types such as powders,
gels, sponges, papers, cotton, rice flakes, leaf, flower, etc. posed difficulties.
Children shifted to a new category based on property or any other concrete
characteristic of the material (such as creams, or materials that can be burned,
soluble, insoluble) during the course of the classification to accommodate above
the material types.
The final groups formed
Solids, Liquids, Gas, Plasma, Khara-dravakom (creams and gels)
Sub classifying solids to: Decorative Items, Glass Products, Those that burn, Those
that float in water, Cubes, Iron, Cloth, Found on the courtyards of the house, Those
that can be worn, Those that can be bend, Seeds, To Clean Vessels, Edible items,
Those that are used to write, That bounce, Those that are used in the Kitchen
The above group of children started with the category solid, liquid and gas,
created a new categories ‘plasma’ and ‘khara-dravakom’ to accommodate creams
and gel; finally sub-classified solids based on its properties, functions and materiality
f) Formation of intermediate group between solid and liquid
It was not only powders that posed problem to be classified using the category
names solid, liquid and gas. Materials such as gels, creams, cotton, wax, etc.
also posed difficulty to be classified under the category name of solid, liquid or
gas. Children formed distinct category for gels/creams. Some groups of children
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
316
kept gels in between solid and liquid, also devised new name such as khadrava
(combining the first letters of Kharam (solid) and Dravakam(liquid)), Khara-
Dravakam (a solid-liquid), Kuzhambu (cream) etc.
Episode 6 (Gokul, Rahul and Sachin; Grade VII; 25/10/07)
Assigning category for a gel candy
Gokul: (taking the gel) what is this? (Examining and telling to others)
touch and see
Rahul and sachin taking it from Gokul, touching and feeling the gel in hand
Gokul: We can consider this in both groups solid and liquid.
Sachin: then it belongs to all the three.
Gokul: But, it is not a gas
Rahul taking it from others, pressing, feeling in hands and showing to
others. Three of them examining it again and again
Rahul: this belongs to both solid and liquid.
Sachin: it looks like solid, but if we hold it feels like water and there is
water inside it.
Gokul: So where will we keep this one?
Sachin: Solid and liquid
Rahul: it is hard outside, also inside. It has a shape too.
Gokul: it is also sticky
Sachin: (checking again) yes it is hard
Gokul: I think this is rubber.
Sachin: then to which group this belongs to?
Gokul: Solid, but there is water that is sticking to my hands, like ice
Sachin: it is like water when we hold it
Gokul: yeah, there is water sticking to hands, this is like ice
Sachin: then we can keep it with solids
Gokul: but it is getting squeezed when pressed, also its shape change.
I doubt whether it is becoming small.
So what will we do with this?
Sachin: I don’t know
Rahul: where will we keep this?
I think there is water inside
Gokul: (examining by looking through it) yes there is water inside
317
Rahul: Can we break this and see?
(Breaking the gel into four pieces; more water sticking to their hands)
Sachin: this is liquid
and rahul confirming yes, this is water
Gokul: then keep it with the group of water
Sachin: yeah looks like it belongs there. We can keep it there for
sometime and see what will happen
Rahul: yes we can wait and see whether it will completely turn
to water
(Observing it)
Rahul: yes it is liquid; there is water on my hands
Sachin also agreeing to Rahul
Rahul: Both that in the tin (hair gel) and this one is liquid (Gel candy).
This will turn to water after sometime.
Q: why you think, it is a liquid?
Gokul: water is sticking to my hands
But it has also shape
I think it will soon become water.
Rahul: We have kept it here to see whether it will become water
Sachin: We can keep that out in the sun and check whether it will
become water,
it may become water if heated, Then may become vapor.
Others also agreeing to it
(Heating the gel candy over the flame of candle keeping on a dish; the
candy remains the same; )
Q: so where will we keep it now?
Sachin: solid, also liquid
Gokul: First with solid for sometime, then with liquid
Q: where did you keep that finally?
R: solid
M: why
R: it is very difficult to say whether this is solid, liquid or gas
R: it is liquid when we hold it, but it has also a shape
G: If it was a solid then its shape wouldn’t have changed. But the
shape of this can be changed. Also hard, so what we will do?
What about keeping this in a new group?
S: yeah, we can make a new group of kharadravakam
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
318
Sachin continuing to explain about the name and the gel candy was assigned
to the new group of Khadravakom.
Butter, peanut butter, cheese, ghee, hair gel, gel candy, agar-agar, tar, wax and
paraffin wax are the items that were finally grouped with the category of Khadrava
d) Identification of materials
Children identified an unfamiliar material through two methods 1) comparing its
properties with a familiar material that has similar properties 2) by performing
certain actions.
Children examined, identified and tested materials by performing certain
actions such as smelling, listening the sound (tapping them on the floor or with
another object/material and comparing the sound) smelling, holding in hand,
touching or pressing, checking its texture, scratching on it with nails, weighing
in hand, bending, stretching, checking for its breakability etc.
Action performed Material Type ( for
examination and identification of)
Smelling Liquids, Gels/creams/sticky items
(Wax, Soap), Powders Camphor,
moth balls, sandalRubber
Touching and feeling in hand Gels/creams, and sticky items,
powders
Pressing Soft and puffy items (thermo Cole,
sponge, cotton)
Holding /Weighing in hand Metals (aluminum, iron, steel,
copper, brass, lead) and non-metals
Examining /comparing (Rubber, wood, Glass,
heaviness and hardness Ceramic, Ebonite, Plastic,
and Carbon)
Separation of metals (e.g. to
distinguish Iron from
Aluminum/steel)
319
Another manner in which materials were identified was comparing it with
a prototypical material or a similar familiar material. For e.g. the important
identification criteria used for liquids was by comparing the liquid under
consideration with the prototypical liquid water.
Separation of non-metals from
metals (Ebonite cube from metal
cubes; carbon rod from iron)
Separation of non-metals (e.g.
Plastic from wood; Ebonite
from plastic)
Scratching with nails Brittle items (charcoal, moth
balls, camphor)
Bending Rubber, Metal Wires, thin sheets
Stretching Rubber
Metals (aluminum, iron, brass,
copper, brass, lead)
Non-metals (Glass, Ceramic)
To distinguish between metals (Iron
from Aluminum/steel/lead)
To distinguish metals from
non-metals (eg. Iron rod from
carbon rod)
Checking for its breakability Ebonite rod, Carbon rod, Glass,
Ceramic items
Separation of metals (aluminum-
Color iron-steel-lead; brass-copper);
identification of liquids
Listening to the sound by tapping
on the floor, with another object/
material, with same material and
comparing the sounds
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
320
Some interesting materials and the method of identification
Material Method of identification
Tar
Peanut ButterGel
Fabric paint
Syrup (medicine)
Honey
Ink
Aluminum Pipe and Iron Comparison of weight by weighing
in hand, Color, Heaviness, Shape
Ceramic (tiles and cup) Comparison of sound, checking
breakability
7.8.5 Classification of Materials at the Home Context
The classification activity was conducted at five house holds along with children’s
playmates, siblings and elders present during the time. Elder members considered
the activity proposed as an academic or schooled activity, also made an association
of the activity with science lessons, due to which they initially showed reluctance
to participate in the activity. These assumptions was made based on the very
nature of the materials (cubes, spheres, gels, solutions of different colors, sugar)
and the popular notion that experiments using materials at school are done only
in science. Many of them considered science as a difficult subject and expressed
that they don’t know much of science to participate in the task. Initially elders
observed children performing the activity and during the course of the activity
they began to participate by giving their suggestions for making categories and
helping children to identify materials, and sorting the material etc. The category
formed in all the five tasks were based on materiality, characteristics and functions
of the material. The approach towards the task was mainly through the properties,
function and materiality of the familiar materials. There was not any significant
difference being observed in the final categories formed, examination and
identification criteria employed. One of the observations that needs mention is
that the category solid, liquid and gas was not invoked in any of the task that was
performed at the home context, rather the materials were classified based on the
Close observation
Smelling
Feeling with fingers: Touching, Pressing
Close observation
Smelling
321
materiality, properties and functions. Overall the tasks suggest that there is no
significant difference in the manner which children approached the task or the
categories formed at the context of home.
7.8.6 Operation of Gender while working on the task
It was noticed during the task that among the adolescent children both girls
and boys preferred to work with the same sex peers. Children from grade IV to
grade VIII were grouped in groups of four for the classification activity, during
the pilot phase of study. Groups were composed as a) All girls groups b)All
boys group c) Boys dominant group d) Girls dominant group e) Girls and boys
of equal in number. The task worked effectively in all the above groups in
Grade IV and Grade V. In both these grades there were cooperation and
collaboration among children irrespective of the gender of the peers. Children
worked as a team and there were not any segregation or clustering observed
among boys and girls in mixed groups. Children shared their ideas freely and
the task generated rich conversations among the participants as expected.
Children exhibited lots of excitement and interest about the variety of materials
that were in-front of them. They examined the materials, discussed their ideas
and criteria for classification with each other without being conscious about
the gender of the peers participating in the task.
Among the Grade VI, Grade VII and Grade VIII, the task worked effectively
only among the all girls and all boys groups. Groups in which either boys/girls
were majority, the other member became a passive member who silently watched
the dominant members performing the task. In mixed groups of equal number of
boys and girls, boys were the active members who dominated, taken the lead
role and course of the task. Girls passively watched boys performing the task. It
was being noticed that girls were not comfortable to work in a mixed group of
boys and girls. Girls maintained their physical distance with the boys and there
was a great amount of difficulty among children to begin the task itself and
eventually do the classification. Finally in mixed groups, boys classified the
materials, while girls watch boys doing the task silently. Boys took the role of an
expert peer, narrated their previous experience of using or seeing the materials
and girls seems to be agreeing to this expertise of the boys. The girls began their
discussion by whispering to the other girls. The investigator had to re-explain
the concept of group. The children subsequently talked louder and also talked
with the peer companion, but still did not talk to the entire group. Once the boys
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
322
groups decided their categories they proceeded to the next material without the
rest of the group. In spite of investigator, giving many prompts for initiating
conversation, sharing ideas with each other to sort out the materials there was no
progress observed interaction during the course of the task. There was nil
interaction among the boys and girls irrespective of the continuous encouragement
and direction to perform the task as a team. What is important to conclude is that
there was no progress in collaboration with the advancement of task among the
mixed groups and there was difficulty in coordinating ideas. The different gender
preferred to work independently which was the way in which children were
eventually grouped for the classification task.
7.9 Discussion
Regardless of the grade in which children studied and their familiarity with the
idea of matter, ‘solid-liquid and gas’, almost all children used experiential and
external characteristics of materials in order to classify materials. Their
classification was dominated by natural criteria based on material, property, and
function. Children’s direct action on material seemed to be the chief instrument
to develop material conceptions. Children approached their everyday world of
materials from functional criteria and properties, and the major way they saw
their world is through the materiality that makes it. The range of properties that
they examined in this was quite wide and impressive and they used multisensorial
tests to examine each material.
The difficulty of classification by the state of matter indicates that concepts
of solids, liquids and gas draws attention to the fact that these are not important
categories, or significant categories from the point of view of the everyday material
world. Rather it results from schooling and science education i.e. the categories
solid, liquid and gas are very ‘school-science’ categories.
On the whole it can also be observed that science classroom concepts had
very limited use in enabling children to approach and handle the real everyday
material world. It seemed that ‘Matter’ and its ‘classification into solids, liquids,
gas’ are school concepts. In everyday the classification of materials as solid,
liquid or gas are never invoked, rather approach materials based on their
materiality, functions and characteristics and by performing certain actions on it.
Though matter, solid, liquid and gases are something that permeates children’s
everyday world very much, the invocation of these categories is not on the lines
323
of ‘science’. Children invented new categories between solids and liquids in
order to accommodated powders and gels. Clearly the physical experience of
these materials had not been assimilated into the science categories of the three
states of matter. Everyday understanding of materiality and sensorial experiences
of matter had not been reconciled with the scientific concept of matter.
The concept of ‘substance’ which is the key concept focused on, is elusive
for children, having the characteristic of a super ordinate concept rather than a
basic one. Children have difficultly separating the idea of materiality from object,
distinction of which is the key to the understanding of the concept of substance
and of matter (Krnel, Watson & Glazar, 2003). The examples that children
provided for substance was dominated by everyday examples and science textbook
examples that were objects, material kinds and substances. As shown in the
children’s attempts to define ‘substance’ they did not find adequate everyday
language to capture the idea of substance/padartham. Instead they tried to use
textbook language. Those children who provided more appropriate examples for
padartham were also found to be the same children using textbook language to
define the concept. Rather than interpreting this as rote memorization, we suggest
that given the abstract character of the concept and its irrelevance to everyday
life, the science language from the textbook was necessary for children to be
able to convey their understanding of the concept. This was especially so, given
that in the everyday language, there is insufficient distinction between the ideas
of object, materiality and substance.
What was evident regarding children’s conception of ‘substance’ was that
children’s initial understanding of substance was very much based on perception—
seeable and tangible matter. Their initial conceptions were quite different from
the concept of chemical substance that was the target of the middle school science
curriculum. Children’s conceptions were characterized by a lack of appropriate
categories of substance and their interaction. They cognized the relation between
substance, material, object, or a thing, but they were not able to explain the relation
in a clearer manner. They found it difficult to explain in words the distinction
between the ideas of object and materiality—perhaps this difficulty was
compounded by the fact that in Malayalam there is only one term vasthu for both
material and object. Children cited not only substance/materials kinds, but also
objects such as table, pen, chair as examples for ‘padartham’ where water, stone,
iron, sugar, salt etc.were being the more frequently cited examples for ‘padartham’.
There was no significant conceptual progression observed between children of
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
324
different grade levels as there is tremendous overlap in conceptions among
students of different grade. What was noted in the clinical interview was that
though children found it easy to give examples for substances they found it difficult
to define substance; they in fact seemed to shift and provide multiple definitions
to define substance during the course of the interview. Children were seen to
systematically connect their own everyday term ‘Vasthu’ with the formal science
textbook term ‘Padartham’ and assert, apparently tautologically that vasthu is
padartham i.e. substance is a material or object. “Vasthu” is a word that is used in
Malayalam simultaneously for an object or the material from which an object is
made. “Padartham” in contrast was the terms used in the science text book.
Children intuitively explained what a “padartham” was by recalling examples
from the textbook and by connecting examples to the definition of a substance. It
was also noted in the interviews that definition for substance also evolved from
a consideration of examples and non-examples. Children didn’t consider living
things or anything that has life or can move as examples for substance. Children
were also clear about the distinction of substance in terms of solid, liquid and
gas; as also examples for solid, liquid and gas.
With regards the conceptions of solid, liquid and gas, solid was by far the
concept with which students related most easily. Stone seemed to be a prototypic
solid with ‘hardness’ being a prototypic property. The properties that dominated
children’s thinking of solid were everyday experiential properties and they did
not support the children in differentiating the idea of solid from the idea of object.
The idea of ‘liquid’ seemed to drawn from ‘water’. Liquid was also a very much
an everyday experiential conception. Gas was by far the most elusive concepts,
with hardly any real life examples that children could give for it.
Concept of solid was cognized through a prototypical property and
prototypical example. This result was in accordance with previous studies conducted
among children on the concept of solid (Stavy 1990; Mortimer 1993; Krnel, Watson
& Glazar, 1998). What was noted in this case, which is similar to the above studies,
was that children cognized the concept of solid through salient properties such as
“having a shape”, “hardness” and “heavy/has weight”. The prominence of stone as
the example of solid was very evident in children’s examples. Over 95% of children
named ‘stone’ as an example. This was followed by ‘wood’ and ‘iron’. The absence
of powders and minimum occurrence of soft materials, pliable materials were
noticeable. The rigid solids were successfully named by majority of the children as
an example for solid, but left out the non-rigid solids. Materials or objects that are
325
heavy, hard, rigid and have a definite shape are the ones that are mostly named by
children as examples for solid. Children also cognized the concept of solid through
a prototypical example such as stone and iron. These materials seemed to have the
essential qualities associated with the idea of solidity.
Assignment of non-rigid solids and powders into solid category was found
to be difficult for children. It was noticed during the Piagetian Clinical Interview
on the concept of solid, that children tend to regard any rigid material as a solid,
but non-rigid material such as sponge, cloth, paper, powder etc as “like solid”
i.e. they tend to put non-rigid solids, powders, soft, pliable, thin solids under a
new category of ‘like solids’. Children considered non-rigid, soft, pliable materials
not as a good solid and preferred to put them under the category of “like solid”.
Identification and reasoning process associated with correct classification of these
materials that are not consistent with the everyday or real life conceptions seemed
to be more demanding for children. Children found it quite difficult to bring
together an iron cube/copper cube and a sponge/thermocole to a single category
called “Solid”. Children experience solids by acting upon them for example
checking its breakability, solubility, whether can be powered etc. and tend to
represent solids as something that has a shape, hard, rigid and is unbreakable.
Rigid solids such as stone, iron were correctly classified as solid whereas non-
rigid solids elastic and plastic objects, e.g., clay, cotton, sponge, cloth were less
successfully classified. Classification of powders seems to be even more problematic.
The concept labels essential to the description of solid are hard, that which has a
shape, and rigid– terms which relate to direct tactile sensing. Among all the several
properties described hard is the most distinct property children considered essential
to idea of solidity. Hard means difficult to break distort or bend as distinct from soft
which describes things which can be broken easily, squashed or deformed in the
hand. We can say that children consider solid as a subcategory of hard things that
have a continuity of substance throughout as distinct from things which have a hollow
space inside, brittle, soluble, thin, light in weight etc. Thus we can say that the word
solid is being used by children as an adjective to describe the extent of the hard
substance in an object. An everyday conception of solid, which was based on this
property as its key defining property hence seemed to be interfering with the scientific
conception, which they were also learning in school.
The most important feature identified for liquid by the children was that
liquids flow. This was followed by absence of definite shape and finally by taking
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
326
the shape of the container in which they are placed. They also elicited properties
such as no color, cannot beheld, not hard, drinkable, has weight, needs space,
and can’t fly. Children also seemed to be using ‘water’ like a prototype and they
used this in definitions saying ‘like water’.
The concept of gas was defined in terms of its properties. The key
characteristic considered for gas was that it lacks shape followed by characteristics
such as invisible, no color, no smell, floats/fly, can breath, spreads everywhere
etc. Others were properties that seemed to suggest how elusive ‘gas’ was this
was for them to experience—being colourless, with no smell. Several other
characteristics were more to do with establishing that gas exists (it is everywhere)
and that it is ‘useful’ (it is essential for life), etc. However, this was clearly a very
difficult concept for them to grasp. Many of the children’s statements were
assertions and did not describe properties or try to define them.
Children considered the activity of classification as a task that is specific
to school context as in everyday life the act of classification was not done
intentionally. In everyday life classification or category formation is not done
as a main goal of an act rather categories are formed for a functional aspect
and done implicitly. It is the school or a formal context that demands for a
task like classification. Children used multiple strategies for classifying and
linking the materials together. They used both abstract and concrete categories
towards the formation of groups. The categories children formed included
textbook categories such as solid, liquid, gas; perceptual categories such as
shape, color, form; certain properties such as solubility, sinking, floating etc.;
and functional categories such as used in the kitchen, decorative items etc..
Some of the significant attributes of the materials that were employed by
children to assign a category and establish the identity of a material, also
extensively discussed by majority of the groups during the course of the task
included the following: materiality: - (it is made of wood, or iron, or plastic,
or cotton, etc), color, shape:-definite shape, that changes shape, bend etc,
solubility and insolubility, floating and sinking in water, heaviness, hardness,
softness, smoothness, and brittleness, breakability and that which can be
powered, natural and man-made, function of materials, those that melt, and
burn, sticky and viscous materials, transparent, translucent and opaque. The
final categories formed by the 27 groups (64 children) were based primarily
on three criteria: materiality, properties and functions and a general category
name, such as solid, liquid, gas etc.
327
Children identified unfamiliar materials by acting upon them, by seeing
what they can be used for, or what happens to them when an action is performed
on them. Examples of such actions include smelling, listening to the sound,
feeling in hand, touching, holding and weighing, checking material for its
breakability, solubility in water, floating and sinking in water, heating the
material, burning etc. A quick and successful way of identification was possible
by comparing properties of an object or material with a familiar material/object.
Solids, especially those which are rigid, heavy and have a shape are the material
that got primary attention in almost all groups for primary classification.
Children easily identified materials made up of wood, rubber, stone, metals,
marbles, brick etc. whereas materials such as carbon rod, ebonite rod, certain
liquids, fabric paint, gels etc. turned out to be unfamiliar material for them. It
was fairly straightforward for grouping liquids. The materials that posed
challenge for identification and classification were gels, creams, powders,
cotton, soft materials ebonite rod, carbon rod etc. Powders got a distinct group
or category and children found it difficult to put it under the group of solid.
The approach towards the task was mainly through the properties, function
and materiality of the familiar materials. Overall the tasks suggest that there is
no significant difference in the manner which children approached the task or
the categories formed at the context of home.
7.10 Conclusion
This chapter presented findings pertaining to children’s conceptions of matter,
as emerging from a written task, followed by a clinical interview and a
classification task followed by a clinical interview. In both these tasks what
emerged first is that the concept of substance is abstract and more often
children are dealing with and thinking in terms of ‘object’ and ‘materiality’
which are sensorially accessible ways of interacting with the everyday world.
However these concepts were not made the basis of the scientific concepts of
matter, solid, liquid, gas in the textbook. The classification task showed the
impressive capability children have to interact with and analyze materials
properties through sensorial explorations. This was a capability completely
unrecognized and unutilized by the school science curriculum for science
concept development. Instead the premature introduction of formal ideas such
as solid liquid gas sat uncomfortably with this sensorial knowledge of
materials and objects.
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
328
EndnotesC
hild
ren
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 10 20 30 40 50 60Examples
Median =15
Spread of Examples written for solid by 95 children
Spread of Examples written for substance by 113 children
2
1
329
Spread of Examples written for Gas by 64 children4
Spread of Examples written for Liquid by 92 children3
Chapter 7 – Children’s Conceptions of Matter
330
1 Doesn’t have a definite shape (20) –Invisible (19) -No color (12) - No smell (11) - Floats/Fly
(11) - Can breath (8) - Spreads everywhere (7) - Essential for the existence of life (6) Doesn’tneed space to exist (6) - Found in the atmosphere (5) - Vapor form (4) - Can’t hold (4) - Less
Dense (4) -Can be filled in tyre/balloon (4) - Molecules flows freely (3) - Has weight (3) -
Doesn’t have weight (3) - Not hard (3) - Moves Freely (3) - There are many types of gases onearth (2) - Take the shape container in which it is kept (2) - Oxygen, Hydrogen etc are
examples of gas (2) - No form (2) - like smoke (2) - Used to fly planes (1) - Used in science
for experiments and investigations (1) - Used for different purpose (1) -
There are many products that are in gaseous state, the gas used in the kitchen, spray etc.
spread in the atmosphere (1) -There are gas that are artificial (1) -
Some of the gases are dangerous (1)- Not heavy (1)- Need space to exist (1) - Less
weight (1) - Known in different name (1) - if filled in any object the object floats (1) - Have
advantages and disadvantages (1) - Has shape (1) - has molecules and atoms in it (1) - Foundin variety of colors (1) -
Found in mars (1) - Doesn’t have volume (1) - Different uses (1) - Cannot destroy (1)
- Can use for different purpose (1) - Can cause some dangers (1) - Can blow (1) - Bothvisible and invisible (1) - Attraction between molecules is less (1) - Also there are gases
that are poisonous (1)