An investigation of learners' understanding of electrostatics illustrations in school textbooks

Abstract

The main research question to be answered in this study was: How do Grade 10 learners understand electrostatic illustrations from school textbooks? Illustrations are used in school textbooks to communicate abstract or difficult information; this is also the case with Physical Science textbooks. Often these illustrations are simplified to try and convey only the most important aspects of what is intended. This, unfortunately, sometimes leave room for misconceptions as the illustration is then simplified to an extent where it might not be scientifically accurate. The three types of illustrations that pertain to this study were diagrams, photographs and scientific models. In order for learners to learn effectively using illustrations there need to be sufficient understanding of the topic at hand as well as the conventions used in the type of illustration. Prior knowledge, therefore, play an important role in the helpfulness of illustrations. A cohort of 70 Grade 10 Physical science learners from a South African high school (in the North-West Province) took part in the pragmatic sequential mixed method study. A questionnaire was developed in order to probe the prior knowledge (including misconceptions) of the participants after which an interview was conducted with nine of the learners. Both the questionnaire results and the interviews were processed in order to answer the research questions. In the questionnaire consistency in learners’ responses were determined by using the Cronbach-Alpha method and correlations between questions were draw with the aid of Cohen’s effect sizes. The interviews were analysed by coding and mind-maps. The results concluded that learners do struggle to understand electrostatics illustrations from school textbooks. Also when learners with a higher pre-knowledge answer questions they depend less on illustrations and more on their pre-knowledge. Learners with less pre-knowledge depend more on the different features of the illustration than the intended meaning.