Elementary School Students’ Mental Models about Formation of Seasons: A Cross Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The purpose of this study is to determine the mental models of elementary school students on seasons and to analyze how these models change in terms of grade levels. The study was conducted with 294 students (5<sup>th</sup>, 6<sup>th</sup>, 7<sup>th</sup> and 8<sup>th</sup> graders) studying in an elementary school of Turkey’s Black Sea Region. Qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were used in the study. The students first were asked 3 open ended questions (one of them was a drawing) in order to determine their mental models on seasons. Following this, the students took an achievement test on seasons that consisted of 4 multiple questions. Quantitative data were analyzed by SPSS 20.0 while the qualitative data were analyzed by the researchers by using content analysis technique. The results of the study showed that the students construct the formation of seasons in various ways in their minds. However, differently from the literature, the presence of some new mental models was found. For a full understanding of the seasons, the necessity of a set of pre-learnings has been recommended. It will be useful to design basic activities based on hands-on and learning by doing which will enable the most effective learning and to put this in the textbooks in the most suitable way. Additionally tangible physical-scale hands-on models, 3D simulation modeling and planetarium environment should be used in students’ education about formation of seasons.</p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".