‘The Hole in the Sky Causes Global Warming’: A Case Study of Secondary School Students’ Climate Change Alternative Conceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study identified secondary school students’ alternativeconceptions (ACs) of climate change and their resistance to instruction. Usinga case-based approach, a diagnostic test was administered to Secondary 3 malestudents in a pre-test and post-test. The ACs identified in the pre-test wereon the causes of climate change, the natural greenhouse effect and itsproperties, the enhancement of the greenhouse effect, the elements involved inheat-trapping and their characteristics. There were also notable ACs on theeffects of climate change, mostly on how the phenomenon is related tonon-atmospheric events such as tsunami, earthquakes, acid rain and skin cancer.The students confuse the Montreal with the Kyoto Protocol as the primary treatyaimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions. Whereas there was significantimprovement in students’ understanding in the post-test, the distribution ofresponses for each of the ACs showed that the reduction in erroneous responseswas not sufficient to reject the ACs fully. The authors recommend thatinstruction should move beyond patchwork pedagogy to a more explicitacknowledgement, incorporation and direct refutation of misconceived knowledgestructures.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".