Cited by 98Science Education and PedagogyProblem and Project Based LearningScience Education and Perceptions

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Posing Problems for Open Investigations: What questions do pupils ask?

Chin, Christine, Kayalvizhi, G.·2002·Research in Science & Technological Education

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to (a) find out the types of questions that pupils ask for open-ended science investigations, and (b) discuss how teachers can help pupils to identify problems and pose questions that are feasible for investigations. The study was conducted in a class of 39 primary 6 pupils of mixed ability. The pupils wrote down questions for two investigations that they would like to work on. The questions for the first investigation were generated individually, but those for the second investigation were posed in groups after the pupils were shown some examples of investigable questions. Among the questions that were posed individually, only 11.7% could be answered by performing hands-on investigations. Most of the questions asked were based on general knowledge and covered a wide range of topics. However, when questions were generated in groups after examples were shown, there was a significant increase in the number of questions that were amenable to science investigations (71.4%) but they related to fewer topics. A typology of investigable and non-investigable questions is proposed. Suggestions on how teachers can help pupils to pose problems and questions that are feasible for investigations are given.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0263514022000030499

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 55

  1. WOOLNOUGH B., 1989, Skills and Processes in Science Education
  2. WOOLNOUGH B.E., 1991, Practical Science
  3. WOOLNOUGH B., 1985, Practical Work in Science
  4. ALFKE D., 1974, Science and Children, 11, 18
  5. 10.1002/sce.3730700109 · DOI
  6. 10.1007/BF02357384 · DOI
  7. ARENA P., 1996, Australian Science Teachers Journal, 42, 34
  8. 10.1007/BF02356821 · DOI
  9. 10.1080/0263514860040108 · DOI
  10. BLOSSER P.E., 1995, How to Ask the Right Questions
  11. CARR D., 1998, School Science Review, 79, 47
  12. 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200002)37:2<109::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-7 · DOI
  13. CHIN C., 2002, Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 25, 70
  14. 10.1007/BF02356327 · DOI
  15. CROSSLAND J.H., 1993, Primary Science Review, 28, 16
  16. DlXON N., 1996, Primary Science Review, 44, 8
  17. 10.1080/0950069950170201 · DOI
  18. DUNKHASE J.A., 1990, Journal of College Science Teaching, 19, 367
  19. ELSTGEEST J., 1985, Primary Science: Taking the Plunge
  20. FAIRBROTHER R.W., 1988, Assessment of Practical Work for the GCSE
  21. 10.1080/03057268608559931 · DOI
  22. KATZ L.G., 1998, EPIC Digest
  23. 10.1007/BF02461565 · DOI
  24. 10.3102/00028312031002338 · DOI
  25. KOUFETTA-MENlCOU C., 2000, School Science Review, 81, 79
  26. KRAJCIK J., 1999, Teaching Children Science: A Project-based Approach
  27. 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199605)33:5<475::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI
  28. 10.1080/00461520.1986.9653026 · DOI
  29. GOLDSWORTHY A., 1998, Primary Science Review, 53, 15
  30. GOTT R., 1995, Investigative Work in the Science Curriculum
  31. HARLEN W., 1996, The Teaching of Science in Primary Schools,
  32. 10.1080/03057269308560022 · DOI
  33. JELLY S., 1985, Primary Science: Taking the Plunge
  34. KULAS L.L., 1995, Science and Children, 32, 16
  35. 10.1080/713694953 · DOI
  36. LOCK R., 1990, School Science Review, 71, 63
  37. 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1991.tb12088.x · DOI
  38. MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, 2001, Science Syllabus: Primary
  39. NEWELI A., 1972, Human Problem-solving
  40. 10.1002/tea.3660300203 · DOI
  41. 10.1007/BF01538162 · DOI
  42. 10.1207/s1532690xci0903_1 · DOI
  43. 10.1002/tea.3660280910 · DOI
  44. SELLEY N., 1992, Primary Science Renew, 21, 3
  45. 10.1002/sce.3730790506 · DOI
  46. 10.1080/0141192920180107 · DOI
  47. SYMINGTON , D.J. 1980. “Scientific problems seen by primary school pupils”. Australia: Monash University. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis,
  48. 10.1002/sce.3730650503 · DOI
  49. TYTLER R., 1992, School Science Review, 74, 21
  50. WATSON R., 1999, School Science Review, 80, 101
  51. WATTS M., 1991, The Science of Problem-solving
  52. WATTS M., 1995, School Science Review, 76, 91
  53. WATTS M., 1997, School Science Review, 79, 57
  54. WHlTE R.T., 1977, Australian Science Teachers'Journal, 23, 124
  55. 10.1002/sce.3730580118 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Chin, C., & Kayalvizhi, G.
Venue
Research in Science & Technological Education
Published
2002-12
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
269-287
ISSN
  • 0263-5143 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1138
OpenAlex
W2047123682
Cited by
98
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
FWCI
6.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Research in Science & Technological Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Science Education and Perceptions
Keywords
problem posing, elementary school students, hands-on experiments

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review