Alternative conceptions and students’ achievement in basic science and technology: Evidence from upper basic education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58524/jasme.v6i1.1099Keywords:
Alternative Conceptions, Basic Science and Technology, Science Learning, Students’ Achievement, Upper Basic EducationAbstract
Background: In science education, students are expected to develop an understanding of concepts, principles, and scientific reasoning. However, many learners enter the classroom with pre-existing alternative conceptions shaped by their everyday experiences. These prior understandings may not always align with scientific explanations and can influence how students engage with and interpret new knowledge in Basic Science and Technology.
Aims: Building on this concern, the present study examined the relationship between alternative conceptions and students’ achievement in Basic Science and Technology among Upper Basic Education learners.
Method: To address this aim, an ex-post facto descriptive research design was employed. A total of 398 Upper Basic Education 1 students were selected from three educational zones in Benue State, Nigeria. Data were collected using the Basic Science Alternative Conceptions Identification Checklist and the corresponding achievement test. The data were analyzed using frequency counts, percentages, mean, standard deviation, and t-test at a 0.05 level of significance.
Results: The analysis indicated that students held alternative conceptions across multiple Basic Science concepts. These conceptions were found to have a significant negative influence on students’ achievement. In addition, the findings revealed no significant difference in the influence of alternative conceptions on achievement between male and female students.
Conclusion: Overall, the study highlights that alternative conceptions remain prevalent among Upper Basic Education students and play a significant role in shaping their achievement in Basic Science and Technology. Addressing these conceptions through appropriate instructional strategies is therefore essential for improving students’ learning outcomes.
References
Albadarin, Y., Saqr, M., Pope, N., & Tukiainen, M. (2024). A systematic literature review of empirical research on ChatGPT in education. Discover Education, 3(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00138-2
Al-Mamary, Y. H. S. (2022). Understanding the use of learning management systems by undergraduate university students using the UTAUT model: Credible evidence from Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 2(2), 100092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jjimei.2022.100092
Almasri, F. (2024). Exploring the Impact of Artificial Intelligence in Teaching and Learning of Science: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. Research in Science Education, 54(5), 977–997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10176-3
Ardoin, N. M., & Heimlich, J. E. (2021a). Environmental learning in everyday life: Foundations of meaning and a context for change. Environmental Education Research, 27(12), 1681–1699. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1992354
Ardoin, N. M., & Heimlich, J. E. (2021b). Environmental learning in everyday life: Foundations of meaning and a context for change. Environmental Education Research, 27(12), 1681–1699. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.1992354
Asberger, J., Thomm, E., & Bauer, J. (2021). On predictors of misconceptions about educational topics: A case of topic specificity. PLOS ONE, 16(12), e0259878. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259878
Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2023). The Impact of Physics Education Technology (PhET) Interactive Simulation-Based Learning on Motivation and Academic Achievement Among Malawian Physics Students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(1), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-10010-3
Bryce, T. G. K., & Blown, E. J. (2024). Ausubel’s meaningful learning re-visited. Current Psychology, 43(5), 4579–4598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04440-4
Cho, Y., & Park, K. S. (2023). Designing Immersive Virtual Reality Simulation for Environmental Science Education. Electronics, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12020315
Conrad, D., & Libarkin, J. C. (2022). Using Conceptual Metaphor Theory within the Model of Educational Reconstruction to identify students’ alternative conceptions and improve instruction: A plate tectonics example. Journal of Geoscience Education, 70(2), 262–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2021.1983941
Dare, E. A., Keratithamkul, K., Hiwatig, B. M., & Li, F. (2021). Beyond Content: The Role of STEM Disciplines, Real-World Problems, 21st Century Skills, and STEM Careers within Science Teachers’ Conceptions of Integrated STEM Education. Education Sciences, 11(11), 737. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11110737
Dost, G. (2024). Students’ perspectives on the ‘STEM belonging’ concept at A-level, undergraduate, and postgraduate levels: An examination of gender and ethnicity in student descriptions. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00472-9
Fries, L., Son, J. Y., Givvin, K. B., & Stigler, J. W. (2021). Practicing Connections: A Framework to Guide Instructional Design for Developing Understanding in Complex Domains. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 739–762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09561-x
Fujiyama, H., Kamo, Y., & Schafer, M. (2021). Peer effects of friend and extracurricular activity networks on students’ academic performance. Social Science Research, 97, 102560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2021.102560
Han, F. (2021). The Relations between Teaching Strategies, Students’ Engagement in Learning, and Teachers’ Self-Concept. Sustainability, 13(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095020
Hartelt, T., Martens, H., & Minkley, N. (2022). Teachers’ ability to diagnose and deal with alternative student conceptions of evolution. Science Education, 106(3), 706–738. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21705
Heyder, A., Weidinger, A. F., & Steinmayr, R. (2021). Only a Burden for Females in Math? Gender and Domain Differences in the Relation Between Adolescents’ Fixed Mindsets and Motivation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 50(1), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01345-4
Hsieh, T.-L., & Yu, P. (2023). Exploring achievement motivation, student engagement, and learning outcomes for STEM college students in Taiwan through the lenses of gender differences and multiple pathways. Research in Science & Technological Education, 41(3), 1072–1087. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1983796
Kolil, V. K., & Achuthan, K. (2024). Virtual labs in chemistry education: A novel approach for increasing student’s laboratory educational consciousness and skills. Education and Information Technologies, 29(18), 25307–25331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12858-x
Korlat, S., Kollmayer, M., Holzer, J., Lüftenegger, M., Pelikan, E. R., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2021). Gender Differences in Digital Learning During COVID-19: Competence Beliefs, Intrinsic Value, Learning Engagement, and Perceived Teacher Support. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.637776
Mason, L., & Zaccoletti, S. (2021). Inhibition and Conceptual Learning in Science: A Review of Studies. Educational Psychology Review, 33(1), 181–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09529-x
Matsler, A. M., Meerow, S., Mell, I. C., & Pavao-Zuckerman, M. A. (2021). A ‘green’ chameleon: Exploring the many disciplinary definitions, goals, and forms of “green infrastructure.” Landscape and Urban Planning, 214, 104145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104145
McDonald, B., & Kanske, P. (2023). Gender differences in empathy, compassion, and prosocial donations, but not theory of mind in a naturalistic social task. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 20748. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-47747-9
Meli, K., Koliopoulos, D., & Lavidas, K. (2022). A Model-Based Constructivist Approach for Bridging Qualitative and Quantitative Aspects in Teaching and Learning the First Law of Thermodynamics. Science & Education, 31(2), 451–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00262-7
Mladenovici, V., Ilie, M. D., Maricuțoiu, L. P., & Iancu, D. E. (2022). Approaches to teaching in higher education: The perspective of network analysis using the revised approaches to teaching inventory. Higher Education, 84(2), 255–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-021-00766-9
Morris, D. L. (2025). Rethinking Science Education Practices: Shifting from Investigation-Centric to Comprehensive Inquiry-Based Instruction. Education Sciences, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010073
Potvin, P. (2023a). Response of science learners to contradicting information: A review of research. Studies in Science Education, 59(1), 67–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.2004006
Potvin, P. (2023b). Response of science learners to contradicting information: A review of research. Studies in Science Education, 59(1), 67–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.2004006
Sreelohor, T., Jakpeng, S., & Chaijaroen, S. (2025). Constructivist Learning Environment Model for Rectifying Secondary Students’ Misconceptions in Learning Science: Design Development and Validation Phases. Journal of Education and Learning, 14(6), 418–434.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Johnson Mhile Yaapera, Terungwa James Age
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
