International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning
2023, 5(2), ep2312
ISSN 2754-0618 (Online)
https://www.ijpdll.com/
Research Article
OPEN ACCESS
A teaching intervention for magnetism using STEM in
kindergarten
Vasiliki Samara 1*
, Konstantinos T. Kotsis 1
1
Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, GREECE
*Corresponding Author: samaravasiliki05@gmail.com
Citation: Samara, V., & Kotsis, K. T. (2023). A teaching intervention for magnetism using STEM in kindergarten. International Journal of
Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312. https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/13667
ABSTRACT
STEM education should begin in kindergarten, as pre-school children’s engagement with science and other fields,
such as technology, raises their awareness and interest in science (Mantzicopoulos et al., 2009). In addition, it
provides kindergarten children with the necessary opportunities to cultivate their talents (Chesloff, 2013) and
contributes to their later development (Kermani& Aldemir, 2015). Pre-school children are capable and ready to learn
with a STEM approach, as they can ask investigative questions, justify their opinions, and formulate interpretations
about how the world around them works (NSF, 2012). Given the importance of the universal introduction of STEM
in pre-school education, this work aims to design a teaching intervention in kindergarten using STEM on the topic
of magnetism. First, reference is made to the use of STEM in kindergarten and the usual learning theories on which
it is based. Then, the basic methods of its application are briefly presented. Furthermore, the theoretical framework
regarding children’s misconceptions about magnetism is presented. Subsequently, the research questions are
formulated on which the design of the educational intervention will be based, as well as the research hypotheses
arising from the bibliographic review. Then, the goals of the teaching intervention are developed in harmony with
the goals of the Greek curriculum for kindergarten, and the choice of methods, means, actions, and applications is
justified. Finally, interdisciplinary activities using STEM and the involvement of new technologies are proposed.
Keywords: STEM, kindergarten, magnetism, project
Received: 02 Aug. 2023 Accepted: 07 Sep. 2023
INTRODUCTION
STEM education seems to be an approach that improves the
knowledge and experience of individuals (Gunsen et al., 2017),
predisposes them to solve problems by making interdisciplinary
connections for situations they face in their daily lives (Tosmur et al.,
2018) and enhances their creativity (Tozlu et al., 2019). Learning about
magnetism is an important component of science education (Van Hook
& Huziak-Clark, 2007). Students’ understanding of magnets has been
studied extensively over the past 20 years, covering a wide range of age
groups, from elementary to university level.
LITERATURE REVIEW
STEM in Kindergarten
STEM education begins in kindergarten. Pre-schoolers have an
innate curiosity for inquiry, like experimenting and using various tools,
solving problems and puzzles, comparing phenomena, and objects
(Sharapan, 2012), and investigating facts, patterns, and rules.
In addition, early childhood brain development through STEM
education can contribute to later life children’s development (Kermani
& Aldemir, 2015) and minimizes possible poor performance in their
later education, enhancing the success of admission to higher education
but also in their later work career (Chesloff, 2013).
Furthermore, research has shown that including STEM in primary
education motivates students and improves learning speed (Scaradozzi
et al., 2015).
STEM is a seed for cultivating critical-thinking citizens for a digital
tomorrow, and early childhood appears to be the perfect “seed time”
(McClure et al., 2017). Children are born scientists, and every child
wonders about the objects that surround him and about the events that
happened (Akturk, 2019; Alan, 2020).
In conclusion, pre-school children appear ready and able to engage
in STEM activities. Therefore, they should be introduced to STEM
approaches from early childhood. In pre-school classrooms, where
STEM activities are conducted, children build and internalize scientific
and mathematical concepts through experimentation and exploring
various materials. In this way, STEM education provides meaningful
learning and can lead to positive future educational experiences
(Moomav & Davis, 2010).
Theories of Learning
STEM education is based on the following learning theories:
© 2023 by the authors; licensee IJPDLL by Bastas, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
2/8
Samara & Kotsis / International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312
1. In Piaget’s constructivism: A theory argues that students
build new knowledge on top of pre-existing knowledge. The
teacher’s role is to guide and aims to provide the student with
the appropriate stimuli to discover knowledge on his own
(Mödritscher, 2006).
2. In Papert’s constructivism: This theory is based on Piaget’s
Constructivism. Still, the emphasis is placed on the
“construction of knowledge”, which is constructed by the
students themselves, based on their previous knowledge, to
build new knowledge. Thus, knowledge is constructed and not
transmitted (Chatzidimitriou, 2015).
3. In Bruner’s discovery learning: A theory on constructivism
claims that students discover knowledge on their own, starting
from internal motivations, the main of which are curiosity, the
need to interact with other students to achieve common goals,
and the desire for recognition (Raptis & Raptis, 2004).
STEM Application Methods
STEM application methods are, as follows.
Project method
This method is very popular in applying STEM education. The
project method is a group learning process, where the whole group
participates actively, regulatory, and decisively (Frey, 1991).
Matsangouras defines projects as “collective, interdisciplinary work
plans of multiple intelligences” (Matsangouras, 2003). Using the project
method, the students independently implement “complex work plans,
thus developing their critical thinking and collaborative skills” by
interacting with their classmates, teacher, and social environment
(Matsangouras, 2003). The process of the method is divided into four
phases, starting with a temporal gradient view and the characterization
of the initial, middle, and final phases in the life of a project (Katz &
Chard, 2004). These four phases are, as follows:
1. Problematization
2. Planning the teaching activities
3. Conduct of activities
4. Evaluation.
This separation is not binding but is necessary for a presentation of
the activity in a more systematic way.
Problem-solving method
According to the literature (La Force et al., 2017), problem-solving
contributes to increasing students’ interest in STEM education. Also,
students develop their creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving
skills while at the same time learning to collaborate and improve their
communication skills. In addition, students’ self-confidence regarding
STEM fields is strengthened, and the likelihood of them engaging in
them in the future increases.
Exploratory method
The application of the exploratory method strengthens children’s
interest in science (Zakariah et al., 2016). The exploratory method is
appropriate for STEM education (Crippen & Archambault, 2012), as
students follow a series of steps to gather evidence to find the answers
they need to a problem in their everyday life that interests them.
Furthermore, the analysis of these elements and the presentation of the
results of their research in the form of various representations, such as
tables, diagrams, etc. This is followed by evaluating their effort and
thoroughly presenting their findings.
Engineering design process
Engineering design process includes the construction of a final
product resulting from the utilization of children’s knowledge in
mathematics and engineering to involve them mainly in the whole
process (Mann et al., 2011) in the search for possible solutions and not
so much in successful manufacturing of the product.
Planning Teaching Intervention
Children’s perceptions of magnetism
A review of the research literature reveals that there are only a
limited number of studies on children’s perceptions of magnetism, even
though children are quite familiar with related phenomena, which are
usually included in the curriculum of physical activities in kindergarten.
In some research that has been done on children’s understanding of the
concept of gravity, it has been found that children tend to associate
magnetism with gravity since they sometimes explain the existence of
gravity in terms of a magnetic force that tends to pull objects towards
earth (Driver et al., 1998).
Many researchers report that pre-school children generate theories
about objects or situations through their intuition (Bonawitz et al.,
2019; Gopnik, 2012). Young children tend to make spontaneous
operations, which they have never classified or organized conceptually
(Ravanis, 1994).
According to Bagno and Eylon (1997), several studies conclude that
students need help understanding the phenomenon of magnetism.
Children’s science misconceptions appear to be quite persistent and
particularly resistant to change (Driver et al., 1994).
Some studies conducted have shown that children explain the
attraction behavior of the magnet as an “invisible force” (Selman et al.,
1982) and use the expression “sticking” (Piaget & Chollet, 1973).
According to Barrow (2000), children mostly only have perceptions
of the attractive behavior of magnets and think that the attractive force
of magnets will increase with their size. The fact that children state that
the magnet has “miraculous” characteristics, and the use of incorrect
conceptual expressions show us that invisible situations must be
explained correctly and clearly for pre-school children to understand
the nature of science (Kalogiannakis et al., 2018).
A study by Bailey et al. (1987) investigated whether or not
elementary school students use their alternative ideas about magnetism
to predict how magnets interact. The research was conducted on 119
elementary school students. The students came to the following
conclusions:
(a) that in every interaction, the more recent it is the medium, the
greater effect it has, and
(b) that the larger the medium, the greater effect it has.
Many students thought that the older the magnet would be, the less
its magnetic strength, which is inconsistent with the scientific data.
They also considered, in their majority, that a magnet half the length of
the magnetic strip would have a less magnetic effect than a magnet
twice the size (Bailey et al., 1987).
According to Smolleck and Hershberger (2011), three-eight yearold children had the misconception that magnets attract all materials
and thought that magnets attract all metals. In addition, children
Samara & Kotsis / International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312
reported that magnets are different “colors,” “shapes,” and “sizes,” and
reported that they “have a north pole and a south pole” and that they
have “different forces. “Most children also reported that the magnets
“stick”. Some other children’s perceptions were that magnets are ‘magic’,
‘hard’, ‘stick to all metals’, ‘stick to silver’, the ‘size of the magnet’ affects
its magnetic field, the poles ‘do not attract equally’, the magnet will not
attract objects that are “heavier” than the magnet itself. Magnets will not
attract objects that are “harder”, “thicker”, “stronger,” and “bigger” than
the magnet.
Similarly, research has concluded that children under the age of
seven have difficulty distinguishing objects/materials that are attracted
to magnets from those that are not, i.e., they cannot explain magnetic
attraction (Finley, 1986; Ravanis, 1994). Gunes (2017) explained the
reasons for misconceptions in the form of “magnets only attract” and
“magnets repel nonmetals” among students in his book.
The literature also points to students’ need to be more accurate
about understanding the effect of the magnetic force produced by
magnets. “Bigger magnets are stronger than smaller magnets” is a
popular misconception among students of all grades (Gulcicek, 2004;
Lemmer et al., 2018; Smolleck & Hershberger, 2011; Tanel & Erol,
2005). The opinion that “the magnet must touch a material to attract it”
was found among students aged nine-18 years (Bar et al., 1997). Studies
have also revealed misconceptions about how far magnets can attract
materials among students at all grade levels (Bar & Zinn, 1998; Bar et
al., 1997; Hickey & Schibeci, 1999).
Implementing planned activities, enriched with various
pedagogical means, can help younger children overcome wrong
alternative ideas regarding magnetism (Samara & Kotsis, 2023). In a
study by Christidou et al. (2009), three different approaches to teaching
magnetic attraction were applied to pre-school children to investigate
their degree of effectiveness. In the first approach, emphasis was placed
on the children’s alternative understandings regarding magnets and
magnetic forces and on the interactions that appeared among the
children in the classroom. In the second approach, emphasis was placed
on children’s perceptions combined with specially designed activities
that used pedagogical tools such as storytelling, experiments, and
dramatization. The third approach was purely teacher-centered
regarding magnetic attraction. This research concluded that children
who participated in the first two approaches showed a better
understanding of magnetic attraction, while the third approach did not
seem to affect changing their initial incorrect alternative ideas
(Christidou et al., 2009).
In research conducted on the teaching of magnetism in
kindergarten with the alternative approach of reading related picture
stories, before the teaching intervention, it appeared that the children
had little knowledge about magnets and their properties. They also
needed clarification on magnets’ definition, utility, material, and origin.
They also did not know the property of the magnet to repel, only to
attract. The kids thought the magnets could attract because there was
glue on the magnets, a material they often use at their age. They still
needed to sort out which materials cause the magnetic attraction, but
they understood that magnets attract other materials besides magnets.
After the teaching intervention, the children were able to create an
adequate definition of magnets. In addition, they could correctly
identify the material from magnets. They understood that a magnet has
the property of attraction and repulsion and that this “invisible force” is
responsible for these properties. Furthermore, most children
3/8
understood the magnet’s property to attract only iron objects but
needed to identify its origin and utility before or after the teaching
intervention (Kalogiannakis et al., 2018).
In research conducted by Dimitriou (2015), the development of the
skill of sorting objects based on their interaction with the magnet and
the cultivation of the skill of sequencing magnets based on their
strength were investigated before and after the implementation of
appropriate activities designed with the application of the didactic
learning sequence. After the instruction, it was observed that the
children could sort the objects according to their property of being
attracted to the magnets and rank them according to their strength. The
classification of objects based on their property of being attracted by
magnets contradicts other research, such as the research by
Temertzidou et al. (2014), where even after the assessment, children
managed to group them into magnetic and non-magnetic materials
without error. Before instruction, children could not name any
magnetic object or only mentioned one. Only two children (out of 32)
showed the ability to identify two or three objects attracted by the
magnet but also make incorrect identifications at the same time (“nail,
paper clip, coin, and glass ornament” or (“coin, paper clip and plastic
cup”). Also, before the teaching, 18 children out of the 32 who
participated in the research, managed to put the magnets in order,
recognizing that the big one is the strongest, followed by the medium
one and the small one respectively (Dimitriou, 2015).
Ravanis (1994) argued for the necessity of playing with and
manipulating magnets for pre-schoolers to discover the reciprocal
forces of interaction.
Also, in research conducted, it was shown that the alternative
teaching method that includes the interaction of children, who
participate actively and experientially in the entire educational process,
can help them understand the concept of magnetism (Rendom et al.,
2022).
Systematic design is necessary if one wishes to create a framework
of analysis for comparing communication practices and for its role in
the construction of kindergarten activities on the concepts of magnets
and magnetic attraction (Poimenidou & Christidou 2010).
For Constantinou (2013), the children’s chronological age, and not
their cognitive maturation, in relation to a structured teaching
intervention played an important role in the performance by two
groups of children aged four-six years of two operational definitions of
a magnet (Constantinou et al., 2013).
The results from the above studies suggest that pre-school children
should be given the opportunity to try and sort different objects that are
attracted and not attracted to magnets, such as cardboard, plastic, and
metal objects (some should be iron or steel, but others should be
materials such as aluminum). In this way, children will learn that many
materials are not attracted to magnets: those that are attracted to
magnets are all metals, but not all metals are attracted to magnets.
Research Questions
1. Effectiveness in learning that magnet has push and pull
behaviors due to its positive and negative poles.
2. Effectiveness in learning that magnets attract and repel certain
materials.
3. Effectiveness in learning that magnets have different shapes
and sizes.
4/8
Samara & Kotsis / International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312
4. Do STEM activities increase children’s mathematical talk in the
reflection/expression lesson on the characteristics of magnets?
5. Is using technology in STEM activities effective in teaching the
concept of magnets to pre-school children?
Research Cases
1. Children will struggle to define the concept of magnetism for
which they draw their explanations from everyday life and
attribute magnetic attraction to some ‘electricity’, ‘air pressure’
or ‘some kind of gravity’ (Barrow, 2000).
2. Children will not know the property of the magnet to repel,
only to attract (Kalogiannakis et al., 2018).
one’s choice from one’s own computer. The application is free, requires
registration, and supports the Greek language. It is easy to use and
simple, so it is ideal for young children.
Kidspiration
It is a concept mapping software aimed at young children
(https://learningworksforkids.com/apps/kidspiration/).
Nvivo
It is a software package for processing qualitative data, which
enables the visualization of the participants’ responses in a survey, thus
helping to conclude (https://lumivero.com/products/nvivo/).
BeeBot
3. Children will assume that magnets attract all metals and include
in their answers about which materials magnets attract and
other materials that are not attracted to magnets, a perception
that is consistent with other studies (Finley, 1986; Karabacak,
2014; Ravanis, 1994; Smolleck & Hershberger, 2011).
Beebot, the “smart bee,” is a programmable floor robot specially
made for pre-schoolers and first graders (https://grobotronics.com/
bee-bot.html).
4. Activities using STEM will increase children’s mathematical
talk in the reflecting/expressing the characteristics of magnets
lesson, which agrees with the literature review (Cambell &
Speldewinde, 2022).
It is an introductory programming language that enables children
aged five and up to create their own interactive stories and games
(https://www.scratchjr.org/).
5. Children will understand that magnets have different shapes,
sizes, and colors, as mentioned in the literature review
(Smolleck & Hershberger, 2011).
6. Children will consider bigger magnets to be stronger than
smaller ones, as mentioned in the literature review (Gulcicek,
2004; Lemmer et al., 2018; Smolleck & Hershberger, 2011;
Tanel & Erol, 2005).
7. Children will consider that the distance of the magnet from the
object will affect its magnetic attraction to it since even nine-18
year olds have expressed the opinion that “the magnet has to
touch a material to attract it” (Bar et al., 1997).
ScratchJr
Activities: A & B Phase of the Project
Problematization and planning of the activities
Learning areas: New technologies–Language.
Objectives from the kindergarten curriculum (Educational Policy
Institute, 2014). The children:
-
to develop their oral language
-
to build new knowledge about magnetism on top of the old,
that is, on what they know
-
to express their opinion and their cases
Materials–media: Kidspiration software.
Pedagogical management: Work in small groups.
DESIGN & DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES:
METHOD, APPLICATIONS, OBJECTIVES,
MEANS-MATERIALS, & PEDAGOGICAL
MANAGEMENT
Method
It is recommended to use the project method, where children can
retrieve their previous ideas, visualize their perceptions and plan,
implement, and present their actions. The teaching approach will be
interdisciplinary, that is, more than one learning area will be involved
in each activity, as is consistent with the new kindergarten curriculum
(Educational Policy Institute, 2014) and the needs and abilities of preschool children.
Applications
StoryJumper
StoryJumper is a web 2.0 tool for creating illustrated e-books
(https://www.storyjumper.com/book/read/16476072/StoryJumper).
The user is given two possibilities: either to develop a descriptive story
or narrative easily and quickly by choosing one of the available readymade templates or to start from scratch. To illustrate the story, one can
use ready-made scenes and various objects but also upload photos of
Activity description: Creating histograms highlighting children’s
previous ideas through the Kidspiration application (Figure 1). Thus,
young children visualize their knowledge and are helped to structure
and process it to plan the next actions to discover new knowledge and
to overcome their false alternative ideas “represent knowledge that
cannot be expressed measurably” (Komis & Raptis, 2002).
Activities: C Phase of the Project–Implementation
Learning areas: Natural sciences–Mathematics.
Objectives from the kindergarten curriculum (Educational Policy
Institute, 2014). The children:
-
to express their ideas about the natural phenomenon of
magnetism and discuss them with others.
-
to adopt or formulate relevant questions for investigation
-
to formulate answers to the questions they investigate and
utilize the results of their investigations in new situations
Materials–media: Variety of materials: plastic, metal, magnets of
various sizes, & A3 paper.
Pedagogical management: Children work in small groups.
Samara & Kotsis / International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312
5/8
Figure 1. Kidspiration application: What do you know about the
magnets? (https://learningworksforkids.com/apps/kidspiration/)
Figure 2. StoryJumper program (https://www.storyjumper.com/
book/read/16476072/StoryJumper)
Activities’ Description
Activity Description
Activity 1
The children put the magnets in order, from the smallest to the
largest magnet, and vice versa. They also make groupings of the objects,
based on the materials that are attracted and the materials that are
repelled by the magnets.
Children are given a variety of materials, plastic, metal, small and
large, as well as magnets of various sizes with which they experiment
and form their perceptions of which materials are attracted or not. A
child is designated as the representative of each group, who will present
the conclusions of his group’s action at the end of the activity.
Activity 2
The conclusions will be recorded using the painting technique: the
children will divide the A3 paper into two parts: objects attracted by a
magnet and objects not attracted by a magnet.
Activity 3
With the help of phonological awareness, the children write the
names of these two groups and the names of the objects that are
attracted or not by the magnet.
Activity 4
Children in groups test magnets of different sizes, new and old, for
how well they attract different objects, record their answers about how
many objects each magnet attracted, discuss with each other the results
of their actions and the representative of each group presents to the
other groups the conclusions of his group.
Learning area: Mathematics.
Objectives from the kindergarten curriculum (Educational Policy
Institute, 2014). The children:
-
-
to think about and investigate various situations, rely on
previous knowledge and experiences, make simple
assumptions, and come to relevant conclusions.
to “interpret” general elements of the world around them
through processes of observation and description, comparison,
classification, matching, sequencing, and symbolic
representation.
Materials–media: magnets of various sizes, various materials:
plastic & metal.
Pedagogical management: Work in small groups.
Learning areas: New technologies–Language.
Objectives from the kindergarten curriculum (Educational Policy
Institute, 2014). The children:
-
to cooperate in groups to produce a project and respect the
opinions and work of others.
-
to develop their oral language.
Materials–media: StoryJumper application & photos of the
children’s activities.
Pedagogical management: Work in small groups.
Activity description: Create an electronic book with photos of
the children’s actions from their interaction with the magnets, as well
as create comments under each photo that will concern their
conclusions for each action, with StoryJumper program (Figure 2).
Learning areas: Robotics–Art.
1. Bee-Bot
Objectives from the kindergarten curriculum (Educational Policy
Institute, 2014). The children:
-
to familiarize themselves with the correct use of simple robots
Materials–media: Bee-bot robot, tape measure, markers, and
other painting materials.
Pedagogical management: Work in small groups.
Activity description: Children use simple materials to create a
floor path for their robot Bee-Bot and program it to only move towards
the area, where there are magnetic objects.
2. ScratchJr
Objectives from the kindergarten curriculum (Educational Policy
Institute, 2014). The children:
-
to investigate, experiment, model, and discover knowledge
-
to develop the ability to judge and make decisions and solve
problems
Materials–media: ScratchJr.
6/8
Samara & Kotsis / International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312
has only an encouraging, facilitating and mediating role both between
the students and between the students and the technological tools.
In the present work, a project is developed, based on STEM
education, since, as evidenced by the literature review, STEM can help
children change their wrong alternative ideas about the properties of
magnetism and thus understand the specific concept better. The results
and conclusions from implementing the project in a kindergarten
served by the researcher will be presented in subsequent work.
Author contributions: Both authors were involved in concept, design,
collection of data, interpretation, writing, and critically revising the article.
Both authors approved the final version of the article.
Figure 3. ScratchJr software (https://www.scratchjr.org/)
Pedagogical management: Work in small groups.
Activity description: Through ScratchJr program, children can
give their hero, which can be, for example, their well-known bee BeeBot, which in our case, will attract and be attracted by magnetic objects,
simple commands, such as to move only in the area, where metal objects
are present, to reach its destination (Figure 3).
Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research and/or
authorship of this article.
Ethics declaration: The authors declared that the study does not require
ethical approval since it is based on existing literature.
Declaration of interest: Authors declare no competing interest.
Data availability: Data generated or analyzed during this study are
available from the authors on request.
REFERENCES
D Phase of the Project–Evaluation
Learning areas: New technologies–Robotics.
Objectives from the kindergarten curriculum (Educational Policy
Institute, 2014). The children:
-
-
to compare their initial alternative perceptions and their
perceptions after implementing the activities using appropriate
applications of new technologies
to develop their oral language
Means: NVivo application.
Pedagogical management: work alone
Activity description: Transcribing the children’s answers and
entering this data into the qualitative analysis software NVivo
(https://lumivero.com/products/nvivo/) through two-dimensional
expansive graphs, stereoscopic analysis, text search query to visualize
the answers of the children, before and after the teaching intervention,
as a means of evaluating it for the kindergarten teacher and the children.
Also, new data may emerge in this way, leading to an extension of the
teaching intervention. NVivo can also be used as a concept mapping
tool at the initial stage of the project when the histogram of the
children’s ideas is created.
CONCLUSIONS
Various attempts have been made occasionally to teach primary
education concepts of sciences, such as the concept of magnetism. From
the evaluation of these efforts, it follows that the teaching of natural
concepts to children is much more effective when it is enriched with
tools such as the telling of related stories, experiments, theatre,
storytelling, tools that are also STEM tools, as long as it is used the
appropriate technological equipment.
STEM is not difficult for teachers to apply to children since no
specialized technological knowledge is required, but the active
participation of children throughout the educational process is required
for the tasks to arise from the students themselves, and the teacher to it
Akturk, A. A. (2019). Development of a STEM based engineering design
curriculum for parental involvement in early childhood education
[Doctoral thesis, Middle East Technical University].
Alan, U. (2020). Investigation of the effectiveness of STEM education
program for preschoolers [Master’s thesis, Hacettepe University].
Bagno, E., & Eylon, B.-S. (1997). From problem solving to a knowledge
structure: An example from the domain of electromagnetism.
Amrican Journal of Physics, 65(8), 726-736. https://doi.org/10.1119/
1.18642
Bailey, J., Francis, R. G., & Hill, D. M. (1987). Exploring ideas about
magnets. Research in Science Education, 17, 113-116. https://doi.org/
10.1007/BF02357178
Bar, V., & Zinn, B. (1998). Similar frameworks of action-at-a-distance:
Early scientists’ and pupils’ ideas. Science and Education, 7, 471-498.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008687204309
Bar, V., Zinn, B., & Rubin, E. (1997). Children’s ideas about action at a
distance. International Journal of Science Education, 19(10), 1137-1157.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970191003
Barrow, H. (2000). Do elementary science methods textbooks facilitate
the understanding of magnet concepts? Journal of Science Education
and Technology, 9(3), 199-205.
Bonawitz, E., Ullman, T. D., Bridgers, S., Gopnik, A., & Tenenbaum, J.
B. (2019). Sticking to the evidence? A behavioral and computational
case study of micro-theory change in the domain of magnetism.
Cognitive Science, 43(8), e12765. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.
12765
Cambell, C., & Speldewinde, C. (2022). Early childhood STEM
education for sustainable development. Sustainability, 14(6), 3524.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063524
Chatzidimitriou, P. (2015). Creating a technology-supported learning
environment in the context of STEM education by combining the
collaborative Jigsaw strategy with cognitive learning methods for primary
school education. https://dione.lib.unipi.gr/xmlui/handle/unipi/
9266
Samara & Kotsis / International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312
Chesloff. D. (2013). STEM education must start in early childhood.
Education Week, 32, 32-27.
Christidou, V., Kazela, K., Kakana, D., & Valakosta, M. (2009).
Teaching magnetic attraction to preschool children: A comparison
of different approaches. The International Journal of Learning Annual
Review, 16(2), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/
v16i02/46130
7/8
Karabacak, U. (2014). Öz düzenleme ve ilköğretim ikinci kademeö
ğrencilerinin fen başarısının incelenmesi [Examination of self-regulation
and science achievements of the 2nd levels of primary school students]
[Master’s thesis, Balikesir University].
Katz, L. G., & Chard, S. C. (2004). The project method: The development of
critical thinking and creativity of preschool children. Atrapos.
Constantinou, C., Raftopoulos, A., Spanoudes, G., & Natsopoulos, D.
(2013). Pre-schoolers’ construction of operational definitions in
magnetism. The Journal of Emergent Science, 5, 6-21.
Kermani, H., & Aldemir, J. (2015). Preparing children for success:
Integrating science, math, and technology in early childhood
classroom. Early Child Development and Care, 185(9), 1504-1527.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2015.1007371
Crippen, K. J., & Archambault, L. (2012). Scaffolded inquiry-based
instruction with technology: A signature pedagogy for STEM
education. Computers in the Schools, 29(1-2), 157-173. https://doi.org
/10.1080/07380569.2012.658733
Komis, B., & Raptis, A. (2002).Computational modeling in the teaching
and learning of science. In Proceedings of the 3rd Panhellenic
Conference & Teaching of Natural Sciences and Application of New
Technologies in Education (pp. 52-57).
Dimitriou, D. (2015). Cultivating science skills in kindergarten by teaching
magnets and their properties. http://dspace.uowm.gr/xmlui/handle/
123456789/200
La Force, M., Noble, E., & Blackwell, C. (2017). Problem-based learning
(PBL) and student interest in STEM careers: The roles of
motivation and ability beliefs. Education Sciences, 7(4), 92.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7040092
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994).
Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational
Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X
023007005
Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1998).
Building science concepts. A global summary of student ideas. Print.
Educational Policy Institute. (2014). New curriculum for kindergarten.
https://www.esos.gr/sites/default/files/articleslegacy/1947_1o_m
eros_pps_nipiagogeioy.pdf
Finley, F.-N. (1986). Evaluating instruction: The complementary use of
clinical interviews. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(7), 635650.
Frey, K. (1991). Project method. Kyriakidis.
Gopnik, A. (2012). Scientific thinking in Young children: Theoretical
advances, empirical research, and policy implications. Science,
337(6102), 1623-1627. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1223416
Gulcicek, N. (2004). Kavramsal değişim metinlerinin öğrencilerin
manyetizma konusunu anlamalarına ve fizik tutumlarına etkisi [The
effect of conceptual change texts on students’ understanding on magnetism
subject and attitudes towards physics] [Unpublished master’s thesis].
Gazi University, Ankara.
Gunes, B. (2017). Doğru bilinen yanlışlardan, yanlış bilinen doğrulara:
Fizikte kavram yanılgıları [From correct known incorrect to incorrect
known corrects]. Palme Yayıncılık [Palme Publishing].
Gunsen, G., Fazlioglu, Y., & Bayir, E. (2017). STEM-based preschool
teaching application example and its effects on 5-year-old children:
“Come on, we make our drinking water!” In Proceedings of the 6th
International Eurasian Educational Research Congress.
Hickey, R., & Schibeci, R. A. (1999). The attraction of magnetism.
Physics Education, 34(6), 383-388. https://doi.org/10.1088/00319120/34/6/408
Kalogiannakis, M., Nirgianaki, G.-M., & Papadakis, S. (2018). Teaching
magnetism to preschool children: The effectiveness of picture story
reading. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46, 535-546.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0884-4
Lemmer, M., Kriek, J., & Erasmus, B. (2018). Analysis of students’
conceptions of basic magnetism from a complex systems
perspective. Research in Science Education, 50, 375-392.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9693-z
Mann, E. L., Mann, R. L., Strutz, M. L., Duncan, D., & Yoon, S. Y.
(2011). Integrating engineering into K-6 curriculum: Developing
talent in the STEM disciplines. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(4),
639-658. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X11415007
Mantzicopoulos, P., Samarapungavan, A., & Patrick, H. (2009). The
development and validation of the science learning assessment
(SLA): A measure of kindergarten science learning. Journal of
Advanced Academics, 20(3), 502-535. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1932202X0902000306
Matsangouras, H. (2003). Intersubjectivity in school knowledge. Grigori.
McClure, E., Guernsey, L., Clements, D., Bales, S., Nichols, J., KendallTaylor, N., & Levine, M. H. (2017). STEM starts early: Grounding
science, technology, engineering, and math education in early childhood.
The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
Mödritscher, F. (2006). E-learning theories in practice: A comparison
of three methods. Journal of Universal Science and Technology of
Learning, 0(0), 3-18.
Moomaw, S., & Davis, J. (2010). STEM comes to preschool. Young
Children, 65(5), 12-18.
NSF. (2012). STEM education. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/digest12/
stem.cfm
Piaget, J., & Chollet, M. (1973). Le problème de l’attraction à propos des
aimants [The problem of attraction about magnets]. In J. Piaget (Ed.),
La formation de la notion de force [The formation of the concept of force]
(223-243). PUF.
Poimenidou, Μ., & Christidou, V. (2010). Communication practices
and the construction of meaning: Science activities in the kindergarden. Creative Education, 1(2), 81-92. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.
2010.12013
Raptis, A., & Raptis, A. (2004). Learning and teaching in the information
age–A holistic approach. Self-Published.
8/8
Samara & Kotsis / International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2312
Ravanis, K. (1994). The discovery of elementary magnetic properties in
preschool age. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal,
2(2), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502939485207621
Rendon, J. D. L., Doloretos, N. L., Capilitan, L. B., Dumaan, D. L.,
Mamada, M. J. D., & Mercado, J. C. (2022). Alternative teaching
methods in electricity and magnetism. International Journal of
Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 3(8), 16001606. https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.03.08.23
Samara, V., & Kotsis, K. T. (2023). The use of new technologies and
robotics (STEM) in the teaching of sciences in primary education:
The concept of magnetism: A bibliographic review. European
Journal of Education Studies, 10(2), 51-64. https://doi.org/10.46827/
ejes.v10i2.4652
Scaradozzi, D., Sorbi, L., Pedale, A., Valzano, M., & Vergine, C. (2015).
Teaching robotics at the primary school: An innovative approach.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 3838-3846.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.1122
Selman, R. L., Krupa, M. P., Stone, C. R., & Jacquette, D. S. (1982).
Concrete operational thought and the emergence of the concept of
unseen force in children’s theories of electromagnetism and gravity.
Science Education, 66, 181-194. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.
3730660205https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ262225
Sharapan, H. (2012). From STEM to STEAM: How early childhood
educators can apply Fred Rogers’ approach. Young Children, 67(1),
36.
Smolleck, L., & Hershberger, V. (2011). Playing with science: An
investigation of young children’s science conceptions and
misconceptions. Current Issues in Education, 14(1), 1-32.
Tanel, Z., & Erol, M. (2005). Lisans düzeyindeki öğrencilerin manyetik
alan şiddeti, manyetik akı yoğunluğu ve manyetizasyon
kavramlarına yönelik yanılgıları [Misconceptions of undergraduate
students on the magnitude of magnetic field, magnetic flux density
and magnetization]. Türk Fizik Derneği [Turkish Physical Society], 23.
Temertzidou, E., Papadopoulou, P., & Kariotoglou, P. (2014). A study
of preschool children’s skills in classifying materials based on their
magnetic properties. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(2)
Tosmur-Bayazit, N., Akaygun, S., Demir, K., & Aslan-Tutak, F. (2018).
An example of STEM teacher professional development:
Exploration of edible cars activity from teacher education
perspective. Journal of Science Teaching, 6(2), 213-232.
Tozlu, I., Gulseven, E., & Tuysuz, M. (2019). Activity application for
STEM education: Sample of force and energy. Yuzuncu Yil
University Journal of Education Faculty, 16(1), 869-896.
https://doi.org/10.23891/efdyyu.2019.145
Van Hook, S., & Huziak-Clark, T. (2007). Tip-to tail: Developing a
conceptual model of magnetism with kindergartens using inquiry
based instruction. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 19(2), 4558. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173662
Zakariah, N. D., Kamarrudin, H., Tompang, Ε, Mohtar, L. E., & Halim,
L. (2016). STEM teaching strategies of primary school science
teachers: An exploratory study. https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/311693544_STEM_Teaching_Strategies_of_Primary_
School_Science_Teachers_An_Exploratory_Study