INT. J. SCI. EDUC., 2002, VOL. 24, NO.

6, 575–591

RESEARCH REPORT

Struggling to understand abstract science topics: a

Roundhouse diagram-based study

Robin E. Ward and James H. Wandersee, University of Louisiana at

Lafayette and Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, USA

This study explored the effects of Roundhouse diagram construction on a previously low-performing
middle school science student’s struggles to understand abstract science concepts and principles. It is
based on a metacognition-based visual learning model proposed by Wandersee in 1994. Ward and
Wandersee introduced the Roundhouse diagram strategy and showed how it could be applied in science
education. This article aims at elucidating the process by which Roundhouse diagramming helps lear-
ners bootstrap their current understandings to reach the intended meaningful understanding of complex
science topics. The main findings of this study are that (a) it is crucial that relevant prior knowledge and
dysfunctional alternative conceptions not be ignored during new learning if low-performing science
students are to understand science well; (b) as the student’s mastery of the Roundhouse diagram
construction improved, so did science achievement; and (c) the student’s apt choice of concept-related
visual icons aided progress toward meaningful understanding of complex science concepts.

Introduction
Traditionally speaking, students who are poor readers are limited in their ability to
understand and apply difficult ideas during science instruction. Current science
textbooks and methods of instruction emphasize the learning of factual informa-
tion and they test primarily for recall (Mintzes and Wandersee 1998). Often the
information teachers present to students is straight out of the textbook, providing
only one point of view of complex, abstract concepts. Many times rote memoriza-
tion is rewarded, rather than critical thinking and reflection. Isolated facts are
valued over integrated scientific understandings, where concepts in subsystems
are related to a larger system and other systems. Actively constructing conceptual
knowledge is not encouraged, and many topics are retaught in isolation and with
needless detail (Langer 1997). The long-established tradition in education, espe-
cially in the sciences, is the transmission of information from teacher and text to
students – as generalized, idealized, logically organized knowledge (i.e., a prefab-
ricated knowledge structure). Research has repeatedly revealed that when instruc-
tional strategies do not lead students to grasp the meaning of a learning task, then
the learners’ confidence wanes (Novak and Gowin 1984).
Learners who learn primarily by rote fail to develop such knowledge integra-
tion and often fill the gaps with alternative conceptions to support their conceptual
house of cards (Novak 1998). Students who rely on rote learning may memorize
enough to pass a test but often do not understand the material well enough to apply
it outside of class. Teachers need to be selective about what they chose to teach and
International Journal of Science Education ISSN 0950–0693 print/ISSN 1464–5289 online # 2002 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/09500690110074017
576 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

realize that teaching for meaningful learning of less – but more carefully chosen –
science content material may ultimately be more beneficial, though it may also be
more time consuming (Mintzes and Wandersee 1998).
Across recent decades, cognitive scientists have studied how human memory
works, in order to discover relationships between knowledge structures and infor-
mation processing. Educators who study cognition use terms such as ‘deep under-
standing’ and ‘meaningful learning’ that refer to how concepts are represented and
connected by learners. Learning should ultimately consist of retained or recon-
structable, useful knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Cognitive research is relevant to
education because of the need to understand how children learn and what mental
processes one utilizes in order to solve problems (Bruer 1993).

Rationale
Research indicates that meaningful learning benefits learners by increasing their
ability to store and access information effectively. Learners often create mental
models – pictures or images of concepts in their mind, especially if information has
been well-organized. Organizational techniques involve sorting out principal
themes within the structure of a text, and making clear the pattern and nature of
the links within it, from one concept to the next. Ausubel (1963: 43) made an
important distinction between meaningful and rote learning, saying:
Rote learning tasks can only be incorporated into cognitive structures in the form of
self-contained entities organizationally isolated from the learner’s conceptual systems.
The learner must learn certain facts but should then begin to assimilate and inte-
grate them into concepts, constructs, principles, and conceptual frameworks.
These frameworks are based on the learner’s ever-evolving prior knowledge.
Ausubel’s (1968) assimilation theory of cognitive learning places emphasis on
the importance of prior knowledge to provide an anchor point with which to
link new information.
There are central tenets in the comprehension process based on schema the-
ory. First, an individual must have prior knowledge in the form of knowledge
templates about how the world works, and these are known as ‘schema’. Second,
assimilation occurs when new information enters into an existing schema.
Accommodation involves adjusting prior knowledge to incorporate new informa-
tion. Third, the learner may decide to reject the new information if it doesn’t seem
to fit. The connections to prior knowledge are also influenced by ones current
schemata (Wittrock 1994).
When meaningful learning takes place, that implies that information has been
well-represented and well-connected. Our knowledge is represented in synaptic
patterns due to neural activation of the numerous interconnected brain cells. ‘The
strength of these connections is determined by experience and learning’ (Solso
1994: 262). The greater the interconnectivity and the number of connections,
the greater the understanding (White 1988). When information is regrouped
into well-integrated categories, it is stored and retrieved more efficiently than
when it exists as isolated facts and strings. Searleman and Herrmann (1994)
refer to encoding – which involves transforming information into a form that a
person is more likely to retain and access. Organization enhances the encoding
process. George Mandler wrote:
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 577

To organize is to memorize [well]; memory and organization are not only correlated,
but organization is a necessary condition for memory. (p. 82)
In 1956, George Miller wrote a now-famous paper in the annals of psychology
entitled, ‘The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our ca-
pacity for processing information’. In this article Miller described his research
results on the human short-term memory span. He repeatedly found that normal
adults remembered about seven items, plus or minus two – hence the assumed
capacity of working memory, a kind of bottleneck for data entering human mem-
ory. Miller coined the term ‘chunk’ and claimed that organizing information into
groups or clusters efficiently would increase the amount of information one could
commit to memory. Searleman and Hermann (1994) pointed out that memory
performance is usually enhanced when the pieces of information to be remembered
are either familiar, frequent, related to each other – or when they involve concrete
objects – and especially if these attributes are combined (p. 30).

Visual literacy
In an attempt to help learners organize, abstract, and reflect upon expository
information, graphic organizers have emerged as the basis of some successful
learning strategies (Trowbridge and Wandersee 1998). These organizational
tools can be used as either pre-teaching or post-teaching strategies. A prime reform
goal of science education is to teach students lessons in the classroom that can be
applied in the real world. Strategies that help to improve science understanding
may also increase science-related self-efficacy, confidence, and decision-making
capability in real life situations.
Visual processing occurs not only in the eye, but also in the cerebral cortex of
the human brain – thus, in the eye-brain system. Understanding the way the brain
organizes information into visual patterns is fundamental to the understanding of
cognition. In the book Cognition and the Visual Arts, Solso (1994) refers to simple-
shaped, stable figures by using the German word ‘Prägnanz’, which means ‘preg-
nant with meaning’, and this term can be applied to regular figures such as circles.
Our mind’s eye-brain system naturally seeks out these types of two-dimensional
figures in the environment. If graphic organizers are constructed well, using
simple lines which are clear and not too close together, the figure can serve to
enhance information processing, thus making it easier to recall. Presently, cogni-
tive psychologists are seeking out general principles regarding how the mind reacts
to environmental stimuli. How people perceive simple forms is now seen as an
important element in the chain of knowledge (Solso 1994).

The Roundhouse diagram

There is a great variety of graphic organizers, some of which use circles as their
basic shape and serve as useful tools in the science education classroom. For ex-
ample, there are Venn Diagrams that consist of three circles used in deductive
arguments. Concept circle diagrams involve up to five circles which are labelled
and structured to show inclusive-exclusive relationships (Wandersee 1987).
Concept maps often use circles, which contain the relevant concepts linked
together by propositions, and are arranged hierarchically from general to specific
578 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

Figure 1. Blank Roundhouse diagram.

(Novak and Gowin 1984). For the purposes of this study, we focused on the
Roundhouse diagram, a new metacognitive technique proposed by Wandersee in
1994 (see figure 1). Roundhouse diagrams are named after the circular buildings
with central turntables that are used by railroads for housing, repairing, and
switching locomotives (Trowbridge and Wandersee 1998). Wandersee introduces
the diagram with the centre representing a conceptual turntable, housing the dia-
gram’s central theme – in the form of a simple or compound phrase. The diagram
contains seven outer sectors that are in line with George Miller’s psychological
research on short-term memory capacity (Miller 1956). The student begins creat-
ing the diagram in the sector nearest the 12 o’clock position and continues to go
around in a clockwise direction. This diagram is based on constructivist principles
because the learner puts the main ideas into his/her own words, places each con-
cept in a particular sequence within the diagram, and then associates each concept
with an icon (a graphically simple representative figure), that reminds the learner
of that concept. In other words, the diagram becomes the learner’s unique crea-
tion, arranges in a personally meaningful way, so as to be easily recalled.
The learner is initially asked specific questions to aid in planning the diagram.
These guiding questions are found on a worksheet, which is checked for content
and organization by the classroom teacher (see figure 2). After the diagram has
been completed, the teacher uses a checklist to determine if the student has mas-
tered the technique (see figure 3). Students are asked to interpret and represent
some lesson-related, abstract or complex information typically found in today’s
science curricula. The student’s diagram can serve as a way to understand and
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 579

Figure 2. Roundhouse diagram worksheet.

Figure 3. Mastery of technique checklist.

follow directions, to capture the essential parts of a whole idea, to learn a list of
steps for solving a problem, or to order a sequence of events within a cycle. The
centre of the diagram has a wavy (sinusoidal) line through it – which can be used, if
desired, to frame contrast-based topics such as ‘the people and places of’, ‘ the
structure and function of’, ‘the causes and treatments for’, or ‘wetland organisms
and their ecological relationships’. Each sector should contain a ‘chunk’ of infor-
mation, which if efficiently constructed, can capture one concept related to the
organizing idea. Each of the chunks is then paired with a learner-selected, associ-
able image or icon, which improves retrieval of that information (Trowbridge and
Wandersee 1998).
The Roundhouse diagram is designed and based on research in neuroscience
and visual cognition. Reconstructing information in dual forms (verbal and visual)
is an effective encoding strategy. The diagram’s circular shape and simple lines
make it easy to process, pleasing to the mind, and useful in forming a mental
picture. We discovered that, in answering many of the open-ended science test
questions they encountered on the summative evaluation for a unit, students
were apparently visualizing their Roundhouse diagrams because they answered
the questions by numbering their sentences from 1 to 7, reflecting the seven
sectors within this graphic organizer (see figure 4). Novak and Gowin (1984)
termed this memory process ‘metalearning’ – a term used to imply that the learner
has recalled the images in the graphic organizer, created by the learner, prior to
test-taking.
580 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

Figure 4. Sample test answer.

Interview tasks for students who are constructing Roundhouse diagrams can
be designed to elicit data regarding the students’ work and pictures used within the
diagram. The interview format we used begins with the student’s diagram; its
verbal deconstruction can be used as a way to understand the student’s cognitive
structure. The interviewer can probe the student’s learning about concepts in the
diagram and may ascertain whether the learner held any misconceptions regarding
the topic under study. The principal objective of any interview should be to
determine what the learner knows about a given body of knowledge (Novak and
Gowin 1984).

Elizabeth’s journey
Elizabeth (a pseudonym) is a shy, mild-mannered, African-American, female,
sixth-grade student who had previously failed two grades in the years prior to
this study. When she spoke, she would often place her hand in front of her
mouth, making it difficult to understand what she was saying. Her insecurity,
low self-esteem, and fear of answering incorrectly kept her isolated in her class,
but she continued to struggle in spite her ‘handicaps’. She was chosen to partici-
pate in this study because of her constant attempts to improve her grades, even
though she received little help at home.
She was part of a multiple case study consisting of six students from various
achievement levels. There were two above-average, two average, and two-below
average students and Elizabeth was one of the below-average students. All of them
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 581

were very eager to try this new method of learning science because it was novel and
stimulated their curiosity. They all indicated that they enjoyed drawing pictures.
Observations, interviews, student self-evaluations, and informal conversations
indicated that analysing expository information consisting of complex science sub-
ject matter was not an easy task. The students from all levels revealed that it was
especially difficult for them to think in terms of taking a general concept and
breaking it down into constituent parts. In the past, these students had never
been asked to reflect upon written information and to reconstruct the knowledge
to be learned using graphic organizers. We found that, in the past, the educational
system had stifled creativity in many students by not asking them to think about
what they were learning.
The greatest problem for these students was to think on their own. They
were all very teacher-dependent and constantly raised their hands to make sure
they were answering the questions ‘correctly’ (misassuming there was always one
and only one right answer) for each worksheet item. We noticed that Elizabeth
hovered over her work so others could not see it, and she purposefully did not draw
attention to her diagram. The students had to get their worksheets approved
before they could begin to assimilate the information and represent it dia-
grammatically. Both the diagram and the worksheet had to be turned-in so we
could understand their thought processes. The students had to be interviewed
because, often, we could not immediately interpret the icons they drew, and
understand how these related to the Roundhouse diagram’s sector concepts. In
contrast to traditional instruction, a student was unable to sit passively and shun
participation, because teacher-student interaction and scrutiny of the work-in-
progress was the norm now.
At the end of the first class, all of the students had finished their worksheets
about ecological food chains, and most of them had started constructing their
Roundhouse diagrams. Elizabeth did not turn in a worksheet with her diagram
when it was completed, and her regular classroom teacher may have overlooked
her work instead of approving it on the diagram sheet. When questioned, she said
she had lost the worksheet. We think she may have hidden her work because she
had low self-esteem and was insecure. We had decided to begin the Roundhouse
diagramming training with the topic of food chains because it was familiar to all of
the students and they had some prior knowledge of it. Food chains had been taught
to them periodically (in a spiral approach) ever since first grade. Elizabeth’s first
attempt at Roundhouse diagramming was slow and confused – indicating she had
not constructed the requisite prior understandings needed to create her diagram
(see figure 5). Her diagram’s title was incomplete and she erased the ‘and’ and ‘of ’
from the template, so she would not have to use the extra words and deal with the
additional complexity. She didn’t bother to look up the definitions and her spelling
was inaccurate. Even though the students were allowed to work in pairs on the first
diagram, she appeared merely to be copying parts of other student’s concepts and
pictures. In four of the seven sections she drew tentative images and erased them
so the lines could still be seen. Her uncertainty was obvious. She was able to write
words, but was unable to connect images to her words, because she did not under-
stand the concepts behind the words.
It was apparent that Elizabeth did not comprehend the different roles organ-
isms played in food chains. Other students’ diagrams revealed understanding
because they used pictures of plants connected to the concept of producers.
582 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

Figure 5. Incomplete Roundhouse diagram on food chairs.

They used animals like deer and cows to connect to herbivores, lions to connect to
carnivores, and people to connect to omnivores. Elizabeth only wrote down words,
and then drew a plant she related to a consumer. She had memorized that mush-
rooms were decomposers, but drew a mushroom with an arrow pointing to a duck
and stated ‘Decompose eat dead material’. In other words, she could no longer
memorize and get by in class. She was being forced to face what she didn’t under-
stand and go unchallenged in science class and that was very uncomfortable for her
at first.
We only allowed the students to do their worksheets in groups, but when it
came time to distil and chunk their sentences and connect them to icons, we asked
them to work individually. Our reasoning was: their diagrams were quite similar
and we wanted to encourage production of personal and unique representations.
Elizabeth continued to struggle throughout construction of her second diagram
(on food webs). This investment of effort then began to pay off. Her third diagram
portrayed a great deal of improvement and was constructed on the water cycle.
This was the first time that Elizabeth incorporated the compound-title feature of
the Roundhouse diagram template in her work (see figure 6). Her spelling was still
inaccurate, but her pictures and concepts were linked correctly, indicating that she
was beginning to understand the science concepts being taught. She used arrows in
the first sector and had them pointing upward, to show that water evaporated. Her
understanding of condensation was a bit fuzzy; her arrow went down from the
cloud into a body of water and the back up to the sun. However, she clearly
understood precipitation as indicated in her picture of rainfall.
Elizabeth’s grades increased immediately after beginning the Roundhouse
diagram training. She obtained an overall grade point average of 1.8 on her report
card prior to the study (see table 1). Her science and reading grades were below
average. The study began in the middle of the fourth 6-week grading period. Her
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 583

Figure 6. Roundhouse diagram on the water cycle.

first three grades in science prior to the study consisted of two Fs and a C. Her first
test taken post-Roundhouse diagramming was on food chains and food webs.
Although Elizabeth exhibited a number of misconceptions while constructing
the first two diagrams, the extra one-on-one revisitation and reteaching of those
concepts during the interview process helped her to earn a score of 80 out of 100 on
that test (see table 2). The second test was on the water cycle, and Elizabeth
received a satisfactory score of 77 out of 100 on that test.
Elizabeth’s mastery of the technique continued to improve on her diagrams.
As her technique improved, so did her grades. The highest lab grade one could
earn was 20, and to the classroom teacher’s surprise, Elizabeth’s persistence was
rewarded with three 20s near the end of the Roundhouse diagramming training
period (see table 3). She linked an image to every concept. Her work became neater
and more detailed. Her diagram on the behaviour of light explored and partially
elaborated the process of reflection, and she earned a score of 84 out of 100 on that
test (see table 4). On the mastery of technique sheet, the students are assessed on
the coherence of the relationship between the concept and the icon they created to
remind them of that concept. Students receive a ‘0’ if there is no coherent relation-
ship, a ‘1’ if there is a tangential relationship, and a ‘2’ if there is an obvious and
coherent relationship between the concept label and the icon chosen to represent it.
Dialogue between student and teacher is often used to validate this assessment, if
initially there is some ambiguity. Elizabeth’s diagrams were becoming more mean-
ingful to her as her mastery of technique improved and she was able to make these
connections more easily. Elizabeth’s diagram on reflection indicated that she not
only understood the material, but she was able to explain the concepts with well-
developed images used in class (see figure 7).
In summary, Elizabeth was considered a low-performing science student
before she began learning via Roundhouse diagramming. At the beginning of
584 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

Table 1. Information on case study participants.

Student Levels for Sampling Procedure

Level of 1998 Overall

LEAP Scores Grade
Point Science Reading
No. Name L M Average Grade Grade Race Gender

1 Marian* 567 578 3.389 B‡ B¡ B F

2 Melissa 554 578 3.111 B C‡ W F
3 Collin* 597 573 3.000 B B W M
4 Carla* 574 569 2.944 C‡ B¡ W F
5 Keith 559 571 2.722 B C W M
6 Bobby 565 573 2.666 B¡ C W M
7 Donna 574 569 2.611 B¡ C‡ B F
8 Lance 570 575 2.500 B C B M
9 Meghan 568 561 2.500 C C‡ W F
10 Willy* 568 575 2.389 C¡ C W M
11 Diane 555 564 2.388 C‡ C B F
12 Betty* 565 575 1.944 C¡ D B F
13 Tremaine 565 568 1.944 C C‡ B F
14 Elizabeth* 558 571 1.888 C¡ D B F
15 Joanie 557 568 1.722 C¡ D B F
16 David 555 578 1.666 C¡ C¡ W M
17 Sandra 553 553 1.666 C D B F
18 Tom 556 571 1.611 C D B M
19 Blake 559 557 0.555 D¡ D B M

Table 2. Fourth 6-weeks grades.

Tests

Pre-Roundhouse Post-Roundhouse
Diagramming Diagramming

Students 1 2 3 4 5 Average
*Willy 71 63 82 83 100 80/C
Keith 89 97 92 98 95 94/B
Bobby 71 80 90 95 100 87/C
Meghan 86 83 90 78 100 87/C
Tremain 64 80 85 95 73 79/C
David 79 90 90 55 90 81/C
Lance 86 83 92 100 100 92/B
Tom 61 60 82 98 90 78/C
Joanie 60 70 82 65 85 72/D
*Collin 86 83 100 97 90 91/B
Diane 86 77 92 86 90 86/C
*Carla 86 97 92 95 100 94/B
*Elizabeth 61 63 77 80 77 72/D
*Marian 86 97 90 100 100 94/A
Donna 89 83 95 100 100 93/B
Sandra 61 63 69 54 100 69.4/F
*Betty 71 63 51 72 100 84/C
Blake 71 57 74 63 100 73/D
Melissa 77 77 100 85/C
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 585

Table 3. Mastery of technique grades for the case study diagrams.

Roundhouse Diagrams

Students 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Willy 18 20 18 20 20 17 18 17 20 20 20
Collin 19 16 18 18 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Carla 17 20 20 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Elizabeth 15 18 16 17 18 16 20 20 20 18 17
Marian 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Betty 17 15 20 14 20 17 20 18 20 19 18

Table 4. Fifth 6-weeks grades.

Students (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

1 *Willy 83 82 100 100 92

2 Keith 95 85 87 100 100
3 Bobby 103 90 96 89 82
4 Meghan 68 76 89 84 78
5 Tremain 90 95 84 92 82
6 David 73 90 74 92 90
7 Lance 106 90 89 100 95
8 Tom 91 95 89 92 86
9 Joanie 60 81 76 56 80
10 *Collin 106 95 100 78 100
11 Diane 96 100 84 84 100
12 *Carla 98 95 100 100 92
13 *Elizabeth 53 80 84 76 76
14 *Marian 91 100 96 100 100
15 Donna 88 95 92 92 75
16 Sandra 70 50 72 84 82
17 *Betty 70 56 84 52 82
18 Blake 45 89 96 76 82
19 Melissa 78 85 94 100 94

the Roundhouse diagram training period, we noted that her lack of relevant prior
poor knowledge in science had often caused her to resort to rote memorization
methods of learning, which rendered her helpless in applying her knowledge in
new situations (Mintzes and Wandersee 1998). Her lack of language and reading
skills hindered her ability to write and paraphrase concepts accurately, and to
communicate what she was thinking. As our study began, Elizabeth seemed very
insecure and had low self-esteem because of her poor performance and low grades
in school. After Roundhouse diagram training, Elizabeth’s observed and verba-
lized self-esteem was elevated, and she ended up with a ‘C’ average after the
fifth 6-week grading period. She was able to perform some higher order cognitive
tasks that she was not able to perform prior to the Roundhouse diagramming
intervention, such as composing titles, identifying and specifying goals, and
analysing a complex concept into its component parts. Roundhouse diagramming
had not yet become easy for Elizabeth, but she tried hard and overcame obstacles,
and was clearly making more progress toward becoming a meaningful and mindful
learner.
586 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

Figure 7. Roundhouse diagram on reflection.

A mixed-methods study
In-depth information from a small number of participants was valuable in explor-
ing the construction of the Roundhouse diagram and its effectiveness in under-
standing abstract science concepts. Six students were selected for detailed
investigation. Stratified purposeful sampling was used to facilitate comparisons.
The findings of this multiple case study were considered in terms of their implica-
tions for effective instruction in the middle school science classroom. For the
purposes of this research study, a mixed-methods approach was used to answer
the major research question: Does constructing and using Roundhouse diagrams
affect the meaningful learning of science concepts by middle school students?
We collected and analysed qualitative and quantitative data to determine the
effectiveness of the Roundhouse diagram in a sixth-grade science classroom. Data
included triangulated field notes and observations, students’ responses to
Roundhouse diagram worksheets, students’ evaluation sheets (see figure 8), mas-
tery of technique sheets, tapes and transcripts of student interviews, and student
constructed Roundhouse diagrams.
Several statistical methods were used in this multiple case study.
Documentation of science grades, both pre- and post-Roundhouse diagramming
were compared using a paired t-test of H0:D < 0 vs. Ha:D > 0 where D ˆ pre-post.
The null hypothesis states that no difference between them exists. The alternative
hypothesis states the difference of the two scores is going to be positive which
indicates the post-diagramming score is higher than the pre-diagramming score
(see table 5). Table 5 examined the first three tests prior to the Roundhouse
diagramming training period and the first three tests post-Roundhouse diagram
training. The post-diagramming scores were significantly higher than the pre-
diagramming scores.
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 587

Figure 8. Student evaluation checklist.

Table 5. Case study group pre- and post-Roundhouse diagram.

Case study group

Variable n Mean SD Min Max t Prob>(t)

PRE 6 78.83 13.50 61.67 91.67
POST 6 85.33 14.37 66 99.33
DIFF 6 6.5 1.20 5.41 *0.003 0.48
(std. error)

* p < 0:05.

The mastery of technique checklists were used to evaluate the students’ ability
to construct Roundhouse diagrams. The mastery of technique checklist was
divided into 10 learning tasks. Each errorless learning task was worth 2 points,
so a perfect Roundhouse diagram score was 20 points. One point was earned if the
student attempted to accomplish the task. Each diagram received a mastery of
technique score. The mastery of technique scores were compared to the students’
test scores in order to establish the relationship. A Pearson’s r Correlation was
used to determine if there was a statistically significant relationship between a
student’s test score and a student’s score on the Roundhouse diagram. A positive
correlation existed between the students’ academic progress and the mastery of
technique on the diagrams (see table 6).
The overall study examined the relationship between the students’ choice of
icons and the concepts that they wrote in each sector. This Pearson’s r correlation
was established with all six tests and 11 diagrams used in this study. Evidence
588 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

Table 6. Correlation of Roundhouse diagram test scores and mastery of

technique scores.

Two ‘VAR’ variables: diagram test simple statistics

Variable n Mean SD Sum Min Max

Diagram 36 18.98 1.19 583.17 16.00 20.00
Test 36 14.12 14.12 3148.00 52.00 106.00
Pearson Correlation Coefficients/ˆ 0.56 and Prob > jRj under H0 : r ˆ 0=n ˆ 36

Note: correlation ˆ 0.56 and Prob > jRj ˆ 0:0004.

Table 7. Correlation of Roundhouse diagram icon scores and test

concepts.

1 ‘VAR’ variables: icon concept simple statistics

Variable n Mean SD Sum Min Max

Icon 36 93.44 8.20 3364.00 75.00 100.00
Concept 36 84.81 15.33 3053.00 50.00 100.00
Pearson Correlation Coefficients/ Prob > jRj under H0 : r ˆ 0=n ˆ 36

indicated that there was a positive relationship between the icon score and the
student’s test grades (see table 7).
Multiple methods of triangulation were used in an attempt to secure an in-
depth understanding of Elizabeth’s struggles to learn science. Qualitative data
were compared to quantitative data. Interview data were compared to observa-
tional data. What was said in the interview was compared to what was said during
class. We checked for repetitiveness and patterns of behaviour, comparing differ-
ent points of view from the participants, teachers and researchers.

The big picture

Based on the construction of 11 Roundhouse diagrams, the entire case study group
improved on mastery of technique of constructing the Roundhouse diagrams. All
but one student improved on the overall grade point averages in science. The
higher achieving students and average-performing students improved in areas
related to creativity, higher level thinking skills, and metacognition. This new
method increased all of their present capabilities to organize, paraphrase, sequence
events, and write paragraphs effectively.
The entire class appeared transformed, and became active instead of passive
learners. They went from merely following directions to thinking on their own. It
appeared that most students were on-task for longer periods of time. All of the
students went from being teacher-dependent, to group-dependent, to indepen-
dent, while constructing the diagrams. They all began to learn metacognitive skills,
such as mindfully participating, questioning, and creating on their own. Their
work became more creative, artistic, well-planned, thoughtful and meaningful.
They were all operating at higher levels of thinking by problem solving and con-
structing meaning instead of memorizing. Their visual processing capabilities were
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 589

improved, as well as their abilities to show relationships and connections – to forge

meaningful links between new ideas.
The classroom teacher was transformed as well. She went from, thinking that
the diagramming process was too time-consuming, to appreciating the results. The
teacher went from being a lecturer to being a facilitator of her students’ science
knowledge construction. Her previous occasional lab activities went from being
just hands-on to being frequent, hands-on/minds-on, reflective experiences.

Conclusive and integrative remarks

The entire class exhibited traits involving the meaning of creativity according to
Starko (1995). Creativity is a form of problem solving. Constructing a Roundhouse
diagram involves recognizing the problem, analysing the problem, making sugges-
tions and inferences, and making decisions to select material needed to solve the
problem. The product of thinking is associated with Roundhouse diagramming
because one must discover how to link and integrate the parts within a system.
These students learned to think in terms of whole/part relationships. This process
involved the ability to order, to arrange details, and to carry out steps in a reason-
able sequence in order to achieve a final product.
The students in this class extended their science learning by linking previous
knowledge about a given topic and restructuring that knowledge to fit within a
Roundhouse diagram. The diagram allowed the learner to visualize new connec-
tions. As a result, metacognitive learning skills began to emerge in learners of all
levels. Elizabeth began to ask more questions and re-read the information in the
textbook before just putting anything down on paper. Before this method,
Elizabeth would simply write a rather thoughtless answer to the questions at the
back of the chapters. Now, she was being compelled to be responsible with learn-
ing the material at her own pace. Now she would make changes on her own and
would reach out for help, rather than hide behind her book. She became involved
to the point that she took charge and did what needed to be done without being
told what to do. Elizabeth and her peers became much more self-directed and
confident. When asked how using Roundhouse diagrams helped her in science
class, she said ‘The Roundhouse diagram helped me to apply the information in
shorter words, in my own words, where I can understand them, and pictures to
see. The pictures help me with my grades. I’m not using someone else’s brain, it’s
my brain’.

Implications and need for future study

The developments in science education reform which involve psychology and
other sciences offer the possibility of better understanding specific science content
material for the majority of students, including the at-risk students like Elizabeth.
Providing teachers with a better understanding of the human mind will better
support teaching practices – those which promote meaningful and mindful encod-
ing as well as memory retrieval (Bruer 1993).
In a grade-seeking climate where memorization of facts makes one a good
student, anxiety exists for many students who are so unchallenged that their inat-
tention to classroom procedures hinders their responses on tests. Over a period of
time, their grades fall and their self-confidence is hindered to the point that they
590 R. E. WARD AND J. H. WANDERSEE

are no longer interested in trying. Involving students in meaningful learning

experiences generates interest as well as helps them process information at a deeper
level, which results in transfer to more complex learning tasks. The effect on
anxiety in science classrooms is an important factor to consider. High fear of fail-
ure has a detrimental affect on the ability to organize information and to use
knowledge for problem-solving purposes. Testing procedures which merely
probe for factual information often do not accurately measure the learner’s knowl-
edge or capabilities (Langer 1997).
Pupils motivated to learn by restructuring information enlarge their working
memory capacity and are able to activate existing schemas. The organization and
imagery strategies provided by the teacher must be based on what the learner
already knows because if misconceptions exist, substantive future learning cannot
take place (Mintzes and Wandersee 1998). Teachers must have a method by which
they are able to approximately visualize their student’s conceptual frameworks,
based on what the students know about predetermined subject matter. In any
learning situation, the quality of the intellectual relationship between the learner
and the teacher can greatly influence student motivation and achievement.
The cognitive view of learning is based on the idea that conceptual reorganiza-
tion is necessary for learning to occur. Ausubel (1963) believed that meaningful
learning occurs when new information is related to information that is already in
the cognitive structure. This new information is selected for the working memory
according to factors such as novelty or intensity, which activates attention. The
items that are selected must be organized, visualized, or elaborated upon in some
manner, so that encoding can take place. Conceptual models such as Roundhouse
diagrams provide the organization and visualization needed to enhance the encod-
ing process.
Retrieval of information for complex learning tasks such as problem solving
depends on the training of the teacher. Teachers need training if they are to
employ knowledge representation strategies that can make abstract concepts
more concrete and easier to understand by students.
The Roundhouse diagramming technique described in this study is intended
to provide the teacher with a concrete method for instruction as well as assessment.
We hope and have reasons to think that this technique can make a positive con-
tribution to improve student understanding in science education. We think that
teachers should be able to encourage this type of associative learning thereby
building useful schemas for doing science and thinking scientifically.

References
Ausubel, D. P. (1963) The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal Learning (New York: Grune &
Stratton).
Ausubel, D. P. (1968) Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View (New York: Holt, Reinhart
& Winston).
Bruer, J. T. (1993) Schools for Thought (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
Hohn, R. L. (1995) Classroom Learning and Teaching (New York: Longman).
Langer, E. J. (1997) The Power of Mindful Learning (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley).
Miller, G. A. (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our
capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
Mintzes, J. J. and Wandersee, J. H. (1998) Reform and innovation in science teaching: A
human constructivist view. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee and J. D. Novak (eds)
STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND ABSTRACT SCIENCE TOPICS 591

Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View (San Diego, CA:
Academic Press), 328–350.
Novak, J. D. (1998) The pursuit of a dream: Education can be improved. In J. J. Mintzes,
J. H. Wandersee and J. D. Novak (eds) Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human
Constructivist View (San Diego, CA: Academic Press), 60–90.
Novak, J. and Gowin, D. (1984) Learning How to Learn (New York: Cambridge University
Press).
Searlemann, A. and Herrmann, D. (1994) Memory From a Broader Perspective (New York:
McGraw Hill).
Solso, R. L. (1994) Cognition and the Visual Arts (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
Starko, A. J. (1995) Creativity in the Classroom: Schools of Curious Delight (New York:
Longman).
Trowbridge, J. E. and Wandersee, J. H. (1998) Theory-driven graphic organizers. In J. J.
Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee and J. D. Novak (eds) Teaching Science for Understanding:
A Human Constructivist View (San Diego, CA: Academic Press), 95–131.
Wandersee, J. H. (1987) Drawing concept circles: a new way to teach and test students,
Science Activities, 24, 9–24.
Ward, R. E. (1999) The effects of Roundhouse diagram construction and use on meaningful
science learning in the middle school classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA.
Ward, R. E. and Wandersee, J. H. (2001) Visualizing science using the roundhouse dia-
gram. Science Scope, 24, 17–21.
Ward, R. E. and Wandersee, J. H. (in press) Student’s perceptions of roundhouse
Diagramming: a middle school viewpoint, International Journal of Science Education.
White, R. T. (1988) Learning Science (New York: Basil Blackwell).
Wittrock, M. C. (1994) Generative science teaching. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone and R.
White (eds) The Content of Science: A Constructivist Approach to its Teaching and
Learning (London: Falmer Press).