This article was downloaded by: [University of Southern Queensland]

On: 09 October 2014, At: 18:01

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Science

Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

Investigating Urban Eighth-Grade

Students’ Knowledge of Energy
Resources
a
Alec Bodzin
a
Department of Education and Human Services , Lehigh
University , Bethlehem , 18015 , USA
Published online: 19 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Alec Bodzin (2012) Investigating Urban Eighth-Grade Students’ Knowledge
of Energy Resources, International Journal of Science Education, 34:8, 1255-1275, DOI:
10.1080/09500693.2012.661483

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.661483

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 International Journal of Science Education
Vol. 34, No. 8, 15 May 2012, pp. 1255–1275

Investigating Urban Eighth-Grade

Students’ Knowledge of Energy
Resources
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

Alec Bodzin∗
Department of Education and Human Services, Lehigh University, Bethlehem 18015,
USA

This study investigated urban eighth-grade students’ knowledge of energy resources and associated
issues including energy acquisition, energy generation, storage and transport, and energy
consumption and conservation. A 39 multiple-choice-item energy resources knowledge
assessment was completed by 1043 eighth-grade students in urban schools in two cities in
Pennsylvania, USA. Mean scores for the entire assessment measure indicated low conceptual
energy knowledge of the eighth-grade students. Subscale means revealed that student
understandings of energy resource acquisition, energy generation, storage and transport, and
energy consumption and conservation are not satisfactory. Distractor analysis identified many
misunderstandings that eighth-grade students hold with regard to energy resources. Findings
revealed that students did not have a sound knowledge and understanding of basic scientific
energy resources facts, issues related to energy sources and resources, general trends in the US
energy resource supply and use, and the impact energy resource development and use can have
on society and the environment. Implications for teacher enactment of energy resources
curriculum activities are discussed.

Keywords: Energy resources; Energy knowledge; Energy literacy; Energy conservation;

Curriculum

Introduction
Energy holds a central role in topical socioscientific issues, such as energy supply, distri-
bution and utilization, consumption, and transport economics (Hinrichs & Kleinbach,

∗
Lehigh University, Department of Education and Human Services, A113 Iacocca Hall, 111
Research Dr., Bethlehem 18015, USA. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0950-0693 (print)/ISSN 1464-5289 (online)/12/081255–21

# 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.661483
 1256 A. Bodzin

2006; Papadouris, Constantinou, & Kyratsi, 2008). Energy pervades all sectors of our
society, is needed to create goods from natural resources, and provides many of the ser-
vices in our personal lives such as housing, food, health, transportation, and recreational
activities. The availability of an adequate and reliable supply of energy is important for
economic development and improved standards of living. Reliable energy supply is
essential in all economies for lighting, heating, communications, industry, transport,
and other essential services that are taken for granted in industrialized nations. World
energy use increased over 10-fold during the twentieth century, predominantly from
fossil fuels – coal, petroleum, and natural gas (Twidell & Weir, 2006). Furthermore,
world marketed energy consumption is expected to increase 49% from 2007 to 2035
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

(U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2010). The use of our energy resources is
one of the major factors affecting the environment. Increased use of fossil fuels since
the beginning of the industrial age has increased the carbon dioxide concentration in
the atmosphere by 30% and has probably also increased the Earth’s temperature (Schip-
per, Unander, Murtishaw, & Ting, 2001).
The need to conserve finite energy resources is the subject of increasing public
awareness, and the debate concerning the possible contributions to the energy
economy of sustainable resources has high public profile (Boyes & Stanisstreet,
1990). As fossil fuel reserves are being depleted worldwide and energy costs are
increasing, the use of renewable and sustainable energy resources is being more
widely considered as a solution to our current energy crisis. With environmental
issues related to energy use playing a more prominent role in the lives of citizens, it
is important that young adults be equipped with fundamental knowledge about
energy resources so as future citizens they will be able to make informed decisions
to effectively confront the energy issues that face the environment (Gambro &
Switzky, 1999).
Education programs in schools should have an ultimate goal of providing students
with a conceptual knowledge of energy and the issues related to energy use in order for
them to be able to critically analyze and decipher information to effectively make
informed decisions as future citizens (Barrow & Morrisey, 1989; Farhar, 1996;
Hofman, 1980; Solomon, 1992; Van Koevering & Sell, 1983). Environmental
science topics related to energy resources are quite established in US science edu-
cation frameworks, state standards, and environmental science curriculum (American
Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1993; Barrow & Morrisey,
1987; Blum, 1981; National Research Council, 1996). Concepts pertaining to the
acquisition of renewable and nonrenewable resources, energy generation, storage,
and transport, and energy consumption and conservation are included in the concep-
tual strand maps of the American Association for the Advancement of Science
[AAAS] (2007) Atlas of Science Literacy as important learning goals that should be
achieved by students by the completion of eighth grade. Furthermore, these energy
resources concepts are globally recognized as being important for inclusion into the
national curriculum of many countries; see, for example, the Australian K-10
science curriculum (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority,
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1257

2011) and the UK science curriculum (Qualifications and Curriculum Development

Agency, 2011).
In the US state of Pennsylvania, understanding energy resources and associated
environmental issues are learning goals that are explicitly stated in the state aca-
demic standards. Renewable and nonrenewable resources compose an entire
section of the academic standards for environment and ecology across all grade
levels and include strands pertaining to uses, availability, management, and influen-
tial factors. In addition, concepts pertaining to understanding forms and sources of
energy, both renewable and nonrenewable, are included in the science standards for
eighth grade and concepts pertaining to the spatial distribution of nonrenewable and
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

renewable resources are included in the state’s geography standards for seventh
grade (Table 1).

Table 1. Energy resources content in the Pennsylvania state science and geography standards

3.2.4. B2. Identify types of energy and their ability to be stored and changed from one form to
another.
3.2.5. B2. Examine how energy can be transferred from one form to another.
3.2.7. B2. Describe how energy can be changed from one form to another (transformed) as it moves
through a system or transferred from one system to another system.
3.2.8. B2. Identify situations where kinetic energy is transformed into potential energy, and vice
versa.
3.2.3. B6. Recognize that light from the sun is an important source of energy for living and nonliving
systems and some source of energy is needed for all organisms to stay alive and grow.
3.3.8. A2. Describe renewable and nonrenewable energy resources.
3.3.8. A6. Explain changes in earth systems in terms of energy transformation and transport.
3.4.3. E3. Recognize that tools, machines, products, and systems use energy in order to do work.
3.4.3. E3. Recognize that tools, machines, products, and systems use energy in order to do work.
3.4.4. E3. Identify types of energy and the importance of energy conservation.
3.4.6. E3. Investigate that power is the rate at which energy is converted from one form to another or
transferred from one place to another.
3.4.7. E3. Examine the efficiency of energy use in our environment.
4.3.4. A. Identify ways humans depend on natural resources for survival.
Identify resources used to provide humans with energy, food, employment, housing and water.
4.3.7. A. Explain how products are derived from natural resources.
Describe the process of converting raw materials to consumer goods.
Differentiate between renewable and nonrenewable resources.
4.3.7. B. Explain the distribution and management of natural resources.
Differentiate between resource uses: conservation, preservation, and exploitation.
4.3.8. A. Compare and contrast alternative sources of energy.
4.3.8. B. Analyze how humans manage and distribute natural resources.
Describe the use of a natural resource with an emphasis on the environmental consequences of
extracting, processing, transporting, using, and disposing of it.
7.3.3. D. Identify the human characteristics of places and regions by their economic activities.
† Spatial distribution of resources
† Non-renewable resources
† Renewable resources
 1258 A. Bodzin

The objective of this study was to investigate urban eighth-grade students’ knowl-
edge about energy resources and associated societal uses with a comprehensive energy
knowledge assessment measure.

Background
A review of the international research literature that investigated the conceptual
knowledge relating to energy resources and related socioscientific issues for middle-
school learners (aged between 13 and 15) was conducted. Since only a limited
number of studies specifically addressed middle-school age students’ understandings
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

of environmental science issues of energy acquisition, energy generation, storage and

transport, and energy consumption and conservation, the literature review was
expanded to include all age levels.
The majority of published data indicate a lack of knowledge in our society about
nonrenewable resources. Rules’ (2005) interview study with elementary age students
reported misconceptions about the origin and sources of petroleum, coal, and natural
gas, gasoline manufacture and storage, and the importance of petroleum in our
society. She also found that these misconceptions continue into adulthood. Additional
studies of upper secondary learners published between 1975 and 1990 also revealed
that students had knowledge deficiencies about the availability and use of fossil fuel
resources (Boyes & Stanisstreet, 1990; Holden & Barrow, 1984; Holmes, 1978;
Lawrenz, 1983; National Assessment of Educational Progress, 1975; Richmond &
Morgan, 1977). Studies that used knowledge assessment items pertaining to
nuclear power use reported that both adults and upper secondary students have
incomplete understandings about the viability of using nuclear power as an energy
source (Arcury & Johnson, 1987; Blum, 1984; Lawrenz, 1983).
Few studies have investigated conceptual knowledge of renewable resources.
Holmes’ (1978) analysis of NAEP items found that young adults have knowledge def-
icits about the availability and use of renewable resources. Bang, Ellinger, Hadjimar-
cou, and Traichal (2000) found that self-reported knowledge levels of US adults
about renewable energy sources were low. Liarakou, Gavrilakis, and Flouri (2009)
reported that a small sample of content secondary school teachers in Rhodes,
Greece, had knowledge deficits about the applications and environmental impacts
of solar and wind energy and the environmental impacts of renewable energy
resources.
Findings from previous studies that analyzed energy knowledge assessment items
reported low understandings about energy consumption and conservation for both
secondary students and adults (Barrow & Morrisey, 1989; DeWaters & Powers,
2008; Holden & Barrow, 1984; Holmes, 1978; National Environmental Education
& Training Foundation & Roper ASW, 2002; Valhov & Treagust, 1988). Data from
these studies found that most students and adults in the USA have incomplete under-
standings about societal and personal energy consumption patterns. Many do not
know which energy sources are used primarily for a given sector (residential, commer-
cial, industrial, transportation), which sources are converted into usable electrical
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1259

power, are unfamiliar about practical considerations involved in power generation,

and lack a fundamental understanding about energy efficiency.
A limitation of many of the previous published studies is that the reported findings
are based on using a small number of energy resource-related items as part of a larger
environmental knowledge assessment measure. In some studies, subscale reliabilities
pertaining to a cluster of energy items were not reported. Researchers have noted the
importance of improving on such studies using a variety of environmental knowledge
scales (Arcury & Johnson, 1987; Gambro & Switzky, 1999). Research using an energy
resources knowledge scale measure is quite timely as the US science education com-
munity is now working to assess and promote energy learning progressions as part of a
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

new national science education framework (Lee & Liu, 2010) and the US Department
of Energy is undertaking a new initiative to identifying the essential principles and fun-
damental concepts that underlie energy literacy (U.S. Department of Energy, 2011).

Aim of the Research

The aim of this study was to investigate eighth-grade students’ (aged between 13 and
15) knowledge about energy resources and associated societal uses that aligned to
energy resources literacy goals. This study explored the following research question:
What are eighth-grade students’ knowledge of energy resource acquisition, energy
generation, storage and transport, and energy consumption and conservation?

Method
Participants
One thousand and forty-three students taught by 13 teachers in five middle schools in
two city school districts located in Pennsylvania participated in this study. These
middle schools represented public school districts with students of varying degrees
of language ability, socioeconomic status, and academic ability levels in science as
measured by the Pennsylvania state science assessment. Sampling was purposeful
to include urban middle schools in close proximity to our institution to ensure a
high response rate.
Both school districts had adopted the Prentice Hall Science Explorer (2005) basal
textbook program. In US schools, basal textbook programs play an important role to
guide the implemented science curriculum (Venezky, 1992). They are a main source
of content knowledge for teachers and are used as the primary instructional tool in the
classroom (Garner, 1992). The adopted basal curriculum in this study included an
entire chapter on energy with sections titled What is energy?; Form of energy; Energy
transformations and conservation; and Energy and fossil fuels. The topics and content
in the textbook program align to those listed in the Pennsylvania Science Standards.
In Pennsylvania middle schools, the standards and are expected to be covered in the
enacted curriculum prior to the administration of the Pennsylvania state science
assessment in late March.
 1260 A. Bodzin

Energy Resources Knowledge Assessment

The Energy Resources Knowledge Assessment was used to measure learner understand-
ings about energy resources. It is a 39 multiple-choice-item measure with items
aligned to benchmark ideas from the AAAS (2007) Atlas of Science Literacy maps
– Energy Resources and Use of Earth’s Resources. These benchmarks are learning
goals that should be achieved by students by the completion of eighth grade
(Table 2). The assessment items include distractors that address misunderstandings
and knowledge deficits about energy resources from the existing literature (see, for
example, Arcury & Johnson, 1987; Barrow & Morrisey, 1989; Blum, 1987; DeWaters
& Powers, 2008; Farhar, 1996; Gambro & Switzky, 1996, 1999; Holden & Barrow,
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

Table 2. Benchmark ideas about energy resources and associated issues

I. Energy Resources Acquisition

1. Some resources are not renewable or renew very slowly. Fuels already accumulated in the earth,
for instance will become more difficult to obtain as the most readily available resources run out. How
long the resources will last, however, is difficult to predict. The ultimate limit may be the prohibitive
cost of obtaining them. (8C/M10)
2. Energy from the sun (and the wind and water energy derived from it) is available indefinitely.
Because the transfer of energy from these resources is weak and variable, systems are needed to
collect and concentrate the energy. (8C/M5)
II. Energy Generation, Storage, and Transport
1. Energy can be stored in various forms for subsequent use (gravitational, chemical, electrical,
mechanical, etc.).
2. Transport of energy depends on the form of energy.
3. Energy resources are more useful if they are concentrated and easy to transport. (8C/M9)
4. People have invented ingenious ways of deliberately bringing about energy transformations that
are useful to them. (8C/M8)
5. Electrical energy can be generated from a variety of energy resources and can be transformed into
almost any other form of energy. (8C/M4)
6. Electric circuits are used to distribute energy quickly and conveniently to distant locations. (8C/
M4)
7. In many instances, manufacturing and other technological activities are performed at a site close
to an energy resource because of losses in transmission. Some forms of energy are transported easily
and others are not. (8C/M3)
III. Energy Consumption and Conservation
1. Energy is required to do anything (including technological processes, such as manufacturing).
(8C/M7)
2. Industry, transportation, urban development, agriculture, and most other human activities are
closely tied to the amount and kind of energy available. Different parts of the world have different
amounts and kinds of energy resources to use and use them for different purposes. (8C/M6)
3. There are different ways of obtaining, transforming, and distributing energy, and each has
environmental consequences. Each of these has trade-offs pertaining to energy dependence and the
impacts of organisms (particularly humans) on the environment (8C/M2)
4. There are ways to conserve energy by reducing waste in everyday activities.

Note: AAAS (2007) benchmarks are listed in parentheses.

 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1261

1984; National Environmental Education & Training Foundation & Roper ASW,
2002; Richmond & Morgan, 1977; Rule, 2005; Stubbs, 1985).1
The items are grouped into three subscales corresponding to three main energy
content areas:
(1) Energy Acquisition – Renewable and Nonrenewable Energy Resources (EA) (13
items)
(2) Energy Generation, Storage and Transport (EGST) (13 items)
(3) Energy Consumption and Conservation (ECC) (13 items)
Each item is assigned one point for a correct answer and 0 points for an incorrect
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

answer or blank response. The maximum achievable score on the total assessment
is 39 points. The development of the Energy Resources Knowledge Assessment is fully
described in Bodzin (2011).
The Energy Resources Knowledge Assessment was administered in Spring 2010 after
students had completed the Pennsylvania state science assessment. It should be
noted that the items in the assessment align to the Pennsylvania science and geogra-
phy standards on energy resources. The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS)
version 16.0 Windows was used for data analysis to process the study results. Total
score reliability (Cronbach’s a) for the assessment was 0.776. Subscale reliabilities
were EA: 0.603, EGST: 0.565, and ECC: 0.477.

Findings
Table 3 displays the summary statistics of the students’ energy resources knowledge.
Mean scores for the entire assessment indicated low conceptual energy resources
knowledge of the eighth-grade students. Subscale means revealed that students
have not attained conceptual understandings of energy resources benchmark ideas
pertaining to energy acquisition, energy generation, storage and transport, and
energy consumption and conservation.
Item analyses were conducted that included item difficulty level and item discrimi-
nation of each item. Distractor analysis was used to identify misunderstandings that
eighth-grade students hold with regard to energy resources. Item difficulties ranged
from 0.10 to 0.80. Fifteen items had item difficulty levels less than 0.30. Two items
had item difficulty levels greater than 0.70. Twenty-two items had item difficulty
levels between 0.30 and 0.70. Item discriminations ranged from 20.01 to 0.53.

Table 3. Energy resources knowledge assessment results (n ¼ 1043)

Mean Standard deviation

Entire assessment (39 items) 14.77 5.74

EA subscale (13 items) 5.42 2.47
EGST subscale (13 items) 4.99 2.37
ECC subscale (13 items) 4.35 2.16
 1262 A. Bodzin

It should be noted that very difficult content knowledge assessment items have little
discrimination (Hobsley, 1999). Point biserial correlations for 38 of the 39 items
were significant at the 0.01 level.

Energy Acquisition: Renewable and nonrenewable energy resources

Table 4 displays the results of select item responses to the energy acquisition subscale.
Students’ knowledge about nonrenewable energy resources was quite low. Coal was
identified as the most abundant fossil fuel found in the USA by 42.0% of the students.
Only 36.1% identified natural gas as being a nonrenewable energy resource.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

Responses to distractor selections indicated that students hold many incorrect ideas
about the sources of nonrenewable energy. Only 12.9% of the students knew that pet-
roleum (crude oil) and natural gas come from plankton and sea life that are millions of
years old; 34.2% incorrectly identified the source of these fossil fuels as coming from
coal fired power plants, 20.3% as swamp remains that are thousands of years old,
16.8% as dead dinosaur remains, and 15.4% from large tanks underneath gas
stations. Just 17.3% of the students knew that coal is a fossil fuel formed from
swamp plants that lived millions of years ago. In addition, many students do not
understand why nuclear power is a nonrenewable energy resource; 50.9% of the stu-
dents incorrectly thought that nuclear energy is considered nonrenewable because it
produces waste that is radioactive.
In general, more students had a better understanding about renewable energy
resources than nonrenewable resources. More than half (57.5%) understood that
the term ‘renewable energy resources’ meant that resources can be replenished by
nature faster than they are consumed. Many students (70.9%) could identify a
good location to build a solar power plant; 80.5% correctly identified the sun as the
original source of energy for almost all living on our planet; 47.7% knew that areas
with geothermal resources include geysers, fumaroles, hot springs, and volcanoes;
and 58.1% think that in the year 2250, most of the world’s energy will likely come
from a mix of renewable energy sources.

Energy Generation, Storage, and Transport

Table 5 displays the results of select item responses to the energy generation, storage,
and transport subscale. Data findings revealed that many students do not understand
how different energy resources are converted from its source form to usable electricity.
Only 19.7% knew that electrical power generation from a hydroelectric dam turbine is
an example of gravitational potential energy being converted into kinetic energy. Less
than half (40.8%) of the students knew that the electrical grid is a network of power
transmission lines that connect across the USA to transport electricity. Only 25.5%
knew that voltage is reduced by transformers before it reaches a home. Responses
to select items also indicated that students have incomplete knowledge about
energy efficiency and do not understand that energy is lost during electrical energy
transmission from a power-generating source to a consumer of usable electricity.
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1263

Table 4. Select energy acquisition subscale item responses (n ¼ 1043)

Item n % Response

What is the original source of energy for almost all living things on earth?
A. Suna 840 80.5
B. Soil 13 1.2
C. Wind 14 1.3
D. Water 150 14.4
E. Plant life 26 2.5
Which of the following is NOT a renewable biofuel?
A. Wood chips 228 21.9
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

B. Petroleum (crude oil)a 530 50.8

C. Ethanol made from corn 71 6.8
D. Diesel fuel made from vegetable oil 95 9.1
E. Methane captured from decaying cow manure 117 11.2
No response 2 0.2
Petroleum (crude oil) and natural gas come from . . .
A. Dead dinosaur remains 175 16.8
B. Coal fired power plants 357 34.2
C. Large tanks underneath gas stations 161 15.4
D. Swamp remains that are thousands of years old 212 20.3
E. Plankton and sea life that are millions of years olda 135 12.9
No response 3 0.3
The term ‘renewable energy resources’ means resources that . . .
A. Are free and easy to use 47 4.5
B. Do not produce air pollution 80 7.7
C. Are very efficient to use for producing energy 180 17.3
D. Can be converted directly into heat and electricity 132 12.7
E. Can be replenished by nature faster than they are consumeda 600 57.5
No response 4 0.4
Which energy resource is nonrenewable?
A. Solar 116 11.1
B. Biomass 262 25.1
C. Natural gasa 377 36.1
D. Geothermal 206 19.8
E. Hydropower (water) 80 7.7
No response 2 0.2
Which is the most abundant fossil fuel found in the USA?
A. Coala 438 42.0
B. Wood 137 13.1
C. Nuclear 94 9.0
D. Natural gas 218 20.9
E. Petroleum (crude oil) 154 14.8
No response 2 0.2
Which fossil fuel is formed from swamp plants that lived millions of years ago?
A. Coala 180 17.3
B. Nuclear 97 9.3
C. Methane 314 30.1
D. Natural gas 158 15.1

(Continued)
 1264 A. Bodzin

Table 4. (Continued)
Item n % Response

E. Petroleum (crude oil) 291 27.9

No response 3 0.3
Areas with geothermal resources include . . .
A. Large lakes that flow into rivers 135 12.9
B. Large mountain ranges and forests 171 16.4
C. Large tidal ranges and shallow water 104 10.0
D. High wind velocities and open space areas 153 14.7
E. Geysers, fumaroles, hot springs, and volcanoesa 477 47.7
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

No response 3 0.3
Nuclear energy is considered NONRENEWABLE because . . .
A. It produces waste that is very radioactive 529 50.7
B. Heat produced in the reactor turns huge turbine blades 88 8.4
C. The power plant must use a lot of water for the cooling process 125 12.0
D. The uranium fuel source are found in rocks that can be mined outa 221 21.2
E. Fission generates heat in the reactor just as coal generates heat in a 76 7.3
boiler
No response 4 0.4
In the year 2250, most of the world’s energy will likely come from . . .
A. Coal and oil 89 8.5
B. Natural gas and coal 105 10.1
C. Nuclear power from uranium 169 16.2
D. A mix of renewable energy sourcesa 606 58.1
E. Petroleum (crude oil) and natural gas 72 6.9
No response 2 0.2

a
Correct response.

Responses to select items indicate that students do not have a complete understand-
ing about the advantages and relative environmental impacts of using different energy
resources to generate electricity. For example, only 22.1% knew that an advantage of
geothermal power plants over fossil fuel burning power plants is that they do not have
to transport fuel. Less than half (46.1%) knew that nuclear power emits less air pol-
lution that coal or petroleum.

Energy Consumption and Conservation

Table 6 displays results of select item responses to the energy consumption and con-
servation subscale. Student understandings of energy consumption and conservation
were limited. Many do not grasp quantitatively how much energy is consumed during
their personal and household activities. Heating and cooling rooms were identified
correctly by only 24.7% of the students as the most energy consuming use in the
US household; 31.4% incorrectly thought that entertainment (TV, computer, video
games) consumed the most household energy when in fact it consumes the least.
Many students (39.4%) incorrectly thought that cooking and storing food uses the
least amount of energy in an average US home; only 10.1% correctly identified
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1265

Table 5. Select energy generation, storage, and transport subscale item responses (n ¼ 1043)

%
Item n Response

Which type of electricity generation has the LEAST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT?

A. Wind turbines on the top of mountains 407 39.0
B. A dam on a river to produce hydropower 212 20.3
C. A coal burning power plant in a rural area 128 12.3
D. A nuclear power plant on an island in a river 145 13.9
E. A geothermal power plant in a hot earth areaa 146 14.0
No response 5 0.5
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

What does it mean if an electric power plant is 35% efficient?

A. For every $35 used in the production of energy, $100 is made into profit 113 10.8
B. For every $100 used in the production of energy, $35 is made into profit 142 13.6
C. For every 100 units of energy that go into the plant, 35 units are 379 36.3
converted into electrical energya
D. For every 35 units of energy that go into the power plant, 100 units of 255 24.4
electrical energy are produced
E. For every 100 units of energy that go into the power plant, 35 units are 149 14.3
lost during energy transformations
No response 5 0.5
Most electrical energy in the USA is produced from . . .
A. Coala 232 22.2
B. Nuclear 163 15.6
C. Natural gas 245 23.5
D. Hydropower (water) 220 21.2
E. Petroleum (crude oil) 179 17.2
No response 4 0.4
Photovoltaic cells convert . . . directly into electricity
A. Coal 75 7.2
B. Wind power 184 17.6
C. Hydropower 171 16.4
D. Light energya 453 43.4
E. Nuclear energy 156 15.0
No response 4 0.4
Which is an advantage that geothermal power plants have over fossil fuel burning power plants?
Geothermal power plants . . .
A. Do not have to transport fuela 231 22.1
B. Ccan be built almost anywhere 194 18.6
C. Generate waste products that can be easily stored 265 25.4
D. Are the cheapest way to generate electricity in the USA 153 14.7
E. Are more efficient to transport electricity to homes and businesses 196 18.8
No response 4 0.4
A network of power transmission lines connected across the entire country is called the . . .
A. Grida 426 40.8
B. Turbine 100 9.6
C. Generator 159 15.2
D. Transformer 100 9.6
E. Power surge 253 24.3
No response 3 0.5

(Continued)
 1266 A. Bodzin

Table 5. (Continued)
%
Item n Response

Electricity enters the grid at 350,000 V. How does this voltage get reduced to 120 when it reaches
your home?
A. Transformers step down the voltage before it reaches your homea 266 25.5
B. Power surges in the grid reduce the voltage before it reaches your home 195 18.7
C. Transmission lines that carry electricity long distances reduce the 240 23.0
voltage
D. The electrical grid decreases the voltage the further that electricity 172 16.5
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

travels
E. Power generators in the grid reduce the voltage before it reaches your 166 15.9
home
No response 4 0.4
In a hydroelectric dam facility, water pressure in the reservoir forces water to turn a turbine that
generates electricity. This is an example of . . .
A. A low energy efficient process of a dam 157 15.1
B. Energy transport efficiency of the dam 245 23.5
C. Turbines producing gravitational potential energy to do work 195 18.7
D. Water gaining potential energy from the reservoir to do work 235 22.5
E. Gravitational potential energy being converted to kinetic energya 205 19.7
No response 6 0.6
The best place to build a new factory is at a location near an electric power plant because . . .
A. Less energy is lost during electrical transmissiona 350 33.6
B. Fewer miles of pipeline are needed to transport fuel 135 12.9
C. Less kinetic energy is needed for electrical transport 172 16.5
D. More efficient electrical lines can be built underground 217 20.8
E. The environmental impact of the factory will be reduced 158 15.1
No response 11 1.1

a
Correct response.

entertainment as using the least amount of household energy. Only 17.6% knew that
electricity is measured in kilowatt-hours; 58.1% thought volts was the unit that
measures electrical energy. Less than half (48.4%) knew that placing a cell phone
in a charger consumes energy when it is not actively charging.
Students did not have a complete understanding about energy resources consump-
tion in the USA. Most (78.7%) students did not know that petroleum is the most con-
sumed energy resource in the USA. Only 29.9% knew that the transportation sector
consumes the most petroleum in the USA. Many (73.3%) students did not know that
coal is used to produce the most energy in the USA. Only 27.8% knew that coal is
likely to be the first energy resource to be depleted in the USA.

Discussion
Understanding energy resources, its uses, and associated societal issues are important
facets of science education and have become an area of foremost importance for those
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1267

Table 6. Select energy consumption and conservation subscale item responses (n ¼ 1043)

Item n % Response

The largest energy source that is used by the USA is . . .

A. Coal 279 26.7
B. Nuclear 114 10.9
C. Natural gas 242 23.2
D. Hydropower (water) 180 17.3
E. Petroleum (crude oil)a 222 21.3
No Response 6 0.6
Which uses the MOST ENERGY in the average American home in one year?
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

A. Lighting the home 242 23.2

B. Cooking and storing food 98 9.4
C. Heating and cooling roomsa 258 24.7
D. Cleaning (washer, dryer, ironing, vacuum) 114 10.9
E. Entertainment (TV, computer, video games) 327 31.4
No response 4 0.4
Which uses the LEAST ENERGY in the average American home in one year?
A. Lighting the home 134 12.8
B. Cooking and storing food 411 39.4
C. Heating and cooling rooms 135 12.9
D. Cleaning (washer, dryer, ironing, vacuum) 253 24.3
E. Entertainment (TV, computer, video games)a 105 10.1
No response 5 0.5
Which use consumes the most petroleum in the USA?
A. Electrical 156 15.0
B. Transportationa 312 29.9
C. Residential (homes) 136 13.0
D. Industrial (factories) 330 31.6
E. Commercial (stores and businesses) 103 9.9
No response 6 0.6
Which energy source is likely to run out first?
A. Coal 290 27.8
B. Biomassl 115 11.0
C. Geothermal 104 10.0
D. Natural gas 212 20.3
E. Petroleum (crude oil)a 314 30.1
No response 8 0.8
The amount of ELECTRICAL ENERGY (ELECTRICITY) we use is measured in units called . . .
A. Volts (V) 606 58.1
B. Joule-hours (Jh) 71 6.8
C. Horsepower (HP) 97 9.3
D. Efficiency-hours (Eh) 75 7.2
E. Kilowatt-hours (kWh)a 184 17.6
No response 10 1.0
Placing your cell phone in the charger when you are not using it . . .
A. Is an energy angel activity 94 9.0
B. Is an energy efficient practice 131 12.6
C. Uses renewable energy from the grid 123 11.8

(Continued)
 1268 A. Bodzin

Table 6. (Continued)
Item n % Response

D. Uses more energy than heating rooms 184 17.6

E. Uses energy when it is not actively charginga 505 48.4
No response 6 0.6
In homes, NATURAL GAS is primarily used for . . .
A. Lighting the house 105 10.1
B. Entertainment activities 108 10.4
C. The refrigerator and freezer 93 8.9
D. Microwave ovens and toasters 105 10.1
E. Heating, cooling, and cooking on the stovea
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

621 59.9
No response 11 1.1

a
Correct response.

who are responsible for education in school systems. In many countries, education
ministers, policy-makers, teachers, and the general public agree that school curricu-
lum should provide students with the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to live
in a world faced with rising energy demands and shrinking available nonrenewable
resources (Trumper, Raviolo, & Shnersch, 2000). Energy resources are included pro-
minently in US national science education curriculum frameworks and the Pennsyl-
vania state standards. These curriculum frameworks and state standards have been
established to ensure ample attention to the teaching and learning of particular
science concepts at particular grade levels (AAAS, 2007; National Research
Council, 1996, 2011) and to establish a vision for the kind of science concepts that
should be taught to have enduring relevance to one’s life (Millar & Osborne, 1998;
OECD, 2000; Tomorrow 98, 1992). Content standards enable curriculum guidelines
to go beyond specifying a list of topics, such as Energy Resources and Use of Earth’s
Resources, and articulate key ideas that are important to learn (AAAS, 1993, 2007).
US reform efforts in science education endeavor to align instructional materials and
assessments with local, state, and national standards (Knapp, 1997; Wilson &
Berenthal, 2006). Although concepts pertaining to the acquisition of renewable and
nonrenewable resources, energy generation, storage, and transport, and energy con-
sumption and conservation have been included as important learning goals in national
frameworks and the Pennsylvania state science standards for the past decade, the
eighth-grade students in this study are clearly not achieving these expected learning
goals.
Findings from this study revealed that this sample of urban eighth-grade students
did not have a sound knowledge and understanding of basic scientific energy
resources facts, issues related to energy sources and resources, general trends in the
US energy resource supply and use, and the impact energy resource development
and use can have on society and the environment. The energy resources knowledge
deficits of urban middle-school students found in this study are similar to those
reported in past studies with primary and upper secondary learners. The eighth-
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1269

grade students had many knowledge deficiencies about nonrenewable and renewable
resources, about energy transformation processes from an original energy fuel source
to a usable form of electrical energy or other usable form for consumption, and about
their personal and household energy use practices. These findings are related to more
recent studies that reported that secondary school students in the state of New York
(USA) (DeWaters & Powers, 2008) and in Valencia (Spain) (Punter, Ochando-Pardo
& Garcia, 2011) were not aware of how energy sources are used to make electricity
and had incomplete understanding to how their personal and household consumption
practices translate to energy utilization.
The success of US students achieving science standards pertaining to energy
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

resources depends primarily on the adoption and enactment of appropriate curricu-

lum materials that are aligned with these goals. A variety of other contextual factors
such as teaching and assessment approaches for diverse urban learners, energy
resources content knowledge of teachers, teacher and student motivation, and the
availability of appropriate laboratory materials and other curriculum supports are
equally important for effective science teaching and learning of energy resources.
Although US national frameworks and Pennsylvania state standards include energy
resources as important concepts to be learned by eighth grade, it appears that the
implementation of energy resources curriculum in middle schools may be lacking in
conceptually rich and personally relevant learning experiences that align to important
energy resources literacy goals of energy resources acquisition, energy generation,
storage and transport, and energy consumption and conservation. It has been
argued that few middle-school curriculum materials succeed in meeting standards
(Krajcik, McNeill, & Reiser, 2008). A review of commercially published US
middle-school science curriculum materials concluded that none of examined curri-
culum programs would help students learn standards and many topics were not
covered sufficiently in-depth (Kesidou & Roseman, 2002). Likewise, US state and
local district standards (which are used by developers of commercially published
US science curriculum) have been criticized for superficial coverage of many topics
(Krajcik et al., 2008; Schmidt, Wang, & McKnight, 2005).
In Pennsylvania, the intended science curriculum is developed by a local school dis-
trict to align to the state science standards. State standards are statements of what stu-
dents should know and be able to do by the completion of a certain-grade level.
Pennsylvania state standards are written as brief statements and do not include
detailed examples or discussion to assist local school districts on how to develop
and implement curriculum to effectively teach these concepts. There are 501 Pennsyl-
vania school districts and each school district decides which basal and supplemental
curriculum materials are to be adopted for a school’s implemented curriculum.
Since many science standards must be covered prior to the administration of the
state science assessment, many science topics may only be covered superficially
during the school year. As a result, deep and meaningful understandings about impor-
tant topics such as energy resources may not occur.
Both urban school districts that participated in this study had adopted a basal text-
book middle-school curriculum program with an entire energy chapter of 30 pages
 1270 A. Bodzin

that included energy topics aligned to Pennsylvania science standards. The curricu-
lum teacher guide included demonstrations of energy concepts and two laboratory
activities. However, the findings in this study tend to support that the implementation
of the locally adopted curriculum in these two urban school districts were not suffi-
cient to develop comprehensive knowledge that aligned to energy resources literacy
goals.

Implications for Teacher Enactment of Energy Resources Curriculum Activities

According to the National Science Foundation report, Complex environmental systems:
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

Synthesis for earth, life, and society in the 21st century (Pfirman, and the AC-ERE, 2003),
in the coming decades, the government and public will be called upon ever more fre-
quently to understand complex environmental issues, evaluate proposed environ-
mental plans, and understand how individual decisions affect the environment on
local to global scales. The report calls for raising the environmental literacy of the
general public by providing quality Earth and environmental science education.
Adopting and enacting an energy resource curriculum in Pennsylvania and in the
USA is timely and leverages current national and global attention on energy resources
and related environmental issues such as the contribution of energy consumption to
climate change.
Today, we face the challenges of many interrelated environmental issues including
energy use, climate change, pollution, and waste issues. To meet these challenges, we
need to ensure that teachers are equipped with well-designed Earth and environ-
mental science curriculum and are well prepared to provide their students with the
best possible education on topics pertaining to energy resources and associated
societal issues. Only with sound knowledge and understandings of underlying scien-
tific and environmental concepts can middle-school students make sense of relevant
real-world phenomena associated with energy use such as the acquisition of sustain-
able energy sources, energy transformations, energy production and consumption,
environmental impacts of energy sources, energy efficiency, and energy conservation.
Many energy resources content materials and curriculum learning activities that
can be implemented to supplement existing commercially published middle-school
science programs do exist and are accessible through US science education Web data-
bases such as the National Science Digital Library [NSDL] (2011). A review of
NSDL resources accessible via the Internet revealed many available content and
learning materials designed to promote middle-school students’ understandings of
acquisition of sustainable and nonrenewable energy; energy generation, storage and
transport; and energy consumption and conservation. For example, NSDL contains
links to over 30 middle-school learning activities that involve students calculating their
personal energy use and analyzing their energy consumption patterns. By completing
these energy audit activities, students would understand that they use energy for many
purposes including: lighting, heating, transportation, entertainment, food prep-
aration, cleaning, and communications. Such learning activities can enable students
to describe ways they can reduce both their personal energy use and their household
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1271

energy use. These energy audit learning activities also focus on energy efficiency and
energy conservation practices.
Many energy resource issues involve spatial analysis and reasoning skills. Geospatial
learning technologies such as Google Earth and Geographic Information Systems can
be used to enhance inquiry-based environmental investigations, promote spatial
thinking, and draw on skills crucial to developing higher-order thinking and environ-
mental problem-solving (Bodzin, 2008; Bodzin & Anastasio, 2006). NSDL includes
links to energy investigations that use geospatial learning technologies to develop
understandings about contemporary energy resources including solar, wind, tidal,
hydroelectric, nuclear, geothermal, biomass/biofuels, coal, oil, and natural gas.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

It appears that many readily available energy resources curriculum materials aligned
to energy resources literacy goals are available for Pennsylvania and other science tea-
chers to implement with their students that would enhance a school district’s adopted
basal commercially published textbook program. However, in order for such enact-
ment to occur, classroom teachers must first be aware of these resources and may
need to be provided with appropriate professional development experiences including
provisions of new energy resources content knowledge. Pennsylvania has an associ-
ation of Intermediate Units across the state who provide school districts with curricu-
lum and instruction services that include reviewing, planning, developing, evaluating,
and implementing curriculum and instructional materials and programs. The infra-
structure provided by the Intermediate Units could be used to disseminate existing
energy resources curriculum materials and establish partnerships with university
faculty across the state to provide appropriate professional development and
support for new curriculum adoption.

Conclusion
This study investigated urban eighth-grade students’ understandings of energy
resource acquisition, energy generation, storage and transport, and energy consump-
tion and conservation in Pennsylvania. A comprehensive energy resources knowledge
assessment measure that aligns to benchmark ideas about energy resources was used
to measure energy knowledge of diverse eighth-grade learners (ages 13–15). Findings
in this study revealed that the study sample of urban eighth-grade students in
Pennsylvania had low conceptual energy resources knowledge. If energy curriculum
adoption and enactment rely primarily on adopted basal textbook programs, then
energy literacy levels of eighth-grade learners in Pennsylvania may also be low in
other demographic areas of the state. A limitation of this study included using a
sample of only five middle schools located in two Pennsylvania cities. Increasing the
sample size to include a larger number of classrooms in other geographic areas and
including rural and suburban area schools would improve the validity and generaliz-
ability of the findings. Such larger-scale studies would require significant resources to
conduct.
The findings reported in this research have many implications related to the new
US K-12 science education framework (National Research Council, 2011). Energy
 1272 A. Bodzin

resources and associated socioscientific issues fit prominently within this document.
While many energy resources learning activities and content materials currently
exist and align to energy resource literacy goals, an energy resources curriculum fra-
mework that can readily be adopted by classrooms in Pennsylvania schools does not
exist. Such a framework would be the first step to designing a coherent curriculum
that includes conceptually rich and relevant learning experiences that align to impor-
tant energy resources literacy goals of energy resources acquisition, energy generation,
storage and transport, and energy consumption and conservation. The findings pre-
sented in this study have identified specific energy knowledge deficiencies and misun-
derstandings of urban Pennsylvania middle-school students. These findings can be
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

used to ensure that the development and enactment of energy resource curriculum
activities addresses the many energy resource knowledge deficiencies of urban
middle-school students.

Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by the Toyota USA Foundation. The author grate-
fully acknowledge the assistance of David Anastasio, Dork Sahagian, Tamara Peffer,
Lori Cirucci, Violet Kulo, and Victoria Arnord without whose help this work would
not have been possible.

Note
1. The energy resources knowledge assessment is available online at: http://ei.lehigh.edu/eli/
research/erca.pdf

References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2007). Atlas of science literacy (Vol. 2).
Washington, DC, AAAS Project 2061.
Arcury, T.A., & Johnson, T.P. (1987). Public environmental knowledge: A statewide survey. The
Journal of Environmental Education, 18(4), 31–37.
Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2011). Australian curricu-
lum: Science K-10. Retrieved March 1, 2011, from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/
Science/Curriculum/F-10
Bang, H-K, Ellinger, A.E., Hadjimarcou, J., & Traichal, P.A. (2000). Consumer concern, knowl-
edge, belief, and attitude toward renewable energy: An application of the reasoned action
theory. Psychology and Marketing, 17(6), 449 –468.
Barrow, L.H., & Morrisey, J.T. (1987). Ninth-grade students’ attitudes toward energy: A compari-
son between Maine and New Brunswick. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(3), 15–21.
Barrow, L.H., & Morrisey, J.T. (1989). Energy literacy of ninth-grade students: A comparison
between Maine and New Brunswick. Journal of Environmental Education, 20(2), 22–25.
Blum, A. (1981). A survey of environmental issues treated in science education curricula, before and
after 1974. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(3), 221– 228.
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1273

Blum, A. (1984). What do Israeli high school students know and believe about environmental
issues? Environmental Education and Information, 3, 338–348.
Blum, A. (1987). Student’s knowledge and beliefs concerning concerning environmental issues in
four countries. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(3), 7–13.
Bodzin, A. (2008). Integrating instructional technologies in a local watershed investigation with
urban elementary learners. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 47–58.
Bodzin, A. (2011, April). What Do Eighth Grade Students Know About Energy Resources? Paper pre-
sented at the 2011 National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Annual
Meeting in. Orlando, FL.
Bodzin, A., & Anastasio, D. (2006). Using Web-based GIS for Earth and environmental systems
education. The Journal of Geoscience Education, 54(3), 295–300.
Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (1990). Pupils’ ideas concerning energy sources. International Journal
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

of Science Education, 12(5), 513 –529.

DeWaters, J., & Powers, S. (2008). Energy literacy among middle and high school youth. Paper pre-
sented at the 38th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Sarasota, FL.
Farhar, B.C. (1996). Energy and the environment: The public view. Renewable energy policy project
REPP issue brief (p. 20). College Park: University of Maryland at College Park.
Gambro, J.S., & Switzky, H.N. (1996). A national survey of high school students’ environmental
knowledge. The Journal of Environmental Education, 27(3), 28–33.
Gambro, J.S., & Switzky, H.N. (1999). Variables associated with American high school students’
knowledge of environmental issues related to energy and pollution. The Journal of Environmental
Education, 30(2), 15– 22.
Garner, R. (1992). Learning from school texts. Educational Psychologists, 27(1), 53–63.
Hinrichs, R., & Kleinbach, M. (2006). Energy: Its use and the environment (4th ed.). New York, NY:
Thomson Learning.
Hobsley, M. (1999). Counting apples with oranges: A limitation of the discrimination index.
Medical Education, 33(3), 192–196.
Hofman, H. (1980). Energy Crisis - Schools to the rescue. School Science and Mathematics, 80(6),
467– 478.
Holden, C.C., & Barrow, L.H. (1984). Validation of the test of energy concepts and values for high
school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(2), 187– 196.
Holmes, B. (1978). Energy: Knowledge and attitudes, a national assessment of energy awareness among
young adults. Denver, CO: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Kesidou, S., & Roseman, J.E. (2002). How well do middle school science programs measure up?
Findings from Project 2061’s curriculum review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
39(6), 522–549.
Knapp, M.S. (1997). Between systemic reforms and the mathematics and science classroom: The
dynamics of innovation, implementation, and professional learning. Review of Educational
Research, 67(2), 227 –266.
Krajcik, J., McNeill, K.L., & Reiser, B.J. (2008). Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing
curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based peda-
gogy. Science Education, 92(1), 1–32.
Lawrenz, F. (1983). Student knowledge of energy issues. School Science and Mathematics, 83(7),
587– 595.
Lee, H-S, & Liu, O.L. (2010). Assessing learning progression of energy concepts across middle
school grades: The knowledge integration perspective. Science Education, 94(4), 665 –688.
Liarakou, G., Gavrilakis, C., & Flouri, E. (2009). Secondary school teachers’ knowledge and atti-
tudes towards renewable energy sources. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(2),
120– 129.
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King’s
College.
 1274 A. Bodzin

National Assessment of Educational Progress. (1975). Selected results from the national assessments of
science: Energy questions. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
National Environmental Education & Training Foundation and Roper ASW. (2002). Americans’ low
‘Energy IQ’: A risk to our energy future/why America needs a refresher course on energy. Washington,
DC: National Environmental Education & Training Foundation.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting con-
cepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education
Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Edu-
cation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Science Digital Library. (2011). Retrieved from http://nsdl.org/
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014

OECD. (2000). Measuring student knowledge and skills: The PISA 2000 assessment of reading, math-
ematical and scientific literacy. Paris.
Papadouris, N., Constantinou, C.P., & Kyratsi, T. (2008). Students’ use of the energy model to
account for changes in physical systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 444– 469.
Pfirman, S., & the AC-ERE (2003). Complex environmental systems. Synthesis for earth, life, and society
in the 21st century, a report summarizing a 10-year outlook in environmental research and education
for the National Science Foundation. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
Prentice Hall Science Explorer. (2005). Motion, forces, and energy teacher’s edition. Needham, MA:
Pearson Prentice Hall.
Punter, P., Ochando-Pardo, M., & Garcia, J. (2011). Spanish secondary school students’ notions on
the causes and consequences of climate change. International Journal of Science Education,
33(3), 447–464.
Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency. (2011). National curriculum. Retrieved
March 1, 2011, from http://curriculum.qcda.gov.uk/key-stages-3-and-4/subjects/key-stage-3/
science/index.aspx
Richmond, J.M., & Morgan, R.F. (1977). A national survey of the environmental knowledge and atti-
tudes of fifth year pupils in England. Columbus, OH: ERIC/SMEAC Information Reference
Center.
Rule, A. (2005). Elementary students’ ideas concerning fossil fuel energy. Journal of Geoscience Edu-
cation, 53(3), 309– 318.
Schipper, L., Unander, F., Murtishaw, S., & Ting, M. (2001). Indicators of energy use and carbon
emission: Explaining the energy economy link. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 26,
49–81.
Schmidt, W.H., Wang, H.C., & McKnight, C.C. (2005). Curriculum coherence: An examination of
U.S. mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 37(5), 525– 559.
Solomon, J. (1992). Getting to know about energy: In school and society. London: The Falmer Press.
Stubbs, M. (1985). Energy education in the curriculum. Educational Studies, 11(2), 133 –150.
Tomorrow 98. (1992). Report of the superior committee on science, mathematics and technology education
in Israel. Jerusalem: The Ministry of Education and Culture.
Trumper, R., Raviolo, A., & Shnersch, A.M. (2000). A cross-cultural survey of conceptions of
energy among elementary school teachers in training – empirical results from Israel and Argen-
tina. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(7), 697–714.
Twidell, J., & Weir, T. (2006). Renewable energy resources (second edition). New York: Taylor &
Francis.
U.S. Department of Energy. (2011). Energy literacy: The essential principles of energy education.
Retrieved from https://wiki.citizen.apps.gov/Energy_Literacy/index.php/Main_Page
U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2010). International energy outlook 2010. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Energy.
 Urban Students’ Knowledge of Energy 1275

Valhov, S.J., & Treagust, D.F. (1988). Students’ knowledge of energy and attitudes to energy con-
servation. School Science and Mathematics, 88(6), 452 –458.
Van Koevering, T.E., & Sell, N.J. (1983). An analysis of the effectiveness of energy education work-
shops for teachers. Science Education, 67(2), 151 –158.
Venezky, R.L. (1992). Texbooks in school and society. In P.W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on
curriculum (pp. 436 –461). New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing.
Wilson, M.R., & Berenthal, M.W. (2006). Systems for state scsience assessment. Washington, DC:
National Academies Press.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 18:01 09 October 2014