Science & Education (2007) 16:801 833 Ó Springer 2006

DOI 10.1007/s11191-006-9034-x

Models of the Universe: Children’s Experiences

and Evidence from the History of Science

VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU
General Department of Education, School of Pedagogical and Technological Education
(A.S.PE.T.E.), Achaikis Sympoliteias 20, Zavlani, Patras, Achaias, 26442, Greece
E-mail: spiliot@otenet.gr

Abstract. This study focuses on children’s experiences and the creation of ‘‘the big picture’’,
the Universe. It draws data from an age range 6 16 and is based on 270 children’s drawings of
how they imagine the Universe to be, and on their answers to a number of short questions
about it. Results are discussed using as a base a specially developed systemic network, which is
considered to be a formulation broad enough to cover the different ways of experiencing the
Universe. The categories of descriptions which have been developed are exemplified by chil-
dren’s characteristic drawings, and analogies with historical conceptions are discussed. They
have also been tested with groups of teachers’ and student teachers’ descriptions. Moreover,
dominant images held during the history of Science, have been explored in terms of their
relevance to the categories of the systemic network. It appears that, although there is no
analogical evolution of the ideas between these two fields, some historical instances resemble
some of the children’s models.

Key words: children’s models of universe, children’s cosmologies, historical cosmological

models, phenomenography

1. Introduction
Astronomy and Space Science have a strong appeal for the human mind
and imagination. They are characterized by dynamic and exciting features,
as their themes are related to everyday life, the surrounding culture, and to
the unknown as well. Some ideas from astronomy are also introduced into
the school curriculum and they attract students’ interest for learning,
although this is a demanding activity. It requires an understanding of the
ability to visualize events and objects as they may appear from different
perspectives simultaneously. Children usually develop such thinking at an
early age and evidence from research studies has brought to light their
ideas, about the earth, the sky gravity, and other astronomical and meteo-
rological entities. However, research into children’s astronomical and cos-
mological ideas is quite limited, compared with the studies in other fields
of science, and concentrates mainly on specific concepts of astronomy,
although this is a field with particular features. One is that the entities
802 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

involved are different from the usual macroscopic phenomena as they

extend beyond people’s reach and immediate experience. Another is its
systemic nature that is well suited to Buck’s (1990) description of a nesting
system with which he tried to depict the material world. The galaxy is
described as a system of which our solar system is part, our solar system
the sun together with the planets the Earth being one element of this
system, is thus a system within this system. The Earth itself can be said to
comprise a system of mountains, rivers, cities and so on, getting progres-
sively smaller, until you end up with elementary particles, probably quarks.
According to this ‘‘system-component’’ approach the qualities and proper-
ties of a given component are usually not the same qualities of the whole
system of which it is a part. Children’s thinking about the widest, most
complete, system, that of the universe, seems to be of interest as it includes
an appreciation of qualities of both the parts and the whole in a way
analogical to the material, natural world.
This study focuses on children’s experiences and the creation of ‘‘the big
picture’’, the universe, and aims at finding and systematizing the forms of
thought in terms of which people interpret significant aspects of the reality
under study. More specifically, it aims at description, analysis and under-
standing of experiences (Marton 1981). Studying children’s experiences
about the Universe, we deal with both the conceptual and the experiential,
with what is thought of as well as that which is lived. We also deal with
what is culturally learned and with what are individually developed ways
of relating ourselves to the world around us. In order to develop a more
adequate understanding of the structure and nature of students’ experi-
ences of the universe, historical evidence concerning the evolution of the
pictures of the universe is taken into account. In particular, the study
sought answers to the following research questions:
How do children experience and think of the Universe? Can their experi-
ences be modeled? Do children’s models differ according to age? Is there a
relationship between children’s models and historical models?

2. Research on Astronomical and Cosmological Concepts

The question of what subjects and which domains a syllabus should
include is not a new one. From the days of Socrates and Plato, this has
even been a very important aspect of democracy and has been explic-
itly stated and argued. Such a characteristic example, a part of Plato’s
Republic, quoted from Toulmin’s book, The Fabric of Heaven (1961) is
presented below partially and selectively. In this, Plato discusses the
purposes and methods of astronomy:
Socrates, Plato’s teacher, is depicted talking over the ideal educational
syllabus with his ‘feed’ or ‘stooge’, Glaucon. They have agreed that the
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 803

rulers must certainly learn a good deal of mathematics in particular,

plane geometry. Then Socrates raises the question of astronomy:
Socrates: Shall we put astronomy third? Do you agree?
Glaucon: Certainly I do. It is important for military purposes, no less
than for agriculture and navigation, to be able to tell accurately the
times of the month of the year.
S.: I am amused by your evident fear that the public will think you are
recommending useless knowledge. True, it is quite hard to realize that
every soul possesses an organ [the intellect] better worth saving than a
thousand eyes, because it is our only means of seeing the truth; ... So
you had better decide at once which party [the theorists or the practical
men] you mean to reason with...
............
G.: Very well, then, Socrates. I will now praise astronomy on your prin-
ciples, instead of vulgarly commending its utility for which you criti-
cized me. Anyone can see that this subject forces the mind to look
upwards, away from this world of ours to higher things.
S.: Anyone except me, perhaps, I do not agree
G.: How, then, do you mean the study of astronomy?
............
S.: So if we mean to study astronomy in a way which makes proper use
of soul’s inborn intellect, we shall proceed as we do in geometry
working at mathematical problems and not waste time observing the
heavens. (Toulmin 1961, pp. 81 83)
This kind of dilemma has arisen throughout the history of science educa-
tion, discussed in detail by Matthews (1994), with the inductive-empiricist
view of science dominating curricula reforms and science teaching over the
last 50 years. This perspective had excluded from the curriculum areas of
science that dealt with the study of parts of the world out of children’s
experiential reach. However,
All students, whether science majors or others, should have some knowledge of the
great episodes in the development of science and consequently of culture: the ancient de-
mythogizing of the world picture; the Copernican relocation of the earth from the centre
of the solar system; the development of experimental and mathematical science associ-
ated with Galileo and Newton; Newton’s demonstration that the terrestrial laws of
attraction operated in the celestial realms;... (Matthews 1994, p. 3)

Contemporary scientific advances and the spread of constructivist science

teaching have recently led to the introduction of mainly elementary ideas
of these fields into science curriculum. So, the study of the micro-world
and the mega-world in school is rather limited to the learning of the solar
system, or the phenomena of the day and night cycle, lunar phases and
seasons. As Albanese et al. (1997) discuss ‘‘the heliocentric model is now
804 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

considered the ‘true’ scientific model that must be communicated to chil-

dren at an early age as a basic knowledge of science’’. This also shows the
persistence of the idea that school science can only involve entities of
Harré’s realm 1 and realm 2, as discussed in Osborne (1996, pp. 70 74).
Harré’s realm 3 theories, which include theoretical objects for the existence
of which there is no direct evidence, such as quarks and black holes, are
usually avoided as they are beyond all possible experience. This may
explain the comparatively limited research into students’ cosmic ideas
which has mainly focused on astronomic concepts. In particular, entities,
like the earth, the sun, the moon, solar systems and students’ or teachers’
thinking has been explored in terms of their properties, like shape, posi-
tions, dimensions, distances or in terms of relevant phenomena like the
day/night cycle, lunar phases, seasons, or related concepts like gravity. The
main issues, which emerge and are studied, are the existing notions or
models, their nature, sources and progression, and the role of teaching
interventions.
Nussbaum & Novak (1976) first focused on pupils’ conceptions of earth,
devised interesting research tasks and identified a progressive differentia-
tion of the earth concept expressed by five notions. They claimed that
learning the concept is accomplished in a series of identifiable steps rather
than as a single ‘conceptual leap’. Relevant research continued by explor-
ing the role of age and cultural factors (Mali & Howe 1979), or social and
cultural factors (Klein 1982), and the effect of appropriately designed
audio-tutorial teaching interventions (Nussbaum & Sharoni-Dagan 1983).
Sneider & Pulos (1983) claimed that, for concepts like the earth’s shape
and gravity it is useful to employ the notion of the ‘psysicho-cultural’ con-
cept. They defined this concept as a view of the physical world held in
common by a cultural group and as probably contrasted with the logico-
mathematical concepts studied by Piaget, usually acquired through the
interaction of the individual with his physical environment. Vosniadou &
Brewer (1992) defined three types of mental models of the earth, the initial,
the synthetic and the scientific and for explaining their construction posited
the existence of a hierarchy of constraints. Jones et al. (1987) broadened
the system of the study and focused on aspects of the solar system. They
identified five special model categories which show a hierarchy, while stu-
dents’ success in dealing with cosmic bodies’ size, shape and distances seem
to depend on memorizing school knowledge. Baxter (1989) studied pupils’
theories about the gravitational field, the day and night cycle, the phases
of the moon and the seasons. He developed a scheme of notions for each
domain and argued that many pupils’ notions have historical parallels.
Similar astronomic conceptions have also been studied by Trumper (2001),
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 805

who found a serious discrepancy between junior high school students’ con-
ceptions and the corresponding accepted scientific view.
Two-level hierarchy schemes and facets-of-knowledge were used to inter-
pret students’ concept of the sky by Galili et al. (2004), who suggested the
inclusion of sky and visibility distance into the physics curriculum.
University students’ and teachers’ ideas have also been studied in this
field. Targan (1987) found that students exposed to a university course in
basic astronomy with experimental work did not change their knowledge
in order to reach scientific explanations for the lunar phases. Ojala (1992)
reported that future teachers in Finland did not understand matters relat-
ing to planetary features as a consistent system and that the significance of
various phenomena and their interrelationships remain obscure and
unstructured. Suzuki (2003) adopted the idea of two perspectives for the
study of the sun earth moon system, as viewed from the earth and from
outside the solar system, in a course for prospective teachers in order to
develop their understanding.
Lightman et al. (1987) focused on adults and students’ cosmological
beliefs and found that the idea of an expanding universe frightens both
adults and students, while religious beliefs play an important role in their
conceptualization. However, students seem to have and use a lot of infor-
mation about space trips and exploration and the possibility of extraterres-
trial life. Perceptions of the universe of Physics undergraduates in South
Africa have been studied through a questionnaire by Lemmer et al. (2003),
the first question of which requested a sketch of their image of the uni-
verse. They based the analysis of students’ worldviews as derived from stu-
dents’ sketches on a-priori existing historical world models of Physics like
the organistic, the mechanistic and the contemporary models. They found
that students have met difficulty comprehending the scientific method and
the paradigm of Physics. As an explanation for the finding that African
students displayed organistic models in significantly larger number than
European students, they suggested the mechanistic worldview common in
Europe.
In a critical review of research up to 1997 on students’ ideas about the
earth and its place in the universe based on historical evidence, Albanese
et al. (1997) noticed that in all reviewed reports ‘it is evident that the
Copernican model is seen as the final stage of astronomical concepts, to be
taught as an explanatory model of unknown observations. There seems to
be the implicit belief that the model may be understood by means of direct
and individualized observations of the astronomical phenomena (day/night,
moon’s phases, seasons, etc.)’ (pp. 587 588). Their analysis from the
history of astronomy shows that there is evidence that the Copernican
model can not be understood by means of direct and individualized obser-
806 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

vation of astronomical phenomena. They also found that the articles stud-
ied never touch on the important theme of reference systems, which they
consider as the most important factor in the astronomy of position.
On the other hand, although references to the history of ideas exist in
this body of the reviewed research, this usually happens in a non-system-
atic way. Work on the differences between beginners and expert practitio-
ners, or teaching and history has been reported that has followed different
directions. Some has focused on the nature of conceptual changes occur-
ring in different domains analyzing mainly the scientific or the historical
field, e.g. heat and temperature (Wiser & Carey 1983), historical develop-
ment of arithmetical thinking (Damerow 1996), other has compared onto-
logical findings of the locally studied historical fields with evidence from
the reviewed literature concerning students’ conceptions, e.g. nature of
light (Raftopoulos et al. 2005), mechanism of vision (Dedes 2005). In most
of this body of research the main focus is on the analysis of the historical
evidence. This study initiated by the desire to explore children’s concep-
tions and ways of understanding which are not seen as individual qualities,
but which are the basis for the creation of categories of description to be
used in facilitating the grasp of concrete cases of human functioning con-
cerning the universe. Because we aim to create a set of categories that will
be stable and generalizable, we investigate, by adopting a phenomeno-
graphic orientation, whether the same categories appear in other situations,
like in groups of adults and in the history of ideas about the universe.

3. The Present Study

3.1. THE RATIONALE

What distinguishes the present research effort from previous ones is the
methodological approach adopted for the study of children’s thought, that
falls within the field of inquiry, labeled as phenomenography (Marton
1981). That means that the research aim is:
... not to classify people, nor is it to compare groups, to explain, to predict, nor to make
fair or unfair judgements of people. It is to find and systematize forms of thought in
terms of which people interpret aspects of reality aspects which are socially significant
and which are at least supposed to be shared by the members of a particular kind of
society; namely, our own industrialized Western society (p. 181)

This kind of research is complementary to other kinds of research (e.g. cog-

nitive psychology, or constructivist). According to this line of thought we
only have access to world through experience. This implies that we cannot
separate that which is experienced from the experience per se and because a
way of experiencing something is an internal relationship between the ex-
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 807

periencer and the experienced, it reflects the latter as much the former
(Marton & Booth 1997). A central notion is that of ‘essence’ and although
its interpretation varies, as to the study of people’s experience of a certain
aspect of reality, ‘essence’ here will refer to the common, intersubjective
meaning of that aspect. This is expressed in the relevant research finding
that phenomena, aspects of reality, are experienced in a relatively limited
number of qualitatively different ways. So, the focus is on a level of modes
of experience existing in-between the common and the idiosyncratic.
Such an approach is different to a phenomenological approach. For
example, ‘the phenomenology of the universe’ refers to something we ar-
rive at concerning the universe by means of a phenomenological investiga-
tion, while ‘the phenomenography of the universe’ refers to anything that
can be said about how people perceive, experience and conceptualize the
universe. Another difference is that under a phenomenological investiga-
tion the aim is to describe what the universe would be like without having
learned how to see it or how the taken-for-granted universe of our every-
day existence is ‘lived’. In ‘phenomenography’ we deal with both the con-
ceptual and the experiential, with what is thought of as well as that which
is lived; with what is culturally learned and with what are individually
developed ways of relating ourselves to the world around us.
Marton (1981) argued that it is important to produce categories of
descriptions which may not describe an individual’s conceptions of some-
thing, e.g. the universe, in a sufficiently reliable way, but which can in fact
describe conceptions of the universe in an absolutely reliable way. ‘‘This
means that the same categories of description appear in different situations
and can be considered stable and generalizable between situations, even if
the individuals ‘move’ from one category to another on different occa-
sions’’ (pp. 194 195). He also argued that further investigation of chil-
dren’s ways of thinking would focus on the perceived world, rather than
the perceiving child, and
... that the outcome of a research undertaking is thus separated into two different as-
pects; on one hand, we can view the results as categories of description considered as
abstract instruments to be used in the analysis of concrete cases in the future. On the
other hand, we can focus on the applicability of these categories in concrete cases, con-
sidering the possibility of applying the categories in order to make a statement about an
historical fact such as, for instance, that individual X exhibited conception Y under cir-
cumstance Z. This dual character of the description has its counterparts in a corre-
sponding dual character of what is described. A conception exists in the real world only
in terms of a mental act and it is exhibited by someone who does something in a certain
setting. In talking about categories of description, then we ‘‘bracket’’ the dynamic-activ-
ity perspective and we consider the categories almost as if they were ‘frozen’ forms of
thought. (Marton 1981, p. 196)
808 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

The sectioning-off of thought from thinker, accepted in phenomenography,

‘‘in spite of obvious differences in other respects, has a certain similarity to
Popper’s (1972) notion of epistemology without a knowing subject’’ (p. 196),
who also thinks of this ‘third world’, the world of ‘objective contents of
thought’ (the world of physical objects and physical states is the ‘first
world’, and the world of states of consciousness is the ‘second world’), in
terms of valid scientific knowledge which changes in an evolutionary way,
where some forms die, others evolve.
Under the phenomenographic perspective, not only is evidence of the
ways students conceptualize phenomena used as data, but also evidence
from the history of scientific ideas within specific domains (Driver 1989),
while descriptions of categories refer not only to differences in the concep-
tion of various aspects of reality between individuals, but between different
periods in the history of science and within individuals as well.

3.2. SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESEARCH

The study presented here is part of broader research into children’s experi-
ences of different aspects of the world, collected by various tools aiming to
develop generalized categories of descriptions that define children’s cosmol-
ogies (Spiliotopoulou 1997). It draws data from different sources: children,
teachers, student teachers, and history of science. The initial investigation
was based on children’s drawings of the universe. Children, aged
6 16 years old, were asked to make drawings responding to the question:
‘What do you think the ‘‘Universe’’ looks like? Make a drawing’. In cases,
where very young children seem not to be aware of the word universe, a
small explanation had been prepared and was given: ‘The Universe is every-
thing you see, you know or you imagine exists around us as far as you can
possibly think’. Their answers to a number of 12 short questions about the
universe, like ‘What is it made of?’, ‘Who or what made it?’, ‘Does it
move?’, etc and about other related entities, like the earth, the sun, the gal-
axy, etc, have been used. The systematic analysis of these answers is not
presented here. They are only used for throwing light on aspects of the
drawings which are not clear and for bringing forward arguments of simi-
larities and differences between children’s cosmologies and historic models.
The task of thinking about and drawing what the universe looks like
offers the freedom, for the one who expresses his/her ideas, to choose the
system of reference for describing his/her model of the universe.
The study was carried out in a total of eight schools (four primary and
four secondary) in the Merseyside area of England. 280 children took part
in this research and worked outside the classroom. The age groups were
chosen to cover the range from junior 1-class of primary school to 10th
form of secondary school. Children worked in groups of four. In primary
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 809

schools, groups worked one at a time and children were free to discuss
amongst themselves. The intention was to give children time to think
about their own ideas and to become familiar with the questions. Discus-
sions were audio-taped. Children worked in three or four school sessions,
typically 3 4 h in total.
The same question was also given to 60 student teachers of primary
education, 50 primary teachers and 130 secondary teachers of science and
technology. Historical sources of ancient and more recent cosmologies
were also collected and studied in terms of the conceptions of the universe
used in each period (Spiliotopoulou 1997).
Based on a grounded theory approach (Strauss & Corbin 1998), initial
analysis was applied to the data collected from children and then data
from the adults’ groups and the history was considered. Analytical presen-
tation of the historical models met and the adults’ models is omitted here,
but selected evidence is used throughout the presentation of the network
categories and the discussion of our findings.

3.3. ANALYSIS OF DATA

The analysis was carried out on the overall collection of children’s draw-
ings of the universe. The network analysis is a technique that has been suc-
cessfully employed in the analysis of quantitative data (Cohen & Manion
1989) and which was adopted here for dealing with and analyzing our
qualitative information. Essentially, this strategy involves the development
of an elaborate system of categories by way of classifying qualitative data
and preserving the essential complexity and subtlety of the materials under
investigation. It generates a network-like system in which descriptive cate-
gories appear linked in a structure which shows, amongst other things,
which categories belong within others, which are independent, and which
are conditional on the choice of others (Bliss et al. 1983).
So, each drawing has been explored in terms of its characteristics in
order to identify different dimensions appropriate for all drawings. Eventu-
ally, an initial construct of categories was created that was tested with the
rest of our data, until a certain degree of certainty that the network was a
good description of this group’s experiences, was obtained. During this
process, three independent researchers confirmed the consistency and the
reliability of the categories. This ended with the final form of a specially
developed systemic network, which was considered to be a formulation
broad enough to cover the children’s different ways of experiencing the
Universe. The categories, which were developed, hold true for a number of
drawings where similarities in terms of the structure of the universe were
identified.
810 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

Later, this network was tested through other adult groups’ drawings and
how well their ideas fitted with this formulation. The network was
extended by adding one more category that expresses an aspect of adults’
thought about the universe not met among children. The finally con-
structed systemic network with the categories which emerged from the data
is presented in Figure 1. The network is constructed by using two basic
notations: One indicates constraints or conditions on choices represented
by the bar notation (BAR), consisting of a vertical line with the main
category to the left and the subcategories to the right. Subcategories are
mutually exclusive and help to define each another by the contrasts
they mutually offer. The other indicates the possibility of repeated choice

terrestrial

localystic of
planets
transitory
as a of solar
group systems

of
galaxies

geocentric

physical celestial heliocentric

model

undefinable

uniform distribution

as a
whole
exogalactic
metaphysical as a
model group of universes

Universe symbolic
model

finite

infinite

undefinable

Figure 1. Systemic network for models of the Universe.

MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 811

represented by a bracket (BRA), which means that selections must be

made in all the subcategories which follow the bracket, which means neces-
sary co-selection.

4. Findings
4.1. QUALITATIVE ASPECTS

Initially, drawings were analyzed in two dimensions: one concerning the

kind of model, the other concerning the limits of the universe (Figure 1).
In terms of the limits, the drawing or the comments on it show whether
the universe is considered by the children to be ‘finite’ or ‘infinite’. In
terms of the kind of model, three main categories emerged: the physical,
the metaphysical and the symbolic model. Drawings characterized as phys-
ical models can be further analyzed. They create the subcategories of ter-
restrial, or transitory, or celestial, or exogalactic model, while the celestial
models can either be localystic, or descriptions of groups of entities, or
uniform distribution, and the exogalactic models describe the universe as a
whole or as a group of universes. Subcategories of the model of groups of
entities are groups of planets, of solar systems, or of galaxies. Drawings
that fall within the localystic and the group of entities model can also be
categorized in terms of their geocentricity or heliocentricity. Categories and
subcategories are further discussed below, where characteristic drawings
for each category are also presented and discussed.
Question: What do you think the ‘‘Universe’’ looks like? Make a drawing.
(The Universe is everything you see, you know or you imagine exists
around us as far as you can possibly think.)
The category ‘indefinable’ locates drawings which do not have an indica-
tion of the person’s beliefs regarding the finite nature of the universe.
In terms of the kind of model that the drawing expresses, two categories
have been identified: the physical model and the metaphysical model. The
category of symbolic model was not met among children, but added to the
systemic network from drawings collected from student teachers and
teachers (Spiliotopoulou & Ioannidis 1996a). Teachers’ drawings that rep-
resent items arbitrarily chosen to stand for something else (von Glasersfeld
1987), the universe in our case, are located in this category.
The category ‘physical’ model contains drawings which are physical rep-
resentations of the universe. Modern cosmology studies a physical universe
that includes all that is physical and excludes all that is non-physical. In
science the definition of physical includes all those things that are
observed, that are studied in controlled experiments and are explained by
quantitative and predictive theories vulnerable to disproof.
812 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

Figure 2. A layered terrestrial model.

In the ‘Terrestrial’ model, the universe has a very narrow range. It is

limited to the surrounding environment as experienced in our everyday life.
It includes the part of the Earth where we live and familiar entities like
buildings, trees, stars, space above us which we see or we imagine.
Figure 2 is a characteristic example of a terrestrial model structured in lay-
ers. This 7-year-old girl’s drawing shows a real representation of her idea
of the universe as ‘everything she sees, she knows or she imagines existing
around her as far as she can possibly think’. It seems that she is aware of
entities like space, planets, and shooting stars, but her way of experiencing
the whole system ends in adopting an interesting perspective for her repre-
sentation. Figure 3 is another interesting example of the terrestrial model,
where universe has a different structure, that of a dome. The sky extends
at the upper space of the dome, while space and spacemen are located on
top of it. It is remarkable that the form of this 6-year-old girl’s drawing of
the universe resembles the form and structure of the world represented in
the Egyptian pot of Figure 4.
In ‘transitory’ models, both terrestrial and celestial entities are exhibited.
These models trap a phase during which the children are trying to cope
with new information about the structure of the universe without being
able to overcome their experiential adherence to the sky existing at the top
or to sea at the bottom of the universe. The 7-year-old girl’s drawing, pre-
sented in Figure 5, is a characteristic example of the transitory model. She
adopts a more distanced view of the earth and her drawing shows an
appreciation of the celestial locus. What she has not managed yet to over-
come, is her terrestrial experiences and so she represents sky and sea as the
limits of the vertical direction of universe. The representation of America
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 813

Figure 3. A dome-type terrestrial model.

Figure 4. Shu, the god of atmosphere raises his daughter Nurt, the goddess of the sky, over
the lying body of his son Geb, the god of earth (British Museum).

as one of the planets is another sign of her effort to relate knowledge and
experience in one picture and transit her terrestrial sense.
A ‘Celestial’ model can be ‘localystic’ or can represent ‘groups of plan-
ets, solar systems’, or ‘galaxies’. In a localystic model, the universe is again
814 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

Figure 5. A transitory model.

Figure 6. A localystic celestial model.

narrow in range, but now the narrowness concerns a limited part of space.
Such drawings show that the child who draws takes a perspective close to
a planet, usually the earth, or close to the sun and represents the nearby
area. Such a model, which can simultaneously be considered as heliocen-
tric, is presented in Figure 6, where a small part of the sun and the
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 815

surrounding area appears with the planets and the moon orbiting around
the sun. Pieces of rock from other planets and shooting stars are falling,
while spaceships are emitting signals or radio signals to the earth. Black
holes, white holes and a locus of dots called Milky Way are also present.
Localystic models and group models can also be described as ‘geocentric’
or ‘heliocentric’. When there is no clear indication of its geocentricity or he-
liocentricity, the drawing falls into the category named ‘indefinable’. A typi-
cal geocentric model of a 10-year-old boy is shown in Figure 7. The earth is
the dominant entity, spinning around itself, the sun and the moon are still,
while planets may move, ‘as Pluto moves and takes 365,000 years for this’.
Stars are distributed around the earth, in an enriched version of the ‘two-
sphere’ universe, that became popular at about the time of Plato in the 4th
century b.c.. In Figure 8, a group of planets forming our solar system is
beautifully represented with the sun in the middle of the spiral arm.
A more distanced view is adopted in the model ‘group of solar systems’
(Figure 9) and ‘group of galaxies’ (Figure 10). The 12-year-old boy’s draw-
ing shows his knowledge of the planets of our own solar system and that
the sun is bigger in size than the planets, and he also represents, analogical
to our solar systems, other solar systems. However the way he represents it
implies a rather geocentric model. A 15-year-old girl’s drawing includes
comets, black holes, planets, solar systems and galaxies as independent
entities, showing on the one hand that she has the knowledge of different
entities of the universe, but on the other, a lack of appreciation of how
they are connected in a structured whole.

Figure 7. A geocentric model of a group of planets.

816 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

Figure 8. A celestial model of a solar system.

Figure 9. A celestial model of a group of solar systems.

In the ‘uniform distribution’ model the point of view taken by the child
who represents the universe is such that the cosmic entities are represented
as undifferentiated in their structure, usually as dots or small arrows, dis-
tributed over the whole area, in a uniform way. Such is the example in
Figure 11 of a 13-year-old boy’s universe, where spiral signs present either
galactic formulations or curled movements or turbulent flow in the uni-
verse. This model reminds us of the Newtonian universe, which was infi-
nite and at first was centereless and uniformly populated with stars similar
to the Sun. Only with the improvements in telescopes, could astronomy
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 817

Figure 10. A celestial model of a group of galaxies.

Figure 11. A model of uniform distribution.

widen its horizons; and it became increasingly difficult to ignore the fact
that stars are not distributed uniformly throughout space.
‘Exogalactic models’ are considered to be the ones that represent either
the universe as a whole or as a group of universes. These models seem to
be closer to a scientific model of the universe. Two characteristic cases of
this model appear in Figures 12 and 13 respectively. In the first case, the
14-year-old boy’s universe seems to include his knowledge of current views
about universe, which are accepted, worked out and organized in his con-
ceptual thinking as a complete image. So, the universe for this boy ‘should
be exactly spherical’. He comments: ‘Every dot represents one galaxy.
There are millions and millions of galaxies in our universe. The galaxies
818 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

Figure 12. A balloon model of the whole Universe.

Figure 13. A model of many universes.

are getting apart all the time and so universe is expanding’. In the second
case (Figure 13), the drawing not only implies the spherical idea of the
Universe, but reveals a theory of the existence and creation of other uni-
verses. An amoebic creation is represented, while his comment ‘the uni-
verse expands and so one moment it is divided’ shows that he is aware of
the universe’s expansion. Of course such ideas are not very common in
general and are not met very often among children. However, the idea of
the creation of a new universe from one already existing is very interesting
and the creation of new matter has also been discussed in the scientific
community.
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 819

In 1929 James Jeans surmized that the ‘centres of the nebulae are of the
nature of ‘‘singular points’’, at which matter is poured into our universe
from some other, entirely extraneous, spatial dimensions, so that to a deni-
zen in our universe, they appear as points at which matter is being contin-
ually created’. In 1939 Pascual Jordan of Germany developed the
scalar tensor theory, according to which, matter is not conserved but cre-
ated. He said: ‘The conjecture suggests itself that the cosmic creation of
matter does not take place as a diffuse creation of protons, but by the sud-
den appearance of whole drops of matter’ (quoted from Harrison 1981, p.
318).
The concept of space and the shape of the universe are closely related
and comprise the focus of current research explorations, while the curva-
ture constant k has a crucial role (Friedmann 1979). For one of the three
mentioned cases, when k=)1, the universe has hyperbolic expanding space
and is infinite and unbounded, corresponding to a ball that is continually
expanding. This last case is expressed in the drawing of an adult secondary
school teacher, shown in the upper part of Figure 14, where, knowing

Figure 14. Adults’ models of hyperbolic space and parallel universes.

820 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

about the hyperbolic space, he constructs this model and explains it thus:
‘four pieces of universe that are spread and lost’. Similar to Figure 12, dots
represent galaxies. Lower in Figure 14, an unusual and intriguing idea of
parallel universes is shown. This idea is also historically recorded. In Men
Like Gods, H.G. Wells (quoted in Stapledon 1937) introduced the idea of
parallel universes, occupying a ‘superspace’, which are normally cut off
from each other, but which occasionally come into contact.
As an example of the metaphysical model we can consider a drawing
which attempts to show aspects beyond physical entities, entities that be-
long to a non-physical realm, such as heaven, angels, or the existence of
god. This expresses the individual’s needs to give physical existence to
things that are considered to be the most valuable and powerful: souls,
minds, emotions, powers, gods. Figure 15 shows an elaborated, well struc-
tured model of how a 13-year-old boy experiences the universe. In the cen-
tre, he represents the physical universe (all the solar systems, etc.), which is
surrounding by a vacuum destroying the souls of evil men and this by the
zone of heaven. All these are contained in the outer zone representing
God. The idea of God as something related to circles and sphericity is a
common one, expressed also in Empedocles, in the 5th century b.c.: ‘God
is a circle whose centre is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere’.
It seems that thinking about the universe usually cannot exclude the
interference of the human metaphysical beliefs. In the 13th century

Figure 15. A metaphysical model.

MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 821

Thomas Aquinas showed how Christianity could be accommodated within

the Aristotelian universe with relatively slight modifications (quoted in
Harrison 1981, p. 76). Human beings retained immortality, but the adop-
ted universe lost its eternity because it had been created by God. Further
adaptations soon followed as portrayed by Dante in the Divine Comedy;
hell became a nether region within Earth, purgatory was the sublunar re-
gion, and the ethereal regions were found to be ideal for the residence of
superlunary hierarchies of angelic beings (Figure 16).
The network of Figure 1 has also been tested and worked with other
groups, such as children, primary and secondary teachers in Greek schools
and university students. It was enriched by an interesting category, the
‘symbolic models’, while the two primary categories of ‘terrestrial’ and
‘transitory’ models proved to be unpopulated among adults.

4.2. QUANTITATIVE ASPECTS

The last finding also holds for the older children, as shown in Table I,
where we can also follow the distribution of models across age groups.
Terrestrial and transitory models are both met among the younger

Figure 16. The medieval universe as represented in Dante’s Divine Comedy.

822 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

Table I. Frequencies of models of the Universe across three age groups

Models Percentages per age group

5 8 years old 9 11 years old 12 16 years old

Terrestrial 9
Transitory 15 4
Celestial
Localystic 37 61.5 9
Group of
Planets 32 42 45.5
Solar Systems 4.5
Galaxies 1.5 24.5
Uniform distribution 4.5
Exogalactic 6.5
Metaphysical 7 4.5

children, while a small percentage of transitory models still exist among 9

to 11-year-old children. In terms of celestial models, the localystic ones are
the most usual for the two first age groups and only a small percentage of
older children give a drawing falling into this model.
We notice that models of a group of planets are frequently given by all
age groups, while models of a group of solar systems exist only in a small
percentage in the older age group. The model of a group of galaxies is
mainly met among older children, while the uniform distribution and the
exogalactic models are exclusively met in this age group.
Metaphysical models are not favored by the 9 to 11-year-old children
and are only worked out by the younger and the older age groups. The
quality of this model is not the same for the two age groups. Younger chil-
dren express their metaphysical beliefs in simplistic ways by drawing angels
and God’s throne, while older children present elaborated models with
completed personal belief systems for the world. The fact that among the 9
to 11-year-old children this model was not met may show a temporary
realism. In Table II, the percentages of geocentric and heliocentric models
per age group are presented. The decrease of the geocentric view of the
solar systems with age, in favor of the heliocentric view is apparent. It is
remarkable that a geocentric view is still met among children of the older
age group and among primary school teachers.
This means that although in these cases an advanced model of universe
may be used and expressed, for example a model of groups of galaxies, the
drawings may involve solar systems that are geocentric. Table III refers to
the infiniteness of the universe. A differentiation with age can also be
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 823

Table II. Frequencies of the kind of celestial models across three age groups

Models Percentages* per age group

5 8 years old 9 11 years old 12 16 years old

Geocentric 32 22 15
Heliocentric 29 51.5 80
Indefinable 39 26.5 5

*The percentages refer only to the number of celestial models.

Table III. Frequencies of models of the universe in terms of infiniteness across three age groups

Models Percentages per age group

5 8 years old 9 11 years old 12 16 years old

Finite 56 25.5 32.5

Infinite 41 68 63
Indefinable 3 6.5 4.5

noticed. However the concept of infiniteness is met in all age groups and is
strongly connected with the way individuals experience the universe.
Secondary school Children exhibit a small increase in experiencing a
finite universe. This may be due to the phase of liberation which older chil-
dren of primary schools taste and which creates a sense of the very big, the
concept of infiniteness and the infinite universe. The fact that older chil-
dren are aware of contemporary scientific views about the universe, like
the balloon model, may create the sense of closeness and so a finite uni-
verse fits in better and results in the small observed increase in finite model
among the older children.

5. Discussion
The aim of this study was the establishment and description of forms of
thought and perception concerning the universe. A system of categoriza-
tion has emerged from children’s expressed experience which seems to
work with evidence from both the adults’ descriptions, and the history of
human development. However, certain models are the result of ways of
representing the universe and not ‘objective contents of the world’. For
example, the symbolic model is chosen by adults to express ideas about the
universe in an indirect way that refer not to the form of the universe, but
to philosophical considerations or individual meanings attributed to this
824 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

huge system, for example appreciation of human weakness to understand

or to really provide valid models of it. Localystic model can also be con-
sidered as a way of representing details or a part of a whole, that is too
big to be drawn on a piece of paper. Metaphysical models, on the other
hand, are met among all groups and express the human need for a divine
plan or presence. However, physical models are characterized by an evolu-
tionary hierarchy in terms of the physical aspects of the universe; by means
of scientific progress new ways of conceiving aspects of reality are intro-
duced into thinking in general. Following the children’s models across the
different age groups and the evolution of historical conceptions of the uni-
verse, we notice that certain similarities become apparent. They are dis-
cussed in terms of their path of development, the existence of beliefs and
the structural and conceptual similarities of certain descriptions.

5.1. PATH OF DEVELOPMENT

Following children’s physical models of the universe across different age

groups, we have seen that their experiences are described in the categories
of the terrestrial, the transistory, the celestial and the exogalactic models.
Celestial models on the other hand are differentiated in terms of experi-
ences of the universe as a group of planets, or a group of solar systems, or
a group of galaxies. It seems that what differentiates these models is main-
ly the child’s point of view when representing the universe. A gradual in-
crease in the distance the person takes to view the universe from his/her
actual position on earth can be identified. The shortest distance is consid-
ered to be taken when the child provides a drawing of the surrounding,
immediately experienced environment, while the farthest distant when the
child draws, for example, a universe created from a pre-existing universe,
which has a similar structure to the scientific model of the Universe. These
models involve interwoven beliefs, emotions, experiences and received
information, and seem to evolve at the individual level, although not
always in an even way, towards scientific models.
The path, that the development of children’s experiences of the Universe
follows, looks similar to the path that the cosmological and scientific quest
has followed so far. According to Harisson (1981) three historical universes
exist: the anthropomorphic, the anthropocentric with three main phases,
the geocentric, the heliocentric and the Newtonian universe and the
anthropometric, while Toulmin (1982) talks about the anthropomorphic
myths and the mechanomorphic myths of the twentieth century. Watching
the history of cosmology unfold we see a steady growth in the conviction
that mankind does not occupy the center of the universe. The cosmic cen-
ter was displaced first from the tribe and nation and then from the earth,
the sun and finally the galaxy (Harisson 1981).
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 825

So, Babylonic wizardry flourished four thousand years ago when Baby-
lonians started to charter the heavens without however being able to
theorize on the nature of celestial regularity or to invent geometrical mod-
els of heavens. Very young children’s drawings of the universe with repre-
sentations of their personal stories on a perceived everyday environment
could be considered as similar to the early picture of the universe. The
Greeks’ ‘two-sphere’ universe, consisting of a spherical Earth surrounded
by a distant spherical surface studded with stars is also met among chil-
dren. This geocentric picture was discarded after almost 2000 years, in the
Copernican Revolution and replaced by the heliocentric picture with the
Sun at the cosmic center, which is a very popular description among the
two older groups of children. By the late seventeenth century, the heliocen-
tric picture had also been altered. An infinite, centerless universe emerged,
an idea met also in older children and more often in adults, which in the
eighteen century was replaced by a hierarchical universe of many centers.
In the nineteenth century the idea of an island universe arose in which the
Sun had a central location in the Galaxy. Such kinds of experiences are
also expressed in older children’s drawings, characterized as celestial mod-
els of a group of galaxies. In the 20th century, as the result of advances
made in astronomy and cosmology, once again a centerless universe has
appeared. Among children’s drawings that can be considered to express
such an aspect are the ones located in the category of exogalactic models.
As we watch the history of cosmology unfold we see a steady growth in
the conviction that mankind does not occupy the center of the universe.
In Mind and Matter (1958), Erwin Schrödinger writes
Without being aware of it, we exclude the Subject of Cognizance from the domain of
nature that we endeavour to understand. We step with our own person back into the
part of an onlooker who does not belong to the world, which by this very process
becomes an objective world. (Quoted in Harrison 1981, p. 118)

He then says: ‘A moderately satisfying picture of the world has only been
reached at the high price of taking ourselves out of the picture, stepping
back into the role of nonconcerned observer’.

5.2. BOTH SYSTEMS INCLUDE BELIEFS

Metaphysical beliefs are always interwoven with human thinking of the

universe and this seems to hold true both for children’s models and histori-
cal models. Drawings with angels who wash and pour the waters making
rain, god in his throne, spirits, and heaven are met among children’s draw-
ings, but human needs concerning heaven and hell, and the existence and
the role of God have been expressed even in scientists’ models and theo-
ries. These are usually naive. However, more sophisticated models seem to
be in use among young adolescents, like the one presented in Figure 15,
826 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

which presents a system of belief worked out with great care. It seems to
stand comparably with the one portrayed by Dante.
The displacement of the cosmic center occurred simultaneously with the
increase of notions concerning God and the universe. Medieval theology
developed far-reaching concepts of the nature of God that were subse-
quently transformed into ideas about the nature of the universe. Concepts
of God as unconfined, ubiquitous, and infinite were transformed into sci-
entific ideas of the universe as unconfined, infinite, and having its center
everywhere or nowhere.
Feelings of fear or of admiration or human worthlessness have also been
expressed in some teachers’ symbolic models, while similar feelings have
been recorded in previous historical moments. Such an example is the fol-
lowing extract from Bernard de Fontenelle’s (1657 1757) work ‘Conversa-
tions with a Lady on the Plurality of Worlds’ (quoted in Harrison 1981,
p. 117): ‘Behold a universe so immense that I am lost in it. I no longer
know where I am. I am just nothing at all. Our world is terrifying in its
insignificance’!

5.3. FROZEN FORMS OF THOUGHT OR SCATTERED IDEAS ARE SIMILAR

It also appears that some of the children’s individual models resemble

instant ideas of the historical intellectual development about universe. For
instance, similarities have been identified between the structures of the
Universe models. So, from a structural point of view, children’s models
seem to be similar to models met in history: the earth in the centre of the
world, heliocentric systems, the universe as a group of solar systems or as
a group of galaxies. Characteristic is the example, already presented, of a
child’s dome model that resembles a form similar in structure met in Egyp-
tian pottery. Also, ideas like ‘‘the sun and the planets move by a fluid
pushing them’’ that children offer for reasoning the cosmic entities’ move-
ments, resemble Descartes’ theory of vortex. Hypotheses like the creation
of a new universe from one already existed, or a boy’s representation of a
black whole as an entrance and of a white whole as an exit, have met in
both human history of science and children’s expressed experiences.
However, it seems that a claim for an analogical evolution of the ideas
between these two fields cannot stand. These two spaces have developed in
a similar way only from the structural point of view. The functional
aspects seem to have a quite different quality.

5.4. DIFFERENCES

It is beyond the scope of this paper to argue extendedly on the differences

between children’s models and historical models, as this is related to data
concerning the explanatory aspects. Our experiences from the broader
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 827

research undertaken (Spiliotopoulou 1997) however, point to where these

two domains draw apart. One of the main differences refers to the internal
consistency and quality of the experienced model. Even if children’s mod-
els are often characterized by a structure similar to the structure of a his-
toric model, children’s reasoning of this structure is limited. For example
their explanations about the creation and the movements of the universe
and the other related space entities can be characterized only as simplistic
and naı̈ve in terms of their consistency and coherence, while only the struc-
tural forms of their causal explanations resemble causal patterns met in
ancient Greek philosophy and thought (Spiliotopoulou & Ioannidis
1996b). Another difference is that the mechanism for the change of a mod-
el of the universe has a different nature and needs different time. Human
historical activity is based not only on simple observational experiences
and speculations, but on new powerful apparatus for collecting data, ad-
vanced mathematical models, mathematical calculations, and accurate
physical models continuously verified by advanced space technology.
Changes in human experiences of the universe have occurred through com-
plicated and carefully thought out syllogisms over a long period of time, or
by constructing powerful tools that broadened the experiential field, which
is not the case for the children. Another difference seems to occur in terms
of motives and intentions; the growth of knowledge, beyond school, hap-
pens naturally, usually aimlessly and unconsciously for children. As Mat-
thews (1994, p. 28) argued ‘Scientific thinking is not natural thinking.
Feral children do not develop scientific thought even though they might be
successful in coping with their environment’.

6. Conclusions

Ever since human beings first began to reflect about, and to discuss, their situation
within the world of natural things, their most comprehensive ambition has been to talk
sense about the Universe as a Whole. In practical terms, the ambition has reflected the
need to recognize where we stand in the world into which we have been born, to grasp
our place in the scheme of things and to feel at home within it. In intellectual terms,
meanwhile, it has stretched our powers of speculation and imagination like no other
ambition, requiring us to extend of our thoughts and our language beyond all natural
boundaries, so that they become ‘all inclusive’. (Toulmin 1982, p. 1)

The totality of categories of description as developed and presented in the

systemic network of Figure 1, denotes a kind of collective intellect, an evo-
lutionary tool in continual development. We have seen that a conception
of the universe is not something given, something which is to stand for all
time. It is not even agreed upon by everyone during the same period of
time. Historically, there have been other dominant conceptions no longer
828 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

taken as correct and it is not unreasonable to think that there will be

others in the future. ‘The scientifically accepted conceptions of today thus
appear a section in time as well as a special case of the variation in peo-
ple’s commonsense conceptions of the same aspect of reality which exists
at the same point in time’ (Marton 1981, p. 185). Thus, new forms of
thought are introduced from time to time and become through being
transformed to common categories of interpretation, parts of the ‘per-
ceived world’. Furthermore we have found that these two kinds of qualita-
tive variation present certain resemblances. Conceptions held by children
and adults although are not accepted by science frequently turn out to
have the same structure with conceptions of the universe accepted previ-
ously in history as scientifically valid ways of thinking. The models met
among children allow us to talk about the pictures of the universe as part
of social inheritance. The fact that we meet among children models of the
universe similar to the scientific ones, although they have not been taught
in school, implies a spread of intellectual ideas by social learning not only
to the other members of a group e.g. scientists, but even to the subsequent
generations.
The kind of data examined in this study and the system of categories
emerged support the existence of certain similarities in the way human
beings experience the universe, however further exploration of complemen-
tary data and of the actual historical endeavor is needed in order to obtain
a more completed scene in this field. Osborne (1996, p. 77) argued for the
existence of ‘two sources of human learning knowledge that is a
acquired through the sensorimotor interaction, that is, by acting and inter-
vening on the world, and knowledge that this is acquired through cultural
transmission’. This argument is more than evident for the results of this
study as they appear in the system of children’s ways of description of the
universe.

7. Teaching Implications
Research results concerning such system of categories that inform us about
similarities and differences between children’s experiences and historical
evidence is valuable information for rethinking classroom epistemology.
This can lead to a re-examination of the school curriculum that has to
take all this knowledge into account. Recalling the names of planets, or
calculating gravity on the surface of the moon, typical knowledge in most
national curriculums, is only a limited frame of knowledge, today. The
belief in the inductive process still expressed even in constructivist class-
rooms’ actions is also a brake. Contemporary knowledge about the uni-
verse cannot be achieved only by observing the sky and building the
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 829

picture piece by piece. This procedure is too complicated to be followed by

children. There is evidence that children can use more elaborate models of
the universe even when their previous knowledge is not accepted from the
scientific point of view. For example, they can use a model of the universe
as a group of galaxies, but they represent a geocentric solar system. Of
course this is not desirable but waiting for the change to a child’s heliocen-
tric solar system in order to discuss the current scientific views or the diffi-
culty scientific growth has met, is also a limitation. There is a growing
need to provide our students with broader images of science, where the
fragments of everyday school knowledge will be possibly framed, while
children’s models could be simultaneously altered and improved in a more
meaningful way.
The question of how to use this knowledge for the enhancement of class-
room science teaching is difficult. One direction is to support teachers’
awareness of such models (Spilitotopoulou & Ioannidis 1996a, b), and the
other is to define what kind of priorities and actions have to be chosen for
school classrooms (Monk & Osborne 1997). The school curriculum usually
focuses on specific pieces of this broader system, the universe, for example,
the solar system, the lunar phases, the seasons and gravity. It seems that
these pieces, while fragmented, are approached by emphasizing activities
like observation and simple experimentation. There is a need to identify
ways to frame this knowledge and to provide children with current scien-
tific views. As Sutton (1996) claimed scientific understanding is sometimes
based on a collection of facts, but other time it ‘begins with the imagining
of a new model which influences what ‘‘facts’’ are worth seeking, and what
will count as relevant evidence’.
So, the issue of what kind of science syllabus can best support students’
scientific literacy is today crucial. Decisions in terms of content, decisions
in terms of ideological and philosophical orientation should be made. Sci-
ence does have a human, cultural and historical dimension, it is closely
connected with philosophy, interests and values, and its knowledge claims
are frequently tentative (Matthews 1994). Domains, like the cosmological
field seem to be able to carry such dimensions.
Some episodes in the history of the scientific endeavor are of surpassing significance to
our cultural heritage. Such episodes certainly include Galileo’s role in changing our per-
ception of our place in the universe; Newton’s demonstration that the same laws apply
to motion in the heavens and on earth; ... These stories stand among the milestones of
the development of all thought in Western civilization. (AAAS 1989, p. 11)

However, the use of historical models in classrooms seems to be a compli-

cated task. Neither teachers’ education, nor the textbook model are appro-
priate to support this perspective; ‘hybrid models’ met in the case of
chemical kinetics, are ‘constituted of elements of different historical models
830 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

treated as if they constituted a coherent whole’ which cannot be considered

as a useful contribution to students’ understanding of scientific reasoning
and how science evolves (Justi & Gilbert 1999). A structured teaching
intervention which is based on the specific attributes of the historical mod-
els in a field is probably a demanding project. However, the awareness of
characteristics of children’s and historical thinking in a conceptual field
could function as a source of enriching our understanding of the domain
of school knowledge under consideration and our related classroom prac-
tices. Such decisions could be based on selecting specific topics from his-
tory or inventing relevant meaningful learning activities. Sneider & Ohadi
(1998) found that students of the upper elementary and middle school lev-
els corresponded successfully to the constructivist historical teaching
strategy about the earth’s shape and gravity. They have developed different
activities, two of which introduced students into historical cultural scenes,
thousands of years ago and in ancient Greece. Students have worked in
the first case by explaining how on a flat earth the sun returns to the east-
ern part of the sky every morning, and in the second case by means of a
questionnaire about earth’s shape and gravity, after been presented a story
with Greeks and how they invented a ball shaped earth. Although some of
the ideas seem interesting, the variety of the four activities combined with
the test instruments used, raise questions in terms of the claimed construc-
tivist approach.
There is a need for educating our children in the modern vision of the
physical universe. Contemporary magnificent concepts that scientists use
can become today part of our school science. ‘Science’s theoretical con-
structs are critical in enabling common experiences to be reinterpreted’
(Osborne 1996, p. 77). Thinking of the introduction of cosmological enti-
ties and ideas in school, it seems that a ‘pendulum’ teaching model could
be appropriate. This means that the study of such ideas has to be
approached moving from one side where scientists’ theoretical constructs
are presented to the other where children get involved into observational
activities, or explanatory schemes, from the general and abstract to the
concrete and specific, from the picture of the universe as a whole to the
study of local entities and phenomena. This includes mental practice in
forward and backward movements of our point of view from where we
stand on the earth, in order to experience the relevance of phenomena and
scale; as such an activity seems to develop human ability to look at the
phenomena from multiple perspectives. Photos or videos with specially
selected or constructed pictures and images of the different entities of our
world, like galaxies or historical models would provide new insights into
their own experiences and notions. Stories of why some models are not
acceptable any more and how they have changed, why some ideas have
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 831

been abandoned could be selectively discussed. The technique of historical

vignettes proposed by Wandersee (1990) could also be appropriate for this
field.
Children are fascinated by this mega aspect of the world and seem more
willing to work and express their ideas compared with the micro and mac-
ro aspects of the world. All this means changes in content, changes in
materials, changes in processes, if we intend to make the science of space
more contemporary and meaningful for children and for enabling the crea-
tion of a frame within which concepts are developed and theories are
shaped. Science has to involve new pieces of knowledge, even if we have
not yet obtained the scientific certainty needed. The historical evolution of
science supports the humanistic view of Science and shows to all of us
more clearly its nature as a human and social activity. Science has always
been an adventure and not, like in school, a certainty.

Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank Prof. Jon Ogborn for his valuable comments
on an initial version of the systemic network during one of his visit in Pa-
tras and Assoc. Prof. George Ioannidis for his help and the discussions we
had about the status of the categories.

References
Albanese, A., Danhoni Neves, M.C. & Vicentini, M.: 1997, ÔModels in Science and in Edu-
cation: A Critical Review of Research on Students’ Ideas about the Earth and its Place in
the UniverseÕ, Science and Education 6, 573 590.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): 1989, Project 20061: Science
for All Americans, AAAS, Washington, DC.
Baxter, J.: 1989, ÔChildren’s Understanding of Familiar Astronomical EventsÕ, International
Journal of Science Education 11, 502 513.
Bliss, J., Monk, M. & Ogborn, J.: 1983, Qualitative Data Analysis for Educational Research,
Croom Helm, London.
Buck, P.: 1990, Jumping to the Atoms: Introduction of Atoms via Nesting Systems, in P.H.
Lijnse, P. Licht, W. Vosde and A.J. Waarzo (eds.), Relating Macroscopic Phenomena to
Microscopic Particles, CD-6, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, pp. 212 219.
Cohen, L. & Manion, L.: 1989, Research Methods in Education, Routledge, London.
Damerow, P.: 1996, Abstraction and Representation: Essays on the Cultural Evolution of
Thinking, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dodrecht.
Dedes, C.: 2005, ÔThe Mechanism of Vision: Conceptual Similarities between Historical
Models and Children’s RepresentationsÕ, Science and Education 14, 699 712.
Driver, R.: 1989, ÔStudents Conceptions and the Learning of ScienceÕ, International Journal of
Science Education 11(special issue): 481 490.
832 VASILIKI SPILIOTOPOULOU-PAPANTONIOU

Friedmann, A.: 1979, ‘On the Curvature of Space’, in R. Lang, & O. Gingerich (eds.), B.T.
Doyle, (trans.) A Source Book in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 1900 1975, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Gallili, I., Weizman, A. & Cohen, A.: 2004, ÔThe Sky as a Topic in Science EducationÕ, Science
Education 88(2): 574 593.
Harrison, E.R.: 1981, COSMOLOGY, the Science of the Universe, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge.
James, J.: 1929, Astronomy and Cosmogony, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Jones, B.L., Lynch, P.P. & Reesink, C.: 1987, ÔChildren’s Conceptions of the Earth, Sun and
MoonÕ, International Journal of Science Education 9(1): 43 53.
Justi, R. & Gilbert, J.: 2000, ÔHistory and Philosophy of Science Through Models: Some
Challenges in the Case of ‘‘the Atom’’Õ, International Journal of Science Education 22(9):
993 1009.
Klein, C.A.: 1982, ÔChildren’s Concepts of the Earth and Sun: A Cross-cultural StudyÕ, Science
Education 65(1): 95 107.
Lightman, A.P., Miller, J.D. & Leadbeater, B.J.: 1987, ‘Contemporary Cosmological Beliefs’,
in J.D. Novak (ed.), Proceedings of the second International Seminar: Misconceptions and
Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Vol. III, July 26 29, Cornell Uni-
versity, Ithaca, N.Y., pp. 309 321.
Lemmer, M., Lemmer, T.N. & Smit, J.J.A.: 2003, ÔSouth African Students’ Views of the
UniverseÕ, International Journal of Science Education 25(5): 563 582.
Mali, G.B. & Howe, A.: 1979, ÔDevelopment of Earth and Gravity Concepts among Nepali
ChildrenÕ, Science Education 63(5): 685 691.
Marton, F.: 1981, ÔPhenomenography Describing Conceptions of the World Around UsÕ,
Instructional Science 10, 177 200.
Marton, F. & Booth, S.: 1997, Learning and Awareness, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Mahwah New Jersey.
Matthews, M.: 1994, Science Teaching, the Role of History and Philosophy of Science,
Routledge, New York.
Monk, M. & Osborne, J.: 1997, ÔPlacing the History and Philosophy of Science on the Cur-
riculum: A model for the Development of PedagogyÕ, Science Education 81, 405 424.
Nussbaum, J. & Novak, J.D.: 1976, ÔAn Assessment of Children’s Concepts of the Earth
Utilizing Structured InterviewsÕ, Science Education 60(4): 535 540.
Nussbaum, J. & Sharoni-Dagan, N.: 1983, ÔChanges in Second Grade Children’s Precon-
ceptions about the Earth as a Cosmic Body Resulting from a Short Series of Audiotutorial
LessonsÕ, Science Education 67(1): 99 114.
Ojala, J.: 1992, ÔThe Third PlanetÕ, International Journal of Science Education 14(2): 191 200.
Osborne, J.F.: 1996, ÔBeyond ConstructivismÕ, Science Education 80(1): 53 82.
Raftopoulos, A., Kalyfommatou, N. & Constantinou, C.P.: 2005, ÔThe Properties and the
Nature of Light: The Study of Newton’s Work and the Teaching of OpticsÕ, Science and
Education 14, 649 673.
Schrödinger, E.: 1958, Mind and Matter, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Sneider, C.I. & Ohadi, M.M.: 1998, ÔUnraveling Students’ Misconceptions about the Earth’s
Shape and GravityÕ, Science Education 82(2): 265 284.
Sneider, G. & Pulos, S.: 1983, ÔChildren’s Cosmographies: Understanding the Earth’s Shape
and GravityÕ, Science Education 63(2): 205 221.
Suzuki, M.: 2003, ÔConversations About the Moon with Prospective Teachers in JapanÕ,
Science Education 87(6): 892 910.
Stapledon, O.: 1968, The Star Maker, 1937. Reprinted in Last and First Men and Star Maker,
Dover Publications, New York.
MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE 833

Spiliotopoulou, V.: 1997, The Cosmologies of Children, aged 6 16 years old, Unpublished
Ph.D Thesis, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Spiliotopoulou, V. & Ioannidis, G.: 1996a, Primary Teachers Cosmologies: The Case of the
‘Universe, in G. Welford, J. Osborne and P. Scott (eds.), Research in Science Education in
Europe, Current Issues and Themes, Falmer Press, London, pp. 337 350.
Spiliotopoulou,V. & Ioannidis, G.: 1996b, ‘Causality in Ancient Greek Thought and in
Children’s Thought’, Proceedings of the 7th Pan-Hellenic Conference of the Association of
Greek Physicists, held in Crete, EEF Press, Athens (in Greek).
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J.: 1998, Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage, California.
Sutton, C.: 1996, The Scientific Model as a Form of Speech, in G. Welford, J. Osborne and P.
Scott (eds.), Research in Science Education in Europe, Current Issues and Themes, Falmer
Press, London, pp. 143 152.
Targan, D.: 1987, A study of Conceptual Change in the Content Domain of the Lunar Phases,
in J.D. Novak (ed.), Proceedings of the Second International Seminar: Misconceptions and
Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Vol. II, July 26 29, Cornell University,
Ithaca N.Y., pp. 499 511.
Trumper, R.: 2001, ÔA Cross-age Study of Junior High School Students’ Conceptions of Basic
Astronomy ConceptsÕ, International Journal of Science Education 23(11): 1111 1123.
Toulmin, S.: 1961, The Fabric of Heavens, Hutchinson of London, London.
Toulmin, S.: 1982, The Return to Cosmology, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los
Angeles California.
von Glasersfeld E. (1987). Preliminaries to Any Theory of Representation. In Janvier C. (eds),
Problems of Representation in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Hillsdale New Jersey.
Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W.F.: 1992, ÔMental Models of the Earth: A Study of Conceptual
Change in ChildhoodÕ, Cognitive Psychology 24, 535 585.
Wandersee, J.H.: 1990, On the Value and Use of History of Science in Teaching Today’s
Science: Constructing Historical Vignettes, in D. Herget (ed.), More History and Philos-
ophy of Science in Science Teaching, Florida State University Press, Tallahassee, FL.
Wiser, M. & Carey, S.: 1983, When Heat and Temperature Were One, in D. Gentner and A.L.
Stevens (eds.), Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 267 298.