We examined the characteristics of field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles of learning in the presentation of scientific information within the parameters of this research. We undertook three investigations in this study. These investigations were conducted in a lower secondary school and involved 74 students from the3rd grade (9th year students). First, an Embedded Figure Test was used in the investigation of field-dependent and field independent cognitive styles. As a result, we divided the students into two cognitive style groups: 38 students in the field-dependent group and 36 students in the field-independent group. Two further investigations were then conducted. In the first, the subjects undertook learning that depended upon the traditional method of reading problems and responded to 20 questions. In the second investigation, conducted weeks later, the subjects undertook learning that depended upon the use of pictures and imagery, and again they responded to the same 20 questions. The results were compared between the field-dependent and the field-independent groups. The influence of field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles of learning in the presentation of scientific information became clear as a result. When information was presented using only words, students in the field-independent group could understand the scientific information easily. But when information was presented using images only, students in the field-dependent group could understand easily.

So far, research has been conducted on self-evaluation using the concept-mapping approach in science education. However, although there has been research on the value of having students draw concept maps before and after Studying the concept in question, there has not been any research on the value of having the students themselves recognize and evaluate the differences between the concept maps. In this study we had students compare their own concept maps drawn before and after studying the concept of the ion, and we examined the validity of this concept-mapping approach. As a result of these investigations, we came to the following two conclusions. First, this approach is effective for the students’ self-evaluation of their cognitive and affective abilities. Second, students have a good impression of this approach because they can recognize, by themselves, the differences between the concept maps drawn before and after learning, even when they study such difficult concepts as that of the ion. Based on these two findings we have proposed the following two points. First, this approach is very useful because teachers can give their students personal guidance in checking the concept maps drawn by the students. Second, with this approach students can monitor their self-evaluation by referring to their self-evaluation scoring sheet, and it is important to encourage the autonomous ability of students to learn.

One mistaken use of science history in science education is teaching that Dalton’s atomic theory had been formulated on the basis of the law of conservation of mass, the law of definite proportions, and the law of multiple proportions. Not a few chemistry textbooks in upper secondary school describe the formulation of the concept in this manner. As a result, atomic theory is not recognized as the result of reasoning inductively from facts found by experiments which are based on the laws mentioned above. Indeed, the premise of atomism allowed both the law of the indestructibility of matter and the idea of particles to be discovered. When the idea is deductively applied to actual chemical changes of matter, which are the phenomena of the macrocosm, students become aware that atomism is effective. They not only grasp the law of conservation of mass, the law of definite proportions, and the law of multiple proportions clearly, but also come to understand what atomism really means. Two methods of introducing atomism to upper secondary school students were used in this study: one is the inductive method used in chemistry textbooks, and the other is a deductive one based on the recognition process of atomism according to science history. The results of the test showed that it was easier for students learning with the deductive method to understand atomism. This finding shows that the traditional way of teaching atomism in upper secondary school textbooks is insufficient and that we should teach the process of recognition according to science history.