Humans have always lived embedded in the natural environment, but the rise of modern and technology-dependent societies promoted an increased detachment between them and nature and brought up the need to achieve a reconnection between both (Beery et al., 2020; Paz et al., 2022). In fact, the relationship between people and the environment is one of the most important current issues of human survival (Shutaleva et al., 2021; Vasconcelos and Orion, 2021).

According to Balmer (2021), every child needs to understand their natural environment and how soils, rocks, weather, plants, and habitats work together. Geosciences education is a main force to address it as it allows the promotion of a more holistic view of the Earth system and its intertwined processes and dynamics, which are also related to the achievement of planetary sustainability (Ribeiro and Orion, 2021; Vasconcelos and Orion, 2021; Paz et al., 2022). In addition, all citizens should have some degree of geosciences literacy as it is progressively necessary to make informed and conscious decisions about contemporary issues such as climate change or the use of natural resources. As such, we recognize the need to start this from the early years of schooling.

Children already own predetermined ideas about how the world works when they first enroll in school. This can act as a barrier to learning scientific concepts (Adadan and Yavuzkaya, 2018; Cardoso et al., 2018). Thus, it is necessary to identify and understand these primary representations, rooted in previous life experiences, to understand how the learning process occurs and evolves (Gilbert and Watts, 1983; Adadan and Yavuzkaya, 2018; Cardoso et al., 2018).

Also, several times these preconceived ideas are not aligned with the scientifically accepted concepts, which gives rise to inaccurate or wrong conceptions. In the geosciences field, several authors recognize the existence of these (mis)conceptions regarding concepts, processes, and phenomena (Blake, 2005; Sibley, 2005; Francek, 2013; Cardoso et al., 2018; Guffey and Slater, 2020; Bakopoulou et al., 2021), whether in children or adults, as well as in teachers (Dahl et al., 2005; King, 2008; Corrochano and Gómez-Gonçalves, 2020).

There are thousands of islands of different sizes and shapes (Baldacchino, 2005; Whittaker and Fernández-Palacios, 2007). In total, almost one-quarter of the world’s countries are islands or archipelagos (Kueffer and Kinney, 2017), covering up approximately 2% of the Earth’s surface area (Ratter, 2018). Currently, there are approximately 86,000 inhabited islands, home to more than 600 million people (Baldacchino, 2018).

Islands studies are complex as they entail several features linking different disciplines, namely, anthropology, biology, geography, geology, and even social studies. As such, we might say that they are hotspots of geophysical, biological, and cultural diversity (Gillespie and Clague, 2009; Kueffer and Kinney, 2017).

Islands also offer opportunities for the teaching of sustainability subjects as they are among the most vulnerable places on Earth due to their greater susceptibility to environmental threats, like climate change and socioeconomic challenges (Kueffer and Kinney, 2017; Russell and Kueffer, 2019; Poti et al., 2022). For this reason, several studies even entail them as models for addressing sustainability studies, which may then be replicated in continental areas (Kueffer and Kinney, 2017; Poti et al., 2022).

The most known definition of an island refers to a portion of land surrounded by water (Pungetti, 2012; Ratter, 2018), smaller than a continent (Jêdrusik, 2011). The largest island in the world is Greenland. Australia, being more than three times the size of Greenland, is considered to be the smallest continent on our planet (Pungetti, 2012).

What about the part of the island that stays hidden underwater? Many studies refer to the lack of knowledge or misconceptions regarding this topic in children. The need for them to understand the concepts about islands is relevant since that knowledge develops scientific reasoning related to further and more cognitive scientific concepts. For example, knowledge about islands is important for geology and geography issues, like earthquakes, volcanism, hot spots, or plate tectonics. On the other hand, emergent biological topics also require accurate scientific knowledge about islands. For example, coastal planning for economic usages, such as tourism or fisheries, or land–sea connections with geology and the environment.

In Portugal, geographic landscapes are introduced to students in the third year of elementary school. An overview of several elementary textbooks presents the definition of an island as “a portion of land surrounded by sea on all sides.” This largely spread definition found in textbooks is not scientifically correct as an island is “a portion of land surrounded by water” but not necessarily “sea.” In addition, islands’ representations that are found in children’s books or cartoons relate to a piece of land on the surface, surrounded by water. There are no images in traditional textbooks of what lies underneath the water. Geosciences is not learned in Portuguese elementary schools, except on the topic of some rock types and their uses in society. As such, by the end of elementary school, children have not yet received any formal education regarding the island’s formation theme.

Also, Portuguese elementary school teachers may complete their degrees with little background in science knowledge. They may enroll in higher education courses to obtain a degree as teachers for elementary education, having attended social studies, language, or arts as fields of study during secondary education, thus, having little contact with disciplines within the scope of science in general, and of geosciences in particular.

Children’s drawings have long been considered valid representations of their ideas and how they view the world (Einarsdottir et al., 2009; Farland-Smith et al., 2014). Based on this assumption, this study addresses elementary school childrens’ and teachers’ conceptions of islands by answering a survey based on a drawing task.

We intend to diagnose their initial ideas about this topic, which were autonomously developed according to their life experiences and interpretations of the world (Kambouri, 2016; Cardoso et al., 2018), along with information probably provided by their parents, teachers, friends, cartoons, text or child books. Regarding the teachers, we aim to identify possible misconceptions.

During our literature review, we found no study regarding students’ or teachers’ conceptions of the island’s formation or its connection to geology. As such, our study may contribute to adding more data to this topic. Within this context, our purpose is to bring some glimpses that may contribute to developing a geoscience curriculum in elementary school years, namely, through the construction of simple but efficient resources for the teaching of islands and their formation, at the elementary school level.

This study resorted to a survey based on both a drawing task and an answer to one question. Content analysis was applied to the drawings, and statistical tests were performed using the IBM^® SPSS^® software version 28.

The survey was applied to a convenient sample of 122 participants (n = 122) from two different groups: 118 elementary school students (n = 118) and their four elementary school teachers (n = 4). Students’ ages range between 6 and 10 years (average age = 7,92). The students’ group consisted of 66 girls (n = 65; 55,9%) and 52 boys (n = 52; 44,1%). They were enrolled in two different school years: 64 in a second-grade classroom (n = 64, 54,2%) and 53 in a fourth-grade classroom (n = 54; 45,8%). The students’ teachers who accepted to participate in this study consisted of four females (n = 4, 100%), with ages ranging between 43 and 49 years (average age = 45,75). The sample characterization is presented in Table 2.

Participants were from the same public urban school. The reason to apply the survey to students of the second and fourth school years was result of the availability shown by the elementary teachers to collaborate in the research. Elementary teachers of the first and third school years were behind the scheduled time to finish the curricular program and, for this reason, could not be involved.

The drawings were subject to content analysis. First, we determined which drawings (i) only represented the island above the sea level and (ii) also represented the unseen part of the island under the sea surface, whether it reached the seafloor or not. We grouped the designs into four different categories (Table 3): (i) drawings representing islands above the sea surface; (ii) drawings representing islands both above the sea surface and linked to the ocean floor; (iii) drawings representing islands above the sea surface and with some land underwater, but without reaching the sea floor; and (iv) drawings with no island representation. The results are presented in Table 3.

As shown in Table 3, only 19 students (n = 19; 16,10%) have represented the island in a scientifically correct way, linking its’ surface to the ocean floor (model 2). The majority of participants represented the island in a non-scientific way (models 1, 3, and 4) as it was floating on the ocean (n = 97; 82,20%). Most of them drew an island only above the sea surface (n = 85; 72,03%), and others represented some land above water but without connection to the ocean floor (n = 12; 9,84%). Two participants did not represent an island at all (n = 2; 1,64%).

Some of the more representative drawings made by the students are presented in Figure 1.

In Figure 2, we present other drawings, also made by the students. In those drawings, the students represented islands with some land below the sea surface but without reaching the seafloor. These drawings also present some other features, like submarines, mythological creatures (like mermaids), persons, planes, or seaweeds.

Although in a much less number, some of the students were able to draw an island according to the scientifically accepted conception, as shown in Figure 3.

In order to analyze if statistically significant differences were observed between the types of drawings made by students and the school grade they attended, we joined the drawings into two groups: (i) Those with the scientifically accepted conception of islands (model 2) and (ii) those with unscientific conceptions (models 1, 3, or 4). The chi-square analysis is presented in Table 4.

No differences were found between girls and boys, and the conception held about islands (χ² = 0,100; p = 0,752).

Regarding special elements portrayed in the drawings, one of the students (n = 1; 0,85%) represented a volcano, revealing knowledge about a type of island’s formation. Nevertheless, the same student could not link the bottom of the island completely to the seafloor, as shown in Figure 4.

A few students made their drawings of the bedrock under the water with cracks or caves (n = 4; 3,39%), as presented in Figure 4.

Although it was not the focus of this work, several other features were drawn by students, namely, mythological elements, such as mermaids or marine monsters (n = 17; 13,9%), elements usually linked to pirates, like pirate boats, pirate flags, treasures maps or treasure arcs (n = 10; 8,2%), and seaweeds (n = 12; 9,8%).

Students also had to respond to a question of whether they thought it was possible, or not, to swim beneath an island. The answers from the two participants who had not been able to draw an island in the image of the sea were excluded from this analysis.

The answers revealed that most of the students thought it was possible to swim beneath the island (n = 67; 57,8%), 45 students answered that it was not possible (n = 45; 38,8%), three students (n = 3; 2,6%) responded that it depended on whether the rocks that are beneath the island surface had caves or not, and one student answered: “I don’t know” (n = 1; 0,9%).

To understand if the answers to this question were aligned with the island conception shown by students in their drawings, we compare them to both school grades and, in total, with the type of island students made in the drawing, as presented in Table 5.

We considered that the correct answer was “no” because once the island is linked to the seafloor, it is not possible to swim beneath it. We also considered that the students who responded, “It depends if there are caves in the rocks underwater” were correct as they provided a plausible explanation. In theory, it can be possible to cross a bedrock if it has various caves lined up so that swimming across them can be accomplished.

Thereby, crossing the results from the two tasks proposed to the students, the drawing and the question, there was a total of 15 correct answers (n = 15; 12,9%), all given by students enrolled in the fourth grade.

In line with the students’ conceptions, the teachers’ drawings also revealed misconceptions about islands, as presented in Table 6. Participant teachers only represented the island according to models 1, 2, or 4.

As shown in Figure 5, we present two drawings made by elementary teachers. On the left is a representation of model 1, and on the right is a representation of model 2.

Regarding the answer to the question, “Do you think it is possible for a diver (humans or fishes) to swim beneath an island from one side to the other?” the participant teachers responded as presented in Table 7.

One of the participant teachers (n = 1; 25%) answered correctly and presented the drawing of the island aligned with the scientifically accepted conception; the other three (n = 3; 75%) revealed misconceptions about this topic.

Regarding our total findings, only 16 participants (n = 16; 13,11%), one teacher (n = 1; 25%), and 15 students (n = 15; 12,93%) were able to draw an island according to the scientifically accepted conception, which is linking it to the seafloor, and at the same time answering that it is not possible to swim beneath an island, except in the case of existing some caves aligned on the rocky layers below the surface, in such a way which would allow them to be crossed.

As in prior research studies (Sibley, 2005; Shepardson et al., 2007; Smith and Bermea, 2012; Anderson et al., 2014; Cardoso et al., 2018), the drawings also provided interesting insights into students’ conceptions of this investigation topic.

In our study, most of the participants exhibited unscientific conceptions about the formation of islands. Students mostly portrayed the island as if it was floating on the sea surface. This may happen because science content is still taught in a very fragmented way (Jaimes et al., 2020), not allowing the understanding of the underlying processes involved in an island formation. As most of these processes cannot be seen due to the huge temporal and spatial scale in which they occur, students have difficulties understanding them (Dolphin and Benoit, 2016; Conrad and Libarkin, 2022). Furthermore, their comprehension demands the ability to abstract thinking (Blake, 2005; King, 2008) and system thinking (Ben-Zvi-Assaraf and Orion, 2005), that lacks in most of the youngest (Ben-Zvi-Assaraf and Orion, 2010).

In addition, searching in elementary Portuguese textbooks, we could not find any image of an island with the representation of what lies underneath the sea level. The images of islands repeatedly consist only of the “piece of land surrounded by water” above the seafloor, as revealed by an online search in some photo repositories (Figure 6).

Aligned with the most common drawing made by the participant students, this island’s image consists of a piece of land surrounded by the sea, with the sun and a palm tree. As this topic is not explicitly addressed at this school level, this misconception about islands might also be related to the influence of media on children as some studies point out that they are regular consumers (Strasburger et al., 2013; Rideout, 2016). The representations of mythological elements made by students in their drawings are an indicator of this as these elements are frequently addressed in child books or cartoons. Surprisingly there is little research done about how science is represented in popular children’s media and how exposure to this media can play a role in children’s science knowledge (Bonus and Mares, 2018), which highlights the need to further investigate the topic.

Although not part of the purpose of our study, another curious fact relates to the way students represented seaweeds in their drawings since they colored them all in green (like in Figure 2). This may be related to some alternative conceptions common in students regarding the process of photosynthesis and to the confusion between what are plants and what are seaweeds as supported in the literature (Wood-Robinson, 1991; Griffard and Wandersee, 2001; Ekici et al., 2007). Interestingly, the only teacher’s drawings with seaweed representations were drawn not only in green (see Figure 5). According to Balmer (2021), many elementary school teachers reveal that the only science they feel comfortable teaching is biology, which may indicate stronger levels of knowledge in this subject.

As expected, fourth-grade students revealed better outcomes than second-grade ones. Students’ conceptions evolve gradually as they become older and have the opportunity to go through more experiences in life. Also, as they complete steps along their formal schooling, they enrich their theoretical frameworks, being able to construct new concepts closer to the scientifically accepted ones (Adadan and Yavuzkaya, 2018; Cardoso et al., 2018).

As aforementioned, in Portugal, geology is not explicitly learned until the seventh grade, when students learn concepts like plate tectonics and volcanology. As these processes are involved in forming an island, it was expected that elementary school students would only address their prior ideas for completing the task proposed in this study. We found no other study regarding this investigation topic. Notwithstanding, other studies that have focused on other geoscience content have also found several misconceptions among the youngest (Blake, 2005; Cardoso et al., 2018). As these misconceptions persist over time, as revealed by several research studies with older students (Sibley, 2005; Clark et al., 2011; Francek, 2013; Conrad and Libarkin, 2022), it is important to diagnose and act upon them, in order to bring them closer to the scientifically accepted conceptions.

Earth science concepts are taught in Portuguese elementary schools along with biology, geography, and history. Although there have been some efforts to improve the Portuguese elementary Earth science curriculum, it continues to be scarce and fragmented, with unclear joints with the rest of the curriculum. According to Balmer (2021), this is also the case in England.

Prior research also acknowledges that science-content knowledge of teachers enrolled in early and elementary schooling is poor (Trundle et al., 2002; Garbett, 2003; Davis et al., 2006; Anderson et al., 2014), namely, in the geosciences field (Dahl et al., 2005; King, 2008; Corrochano and Gómez-Gonçalves, 2020; Balmer, 2021). This condition is aligned with the teachers’ outcomes in this study.

These results address the need to change the way islands are represented. By incorporating images like those presented in Figure 6, students could better understand that something is upholding the island beneath the visible surface. Furthermore, it could be a starting point to address the Earth system approach and develop system thinking in elementary students.

Geosciences education is essential to ensure the development of responsible citizens, able to make decisions on everyday matters. In addition, it develops system thinking, a competency essential to understand the Earth as a holistic system whose subsystems influence and are influenced by each other.

Our findings suggest that in Portugal there are several misconceptions regarding the island formation topic among pupils and elementary school teachers. As these unscientific ideas may be persistent over time, it is essential to diagnose them to enhance the teaching about islands. Through professional development actions, conceptual change can be achieved. Teaching a topic with correct scientific knowledge is essential to drive students to avoid misconceptions themselves. Since changing a misconception is hard, and as they easily return when students have difficult problems to solve, it is imperative that the teaching is scientifically accurate.

Our study also indicated that about a third of the fourth-grade students expressed a scientific perception of islands, although many were misconceptions. It is unlikely that the science textbooks and the teachers are the main sources of their schools’ scientific perceptions. Regarding this evidence, future studies may explore which external sources influence the development of scientific perceptions about islands in children.

We argue in favor of a more scientific representation of these features in textbooks, portraying the linkage between the landscape of the island above the sea level and the part of the island that is hidden underneath the surface, which is attached to the seafloor. This might be a simple way to promote not only knowledge about island formation but also students’ ability to use systems thinking, which is essential for correctly understanding the intertwined relations among the Earth system.

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Faculty of Sciences Ethical Commission. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants’ legal guardian/next of kin.

CV: conceptualization and supervision. MP: data collection. CV and MP: data analyses, the writing of original draft preparation, and the writing of review and editing. Both authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.