<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Filip Hašpl</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Karel Vojíř</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">UNCOVERING LOWER SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS’ APPROACHES DURING BIOLOGICAL OBSERVATION</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eye-tracking</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">science process skills</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">scientific observation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">secondary education</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">visual literacy</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October / 2026</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://oaji.net/articles/2026/987-1793131731.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">25</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Biological observation requires students to distinguish task-relevant morphological features from irrelevant visual information. However, little is known about how lower-secondary school students allocate attention while solving image-based biological tasks. This study examined observational approaches using eye-tracking. Seventy-five students completed 18 feature-identification tasks across fauna, flora, and microscopic life. Hierarchical cluster analysis of standardised eye-tracking metrics, supplemented by qualitative inspection of scan paths, identified four observational approaches: Quick Targeting (54.1%), Diagnostic Scanning (27.2%), Instruction-Guided Search (10.2%), and A Thorough Wander (8.5%). More than 72% of students showed one dominant approach across most tasks. Observational approach was associated with task performance, although the association was small (χ² = 29.00, df = 18, p = .048, Cramér’s V = .085). Diagnostic Scanning and Quick Targeting showed the highest mean scores (5.54 and 5.52 out of 6), whereas A Thorough Wander and Instruction-Guided Search showed lower scores (5.28 and 5.21). Longer viewing was not associated with better performance. Higher task performance was instead associated with attention to task-relevant morphological features. These findings support explicit visual guidance and systematic comparison of diagnostic features in image-based biology observation tasks.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">855-869</style></section></record></records></xml>