- Email: [email protected]
Conceptual Change Instruction: A Method For Facilitating Consciousness In Problem Solving Activities
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 33 – 38 Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2010) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2011)
Conceptual change instruction: A method for facilitating consciousness in problem solving activities. Dr. Jules A. Troyer Valdosta State University. Valdosta, GA [email protected]
Abstract
Problem solving is one of the most difficult higher level cognitive abilities to teach students how to improve on. The ability to detect and respond correctly to the relevant and salient items within a problem space requires students to pay close attention to what is important and unimportant in a given scenario. Often this process requires students to engage in a conceptual change in order to successfully complete a presented problem. This is due to the fact that students have difficulty in adapting to a new approach to a problem once it has been proven to not answer it successfully. Typically, individuals perseverate an incorrect approach many times prior to generating a novel solution methodology. It is presented here that conceptual change instruction is an effective means of improving level of consciousness, which in turn, improves problem solving ability.
© Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under of DrofZafer Bekirogullari. © 2011 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of responsibility Dr. Zafer Bekirogullari Cognitive – Counselling, Research & Conference Services C-crcs. Keywords: Problem Solving, Level of Consciousness; Mindfulness; Cognitive Ability; Instruction; Memory; Awareness; Attention
1. Introduction Learning is primarily understood as a result of the interaction between students existing ideas and concepts and the material they are being presented with. According to Ausebel (1968), the most important individual factor influencing learning is the prior knowledge of the learner. In the first half of the 20 th century, Bartlett presented a theory of the content of mind as schema, or networks of meaning (Beals, 1998) as a way of explaining how knowledge is constructed and changed. Bartlett (1932) underscores the importance of changing knowledge or conceptions by stating, “An organism has somehow to acquire the capacity to turn round upon its own „schemata‟ and to construct them afresh. This is a crucial step in organic development” (p. 206). This position highlights the importance of a learner‟s ability to alter their existing knowledge or schema in cognitive development. Bartlett (1932) continues, by stating the ability to change schema is the premise of “where and why consciousness comes in; it is what gives consciousness its most prominent function” (p. 206). Consequently, any instructional strategy that 1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Dr Zafer Bekirogullari. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.202
34
Jules A. Troyer / Procedia - Social Behavioral Sciences (2011) 33 – 38 Dr. Jules A. Troyer/ Procedia – Social andand Behavioral Sciences 00 29 (2011) 000–000
aids a student in conceptual change, an inherent component of any successful problem solving situation, also is facilitating the primary function of consciousness. 1.1 Definition It is well established that learning is the result of the interaction between the prior knowledge of a learner and the concepts and ideas they are presented with thus illustrating the cognitive structure of the learner aids in determining the learning process (Cakir, Uzuntiryaki, & Geban, 2002). When existing knowledge is contradictory to information they are presented with an obstacle in the learning process is created. In order to overcome this impediment, the learner must undergo a conceptual change. In the early 1980‟s, Posner, Strike, Hewson, and Gertzog (1982) introduced a Conceptual Change Model (CCM) constructed of two patterns of change, similar to Piaget‟s concepts of assimilation and accommodation. According to the CCM, assimilation is “the use of existing concepts to deal with new phenomena” and accommodation is “replacing or reorganizing the learner‟s central conceptions” (p. 212). Accommodation involves the abandonment of an existing conception and the acceptance of a new one thus indicating an abrupt change (Tau & Gunstone, 1997). Other theorist‟s, however, define this change from different viewpoints. Fensham, Gunstone, and White (1994) argue that conceptual change does not usually take the form of an abrupt change and is usually “an accretion of information and instances that the learner uses to sort out contexts in which it is profitable to use one form of explanation or another” (p. 6). Due to the fact that ideas are not abandoned but instead revised incrementally Fensham et al. (1994) call this „conceptual addition.‟ Similarly, Linder (1993) posits that the learner has a range of conceptions, which are cued due to specific events. He presents evidence that even scientists use varying conceptions of the same concept in different contexts and hypothesizes this could also be true for students. Driver et al. (1994) offer additional evidence regarding the idea of „conceptual profile‟, revealing that people have a variety of ways of thinking within specific domains. Niedderer and Goldberg (1994) assert conceptual change is a process of change from the learner‟s prior conceptions to intermediate conceptions and finally to scientific conceptions. Dykstara, Boyle, and Monarch (1992) agree that it is a progressive change process and present a taxonomy of conceptual change including differentiation, class extension and reconceptualization. Additionally, Demastes, Good and Peebles (1996) indicate four patterns of change. They are (a) cascade of changes (a sequence of conceptual changes catalyzed by change in conception), (b) wholesale changes (alternative conceptions rejected in lieu of scientific conceptions), (c) incremental changes (alternative conceptions changing incrementally to scientific conceptions), and (d) dual constructions (individuals having two logically mutually exclusive conceptions). It is clear that the views on the process involved in conceptual change are wide-ranging and diverse, offering a fertile ground for further analysis.
1.2 Misconceptions and the Tendency to Cling to Outdated Ideas There is an abundance of research illustrating that inaccurate understandings are pervasive, stable, and often resistant to change through classroom instruction. There are several reasons proposed to explain the difficulty in creating conceptual changes in science learning. Hsiao-Ching (2003) states they include: (1) students‟ intuitive concepts are based in everyday experiences; (2) students have difficulty understanding abstract concepts; and (3) students have problems perceiving the invisible molecule. Fishbein & Ajezen (1975) describe a student‟s attitude towards any object (subject) as being a function of their beliefs about the object and object (subject) and the implicit evaluative responses with those beliefs. It is well supported (Fraser et al, 1984) that student attitude is a primary influence on an individual‟s learning and effective teaching strategies will influence attitude in a positive manner. MacMillian (1979) found, in a variety of studies, that students using activity oriented techniques exhibited more favorable attitudes towards science than those taught via the traditional method. The authors also found that teachers with personality and interrelationships were vital to the attitude formation of students.
Dr. Jules Troyer/ Procedia – Social Behavioral Sciences (2011) Jules A. A. Troyer / Procedia - Social andand Behavioral Sciences 29 00 (2011) 33 000–000 – 38
35
These attitudes, as a function of belief, are prey to the same tendencies as beliefs. The psychological literature underscores Bacon‟s statement: “Beliefs tend to sustain themselves even despite the total discrediting of the evidence that produced the beliefs initially”(Nisbett & Ross, 1980, p. 192). It is true, in many disciplines that researchers will cleave with their very being to observations and measurements that are a direct product of their personal bias. A perfect example of researchers attempting to override this prevalent phenomenon is the use of the double-blind protocol. Conceptual change is very closely tied to the ability a learner has to reject a concept. This ability is fostered by social and affective factors that influence conceptual change (Pintrich et al., 1993). The social matrix in which conceptual change occurs includes student peers, teachers, adults, and presents a diverse web of interacting attitudes. Harvey (1957) presents a sound history of behavioral „side effects” resulting from attempts at attitude change. It is plausible these effects reflect a desire of the learner to maintain a view of the world that conforms to their already existing attitudes. When a learner is presented with information that is different from their existing conceptualization, Harvey (1957) states, “congruence can be maintained or restored by a change in the internal standard or by a cognitive distortion of the impinging stimuli” (p.127). This distortion either brings the stimuli in congruence with the existing conceptual schema or makes it so incompatible that they can be dissociated or made irrelevant. Harvey (1957) explains that this process of minimizing and maximizing stimulus discrepancies is referred to as assimilation and contrast. The author (1957) defines assimilation as an individual evaluating a discrepant stimulus as being more in accord with his own concept than it really is or that changing one‟s own concept in the direction of the discrepant stimulus or source of evaluation. Harvey (1957) alternately defines contrast as a learner distorting the stimulus away from his concept or changing his concept in the direction opposite to that of the stimulus, representative of the „boomerang phenomenon.‟ Although assimilation and contrast are fundamentally different they both create the effect of maintaining congruency between the outside world and the associated internal standards. 2. Conceptual Change Instruction 2.1 History There is a sound basis of research supporting the effectiveness of instructional strategies that target conceptual change in students (Beeth, 1993). It is necessary, in this type of strategy, to identify students existing conceptual knowledge, recognize the resistance to change these conceptions have, and the possible impact of „alternative‟ perceptions on further learning (Beeth, 1993). Abundant research has been target at delineating the primary components of a classroom that address students‟ conceptions in a practical and effective way. Beeth (1993) reviewed the history of conceptual change instruction and identified a common pattern elicited in students‟ ideas on a topic. He recommends having students represent their ideas (e.g. through concept maps, verbally, or in some written form). He also indicates research supports the idea that teachers should confront students‟ ideas with a cononical view of the same concept and see if it alters the student‟s ideas. Hewson & Thorley argue that this ignores the importance of the conceptual ecology and the status that an individual attaches to a particular conception, a central tenet in the Conceptual Change Model. Conceptions are understood to persevere and have meaning within different aspects of the conceptual ecology, and because a change in a conception has to be in the presence of a concomitant change in status (Hewson & Thorley, 1989), deductively successful instruction targeted at these parts of the Conceptual Change Model would be more likely to facilitate change in a learner‟s thinking. This is a hypothesis that was confirmed through a variety of experiments conducted by Beeth (1993). 2.2 Current Research Current researchers have used this historical understanding of student conceptual change processes to develop a conceptual change model known as the Dual Situated Learning Model (DSLM) (Hsiao-Ching, 2003). This model has been used to demonstrate how actual classroom instruction can initiate conceptual change of alternative scientific views (Hsiao-Ching, 2003). DSLM emphasizes the process by which learners undergo conceptual change,
36
Jules A. Troyer / Procedia - Social Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 33 – 38 Dr. Jules A. Troyer/ Procedia – Social andand Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
underscoring the theoretical undercurrents for this domain of inquiry. The DSLM indicates that starting with students‟ ontological view of the concept in addition to the attributes of the concepts are the foundation for dual situated learning events. In a study conducted by Hasio-Ching (2003) dual situated learning events with instruction with DSLM contributed successfully to more than 60% of the students; conceptual change concerning thermal expansion, the domain tested. This indicates favorable possibilities in creating instructional models that successfully instigate conceptual change within students.
3. Discussion It is evident through this discussion that although there are a variety of perspectives on the exact processes that learners are involved in during conceptual change, there are fundamental aspects that all can agree on. Attitude‟s and beliefs play a significant role in the flexibility students have in their knowledge schemas necessary to solve all types of problems. Strategies that address students‟ misconceptions and resulting attitudes can effectively initiate conceptual change that makes students more able to solve problems and learn. It was presented at the beginning of this review that this is also analogous to the primary function of consciousness. The ability to rearrange schema or to construct them anew was described by Bartlett (1932) as a primary evolutionary adaption, necessary for problem solving that is inherent in the learning process. It is a promising area of research to investigate the effects of these empirically proven instructional strategies for conceptual change, in the arena of elevating consciousness for the purpose of improving student ability within the domain of problem solving. References Adams, A. D., & Chiapetta, E. L. (1998, April). Students’ beliefs, attitudes, and conceptual change in a traditional high school physics classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Adam, A. D., & Griffard, P. B. (2001, March). Analysis of alternative conceptions in physics and biology: Similarities, differences, and implications for conceptual l change. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. Ausubel. D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Beals, D. E. (1998). Reappropriating schema: Conceptions of development from Bartlett and Bakhtin. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(1), 3-24. Beeth, M. E. (1993, April). Classroom environment and conceptual change instruction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research In Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA. Beeth, M. E., & Hennessey, M. G. (1996, April). Teaching for understanding in science: What counts as conceptual change? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. Beeth, M. E., & Hewson, P. W. (1997, September). Learning to learn science: Instruction that supports conceptual change. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the European Science Education Research Association, Rome, Italy.
Jules A. A. Troyer / Procedia - Social andand Behavioral Sciences 29 00 (2011) 33 000–000 – 38 Dr. Jules Troyer/ Procedia – Social Behavioral Sciences (2011)
37
Bowen, C. W., & Bunce, D. M. (1997). Testing for conceptual understanding in general chemistry. The Chemical Educator, 2(2), 1-17. Brown, H. L. (1986). Sellars, concepts, and conceptual change. Synthese, 68, 275-307. Caillot, M., & Chartrain, J. (2001, April). Conceptual change and relation to knowledge: The case of volcanism at primary school. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Research Association, Seattle, WA. Caikir, O. S., Ozlem, S., & Geban, O. (2002, April). Contribution of conceptual change texts and concept mapping to students’ understanding of acids and bases. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA. Demestes, S. S., Good, R. G., & Peebles, P. (1996). Patterns of conceptual change in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(4), 407-431. Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2002, April). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Driver, R.,, Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. Dykstra, D. I., Boyle, C. F., & Monarch, I. A. (1992). Studying conceptual change in learning physics. Science Education, 76(6), 615-652. Fensham, P. H., Gunstone, R. F., & White, R. T. (1984). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. London: Falmer. Hartman, H. J. (2001). Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Harvey, O. J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1959). Assimilation and contrast phenomena in response to environmental variation. Journal of Personality, 27(2), 127-138. Hewson, P. W. & Thorley, N. R. (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 541-553. Hsiao-Ching, S. (2003). DSLM instructional approach to conceptual change involving thermal expansion. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21 (1). Lindner, C. J. (1993). A challenge to conceptual change. Science Education, 77(3), 293-300. Linn, M. C. (1978). Influence of cognitive style and training on tasks requiring the separation of variables schema. Child Development, 49, 874-877. Marks, D. F. (1999). Consciousness, mental imagery, and action. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 567-585. Niedderer, H., & Golderg, F. (1994). An individual student‟s learning process in electric circuits. Paper presented at NARST 1994 Annual Meeting. Nisbett, R., & Ross, L (1980). Human inference. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Nissani, M. (1996). The mystery of the dancing fruit flies. American Biology Teacher, 58(3), 168-171.
38
Jules A. Troyer / Procedia - Social Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 33 – 38 Dr. Jules A. Troyer/ Procedia – Social andand Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
Nissani, M., & Hoefler-Nissani, D. M. (1992). Experimental studies of belief dependence of observations and of resistance to conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 97-111. Ogunsola-Bandele, M. F., & Oyedokun, C. A. (1998, April). The effect of a conceptual change teaching strategy (model) on students’ attitude towards the learning of some biology concepts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167-199. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hweson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227. Tao, P., & Gunstone, R. F. (1997, March). The process of conceptual change in “force and motion.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Watson, B., & Kopnicek, R. (1990). Teaching for conceptual change: Confronting children‟s experience. Phi Delta Kappan, May, 680-684. Winer, L. R., & Vazquez-Abad, J. (1995, April). The potential of repertory grid technique in the assessment of conceptual change in physics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Yuru, N., & Geban, O. (2002, March). Conceptual change text: A supplementary material to facilitate conceptual change in electrochemical cell concepts .Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. Zietsman, A., & Clement, J. (1997). The role of extreme case reasoning in instruction for conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1), 61-89.
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 33 – 38 Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2010) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2011)
Conceptual change instruction: A method for facilitating consciousness in problem solving activities. Dr. Jules A. Troyer Valdosta State University. Valdosta, GA [email protected]
Abstract
Problem solving is one of the most difficult higher level cognitive abilities to teach students how to improve on. The ability to detect and respond correctly to the relevant and salient items within a problem space requires students to pay close attention to what is important and unimportant in a given scenario. Often this process requires students to engage in a conceptual change in order to successfully complete a presented problem. This is due to the fact that students have difficulty in adapting to a new approach to a problem once it has been proven to not answer it successfully. Typically, individuals perseverate an incorrect approach many times prior to generating a novel solution methodology. It is presented here that conceptual change instruction is an effective means of improving level of consciousness, which in turn, improves problem solving ability.
© Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under of DrofZafer Bekirogullari. © 2011 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of responsibility Dr. Zafer Bekirogullari Cognitive – Counselling, Research & Conference Services C-crcs. Keywords: Problem Solving, Level of Consciousness; Mindfulness; Cognitive Ability; Instruction; Memory; Awareness; Attention
1. Introduction Learning is primarily understood as a result of the interaction between students existing ideas and concepts and the material they are being presented with. According to Ausebel (1968), the most important individual factor influencing learning is the prior knowledge of the learner. In the first half of the 20 th century, Bartlett presented a theory of the content of mind as schema, or networks of meaning (Beals, 1998) as a way of explaining how knowledge is constructed and changed. Bartlett (1932) underscores the importance of changing knowledge or conceptions by stating, “An organism has somehow to acquire the capacity to turn round upon its own „schemata‟ and to construct them afresh. This is a crucial step in organic development” (p. 206). This position highlights the importance of a learner‟s ability to alter their existing knowledge or schema in cognitive development. Bartlett (1932) continues, by stating the ability to change schema is the premise of “where and why consciousness comes in; it is what gives consciousness its most prominent function” (p. 206). Consequently, any instructional strategy that 1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Dr Zafer Bekirogullari. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.202
34
Jules A. Troyer / Procedia - Social Behavioral Sciences (2011) 33 – 38 Dr. Jules A. Troyer/ Procedia – Social andand Behavioral Sciences 00 29 (2011) 000–000
aids a student in conceptual change, an inherent component of any successful problem solving situation, also is facilitating the primary function of consciousness. 1.1 Definition It is well established that learning is the result of the interaction between the prior knowledge of a learner and the concepts and ideas they are presented with thus illustrating the cognitive structure of the learner aids in determining the learning process (Cakir, Uzuntiryaki, & Geban, 2002). When existing knowledge is contradictory to information they are presented with an obstacle in the learning process is created. In order to overcome this impediment, the learner must undergo a conceptual change. In the early 1980‟s, Posner, Strike, Hewson, and Gertzog (1982) introduced a Conceptual Change Model (CCM) constructed of two patterns of change, similar to Piaget‟s concepts of assimilation and accommodation. According to the CCM, assimilation is “the use of existing concepts to deal with new phenomena” and accommodation is “replacing or reorganizing the learner‟s central conceptions” (p. 212). Accommodation involves the abandonment of an existing conception and the acceptance of a new one thus indicating an abrupt change (Tau & Gunstone, 1997). Other theorist‟s, however, define this change from different viewpoints. Fensham, Gunstone, and White (1994) argue that conceptual change does not usually take the form of an abrupt change and is usually “an accretion of information and instances that the learner uses to sort out contexts in which it is profitable to use one form of explanation or another” (p. 6). Due to the fact that ideas are not abandoned but instead revised incrementally Fensham et al. (1994) call this „conceptual addition.‟ Similarly, Linder (1993) posits that the learner has a range of conceptions, which are cued due to specific events. He presents evidence that even scientists use varying conceptions of the same concept in different contexts and hypothesizes this could also be true for students. Driver et al. (1994) offer additional evidence regarding the idea of „conceptual profile‟, revealing that people have a variety of ways of thinking within specific domains. Niedderer and Goldberg (1994) assert conceptual change is a process of change from the learner‟s prior conceptions to intermediate conceptions and finally to scientific conceptions. Dykstara, Boyle, and Monarch (1992) agree that it is a progressive change process and present a taxonomy of conceptual change including differentiation, class extension and reconceptualization. Additionally, Demastes, Good and Peebles (1996) indicate four patterns of change. They are (a) cascade of changes (a sequence of conceptual changes catalyzed by change in conception), (b) wholesale changes (alternative conceptions rejected in lieu of scientific conceptions), (c) incremental changes (alternative conceptions changing incrementally to scientific conceptions), and (d) dual constructions (individuals having two logically mutually exclusive conceptions). It is clear that the views on the process involved in conceptual change are wide-ranging and diverse, offering a fertile ground for further analysis.
1.2 Misconceptions and the Tendency to Cling to Outdated Ideas There is an abundance of research illustrating that inaccurate understandings are pervasive, stable, and often resistant to change through classroom instruction. There are several reasons proposed to explain the difficulty in creating conceptual changes in science learning. Hsiao-Ching (2003) states they include: (1) students‟ intuitive concepts are based in everyday experiences; (2) students have difficulty understanding abstract concepts; and (3) students have problems perceiving the invisible molecule. Fishbein & Ajezen (1975) describe a student‟s attitude towards any object (subject) as being a function of their beliefs about the object and object (subject) and the implicit evaluative responses with those beliefs. It is well supported (Fraser et al, 1984) that student attitude is a primary influence on an individual‟s learning and effective teaching strategies will influence attitude in a positive manner. MacMillian (1979) found, in a variety of studies, that students using activity oriented techniques exhibited more favorable attitudes towards science than those taught via the traditional method. The authors also found that teachers with personality and interrelationships were vital to the attitude formation of students.
Dr. Jules Troyer/ Procedia – Social Behavioral Sciences (2011) Jules A. A. Troyer / Procedia - Social andand Behavioral Sciences 29 00 (2011) 33 000–000 – 38
35
These attitudes, as a function of belief, are prey to the same tendencies as beliefs. The psychological literature underscores Bacon‟s statement: “Beliefs tend to sustain themselves even despite the total discrediting of the evidence that produced the beliefs initially”(Nisbett & Ross, 1980, p. 192). It is true, in many disciplines that researchers will cleave with their very being to observations and measurements that are a direct product of their personal bias. A perfect example of researchers attempting to override this prevalent phenomenon is the use of the double-blind protocol. Conceptual change is very closely tied to the ability a learner has to reject a concept. This ability is fostered by social and affective factors that influence conceptual change (Pintrich et al., 1993). The social matrix in which conceptual change occurs includes student peers, teachers, adults, and presents a diverse web of interacting attitudes. Harvey (1957) presents a sound history of behavioral „side effects” resulting from attempts at attitude change. It is plausible these effects reflect a desire of the learner to maintain a view of the world that conforms to their already existing attitudes. When a learner is presented with information that is different from their existing conceptualization, Harvey (1957) states, “congruence can be maintained or restored by a change in the internal standard or by a cognitive distortion of the impinging stimuli” (p.127). This distortion either brings the stimuli in congruence with the existing conceptual schema or makes it so incompatible that they can be dissociated or made irrelevant. Harvey (1957) explains that this process of minimizing and maximizing stimulus discrepancies is referred to as assimilation and contrast. The author (1957) defines assimilation as an individual evaluating a discrepant stimulus as being more in accord with his own concept than it really is or that changing one‟s own concept in the direction of the discrepant stimulus or source of evaluation. Harvey (1957) alternately defines contrast as a learner distorting the stimulus away from his concept or changing his concept in the direction opposite to that of the stimulus, representative of the „boomerang phenomenon.‟ Although assimilation and contrast are fundamentally different they both create the effect of maintaining congruency between the outside world and the associated internal standards. 2. Conceptual Change Instruction 2.1 History There is a sound basis of research supporting the effectiveness of instructional strategies that target conceptual change in students (Beeth, 1993). It is necessary, in this type of strategy, to identify students existing conceptual knowledge, recognize the resistance to change these conceptions have, and the possible impact of „alternative‟ perceptions on further learning (Beeth, 1993). Abundant research has been target at delineating the primary components of a classroom that address students‟ conceptions in a practical and effective way. Beeth (1993) reviewed the history of conceptual change instruction and identified a common pattern elicited in students‟ ideas on a topic. He recommends having students represent their ideas (e.g. through concept maps, verbally, or in some written form). He also indicates research supports the idea that teachers should confront students‟ ideas with a cononical view of the same concept and see if it alters the student‟s ideas. Hewson & Thorley argue that this ignores the importance of the conceptual ecology and the status that an individual attaches to a particular conception, a central tenet in the Conceptual Change Model. Conceptions are understood to persevere and have meaning within different aspects of the conceptual ecology, and because a change in a conception has to be in the presence of a concomitant change in status (Hewson & Thorley, 1989), deductively successful instruction targeted at these parts of the Conceptual Change Model would be more likely to facilitate change in a learner‟s thinking. This is a hypothesis that was confirmed through a variety of experiments conducted by Beeth (1993). 2.2 Current Research Current researchers have used this historical understanding of student conceptual change processes to develop a conceptual change model known as the Dual Situated Learning Model (DSLM) (Hsiao-Ching, 2003). This model has been used to demonstrate how actual classroom instruction can initiate conceptual change of alternative scientific views (Hsiao-Ching, 2003). DSLM emphasizes the process by which learners undergo conceptual change,
36
Jules A. Troyer / Procedia - Social Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 33 – 38 Dr. Jules A. Troyer/ Procedia – Social andand Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
underscoring the theoretical undercurrents for this domain of inquiry. The DSLM indicates that starting with students‟ ontological view of the concept in addition to the attributes of the concepts are the foundation for dual situated learning events. In a study conducted by Hasio-Ching (2003) dual situated learning events with instruction with DSLM contributed successfully to more than 60% of the students; conceptual change concerning thermal expansion, the domain tested. This indicates favorable possibilities in creating instructional models that successfully instigate conceptual change within students.
3. Discussion It is evident through this discussion that although there are a variety of perspectives on the exact processes that learners are involved in during conceptual change, there are fundamental aspects that all can agree on. Attitude‟s and beliefs play a significant role in the flexibility students have in their knowledge schemas necessary to solve all types of problems. Strategies that address students‟ misconceptions and resulting attitudes can effectively initiate conceptual change that makes students more able to solve problems and learn. It was presented at the beginning of this review that this is also analogous to the primary function of consciousness. The ability to rearrange schema or to construct them anew was described by Bartlett (1932) as a primary evolutionary adaption, necessary for problem solving that is inherent in the learning process. It is a promising area of research to investigate the effects of these empirically proven instructional strategies for conceptual change, in the arena of elevating consciousness for the purpose of improving student ability within the domain of problem solving. References Adams, A. D., & Chiapetta, E. L. (1998, April). Students’ beliefs, attitudes, and conceptual change in a traditional high school physics classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. Adam, A. D., & Griffard, P. B. (2001, March). Analysis of alternative conceptions in physics and biology: Similarities, differences, and implications for conceptual l change. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. Ausubel. D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Beals, D. E. (1998). Reappropriating schema: Conceptions of development from Bartlett and Bakhtin. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(1), 3-24. Beeth, M. E. (1993, April). Classroom environment and conceptual change instruction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research In Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA. Beeth, M. E., & Hennessey, M. G. (1996, April). Teaching for understanding in science: What counts as conceptual change? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. Beeth, M. E., & Hewson, P. W. (1997, September). Learning to learn science: Instruction that supports conceptual change. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the European Science Education Research Association, Rome, Italy.
Jules A. A. Troyer / Procedia - Social andand Behavioral Sciences 29 00 (2011) 33 000–000 – 38 Dr. Jules Troyer/ Procedia – Social Behavioral Sciences (2011)
37
Bowen, C. W., & Bunce, D. M. (1997). Testing for conceptual understanding in general chemistry. The Chemical Educator, 2(2), 1-17. Brown, H. L. (1986). Sellars, concepts, and conceptual change. Synthese, 68, 275-307. Caillot, M., & Chartrain, J. (2001, April). Conceptual change and relation to knowledge: The case of volcanism at primary school. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Research Association, Seattle, WA. Caikir, O. S., Ozlem, S., & Geban, O. (2002, April). Contribution of conceptual change texts and concept mapping to students’ understanding of acids and bases. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA. Demestes, S. S., Good, R. G., & Peebles, P. (1996). Patterns of conceptual change in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(4), 407-431. Diakidoy, I. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2002, April). Reading about energy: The effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Driver, R.,, Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. Dykstra, D. I., Boyle, C. F., & Monarch, I. A. (1992). Studying conceptual change in learning physics. Science Education, 76(6), 615-652. Fensham, P. H., Gunstone, R. F., & White, R. T. (1984). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. London: Falmer. Hartman, H. J. (2001). Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Harvey, O. J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1959). Assimilation and contrast phenomena in response to environmental variation. Journal of Personality, 27(2), 127-138. Hewson, P. W. & Thorley, N. R. (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 541-553. Hsiao-Ching, S. (2003). DSLM instructional approach to conceptual change involving thermal expansion. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21 (1). Lindner, C. J. (1993). A challenge to conceptual change. Science Education, 77(3), 293-300. Linn, M. C. (1978). Influence of cognitive style and training on tasks requiring the separation of variables schema. Child Development, 49, 874-877. Marks, D. F. (1999). Consciousness, mental imagery, and action. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 567-585. Niedderer, H., & Golderg, F. (1994). An individual student‟s learning process in electric circuits. Paper presented at NARST 1994 Annual Meeting. Nisbett, R., & Ross, L (1980). Human inference. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Nissani, M. (1996). The mystery of the dancing fruit flies. American Biology Teacher, 58(3), 168-171.
38
Jules A. Troyer / Procedia - Social Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 33 – 38 Dr. Jules A. Troyer/ Procedia – Social andand Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
Nissani, M., & Hoefler-Nissani, D. M. (1992). Experimental studies of belief dependence of observations and of resistance to conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 97-111. Ogunsola-Bandele, M. F., & Oyedokun, C. A. (1998, April). The effect of a conceptual change teaching strategy (model) on students’ attitude towards the learning of some biology concepts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167-199. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hweson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227. Tao, P., & Gunstone, R. F. (1997, March). The process of conceptual change in “force and motion.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Watson, B., & Kopnicek, R. (1990). Teaching for conceptual change: Confronting children‟s experience. Phi Delta Kappan, May, 680-684. Winer, L. R., & Vazquez-Abad, J. (1995, April). The potential of repertory grid technique in the assessment of conceptual change in physics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Yuru, N., & Geban, O. (2002, March). Conceptual change text: A supplementary material to facilitate conceptual change in electrochemical cell concepts .Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO. Zietsman, A., & Clement, J. (1997). The role of extreme case reasoning in instruction for conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1), 61-89.