Category Archives: A. Conceptual Challenges

The video introduced graduates having similar misconceptions before and after formal knowledge (ex. seasons from earth-sun distance; lunar phases from eclipsing clouds). The clip then focused on Heather’s private theories (ex. peculiar orbit, indirect bounce), confidently holding onto confusing assumptions with interpretive frameworks outliving contradictory instruction. These misconceptions are basic ideas and lingering thoughts arising from experience and association, not limited to perspective drawings or abstract concepts, but depend upon everyday sense perception (where in the first example closer does suggest warmer). Students have firm beliefs or naïve preconceptions through spontaneous interaction with their environments, adapting new ideas to prior knowledge, isolating formal instruction from intuition. Misconceptions are often surprising, pervasive and resilient contingent upon existing frameworks, where students misinterpret common sense (Chi, 2005) with loosely connected reinforcing conceptions that do not match reality. At times misconceptions even share correct propositions, which can be accurate in parts but incomplete affecting ease of removal. Students are not blank slates, and unless sufficiently dissatisfied with old models, are unlikely to accommodate new theories (Confrey, 1990).

In response, Posner et al. define learning as conceptual change, modifying paradigms through assimilation and accommodation, historically valued for problem solving over prediction making, requiring layered adaptation and reconciliation. Learners must face dissatisfaction with anomalies and be presented with intelligible, plausible and extendable alternative frameworks to challenge conceptual ecology (Posner et. al, 1982). Educators need to first probe student understanding, providing counterexamples and critical barriers with different kinds of knowledge, giving time to sort out confusion with expectations. Have students give reasons for answers, redirecting representations to focus attention and understanding belief as arbitrary point of view, having gradual tolerance for inconsistency to reconcile fundamental assumptions. Students learn through peer teaching and correction, straightening ideas with tangible manipulatives, making viable adaptations upon empirical data and reflection. Teachers need to help learners be aware of continual competition between new concepts and old ideas to free them from private universes, giving value to process as well as outcome.

References

Chi, M. T. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. The journal of the learning sciences, 14(2), 161-199.

Confrey, J. (1990). A review of the research on student conceptions in mathematics, science, and programming. Review of research in education, 16, 3-56.

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci. Ed., 66: 211–227. doi: 10.1002/sce.373066020.

I have taught Science for 6 years in Canada, but nothing challenged me more than when I came to the United Arab Emirates to teach Science at the Middle School level.  In Driver et al.’s book, Children’s Ideas and the Learning of Science, it is stated that people construct their own meanings and personal ideas influence the manner in which information is acquired.  This is further made difficult if the language in which the Science information is being taught is not the mother tongue of the student.  In my case, I sometimes feel like I am doing my students a disservice because so much gets lost in translation.  Earlier this year, I was teaching students about plant and animal cells and students were lost because they had no idea what a cell was.  I showed them videos and we looked through textbooks, but I knew at the end of the unit that there were still many students that had no clue what I was talking about.  They could not fathom that our blood which looks liquid to the naked eye could have red blood cells as a component.
Like Heather and her classmates, my student’s posses so many misconceptions. These stem from information they have “heard” throughout their lives, events that they have observed and even various forms of media.  I read, Exploring the role of a discrepant event in changing the conceptions of evaporation and boiling in elementary school students, this paper stated that many causes and solutions to misconceptions among children in elementary school science problems have been proposed; however, in the study, it is suggested that the traditional examples used to enhance student understanding have instead caused misconceptions because of their limited scope.  They suggested that to explain abstract scientific concepts, concrete examples are generally presented, but it is difficult to represent all cases, and thus, only typical cases are selected. However, these traditional solutions can contribute to the students’ difficulties in learning.  This may ne an answer to reducing misconceptions in the science classroom.

Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes [Buckinghamshire];Philadelphia;: Open University Press.

Paik, S., & Paik, S. (2015). Chemistry education research and practice: Exploring the role of a discrepant event in changing the conceptions of evaporation and boiling in elementary school students Department of Chemistry, University of Ioannina. doi:10.1039/c5rp00068h

Heather and many of her peers we confronted with having to compare their notions of how the Earth orbited the Sun with factual information.  The student’s initial thoughts were that seasons were affected by the earth being closer or further from the Sun. There were also a lot of misconceptions in regards to the phases of the Moon.  The students struggled to explain the most basic concepts orally and through the use of drawing a diagram.

I was actually just teaching a lesson on the Earth’s orbit, axis tilt, hemispheres, and seasonal impact to my fourth graders and it was interesting to hear their thoughts on the matter. Some of their ideas were quite similar to the answers the students gave in the video we watched. I rarely have the student’s use a textbook in the class because I find it quite boring and noninteractive.  I brought out the models of the planets and showed some videos on the projector, as well as gave them scenarios to apply their knowledge.  Most of my students are tactile learners and once they were able to manipulate the model of the solar system, things became more clear to them.

As teachers, it is important for us to connect all the little bits of knowledge that they students may have.   Vosniadou et al (1992) suggests that children can have a set of very fragmented ideas about how something works. They may try to connect those ideas in a way that makes sense in their mind.  As a result, this can fuel a misconception that they have believe to be a truth for years if no one challenges their thinking. Vosniadou (1992) goes further to state that children are theory builders and will continually construct  ideas about the Earth around them that are consistent with their personal experience. Posner et al (1982) suggests that teachers focus on the the actual content of the student’s ideas.  They argue that too much emphasis is places on understanding the underlying cognitive structures.

In activating prior knowledge teachers should get a sense of their student’s current understanding of a particular concept. Lucariello (n.d.) suggests that students can have a challenging time changing their ideas on their deeply entrenched thoughts. He suggests that students can help overcome this by their teacher using diverse methods of instruction, and bridging gaps through model based reasoning. Through creating an environment where the students can reflect on their thinking and assess their own understanding of a given topic, the classroom will inch closer to reconciling false notions.

References:

Lucariello, J. (n.d.). How Do I Get My Students Over Their Conceptions (Misconceptions) for Learning? American Psychological Association. Accessed on January 14, 2017 from http://www.apa.org/education/k12/misconceptions.aspx

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci. Ed., 66: 211–227. doi: 10.1002/sce.373066020

Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive psychology, 24(4), 535-585

In the video, “A Private Universe”, some of the challenges or scientific misconceptions that Heather holds are as follows:

• She believes the earth travels in a curly orbit around the sun;
• She cannot identify direct and indirect rays;
• She misunderstands the shadow of the earth.

Heather’s theories were a result of what she had learned on her own in the past. Her misconception about the orbit, for example, was based on an illustration she had seen in a textbook. In an effort to explain her theories, Heather uses illustrations and objects. Direct instruction helps alter some of her personal theories. Probing questions from the classroom teacher, along with a model of the earth, the moon and the sun, help students overcome some of their misconceptions.

One of the challenging concepts that I had in math when I was in school was comprehending word problems. I lacked confidence in math, and I used to feel stressed out when I tried to tackle word problems. I would need to read the word problem multiple times, and would have difficulty comprehending what I was being asked to calculate. I could not seem to be able to figure out how to convert the problem to numbers or a mathematical equation. In an effort to try and figure out what I was trying to solve, I would draw pictures and charts. I had great difficulty connecting what I was reading to concrete mathematical concepts.

Driver et al (1994) and Cobb (1994) draw connections between constructivism and learning science and math. According to Driver et al (1994), individuals construct their own scientific theories as a result of the interactions they have in their personal lives. Students should be able to participate in classroom activities that challenge these prior misconceptions, so that students are able to modify their knowledge. Cobb (1994) describes the process of actively drawing upon your personal experiences in an effort to construct an understanding of mathematical principles. This personal knowledge can conflict with what is being taught by the classroom teacher. Cobb (1994) also presents the sociocultural perspective whereby an individual is influenced by the “participation in encompassing cultural practices” (Cobb, 1994, p. 13).

I think it is important to present concepts in math and science using a variety of mediums in an effort to better meet the needs of different learners, and help reinforce what is being presented in the classroom. It is important for students to be engaged and have the opportunity for reflection and practice. Some of the faculty members I worked with in the post-secondary system utilized the flipped classroom model, so that lectures were recorded, and viewed by students in advance of the lesson, and classroom time was spent working on interactive, engaging activities that reinforced the concepts presented in the lecture. Khan Academy is also utilized by many teachers as an opportunity to reinforce what is being taught in the classroom. Another approach I have seen in an online learning environment is to have students create instructional videos that highlight specific mathematical or scientific concepts. These videos are added to an online resource database within the learning management system for current and future students.

Resources

Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23 (7), 13-20.

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E. & Scott, P. Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23 (5), 5-11.

Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (Producer).  (1987).  A Private Universe [online video].  Retrieved 6 January, 2017, from: http://learner.org/vod/vod_window.html?pid=9

Dear class,

Please find attached several pictures of primary children’s models of the Earth. I have been teaching a kindergarten/grade one class astronomy this year. The children have wonderful ideas. The activities I have undertaken this year are based on Stella Vosniadou’s research reviewed by a couple of you in this forum on conceptual challenges and Bill Thornburgh et al. (2015) studies on young children’s sense of perspective in space. In it, our first activity queried can you draw a picture of the earth and to follow up, is this what the earth would look like if you were in space? As promised, here are several of the models that emerged from this activity.

Thoughts and questions on conceptual challenges welcome! Samia

In A Private Universe, Heather’s challenges come from a number of places:

1. Her brain’s attempt to integrate correct information from differing topics (see: Heather’s reference to analemmas in her description of orbits)
2. Integrating learned conceptual knowledge with observed phenomena (seasonal differences caused by proximity to the sun makes sense when we think about our experience with proximity to a heat source)
3. Her own best guesses at information she has not yet learned.

Heather’s misconceptions tend to be around phenomena she can’t observe.  As Driver et al (1985) states, “some elements in the structure of a scientific theory do not correspond to direct perceptions” (p. 5).  Because of this, Heather must assimilate knowledge of her perceived environment with the theoretical or unobservable.  The demonstrations her teacher led with the model of the solar system were helping to correct her understanding.  Posner et al (1982) theorized that to change a misconception, a person must: be dissatisfied with current conceptions, have the ability to understand a new conception, have an initially plausible new conception, and the new conception must be seen as means to open up new learning.    Heather’s old thoughts had a stickiness to them – whenever Heather was questioned beyond a point of her comfort zone, she would return to her old explanations.  When it came to her description of the seasons, it sounded like she was on the right track, but misconceptions revealed themselves when she was questioned.  Chi (2005) would point out that Heather was mis-categorizing an ‘emergent’ process as a ‘direct’ process.  Her ideas of direct and indirect light seemed to be based on her observed notions of reflection.  The observed direct process was so powerful in her thinking that she was able to ignore the fact there is almost nothing in space for the sun’s light to reflect off to ‘bounce’ back at Earth.

As a teacher, I remain an optimist about my student’s ability to adapt to new ways of thinking.  For Heather, I hope that, as she integrates correct information into her understanding, it will replace misconceptions.  It seems to me that the deeper her inquiry and the more frequent her exposure to the correct information, the more likely Heather is to rewire her brain away from the misconceptions she holds (though maybe that is my own deeply held misconception!).  While I was watching the video and listening to all the Harvard grads explain their flawed view of the changing seasons, I found myself shaking my head and feeling quite smug.  Later, I reflected on Heather’s interview and remembered how her improved explanations fell to pieces when she was questioned and probed deeper.  As an experiment, I began asking myself deeper questions about my own understanding of the seasons, and found it didn’t take long until I was out of my depth.  The fact is, there is a point at which every person’s understanding on a given topic comes to its limit.  Like the signs on ancient maps, ‘beyond this place there be dragons’, it is imagination, educated guesses, and misconceptions that live in that place beyond our understanding.

References

Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161-199. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1402_1

Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science. Children’s ideas in science, 1-9. Retrieved from: https://www.questia.com/read/118893479/children-s-ideas-in-science

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of ascientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci. Ed., 66: 211–227. doi: 10.1002/sce.373066020.  Retrieved from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sce.3730660207/full

Schneps, M. H., Sadler, P. M., Woll, S., & Crouse, L. (1989). A Private universe. S. Burlington, VT: Annenberg Media.

Although my posting this week has been delayed slightly beyond the target date, I have spent some time thinking on Heather and the responses of the randomly selected students and faculty at Harvard. Although some of Heather’s explanations seems quite “out there” i.e. orbit of the Earth and definition of indirect rays from the sun, I realized that no long ago I would have fit in with the twenty-three incorrect Harvard respondents quite comfortably. I can attest that the only reason I have an understanding of the reason for seasons, moon phases and sun ray activity is because I have homeschooled my own children through the elementary school grades. When teaching them about the seasons and moon phases, an orange with a skewer stuck through it, a ping pong ball and a lamp were brought out to physically model how the sun’s light strikes the earth during its yearly orbit, and the moon during its monthly phases. In Heather’s experience, it would seem that no such modelling experience had been a part of her learning. Surprisingly, even when the science teacher presented learning with a model, the sun didn’t seem to contain a light source, so students didn’t get to physically see the light shining on various sections of the earth and moon spheres. The other day I asked my grade eight daughter, whom I am presently homeschooling, to explain the seasons, the moon phases and the difference between indirect and direct light. She confidently did so, accurately without any prompting. All of these concepts were explored during her mid-elementary home learning years, so I find it intriguing that they have stayed with her – we must have done something right!

The article that I chose to explore this past week is entitled “Children’s Ideas About Weather: A Review of the Literature” (Henriques, 2002) from Social Science and Mathematics. This article reviews literature and studies connected to student misconceptions on topics of weather mainly on the water cycle, properties of water, movement of air, climates versus weather and the greenhouse effect. The Appendices include charts with topics related to weather and scientist perspectives aside student perspectives and potentials reasons for student misconceptions. One of the key purposes of the review is to provide teachers with a comprehensive list of common misconceptions in order to help them plan effectively in how to present their instruction. As well, individualized assessment of student understanding, or lack of understanding, is critical as supported by Driver, Guesne and Tiberghien (1985) – a call for teachers to take into consideration the prior knowledge of students when planning concepts, experience and presentations to include within their lessons. Relating back to Heather, one of her large misconceptions was her figure eight version of the earth’s orbit around the sun. When probed, she said that she must have confused a diagram from another textbook with the diagram of the earth’s orbit. Similarly, in Henriques review, diagrams of the water cycle showing the ocean as the sole source from where water evaporates seemingly led students to believe that water only evaporates from oceans and not from any other water bodies or sources of water i.e. plants on earth. These examples related to misconceptions emphasize the importance of accuracy in visual representations for young students. This is an area in which digital technology can help students visually see or design representations of science concepts through videos and interactive websites.

To close, a comment worth considering that Henriques offers is that often what is considered a “misconception” can actually be an incomplete or limited conception, or simply unknown information (2002). Again, individual assessment and further probing is necessary in order to define what is known and what is unknown, and to help guide future learning. This, I believe, is a key aspect in effective education in all areas, yet is often neglected due to time demands and assumptions. As educators, there is room for improvement.

Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A.  (1985).  Children’s ideas and the learning of science.  Children’s Ideas in Science (pp. 1-9).  Milton Keynes [Buckinghamshire]; Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (Producer).  (1987).  A Private Universe [online video].  Retrieved 6 January, 2017, from: http://learner.org/vod/vod_window.html?pid=9

Henriques, L.  (2002, May). Children’s misconceptions about weather: A review of the literature. Social Science and Mathematics, 102 (5), 202-214.

Dear class,

Your comments and aha moments on Heather in the Private Universe as well as your insights into student learning have been enlightening.  The new readings you identified in your research studies contributed to our understanding of the scope of misconceptions that students hold in science and math. In the literature, student misconceptions are described often as quite reasonable explanations of how children and young adults view their world. These conceptions are also oft referred to as student: alternative conceptions, preconceptions, partial conceptions, hybrid conceptions. The student alternative conceptions that you highlighted are in domains of practice for many of you, and as a class, we can look forward to how you keep these (and the Private Universe) in mind, as our discussions progress. One of the goals of any good graduate program is to foster entry into scholarly discourse, and your citations to the work you read is a characteristic of being able to engage in this type of discussion. This is a good start. I have been commenting on each of your posts individually but also wanted to share how much this forum on student conceptual challenges has gotten many of us thinking about our own personal conceptions and our teaching settings. Weaving together the suggestions by Driver, Posner, Cobb, and Confrey et al. to confront these conceptual challenges begins a course-long process of how we may integrate particular instructional strategies and digital technologies in our teaching to support student learning. By expanding our collective repertoire of possible alternative conceptions, we can inform design decisions as you showed with suggested teaching strategies. There were a number of thoughtful strategies proposed in the posts. I look forward to your continuing to explore the possible conceptual challenges of students in math and science throughout the course.

Thank you,

Samia

It was intriguing to compare the misconceptions between Harvard graduates and grade 9 students. Interestingly, the misconceptions between the two demographics were similar.  When Heather was pressed on how she acquired these theories, she either wasn’t sure, or suggested confusing ideas based on how they were depicted in textbooks from earlier grades.  It is likely that most common sources of misconceptions are lack of clear explanations, misunderstandings from reading and visual materials, and lack of hands on learning. Without having the Sun, the earth and the moon in your hands, it becomes difficult to understand clearly the reasons why we have phases of the moon.

The study by Turgut, Gurbuz, and Turgut (2011) focused on gaining an understanding of misconceptions harbored by grade 10 students on electricity.  A three part multiple choice test was conducted with 10 questions, part one: a normal content knowledge multiple choice question, part two: a multiple choice question where the student would pick the best option supporting why they chose the answer they chose in part one, and part three: how sure they were of their choice in part one.  This was a clever way of determining any misconceptions as if the student was sure of the wrong answer with a reason given, a misconception would become clear.  If the student got a wrong answer and wasn’t sure of the answer, that wouldn’t count as a misconception.  The researchers found around 25 or so different misconceptions related to electricity among 96 grade 10 students.  A few of these misconceptions included: current is consumed in the circuit; current decreases when it passes through the bulb; and bulbs in the parallel are always brighter in series.  The researchers strongly recommended designing classroom experiences that addressed these misconceptions so that students could have better learning experiences regarding electricity.

There were some parallels between the Turgut, Gurbuz, and Turgut (2011) and Driver, Guesne, and Tiberghien (1985), one of the required readings.  Both studies highlighted the sheer difficulty of getting rid of misconceptions that children develop as they go through different grades learning science.  Both articles also suggested students are not empty vessels when they come to class, that they have their own set of ideas, something that was also a fact stated in the required video about Heather.

From the readings I have discovered that multiple activities are required so that students get various opportunities to compare the scientific view of a concept to their own.  To allow students to be rid of a misconception, it first needs to be recognized by the teacher.  Furthermore, it needs to be confronted directly by the teacher in multiple ways so that students have a better chance of letting go of their misconception.  To that end, there are a variety of interactive simulations and high quality video content that teachers could use to provide these multiple ways of teaching a single concept.  There are a number of science related channels like TEDEd, CrashCourse, The Sci Guys etc. that produce very engaging and inviting video content, along with simulations like Phet can go a long way in helping students understand concepts.

References

Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science. Children’s ideas in science, 1-9. Available online: search the title using any engine.

Turgut, U., Gurbuz, F., & Turgut, G. (2011).  An investigation 10th grade students’ misconceptions about electric current. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1956-1971.

Reflecting on my own experiences as a student and as a teacher leads to two generalizations of personal challenges I have encountered:

1. Memorization of so much information without application
2. Repetition + Rote vs. Time + Experience

Both of these issues were relevant to me in my secondary and post-secondary education. Having been a particularly strong student through most of my grade levels, I began to struggle at the end of secondary school and beginning of post-secondary when I could not simply rely on memorization of what I heard in class. I was not used to having to “work” to acquire my learning.

The video we watched about Harvard graduates and the case study of Heather stated, “every time we communicate, new concepts compete with the pre-conceived ideas of our listeners” (18:38). In thinking about the growing trend or use of STEM, or STEAM, or inquiry-based learning and other related terms in the classroom, the similarity of all of these is integrating subject areas and hands on learning. I find it exciting to think of all the possibilities when we picture inter-curricular projects rather than separate boxed subject areas. Recognizing how these subject areas can co-exist simultaneously and being comfortable with it, however, seems to be one of the biggest hurdles. Nadelson et al. (2013) suggest that, “many elementary teachers have constrained background knowledge, confidence, and efficacy for teaching STEM that may hamper student STEM learning” (p. 157). “Access to appropriate resources” (p. 157) and appropriate professional development seem to also be key challenges to the integration of STEM into the elementary curriculum whose content and daily schedule seem to lend itself particularly well to the teaching of STEM. Although this article cites the problem being that the teacher certification program does not include enough science and mathematics methods and content courses, which I do agree with to a certain extent, I have found that authentic, engaging professional development is severely lacking and not often sought out. I also contend that even if there were more methods and content courses in teacher certification programs, change would not necessarily occur if the teaching in the certification programs continued to be on dated methods and content. Getting back to the original quote from the video, new concepts compete with the pre-conceived ideas not only in our students but also in teachers. How can teachers be encouraged to challenge their own pre-conceived ideas without feeling threatened or without having the fear of a ton more work without any payoff in regards to student learning?

Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science. Children’s ideas in science, 1-9.

Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J. , Pyke, P. , Hay, A. , Dance, M. & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM Perception and Preparation: Inquiry-Based STEM Professional Development for Elementary Teachers, The Journal of Educational Research, 106:2, 157-168, DOI: 10.1080/00220671.2012.667014

Shapiro, B. L. (1988). What children bring to light: Towards understanding what the primary school science learner is trying to do. Developments and dilemmas in science education, 96-120.