As the issue of misconceptions is new for me, I want to elaborate on three basic questions: What are misconceptions? Where do misconceptions come from? And how can we resolve them?
Conceptions of children are “ideas about their world” (Confrey 1990 , p. 4). They help to “obtain explanations for how and why things behave as they do”. Misconceptions are “learner’s deviations from scientists’ view” (Shapiro 1988, p. 99).
In Heathers case, it is not fully clear where the misconceptions come from. The idea of the bizarre orbit may come from text book illustrations. The source of her ideas on indirect light is unclear. Altogether, Heather tries to accommodate different sources of information into a coherent private theory.
After the lecture, Heathers changes some of her misconceptions. Posner (1982) calls such a conceptual change “accommodation” (p. 212). Heather is now able to give a correct picture of the orbit of the earth. Yet, she still has misconceptions on indirect light.
Confrey (1990) confirms that children have “firmly held, descriptive, and explanatory systems for scientific … phenomena” (p. 4), and that these “systems are resistant to change through traditional instruction” (p. 4). So the case of Heather seems to be typical.
According to Piaget, a child “develops certain perspectives and beliefs that are functionally adaptive”, and that “may or may not correspond well with the views of disciplinary experts” (Confrey 1990, p. 8). From this point of view, misconceptions seem a normal aspect of the maturation of a child. According to von Glaserfeld (1982), errors are “key moments” and “opportunities to glimpse our own constructs” (cited after (Confrey, 1990, p. 14)). For Heather, this seems true, as she is able to reflect on her own beliefs during class and correct them.
How can misconceptions be resolved?
First, students should describe their own conceptual framework when working on a problem (Confrey 1990, p. 43). Shapiro (1988) also states that the preconceptions need to be clarified, e.g. by group discussions. Shapiro (1988) proposes a Classroom Profile to document preconceptions of each student, helping the teacher “to understand how individual children are thinking” (p. 117).
Second, when a student understands that the own conception is not appropriate to solve a problem, he or she may get “dissatisfied” and adopt an alternative, better framework (Confrey 1990, p. 43). Posner (1982) also sees “dissatisfaction” as a major condition for accommodation (p.214) and suggests that the teacher should create “cognitive conflicts in students” (p. 225) for this. Accommodation is supported when the new concept is plausible and intelligible (Posner 1982, p. 214) and when the student sees the teacher as a “credible authority” (Saeli, 2011, p. 113).
I am a computer scientist and teach at a university. Misconceptions are not so obvious here, as learning is often not as visible as in a school setting. However, I looked for research on typical misconceptions in computer science classes. One study shows that these misconceptions are very individual, as “different students have different needs and difficulties” (Saeli 2011, p. 81). Thus, Saeli (2011) concludes: There is not one approach to support accommodation that suits all students, and thus the teacher has to adopt different strategies for different students based on his PCK (pedagogical content knowledge) (Saeli, 2011).
References
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.
Saeli, M., Perrenet, J., Jochems W.M.G., & Zwaneveld, B. (2011): Teaching Programming in Secondary School: A Pedagogical Content Knowledge Perspective. Informatics in Education, 10(1), 73–88.
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.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1982). An interpretation of Piaget’s constructivism. In Revue internationale de philosophie (142-143). France: Ministere de L’Education Nationale.