Describing and analyzing learning in action: An empirical study of the importance of misconceptions in learning science

Science Education

Volumn 92, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 141-164

  Hamza, Karim M ^a   Wickman, Per Olof ^a  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 38049176896     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20233     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (68)

1. Almqvist, J. (2005). Learning and artefacts: On the use of information technology in educational settings. Digital comprehensive summaries of Uppsala dissertations from the Faculty of Social Sciences, 3. Uppsala, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
2. Anderson, J. R., Greeno, J. G., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (2000). Perspectives on learning, thinking, and activity. Educational Researcher, 29, 11-13.
3. Caravita, S., & Halldén, O. (1994). Re-framing the problem of conceptual change. Learning & Instruction, 4, 89-111.
4. Carey, S. (1999). Sources of conceptual change. In E. K. Scholnick, K. Nelson, S. A. Gelman, & P. H. Miller (Eds.), Conceptual development: Piaget's legacy (pp. 293-326). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & deLeeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning & Instruction, 4, 27-43.
6. Clement, J., Brown, D., & Zeitsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: Finding anchoring conceptions for grounding instruction on students' intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 554-565.
7. Coll, R. K., & Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding held by upper secondary and tertiary students. Research in Science and Technological Education, 19, 171-191.
8. De Posada, J. M. (1997). Conceptions of high school students concerning the internal structure of metals and their electric conduction: Structure and evolution. Science Education, 81, 445-467.
9. Dewey, J. (1958). Experience and nature (2nd ed.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1925)
10. Dewey, J. (2005). Democracy and education. Stilwell, KS: Digireads.com Publishing. (Original work published 1916)
11. diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition & Instruction, 10, 105-225.
12. diSessa, A. A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research. In K. R. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265-281). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
13. diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M., & Esterly, J. B. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28, 843-900.
14. diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (1998). What changes in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1155-1191.
15. Driver, R., & Erickson, G. (1983). Theories-in-action: Some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students' conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Education, 10, 37-60.
16. Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children's ideas. London: Routledge.
17. Duit, R. (2007). Bibliography STCSE - Students' and teachers' conceptions and science education. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from IPN - Leibniz Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel Web site: http://www.ipn.uni- kiel.de/aktuell/stcse//bibint.html
18. Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 671-688.
19. Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992a). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation - reduction equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 121-142.
20. Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992b). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electrochemical (galvanic) and electrolytic cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 1079-1099.
21. Garrison, J. W. (1995). Deweyan pragmatism and the epistemology of contemporary social constructivism. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 716-740.
22. Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In K. R. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79-96). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
23. Groves, F. H., & Pugh, A. F. (2002). Cognitive illusions as hindrances to learning complex environmental issues. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 11, 381-390.
24. Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 68, 52-59.
25. Hamza, K. M., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Encounters with distractions: A study of their role during a practical in electrochemistry. Manuscript in preparation.
26. Hewson, P. W., & Thorley, N. R. (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541-543.
27. Hickman, L. A. (1998). Dewey's theory of inquiry. In L. A. Hickman (Ed.), Reading Dewey: Interpretations for a post modern generation (pp. 166-186). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
28. Huddle, P. A., White, M. D., & Rogers, F. (2000). Using a teaching model to correct known misconceptions in electrochemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 104-110.
29. Hunt, E., & Minstrell, J. (1994). A cognitive approach to the teaching of physics. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 51-74). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. Ioannides, C., & Vosniadou, S. (2002). The changing meanings of force. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2, 5-61.
31. Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Transformation through language use: Children's spontaneous metaphors in elementary school science. Science & Education, 16, 267-289.
32. Johnson, P., & Gott, R. (1996). Constructivism and evidence from children's ideas. Science Education, 80, 561-577.
33. Kelly, G. J., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world (pp. 145-181). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Kruckeberg, R. (2006). A Deweyan perspective on science education: Constructivism, experience, and why we learn science. Science & Education, 15, 1-30.
35. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3-32). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
36. Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2003). Individual and sociocultural views of learning in science education. Science and Education, 12, 91-113.
37. Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Östman, L. (2006). Teaching and learning in the science classroom: The interplay between teachers' epistemological moves and students' practical epistemology. Science Education, 90, 148-163.
38. Lundegård, I., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Conflicts of interest: An indispensable element of education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 13, 1-15.
39. Magnusson, S. J., Templin, M., & Boyle, R. A. (1997). Dynamic science assessment: A new approach for investigating conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 91-142.
40. Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates' bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 707-730.
41. Novak, J. D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate prepositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education, 86, 548-571.
42. Özmen, H. (2004). Some student misconceptions in chemistry: A literature review of chemical bonding. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 13, 147-159.
43. Rhees, R. (1970). Discussions of Wittgenstein. Bristol, England: Thoemmes Press.
44. Rogoff, B., & Chavajay, P. (1995). What's become of research on the cultural basis of cognitive development? American Psychologist, 50, 859-877.
45. Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997a). Common student misconceptions in electrochemistry: Galvanic, electrolytic, and concentration cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 377-398.
46. Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997b). Students' misconceptions in electrochemistry: Current flow in electrolyte solutions and the salt bridge. Journal of Chemical Education, 74, 819-823.
47. Schoultz, J., Säljö, R., & Wyndhamn, J. (2001). Heavenly talk: Discourse, artifacts, and children's understanding of elementary astronomy. Human Development, 44, 103-118.
48. Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 115-163.
49. Songer, C. J., & Mintzes, J. J. (1994). Understanding cellular respiration: An analysis of conceptual change in college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 621-637.
50. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology and educational theory and practice. New York: State University of New York Press.
51. Säljö, R. (1997). Learning and sociocultural change. Den Haag: CIP-gegevens Koninklijke Bibliotheek.
52. Taber, K. S. (1995). Development of student understanding: A case study of stability and lability in cognitive structure. Research in Science and Technological Education, 13, 89-99.
53. Taber, K. S. (2000). Multiple frameworks?: Evidence of manifold conceptions in individual cognitive structure. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 399.
54. Taber, K. S. (2001). Shifting sands: A case study of conceptual development as competition between alternative conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 731-753.
55. Taber, K. S. (2006a). Beyond constructivism: The progressive research programme into learning science. Studies in Science Education, 42, 125-184.
56. Taber, K. S. (2006b). Constructivism's new clothes: The trivial, the contingent, and a progressive research programme into the learning of science. Foundations of Chemistry, 8, 189-219.
57. Tytler, R. (1998). The nature of students' informal science conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 901-927.
58. Watson, R. J., Prieto, T., & Dillon, J. S. (1997). Consistency of students' explanations about combustion. Science Education, 81, 425-443.
59. Welzel, M., & Roth, W.-M. (1998). Do interviews really assess students' knowledge? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 25-44.
60. Wickman, P.-O. (2004). The practical epistemologies of the classroom: A study of laboratory work. Science Education, 88, 325-344.
61. Wickman, P.-O. (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-making as situated talk and action. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
62. Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002a). Induction as an empirical problem: How students generalize during practical work. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 465-486.
63. Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002b). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86, 601-623.
64. Vosniadou, S. (2001). Conceptual change research and the teaching of science. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit, W. Gräber, M. Komorek, A. Kross, & P. Reiska (Eds.), Research in science education - Past, present, and future (pp. 177-188). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
65. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535-585.
66. Vosniadou, S., & Ioannides, C. (1998). From conceptual development to science education: A psychological point of view. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1213-1230.
67. Vosniadou, S., Skopeliti, I., & Ikospentaki, K. (2005). Reconsidering the role of artifacts in reasoning: Children's understanding of the globe as a model of the earth. Learning & Instruction, 15, 333-351.
68. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.