Data from written tests and videotaped problem-solving interviews show that many physics students have a stable, alternative view of the relationship between force and acceleration. This ’’conceptual primitive’’ is misunderstood at the qualitative level in addition to any difficulties that might occur with mathematical formulation. The misconception is highly resistant to change and is remarkably similar to one discussed by Galileo, as shown by comparison of his writings with transcripts from student interviews. The source of this qualitative misunderstanding can be traced to a deep-seated preconception that makes a full understanding of Newton’s first and second laws very difficult. In such cases learning becomes a process in which new concepts must displace or be remolded from stable concepts that the student has constructed over many years.
Lessons were designed to deal with students' alternative conceptions in three areas of mechanics: static normal forces, frictional forces, and Newton's third law for moving objects. Instructional techniques such as class discussions of the validity of an analogy between a target problem and an intuitive anchoring example, and forming a structured chain of intermediate bridging analogies were used. There were large differences in pre–posttest gains in favor of the experimental group. In formulating a model of learning processes that can explain these results, it is argued that (a) the lessons have a more complex structure than a simple model of analogy use; (b) rational methods using analogy and other plausible reasoning processes that are neither proof based nor directly empirical can play a very important role in science instruction; (c) much more effort than is usually allocated should be focused on helping students to make sense of an analogy; and (d) researchers and curriculum developers should be focusing at least as much attention on students' useful prior knowledge as they are on students' alternative conceptions.
In most work investigating factors influencing the success of analogies in instruction, an underlying assumption is that students have little or no knowledge of the target situation (the situation to be explained by analogy). It is interesting to ask what influences the success of analogies when students believe they understand the target situation. If this understanding is not normative, instruction must aim at conceptual change rather than simply conceptual growth. Through the analysis of four case studies of tutoring interviews (two of which achieved some noticeable conceptual change and two of which did not) we propose a preliminary list of factors important for success in overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning. First, there must be a usable anchoring conception. Second, the analogical connection between an anchoring example and the target situation may need to be developed explicitly through processes such as the use of intermediate, "bridging" analogies. Third, it may be necessary to engage the student in a process of analogical reasoning in an interactive teaching environment, rather than simply presenting the analogy in a text or lecture, Finally, the result of this process may need to be more than analogical transfer of abstract relational structure. The analogies may need to be used to enrich the target situation, leading to the student's construction of a new explanatory model.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.