Abstract

Previously, we proposed a model of student reasoning which combines the roles of representation, analogy, and layering of meaning---analogical scaffolding [Podolefsky and Finkelstein, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 3, 010109 (2007)]. The present empirical studies build on this model to examine its utility and demonstrate the vital intertwining of representation, analogy, and conceptual learning in physics. In two studies of student reasoning using analogy, we show that representations couple to students' existing prior knowledge and also lead to the dynamic formation of new knowledge. Students presented with abstract, concrete, or blended (both abstract and concrete) representations produced markedly different response patterns. In the first study, using analogies to scaffold understanding of electromagnetic (EM) waves, students in the blend group were more likely to reason productively about EM waves than students in the abstract group by as much as a factor of 3 (73% vs 24% correct, $p=0.002$). In the second study, examining representation use within one domain (sound waves), the blend group was more likely to reason productively about sound waves than the abstract group by as much as a factor of 2 (48% vs 23% correct, $p=0.002$). Using the analogical scaffolding model we examine when and why students succeed and fail to use analogies and interpret representations appropriately.

Highlights

  • This paper examines the interplay between two essential components of scientific reasoning, use of representation and analogy

  • The across-domain study demonstrated two key findings on student learning with analogies. ͑i Across several conceptual questions on EM waves, students taught with abstract, concrete, or blend representations produced substantially different response patterns on these questions. ͑ii We found that students’ reasoning about and answers to these questions were associated in similar ways for the abstract, concrete, and blend groups

  • As part of ongoing studies of student learning with analogy, we have conducted two sets of empirical studies to examine the utility of the analogical scaffolding model

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

This paper examines the interplay between two essential components of scientific reasoning, use of representation and analogy. Goldstone and Sakamoto[25] find that even relevant concreteness can hinder across-domain learning These recent results parallel our own findings that representations can play a key role in teaching students with analogies.[27] Based on these findings, we proposed a model of analogy use, analogical scaffolding,[5] which describes mechanisms by which multiple analogies may be layered in order to learn abstract ideas. In the within-domain study, conducted in another algebrabased introductory physics course, we explore the implications for student reasoning and use of analogy by varying the concreteness of the representations used on a quiz within a single conceptual domain, sound waves.

Methods
Results
Discussion of the within-domain study
CONCLUSION
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.