An Overview of Conceptual Change Theories

Autor/inn/en	Özdemir, Gökhan; Clark, Douglas B.
Titel	An Overview of Conceptual Change Theories
Quelle	In: EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3 (2007) 4, S.351-361 (11 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1305-8223
Schlagwörter	Concept Formation; Change; Theories; Models; Science Instruction; Science Education; Science Teachers; Scientists; Misconceptions; Teaching Methods; Comparative Analysis; Ecology; Constructivism (Learning); Epistemology; Educational Strategies; Foreign Countries; Turkey + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Concept learning; Begriffsbildung; Wandel; Theory; Theorie; Analogiemodell; Teaching of science; Science education; Natural sciences Lessons; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht; Naturwissenschaftliche Bildung; Science; Teacher; Teachers; Science teacher; Wissenschaft; Lehrer; Lehrerin; Lehrende; Scientist; Wissenschaftler; Missverständnis; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Ökologie; Erkenntnistheorie; Lehrstrategie; Ausland; Türkei
Abstract	Conceptual change researchers have made significant progress on two prominent but competing theoretical perspectives regarding knowledge structure coherence. These perspectives can be broadly characterized as (1) knowledge-as-theory perspectives and (2) knowledge-as-elements perspectives. These perspectives can be briefly summarized in terms of the following questions. Is a student's knowledge most accurately represented as a coherent unified framework of theory-like character (e.g., Carey, 1999; Chi, 2005; Ioannides & Vosniadou, 2002; Wellman & Gelman, 1992)? Or is a student's knowledge more aptly considered as an ecology of quasi-independent elements (e.g., Clark, 2006; diSessa, Gillespie, & Esterly, 2004; Harrison, Grayson, & Treagust, 1999; Linn, Eylon, & Davis, 2004)? In this review, we clarify these two theoretical perspectives and discuss the educational implications of each. This debate is important because these perspectives implicate radically different pathways for curricular design to help students reorganize their understandings. Historically, the research literature has predominantly supported knowledge-as-theory perspectives. After outlining both perspectives, this paper discusses arguments and educational implications that potentially favor the adoption of knowledge-as-elements perspectives. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	EURASIA. Gazi Egitim Fakultesi, K Blok 210, Teknikokullar, Ankara, 06500 Turkey. Tel: +90-312-202-8192; Fax: +90-312-222-8483; e-mail: editor.eurasiajournal@gmail.com; Web site: http://www.ejmste.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01