Drawing on Experience: How Domain Knowledge Is Reflected in Sketches of Scientific Structures and Processes

Abstract

Capturing the nature of students' mental representations and how they change with learning is a primary goal in science education research. This can be challenging in spatially intense domains, such as geoscience, architecture, and engineering. In this research, we test whether sketching can be used to gauge level of expertise in geoscience, using new technology designed to facilitate this process. We asked participants with differing levels of geoscience experience to copy two kinds of geoscience images-photographs of rock formations and causal diagrams. To permit studying the process of sketching as well as the structure and content of the sketches, we used the CogSketch system (Forbus et al. 2011, Topics in Cognitive Science 3:648-666) to record the time course of sketching and analyze the sketches themselves. Relative to novices, geoscience students included more geological structures and relational symbols in their sketches of geoscience materials and were more likely to construct their sketches in a sequence consistent with the order of causal events. These differences appear to stem from differences in domain knowledge, because they did not show up in participants' sketches of materials from other fields. The findings and methods of this research

On the acquisition of abstract knowledge: Structural alignment and explication in learning causal system categories

“…Of course, we would not claim that a brief training session can substitute for systematic study and experience. Nevertheless, these results join with current research in suggesting that providing more support for analogical comparison improves education in science and mathematics (e.g., Chen & Klahr, 1999;Gentner et al, 2015;Jee et al, 2014;Richland, Zur, & Holyoak, 2007;Rittle-Johnson & Star, 2009;Schwartz, Chase, Opezzo, & Chin, 2011;Thompson & Opfer, 2010; see Alfieri, Nokes-Malach, & Schunn, 2013 for a meta-analysis).…”

“…This kind of ''relational shift'' in category understanding -from an early focus on concrete features to a later focus on relational structure -is well-attested in cognitive development (Gentner & Rattermann, 1991;Imai, Gentner, & Uchida, 1994;Richland, Morrison, & Holyoak, 2006), as well as in novice-expert studies of adults (Chi et al 1981;Jee et al, 2014;Proffitt, Coley, & Medin, 2000;Shafto & Coley, 2003;Stains & Talanquer, 2008). Further, there is evidence that analogical comparison can promote this shift from object focus to relational focus (Christie & Gentner, 2010;Gentner et al, 2011;Kotovsky & Gentner, 1996;Namy & Gentner, 2002).…”

Comprehending 3D Diagrams: Sketching to Support Spatial Reasoning

“…Work on student sketching has shown that it is a promising tool both for facilitating inferential reasoning (Gobert, , ; Gobert & Clement, ; Johnson & Reynolds, ) and assessing knowledge (e.g., Jee et al., ; Johnson & Reynolds, ; Matlen, Atit, Goksun, Rau, & Ptouchkina, ). For example, Gobert and Clement () had students learn about plate tectonics using lessons that included (a) reading and summarizing, (b) sketching diagrams that represented main text ideas, or (c) reading the text alone.…”

“…Jee et al. () found that the types of information conveyed in a student sketch (such as process and relational information) predicted their level of geoscience content knowledge. Johnson and Reynolds () suggest the use of concept sketches to promote organization and consolidation of information in the geosciences.…”

When Gesture Becomes Analogy

“…Jee et al. () found that, relative to novices, geoscience experts included more relational symbols such as arrows in their sketches.…”