Finding faults: analogical comparison supports spatial concept learning in geoscience

Abstract

A central issue in education is how to support the spatial thinking involved in learning science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). We investigated whether and how the cognitive process of analogical comparison supports learning of a basic spatial concept in geoscience, fault. Because of the high variability in the appearance of faults, it may be difficult for students to learn the category-relevant spatial structure. There is abundant evidence that comparing analogous examples can help students gain insight into important category-defining features (Gentner in Cogn Sci 34(5):752-775, 2010). Further, comparing high-similarity pairs can be especially effective at revealing key differences (Sagi et al. 2012). Across three experiments, we tested whether comparison of visually similar contrasting examples would help students learn the fault concept. Our main findings were that participants performed better at identifying faults when they (1) compared contrasting (fault/no fault) cases versus viewing each case separately (Experiment 1), (2) compared similar as opposed to dissimilar contrasting cases early in learning (Experiment 2), and (3) viewed a contrasting pair of schematic block diagrams as opposed to a single block diagram of a fault as part of an instructional text (Experiment 3). These results suggest that comparison of visually similar contrasting cases helped distinguish category-relevant from category-irrelevant features for participants. When such comparisons occurred early in learning, participants were more likely to form an accurate conceptual representation. Thus, analogical comparison of images may provide one powerful way to enhance spatial learning in geoscience and other STEM disciplines.

The Unique Contributions of Verbal Analogical Reasoning and Nonverbal Matrix Reasoning to Science and Maths Problem‐Solving in Adolescence

“…Further, we predicted that verbal analogical reasoning would be more important in science than maths, and this was supported by the behavioral analyses: correlations with science were higher, and the correlation with maths disappeared when verbal IQ and VSWM were controlled for. These results are in line with the suggestion that science learning requires verbal encoding of associations (Tolmie et al, ) and is supported by analogical reasoning (Jee et al, ; Matlen et al, ; Vendetti et al, ). Although participants recruited the RLPFC, DLPFC, VLPFC, and parietal cortex regions previously implicated in relational reasoning when resolving science problems, we did not observe the predicted correlation between activation in these regions and individual differences in verbal analogical reasoning scores.…”

“…A third study revealed that a combined measure of relational reasoning, which included numerical reasoning, verbal analogical reasoning, and spatial reasoning, predicted maths learning in 11‐ to 14‐year olds over 2 years (Primi, Ferrão, & Almeida, ). Other studies have shown teaching by analogy to improve maths performance in adults (Richland & McDonough, ), and science performance in 9‐ to 10‐year olds (Matlen, Vosniadou, Jee, & Ptouchkina, ) and adults (Jee et al, ).…”

Rapid Learning in a Children's Museum via Analogical Comparison

“…We know from many laboratory studies that analogical mapping can promote learning in science, mathematics, and engineering (Bassok & Holyoak, 1989;Goldstone & Son, 2005;Jee et al, 2013;Reed, Dempster, & Ettinger, 1985;Ross & Kilbane, 1997;Schwartz, Chase, Oppezzo, & Chin, 2011;Vosniadou, 1989). Analogical processing is a powerful learning mechanism.…”

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

“…They also learn about the causal processes that create these structures-both local deformation processes that create faults and folds, and large-scale global processes such as tectonic movements. All these topics are intensely spatial Jee et al 2013;Kastens et al 2009;Libarkin and Brick 2002). Consider, for example, the geologic concept of a fault-a fracture in rock along which movement has occurred ( Fig.…”