Supporting Conceptual Change in School Science: A possible role for tacit understanding

Technology and Early Science Education: Examining Generalist Primary School Teachers’ Views on Tacit Knowledge Assessment Tools

“…The final section of the interview addressed their views on software assessing tacit knowledge. As part of the final interview section teachers were given the opportunity to engage with the software used in Howe et al (2013Howe et al ( , 2016, with minimal guidance from the interviewer (Note 1). Interviews were carried out in teacher classrooms outside of teaching hours.…”

“…Tacit knowledge has consequences for science education -'a great deal of our commonsense knowledge, and there is a large amount of it, is tacit' (Bliss, 2008, p. 123;also see Brock, 2015). Indeed it has already been made use of in the development of intervention approaches to facilitate conceptual change in children; children who were given the opportunity to engage with software that taps tacit knowledge about falling objects showed much greater score improvements from pre-to post-test than children who did not get to work with the computer program (Howe, Devine, & Taylor-Tavares, 2013;Howe, Taylor-Tavares, & Devine, 2016). Harnessing such opportunities to enable conceptual change is critical to promote an understanding of and resulting interest in science.…”

Confronting the Need for Conceptual Change in Pre-Service Science Education

“…Limón (2001) noted that: "Three kinds of instructional strategies can summarize many of the instructional efforts made to promote conceptual change: (a) the induction of cognitive conflict through anomalous or unanticipated data; (b) the use of analogies to guide students' change; and (c) cooperative and shared learning to promote collective discussion of ideas" (p. 358). Howe, Devine and Tavares (2013) summarized three potential issues with the classic framework when researchers reported limited success with an intervention: "(a) experiments often fail to generate the requisite data; (b) Posner et al's (1982) [first] three conditions may be necessary, but they are insufficient; and, (c) cognitive limitations eclipse the significance of experimental evidence" (p. 865). The last point has been a central focus in the cognitive sciences to understand cognitive limitations from a developmental point of view and to explain the movement from disequilibrium to equilibrium as a dynamic process that evolves as the mind and brain mature (Fischer & Bidell, 2006;Schwartz, 2009).…”

“…Researchers continue to explore how the process unfolds (Suping, 2003;Vosniadou et al, 2007;Vosniadou, 2008) and the approaches or strategies useful to support the process (Chinn & Brewer, 1998;Hewson & Hewson, 1984;Howe et al, 2013;Vosniadou, 2008;Durmus & Bayraktar, 2010). Sometimes refereed to as the classic framework (Vosniadou, 2008), Posner and colleague's (1982) original framework remains a centerpiece of discussion as researchers continue to search for mechanisms that support and promote conceptual change in students.…”

“…While the desire to resolve a problem creates the opportunity to improve one's understanding of nature, educators continue to face the daunting challenge of designing curricula to support conceptual change. Over the last three decades many authors have focused on formalizing and adapting the process to classrooms (Cosgrove & Osborne, 1985;Howe et al, 2013;Ivarsson, Schoultz, & Saljo, 2002;Lee & Byun, 2012;Nussbaum & Novick, 1982;Turcott, 2012;Vosniadou, 2008). Other researchers have focused on other areas such asthe importance of the student's prior conceptions (Driver et al, 1985;Sadler, 1992;diSessa, 2008),the value in creating experiences that generate cognitive conflict in classrooms (Lee & Byun, 2012;Vosniadou, 2007) or the challenges students face in re-organizing their views in light of the dissonance they experience in lessons designed to create cognitive conflict (Chi & Roscoe, 2002;Chin & Brewer, 1993Lee & Byun, 2012;Howe et al, 2013).…”