The Mismatch between Assumed Prior Knowledge and the Learner's Conceptions: A typology of learning impediments

This paper considers some of the reasons why motivated students in suitable learning environments may fail to learn from competent teachers. It draws upon work in the psychology of learning, and the considerable body of research that has been undertaken to explore the nature and origin of learners' alternative conceptions in science. A synthesis of ideas from this previous work suggests a simple typology of 'learning impediments' in terms of the mismatch between the learner's cognitive structure and the teacher's expectations. It is suggested that this classification system may be a useful tool that, alongside techniques to probe prior knowledge, can help teachers diagnose and overcome such impediments to intended learning, and thus make teaching more effective. Although deriving from research into the learning of science, it is suggested that the typology can be applied to conceptual learning across the curriculum.

[1]  D. Ausubel,et al.  IN DEFENSE OF VERBAL LEARNING , 1961 .

[2]  G. Kelly.  A theory of personality : the psychology of personal constructs , 1963 .

[3]  S. Engel,et al.  Thought and Language , 1964, Dialogue.

[4]  D. Ausubel,et al.  School learning;: An introduction to educational psychology , 1969 .

[5]  D. Child,et al.  Psychology and the teacher , 1973 .

[6]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The essential tension : selected studies in scientific tradition and change , 1977 .

[7]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[8]  Personal construction of formal knowledge , 1982 .

[9]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Children's science and its consequences for teaching , 1982 .

[10]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Students' conceptions of ideas in mechanics , 1982 .

[11]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Concepts, Misconceptions and Alternative Conceptions: Changing Perspectives in Science Education , 1983 .

[12]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Enigmas in School Science: students’ conceptions for scientifically associated words , 1983 .

[13]  R. Driver,et al.  The Pupil as Scientist , 1983 .

[14]  Mariana G. Hewson,et al.  The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction , 1984 .

[15]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  A conceptual framework for science education: The case study of force and movement , 1985 .

[16]  R. Driver,et al.  Children's Ideas in Science , 1985 .

[17]  D Shipstone,et al.  Electricity in Simple Circuits , 1985 .

[18]  R. Driver,et al.  A Constructivist Approach to Curriculum Development in Science , 1986 .

[19]  Mike Watts,et al.  Constructivism in the Classroom: enabling conceptual change by words and deeds , 1987 .

[20]  Neil Mercer,et al.  Common Knowledge: The Development of Understanding in the Classroom , 1987 .

[21]  Reinders Duit,et al.  Bibliography. Students' Alternative Frameworks and Science Education. 2nd Edition. , 1988 .

[22]  R. Driver,et al.  Students’ conceptions and the learning of science , 1989 .

[23]  Reinders Duit,et al.  Students' Alternative Frameworks and Science Education. Bibliography. 3rd Edition. IPN Reports-in-Brief = Alltagsvorstellungen und Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht. Bibliographie. 3. Auflage. IPN-Kurzberichte. , 1991 .

[24]  G. Posner,et al.  A revisionist theory of conceptual change , 1992 .

[25]  R. Driver,et al.  Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into children’s ideas , 1993 .

[26]  Peter J. Fensham,et al.  The Content Of Science: A Constructive Approach To Its Teaching And Learning , 1994 .

[27]  Keith S. Taber,et al.  Student reaction on being introduced to concept mapping , 1994 .

[28]  Keith S. Taber,et al.  Development of Student Understanding: a case study of stability and lability in cognitive structure , 1995 .

[29]  J. Bliss.  Piaget and after: the case of learning science , 1995 .

[30]  K. Taber,et al.  An explanatory gestalt of essence: students’ conceptions of the ‘natural’ in physical phenomena , 1996 .

[31]  Mike Watts,et al.  The secret life of the chemical bond: students’ anthropomorphic and animistic references to bonding , 1996 .

[32]  A. Howe,et al.  Development of science concepts within a Vygotskian framework , 1996 .

[33]  Keith S. Taber.  Student Understanding of Ionic Bonding: Molecular versus Electrostatic Framework?. , 1997 .

[34]  Understanding Chemical Bonding: The Development of A Level Students' Understanding of the Concept of Chemical Bonding. , 1997 .

[35]  Mike Watts,et al.  Constructivism and concept learning in chemistry: perspectives from a case study , 1997 .

[36]  Kathryn F. Cochran.  The content of science: a constructivist approach to its teaching and learning , 1997 .

[37]  P. Scott.  Teacher Talk and Meaning Making in Science Classrooms: a Vygotskian Analysis and Review , 1998 .

[38]  Keith S. Taber,et al.  An alternative conceptual framework from chemistry education , 1998 .

[39]  Keith S. Taber.  ALTERNATIVE FRAMEWORKS IN CHEMISTRY , 1999 .

[40]  K. Taber.  Multiple frameworks?: Evidence of manifold conceptions in individual cognitive structure , 2000 .

[41]  K. Taber.  Shifting sands: a case study of conceptual development as competition between alternative conceptions , 2001 .

[42]  Guy Claxton,et al.  Minitheories: a preliminary model for learning science , 2002 .

[43]  J. Solomon.  The social construction of children’s scientific knowledge , 2002 .

[44]  J. Bliss.  The relevance of Piaget to research into children’s conceptions , 2002 .