Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Content Preconceptions, misconceptions or levels of mental models? Modeling of structure of common and scientific concepts Triangular model of concept Cognitive architecture of concept Cognitive architecture and concept maps of misconceptions Aristotelian preconception of force Newtonian conception
Paul Tarabek, didaktis@t-zones.sk Educational Publisher Didaktis, Bratislava, Slovakia European Educational Publishers Group, Hasselager, Denmark, EU Curriculum Studies Research Group, CB, Czech Republic
Examples of misconceptions We experience seasons because of the earth's changing distance to the sun - closer in summer, farther in winter. The moon is only visible at night.
Misconceptions in biology
bacteria
protists
viruses
fungi
absorption curve
Green leafs are green because... A. They absorb the green color. B. They reflect the green color. C. Chlorophyll emits green. D. Chlorophyll it green. Misconception: Chlorophyll it green.
molecule of chlorophyll
Bohrs preconception: Atoms have electrons circling them like planets around a star
In the Bohr model, the neutrons and protons (symbolized by red and blue balls in the adjacent image) occupy a dense central region called the nucleus, and the electrons orbit the nucleus much like planets orbiting the Sun. An example of misconception caused by textbooks: The Bohr planetary model of atom is from the point of view of modern physics (quantum mechanics) incorrect. Many textbooks show and teach the planetary model of the atom because the pupils can easily imagine it and then the model remains in their memory.
The quantum mechanical model of the atom
The location of an electron is described as the probability of finding an electron in a given region of the atom.
Developmental misconceptions
Developmental misconceptions with common sense concepts (Hestenes, 2006) are formed as natural preconceptions of pupils and students who look and explore reality by use only empirical methods of cognition leading to empirical laws as generalization of observed phenomena and expressed by verbal statements.
Structure of concepts
The first problem was also the detail description of the structure of concept. The cognitive psychology and cognitive sciences give more models of concept, but its structure was modelled by a simple way only, e.g.: the semiotic triangle in cognitive linguistic, the latitude and longitude of concepts (Vygotsky), the semantic frame (Fillmore, 1976, 1982), the prototype theory (Rosch, 1978), metaphor and radial categories (Lakoff), the concept tree (Merrill, 2000) the concept triad (Hestenes, 2006).
[21]
[21]
a concept structure in an educational and cognitive science depending on a theory: meaning, reference referent, sense, core of concept, (characteristic) properties, attributes, intension, extension of concept, symbol, sign, icon, to designate designatum, to denotate denotatum, form, prototype, triangle of meaning, semiotic triangle, concept triad, etc. Can we find a more detailed concept structure? To solve this problem, the model, called the triangular model of concept structure, was created and further developed.
[Hestenes]
[7]
Core of the concept force: word force symbol intrinsic structure (of prototype) representative semantic image (RSI) / image form of prototype
Concept
Core of concept
Periphery
S1
M1 M2 M3 E Extension
Meaning of concept
Meaning layer M2 designata: pushing and pulling forces, friction, air resistance, etc
direction of motion
Core of the concept force: word force symbol intrinsic structure (of prototype) representative semantic image (RSI) / image form of prototype
Concept
Core of concept
Periphery
S1
M1 M2 M3 E Extension
Meaning of concept
The model of the cognitive architecture of concept describes a specific structure of common or scientific concepts and their semantic frames as components of the conceptual knowledge systems, which may be external or internal (mental). The model distinguishes the concepts meaning and sense as two disjunctive sets. The basic components of the model are: core of a concept, periphery of a concept, meaning M and sense S of a concept, their mutual connections and also the hierarchical layers of the meaning.
C Core of concept Symbol (word W, sign, icon) Representative semantic image RSI (prototype or core of category) Intrinsic structure Meaning links
Sense links
S1 Set of concepts assigned to concept core C which can be meaningfully connected in speech or thought with the given concept core C.
M1 referential set set of subordinate concepts which refers to the above concept core set of referential concepts Meaning links M2 Set of designata concrete subordinate concepts and mental semantic images which refers to the above concepts of M1 or to core C Meaning links M3 Concrete mental semantic images of the objects, phenomena, events, entities in the mind of the person named by the symbol }(word W) above. E Extension class of denotata: objects, phenomena, events, entities named by the word W above
Sense links
Concept
Sense of concept
We can divide sense links into: qualitative links actual, potential, S1 C and attributive, cognitive (F acceleration, deceleration, change of direction, deformation, etc), Meaning M1 M2 M3 operational links to other concepts of concept in definitions, e.g. s v, s t E Extension in the s = vt, and contextual links between the core of a given concept and all other concepts that may be meaningfully connected with the given concept in statements, propositions, sentences, etc force can be meaningfully connected in sentences with the concepts motion, action, field, space, time, etc. Clearly, the sentence The car has green leaves is meaningless, because there is no contextual link between the concepts car and green leaves.
Concept
Qualitative links are the links of the core Core of concept Sense of concept to the concepts which express actual qualities or features, as well as potential qualities and attributes (relevant properties), of a given concept. S1 C Actual qualities are features characterizing the concrete denotatum (object, phenomenon, event, or entity). An actual attribute of force is the fact that it is a vector physical quantity. An actual attribute of a red apple is Meaning M1 M2 M3 its red colour. of concept Potential qualities are properties E Extension characterizing denotata of subordinate referential concepts or designata. The connection of potential qualities to a given concept results in its division into subordinate concepts. For example, potential qualities connected to the concept force are gravitational, electromagnetic, nuclear and the quality expressed by the term weak interactions. Thus the general concept of force is differentiated into referential concepts: gravitational force, electromagnetic force, nuclear force, and weak interaction. Attributes of a given concept are the relevant properties characterizing the denotata class (objects, phenomena, events, and entities denoted by the name of the concept). According to these properties, we are able to categorize an observed object, phenomenon, or entity into a denotata class (an extension of the given concept). For instance, the concept body has its mass as an attribute. Attributes are used in definitions together with superordinate concepts. For instance, in the definition body is a mass object, object is a superordinate concept while mass is an attribute.
Sense of concept
S1
M1 M2 M3 E Extension
Meaning of concept
4. Formal level
Formal level of CKS (Formal physical theories)
C M sense of concept
strong engine
big boy
big man
dad
bee
M2 designata
Sense S of the concept force (see the text below this figure) contextual links, attributive link to the concept forced motion
M sense of concept
human force
animal force
water force
fire force
M2 designata
Concept map of the concept force at the exact (scientific) Newtonian level
cause SC superordinate concept
Core C of the concept force: word W force representative semantic image symbol F
Sense S of the concept force consists of the set S1 and the following links (see the text below this figure): contextual links, links to the actual and potential qualities, attributive link, cognitive links.
M meaning of concept
sense links
real forces
inertial forces
M1 referents
gravitational force
push force
pull force
frictional force
M2 designata
Developmental misconceptions
A force acts on a body. What are the effects of the acting force? [12] The answers were classified as belonging to the Newtonian level of concept force if they contained at least one of the changes of the motion: acceleration, deceleration, or curving of the trajectory (column 6). The Aristotelian level of the concept force was characterized by the statements: Force causes motion of an object., A body starts moving and the force is needed to keep it moving, The effects are: acceleration, motion, and deformation. (column 5) Statements of the type F motion, are called the Aristotelian preconceptions. They are natural developmental misconceptions formulated as generalizations of empirical experiences coming out directly from observation.
1 N 370 307 264 209 221 115 187 2 zero answers 16 % 14 % 11 % 8% 4% 3% 3% 3 incorrect answers 35 % 12 % 9% 3% 3% 1% 2% 4 answers deformation 4% 16 % 26 % 3% 4% 3% 4% 5 answers at the Aristotelian level 44 % 54 % 51 % 55 % 64 % 65 % 64 % 6 answers at the Newtonian level 1% 4% 3% 31 % 25 % 28 % 27 %
number of column number of respondents age of respondents grade 6 grade 7 grade 8 grade 9 grade 10 grade 11 grade 12
Concept map showing the cognitive architecture of the concept force of 6 8th grade students at the Aristotelian (empirical) level.
Concepts at this level correspond to the CS (common sense) concepts of Hestenes (2006). The group of respondents answered questions regarding components and links of the structure of the concept force (Tarbek, 2007). The concept map was designed with the answers of students from 6th to 8th grade as they reached the Aristotelian level of force.
The concept map shows the cognitive architecture of the conception of force by 12 grade students at the Newtonian level.
The group of respondents answered questions regarding components and links of the structure of the concept force (Tarbek, 2007). The concept map was designed with the answers of the best students whose cognitive links reached the symbolical level of concept force because their meaning structure does not correspond to this level.
Conclusions
The model of the cognitive architecture of concept is a theoretical construct based on knowledge of cognitive psychology and cognitive science (as arrangement of related terms of these sciences in cognitive maps) that shows: a structure of concepts and their semantic frames in the external conceptual knowledge systems of science, developmental levels of physics concepts. The model is used to: mapping of concepts of external conceptual knowledge systems, mapping of mental concepts of pupils and students. The concept map of the given concept C: goes out from the structure of the triangular model, describes a structure of the semantic frame of the concept C which is composed of all the concepts related to the concept C in thought and speech. The concept maps show clearly the structure of semantic frames thus they may help to students and pre-service teachers to understand content knowledge of the subject they will teach.
S Sense of concept = set S1 and sense links C Core of concept Word W (word form) Symbol (symbol form) Representative semantic image (image form of core) Meaning links M1 referential set set of subordinate concepts which refers to the above concept core set of referential concepts Meaning links M2 Set of designata concrete subordinate concepts and semantic images which refers to the above concepts of M1 or to core C Meaning links M3 Concrete images of the objects, phenomena, events, entities in the mind of the person named by above word W. E Extension class of denotata: objects, phenomena, events, entities named by above word W Sense links S1 Set of concepts assigned to concept core C which can be in speech or thought meaningfully connected with the given concept core C. M Meaning of concept M = M1 M2 M3 E and meaning links
More information: www.didaktis.sk Educational & Didactic Communication 2007 Vol. 2, pages 107 149, Cognitive Analysis
http://www.didaktis.sk/Educ_Didac_Communication/Kognitivna_analyza.pdf
REFERENCES
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Adams, W., Wieman, C. (2008) Identification of Specific Cognitive Processes Used for in-Depth Problem Solving, PER 2008 conference, July 23 24, 2008, Edmonton, University of Alberta, CA Fillmore, J. Ch. (1976). Frame semantics and the nature of language. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the Origin and Development of Language and Speech . Volume 280: 20-32. Fillmore, J. Ch. (1982) Frame semantics. In Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul, Hanshin Publishing Co., 111-137. Frege, G. (1892). ber Sinn und Bedeutung (On Sense and Reference), www.iep.utm.edu/f/frege.htm#H4 Hestenes, D., Wells, M., and Swackhammer G., Physics Teacher 30, 141 (1992), 33, 502 (1995) Hestenes, D., (2006). Notes for a Modeling Theory of Science Cognition and Instruction. Proceedings of the 2006 GIREP conference. Hestenes, D. (2006). Notes for a Modeling Theory of Science, Cognition and Instruction. Proceedings of the 2006 GIREP conference: Modelling in Physics and Physics Education. Hestenes, D. (2008). Modeling Theory for Math and Science Education. In Mathematical Modeling ICTMA-3: Education and Design Sciences. Nachtigall D., (1981). The pre-Newtonian Concept of Motion in the Minds of Students in Methods of Teaching Physics Proceedings of Conference. Thailand: Khon Kaen University. Sharma, S.V. & Sharma, K.C., Physics Education Vol. 42. Number 5, 2007 Tarbek P., Concept Networking Based on Triangular Model of Concept Structure in Modern Science and Textbook Creation, Conference proceedings Frankfurt, Bratislava: Educational Publisher Didaktis, 2005, http://www.didaktis.sk/zmaturuj_fyzika_struktura/triangular.pdf Tarbek P., Cognitive Analysis & Triangular Modeling of Concepts in Curricular Process in Educational and Didactic Communication 2007, Vol. 2, p. 107-149, Bratislava: Educational Publisher Didaktis, 2007, http://www.didaktis.sk/Educ_Didac_Communication/Kognitivna_analyza.pdf Wieman, C. (2007). Why not to Try a Scientific Approach to Science Education. http://www.cwsei.ubc.ca/resources/other.htm Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Adamkov, V., Tarbek, P. (2008) Didactic Communication and Curricular Process of Physics. GIREP 2008 conference.
educational and cognitive science depending on a theory: [Ogden] meaning, reference referent, to designate designatum, denotatum, extension of concept, sense, intension, prototype, core of concept, [Hestenes] (characteristic) properties, attributes, triangle of meaning, semiotic triangle, concept triad, ... Theories: cognitive linguistic, semantics, semiotics, ... the latitude and longitude of concepts (Vygotsky), the semantic frame (Fillmore, 1976, 1982), the prototype theory (Rosch, 1978), metaphor and radial categories (Lakoff), the Force Dynamics (Talmy), phenolomenological primitives (di Sessa), [7] concept tree (Merrill), the Modeling theory, the concept triad (Hestenes), ...
315
28,9 %
Grade 9
Grade 10
200
218
3,0 %
0,4 %
55,5 %
36,1 %
33,5 %
55,0 %
8,0 %
10,5 %
Grade 12
200
4,0 %
25,0 %
59,0 %
12,0 %
Addendum
Concept map of the complex phase of concept conductor (of the electric current)
Core C of concept conductor of the electric current Word W conductor Sense S of concept conductor (see the text below and near this figure): contextual links (may be absent)
M meaning of concept
metal
bulb
wire
M2 designata
image of a bulb
image of a wire
M3 images of denotata
The core C of the lower complex conductor (of the electric current) comprises the word conductor. The representative semantic image for the lower complex is not developed yet. It is substituted by an inaccurate and incomplete image, e.g. electric cable or line a prototype, which also has incorrect characteristics. According to them the child also includes into the sense the denotata, which do not belong under the denotation conductor of the electric current, e.g. a rope or line resembling a conductor. The complex does not have any superordinate concept. The meaning M of the complex has at most two developed meaning layers: the layer M2 of the designata and the layer M3 of the specific images of the denotata. The learner does not distinguish the referential concepts from designata and includes them into the layer M2. Some images of the denotata are linked directly to the core and some designata may have no associated image. The sense also contains incorrect designata, e.g., sound, signal, link etc.
The sense S of the complex phase concept conductor of the electric current may consist of: the contextual links to the concepts to flow, bulb, battery, electric circuit, etc., in case the learner understands the statements: Electricity flows through conductor. Conductors connect bulb, battery and switch in an electric circuit. These contextual links may be absent in case the learner states: Current flows through wire. or Bulb, battery and switch in electric circuit are connected through wires. In such case the concept conductor does not have the developed sense yet it is depicted by the dotted-dashed box S1 and the arrow representing the sense links. The sense is developed (not always) only for the subordinate concepts designata. the qualitative links to the potential qualities solid, liquid, gas are not developed. the attributive link to the term free electric particles does not exist.
Addendum
Concept map of the pseudo-concept phase of concept conductor (of the electric current)
Core C of concept conductor of electric current: word W conductor of the electric current representative semantic image Sense S of the concept conductor (see the text): contextual links, cognitive links to the concepts: solid, liquid, gas
M meaning of concept
metal
electrolytes
ionized gases
M1 referents
M2 designata
image of a cable
image of an acid
M3 images of denotata
The sense S of the pseudoconcept conductor of the electric current consists of: the qualitative links to the potential qualities solid, liquid, gas, which divide the set of the electric conductors into the corresponding subsets. In case the referential concepts are not fully developed, the concept of conductor of the electric current does not have fully developed the potential qualities. This is indicated by the dotted-dashed arrows. the contextual links to the concepts to flow, bulb, battery, electric circuit source of current, accumulator, etc., because the learner is able to state: Current flows through the conductor., Conductors connect the bulb, battery and switch in an electric circuit. the attributive link to the term free electric particles does not exist yet. The learners are not able to formulate for example the following definition: Conductor is a matter, which contains free electric particles.
The core C of the pseudoconcept conductor (of the electric current) consists of the word conductor, or the word conducto r of the electric current, and the representative semantic image, which may be the image of a specific conductor, e.g. the image of a metal cable, insulated wire, uninsulated wire, etc. The pseudoconcept does not have the link to the superordinate concept yet. The meaning M of the pseudoconcept does not have fully developed all three meaning layers M1, M2, M3 this is indicated by the absent or dotted-dashed boxes. Furthermore, the learner does not have a clear hierarchy of the referential concepts, designata and denotata, and he/she insufficiently distinguishes between them. Therefore, some of the designata are not subordinate to the referential concepts, but they are linked directly to the core instead, and similarly, some images of the denotata are not subordinate to the designata, but they are directly linked to the core.
Addendum
Concept map of the completely formed concept conductor (of the electric current)
matter material SC superordinate concept Sense S of concept conductor (see the text): attributive link to the free electric particles, contextual links, qualitative links to the concepts: solid, liquid, gas
Core C of concept conductor of the electric current: word W conductor of the electric current icon
M sense of concept
metals
electrolytes
ionized gases
M1 referents
M2 designata
images of wires
etc.
M3 images of denotata
The sense S of the concept conductor of the electric current consists of: the attributive link to the term free electric particles. In the definition Conductor is a matter, which contains free electric particles. is matter superordinate concept and free electric particles an attribute. the qualitative links to the potential qualities solid, liquid, gas, which divide the set of the electric conductors into the corresponding subsets. the contextual links to the concepts to flow, bulb, battery, electric circuit, etc., because we can say: Current flows through the conductor. and Conductors connect the bulb, battery and switch in an electric circuit..
The core C of the concept conductor (of the electric current) consists of the word conductor, or the word conductor of the electric current. This term is not a physical quantity, so it does not have any symbol. The representative semantic image has the form , which is an electro-technical symbol for conductor. The meaning M of the fully developed concept has all three fully developed and hierarchically arranged meaning layers M1, M2 and M3.
Addendum
B. Newtonian level
inertial force
C. Aristotelian level E.
Aristotelian level
The solutions of the task Sketch in all forces acting in the figure! [9]
1
N
2
zero answer
3
verbal answers
5 (A+C+E+F)
answers at the Aristotelian level
6 (B+D)
answers at the Newtonian level
34 % 21 % 22 % 3%
18 % 25 % 9% 3%
46 % 41 % 62 % 72 %
2% 13 % 7% 22 %
grade 10
grade 11 grade 12
221
115 187
0%
3% 2%
3%
2% 1%
68 %
67 % 86 %
29 %
28 % 11 %
Addendum
2.
3.
4.
Addendum