Concept and conceptionOn researching understanding

Ola Halldén⁰ and Åsa Larsson⁺⁰Stockholm University⁺Södertörn University

Paper presented at ConChaMo 2, October 2012, Helsinki

Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored inphilosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in anti nuclear demonstrations.

(Kahneman & Tversky 1982, p.496).

A. Linda is a bank teller

B. Linda is a bank teller who is active in the feminist movement.

Psychology students choosing B as the most probable statement:

86% of the undergraduate students

50% of the graduate students

A description of the dilemma

First I thought a), according to the rules for determining the probability of a true statement, but then I thought that I was supposed to draw conclusions from the text describing Linda and thus I chose b). Now, however, I realize I was wrong!

A good reason assay

Since Linda had been involved so much in issues of discrimination and social equality while at school, I thought she'd be inclined to carry on the "struggle" later on in her working life.

A deliberate choice between statistics and good reason assay

I chose a) because that way I'm neither assuming too much nor too little. A safer judgement. The risk of being prejudiced or making generalisations determined my choice of a). ... Maybe it wouldn't have been wrong to say that she belonged to the feminist movement, but it might not have been right either, so I left it out.

Another deliberate choice

Initial comment

"An academic grade in philosophy does not land you a job in a bank, the feminist movement speaks for b)."

Comment after the presentation of the statistical solution

"From now on I'll have to take everything's probability into account, but in this case I don't intend to change my mind."

Concept as classification

According to a prototype

According to exemplars

Theory

Model

Experimental field of reference

ParadigmsCausalityPrinciplesLaws…

Explanation

Formalism: relations between physical quantities, …Qualitative aspects associated with observable phenomena

MeasurementsExperimental factsExperimental devices

(Tiberghien, Learning and Instruction, 1994)

World view meta level of TheoreticalIdeology alternative context

frameworks

(Conceptions alternative (TheoreticalNorms for action) frameworks concepts)

Practical practice Empiricalcontext contextExperiencePerception

Figure 1. Different contexts for interpretation (Caravita & Halldén, Learning and Instruction, 1994)

first run (100 meters)

boy boy girl

girl

10 meters

second run (100 + 10 meters for the girl)

boy

girl

10 meters

(Wistedt, 1994, European Journal of Psychology of Education)

World view meta level of TheoreticalIdeology alternative context

frameworks

(Conceptions alternative (TheoreticalNorms for action) frameworks concepts)

Practical practice Empiricalcontext contextExperiencePerception

Figure 1. Different contexts for interpretation (Caravita & Halldén, Learning and Instruction, 1994)

A linear and causal(?) model for conceptual change

A B (Posner & Strike, 1982)

A B

(diSessa, 2001)

Concept “to describe a grouping of objects or behaviours with the same defining features that has become recognised through research or widespread use” (Entwistle, 2007, p.2)

Conception is “all the knowledge that a person has, and associates with, the concept’s name” (White, 1994, p.118)

Concept and conception

We cannot isolate the contribution of conceptual content from the beliefs we hold about the entities that fall under a concept (concepts as distinct from conceptions). (Carey, 2011 p. 123).

Conception “Indicates individuals’ different ways of thinking about a particular grouping” (Ibid., p. 2)

What we are studying in conceptual research, then, is conceptions and the change of conceptions.

we are studying the learner’s conception ofthe same entity, or similar entities, as the scientific concept denotes.

“To understand a concept “should rather be expressed by “to have a conception is to understand the same that is understood by a concept”

Having a scientific conception depends on similarities with the scientific concept

Concept and conception

scientificconcept

idiosyncraticconception

similarities?

territoryarea of

description/explanation

social and cultural situation

time

‘negative rationalism’ (Rommetveit, 1978)characterised by a predominant focus on students’shortcomings, difficulties and general fallibility.

‘theories of difficulty’ (Perkins, 2005)

What do students do when they fail?

Behaviour gets its intentional character from being seen by the agent himself or by an outside observer in a wider perspective, from being set in a context of aims and cognitions. This is what happens when we construe a practical inference to match, as premises match a given conclusion. (Emphasis in original, von Wright, 1971,p. 115)

P 1 A person P intends to bring about x (where x is a verb or a verb-phrase) in situation s.

P 2 P believes that she or he can bring about x, in situation s, by doing y (where y is a verb or a verb-phrase).

C Thus, P does y.

teacher’s intention interpretation student’s

assignment task problem/project/

issue(Halldén, Haglund, & Strömdahl, Educational Psychologist, 2007)

intention action

conceptions, i.e. embracedbeliefs, wants, abilities

conceptions ofduties, norms, opportunities

competence oriented:

determinants of orresources for action

discourse oriented:

Determinants of action (from Halldén in Schnotz et al (Eds) Conceptual change. Elsevier, 1999, based on von Wright 1971, 1974, 1979 and 1980).

Dimensions of context

Historical context; diachronic, time

Conceptional context, i.e. Idiosyncratic theories

Contexts for description and explanation, scientific vs idiosyncratic

Sociocultural context, i.e. setting, culture, and so on

(Larsson & Halldén, Science Education, 2010)

synchronic

Conceptual change as integration and differentiation

Spherical with flat ground

Up in space

down here etc.

A.The earth

B. The near ground

AB. The hollow sphere

Ab .

A. The earth in space

b. The near ground

Ba .

B. The near ground

a. The earth in space

Larsson, Å., Halldén, O. (2010) A structural view of the emergence of a conception: conceptual change as radical re-construction of contexts. Science Education, doi:10.1002/sce.20377.

The study was made possible by a grant from the Swedish Research Council’s Committee for Educational

Science.

On the impossibility of living on an earth in spaceTwo conceptions: one of the earth in sky and another one of the place where we

live

The children “know” that the earth is up in space.

Thus,I cannot live there because I am living down here on the ground

a logical contradiction

Things down here are so big that there are no space for them on earth

Information that has to be taken into account, i.e. issues to be solved:

Astronomical aspects of the earth as, eg., being up thereI am living hereThe logical contradictionSize relations

On the avoidance of the logical contradiction

Three different ways to maintain coherence:

1. Avoiding to locate the earth or avoiding to talk about the surroundings of the earth.

2. Denying the earth up in the sky, but then also the astronomical aspects of the earth.

3. Keeping the two locations apart as different places, often as different countries.

Information that has to be taken into account, i.e. issues to be solved:

Astronomical aspects of the earth as, e.g., being up thereThe conception of countryA new logical contradiction

On the possibility for other people to live on earthStill two conceptions, but now with an attempt to relate them to each other

Other people than me are living on earth

It is possible to go to the earth, also for me.Long distance travels by air.

Information that has to be taken into account, i.e. issues to be solved:

The earth is up in the skyPeople are living on earthI am living down herePeople are living in countries

On the impossibility of living on the surface of the earth surrounded by space

The hollow sphere model

The compelling conditions for the hollow sphere:

a) The earth in space and the place down here is the same place.b) It is impossible to live in space

We are “weightless and then one can just float away.”

“you are in space and then you fly away. You can’t breathe”

“One should not get any air”

“Other planets can hit your head” “And some planets might be hard.”

“The kids can be scared” because it is dark in space.

“It’s so cold in space “, “you can’t take cold air, then you will die”

Examples of information that has to be taken into account, i.e. issues to be solved

On the possibility of living on the surface of the spherical earth surrounded by space

A kind of normative model

We cannot live inside the earth because-There is lava inside-There are so many countries in the world-The world is so big

These issues have to be solved and are now solved by a spherical earth

It is possible to live on the surface because

“We’re stuck”, there is a “kernel” inside the earth; thus, some kind of gravitation

“There’s something blocking”; thus a conception of some kind of atmosphere that protects us from falling off and that makes it possible to breath- “The globe is big. That’s why it is so flat”; the earth is so huge

To summarize so far

The great amount of issues actualized the differences in dignity of these issues

The accidental occurrences of these issues in becoming of importance within the children’s problem solving activities

in what ways they became combined

In order for a conceptual change to come about, it looks like there are several issues requiring a simultaneous solution in order to make sense in the new conception to be acquired

All this taken together speaks for a view on conceptual change as a highly multi determined process also involving processes of chance.

Also, the results suggest that a lot of effort should be put upon understanding the reasoning in the learner before we try to challenge the learner with conflicting evidence in order to initiate a conceptual change.

“Equilibration is achieved in…three forms: between the subject and the objects,between schemes or subschemes on the same hierarchic level, and between their differentiations and their integrations into superior totalities.” (Piaget, 1977, p. 30)

Between the subject and the objects, cognitive conflict:- anomalous data (Chinn & Malhotra, 2002;

Echevarria, 2003; Mason, 2000, 2001)-discrepant events (Baddock & Bucat, 2008; Nussbaum & Novick, 1982;

Tsai, 2003) - refutational texts (Guzzetti, 2000; Hynd, 2001; Mason, Gava, & Boldrin, 2008)

Within a conceptual structure, incoherence:

-logical incoherence-contradictory beliefs-extension or change of explanatory field

Cognitive conflict and incoherence

Dimensions of context

Historical context; diachronic, time

Conceptional context, i.e. Idiosyncratic theories

Contexts for description and explanation, scientific vs idiosyncratic

Sociocultural context, i.e. setting, culture, and so on

(Larsson & Halldén, 2010)

synchronic