Abstract
Our analyses illustrate nine instances of what we call multimodal and multimedial reformulations of content beginning either with drawings of physics experiments and going to the manipulation of the physics experiments themselves or beginning with the experiments and going to the drawings. We postulated that each time one of these reformulations occurred, it was a potential (yet rare) pivotal moment for conceptual change because content was being transformed across modes and media. Within the nine instances of reformulation, we found two types of pivotal moments (three instances in all). The first type was changing one’s conception from an intuitive everyday view on physics to a canonical view of physics. The second was maintaining a canonical view of physics but while also integrating more complexity in terms of experiments constructed, drawings made, or concepts talked about. In addition, the notion of the semantic bundle enabled us to show how the ongoing interaction supplied building blocks that illustrated either sustained conceptual change coherent with canonical physics or difficulties that students faced.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Trace Analysis Tool for Interaction Analysts: http://code.google.com/p/tatiana/
References
Ainsworth, S. E. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198.
Apothéloz, D. (2001). Les formulations collaboratives du texte dans une rédaction conversationnelle : modes d’expansion syntaxique, techniques métalangagières, grandeurs discursives manipulées, etc. In M.-M. de Gaulmyn, R. Bouchard, & A. Rabatel (Eds.), Le processus rédactionnel. Ecrire à plusieurs voix (pp. 49–66). Paris: L’Harmattan.
Arzarello, F. (2004). Semiosis as a multimodal process. Relime, Numero Especial, 267–299.
Bécu-Robinault, K. (2007). Modélisation et investigation autour d’une séquence d’électrocinétique: Introduction d’une analogie pour expliquer. In L. Morge & J.-M. Boilevin (Eds.), Séquences d’investigation en physique-chimie (pp. 117–129). Scéren: CRDP Auvergne.
Chen, W., & Looi, C. -K. (this volume). Group Scribbles-supported collaborative learning in a primary grade 5 science class. In D. D. Suthers, K. Lund, C. P. Rose, C. Teplovs, & N. Law (Eds.), Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions (Chap. 14). New York, NY: Springer.
De Gaulmyn, M. -M. (1987). Actes de reformulation et processus de reformulation. In P. Bange (Ed.), La dame de Caluire (pp. 83–98). Berne: Peter Lang.
Dyke, G., Lund, K., & Girardot, J. -J. (2009, June 13–18). Tatiana: An environment to support the CSCL analysis process. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 2009 on CD-ROM. University of the Aegan: Rhodes, Greece.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge Press, MA: MIT Press.
Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2003), 205–226.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multi-modal discourse. London: Arnold.
Lund, K. (2007). The importance of gaze and gesture in interactive multimodal explanation. International Journal of Language Resources and Evaluation, 41(3/4), 289–303.
Lund, K., & Bécu-Robinault, K. (2010). Learning physics as coherently packaging multiple sets of signs. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the Disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2010)—Volume 1, Full Papers (pp. 404–411). Chicago IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Lund, K., & Suthers, D. D. (this volume). Methodological dimensions. In D. D. Suthers, K. Lund, C. P. Rosé, C. Teplovs & N. Law (Eds.), Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions (Chap. 2). New York, NY: Springer.
Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, VIII(4), 289–327.
Schwartz, D. L., Varma, S., & Martin, L. (2008). Dynamic transfer and innovation. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 479–506). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Vosniadou, S. (2007). The cognitive-situative divide and the problem of conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 55–66.
Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 179–217.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lund, K., Bécu-Robinault, K. (2013). Conceptual Change and Sustainable Coherency of Concepts Across Modes of Interaction. In: Suthers, D., Lund, K., Rosé, C., Teplovs, C., Law, N. (eds) Productive Multivocality in the Analysis of Group Interactions. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, vol 15. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8960-3_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8960-3_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-8959-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-8960-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)