Abstract
In interviews within our studies, students revealed their conceptions of cell division and climate change. Their conceptions of these topics are far from the current scientific theory, but they still make sense to the students. Employing the theory of experientialism, we argue that students use imaginative thinking, that is, metaphors to understand the imperceptible world of cell division and climate change. This metaphorical understanding is achieved by conveying the structure of a source domain to a target domain. Usually the source domain is a conceptual structure grounded in bodily experience that is understood directly. The source-to-target mapping that leads to this kind of understanding is done unconsciously. It functions like a hidden hand that shapes everyday conceptual understanding of abstract target domains in the microcosm and macrocosm. We identify and characterize common source domains that lie in the perceptible mesocosm to understand biological phenomena in the microcosm (cell division) and macrocosm (climate change). Furthermore, we present successful representations that foster students understanding of these phenomena.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Andersson, B., & Wallin, A. (2000). Students’ understanding of the greenhouse effect, the societal consequences of reducing CO2 emissions and the problem of ozone layer depletion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1096–1111.
Aubusson, P. J., Harrison, A., & Ritchie, S. M. (2006). Metaphor and analogy. In P. J. Aubusson, A. Harrison, & S. M. Ritchie (Eds.), Metaphor and analogy in science education (pp. 1–9). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Bucat, B., & Mocerino, M. (2009). Learning at the sub-micro level: Structural representations. In J. K. Gilbert & D. Treagust (Eds.), Multiple representations in chemical education (pp. 11–29). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Duit, R., Gropengiesser, H., & Kattmann, U. (2005). Towards science education research that is relevant for improving practice: The model of educational reconstruction. In H. Fischer (Ed.), Developing standards in research on science education (pp. 1–9). London: Taylor & Francis.
Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2011). Conceptual change – Still a powerful framework for improving the practice of science instruction. In B. F. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 107–118). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Ekborg, M., & Areskoug, M. (2006). How student teacher’s understanding of the greenhouse effect develops during a teacher education programme. NorDiNa, 5, 17–29.
Gropengiesser, H. (2003). Lebenswelten, Denkwelten, Sprechwelten. Wie man Vorstellungen der Lerner verstehen kann [Worlds of Living, thinking, and talking. How to understand student’s conceptions]. Oldenburg, Germany: Didaktisches Zentrum.
Harrison, A. G., & Jong, O. D. (2005). Exploring the use of multiple analogical models when teaching and learning chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1135–1115.
Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Teaching and learning with analogies. Metaphor and analogy in science education (pp. 11–24). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. (2007). Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Geneva, Switzerland: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind. The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Kattmann, U. (2008). Learning biology by means of anthropomorphic conceptions. In M. Hammann, M. Reiss, C. Boulter, & S. D. Tunnicliffe (Eds.). Biology in Context Learning and teaching for the 21st century. A selection of papers presented at the VIth Conference of ERIDOB (pp. 7–17). London.
Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13, 205–226.
Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Levi, P. (1975). The periodic table. London: Penguin.
Moore, G. E. (1996). Principia Ethica. Dover, MA: Dover Philosophical Classics.
Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead, PA: Open University Press.
Niebert, K. (2009). Der Kohlenstoffkreislauf im Klimawandel. [The carbon cycle in climate change]. Unterricht Biologie, 349, 34–40.
Niebert, K., & Gropengiesser, H. (2011). CO2 causes a hole in the atmosphere« Using laypeople’s conceptions as a starting point to communicate climate change. In W. Leal (Ed.), The economic, social and political elements of climate change (pp. 603–622). Berlin, The Netherlands: Springer.
Richards, I. A., & Ogden, C. K. (1923). The meaning of meaning. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Riemeier, T., & Gropengiesser, H. (2008). On the roots of difficulties in learning about cell division. International Journal of Science Education, 30(7), 923–939.
Schneeweiss, H., & Gropengiesser, H. (2010). Lernervorstellungen und Vorstellungsentwicklungen zu Bakterienkolonien [Students’ conceptions and their conceptual development on microbes]. In U. Harms & I. Mackensen-Friedrichs (Eds.), Lehr- und Lernforschung in der Biologiedidaktik. Band 4 (pp. 85–98). Innsbruck: Studienverlag.
Schreiner, C., Henriksen, E. K., & Hansen, P. J. K. (2005). Climate education: Empowering today’s youth to meet tomorrow’s challenges. Studies in Science Education, 41, 3–50.
Sterman, J., & Booth-Sweeney, L. (2007). Understanding public complacency about climate change: Adults’ mental models of climate change violate conservation of matter. Climatic Change, 80(3), 213–238.
van Berkel, B., Pilot, A., & Bulte, A. (2009). Micro-macro thinking in chemical education: Why and how to escape. In J. K. Gilbert & D. Treagust (Eds.), Multiple representations in chemical education (pp. 31–54). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Vollmer, G. (1984). Mesocosm and objective knowledge. In F. M. Wuketits (Ed.), Concepts and approaches in evolutionary epistemology (pp. 69–121). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Vosniadou, S., & Ioannides, C. (1998). From conceptual development of science education: A psychological point of view. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1213–1230.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Niebert, K., Riemeier, T., Gropengießer, H. (2013). The Hidden Hand that Shapes Conceptual Understanding: Choosing Effective Representations for Teaching Cell Division and Climate Change. In: Treagust, D., Tsui, CY. (eds) Multiple Representations in Biological Education. Models and Modeling in Science Education, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4192-8_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4191-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4192-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)