Instructional Science

, Volume 22, Issue 2, pp 75–90 | Cite as

The role of anomaly and of cognitive dissonance in restructuring students' concepts of force

  • Paul Gorsky
  • Menahem Finegold
Article

Abstract

This paper reports a study of (1) students' responses to an anomaly generated by the juxtaposition of opposing explanatory frameworks and (2) the nature and impact of cognitive conflict as students move from pre-scientific to scientific explanatory frameworks concerning the concept of force. Both rational and emotional responses to anomaly were observed and student responses to anomaly were ranked according to the extent of disequilibrium generated. In addition, ways in which students resolve anomaly were recorded and processes associated with dissonance resolution and learning were hypothesized. Finally, the impact of dissonance was seen to influence students' epistemological beliefs about learning.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ausubel, D., Novak, J. & Hanesian, H. (1978).Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  2. Bell, A. (1987). Misconceptions, conflict and discussion in the teaching of graphical interpretations. In Proceedings of the Second International Seminar: Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.Google Scholar
  3. Berlyne, D. (1965). Curiosity and education, in J.D. Krumboltz, ed.,Learning and the Educational. Process. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co.Google Scholar
  4. Brna, P. (1987). Confronting dynamics misconceptions.Instructional Science 16: 351–379.Google Scholar
  5. Champagne, A., Klopfer, L. & Gunstone, R. (1982). Cognitive research and the design of science instruction.Educational Psychology 17: 31–53.Google Scholar
  6. Clement, J. (1982). Students' preconceptions in introductorymechanics. American Journal of Physics 50: 60–71.Google Scholar
  7. Driver, R. (1973). The representation of conceptual frameworks in young adolescent science students. Unpublished doctorate thesis, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  8. Festinger, L. (1956).A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  9. Gilbert, J. & Watts, M. (1983). Misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education.Studies in Science Education 10: 61–98.Google Scholar
  10. Goetz, J. & LeCompte, M. (1981). Ethnographic research and the problem of data reduction.Anthropology and Education Quarterly 12: 51–70.Google Scholar
  11. Gorsky, P. & Finegold, M. (1992). Using computer simulations to restructure students' conceptions of force.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 11: 163–178.Google Scholar
  12. Hewson, P. & Hewson, M. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction.Instructional Science 13: 1–13.Google Scholar
  13. Kuhn, D. (1972). Mechanisms of change in the development of cognitive structure.Child Development 43: 823.Google Scholar
  14. Nussbaum, J. & Novick, S. (1982). Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict, and accommodation: Toward a principled teaching strategy.Instructional Science 11: 183–200.Google Scholar
  15. Osborne, R. & Freyberg, P. (1985).Learning in Science: The Implication of Children's Science. Auckland: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  16. Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P. & Gertzoy, W. (1982). Accommodation of scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change.Science Education 66: 211–227.Google Scholar
  17. Stavy, R. & Berkovitz, B. (1980). Cognitive conflict as a basis for teaching quantitative aspects of the concept of temperature.Science Education 64: 678–692.Google Scholar
  18. Wallas, G. (1921).The Art of Thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Google Scholar
  19. Zietsman, A. & Hewson, P. (1986). The effect of instruction using microcomputer simulations.Journal of Research in Science Teaching 23: 27–39.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Gorsky
    • 1
  • Menahem Finegold
    • 2
  1. 1.National Museum of ScienceIsrael
  2. 2.Israel Institute of TechnologyTechnionIsrael

Personalised recommendations