Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 495–511 | Cite as

The effectiveness of teaching science with pictorial analogies

  • Huann-shyang Lin
  • Bih-ruh Shiau
  • Frances Lawrenz
Article

Abstract

This study used a conceptual problem solving test to investigate the effect of a series of pictorial analogies on the concepts of density, pressure, and atmospheric pressure in Year 8 classrooms. The analogies were taught following Glynn's teaching with analogies model. It was found that the students taught with the pictorial analogies scored significantly higher than their counterparts (p<01). In addition, the low achievers benefited more from this teaching strategy than did the high achievers. Further, qualitative analysis revealed that most of the students' alternative conceptions were from preexisting naive intuitions rather than arising from analog instruction.

Keywords

Qualitative Analysis Teaching Science Teaching Strategy Analogy Model Alternative Conception 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, C. W., & Smith, E. L. (1987).Teaching science (Report Series No. 169). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Institute for Research on Teaching. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 274 541).Google Scholar
  2. Brown, D. E. (1992). Using examples to remediate misconceptions in physics: Factors influencing conceptual change.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(1), 17–34.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, D. E. (1994). Facilitating conceptual change using analogies and explanatory models.International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), 201–214.Google Scholar
  4. Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconception in physics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241–1257.Google Scholar
  5. Clement, J., & Brown, D. E. (1984).Using analogical reasoning to deal with deep misconceptions in physics (Technical Report No. 95). Amherst, University of Massachusetts: Scientific Reasoning Research Institute.Google Scholar
  6. Dagher, Z. R. (1995). Review of studies on the effectiveness of instructional analogies in science education.Science Education, 79(3), 295–312.Google Scholar
  7. Dowell, R. E. (1968). The relations between the use of analogies and their effect on student achievement in teaching selected concepts in high school biology.Dissertation Abstract International, 29(10), 3519-A (University Microfilms No. 69-6732).Google Scholar
  8. Dreistadt, R. (1969). The use of analogies and incubation in obtaining insight in creative problem solving.Journal of Psychology, 71, 159–175.Google Scholar
  9. Drugge, N. L., & Kass, H. (1978, March).The effect of selected analogies on understanding of scientific explanations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 152-537)Google Scholar
  10. Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science.Science Education, 75, 649–672.Google Scholar
  11. Dupin, J. J., & Johsua, S. (1989). Analogies and modelling analogies in teaching: Some examples in basic electricity.Science Education, 73, 207–224.Google Scholar
  12. Friedel, A. W., Gabel, D. L., & Samuel, J. (1990). Using analogies for chemistry problem solving.School Science and Mathematics, 90, 674–682.Google Scholar
  13. Gabel, D. L., & Sherwood, R. D. (1980). Effect of using analogies on chemistry achievement according to Piagetian level.Science Education, 64(5), 709–716.Google Scholar
  14. Gay, L. R. (1981).Educational Research (p. 218). Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.Google Scholar
  15. Glynn, S. M. (1989). Explaining science concepts: A teaching-with-analogies model. In S. M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany, & B. K. Britton (Eds.),The psychology of learning science (pp. 219–240). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Goswami, U. (1991). Analogical reasoning: What develops? A review of research and theory.Child Development, 62(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  17. Gussarsky, E., & Gorodetsky, M. (1990). On the concept “Chemical equilibrium”: The associate framework.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 197–204.Google Scholar
  18. Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1993). Teaching with analogies: A case study in grade-10 optics.Journal of Research in Science Teching, 30(10), 1291–1307.Google Scholar
  19. Helm, H., & Novak, J. D. (Eds.). (1983).Misconceptions in science and mathematics. Proceedings of the international seminar. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University.Google Scholar
  20. Howell, D. C. (1982).Statistical methods of psychology (2nd ed.). Boston: Prindle, Weber and Schmidt.Google Scholar
  21. Lawson, A. E. (1993). The importance of analogy: A prelude to the special issue.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1213–1214.Google Scholar
  22. Matthews, M. R. (1994).Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Nakhleh, M. B. (1993). Are our students conceptual thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers?Journal of Chemical Education, 70(1), 52–55.Google Scholar
  24. Nakhleh, M. B., & Mitchell, R. C. (1993). Concept learning versus problem solving, there is a difference.Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), 190–192.Google Scholar
  25. Raven, R. J., & Cole, R. (1978). Relationships between Piaget's operative comprehension and physiology modelling process of community college students.Science Education, 62(4), 481–489.Google Scholar
  26. Stavy, R. (1991). Using analogy to overcome misconceptions about conservation of matter.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 305–313.Google Scholar
  27. Thiele, R. B., & Treagust, D. F. (1994). An interpretive examination of high school chemistry teachers' analogical explanations.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(3), 227–242.Google Scholar
  28. Thiele, R. B., Venville, G. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1995). A comparative analysis of analogies in secondary biology and chemistry textbooks used in Australian schools.Research in Science Education, 25(2), 221–230.Google Scholar
  29. Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., Joslin, P., & Lindauer, I. (1992). Science teachers' use of analogies: Observations from classroom practice.International Journal of Science Education, 14, 413–422.Google Scholar
  30. Treagust, D. F. (1993). The evolution of an approach for using analogies in teaching and learning science.Research in Science Education, 23, 293–301.Google Scholar
  31. Wong, E. D. (1993). Self-generated analogies as a tool for constructing and evaluating explanations of scientific phenomena.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 367–380.Google Scholar
  32. Zook, K. B. (1991). Effects of analogical processes on learning and misrepresentation.Educational Psychology Review, 3, 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zook, K. B., & Di Vesta, F. J. (1991). Instructional analogy and conceptual misrepresentations.Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 246–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zook, K. B., & Maier, J. M. (1994). Systematic analysis of variables that contribute to the formation of analogical misrepresentation.Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 589–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian Science Education Research Association 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huann-shyang Lin
    • 1
  • Bih-ruh Shiau
    • 1
  • Frances Lawrenz
    • 2
  1. 1.National Kaohsiung Normal UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan
  2. 2.University of MinnesotaMinnesotaUSA

Personalised recommendations