Higher Education

, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 373–388 | Cite as

Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning

Abstract

The present study builds on earlier work by Meyer and Land (2003) which introduced the generative notion of threshold concepts within (and across) disciplines, in the sense of transforming the internal view of subject matter or part thereof. In this earlier work such concepts were further linked to forms of knowledge that are ‘troublesome’, after the work of Perkins (1999). It was argued that these twinned sets of ideas may define critical moments of irreversible conceptual transformation in the educational experiences of learners, and their teachers. The present study aims (a) to examine the extent to which such phenomena can be located within personal understandings of discipline-specific epistemological discourses, (b) to develop more extensively notions of liminality within learning that were raised in the first paper, and (c) to propose a conceptual framework within which teachers may advance their own reflective practice.

Keywords

Threshold concepts troublesome knowledge identity liminality mimicry pre-liminal variation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Biggs, J. 1999Teaching for Quality Learning at UniversitySRHE and Open University PressBuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  2. Brousseau, G. 1983Les obstacles epistemologiques et les problèmes en mathématiquesRecherches en didactique des mathematiques4165198Google Scholar
  3. Brousseau, G. 1997Theory of didactical situations in mathematicsKluwer Academic PublishersDordrechtGoogle Scholar
  4. Cornu, B. 1991

    ‘Limits’

    Tall, D. eds. Advanced Mathematical ThinkingKluwer Academic PublishersDordrecht
    Google Scholar
  5. Cousin, G. (2003). ‘Threshold concepts, troublesome knowledge and learning about others’, Paper presented to the 10th Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Padova, Italy, August 26–30.Google Scholar
  6. Derrida, J. 1978

    ‘Structure, sign and play in the discourse of the human sciences’

    Lodge, D. eds. Modern Criticism and TheoryLongmanLondonCited
    Google Scholar
  7. Ellsworth, E. 1989‘Why doesn’t this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of critical pedagogy’Harvard Educational Review59297324AugustGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellsworth, E. 1997Teaching Positions: Difference Pedagogy and the Power of AddressTeachers College PressNew York297324Google Scholar
  9. Entwistle, N. 1981Styles of Learning and Teaching; An Integrated Outline of Educational Psychology for Students, Teachers and LecturersJohn WileyChichesterGoogle Scholar
  10. Goethe, R. (2003). Ritual and Liminality (NCSS Theme: Culture) - Purpose, Background, and Context. available at http://www.uiowa.edu/∼socialed/lessons/ rituals.htm.Google Scholar
  11. Halldén, O. 1999

    ‘Contextual Change and Contextualisation’

    Schnotz, W.Vosniadou, S.Carretero, M. eds. New Perspectives on Conceptual ChangeAmsterdamPergamon/Elsevier Science5365
    Google Scholar
  12. Land, R., Cousin, G., Meyer, J.H.F., Davies, P. 2005

    ‘Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (3): Implications for course design and evaluation’

    Rust, C. eds. Improving Student LearningOxford Centre for Staff and Learning DevelopmentOxford
    Google Scholar
  13. Lather, P. 1998Critical Pedagogy and Its Complicities: A Praxis of Stuck PlacesEducational Theory Fall48487498Google Scholar
  14. Marton, F.Hounsell, D.Entwistle, N. eds. 1997The Experience of Learning2Scottish Academic PressEdinburghGoogle Scholar
  15. Meyer, J.H.F., Land, R. 2003

    ‘Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge: Linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines’

    Rust, C. eds. Improving Student Learning: Improving Student Learning Theory and Practice–Ten Years OnOxford Centre for Staff and Learning DevelopmentOxford
    Google Scholar
  16. Meyer, J.H.F. and Shanahan, M. (2003). ‘The troublesome nature of a threshold concept in economics’, Paper presented to the 10th Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Padova, Italy, August 26–30.Google Scholar
  17. Perkins, D. 1999‘The many faces of constructivism’Educational Leadership57611Google Scholar
  18. Ramsden, P. eds. 1988Improving Learning: New Perspectives.Kogan PageLondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Reimann, N. and Jackson, I. (2003). ‘Threshold concepts in economics: A case study’, Paper presented to the 10th Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Padova, Italy, August 26–30.Google Scholar
  20. Siegfried, J.J., Sanderson, A.R. 1998

    ‘Using sports to teach economics’

    Becker, W.E.Watts, M. eds. Teaching Economics to Undergraduates: Alternatives to Chalk and TalkEdward ElgarCheltenham
    Google Scholar
  21. Schwartzenberger, R.L.E., Tall, D.O. 1978Conflicts in the learning of real numbers and limitsMathematics Teaching824449Google Scholar
  22. Trubshaw, B. (2003). ‘The metaphors and rituals of place and time - an introduction to liminality, or Why Christopher Robin wouldn’t walk on the cracks’, available at http://www.indigogroup.co.uk/edge/liminal.htm.Google Scholar
  23. Turnbull, C. 1990

    ‘Liminality: A synthesis of subjective and objective experience’

    Schechner, R. eds. By Means of Performance: Intercultural studies of theatre and ritualCambridge University PressCambridge
    Google Scholar
  24. Turner, V. 1969The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-StructureRoutledge and Kegan PaulLondonGoogle Scholar
  25. van Gennep, A. 1960The Rites of PassageRoutledge and Kegan PaulLondonGoogle Scholar
  26. Williamson, J. 1992

    ‘How does girl number twenty understand ideology?’

    Alvarado, M.Boyd-Barrett, O. eds. Media Education: An IntroductionOpen University PressMilton Keynes
    Google Scholar
  27. Winnicott, D.H. 1971Playing and RealityBasic BooksNew YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Learning, Teaching and Research in Higher EducationUniversity of DurhamUnited Kingdom
  2. 2.Centre for Higher Education DevelopmentCoventry UniversityUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations