Feedback that corrects and contrasts students’ erroneous solutions with expert ones improves expository instruction for conceptual change

Asterhan, Christa S. C.; Dotan, Aviv

doi:10.1007/s11251-017-9441-1

Published: 11 December 2017

Feedback that corrects and contrasts students’ erroneous solutions with expert ones improves expository instruction for conceptual change

Instructional Science volume 46, pages 337–355 (2018)Cite this article

1011 Accesses
9 Citations
66 Altmetric
Metrics details

Abstract

In the present study, we examined the effects of feedback that corrects and contrasts a student’s own erroneous solutions with the canonical, correct one (CEC&C feedback) on learning in a conceptual change task. Sixty undergraduate students received expository instruction about natural selection, which presented the canonical, scientifically accepted account in detail. Two-third of these received CEC&C feedback on their self-generated solutions to open-ended test items. Students either received this feedback on their pretest solutions (prior to instruction), or on their immediate posttest solutions (following instruction). Students in the control condition only received the correct canonical answers to the immediate post-test items and compared these with their own solutions autonomously. Conceptual understanding on transfer items was assessed after 1 week. Results showed that students in the CEC&C feedback conditions outperformed control students. Timing of feedback did not affect learning, however. These findings add to accumulating evidence from different lines of research on the importance of instructional support that explicitly compares and contrasts between erroneous student models and canonical models in conceptual change tasks.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

Ames, G. J., & Murray, F. B. (1982). When two wrongs make a right: Promoting cognitive development through cognitive conflict. Developmental Psychology, 18(6), 894–897. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.18.6.894.
Article Google Scholar
Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2007). The effects of monological and dialogical argumentation on concept learning in evolutionary theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 626–639.
Article Google Scholar
Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). The role of argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer-to-peer dialogue. Cognitive Science, 33, 373–399.
Article Google Scholar
Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2016). Argumentation for learning: Well-trodden paths and unexplored territories. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 164–187.
Article Google Scholar
Asterhan, C. S. C., Schwarz, B. B., & Cohen-Eliyahu, N. (2014). Outcome feedback during collaborative learning: Contingencies between feedback and dyad composition. Learning and Instruction, 34(4), 1–10.
Article Google Scholar
Babai, R., Sekal, R., & Stavy, R. (2010). Persistence of the intuitive conception of living things in adolescence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9174-2.
Article Google Scholar
Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of research in education, 24(1), 61–100.
Article Google Scholar
Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). The effect of type and timing of feedback on learning from multiple-choice tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 13(4), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1037/e527352012-769.
Google Scholar
Chan, C., Burtis, J., & Bereiter, C. (1997). Knowledge building as a mediator of conflict in conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 15(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1501_1.
Article Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Eds.), Handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0605-8_20.
Chi, M. T. H., Roscoe, R., Slotta, J., Roy, M., & Chase, M. (2012). Misconceived causal explanations for “emergent” processes. Cognitive Science, 36, 1–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01207.x.
Article Google Scholar
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63(1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170558.
Article Google Scholar
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1998). An empirical test of a taxonomy of responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 623–654. http://chilab.asu.edu/papers/Chi_concpetualchangechapter.pdf.
Diakidoy, I. A. N., Kendeou, P., & Ioannides, C. (2003). Reading about energy: the effects of text structure in science learning and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 335–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00039-5.
Article Google Scholar
Diakidoy, I. A. N., Mouskounti, T., Fella, A., & Ioannides, C. (2016). Comprehension processes and outcomes with refutation and expository texts and their contribution to learning. Learning and Instruction, 41, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.10.002.
Article Google Scholar
Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1978). Individual and collective conflicts of centration in cognitive development. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9(1), 245–247. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420090110.
Google Scholar
Dunbar, K., Fugelsang, J., & Stein, C. (2007). Do naïve theories ever go away? Using brain and behavior to understand changes in concepts. Thinking with data. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740810865085.
Google Scholar
Durkin, K., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2012). The effectiveness of using incorrect examples to support learning about decimal magnitude. Learning and Instruction, 22(3), 206–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.11.001.
Article Google Scholar
Fugelsang, J., & Dunbar, K. (2005). Brain-based mechanisms underlying complex causal thinking. Neuropsychologia, 48, 1204–1213.
Article Google Scholar
Gadgil, S., Nokes-Malach, T. J., & Chi, M. T. (2012). Effectiveness of holistic mental model confrontation in driving conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 22(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.06.002.
Article Google Scholar
Große, C. S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Finding and fixing errors in worked examples: Can this foster learning outcomes? Learning and Instruction, 17, 612–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.008.
Article Google Scholar
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487.
Article Google Scholar
Hill, H., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Education Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312042002371.
Article Google Scholar
Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Duchak-Tanner, V., & Rattay, C. (2000). Hypothesis-testing in science: Group consensus and the acquisition of conceptual and procedural knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10(4), 361–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00004-9.
Article Google Scholar
Jensen, M. S., & Finley, F. N. (1996). Changes in students’ understanding of evolution resulting from different curricular and instructional strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 879–900. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199610)33:8<879:aid-tea4>3.0.co;2-t.
Article Google Scholar
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (1992). Thinking about theories or thinking with theories?: A classroom study with natural selection. International Journal of Science Education, 14(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069920140106.
Article Google Scholar
Kapur, M., & Bielaczyc, K. (2011). Classroom-based experiments in productive failure. In L. Carlson, C. Holscher, & T. Shipley (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2812–2817). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/iecon.2007.4459876.
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254.
Article Google Scholar
Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58(1), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170349.
Article Google Scholar
Light, P., & Glachan, M. (1985). Facilitation of individual problem solving through peer interaction. Educational Psychology, 5, 217–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443418500503.
Article Google Scholar
Limon, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11, 357–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(00)00037-2.
Article Google Scholar
Loibl, K., & Rummel, N. (2014). Knowing what you don’t know makes failure productive. Learning and Instruction, 34, 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.08.004.
Article Google Scholar
Masson, S., Potvin, P., Riopel, M., & Foisy, L. M. B. (2014). Differences in brain activation between novices and experts in science during a task involving a common misconception in electricity. Mind, Brain, and Education, 8(1), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12043.
Article Google Scholar
Ohlsson, S. (2002). Generating and understanding qualitative explanations. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 91–128). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Google Scholar
Opfer, J. E., & Siegler, R. S. (2004). Revisiting preschoolers’ living things concept: A microgenetic analysis of conceptual change in basic biology. Cognitive Psychology, 49, 301–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.01.002.
Article Google Scholar
Özdemir, G., & Clark, D. (2007). An overview of conceptual change theories. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3, 351–361.
Article Google Scholar
Potvin, P., Masson, S., Lafortune, S., & Cyr, G. (2015a). Persistence of the intuitive conception that heavier objects sink more: A reaction time study with different levels of interference. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9520-6.
Article Google Scholar
Potvin, P., Sauriol, É., & Riopel, M. (2015b). Experimental evidence of the superiority of the prevalence model of conceptual change over the classical models and traditional teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(8), 1082–1108. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21235.
Article Google Scholar
Ramsburg, J. T., & Ohlsson, S. (2016). Category change in the absence of cognitive conflict. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(1), 98. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000050.
Article Google Scholar
Richland, L. E., Kornell, N., & Kao, L. S. (2009). The pretesting effect: Do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(3), 243. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016496.
Google Scholar
Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Coyle, H. P., Cook-Smith, N., & Miller, J. L. (2013). The influence of teachers’ knowledge on student learning in middle school physical science classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 50(5), 1020–1049. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213477680.
Article Google Scholar
Schnotz, W., & Preuss, A. (1999). Task-dependent construction of mental models as a basis for conceptual change. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 193–222). Amsterdam: Pergamon Press.
Google Scholar
Schwarz, B. B., & Linchevski, L. (2007). The role of task design and argumentation in cognitive development during peer interaction: The case of proportional reasoning. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 510–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.009.
Article Google Scholar
Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., & Biezuner, S. (2000). Two wrongs may make a right… If they argue together! Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 461–494. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1804_2.
Article Google Scholar
Shtulman, A. (2006). Qualitative differences between naïve and scientific theories of evolution. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 170–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.10.001.
Article Google Scholar
Shtulman, A., & Valcarcel, J. (2012). Scientific knowledge suppresses but does not supplant earlier intuitions. Cognition, 124(2), 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.04.005.
Article Google Scholar
Sinatra, G. M., & Broughton, S. H. (2011). Bridging reading comprehension and conceptual change in science education: The promise of refutation text. Reading Research Quarterly, 46(4), 374–393.
Article Google Scholar
Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 951–970.
Article Google Scholar
Van Loon, M. H., Dunlosky, J., Van Gog, T., Van Merriënboer, J. J., & De Bruin, A. B. (2015). Refutations in science texts lead to hypercorrection of misconceptions held with high confidence. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.04.003.
Article Google Scholar
Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2009). International handbook of research on conceptual change. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203154472.ch1.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental models of the day/nightcycle. Cognitive Science, 18, 123–183.
Article Google Scholar
Vosniadou, S., & Mason, L. (2013). Conceptual change induced by instruction: A complex interplay of multiple factors. In S. Graham, J. Royer, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors, Vol 2 of the APA Educational Psychology Handbook Series (pp. 221–246). APA Publications. https://doi.org/10.1037/13274-000.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by Israeli Science Foundation Award 1044/13. We thank Maya Resnick, Roni Segal, Noa Ettinger and Morag Pitaro for their assistance in data collection and coding efforts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

School of Education, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mount Scopus, 91905, Jerusalem, Israel
Christa S. C. Asterhan & Aviv Dotan

Authors

Christa S. C. Asterhan
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Aviv Dotan
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christa S. C. Asterhan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Asterhan, C.S.C., Dotan, A. Feedback that corrects and contrasts students’ erroneous solutions with expert ones improves expository instruction for conceptual change. Instr Sci 46, 337–355 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9441-1

Download citation

Received: 28 October 2016
Accepted: 07 December 2017
Published: 11 December 2017
Issue Date: June 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-017-9441-1

Keywords

Conceptual change
Feedback
Comparing and contrasting
Erroneous solutions