Skip to main content

A Three-Phase Design for Productive Use of Analogy in the Teaching of Entropy

  • Chapter
Research and the Quality of Science Education

Abstract

Gentner has described analogy as a mapping of terms from a base (better known) domain to a target domain. She asserts that use of analogy can lead to new conclusions in the target domain. This ‘structure mapping’ theory, though useful, does not yet describe the process of analogical reasoning. We will argue that an analogy can be used productively in a process that has two phases: first, constructing the analogy using existing knowledge of base and target domains, and second, extrapolating the analogy within the target domain. In the first phase object mapping is motivated by the recognition of mappable relations. In the second phase, the productive use of the analogy can involve creation of both new terms and relations, as a result of mapping existing terms and relations from the base domain. If analogies are to be understood critically, then a third phase might be the testing of new relations against learners’ experience. This three-phase process description of analogy has been tried out in a teaching experiment that aimed at an understanding of entropy, by an analogy to falling water. We conclude that this three-phase description is useful.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 239.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Arnold, M. & Millar, R. (1996). Learning the scientific “story”: a case study in the teaching and learning of elementary thermodynamics. Science education 80(3), 249–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W.P. & Lawson, A.E. (2001). Complex instructional analogies and theoretical concept acquisition in college genetics. Science Education 85(6), 665–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D.E. (1993). Refocusing core intuitions: a concretizing role for analogy in conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30(10), 1273–1290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnot, S. (1824). Reflexions sur la puissance motrice du feu et sur les machines propres à déveloper cette puissance. Edition critique par R. Fox, 1978, Paris: J. Vrin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30(10), 1241–1257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 7, 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentner D. & Gentner, D.R. (1983). Flowing waters or teeming crowds: mental models of electricity. In D. Gentner & A.L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp.99–129). Hillsdale N.J.: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D. & Holyoak, K.J. (1997). Reasoning and learning by analogy: Introduction. American Psychologist 52(1), 32–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gick, M.L. & Holyoak, K.J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive psychology 15, 1–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glynn, S.M. (1989). The Teaching-with-Analogies (TWA) model: Explaining concepts in expository text. In K.D. Muth (Ed.), Children’s comprehension of narrative and expository text: research into practice (pp.185–204), Newark DeI.: International Reading Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glynn, S.M. & Takahashi, T. (1998). Learning from analogy-enhanced science text. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 35(10), 1129–1149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haeberlen, S. & Schwedes, H. (1999). Learning-processes in analogy-based instruction about electricity: learning to understand the water-model. In M. Komorek et al., Research in Science Education: Past, Present, and Future, proceedings of the second international conference of the ESERA, (vol. 1, pp.198–201). Kiel: IPN. Online at: http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/projekte/esera/book/eserbook.htm

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, F. (1989). Physik, Unterrichtshilfen. Teil 1, Auflage November 1989. Karlsruhe: Institut für Didaktik der Physik der Universität Karlsruhe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, K.J., Miao, C.-H. & Gentner, D. (2001). Learning by analogical bootstrapping. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 10(4), 417–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeitoun, H.H. (1984). Teaching scientific analogies: a proposed model. Research in Science & Technological Education 2(2), 107–125.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kaper, W., Goedhart, M. (2005). A Three-Phase Design for Productive Use of Analogy in the Teaching of Entropy. In: Boersma, K., Goedhart, M., de Jong, O., Eijkelhof, H. (eds) Research and the Quality of Science Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_24

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics