Abstract
What can contribute to the ‘value’ of a piece of research about an innovative teaching-learning sequence from a research point of view and a teacher’s point of view? We will try to demonstrate that such values from these two perspectives are different, but not contradictory, and that they can be sought in the same research work. Two aspects will be developed and illustrated.
The first aspect is about ‘a priori’ justification. We will propose a general framework which can help to make the principles underlying the design of a sequence clear, and so situate various teaching-learning sequences concerning the same domain of knowledge. Such a framework can be useful both for researchers to make their choices and hypotheses more explicit and for teachers to select one approach over another.
The second aspect is about ‘a posteriori’ or ‘empirical’ validation. Referring to various pieces of research work, we will discuss the limits of usual ‘comparative’ approaches and will focus on more ‘internal’, ‘descriptive’ approaches. We will argue that describing cognitive pathways of learners through teaching-learning situations constitutes a fruitful tool, both for researchers to validate some of the choices or hypotheses underlying the design of the learning situations and for teachers to feel more comfortable with such innovative teaching-learning sequences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Andersson, B. & Bach, F. (1996). Developing new teaching sequences in science: the example of ‘Gases and their properties’. In G. Welford, J. Osborne & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe: current issues and themes (pp.7–21). London: The Falmer Press.
Arnold, M. & Millar, R. (1996). Exploring the use of analogy in the teaching of heat, temperature and thermal equilibrium. In G. Welford, J. Osborne & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe: current issues and themes (pp.22–35). London: The Falmer Press.
Artigue, M. (1988). Ingéniérie didactique. Recherches en didactique des Mathématiques, 9, 281–308.
Asoko, H. (1996). Developing scientific concepts in the primary classroom: teaching about electric circuits. In G. Welford, J. Osborne & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe: current issues and themes (pp.36–49). London: The Falmer Press.
Aufschnaiter, S. & Welzel, M. (1999). Individual learning processes: A research programme with focus on the complexity of situated cognition. In M. Bandiera et al. (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe (pp.209–215). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Boohan, R. (1996). Using a picture language to teach about processes of change. In G. Welford, J. Osborne & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe: current issues and themes (pp.85–99). London: The Falmer Press.
Chang, C.-Y. & Barufaldi, J.-P. (1999). The use of a problem-solving-based instructional model in initiating change in students’ achievement and alternative frameworks. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 373–388.
Chauvet, F. (1996). Teaching colour: design and evaluation of a sequence. European Journal of Teacher Education 19, 119–134.
Dekkers, P. (1993). Effectiveness of practical work in the remediation of alternative conceptions of force with students in Botswana. In P.L. Lijnse et al. (Ed.), European research in science education: Proceedings of the first PhD Summerschool (pp. 233–241). Utrecht: CDβ Press.
Dewey, I. & Dykstra, Jr. (1992). Studying conceptual change: constructing new understandings. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp.40–58). Kiel: IPN.
Driver, R. & Bell, B. (1986). Students’ thinking and the learning of science: a constructivist view. The school science review, 67, 443–456.
Driver, R. & Erickson, G. (1983). Theories in action: some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students’ conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Education, 10, 37–60.
Duit, R., Goldberg, F. & Niedderer, H. (1992). Research in physics learning: theoretical issues and empirical studies. Kiel: IPN.
Duit, R., Roth, W-M, Komorek, M. & Wilbers, J. (1998). Conceptual change cum discourse analysis to understand cognition in a unit on chaotic systems: towards an integrative perspective on learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1059–1073.
Dumas-Carré, A. & Weil-Barais, A. (1998). Tutelle et médiation dans l’éducation scientifique. Bern, Peter Lang.
Gilbert, J.K. & Boulter, C. (1998). Learning science through models and modelling. In B.J. Fraser and K.G. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education (pp.53–67). Dordrecht, Kluwer academic Press.
Kaminski, W. (1991). Optique élémentaire en classe de quatrième: raisons et impact sur les maîtres d’une maquette d’enseignement. Thèse de doctorat, Université Paris 7.
Kariotoglou, P., Koumaras, P. & Psillos, D. (1995). Différenciation conceptuelle: un enseignement d’hydrostatique fondé sur le développement et la contradiction des conceptions des élèves. Didaskalia, 7, 63–90.
Kattmann, U., Duit, R., Gropengieber, H. & Komorek, M. (1995). A model of Educational Reconstruction. Paper presented at The NARST annual meeting. San Francisco.
Komorek, M., Stavrou, D. & Duit, R. (2001). Nonlinear Physics in Upper Physics Classes: Educational Reconstruction as a Frame for Development and Research in a Study of Teaching and Learning Basic Ideas of Nonlinearity. In D. Psillos et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Science Education Research in a Knowledge Based Society (pp.483–485). Thessaloniki: Art of Text.
Leach, J. & Scott, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: An approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38, 115–142.
Lemeignan, G. & Weil-Barais, A. (1988). Etude de quelques activités de modélisation. In G. Vergnaud, G. Brousseau, M. Hulin (Eds.), Didactique et acquisition des connaissances scientifiques (pp.229–244). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage.
Lemeignan, G. & Weil-Barais, A. (1992). L’apprentissage de la modélisation dans L’enseignement de l’énergie. In Equipe INRP-LIREST (Eds.), Enseignement et apprentissage de la modélisation en sciences (pp.171–232). Paris: INRP.
Méheut, M. & Chomat, A. (1990). The bounds of children atomism; an attempt to make children build up a particulate model of matter. In P.L. Lijnse et al. (Eds.), Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles. (pp.266–282). Utrecht: CDβ Press.
Méheut, M. (1997). Designing a learning sequence about a pre-quantitative model of gases: the parts played by questions and by a computer-simulation. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 647–660.
Méheut, M. (1998). Designing learning sequences about pre-quantitative particle models. In A. Tiberghien, E.-L. Jossem & J. Barojas (Eds.), Connecting Research in Physics Education with Teacher Education http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~jossem/ICPE/BOOKS.html.
Méheut, M. & Psillos, D. (org.) (2000) Designing and validating teaching-learning sequences in a research perspective. Paris.
Minstrell, J. (1992). Facets of students’ knowledge and relevant instruction. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg and H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp.110–128). Kiel: IPN.
Morge, L. (2003). Les connaissances professionnelles locales: le cas d’une séance sur le modèle particulaire. Didaskalia, 23, 101–132.
Mortimer, E.F. (1993). The evolution of students’ explanations for physical state of matter as a change in their conceptual profile. In P.L. Lijnse et al. (Eds.), European research in science education: Proceedings of the first PhD Summerschool (pp.281–287). Utrecht: CDβ Press.
Nikolopoulou, K. (1993). An investigation into the effect of I.T. on pupils’ understanding of some science concepts and processes. In P.L. Lijnse et al. (Eds.), European research in science education: proceedings of the first PhD Summerschool (pp.206–214). Utrecht: CDβ Press.
Nussbaum, J. & Novick, S. (1982). Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and accommodation: toward a principled teaching strategy. Instructional Science 11, 183–200.
Nussbaum, J. (1989). Classroom conceptual change: philosophical perspectives. International Journal of Science Education 11, 530–540.
Petri, J. & Niedderer, H. (1998). A learning pathway in high-school level quantum atomic physics. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1075–1088.
Psillos, D. (1998). Teaching introductory electricity. In A. Tiberghien, E.-L. Jossem & J. Barojas (Eds.), Connecting Research in Physics Education with Teacher Education. http://www.physics.ohiostate.edu/~jossem/ICPE/BOOKS.html.
Psillos, D. & Kariotoglou, P. (1999). Teaching fluids: intended knowledge and students’ actual conceptual evolution. International Journal of Science Education 21, 17–38.
Psillos, D. & Méheut, M. (coord.) (2001). Teaching-learning sequences as a means for linking research to development. In D. Psillos et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Science Education Research in the Knowledge Based Society (pp.226–241). Thessaloniki, Art of Text.
Ravanis, K. & Papamichael, Y. (1995). Procédures didactiques de déstabilisation du système de représentations spontanées des élèves pour la propagation de la lumière. Didaskalia 7, 43–61.
Robardet, G. (1995). Situations problèmes et modélisation; enseignement en lycée d’un modèle newtonien de mécanique. Didaskalia, 7, 131–143.
Schwedes, H. & Schmidt, D. (1992). Conceptual change and theoretical comments. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg and H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp.188–202). Kiel: IPN.
Tiberghien, A., Psillos, D. & Koumaras, P. (1995). Physics instruction from epistemological and didactical basis. Instructional Science, 22, 423–444.
Tsoumpelis, L. (1993). Explications et modèles dans des situations a-didactiques en sciences physiques: le cas de la concentration molaire. Thèse de doctorat. Université Lyon 1.
Viennot, L. & Rainson, S. (1999). Design and evaluation of a research-based teaching sequence: the superposition of electric fields. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1–16.
Welzel, M. (1998) Emergence of complex cognition during a unit on static electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1107–1118.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
MéHeut, M. (2005). Teaching-Learning Sequences Tools for Learning and/or Research. 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_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3673-6_16
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-3672-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-3673-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawHistory (R0)