Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Coherent Knowledge Structures of Physics Represented as Concept Networks in Teacher Education

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A characteristic feature of scientific knowledge is the high degree of coherence and connectedness of its conceptual structure. This notion is also behind the widely accepted instructional method of representing the concepts as networks. We suggest here that notions of explanatory coherence and deductive coherence naturally connect the structure of knowledge to the processes which are important in constructing the concept networks. Of these processes, experimental method and modelling are shown to be closely connected with explanatory and deductive coherence, respectively. From this viewpoint, we compare here how experts and novices represent their physics knowledge in the form of concept networks, and show that significant differences between experts’ and novices’ quality of knowledge become directly reflected in the structure of the networks. The results also show how concept networks make visible both the structure of knowledge and the methodological procedures, which support its formation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson PW (2001) Science: a ‘dappled world’ or a ‘seamless web’? Stud Hist Philos Mod Phys 32:487–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BonJour L (1985) The structure of empirical knowledge. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford JD, Brown AL, Cocking RC (2000) How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi M, Feltovich P, Glaser R (1981) Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cogn Sci 5:121–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • da Costa LF, Rodrigues FA, Travieso G, Villas Boas PR (2007) Characterization of complex networks: a survey of measurements. Adv Phys 56:167–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derbentseva N, Safayeni F, Cañas AJ (2007) Concept maps: experiments on dynamic thinking. J Res Sci Teach 44:448–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • di Sessa A, Sherin BL (1998) What changes in conceptual change? Int J Sci Educ 20:1155–1191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giere RN (1988) Explaining science: a cognitive approach. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Giere RN, Bickle J, Mauldin RF (2006) Understanding scientific reasoning, 5th edn. Thomson Wadsworth, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Haack S (1993) Evidence and inquiry: towards reconstruction in epistemology. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman G (1986) Change in view: principles of reasoning. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes D (1992) Modeling games in the Newtonian World. Am J Phys 60:732–748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingeç SK (2008) Analysing concept maps as an assessment tool in teaching physics and comparison with the achievement tests. Int J Sci Educ 67:1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinchin IM, Hay DB, Adams A (2000) How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educ Res 42:43–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinchin IM, De-Leij FAAM, Hay DB (2005) The evolution of a collaborative concept mapping activity for undergraduate microbiology students. J Further Higher Educ 29:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P (1983) The nature of mathematical knowledge. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Koponen IT (2007) Models and modelling in physics education: a critical reanalysis of philosophical underpinnings and suggestions for revisions. Sci & Educ 16:751–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koponen IT, Mäntylä T (2006) Generative role of experiments in physics and in teaching physics: a suggestion for epistemological reconstruction. Sci & Educ 15:31–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosso P (1992) Reading the book of nature. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosso P (2009) The large-scale structure of scientific method. Sci & Educ 18:33–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer K (1990) Theory of knowledge. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Leve RM (2004) Informational acquisition and cognitive models. Complexity 9:31–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machin J, Loxley P (2004) Exploring the use of concept chains to structure teacher trainees’ understanding of science. Int J Sci Educ 26:1445–1475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mäntylä T, Koponen IT (2007) Understanding the role of measurements in creating physical quantities: a case study of learning to quantify temperature in physics teacher education. Sci & Educ 16:291–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClure JR, Sonak B, Hoi K, Suen HK (1999) Concept map assessment of classroom learning: reliability, validity, and logistical practicality. J Res Sci Teach 36:475–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mestre JP (2001) Implications of research on learning for the education of prospective science and physics teachers. Phys Educ 36:44–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minsky M (1975) A framework for representing knowledge. In: Winston PH (ed) The psychology of vision. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 211–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreira M (1985) Concept mapping: an alternative strategy for evaluation. Assess Eval Higher Educ 10:159–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison M, Morgan M (1999) Models as mediating instruments. In: Morgan MS, Morrison M (eds) Models as mediators. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel E (1961) The structure of science. Routledge & Kegan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak J, Gowin BD (1984) Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pemmaraju S, Skiena S (2006) Computational discrete mathematics combinatorics and graph theory with mathematica. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Primo MA, Shavelson RJ (1996) Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. J Res Sci Teach 33:569–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart D, Smolensky P, Hinton G, McClelland J (1986) Schemata and sequential thought processes in PDP models. In: McClelland J, Rumelhart D (eds) Parallel distributed processing: explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol 2. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 7–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruskeepää H (2004) Mathematica navigator: mathematics, statistics, and graphs, 2nd edn. Elsevier Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell B (1973) Essays in analysis. Allen and Unwin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Safayeni F, Derbentseva N, Cañas AJ (2005) A theoretical note on concepts and the need for cyclic concept maps. J Res Sci Teach 42:741–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sensevy G, Tiberghien A, Santini J, Laube S, Griggs P (2008) An epistemological approach to modeling: cases studies and implications for science teaching. Sci Educ 92:424–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slotte V, Lonka K (1999) Spontaneous concept maps aiding the understanding of scientific concepts. Int J Sci Educ 21:515–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder JL (2000) An investigation of the knowledge structures of experts, intermediates and novices in physics. Int J Sci Educ 22:979–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suppe F (1977) The structure of scientific theories, 2nd edn. University of Illinois Press, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard P (1988) Computational philosophy of science. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard P (1992) Conceptual revolutions. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard P (2000) Coherence in thought and action. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard P (2007) Coherence, truth, and the development of scientific knowledge. Philos Sci 74:28–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trowbridge JE, Wandersee JH (1989) Theory-driven graphical organizers. In: Mintzes JJ, Wandersee JH, Novak JD (eds) Teaching science for understanding: a human constructivistic view. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 95–128

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zele E, Lenaerts J, Wieme W (2004) Improving the usefulness of concept maps as a research tool for science education. Int J Sci Educ 26:1043–1064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanides J, Yin Y, Tomita M, Ruiz-Primo MA (2005) Using concept maps in the science classroom. Sci Scope 28:27–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (1999) Consilience: the unity of knowledge. Vintage Books, New York

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Ismo T. Koponen & Maija Pehkonen

Authors
  1. Ismo T. Koponen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maija Pehkonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ismo T. Koponen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Koponen, I.T., Pehkonen, M. Coherent Knowledge Structures of Physics Represented as Concept Networks in Teacher Education. Sci & Educ 19, 259–282 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9200-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9200-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation