Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory

2017 Edition
| Editors: Michael A. Peters

Conceptual Change in Science and Science Education

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-588-4_41

Introduction

A large body of work in science education and conceptual development research has noted that historical changes in scientific ideas display similarities to students’ conceptual progressions along a novice-expert continuum. For example, researchers have noted that scientists’ historical resistance to changing their pre-Newtonian ideas relating to mechanics was very similar to modern students’ difficulties abandoning pre-Newtonian ideas, that there are parallels between students’ ideas of chemical equilibrium and earlier scientists’ conceptual models, or that students’ thinking about evolution appears to parallel large-scale changes in scientific thought from essentialist to selection-based views of evolution. In contrast, other scholars have cautioned that purported similarities between students’ conceptual changes and the historical development of scientific concepts are superficial and are derived from different methods and sources of knowledge (Nersessian 1989)....

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Burkhardt, R. W. (2013). Lamarck, evolution, and the inheritance of acquired characters. Genetics, 194, 793–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. DiSessa, A. A. (2014). A history of conceptual change research. In R. Keith Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (Cambridge handbooks in psychology 2nd ed., pp. 88–108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: Cambridge Books Online. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139519526.007. Accessed 09 Oct 2015. [Online].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gauld, C. (1991). HOS, individual development and science teaching. Research in Science Education, 21, 133–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ha, M., & Nehm, R. H. (2014). Darwin’s difficulties and students’ struggles with trait loss: Cognitive-historical parallelisms in evolutionary explanation. Science & Education, 23(5), 1051–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kampourakis, K., & Nehm, R. (2014). History and philosophy of science and the teaching of evolution: Students’ conceptions and explanations. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 377–399). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2007). Students’ preconceptions about evolution: How accurate is the characterization as “Lamarckian” when considering the history of evolutionary thought? Science & Education, 16(3–5), 393–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2009). Preliminary evolutionary explanations: A basic framework for conceptual change and explanatory coherence in evolution. Science & Education, 18(10), 1313–1340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Moharreri, K., Ha, M., & Nehm, R. H. (2014). EvoGrader: An online formative assessment tool for automatically evaluating written evolutionary explanations. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 7, 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nehm, R. H., & Ha, M. (2011). Item feature effects in evolution assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(3), 237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nersessian, N. (1989). Conceptual change in science and in science education. Synthese, 80, 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nersessian, N. (2008). Creating scientific concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2013). International handbook of research on conceptual change (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Stony Brook UniversityStony BrookUSA
  2. 2.University of GenevaGenevaSwitzerland