LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Hast, Michael (2014)
Publisher: St Mary's University
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: 501, 372
It is well-documented that children do not begin school as blank slates but that they bring with them extensive knowledge about how the world around them works. This conceptual knowledge, embedded within rich theoretical structures, is not always accurate and requires change through learning and instruction. Yet some ideas – such as object motion – appear to be particularly resistant to such change. So how can conceptual change be achieved or facilitated? Collaboration, for one, has long been recognised as a beneficial learning and teaching approach, including early science education. However, for deep-rooted ideas collaborating with others may not always have the desired impact. Instead, the notion of self-collaboration is considered in this review. The current state of research in the field of predictive and underlying knowledge in childhood is outlined and different models of how the knowledge systems relate to each other are discussed. While further work is still needed to establish a clearer picture of how self-collaboration might effect conceptual change, research to-date clearly identifies significant differences between predictive and underlying knowledge structures throughout childhood, how these structures can be related to traditional conceptual change theories, and how they may play a role in future learning and instructional approaches.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Baillargeon, R. (2004). Can 12 large clowns fit in a Mini Cooper? Or when are beliefs and reasoning explicit and conscious? Developmental Science, 7, 422-424.
    • Baker, S.T., Murray, K., & Hood, B.M. (2009). Children's expectations about weight and speed in falling objects: The younger the judge, the better? Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the SRCD, Denver, CO.
    • Bloom, P., & Weisberg, D.S. (2007). Childhood origins of adult resistance to science. Science, 316, 996-997.
    • Broaders, S.C., Cook, S.W., Mitchell, Z., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2007). Making children gesture brings out implicit knowledge and leads to learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 539-550.
    • Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Cahyadi, M.V., & Butler, P.H. (2004). Undergraduate students' understanding of falling bodies in idealized and real-world situations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 569-583.
    • Carey, S. (2000). Science education as conceptual change. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 13-19.
    • Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Chinn, C.A., & Malhotra, B.A. (2002). Children's responses to anomalous scientific data: How is conceptual change impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 327-343.
    • Chomsky, N. (2007). Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland & H.-M. Gärtner (Eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky's minimalism and the view from syntaxsemantics (pp. 1-30). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    • Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and explicit knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    • Dehaene, S. (2011). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Duit, R. (2009). Bibliography STCE: Students' and teachers' conceptions and science education. Retrieved October 23, 2009, from http://www.ipn.unikiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html
    • Duit, R., Treagust, D.F., & Widodo, A. (2008). Teaching science for conceptual change: theory and practice. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 629-646). London: Routledge.
    • Friedman, W.J. (2002). Arrows of time in infancy: The representation of temporal-causal invariances. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 252-296.
    • Fu, Q., Dienes, Z., & Fu, X. (2010). The distinction between intuition and guessing in the SRT task generation: A reply to Norman and Price. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 478-480.
    • Hast, M. (2011). Explicit versus tacit knowledge in early science education: The case of primary school children's understanding of object speed and acceleration (doctoral thesis). Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
    • Hast, M. (2012). Tacit knowledge assessment in early science education: A new horizon in learning and instruction? Paper presented at the EARLI Junior Researchers Conference 2012, Regensburg, Germany.
    • Hast, M., & Howe, C. (2010). Explicit versus tacit knowledge in children's reasoning about object motion. Paper presented at the BPS Developmental Section Annual Conference, London, UK.
    • Hast, M., & Howe, C. (2012). Understanding the beliefs informing children's commonsense theories of motion: The role of everyday object variables in dynamic event predictions. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30, 3-15.
    • Hast, M., & Howe, C. (2013a). Towards a complete commonsense theory of motion: The interaction of dimensions in children's predictions of natural object motion. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 1649-1662.
    • Hast, M., & Howe, C. (2013b). The development of children's understanding of speed change: A contributing factor towards commonsense theories of motion. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22, 337-350.
    • Hennessy, S. (2006). Integrating technology into teaching and learning of school science: A situated perspective on pedagogical issues in research. Studies in Science Education, 42, 1-48.
    • Hennessy, S., Wishart, J., Whitelock, D., Deaney, R., Brawn, R., la Velle, L, … & Winterbottom, M. (2007). Pedagogical approaches for technology-integrated science teaching. Computers & Education, 48, 137-152.
    • Hogarth, R.M. (2001). Educating intuition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    • Howe, C.J. (1998). Conceptual structure in childhood and adolescence: The case of everyday physics. London: Routledge.
    • Howe, C. (2009). Collaborative group work in middle childhood: Joint construction, unresolved contradiction and the growth of knowledge. Human Development, 39, 71- 94.
    • Howe, C. (2010). Peer groups and children's development. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
    • Howe, C. (2012). Neuroscience and knowledge acquisition in curriculum contexts: Modelling conceptual development in school science. British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II, 8, 83-98.
    • Howe, C. (2013). Discussion. In H. Tenenbaum (Chair), Young people's reasoning about biology and physics. Symposium conducted at the Joint Annual Conference of the BPS Cognitive and Developmental Sections, Reading, UK.
    • Howe, C., Devine, A., & Taylor Tavares, J. (2013). Supporting conceptual change in school science: A possible role for tacit understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 864-883.
    • Howe, C.J., & McWilliam, D. (2006). Opposition in social interaction amongst children: Why intellectual benefits do not mean social costs. Social Development, 15, 205-231.
    • Howe, C., McWilliam, D., & Cross, G. (2005). Chance favours only the prepared mind: Incubation and the delayed effects of peer collaboration. British Journal of Psychology, 96, 67-93.
    • Howe, C., Taylor Tavares, J., & Devine, A. (2012). Everyday conceptions of object fall: Explicit and tacit understanding in middle childhood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111, 351-366.
    • Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2013). The acceptance of tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers' perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 525-534.
    • Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence (A. Parsons & S. Milgram, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    • James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. London: Macmillan.
    • Kaiser, M.K., & Proffitt, D.R. (1984). The development of sensitivity to causally relevant dynamic information. Child Development, 55, 1614-1624.
    • Kaiser, M.K., Profitt, D.R., Whelan, S.M., & Hecht, H. (1992). Influence of animation on dynamical judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 669-690.
    • Kannass, K.N., Oakes, L.M., & Wiese, D. (1999). The development of infants' perception of object movement along inclines. Cognitive Development, 14, 215-240.
    • Kim, I.K., & Spelke, E. (1992). Infants' sensitivity to effects of gravity on visible object motion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Behaviour and Performance, 18, 385-393.
    • Kim, I.-K., & Spelke, E.S. (1999). Perception and understanding of effects of gravity and inertia on object motion. Developmental Science, 2, 339-362.
    • Kinzler, K.D., & Spelke, E.S. (2007). Core systems in human cognition. In C. von Hofsten & K. Rosander (Eds.), Progress in brain research (Vol. 164, pp. 257-264). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
    • Klaassen, K. (2005). The concept of force as a constitutive element of understanding the world. In K. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. de Jong, & H. Eijkelhof (Eds.), Research and the quality of science education (pp. 447-457). Dordrecht: Springer.
    • Lemer, C., Dehaene, S., Spelke, E., & Cohen, L. (2003). Approximate quantities and exact number words: Dissociable systems. Neuropsychologia, 41, 1942-1958.
    • Livingstone, S. (2012). Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. Oxford Review of Education, 38, 9-24.
    • Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2005). Primary science in the UK: A scoping study. London: Wellcome Trust.
    • Nachtigall, D. (1982). Vorstellungen von Fünftkläßlern über den freien Fall [Fifth-graders' conceptions of free fall]. Naturwissenschaften im Unterricht - Physik/Chemie, 30, 91- 97.
    • Piaget, J. (1985). The equilibration of cognitive structures: The central problem of intellectual development. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    • Planinic, M., Boone, W.J., Krsnik, R., & Beilfuss, M.L. (2006). Exploring alternative conceptions from Newtonian dynamics and simple DC circuits: Links between item difficulty and item confidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 150-171.
    • Plessner, H., & Czenna, S. (2008). The benefits of intuition. In H. Plessner, C. Betsch, & T. Betsch (Eds.), Intuition in judgement and decision making (pp. 251-265). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    • Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    • Porter, C. (2013). ICT enhancing science. In L. Kelly & D. Stead (Eds.), Enhancing primary science: Developing effective cross-curricular links (pp. 42-57). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
    • Posner, G.J., Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W., & Gertzog, W.A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.
    • Reed, N., McLeod, P., & Dienes, Z. (2010). Implicit knowledge and motor skill: What people who know how to catch don't know. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 63-76.
    • Reif, F. (2008). Applying cognitive science to education: Thinking and learning in scientific and other complex domains. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • Rosenberg, R.D., & Carey, S. (2009). Infant's representations of material entities. In B.M. Hood & L.R. Santos (Eds.), The origins of object knowledge (pp. 165-188). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Sequeira, M., & Leite, L. (1991). Alternative conceptions and history of science in physics teacher education. Science Education, 75, 45-56.
    • Scott, R.B., & Dienes, Z. (2010). Knowledge applied to new domains: The unconscious succeeds where the conscious fails. Consciousness and Cognition, 19, 391-398.
    • Shanon, B. (1976). Aristotelianism, Newtonianism and the physics of the layman. Perception, 5, 241-243.
    • Spelke, E.S., & Hespos, S. (2001). Continuity, competence, and the object concept. In E. Dupoux (Ed.), Language, brain, and cognitive development: Essays in honor of Jacques Mehler (pp. 325-340). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • Stanescu-Cosson, R., Pinel, P., van de Moortele, P.-F., Le Bihan, D., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. (2000). Understanding dissociations in dyscalculia: A brain imaging study of the impact of number size on the cerebral networks for exact and approximate calculation. Brain, 123, 2240-2255.
    • Taylor Tavares, J., Howe, C., & Devine, A. (2009). Children's conceptions of horizontal motion: Tacit and explicit understanding in middle childhood. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the SRCD, Denver, CO.
    • van Hise, Y.A. (1988). Student misconceptions in mechanics: An international problem? The Physics Teacher, 26, 498-502.
    • Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Funded by projects

  • WT

Cite this article