ThesisPDF Available

Overcoming preconceptions to enhance student learning process in engineering science Domain of validity framework: a new instructional theory for designing and implementing preconception-centred teaching strategies in higher education

Authors:
  • Ohme Academia

Abstract

Each teacher can experience it every day: students come to science courses with prior knowledge which can act both as building blocks and as obstacles for new learning. It is widely acknowledged that preconceptions are present at both pre-university and university level, in particular in general physics education. These preconceptions may constitute important obstacles to learning since, successfully used in past experiences and contexts, they are considered as a priori ’always true’ by their owners and are then really difficult to overcome. As engineering teachers at university level, our practices in electricity, electromagnetism and electronics have offered many opportunities (questions in class, lab sessions, exam marking, etc) to realise that our specific context was not immune to this phenomenon. Despite our intuitive efforts and questionings about our teaching approach and material, we have been each year facing repetitive unexpected ‘mistakes’ from students in the context of electricity courses dedicated to second-year engineering students at Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB). Frustrated that we were not able to get the messages across effectively to students and motivated by the scarcity of published works in our specific niche, we decided to investigate areas in science education related to the teaching situations and issues we used to face. This thesis was the opportunity to explore the field (model-based learning, conceptual change, epistemological obstacle and pre/misconception) with the aim to improve our understanding, practices and teaching material. One intuitive ’to-be-tested’ idea acted as a starting point: switching the focus from the models themselves, i.e. the substances and subjects we use to learn and teach, to another central concept around which this whole piece of research is gravitating: what we call the domains of validity associated with those models, i.e. the range of situations in which they can be appropriately used and applied regarding the related context and desired outcomes. By embracing a two-component view of knowledge (considered as the association of a model and a DoV), we propose a new theoretical framework: the Domain of Validity Framework (or DoV framework). This framework explains the obstacle to learning as an overgeneralised DoV. It is specifically designed for developing teaching strategies and for use in the field, with the aim of helping teachers to trigger the overcoming of students’ preconceptions. The instructional techniques derived from this practice-oriented framework confront students with a paradoxical situation so that the student realises the limits of the original DoV and subsequently both searches for a new model and reduces the domain of validity of the original model. This instructional model also emphasises the importance of teaching not just models, but their domains of validity and, then, also means being explicit about the two components of knowledge. A series of studies integrated to a mixed methods research design has been built to assess the usefulness and effectiveness of our ideas and new framework to help teachers both diagnosing students’ learning obstacles and conceiving teaching strategies, methods and tools to help students to overcome such obstacles. Those studies include analyses of past examinations (summative assessments) and lab tests (formative assessments), the conception and impact analysis of new exercises and lab sessions with pre/post-tests research design, a qualitative inquiry based on student’s interviews, a case study based on the history of Maxwell’s discoveries and an autonomous educational web app aiming to help students overcome their preconceptions in electricity and in basic mechanics. Wherever we tested it, the implementation of the DoV framework through studies have shown interesting results. Investigating the implications of the concept of Domain of Validity (or DoV) regarding the literature, we have demonstrated the integrative power of our theory in relation to other scientific constructs related to prior knowledge, firstly by resolving apparent oppositions between these constructs, and secondly by redefining (or at least linking with our model) known terms using a small set of precisely defined terms. We have shown that engineering students at university level make mistakes in electricity partly on account of preconceptions they experience in that field, but also highlighted that their preconceptions are mostly different than those provided by the literature. Characterised by its ability to help teachers develop new techniques, the DoV framework has also proven to be a useful and ready-to-use tool for teachers to diagnose difficult-to-overcome students’ learning barriers, to build effective teaching strategies and methods as well as to reconsider the chronological sequence of the contents to be taught. As experiences and results have been gained, the framework has continued to evolve through iterations and exchanges between the theoretical and on-the-field levels, progressively integrating incremental enhancements opening new doors, new understanding and new applications. It also unveiled some unexpected, interesting and surprising concerns and questions we tried to address, such as the transposition of the DoV framework from a conceptual to a methodological level or the seemingly high interconnectedness existing between our ease to overcome a learning obstacle and our ability to diversify and switch between different modes of representation we use to describe phenomena or situations. Although we claim that our theory has high integrative power and applicability, it has its own domain of validity like any other model. It does not address all the issues related to prior knowledge and conceptual change. While we have given an example from and tested the theory in our field of electrical engineering, further research is needed to demonstrate its broad applicability across fields of science, the effectiveness of different teaching strategies based on the theory, the relationship with other theories, and the socio-cultural, emotional and affective dimensions of overcoming DoV-based preconceptions.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Il existe des similarités entre le processus d'apprentissage et le processus d'innovation scientifique (Espinoza, 2005). Tous deux consistent en la construction de nouvelles connaissances, en la création et l'acquisition de modèles toujours plus performants pour représenter la réalité. Selon Clement, « Si la recherche peut être vue comme une création de savoir public, l'apprentissage peut être vu comme une création de savoirs privés » (Clement, 2006). Nos précédentes recherches nous ont amené à formaliser le processus de rupture cognitive (dépassement par un étudiant d'un obstacle cognitif) par le biais d'un modèle simple et original. Celui-ci nous a permis de mieux comprendre ce processus et d'améliorer nos stratégies d'enseignement. Nous avons pu démontrer l'efficacité de cette analyse dans le cadre de séances d'exercices d'un cours de théorie des circuits à l'université (Référence masquée). Selon cette représentation, une préconception n'est pas due à la mobilisation d'une connaissance intrinsèquement fausse mais à l'inadéquation du domaine de validité (les conditions d'application dans lesquelles le modèle est valide) qui lui est attribué. Afin d'aider l'étudiant à dépasser une telle préconception, il faut donc le mener à une expérience qui va l'amener à douter des limites de son modèle (et non du modèle lui-même). Suite à cet état de conflit cognitif (Brousseau, 1989 ; Duval, 1992), l'étudiant pourra envisager de restreindre la gamme de validité de son modèle initial tout en entamant la recherche d'un nouveau modèle plus performant. Cette opération de restriction apparait alors comme la nature même de la rupture cognitive. Nous basant sur cette analyse et sur le lien entre les processus d'invention et d'apprentissage, est apparue la question de savoir si notre modèle de la rupture cognitive s'applique également (et dans quelle mesure) au processus d'innovation scientifique. Ceci pour mieux comprendre la dynamique à l'œuvre lors d'une invention et le cas échéant en retirer des éléments additionnels applicables aux processus d'enseignement.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Les erreurs récurrentes observées chez les étudiants peuvent parfois, voire souvent, être expliquées en exploitant l’idée de préconception selon laquelle un étudiant construit son apprentissage en s’appuyant sur des concepts antérieurs. Les préconceptions, parce qu’elles sont susceptibles d’entrer en conflit avec l’assimilation de nouveaux savoirs, peuvent constituer des obstacles parfois sévères à l’apprentissage. Plusieurs courants de recherche ont émergé pour développer cette notion complexe. En tentant de décrypter les erreurs commises dans un cours d’électricité de BAC2 en sciences de l’ingénieur à l’École Polytechnique de Bruxelles, nous avons été amenés à proposer une modélisation particulière de ce phénomène.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Our research studies about student’s prior knowledge acting as learning difficulties (referred to as preconceptions) in electricity courses at university level led us to define knowledge as the association of two elements: a model and a domain of validity (DoV). This statement is the core of the DoV framework. This framework reveals its powerfulness in the way it helps teachers to map students’ cognitive structures, to identify their preconceptions as well as to derive effective teaching strategies. Quantitative experimentations we carry out indicate a lack of global circuit solving strategy among students. Especially, they highlight the fact that the difficulties encountered by those students in network analysis are not that much relying on the mastering of solving methods but on the method selection process. This lack of solving strategy prevents the students to grasp the domain of validity of the solving methods they master, so to associate the relevant methods with the suitable circuits. This paper depicts how the application of the DoV framework to this problem-solving process reveals to be a great tool to identify and tackle students’ (methodological) preconceptions as well as to formalize, rationalize and simplify complex solving strategies making them easier to explain, teach and learn.
Book
Described by the philosopher A.J. Ayer as a work of ‘great originality and power’, this book revolutionized contemporary thinking on science and knowledge. Ideas such as the now legendary doctrine of ‘falsificationism’ electrified the scientific community, influencing even working scientists, as well as post-war philosophy. This astonishing work ranks alongside The Open Society and Its Enemies as one of Popper’s most enduring books and contains insights and arguments that demand to be read to this day. © 1959, 1968, 1972, 1980 Karl Popper and 1999, 2002 The Estate of Karl Popper. All rights reserved.