Abstract
In most work investigating factors influencing the success of analogies in instruction, an underlying assumption is that students have little or no knowledge of the target situation (the situation to be explained by analogy). It is interesting to ask what influences the success of analogies when students believe they understand the target situation. If this understanding is not normative, instruction must aim at conceptual change rather than simply conceptual growth. Through the analysis of four case studies of tutoring interviews (two of which achieved some noticeable conceptual change and two of which did not) we propose a preliminary list of factors important for success in overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning. First, there must be a usable anchoring conception. Second, the analogical connection between an anchoring example and the target situation may need to be developed explicitly through processes such as the use of intermediate, “bridging” analogies. Third, it may be necessary to engage the student in a process of analogical reasoning in an interactive teaching environment, rather than simply presenting the analogy in tetext or lecture. Finally, the result of this process may need to be more than analogical transfer of abstract relational structure. The analogies may need to be used to enrich the target situation, leading to the student's construction of a new explanatory model.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brown, D.E. (1987). Using analogies and examples to help students overcome misconceptions in physics: a comparison of two teaching strategies. Dissertation Abstracts International,49, 473A. (University Microfilms No. 8805897).
Brown, D. E. and Clement, J. (1987a). Misconceptions concemiing Newton's law of action and reaction: the underestimated importance of the third law. In J. D. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the Second International Seminar, Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Vol. III (pp. 39–53). Cornell University, July 26–29, 1987.
Brown, D. E. and Clement, J. (1987b). Overcoming misconceptions in mechanics: a comparison of two example-based teaching strategies. Paper presented at the conference of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC, April, 1987.
Camp, C., Clement, J., Schultz, K. and Brown, D. (1988), with the assistance of Kudukey, J., Minstrell, J., Steinberg M., Veneman, V. and Zietsman, A. Eight lessons designed to overcome misconceptions in physics: relative motion, frictional forces and Newton's third law. Scientific Reasoning Research Institute Tech. Rep. #166, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.
Clement, J. (1987), with the assistance of Brown, D., Camp, C., Kudukey, J., Minstrell, J., Palmer, D., Schultz, K., Shimabukuro, J., Steinberg, M. and Veneman, V. Overcoming students' misconceptions in physics: the role of anchoring intuitions and analogical validity. In J. D. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the Second International Seminar, Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Vol. III (pp. 84–97). Cornell University, July 26–29, 1987.
Clement, J. (1989). Learning via model construction and criticism: protocol evidence on sources of creativity in science. In G. Glover, R. Ronning and C. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity: assessment, theory, and research (pp. 341–381). New York: Plenum.
Clement, J. and Brown, D. E. (1984). Using analogical re deal with “deep” misconceptions in physics (Tech. Rep. No. 95). Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Scientific Reasoning Research Institute.
Clement, J., Brown, D. E. and Zietsman, A. (in press). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: finding “anchoring conceptions” for grounding instruction on students' intuitions. International Journal of Science Education.
Driver, R. and Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: a review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61–84.
Driver, R. and 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. (1987). Research on students' alternative frameworks in science-topics, theoretical frameworks, consequences for science teaching. In J. D. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the Second International Seminar: Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, Vol. I (pp. 151–162). Cornell University, July 26–29, 1987.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155–170.
Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199–241). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gick, M. L. and Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306–355.
Gick, M. L. and Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1–38.
Harre, R. (1972). The philosophies of science. New York:NY: Oxford University Press.
Hesse, M. B. (1967). Models and analogies in science. In P. Edwards (Ed.), The encyclopedia of philosophy (pp. 354–359). New York: Free Press.
Holland, J. H., Holyoak, K. J., Nisbett, R. E. and Thagard, P. R. (1986). Induction: processes of inference, learning and discovery. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Holyoak, K. J. and Thagard, P. R. (1989). A computational model of analogical problem solving. In S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 242–266). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (1983). What have we learned about increasing the meaningfulness of science prose? Science Education, 67, 223–237.
Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59, 43–64.
McDermott, L. (1984, July). Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics. Physics Today, 37, 24–32.
Murray, T., Schultz, K., Brown, D. and Clement, J. (in press). An analogy-based computer tutor for remediating physics misconceptions. Interactive Learning Environments, 1(1).
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211–227.
Royer, J. M. and Cable, G. W. (1975). Facilitated learning in connected discourse. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 116–123.
Royer, J. M. and Cable, G. W. (1976). Illustrations, analogies and facilitative transfer in prose learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 205–209.
Simons, P. R. J. (1984). Instructing with analogies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 513–527.
Stepich, D. A. and Newby, T. J. (1988). Analogical instruction within the information processing paradigm: effective means to facilitate learning. Instructional Science, 17, 129–144.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brown, D.E., Clement, J. Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instr Sci 18, 237–261 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00118013
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00118013