Concept and Conception in Science Education

The terms concept and conception may have ambiguous as well as contentious definitions in philosophy and psychology (Lalumera, 2014; Malt, 2010). These two perspectives theorised that, “concept is a theoretical term” (Lalumera, 2014, p. 73). As such, the term concept is part of a theoretical explanation about the science of cognitive construction of an idea (Lalumera, 2014). In addition, Bloch-Mullins (2015) pointed out that, “concepts are constituents of thoughts. They enable us to classify the world into categories” (p. 940). On the one hand, philosophers proposed that concept is an abstract object, independent of the mind while on the other hand, psychologists theorised concept as a mental representation, internal to the mind (Margolis & Laurence, 2007). Subsequently, when examining this theoretical difference, Margolis and Laurence (2007) postulated that “concepts should be identified with mental representations” (p. 588). That is, concepts are mental representations of entities or phenomena. It is alleged that individuals may regard their mental representations of entities and phenomenon as truths about reality. Hence, the mental representations that

27

an individual construct and hold about reality would set a system of beliefs that are well situated within the holder’s schema of thoughts and actions (Remesal, 2011). Accordingly, Remesal (2011) argued that, conception is the organisation of the systems of beliefs that individuals construct and hold as mental representations of reality that they experience.

Science education literature indicated that many science curriculum documents use verbs such as “understand, know, have, use, apply, and develop” (Tang, 2011, p. 111) along with the term concept. For example, learners must be able to understand and apply the concept of force. The use of such verbs tend to indicate that concept is an object or a thing that an individual “can recognise, acquire and possess” (Tang, 2011, p. 111). Along with this, a concept was normally regarded as a stable idea or mental representation of an entity or a phenomenon (Gilbert & Watts, 1983). It was posited that a mental representation is a formation of some structured strings of information, images, situations and actions which can be integrated cognitively to interpret and explain new happenings as well as guide individuals interactions and reasoning about any new and similar entity or phenomena (Driver, 1989; Lalumera, 2014). In other words, mental representations of reality may help individuals to recognise and classify entities into categories as well as, to have the capacity to integrate and apply their knowledge within other situations (Bloch-Mullins, 2015). That means, individuals use their mental representations of entities to recognise and explain phenomena and situations.

However, while concept may be regarded as a stable mental model of an entity or a phenomenon, Wells (2008) and Vosniadou (2008) argued that scientific concepts are not relatively stable and they do not belong to individuals. This argument is in-line with the view that, the term concept can be used with reference to individual’s knowledge structure, such as every day concepts, as well as public knowledge systems such as, scientific concepts (Gilbert & Watts, 1983; Wells, 2008). That means, a concept can be referred to as a mental representation that an individual constructed about reality through cognitive development or as a system of knowledge constructed and sanctioned by an organisation.

According to Vygotsky (1987) and Fleer (2009), it is important to differentiate and connect everyday concepts to scientific concepts that are sanctioned and can be

28

generalised. Vygotsky (1987) asserted that learners developed an idea or a mental representation through their everyday experiences and direct interactions with an entity or phenomena. Basically, Vygotsky (1987) developed a dialectical argument about conception or formation of a mental representation by emphasizing a link between words and verbal thinking which reflects that someone has consciously developed an idea about an entity. That is, when an idea is formed in the mind there are words that are linked to it and those words can be used when speaking and writing to reveal that idea. Besides, Vygotsky (1987) claimed that everyday concepts or ideas that learners formed about entities and phenomena are grounded in their daily life experiences and interactions. These everyday concepts are well situated in the mind, thus greatly influence the learner’s conceptions and beliefs about reality.

However, an idea formulated through and from experience as well as direct interaction in everyday life may not be scientific and cannot be generalised to other contexts or situations (Fleer, 2009; Vygotsky, 1987). Learners may construct mental representations from every day experiences and interactions but the mental representations may not be scientific (Fleer, 2009). For example, learners may develop an idea by experiencing that bigger and heavier objects fall faster than smaller and lighter objects when dropped at the same time from the same height above the ground. Although, learners through everyday experience with falling objects may formulate and can reasonably reveal their ideas in words and semiotics, their explanation that heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects may not be scientific. Other researchers refer to learner’s conceptions that are different to scientific concepts as “misconceptions… preconception, naïve theories, and alternative frameworks” (Read, 2004, p. 2). Nevertheless, Sneider and Ohandi (1998) prefer to use the term misconception to emphasize the need for learners to make a conceptual change from a conception that is not scientific to one that is scientifically correct.

According to Vygotsky (1987), everyday concepts are spontaneous and constructed during particular instances in everyday life while scientific concepts were constructed over time and are part of a structured body of knowledge. As such, Vygotsky (1987) argued that a mental representation of an entity that is scientifically correct can be constructed through formal learning in school science. However, Vygotsky (1987) and Fleer (2009) asserted that scientific concepts that are formally learnt in schools during

29

schooling should have some connections to the learner’s everyday contexts. Further to that, it is beneficial to connect the learning of scientific concepts with learner’s every day or “spontaneous concepts” (Howe, 1996, p. 38). In other words, it is vital to make connections between the formation of concepts from everyday experiences and formation of scientific concepts through formal learning.

However, according to Tang (2011), Vygotsky’s terminology of scientific concepts refers more “to the systematic concepts that are gained through formal learning (as opposed to spontaneous concepts) and not the notion of scientific concepts that are commonly found in science curriculum and instructions” (p. 114). Tang (2011) argued that Vygotsky’s contentions about scientific concepts was mainly from the stand point of learners’ psychological development. In fact, Tang (2011) highlighted that scientific concepts are “more concerned with a broad sociohistorical constitution of knowledge, social subjects, and conceptual framework of a society or institution” (p. 115). Hence, in a broader and discursive system, scientific concepts are defined and sanctioned by an organised society or institution with a set of rules and discourse. In this case the organised society is the scientific community (Tang, 2011). Therefore, scientific concepts that are formally learnt in school science are collaboratively constructed overtime and sanctioned by the scientific community.

Wells (2008) alleged that scientific concepts are institutionally accredited by the interrelated organisations within the scientific community. Hence, although concepts maybe formulated or constructed by an individual within the community, the concepts are further proved, scrutinized and formally documented according to the binding historical practices and rules of conduct within the scientific community (Tang, 2011; Wells, 2008). As such, it can be argued that the scientific concepts that are found in science curricula were collaboratively produced, heavily scrutinized, documented and institutionally sanctioned within the scientific community. So scientific concepts are not determined and defined by a single discipline such as Physics, Chemistry or Biology but by the broader scientific community that consists of many interrelated systems of disciplines (Tang, 2011; Wells, 2008). Added to that, Wells (2008) asserted that a scientific concept is not a single idea but a systematic structure of ideas that are interrelated, connected and is shared within the scientific community.

30

Along this line of argument, Treagust and Duit (2008) portrayed scientific concepts as mental constructs that are collaboratively shared by a community. Additionally, they asserted that the conception of scientific concepts is basically the formulation of mental models that represent external entities that are formally learnt in school science. That implies that, the understanding of scientific concepts in science curricula documents should be accorded to what is known, accepted and sanctioned by the scientific community. Historically, professional scientists over many generations had developed the scientific concepts to increase their understanding as well as to develop possibilities for their actions within the scientific community (Wells, 2008). Thus, scientific concepts were produced as “cultural artefacts… and they do not belong to particular individuals… but are available for all to use” (Wells, 2008, p. 346). That means, scientific concepts belong to the scientific community and teachers, learners as well as individuals can learn and use them on a social plane (Tang, 2011). Subsequently, science teachers should develop better understanding of scientific concepts in school science. In this regard, it is significant for this study to explore both the trainee and practising science teachers’ understanding of physics and scientific concepts in the context of practical work.

However, in order to understand and subsequently teach, learn, assess and use scientific concepts it is also proper to further outline the nature and construction of scientific concepts from a representation framework (Tang, 2011).

2.3.2 Representation Framework of Concept and Conception