Posner et al. (1982) introduced the concept of “conceptual change” they attempted to simplify the term of conceptual change; they agreed that a student’s conceptual ecology (i.e., something that exists naturally) is grounded in conceptual change because “Without [preconceptions of phenomena] it is impossible for the learner to ask a question about the phenomena, to know what would count as an answer to the question, or to distinguish relevant from irrelevant features of the phenomenon.” (p. 212).
DiSessa (2006) states that conceptual change refers to a process in which students build new ideas or concepts in the context of their current understanding. Liu, Hmelo-Silver (2007) state that in science education the ideal conceptual change involves students’ shifting from their initial preconceptions to scientific conceptions (i.e., scientific beliefs, ideas, or ways of thinking)
The current study concentrates on changing the concepts of science students from 10 to 11 years old; this age group is part of the third phase from Piaget’s perspective of cognitive development (7- 11 years). Therefore, the students in this age group have difficulty understanding abstract concepts or problems, I find that the new science curriculum in primary schools in Kuwait contain an abundance of abstract (i.e. intangible) concepts and new scientific terminology in various topics. These abstract concepts (such as the flow direction of electric current in the electric circuit lesson or the state of air molecules or plant pollination) are not easy for students to understand through traditional didactic teaching. This method is insufficient, and teachers need appropriate educational tools that can describe and explain to the students what is meant by these abstract concepts.
Scientific concepts are opposed or offset by pre-existing concepts and information in the mind of the student. These pre-existing concepts are characterised by strong resistance to conceptual change, and this affects the student’s ability to receive new information during the education process. At the same time, the use of traditional teaching methods is the dominant style of science teachers in primary schools in Kuwait, where the common practice is to use oral explanations, with pictures from the school’s science textbook, without trying to engage the majority of students in discussion during the lesson (see the first chapter’s “Educational reforms in science teaching in Kuwait”). Therefore the product
28
of science education in Kuwaiti primary schools is rote learning; this means that the learner demonstrates good retention (memorisation) and poor understanding (Mayer, 2009). In rote learning, learning depends on retaining the concepts and new information of the science subject and recalling them during tests, without initiating cognitive conflict and then changing or modifying the misunderstandings to get meaningful learning (Loveless & Ellis, 2001). This conflict on which learning can be based is the conflict between knowledge acquired before entering school and the new, correct scientific concepts that a student must learn in school; the aim is to revise the former by remedying them with the latter to obtain meaningful learning instead of rote learning (Tekos & Solomonidou, 2009).
In order to create conceptual conflict and make students dissatisfied with preconceptions the Posner et al - through CCM - suggests new scientific concepts in the learning process must include the following three conditions or characteristics:
1. New knowledge or concepts should have intelligibility; intelligibility means the new concept/information must be clear and understandable and make sense to students. 2. New knowledge or concepts should have plausibility; plausibility means the new
concept/information must be reasonable and true, must match students’ personal standards of knowledge, and must be consistent with students’ existing conceptions. 3. New knowledge or concepts should have fruitfulness; the new concept should have
the capacity to solve problems or predict phenomena more easily than the existing concept.
Posner and his colleagues assume that in order to successfully effect conceptual change, the three conditions for a new concept should be met and occur during the learning process. A major aim is to establish or create conceptual conflict to make students dissatisfied, which is akin to Piaget’s disequilibrium view of existing conceptions. Many researchers therefore put dissatisfaction as a fourth condition, but I support Ozdemir and Clark (2007) in that the dissatisfaction should be the result of the three conditions above, applied during the learning process.
Several studies (e.g., Skoumios & Hatzinikita, 2005; Cindy & Silver, 2007) have shown that the use of the cognitive conflict approach supports the achievement and enhancement of conceptual change and then helps students to construct or modify old knowledge. This
29
means cognitive conflict creates opportunities for students to confront conflicting concepts and information on the target topic, and hence, the concepts and information are discrepant or unlike the prior knowledge they hold of the concept and their beliefs on the same topic. Thus, cognitive conflict arises when students face experimental results that are inconsistent with their expectations, which results in dissatisfaction and leads students to re-evaluate their existing knowledge.
There are, of course, limitations that science teachers are facing, and that limits or hinder the application of the constructivism approach and scaffolding in science classrooms or shift the science classroom from traditional to constructivist (see table 1) as one of the most important aims in science educational reform in Kuwait . Also, science teachers lack the necessary resources and materials that can help them present the desired concepts to students in form of intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness – as proposed by Posner et al - so as to make science lessons interesting and engage students in the learning process and achieve a conceptual conflict and then the conceptual change, these are some of the challenges that were cited and demanded by the officials of science education methods development in Kuwait for science education reform. Therefore, science teachers have embarked on using traditional teaching methods and science teacher role is the controlling and dominating on the classroom.
The current study attempts to use interactive computer simulation software, in applying the constructivist method, instead of traditional methods. In the other words, the study changes traditional science classrooms to constructivist classrooms through adopting a conceptual change model (Posner et al., 1982), in providing the desired concepts and information, which is thought to be more interesting for students when it comes to understand the new concepts and attempting to get meaningful learning (not rote learning). Use ICSS merged with the conceptual change model (CCM) proposed by Posner et al. (1982), an increasingly important approach used in many of the various branches of science education (as will be demonstrated by the literature review in the next chapter). The CCM has proved effective at contradicting students’ early-phase misconceptions.
30
Table 1
The Difference between a Traditional Classroom and a Constructivist Classroom
Factors Traditional Classroom Constructivist Classroom
Curriculum
Curriculum is presented part to whole, with emphasis on basic
skills.
Strict adherence to fixed curriculum is highly valued.
Curriculum is presented whole to part, with emphasis on big
concepts.
Pursuit of student questions is highly valued.
Curricular Activities
Rely heavily on textbooks and
workbooks. Rely heavily on primary sources of data and manipulative materials [simulation program].
How Students are Viewed
Students are viewed as blank slates onto which information is etched by
the teacher.
Students are viewed as thinkers with emerging theories about the world.
Teacher
Generally behave in a didactic manner, disseminating information to students.
Teachers seek the correct answer to validate student learning.
Teachers generally behave in an interactive manner, mediating the
environment for students.
Teachers seek the students' point of view in order to understand students' present conceptions for
use in subsequent lessons.
Assessment
Assessment of student learning is viewed as separate from teaching and
occurs almost entirely through testing.
Assessment of student learning is interwoven with teaching and occurs
through teacher observation of students at work and through student
exhibitions and portfolios. How Students
Work
Students primarily work alone. Students primarily work in groups.
Source: Brooks, J & Brooks, M (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASC
Because of the huge capabilities and advantages available in computer simulation programmes (Wellington, 1985), they can provide non-traditional educational situations. Papadourisa and Constantinoub (2009) agree with Jimoyiannis and Komis (2001) that computer simulations have enormous capabilities and can provide students with several opportunities (see Table 2). Simulation programmes has potential to achieve the conditions
31
of conceptual change suggested by Posner and his colleagues. They use words (as printed on the screen or spoken text), static graphics (photos, maps, or illustrations) and animations (as dynamic graphics and video) and these make available of the three characteristics of intelligibility, plausibility, and fruitfulness.
Thus, showing the intelligibility, plausibility, and fruitfulness in the desired new information, knowledge, and concepts of science topics which be taught in simulation program, may be help to taught in a way that creates dissatisfaction in the students toward the prior knowledge which they hold about the same topic.
Table 2
The Contribution to Science Teaching and Learning which may be Provided by the Capabilities of Computer Simulation
The capabilities which computer simulation software can provide
Potential contribution to the science teaching and learning
Run animated/dynamic simulations of physical phenomena and systems.
Visualization of complex and abstract physical systems and phenomena.
Development of mental models to represent abstract and inferred concepts.
Clear and quick collection of pseudo- experimental data.
Evaluation of the validity of mental models and gradual improvement.
Generation of cognitive conflicts. Virtually conduct experiments that
would normally require ideal conditions.
Evaluation of the validity of theoretical
principles in conditions that cannot be naturally established.
Explore more than one representations of a physical phenomenon.
Gain deeper understanding of underlying physical phenomena.
Translate ideas from one representation to another.
Evaluation of alternative representation formats.
Development of the skill to select and combine
Appropriate representation formats to communicate certain ideas.
Development of awareness with respect to the characteristics of effective communication. Variable control and isolation by
interactivity
Foster skills with respect to the conduction of valid experiments through the appropriate control of variables by manipulating variables.
Identify causal relationships and irrelevant parameters.
32
Many tools may be able to satisfy the three conditions of Posner et al (1982) regarding the teaching of new concepts to students. For example educational television introduces new concepts in a dynamic form, and provokes students to reflect, creating the conceptual conflict between students’ prior knowledge or pre-concepts and the correct scientific concepts to which they have been exposed. Given that, what is new in simulation? How is simulation different from other tools?
The one unique characteristic of computer simulation software as an educational tool that distinguishes it from other education tools is interactivity or the potential for interactivity. Interactivity enables students to manipulate variables of an experiment or phenomenon. It can show the student the impact of this manipulation as immediate feedback. Such interactions between the student and the simulation program are not available and cannot be provided with the any other education tools.
From a learning perspective there are three types of interactions (see Figure 2) in the formal setting (Evans and Sabry, 2003). These may occur in the classroom or other instructional environment, they are:
a) Interactions between students (students-student interaction): These types of interactions in science education in Kuwaiti primary schools happen very rarely between students, on the occasion that there is discussion about the topic being taught.
b) Interaction with tutors (teacher-student interaction): This type of interaction rarely happen in science lessons in primary school in Kuwait and if it happens, happens with smart students in the classroom without taking into account individual differences among students. What predominantly happens is one-way information transfer from science teachers to students in order to provide information on the topic being taught. The reason for this is that science teachers in primary schools in Kuwait face many obstacles that prevent them from using this type of interaction (see Chapter One).
c) Interactions with teaching material itself (student-content interaction): This type of interaction, through adoption and utilisation of ICSS as educational tool, as
addressed in the current study, may achieve some of the goals of using this type of interaction in practical work with the real materials during experiment conduct.
33 .
Figure 2. The three types of interactions in an educational environment
The current study is focusing on interactivity between the students and ICSS program and aims is to create an active educational environment that will facilitate students being involved and participating in the educational process, as well as providing students with ample opportunity to develop information through investigation in the context of the interactivity of a ICSS program. Thus, the students will work on constructing scientific knowledge and concepts by examining (i.e. testing or checking) their previous knowledge or concepts through manipulating and controlling the scientific experiments or the natural phenomena displayed by the program. This added forum for exploration does not detract in any way from the role of the teacher as a guide, advisor, and facilitator of student learning. In conclusion, the functionality and characteristics available in an interactive computer simulation software may include the following: First, it can display or introduce a lesson in a simple and interesting way, as well as being able to display concept in a form that is intelligible, plausible, and fruitful through introduced the scientific concepts, experiment or phenomenon in animations - dynamic graphics - (Posner et al, 1982, of conditions of new conception teaching), in order to give students the opportunity to notice things that couldn’t be seen in the traditional laboratory. This opportunity facilitates conceptual change. Second, it is possible for students to interact with a simulation program and enable them to manipulate the conditions of the scientific experiment or natural phenomena, as well as to receive immediate feedback on the impact of such manipulation. These characteristics may contribute to meeting these prescribe an active educational environment with concentration on constructivist learning and modifying pre-concepts (or misconceptions) through students engage in process education.
Student Student Teacher Student Content (Material) Student
34
Through using the characteristics of dynamic graphics in the form of animations, and illustrations, many researchers – as can we see in the literature review chapter - (such as Jaakkola & Nurmi, 2008; Tekos & Solomonidou, 2009; Ozmen, 2011) have shown that computer simulations are particularly effective at fostering conceptual change on a variety of topics (e.g., electric current and circuits, light reflection and diffusion, and the nature of matter) because in these environments, students can engage with simulated phenomena and review their actions as they formulate and test alternative hypotheses, receive feedback, and reconcile the discrepancies between their pre-existing ideas and their observations.