Zubrowski Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science

1. Auflage 2009
ISBN: 978-90-481-2496-1
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: 1 - PDF Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, Band 18, 343 Seiten

Reihe: Innovations in Science Education and Technology

Mountaineers, Rock Climbers, and Science Educators Around the 1920s, rock climbing separated from mountaineering to become a separate sport. At that time European climbers developed new equipment and techniques, enabling them to ascend mountain faces and to climb rocks, which were considered unassailable up to that time. American climbers went further by expanding and improving on the equipment. They even developed a system of quantification where points were given for the degree of difficulty of an ascent. This system focused primarily on the pitch of the mountain, and it even calculated up to de- mals to give a high degree of quantification. Rock climbing became a technical system. Csikszentmihaly (1976) observed that the sole interest of rock climbers at that time was to climb the rock. Rock climbers were known to reach the top and not even glance around at the scenery. The focus was on reaching the top of the rock. In contrast, mountaineers saw the whole mountain as a single 'unit of perc- tion. ' 'The ascent (to them) is a gestalt including the aesthetic, historical, personal and physical sensations' (Csikszentmihaly, 1976, p. 486). This is an example of two contrasting approaches to the same kind of landscape and of two different groups of people. Interestingly, in the US, Europe, and Japan a large segment of the early rock climbers were young mathematicians and theoretical physicists, while the mountaineers were a more varied lot.

Autoren/Hrsg.

Zubrowski, Bernard

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Innovations in Science Education and Technology;2
1.1;Title Page;3
1.2;Copyright Page;4
1.3;Acknowledgments;5
1.4;Contents;6
1.5;Introduction;12
1.5.1;Mountaineers, Rock Climbers, and Science Educators;12
1.5.2;The Need for a Holistic Approach to Science Education;13
1.5.2.1;Truncated Inquiry;14
1.5.2.2;Aesthetics, Play, and Metaphor;16
1.5.2.3;Technology in Addition to Nature;17
1.5.2.4;Practical Background;18
1.5.3;Structure of the Book;18
1.5.3.1;Terminology;19
1.5.3.2;Guided Inquiry;19
1.5.3.3;Genetic Curriculum;20
1.5.3.4;Phenomenon;20
1.5.4;Holistic Versus Humanistic;20
1.5.5;References;21
1.6;Chapter 1;22
1.6.1;Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design;22
1.6.1.1;Mobiles and Balancing Toys;25
1.6.1.2;The First Activity;26
1.6.1.3;The Second Activity;27
1.6.1.4;The Third Activity;30
1.6.1.5;The Second Part – Balancing Objects Horizontally;32
1.6.1.6;The Overall Scheme of These Activities;33
1.6.1.7;Psychological Movements;34
1.6.1.8;Pedagogical Practices;35
1.6.1.9;Contextualizing the Object of Study;35
1.6.1.10;Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts;36
1.6.1.11;Multisensory Engagement;37
1.6.1.12;Empathy;37
1.6.1.13;Aesthetics;37
1.6.1.14;Exploration and Play;38
1.6.1.15;Models and Analogies;39
1.6.1.16;Philosophical Framework;40
1.6.2;Reference;40
1.7;Chapter 2;41
1.7.1;A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry;41
1.7.1.1;Faraday and Maxwell – Models for Extended Inquiry;41
1.7.1.1.1;Case Study #1 – Michael Faraday;41
1.7.1.2;Multisensory Engagement;43
1.7.1.3;Visualizations;45
1.7.1.4;Explorations and Analogies;46
1.7.1.5;Thought Experiments;46
1.7.1.6;A Case Study in the Use of Analogies and Metaphors in Science;47
1.7.1.6.1;Case Study #2;47
1.7.1.7;Generative Metaphor;50
1.7.1.8;The Use of Analogies and Science Pedagogy;52
1.7.1.9;A Modified Pedagogical Model as a Developmental Progression;55
1.7.1.10;Phases of Inquiry;58
1.7.1.11;Exploratory Phase;59
1.7.1.12;Data Gathering and Experimental Phase;60
1.7.1.13;Meaning Making Phase;61
1.7.1.14;Modeling Phase;62
1.7.1.15;Extending the Inquiry with a Closely Related Phenomena;62
1.7.1.16;Relationship to the Learning Cycle Model;63
1.7.1.17;Cycles in Guided Inquiry;64
1.7.1.18;Theoretical Rationale;66
1.7.2;References;67
1.8;Chapter 3;69
1.8.1;A Grade 1–9 Curriculum Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts;69
1.8.1.1;Scenario #1;69
1.8.1.2;Concrete Images in Scientific Thinking;73
1.8.1.3;Images as They are Related to Primary Processes and Paleologic Thinking;75
1.8.1.4;Key Symbols in Scientific Thinking;77
1.8.1.5;The Function of Key Symbols;80
1.8.1.6;The Relationship Between Key Symbols, Root Metaphors, and Pedagogical Archetypes;82
1.8.1.7;Affective Coherence in a Grades 1–9 Science Curriculum Framework;91
1.8.2;References;95
1.9;Chapter 4;97
1.9.1;An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education;97
1.9.1.1;Scenario #2;97
1.9.1.2;The Architect as One Model for Curriculum Design and Teaching;100
1.9.1.3;Portoghesi and the “Listening Architect”;101
1.9.1.4;Curriculum Design and Teaching as a Dialectical Process: An Alternate Paradigm;104
1.9.1.5;Engineering Versus Artist Paradigm;106
1.9.1.6;The Alternative Paradigm and Constructivism;109
1.9.1.7;Students Prior Knowledge and Conceptual Change;110
1.9.1.8;Pedagogical Practices for a Constructivist Approach to Teaching Science;113
1.9.1.9;Authenticity and Science Education;115
1.9.1.10;A Holistic Approach to Science Education – Meaning Making in the Broader Sense;117
1.9.2;References;122
1.10;Chapter 5;124
1.10.1;The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning;124
1.10.1.1;Scenario #3;124
1.10.1.1.1;A Rationale for This Approach;127
1.10.1.2;The Body as Ultimate Image and Basis for Physical Intuition;128
1.10.1.3;Embodied Cognition;130
1.10.1.3.1;Metaphoric Projection and the Embodied Mind;131
1.10.1.3.2;Nonverbal Thinking and the Role of Emotions and Feelings in Learning;135
1.10.1.3.3;Emotions and Feelings;137
1.10.1.4;Body Image and Spatial Orientation;139
1.10.1.4.1;The Embodied Curriculum and a Holistic Education;142
1.10.2;References;144
1.11;Chapter 6;146
1.11.1;Sensory Understanding;146
1.11.1.1;Scenario #3 – Exploring with Siphon Bottles;146
1.11.1.2;Alternative Pedagogical Practices in Science Teaching;150
1.11.1.3;Scientific Imagination and the Role of Intuition;154
1.11.1.3.1;The Multimodal Imagination of Creative Scientists and Inventors;154
1.11.1.4;Nonverbal Thought: Vision and Its Relationship to the Other Senses;160
1.11.1.5;Thinking Without Language;161
1.11.1.5.1;Case Study #3;161
1.11.1.6;The Neurophysiology of Intuition;163
1.11.1.7;The Role of Vision in Exploring a Phenomenon;164
1.11.1.8;Visualism, Language, and Science Pedagogy;168
1.11.1.9;Authenticity in Science Education;173
1.11.2;References;177
1.12;Chapter 7;180
1.12.1;Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication;180
1.12.1.1;Scenario #4;180
1.12.1.2;Movement During Explorations;182
1.12.1.3;Movement in Communication – Hand Gestures and Thinking;187
1.12.1.4;Gesture and Talk;191
1.12.1.5;Gestures, Body Movement, and the Focusing of Attention;195
1.12.1.6;Expressive Movements and Expressive Stories;197
1.12.2;References;199
1.13;Chapter 8;201
1.13.1;Empathy;201
1.13.1.1;Scenario #5;201
1.13.1.2;The Art Experience and Empathy;204
1.13.1.3;The Relative Contributions of the Visual, Kinesthetic,and Tactile to Empathy;209
1.13.1.4;Intrinsically Interesting Phenomena and Archetypical Images;211
1.13.1.5;Difference/Distance and a Holistic Approach to Science Education;218
1.13.2;References;220
1.14;Chapter 9;222
1.14.1;Aesthetics in the Learning of Science;222
1.14.1.1;Scenario #6;222
1.14.1.2;Historical Examples of the Impact of Aesthetic Impulses on Scientific Thinking;227
1.14.1.2.1;A Broad Historical View;227
1.14.1.2.2;A Case Study of a Historical Period;229
1.14.1.2.3;Case Studies of Individual Scientists and Inventors;232
1.14.1.3;Shaping Experiences Aesthetically;234
1.14.1.4;Aesthetics in the Selection and Organizing of Science Curriculum Experiences;238
1.14.1.5;Choosing Aesthetically Interesting Phenomena;239
1.14.1.6;Aesthetics and Exploratory Behavior;241
1.14.1.7;Structuring a Sequence of Experiences to Have an Aesthetic Orientation;244
1.14.1.8;Representing Experiences with Aesthetics in Mind;245
1.14.1.9;Aesthetics in Conceptualizations;249
1.14.1.10;Aesthetics Experiences as a Model for Science Education Experiences;251
1.14.1.11;Aesthetic Experience as a Model for Holistic Science Education Experiences;253
1.14.2;References;257
1.15;Chapter 10;259
1.15.1;Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science;259
1.15.1.1;Scenario #7;259
1.15.1.2;Conditions for Play: Play and Intrinsic Motivation;262
1.15.1.3;Conditions for Play – Frames and Contexts;268
1.15.1.4;The Boundaries of After-School Programming;269
1.15.1.5;The Boundaries of School Activities;270
1.15.1.6;Differentiating Play and Exploration;272
1.15.1.7;Exploration and Play During Different Time Intervals;276
1.15.1.7.1;The First Few Minutes;277
1.15.1.7.2;During a 45–50 Min Class Session;277
1.15.1.7.3;Over Multiple Sessions of an Extended Investigation;278
1.15.1.7.4;Over a 9-Year Period;281
1.15.1.8;Symbolic Play and Conceptual Change;282
1.15.1.9;Fusion, Empathy and the Anthropomorphic Involvementand Projection of Children and Adults;283
1.15.1.10;The Evolution of Generative Symbols;287
1.15.1.11;The Transitional Zone as the Primordial Play Situation – Role Model for a Holistic Science Education;291
1.15.1.12;The Transitional Zone and Conceptual Change;295
1.15.2;References;296
1.16;Chapter 11;298
1.16.1;Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations: The Stereoscopic Principle and Montage in the Design of Science Educa;298
1.16.1.1;Scenario #8;298
1.16.1.2;Collage and Visual Perception;302
1.16.1.3;Proust and Stereoscopic Vision;307
1.16.1.4;Goethe’s Alternative Approach to Understanding the Natural World;310
1.16.1.5;Goethe and Contemporary Science Education;312
1.16.1.6;Variable Exploration of Children;312
1.16.1.7;Science Curriculum and Exhibits Using Multiple Examples;314
1.16.1.7.1;Stretch a Bubble;314
1.16.1.8;Large Bubble Dome;315
1.16.1.8.1;Small Bubble Dome;315
1.16.1.8.2;Frame a Bubble;315
1.16.1.8.3;Bubble Cells;315
1.16.1.8.4;Bubble Writing;316
1.16.1.9;A Bubble Investigation in the Classroom;317
1.16.1.10;Juxtaposition of Phenomena;319
1.16.1.11;Analogies as Juxtapositions;320
1.16.2;References;323
1.17;Chapter 12;325
1.17.1;The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education;325
1.17.1.1;Scenario #9;325
1.17.1.2;Mile-Wide–Inch-Deep Versus Narrow Focus and In-Depth;328
1.17.1.3;Defining a Domain and Subdomains;330
1.17.1.4;Domain Specificity and the Learning of Analogies;332
1.17.1.5;Analogies Within Domains and Subdomains;334
1.17.1.6;Accessing Analogies;336
1.17.1.7;Models and Modeling;336
1.17.1.8;Simple Physical Models Related to Real Objects;338
1.17.1.9;Current Problems with Design Challenges;339
1.17.1.10;Time;339
1.17.1.11;Conflating Design and Inquiry;339
1.17.1.12;Visual Representations;341
1.17.1.13;Assessment;341
1.17.1.14;Visual Modeling;341
1.17.1.15;Visual Modeling Combining Hands-On Activities with the Use of a Computer;342
1.17.1.16;Modeling with Computers;344
1.17.1.17;The Modeling of the Particulate Nature of Matter;344
1.17.1.18;First or Second Grade – Dyes and Pigments;345
1.17.1.19;Third or Fourth Grade – Crystals;346
1.17.1.20;Sixth Grade – Salad Dressing Physics;346
1.17.1.21;Seventh Grade – Chromatography;347
1.17.1.22;Eighth Grade – Investigating Special Inks;347
1.17.1.23;Comparison Across Subdomains;348
1.17.1.24;Concluding Comments;350
1.17.2;References;352
1.18;Index;354