Nersessian
Conceptual innovation and change are essential to
understanding the creativity of the scientific process. He discusses the different view points on how
philosophers believe this conceptual change can occur. He conducts research about what knowledge is
needed to build an epistemology and what methods other than logical and
conceptual analysis can we use to achieve this, going into detail about cognitive
approaches. Then he discusses how models
figure in and facilitate reasoning about target phenomena.
A theme I noticed is the importance
of problem solving to the scientific process but more so the importance of
model based reasoning to enhance one’s problem solving processes.
DiSessa
DiSessa discusses literacy and how
it is an infrastructural aspect to education and to life. With that, the introduction of computers has completely
transformed our society and scientific practices. He stresses the need for “material intelligence.” He talks about the three pillars of literacy:
material, mental/cognitive, and social.
A theme for DiSessa is most obviously, the important of
literacy for not only science, but also for life in general. Literacy in the sciences will help to enrich
one’s understanding of complex processes or phenomena, as literacy in general
will help to enrich one’s life.
This innovative aspect of science is so important for
students to understand, and I think to aid in this understanding teachers
should elect to include historic science pieces in their curriculum. Not only would this help to show students the
reasoning behind how some common concepts, like gravity or space-time, first
came about to being understood or to show how someone reasons their way through
something new. It also shows, as
Nersessian points out, how a lot of science is continuous and cumulative. Most new concepts are logical extensions of
previous notions.
I think that the modeling and problem solving practices
talked about in Nersessian can be vastly enhanced through use of computers, as
discussed in DiSessa and Schwartz. Currently, there are
great programs for computational thinking out there, and it will be very
important for teachers and students to get regular access to using computers in
the classroom. Both authors discuss the
cumulative aspect of science and emphasize a “social pillar” of literacy that
people cannot ignore because it has become infrastructural. I found it interesting that both authors
utilized historical literacy in order to delve into their own cognitive views.
I agree that historical context is a great way to ground students in the dynamic process of discovery. This type of exercise can also help with the elusive 'everything should be questioned' mentality we discussed last week, as students can see how new theories come from questioning but simply represent our most current understanding of the way the world works.
ReplyDeleteI am also interested in your thoughts on computational thinking, is it really as simple as just working on a turtle program in class? I'm not clear on diSessa's vision for computational literacy but it seems much deeper than that, and I don't know that I'm currently qualified to teach at that level.
While literacy is important not only for science, but life in general, how is it that this can be communicated to learners? Students may not have an interest in building their language knowledge in the science classroom. While I agree that historical literacy works may be appreciated, how will students gain this appreciation? How can these literacy works contribute to the student’s appreciation that science is continuous and cumulative? Also, how can a teacher transfer the computational thinking, such as problem solving, from models to problem solving?
ReplyDeleteKim I do agree with you that computational literacy would be a critical asset to the classroom if used in the correct way of course. In order to manipulate tools on the computer and other "external materials" as diSessa terms it, teachers must not only be masters in their content area but also understand these programs very well. Realistically, can this be achieved. As I stated before, technology is constantly changing so teachers would have to continually learn about new programs while at the same time present new software to their classes in an educationally productive manner. It just seems so overwhelming!
ReplyDelete