Let's frame it differently – analysis of instructors’ mechanistic explanations
Let's frame it differently – analysis of instructors’ mechanistic explanations
复制标题
让我们以不同的方式来分析——教师的分析——机械解释
DOI：
10.1039/d1rp00064k
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Graulich
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Eckhard;Rodemer;Langner;Bernholt;Graulich
有机化学教育的研究揭示了学生在机械推理方面的挑战。在解决机械性任务时，学生往往专注于明确的表面特征，应用零散的概念知识，依赖于死记硬背，因此，往往难以建立有充分依据的因果解释。以资源视角为透镜，学生的困难可能来自于认知资源的无效激活或缺失激活。教师的讲解和教学情境的引导是激活这些资源的关键。与学生在有机化学中建立机械性解释的挑战相比，教师在解决机械性任务时的解释以及他们如何在因果原理的构建和嵌入方面为学生塑造有针对性的解释却知之甚少。本研究旨在通过探讨教师的解释方法，为日益增长的机械推理研究做出贡献。因此，我们使用了框架结构，旨在通过显式指令触发某些帧。十名有机化学教师（大学教授和讲师）被要求解决案例比较任务，同时在两个场景中提示：专家框架和教学框架。我们的分析表明，有一个转变，从教师的机械的解释，在专家的框架向更详细的解释，在教学框架。在教学框架中，与预期相反的是，完整的因果关系并不总是建立起来的，教师在如何形成他们的解释上也各不相同。在这两个框架中确定了其他解释性要素，并讨论了它们在使用中的变化。框架之间的比较方法揭示了教师如何传达机械的解释，并使我们能够获得有机化学教学的影响。
Research in Organic Chemistry education has revealed students’ challenges in mechanistic reasoning. When solving mechanistic tasks, students tend to focus on explicit surface features, apply fragmented conceptual knowledge, rely on rote-memorization and, hence, often struggle to build well-grounded causal explanations. When taking a resource perspective as a lens, students’ difficulties may arise from either an unproductive or a missing activation of cognitive resources. Instructors’ explanations and their guidance in teaching situations could serve as a lynchpin to activate these resources. Compared to students’ challenges in building mechanistic explanations in Organic Chemistry, little is known about instructors’ explanations when solving mechanistic tasks and how they shape their targeted explanations for students in terms of the construction and embedding of cause–effect rationales. This qualitative study aims to contribute to the growing research on mechanistic reasoning by exploring instructors’ explanatory approaches. Therefore, we made use of the framing construct, intended to trigger certain frames with explicit instruction. Ten Organic Chemistry instructors (university professors and lecturers) were asked to solve case comparison tasks while being prompted in two scenarios: an expert frame and a teaching frame. Our analysis shows that there is a shift from instructors’ mechanistic explanations in the expert frame towards more elaborated explanations in the teaching frame. In the teaching frame, contrary to what might be expected, complete cause–effect relationships were not always established and instructors differed in how they shaped their explanations. Additional explanatory elements were identified in both frames and their shift in use is discussed. Comparing approaches between frames sheds light on how instructors communicate mechanistic explanations and allows us to derive implications for teaching Organic Chemistry.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2008
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
W. Goodwin
通讯作者：
W. Goodwin
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
K. Taber
通讯作者：
K. Taber
面向概念的任务设计：在有机化学中进行有目的的案例比较
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Nicole Graulich;Michael Schween
通讯作者：
Michael Schween
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Osborne, J;Erduran, S;Simon, S
通讯作者：
Simon, S
在科学课堂上关注学生的认识论框架
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Paul Hutchison;David M. Hammer
通讯作者：
David M. Hammer