Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science

Innovations in Science Education and Technology

For other titles published in this series, go to www.springer.com/series/6150

Bernard Zubrowski

Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science

Bernard Zubrowski Education Development Center, Inc. Newton USA

ISBN 978-90-481-2495-4 e-ISBN 978-90-481-2496-1 DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1 Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York Library of Congress Control Number: 2009929355 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

Acknowledgments

The following were very generous in giving their time to reading various chapters in the book and providing valuable feedback. Karen Worth, Rachel Hellenga, David Crismond, Paul Tatter, Richard Duschel, Susan Henry, Tracy Noble, Pat Campbell, and Joyce Gleason

v

Contents

1  Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design...............

1

Mobiles and Balancing Toys......................................................................... The First Activity.......................................................................................... The Second Activity...................................................................................... The Third Activity......................................................................................... The Second Part – Balancing Objects Horizontally...................................... The Overall Scheme of These Activities....................................................... Psychological Movements............................................................................. Pedagogical Practices.................................................................................... Contextualizing the Object of Study............................................................. Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts................................. Multisensory Engagement............................................................................. Empathy........................................................................................................ Aesthetics...................................................................................................... Exploration and Play..................................................................................... Models and Analogies................................................................................... Philosophical Framework.............................................................................. Reference.......................................................................................................

4 5 6 9 11 12 13 14 14 15 16 16 16 17 18 19 19

2  A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry................................................. 21 Faraday and Maxwell – Models for Extended Inquiry.................................. Case Study #1 – Michael Faraday............................................................. Multisensory Engagement............................................................................. Visualizations................................................................................................ Explorations and Analogies.......................................................................... Thought Experiments.................................................................................... A Case Study in the Use of Analogies and Metaphors in Science................ Case Study #2............................................................................................ Generative Metaphor..................................................................................... The Use of Analogies and Science Pedagogy............................................... A Modified Pedagogical Model as a Developmental Progression................ Phases of Inquiry........................................................................................... Exploratory Phase.........................................................................................

21 21 23 25 26 26 27 27 30 32 35 38 39 vii

viii

Contents

Data Gathering and Experimental Phase....................................................... Meaning Making Phase................................................................................. Modeling Phase............................................................................................. Extending the Inquiry with a Closely Related Phenomena........................... Relationship to the Learning Cycle Model................................................... Cycles in Guided Inquiry.............................................................................. Theoretical Rationale.................................................................................... References.....................................................................................................

40 41 42 42 43 44 46 47

3  A Grade 1–9 Curriculum Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts....................... 49 Scenario #1.................................................................................................... Concrete Images in Scientific Thinking........................................................ Images as They are Related to Primary Processes and Paleologic Thinking................................................................................ Key Symbols in Scientific Thinking.............................................................. The Function of Key Symbols....................................................................... The Relationship Between Key Symbols, Root Metaphors, and Pedagogical Archetypes......................................................................... Affective Coherence in a Grades 1–9 Science Curriculum Framework................................................................................. References.....................................................................................................

49 53 55 57 60 62 71 75

4  An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education.......................................... 77 Scenario #2.................................................................................................... The Architect as One Model for Curriculum Design and Teaching.............. Portoghesi and the “Listening Architect”...................................................... Curriculum Design and Teaching as a Dialectical Process: An Alternate Paradigm.................................................................................. Engineering Versus Artist Paradigm............................................................. The Alternative Paradigm and Constructivism............................................. Students Prior Knowledge and Conceptual Change...................................... Pedagogical Practices for a Constructivist Approach to Teaching Science....................................................................................... Authenticity and Science Education............................................................. A Holistic Approach to Science Education – Meaning Making in the Broader Sense........................................................................ References.....................................................................................................

77 80 81 84 86 89 90 93 95 97 102

5  The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning.................................. 105 Scenario #3.................................................................................................... 105 A Rationale for This Approach................................................................. 108

Contents

The Body as Ultimate Image and Basis for Physical Intuition..................... Embodied Cognition..................................................................................... Metaphoric Projection and the Embodied Mind....................................... Nonverbal Thinking and the Role of Emotions and Feelings in Learning........................................................................... Emotions and Feelings.............................................................................. Body Image and Spatial Orientation............................................................. The Embodied Curriculum and a Holistic Education............................... References.....................................................................................................

ix

109 111 112 116 118 120 123 125

6  Sensory Understanding.............................................................................. 127 Scenario #3 – Exploring with Siphon Bottles............................................... Alternative Pedagogical Practices in Science Teaching................................ Scientific Imagination and the Role of Intuition........................................... The Multimodal Imagination of Creative Scientists and Inventors........... Nonverbal Thought: Vision and Its Relationship to the Other Senses.......... Thinking Without Language.......................................................................... Case Study #3............................................................................................ The Neurophysiology of Intuition................................................................. The Role of Vision in Exploring a Phenomenon........................................... Visualism, Language, and Science Pedagogy............................................... Authenticity in Science Education................................................................ References.....................................................................................................

127 131 135 135 141 142 142 144 145 149 154 158

7  Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication................................................................................... 161 Scenario #4.................................................................................................... Movement During Explorations.................................................................... Movement in Communication – Hand Gestures and Thinking..................... Gesture and Talk............................................................................................ Gestures, Body Movement, and the Focusing of Attention.......................... Expressive Movements and Expressive Stories............................................ References.....................................................................................................

161 163 168 172 176 178 180

8  Empathy....................................................................................................... 183 Scenario #5.................................................................................................... The Art Experience and Empathy................................................................. The Relative Contributions of the Visual, Kinesthetic, and Tactile to Empathy.................................................................................. Intrinsically Interesting Phenomena and Archetypical Images..................... Difference/Distance and a Holistic Approach to Science Education............ References.....................................................................................................

183 186 191 193 200 202

x

Contents

9  Aesthetics in the Learning of Science........................................................ 205 Scenario #6.................................................................................................... Historical Examples of the Impact of Aesthetic Impulses on Scientific Thinking................................................................................... A Broad Historical View........................................................................... A Case Study of a Historical Period.......................................................... Case Studies of Individual Scientists and Inventors.................................. Shaping Experiences Aesthetically............................................................. Aesthetics in the Selection and Organizing of Science Curriculum Experiences.............................................................................. Choosing Aesthetically Interesting Phenomena......................................... Aesthetics and Exploratory Behavior......................................................... Structuring a Sequence of Experiences to Have an Aesthetic Orientation............................................................................. Representing Experiences with Aesthetics in Mind................................... Aesthetics in Conceptualizations................................................................ Aesthetics Experiences as a Model for Science Education Experiences................................................................................ Aesthetic Experience as a Model for Holistic Science Education Experiences................................................................................ References...................................................................................................

205 210 210 212 215 217 221 222 224 227 228 232 234 236 240

10  Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science........... 243 Scenario #7.................................................................................................. Conditions for Play: Play and Intrinsic Motivation.................................... Conditions for Play – Frames and Contexts............................................... The Boundaries of After-School Programming.......................................... The Boundaries of School Activities.......................................................... Differentiating Play and Exploration.......................................................... Exploration and Play During Different Time Intervals............................... The First Few Minutes............................................................................ During a 45–50 Min Class Session......................................................... Over Multiple Sessions of an Extended Investigation............................ Over a 9-Year Period............................................................................... Symbolic Play and Conceptual Change...................................................... Fusion, Empathy and the Anthropomorphic Involvement and Projection of Children and Adults.............................................................. The Evolution of Generative Symbols........................................................ The Transitional Zone as the Primordial Play Situation – Role Model for a Holistic Science Education.......................... The Transitional Zone and Conceptual Change.......................................... References...................................................................................................

243 246 252 253 254 256 260 261 261 262 265 266 267 271 275 279 280

Contents

xi

11  Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations: The Stereoscopic Principle and Montage in the Design of Science Educational Experiences........................................................ 283 Scenario #8.................................................................................................. Collage and Visual Perception.................................................................... Proust and Stereoscopic Vision................................................................... Goethe’s Alternative Approach to Understanding the Natural World........................................................................................ Goethe and Contemporary Science Education........................................... Variable Exploration of Children................................................................ Science Curriculum and Exhibits Using Multiple Examples..................... Stretch a Bubble...................................................................................... Large Bubble Dome.................................................................................... Small Bubble Dome................................................................................ Frame a Bubble....................................................................................... Bubble Cells............................................................................................ Bubble Writing........................................................................................ A Bubble Investigation in the Classroom................................................... Juxtaposition of Phenomena....................................................................... Analogies as Juxtapositions........................................................................ References...................................................................................................

283 287 292 295 297 297 299 299 300 300 300 300 301 302 304 305 308

12  The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education................................................................................. 311 Scenario #9.................................................................................................. Mile-Wide–Inch-Deep Versus Narrow Focus and In-Depth....................... Defining a Domain and Subdomains.......................................................... Domain Specificity and the Learning of Analogies.................................... Analogies Within Domains and Subdomains............................................. Accessing Analogies................................................................................... Models and Modeling................................................................................. Simple Physical Models Related to Real Objects....................................... Current Problems with Design Challenges................................................. Time............................................................................................................ Conflating Design and Inquiry.................................................................... Visual Representations................................................................................ Assessment.................................................................................................. Visual Modeling.......................................................................................... Visual Modeling Combining Hands-On Activities with the Use of a Computer........................................................................ Modeling with Computers.......................................................................... The Modeling of the Particulate Nature of Matter...................................... First or Second Grade – Dyes and Pigments.............................................. Third or Fourth Grade – Crystals................................................................

311 314 316 318 320 322 322 324 325 325 325 327 327 327 328 330 330 331 332

xii

Contents

Sixth Grade – Salad Dressing Physics........................................................ Seventh Grade – Chromatography.............................................................. Eighth Grade – Investigating Special Inks.................................................. Comparison Across Subdomains................................................................ Concluding Comments............................................................................... References...................................................................................................

332 333 333 334 336 338

Index................................................................................................................... 341

Introduction

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 decimals 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 perception.” “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. There is a parallel to the current practices in science education. There are science educators who are like the mountaineers. They approach science from a larger perspective where the attention to the aesthetic of a phenomenon is part of their way of teaching science. Their encounters with different natural phenomena are a matter of discovery and resonance. They are motivated as much by curiosity as by intellectual development. Others are more like the rock climbers, where there is a narrower conception of science and the teaching of science. It is a way of mastering nature. Measurement tends to dominate their first encounters and their main focus appears to be solely conceptual understanding. The aesthetics of the phenomena are barely mentioned or noticed. In recent times this attitude has been accentuated by the introduction of computer software and the use of measurement probes. In schools, even at the

xiii

xiv

Introduction

elementary level, probes are used to make measurements of great accuracy even where simple qualitative comparisons would do. To some degree these characterizations are a bit of an exaggeration. This metaphor is used to bring into focus some of the values and attitudes that pervade contemporary science education. From my perspective there is a general problem with the way science is taught in the elementary and middle schools. It has been noted that there is a lack of balance in the way science is taught (Pintrick et. al., 1993). There is an overemphasis on the rational and cognitive aspect with a neglect of the affective. One indicator of this problem is a recent report showing that there is a significant decrease in interest in science as elementary students move through the grades. By high school only a small percent of students continue in science (Zacharia and Calabrese-Barton, 2003). Some of this, no doubt, reflects the narrowing of interest of students because of their own specific talents. Some of it could also be attributed to the narrow way in which science is taught. A part of the problem is the growing emphasis on testing. From my work with teachers I have found that they are very conscientious in attempting to address the state standards. In my exchanges with them they state that they would like to spend more time with each topic but because of the number of standards there is not enough time for extended development of each. Under pressure from their administration to have students perform well on the tests, they narrow their pedagogy to “teaching to the test.” There is also the question of high expectations of the teachers. A great deal of research in recent years has generated many recommendations for changes in teaching practice. There is a gap between the expectations arising from these recommendations and where most teachers are in terms of their background. There is also a problem of insufficient funds for in-service programs to learn about these changes (Duit and Treagust, 2003). These expectations can be demoralizing to teachers and can affect the way they teach.

The Need for a Holistic Approach to Science Education There is a deeper problem that may also account for the drop in interest in science. Bo Dahlin (2001) describes this overemphasis on objective detachment as a type of cognitivism. He defines it as “letting conceptual, theoretical cognition constitute the central theme of all research or practice dealing with teaching, learning and the development of knowledge. The acquisition of concepts becomes the primary and most important aim of all schooling” (Dahlin, 2001, p. 460). Dahlin’s concern is about the neglect of sense experience or aesthetics in educational practice. Dahlin’s corrective to this overemphasis is to draw upon the approach advocated by John Dewey and the perspective of phenomenologists such as Merleau-Ponty. He argues for a more fundamental role of experience where there is direct engagement with phenomena and aesthetic richness. He advocates for a kind of experience where the person “lets the thing think in us” (p. 465).

Introduction

xv

This engagement can be described as a transaction where sensory experiences with educational guidance bring about a conception rather than one imposing a conception on the experience. There is a dialectical interaction between the subject and the object. Artists and craftspeople often mention this process. Sculptors and craftspeople, in particular, have been known to practice a variant of this approach when they state that the materials “tell them what to do.” Edmund Carpenter provides an example of this approach in reporting his observations of an Eskimo carver working with a piece of ivory or bone. The carver does not start off with a preconceived notion of what he will end up with but rather whittles away getting a feeling for the material. In the process of having a dialogue with the material a shape begins to emerge. Eventually, the shape of a seal emerges. Somehow it came from the bone. It was not imposed on it. This stance toward materials has a parallel in the world of science. Evelyn Fox Keller in her biography of Barbara McClintock, the noted biologist, reports on her research on the genetics of corn. McClintock felt a need to “listen to the material” and that one should “let the experiment tell you what to do.” This approach to and the conception of the relationship between a person and a phenomenon can act as a philosophical framework for the way curriculum is designed and the relationship between teacher and student. It can be described as a holistic approach to science education. This approach will be the basis of an alternative paradigm for science education that will be presented in Chapter 4 and is an underlying conception that runs throughout the book.

Truncated Inquiry It may appear that these more philosophical concerns are far removed from the dayto-day teaching of science. In my work over the years with teachers and in the review of many curriculum programs I see a direct relevance. For instance, there are two common practices in science education that I think are manifestations of an excessive concern about conception. There is a tendency to downgrade the role of sensory experience and the aesthetic properties of a phenomenon. Closely related to this attitude, there is undervaluing of open explorations and a lack of adequate support to help the student transition from formal experiments to explicit explanations. Hands-on explorations are perhaps the only time when students have direct contact with natural or physical phenomena. It is one of the few times where there is a chance for multisensory stimulation. Art classes may be the other possible instance but art comes and goes with the fluctuations in school budgets. In my work with students and in many observations of classroom, I have observed that direct engagement with materials can be highly motivating. There is an affective charge when students have control over the materials and can act on, produce effects, and observe interesting objects and organisms. There is another aspect to this interaction that tends to be overlooked. Students resonate with different phenomena and

xvi

Introduction

materials in a way that gives rise to meaningful personal connections. There is the possibility of an aesthetic experience. With the rise of the use of computer and the proliferation of software there is a trend to move away from this type of direct engagement. In fact, there appears to be a strong debate about the relative effectiveness of these two approaches. Recent research reports that with some kinds of activities children were able to learn as well with a virtual approach as with physical materials (Klahr, 2007). The implications of these kinds of studies will further question the importance of direct encounters with phenomena. Why engage in hands-on experience when virtual ones with a computer are not messy and easily replicated? We will surely hear more about this issue in the future about how the computer can replace direct experience with phenomena. Here I am not going against the essential and very productive role it can play. It is more a matter of when and how it enters into the inquiry investigation. The overall purpose of this book is to present a case for the importance of direct engagement with phenomena and materials. I will argue that this practice is more than a matter of motivating students to become engaged in inquiry. There is added value to this practice because of the personal connections and the aesthetic dimension. Support for this approach can be found in the changing understanding about the relationship between metaphorical thinking and embodied cognition. These theoretical developments and related research suggest that these direct experiences with materials may play an essential role in promoting conceptual change in students. If teachers are involved in hands-on activities in a science education context there is a tendency to move through the initial exploratory phase of an inquiry investigation quickly or even skip some parts of it, moving directly to measurements. This results in students having an encounter of a few minutes or only one session where they are allowed to explore the materials in a relatively open-ended manner. Even if it is allowed to happen there are moves and talk by the teacher to direct students to that which will be directly related to the concepts that will be taught. Valuing the experience in and of itself is a foreign notion. There is a rush to formal experimentation and explanation without much time for the students to become reacquainted with a phenomenon and develop a deeper intuition about its properties. Some curriculum programs will explicitly include as part of their pedagogical model an exploratory phase but there are still problems with the way this phase is dealt with in these guides and practiced. I will critique some of these problems in some of the chapters. The other problem is the way conceptualization is developed. The more sophisticated practitioners of inquiry do insist on evidence gained from the experimentation. What is neglected is the transitional phase between the open explorations and experimentation and the transition from gathering evidence to explicit conceptual development. Not enough recognition is given to transitional modes of representation such as gesture. Not enough time is given to moving students through multiple representations so that they can begin to develop a mental model. Prior to explanations students need to work through a series of external representations moving through kinetic and gestural enactments, visual media such as sketches or graphs, verbal descriptions, and then the written word. There is a need to provide for these

Introduction

xvii

transitions so that the pre-analytic modes of thinking, the emerging intuitions can gradually take shape, be externalized, and tested. Too often these different modes of representations are given a cursory recognition. This problem will also be addressed throughout the book. A holistic approach to science education would continue to challenge students to think critically and work toward adopting more scientific explanations while also promoting personal growth. There would a balance between the academic goal of conceptual change and the goal of providing for meaningful personal connections with the world. This balanced approach could result in less alienation from the natural and man-made world as well as lay a deeper and richer foundation so that students might more readily reconcile their prior knowledge with a more scientific understanding of basic phenomena.

Aesthetics, Play, and Metaphor There are modes of perception, attitudes, and pre-analytic thinking that can be associated with the approach of “letting the material speak to you.” This approach implies that there is a relationship of empathy between the phenomenon, materials, or living thing and the student. There can be identification with these entities. Feelings about these entities can arise in the student because of the specific characteristics of the object or materials. This resonance between the object and person arises from aesthetic predispositions. If this resonance were an essential part of the engagement, then it would make sense for the science educator to look toward the arts for some guidance in what brings about engagement and how these experiences can be communicated by useful explicit representations. In this book I present a modified paradigm of science education that is related to the stance of the artists in their dialogue with materials as described previously. This is in contrast to the current prevailing paradigm of an engineering approach to education. I propose that the curriculum designer can find some guidance from the practice of some architects, and the teacher can find some inspiration from the conductor of a jazz orchestra. I also draw upon the art of the mime and specific artists like David Hockney and Macel Proust to illustrate ways of characterizing explorations and how educational experience can be structured. In various ways the sense that there can be an aesthetic approach to science education pervades the whole book. Those who have studied play in the broader social context have observed that there is a close relationship between play and aesthetic engagement. Although play is a politically incorrect term and is considered a problem in formal schooling, it is an approach to the world that is natural for students. The characteristics of play should be studied for a sense of how to guide students in their explorations and ways to stir their imagination in making sense of experiences with phenomena. One of the chapters specifically addresses this basic mode of activity and it is implied in discussions in other parts of the book.

xviii

Introduction

Aesthetics and play provide the foundation for the ways in which people make sense of their encounters with their environment. These modes of perception and behavior provide a structure for ways to see relationships between disparate situations, objects, and systems. This is related to the ability of humans to conjure up metaphors and analogies. Fundamental to the thinking of scientists and the processes of science is the use of analogies and models. In recent times the role of models and modeling are receiving increasing attention because these modes of thinking are seen as fundamental to bringing about conceptual change in students. The relationship between basic sensory experiences and the development of analogies and modeling will also be addressed. My sense is that these three aspects of learning are intimately connected which means that if science educators want to give importance to the role of metaphor and modeling they should also be considering how aesthetics and play support the making of metaphors and analogies.

Technology in Addition to Nature Writers such as Bo Dahlin and others in their advocacy for a more holistic approach to science education generally write about the student’s growing alienation from the natural world. I agree with this view but I feel that there is also a need for expanding the scope of what is to be experienced sensorally and aesthetically. There should also be recognition of a need to be at home with the man-made world. In Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Robert Persig (1974) addresses this issue by weaving into his travelogue on his motorcycle some deep philosophical issues about the contemporary person’s alienation from modern technology. Interestingly, he uses the metaphor of traveling the back roads instead of the highway that could be compared to the difference between the mountaineers and the rock climbers. He traveled the back roads instead of the superhighways to get a better sense of the countryside. It was a more personally engaging way of getting a feel for the country he was traveling through. In this book Persig is writing about contemporary people’s alienation from their own technology. Perhaps, it is no accident that he is traveling by motorcycle. The union of a person and his motorcycle is a special one. It is an instance where machine and person become one. In his travelogue he contrasts his approach of bricolage when maintaining and troubleshooting his motorcycle to his adult traveling companion’s reliance on others to maintain his motorcycle. At one point Persig relates how he uses a piece of a beer can as a way of solving a problem with his motorcycle, while his companion relies totally on others to maintain his vehicle. The companion appears to have no notion of how his piece of technology functions while Persig has enough of a sense of how it functions that he can quickly solve a minor problem. He has a feel for how this machine functions. I propose that a pedagogical approach should explore both natural phenomena as well as those of human creation. Therefore, I will be using the term ‘technological artifact’ to stand in for the multiplicity of all of these creations.

Introduction

xix

Practical Background This book represents my attempt to summarize my evolving thinking about curriculum design and direct work with students. Over the years I have been involved with several different curriculum efforts, the development and design of interactive exhibits for children’s museums and science centers, the writing and publishing of children science books, as well as the productions of several video projects for teacher education. I draw upon all these experiences to give specific examples to illustrate what I consider important pedagogical practices and how they relate to extended inquiry. I mentioned this background because it represents the practical work I have been doing. Over the years of my involvement in science education, I sometimes worked with the same phenomena and set of activities transforming them to fit different media-trade books, exhibits, and videos. Out of these experiences I came to see that the context and media shapes what kind of learning can occur. In my view context is not just the social and physical environment but must include the specific materials and the phenomena being investigated. I have drawn upon this work with different media to illustrate pedagogical issues and present examples of how inquiry can be guided. Most of the curriculum mentioned is in published form and available from a publisher.

Structure of the Book Overall, the book can be divided into three parts. The first four chapters lay out different levels of a pedagogical approach and an overall theoretical orientation. The first chapter presents an example of one curriculum topic. This is used to introduce different pedagogical practices and related psychological processes that will be commented on in the remainder of the book. The second chapter presents a modified pedagogical model, meaning that it is based on existing practices and current research. The third chapter presents a rationale for a grade 1–9 curriculum framework based on the concept of archetypical phenomena and technological artifacts. The fourth chapter presents an alternative paradigm for science education. Chapters 3 and 4 present some surveys of broad theoretical issues but also include specific examples to illustrate these issues in a concrete way. The middle chapters focus on what might be called sensory knowledge. These are concerned with the role of different sensory engagements, movement as related to gestural representation, and the role of empathy in exploration. The role of empathy is something not usually discussed in science education but my sense is that it is fundamental to conceiving of a holistic approach to education. The last four chapters are about the role of aesthetics, play, variable exploration, and metaphor in the shaping of science education experiences. What is developed in these chapters builds on what was mentioned in the middle chapters and provides

xx

Introduction

a general rationale for what was proposed in the first four chapters. There are vast literatures associated with each of these topics. At the risk of being too biased, I have selected certain accounts that support the particular pedagogical approach and the general orientation being proposed. Each chapter is introduced with a scenario or case study describing the behavior and talk of elementary or middle school students. (Most of these scenarios are taken from a series of published videos that are part of the “Learning to See” project which is available from the Education Development Center.) The intention in presenting these scenarios is to help the reader stay grounded while considering the more abstract development of research reports and broader philosophical issues. The specific examples that I give come from the various curriculum projects that I have been involved in over the past 30 years. Most of these are available in published curriculum or trade books. The approach I have taken in the writing of the book and the chapters is an unorthodox one. There is a spiraling around several themes that are related to the general thesis. There are repetitions where I return to some of the same specific activities and some of the same authors and quotes. The point of this repetition is that the same investigation of a phenomenon or behavior of a student can be viewed with multiples lenses. The way a particular inquiry investigation is structured and potentially carried out can be informed by the way one thinks about the role of sensory engagement, empathy, aesthetics, play and metaphor.

Terminology Education is filled with lots of clichés, jargon, and terms that quickly expand to include a wide range of understandings and references diluting the original meaning. I thought it would be helpful here to comment on some educational terms and the way I will be using them.

Guided Inquiry Inquiry has now been adopted by all kinds of curriculum programs, textbook publishers, and teachers. There is currently a wide range of practices by teachers and a wide range of pedagogies that go by this term. Closely tied to these different pedagogies are ideological differences about what makes inquiry authentic and relevant. The different approaches to inquiry could be represented by a continuum where at one end there is completely open inquiry giving students much leeway and at the other end represented by a highly structured approach. Open inquiry seems to mean that students are very free to choose what they will investigate and how they will carry it out. An alternative to this approach is guided inquiry that also can have

Introduction

xxi

multiple meanings. In my use of the term I would associate it with a balance between teacher-directed and student-directed approaches. I would situate the type of examples of investigations given in this book as a type of guided inquiry locating somewhere in the middle of the continuum.

Genetic Curriculum The proposed pedagogical model given in Chapter 2 is not very different on the surface from the practices already in place with some curriculum programs and teaching. From my perspective I would give higher priority to the role of explorations and give particular attention to the changing type of representations that develop during an investigation. To differentiate the pedagogical approach being proposed from others that are more prevalent, I have decided to designate it as a curriculum that is genetic in its structure. This refers to the psychological movement from concrete experiences that are multisensory, to the initial representations through gestures, on to visual and verbal representations that eventually can be the basis for the development of mental models. I focus on these changing representations to emphasize the need to be very cognizant of the foundational role of sensory engagement with a phenomenon and the role of aesthetics in learning.

Phenomenon I associate this term with basic natural objects, systems, and happenings in the natural and physical world. It covers such happenings as air and water movement, objects in motion such as balls on tracks, and soap bubbles.

Holistic Versus Humanistic There is also the problem of finding an appropriate term to cover the need for a more balanced approach to science education as I have mentioned above. Some writers when advocating this perspective sometimes have used the term “humanistic.” In reviewing the history of this term, it becomes problematic because the center of attention is the person. My concern is more with the person’s relationship to the natural and man-made world and how these are experienced in a sociocultural environment. The best I can come up with is holistic. This term has associations with some psychological practices and dogmas. In this book I wanted it to have the sense that there was recognition and need for an aesthetic approach for teaching science, while still allowing for movement from the sensory experience and aesthetic representation to the eventual abstract conceptualizations.

xxii

Introduction

Acknowledgments  The following were very generous in giving their time to reading various chapters in the book and providing valuable feedback: Karen Worth, Rachel Hellenga, David Crismond, Paul Tatter, Richard Duschel, Susan Henry, Tracy Noble, Pat Campbell, Joyce Gleason.

References Carpenter, E. (1965). “Art of the Eskimo Carver” in Education of Vision, Kepes, G. (ed.). New York: Braziller. Csikszentmihaly, M. (1976). “The Americanization of Rock Climbing” in Play: Its Role in Development and Evolution, Bruner, J.S., Jolly, A., and Sylva, K. (eds.) (pp. 484–486). New York: Viking Penguin. Dahlin, B. (2001) The primacy of cognition – or of perception? A phenomenological critique of the theoretical bases of science education. Science & Education, 10:453–475. Duit, R. and Treagust, D.T. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Education, 25(6): 671–688. Klahr, D., Triona, L.M., and Williams, C. (2007). Hands-on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1): 183–203. Persig, R. (1974). Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values. New York, Morrow. Pintrich, P.R., Marx, R.W., and Boyle, R.A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63: 167–199. Zacharia, Z. and Calabrese-Barton, A. (2003). Urban middle-school students’ attitudes toward a defined science. Science Education, 87: 1–27.

Chapter 1

Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

Over the past 30 years I have worked in six curriculum development projects and have written a series of science books for children. During each of these efforts I became acquainted with some standard pedagogical practices and began to develop some of my own ways of structuring science education experiences. It all started with a fortunate break of being hired to work for the Elementary Science Study (ESS); continued with the African Primary Science Program; followed by a long involvement with the Boston Children’s Museum; and most recently at the Center of Science Education of Education Development Center, which in its early days was the progenitor of curriculum projects such as the PSSC high school project and the ESS. My initial involvement in curriculum design was the most formative. This was with the Elementary Science Study that had an impressive group of scientists and master teachers who represented a range of thinking about ways of engaging elementary school children in effective science education. In looking through the various curriculum guides generated through this project one can see this range of pedagogy in practical terms. Some are very open-ended leaving a great deal up to the teacher in terms of where and how to proceed, while others were much more structured and specific in what to do with the children. However, there still was a shared philosophy and a basic set of values. Emphasis was on a student-centered as contrasted to a subject-matter-centered approach. Direct involvement with the phenomenon through the manipulation of simple materials was paramount. In most of the curriculum units there was a pedagogical flow where activities were sequenced in a way that grew out of students interests and what could be investigated with simple materials. What I learnt from this experience was an idea of a pedagogical approach that focused on the exploration of a phenomenon in contrast to other approaches that started with science concepts or processes and then arbitrarily pick concrete examples to develop the concept. The priority was on what engages

B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_1, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

1

2

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

the curiosity of the students and how to provide the right kind of support to investigate their own questions. The overall approach was based on the exploration of a phenomenon rather than imparting a body of knowledge. The scientists and master teachers would get excited about interesting phenomena that they wanted to share with students. There still was the goal of promoting scientific thinking but it was to arise within a context of making discoveries about the natural and manmade world. A similar kind of educational philosophy and pedagogy was also shared among those who were involved in the African Primary Science Program. This partly happened because some of us had worked previously for the Elementary Science Study, but it also came about through our collaboration with educators in the participating countries who had a similar orientation to teaching science. A major constraint in developing curriculum units was the very limited materials available in the elementary schools of the countries that were participating in this project. Basically, we had to design activities around what children and teachers could bring to school. Even the possibility of recycling something like tin cans was problematic. We ended up using mostly natural materials and kept the activities as simple as possible. For instance, one day while visiting a school I noticed that the roof was thatched with a grass that had useful properties. It was thick and was quite strong in structure for a grass. I had students bring this kind of grass to school and challenged them to build small-scale houses with this grass using pins as the means for joining the grass together. This resulted in a curriculum unit called “Construction with Grass.” It was analogous to working with drinking straws in America and allowed for an investigation of the physics of structures. The constraint of limited materials turned out to be a lesson learned that became for me a pedagogical principle that I still practice. I also saw that basic phenomena engaged the African students as much as they did with American students. I came to see that there are intrinsically interesting phenomena which have universal appeal. After the African Primary Science Program I ended up at the Children’s Museum in Boston where I remained for 23 years. During that time I was fortunate to be able to build upon my experience and knowledge gained from the ESS and African Primary Science Program. I adapted activities from the various curriculum units that had been developed in these programs. Then over years I expanded these activities trying out these new variations multiple times in a variety of settings ranging from after-school programs, museum programs to classrooms. Being able to carry out this iterative process helped me to gain a sense of what engaged children and how I could work with the children to move them to a more scientific understanding of a phenomenon in a way that was not prescriptive but collaborative. Testing activities in after-school programming was particularly challenging because there was no captive audience. Often, the situation was a drop-in program where children did not sign up for an activity and could walk away from an activity if they did not find it interesting. Whatever you presented had to be very compelling to keep the children coming back. During this time I developed ways of engaging children over multiple sessions by introducing intrinsically

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

3

interesting phenomena where new variations of exploring the phenomena were introduced. The design challenge for each additional activity was to pose a question that immediately engaged the children’s interest, to shape the materials so that they could start with this question and to move them to try out their own ways of exploring the phenomenon. During this extended development I came to formulate what I would call a middle way. This pedagogical approach attempted to navigate between the totally scripted worksheets in some science curriculum or science trade books and the very broad thematic starting points with a limited structure of the more open-ended approaches. I also thought it important to recognize and promote the opportunity for children to explore their affective engagement with phenomenon. There are some phenomena that have high aesthetic appeal, which will elicit a more personal and affective reaction from children. This affective involvement was essential in keeping their attention and motivating them to continue with the activities. So, I ended up choosing phenomena that had high aesthetic appeal and allowed for a more balanced approach to the teaching of science. It was also during this time that I tried out a variety of activities that centered on working models of historical machines and tools such as water wheels, windmills, and clocks. I came to see that these topics would naturally allow for a multidisciplinary approach to curriculum design. During the years at the museum I wrote and managed to get published a series of science books for children. My approach was different from most other science books of this genre. Rather than a smorgasbord of activities where every page or every few pages presented a new activity with a new set of materials and new phenomena to sample, I took the approach of providing for the user of the book an in-depth involvement focusing on one phenomena or one technological artifact. One of the first books was about how to investigate bubbles and soap films showing a variety of ways to makes bubbles different ways and discover their properties. Others in the series showed how to investigate spinning tops and yo-yos, balloons, waves, water wheels and windmills, and drinking straw constructions. All the materials were simple and relatively available. The activities built on each other and were designed to be a starting point in the sense that after making the object shown in the book, there was still opportunity for the reader to make up their own variations and generate their own questions to further the exploration. In effect, the later books became a type of informal curriculum. Teachers reported to me that they were using them in their classes adapting the activities for teaching science concepts. Sometime later in the course of writing these books I designed a middle school physical science curriculum with National Science Foundation funding, adapting some of the same topics to the school context. One of the last books in the series – Mobiles and Balancing Toys – provided an example of this evolved pedagogy that was also used in the curriculum for middle school. The design of the activities from Mobiles and Balancing Toys will be the focus of this chapter. The nature of these activities and how they relate to each other provide examples of what I would propose to be essential pedagogical practices for effective teaching of science and technology. These activities will be used to set the stage for

4

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

the development of what follows in this book. In delving into the details about the activities of this book I will carry out the same process I would use if I were working with teachers or students. The activities will first be discussed – what is involved with each activity and my rationale for including it in the series. Then I will propose that the choice of this kind of activity and how it fits into the whole series is related to broad pedagogical considerations. Additionally, an alternative paradigm of science education and philosophy of education is implicit in the whole approach.

Mobiles and Balancing Toys The activities in the Mobiles and Balancing Toys book were as follows: BALANCING YOUR OWN BODY Balancing on a beam Balancing a model of your body BALANCING OBJECTS Finding the vertical and horizontal balancing points VERTICAL BALANCING Balancing a cardboard shaped vertically on a wire balancing toy rolling toy Balancing symmetrical object vertically Balancing hidden weights Finding the balancing points of unsymmetrical objects HORIZONTAL BALANCING toy balance beam symmetrical mobile Other symmetrical mobiles An unsymmetrical balancing device An unsymmetrical mobile simple balance I will describe some of the activities in detail as well as comment about the rationale behind this pedagogical approach. My comments apply to a child or youth doing these activities at home or a student in school involved with the same activities under the guidance of a teacher.

The First Activity

5

The First Activity The first activity challenges the reader/student to start with their own body and try out different kinds of positions while keeping their whole body balanced for as long as possible. Some challenges are: • How long can they balance on one foot? • How long can they balance on a piece of wood acting as a beam? There are other challenges, which involve balancing objects and holding up other people. In this first activity the muscles in the legs have to be carefully adjusted so as to remain upright. Holding the arms out may or may not help. If they are held directly over the head, it can result in instability. If the arms are held low and to the sides, it does seem to help. Holding one leg above the ground far away from the body results in instability while keeping the leg close to the body helps. So, in an approximate way the child begins to feel that stability depends on how the arms are held in relationship to the rest of the body. This observation can provide some insight later when they are balance other objects that have appendages. My rationale for starting with this activity is that it involves the person in a very personal way. It is their body that they are balancing and not an object. It is a multisensory experience activating prior knowledge and personal symbols about how objects maintain equilibrium. My rationale for starting with the vertical is that it is the most fundamental orientation of our whole existence. Why not have children become more aware of how their muscles, bones, and sensory equipment all work together to keep them upright? In the context of the investigation, questions are posed for them to think about how they maneuver or position various parts of their body to maintain this orientation. It challenges them to act out, think about, and reflect on this basic orientation. Therefore, their bodies can be an object to be investigated as it relates to balancing. At a deeper level there are several senses of balance that can be discussed here. We keep our body balanced automatically and are not directly conscious of how we do this. There are times when our balance is at risk and we must pay close attention

6

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

to what we do with our body. This is when we first learn how to ice skate, ski, or other kinds of activities which force us to deliberately arrange our muscles and members to keep ourselves upright. Some circus acts are about balance and part of the appeal is this defying and overcoming of the pull of gravity. This appeal goes beyond mere entertainment. It resonates with a deep need of our psyche. Michael Jackson, an anthropologist, writing about the body asserts that losing our balance is “a disturbance at the very center and ground of our Being.” (Jackson, 1983, p. 329). Part of the appeal of ice skating, skiing, or bike riding is the sense of achievement of being on things, which are unstable, can easily tip over; with training and concentration we overcome this instability. In a way we defy gravity. With lots of training and practice we can smoothly glide on one foot or on two wheels without falling over. Balance then becomes again an unconscious act. We enjoy the mastery that has been achieved. With this in mind, starting off to balance one’s own body has an intrinsic appeal.

The Second Activity The second activity suggested in this investigation is to balance a cardboard model of a human body. The recommended dimensions of arms, legs, head, and torso are proportionally in size and weight and are the same percentage as those dimensions of the human body. The resulting model is about half human size in terms of weight. There were these kinds of problems. The readers of the trade book or students in school are challenged by a teacher to move the arms and legs of this cardboard model into different positions. They can place a metal rod along the holes of the cardboard torso to see where it can be balanced vertically. This is a big step for the students even though there is an obvious correspondence. There is now a representation of the body but it has a size and weight where kinesthetic and haptic feedback is still possible. There is some correspondence between this model and one’s own body. This assemblage of cardboard can function in several different ways. It is a scale model of a body in that manipulating it in some ways is like manipulating a human body. It allows experimentation that would be hard to do with a real body. If the arm of the model is fixed so that it extends out from the body, the model tips toward the arms and loses it balance or tilts from the vertical. This kind of maneuver can’t be done with a real body. However, there is an approximation to the balancing of a real body. If the student extends his or her arms out from their body, they will feel the weight of the arms after a while and a tendency to move away from the vertical. If one leg of the model is extended outwards, the model will tip in that direction. A similar kind of tendency would be felt doing this with our own body. Therefore, a mapping can be done between the model and the body. It isn’t a full and real correspondence but it can be useful to do so.

The Second Activity

7

8

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

Models are an integral part of the scientific process. The juxtaposition of this cardboard model with that of the human body provides an example for the student of how something can be investigated in a more manageable manner. On the other hand, some of this experimentation may be misleading because the model is an approximation as it is true of all models. In some positions it may not correspond to the way a real body can be balanced. Nevertheless, it is a step on the way to objectifying and making explicit ways of thinking about balancing objects. It is explicit in the sense that the model body stands outside of us but represent us. With the introduction of the cardboard assemblage there is the beginning of a psychological distance between the student’s own body and the model. This has a similarity to playing with dolls and play action figures, both of which allow involvement and distance. This reduction in scale allows for the student to gain control and take in all at once the whole subject of the investigation – the human body. (Michael Jackson (1983) quoting Levi Strauss). This assemblage is also representative of other objects and may be thought of as an analogue of these objects. Hold the model so that the torso is horizontal. Place the arms and a leg below the torso, remove the head and one has a close approximation to a table. Extend the arms and legs to make one long horizontal piece. Find the spot on the torso piece where it balances horizontally and you have something approaching a seesaw. You can run through a variety of manipulations quickly and gain a sense of where the center of gravity may be. You can even distort the arms and legs putting them in unnatural positions and see how this affects its center of gravity. There is an added dimension to this cardboard model. It is not just a neutral object. I have had adults make comments about the different configurations in workshops. They used words to describe emotional states such as it looking sad because its head is hanging down and the body is drooping over. Because of its shape and the context, a special kind of relationship can be fostered between the model and the student. There can be an affective reaction to the cardboard model. It is like a large-scale doll. You could even decorate it and shape the cardboard so that its shape and features look more like a human body. Dolls function in this manner, although they are not generally designed to be proportional in weight. A type of empathy can be promoted. This is related to what traditional sculptors have carried out. They promote empathy on the part of the observer by creating likeness of the human body in various poses and distortions. Each kind of form and shape brings forth feelings and conceptions about ourselves. In this sense there can be said to be the beginnings of an aesthetic response to this model. In the context of science education this aspect of student involvement is hardly ever acknowledged but I would argue it is essential to recognize it for the purpose of gaining deep student involvement.

The Third Activity

9

The Third Activity The third activity in this guided exploration involves the balancing of a rectangular piece of cardboard that is longer than it is wide. These proportions are analogous to the proportions of the human body in terms of length and width but not distribution of weight. To keep a connection to the previous activity it is suggested in the book that a human figure be drawn on one side. The figure is a compressed one occupying most of the area of the cardboard but still approximating the proportions of a human body. This results in a representation that is more abstract and iconic. The student is challenged to stick a metal rod in the holes on the side of the cardboard and find where the rectangular piece of cardboard will remain vertical. Of course, when the rod is place slightly above the middle it will remain vertical roughly the same as if it were a human body. As soon as it is placed below the middle it will rotate. The challenge is taken further by having the student find out how many nails would be needed at the bottom of the cardboard to keep it vertical when the rod is now placed below the middle. The goal of the activity is to move the student to an explicit realization that more weight has to be below the balancing point compared to above the balancing point if the object is to remain vertical. This is a transitional activity where students can investigate in a more controlled manner how geometric objects can be balanced. The cardboard rectangle is representative of these objects. It also illustrates how forces act on an object to keep it in a vertical orientation. In addition, there is now a movement toward a more geometric two-dimensional arrangement. The outline could be traced on paper providing a visual representation that can then be the means for developing a conceptualization about how objects are balanced vertically. There is also a relatively easy transition to visual modeling. Going even further, a reduced size rectangle, which represents the cardboard model, can be drawn. Drawing them at a much smaller scale can readily represent the shapes that students are working with. Representation has shifted to a mode that is visual and more abstract. With some further work mathematical operations can be applied such as applying the formula that the area of a rectangle is the product of the length and width. This piece of cardboard has a transitional figure drawn on it that can be considered iconic (a compressed human figure) and it is not too great a leap of imagination

10

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

to where this kind of arrangement can be represented abstractly. When viewed from the side with the drawing of the human body, there is still the connection to the body. When the cardboard is viewed from the plain side it is just a rectangular object. This progression was deliberately set up to provide for this transition to a more abstract representation. After the third activity there are more challenges and problems using the rectangular piece of cardboard. In one activity the student is challenged to find a way of keeping the rectangular piece of cardboard vertically balanced resting on the finger or edge of the table. He or she has two long pieces of cardboard, the rectangular piece and some nails to carry this out. Despite their most recent prior experience of getting the same piece of cardboard to balance vertically by hanging a bunch of nails at the bottom of the cardboard, students and even adults have difficulty seeing that the two extra pieces of cardboard can be attached at the bottom with a few nails added at the end of these. Most students do not seem to make any connection to what they did in the previous activity because they are operating under an intuitive framing of the problem that prevents them from seeing the connection. This difficulty is an important example where assumptions are often made that a student can readily transfer understanding from one situation to the next. Although the eventual solution builds on the previous activity, there is something about the change in configuration and that there are now pieces of cardboard instead of nails which somehow prevents the student from seeing the connection. A follow-up discussion is needed where the teacher coaches the students to help them see connections to the previous activities. Students are also challenged to balance other kinds of simple geometric shapes of cardboard such as squares and rectangles and circles. These shapes have lines of symmetry that divide the shapes into equal areas. By using these symmetrical relationships an intuitive sense of the difficult concept of center of gravity can be developed. Invoking symmetry taps into the students’ innate aesthetic sensibilities and the activities allow them to explore the relationship between symmetry and how things balance vertically.

The Second Part – Balancing Objects Horizontally

11

One may question about the use of having students carry out multiple activities involving balancing. A common practice is to have students do one or two activities and assume that they have gained a sense of what is involved in balancing an object. My argument is that a single activity does not provide enough experience for students to grasp the underlying concept that can be developed with these materials. It would be critical for the teacher to take the time to discuss with the students about what carries over from the preceding activities. By getting them to analyze each of the situations they are exploring about balancing objects, they can begin to understand that there is a pattern of relationships that holds across all of them. During the follow-up discussion with these activities, the teacher should have the student use the objects while they are attempting to develop explanations of what they think are happening. Gestures and use of the object during the discussion is a way of externalizing the thinking of the students. Using the objects during the reporting and sense-making enables the student to coordinate and externalize their thinking about what they have experienced. Additionally, students should make drawings of these objects and discussions carried out of how forces are acting in the balancing of these objects using these drawings. In this manner these practices can help the student to externalize their prior knowledge about balancing.

The Second Part – Balancing Objects Horizontally The second part of this investigation involves working with narrow rectangular pieces of cardboard where each piece is 2 in. wide and 2 feet long. These can be stacked into corbel-like arrangements or hung into different kinds of mobiles. Both children and adults have strong preferences for symmetrical arrangements of the pieces of cardboard in these different activities. After assembling this type of mobile, the students are given a challenge of making one that seems rather different. An interesting problem arises when making asymmetrical mobiles. These are the ones that have members hanging from each other in the following manner.

12

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

When there is an attempt to construct an asymmetrical type of mobile, they run into problems. They get confused about how to move the string to keep all the members horizontal. Their innate preference for symmetry in the earlier activities was a help whereas it is a hindrance here. They have to rethink about how the balance is achieved operating at a more flexible and abstract level. There is also a symmetry at this more abstract level. It is based on the relationship that the product of the mass and its distance from the balancing point should equal the product of the mass and its distance from the balancing point of the opposite side. To help them make this transition some analysis is carried out with these mobiles moving the supporting string or adding weights just to see what will happen. The students are challenged to come up with some consistent pattern on how the pieces above counterbalance the pieces below. The final activity is using the narrow cardboard piece as a simple balance where the cardboard piece is hung from a support in the middle of it. Marks are made on it so that distances from the balance point are easily measured. Weights can be hung in various combinations on each side at these points. This particular activity is a standard activity in many curriculum programs. It is used to help students see that there is a pattern to the way weights hung on each side balance each other. These patterns can be related to the concept of moment arms, torque, and provide concrete examples of algebraic relationships. The collection of activities of this second part are an example of a variable exploration in the sense that a limited set of materials – pieces of cardboard, rubber bands, and string – are combined in a variety of ways to achieve different kinds of structures. All of these rearrangements in structures can be studied and related to how equilibrium is achieved. In the overall scheme of the investigation there is a type of juxtaposition where objects were balanced in a vertical orientation in the first part of the book in contrast to the second part where there is a balancing of objects in horizontal orientation. (With the exception of the unsymmetrical mobile) The practice of varying the use of materials to create similar effects and that of juxtaposition are artistic practices that happen within all the arts. Therefore, there is an incorporation of artistic practices and aesthetic sensibilities that can support and lead the way to a rationale analysis.

The Overall Scheme of These Activities These activities and their overall structure were designed with a conscious use of pedagogical practices and a philosophical orientation. Some of these practices have been used for some time while others are of more recent development. Implicit in the design of the balancing activities is a deliberate attempt to provide for a psychological and cognitive movement on the part of the students as they carry out an extended investigation. This is a movement in the sense that there should be a significant change in students’ thought processes as they make the

Psychological Movements

13

effort to assimilate the experience of the encounter with a phenomenon, represent it in an explicit way, and reconcile their own thinking with the formal scientific knowledge that would be introduced by a teacher in the school context. Informing both these practices and movement is a broad philosophical perspective that is based on an approach to education that balances the affective and the cognitive. The following statements about pedagogy and philosophy provide only a brief introductory description to set the stage for later in-depth development in the remaining chapters.

Psychological Movements The set of activities just described represents several kinds of psychological movements: • There is a progression of sensory engagement from the visceral (internal organs of the body such as thorax, abdomen, heart, etc.) and proprioceptive (muscles and skeletal systems) to a mode of engagement that is more visual and tactile. There is multisensory engagement throughout the activities.1 • Modes of representations move from those involving the whole body (mime and empathy) or gestural (hands and facial expression) to ones that are visual such as approximate realistic drawings or schematics. • There is a movement from an engagement involving empathy which can give rise to personal associations and personal symbols toward a state of awareness where shared symbols, which are culturally given such as in art (mobiles) and in science (the equal arm balance) come to be adopted. There is another way of describing this movement. It is a progression from a more personal engagement of one’s own body-image to something involving manipulations of objects that are iconic and/or abstract representations of the human body and other objects. • There is a movement that is from a more global perception (vague images of how ones balances one’s body) to one that becomes more analytical (experimenting with an equal arm balance). It could be said that there is at first an inception of the whole gestalt of the phenomenon and then a differentiation of the parts of the phenomenon. • There is a resonance between a personal affective response (symbolic associations conjured up by a model of a body) and a cultural affective response

 The vestibular – the detectors in the inner ear – should also be included because it maps the coordinates of the body in space. 1

14

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

(balancing toys and circus performances) with a growing realization that this basic phenomenon can be dealt with in a more objective scientific manner. Overall, there is a progression from the difficulty of characterizing what specifically is occurring to one’s body regarding balancing to a use of objects and visualizations which allows the student to carry out operations that can provide a more objective characterization of how objects can be balanced. This could be characterized as a genetic progression in the sense that early activities activate sensory– motor perceptions and representations while later activities involve higher cognitive functions. These characterizations provide a sense of an overview of changes that can be brought about by a carefully considered curriculum program. A rationale for emphasizing these kinds of changes and why they are important will be developed in the rest of the book.

Pedagogical Practices From a more practical perspective the following characteristics and pedagogical practices are exemplified: • • • • •

Contextualizing the object of study in an investigation Choosing an archetypical phenomenon (balancing) for an investigation Providing for multisensory engagement with a phenomenon Recognizing the role of empathy in exploration, and the development of concepts Valuing and making explicit use of the aesthetic dimensions of phenomena and artifacts such as symmetry and utilizing aesthetic practices such as variation and juxtaposition • Adapting the structures of play and exploration for pedagogical purposes • Using models and metaphors for experiential extension and conceptual development

Contextualizing the Object of Study In the book on balancing, there are drawings of circus acts in the introduction of some of the activities. These were added to remind the students that the types of devices they were constructing had parallels in the world outside the classroom. In a later version of these activities students were given models of boats and airplanes to explore ways of testing how these models change their vertical or horizontal orientation when additional materials are added to them. (These are found in the “Explore-it after school” curriculum project published by Kelvin.) The purpose of including the drawing of circus acts and objects such as boats and airplanes was to provide a connection to the world outside the classroom for the children.

Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

15

The student also has prior experience and knowledge with balancing in their immediate lives such as in sports or dancing. The student can call upon these previous experiences that are personally meaningful and relate these to the challenges and problems that arise during the early stages of an extended investigation of this phenomenon. The associations of balancing their body in the past can be drawn upon to assimilate and begin to formulate a way of conceptualizing about these new experiences that they encounter. In an extended investigation students should be encouraged to make connections to these experiences. This is one way of bringing authenticity to the investigation and a way of activating prior understandings. In addition there are evolving theories of learning that propose that a great deal of learning is contextual. Throughout the book I will return to the important issue of the relationship between context and learning, citing some current thinking about this issue and giving suggestions of how it can be designed into curriculum activities.

Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts Keeping ourselves balanced physically and psychologically is fundamental to our daily existence. The many examples of popular circus acts that involve the performers in precarious balancing arrangements attest to the appeal of the phenomenon of balancing bodies or objects. It is an intrinsically interesting phenomenon. It is one that directly engages the attention of the student without the need for seductive “bells and whistles” such as costly materials and catchy titles. The phenomenon connects with the student at a deep psychological level. Their involvement in the investigation arises more out of intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation. The degree to which it arises out of intrinsic motivation reflects the degree to which the activity of the student could be said to be authentic. In this book I will introduce other kinds of intrinsically interesting phenomena such as air and water movement, bubbles and soap film, and balls moving along tracks. I propose that the science curriculum framework for grades 1–8 should be centered on intrinsically interesting natural and man-made phenomena such as these. To do so assures that we will engage the attention of students affectively as well as intellectually because these can be related to the Jungian concept of archetypical symbols where there are deep associations between the representations of these phenomena and universal cultural symbols. How this connection arises and its relevance to science pedagogy will be developed in several chapters. This connection is important because it will provide one way, among others, I will develop for advocating a holistic approach to science education.

16

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

Multisensory Engagement The first activity involves the whole body of the student. Keeping one’s balance not only involves the organ of the inner ear but also requires the coordination of our whole muscular–skeleton system. We can balance our body with our eyes closed but visual alignment makes it easier. In the other activities the student manipulates materials and devices getting a feeling of the forces that may or may not keep the device in a vertical or horizontal orientation. Our tactile and haptic systems participate in this action coordinating with the visual to provide a fuller perception of what is involved in balancing objects. Advocating for multisensory involvement has been part of some educators’ agenda for some time. I will take it beyond the common sense notion that the students will gather more information or it is a matter of equity. Paying attention to what kinds of sensory systems are activated has implications for the way phenomena come to be represented, what kind of aesthetic engagement may arise, and whether useful analogies in meaning making can be generated.

Empathy The first and second activities are closely coupled because the model is that of a human body. We can readily imitate some of the arranged positions of the arms and legs of the cardboard model. Included in the children’s book were drawings of circus acts where performers were in arrangements that were analogous to the pieces of cardboard in the devices suggesting that we can identify with the balancing of the different devices in an empathic manner. Recognizing the importance of this empathic relationship may appear to run counter to the objective nature of the scientific process but accounts of scientists suggest that it is a necessary and useful step in moving toward new conceptualizations. A separate chapter will examine this type of engagement and place this aspect of behavior in the larger context of how meaning is made by students when they are assimilating experiences with basic phenomena.

Aesthetics Alexander Calder appeared to have invented the first mobiles and went on to produce multiple variations. By including an object that was originally meant as a work of art, it might be assumed that aesthetics automatically becomes a part of the pedagogical process. I will attempt to show that aesthetic in the learning of science goes much further than this kind of practice. The usual definition of aesthetics has it closely connected with art and philosophy but its domain of consideration can be expanded to include the natural world

Exploration and Play

17

and the work of scientists. When some scientists talk about the aesthetics of their work, the term is expanded to include well-worked-out elegant theories or visual representations that have a beauty similar to the work of some artists. In fact, some artists have appropriated some of these visual representations and by changing the context designated them as works of art. There are several characteristics of the overall design of the activities in the Balancing Toys investigation that can be considered as aesthetic in intent. The activities were divided into two parts. One focused on balancing objects vertically while the other focused on balancing objects horizontally. This can be thought of as a juxtaposition where there are contrasting elements but there is still some similarity between the two parts. Juxtaposition is a technique and element of design adopted by many artists. For instance, this is a frequent technique used in cinema. Each of the activities involves balancing in some ways. There is a variation on the theme of balancing objects. Variation is also an element of design and is used frequently by artists. Many works of music are examples of this practice. A separate chapter will focus on the role of variation and juxtaposition in curriculum design. The symmetry of objects was explicitly dealt with in a number of activities. Symmetry has become recognized among some scientists as a fundamental way of representing natural phenomena. As part of a chapter on the role of aesthetics in science I elaborate on how it has been used in science and how it is relevant in teaching science. In the chapter on aesthetics I will present a history of how aesthetics shaped scientific thinking, how some scientists’ avocation as an artist or a craftsperson shaped their approach as an experimental or theoretical scientist, and what is the role of symmetry in representing and conceptualizing about basic natural phenomena.

Exploration and Play The model of the human body could be thought of as a crudely made large-scale doll that can not only function as an object for investigation but could also be an object for fantasy play. In fact, it was reported that in some after school program implementing this particular activity children modified their models with markings to represent faces and clothing and used the cardboard models as characters in mini-stories. Some of the activities are presented in a type of a challenge that has similarity to the structure of games. For instance, one child can place nails in the corrugations of a piece of cardboard and place tape around the edges to conceal the spot where the nails were added. Then another child can try to figure out where the nails are by finding the balance point of this piece of modified cardboard. This is the activity of Balancing Objects of Hidden Weight mentioned in the outline of the book above. Simple challenges like these, depending how they are designed and presented, can activate the innate playful mode of children. On a broader level, the way the whole set of activities is put together has characteristics of play in certain kinds of manifestations. The overall structure has similarities to a game, in the sense that there is a limited set of materials – cardboard,

18

1 Characteristics of a Genetic Approach to Curriculum Design

nails, string, and metal rods; the boundary of the investigation is limited to balancing things; and there are a few “rules” which determine how to play with the objects. There are also in many kinds of play the elements of variation and juxtaposition so that there is a strong connection between play and aesthetics. In the chapter on play I will report on the categories of play, the close connection between play and exploration, how it acts to foster the creation of analogies, and how it can provide a paradigm for a different kind of teacher–student relationship. Adopting a playful approach to education leads to a more holistic experience for the student.

Models and Analogies Several kinds of models are used in the balancing activities mentioned above. There is a scale model of the human body and the rectangular piece of cardboard acting in some ways as an analogue model. The placing of weights on the balance beam in the last activity could be modeled mathematically. Some teachers frequently incorporate models in their teaching. It is a way of making connections between the experiences during the investigation and prior knowledge as well as a bridge toward introducing formal scientific concepts. All the investigations should incorporate models and analogies. I will develop on the topic of how the role of modeling and use of models bring about conceptual change, in this chapter. Physical models and related analogues have been a part of science education for some time. However, there has been and continues to be ambivalency, distrust, and skepticism on the part of some science educators, scientists, and philosophers about the essential role of their use in scientific thinking. There is the possibility that their use will lead to misconceptions and there is the question whether they are needed to bring about conceptual change. An important pedagogical question is how and where they are introduced and what are the ways of using them so that students are not mislead. This will be discussed throughout the book. Modeling in recent years has taken on new importance with the development of a variety of programs for use on the computer. These have added a powerful extension to traditional pedagogy. Working with these programs can be so seductive that curriculum designers and teachers tend to drop the necessary connection to tangible experiences and do not provide a learning progression that moves from the concrete to the abstract. The simulations on the computer are often by necessity very schematic and abstract. Students are introduced to computer simulations or models without sufficient experience with tangible materials. Students may master what they can do with the computer simulations but not necessarily know how to transfer this learning to real-world situations. This issue will be given attention in some of the chapters in this book. There has been a great deal written in the last 30 years or so about metaphorical thinking in the development of scientific thinking and in general about its role in language and in the shaping of cultural paradigms. In the chapter on metaphorical thinking I will refer to some of these recent developments relating them to a way in

Reference

19

which science curriculum can be designed and how a grade 1–8 science curriculum framework can be structured.

Philosophical Framework The concept of balance as it has so far been developed has been related to the physical sciences but it has much broader application. In education, various practices methodologies and values tend to be emphasized and oversold because of the changing political environment. There are continual struggles to introduce new practices or bring back traditional methods and values. The situation in schools tends to end up with an either/or dichotomy where it is one methodology or another that must be put into practice. The same holds for the goals and values that guide the teaching of science. As a result, curriculum designers and teachers are often put in the position of setting up an unbalanced environment for students to learn and grow. In this book I am arguing for an approach that gives greater attention to the affective life of the student and the multiple modes by which students become engaged in, and make sense of, experiences with phenomena. Given that the current practices and the political climate emphasize the economic and cognitive over personal fulfillment I will emphasize the need to balance this emphasis with greater attention to the manner in which students make personal sense of their experiences. What may best characterize this approach is the idea of a holistic approach to education that balances the cognitive and affective, the practical and the personal, and the traditional and innovative approaches to teaching science. In the succeeding chapters I examine and elaborate upon a more extensive and deeper development of parts of these pedagogical practices, psychological movements, and philosophical orientation. In some ways there is a cyclical development of the overall theme. The scenario given at the beginning of each chapter will provide the specific context for further elaboration of what is meant by the psychological movements I have just listed, dealing with only one or two or three movements at a time. Various literature and research will be mentioned to provide a rationale and justification for giving attention to these particular psychological considerations. The phenomenon mentioned in the scenario will then be used to illustrate how the psychological movement is embodied in a practical manner as it might happen in a classroom and how these considerations are related to a holistic orientation.2

Reference Jackson, M (1983). Man, 18, pp. 327–345.

 All the drawings in this chapter are taken from Mobiles and Balancing Toys which is part of the “Explore-it” program published by Kelvin. Kelvin and Roy Doty, the artists, have given permission for use of these drawings. 2

Chapter 2

A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

In the previous chapter a specific curriculum topic provided a way of exemplifying an overall pedagogical approach and associated practices. It provided a concrete context for introducing a number of pedagogical issues. In some ways it incorporates recommendations from current research as well as reflections from master teachers. A generic model which is a modification of a current popular model is proposed in this chapter. To give these modifications some concreteness and relate them to the pedagogy of teaching science, I will give a very brief summary of the work of two exemplary scientists – Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell. Drawing upon the in-depth studies of these scientists, I will summarize some essential practices and ways of thinking that can be incorporated into a revised pedagogical model.

Faraday and Maxwell – Models for Extended Inquiry Case Study #1 – Michael Faraday It is often proposed that investigations be carried out in a manner analogous to the ones conducted by the scientists. This modeling would include their practical work as well as their thought processes. Examining the work of specific scientists can illustrate what specific practices are involved in the scientific approach and to ways of developing concepts and theories. Drawing upon these historical examples, a pedagogical model for the teaching of science can be given greater integrity. From my perspective it would be useful to consider scientists who are experimentalists as well as those who are more involved in theoretical development. This is to give balance to what is involved in scientific practice because the tendency has been to emphasize more on how new concepts and theories are developed without much attention given to the exploratory part of inquiry and the manipulation of B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_2, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

21

22

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

materials. This has been characterized as differentiating the context of discovery and the context of justification (Reichenbach, 1938). To some extent these categorizations are not entirely separable. Experimentalists operate within a theoretical framework and some develop theories that grow out of their work. Some theoretical scientists work closely with experimentalists. Since the main focus in this book is the essential role of exploration, I will give more attention to a scientist known for his experimental work, and also include another who built on this experimental work. There are multiple examples of scientists to choose from. I have chosen to draw on the extensive studies of Michael Faraday and the commentary about his work. Some of those who have studied his work make important comments that have implications for science education. There is a close connection between Faraday’s work and some of the works of James Clerk Maxwell. How Maxwell utilized the experimental work of Faraday in developing his theory of electromagnetic phenomena provides an idea about the early and later stages of guided inquiry as well as the relationship between elementary, middle school, and the later developments of high school. Faraday provides an excellent opportunity for studying how a scientist works with his extensive notebooks. Numerous studies have been carried out closely examining these notebooks as well as recreating some of his explorations and experiments. Some researchers have focused on specific situations where Faraday recorded his detailed manipulations and interpretations of his discoveries and findings revealing how a very creative and productive scientist operates. Some researchers have actually recreated some of his explorations and experiments using similar equipment and in one study the materials actually used by Faraday were used. These examinations of detailed processes have then been used to develop a theoretical framework for scientific processes with physical materials with particular attention to the role these manipulations play in the development of concepts and theories. Faraday is considered to be one of the greatest experimental scientists. He made major contributions in several areas of physical science ranging from the chemistry of different kinds of materials, electrochemistry, and an extensive, prolonged investigation of electromagnetic phenomena. His most significant work occurred during the 1820s and continued for another 30 years. Faraday carried out most of his explorations and experiments himself. Possibly, because of this practice some popular impressions of Faraday tend to present him as a lone scientist making major discoveries by himself. In fact, he was constantly in contact with scientists in England, Scotland, and the Continent. His laboratory was in the Royal Society building. He often gave lectures to the Society about his discoveries and took great care in how he presented his findings using physical devices that were specially designed to show what he had discovered. When he became aware of important discoveries of other scientists, he would recreate the experiments that were reported. For instance, he and Humphrey Davy recreated the discoveries of Orstead, who found that a magnetic field was produced when current was passed

Multisensory Engagement

23

through a wire. Faraday’s ability to question and dissect other’s experiments as well as his own experiments has been noted as one of his great strengths (Williams, 1965, p. 118). It is important to keep in mind that most of Faraday’s work did not involve the direct use of mathematics. In fact, he had a mistrust for mathematical symbols used in the different stages of his explorations and experimentation. David Gooding is among those scholars who have studied his work closely. He studied Faraday’s notebooks and developed a system for following Faraday’s manipulation of equipment and materials as well as the interpretations of his manipulations and theoretical musings. Drawing on Gooding’s studies I will report on some significant observations about Faraday’s work. He did not just duplicate other experimental work but went beyond the reported discoveries, varying the conditions and the materials to find out what more could be discovered, partly because his own theoretical thinking did not align with the general interpretations. He designed new techniques or instruments to extend these explorations. These new instruments were used to magnify and make more apparent, subtle happenings or to query further the nature of the phenomenon. Faraday was quite aware of the need to communicate what he had discovered as clearly as possible, as he did not totally trust words and diagrams to do the work. In some situations he designed specific physical devices to demonstrate what he had discovered. It is important to keep in mind that Faraday carried out parallel investigations of different phenomena but continued his exploration of electromagnetic phenomena for over 30 years. In addition to these practices, there are several characteristics of his experimental work that Gooding, Neseriian, Tweny, and others have emphasized and which have implications for the teaching of science. These would be: • • • •

Multisensory Exploration of a Phenomenon Visualizations Use of Analogies Thought Experiments

Multisensory Engagement According to Tweney (1985), Faraday made several attempts to gain a better understanding of the nature of electrostatics, and he carried out an extended investigation. There are several important procedures of this particular investigation, which are relevant to a pedagogical model. In carrying out this investigation, Faraday utilized techniques that gave multiple sensory information even involving his whole body. Placing these manipulations in the larger framework of Faraday’s work, Tweney speculates that Faraday wanted to gain a more direct perceptual access to the lines of induction of electrostatics reflecting a general mistrust of purely mathematical modeling that some continental scientists had used to

24

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

develop their theories of electricity and electrostatics. Previous explorations by others had not fully determined the nature of an electrostatic field. One of his first explorations of electrostatics was to use the electroscope to map out the field inside a container placing an electroscope at various positions inside this container. (This is a simple device where two thin metal leaves are spread apart in the presence of an electrostatic field.) He recorded the position of the gold leaf when the electroscope was placed in different places in this large container to map the varying strength of the field. These were recorded in a number of drawings. He then arrived at a point where he generated a composite drawing of the field inside the container. Not satisfied with this one technique Faraday went further by varying the method of investigation to obtain even more direct perceptual access to lines of induction. Especially interesting is one technique where he moved an end of a wire connected to an electrostatic generator inside a copper boiler vessel. The variation in the sound of the discharge between the tip of the wire and the surface of the vessel helped to map the electricity being discharged. He also used stroboscopic techniques to view the diffuse forms of electrostatic discharge where one technique was the quick movement of fingers in front of the phenomenon. This technique takes skill and practice and might not be easily duplicated by other investigators. Therefore, Faraday also borrowed a technique from Charles Wheatstone using a mirror device to strobe the phenomenon resulting in more reproducible data. Faraday even put his whole body in the investigation of electrostatic phenomena, making a large metal cage into which he could enter and to observe further the nature of electrostatic charges. These varied methods eventually resulted in drawings showing maps of lines and surfaces of equal electrostatic intensity enabling him to get a complete picture of the electrostatic field. Gooding (2005) proposes that these later drawings functioned both as a record of manipulations and the beginning of a theory about the phenomenon. For later reference it is important to keep in mind these multiple approaches using different sensory modalities for studying the same phenomenon. There are implications for the way that the exploratory and experimental stages of extended inquiry could be conducted.1 Tweney and Gooding make an important point about these types of manipulations. The physical materials were external tools by which these formulations came about. “Faraday clearly appeared to be using an eye–hand–mind dynamic in constructing new spaces for both thought and action, much as he had done earlier in his discovery of electromagnetism and electricity.” Here Tweney refers to other explorations by Faraday of colloidal suspensions of gold in water and the optical effects of these suspensions. (Tweney et al. 2005 in Scientific and Technological Thinking). The design of the experiment shapes the kind of results obtained and how they can be interpreted. As in the exploration of electrostatic phenomena, different techniques revealed both similarities and new information about the 1

 Gooding in Faraday Rediscovered gives a fuller account of this whole process.

Visualizations

25

phenomena. A thorough grounding in the how and what of the experiments can also help shape the physical intuitions about a phenomenon. The theories of electricity and magnetism emerged from the manipulations of the laboratory artifacts. They were not imposed on them before Faraday started the whole process but they arose as he explored.

Visualizations Gooding in his study of Faraday’s notebook finds that his use of drawings and diagrams played a critical role in the development of his thought processes and theoretical formulations. Two investigations that illustrate the various functions of these drawings were studied. One was the study of electrostatics previously described. The other involved exploring the magnetic field generated near a wire conducting a current. In 1821, Faraday assisted Humprey Davy in this investigation. They suspended a needle on a thin string and moved this needle to different positions around the wire. When a current was allowed to flow through the wire, the needle assumed a specific orientation at each point of suspension. Multiple observations using this technique were combined into one composite image. Using Faraday’s series of drawings from the earliest recordings to later ones, Gooding shows by the juxtaposition of these drawings the growing understanding of the electromagnetic field around a wire conducting electricity. Gooding (2005, pp. 203–211 in “Visualization”) proposes that these drawings are more than the recording of observations. He proposes that at various times the drawings possibly functioned in several ways. • They could have functioned as a heuristic aiding Faraday in his process of discovery. • They could have integrated a series of observations providing a composite image giving a more complete understanding of the phenomena. • They could have functioned as a visual theoretical model standing for a complex of manipulations, observations, and theoretical proposals. • They also could have provided a way of fostering analogical transfer. Gooding elaborates on this sensory interaction in this manner: Far from functioning in isolation from other modes of perception or from other persons as sources of experience, visual perception integrates different types of knowledge and experience. There is a complex interaction of different kinds of doing: hands-on manipulation, looking, listening, imagining, thinking and argumentation. This type of visualization depends on and interacts closely with other forms of perception; it is a sort of perceptual inference that is not reducible to visual perception. Much of the cognitive power of images resided in this integrative capability, which is central to the inference in many sciences. (Gooding, 2005, pp. 208–209)

26

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

Explorations and Analogies It appears that Faraday at times studied some phenomenon initially out of mere curiosity. Williams in his study of Faraday’s notebooks recounts that the investigation of sound started out as a kind of dabbling because initially there is little mention of his initial manipulations in his notebooks. However, as he became more involved with this phenomenon he became more systematic. In one instance he experimented with the arrangements of small particles on one plate determining how the vibration of a nearby plate affected them. The plates were not in contact but it was obvious that something was being transmitted across the space between the plates during the sound vibrations. William asserts “Faraday could not help but be struck by the analogy to some experiments he had carried out with the phenomenon of electrical induction.” (Williams, 1965, p. 178) William speculated that acoustical phenomena provided a useful means for studying vibratory motion and that it might be possible that this mode of transmission of energy could be applied to electricity. This idea was not originally Faraday’s but had been suggested previously by Oersted. Faraday expanded on the analogy. Later, he began to suspect an analogy between sound, light, and electricity with the implication that Faraday saw similar behaviors in these phenomena (Williams, p. 181). The point to keep in mind is that experiences with concrete phenomena appear to bring about the noticing of similarities of different phenomena and that these could be called generative as some writers have designated this type of occurrence.

Thought Experiments At times Faraday in his notes and papers conjured up thought experiments to clarify his theoretical thinking and summarize exploratory findings. After his explorations with electrostatic phenomena he proposed a thought experiment imagining small mites occupying a globe surrounded by a larger conducting sphere. It requires an extended account of the electrostatic phenomena to fully understand how this thought experiment works. The point here is that he used this image to bring about a different interpretation of these phenomena (Gooding, 1985, pp. 125–126). There are other aspects of the experimental techniques that are of interest and have implications for science pedagogy. Faraday repeated the experiments of others partly because he felt they had missed subtle happenings of significance. He would come up with variations of the manipulations of these experiments using different materials or designing new apparatus to reveal more about the phenomenon being studied. One essential point I would emphasize about this practice is the fact that Faraday felt a need to study the phenomenon multiple ways to build up a more complete feeling and picture of what was present but not immediately evident. One type of manipulation or experiment was not enough for him to confirm his thinking and to develop a complete theory.

A Case Study in the Use of Analogies and Metaphors in Science

27

A Case Study in the Use of Analogies and Metaphors in Science Case Study #2 Another scientist who could function as a model for teaching science is James Clark Maxwell. There are also a large number of studies of his work. He started out studying the work of Faraday putting the latter’s experimental findings and implicit theoretical proposals on a firmer ground and extending these experimental findings and implicit theories into a more general theory with the eventual development of a mathematical model encompassing electricity, magnetism, and light. I include this account because the role of analogies takes on a more explicit and essential role in his development of a general theory. He also illustrates that theoreticians ground their thought at times in concrete images. I will draw upon the following writers who present different aspects of Maxwell’s development of his theory of electromagnetism. John North focuses on the role of analogy in Maxwell’s work, while Harman lays out a more comprehensive account covering some of the same areas as other writers but putting this in the larger historical context. N. Norton Wise covers the same history but gives more attention to the mathematical formalisms and their relationship to Maxwell’s imagery of the concept of field forces proposing that a symbolic image plays an essential role in this development. Brian Gee, in writing about Maxwell’s development of his well-known equations for electromagnetic phenomena, explicitly makes a link to science pedagogy. Together they provide a fuller picture of this theoretical development and provide some key characteristics that have relevance for a pedagogical model of inquiry. Maxwell, not long after his graduation from Cambridge University (1854), started his study of Michael Faraday’s experimental work on electricity and magnetism to gain a sense of the experiments that were performed and to get a sense of how Faraday formulated his qualitative theories. Faraday’s strength was in his experimentation and qualitative visualization; however, a number of writers point out that comments in his notebooks and papers in his later years have an implicit mathematical model. (Wise, 1979) In this very early stage Maxwell held off giving a complete mathematical formulation to what was implicit in Faraday’s thinking and writing. Gee as well as others who have commented on Maxwell’s close study of Faraday’s experiments give special attention to a critical disposition about his approach during this phase of development. Maxwell wanted to “lay hold of a clear physical conception” (Gee, 1978; Nersessian, 1992, p. 25). Maxwell states In a Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism: [B]efore I began the study of electricity I resolved to read no mathematics on the subject till I had first read through Faraday’s Experimental Researches in Electricity. However, Maxwell later comments that “As I proceeded with the study of Faraday, I perceived that his method of conceiving the phenomenon was also a mathematical one, though not exhibited in the conventional form of symbols. (Maxwell, 1833, preface)

While reviewing and assimilating Faraday’s exploration of electromagnetic phenomena, Maxwell also studied William Thomson’s mathematical and physical

28

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

papers, which are concerned with fields of force in an imaginary fluid medium called “ether.” He gave particular attention to Thomson drawing an analogy between heat flow and electrostatics (North, p. 125). According to Gee and Harman this was a precise mapping between properties of a fluid system and electrostatic phenomena. Thomson was noted for his use of analogies of this kind and Maxwell recognized the usefulness of this process. The juxtaposition of the studies of Faraday’s work and Thomson’s papers resulted in Maxwell realizing that Faraday’s conceptions about the lines of force of electromagnetic phenomenon could be represented in a mathematical manner and that analogies of a fluid medium would help in relating these to a physical conception. The mathematics in his first paper about electromagnetic phenomena is described as geometrical. The attention is on “lines of force” which have a conceptual and theoretical understanding derived from Faraday and Thomson. In this first stage, his use of analogy was illustrative not explanatory. Norton Wise speculates that this loose mathematical description was a “means for visualizing a complex physical situation, it suggested creative new ways of treating the old problem” (Wise, 1979, p. 1312). Maxwell had in mind a program of theoretical development that was to proceed from this early geometrical description of the electromagnetic field to one that could be related to a mechanical analogy. This formulation would give further explanatory power and a fuller mathematical description (Harman, 1998, p. 98). This approach was a very conscious one and differed from that of his mentor Thompson. Maxwell and Thompson were working toward closely related goals of developing a comprehensive theory of electromagnetism founded on Faraday’s work. Harman notes that Maxwell’s approach had important differences than that of his former mentor. “Many of Thompson’s papers are presented as bare-bones mathematics, their physical implications being merely hinged, and their place within a theoretical outlook left obscure. Maxwell, by contrast wrote as a natural philosopher, always concerned to develop a world view.” (Harman, 1998, p. 82)2

It is important to note that Maxwell in his papers and presentations to scientists deliberately grounded his work in concrete images because he felt this was needed not only as a means of persuasion but also as a way of helping others understand how his approach generated the mathematical representations. Therefore, Maxwell, although highly competent in the mathematical representation of physical phenomena, felt a need to anchor these in tangible images. Wise notes another critical ingredient in this approach and process. He proposed that symbolic imagery played a critical role in Maxwell’s thinking in the early stages and through most of the development of his work with these phenomena. Maxwell used the term “mutually embracing curves” to describe his reaction to Faraday’s drawings of electric and magnetic fields interacting with each other. Wise states that the term “embrace” was used repeatedly by Maxwell in later papers indicating that it was more than a rhetorical flourish (Wise, 1979).  This is a curious observation because North reports that Thomson “should be credited for drawing the attention of physicist to the power of analogy (North, p. 123). 2

A Case Study in the Use of Analogies and Metaphors in Science

29

The two intersecting circles represent the interaction of the electric and magnetic fields. After the publication of this first paper Maxwell continued to work on ways of taking the physical conceptions and the mathematics further. After a period of long gestation, he published another paper that includes a revision of the earlier analogy of electrical phenomena of Faraday’s lines of force. This model is a combination of fluid and mechanical elements where magnetic action is represented as vortices and the electrical action is represented as “idler wheels” or cylinders that rotate. Maxwell doesn’t propose this as a fully developed theory but as a possible mechanical modeling of the electromagnetic field (Harman, 1998, p. 105). At this point this model is more theoretical in the sense that it doesn’t map directly onto observed phenomena (Nersessian, 1999). As he continues to gain a more general and abstract representation of this phenomenon he still has the position that there must be a link between the mathematical formalism and the physical reality being studied (Harman, 1998, p. 122). This position is explicitly stated by him because some continental scientists such as Lagrange were presenting pure mathematics, devoid of diagrams and physical ideas. They were relying on an approach based more on mathematical analogies. Maxwell, Thomson, and other scientists had noted that there are analogies between mathematical expressions symbolizing different phenomena such as heat and light. The fact that there were these mathematical parallels suggested that a representation of one phenomenon could possibly be used to represent some other that was not well understood. For some scientists the math alone could be used as a heuristic without recourse to the physical reality. Some scientists on the continent asserted that electromagnetism had already had an adequate theory to represent it but Maxwell felt that a deeper understanding and a more comprehensive representation was needed to explain the ongoing experimental discoveries. Eventually, the model he proposed in an earlier paper became unwieldy and he moved to express his theory mostly in a set of mathematical equations. One more step was taken later where the entire math is distilled into four equations that still have an associated physical description (Gee, 1978, p. 290).

30

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

This very brief history gives little account of the numerous correspondences between Maxwell and Thomson as well as the involved development of the analogies and mathematics that took place. What is important to keep in mind is that analogies were an explicit and critical ingredient that continued throughout this development. The analogies were more than the pairing of different physical phenomena such as flow of heat and electrostatics to provide a way of utilizing existing mathematical representation of one phenomenon – heat to a less well-understood phenomenon – electricity. In the process of examining and applying the correspondences Maxwell clarifies his emerging reconceptualization of electromagnetic phenomena as a way of moving toward more abstract representations. From my perspective what is of even greater significance with implications for science education is the role of symbolic images such as the mutually embracing curves. Symbols such as these have strong affective associations serving the function of providing a connection between deep unconscious processes and the more conscious process of rational thought. The significance of this observation will be developed in the next chapter. Here are the parts that stand out for me and have implications for a pedagogical approach. • Maxwell’s review of the prior experimental work of Faraday. He draws upon both Faraday’s qualitative theories and Thomson’s use of analogies based on other phenomena to gain a clear physical conception of the phenomenon being investigated. • In the process of reviewing Faraday’s extensive work, he adopts a visual image to which he returns to repeatedly in the long development of this attempt at an explanatory mathematical and physical description. Wise calls this a generative symbolic image (mutually embracing curves). • His first analogies are explicitly meant to be exploratory or heuristic. • The mathematical representation in the early stage was described as a geometrical mathematical and physical mathematical corresponding to the findings of Faraday. • The early analogies evolve to take on a more explanatory role and act as a model of the phenomenon. • When he has reached a point where these formulations prove to be adequate as well as innovative, he moves toward a purely mathematical formulation. Although this is a process that focuses on a physical phenomenon and mathematics figures prominently in the eventual characterization and explanation of it, it could well fit with similar evolution of thinking in the life sciences also. All these processes can in some way be incorporated into a pedagogical model for teaching science.

Generative Metaphor Given the nature of theoretical physics and electromagnetic theory it may be hard for the reader to fully grasp the significance of the phases of Maxwell work. Another case history involving the design process of a familiar object may help to

Generative Metaphor

31

clarify and reinforce some of the important elements just mentioned. In this instance it involves the solution to a technical problem. It is useful to consider the next example because it shows that there are similar processes occurring in different kinds of creative undertakings. What is particularly relevant is the role that analogy and symbolic images play in the design process. Donald Shon tells of a group of product-development researchers who were working on the problem of new paint brushes having synthetic fibers. At that time the brushes were not as effective as those made from natural bristles. During the meeting the researchers tried out the brushes with paint to gain firsthand experience. They found that in the use of the synthetic fibers the paint was delivered in a discontinuous “gloppy” way. While they discussed this problem one of the members had the insight that a “paintbrush is a kind of a pump.” The change in perception brought about this new way of looking at paintbrushes and drew attention to the spaces between the bristles. Instead of thinking of the paint as just adhering to the bristles, the spaces between them acted as channels for the flowing of the paint. This led them to think about the different bending angles of different kinds of bristles that would affect the flow of the paint through the brush. They then tried out different kinds of brushes with the mind-set that the brushes were acting like pumps. This resulted in a variety of possible solutions for a redesign of the brushes (Schon, 1979, pp. 257–259). Schon labels this comparison of a paintbrush to a pump a generative metaphor because for the researchers it brought about new perceptions, explanations, and inventions. Associated with pumping were features that reframed the way that the usual process of painting with a brush was carried out. It could be said that this metaphor helped them gain a clearer physical conception about the functioning of the paintbrush. Schon characterizes the cycle of making a generative metaphor in this manner: In the earlier stages of the life cycle, one notices or feels that A and B are similar without being able to say similar with respect to what. Later on, one may come to be able to describe relations of elements present in a restructured perception of both A and B which account for the preanalytic detection of a similarity between A and B, that is, one can formulate an analogy between A and B. Later still, one may construct a general model for which a redescribed A and a redescribed B can be identified as instances. To read the later model back onto the beginning of the process would be to engage in a kind of historical revisionism. (Schon, 1979, p. 260)

Therefore, it is to be noted that a full-blown analogy where the originator can explicitly map relationships between the two parts does not happen at once – gaining a “clear physical conception” takes time. Also, the mapping between the elements of the two parts of the analogies becomes clearer as one applies it to further testing. What was most interesting to me was Schon relating how the generative metaphor arose. The triggering of the generative metaphor (“A paintbrush is a kind of pump!”) occurred while the researchers were involved in the concrete, sensory experience of using the brushes and feeling how the brushes worked with the paint. The researchers used words like “gloppy” and “smooth” to convey some of the qualities of the phenomena they were experiencing. It seems to me very likely that the triggering of the metaphor

32

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry occurred because the researchers were immersed in the experience of the phenomena. (Ortony, p. 259)

I have witnessed such occurrences of the triggering of analogies a number of times when students are directly engaged in exploring with materials. At other times, the spontaneous analogies generated during a follow-up discussion arise from the materials the student has just manipulated. For instance, one student as he was exploring with liquid and vials commented thus on his observation of a vial of syrup, oil, and a drop of food color: “It’s like swimming in mud and water,” suggesting an analogy that might be used to gain a clearer idea of the properties of the liquids he was mixing (Zubrowski, 2001, Salad Dressing Physics). There are some parallels between the situation with the paintbrushes just described and Maxwell’s process. The time periods involved and the level of abstraction are very much different but the genesis and processes have some similarities. The product development people went back to using paintbrushes to get a clearer physical conception of what was happening to the bristles. It was at that point in the process that a new way of thinking about paintbrushes arose. The image of pumping action brings about a different way of viewing the workings of the paintbrush that in turns brings about a different way of thinking about it. The image of the pumping action according to Schon is preanalytic but appears to perform a critical function. The paint brush as a pump sounds like it served the same function as Maxwell’s mutually embracing curves. Only later as they consider the way paint moves between the bristles do they make explicit mappings between the two kinds of actions. In the case of Maxwell it might be said that the early analogy of a fluid for the electromagnetic field and his physical “mathematization” was more openended when compared with some kind of mechanical device allowing him to play around with different visualizations. Fluid movement is less well-defined in its concrete manifestation compared to mechanical devices such as idler wheels. One way of describing this movement is that a qualitative understanding is needed and precedes a thorough quantitative development. For me the most salient implication from both case studies is the need for a gestation period for generative metaphors to come forth and this critical ingredient of getting a “clear physical conception of the phenomena.” Additionally, there is a back and forth movement between playing with the generative metaphor and developing new ways of considering a familiar problem or attempting to understand a phenomenon.

The Use of Analogies and Science Pedagogy Gee in his paper gives a very cursory commentary on the pedagogical significance of the extended process of Maxwell. He proposes a parallel to Jerome Bruner’s characterization of three levels of representations that are the enactive, the iconic, and the symbolic phases. The first involves characterization of a phenomenon into categories that could be seen as Faraday’s experimentation and Maxwell’s first attempts to assimilate Faraday’s work. The second is the

The Use of Analogies and Science Pedagogy

33

organizing into some kind of structure that could be described in Maxwell’s first paper, where he tries to lay hold of a clear physical conception. The third is an abstraction from some kind of mental model that is contained in the second major paper that Maxwell published, where he combines mechanisms and fluid movement (Gee, 1978, p. 291). The history of Faraday and Maxwell’s work provides us with elements for a model of inquiry at two different levels. On one level it can be used to suggest important phases in an extended investigation. At another level the work of these two scientists could be used to think about the relationship between how experiences with basic phenomena in elementary and middle school establish the experiential groundwork for the more abstract developments of high school. The relationship between their works suggests that a major goal for elementary and middle school science teaching would be to help students develop “a clear physical conception of basic phenomena.” This does not preclude the use of measurement and some mathematical modeling at these earlier levels but it is a matter of what is considered a priority. There are four critical features of the interrelationship between Faraday and Maxwell, and how the theory of electromagnetism was developed. Nersessian and Gooding drew upon their work in the study of Faraday and Maxwell and proposed that there are implications for science pedagogy. Drawing upon their comments and my own sense of the history of these two scientists, I would propose the following as having real significance. • The manipulations of materials are integral to the process of understanding a phenomenon and can be characterized as embodied cognition. • Visual representations serve multiple functions. They act as a means for recording or documenting what is observed. They act as a means for thinking about the phenomenon and arriving at explicit conceptualizations. • The use of analogies is a means for utilizing prior knowledge to gain insight into new observations and to formulate new understandings about a phenomenon. • Abstract scientific terms and symbols are the distilled essences of an extended cognitive process. One must be acquainted with these processes to fully understand their meaning and significance. What arises from a consideration of these case studies of the relationship between the works of the two scientists is that rational analysis and logic are only part of the process by which new discoveries are made and new theories developed. The early stages of experimentation and theorizing involved a great deal of nonverbal thinking that is more than visualization. It can be characterized as depending heavily on physical intuition. This cognitive process is not generally recognized for the role it plays in scientific and mathematical thought. However, the reports by scientists and mathematicians do establish a role for intuition and the importance it plays in how they arrive at new conceptions. Each of these practices could be related to science pedagogy in the following ways. There is the gaining of a clear physical conception. Maxwell gives a great deal of attention to the work of Faraday. As already noted, Faraday did not make much use

34

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

of formal mathematics but apparently conducted experiments guided by theories which had a mathematical structure implicit in them. There are at least two implications for pedagogy at the elementary level. It is my opinion that at the elementary level the primary goal should be helping the students gain both a good physical feeling and the beginnings of a clear physical conception. These two processes may sound very similar but are really the development of one based on the other. By the former I mean sensory involvement carried out in ways I will describe in the succeeding chapters. Schon’s insightful observation is very relevant here. The triggering of the generative metaphor came while the designers were actually manipulating the materials. Exploration and play has been found to be productive of symbolic imagery. Well-designed curriculum and teaching can shape the sensory perceptual faculties of the students so that they can develop strong and deeper intuitions about how a phenomenon behaves and in the process trigger possibly useful analogies. Developing a clear physical conception at the elementary and middle school level would depend on well-designed curriculum and teaching that helps students make connections to their own prior knowledge and to carefully chosen analogies which are meant to be more heuristic at least in the early stages of inquiry and explanatory in the later stages. This means the analogies, whether student- or curriculum-generated, are used to help sort out what has been observed. It is my opinion that there should be less of an effort to use them in the early stages to explain in a scientific manner what has been observed. This runs counter to current calls for rigor in inquiry, but what I am attempting to counter is the premature pushing of students to a deep understanding of phenomena before they have a clear physical conception. Some support for this position is found in the commentaries about the relationship between misconceptions and conceptual change in Taking Science to School (Duschl et al. 2007). It is proposed that [c]hildren’s misconceptions can be dramatic, but they do not really represent a step backward from earlier ages when those misconceptions may be weaker or not even present. In many cases, moving through a series of misconceptions may be the only plausible way for a child to progress toward a more correct and detailed notion of mechanism. (Duschl et al., 2007, pp. 105–106)

In addition, I propose that less attention be given to measurement because there is a tendency among some teachers to assume that just because measurements are being made, the activity is automatically scientific. It is not that measurements can be useful or even necessary. The point here is; Does the measurement help clarify for the student what is happening physically? Often, at the elementary level a semiquantitative approach is more useful because attention is focused on clarifying relative magnitudes or comparing contributions of relevant characteristics. The student’s attention can be diverted to just making measurements and getting them precise instead of gaining a sense of what is happening. The relationship between Faraday’s work and Maxwell’s theoretical developments could be seen as that between what might happen in elementary school and what develops in secondary school. At the secondary level the development of abstract models and mathematical representation should be directly connected to

A Modified Pedagogical Model as a Developmental Progression

35

what has been carried out at the elementary level. A coherent curriculum grade 1–12 curriculum framework would be necessary to allow this to happen. In addition, ideally, the very same hands-on activities with specific phenomenon or technological artifacts are repeated and studied as Maxwell did with Faraday’s work but at the secondary level there is a move to mathematical modeling which is still strongly connected to the physical situation.3

A Modified Pedagogical Model as a Developmental Progression The case studies of Faraday and Maxwell provide suggestions for various practices in the enactment of explorations and in the eventual development of mental models for introducing scientific concepts and theories. If a pedagogical model for inquiry is to reflect the practices of scientists, it would make sense to incorporate in some way the habits of mind and some of the practices of Faraday as well as the developmental progression leading to a concise scientific model as carried out by Maxwell. Here, I am using the term “developmental progression” in a special way referring to the movement from concrete hands-on involvement through intermediate visual representations to eventual schematic visuals representing scientific models. This is different from the term “learning progression.” The latter focuses on the organization of conceptual knowledge around core ideas and strands of scientific proficiency. This term is also generally related to the multiyear development of this conceptual knowledge (Duschl et al., 2007, pp. 219–222). Various pedagogical models for carrying out inquiry have been proposed over the years and have been adopted in the overall design of published curriculum such as those funded by the National Science Foundation. One in particular has received frequent and ongoing attention. This is the learning cycle from the Science Curriculum Improvement study. It still has advocates today such as Roger Bybee who has modified it to have five phases – engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate. Comments in the recent National Research Council publication question the adequacy of the learning cycle and its variants. So, it is necessary to modify it in significant ways.  This proposal runs counter to some recent research (Lesh and Doerr, 2003) where elementary and middle school students are at some point in their investigation moved to mathematical modeling. Some of this research has had real success in moving students to a deeper understanding of what they were investigating. These studies show that it is possible to move even younger children toward the development of mathematical models. Nevertheless, I reserve some skepticism for pushing students too soon to mathematical modeling based on my own experience in working with students. In the context of science teaching, it would be critical that students have sufficient time to become thoroughly acquainted with the phenomena being modeled. Additionally, many elementary teachers do not have the science and math background as well as the sophistication of the researchers in these studies. Until teachers become more proficient in these areas it may be premature to push elementary students in the development of mathematical models when carrying out science inquiry. 3

36

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

If one studies the work of Faraday closely, it is quite clear that the process of discovery, experimentation, and the development of a qualitative theory is a very complex and extended undertaking. Gooding observes that Faraday in his investigations went through a series of stages. He puts this in terms of the life of an experiment: “The first is the invention of strategies for discovery and the representation of new information. The second stage is the development of strategies of proof or disproof, in which procedures, their rationales, and the interpretation of results are tried. Finally, experiment is perfected as a demonstration in which otherwise observables recondite effects are made manifest to lay observers” (Gooding, 1985, p. 132). The first two stages have similarities to the Learning Cycle and other related pedagogical models. In the National Standards communication it is recommended as part of inquiry so that the third stage is also relevant. It is important to keep in mind that the representation of new information in the case of Faraday was the use of drawings having different levels of abstraction. Attempting to apply the development process of Maxwell is more challenging and complex. Certainly, the process of getting a clear physical conception would be paramount in the early stages. Additionally, utilizing students’ own analogies or curriculum, recommended ones at different stages would be relevant. Keeping in mind that Maxwell used different kind of analogies from the “good physical feeling” to the eventual mathematical model the curriculum designer and teacher needs to take care when these are given attention and elaborated in careful and extended manner. Attempting to overlay and integrate these two complementary approaches means that an extended investigation not only has a direction but is also an iterative process. It has direction in the sense that movement is toward getting the student to think more abstractly and make his or her thoughts more explicit. The process is iterative in the sense that reference is always toward those initial encounters with a phenomenon through multisensory experience and through multiple gestural and visual representations. Some writers would use the term “learning progression” for what I propose for a pedagogical model. I prefer the use of developmental for several reasons. Development is associated with gradual change. My experience with students suggests that it takes time to support students’ movement through several stages of inquiry to get them to a point where there might be conceptual change. The progression being proposed is an organic one in the sense that cognitive growth builds on and incorporates what has previously been experienced, represented, and conceptualized. The developmental progression would occur during the phases of an extended inquiry investigation. During each phase various perceptual and cognitive operations would be enacted and structured in terms of what occurs providing for a psychological movement from the beginning to the end of the investigation as was mentioned in the first chapter. A theoretical framework drawing on Jerome Bruner, Heinz Werner, Zoltan Diens, and Jean Piaget would provide a rationale for this approach to inquiry. With all the above in mind, I outline below a pedagogical model that summarizes the various behaviors and thought processes occurring during different phases

A Modified Pedagogical Model as a Developmental Progression

37

that lead to the development of an explicit, visual model. This visual model would be the means for the student to develop a mental model, enabling them to test against their own prior knowledge, possibly bringing about reconceptions and formulating tentative theories. The content of these charts represents a synthesis of what has been put forth in the national science standards, recommendations from past research reports, and my own experience of working with students at the elementary and middle school level. It is a variation of previous models. The purpose of the charts is to summarize practices and show how they relate to a developmental progression. (A more detailed outline of this type of guided inquiry model with specific suggestion for a teacher attempting to carry out this type of guided inquiry is given in “An observational and planning tool for professional development in science education,” Zubrowski, 2007.)

Phases of Guided Inquiry Exploration •  Getting acquainted with the phenomenon and problem •  Disaggregating characteristics of the phenomenon •  Isolating salient characteristics •  Looking for patterns of salient characteristics •  Activating prior knowledge •  Generating questions •  Generating hypothesis •  Preliminary analogies

Experimentation/ data gathering •  Setting up and running experiments or systematic observations •  Generating drawings and inscriptions (graphs) •  Processing results of experiments or systematic observations •  Confirming or disconfirming hypothesis •  Looking for patterns and relationships among results •  Testing explanations •  Generating more questions •  Generating more hypothesis

Meaning making

Modeling

•  Consolidating and reviewing data •  Developing visual representations •  Constructing or introducing analogies •  Mapping analogies to results •  Refining explanations •  Developing an explicit model representation

•  Transforming visual representations to a workable computer simulation •  Generating questions and hypothesis •  Testing questions and hypotheses with computer simulations •  Testing analogies and explanations

38 Pedagogical practices (Generic)

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry Exploratory Phase

Data gathering phase/ sense making phase

Modeling phase

Collaborative work Drawings, inscriptions Recording observations and data Processing for meaning (aural and written) Embedded assessment Self assessment Psychological movements Implicit understandings

Explicit explanations

Physiognomic, strongly affective perceptions

Rational, analytical, thinking

Global perception of the whole phenomenon

Attention to specific features and relationship to the whole phenomenon

Highly contextualized thought

Decontexualized conceptions Shared Scientific Symbols

Personal symbols Relevant theories of pedagogical progressions Bruner Enactive Piaget Sensory motor operations Dienes Play stage

Iconic

Symbolic

Concrete operations

Formal operations

Structured activity stage

Becoming aware stage

Phases of Inquiry There are multiple interpretations of how inquiry is implemented in the classroom. The phases I have put forth here are a variation of what may be commonly found in some expanded interpretations of what is called the “learning cycle.” There appears to be a general consensus about the first two phases and the labels I have used for them. The third phase has been given different labels and different emphasis depending on what is considered important. Some call it “processing for meaning,” others might call it the sense-making phase. The fourth phase is not usually mentioned partly because modeling is either implicit or models are introduced from

Exploratory Phase

39

the very beginning of an investigation such as what happens with recent work in computer visualizations or simulations (Clark and Jorde, 2004; Snir et al., 1993; White and Fredickson, 1998; White, 1993).4 It is very important to recognize that there are real and critical differences between the phases of guided inquiry. Here is what I see as the differences and what is involved in each phase. First, the term “phase” has also been used in multiple ways with different meanings. The proposed model phase does not refer to a part of one activity or one lesson. It is meant to refer to multiple sessions where one type of activity predominates the processing of the experiences by students and teacher.

Exploratory Phase The exploratory phase by definition is an open process. There is a structure to it but during this time students are try out various manipulations or carry out observations that are not systematic. The overall guiding questions are: “What happens if…?” “What can I do with this…?” “What interesting effects can I produce?” The goal is to stimulate student interest so that they become invested at a deep personal level with the phenomenon or problem being studied, but at this point there is no development of explanations or planning of formal experiments. During the follow-up discussions after each of these types of sessions, the students share what was discovered. There is much more to this phase than a motivational and discovering experience. For instance, another goal during this phase is to help students gain a global feeling for the phenomenon in that they have a sense for the overall structure and its parts. Toward the end of this phase they should be able to begin to differentiate parts of the structure of the phenomenon or problem in an explicit manner. They can verbally describe what appear to be the most prominent characteristics that need to be considered for further investigation. Throughout this phase prior knowledge may spontaneously come forth and the teacher should deliberately solicit comments from the students about what they know about the phenomenon or problem. This mix of discoveries and the revealing of prior knowledge can lead to the generation of questions and hypothesis that are authentic because they have come out of the students’ curiosity. The teacher working with a high quality curriculum can also propose questions and hypotheses which are authentic if these come out of previous experiences with students and resonate with the students’ curiosity.

 Recently, with the growing use of computers simulations, modeling is becoming more prominent and is sometimes used at the very start of an investigation. This practice, I argue, is problematic because there is a tendency to move the students right into the use of the simulations or models before they have had a chance to become acquainted with the phenomenon in a more concrete and direct manner. The main point about the developmental progression presented here is that there is a gradual development moving from the “getting a good physical feeling for the phenomenon” to a schematic representation of the phenomenon. 4

40

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

At this point each class does not necessarily generate a full range of questions and hypothesis that are possible. Again, this phase is more than one session lasting as long as there is a need for students to get a sense of what the phenomenon is about, and how they are going to go about developing an understanding of their discoveries.5 Among some science educators much has been made about students generating their own questions during or after this exploratory phase. Indeed, if there is going to be an authenticity to the investigation, this solicitation of questions should happen. In practice this can be a challenging undertaking for the teacher. It has been my experience in working with students, who have had little exposure with this practice, that they are often unsure of what to say when you directly pose to them the challenge of making a list of questions. I have seen teachers solicit questions from students who are inexperienced in this practice. It seemed to me that the students’ responses were more in the assumed role of doing what the teacher has requested. The questions did not seem to arise from the unexpected discoveries or discrepancies in their observations. To provide for a more authentic type of question generation one strategy is for the teacher to be a close observer during the explorations looking for occasions when discoveries are made. For instance, in observing students exploring with the Balancing Toys activities mentioned in the previous chapter, I have seen occasions where a student does a manipulation and an expression of surprise appears on his or her face. What they expected to happen did not occur. The toy acrobat did not balance in accord with the student’s expectation. The observant teacher could take note of this reaction and step in to find out why there was the expression of puzzlement. It then can become an occasion where an authentic question can be generated. The role of the teacher during this phase is then not to step back and passively watch but to be an active observer. When he or she does step in and starts talking, there is a delicacy to this move. It has to be done in a way that doesn’t disrupt the focused attention of the student.

Data Gathering and Experimental Phase The data gathering or experimental phase is when students need to move toward a much more constrained work with materials. There is a need for a careful consideration of questions generated by the students or proposed by the teacher. There are constraints on this process. What can be investigated with given limitations of time and materials? What questions are most relevant to the targeted concepts the teacher has set as a goal for understanding? If experiments or structured observations (I am using the term “structured observations” for situations where it is difficult to control variables such as in the studying of pond organisms or in studying  There can be inquiry where there is no direct manipulation of materials such as in the observation of the phases of the moon, or long-term observation of living systems. In these situations there is still a need to start out in an open manner gathering information and developing impressions before a more focused and systematic approach is taken. 5

Meaning Making Phase

41

large-scale phenomena such as air movement or the phases of the moon) are to be conducted, these need to be carried out in a systematic manner. If results are going to be compared across small groups, then some common set of procedures need to be established. Often, results from experiments vary across groups so that there is a need for either repeating or reconciling the variance of results. In interpreting the results, some common terminology that may first start out from students’ everyday language but is eventually replaced by formal scientific language needs to be developed and understood. During the processing and further development of experiments or systematic observations there should be an ongoing attempt also to make sense of the results. There is a tendency for teachers to prematurely introduce conceptions during these times. It takes time for students to sort out relationships between the parts from the whole, establish patterns of results, and to reconcile differences between what was found in the experiments and expectations from prior knowledge. The goal during this phase is to move the students to clarify their thinking and develop verbal and visual representations that will lead to reconceptualizations about the phenomenon. Terms associated with scientific conceptions can be introduced, but this does not mean that students have assimilated the conceptions associated with these terms. There is still a further processing of results and a careful use of visual representations and analogies to move students to a point where they might change their thinking. If visual representations have evolved to a point where there is some clarity about what is happening, and appropriate analogies are introduced, then the student needs to work at using these tools to change their thinking. There is still the possibility that the student recognizes the concept introduced by the teacher as useful but that the concept is only tenuously held.

Meaning Making Phase By the time the meaning making phase is arrived at some clear and established findings should be agreed upon. There may be some return to experiments or collected data but the purpose in this phase is somewhat different than that of the previous phase. The experiments here are to help add certainty to the explanations. (It was noted by some who studied Faraday’s notes that in the early stage his explorations and experimentation were confirmatory and after some confidence in the results, experiments were designed to be non-confirmatory.) Also, during this phase visual representations become integral to developing explanations. These function as external aids to thinking. They are on their way to becoming closely aligned with a descriptive model of the phenomenon being investigated. They are no longer like sketches or rough drawings that were generated in the exploratory phase. Elements of these visual representations have taken on conceptual meaning. During this phase previous or new analogies are used to move students toward conceptual change. The analogies may have been generated by students or

42

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

introduced by the teacher. Whether student- or teacher-generated, careful mapping has to be carried out between elements of the analogy and that of the phenomenon being investigated. Mapping of this kind alone will not bring about reconceptualizations. The teacher also needs to draw the implicit concept out of the analogies.

Modeling Phase The modeling phase, as I see it, is a point where there is movement toward making what was implicit more explicit and a movement toward schematic visualizations that support greater abstraction. To some extent there can be an overlap with the previous phase. Visualizations can evolve during the meaning making to become schematic models. At that point students try out explanations using these visual models. Depending on the curriculum used or the way the teacher has designed and structured a guided inquiry, a model may have been implicit from the very beginning of the investigation. The balancing activities described in the first chapter are examples where there are adjusting of weights or forces to achieve static equilibrium. In a way, each of these could be a model for studying static equilibrium. I put forth these variations on balancing objects to provide a way for students to gain a firmer grasp on the way things are balanced. The last activity focuses on a simple balance beam that could become translated into a mathematical model. Having students work with computer simulations can also extend the modeling phase. Depending on the type of simulations students can be moved further along to a more scientific conception of the phenomenon they have just investigated. What is seen on the computer has an experiential grounding and has been shared by the whole group during the previous activities. The previous rough sketches and more refined visual representations as well as personal and teacher introduced analogies have prepared the way for the kind of more schematic visual representations seen on the computer. In other words students have had a great deal of preparation before they ever get to the simulation on the computer.

Extending the Inquiry with a Closely Related Phenomena In the original version of the learning cycle model there is what is called a “concept application” phase. Students are given a new problem or phenomenon where they apply the introduced concept. There are differences of pedagogical approaches however similar the new problem is to the previous one. Some curriculum programs have students encounter phenomena from two broad domains such as physical and biological. One approach to the phase of concept application was illustrated in the first chapter with the multiple encounters with cardboard devices that are balanced in different ways. Balancing is a manifestation of the concept of static equilibrium and

Relationship to the Learning Cycle Model

43

often there is an adjustment of the parts of the device to arrive at this static state. The adjustment in some cases is a manifestation of dealing with the moving of weights or changing of the weight to different distances from a balancing point. In the first set of activities students deal with balancing objects in a vertical orientation. In the second set of activities they are challenged to balance objects in a horizontal orientation. The same set of materials is used in both situations. Some educators might view these two situations as too similar. My experience in doing these activities with students is that it is a challenge for students to transfer their learning even in these apparently closely related situations.

Relationship to the Learning Cycle Model Some readers may react to the above chart and description of the phases of inquiry as a more elaborated version of the pedagogical model called the learning cycle. There are some similarities but important differences. J. Myron Atkins and Robert Karplus originated the concept of a learning cycle. It has undergone various modifications with special attention from Lawson et al., (1989) who elaborated on its different manifestations in a monograph. Then more recently Rodger Bybee (1997) also modified the cycle and gave his own interpretations of how it could be implemented. This is elaborated in his book Achieving Scientific Literacy. Attention should be given to the model of a learning cycle as put forth by these authors and others because it is frequently cited as a model for curriculum design and as an instructional model. The monograph by Lawson et al., as well as the version put forth by Bybee is a very useful guide to think about, and plan for, instruction. I would agree with most of what they propose regarding the development of this model. However, based on my own experience of working with students and a reading of recent research literature (Taking Science to School, 2007) and that of writings of teachers, I find that there is too much implied or not mentioned. The above authors do give importance to the role of exploration. As they describe this phase it is not clear to me as to what happens during exploration. Bybee allows that explanations are already developed for he writes at one point: “If called upon, the teacher may coach or guide students as they begin constructing new explanations” (Bybee, 1997, p. 180.), suggesting that this happens during the exploratory phase. It is my belief that developing explanations in this early stage is premature. Lawson, Abraham, and Renner provide a description that seems more appropriate. “It (exploration) should lead to the identification of a pattern of regularity in the phenomena” (Lawson et al., 1989, p. 5). Bybee labels one phase “Explanation,” while Lawson, Abraham, and Renner use the term “Introduction.” All do point out that the teacher should relate the explanation or term introduction to the experiences of the exploratory phase. The way Bybee describes the role of the teacher sounds contradictory to his advocacy of a constructivist approach. He writes under the “explanation” phase: “The key to this

44

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

phase is to present concepts, processes, or skills briefly, simply, clearly and directly, and then continue to the next phase” (Bybee, 1997, p. 180). There is no mention of the intricacy of negotiating meaning with the students. What seems to be implied is that just by being clear students will assimilate and adopt the concepts and skills introduced. According to Lawson, Abraham, and Renner terms that can be applied to the patterns discovered by the students in the exploratory phase are introduced. They sometimes use terms and concepts interchangeably and so it is not clear at times as to what is being introduced to the students. There is a statement at one point that might clarify this confusion. “[A] concept is the pattern plus the term. Teachers can introduce terms but students must perceive the pattern themselves” (Lawson, et al., 1989, p. 5). Emphasis appears to be on the role of language being the sole means of introducing the term or concept. Bybee makes no mention of the role of analogy in this explanation phase. What is curious is that Lawson, Abraham, and Renner do give special attention to the role of analogy and propose it as the means for bringing about conceptual change. Yet, when they get to describe the three types of learning cycles, there is no mention at all of analogy when there is the term introduction phase. If analogies are critical to bringing about conceptual change, there is a need to elaborate on how this can happen in a very explicit manner. An essential pedagogical question is that how are analogies introduced in terms of their relationship to what was experienced in the exploration phase. In addition it should be noted that analogies do not necessarily present concepts. There is a need to uncover the implicit concepts in the analogies. The elaboration phase or concept application phase as described by Bybee is not much elaborated. He briefly states that students should be engaged in new situations or problems that involve applications of similar concepts as was developed in the previous phases (Bybee, 1997). Lawson, Abraham and Renner’s description give a little more detail about the purpose. They write: Many students may fail to abstract it (the concept) from its concrete examples or to generalize it to other situations. In addition, Application activities aid students whose conceptual reorganization takes place more slowly than average, or who did not adequately relate the teacher’s original explanation to their experiences. (Lawson, et al., 1989, p. 5)

Cycles in Guided Inquiry From my experience with students and from recent research reports it clear that there are three kinds of cyclic processes occurring over the course of an investigation. These are: • The way each lesson or activity is structured. • The repeating progression from experience to multimodal representations. • The repeating return to the same set of materials, system, organisms, or problem.

Cycles in Guided Inquiry

45

Keeping in mind that I am working with a guided inquiry pedagogical model, an activity is defined as a repeating unit of time that may last for one class period or several. During an activity there is an introduction, which may include a recapitulation of previous work or the planning for further experimentation or observation, which is followed by the manipulation of materials either by way of exploration or experimentation or structured observation, and then there is a regathering of the whole group for reporting and processing of results. This repeating structure happens through each of the phases. Depending on where the students are in the investigation, there are separated times for explorations, experimentations, and extended meaning making as was elaborated above. The other type of cyclic process occurs within this repeating structure. It is a type of genetic progression – a movement from assimilated perceptual experiences to the externalization of these experiences through multimodal representations. During each lesson or activity there is the manipulation of the materials or structured observation resulting in an assimilation of information about the phenomenon. Standard practice in the follow-up discussions traditionally favors verbal reporting. Recent research suggests that nonverbal communication should also be explicitly given attention and encouraged. Gestures and body language appear to be the means for representing these experiences and most importantly are a way of supporting the thinking about these experiences (Roth, 2001; Roth and Welzel, 2001). (This process will be elaborated upon in the chapter on Movement.) Additionally, sketches and detailed drawings are sometimes used in these follow-up discussions. Their role tends to be seen as secondary to the more important function of language. However, there is emerging acknowledgment that gestures and visual representations play an essential role in the processing of these experiments. (Nersessian, 2005; Gooding, 2005; Alibali and Goldin-Meadow, 1993). They are more than a means for communication. They are part of the thinking process for students in their attempts to make sense of their experiences. The genetic development could then be represented in this way: experiences → body language/gestures → visual representations → verbal representations Verbalization, both spoken and written, occurs during each of these phases. The point here is that the words are complementary to these other modes of expression and are not representative of the full thinking of the student. Eventually, much of the discussion is through verbalization but the teacher having consciously taken students through this progression has provided a meaningful shared grounding for the words that are used. However, even at the end of the cycle visual means still play an essential role. This type of movement can be related to the concept of progressive formalization. In the program Mathematics in Context students move through phases where they start with a mathematical situation describing these in their own words, as well as pictures and diagrams. These representations are used to help organize their prior knowledge. Gradually, they are moved to introduce symbols to describe the situations, describe their work and their strategies. (How People Learn, p. 137)

46

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

The third kind of cyclic process is exemplified in the elaboration of the balancing activities given in the first chapter. The students usually work with the same set of materials and continue to focus on the same phenomenon. In this situation it is balancing. In the case of a more open inquiry there would be a follow up to studentgenerated discoveries and questions. The fact that the students are still involved in a highly focused manner with the same phenomenon as embodied with the same kinds of materials, organisms, or system is a very critical point. In some enactments of the learning cycle students are presented with one set of materials embodying one phenomenon for a few sessions. Then they are presented with a completely different set of materials embodying a different phenomenon for a new set of sessions. The connection between the two sets of experiences is that the same concepts will be developed from each. This is what elaboration or application in the learning cycle model appears to be. The problem with this approach is that this practice results in a large cognitive load for students. They have to get acquainted with a new set of materials, a new phenomenon with all of the associated prior knowledge and understandings. The students are called upon to sort all this out and not only accommodate a new conceptualization but also be able to apply it to the second situation. It has been my experience that this requires too much processing from even the best students.

Theoretical Rationale The pedagogical model proposed above as already mentioned would have similarities to others such as the learning cycle. I will give particular attention to the critical importance of exploration, play, and the way these modes of engaging with the world can bring about multiple representations of these experiences, throughout the rest of the book. Here representations would not only include written and spoken words and drawings but also the physical materials or an embodiment as some writers refer to this mode. It is the contention of some of those doing research in science and math education that multiple representations can be means for powerful conceptual development (Lesh and Doerr, 2003). A frequently cited theoretical rationale for the importance of representations is the work of Jerome Bruner who, in his theory of instruction, proposed that enactive, iconic, and symbolic representations provide a basis for conceptual change. Cramer (2003) points out that although Bruner never explicitly stated that these were an optimal progression it appears that math educators have interpreted it in this manner. The same would apply for some science educators. Those designing science curriculums do not usually mention Zoltan Dienes. His work is most often associated with math education. In a book about models and modeling in mathematics his approach is given special attention in several of the papers (Lesh and Doerr, 2003). His stages of development would seem to apply to the learning of science as well. Briefly, they are the play stage, the structured activity stage, and becoming aware stage (Cramer, 2003, p. 452). Essentially, these have characteristics similar to what I have listed above in the first two

References

47

stages of guided inquiry. Additionally, there is his embodiment principle. He used this term to refer to concrete manipulable materials (such as arithmetic blocks) that are used to develop mathematical concepts (Lesh et al., 2003, p. 37). There is more than one kind of manipulable material that is used in Dienes pedagogical approach. Another important feature is the perceptual variability principle. “The perceptual variability principle suggests that conceptual learning is maximized when children are exposed to a concept through a variety of physical contexts or embodiments” (Lesh and Doerr, 2003, p. 452). This means that the students would be involved with several kinds of manipulables. The parallel to this practice is what I have elaborated about the balancing activities in the first chapter. An extended account of this process and rationale will be developed in a later chapter on variations and juxtapositions. Throughout the book there will be further references to other theoretical work such as that by Piaget. At this point I just want the reader to note that the proposed model is not without a theoretical foundation. The next two chapters place this pedagogical model in a broader framework.

References Alibali, M. and Goldin-Meadow, W. (1993). Gesture-Speech Mismatch and Mechanisms of Learning: What the Hands Reveal about a Child’s State of Mind. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 468–523. Bybee, R. (1997). Achieving Scientific Literacy. Portsmouth/New Hampshire, Heinemann. Clarke, D. and Jorde, D., (2004). Helping Students Revise Disruptive Experientially Supported Ideas About Thermodynamics: Computer Visualization and Tactile Models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(1), 1–23. Cramer, K (2003). Using a Translation Model for Curriculum Development and Classroom Instruction in R. Lesh and H. M. Doerr (eds.). Beyond Constructivism, Modeling and Modeling Perspectives on Mathematics Problem Solving Learning and Teaching, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., and Shouse, A. W. (eds.). (2007). Taking Science to School. Washington, DC, National Academies Press. Gee, B. (1978). Models as a Pedagogical Tool: Can We Learn from Maxwell? Physics Education 13, 287–291. Gooding, D. C. (2005). Seeing the Forest for the Trees: Visualization, Cognition, and Scientific Inference. In M. Gorman, R. Tweeny, D. Gooding, and A. Kincannon (eds.), Scientific and Technological Thinking (pp. 173–219). Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum, pp. 208–209. Gooding, D.C. (1985). In Nature’s School: Faraday as a Natural Philosopher. In D. Gooding and F. James (Eds.) Faraday Rediscovered (pp. 105, 135). New York, Macmillan/American Institute of Physics. Harman, P. (1998). The Natural Philosophy of James Clerk Maxwell. Cambridge UK, Cambridge University Press. Lawson, A., Abraham, M., and Renner, J. (1989). A Theory of Instruction: Using the Learning Cycle to Teach Science Concepts and Thinking Skills, NARST monograph, Number one. Lesh R. and Doerr, H. M. (eds.) (2003). Beyond Constructivism, Modeling and Modeling Perspectives on Mathematics Problem Solving Learning and Teaching. Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum.

48

2 A Pedagogical Model for Guided Inquiry

Lesh, R. et al. (2003). Model Development Sequences. In Lesh, R. and Doerr, H. M. (eds.), Beyond Constructivism, Modeling and Modeling Perspectives on Mathematics Problem Solving Learning and Teaching, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum. Maxwell, J. (1833). A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism (1883). In H. Bortoft (1996). The Wholeness of Nature: Goethe’s Way Toward a Science of Conscious Participation in Nature (p. 380). Barrington, MA, Lindisfarne Press. Nersessian, N. (1992). Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. In R. Giere (ed.), Cognitive Models of Science. Minneapolis, MN, University of Minnesota Press, p. 25. Nersessian, N. (1999). Model-Based Reasoning in Conceptual Change. In L. Magani, N. Nersessian, and P. Thagard (eds.), Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York, Kluwer. Nersessian, N. (2005). Interpreting Scientific and Engineering Practices: Integrating the Cognitive, Social and Cultural Dimensions. In M. Gorman, R. Tweeny, D. Gooding, and A. Kincannon (Eds.), Scientific and Technological Thinking (pp. 17–56). Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum. North, J. N. (1980). Science and Analogy in Scientific Discourse. M. D. Grmek, R. S. Cohen, and G. Cimino (eds.). Dordrecht, Holland, D. Reiderl. Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and Prediction. Urbana/Chicago/London, The University of Chicago Press. Roth, W.-M. (2001). Gestures: Their Role in Teaching and Learning. Review of Education Research, 71(3), 365–392. Roth, W.-M. and Welzel, M. (2001). From Activity to Gestures and Scientific Language. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8(1), 103–136. Schon, D. A. (1979). Generative Metaphor: A Perspective on Problem-Setting in Social Policy. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press. Snir, J., Smith, C., and Grosslight, L. (1993). Conceptually Enhanced Simulations: A Computer Tool for Science Teaching. Journal of Science and Technology, 2, 373–388. Tweney, R. D. (1985). Faraday’s Discovery of Induction: A Cognitive Approach. In Faraday Rediscovered: Essays on the Life and Work of Michael Faraday. New York, Stockton Press. Tweney, R., Mears, R., and Spitzmuller, C. (2005). Replicating the Practices of Discovery: Michael Faraday and the Interaction of Gold and Light. In M. Gorman, R. Tweney, D. Gooding, and A. Kincannon (eds.), Scientific and Technological Thinking (pp. 137–159). Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum. White, B. (1993) Thinker Tools: Causal Models, Conceptual Change, and Science Education. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 1–100. White B. and Frederiksen J. R. (1998). Inquiry, Modeling and Metacognition: Making Science Accessible to All Students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118. Williams, L. (1965). Michael Faraday: A Biography. New York, Da Capo Press, Subsidiary of Plenum. Wise, M. N. (1979). The Mutual Embrace of Electricity and Magnetism, Science, 203, 1310–1318. Zubrowski, B. (2001). Salad Dressing Physics Curriculum Guide in the Explore-It Series. Farmindale, NY, Kelvin. Zubrowski, B. (2007). An Observation Tool and Planning Tool for Professional Development in Science Education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8(6), 861–884.

Chapter 3

A Grade 1–9 Curriculum Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

Education, whatever guise it takes, is retrieval of the archetype Marshall McLuhan

Scenario #1 A boy (11 years old) and a girl (11 years old) sit at a table in an after school program mixing liquids. They have just spent 10 min observing liquids in a special bottle arrangement. Two soda bottles are connected with a special tube containing two different liquids. (Drawing of special device is from Salad Dressing Physics. Permission granted from Kelvin the publisher of the curriculum.) When this arrangement is turned over, each liquid moves to replace the other. A thin stream forms in the top bottle as the liquid formerly at the bottom floats upwards, and the liquid formerly at the top sinks to the bottom. The liquids in these connected bottles are common liquids such as cooking oil, water, mineral oil, and alcohol. After observing these “mystery’ bottles, the two are allowed to mix unlabeled liquids (the same as in the special bottles) carrying this out in small vials. At one point, the boy pours some clear Karo syrup into a vial filling it half way. Then he adds some cooking oil. Using an eyedropper, he places a few drop of food color into this vial. It sinks through the oil but stops at the surface of the syrup and remains there. The boy looks perplexed and stares at this lineup of layers. He says: “It likes swimming through mud and water.” Later, this implied analogy is picked up by the girl who elaborates on it by comparing mud and sand sinking through water (Zubrowski, 1996, Salad Dressing Physics video). The comment of the boy struck me at the time as a very interesting one. After viewing the video of this session several times, I was still intrigued by its imaginative conjunction. As I reflected on its significance, I felt that it really is a condensation of a number of observations and personal associations.

B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_3, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

49

50

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

First, the boy’s identification of himself with the drop of food color: Although he does not use the personal pronoun, it seemed to me as if he was placing himself in a liquid environment. He compares the viscosities of the oil and syrup to that of water and mud in a pond. Perhaps, he had walked through mud and water where the mud offered a great deal of resistance. So, he combines the experience of walking through mud and water with the resistance water presents when swimming through it. Swimming through mud is like swimming through water but with much more difficulty. However, the drop of food color did not penetrate the syrup. It stayed on top at the interface of the oil and syrup. Yet, he knows from the immediate previous exploration that the syrup is a liquid that moves very slowly and is very viscous. He is possibly assuming that the drop of food color would move very slowly if it could penetrate through the syrup. The drop descended in a vertical manner, while swimming happened in a horizontal plane. Despite the difference in orientation, he considers the two spatial movements similar. We have here a mixing up of modes of actions, displacement of environments, physical sensations with visual observation, or an alignment of a kinesthetic experience with a visual one. In addition, I assume that there is an implicit empathy with the drop of food color.

Scenario #1

51

Cooking oil Drop of Food color syrup

Second, there is an interjection of his body into the observation. He does not say: “This is similar to a layer of mud underneath water with something floating between the two.” He speaks in a way as if he is the drop of food color stuck between two layers of liquid. He involves his body in the making of the analogy. He could well have said something about the resistance that the syrup presents to his fingers when he attempted to move his fingers through it. He implies not just his body, but the body in motion – swimming. Third, he has made an analogy to a specific property of the liquids. He has made a connection from his own past experience to the occurrence that has happened at that moment. He does not elaborate on this statement at the moment, he says it, and a few minutes later when I pursued it further with the girl he did not contribute more to what he had said. Possibly to him, this statement may have been complete. It expressed in a few words an observation, a connection, and an implied conceptualization – some liquids are too thick to move through easily. The boy’s utterance on the surface gives a concrete image with an implied analogy. The image of swimming through mud and water has symbolic associations that can be scientific and personal. It is this aspect that intrigues me. One would not characterize his statement as elaborating on the geometric–technical properties of the liquids and therefore of immediate scientific relevance. It condenses a variety of observations and concepts in a very concise image and in just a few words. He is far from getting at the concept of relative densities of liquids and the reason why things float. Yet, there exists the possibility of “unpacking” several levels of thought in a manner that could eventually lead to some kind of explicit, direct statement about the relative viscosities and densities of the two different liquids. His comment can be viewed as a generative metaphor as is mentioned in the previous chapter. This kind of statement is not a highly unusual occurrence when children are exploring with materials. On other videos I have studied, there are similar kinds of statements where there is a condensation of observations in concretes images. • A boy during an activity with a model waterwheel, holds a bucket high above the wheel and lets the water pour on the wheel using a plastic tubing as the means to guide the water onto the wheel. A string with weight is attached to the axle of the wheel. When water is poured onto the model, the axle turns causing the weight to be lifted. In an attempt to explain why water flowing through different diameter tubing might have an impact on the lifting capacity of the waterwheel, he imagines himself sliding down inside a tube attempting to explain that the size of the tubing would determine how fast he or the water moves through the tube. In the same scenario, there is also the comment of a girl who compares

52

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

the movement of the water in the tubing to moving on a roller coaster (Water Wheels video, Science First Hand). • When making very large bubbles on a tabletop, a boy asks the question: What would happen if he were in a bubble as big as a room. Would he float inside the bubble? (Zubrowski, 1996: Exploration of Bubbles). • A girl in attempting to explain the results of testing a model windmill having many blades close together compares the movement of air through the blades of the model to her moving between two closely spaced houses (Unpublished video). Apparently, these kinds of explanations are not solely a practice of children. They also happen with more mature students. John Clement studied the generation of spontaneous analogies when students (freshman engineering majors) were asked to solve qualitative physics problems. Clement reports that 53% of the analogies were “personal analogies referring to some sort of body action, showing a preference for anthropomorphic explanations” (Clement, 1989, p. 305). There are significant implications in considering the utterance of the boy and these other examples. When exploring in a relaxed environment, and allowed to talk freely, children will occasionally make similar kinds of statements. Often, the complex nature of their utterances is not immediately apparent. They speak quickly, offhandedly, if not shyly. They are often thrown out without any elaboration. Somehow the statement has erupted from their unconscious and is too far removed from conscious processes that the child would have difficulty even accounting for why and how he or she came up with the statement. I proposed that these types of personal analogies have the potential for leading to some understanding about the targeted concept during an investigation. I think the boy’s utterance has a special significance and can be related to a fundamental issue in science education. An essential question is whether these kinds of spontaneous personal analogies are relevant to conceptual change. Also, if they are relevant, what kind of phenomena and material context might be more likely to evoke these kinds of personal analogies where there is a fusion of personal associations and immediate experiences. There are many phenomena to explore. I will argue that there are some more evocative than others and these same phenomena have a rich historical and cultural significance. In some cases, they have associations with universal symbols. If there is a goal to bring about a more holistic approach to science education, I propose that these kinds of phenomena and objects be the ones that students investigate through their elementary and middle school years. In the following sections, I will connect the one example of the boy’s potent image to examples of creative scientists who report on symbolic images at the beginning of their development of very abstract theories, giving particular attention to Charles Darwin and his use of the image of the tree. Images in scientific thinking will be related to the concept of key symbols and root metaphors. After elaborating on the nature of these concepts, I will propose that a curriculum framework for grades 1–9 could be organized around archetypical phenomena and basic technological artifacts, which could be the experiential context for evoking analogies that are deeply personal and pedagogically productive.

Concrete Images in Scientific Thinking

53

Concrete Images in Scientific Thinking Arthur Miller has written about the role of imagery in scientific thinking, focusing on a few very creative scientists and mathematicians of the past century. There are particular characteristics of their thought process that I think have significance for my purposes here. Two of the most prominent scientists he comments on are Einstein and Poincare. There are three aspects of their biographical details described by Miller that I think are relevant to the teaching of science. • Their initial thinking arises from sensual imagery. • Multiple images are condensed into one insight. • This insightful image contains the solution to a problem. All these characteristics can be considered as a form of physical intuition. In the previous chapter, these were implied in the description of how Faraday went about his investigations and developed his theory of electromagnetism. He did not disclose much about his thought processes. Arthur Miller reports on those who consciously reflected on how they developed their theories. Both Poincare and Einstein claim that their thinking arose from sensual imagery and not just from visualization. (Although some writers describe Einstein’s thinking as visual, it would appear that Einstein was also drawing upon nonvisual impressions and experience.) Significantly, Einstein in reflecting on the emergence of his theoretical formulations claimed: “[S]cientific thought is a development of prescientific thought” (Miller, 1986, p. 210). Here is a quote from his autobiographical notes that captures his reflections about this process. Taken from a psychological viewpoint, (a certain) combinatory play seems to be the essential feature in productive thought-before there is any connection with logical construction in words or other kinds of signs which can be communicated to others. The above-mentioned elements are, in my case, of visual and some of muscular type. Conventional words or other signs have to be sought for laboriously only in a secondary stage, when the mentioned “associative play” is sufficiently established and can be reproduced at will. (Holton, 1973, p. 359)

Also, in his autobiographical notes in asking the question, “What is scientific thinking?” he replies that “memory images” emerge from sense impressions. A certain “picture” serves as an “ordering element” for the potpourri of “memory-pictures,” and this picture is a “concept” (Miller, 1986, p. 241). He seems to be implying here that a collection of images is summed up by one image. Also, important to keep in mind is that when he uses the term “picture,” he appears to mean more than a visual image. Poincare claimed that creative work occurred in cycles of conscious and unconscious work. He felt that sensual imagery – one usually devoid of visualization – set up a “primary play of associations” from previous work and through preparation in studying a problem. Somehow these associations were synthesized into an insight that became conscious. Much more work would have to happen to

54

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

develop this insight into a full theory, but this insight was the basis for the theoretical development. Poincare maintained that in this sensual imagery, there was an ability to see the whole solution (Miller, 1986, p. 233). Thus, insight is associated with one image. In the previous chapter, it was mentioned that one image played a special role in this development. Summing up the role of this symbol in Maxwell’s work, Wise observes that the image of “mutually embracing curves” was present throughout the formative stages of Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory, roughly from 1855 to 1870. Through the metaphor of mutual embrace, symbolized as two interlocked rings, Maxwell first conceived the reciprocal dynamics of electric currents and magnetic forces. His original conception was physically and mathematically incomplete, yet it acted as both motivation and guide for completion (Wise, 1979, p. 1310). This symbol could be interpreted as being more than “scientific.” Just consider if instead of the term “mutually embracing,” Maxwell had written more dryly, “intersecting fields of force,” or “entwined lines of force.” Mutually embracing is more evocative. When we embrace someone, it can be one-sided. When two of like inclination mutually embrace, there is a different feeling as compared with the one where there is a passive acceptance. The term mutually embracing could go beyond physical phenomena to include human relationships. In this sense, the symbol also has multiple meanings. At one level, this symbol could be an abstract schematic graphic, but at another level, it could be visualized in more concrete forms. Despite the highly abstract nature of the mathematical formulations that each of these theorists arrives at, in their final formulations they apparently started out with pregnant concrete images. Poincare used the term “mathematical invention” to describe the process by which he in his unconscious scanning arrived at solutions to problems he was considering. He also said that in this concrete sensual image, there is a sense of the whole solution and insisted that “pure logic cannot give us (a) view of the whole, it is to intuition that we must look for it” (Miller, 1986, p. 262). There is some relationship of these concrete images of scientists to the early stages of inventors in their work. Brook Hindle studied the way Samuel Morse first came up with his design for a telegraph and Fulton for a scheme for a working steam-driven boat. These instances are not the kind of images mentioned by Einstein and Poincare. However, the sketches generated have this property of conveying the sense of a solution to the whole problem considered. Hindle relates that Morse made some preliminary sketches for a device like a telegraph on board a trans-Atlantic liner returning from Europe. In a notebook for sketching drawings, Morse “shows his ability to conceptualize all the elements of a complete telegraphic system and to design alternative components. They reveal at this stage no input of analytic science or projected circuit parameters and quantitative performance” (Hindle, 1981, p. 95). Hindle also comments that they “resemble remarkably the spatial images recorded in his travel notebooks of the scenes, costumes, and technology he encountered”. (Hindle, 1981, p. 95). This comment

Images as They are Related to Primary Processes and Paleologic Thinking

55

suggests that these encounters may have been stimulus for Morse in picturing his invention. These examples suggested that the boy’s utterance given in the scenario above could perform the same function as the images of Einstein, Poincare, and Maxwell. Similar to Einstein in some of his imaginary thought experiments, muscular action is involved or implied by the boy’s mention of swimming. There is a condensation of actions and implied properties of liquids. The implied property is more about viscosity rather than density. The utterance of the boy could have been used to help him develop a deeper understanding of the properties of viscosity and its relationship to density. These kinds of utterances as I have mentioned tend to be evoked by students’ direct engagement with materials embodying basic phenomena. I want to use this observation and place it in a larger pedagogical context. What kind of materials or situations embodying basic phenomena tend to evoke analogies from students? Are there some that are more evocative than others? If there is a goal to provide for a holistic approach to science education, are there materials and situations that can serve the purpose of introducing basic science concepts while also providing for a more personal development? By the latter, I mean that the student can use the interaction with the materials or situations to make a deeper connection with phenomena. They become a means for personal affective growth. The connection between these two goals will be developed below. Before going further with this connection, it will be useful to provide some brief background for the type of images that Einstein and Poincare report and their relationship to creativity.

Images as They are Related to Primary Processes and Paleologic Thinking A theoretical background for the psychological significance of the images mentioned by Einstein and Poincare and their relationship to creative thinking can be found in the writings of Silvano Arieti. He draws upon the findings and theories of psychoanalysis and his own extensive study of what he calls primitive thought processes. This type of thinking eventually comes to conscious awareness in the form of symbols, actions, feelings, and dreams. In regard to the concrete image and its multiple associations, he draws upon his studies of schizophrenics, using them as a window into the primitive thought processes. Typically, in this type of expression that has an aesthetic dimension, there is a condensation and fusion of multiple images. Arieti proposes that this fusion leads to a creation of unpredictable new forms, new concepts, and new images. Areti gives an example of the fusion of images. These are the ones found in the so-called primitive art and in the art throughout the centuries when fantastic figures have been created. Examples of these would include centaurs, mermaids, the composite images of cat, and the human figure of Egyptian art such as the Sphinx.

56

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

Some contemporary art continues this type of fusion of animal and the human form (Arieti, 1976, p. 208). The point he makes about this type of imaginative creation is that the fusion of images is not localized to the emotionally disturbed, but underlies a fundamental impulse of different artistic traditions. Arieti describes it as arising from a sea of undifferentiated feeling and thought or what is called the primary process in Freudian psychology. He calls this primitive type of cognition as paleologic thinking. It is associated with creativity and the imagination. He points out that this thought process needs to be coupled with discipline if it is to be productive (Arieti, 1976, pp. 76–77). Aside from being connected to the aesthetic impulse of the above-mentioned art products such as Egyptian art, it can be found in various explicit forms in young children’s drawings and their socio-dramatic play. In some instances, it continues to be present in the fantasies of older children. Drawing upon Freud and his followers, Arieti proposes that the artistic impulse as seen in the practice of young children is a more explicit and direct manifestation of a deep thinking process that is within all of us. Although he gives most of his attention to artistic creativity, he also proposes that scientific creativity springs from these undifferentiated visions and feelings. He makes an important point regarding abstractions. In schizophrenia and in dreams of normal people, there is a tendency to take abstractions and put them into concrete representations. Arieti maintains that the abstraction is not lost in the concrete image, but, in fact, as in the case of the gifted artist, reinforces the abstraction. This seems to have some connection to what Einstein and Poincare say about their concrete but global images. In his consideration of the creativity of scientists, he reviews the accounts of scientists and comes to the conclusion that there are at least two ways in which discoveries or solutions to problems are made. One type is an encounter with a physical object. Sometimes these are unplanned. He relates the incident of Galileo being in a church and noticing the oscillations of a hanging lamp when he was a young man. Later, Galileo develops the principle of the isochronism of the pendulum. The incident of observing the oscillations of a lamp moved him to experiment and to develop this principle. The other types of discovery mentioned by Arieti are images, many of which are visual but include other sensory modalities. These are the ones that Einstein and Poincare have reported. Tony Bastick, who carried out an extensive review of research literature in several related areas of psychology, looks at this type of thinking from a different perspective. This research was mostly in the area of the psychology of learning and perception and not from a Freudian or Jungian orientation. He summarizes at one point a conclusion relevant to the role of concrete images. There is evidence to show we think better in concrete examples or analogies because one can empathize, become emotionally involved with the situations, and use the evoked feeling for intuitive thought. The ease with which one can empathize with a concrete situation makes that concrete situation or analogy more suitable for intuitive thought. (Bastick, 1982, p. 271)

Whether examining the role of concrete images from a Freudian or a cognitive psychology perspective, there is support for the contention that people often think in concrete examples. This has implications for the way phenomena are

Key Symbols in Scientific Thinking

57

selected for curriculum and the way an educator interacts with students during an investigation. Areti reports that the images having multiple associations are most evident in the case of schizophrenics and appear in children’s drawings as well as in artists’ paintings. They reflect personal associations and may be the solutions to personal concerns. These personal associations are not mentioned in the preceding accounts of the scientists, and the kinds of images reported do not seem to be loaded with personal concerns. They appear to only serve an intellectual function. When historians of science have gone more deeply into the life of scientists, they have found personal associations mixed with their scientific thinking. The life of Charles Darwin is one example that can be examined to find out where this connection happens. It is useful to consider his history because it provides a way of thinking about what kind of phenomena can be evocative both for development of science concepts as well as personal development.

Key Symbols in Scientific Thinking In the accounts of Maxwell’s work, it is not readily apparent that the symbol of mutually embracing curves goes beyond serving an intellectual function. In addition to the personal psychology of the person, Wise did speculate that there are strong “religious and philosophical commitments” associated with these types of symbols (Wise, 1979 p. 1310). These symbols have a currency in which the artist or scientist participates. Despite this statement, Wise did not elaborate on these possible cultural associations connected to the symbol of the mutual embracing curves. However, other writers have reported that Maxwell did have a strong interest in religion and metaphysical philosophy (Harman, 1998), and possibly this symbol had some religious or special philosophical meaning for him. It is these other associations that should also be considered if one has a goal for a more holistic approach to science education. Symbols and metaphors as they arise in the scientists thinking may be idiosyncratic in the sense that they have arisen from past personal experiences and ongoing interests. Additionally, there could also be associations with cultural symbols and even more remote mythological symbols. Returning to Areti, he explains that there is a stage of immature thought – one just before words and public symbols and signs are used. This stage occurs in creative thinking in art and in science. Referring to the creative process in art, he agrees with Jung that the great work of art is not the sole result of the personal experience of the artist or common cognitive processes. There is what he calls primordial processes involved. These can be associated with what Jung calls the collective unconscious. There can be another factor as to what shapes the artist’s thinking and the eventual final product. He asserted that they had to do more with the processes and forms. The history of Darwin’s development of his theory of evolution is one possible example of the intermingling of personal experiences, public symbols, and a universal symbol. In this history, the tree is the symbol that appears to have these associations.

58

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

There are other studies of scientists in which a key symbol figures prominently in their development of new concepts and theories. Charles Darwin is an example where his use of the symbol of the tree in his theory of evolution had personal as well as cultural and mythological associations. In addition, the symbol of a tree has psychological implications because it is one that Carl Jung classifies as archetypical, meaning that it has a universality appearing in different mythologies and art. Furthermore, this same symbol has a long history, having significance at the individual and the sociocultural level. Darwin’s use of the tree symbol provides a way of illustrating how an image can take on multiple meanings that have symbolic significance. I will give examples of other objects – the mechanical clock and the human body – that function in a similar manner. These can be related to what has been labeled key symbols in anthropological theory or root metaphors in philosophy. They can act as experiential anchors for developing metaphors and analogies in the context of scientific thinking. I will provide a rationale as to how they can also be considered as scientific models or conceptual archetypes. Charles Darwin utilized the symbol of the tree in his multiyear formulation of his theory of evolution. According to Howard Gruber, Darwin starts off in the early stages of his theoretical developments with several diagrams of trees having different branching arrangements, representing different conceptualizations and using them to think about problems related to taxonomy. Gruber reports that “[w]hile Darwin’s thoughts changed in many ways from these earliest notes until the time, some twenty years later, when he wrote the Origin of Species, this image of nature remained constant. … It is the only diagram in the book, and it is referred to throughout as he exploits its theoretical richness” (Gruber, 1978, p. 126). Gruber goes on to put this image in the larger context of Darwin’s life. He speculates that Darwin’s drawings are more than conceptual tools. In reviewing Darwin’s notebooks, he observes that there is a pleasure in the drawings and emotional excitement in the manner in which he writes. Darwin was a passionate observer of nature starting from his childhood as evidenced by his field notebooks. Based on his study of these notebooks and the whole of Darwin’s life, Gruber states “he was a fine and eager observer before he was a great theoretician” (Gruber, 1978, p. 133). It would appear then that the image of the tree serves two kinds of functions. It anchored and assisted Darwin in representing his thinking about his theory of evolution. It also appeared to have an enduring personal significance. Gruber maintains that “the scientists need them in order to comprehend what is known and to guide the search for what is not yet known (Gruber 1978, p. 136). “Information is organized in complex packages, schemas, …. New perceptual data are mapped into them” (Gruber, 1978, p. 136). Many people share the personal significance of trees with Darwin. There is a personal resonance between people and trees. Perlman (1994), a follower of Jung, relates through interviews with different individuals, and a review of various myths that there is a close personal relationship people have with trees and in the history of man’s relationship with trees. Trees can evoke “keen emotional responses from

Key Symbols in Scientific Thinking

59

people” (Perlman, 1994, p. 20). There is empathy, a close identification with trees, but interestingly, as Perlman relates, trees can also engender fear and respect. Jung studied the use of the symbol of the tree. He found different manifestations of the symbolic tree in fantasy, myth, and religion occurring over long periods of time. Jung summarizes the powerful image of the tree in this manner. The tree has associations to: growth, life, unfolding of form in a physical and spiritual sense, development, growth from below upwards and from above downwards, the maternal aspect (protection, shade, shelter, nourishing fruits, source of life, solidity, permanence, firm-rootedness, but also being “rooted to the spot’), old age, personality, and finally death and rebirth.1

Expanding on Jung’s comment of the vertical dimension of trees, Perlman proposes that trees engender a kinesthetic dimension where there is a parallel between the upward and downward thrust and our bodily selves expanded in these directions (Perlman, 1994, p. 46). Also, trees provide a ready image for our biographical lives. In addition, there is the tree’s relationship to architecture. Portoghesi (2000) points out the relationship between nature and architecture where, for instance, the column and similar kinds of vertical structural components appear as analogues for trees. He proposes that the house also has associations with trees. In some cultural traditions, these associations take on a symbolic role reflecting a general cultural orientation that is manifested in the structures that are built. According to his conception of architecture, the tree is a structural archetype both from an engineering and a cultural perspective. In his books on trees, Hayman (2003) writes about the cultural history of trees in the British Isles, Scandinavia, Germany, and America. In Norse mythology, “the gigantic ash Yggdrasil was the cosmic tree that overshadows the whole world,” and in Greek mythology, Aretimis was the goddess of the forest. The forest was an important part of German identity from ancient times. He reports that there is a long association between individual trees and people. Putting all these various associations together, we have a natural object that resonates at the personal, sociocultural, and mythological level across multiple cultures. The tree as a symbol resonates with deep feelings that appear to be universally experienced. It acted as an organizing image and structure for getting a handle on the natural history of life, and it can be a shared symbol by which a society orders its basic conception of its place in the natural world. It also can be a personal symbol for life itself and personal growth and development. This example suggests to me that it would be important to consider what objects, environments, and phenomena have the kind of associations as the tree had for Darwin. This association has implications for what objects and phenomena are selected for a science curriculum. There are other objects and phenomena that have functioned in a similar manner historically. These will be mentioned later. 1

 This is from Perlman Quoting from Jung’s essay “the Philosophical tree”.

60

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

The Function of Key Symbols Generative symbols and generative metaphors are closely related and are almost interchangeable because the symbolic object or image can be the source for making multiple associations in metaphorical projections. Many objects or phenomena can be used as symbols, but there are some that take on a special role for an individual or a society. As seen in the case of the tree, it functioned as a key organizer for Darwin and has acted as a key symbol for past societies. And, according to Jung, it appears to be associated with deep psychological states of mind and aspects of life. The multiple functions of a symbol provide a way of thinking about how basic phenomena can be chosen for a science curriculum framework. If one were to have a goal for science education that goes beyond just promoting science literacy and instead is more holistic in intent, then one would want to choose basic phenomena that function like that of the tree acting as both a personal and universal symbol while also serving as a concrete image for scientific thinking. From my perspective, it would make sense to choose basic phenomena and technological archetypes that have functioned as symbols with a rich cultural history and resonate at a deep personal level. The relationship between the symbolic function of basic phenomena and possible metaphorical projections then becomes a critical consideration. A way of gaining some understanding about this relationship can be found in anthropological theory. Sherry Ortner put forth one particular perspective about the role of symbols in a society. She makes some important distinctions and describes a way of categorizing functions of symbols. This is done from an anthropological perspective, but it is my sense that her categories and way of thinking about symbols is very relevant for the science educator. In particular, one of her categorical functions of symbols is connected to the idea of root metaphors that Max Black had proposed as the foundation for scientific thinking. From a wide survey of anthropological literature, Ortner reports that there are various key symbols found across traditional societies. She cites others who have proposed a similar concept such as “core symbols” (Schneider, 1968) and “dominate symbols” (Turner, 1967). Each of these terms have a common meaning where some object takes on a special role for a society acting as a means for ordering the way it functions. According to Ortner, they are anchors to which members of a society refer to in finding their place in that society, in providing strategies for social relationships, and can be a means of analysis for sorting out feelings and ideas. In order to bring some order to the large collection of key symbols found in traditional societies, she proposes a continuum with summarizing symbols at one end and elaborating symbols at the other. “[S]ummarizing symbols,” first are those symbols which are seen as summing up, expressing, representing for the participants in an emotionally powerful and relatively undifferentiated way, what the system means to them. This category is essentially the category of sacred symbols in the broadest sense, and includes all those items which are objects of reverence and or catalysts of emotion. (Ortner, 1972, pp. 1339, 1340)

The Function of Key Symbols

61

She gives as examples of this type of symbol the flag for Americans and the cross for Christians. The effect of being emotionally powerful is to be noted. These are more related to the attitude and commitment of individuals in a society. “[E]laborating symbols,” on the other hand, work in the opposite direction, providing vehicles for sorting out complex and undifferentiated feelings and ideas, making them comprehensible to oneself, communicable to others, and translatable into orderly action. Elaborating symbols are accorded central status in the culture on the basis of their capacity to order experience; they are essentially analytic. (Ortner, 1972, p. 1344)

It is particularly this category of key symbol and the capacity to order experience that I think have relevance for thinking about the relationship between intellectual and affective coherence in curriculum frameworks. As an example, Ortner cites Mary Douglas’ who reports on the human body as a key symbol in many cultures acting as a source of categories for conceptualizing social phenomena and religious iconology. Also, related to this symbolic application is Bernd Jager who proposes that “[t]he house, the body, the city all form a privileged unity of mutual implication” (Jager, 1984, p. 51). He considers these as primordial terms, and because of their mutual interrelation, the house and the city could also be considered elaborating symbols. Furthermore, he mentions how the body took on the role of an elaborating symbol at least in the early Christian times by citing the fact that St. Paul developed a metaphor between Christ and the church. Thus, the cross-shaped church came to symbolize the body of Christ. By the time of the Protestant Reformation, this connection was obscure if not suppressed. Jager wrote that it would be a challenge “to rekindle the long forgotten” relationship of the house, the body, and the city. Nevertheless, there is a residual relationship that still exists today that is brought to our attention by contemporary artists and architects. So, the human body like the tree has multiple associations and could be considered a key or elaborating symbol. Another example of an elaborating symbol is the mechanical clock particularly those invented and used from the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries. Much has been written about the role of the mechanical clock as a root metaphor (Mayr, 1980; Reynolds, 1980). Within the last 25 years, there has been a replacement of mechanical clocks by evermore sophisticated electronic devices. Nowadays, it would be hard to find a place to buy a mechanical clock except as an antique. This is more than the replacement of one kind of technology for another. It represents a shift from a long-held cultural image to one that is less transparent – the computer and electronic technology. Yet, there is a legacy from several hundred years of this all-pervasive artifact. The metaphor of mechanism pervades our language and the way we conceptualize about different systems. The mechanical clock was the basis for many metaphors that were mechanistic in conception. Otto Mayr writes about the cultural history of the mechanical clock, citing the varied contexts in which it was used as a metaphor. It would seem that that it would receive much attention because of its precision and practical work of telling time. However, Mayr relates: “Almost from the moment of its invention the mechanical clock was used frequently in comparisons, figures of speech, metaphor … until well into the 18th century, the clockwork

62

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts metaphor was employed in steadily increasing frequency and over a wide range of applications. Significantly, it grew into the chief metaphor for three central concerns: the world, the body and the state.” (Mayr, 1980, pp. 1, 2)

For instance, Descartes applied it to human physiology, likening the working of the body to a machine, and one writer likened the Spanish state to a complex interacting clockwork (Mayr, 1980, p. 6). Others spoke of the movement of the objects in the sky as the “clockwork universe.” In the most general sense, what is labeled as mechanistic thinking has it origins in this fascination with the mechanical clock. It could be thought of as the archetypical machine. It has an internal source of power-mainspring or falling weight, a means for transforming that power into useful work – a system of gears, and various control devices – the escapement – to regulate its function. Although many devices today are like black boxes, mechanical devices still fascinate. Nowadays, there is a genre of kinetic sculpture that involves balls rolling down tracks, mechanical constructions involving gears, and other kinds of mechanical constructions. For instance, the work of the sculptor George Rhodes capitalizes on this fascination. He has fabricated large structures that can be found in science centers and airport terminals. These sculptural structures have balls rolling along tracks activating a variety of devices in a sequential manner. Sculptures and devices such as these tap into our fascination both with moving balls and mechanisms. Rube Goldberg in its structure and foundation, these devices do not perform any practical function, yet they in a concrete way can symbolize the working of various systems from the mechanical to the bureaucratic. The fact that artists still fabricate these kinds of devices attests to the continual fascination of this kind of technological artifact. With all this in mind, it seems to me that the mechanical clock could also be seen as an elaborating symbol with an associated deep metaphor even today. Additionally, clocks would be a fruitful topic for inclusion in a science curriculum framework in which they could be an integration of design engineering and physical science concepts. It provides a concrete context for leaning about the function of gears, the conversion of potential energy into kinetic energy, and torque. It could also be a way of modeling mathematical relationships.

The Relationship Between Key Symbols, Root Metaphors, and Pedagogical Archetypes Ortner further divides elaborating symbols into two categories described as root metaphors and key scenarios. We need not be concerned with the latter because they refer to social actions. It is the role of root metaphors that takes us closer to a connection to science education. In a certain sense, trees, houses, the human body, and mechanical clocks could be thought of as root metaphors. These same objects could be topics in a curriculum framework. Therefore, understanding what is meant by root metaphors and their relationship to the teaching of science will be useful.

The Relationship Between Key Symbols, Root Metaphors, and Pedagogical Archetypes

63

Stephen Pepper originally defined root metaphors in this manner. The method in principle seems to be this: A man desiring to understand the world looks about for a clue to its comprehension. He pitches upon some area of common-sense fact and tries if he cannot understand other areas in terms of this one. The original area becomes then his basic analogy or root metaphor. He describes as best he can the characteristics of this area, of if you will, discriminates its structure. A list of its structural characteristics becomes his basic concepts of explanation and description. (Pepper, 1942, pp. 91–92)

Pepper continues with this description by aligning the structural characteristics of metaphors with what he terms categories. The new facts are interpreted in terms of these categories, which need to be refined if they are going to be applicable across different domains of knowledge. Eventually, some root metaphors prove fruitful, survive, and become what he calls world theories. Thus, those objects or experiences that can stand in as symbols can also be thought of as root metaphors by which whole conceptual systems are built. Ornter commented on the relationship between root metaphors and symbols. The symbol helps to sort out experiences and to help us think about how categories of experience are related. [O]ne can conceptualize the interrelationships among phenomena by analogy to the interrelationships among the parts of the root metaphor. (Ortner, 1972, p. 1341)

According to Brown, root metaphors are the ultimate frame of reference and below the level of consciousness. They are the “implicit metamodels in terms of which narrower range models are couched” (Brown, 1987). He gives examples of two dominant root metaphors in historical sociology. These are history as organism and history as mechanism. The latter has already been described above in the comments about the impact of the mechanical clock where it was of much longer use. Mayr reports that Descartes applied the metaphor to the working of the body. He originally applied it to animals, but because of his great influence, it was applied to humans as well. Descartes uses the clock as a root metaphor for his mechanistic philosophy (Mayr, 1980, p. 3). According to Brown: “[T]he organic image of society is deeply rooted in Western consciousness” (Brown, 1987, p. 229). In fact, biological metaphors underlie much social thought. He points out that historians and sociologists do not recognize these metaphors as assumptions in their theories of models of societies. One implication of this observation by Brown is that students of these domains of knowledge should become familiar with these underlying metaphors. This would involve becoming more familiar with the base of these metaphors that are living systems as mechanical devices. Max Black in a seminal work also cites Pepper’s concept of root metaphor connecting it to the role of metaphor and models in science practice and thinking. At the time of his writing in this book, in which he first makes this connection, there was still reservations and doubt about the use of metaphors and models in science. One central question according to Black was whether models play a “distinctive and irreplaceable part in scientific investigations” (Black, 1962, p. 236) or are mere props that can lead to fuzzy thinking. Black argues that models in their different manifestations are necessary for providing a way of gaining insight into phenomena as well as functioning as expository means for communicating new theories and conceptions. Implicit in his writings at

64

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

this point was a strong relationship between models and metaphors. Later, he makes this connection more explicit (Black, 1979, pp. 19–40). More recent writings about the role of models in scientific thinking give a more explicit role to models. A great deal of research involving the role of the use of models has been carried out in recent years. This relationship will be developed in more detail in the chapter on models. Black modifies Pepper’s more universal application of root metaphor and proposes a narrower conception. He designates this as conceptual archetype. By archetype I mean a systematic repertoire of ideas by means of which a given thinker describes, by analogical extension, some domain to which those ideas do not immediately and literally apply. (Black, 1962, p. 241)

In this modification, Black moves away from Pepper’s grounding of root metaphors in physical object or concrete experience. This is a curious shift because in the same writings, he allows that other kinds of scientific models such as the scale model and analogical models can be productive. These could be physical objects. These two types of models have been used frequently in science education. In some instances, basic phenomena can function at three different levels of model. They can act as physical models, analogical models, and be the concrete context for conceptual models. The series of activities outlined in the first chapter can provide examples of these types and levels of models. There is a progression from balancing a body to balancing a model of the human body, and then on to other kinds of situations that involve balancing. These early activities involve physical models. There is a cardboard scale model of the human body. Some of the later activities can function as analogical models. The last activity involves the use of a simple horizontal balance. Operations on this balance could be the basis for a mathematical model about equilibrium. Finally, equilibrium as a concept can be a conceptual archetype applied to many kinds of systems including the physical, biological, and sociological. I reported about Mark Johnson’s example of balance as a metaphor that is applied to various domains such as art where he analyzes the aesthetics of an African mask and a Kandinsky painting. He further develops extensions of the balance metaphor to a concept of justice, rational argument, legal/moral balance, and mathematical equality. The basic phenomenon of the experience of our balanced body becomes a basic symbol that can elaborate different parts of our life. It is a root metaphor that underlies basic concepts in different knowledge domains.2  Black’s shift to an emphasis to the conceptual is also curious because he gives an example of what he considers a conceptual archetype that is heavily experience-based. He mentions Kurt Lewin pointing out that the latter in his psychological theories used such terms as “field,” “vector,” “tension,” “force,” “boundary”. In the context of a theory they may be treated as ideas but they are also grounded in physical experience such as we have with our body or as might be witnessed in a structure. (According to Naomi Quinn, in the Cultural Basis of Metaphor, many common metaphors draw on physical experiences (Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, edited by James W. Fernandez, 1991, p. 81). In addition George Lakoff and Mark Johnson give specific examples in Metaphors We Live By of multiple metaphors that can be said to be grounded in common physical experiences. There are other bases for metaphors but it appears that those grounded in physical experience have common cultural currency.) 2

The Relationship Between Key Symbols, Root Metaphors, and Pedagogical Archetypes

65

It may be helpful to review the movement and connections between a basic phenomenon and technological artifact and where we are now.

basic phenomenon elaborating symbol model conceptual archetype

root metaphor



Movement along this list might only be thought of as occurring from left to right, but an individual in attempting to make sense of the world is moving back and forth. In fact, it is the mark of the expert that he or she has developed the skills and habits of body–mind to be able to do this easily and confidently. It would be the role of the elementary and middle school teacher to help students develop the habits of body–mind to carry this back and forth movement between the concrete and the conceptual. These habits of body–mind are mentioned to some degree in the generic pedagogical model elaborated in the previous chapter. It should be noted that I am not implying that students will be aware of the cultural associations associated with a particular phenomena or technological artifact. This association could also be developed in other subject areas such as in history or art. Ortner emphasizes the analytical role of elaborating symbols. They help “formulate relationships – parallels, isomorphisms, complementarities, and so forth – between a wide range of cultural elements” (Ortner, 1972, p. 1343). This appears to leave out or downplay affective involvement that is more associated with summarizing symbols. However, she notes that the distinctions between elaborating and summarizing may be taken too far. She does allow that “insofar as high level formulations are made, a key elaborating symbol of a culture may move into the sacred mode and operate in much the same way as does a summarizing symbol (Ortner, 1972, p. 1344) Thus, as in the case of Darwin, some phenomena can be both a elaborating and a summarizing symbol allowing a merging of the personal affective with the intellectual and the analytical. Ortner, Pepper, and Black have different agendas for the use of conceptual archetypes. Pepper and Ornter link these conceptual archetypes to common objects. Implicit in Black’s account is a similar recognition that experiences with common objects or phenomena can be the ground for a conceptual archetype. What is important from my perspective is the common notion that there could be archetypal phenomena that can act as key symbols and root metaphors. They can provide an experiential foundation for individuals to make sense of the world, the society and culture of which they are a part. When Black introduces the term conceptual archetypes, he makes no mention of Jung nor does Ortner in her paper. Black’s agenda is justifying the use of models in scientific thinking, so it appears that he sees no need to bring in the personal dimension. Ortner does allow that summarizing symbols have a personal dimension because she proposes they can act as motivators and therefore engage the emotions of a person.

66

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

I am proposing that certain phenomena and technological artifacts could be considered as root metaphors or conceptual archetypes. They can function the way that the mutual embracing curves for Maxwell and the tree for Darwin in the development of scientific concepts and theories. Additionally, they could resonate with deep personal association, social–culture symbols, and in some cases, mythological themes. This is a very critical point because my ongoing agenda in this book is to argue for not separating the affective from the cognitive, not separating the personal from the universal, and not separating the wonder of the natural world from the building up of a scientific conception. It seems to me that we can take something from each of these approaches involving the concept of key symbol or conceptual archetype and apply it to the way that science curriculum is organized for elementary and middle school students. I would appropriate the term archetypes and Black’s intention of associating it with ultimate frames of reference – modify it to include Ortner’s elaborating symbols. In addition, I would include in this synthesis Jung’s thinking about psychological archetypes. I propose this continuum to provide for the science educator a framework for thinking about the relationship between topics they might choose for an investigation and their relationship to the so-called big ideas – conceptual archetypes. Depending on how materials are selected and designed, they can be the embodiment of a basic phenomenon and function as a physical model. Through the manipulation of the materials, spontaneous analogies are evoked in the student. These analogies can be personal or serve a cognitive function in understanding a science concept. The science teacher can work with the student to relate their analogy to other prepared analogies providing a bridge to ones that develop basic science concepts (Clement, 1989). The art and language arts teachers can work with the student to develop personal analogies that are expressive of affective reactions to the phenomenon. I am not proposing these basic phenomena and technological artifacts solely because of their cultural and historical significance although this history adds to their richness. There are properties and characteristics about these phenomena and artifacts that I would describe as intrinsically interesting. They have a direct appeal, tend to be highly evocative, and can be represented by useful visual models. This direct engagement and relationship will be developed in more detail in the chapter on empathy. Further rationale for this kind of engagement will also be given in the chapters on the role of the body, sensory understanding, and movement and gesture. What is needed is a parallel list of phenomena or artifacts that are like the “common sense fact,” which Pepper proposes as the means for developing basic concepts. The idea would be to pick phenomena and artifacts that functioned like the symbol of the tree for Darwin. They would resonate with students at a deep psychological level as in the case of Jungian archetypes. They would have historical and cultural associations as Ortner has proposed. They could act as the source of basic ideas that by analogical extension relate across general domains of scientific knowledge in Black’s sense of archetype. The broad categories and suggestive examples would be the following:

The Relationship Between Key Symbols, Root Metaphors, and Pedagogical Archetypes

67

• The cosmos – the movement of sun, moon, and stars • Physical systems – the movement of air and water • Natural systems – the movement and multiplicity of organisms in ponds, or rivers and oceans • Living things – the growth of trees and the movement of animals, the human body Elements of the earth-crystals, dyes and pigments • Man-made systems and objects – the mechanical clock, the house, and vehicles, balls and tracks, wheels. These objects or experiences with phenomena would be returned to several times over the course of 9 years, allowing students to gain a deeper familiarity with them. They would be distributed through the grades in the following manner. The context for the investigations is carried through the grades. Trees, ponds, the human body, the moon and the sun, air and water movement, houses, and clocks are not themes. The pedagogical approach is one where a phenomenon or a technological artifact is the concrete context by which basic concepts are introduced and developed. An extended rationale for taking this approach is given in the chapter on models. The natural phenomena listed could be classified as primary archetypes in the sense that there has been a very long-term relationship with them. To some extent, our neuropsychology has evolved in relationship to them. Recent research suggests that specific regions of the brain have evolved to react to certain properties of these natural phenomena (Boyer and Barrett, 2005). The technological artifacts listed are of a more recent origin and therefore the biological resonance not evolved. However, they have aesthetics that I would describe as intrinsically interesting. Their actions and properties have wide appeal. The phenomena and technological artifacts can be the concrete context for developing basic science concepts. Here is a list of some of the possible concepts. • Ponds – ecosystems, habitats, form, and function, • Dyes and pigments – properties of matter – solubility, density, physical and chemical changes • Balls and tracks – velocity, acceleration, momentum, gravity • Air and water movement – wave motion, fluid patterns, convection • Structures – forces, tension, compression, physical equilibrium, truss systems • Balancing toys – torque, physical static equilibrium • Waterwheels and windmills – energy transformations, work, power Because of the richness of these phenomena, they could be used to address the national standards both in terms of content and process. In a way, most of the ones proposed are already presented to students in various kinds of curriculum programs and textbooks. So, having seen the above lineup of topics there would appear to be little difference between what it proposed here and what is already available. What I will try to develop in the succeeding chapters is an alternative way of thinking about experiences with these phenomena and artifacts. They may remain the same,

FURTHER STUDY OF ADOPTED ANIMAL & INSECTS (Students continue to study structure and anatomy)

HUMAN BODY (Students study skeletons and the comparative anatomy of a few other vertebrates, design models of body parts)

FURTHER STUDY OF ADOPTED ANIMAL & INSECTS

TREES (Leaves and seasonal changes)

4

POND (Investigation of macroinvertebrates) MOON AND SUN (Daytime astronomy, comparison of the movement of the two)

THE MOON (Movement of the moon across the sky)

3

ADOPTION OF AN ANIMAL AND INSECT (Students work on a long-term study of both an animals and insects)

6

POND (Students study fish and living creatures of a similar scale in ponds)

2

HUMAN BODY (Measure and test capacities of different parts of the body)

HUMAN BODY (Students compare human and animal anatomy)

TREES (Adoption and study of individual trees)

1

5

Natural phenomena

Grade

LIGHT–SHADOWS IMAGES & CAMERAS AIR AND WATER MOVEMENT INKS AND PAPERS (Physical changes)

WAVES (Students compare water waves to waves in solid materials) CRYSTALS

MIRRORS & PICTURES BUBBLES

LIGHT (Reflection in mirrors) BATTERIES & BULBS (Simple circuits)

WAVES (Students study waves in water and other materials) BALLS AND TRACKS

Water PlaY Light–Shadows Air & Water Movement DYES AND PIGMENT (Simple properties of matter)

Physical phenomena

BALANCING TOYS (Vertical balancing) BATTERIES & BULBS (Simple electrical circuits)

STRUCTURES – HOUSES (Drinking straw constructions)

WATER CLOCKS (Design challenges)

BALANCING TOYS

Wheels and Ramps

Technological artifacts

68 3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

HUMAN BODY (Investigate different sensory systems – visual, aural, tactile)

BALLS & TRACKS (Develop empirical relationships about linear motion) TOPS & YO-YOS (experimenting with and analyzing circular motion)

POND (Micro-organisms, classification, ecology) SUN, MOON, STARS (Study all three movements in relationship to the earth) TREES & FORESTS (Students investigate ecology of forests, photosynthesis)

COLORED LIGHT (Rainbows, prisms, colored gels) SALAD DRESSING PHYSICS (Physical properties of liquids and solids, e.g. density)

9

HUMAN BODY (Investigate the physical capacities of the body)

WAVES (Students experiment with models of wave motion.) AIR & WATER MOVEMENT (Modeling of air and water movement-atmosphere, oceans) DYES & PIGMENTS (Chemical changes)

TREES (The overall structures of trees, branching, defenses, adaptation)

8

7

BALANCING TOYS (Students experiment with horizontal balancing and simple balance-torque and physical equilibrium) WATER WHEELS (Design and inquiry –work, power, momentum)

Structures–BRIDGES (Students construct and analyze truss systems) BATTERIES & BULBS (special electronic circuits)

CLOCKS (Construct mechanical clocks.)

The Relationship Between Key Symbols, Root Metaphors, and Pedagogical Archetypes 69

70

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

but the underlying paradigm in terms of pedagogy, the values, and the manner in which the phenomenon is contextualized would have some differences to what is currently practiced. It requires a different kind of paradigm shift as I will outline in the next chapter. In some ways, this aligns with recommendations in National Research Council reports Taking Science to School where an approach labeled “Learning Progressions” is proposed. It is defined as “descriptions of the successively more sophisticated ways of thinking about a topic that can follow one another as children learn about and investigate a topic over a broad span of time (e.g., 6 to 8 years) (Duschl et al., 2007, p. 219). As an example of contrasting approaches in currently available curriculum, consider what happens in the elementary curriculum program Science, Technology, and Children (1996). In their Organisms unit, the first grade students observe plants, seeds, snails, guppies, pill bugs, millipedes, etc. I assume this diversity is deliberate, presumably, getting these first grade students to think about the concept of organisms and diversity. Alternatively, students could observe and study only a few of the larger organisms found in a pond looking closely at their behavior, speculating about their form and function (Investigating Pond Organisms, 2007, Grades 1–2, 2007). There is a context here, a narrow focus, but there is room for conceptualization. The emphasis is on having the students develop a deep understanding of only a few organisms in only one type of environment, so they can gain a clear conception of the organism’s structures and its relationship to behavior and survival in that particular ecosystem. Over the 8-year program when the students return to the study of ponds, the concept of diversity is developed because students would have observed a variety of different organisms in several different scales. Also, these pond organisms stand in for similar classes of related organisms in an implicit manner. They are models for other kinds of organisms. The pond is an implicit model for ecosystems. However, students at this level are somewhat limited in their ability from being able to carry out a mapping across different categories of organisms and living systems. Further in-depth observations are needed of other organisms in the pond that would be carried out in later grades, building on these initial experiences. The Science, Technology, and Children unit The Life Cycle of Butterflies (1996) on the other hand does take a highly focused approach and provides an in-depth experience by which students can gain a good understanding of an insect. Here there is an implicit model that can help students develop a deeper sense of the micro-domain of insects. There is a significant difference in the American Association of Science benchmarks and the National Research council standards regarding the human body. The former gives full attention to the human organism, whereas the latter barely mentions it giving much attention to cellular biology, particularly at the middle school level. In my conversation with teachers, especially at the middle school level, I realized that the human body is of very personal interest to students. Here again

Affective Coherence in a Grades 1–9 Science Curriculum Framework

71

an existing curriculum program comes close to fitting in with the scheme I propose. The Insights curriculum has several units on the human body. These do promote some inquiry, but it is my contention that the inquiry could be more open and go to a greater depth. With the growth of various kinds of computer and software and resources on the Internet, this is a topic that now has possibilities of more open inquiry. The Aries curriculum program has a curriculum unit (Exploring Ear in Motion, Daylight, Sun and Shadow Patterns, 2000) where students work with models of movement of the earth and the sun. This unit has the promise of developing productive engagement. However, in my opinion, there should have been greater emphasis given to long-term observation of the sun and the moon before students attempted to model these. Prior work in the grades before they encounter this one unit could have built up a richer experiential foundation that would have given more meaning to the model being used. So, there does exist some curriculum that could fit with the scheme I proposed although I feel some significant changes would have to be made to fit with the pedagogical model of the previous chapter. Also, school districts would have to deliberately specify the sequence of development over the 9 years instead of ­leaving it to the teachers to decide when and what they would have students investigate.

Affective Coherence in a Grades 1–9 Science Curriculum Framework The above outline of a curriculum framework with the selected phenomena and artifacts can be developed in a way that would align it with the national standards. If care is taken in the coordination of the curriculum across grade levels, then it will possibly end up with a conceptual coherence of the kind laid out in the Atlas of Scientific Literacy (2003). However, to be concerned only with conceptual coherence is too narrow an approach for the education of children and adolescents. Science education when carried out with an emphasis on direct experience with phenomena is one of the few occasions in formal schooling in which the student can make direct personal connections with the natural and physical world. These direct encounters present an opportunity to provide a rich educational experience for personal as well as intellectual development. They can be occasions when students may gain a greater sense of their relationship to the world and gain a sense of personal coherence through meaningful relationships to the phenomena in the world. This psychological movement can be brought about by consideration of how metaphorical projections are involved in the growing of personal identities of children and adolescents. Various theoretical approaches in psychology and ­anthropology can provide a way of thinking about, and providing for, this kind of connection. There is a connection that can be made with the sociocultural concept of personal identity and the more cognitively centered orientation of the prevailing approach of

72

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

science education. This is to associate coherence as laid out in documents such as the Atlas of Scientific Literacy (2003) with a coherence that involves the emotional well-being of a student. If this document has as its purpose to provide a framework for curriculum planners and teachers to build upon student scientific understanding in a systematic manner, then there ought to be some kind of parallel framework that provides for the students emotional growth as it might develop through direct experiences with physical, natural phenomena and technological artifacts. This means that the cognitive and the affective would be viewed as intertwined rather than as separate. The framework with the archetypical phenomena and technological artifacts are a possible step in this direction. In cultural and psychological theory, coherence is recognized as a fundamental factor in the development of personality. Aaron Antonovsky developed a measure of Sense-of-Coherence defining it in terms of three components: • Comprehensibility is related to seeing the world as ordered, consistent, structured, and clear rather than chaotic, disordered, random, or accidental. • Manageability is related to a feeling of control over the world. • Meaningfulness is “[t]he extent to which one feels that life makes sense emotionally”(Colby, 1991, pp. 253–257). It is my sense that certain kinds of pedagogical practices in science education conducted in an inquiry mode could address very well the three conditions. It would depend on the degree to which students are given freedom and responsibility for their own learning. In those instances where the student can feel that they have some control over the learning process, they will in turn have some feeling of control over their world. The sense-making phase of Inquiry if conducted effectively would provide a way of students gaining a feeling for an ordered and structured world. Comprehensibility and manageability depend on the kind of sociocultural context of the classroom and school. In succeeding chapters, I will provide both an expanded development of ways the student can connect with the different domains of the world and some practical suggestions for ways of providing for a more holistic approach to science education. An explicit connection can be made between personal meaningfulness and the phenomena that are investigated. Examining the role of root metaphors particularly as these are developed in anthropological theory can do this. Coherence in this domain centers on how individuals in traditional societies dealt with anxieties and cognitive conflict because these problems were a fundamental concern. Fernandez (1974) proposed a way of thinking about the role of primordial metaphor and the growing of identity by placing it in the larger context of how individuals and societies identified with their natural surroundings. He points out that up until recently, members of many societies, especially traditional ones assumed animal identities. Berman (1989, p. 65) writing from a different perspective about the contemporary culture has a similar proposal “how we relate to animals is emotionally and cognitively isomorphic to how we relate to our own bodies, and that knowledge takes us directly into the self/other relationship. Fernandez proposed that the developing child gives form to his or her inchoate state of mind by identifications with animals or other elements of nature. This also

Affective Coherence in a Grades 1–9 Science Curriculum Framework

73

happens at the higher level of social organization for adults in the complex totemic systems that have been developed over time. He draws upon the cave painting of Paleolithic times and in more recent time,s anthropological accounts of traditional societies to illustrate the observation that this identification has a very long history and is still in practice. This type of identification today has been impacted greatly by mass migrations to urban areas and modern communication. However, it is quite evident that young children in any kind of contemporary setting still have fascination and identification with animals. In addition, since the development of mechanical technology and the accompanying proliferation of mechanical toys, Fernandez points out that this is also a domain where there is identification by children. Children will also assume some type of identifications with the functioning of these toys. In a recent book by Sherry Turkel, she has collected essays written by students in one of her courses about their relationship toward specific objects in their childhood. She reports that she found passion for objects in the history of her students and that this passion contributed to their later interests and careers in science. Some of these accounts show an attachment to these objects that goes beyond intellectual curiosity carrying over to strong affective reactions (Turkel, 2008). It would seem that these fascinations with these two domains have been usurped by contemporary merchandising practice and television but there are still in toy stores all kinds of stuff animals and mechanical toys such as windup cars. Somewhat through different means, the presence of these toys suggests that this kind of identification is still happening. In addition, it can happen through other natural phenomena and technological artifacts. Fernandez asserts that this type of identification with objects of nature such as with animals moves an individual from what he describes as an inchoate state to one where there is mastery of the outside world and a growing structure to the individual’s personality. He proposes a three-phase process that from a certain perspective, appears to be paradoxical. In the first phase, there is individual identification with something in the object world. The person becomes the object (animal or machine). In the second phase, there are multiple identifications with different kinds of objects possibly of the same domain such as other kinds of animals. In the third phase, order is achieved by the use of these metaphorical associations. There is a mastery over these domains but a continuing use of these identifications that are used for the purposes of persuasion, performance, and classification (Fernandez, 1974, p. 122). With this proposed theory in mind, empathy takes on a special meaning and importance and should be given special attention by curriculum designers and teachers. The metaphorical projections proposed by Fernandez sounds similar to Ortner’s summarizing and elaborating symbols, which function to synthesize essential ideas of a society. Recall that elaborating symbols in her view are ones that “provide vehicles for sorting out complex and undifferentiated feelings and ideas” (Ortner, 1972, p. 1340). Fernandez gives emphasis to these symbols acting as vehicles by which individuals grow their identity. Beyond these early identifications of the child, there is a continuous ongoing process of elaboration and mastery.

74

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

“This process appears to be paradoxical because there is a preservation of a sense of these identifications, but at the same time, they bring about a sense of the separation both from nature and from other social subjects” (Fernandez, 1974, p. 122). My sense of what this means can be put in terms what Barbara McClintock described in her close involvement with the cells of maize plants. She described it as working with difference not distance. There was not an attempt to put psychological distance from these objects but one of identifying with them while still being aware of the difference.3 These identifications as metaphorical projections can be a way of bringing coherence to one’s life and one’s position in a culture or society. Moving beyond just identification of humans with animals, there can be other kinds of connections made that provide a more comprehensive connection with the natural and physical environment. The objects and systems I proposed for the above-mentioned curriculum framework can be aligned with categories of experience that are fundamental. Recall that I proposed broad categories of the cosmos, physical systems, natural systems and man-made systems, and objects for the chart. Under these categories are the basic phenomena. With some of the phenomena, there can be metaphorical projections that resonate at a deep personal level and could be the basis for a personal coherence. Folk tales and mythologies about the sun and the moon, wind, and trees are ubiquitous and appear to play a fundamental role in the culture of many societies. Identifying with something like crystals or dyes and pigments may be seen as more problematic, but recall the boy’s comment in the scenario at the beginning of this chapter. In addition, each of these objects and systems can be related to Jungian archetypes. They have properties that provide a structure and order to our inchoate feelings. The phenomena and objects I propose for study in the curriculum framework are what I have called intrinsically interesting ones. They engage the student directly because of their inherent appeal. They can be highly evocative causing students to identify with them and produce personal analogies. I propose that these be investigated over 9 years in a cyclic manner so that these parts of the world get to be well known by the students. If while they are investigating these phenomena, students are also encouraged to write about them and create art objects about them, then this identification can be explored in a meaningful manner. The three phases of identification proposed by Fernandez can be allowed to happen. Connections made to the natural and human made world take on a meaning beyond the context of science. This process can help the students expand their own identity and act as a framework for a more holistic approach to science education.

 Some psychological theories of symbol formation and development such as those of Werner and Kaplan description assert that the original connection to an object or phenomenon is not lost. 3

References

75

References Atlas of Scientific Literacy (2003). American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington DC. Antovosky, Aaron (1987). Unraveling the Mystery of Health: How People Manage Stress and Stay Well. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass. Arieti, Silvano (1976). Creativity: The Magic Synthesis, New York, Basic Books. Bastick, Tony (1982). Intuition: How We Think and Act. New York, Wiley. Berman, Morris (1989). Coming To Our Senses: Body and Spirit in the Hidden History of the West. New York, Bantam Books. Black, Max, (1962). Models and Metaphor, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press. Black, Max (1979). More about Metaphor in A. Ortony (Ed.) Metaphor and Thought, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Boyer P., & Barrett, C. (2005). Domain Specificity and Intuitive Ontology in Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, Buss, David. Ed. Wiley, New York. Bransford, John, Brown, Ann L., Cocking, Rodney (Eds.).(1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, Washington, DC, National Academy Press. Brown, Richard (1987). Metaphor and Historical Consciousness: Organicism and Mechanism in the Study of Social Change in Cognition and Symbolic Structures in R. Haskell (Ed.), The Psychology of Metaphoric Transformation, Norwood, NJ, Ablex. Clement, John (1989). Generation of Spontaneous Analogies by Students Solving Science Problems in Thinking Across Cultures: Third International Conference on Thinking, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum, pp. 303–308. Clement, John, & Brown, John (1989). Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science 18: 237–261. Colby, Benjamin (1991). The Japanese Tea Ceremony: Coherence Theory and Metaphor in Social Adaptation in James Fernandez (Ed.), Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press. Duschl, R. Schweingruber, H., and Shouse, A. (Eds.) (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8, Washington, DC, National Academies Press. Exploring Earth in Motion: Daylight, Sun and Shadow Patterns (2000). ARIES curriculum program, Watertown, MA, Charlesbridge. Fernandez, James (1974). The Mission of Metaphor in Expressive Culture, Current Anthropology, 15(2), 119–132. Fernandez, James (Ed.). (1991). Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press. Gee, Brian (1978). Models as a pedagogical tool: can we learn from Maxwell? Physics Education, 13(5), 287–291. Gruber, Howard E. (1978). Darwin’s “Tree of Nature” and Other Images of Wide Scope in J. Wechsler (Ed.), On Aesthetics in Science, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Harman P.M. (1998). The Natural Philosophy of James Clerk Maxwell, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hayman, Richard (2003). Trees: Woodland and Western Civilization. London, Hambledon and London. Hindle, Brooke (1981). Emulation and Invention, Norton, New York. Holton, Gerald (1973). Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Investigating Pond Organisms, Grades 1–3 [curriculum guide] Nashua, N.H., Neo-Sci, www. neosci.com Jager, Bernd (1984). Body, House, City or the Intertwinings of Embodiment, Inhabitation and Civilization in D. Kruger (Ed.), The Changing Reality of Modern Man, Cape Town, Juta. Life Cycle of Butterflies (1996). Science, Technology and Children. Published by Carolina Biological, Burlington, North Carolina.

76

3 Framework Composed of Archetypical Phenomena and Technological Artifacts

Mayr, Otto (1980). A Mechanical Symbol for an Authoritarian World in K. Maurice and O. Mayr (Eds.), The Clock Work Universe, German Clocks and Automata, 1550–1650 (pp. 1–6)), New York, Neale Watson. Miller, Arthur (1986). Imagery In Scientific Thought: Creating 20th-Centruy Physics, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Organisms (1996). Science and Technology for Children [curriculum guide], Washington, DC, National Science Resource Center. Ortner, Sherry (1972). On Key Symbols, American Anthropologist, 75, 1338–1346. Perlman, Michael (1994). The Power of Trees – The Reforesting of the Soul, Dallas TX, Spring Publications. Portoghesi, Paolo (2000). Nature and Architecture, Milano, Skira Editpre. Pepper, Stephen (1942). World Hypotheses, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. Quinn, Naomi (1991). The Cultural Basis of Metaphor. In James Fernandez (Ed.), Beyond Metaphor: The Theory of Tropes in Anthropology, Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press. Reynolds, Paul (1980). The Clock Metaphor in the History of Psychology in Scientific Discovery: Case Studies, Nickles, T. (Ed.), Dordrecht, D. Reidel. Schneider, David (1968). American Kinship, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall. Turkel, Sherry (2008). Falling for Science: Objects in Mind, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Turner, Victor (1967). The Forest of Symbols, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press. Water Wheels. (1994). Science First Hand [video], WGBH, Boston, MA. Wise, M. Norton. (1979) The Mutual Embrace of Electricity and Magnetism, Science 203, 1310–1318. Zubrowski, Bernard (1996). Exploration with Bubbles: The Origins of Questions, in the videos series Learning to See [curriculum guide] Newton, MA, Education Development Center. Zubrowski, Bernard (2001). Salad Dressing Physics, in Models in Technology and Science curriculum series[curriculum guide], Farmingdale, NY, Kelvin.

Chapter 4

An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

The proposed pedagogical model and curriculum framework of the previous ­chapters lay out a program for individual curriculum units and a multiyear program. These need to be informed by a broader scheme that gives a sense of a how learning can be fostered and guided. I propose an alternative Paradigm to the current engineering approach to science education. The alternative Paradigm gives greater emphasis to the role of sensory experience and the role of aesthetics in learning science.

Scenario #2 This scenario is about my own involvement with a phenomenon. It is about me playing around with ways of making different kinds of soap bubble arrangements. It is a composite of many explorations that were carried out over a long period of time. The idea is to give a sense of a particular approach to working with materials. This approach is Paradigmatic in the sense that it exemplifies a way of thinking about curriculum design, a relationship with students and a holistic approach to science education. I have soap solution, drinking straws, pieces of heavy paper, and various kinds of containers. To start off, I dip the end of the straw into the soap solution and lift the wet straw from the solution. Then I blow gently through the straw creating a spherical bubble that I can launch into the air. Each time I do this I get a spherical bubble. I decide to take a heavy piece of paper and make it into a square shaped tube. Dipping this into the soap solution and blowing, I again get a spherical bubble. Other kinds of shapes of tubes however irregular always result in a perfect sphere. The soap film is telling me that this is the free-form shape it prefers. At the same time I find the perfection of the spherical form quite satisfying. It has precision and independence. The surface is alive with strange movements of B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_4, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

77

78

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

small spots, intense color, and spots of bright light. There are highlights reflected from nearby light bulbs or that of the light coming from the window. The bubbles both stand apart and reflect their environment. The intense colors have a quality that is very attractive. I know that the soap film is delicate so that it shouldn’t be touched but there is a very strong urge to do so. When I touched it with a dry finger, the film breaks. I discovered that when I touched it with a wet finger I could penetrate into the bubble without breaking it. The soap film is so thin that I can’t feel it. The bubble doesn’t resist my probe but this probe doesn’t really tell me much about soap film. Nevertheless, I am drawn to this rich sensory experience. Soap bubbles have a high aesthetic appeal. If one of the spherical bubbles falls to the table it will break unless the surface has been made wet. If it doesn’t break, a hemisphere is formed. When a bubble is blown on the table next to another one a curious thing happens. If the two touch, they immediately rearrange themselves into a joint configuration where there is a common wall. I can blow several bubble hemispheres inside of one another. As soon as one touches another they rearrange themselves into an array where there are straight lines seParating one from another. No matter how many I put together there seems to be a common pattern of how they join together. After close observation and counting these common walls, these arrays always have three sides coming together at one point. The bubbles are telling me that they have a definite way in which they congregate. There is a tension set up as I observe the bubbles. I never quite know when they will break. One can repeat the process of making soap bubbles on the table over and over again anticipating this unpredictability. So, there is not just a visual aesthetic but also one associated with movement and appearance and disappearance. Over time if I keep blowing soap bubbles I could observe that there are definite patterns to the way they join together inside transparent containers, between containers, or between a sheet of Plexiglas and a wet table. I can also continue to marvel at the precision with which they join together and at their thinness – so thin that I can’t feel it. This description is really a reconstruction of the multiple times that I have played with bubbles myself and with children over many years. It only begins to capture the discoveries that can be made about the various geometric configurations they take and the kind of aesthetic experiences that one can have in creating and playing with them. What I want to particularly emphasize is the dialectical nature of this involvement. I go back and forth doing something with the bubbles and observing some interesting property. While doing so I may notice something new that hadn’t caught my attention before. So, I make some more bubbles and focus on this new characteristic. Generally, I did not attempt to start with conceptions that I want to impose on what I see and experience. Over time, through my own multiple encounters with bubbles and in reading about scientific explanations of soap bubbles, I come to realize that they exemplify properties of matter, most specifically the concept of surface tension. I also find in my readings that their various aggregations are also examples of a rather abstract mathematical conception called “minimal surface areas.”

Scenario #2

79

This description is a personal account of a universal process that I referred to in the Introduction. Recall that I mentioned the approach of the Eskimo Carver who works with ivory. According to Edmund Carpenter the carver doesn’t start with a preconceived notion of what he will create. It emerges from his interaction with the ivory. This story impressed upon me the kind of relationship one can have with materials such as soap bubbles. Over the years I have played with a variety of materials assembling indoor and outdoor kinetic pieces. I have found that I shouldn’t force my ideas upon the material to make it take the shape I want. I have to play around with it and get a feel of what is possible. I also had to let my mind get rid of the preconceived images I may have had and take in the images that the interaction with the material brings forth. I have found that, sometimes, certain kinds of preconceived images I had of kinetic sculptures were not possible to make mechanically when I attempted to construct them. There were either the physical limitations of the materials or the arrangements I wanted to make just wouldn’t work. Sometimes, while attempting to put into concrete form, the images I had in mind, my work with the materials suggested other possibilities. Some of my most successful sculptures were discoveries. Certain properties became evident as I played and experimented with the materials. They emerged through this interaction. I could not have anticipated them. This process of having a dialogue with materials has also been often described by some of the practitioners of sculpture and painting. Michelangelo and more recently Brancusi are among some of the well-known sculptors who had a special relationship with their materials. The former worked on a block of marble in a manner that “the work was released from the marble block, patiently, layer after layer” (Wittkower, 1977, p. 116). Brancusi brought with him the craftsmen approach of his native Romania – sensitivity to the properties of materials and the process and tools by which objects were constructed. His first carvings were in limestone, then wood and marble. “Each material tended to produce a particular formal category of object-determined by the shape of the material in its raw state, and by its structural properties” (Tucker, 1974, p. 46). (It should be noted that this ethic of dialoguing with materials is not an approach taken by all artists. Some sculptors and painters take a highly conceptual approach. In some cases they do not even work directly with the materials.) In architecture there are advocates not only for sensitivity to the building materials and the symbolic forms of the structure but also sensitivity to the place in which the structure will be built. Paolo Portoghesi, an architect, in his extended compendium that illustrates the possible connections between natural objects and man-made structures speaks of a “listening architecture” – one that connects “the building to the site so that it grows upwards from the site like a plant” (Portoghesi, 2000, p. 63). This is in contrast to other practices that deliberately have buildings stand out and differ significantly from its surroundings. In Chapter 2, I described the work of Faraday. According to those who have studied his notebooks such as David Gooding and Tweney, Faraday appears to have taken a similar approach to the early stages of his investigations in the sense that he let the phenomenon evoke questions and manipulations.

80

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

I propose that an interactive or dialectical process of person and environment be taken as an archetypical process. It is representative of the way some artisans, artists, and architects approach their work with materials or environments. The type of interaction between the artists and his materials can be a way of thinking about a model for four kinds of relationships. • The way students explore and interact with a phenomenon or technological artifact • The way a teacher mediates between student, phenomenon, and a domain of knowledge • The way the curriculum designer attempts to design a curriculum structure, which provides an authentic experience for the student both in terms of personal fulfillment and intellectual development • The way a philosophical approach could be formulated for science education These types of dialectical interactions suggest that a different paradigm for science education should be considered for a pedagogical framework. I will introduce it and develop various aspects of it in the remaining chapters. The issue of authenticity will be related to the proposed alternative paradigm and to the broader question of a holistic approach to science education.

The Architect as One Model for Curriculum Design and Teaching My involvement with bubbles, as outlined above, is representative of an approach that can be framed as an alternative approach to science education. To get a better sense of what is involved in this approach I will expand on Portoghesi’s conception of the role of the architect. Sometimes by viewing familiar practices in education from a different perspective one can gain new insights about how these traditional practices can be changed. The manner in which Portoghesi portrays the role of a special kind of architectural practice can be one type of model for the science educator. The architect takes on the roles of an artist, an engineer and a social planner as he or she moves through the design process. The architect develops and designs an overall structure that is to be related to the specific site where it will be located. This design draws upon past practices as well as finds inspiration in the shapes and forms from the natural and man-made world. It involves the balancing of making an aesthetic statement, designing a structure that can be built, and providing a useable inner space. In various ways the outer and inner structures subtly affect the behavior, feelings and social interactions of the inhabitants, so the architects must design a structure that takes into account these affective reactions as well as the more practical matters like the physical comfort of the inhabitants. There is also the

Portoghesi and the “Listening Architect”

81

symbolic nature of the structure as it relates to past and current cultural values and the way it is viewed by the general public. In my conception of the role of the science educator he or she should attempt to carry out a similar kind of balancing of aesthetic involvement with the practical goal of helping students understand their environment in a more scientific manner. There are some parallels to the way architects approach their work that can inform these considerations. One element of the latter approach would not ordinarily be explicitly mentioned for the former. The building must perform a practical function but it should also have an aesthetic presence. I propose that aside from the practical function of moving students to learn science, the science educator should have in mind that the investigation should also be an aesthetic experience. Closely related and coming out of the aesthetic is the attention to the symbolic content that arises out of explorations with basic phenomena and technological artifacts. The symbolic content is both personal and related to scientific concepts. In my conception, these elements play a fundamental role in generating imaginative analogies and could be the basis of bringing about conceptual change.

Portoghesi and the “Listening Architect” Portoghesi expands on the idea of a listening architect by explaining how one would approach the design of a structure. A site according to him does have its own individuality but is also the product of other cultural and historical influences. A building should be in harmony with its setting and be a residue of historical and cultural influences. The building should also be connected to the natural environment. To bring about this harmony an architect needs to “listen to objects.” Every object is simultaneously a question, a possibility to draw closer to other things (the power of analogy) and a tendency toward metamorphosis. Like the chemical compounds, there are things that more or less readily react with others, with or without “free valance.” To turn this “listening to objects” into an architectural project, the architect must see these objects through his own eyes as well as identify them with others. This is the only way in which the “inhabitants” of a site will discover the bond between a building and their own mnemonic experiences and imagination and quite literally “find themselves” in this new form and listen to it. The deeper and more mysterious the bonds, the more the inhabitants will draw on their imagination and quite literally “find themselves” in this new form and listen to it. The deeper and more mysterious the bonds, the more the inhabitants will draw on their imagination without relying merely on memory (Portoghesi, 2000, p. 66).

This passage by itself is rather cryptic but it has within it a sense of interaction that can be used to think about curriculum design and teaching. This statement conflates several kinds of interactions and the nature of these interactions. My interpretation would be as follows.

82

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

First, Portoghesi refers to the architect’s reaction to objects found in the natural world. His book is full of examples of objects found in nature and have been the source of inspiration for builders throughout history. Some of these objects are more “reactive” than others. They are not only a possible analogue for a structural element or overall structure, but they also have an associated aesthetic response, which gives rise to symbolic associations. His book has copious examples of built structures that are visual and structural analogues to forms found in nature. Sometimes they are very close analogies while at other times they are transformed (metamorphized) but still have traces of a natural form. For instance, certain parts of the building especially, older ones such as wood frame structures, can be viewed as the skeleton supporting the whole building. The mountain is echoed in the roof of the Hindu temple or some huts of traditional societies. The column can be considered as analogous to tree trunks. Objects such as these are to be “listen to” for inspiration in the design of man-made structures. Relating this approach to science education, the science educator should be on the lookout for natural phenomena that I would describe as intrinsically interesting. They resonate at a deep level with students, causing them to want to explore these phenomena in an in-depth manner. They also can function as models for developing scientific conceptual understanding as well as bring about growth in self-knowledge. Bubbles are one such example. They are compelling, inciting, extended exploratory manipulations. They have been used as structural models in engineering, physical analogues in science, and concrete systems for a branch of mathematics called the calculus of variations. Second, I take the reference to chemical reaction to mean that there are some objects that are more “reactive” than others. These are the ones that resonate with deep memory and imagination. For instance, structures that have shape analogous to the human body will be highly reactive because of the strong connections with our own body. In my experience, I have found that soap bubbles are highly “reactive” in the sense that they are intrinsically interesting and evocative. As elaborated in the scenario in the beginning, there are multiple possibilities of investigating their fascinating structures. I have found that other objects and phenomenon are similarly “reactive.” Food color moving in water, balancing toys such as mobiles, mirrors, shadows, the movement of balls on tracks are among those that, I have found over the years, immediately engage the attention of people. More will be said about the significance of these phenomena in later chapters. Third, “deep and mysterious bonds” could be a reference to the concept of archetypes. In his use of this term he is referring to physical objects, although these objects could be associated with Carl Jung’s sense of this term. These are objects that bring forth symbolic content that appears within many cultures and societies. Intrinsically “interesting phenomena” is another term that captures the same associations. It doesn’t necessarily have the deeper associations that Jung proposed but does suggest that the “reactivity” or resonance is more than that which arises from a specific cultural context but might be said to be inherent in

Portoghesi and the “Listening Architect”

83

our neurological make up. The mysterious bonds appear across all cultures. For instance, the vortex patterns that form in water such as the whirlpools behind rocks have a spiral form. This form and pattern has been assigned special meanings in many of the cultures of the world. Fourth, his differentiation between memory and imagination might be explained by considering the interaction with intrinsically interesting objects or phenomena at three levels – personal associations, aesthetic reactions, and the neurophysio­logical. There are personal associations with a phenomenon that are connected to previous experiences with that phenomenon. These associations are a matter of personal history. Bubble blowing is a common activity among children. These occasions don’t go very far in exploring the bubbles but the presentation and exploration takes place within a context of high social affect such as doing this with parents. There is a mutual enjoyment of the bubbles. The parent attempts to entertain the child who finds pleasure in it. The adults in turn get pleasure from the child’s reaction. The high social affect can make the memory vivid and lasting. There are aesthetic reactions to the form and shapes of a phenomenon. For instance, in the case of soap bubbles there are precise shapes and intense colors as I mentioned in the beginning scenario. These enticing properties can be the beginning of representing the phenomenon in a manner that leads to scientific understanding. There is a deeper resonance having to do with our biological inheritance. The intersection of bubble arrays and the perfect spherical shapes are among some of the properties that might be the ones that the nervous system has a special receptivity. Eibl-Eibesfeldt (1988) writes about the biological foundation of aesthetics. His general proposal is that “[o]ur perception is biased in specific ways so that not everything appeals equally to our senses and cognition” (p. 29). He cites studies related to Gestalt psychology. In one study, children were presented with simple symmetrical figures with their parts cut out. If the experimenter moved pieces of one type of figure onto another figure (piece of square onto a circle) the children protested and became emotionally upset. His conclusion is that “[o]ur perception thus strives to perceive regularity and symmetry and, accordingly, tends to project the latter onto observed objects” (Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1988, p. 31). Fifth, Portoghesi makes a curious distinction between memory and imagination for how can one begin to imagine without in some ways invoking memories of past experiences with objects. It is also not readily apparent what he means by the phrase “find themselves.” I would take these phrases to mean that we can only become aware of deep subconscious symbols and their meanings through interactions with objects. There are characteristics of these objects that resonate with us and are expressed by deep unconscious symbols. In the resonance of interaction a person can find some deep inner core of himself or herself. Recall from the previous chapter Arieti’s categorization of paleologic thinking. Associated with this kind of thinking is his concept of the endocept.

84

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education The endocept is a primitive organization of past experiences, perceptions, memory traces and images of things and movements. These previous experiences, which are repressed and not brought back to consciousness, continue to have an indirect influence. The endocept goes beyond the cognitive stage of the image, but inasmuch as it does not reproduce anything similar to perceptions, it is not easily recognizable. Also, it does not lead to prompt action. Nor can it be transformed into a verbal expression; it remains at a preverbal level. Although it has an emotional component, it does not expand into a clearly felt emotion. (Arieti, 1976, p. 54)

The content of an endocept can be communicated to other people only when it is translated into expressions, belonging to other levels such as words, drawings, and other kinds of artistic expression. So, when we are dialoguing with a material and experiencing a phenomenon we can both discover the salient physical properties and “discover ourselves” in the changing dialectical interaction. However, some of this interaction is happens at an unconscious level.

Curriculum Design and Teaching as a Dialectical Process: An Alternate Paradigm The process proposed by Portoghesi is dialectical in nature. It is an iterative process moving between multiple points that eventually result in a structure of some sort. The architect designs a structure that by analogy or metamorphosis retains the inherent properties related to deep archetypal associations. The following diagram could graphically represent this interactive process.

This overall process is dialectical in the sense that the architect has to go back and forth “listening” to objects in nature, “listening” to the site, and anticipating the

Curriculum Design and Teaching as a Dialectical Process: An Alternate Paradigm

85

reactions of the future occupants. If the architect came up with an effective design, the occupants would find themselves resonating with the structure and have their imagination stirred in a way that referred back to archetypical phenomena. The parallel to curriculum design would be in this manner. The science educator designs an educational experience instead of a building. The science educator designs an educational experience around the exploration/investigation of an object from the natural or physical world that is the embodiment of an archetypical phenomenon or technological artifact. The student has a dialogue both with the physical materials as well as the other students and teachers. The shaping of the dialogue is in terms of canonical scientific knowledge as was laid out in the pedagogical model given in Chapter 2. There is a back and forth movement involving all these contexts. Thinking about and designing the overall structure of this experience is similar to that of the architect designing the overall structure of a building. As mentioned previously it should be conceived of as an aesthetic experience as well as a practical one. The architect makes analogues of the object but in the case of the science educator the objects are the very focus of the investigation. There are many objects to choose from. Why not select those that are “reactive” in the sense that Portaghesi has described. Select the ones that will bring about deep associations and stir the imagination in which students can “find themselves.” I mentioned some of these phenomena in the previous chapter and outlined a rationale for choosing particular phenomena. The process by which the science educator carries this out is parallel to the dialectical process just suggested.

educator archetypical phenomenon

scientific community student

The science educator would start off with “listening” to a phenomenon, not only getting a feeling for possible deep symbolic content based on his or her own reactions, but also drawing his or her intuitions about student reactions. Acting as a representative of the scientific community, the educator designs experiences with this phenomenon to provide a concrete context for students to be challenged to come to terms with their prior understandings while formulating a more scientific conception. The educator also acts as a role model for the students enacting scientific practice and communicating scientific content. The educator would also “listen” to the students in their exploration of a phenomenon. This process would involve the educator helping the students make explicit their prior knowledge, helping them understand the phenomenon, and dialoguing with the student to move them to

86

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

adopt a scientific understanding. The dialoguing would be by way of the phenomena as well as by verbal and visual representations. There is no concrete object produced in this interactive process as there is eventually for the architect. The eventual result is to have students continue to have a curiosity about the world and develop a more scientific understanding of how it functions. Especially at the elementary level I would give higher priority to the former. In this process the teacher takes on a very challenging role. The teacher has to balance between helping the student develop a more scientific understanding of the world and helping students grow intellectually and emotionally. It should be noted that the diagram and the concept of a dialectical interaction is a variant of similar ones that have been proposed previously. Hawkins (1970) drawing upon the writings of Martin Buber provides a simpler arrangement he titled “I, Thou, It,” where thou is the teacher and it is the object or an interesting phenomenon. Closely associated with the process suggested in the diagram is that all of this is happening in a sociocultural context. In this book I have decided to give emphasis to the physical context – the student transactions with the phenomenon. In designating the person as a student I am placing this dialectical interaction in the sociocultural context of school. This designation is still not enough to fully characterize what may or could happen because there are different school cultures and classroom cultures. As will become evident throughout the book I would place these transactions within a school and classroom culture that promotes collaborative and cooperative learning. The diagram is a highly simplified representation of an educational situation that is very complex. The metaphor of “listening” is meant to be a stand-in for a multisensory engagement with the phenomenon and in the case of person to person it is also more than the act of speech. The manner in which these different relationships are understood can result in large differences in pedagogical practice. In the succeeding chapters I will elaborate on what my interpretation of these relationships are and to some degree propose enactments at a practical level. Constructivism is a theoretical approach given much attention in recent times. Certain interpretations of this theoretical orientation can begin to provide a workable structure and suggest pedagogical practices for a Paradigm related to the arts. Before elaborating on this theory it can be useful to consider the role of the current prevailing Paradigm that can be labeled as an engineering approach to education. I bring this up because for some educators it is adopted without a conscious awareness of the values and prescriptive practices associated with it.

Engineering Versus Artist Paradigm The dialectical process that is associated with the architectural design process and gives a different emphasis to the design can be considered to be more Paradigmatic to the pedagogical processes than what is currently said to be the Paradigm underlying traditional practice in science education. Typically, goals are defined first, concepts are targeted, and then the process is specified. Later, the specific context will be

Engineering Versus Artist Paradigm

87

selected, through which these targeted concepts are developed. As one example of this influential structure consider John Rudolph’s review of the history of the development of science curriculum programs of the 1960s and 1970s such as that of the Physical Science Study Committee (PSSC). He reports how scientists who had been heavily involved in the development of defense projects for World War II headed this effort and related curriculum projects of that era. Out of this effort came an analytical approach related to the systems theory. Under the guidance of prestigious scientists this approach was adopted in the development of these new curricula. The focus was subject matter centered and the emphasis was on rigor. One significant development was a series of films that was projected to be more effective than the classroom teacher. Henry Chauncey of the Educational Testing Service – a member of the PSSC Steering Committee made the statement that “instructional films can do as good a job in this respect – if not better – than the average classroom teacher” (Rudolf, 2002, p. 226). Gerald Zacharias, the leader of the project, did allow that the teacher should not be undermined so there were other accompanying materials that the teacher could also use. Rudolph relates that Zacharias considered the implementation to be “merely a question of proper engineering” (These are Rudolf’s words). This approach became “a blueprint for educational reform in the United States” (Rudolf, 2002, p. 228).1 Perkins labels this type of engineering approach to education as an ideology. According to his view of this ideology, learning is broken down into its components and models developed for instruction so that learning happens with carefully designed materials based on these models. The logic of this approach appears self-evident but the results are questionable. He also acknowledges other ideologies such as “Learning As Growth, Education as Cultivation” and “Learning as Ability, Education as Opportunity.” He describes the first as one that promotes students’ learning by placing them in a stimulating and nourishing environment. The teacher promotes a natural inclination to learning by means of this environment. The student will naturally learn by way of this stimulating environment. The artist Paradigm would be closest to this type of ideology. The second two types put an emphasis on individual achievement, leaving a lot up to the student instead of the system. Those with talent will somehow take advantage of what is being offered and excel while the others with less ability will just get by. He admits that in reality there is a mix of these ideologies in the American context but that for historical and cultural reasons the engineering ideology is much more prominent (Perkins, 1989, pp. 289–390). It could be argued that there has been an evolution over the past 30 years or so and curriculum design has moved toward a greater recognition of the role of the teacher, the social context of learning and the importance of student motivation.

 Peter Dow who worked with Zacharias suggests that this may not be a fair characterization of him. Zacharias seems to apply the engineering metaphor more to the delivery system of the materials than what a teaching situation might convey about scientific thinking. One of the projects that also sprung up in these early days was the Elementary Science Study that had advocates for a central role of the teacher. 1

88

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

There is nowadays a greater effort to relate the curriculum to the real-world context and much is made of student’s prior knowledge. However, if one examines closely the curriculum guides of more recently developed programs one can see that this system’s engineering Paradigm still has great sway as Perkins observes. With the legacy of this engineering Paradigm there is still an understanding that goals are clearly stated in the beginning, indicating what students will learn. The goals are first decided without even considering what kind of physical context will be used to serve those goals. The experiential process by which these goals are developed appears to be of the same type in all kinds of investigations so that little consideration is given for the type of phenomenon being investigated and the kind of social interaction that may arise. For instance, life science investigations have to be carried out in a way different from those of physical phenomena. If an investigation of living phenomena is to be done with integrity, it needs to happen over a long time so that changes in the organisms can be observed. Investigating living organisms also brings up all kinds of ethical issues, to which children and early adolescents are particularly sensitive. There is a real difference between investigating organisms such as a tadpole and exploring batteries and bulbs. In the engineering Paradigm, only after the specification of goals and development of evaluative procedures there is a search for the set of materials that will be used to develop or illustrate the targeted concepts. (See Understanding by Design, Wiggins and McTique, 1998.) To some extent there appears to be the assumption that the specific context by which the content knowledge is developed and introduced is neutral in the sense that many kinds of materials can be used to develop the same science concepts. This is an oversimplified characterization, but it does capture the pedagogy of some published curricula and the way some teachers design investigations. If there is some kind of dialogue, it is considered more as a logical argument (Socratic dialogue) that presumably will be adopted by the student because it is plausible. This structured dialogue may bring a changed mind (a replacement of prior conceptions) as contrasted to a dialectical process leading to changed perceptions and understanding. In the engineering Paradigm emphasis tends to be on verbal discourse, although now more attention is given to visual representation. In the Paradigm based on the artist-architect, greater recognition is given to noncognitive intuitions in addition to verbal discourse and visual representation. The juxtaposition of engineering versus artists–architectural approach to science education highlights the essential role that various kinds of contexts play in the conception of a dialectical interaction. The architect designs a building that resonates with its occupants and a science educator designs an educational experience that resonates with students. As Perkins observes, teaching practice is a mix of the different ideologies he outlines. Nevertheless, as he also observed, the engineering Paradigm still is either explicitly or unconsciously followed by curriculum designers and teachers. From my perspective there are several major problems with an engineering Paradigm as it is implemented in science education.

The Alternative Paradigm and Constructivism

89

• The affective component of learning is not given much attention. Attempts are made to motivate students but this is more often through extrinsic rewards (grades and other kinds of honors) than through intrinsic rewards (self-fulfillment, personal growth) (Duit and Treagust, 2003). • Emphasis is on the verbal dialogue. In some cases visual representations may be used but are seen as secondary to the verbal. • If students use physical materials they are seen more as a means to illustrate concepts rather than as a means for students to interact and investigate a phenomenon. All these problems can be related to two issues that will be addressed in the next sections. How do students learn? What is the role of the teacher? How is content and process introduced to the students? These issues have been addressed in recent times by drawing upon what has been called a constructivist approach to teaching science.

The Alternative Paradigm and Constructivism In the above paradigm the understanding is that the teacher “listens” to the student. Here “listens” is metaphorical in the sense that it is more than paying attention to what students say. It involves close observation of how students interact with a phenomenon and empathizing with them – getting a sense of how they are reacting and thinking. Also, it involves the modulation of the discussions where students report and attempt to make sense of what they have experienced. Implied is the stance that the teacher is acting as a facilitator drawing out students’ preconceptions and providing ways for reconceptions to take hold. It is said that the teacher helps students “construct” new understandings. Conceived in this way there is a strong contrast to the traditional role of the teacher that has been characterized as a transmission model of teaching. The teacher tells the students what they need to learn. The information may be given in a rational manner with careful explanations but there is no dialectical process by which students can reconcile their experiences with a phenomenon and their prior understanding of this phenomenon. There are multiple interpretations of what constitutes a true constructivist approach and how it applies at a practical level in the teaching of science. Much of the adaptation of constructivism in science education has centered around two general issues. One has to do with the role of prior knowledge the student brings to school. The other has to do with the ways of bringing about conceptual change, i.e., moving students to accommodate a scientific explanation of different phenomena (Duit and Treagust, 2003). Among the various models of learning that attempt to bring about conceptual change, there has been a great deal of attention given to science content and ways of making it adoptable by students. There has also been a great deal of attention to the nature of the learning environment with particular attention given to the sociocultural context of learning. There has been less discussion

90

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

about the relationship between affect and learning as it relates to students involvement with a phenomenon. At the heart of constructivism is the idea that perception and the development of new concepts is substantially influenced by the intuitive theories that students have developed in early childhood and their practical experience outside school (Duit, 1995). This prior knowledge and understanding should be taken into account in order to move the student to accept new knowledge and change their thinking so that these are more in line with scientific knowledge. There are numerous studies carried out over the past 30 years that have revealed these intuitive conceptions about everyday phenomena. These would include phenomena such as objects in motion, light, the movement of the sun and moon, and heat among others.2 The other major issue is how the teaching environment should be shaped to bring about a conceptual change. Following a theoretical approach called “situated cognition” the environment includes the social, cultural, and physical. Various researchers have given more attention to one of these compared to the others but do acknowledge the role played by the other parts of the environment. The learner as conceived by constructivism is not a passive recipient of new information and conception. He or she is put in the position where they have to actively construct meaning for themselves. There is an essential tension in this goal that has deep ramifications. Duit expressed this tension in terms of child development. There needs to be a balance between self-development and guidance (Duit, 1995, p. 274). Put in another way, within the context of science education, there should be a balance between the extent to which the students are expected to be able to discover new conceptions and theories mostly on their own and the extent to which they are to be given very explicit guidance toward alternative concepts and theories. Most of the discussion about this is concerned with conceptual and intellectual development. However, another dimension can be added to this sense of tension. Self-development can and should also include a sense of development of a personal identity and affective coherence as was proposed in the previous chapter.

Students Prior Knowledge and Conceptual Change There have been many studies trying out different approaches with the goal of bringing about a conceptual change in the thinking of the students’ understandings about basic phenomena. One general approach involved uncovering the prior knowledge of student’s understanding of a particular phenomenon. This was done in a way that

2  See the Web site assembled by Duit (2002) for an extensive list of these studies and student alternative conceptions.

Students Prior Knowledge and Conceptual Change

91

students became aware of the limitations or inadequacy of their own explanation. Then they were either confronted or provided with explicit explanations of formal science. The goal was to bring about cognitive dissonance. The method varied in the way concepts and explanations are introduced. Some involved the use of Socratic dialogue. Others involved the use of visual models and computer simulations. A recent review of these efforts indicates that these appear to be more effective than traditional approaches but there are limitations that need to be taken into consideration (Duit and Treagust (2003). According to Duit and Treagust, this past research has not taken into consideration the larger context of student learning. Various studies indicate that there is a need to move students to become more aware of the processes and nature of science as well as be more self-aware i.e., aware of their own processes of learning (Duschl et al., 2007). They also report that there is a need to give greater recognition to the role of the affective. Additionally, some educators and researchers have tended to overemphasize the social context of learning, putting emphasis on group processes. Researchers such as Vosniadou and Ioannides advocate for more consideration of the individual learner (Vosniadou et al., 2001). A frequently cited model for conceptual change has been that of Strike and Posner (1982, 1992). They drew a parallel between conceptual change as it may occur in formal science and how it might occur with students. First, they proposed that for a change to be accepted the new concept or theory has to be plausible, intelligible, and fruitful. These criteria could be applied to formal science and to conceptual change for students. This model was criticized for being too focused on the rational and for being too linear in process. Second, the student’s habits of mind and past experience need to be utilized to bring about his/her movement through this three-step process. They called these factors the student’s “conceptual ecology.” It includes analogies, metaphors, epistemological beliefs, metaphysical beliefs known from other areas of inquiry, and knowledge of competing conceptions. According to Duit and Treaquest’s review of the literature, this model of conceptual change does not take into account the affective factors. Pintrick and colleagues (1993) in particular, have emphasized the need to take into account motivating factors such as the social environment and student self-concepts. The classroom culture should be improvement-based instead of being competitive. The investigations should be perceived as relevant and related to students’ interests. Self-efficacy and self-control are associated with student beliefs about their capabilities in science and their self-conception of what they can do. Taking into consideration the limitations of past efforts, Duit and Treagust emphasized that there is a need for a multiple theoretical perspective where there is a combination of the conceptual ecologies of the student as outlined by Strike and Posner with those put forth by Pintrick as well as the elements of other theoretical approaches. The different types of conceptual change models based on different theories of learning indicate that there is a great complexity to be brought to the teaching of science. The teacher needs to set up a classroom culture where students feel that they have some control over their learning and are motivated because of the interests

92

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

they bring to the classroom. The teacher also needs to be moving students to develop an understanding of both the science content and the science process. There is also the role of self-reflection by the student in terms of how they learn and what they understand about the nature of science. A question arises, when all this is taken into consideration. Recall Perkins characterization of the different ideologies of education. In particular, the ones that he labels as Learning by Education, Learning by Growth. Is there a relationship between the ideologies as proposed by Perkins and the different models for conceptual change? Strike and Posner’s original model was criticized as being too rational and linear. Their original model had some similarities to an engineering approach to education, although they might not have intended it to be that rigidly implemented. They did recognize the role of social and affective factors such as motivation, and modified their model to include these factors. Also, in their revised list of the conceptual ecologies there appear analogies and metaphors as well as images. This would suggest that change is brought about by more than rational argument. The students’ more personal interests become relevant. Pintrick and others’ advocacy of personal interest and the importance of motivational factors such as self-efficacy should be given greater attention in science education. Learning by Growth, Education as Cultivation would now seem to have a greater relevancy. This attention to current limitations of conceptual change models calls into question the relevance of a pure engineering Paradigm or an effective approach. Duit and Treaguest observe that there are promising tendencies toward new approaches in science education. They describe them as multiperspectival and observe that there is “sufficient evidence in research on learning and instruction that cognitive and affective issues are closely linked” (Duit and Treaguest, 2003, p. 679). Perkins also assumes that in real practice there is a mix of these ideologies. What appears to be missing when affective factors are usually mentioned is the relationship between students and the phenomena they investigate. Students may have strong self-concepts such as they are interested in and are capable of doing science. Therefore, they become involved in science class. Even if they have these inclinations, what about their relationship to different phenomena and how they interact with them in the context of the school? To what extent is the phenomenon itself and the way it is presented are also motivators? This interaction goes beyond the motivation to become engaged with the phenomenon. The particular salient characteristics of the phenomenon can determine the kind of attention the student gives to it. It determines what kind of prior understandings and experiences are brought forth. It determines in what way public visual models and the students’ mental models evolve. To what extent does the involvement with the phenomenon bring about changes not just in scientific conceptions but also in conceptions about the student’s relationship with the natural and man-made world? In the previous chapter I gave examples of phenomena that I proposed to be intrinsically interesting and are a beginning to answering these assertions and questions. Further development of an answer to this question is given in later chapters. If as Duit and Treagust propose, affective factors need to be incorporated into future models of conceptual

Pedagogical Practices for a Constructivist Approach to Teaching Science

93

change then a student’s relationship with a phenomenon should also be incorporated into models of conceptual change.

Pedagogical Practices for a Constructivist Approach to Teaching Science The proceeding commentary about constructivism is somewhat removed from the everyday actions of the teacher in the classroom. There has been much research and commentary that brings it down to a more practical level. Mark Winschitl carried out a broad review of literature and distills from this literature a short list of what he calls constructivist practice. Before presenting this list and commenting on the practicality of it, one should be aware of how he narrows his interpretation of constructivism. First, he goes as far as to write: “[A]ll mental activity is constructive and thus, in a sense, all teaching is constructive” (Windschitl, 2002, p. 136). He gets around this problem by centering his comprehensive review of constructivism on the most current interpretations, which he limits to those approaches that have the goal of deep understanding as differentiated from “weak” ones that are assumed to be more accidental. Additionally, he draws upon those approaches that give attention to the sociocultural context of teaching. He proposes that there is a continuum where there is focus on the isolated individual at one end and the individual embedded in highly interactive and overlapping contexts at the other. An approximate type of characterization that reflects this distinction is to say that there are constructivists who give more attention to what happens to the cognitive development of the individual and others who propose that cognition is distributed across contexts that are social, cultural, and physical. The former focuses on the way individuals construct their understanding of the world. The latter holds that the individuals cannot be seParated in any meaningful way from the social components (Windschitl, 2002, p. 136). How these would be interpreted for classroom practice is listed below based on syntheses from his review of the literature. His list includes: 1. Teachers elicit students’ ideas and experiences in relation to key topics, and then fashion learning situations that help students elaborate on or restructure their current knowledge. 2. Students are given frequent opportunities to engage in complex, meaningful problem-based activities. 3. Teachers provide students with a variety of information resources as well as the tools (technological and conceptual) necessary to mediate learning. 4. Students work collaboratively and are given support to engage in task-oriented dialogue with one another. 5. Teachers make their own thinking processes explicit to learners and encourage students to do the same through dialogue, writing, drawings, or other representations.

94

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

6. Students are routinely asked to apply knowledge in diverse and authentic contexts, to explain ideas, interpret texts, predict phenomena, and construct arguments based on evidence, rather than to focus exclusively on the acquisition of predetermined “right answers.” 7. Teachers encourage students’ reflective and autonomous thinking in conjunction with the conditions listed above. 8. Teachers employ a variety of assessment strategies to understand how students’ ideas are evolving and to give feedback on the processes as well as the products of their thinking (Windschitl, 2002, p. 137). Windschitl does not elaborate on each of these characteristics. This list would be somewhat in accord with other summaries such as How People Learn (Bransford et al. 2000) – a publication of the National Research Council. Overall, they could be described as pedagogical practices that provide for a classroom culture that is studentcentered. Students are put into a position where they accept more responsibility for their own learning as compared to a more traditional approach that was more teacherdirected. The statements could be further elaborated. The first statement has been frequently mentioned in commentary about inquiry. This has most often been carried out in a verbal manner. Students could also reveal their prior knowledge as they explore, experiment, and develop explanations. The second part of this first statement implies that those teachers are designers of their own curriculum. Teachers already have a strong preference for doing this but the resulting curriculum may be questionable. The second, third, and fourth statements are practices where students are given the responsibility of their own learning and are provided with multiple resources. These relate to Pintrick’s advocacy for recognition of students’ self-efficacy and locus of control. The fifth statement is probably the most challenging for teachers to carry out. It is quite different from the traditional mode where information and explanations are given. It also implies that the teachers are well versed in the subject they are teaching. The sixth and seventh statement appears to be a combination of pedagogical practices happening at the level of multiple investigations and during a single investigation. There have been recommendations that newly learned concepts be applied to a new context. The optimum number of new contexts for concept application is not clear from the reading of various literatures. The eighth statement appears to imply that teachers give more attention to formative assessment and have students also reflect on their own learning. There is a tendency among teachers to focus more on the assessment at the end of an investigation. More attention in recent years has been given to formative assessment and student feedback during and after investigation. These conditions can be associated with the modified pedagogical model put forth in Chapter 2 and are compatible with the alternative Paradigm proposed in this chapter. Taken as general statements many science teachers at an intellectual level would probably agree with the intent. Translating these into actual practice, given the

Authenticity and Science Education

95

current background and expertise of most teachers, is a great challenge as Windschitl points out in his paper.

Authenticity and Science Education There is another dimension to what may be associated with affective factors in education. For some educators there is a close connection between constructivism and authenticity. Authenticity has gathered multiple meanings and therefore needs some development of defining characteristics especially as it relates to the alternative Paradigm I have proposed. For some it is related to personal interests while for others it is associated with relevance and a close connection between what happens in school and the environment outside school. Petraglia in his short review of constructivism makes a connection between the concept of authenticity and constructivism. He observes that this concept is a relatively recent goal in the history of Western education, noting that American educators have more frequently invoked it than those of continental Europe. As with the understanding of constructivism, there are also problems of attempting to define authenticity as it relates to education. Petraglia’s interpretations focus mostly on the relationship between what happens in school and that of the so-called real world. “Authentic implies that there should be a correlation between the forms and formats of education and those form and formats as they exist outside the classroom” (Petralglia, 1998, p. 15). Relevant is a term that is often used by educators somewhat as a synonym but he makes a distinction between what is relevant from what is authentic. The former is more associated with what is useful. Authentic is more than the idea of the “isomorphism of certain component skills.” By this he means that certain generic skills acquired in the school context are applicable to life and work outside the classroom (Petraglia, 1998, p. 15). So, authentic has more of an association with a general approach to education as compared to specific practices. Relevancy is more immediate and related to practical applications. These distinctions do not take us very far and a further development is needed. To get at a certain sense of what is meant by the authentic, Petraglia writes that in the history of European education the general goal was to produce an elite. Emphasis was on the selection of the best and the brightest. Book learning was highly differentiated from other kinds of learning such as apprenticeships in various trades and professions. Academics looked down upon this other way of learning because it was vocational and involved the work of the hands. In America there was a recognition among some educators that the general population needed to be educated if they were to be effective citizens. There was also recognition of the economic benefits of having a trained work force with practical skills. The early American educators were of course influenced by their European counterparts and to some degree also felt that education should be of an elitist type but at the same time recognized the need to be more inclusive and practical. This resulted in a

96

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

tension between an emphasis on acquiring an understanding of the structure and concepts of a discipline and the more pragmatic operations and understanding which would allow a student to function at a practical level but not be entirely cognizant of the why and how of their functioning. There is this fundamental tension between an emphasis on the learning of a discipline and the pragmatic value of providing connections between school and the real world. This kind of tension is still present in contemporary science curriculum. This tension is seen today in the call for having teachers fully conversant in the various disciplines so that they can model the practice of these disciplines and pass on the knowledge of these disciplines. As mentioned above, in Winschitl’s list of what some researchers and educators would consider basic practices of the constructivist science teacher there is the idea of cognitive apprenticeship. On the other hand, some followers of Dewey have given greater priority to a close connection between real-world problems and school bringing the real world as much as possible into the classroom. Some environmental education projects have this orientation. The extent to which time is taken to move students to a deeper understanding of relevant scientific concepts varies among these programs to the degree that it is questionable how much science is really being introduced. If there is attention to conceptual change, it is probably a weak one. Petraglia gives emphasis to the practice of students starting out with real-world experiences or students’ lived experiences along with a dialogue that examines these experiences in the light of the various disciplines (Petraglia, 1998, p. 27). In this sense authentic is an educational practice that prepares the student for the real world as contrasted with a more discipline-based approach that places heavy emphasis on the mastering of the different domains of knowledge. There is another dimension to the discussion about authenticity that can also be seen as a goal having an inherent conflict. There is a fundamental tension in the relationship between personal engagement based on deep personal interest and the sociocultural environment of the student. There is a contemporary tendency to emphasize the latter. Oers and Wardekker address this problem and argue for a combination of personal and cultural relevance. From their particular perspective, “[l]earning to participate implies giving a personal sense to culturally pre-given meaning structures” (Oers and Wardekker, 1999, p. 230). A case in point where this tension can arise is the phenomenon mentioned at the beginning of the chapter. Blowing bubbles tends to be viewed by many as a fun and frivolous activity. When approached in a well-designed structured manner there can be opportunities for students to engage their aesthetic sensibilities and activate their curiosity and imagination. Personal symbols can arise through the exploring of bubbles that can have psychological value. Investigating the properties of bubbles can be personally meaningful for some students. There are also practical applications related to architecture, structural engineering, and the mathematics of minimization but these applications can only be mentioned and not practiced by elementary and middle school students because of their complexity. Immediate and direct applications outside school are fairly remote. Because of these personal developments and remoteness from practical applications, would having students investigate

A Holistic Approach to Science Education – Meaning Making in the Broader Sense

97

bubbles be inauthentic? I would argue that there could be an authenticity to investigating bubbles even though, no immediate practical application possible. This argument will be developed throughout the book. On the other hand, there are some investigations that can be personally meaningful and be of relevance to real-world problems. Investigating ponds is one example among others in the area of environmental studies. Students have a real fascination for the creatures that live in ponds. These can be observed and studied in the classroom. There can be strong identifications between these pond creatures and the students. They are generally very protective of them. While doing these studies in the classroom the students could also measure the properties of real ponds such as that happen in acid rain investigations. The data collected has been of use for field biologists and those concerned about the effects of acid rain. In this situation, with careful guidance the teacher can provide for both personal development and public participation in a real problem. However, carrying out this type of investigation is a great challenge for many teachers. To do this kind of investigation requires a great deal of time. Many teachers feel under pressure to cover many topics. The result can be an investigation that will be shortchanged. Overall, when considering the whole school year and what students investigate over 8 years, I would argue that there could be room for both types of approaches. There are phenomena similar to bubbles that have high aesthetic appeal, deeply engage the students, provide a concrete context for introducing basic science concepts, but they do not lend themselves to immediate application or have relevance to contemporary problems. What I am getting at here is one interpretation of authenticity. This is the idea that if investigations have a deep personal meaning for the students where they are both genuinely affectively and intellectually engaged, then I would view them as having authenticity. I would not limit the meaning of this term to only those activities that deal with practical problems and have immediate relevance to the environment outside school.

A Holistic Approach to Science Education – Meaning Making in the Broader Sense As mentioned previously, the Paradigm introduced above may appear in practice to be not very different from other current interpretations such as the engineering Paradigm. Similar diagrams and interpretations of the dialectical nature of teaching can be found in other versions such as in some manifestations of what is called situated cognition. However, a closer look at the underlying epistemologies shows that there can be essential differences. This is particularly evident when considering the role of the body, the senses, and affect in learning. Others have written about this lack of attention to affective reactions and aesthetics and grounded their criticism in an alternative epistemological orientation. Some of their comments provide support for the view that current practices in science education at the elementary and middle school level does not provide for the holistic development of the student.

98

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

Bo Dahlin’s critique of the theoretical basis of science education mentioned in the introduction addresses this issue directly. He argues that there is an excessive concern about “the formation and development of concepts” (Dahlin, 2001, p. 459). He labels this approach as cognitivism. “Cognitivism means letting conceptual, theoretical cognition constitute the central theme of all research or practice dealing with teaching, learning and the development of knowledge.” From this perspective the acquisition of concepts becomes the primary and most important aim of schooling (Dahlin, 2001, p. 460). There is a neglect regarding the role of sense experience, feelings, and their relationship to thinking. There is an imbalance among this emphasis on cognition and feeling and sense experience as well as personal development. A look at the publications that summarize research impacting science education as interpreted by experts in the field supports this contention. In a recent report (Taking Science to School) by the National Research Council, which summarizes a great deal of research in developmental and cognitive psychology, as well those studies concerned with science educational practices there are only a few pages given over to students’ interest and motivation. In the Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning published by the National Science Teacher Association in 1994, there are only about 20 pages devoted to this topic related to affect in a volume of 540 pages. This neglect and imbalance reflects a deeply held philosophical orientation of Western philosophy. Mark Johnson in writing about the role of art and aesthetics and their acting as an exemplar for meaning making points out that the source of this problem is a fundamental dualism that runs through Western philosophy historically and continues up to present times. There is a dualism of mind and body and related to this dualism is the one between thought and feelings. He points out that this pervades our contemporary understanding of mind. “On one side of the dualistic gap we have concepts, thought reason and knowledge. On the other side we have sensations, feelings, emotions, and imagination” (Johnson, 2007, p. 216). This dualism has possible practical consequences beyond the school context. Spretnak (1997) in her critique of contemporary ideologies such as social constructivism asserts that these approaches still retain a mind–body split. The resulting cultural orientations are various kinds of alienations or disconnections that exist between people and the natural environment, between the general population and technology, the disconnections with one’s own body, and an intraspsychic disconnection where deep personal symbolism is at odds with general cultural symbols. These disconnects are seen in the continual disregard for the human impact on the natural environment; the anxieties associated with, or the frivolous use of, new technology; psychosomatic health problems; and lack of a sense of well-being despite our unprecedented prosperity. Abrams (1996) has written about the disconnection between one’s self and the natural world recommending a recuperation of the senses to revive this connection. Persig (1974) in his Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance writes of the alienation of contemporary people from the technology they have created. These deep disconnections arise from the disassociation between thinking and feeling. A holistic approach in science education would be one way of addressing these problems.

A Holistic Approach to Science Education – Meaning Making in the Broader Sense

99

Both Johnson and Dahlin draw heavily upon the writings of Dewey to provide an alternative to this dualistic approach. According to Dahlin’s reading of Dewey, he attempted to find a way “between inhuman rationality and human irrationality.” Dewey gave priority to direct embodied experience having an immediacy that was grounded in full sensory awareness. He was concerned with a premature overemphasis on the intellectualization of this experience (Dahlin, 2001, p. 454). Other interpreters of Dewey such as Holder, Boisvert, and Bisvert also comment about the problem of the mind–body dualism describing it as fundamental to his philosophy of pragmatism. (Bisvert taking a historical perspective describes this problem of dualism as coming out of European thought of the last few hundred years. He maintains that Greek Classical thinking had an ideal closer to a sense of unity.) The consequences of a split between mind and body are what Dewey called a “spectator theory of knowledge.” The person is considered seParate from the objects of the world. Boisvert (1995) makes an important point derived from this view that others imply. As a result of this disjunction there was a “rigid hierarchization of the senses.” Sight and hearing are senses picking up information from afar as compared to touch and taste where the body is in direct contact with objects. Because of this distancing and supposed detachment from their bodily connections, these senses became isolated from the other senses with the result that they became the privileged pathways for human cognition (Boisvert, 1995, p. 328). There is still a legacy of this hierachization that is played out even when there is the so-called hands-on learning. Still, more privilege is given to the visual and the tactile and the kinesthetic are neglected. Much more will be given to this idea of a hierarchy of the senses in the following chapters. Biesta (1995) makes an important point about the person’s involvement with the environment. He reports that Dewy, later in his writings, changed his terminology for this involvement. Dewey came to realize that the term “interaction” did not adequately express what he understood by this involvement. Instead he proposed the term “transaction.” Dewey writes: Our position is … that since man as an organism has evolved among other organisms in an evolution called “natural,” we are willing under hypothesis to treat all of his behavings, including his most advanced knowings, as activities not of himself alone, nor even as primarily his, but as processes of the full situation of organism-environment.3

In a transaction both parties are affected. The object has an impact on the person and the person can have an impact on the object. In the scenario at the beginning of this chapter I described my exploration with soap bubbles. In the process of making small bubble domes I can vary the way the bubbles are made. Each time I make a small bubble dome I can put others next to it to see what happens. When I do this I may notice something about the bubbles that did not catch my attention previously such as the way they rearrange themselves when one breaks. As I make more groups of bubbles I now direct my attention to the way they rearrange themselves instead of  Original quote from Dewey taken from Biesta (1995), “Pragmatism as a Pedagogy of Communicative Action,” p. 111. 3

100

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

how they initially group together. There is a transaction between the bubbles and me as I explore the different possibilities for making them. The concept of transaction is fundamental to understanding the artist Paradigm I proposed. Writers such as Dahlin, Holder, and Boisvert maintain that the Deweyan position is at odds with strong forms of cognitivism. Holder provides an account of how cognitivism becomes problematic when there is an attempt to reconcile creativity and rational thinking. (The relevant point here is that a student’s conceptual change can be thought of as a creative act.) He proposes a “naturalistic emergentism” (Holder, 1995, p. 8). This conception provides a framework for the kind of pedagogical approach that will be elaborated later in this book. To account for some kind of relationship between creativity and rationality, Holder proposes that thinking “emerges from and is continuously controlled by noncognitive levels of experience, levels that include experiential structures such as emotion, habit and imagination” (Holder, 1995, p. 11). Holder maintains that there is structure to these aspects of an experience. “The background consists of stock meanings and interpretations, by which we are immediately in contact with our environment. The background structures are appropriated or mediated in terms of what they are taken to stand for; they shape, color, and implicate. For example, the background provides the standards of valuation that are the habitual norms by which judgments are made possible” (Holder, 1995, p. 15). This view is supported by recent research in neuropsychology (Damasio, 1994). Holder’s analysis of cognitivism goes like this. In stronger forms of cognitivism no essential role is given to emotion and feelings. Thinking is thus merely the process of sorting or connecting information via categories; neither emotions, nor habits, nor even sense experiences play an essential role in thinking per se (Holder, 1995, p. 178). His further characterization of cognitivism is that it involves the manipulations of mental representations and propositions that happen mostly in the form of abstract logical operations (Holder, 1995, pp. 177–178). This account verges on an oversimplification of cognitive psychology but does seem to capture the avoidance of acknowledging the role of affect in learning. Because Dewey conceives of experience as a transactional process, which has a structural complexity there was a need to account for the relationship between the so-called noncognitive and cognitive. Dewey proposes that one thinks of the features of an experience as having a foreground and a background, where the former is representative of cognitive structures and the latter is that of emotions, habits, and imagination. In the usual account of cognition, emotions, and their attendant affects are not seen as involved in thinking partly because they have been conceived as lacking structure. Because there is a lack of structure this psychological processes cannot have an impact on the structured cognitive processes. Holder maintains that the background of experience does have structure. There is a close relationship between affect and thinking. It is interesting to note that Piaget had something to say about the relationship between the cognitive and affective elements of learning. He is mostly associated with the growth of intellectual development, particularly regarding logical operations and rational thought. However, he recognized the inseparable connections

A Holistic Approach to Science Education – Meaning Making in the Broader Sense

101

between affective life and cognitive life. For instance, in his writing about play in his book Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood he gives much attention to the role of symbolism and considers particularly the writings of Freud and Jung. (In fact, the original title of this book in French was La Formation du Symbole.) He writes at length about the relationship between the conscious and the unconscious, though not rejecting their insights into this part of human development but incorporating them to develop an integrated picture of child development. A summarizing statement about the role of symbolism and affect was made at one point. Affective life, like intellectual life, is a continual adaptation, and the two are not only parallel but interdependent, since feelings express the interest and the value given to actions of which intelligence provides the structure. (Piaget, 1962, p. 205)

In a later work he presents a very broad survey of intelligence, Piaget uses the term “valuation” or regulation of behavior with regard to emotions and formulates in a very general way the relationship between cognition and emotions. An act of intelligence involves, then, an internal regulation of energy (interest, effort, ease, etc.) and external regulation (the value of the solutions sought and of the objects concerned in the search), but these two controls are of an affective nature and remain comparable with all other regulations of this type. Similarly, the perceptual or intellectual elements which we find in all manifestations of emotion involve cognition in the same way as other perceptual or intelligent reactions. What common sense calls “feelings” and “intelligence”, regarding them as two opposed “faculties”, are simply behavior relating to persons and behavior affecting ideas or things; but in each of these forms of behavior, the same affective and cognitive aspects of action emerge, aspects which are in fact always associated and in no way represent independent faculties. (Piaget, 1966, Psychology of Intelligence, p. 6)

Interpreters of Piaget in science education seem to have overlooked this part of his theory of intelligence. Returning again to Holder’s proposal of how the foreground and the background can be related, he proposes that there are the formal logical characteristics of the foreground and what appears to be the diffuseness of the background. A way of making a connection between was made by Mark Johnson. In Johnson’s development of a theory of imagination, he recognizes the role of embodied imaginative structures as a way of making a connection between the foreground and background. The essential point of Johnson is that imagination makes a connection between the formal structures of logical rational thinking and the embodied feeling states of the background. It structures a person’s experience bringing about a unity and providing a basis for meaning (Johnson, 1987, p. 165). This unity is brought about by a schematizing function that “mediates between abstract concepts and the contents of sensations” (Johnson, 1987, p. 165). The “embodied imaginative structure,” according to Johnson, is what underlies metaphorical projections. These are the means by which we achieve understanding. The projections move from the concrete to the abstract. If metaphorical projections help bridge our thinking across different kinds of domain of sensory experience and eventually domains of formal knowledge, then this type of thinking about imagination can be a way of addressing the various disconnections that I mentioned above. By thinking in terms of embodied imaginative

102

4 An Alternative Paradigm as a Basis for a Holistic Approach to Science Education

structures as the basis for metaphorical projections then consideration of metaphorical thought becomes essential for any theory or pedagogical approach for the teaching of science. If metaphorical thinking is fundamental to scientific thinking as is generally recognized, then it seems to me that it would be necessary for science educators to closely examine the foundations for and the conditions that promote it. What kinds of embodied experiences promote and enrich the schematizing function? What makes for embodied experiences that enrich the imagination? What kind of pedagogical connections will help structure the student’s imagination and bring about personal meaning? These questions I will try to address in the remainder of the book.

References Abram, D. (1996) The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a More-Than-Human World, New York, Vintage Books. Arieti, S. (1976). Creativity: The Magic Synthesis, New York, Basic Books. Biesta, G. (1995), Pragmatism as a Pedagogy of Communicative Action in J. Garrison (Ed.), The New Scholarship on Dewey, Netherlands, Kluwer, pp. 105–123. Boisvert, R.D. (1995), John Dewey: An “Old Fashioned” Reformer in J. Garrison (Ed.), The New Scholarship on Dewey, Netherlands, Kluwer, pp. 157–174. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R. (Eds.). (2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind Experience and School, Washington, DC, National Academy Press. Dahlin, B.O. (2001) The Primacy of Cognition or of Perception? A Phenomenological Critique of the Theoretical Bases of Science Education, Science & Education, 10, 453–475. Damasio, A. (1994) Descartes Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain, New York, Grosset/ Putnam Books. Duit, R. (1995). The Constructivist View: A Fashionable And Fruitful Paradigm for Science Education Research and Practice in L. Steffe and J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in Education, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum, pp. 271–285. Duit, R. (2002). “Bibliography STCSE: Students” and Teachers Conceptions and Science Education. Kiel, Germany, IPN-Leibniz Institute for Science Education, 9ushttp://www.ipn. uni-kiel.de/us Duit, R. and Treagust, D. (2003). Conceptual Change: A Powerful Framework for Improving Science Teaching and Learning, International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688. Duschl, R., Schweingruber, H.A., and Shouse, A.W. (2007). Taking Science to School. Washington, DC, National Academies Press. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1988). The Biological Foundation of Aesthetics in I. Rentschler, B. Herzberger, and D. Epstein (Eds.), Beauty and the Brain: Biological Aspects of Aesthetics. Basel/Boston, MA, Birkhauser Verlag. Hawkins, D. (1970). “I, Thou and It,” Elementary Science Reader, Newton, MA, Education Development Center. Holder, J.J. (1995). An Epistemological Foundation for Thinking: A Deweyan Approach, Netherlands, Kluwer, pp. 7–24. Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason, Chicago, IL, The University of Chicago Press. Johnson, M. (2007). The Meaning of the Body: Aesthetics of Human Understanding, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press. Oers, B.V. and Wardekker, W. (1999). On becoming an authentic learner: semiotic activity in the early grades, J Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 229–249.

References

103

Petraglia, J. (1998). Reality by Design: The Rhetoric and Technology of Authencity in Education, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum. Perkins, D. (1989). Making the Horse Drink: An “Engineering Ideology Underlying U.S. Education in D. Topping, D. Crowell, and V. Kobayashi (Eds.), Thinking Across Cultures, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum, pp. 389–396. Persig, R. (1974). Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values, New York, Morrow. Piaget, J. (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood. New York, Norton. Piaget, J. (1966). Psychology of Intelligence, Totowa, NJ, Littlefield, Adams & Co. Pintrick, P.R., Marx, R.W., and Boyle, R.A. (1993). Beyond Cold Conceptual Change: The Role of Motivational Beliefs and Classroom Contextual Factors in the Process of Conceptual Change, Review of Educational Research, 63, 167–169. Portoghesi, P. (2000). Nature and Architecture, Translated by Eriks G. Young, Milan, Italy, Skira. Rudolf, J. (2002). From World War to Woods Hole: The Use of Wartime Research Models for Curriculum Reform, Teachers College Record, 104(2), 212–241. Sprentank, C. (1997). The Resurgence of the Real: Body, Nature and Place in a Hypermodern World, Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley. Strike K.A. and Posner, G.J. (1982). Conceptual Change and Science Teaching, European Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 231–240. Strike, K.A. and Posner, G.J. (1992). A Revisionist Theory of Conceptual Change, in R.A. Duschl and R.J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany, NY, SUNY Press. Tucker, W. (1974). The Language of Sculpture. London, Thames and Hudson Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change is science. Learning and Instruction, 1, 381–419. Wiggins, G. and McTique, J. (1998). Understanding by Design, Washington, DC, ASCD. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing Constructivism in Practice as the Negotiation of Dilemmas: An Analysis of the Conceptual, Pedagogical, Cultural, and Political Challenges Facing Teachers, Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175. Wittkower, R. (1977). Sculpture, London, Butler & Tanner.

Chapter 5

The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

Scenario #3 An eighth-grade science class had been designing and investigating the functioning of model waterwheels made from plastic plates and cups. Members of each team siphoned water from a bucket sitting on a table causing their models to move in a larger bucket on the floor while lifting a cup of nails. The teacher had guided them to consider two types of possible actions of the model waterwheel. Some groups tried to see how many nails they could lift. Other groups timed how long it took to lift a given number of nails. At one point in their investigation they isolated variables and attempted to be more systematic in their experimentation. Some groups tried different diameter tubings to see if a wider tubing as compared to a narrow one produced greater work i. e. lifted larger number of nails or moved the wheel faster. Some groups tested to see if the height of the water supply bucket would make a difference in the performance of the model. A boy held a bucket of water while standing on a table to carry out this test. Water flowed through the tubing splashing onto the wheel giving results that were satisfying to the students. During the follow-up discussion there were comments by two of the students who had been testing to see if the height of the water supply made a difference. The teacher asked: “If I had a longer hose, would you get the same results.” A girl responds: “The force would have been greater. Sort of like a roller coaster. When you go down the force is a lot greater than when you go up. So, if it is longer … it will go faster, the force will be greater.” Then one of the boys who had held the bucket high above the model commented: “If the line is shorter it would be more. Say, you are going down a slide. Right. If you are going down a tall slide, like it is going off of the school. It could be real steep (he moves his hand and arms to illustrate the steepness) you would go slower because the friction is slowing you down. But, if you just drop off the school you would go quicker.” (His seat is right next to the window and the classroom is on the second floor.)

B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_5, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

105

106

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

Then he stands up and develops his analogy further. He moves his hand to indicate that the incline is almost vertical. “Say the slide – it could be going straight down. Say, the slide is all around you (He gestures with his hands and arm to show that the slide would cover the whole body.) Like a tube slide going straight down. Like your arms are hitting the side of the tube. And keeps on bumping into it like the water is bumping this tube. Right. It slows you down. Cause of friction. If you just drop, the only friction you would be getting from the air. The air would cause as much as the tube. The tube is a solid, the air is a gas.” It is hard to convey the animated motion of the boy’s hands and body as he develops his analogy. He is fully involved in his explanation in a way acting out his analogy. (This scenario can be viewed from the video series Science First Hand (1995) produced by WGBH. I chose this particular scenario because it is a graphic example of an analogy involving a body image. Both the girl’s and the boy’s comments are especially interesting because they are spontaneously generated. The teacher did not specifically prompt them. In both analogies they place themselves right in the middle of the action. The girl’s body is experiencing the ups and downs of the roller coaster and the boy with his hands and arms acts out the friction of the water moving through the large tubing. His body represents the water moving through the tubing experiencing the pull of gravity. The teacher did not probe beyond the initial offering of the students. He did not help them make explicit the implied mappings of their scenarios to the siphon arrangements the students were using. In the above example we have analogies arising from real and symbolic body involvement. There are other examples of this type of explicit or implicit generated

Scenario #3

107

analogies involving the body. In other video projects showing younger children exploring in an open manner or developing an explanation after some hands-on inquiry, these types of analogies also spontaneously arise. • A fourth-grade student compares an inflated balloon to the muscle of his upper arm. • A third-grade girl compares the flow of air around the blades of a model windmill to her squeezing her body between the narrow spacing of two houses in an urban setting. • A middle school boy describes the structural members of a model house made with drinking straws by pretending his body is one of the members of the structure. Mentioned previously was the work of John Clement studying the use of spontaneous analogies by students. In having them solve physic problems more than half of the analogies produced referred to some sort of body action and a preference for anthropomorphic explanations (Clement, 1989, p. 305). Gerald Holton writes that many metaphors in science are based on the human body. If a list was made, the largest type of metaphors would be those that are anthropomorphic and folkloric (Holton, 1995, p. 270). These are examples in which the connection between body image and making sense of a recent experience is explicitly given. It could be argued that these particular phenomena or technological artifacts (houses or windmills) lend themselves to this kind of connection. It is my contention that these examples can be multiplied if one examines more closely how students explore, play with materials, and make sense of their hands-on experience in the science education context. Implicit in much of what students do in the early stage of inquiry and in what they verbalize in the later stages of inquiry involves in some way real or virtual, present or past whole body experiences. Therefore, the role of the body and the body image has to be given fundamental consideration in the development of any theory about curriculum design and classroom instruction. Given the body image’s foundational role, a conception of science curriculum design and teaching arises. It would involve considering the role of sensory understanding, empathy, and aesthetics in learning because these kinds of engagements and modes of representations arise from the body image. These modes of engagement are given limited attention in traditional approaches to the teaching of science. I will give examples and describe how from my perspective these modes of engagement can be related to the way students interact with phenomena and how they make sense of these phenomena. Taken further, there also has to be consideration of the ways that these engagements can be shaped and the way in which students can be helped to represent visually and verbally the symbolic and cognitive content of these experiences. This involves examining the role of exploratory and playful behavior in the early stages of inquiry and the role of metaphorical thinking in the ongoing process of making sense of these experiences especially in the later stages of inquiry. The succeeding chapters of this book delve into each of these considerations.

108

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

Each of the above examples is representative of a very general response to phenomena and has been called embodied cognition. Associated with embodied cognition are behaviors such as empathy and play and thought processes such as analogy and aesthetics. In recent times there has been a growing development of thought when philosophers (Merleau-Ponty and Mark Johnson), anthropologists (Michael Jackson and James Fernandez), and linguists (George Lakoff) have reconsidered the fundamental role that the body, the body image, and associated body schema play in the consciousness, personal identity, our place in the world, and the way we think about our day-to-day existence. These theoretical developments, research findings and ongoing debate about this basic issue have implications for the way science curriculum is designed and the manner in which teachers conduct inquiry.

A Rationale for This Approach The balancing activities described in Chapter 1 show how the body can become directly involved in an extended science investigation. Because the focus is on balancing, the connection between the body and making sense of a phenomenon are readily apparent. Some may argue that this is a unique situation in the sense that the body can be so readily involved in a direct way in this investigation. Therefore, balancing activities as an example has limited scope. The whole body can be involved in investigating other phenomena. For instance: • Shadows and mirror images of whole bodies as instances of properties of light. • The whole body can experience the force of water waves at the beach and swimming pools that can be related to wave motion. • Experiences on skateboards or roller skates as instances of bodies in motion. • Sinking or floating in a swimming pool as an instance of sinking and floating objects. These experiences may not happen as part of an investigation but they can be a reference point when investigating phenomena such as shadows, waves, movement of objects, and sinking and floating. There can also be an empathic involvement with many phenomena. In certain situations we may identify with many living organisms, even some that do not move such as trees as was mentioned in the previous chapter. Therefore, with these examples in mind there is a way of thinking about the role of the whole body in learning that has relevance beyond the particular phenomenon of balancing. By considering the role that the body and body image plays in assimilating and making sense of experience with a phenomenon it will provide an overall schema that takes on meaning when examining movement, gestures, empathy, and aesthetics in later chapters.

The Body as Ultimate Image and Basis for Physical Intuition

109

There is a long history associated with the changing conceptions, representations, and relationship to learning as they relate to the human body.1 For purposes of later developments in this book I will focus on just a few but highly relevant recent writings. These draw upon the following topics: • In one theory about perception of art the body is always a frame of reference. • In linguistics, a theory that grounds metaphorical thinking in embodied experience has been proposed. • Embodied cognition: Recent theoretical developments in linguistics, anthropology, and the social sciences have placed the body as the ground for our thinking. • Research suggests that there is a relationship between body image and body awareness that can be related to cognitive style. • A holistic conception of science education can be grounded in a different conception of the role of the body in human development. My purpose is to provide some justification for giving special attention to the exploratory phase of inquiry and the particular formulation of the pedagogical model put forth in Chapter 2. The following sections elaborate on these perspectives and can be summarized in this manner.

The Body as Ultimate Image and Basis for Physical Intuition The human figure is a common motif in Western and non-Western sculpture. With these kinds of art objects it is readily apparent that there would be empathy between the object and the viewers’ own bodies. But, what about other art objects, especially those created in recent times, which are clearly not depictions of the human body, or, the many kinds of objects that inundate our contemporary life. Are these types of objects not related to human representations? James Elkins (1996), writing as an art historian, asserts in his book The Object Stares Back that when we see unfamiliar objects, “[w]e seek a body in it: we try to see something like ourselves, a reflection or an other, a doppelganger or a twin, or even just a part of us – a face, a hand or a foot, an eye, even a hair or a scrap of tissue.” In other words, we try to understand strange forms by identifying them with our bodies. Even when we see odd bodies, things that are manifestly not human, we referred back to human bodies when we try to understand them (Elkins, 1996, p. 129). Elkins is writing from the perspective of an art historian reflecting upon the multiple images that all kinds of artists have produced over the centuries. This is not just limited to sculptures depicting the human body but all the various creations, even those of contemporary times, that at first glance seem far removed from such an association. His rationale for this assertion is the

1

 See, for example, Feher et al. (1989a).

110

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

theoretical developments of Gestalt psychology, which established that we attempt to seek continuity out of the disjoint objects of our world (Elkins, 1996, p. 128). He does not give an expanded and extensive justification for this assertion but his insight will be given further elaboration and support when we also consider the writings of Antonio Damasio. This observation of Elkins is a very critical point to keep in mind for the remaining chapters. Balancing the body and other objects may be seen as somewhat unique in terms of a direct involvement of the body and a clear relationship to our body. How does this relate to many other phenomena that can be investigated by students? Elkins’s point is that referring to our bodies assimilates many objects. Empathy arises and enables the person to take in the experiencing of these objects. Consider another kind of extended investigation by students, where they are challenged to build models of houses or bridges using drinking straws and paper clips. These structures at first thought may not appear to be something resembling a body. Forest Wilson (1988) in his book What It Feels like To Be a Building provides a way of making this connection. He cleverly inserts images of human bodies in structures such as columns, arches, and corbels. The figure of a human body takes on a squashed form when under compression in a block that is part of an arch and a stretched human form is under tension in a structural member of a truss. The human body stands in for an element of the structure. Other materials and phenomena that I will introduce later in other chapters also have this implied projection of a body. There appears to be an underlying assumption in science education that objects and apparatus that students encounter are emotionally neutral. Because of the cultural context of most science education, an outward neutral response may appear to prevail among students when various phenomena are introduced. Given the kind of spontaneous analogies cited at the beginning of this chapter, it seems that not far below the surface are responses that could be of a more emotive nature. The boy who compares the drop of food color at the interface of cooking oil and syrup to swimming in mud and water may be making a personal analogy that can be helpful in assimilating the observation to a more scientific understanding. There can be personal affective reactions to this comment. The experience of swimming particularly if one encounters mud is not a pleasant one. The point here is that objects can engender anthropomorphic projections both in terms of a type of empathy with the object or phenomenon as well as a projection of a reaction to what is observed about the object or phenomenon. To bring up feelings that may arise in encounters with phenomena or objects would appear to move us away from what many science educators would consider to be good pedagogical practice. The general view is that science is a rational practice where thinking removed from emotions or feelings is carried out. Rationality and emotion are viewed as incompatible. In some ways this does capture the essence of scientific method in the sense that evidence and logical reasoning are required to arrive at valid conclusions. However, in the way attention is directed to observing phenomena, in the development of the initial explanations or theories,

Embodied Cognition

111

and one can even argue in the acceptance of what is relevant in evaluating evidence, feelings, or intuitions can enter into these processes. Past training can bias observation favorably or unfavorably, well-developed intuitions can result in creative explanations, and past experience can also bias one to evaluate what evidence is most relevant and convincing. All these considerations suggest that bodily engagement accompanied by emotional reactions should be an important part of the pedagogy of science education.

Embodied Cognition There has been in recent times a line of research and theoretical developments that has taken a different perspective about the relationship between mind and body. Drawing upon some areas of cognitive psychology, linguistics, and anthropology, a broad-based theoretical position called embodied cognition has been put forth. There is the growing recognition that a person’s thinking and use of language is grounded in his or her body’s action in the environment. Gibbs (2005, p. 12) in a recent book summarized the emerging view of an embodied mind. Concepts of the self and who we are as a person are tightly linked to tactile-kinesthetic activity. Embodiment is more than physiological and/or brain activity, and is constituted by recurring patterns of kinesthetic, proprioceptive action that provide much of people’s felt, subjective experience. Perception is not something that only occurs through specific sensory apparatus (e.g., eyeball and the visual system) in conjunction with particular brain areas, but is a kinesthetic activity that includes all aspects of the body in action. Many abstract concepts are embodied, because they arise from embodied experience and continue to remain rooted in systematic patterns of bodily action. Systematic patterns of linguistic structure and behavior are not arbitrary or due to conventions or purely linguistic generalizations, but are motivated by recurring patterns of embodied experience (i.e., image schemas) which are often metaphorically extended. Memory, mental imagery, and problem solving do not arise from internal, computational, and disembodied processes but are closely linked to sensorimotor simulations.

Gibbs cites a wide-ranging series of studies to back up these assertions giving particular emphasis to kinesthetic perception, asserting that it takes on an essential role in perception and thinking. People have strong associations with objects by the way they are used. The identification of objects is not just visual but involves touch, the movement of the hands, and the whole body. In this sense, perception of objects is multimodal, depending upon eye, head, and body movements. These findings and an alternative conception of a person’s engagement with the environment give rise to the concept of a body-world structural coupling. This conception supposes that we cannot separate the person from his/her transaction with the environment. To get a better sense of what is meant by these assertions the role of metaphorical projection is next considered.

112

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

Metaphoric Projection and the Embodied Mind In the scenario at the beginning, there is an explicit metaphoric projection of the boy’s body into an explanation of how water is moving through tubing to fall on the model waterwheel. Additionally, in Chapter 1 it was illustrated that there was a deliberately designed relationship among the first three balancing activities. Mappings can be carried out among the activities of balancing the body, manipulating a model of a body, and experimenting with a rectangular piece having approximate proportions to a body. This kind of mapping is metaphorical or analogical in its function. The pedagogical approach implied in this sequence of activities recognizes the deeply embedded tendency for us to use metaphorical projections in making sense of our environment. It is also based on the theory that there is an embodied cognition involved in these metaphorical projections. This is a challenging theory to assimilate because the deeper meanings associated with it run counter to everyday thinking and some fundamental Western philosophical thinking. This view of metaphorical projection and associated concepts provides a rationale for what I listed previously as psychological movement during an investigation as outlined in the pedagogical model. Metaphor and analogy are strongly associated with language but also occur in nonverbal media such as paintings, sculpture, or cinema. In recent times there has emerged a great wealth of studies and writings covering several domains of knowledge examining how metaphor functions and how it is grounded in everyday experience. For instance, some writers (Lakoff, Johnson, and Gibbs) have argued that thinking and language are basically metaphorical at their core. It is at the heart of our thinking processes. Given the emphasis on verbal literacy in schooling and in science education, it useful to consider the relationship between language, thinking, and the experiences of the body. It would provide a way of thinking about the relationship between hands-on or whole body experiences and the eventual verbal representations that relate to these experiences. Most prominent in this rethinking about metaphor have been the writers George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. There are many others who have contributed to this field of research. I have selected them because others frequently cite them irrespective of whether the writers are in agreement with their positions or not. They make assertions in a very explicit manner which puts forth a position encapsulated in the term – the embodied mind. It is useful to consider in a very cursory way their assertions and a few examples because it provides an alternative epistemological framework to traditional approaches of how knowledge and meaning is developed. In a landmark work, Metaphors We Live By, Lakoff and Johnson carried out an extensive study finding that there were many embedded, basic metaphors in everyday language. For instance, happy is up; sad is down. (I’m feeling up. My spirits sank.) More is up; less is down (My income rose this year. He is underage.) One significant example that has importance in later discussions about the general perceptions of the role of emotions and feelings are the examples they give of everyday language that has embedded in it the metaphorical projection. These are summed up in the basic metaphor, “RATIONAL IS UP; EMOTIONAL IS DOWN.

Embodied Cognition

113

The discussion fell to the emotional level, but I raised it back up to the rational plane. We put our feelings aside and had a high-level intellectual discussion of the matter. He couldn’t rise above his emotions” (italics used in the original text. Metaphors We Live By, Lakoff and Johnson, 1980, p. 17). They have categorized these types as spatialization metaphors and they propose that they arise from our physical and cultural experience. These metaphors also suggest a relationship between the rational and emotional where the latter is implied to be of lesser value. The same is true for what they call structural metaphors such as general ones like “rational argument is war, labor is a resource, and time is a resource” (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980, pp. 14, 15). In their analysis of everyday language they found that there are many instances where spatial orientation is embedded in the concepts being expressed. In a later work, Philosophy in the Flesh (1999), they are more emphatic about this assertion and claim that spatial relations concepts are at the heart of our categorical systems (Lakoff and Johnson, 1999, p. 30) and that our bodies define a set of fundamental spatial orientations in establishing ourselves in relationship to objects and the physical environment (Lakoff and Johnson, 1999, p. 34). Their assertion based on this kind of analysis is that a great deal of the metaphor implicit in language is grounded in physical experiences. (Some writers do not fully agree with this characterization and give counter examples but it still does appear that a significant amount of our language can be analyzed in this manner.) Drawing upon this extensive analysis of much of the ordinary language in this manner, they arrived at a position where they state: The mind is not merely embodied, but embodied in such a way that our conceptual systems draw largely upon the commonalities of our bodies and of the environments we live in. The result is that much of a person’s conceptual system is either universal or widespread across language and cultures (Lakoff and Johnson, 1999, p. 60). To get some sense of what is meant by their position consider Johnson’s development of the meaning of balance as he carries this out in his book The Body in the Mind. He gives a lengthy analysis of the fundamental experience of balance as it is played out in several different knowledge domains. First, he makes a very critical point. We learn to balance our bodies by not following a set of rules or propositions. It is achieved and becomes part of our continual adjustment to the world through experience with our bodies. The meaning of balance begins to emerge through our acts of balancing and through our experience of systemic processes and states within our bodies. … [T]he meaning of balance is tied to such experiences and, in particular to the image-schematic structures that make those experiences and activities coherent and significant for us (i.e., recognizable as present or absent, even if we have not formed concepts or learned words for them. (Johnson, 1987, p. 75)

For instance, in learning how to ice-skate or roller-skate some other person can coach us on how to keep upright by giving suggestions as to how to hold the body and position the legs and feet, but much of what happens in achieving balance in these situations occurs by trying something and becoming aware of the feeling of what happens. There is a type of learning through the body that is happening at an unconscious level and is difficult to immediately put it into words. Johnson also

114

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

points out that our daily experience with our body’s internal functions such as the fact that a healthy body is maintained at a steady state temperature also contributes to a general sense of balance. From these experiences we build up what Johnson calls pre-conceptual structures that he associates with the fundamental concept of the schema. This concept is central to his analysis and argument. Many writers in their discussion of sensory experiences use it. It is a term and concept that has gained multiple meanings and interpretations, some of which are not compatible with Johnson’s approach. His preference is for Ulric Neisser’s definition. A schema is that portion of the entire perceptual cycle which is internal to the perceiver, modifiable by experience, and somehow specific to what is being perceived. The schema accepts information as it becomes available at sensory surfaces and is changed by that information; it directs movements and exploratory activities that make information available, by which it is further modified. From the biological point of view, a schema is part of the nervous system. It is some active array of physiological structures and processes: not a center in the brain. (Johnson, 1987, p. 20)

According to Johnson what is important to keep in mind about this conception of a schema is that it is in a dynamic state and not in a fixed state. It is a stable pattern of sensorimotor experiences and is a structure that connects this sensorimotor experience to conceptualizations and language (Johnson, 1987, p. 144). In addition, he makes an important distinction that “image schemata are not rich, concrete images or mental pictures” (p. 23). Movement, perception, and sensory experiences are shapers of the schema. This is in contrast to a conception of a schema where the visual mode would appear to be dominant. Bodily movement through space and physical manipulation of objects figure prominently in how we should think about the concepts of schemas as Gibbs has proposed in his summary of embodied cognition above. Each of these sensory modes of engagement with the environment has important implications for how the science educator should think about the way pedagogical practices impact the assimilation of designed experiences for the student. These are related to what can be called “habits of the body” that one would want to foster in science education. One implication is that it matters a great deal what materials are presented, how they are designed, and how the interaction between students and materials is shaped.2

 Heinz Werner in the introduction to a symposium about the body percept places this concept in a historical context citing Kant’s conception of schema as had Johnson. He also refers to the contributions of Schildre, Merleau-Ponty, and Piaget. Each of these stressed that the body schema was not a static entity but had mobility. 2

In extending Kant’s ideas one may not only look at the schema as a device for articulating body space and integrating the various affective–motor–perceptual-imaginal operations which build the body space: One may also see in it a device, which analogous to Kant’s mediation between senses and abstract concepts, mediates between the concrete tangible body and the abstract self concept, between the visual tangible environment and the abstractly elusive self (Wapner and Werner, 1965, p. 6).

Embodied Cognition

115

Johnson, in agreement with Gibbs, gives emphasis to the kinesthetic characte­ ristic of a schema. This runs counter to the emphasis on visualization and visual experiences in science education where there is less attention paid to the kinesthetic and visceral interaction of what students bring to their attempts at developing meaning. Johnson illustrates the role of a schema as a pre-conceptual structure, giving rise to meaning. He refers to the role of the balance schema in our reactions to certain works of art providing a theoretical basis for the sequence of activities described in Chapter 1. He used artifacts of art such as an African mask and a painting by Kandinsky. He elaborates how pre-conceptual structures determine how we react to these kinds of objects. He proposes that we bring to these objects a perceptual tendency and view them in terms of a balance of forces. He shows a mask that has a strong bilateral symmetry but has other features that make this symmetry less obvious until we study it closely. There is an unconscious mapping of the symmetry of this object to the symmetry of our own face and body. (Attention to the symmetry of objects is an inborn tendency that has implications for the eventual representations of these objects in a scientific context.) This unconscious tendency shapes the way we take in the experience of viewing the mask. Kandinsky’s paintings are a complex of interactions among forms, shapes, and colors that have been balanced by means of a shared aesthetic perspective. In viewing his painting we assimilate the forms and shapes by way of this aesthetic, which is based on balance. The point of these examples is that balance is not directly present in the visual configuration, but we bring to the viewing of them a schema of balance. Johnson proposes: “[B]alance in visual perception already involves a metaphorical projection of a schematic structure from the realm of physical and gravitational forces and weights to a domain of visual forces and in ‘visual space’” (Johnson, 1987, p. 99). From past experiences we come to understand how various objects are balanced physically. These have been assimilated kinesthetically as well as visually. In viewing these art objects we simulate in an unconscious manner the visual and kinesthetic structures. He also gives examples from other domains such as the practice of law symbolized by the equal arm balance, and from psychology where mental and emotional balance are key concepts in the goal of maintaining good health. Each of these metaphorical projections underlies assumptions and practices in the different domains that he maintains arise from a fundamental balance schema. Johnson’s use of the concept of schema as it relates to metaphorical projection has implications for the science educator’s attempt to bring about conceptual change in students. It is my belief that language alone, the Socratic method, and even computer virtual demonstrations will not be enough to effect changes in student’s thinking. The implication is that a pedagogy, which recognizes that prior knowledge is guided by pre-conceptual structures in the sense of the schemas of Neisser and as interpreted by Johnson has to be developed. From this perspective schemas are the operational means for bringing about conceptual change. The implication would appear to be that it is necessary to help the students return to these fundamental schemas, leading to a fundamental pedagogical question. Is this return to basic schemas by way of direct engagement with the phenomena or can it be by visualizations and simulations such as those which occur with computer software. There is an

116

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

ongoing debate in the science education community about the necessary role of direct engagement with physical materials. From my perspective, both in terms of bringing about conceptual change and aiming for a more holistic goal for science education I would propose that it is necessary to involve students as much as possible in direct experiences. The goal would be to design these sensorimotor experiences and their processing in a way that students change the dynamics and configuration of their schemas. Additionally, the aesthetics of these encounters is not secondary but, in fact, are at the very core of the interactions with the phenomenon and a major factor in how experiences with phenomena get represented. This approach is different from one that would directly confront students by verbal or visual means with their “misconceptions” and seek to directly replace them with the correct scientific formulations. Some research provides some support for this view. Gibbs mentions a study he conducted that suggests physically performing some bodily actions can facilitate people’s understanding of simple metaphoric phrases. The subjects in his study were first taught to perform specific bodily actions by way of different nonlinguistic cues such as viewing and imitating actions in a video. They were then shown various metaphorical phrases some of which made sense while others didn’t. It was found that “people were faster in responding to the metaphor phrases after having performed relevant body movements than when they did not move at all” (Gibbs, 2005 p. 184). Such studies suggest it would be critically important to determine what is involved when students have their initial encounters with materials. This could possibly reveal the schemas they are invoking to make sense of these experiences, and how they can be a source for reconceptualization.

Nonverbal Thinking and the Role of Emotions and Feelings in Learning Johnson proposed that meaning is closely connected to the emotions and feelings. Therefore, it is important to examine the role of emotions and feelings and their relationship to body-based experiences. According to Antonio Damasio, emotions are our main way of monitoring our bodies and their interaction with the surrounding environment. They are central to our way of giving meaning to our experiences, how we react to these experiences, and how we later react to similar experiences. To get a better sense of what is meant by the role of emotions and feelings it is useful to draw upon the work of Damasio The Feeling of What Happens (1999), wherein he elaborates a theoretical structure for how the body and the emotions are involved in the making of consciousness. He reports on the key findings and insights put in the form of hypotheses which support the concept of embodied cognition as presented by Lakoff and Johnson. For my purposes in this book the most relevant propositions Damasio put forth can be summarized in this way: • There are several levels of consciousness that can be associated with different parts of the brain.

Embodied Cognition

117

• The lower levels of consciousness do not depend on language for their functioning. The core level of consciousness can be described as functioning as wordless storytelling that is “a narrative or story in the sense of a nonlanguaged map of logically related events.” However, in the case of humans this level of consciousness is immediately converted into language. • Emotions and feelings should be differentiated and are a necessary complement to cognition. • Body states associated with feelings help sift through the multiple possibilities in making decisions (Somatic marker hypothesis) (Damasio, 1999, p. 184). Damasio (1999, p. 198) proposes three levels of consciousness, although these are part of a continuum defining a range from the continuous automatic body functions and wakefulness to the fullest engagement of the individual in intense creative activity and thought. • The proto-self is the lowest level involving the bare functions of keeping the individual awake. This is a state of minimal attention and some image-making ability. • Core consciousness involves a sense of the self and emotional engagement. This sense of self is connected to a body image. • Extended consciousness involves much greater awareness of the self and the environment and “the ability to generate a sense of individual perspective, ownership, and agency, over a large compass of knowledge than that surveyed in core consciousness.” It includes an autobiographical memory. As Damasio points out, this highest state of consciousness is not the same as intelligence that involves the manipulation of knowledge to produce novel responses. The proposal that there are different levels of consciousness is based on the numerous studies of people who have had brain injuries, malfunctions, or have had highly selective strokes in the brain. (It is also based on animal studies.) These changes resulted in strange behaviors or loss of functions and these provide a base for proposing these different levels of consciousness. What particularly interested me is Damasio’s contention that there is a level of functioning that is nonverbal. This is a level above the many automatic processes whereby the body is maintained in a healthy balance such as the regulation of heartbeat and breathing. This core level of consciousness according to Damasio, “provides the organism with a sense of self about one moment – now – and about one place – here” (Damasio, 1999, p. 16). He bases his contention about the nonverbal nature of core consciousness on cases of adult patients with severe language disorders caused by neurological diseases. He reports that “no matter how much impairment of language there was, the patient’s thought processes remained intact in their essentials” (Damasio, 1999, p. 108). However, the higher levels of consciousness, what he calls the autobiographical self and extended consciousness, indeed are dependent upon, and shaped by, language and culture. It is important to keep in mind the proposal that there is nonverbal thinking. In the early stages of exploration the picking up of information through the manipulation of

118

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

materials or even of pictorial images (such as with computer animations) is often highly intuitive and difficult for most students to immediately represent in a clear verbal description. There is a dialectical interaction between student and materials. When students feel comfortable about a social and cultural setting such as an after school program, this dialogue with materials can be mostly nonverbal. If interrupted they have a hard time finding words to communicate what they are observing. Also, when students are moving toward developing explanations of what they have witnessed in these explorations or in their eventual formal experiments, their first statements are not clear, precise, and fully developed. A transition is needed to provide a bridge between the nonverbal thought processes and a fully articulated verbal explanation. The scenario at the beginning of this chapter is one example of a fuzzy explanation by a student. It was noted that the boy’s explanation involved an analogy of his body moving through a tube and water moving through tubing. He is possibly relying on a schema about enclosures and movement that helps him frame his explanation. It would have been more productive for the student as well as the rest of the class if the teacher had taken the time to help the student carefully map this analogy by working with the student to find the right kind of language to bring forth a more explicit mapping. Often, students need help to move from their intuitive nonverbal thoughts to verbal representations. In addition to acknowledging nonverbal thought processes, it is important to also recognize what role emotions and feelings play in getting acquainted with phenomena and how they factor in the making sense of hands-on experiences. Damasio provides a general theory that can help the science educator think about these basic psychological processes in students’ explorations and developing of explanation. He reports that emotions and feelings are elements of core consciousness and the higher levels. They are essential in the thinking of individuals when making decisions or in creative undertakings.

Emotions and Feelings Damasio asserts that there is a distinction between emotions and feelings. This distinction is a challenging one to understand, given the tendency in everyday speech to use these two terms interchangeably. He assigns great importance to the role of feelings. He states that the term “feeling should be reserved for the private mental experiences of an emotion, while the term emotion should be used to designate the collection of responses, many of which are publicly observable” (Damasio, 1999 p. 42). In a more extended account he asserts that feelings play a fundamental role in our thinking. Feelings offer us a glimpse of what goes on in our flesh, as a momentary image of that flesh is juxtaposed with the images of other objects or situations; in doing so, feelings modify our comprehensive notion of those other objects and situations. By dint of juxtaposition, body images give to other images a quality of goodness or badness, of pleasure or pain.

Embodied Cognition

119

I see feelings as having a truly privileged status. They are represented at many neural levels, including the neocortical, where they are the neuroanatomical and neurophysiological equals of whatever is appreciated by other sensory channels. But because of their inextricable ties to the body, they come first in development and retain a primacy that subtly pervades our mental life. Because the brain is the body’s captive audience, feelings are winners among equals. And since what comes first constitutes a frame of reference for what comes after, feelings have a say on how the rest of the brain and cognition go about their business. Their influence is immense (Damasio, 1994, p. 159).

Particularly in science education there is an emphasis on objectivity and rationality that is often represented as taking a dispassionate stance in the exploration, experimentation, and the development of explanations. Among some science educators there is recognition of the need to get students “hooked” into the investigation and the need to have them invested in their explanations. There is also some recognition of the need to take into account the interests of students (Guthrie et al., 2000). Less acknowledged are the affective reactions to the phenomena. This type of reaction is more than an expression of interest. It can be a time of positive or negative identification with the phenomenon. The patterns and forms inherent in the phenomenon give rise to personal feelings and symbols. This identification was mentioned in the chapter on curriculum frameworks. Antonio Damasio addressed this very fundamental issue in his book Descartes’ Error, giving special attention to the role of emotions and feelings in how individuals make decisions, proposing a psychological mechanism that he labeled as the somatic-marker hypothesis. He argues that there are two possibilities for explaining how humans arrive at decisions. The common view or the “high-reason” view, as he calls it, is one where formal logic by itself arrives at the best solution to a problem. This is akin to evaluating the cost and benefits of a particular situation in a systematic manner. Damasio argues that this process for day-to-day living decision-making and perhaps for other endeavors is impractical. There are too many considerations to be able to evaluate all in a timely manner (Damasio, 1994, pp. 170–172). His alternative is the somatic-marker hypothesis. In his scenario of decisionmaking, alternative solutions are considered but in the process of considering ones that come to mind there can be “an unpleasant gut feeling” which is felt fleetingly. According to his thinking, this feeling forces attention on possible negative outcomes, thereby setting up a decision to avoid that choice. These markers “increase the accuracy and efficiency of the decision process” (Damasio, 1994, p. 173). It is unclear to me from his description how much of this occurs at a conscious level or unconscious level. His point is that such a process isn’t carried out in a strictly logical manner. Past experiences give rise to feelings that set up negative or positive tendencies to reject or accept possible solutions to problems or in making decisions. Somatic is used as a technical term here, referring to the workings of the whole body. He would include the visceral and non-visceral (such as chemical systems) under this term. Damasio in Descartes Error proposes that it is not sensible to leave out the relationship between the body and the emotions from the workings of the cognitive systems. This appears to be the way of thinking for a strict view of cognition in mainstream cognitive science and also pervades some brain research, where

120

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

emotions and feelings are considered to arise from “lower” or what are called subcortical neurological systems as contrasted with “higher” or neocortical systems. This way of thinking about feelings has implications for education. [M]ost somatic markers we use for rational decision-making probably were created in our brains during the process of education and socialization, by connecting specific classes of stimuli with specific classes of somatic state. (Damasio, 1994, p. 177)

If his hypothesis has any validity, then it has implications for the manner in which we teach science. Attention must be paid especially in the early years of education of children to the kind of connections they make between sensory encounters with phenomena and the way they are valued and perceived. Parents and teachers have a big role in modulating this interaction.

Body Image and Spatial Orientation The meaning of balance arises out of both our experience with the environment as well as within our bodies. Our sense of our body’s vertical orientation and its relationship to the surrounding environment has been found to be a significant indicator of how we think and make sense of the world. This inner and outer relationship has been studied extensively and there are well-developed theories about how this relationship can be related to what has been called cognitive styles. These are defined as “the manner in which individuals perceive, interpret, organize and think about themselves in relation to their environment” (Bagley, 1988, p. 144). Before going further with reporting about studies relating to spatial thinking and its relevance to science learning, there is a distinction to be made about body schema and body image. They have tended to be used interchangeably. In the context of embodied cognition these two terms have different meanings and understandings. These terms are associated with both nonconscious and explicit conceptualizations of the structure and shape of the body as well as emotional attributions toward one’s body (Gibbs, 2005, pp. 28–29). According to Gibbs, “‘body schema’ is the way in which the body actively integrates its posture and position in the environment” (Gibbs, 2005, p. 29). Closely associated with a body schema is the involvement of our proprioceptive systems. It involves information from all the different nervous systems attached to bones, muscles, and skin giving information about the movement and amount of force used. It also includes the balance organ providing information about posture. On other hand, “[b]ody images refers to conscious representations of the body, including how the body serves as an object of feelings and emotions, such as whether we experience ourselves as fat, thin or tired (Gibbs, 2005, p. 32) The relevance of spatial thinking is illustrated in the scenario described at the beginning of this chapter. The student elaborates his explanation about water flowing through a piece of tubing with many hand gestures. He stands up as he gives his explanation, feeling the need to involve his whole body in the explanation. He talks

Body Image and Spatial Orientation

121

about two situations of his body moving through space. His use of spatial orientation is intimately intertwined with these explanations. The girl’s explanation is less developed but she also projects herself into a situation where spatial orientation is critical to her explanation. This particular type of cognitive style would appear to be an essential part of developing scientific habits of mind. In all the balancing activities mentioned in Chapter 1 there is also a real need for having a clear sense of the distribution of weight of the cardboard as its acts around or at a fulcrum or center of gravity. Having a clear sense of spatial arrangements is necessary for the development of an understanding of what is happening in each of these situations. Students whose cognitive style has a good command of spatial thinking would seem to be good candidates for doing well in science. There has been a line of research and theoretical developments that have given the role of body and it orientation in space a sustained attention. One of the most relevant approaches in the work of Heinz Werner and those influenced by his theoretical approach. In fact, in some of his research he and his collaborators like Seymour Wapner (Wapner and Werner, 1965) studied how people balanced their bodies in a carefully controlled environment. This involved placing subjects in a darkened room in a chair that could be tilted. Witkin extended the work of Wapner and Werner utilizing their orientation tests, correlating it with types of personality and cognitive styles. What is of particular relevance is his theory of field independence and dependence. It is useful to give some details here about the procedure because of the nature of the experimental tasks and the theoretical interpretations. There were two techniques used. One was more physically involving than the other. A person sits on a chair in a small dark room facing a square frame having a lighted rod within it. The chair can be tilted and the rod and frame can be rotated. The experimenter can change the rod before illumination and then ask the subject to tell how much the rod should be rotated back to the vertical position. Because the chair and the rod are tilted, the subject has to sense how much his or her body is tilted (Witkin and Asch, 1948; Witkin, 1978; Witkin and Berry, 1975). The results are surprising with some people adjusting their chairs as much as 35° out of the vertical to align themselves with the rod. Note that these are actual physical manipulations. The other test was an embedded figures test where the subject has to isolate a simple figure from a complex drawing. The times vary in how long these simple figures can be isolated (Wapner and Werner, 1965, p. 29). Correlations were established between the embedded figures tests and the physical one so that later researchers used the embedded features test instead of the chair in the room test. There is some question about the strength of these correlations between the actual physical manipulations and a response to complex drawings. For instance, Mallory Wober (1991) tested Nigerian workers using the Rod and Frame Test with a tilted chair. He found that there were no significant correlations for the workers between the two tests. These results were similar for another study by Gruen (1995) who tested American dancers. The interpretation by Wober was that the Rod and Frame test has a proprioceptive component and that subjects “who might by

122

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

culture or by training be especially sensitive to the ‘proprioceptive field’ perform differently than normal subjects.” I found these results interesting and perhaps very relevant to the type of pedagogical approach one takes in teaching science. Here I want to point out that if as Elkins asserts we start off assimilating other objects in terms of bodies it seems to me that a person who has a greater awareness of his/her body’s reactions to other objects starts off better attuned to characterizing the essential features of objects. Based on this work and other extensive studies, Witkin and his coinvestigators eventually formulated the generally accepted concept of field dependence and field independence. Field-independent subjects do well on the embedded figures test because they appear to respond to the properties of the field. They easily perceive the simple figures. Field-dependent subjects take longer and find the test more difficult, having the tendency to restructure the field on their own. It was found that field-sensitive learners are more readily influenced by opinions and approval of others when making decisions. They do better socially.3 What is most relevant here is that field-independent students were much more likely to choose science and mathematics as a career (Holtzman et al., 1979, p. 561). Some researchers have looked at the relationship between this cognitive style and problem solving with some curious results. For instance, Cross (1976) found that field-dependent learners appear to be better at deductive procedures as compared to field-independent learners who are more inductive. The authors surmise that the former are more global in their thinking, approaching problems in a more intuitive manner. This result, in particular, is curious because it would appear that both types of thinking are necessary for success in scientific thought. In consideration of these studies, some of the authors of these papers suggest that more autonomy should be given to students in problem solving (Lawson and Wollman, 1977). Others have also highly recommended, frequent, and carefully guided processing of experiences, giving emphasis to verbal representation. Although there appears to be some movement in this direction in recent times and students are placed in a more open type of inquiry with frequent sense making, I would question if these changes alone will make a significant difference. It is my contention that students should be brought along from the physical engagement with a phenomenon to abstract representation of it as I outlined with the balancing activities. They need practice disembedding the essential variables from the phenomenon as well as noticing the relationship between these variables. This is an essential first step if they are to move toward a realignment of their conceptions. It is not clear how much cognitive style as it relates to field independence and field independence is influenced or in-born culturally dependent. This is a very controversial area with great political and ethical implications. Are boys better at spatial visualization than girls? Are some ethnic groups better at science problem solving than others? The

 Bastick reports in carrying out a wide-ranging review of research that high spatial orientation has many correlates with intuitive processes. These would include field-independent cognitive style, dependence of body sensations, and ease of change of emotional sets among others (Bastick, 1982). 3

Body Image and Spatial Orientation

123

research in this area has to be considered very carefully. For instance, Bagley summarizes some results from cross-cultural studies on this type of cognitive style. One result is particularly interesting since it seems to contradict Witkin’s original theory. “Japanese children are extremely field independent compared with other groups.” This is curious because of the great emphasis in their school and cultural orientation on group cohesiveness. One would think that they would be more field-dependent. One could make a case for a type of science curriculum that sets up situations and environments, where there is more than visual interaction with phenomena. And most importantly there is a careful sequencing of experiences so that there is psychological movement from the whole body, propioceptive type of experience to one that moves to visual representations of the same experiences. Students would receive help in carrying out these cross-modal representations. This was illustrated with the transition from balancing one’s own body to balancing a symbolic body on a rectangular piece of cardboard. Similar kinds of transitions can be designed for other kinds of phenomena. This is the developmental sequence that is proposed in the pedagogical model in Chapter 2.

The Embodied Curriculum and a Holistic Education The role of the body and the body image in the particular context of science education has implications beyond alternative conceptions of how science can be presented and how curriculum could be designed and implemented. There are deeper issues of a philosophical import if one wants to go beyond learning and consider broader issues of values and even spirituality. This means that science educators should recognize that the shaping of the child’s character could in part occur through his or her relationship with basic phenomena. If Damasio’s somatic marker hypothesis has any validity, then the kind of direct engagement with basic phenomena should be carefully orchestrated. The feelings that develop during these experiences could determine how students react to these basic phenomena as adults. In the advocacy for a deeper scientific understanding some educational leaders invoke the concept of habits of mind. This term is usually associated with rigor, clear thinking, and assertions based on evidence. These are strongly associated with rational thought and an objective stance. As already pointed out this emphasis on rational thought is based on a disembodied approach to learning. If a science educator accepts the somatic marker hypothesis of Damsio and the basic contentions of Lakoff and Johnson that the mind is embodied in their sense of this term, then there is a need to expand or modify what is meant by habits of mind. I would change the term from “habits of mind” to “habits of body-mind,” a term originally used by Dewey. In the context of science education this combined term would have the understanding that the role of the body schema and body image as well as sensory experiences is given special attention in teaching and curriculum design. It would also mean that there would be an explicit recognition and effort to connect sense experience in the development of abstract concepts somewhat as outlined in the

124

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

activities given about balancing objects and mobiles and in the pedagogical model proposed in Chapter 2. There is an interesting and significant distinction that has been made about the relationship of body and mind in Eastern philosophy. A philosophical framework that gets at this sense of body-mind and the shaping influences of physical action apparently can be found in Eastern thought. Yuasa Yasuo studied Western and Eastern philosophies as they dealt with the role of the body in experience and learning. He found that there were ideas in Japanese thought that did not quite parallel Western thought. This centered on the fact that Asian thought does not “sharply separate the mind from the body.” Philosophers like John Dewey, William James, and Merleau-Ponty have written about this issue and therefore, there is no great separation in thinking between the two traditions. However, what is most significant of Yasuo’s finding is that “Eastern Philosophies generally treat mind-body unity as an achievement, rather than an essential relation” (Yasuao, 1987, p. 17). Yasuo summarizes the differences between the Eastern and Western approach to the mind–body problem in this manner. One of the characteristics of Eastern body-mind theories is the priority given to the questions, “How does the relationship between the mind and the body come to be (through cultivation)? Or “What does it become?” The traditional issue in Western philosophy, on the other hand is, “What is the relationship between the mind-body?” In other words, in the East one starts from the experiential assumption that the mind-body modality changes through the training of the mind and body by means of cultivation (shugyo) or training (keiko). Only after assuming this experiential ground does one ask what the mind-body relation is. (Yasuo, 1987, p. 18)

It is the critical role that cultivation plays in personal development that is of most relevance when considering its application to science pedagogy. Yasuo gives an example of this relationship by describing how Zen cultivation prepares the poet for writing poetry. In this theory of art production the artist carries out such practices as correct body posture and direct encounters with the environment to put him or her in a frame of mind such that the mind and body become one. Training in a technique such as composition is not just a way of refining the mind of the poet but it also will act as a way of changing in a beneficial way, the poet’s personality (Yasuo, 1987, p. 101). When the mind–body is one, poetry comes from the whole person not just the mind. Readings of literature alone will not produce great poetry. The poet must have experiences with real things and with a certain state of mind–body. Looking at science education from this perspective would mean that the early phases of inquiry, where there might be direct engagement with a phenomena through physical materials can be an occasion not only for helping the student get “a good physical feeling” for laying the foundation for later development of science concepts, but also a time for personal development. Recall that Maxwell started off his development of electromagnetic theory in this manner. According to those who studied the notebooks of Faraday, he cultivated a deep appreciation for direct engagement with a phenomenon. Concurrently, as was seen in the description of

References

125

Darwin’s work, there was a love of nature that deeply imbued his ongoing development of his theory of evolution. In a similar vein there is Barbara McClintock’s “feeling for the organism” in her close observation of maize plants. These scientists it seems to me capture this sense of the habit of body-mind. They eventually produced creative intellectual achievements in their theoretical work but through direct contact with phenomena. If science educators promote the practice of having students act and think like scientists, then the process and habits of body– mind of these scientists would seem to be most relevant.4

References Bagley, C. (1988). Cognitive Style and Cultural Adaptation in Blackfoot, Japanese, Jamaican, Italian and Anglo-Celtic Children in Canada. In G.K. Verma & C. Bagley (Eds.), Cross Cultural Studies of Personality, Attitudes and Cognition (pp. 143–159), New York, St. Martian’s. Bastick, T. (1982). Intuition: How We Think and Act, New York, Wiley. Cross, K.P. (1976). Beyond Education for All – Toward Education for Each. College Board Review, 99: 5–10. Clement, J. (1989). Generation of Spontaneous Analogies by Students Solving Science Problems. In D. Topping, D. Crowell, and V. Kobayashi (Eds.), Thinking Across Cultures, London, Erlbaum. Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain, New York, Grosset/Putnam Books. Damasio, A. (1999). The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness, New York, Harcourt. Elkins, J. (1996). The Object Stares Back, New York, Harcourt. Feher, M., Naddaff, R., and Tazi, N. (Eds.). (1989a). Fragments for a History of the Human Body, Part 1, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Feher, M., Naddaff, R., and Tazi, N. (Eds.). (1989b). Fragments for a History of the Human Body, Part 2, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Feher, M., Naddaff, R., and Tazi, N. (Eds.). (1989c). Fragments for a History of the Human Body, Part 3, Cambridge, MA. MIT Press. Gibbs, R. (2005). Embodiment and Cognitive Science, New York, Cambridge University Press. Gruen, A. (1995). Dancing Experience and Personality in Relation to Perception. Psychological Monographs, 69(14): 1–15. Guthrie, J., Wigfield, A., and VonSecker, C. (2000). Effects of Integrated Instruction on Motivation and Strategy Use in Reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92: 331–341. Holton, G. (1995). Metaphors in Science and Education. In Z. Radman (Ed.), A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Cognitive content of Metaphor (pp. 216–288), Berlin/New York, Walter de Gruyter. Holtzman, E., Goldsmith, R., and Barrera, C. (1979). Field-Dependence and Field Independence: Educational Implications for Bilingual Education. Austin, TX, Dissemination and Assessment Center for Bilingual Education.

4  The drawing at the beginning of this chapter comes from Water Wheels (1995). Permission granted by Kelvin.

126

5 The Body Image and Feelings in Science Learning

Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason, Chicago, IL, The University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought, New York, Basic Books. Lawson, A. and Wollman, W.T. (1977). Cognitive Level, Cognitive Style, and Value Judgment, Science Education, 61(3): 397, 407. Yasuo, Y. (1987). The Body: Toward an Eastern Mind-Body Theory, New York, State University of New York Press. Water Wheels (1995). Science First Hand: Models in Physical Science, video series, Boston, MA, WGBH Educational Foundation. Wapner, S. and Werner, H. (1965). The Body Percept, New York, Random House. Wilson, F. (1988). What It Feels Like To Be a Building, New York, Doubleday. Witkin, H.A. (1978). Cognitive Styles in Personal and Cultural Adaptation, Worchester, MA, Clark University Press. Witkin, H.A. and Asch, S.E. (1948). Studies in Space Orientation, IV: Further Experiments on Perception of the Upright with Displaced Visual Fields. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38: 762–82. Witkin, H.A. and Berry, J.W. (1975). Psychological Differentiation in Cross-cultural Perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 6(1): 4–87. Wober, M. (1991). The Sensotype Hypothesis. In D. Howe (Ed.), The Varieties of Sensory Experience: A Sourcebook in the Anthropology of the Senses, Toronto, University of Toronto Press.

Chapter 6

Sensory Understanding

Growing up, assimilating the wisdom of the past, is in great part learning how to organize the sensorium productively for intellectual purposes (Walter Ong)

Scenario #3 – Exploring with Siphon Bottles Two boys, 10-years-old, are exploring with a special set of bottles. These bottles have three pieces of tubing going through a two-hole stopper at the top of the bottle. One piece of tubing comes out of a hole and is about 3 ft long. Another piece of tubing comes out of the second hole and is also 3 ft long. A third piece of tubing is attached to the bottom of the stopper. This piece extends to the bottom of the bottle.1 There is also a larger bottle full of water next to the one with the tubing that is a reservoir for the water moving in and out of the siphon bottle. This arrangement allows the user to suck and/or blow water into and out of the bottles. When the session starts, the boys are taking on the challenge to see if they can get water to flow into the bottle with the tubing. They continue to suck on the shorter piece of tubing thinking that this is what is needed to get the water to continuously flow into the smaller bottle. Sometime they blow very hard to get the water to evacuate this smaller bottle. At one point one of the boys rubs his cheeks indicating that he has blown into the tubing with great force. Once they discover that the water will continue to flow without sucking they sometimes sit back in their chairs watching this movement.2 This kind of manipulation of the system can be pleasurable. Playing with water always has high appeal. There is also the pleasure from the sense of control and  Drawing is from the Siphons curriculum guide. Permission granted by Kelvin, the publisher.  For a extended investigation of siphoning and siphon bottles see the “Explore-it” curriculum guide, Siphons, published by Kelvin. 1 2

B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_6, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

127

128

6 Sensory Understanding

mastery. In the beginning of the session the two boys blow and suck to get the water moving, in effect, becoming part of the system and functioning as active agents producing a cause and effect. They can decide on the level of involvement based on the kind of feedback the system gives to them. They can direct their attention to that part of the system that is most interesting and exert a control over it. During this exploration there were times that I attempted to get them to talk about what they were doing and what they thought was happening. (In this situation I was videotaping for a project that would be published and felt that the audience viewing the tape would want some comments from the students.) They responded with a few words and fragmented sentences. Their focus was on exploring what could be done with the bottles. It appeared that attempting to ask questions during this time was a distraction for them. At one point I asked one of the boys to explain what he thought was happening. What was allowing the water to flow by itself? While he was giving his description he traced the movement with his fingers moving them along the tubing. In responding to some of my queries both boys used the term “pressure,” but it was apparent they were applying it in a loose generic manner. Although they seemingly were attending to the changing water levels in the bottle, it was apparent through their actions and some of the comments they made that they did not grasp the significance of what they were seeing. Several times the two boys “see” that the water will flow automatically from the higher to the lower bottle, but they were not cognizant that this was a result of the water in the two bottles being at different levels. Eventually, they did seem to understand that water in the system moves from a higher container to a lower container without having to suck or blow but this was grasped in a tentative manner. This scene can be described in an alternative manner. The boys are working with water as a visible active and passive force. It appears to be active when they see it moving by itself from one bottle to another. At times they can feel the force of the

Scenario #3 – Exploring with Siphon Bottles

129

water coming from the tubing by sticking their finger in the flow of the water when it flows out of the tubing. In lifting the bottles of water up or down with their hands they change the spatial arrangement which results in water flowing from a higher level to a lower level. At other times they can achieve similar results by moving one of the pieces of tubing to a higher or lower position when this tubing has water in it. As a passive force, water in one tubing can prevent flow from happening because it prevents air from coming into the bottle. Air is acting as an invisible active as well as a passive force. When the students blow or suck they are agents of change. Their forceful breath pushes on the water and makes it move. However, they aren’t aware of the effects of atmospheric pressure. This invisible force can stop the flow of water with certain kinds of arrangements. I picked this scenario because of the multisensory involvement. The boys’ lungs and associated muscles systems are involved, not just their hands and eyes. They experience the force to get the water moving in a visceral manner. They experience the mass of the water in the muscles of their hands, arms, and sometime the upper body such as when they lift one of the bottles to change the flow of water. They also experience the fluid character in a tactile way when it spills out of the tubing onto their hands or into their face. This was their second session exploring this water system, and even though I intervened a number of times with pointed queries to draw their attention to the significance of different water levels in the two bottles, they did not seem to recognize nor verbally announce that the water level in the bottles have to be different for water to flow freely. It is only toward the end of the second session that this critical feature becomes apparent. Yet, when I deliberately introduce a third bottle with the same kind of connections with the tubing and challenge them to fill it, they revert back to sucking and blowing with the tubing instead of setting up an arrangement where gravity will keep the flow moving. To begin to see the significance of what is happening requires a multisensory coordination of the visual, the kinesthetic, and haptic along with some conceptualizing that water and air can exert forces on a system. This development of understanding takes more than two sessions and may require multiple sessions to bring about the coordination, representation of forces, and an explicit acknowledgement on the boys’ part that they fully understand what is happening. Therefore, what is happening in this scenario is only of an introductory nature. This scenario is representative of many others that can occur when elementary and middle school students begin an investigation of a phenomenon or work on a design challenge. For instance, in the assembling and adjusting of the cardboard mobiles mentioned in Chapter 1, one can feel with the hands and see with the eyes whether members of the mobile are oriented horizontally. In fact, closing the eyes one could still gain a sense of how the members are oriented and how they are connected to each other. If the material were metal and were of a larger size like a Calder mobile, one could feel the weight in the arms and body. There is a correspondence between the visual and haptic modes of perception. One of the defining characteristics of open explorations with physical materials is this opportunity to correlate different sensory modalities. Science educators

130

6 Sensory Understanding

and researchers recognize the importance of these kinds of sensory engagement. Involving students in these kinds of manipulations can be highly engaging, therefore providing a motivational impulse. Information about a phenomenon is picked up by this sensory engagement. This information acts as evidence to confirm or disconfirm questions and hypotheses. What appears to be less considered are the nature of the sensory engagement and the importance of the multimodal involvement. The visual mode being dominant, these experiences tend to be defined in terms of what is picked up visually. As a reflection of this implicit dominance computer simulations nowadays have started to replace these handson experiences and in some cases considered more effective or at least producing equitable results (as compared to the hands-on) (Clark and Jorde, 2004; Minogue and Jones, 2006). How one values and thinks about sensory engagement in general is reflected in the preference of one kind of pedagogical practice over another. In the pedagogical model put forth in Chapter 2 the exploratory phase and the accompanying sensory engagement is given a critical role. In my observation of children and youth engaged in the above kind of explorations, I find that direct sensory engagement is foundational to understanding and eventually helps in reconceptualizing about a phenomenon. Therefore, examining what is involved in sensory engagements and how it relates to learning science would be useful and provide a more explicit rationale for what was only briefly mentioned when introducing the pedagogical model in Chapter 2. I start off by describing different pedagogical approaches to teaching science. I use these descriptions to accentuate the differing kinds and amounts of sensory engagement that can happen in an investigation. Then, I report on historical accounts about how creative scientists in their childhood were very much engaged in multisensory explorations and how these early experiences shaped their thought processes as adults. These accounts report on the critical role of concrete images and associated multisensory experience and how these were involved in the development of new theoretical developments. Intuition is the general term associated with these kinds of thought processes. It is recognized as playing an essential role in creative thought. Some writers such as Jerome Bruner propose that intuition can be developed and trained to some degree. Therefore, the providing for and design of hands-on experience can be thought of as a way of developing and training intuition. To carry this out in a thoughtful way it is useful to get a better sense of sensory engagements and especially their relationship to each other. This examination needs to consider the relationship between language and thought and the relationship between language and sensory experience. I only go briefly into this contentious issue. While considering the role of sensory engagement, it is also important to recognize the dominance of vision in Western culture especially in the domain of science. Although there is a necessity to give special attention to visual engagement, it should be recognized that an overemphasis on this one visual modality could lead to an impoverished experience of phenomena and a type of alienation from the environment.

Alternative Pedagogical Practices in Science Teaching

131

Alternative Pedagogical Practices in Science Teaching Before going into the examination of the role of sensory systems in inquiry, it can be useful and instructive to expand on the above scenario about siphons. There are alternative pedagogical practices that could be implemented and could possibly help students understand the functioning of siphons as well as be a concrete way for developing basic science concepts such as pressure and equilibrium. Alternative pedagogical practices that present a continuum from a traditional approach of teaching science to a more contemporary multimodal practice that would align with what is recommended in the national science standards are given below. A. Verbal description: A traditional textbook describes the action of siphoning and what happens when a person blows or sucks on the two different pieces of tubing coming from the bottle. A verbal explanation is then given for why the water is expelled or drawn in, and why water levels in the two containers reach equilibrium when left alone.3 B. Verbal Description plus visuals: A text similar to (A) is given but there are accompanying visuals. These visuals could be in the form of cartoons showing two children exploring with the bottles as in the video. Specific occurrences of changing water and air pressure are isolated and emphasized. Verbal explanations are coordinated with drawings. C. Computer animation: An image of a siphon system is presented where parts of it can be manipulated by moving the cursor in a way that the siphon bottle or the reservoir of water can be moved up and down. The animation shows what happens to the levels of the water in the two containers. Arrows indicate the changing pressure of water in the bottles as well as atmospheric pressure. Explanations are coordinated with an animation of the changing water levels and the role of atmospheric pressure. D. Demonstration: A teacher in front of the classroom or explainer in a science center carries out different manipulations of the bottle. The audience can ask questions and suggest manipulations. The development of explanations is coordinated with the audience participating in the manner of what some call a Socratic dialogue. E. Non-visual manipulation: Students work with the bottles as described in the beginning scenario except that one student of the pair is blindfolded or visually impaired. Rubber bands or some kind of marker is placed on the pieces of tubing and the bottles so that the blindfolded student can feel what tubing is being used and where the water levels are in the bottles. The sighted student assists the other

 Nowadays, many textbooks do have accompanying visuals complementing the text. Therefore, this description as a pedagogical practice may seem highly artificial. Nevertheless, there are teachers and some authors who still rely heavily and sometimes exclusively on the written or spoken work. For instance, run through the pages of one of Richard Dawkins’ (1998) book Unweaving the Rainbow. You will not find one drawing even though he is explaining phenomenon such as wave motion or the complexities of molecular biology. He is considered one of the great communicators of science today. 3

132

6 Sensory Understanding

by moving the rubber band on the bottles so that the blindfolded student can line them up and feel where the rubber band on the bottles are in relationship to each other, thus getting a sense of changing water levels. The blindfolded student also can lift the bottles up to sense the changing water levels. Explanations are developed with the blindfolded student based on his or her nonvisual perceptions. F. Guided explorations with a skillful and knowledgeable teacher: Students explore with the bottles as described in the initial scenario. Initially, they are given wide latitude in their manipulations. The teacher observes carefully and sensitively how the students explore, carry out an embedded assessment, and use these observations to structure a later sense-making discussion. After a session or after two students get acquainted with the system, questions are solicited from the students or the teacher may pose questions. This is done in a way that is in tune with the flow of the students’ explorations. The questions or physical interventions are done to draw attention to the happenings that are significant in terms of understanding of what is happening in the system. After several sessions of these kinds of explorations with teacher involvement, the students construct explanations with the teacher acting as facilitator and collaborator. The specific structured experiments are set up based on student and teacher questions and explanations. Concepts of force, pressure, and equilibrium are developed in a dialectical manner. G. Minimally guided explorations: Students explore with the bottles with minimal directions. They are encouraged to try any kind of manipulation that is safe and not messy. The teacher is mainly a participant-observer during this stage. Questions are generated by the students and followed up with some experiments. Explanations are developed after the experiments relying heavily on what the students did during their explorations. I list these different types of pedagogical practices to juxtapose the differing role of sensory engagement. Let’s consider the practices A through G again from the perspective of the kind and mix of sensory engagements. In moving from A through G there is increasing sensory participation on the part of the student. Both the computer animation and the demonstration are visually involving but lack the full kinesthetic feedback of E, F, and G. It is questionable how much students participate in a demon­stration even when they can specify the kinds of manipulations to be done on the system. They are still not in direct control of what is happening. In the case of A there is just a text so the students have to create their own images of what they think the text is describing and there is no manipulation of equipment. So, in this situation there is real sensory deprivation. In all the other scenarios there is the visual pickup of information except for E. In the case of E, I deliberately described a situation in which vision is eliminated. It is an artificial situation. I use it to emphasize the role of haptic engagement. Exploration in this situation would require lifting bottles to feel the weight of the water so that the muscular system in the upper body becomes involved. Sucking and blowing into the tubing involves the lungs and associated muscular system. Touch can also be involved since water can be felt as it is spilling out of the tubing.

Alternative Pedagogical Practices in Science Teaching

133

Fingers and hands can also be used to trace the arrangement of the tubing going into and out of the bottle. The combinations of feeling the arrangements of the tubings and the bottles along with the feeling of the changing weight of the bottles as water moves in and out have to be coordinated. When a students sucks on the end of the tubing, he or she can feel the weight of the bottle increase as water moves from the reservoir bottle to the siphon bottle. When a student blows into the tubing, he or she can feel the weight of the bottle decrease because water is leaving the bottle. Sometimes the student does not need to suck or blow. If water is in one of the tubings connecting the siphon bottle and the reservoir, the student can get water to move back and forth by raising and lowering either bottle. They can either see that there is a change in water levels or feel the changing weight of the bottles. Such a situation even though artificial illustrates these explorations can be multimodal. This also happens if I have vision. However, in situation E the haptic sense is in the foreground while in the other situations vision may be said to be in the foreground. What is essential for the student is to coordinate these sensory experiences. He or she needs to associate the visual changing level of the water in the bottle with a growing weight in the bottle and vice versa. He or she needs to associate sucking with a pulling force and blowing as a pushing force, while in the process realizing that air can be a transmitter of force. Thus, the student comes to realize that in doing the sucking or blowing there is an association with air as an agent that can bring about change. In the other situations with sight all these manipulations and coordination also occur but because one can see what is happening there is less inclination to be conscious of these other possible sensory engagements. The two boys described in the earlier scenario, in fact, did not do much lifting of the siphon bottle. They mostly sucked and blew into one of the tubings and watched what happened to the water levels. In a way, because of this reliance on vision they were less aware of the role of the weight of the water in bringing about a flowing system. The complexity of the interactions increases as we move from A through G. There is much greater cognitive and perceptual coordination required on the part of the student as we move from A through G. In all these pedagogical practices there can be an intentional collaborative structure placing these in a sociocultural framework. In E, F, and G the teacher can sometimes be involved in a nonverbal way. He or she can point to happenings or manipulate the materials effectively guiding the exploration of the student without the use of language during the exploratory phase. This continuum could be associated with different levels of inquiry moving from the highly structured to the most open. It might be possible to have some kind of inquiry with A and B depending on the manner in which the students were engaged. There would probably be differences of opinion about the relative difference between F and G. One major difference is the amount and degree to which students generate their own questions and design their own experiments. In F the teachers would be negotiating with students about what questions to pursue as well as introducing questions and experiments essential for developing targeted concepts. In my observation, there is still a large number of elementary and middle school teachers who are not comfortable or not able to carry out the type of inquiry implied in

134

6 Sensory Understanding

G. Even F is very problematic where it is required that the teacher be very skillful and have sufficient content knowledge to ask useful guiding questions and moving the students to think more scientifically. In any case F and G are potential possibilities for some teachers when their skills and content background become proficient. Aside from the challenges associated with F and G there are questions about students’ direct engagement with physical materials. There is an ambivalency or negative attitude about open exploration and manipulation of materials among some teachers, curriculum designers, and researchers. Some teachers find collecting and organizing the materials a heavy burden as well as a challenge to have students use the materials in a productive manner. (Admittedly, carrying out activities such as ones involving water as described in the scenario is particularly challenging.) This implicit and sometime explicit attitude and set of values can be seen in curriculum guides and in the practice of classroom teachers. The activities in textbooks are one-shot events, acting more as tabletop demonstrations allowing limited possibilities for extended exploration. If a curriculum guide does suggest a type of exploration as exemplified by the boys and the siphons, it is usually of a very short duration. For instance in the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) middle school program, students do work with a siphon system but the textbook and the guide seem to suggest that this be a brief experience of one or two sessions. In fact the focus is not on how the system works but how it is an example of a “big idea” such as equilibrium. It appears that sufficient time is not given for a full understanding of how this system works. This undervaluing of explorations is also seen in the practice of some teachers when utilizing these kinds of materials – there is a strong tendency to move quickly to introduce terminology such as pressure if they were leading an activity with siphons. According to this view, defining terms and giving definitions is where the real teaching happens. Although this may be an oversimplification of the intent of curriculum materials and teaching practice, there is still the legacy of past practices that for many years has emphasized the importance of the text over experience. Some call this a transmission model of instruction. This approach to teaching was seen with student teachers in an undergraduate methods course I taught. They demonstrated the adage that you teach the way you were taught. These students wrote their lesson plans centered on the introducing and elaborations of definitions of scientific words even before there was any experience with the materials. This was their vision of what science teaching was about. All these factors would suggest that advocating direct, open-ended explorations with physical materials is a practice of the past not worth continuing. Despite this possibility I still hold out for providing children and youth the opportunity to explore with physical materials. During the many years of experience working in this mode, I have continually found that children and youth become quite excited and highly motivated. Just the manipulation of the materials is a high motivator. Additionally, for some students this mode of engagement fits well with their cognitive style of learning. Particularly for these children it is their main means of showing their intelligence and

Scientific Imagination and the Role of Intuition

135

creativity. In fact, as will be reported in the next section it is possible that the children and youth who are most engaged by these types of explorations are the ones that most likely become productive scientists and engineers in the future. In focusing on this phase of an inquiry approach I want to get at two very basic issues. This direct engagement with the phenomenon needs to be seen as more than serving the function of information or fact gathering. A subtle coordination of sensory modes occurs as students manipulate materials and apparatus. Concurrently, there is at times a strong affective component to these encounters that goes beyond motivating students to pursue the investigation. Associated with these feelings are images that sometime result in spontaneous analogies such as those mentioned in the beginning of Chapter 3. Recall that these analogies seem to occur during these direct engagements with materials. These analogies can be the beginning of students making important connections to prior experience that can help them conceptualize about the phenomenon. This affective component needs to be valued as an essential accompaniment to the encounters with materials and according to some theories in neurophysiology is essential in narrowing and evaluating sensory experience. The other issue centers on the manner in which these experiences come to be represented within the individual student’s thinking both as implicit knowledge and as explicit representations for communal sharing. There is a general practice to label thinking that is nonverbal or implicit knowledge as visual. The accompanying implication is that visual means is the main mode of making this unconscious or implicit knowledge explicit both for the individual and for the individual attempting to communicate with teacher and other students. In studying videos of scenes such as the scenario presented at the beginning of this chapter and the previous one it should be apparent that encounters and representations are multimodal. There is indeed a heavy visual engagement that is part of all these encounters but there is also visceral, tactile, and kinesthetic involvement some of which is obvious such as the sucking and blowing with the siphon bottle.

Scientific Imagination and the Role of Intuition The Multimodal Imagination of Creative Scientists and Inventors Shepard studied the histories of creative scientists and engineers, giving attention to reports of their own thought processes. Although he mainly focused on visuospatial thinking, he provides some salient details that suggest that their use of concrete sensory images was integral to their creative insights. Shepard also provides some intriguing comments and details about the childhood and lives of these scientists. They had a rich sensual involvement with physical materials in their early years. For instance, he reports (Shepard, 1988, p. 157) that as a child Maxwell had a fascination with mechanical devices. James Watt, the inventor of the steam engine, occupied himself with geometrical problems

136

6 Sensory Understanding

and constructed models and mechanisms as a child (Shepard, 1988, p. 162). Shepard also delved into the childhood of other scientists, engineers, and inventors finding similar patterns of engagement with materials and devices. An interesting observation is made about the role of language in these scientists’ early years. Shepard (1988, p. 156) reports that Einstein did not speak until the age of 3 and spoke with difficulty even later in his childhood. He had an early fascination with the behavior of physical devices and an unusual skill in dealing with spatial structures (original source, Holton, 1972). West also looked into the lives of some of the same scientists and speculates that some may have been dyslexic. Studying the early life of Faraday and then letters written by him in his later life, West proposed that Faraday’s active imagination and great difficulties with mathematics may have arisen from some learning disabilities related to dyslexia. Some of the difficulties with language were manifested in the papers of Faraday where he had problems with punctuation (West, 1997, p. 109). In reviewing his studies of the childhood of scientists Shepard comes to some interesting conclusions. He proposes “that the genetic potential for visual-spatial creativity of a high order seems especially likely to be revealed and/or fostered in a child (a) who is kept home from school during the early school years and, perhaps is relatively isolated from age-mates as well (b) who is, if anything, slower than average in language development, and (c) who is furnished with and becomes unusually engrossed in playing with concrete physical objects, mechanical models, geometrical puzzles, or, simply, wooden cubes.” (Shepard, 1988, p. 173)

The relationship between children’s involvement with objects and materials and their eventual development into scientists and engineers is still happening. Sherry Turkle gave an assignment in one of her courses at MIT for 25 years. “Was there an object you met during childhood or adolescence that had an influence on your path into science?” (Turkle, 2008, p. 6). She comments that this assignment appeared to stir something deep. Her book includes essays from some of her students. Radios, gears, Lego bricks, wooden blocks, and bicycles were among the objects that fascinated these students. Turkle points out that much technology today is less accessible or transparent. Many objects are now like black boxes and even if you take them apart there is little to see or manipulate. There is less opportunity for children to explore everyday objects. This may explain her receiving multiple essays about engagement with Lego blocks. From these stories it would appear that even today there is still this deep engagement with physical objects that move these particular individuals to careers in science and engineering. These creative scientists, as children, were given the opportunity to develop their special talents or intelligence, as Howard Gardiner (1983) would label them. The implications of Shepard’s observations is that their physical intuitions were not left latent but were activitated, associated skills were developed, and the foundation for the special kind of thought processes exercised, all of which become later utilized in their adult work. These habits of body-mind stimulated and practiced in childhood would appeared to have serve them well in later years

Scientific Imagination and the Role of Intuition

137

as they move on to mapping from the concrete properties of a phenomenon to the more abstract relationships. Some even continued to involve themselves in working directly with devices. For instance, as an adult Maxwell devised a mechanical device to demonstrate the stability of Saturn’s rings. He also spent a whole winter building a clay model based on J. Willard Gibb’s data on the complex thermodynamic behavior of water. This involved a three-dimensional plot of temperature, pressure, and volume (West, 1997, p. 115). According to West it might be considered a type of sculpture but was used as an aid in visualizing the confusing verbal description given by Gibbs who had written important papers in the area of thermodynamics. The carryover from childhood to adulthood can be found in some of the quotes and comments that Shepard gathered from scientists and the mathematicians. Here is Jacques Hadamad on the role of non-verbal thinking. “I insist that words are totally absent from my mind when I really think” (p. 75) and “they remain absolutely absent from my mind until I come to the moment of communicating the results in written or oral form” (p. 82). With difficult mathematical problems Hadamad claimed, even algebraic signs became “too heavy a baggage” for him, and he had to rely on “concrete representations, but of a quite different nature-cloudy imagery” that indicated relations of inclusion, exclusion, or order, or that held the structure of the whole problem together in such a way as to preserve its “physiognomy.” (Shepard, 1988, p. 1610)

Shepard does not elaborate on what is meant by physiognomy but from the context of the quote it would appear to be images that have a strong affective charge. (Physiognomy in thought is associated with a fusing of feelings with the perception of such objects, works of art, people, and phenomena.) Shepard reports about Einstein’s work as an adult. Throughout, Einstein’s work in theoretical physics was marked by interplay between concrete perceptual visualization on the one hand, and a relentless drive toward abstract, aesthetic principles of symmetry or invariance on the other. This interplay seems to have been mediated not by verbal deductions, “logical bridges, or mathematical formalisms, but by soaring leaps of spatial and physical intuitions.” Shepard, 1988, p. 156

What is meant by physical intuition can be partly understood by quotes from other scientists. For instance, Memory images of purely sensory impressions … may be used as elements of thought combinations without it being necessary or even possible, to describe these in words. … For, equipped with an awareness of the physical form of an object, we can clearly imagine all of the perspective images which we may expect upon viewing this or that side. (Warren and Warren, 1968, pp. 252–254)

Shepard also reports about other notable scientists, inventors, and engineers who also appeared to have similar tendencies as Maxwell and Einstein. His list includes inventors such as Nikola Telsa; chemists such as James Watson and Francis Crick, formulators of the three dimensional structure of DNA; Friedrich A. Kekule, formulator of the structure of the benzene molecule; Mitchell Fiegenbaum, an early contributor to chaos theory; and Richard Feynman and Stephan Hawking. This is only a partial list of creative scientists, inventors, and

138

6 Sensory Understanding

mathematicians who could be cited with regard to their nonverbal mode of thinking. They either worked with physical models or concrete imaginary physical situations as they moved toward the use of formal mathematical symbols to represent these situations from a theoretical perspective. Robert and Michele Bernstein in their survey of what they describe as important thinking tools of creative scientists and artists comment on the role of imaging. They mention some of the same scientists and inventors but also include artists. They also emphasize that this imaging is multimodal (Root-Bernstein and RootBernstein, 1999, pp. 51–68). Recall that in Chapter 2 there was the historical account of Faraday using sight, sound, and even his whole body to gain information about electrostatic phenomena. Researchers who studied his work proposed that there was a close coordination between hand, body, and mind. Also mentioned was the process by which Maxwell arrived at a fully developed mathematical representation of electromagnetic phenomena. Contrary to the usual picture of the theoretical scientist as only engaged with abstract formulations devoid of involvement with concrete materials and images, Maxwell starts out a wanting to “lay hold of a clear physical conception” after reviewing Faraday’ paper. In further development he relies upon concrete imagery of electric fields as fluids and other kinds of mechanical images. Maxwell relied upon a well-developed physical intuition and visual imagination to develop an electromagnetic theory. There are several characteristics of the imagery and nonverbal thought processes that are to be noted: • The imagery is multimodal although Shepard and others have characterized it as visual. In some cases they appear to be mostly kinesthetic. • The imagery that occurs has a paradoxical quality to it. It is often concrete but at the same time carries with it a sense of the whole phenomenon or problem to be solved. • The images are physiognomic. There is a fusion of feeling and thinking. • At times there is an empathic relationship with the phenomena being studied.4

 In addition there was a strong inclination on the part of some of these scientists to search for symmetry in their theoretical formulations. Einstein and Maxwell sifted through relevant concrete experience and gradually moved to a progressive abstraction that ended up in formulations dealing with invariances. Closely related to this search for symmetry seems to be a certain kind of aesthetic sensibility where the eventual formulations result in a strong affective reaction that is more than a result of the satisfaction of accomplishing something. There is a sense of internal transformation, reordering, and reshaping which results in forms and formulations that to the creator have a beauty. This beauty is more than intellectual satisfaction. It is akin to the artist finishing a sculpture or painting The spare abstract mathematical formulations of the famous e = mc2 and the final equations of electromagnetism of Maxwell might be compared to the very spare works of contemporary minimalist painters and sculpture who paint monochromatic canvases or place a singular object on wall of the museum. The algebraic formula or simple object has associated with it a deep context that it represents. How the scientists or artist arrived there was and is part of the aesthetic appreciation of these symbolic works. 4

Scientific Imagination and the Role of Intuition

139

These characteristics are associated with what has been called “intuition.” In the context of science and science education this type of thinking has been given negative connotations and usually it is not seen as a useful habit of mind to develop. Rigor, clear thinking, and logic are usually highly valued and strongly emphasized in science education. There are certainly important reasons for this emphasis. What is needed is recognition that there is a need for balancing these two types of thought processes. There is a need for providing a sociocultural environment and a pedagogical structure that promotes a dialectical process of moving back and forth between intuitive thought and rational explication and analysis. In an exhaustive survey of research literature on intuition, Tony Bastick (1982) presented a summary of the essential components of intuitive thought. His summary includes those characteristics in the above list. Although his summary and analysis of this literature is not recent, his wide-ranging and extensive survey does provide some basis for considering intuition as a process that can be studied and that is integral to creative thought. At one point he makes a significant comment that could be a summary of his synthesis of this literature. It has important pedagogical implications. This comment is made in the context of the role of concrete analogies. There is evidence to show that we think better in concrete examples or analogies because one can empathize, become emotionally involved with the situations, and use the evoked feeling for intuitive thought. The ease with which one can empathize with a concrete situation makes that concrete situation or analogy more suitable for intuitive thought. The more modalities involved, the more accessible is the intuitive information which has been encoded by the physiological dimensions comprising these modalities (Bastick, 1982, p. 271).

Bastick has summarized the results of studies that compared the relative ability of subjects to remember the ideas or abstract rules when presented by way of concrete examples or more generalized statements. It was found that concrete examples will evoke feelings more so than general statements. Likewise, “Metaphor, simile, analogy, and concrete situations help us to empathize” (Bastick, 1982, p. 273). He is proposes that through empathy, feelings are evoked and enable subjects to assimilate and better remember what is presented. The evoked feelings can be associated with similar feelings from past experiences. If the empathic reaction evokes more than one sensory modality such as vision, then more associations will be developed. His claim is based on those studies that found future use or recall of ideas or rules that will be easier because of the strong associations developed. What is of interest is that some writers such as Bruner and Clinchy propose that intuition can be trained (Ripple, 1964, Bruner and Clinchy, 1967). They propose that cross-modal transposition exercises are one way of bringing this about. By this they mean providing students with situations where students can develop ideas by way of using different sensory modalities. According to some research studies cited by Bastick a common cross-modal transposition is between the visual and kinesthetic modes (Teghtsoonian and Teghtsoonian, 1965; Posner, 1967). More about the relationship between these two modes will be developed later. These studies and their general recommendation would provide support for the developmental progression proposed in Chapter 2. In the early stages of inquiry

140

6 Sensory Understanding

there can be either direct tactile or kinesthetic involvement. These kinds of experiences can be represented through gestural and visual means. Students need help in carrying out these cross-modal transpositions. Their gestures and drawings may initially be idiosyncratic but through the process of classroom dialogue they can become the means for mapping formal scientific conceptions. It is here that computer simulations would make sense and have great value. However, from my perspective these simulations would best be presented after students have had experiences with physical materials first. For instance, after multiple sessions of exploring with siphon bottles students could move to working with computer simulations showing the same kind of device and arrangement with a reservoir of water. They could extend their explorations and further develop their intuitions by being able to change the distance between the siphon bottle and reservoir to distances not practi­cable in the classroom. They could also change the air pressure outside the system to see what happens to the flow of water between the reservoir and the siphon bottle. In this manner the computer simulation extends and deepens the original experience with the real siphon bottle. In considering the above examples given by Shepard and others who have studied the way scientists think some basic issues are implied. 1. Shepard prefers to describe the nonverbal thought processes of scientists as visual. West titles his book The Mind’s Eye, where he also relates examples of scientists’ nonverbal thought processes. Ferguson (1977) in his history of the invention of the telegraph and steamboat uses the same terminology. Whether it is because of the prevailing terminology or deliberate characterization each writer labeled nonverbal thinking as visual imagination. In reading their work it is apparent that this that this type of thought processes encompasses more than the visual. For instance, at one point Shepard even cites an instance of a French mathematician Bernard Morin who is blind. Morin was involved in formulations for the deformation of turning a sphere inside out that seemingly is a visuospatial problem but could also be considered kinesthetic in form. 2. The use of the label “visual” privileges this sensory modality leading us to too strongly associate it with vision when there are also elements of the tactile, kinesthetic, and haptic modalities involved. As Water Ong (1977) has observed, there is indeed a preponderance of the use of the visual in science and in Western culture in general. The problem is that using this term can lead to an ­overemphasis on visual observation. From a pedagogical point of view there is a need for a more encompassing term and a deeper consideration of the relationship between the visual and the other sensory modalities. The purpose of describing the different pedagogical practices previously developed in this chapter was to point out the multimodalities of exploring representation and explanation. For my purposes, in this book I will use the term multimodal thinking. 3. From the accounts of Shepard it is apparent that there is a nonverbal thought process. As one becomes acquainted with a phenomenon, multimodal thinking may occur that eventually comes to a conscious level and is represented in words and visual symbols. To what extent does language facilitate this process? Is the thinking process one that is mostly happening in the nonverbal imagination and

Nonverbal Thought: Vision and Its Relationship to the Other Senses

141

then represented in the linguistic mode? These are questions that have important implications for pedagogical practice. In the chapter on the role of the body in learning I cited the work of Damasio. Based on his research he proposes that there is thinking without language. 4. In the previous chapter it was mentioned that Lakoff and Johnson anchored most development of metaphor in bodily based experience. Related to this hypothesis is the proposal that correlations between and among sensory systems is also a foundation for the development of basic analogies. Research suggests that early analogies and metaphors arise out of cross-sensory correlations or synesthesia (Marks, 1978). Related to this individual development is the historical use of words where linguistic analysis indicates that use of the word changes over time moving from a more tactile origin to a visual interpretation (Classen, 1993). These findings suggest that there is an importance for rich sensory experience for children. This is especially true if we take a long-term developmental view where we want to provide a rich and prolonged gestation period for analogies that can provide the concrete foundation for scientific reconceptualizations. This approach would be similar in intent for the kind of gestation described above regarding creative scientists. In the following sections I review several theoretical accounts of sensory perception. These may seem to be far removed from everyday classroom practice but I include them because they provide a rationale for a way of thinking about the movement through an inquiry investigation. They help provide a way of emphasizing the importance of making careful and explicit connections between early experiences in an investigation that can be highly kinesthetic to later representations that are highly visual and verbal. They also provide a way of thinking about how science education can be framed in a more holistic orientation.

Nonverbal Thought: Vision and Its Relationship to the Other Senses Vision is essential to gathering information and evidence in scientific research as well as in communicating by visual representations about a theory or experimental data. As reported in the last chapter the visual imagination is central to scientists’ attempts to assimilate results from experiments or create new theoretical work. To some extent science educators in helping students to assimilate their experiences and construct new concepts use visual representations. However, greater emphasis and priority is still given to verbal literacy in the school context. These suggest an important pedagogical question: What kind of relationship is there between language and visual representations? However, this question does not go far enough. If there is acknowledgement of nonverbal thinking, the visual is what is given the most attention. In fact, in Western culture the visual could be said to be a dominant sensory modality. Consider that Shepard and other writers mentioned above characterize the nonverbal thinking of

142

6 Sensory Understanding

scientists as visual. This may seem contradictory to what I just wrote about the role of visual thinking but the point is that other sensory modalities are involved as receptors of experience and as means of representations. Therefore, a corollary to the above question should be:What is the relationship between vision and the other sensory modalities? I put forth these questions because they are implicit in the developmental progression proposed in the previous chapters. Examining these relationships provides a deeper rationale for the pedagogical model given in Chapter 2. It also can provide a way of thinking about how this kind of model can provide an authentic approach to teaching science.

Thinking Without Language To start off, providing answers to these questions, it would be useful to consider a story this time instead of a scenario from a video. This story is about a mathematician who struggled throughout his time in school because of language limitations. It again provides another example of the scientific imagination and also illustrates the biases of formal schooling. More importantly the person relates that he utilized more than visual imagination in his work.

Case Study #3 At a conference titled “Thought without language” one of the speakers was an English mathematician (Janson, 1988) who told his story of coping with severe dyslexia as he tried to survive the formal educational system. As a child in school he had great difficulties reading and writing. By the age of 10 he was considered below level even though he could answer teacher’s questions intelligently. Through efforts of his mother he went to various schools to continue his education but still his problems were not recognized until he met a professor of psychology at Cambridge University. With this professor’s help his language abilities improved. Then he managed to get into the university concentrating on mathematics. When he could have his exams read to him, he did well eventually completing a doctorate. As an adult he still suffers from these problems but has developed coping strategies to get by. What is interesting is his account of how he works on math or physics problems. “From an early age I found that many things were easier to think about without language. This usually, but not always, meant thinking in terms of pictures and was particularly true when trying to make or understand intricate mechanisms” (Weiskrantz, 1988, p. 503). He goes on to say that he also employed tactile memory to solve problems. As an example where this may hold is in the tying of knots. He points out that they are extremely hard to describe in words. He imagines the feel of the knot to help him think about them and does this in a nonvisual manner.

Thinking Without Language

143

So, in this instance there are more than visual images involved in these types of nonverbal thought processes. His problems are ones especially associated with those who have dyslexia. However, others who may not have this problem also describe their thought processes and problem solving in similar terms where there is the working out of problems by way of tactile or even the whole body. (See Chapter 9 of Sparks of Genius by Robert and Michele Root-Berstein. They also give multiple examples of scientists and mathematicians nonverbal thought processes.) Somewhat related to this observation is what happens when students are deep in their exploration of an intrinsically interesting phenomenon. In the scenario about the two boys exploring the siphon system, I pointed out that I sometimes made comments or interjected questions as the students explored with the bottles. Most often they did respond to me but I had a sense that they were tolerating me rather than responding to me. The main attention was on exploring with the system and getting the water to move in and out of the bottle. They answered me probably because we were being videotaped. At other times when working with students I have found that they won’t even answer me because they are so involved with the materials. It is not that they are being rude but more a matter that talking would break their focused concentration. It is my opinion that it is more than a matter of concentration. From my own experience of working with materials and multiple experiences of working with children I could perceive that during these times of explorations there is a different mode of involvement than what is employed in verbal dialogue. The visual and haptic modalities are being engaged in a direct and focused way. As the mathematician relates in his story, teachers perceived him as a slow learner and in fact put him in a special education class. Schooling is centered on literacy with the result that what is judged worthwhile is in terms of what can be expressed in aural and written language. During explorations students can be resistant to talk or when they do speak they come up with fragments of sentences or very incomplete descriptions. If teachers do allow an open type of exploration, there is a tendency to move the students through it quickly. The general understanding is that real learning happens when the students talk about what they did with the materials. If there is talk on the part of the teacher during the explorations, it is usually about clarification of directions or asking for a direct report. Sometimes the teacher will probe students’ thinking while they are exploring not with the intent of supporting the manipulative process but to prematurely conceptualize what the students think is happening. I think there is insufficient understanding on the part of some teachers and curriculum developers of what occurs during these times. Teachers who are sensitive to students’ behavior recognize in some ways that the students are involved productively even though there is little overt sign that this may be true. Part of the problem for the teacher and science education in general is the manner in which learning is characterized. One way to get at this situation is to pose a general question. Can there be learning without language? In asking this question I want to go beyond just implicit learning. Picking up information about a phenomenon does

144

6 Sensory Understanding

occur as one manipulates materials. What I am asking here is whether there is conceptualization, theorizing, or hypotheses generation that occurs without language. Taking this further, is this happening even without an internal dialogue? This is a critical question because it appears that sensory involvement with materials is often one that is of the type that engages the nonverbal part of the mind.

The Neurophysiology of Intuition One source supporting the claim that thinking can be carried out nonverbally is from research in neurophysiology. Eduardo Bisiach at the same conference that the dyslexic mathematician spoke presented a paper that examined the issue of nonverbal thought. The arguments and development of his model are too involved to report here but briefly they are based on the following. There are many studies of braininjured patients that reveal there are very specific kinds of functions that are associated with different parts of the brain. The brain is highly modular in the manner in which it processes and stores experiences and in the way it is activated as a person solves a problem. These findings have moved some cognitive scientists to propose that there is parallel processing in the brain. Multiple pathways are activated as thinking is occurring. This is a highly simplistic summary but it is important to note that this research suggests that the visual and other sensory modes of experiencing and representing experiences are involved in certain kinds of thought processes separate from the parts of the brain associated with language (Damasio, 1999; Barsalou, 1999; Freeman, 2001). A basic issue that has come up with the attempts to develop models of how thought processes occur is the relationship between the verbal and the nonverbal. Some of the formulations of these models center around what role language plays in thought processes in its early stages, and then how thought is made explicit through the written and spoken word. Different theoretical models have given greater or lesser weight to the shaping of thinking by language. For instance, Bisiach challenges the generally accepted position that language shapes thought. Based on his and other clinical investigations he claims that “language does not qualify as an autonomous representational system” (Bisiach, 1988, p. 472) By this statement he means language needs other kinds of representations to function. The nature of these other representations is described as mental images that are not well defined. As a result of this claim he challenges the often-cited position of Vygotsky who proposed that inner speech, even fragmentary elements, “constitute the essential framework of adult thought” (Bisiach, 1988, p. 479).5

 Interpreters of Vygotsky tended to emphasize the role of language. This was not necessarily the position of Vygotsky (Wertsch, 1991). 5

The Role of Vision in Exploring a Phenomenon

145

Damasio further supports this view. Recall Damsio’s levels of consciousness where he proposes that at one level language is not involved and that the switch to language is so quick as to appear to involve language. Bisiach does qualify his position by acknowledging the role of social intercourse with its verbal communication and the essential role of language in communication. He bases part of his model of thinking on the difference between analogue and prepositional representation, arguing that sensory processes in some way are represented analogically. How this actually occurs in the brain is not clear.6 Considering this issue from the perspective of an embodied theory of cognition there is a line of research and theoretical development that proposes “many aspects of language and communication arise from, and continue to be guided by, bodily experience (Gibbs, 2005 p. 207). According to Gibbs the traditional view of language as being related to abstract and disembodied symbols ignores how meaning is related to ordinary experience.

The Role of Vision in Exploring a Phenomenon If there is an acknowledgement of some kind of nonverbal learning, the visual mode of engagement is usually mentioned. Because vision is so prominent in all that we do, we assume that most of the information gathered is by way of the eyes. As previously mentioned, writers will often use the term visual thinking when they mean a multisensory image or involvement. Western cultural practices privileges vision, placing it central to how we learn and communicate. The issue here for me is not that vision’s central role be downgraded but that it is important to recognize the contributions of the other ways in which we pick up sensory information and the need for coordination between vision and these other systems. In the previous chapter I elaborated on the kind of the sensory information the siphon bottles picked up as the two boys manipulated the bottles and proposed that there was a need on their part to coordinate this information to make sense of what was happening. In recent times there have been reconsiderations of sensory integrations and experience. James Gibson and a recent work by Varela, Thompson, and Rosch describe this coordination as visually guided action. Their characterization of this process provides a way of thinking differently about this fundamental issue. It is central to very deep questions about how we learn and experience our environment. First, consider that Gibson in his conception of perception reformulated a way to think about the kind of information picked up by way of our sensory organs. Traditionally, there was the assignment of specific kinds of information with specific

 I mentioned this here because Mark Johnson also argues for non-propositional modes of thought that are derivative of body-based experience. Both Johnson and Bisiach are concerned and argue against the claim that only propositions but not analogues qualify as cognitive structures. 6

146

6 Sensory Understanding

organs – vision with the eyes, sound with the ears, touch with the fingers, and smell with the nose. The senses in this traditional conception are passive. There are also problems about how this information is represented in the mind. Gibson proposes a solution for these problems by redefining perception. Working within an ecological framework he defines sensory systems in terms of the kind of information picked up from the environment. His approach is to consider the senses as active and not passive in their function, making a distinction between senses as receptors and senses as systems. He takes what is considered the five basic senses and redefines them as the visual system, auditory system, the taste–smell system, the basic orienting system, and the haptic system. Here haptic subsumes all those sensations associated with touch including heat, pressure, and the sense of movement – kinesthetics. The basic orienting system involves the sensing of up and down. It subsumes posture and balance that which includes the inner ear as sensing and in some way the muscular system as it acts in maintaining posture. He associates this active conception of the perceptual systems with metaphors such as resonating, extracting, optimizing, or symmetricalizing, and activities such as orienting, ­exploring, investigating, or adjusting. In a way, all of these could be associated with ­exploration. It is not clear to me why he has also included the term exploring (Gibson, 1979, p. 245). To get a sense of how the visual system is coordinated with other sensory systems consider how Gibson describes the manner in which the eye picks up information operating not by itself but within the whole body. The eye sits in a cavity constantly moving and at time consciously moved to take in the environment. The head rotates on the top of a body that rotates in all directions and moves through the environment. The eye then is not an isolated sense but part of a complex system of coordination involving the whole body. The flow of visual information in this complex interaction is not characterized as discrete pieces or snapshots. Instead, this flow is sampled by the visual and motor system (Gibson, 1979, p. 222). Gibson and some other writers (Gibbs, Lakoff, and Johnson) go as far as to say that all of the perceptual systems are participating in the coupling of vision with the movements of the whole body. Gibson takes the implication of this reconception further. Vision and hearing are distance-sensing systems. Information is coming from afar. With the basic orientation and haptic systems there is simultaneity of doing and feeling. When touching an object with our hands, there is both the feeling of its texture and its temperature acting on the skin, but at the same time there is the awareness of the grasping by the hand. Because of this inherent transactional involvement there is a need for a way of talking about the differentiation of the relatedness to an object. At times the sensing is of the object, while at other times it is the awareness of the impact of the object on our skin. There is a back and forth where sensing is sometimes in the foreground and other times when it is in the background. He proposes that the “optical information to specify the self, including the head, body, arms and hands accompanies the optical information to specify the environment. The two sources of information coexist” (Gibson, 1979, p. 116), therefore, the dualism of the observer and the environment is unnecessary. Self-perception and environment perception go together. He uses the terms “proprioception” and “exteroception” as designations for these types of information. Proprioception, as he defines it, is sensitivity to self (Gibson, 1979, p. 115). Proprioception is not one

The Role of Vision in Exploring a Phenomenon

147

special channel of sensations or several of them. He maintains that all the perceptual systems are propriosensitive as well as exterosenitive for they all provide information in their various ways about the observer’s activities (Gibson, 1979, p. 115). The observer’s movement usually produces sights and sounds and impressions on the skin along with stimulation of the muscles, the joints, and the inner ear. Accordingly, information that is specific to the self is picked up as such, no matter what sensory nerve is delivering impulses to the brain. The point I wish to make is that information about the self is multiple and that all kinds are picked up concurrently (Gibson, 1979, p. 115). Varela, Thompson, and Rosch propose a similar kind of approach to perception and acknowledge the contributions of Gibson but make other kinds of distinctions as well as disagree with Gibson’s strong emphasis on the pickup of information from the visual environment. According to their reading of Gibson and his followers, there is a focus on the largely optical terms of perception and therefore emphasis on the environmental element of perception. For instance, Gibson states at one point: The information for the perception of an object is not its image. The information in light to specify something does not have to resemble it or copy it, or be a simulacrum or even an exact projection. Nothing [author’s italics] is copied in the light to the eye of an observer, not the shape of a thing, not the surface of it, not it substance, not its color, and certainly not it motion. But all these things are specified in the light. (Gibson, 1979, p. 305)

According to their reading of Gibson it seems that the environment is independent of the observer. Alternatively Varela, Thompson, and Rosch propose a concept of embodied action. To illustrate their conception they cite the experiments of Held and Hein (1958) who exposed kittens to a lighted environment under varying conditions. A first group of animals was allowed to move normally, but each of them was harnessed to a simple carriage and basket that contained a member of the second group of animals. The two groups therefore shared the same visual experience, but the second group was entirely passive. When the animals were released after a few weeks of this treatment, the first group of kittens behaved normally, but those who had been carried around behaved as if they were blind: they bumped into objects and fell over edges. This beautiful study supports the view that objects are not seen by the visual extraction of features but rather by the visual guidance of action. (Emphasis is mine) (Varela et al., 1991, p. 175)

The visual guidance of action centers on what they call recurrent patterns of sensorimotor activity. This is a coupling between visual information picked up from the eye and all the various systems involved in grasping an object as well as movement through the environment. They point out that this coupling can be traced to certain kinds of neural systems that can be found in a wide range of living system. Thus, this conception has some scientific support (Varela et al., 1991, p. 175). In some ways this does not seem to be very different from Gibson’s position but they maintain there are essential differences. They seem to be giving more emphasis to sensorimotor activity compared to Gibson. They wish to avoid a dualism whereby the person and environment are independent of each other. Gibbs in his comprehensive review of research on perception and activity gives haptic perception a primary role. It is through the action on objects that a person

148

6 Sensory Understanding

can gain a feeling for fundamental properties about objects. For instance, without looking at a rod and just by manipulating it, a person can guess the rod’s length (Turvey et al., 1989). Another study determined how many objects people could identify on the basis of touch alone. Blindfolded subjects handled 100 common objects such as a toothbrush, paper clip, fork, and screwdriver. Approximately 96% of the identifications were correct and 94% occurred within 5 sec of handling the object (Klatzky et al., 1993). These studies lend support to the contention that the tactile and haptic systems play a key role in engaging with the physical environment. There is one theory about perception and action that has significant implications for teaching. This is called “sensorimotor contingency” theory. Gibbs sums up this theory by writing: People will experience only those aspects of the world to which they are attending … [and] perception is a skill-based activity that fundamentally depends on eye, head, and body movements. To bring something into visual consciousness, one must do something (e.g. squint, lean forward, tilt toward the light, walk to a window) and not merely passively see. We experience only the things we specifically attend to, depending on our current needs and goals. (Gibbs, pp. 66, 67)

The implication of this theory is that what a student attends to in exploring with materials is limited. Also, there is the possibility that another person such as a teacher or well-designed materials and devices can guide this attention. To attempt to place this view of perception as a strongly coupled system in a practical context consider what is happening in the scenario when the two boys observe the changing water levels in the bottles. At times they are holding the bottles while sucking or blowing into one of the tubings. The action is both in the exertion of the lungs and in the muscles of the arms. One could say that the learning occurrs by way of supporting the bottles and exerting the lungs. The haptic and the visual are coupled where the perception alternates between the feel of the increasing weight of the bottles with the visual pick up of the changing water level in the bottles and the tubing. The eye is telling them what changes are occurring in the system as they manipulate it. Like the situation with the kitten there is the visually guided action of the hands as well as the resulting action of the lungs. Varela et al. propose a middle way between the perceiver and the environment that they see as different from the Gibsonian approach. They attempt to avoid a dualism between the treatment of the world as pregiven and the organism as adapting to it. Gibson does say at one point that it is a mistake to separate the natural world from the man-made as well as to separate it from the cultural. He proposes a type of monism where the world of “mental products” is not seen as separate from the world of “material products” (Gibson, 1979, pp. 202–203). Whether his position may indeed be seen as an extreme or as very strong environmentalism, he does make some useful distinctions and reformulations of perception that would appear to have direct implications for how we think about pedagogy. The distinctions made here would seem to be far removed from the everyday practice of the teacher or of the priorities of the curriculum designer but I think they have deep implications. It comes back again to how exploration is conceived

Visualism, Language, and Science Pedagogy

149

by science educators. Activity on the part of the student in engaging with materials doesn’t seem to be disputed. It is how the student comes to know something and reconceptualizes the experience with a phenomenon that is the critical issue. If my interpretations fit with what Gibson and Varela et al. propose then coming to know something doesn’t start after the hands-on activity is over. It is occurs while the student is involved in the hands-on activity. The teacher needs to pay as much attention to these manipulations as they do to the latter verbal processing of the experiences. The manipulations of the materials are not a matter of witnessing a phenomenon. It is a way of coming to know and thinking about the phenomenon. At a more practical and concrete level it is my stance that the teacher should give special attention to the haptic and basic orienting interaction more than the visual during the early stages of explorations. In the situation with the siphons the teacher should pay more attention to the way students react to the changing water levels when they suck and blow rather than just how they react to the visible changing water levels in the tubing and the jars. As Gibbs points out perception is a skillsbased activity implying that these skills can be fostered and developed. Also, during explorations attention of students can be directed to specific properties by the cons­ cious design of the materials and timely and sensitive intervention by the teacher. Recall in the account of Faraday’s work that he would discover subtle happenings that were significant in terms of a useful theory of electromagnetic phenomena. He then worked to design materials and apparatus to magnify these effects so that others could notice them. Sometimes simple means can be used to draw attention to important happenings. In the investigation with the siphon bottles sliding a rubber band on the jar provides a way to keep track of the changing water level in the jar. As the water level in the jar changes slowly, the rubber band acts as a reference point of observing this change. Without this it is harder to see the slow or small changes. Teachers can draw attention to happenings during manipulations but these should be in the context of the manipulations so that students realize the significance of the teacher’s comments. In the context of exploring with the siphon bottles the changing water levels are readily apparent to the eyes but the relative magnitude of the changing forces in the system is not. The teacher can suggest that the student hold the bottle off the table so that the student can experience the changing weight of water. Moving the bottle up and down determines whether the water flows slowly or quickly. Vision in this situation is more than supplemented by the haptic. There is a visual guidance of action. With this orientation hands-on exploration is more than a means of motivation. Such experiences would be seen as essential for a broader and deeper understanding of what is meant by “getting a good feeling for a phenomenon.”

Visualism, Language, and Science Pedagogy There is a general consensus among science educators that hands-on activities must be coupled with verbal discourse. “Sense making” or “Processing for meaning” are phrases that are applied to this phase of inquiry. There are varying interpretations

150

6 Sensory Understanding

given to what this phrase means and how it should be conducted. In my observations of teachers, in sense making there is a general tendency to introduce scientific terminology and scientific concepts without much careful mapping of the kind of sensory experiences the students had during their explorations or experiments with the terms and abstract formulations of the concepts. They often do not give conscious attention to the kind of language they use and how it relates to the kind of sensory experiences the students have had. The developmental progression proposed in the pedagogical model of Chapter 2 is designed to provide for a more deliberate and explicit process by which these experiences can be carefully assimilated in a manner that visual representations are related to these experiences and provide the basis for conceptualization. Looking at this phase of inquiry from another perspective, there are those who speak of “minds-on” sciencing. Associated with this term is critical or analytical thinking. According to this view students need to distance themselves from what they have experienced and think objectively about their experiences. As already noted the visual mode is closely associated with scientific and technological thinking. As Gibson points out it is a distancing mode of perception. Therefore, it appears that sense making according to this view should be some kind of process whereby the visual and aural modes are connected and that it should be done in a way that puts distance between the observer and the phenomena being investigated. This orientation is already deeply embedded in scientific culture and in intellectual discourse in general. However, the emphasis on objectivity may be to such a degree that students experience a kind of alienation from the phenomenon being investigated. They go through the motions of thinking and conceptualizing as a type of exercise to get through school without developing any sense of personal meaning associated with the phenomenon being investigated. Their connection to the world becomes disjunctive. Here also a consideration of the connection between sensory experiences and conceptualization can address this issue. A careful review of terms used in science teaching during the sense-making phase of inquiry indicates that many of these are visual based. Walter Ong and Constance Classen write about the sensory origins of these terms and reflect on the significance of these origins as they relate to contemporary practices such as those in the sciences. I think it is useful to consider these two writers’ reflections on these terms because as Claissen states at one point: [T]he way we feel and think is obviously deeply influenced by the language we speak and vice versa. To the extent that words express sensory experience and condition thought, consequently, the sensory basis of much of our vocabulary, and particularly of our intellectual vocabulary, indicates that we think through our senses. The exploration of how we grope to express sensory experience through language, and to convey nonsensory experiences through sensory metaphors, is revealing not only of how we process and organize sensory data, but also of the sensory underpinnings of our culture. (Classen, 1993, p. 590)

As already mentioned the visual mode dominates how educators think about the gathering of experiences and about the vocabulary describing these experiences. Such practice does reflect standard scientific methods and habits of mind.

Visualism, Language, and Science Pedagogy

151

However, writers such as Ong and Ernest Schachtel maintain that there can be an overemphasis on the visual at the expense of alienating students from their environment. If one of the goals of science education is to provide for a holistic experience, then there should be a concern about this emphasis as it is reflected in the use of language and in the way sense making is carried out. There should be an awareness of the relationship between the visual and other sensory modalities during the sense-making process so that a proper balance is maintained among the different sensory modalities and between intuitive and analytical thought. Ong (1977, p. 127) points out that there has been an implicit analogy in the English language between visual perception and knowledge. The title of his essay reflects this bias; “I See What You Say.” This conception has a symbolic and a mythological association, meaning that it is not just below the surface but pervasive in our language and the way we think about knowledge. Drawing upon the comments of Bernard Lonergan and adding his own insights he points out that there are limitations to this analogy as they are with any analogies. Sight takes in only the surface features of objects and the environment. In addition, having a highly developed visual sense is not enough. For instance, he points out that there is a difference between having a keen visual sense and the use of this sense for specific types of intellectual purposes. Ong points out that the hunter in a traditional society has keen eyes and is a keen observer of his environment. He may have many words to describe different plants or animals but lacks a language that promotes analysis and abstract conceptualization as is done by modern science. “In order to make what we see scientifically usable, we have to be able to verbalize it and that in elaborately controlled ways” (Ong, 1977, p. 130). According to his view there is no understanding without some involvement in words. Therefore, it is not a matter of doing away or strongly downplaying the visual and aural mode. What is of importance is the way that vision is coordinated with the other senses and how it is aligned and connected with scientific terminology. With the emphasis on knowing as seeing there is a distancing of the person from an object. According to Ong a consequence of this association of vision with surfaces is that the person is excluded (Ong, 1977, pp. 123–124). There is a kind of alienation. Ong goes as far as to describe this visual bias as a hypervisualism. The person as an interior is left out in this analogy. According to him a corrective to hypervisualism is to recognize that the aural mode gives a sense of the interiority of an object. You can hold an object and shake it or tap it to get a sense of its interior. The voice comes from within us. The aural, he maintains, “cannot be reduced to a visual presentation” (Ong, 1977, p. 125). Therefore, recognizing the contribution of the aural can counterbalance this overemphasis on the visual. Ong at the same time proposes that for something to become intelligible the verbal medium is necessary and that elaborate ways have been developed to link the visual with the verbal. Therefore, he seems to be proposing that we must recognize that the visual analogy may be useful but we shouldn’t let it overwhelm the way we think about discourse. I find this solution confusing. It seems there is a fusing together of objects making sounds with a person using his or her voice in describing an object. The analogy doesn’t work for me. What he or she develops regarding the relationship among the

152

6 Sensory Understanding

senses is more useful and provides a way of thinking about how hypervisualism can be lessened. (This hypervisualism also has psychological consequences that will be addressed in the next section. Ernest Schachtel also writes about a continuum of the senses and what this means in terms of a person’s relationship to the environment and his or her mental health.) For instance, taking this analysis further Ong presents a long list of words that exemplify visually based terms. I picked out some which are in the common language of science education. These are terms that are frequently used to talk about the processes and pedagogy of teaching science. Consider the following list: Insight*, theory, evidence*, speculation, clarify, show, observe, represent, demonstrate, exposition, explain, analyze*, definition, outline*, chart, plan, list According to Ong some of these terms are on the surface visually based while others have etymologies deriving from the visual. The starred ones are those that also have a tactile component. Now consider terms taken from another list that are tactually based: Deduce*, induce*, follow, draw a conclusion*, decide, perceive, propose*, arrange*, order, system, method, establish, conceive, express*, convince, Here the starred ones have a kinesthetic component. He makes several interesting points about this list commenting on the all-pervasive role of the visual in Western culture. In considering the first list we would be working under a real handicap if we were “dealing with knowledge and intellection without massive visualist conceptualization, that is, without conceiving of intelligence through models appealing to vision”(Ong, 1977, p. 134). However, he also points out that this dominant visualism is often complemented by the tactile sense. These are the starred members. In the other list the starred members of the tactually based term there is a kinesthetic component. He proposes that this juxtaposition arises from the following continuum: Touch – taste – smell – hearing – sight When conceived in this manner, sight and touch complement each other. Movement from touch to sight represents movement toward greater distance from the object, toward greater abstraction and formalization. Movement from touch to sight is toward concreteness and subjectivity (Ong, 1977, p. 136). The point here seems to be that the visual bias in these words has the possibility of being corrected or balanced by also recognizing the tactile and kinesthetic elements of these terms. According to his analysis vision is a fragmenting sense while touch and the kinesthetic are integrating ones. In the chapter on movement I will examine further this relationship in discussing the role of gesture in communication as the means to bring about a connection between the haptic and the visual. In a way his continuum is somewhat parallel to the pedagogical practices I previously proposed of how siphoning can be presented to students. Going from scenario G to A is a movement from touch to hearing and sight where in G there is high kinesthetic and tactile involvement. The demonstrations of D is in between having a mixture of talk and seeing but no tactile involvement although there can be a sympathetic kinesthetic involvement. So, by moving from G toward A, a student

Visualism, Language, and Science Pedagogy

153

can have the grounding in the kinesthetic and tactile experience by the handling of the bottles, the sucking and blowing into the tubing. Through careful “sense making” these highly involving senses can complement the eventual visual representations, which are needed to develop the abstractions about invisibles forces such as the weight of air and water. The continuum instead of being separate distinct pedagogical approaches can then be seen as a way of providing multimodal experiences moving from ones that are highly tactile and kinesthetic to ones that are highly visual and verbal. This is another rationale behind the developmental progression proposed in the pedagogical model of Chapter 2.7 I used sensory understanding in the title of this chapter instead of something like sensory knowledge. This was because of Ong’s analysis pointing out that understanding is a strongly kinesthetic term. It can have both visual and a tactile reference. Understanding has associated meanings of empathy that I feel should be an essential part of elementary science education. Students should develop a feeling for a pheno­ menon or organism. One of the major goals of elementary science education would be on “understanding” where the emphasis is on the development of physical intuitions grounded in kinesthetic and tactile experiences. Again, this is not to ignore or neglect the visual aspect of explorations but to counterbalance the highly visual bias of prevailing pedagogies and scientific language. There would a conscious explicit effort on the part of the science educator to make connections with nonvisual experiences and use terms with a multisensory background. To relate this approach to a specific example let us return to scenario # 2 described in the previous chapter that was about the role of the body in learning. Recall that two students draw upon prior body – kinesthetic experiences in an attempt to make sense of explorations with water falling on a model waterwheel. Their descriptions were put forth in such a way that it is apparent they are drawing on nonvisual parts of their experiences. The teacher in this situation did not follow up on these analogies in a more deliberate manner getting the students to be more explicit in their analogies. One possibility would be for the teacher to take more time to get the students to expand on their analogies. The approach would be to have them describe the feelings and experiences more as their bodies move through a long tubing or as they move up and down on the hills and valleys of a roller coaster instead of jumping right to what these analogies mean scientifically. For instance, what does it feel like as one’s body moves through tubing getting the student to make connections between the

 There is some research that suggest that touch can provide similar kinds of information as sight. In a series of studies with blind subjects John Kennedy (1997) found that they use similar kinds of representations in their drawings as the sighted. In fact, in one study he discovers that a blind subject used a visual representation that only recently became a visual convention. This was the use of lines in a circle to represent the motion of wheels. Kennedy points out that this was a type of visual metaphor and upon further probing with his blind subjects found that they could understand as well as produce their own visual metaphors. Gibbs concludes after reviewing a number of studies of blind subjects that mental imagery does not have to be visual. Blind persons develop their imagery through the haptic exploration of objects (Gibbs, 2005, p. 131). 7

154

6 Sensory Understanding

kinesthetic experiencing and the tactile experiencing? Furthermore, the teacher could have the students make a drawing of these experiences and a drawing of what is happening with the water as it moves through the plastic tubing. Then through the use of other bridging analogies (Clement, 1991) move toward a more scientific conception. Having carried this out, the teacher could have brought forth other associated physical intuitions about forces and at the same time would have given more validation to the students’ analogy. A more explicit connection could be made between the student’s fanciful story with the associated personal connections and the beginning of the more abstract notions of the momentum and kinetic energy of the moving water. The point here is that even though scientific language may be loaded with visually based terms, and there is a need for visualization there is still room for a complementary role of tactile or kinesthetic representations. I would argue that making these kinds of connections brings a certain kind of authenticity to science teaching in the sense that the sense making is drawn from the students themselves. By following up and expanding on a student bringing forth some kind of personal experience it validates this experience. By then building a bridge between these personal experiences to a more scientific conception anchors the conception to something personally meaningful. This results in a process that is not cold and distancing but one that gives a positive affective charge to the resulting scientific conception. Satisfaction is gained by making this kind of connection. Coherence is promoted between happenings in the physical world and a student’s imaginative way of making connections to these happenings.

Authenticity in Science Education In Chapter 4 I brought up the question of what makes for an authentic science education experience. According to some accounts it appears to be defined mostly in terms of a social constructivist framework. Recall Spretnak’s summaries of what she calls core discontinuities where there are disconnections between persons and their environment. She also observes that some writers place great emphasis on the social context of learning almost to the point that the social is the sole contextual factor in shaping the thinking of a person. In the context of schooling the individual student’s interaction with materials and the resulting spontaneous analogies based on sensory images tend to be placed in the background. A way of addressing this issue is to examine the senses and how a student uses them to relate to nature and the rest of the world. Ong only partly dealt with these issues when he brought up hypervisualism and the need to correct this overemphasis. His formulation of a continuum of sense modalities where he places touch at one end and sight at the other leaves out the broader question of whether other modalities than touch can compensate for hypervisualism and the discontinuities of Spretnak. Ernest Schachtel has written about the senses in a way that can complement Ong’s approach and addresses in part the origin of the discontinuities of Spretnak’s critique.

Authenticity in Science Education

155

He doesn’t propose a continuum but deals with the senses by ranking them in a hierarchy. This hierarchy is in terms of the way each sense gives physical and psychological intimacy or objectivity. This ranking and sense of intimacy or objectivity is connected to how authentic, in my opinion, one might describe science education experiences. The manner in which a person relates to the environment can be a reflection of their emotional health or sickness. At a deep level it can reflect their spiritual connection as Spretnak outlines in her book as well as a sense of their ultimate relation to the universe. There is the long Western tradition of separating rationality and sensuality and in a parallel manner spirituality and sensuality. This is especially so within the traditions of science at least in modern times. Schachtel’s approach is a way of addressing these issues. Schachtel proposes two fundamental modes of perceptual relatedness: These are the subject-centered or autocentric and the object-centered or allocentric modes of perception. In the autocentric mode there is little or no objectification, the emphasis is on how and what the person feels. In this mode there is a close fusion between sensory quality and pleasure or unpleasure feelings (Schachtel’s terms) where the perceiver reacts to the encounters with objects (Schachtel, 1959, p. 83). In the allocenteric mode there is objectification, the emphasis is on what the object is like: “[T]here is either no relation or a less pronounced or less direct relation between perceived sensory qualities and pleasure–unpleasure feelings – the perceiver turns to the object actively and in doing so opens himself or herself toward it receptively (Schachtel, 1959, p. 83). It should be noted that he uses objectification in the sense that the object is perceived as existing independently of the perceiver and that there is a larger degree of awareness of the qualities of the object. Here objectification has a different sense than what is usually given in the scientific context. In some ways Schachtel almost relates it to a meditative stance. There is an awareness of the object as separate from oneself but there is a strong resonance. (At least this is my interpretation of what he means by this state of relatedness.) Here the object designates anything, natural or man-made. According to Schachtel’s account these modes of relatedness differentiate between and cut across the different senses. He places the different senses in a hierarchy where taste, smell and proprioception, and the thermal sense are designated as lower while the visual and aural assume a higher function. These former sensations are closely connected with states of our own body, pleasant or unpleasant, and the object causing the sensation. Thus, as far as the olfactory sense is concerned, what is giving off the aroma is not directly in contact with the body. The autocentric mode is closely associated with feelings arising from the direct impact of the object, and because of the pleasureunpleasure of these encounters the environment more directly controls the reaction. In contrast, seeing or hearing takes in information of objects from a distance. The object is not felt to take place in or near the organs of the eye or ear. Sight gathers in a great deal of sensory data when compared with the so-called lower senses. Schachtel claims that the focusing of vision can be done in an emotionally neutral way. Therefore, these senses are more allocentric in their function.

156

6 Sensory Understanding

In his hierarchical scheme the senses of touch lies in between. He and others propose that it can be both autocentric – subject-centered and allocentric – object– centered. It depends on the attitude of the perceiver. This characterization has a similarity to what Gibson has proposed and would seem to be compatible with Ong’s placing touch as a corrective to hypevisualism. Schachtel does allow that the autocentric senses such as smell and taste can at times be allocentric, but clearly vision is the most valued and is taken to be in the highest regard. He also gives some other qualifications about when each of the senses can be in a more allocentric mode. There is some question about this classification in terms of a hierarchy and the assignment of vision and hearing to a more allocentric relatedness. Constance Claissen (1993) relates how smell at one time in the West had an importance greater than vision and vision was considered a superficial sense revealing only exteriors. Smell was associated with spiritual truth. In other cultures senses other than the visual were considered as the defining cultural symbol. For instance, The Tzotzil of Mexico center their cultural mythology on heat. Therefore, in some ways Schachtel’s ordering of the senses particularly in terms of a hierarchy is problematic. Although Schachtel’s ordering of the senses reflects a Western bias, his thinking about a person’s relatedness to the environment proves to be useful, especially when he differentiates a person’s stance or attitude toward the environment. He advocates for a relatedness that would have a person open to the fullness of objects. This approach is part of what Portoghesi, I assume, means when he writes about “listening to the environment.” This is an aesthetic attitude that has been described as a type of paradoxical involvement where there is both intimacy and distance. The object resonates with deep layers of the mind. This kind of involvement can be one way to think about what is authentic in science education. What most attracted my attention to Schachtel’s portrayal of the role of the different senses and their relatedness to the world was his characterization of the scientific orientation. Here is an extended quote, very long, but summarizing a very critical point. Perception in the service of scientific purposes also is usually perception of an object-ofuse. The scientist, in these cases, looks at the object with one or more hypotheses and with the purpose of his research in mind, and thus “uses” the object to corroborate or disprove a hypotheses, but does not encounter the object as such, in its own fullness. Also, modern natural science has as its main goal prediction, i.e. the power to manipulate objects in such a way that certain predicted events will happen. This means that only those aspects of the object are deemed relevant which make it suitable for such manipulation or control. Hence, the scientist usually will tend to perceive the object merely from the perspective of his power to control certain events or processes which will affect the object in a predicted way. That is to say that his view of the object will be determined by the ends which he pursues in his experimentation. Thus, it becomes an object-of-use. He may achieve a great deal in this way and add important data to our knowledge, but to the extent to which he remains within the framework of this perspective he will not perceive the object in its own right. He may learn to know something very useful about the object but he will not encounter or know the object itself. His knowledge will remain “operational”, he is only concerned with the question whether a particular approach will “work” toward a particular end, whether it can be used to produce a particular result, and he perceives the object as an “object-of-use”

Authenticity in Science Education

157

for the operation which he intends to perform with it. Needless to say, not all scientists perceive the objects in which they are interested in this way all the time. Their attitude undergoes changes. But in their attempt as well as in many other people’s to fit some object or phenomenon into some system, preconception, or hypothesis, one can often observe a blinding of themselves toward the pure and full being of the object itself. Perception, then, may become almost an act of aggressive violence in which the perceiver, like Procrustes with his hapless victim, cuts off those aspects of the object which he cannot use for his purposes. Instead of approaching the object with complete openness and receptiveness, he approaches it with the determination to see how it will fit into this or that scheme which he has in mind, or whether he can produce this or that effect on it or with it, of course, such an approach is entirely legitimate and can be very useful for the purposes the perceiver has in mind. I want to draw attention merely to the fact that it cannot lead to the fuller and richest (allocentric) kind of object perception, but only to a limited, one-sided, and sometime quite distorting perception. (Schachtel, 1959, pp. 171–172)

Schachtel is writing here as a psychologist working within the framework of psycho­analytic theory. His concern is with the emotional health of individuals and in a more general way with the health of a culture orientation. When he uses the term “object-of use” he is refers to our everyday relatedness to most objects. We usually relate to them in terms of how they can be of service to us. Similarly, scientists approach phenomena with a narrowly focused lens. How can this particular phenomenon be described by a particular conceptual framework? Schachtel’s characterization of a procrustean approach to the phenomena may be an exaggeration but there is some validity to it. If one looks at the way some curriculum programs are presented to children there is indeed a cutting off of ways of experiencing a phenomenon. If students are given one or two sessions to get acquainted with pheno­ mena, then they are very limited in what they can take in from the phenomena. They are also limited in the expectations set up by the curriculum designer and the teacher. Attention is solely directed to the learning of a science concept. In contrast to this narrowness of focus Schachtel does reminds us of the openness of children where it is most often seen in their explorations and play. These behaviors are generally seen as unproductive particularly when there is a great deal of sensory engagement. However, there could be several arguments given for this “indulging of exploration and play.” 1. Equity: Howard Gardiner (1983) proposes that there are intelligences such as the spatial and the body-kinesthetic. If addressed at all in the regular school program, it is only done indirectly and often inadequately. So, there is an equity issue. If there are multiple intelligences, there needs to be multiple ways of teaching and provisions for learning. Obviously, little hands-on experience with materials occurs in school. This is shortchanging those students who have a need for these kinds of experience and who rely more on nonverbal modes of learning such as the dyslexic mathematician. 2. Creativity: Schachtel connects his sense of the allocentric to the creative artists and scientists. He proposes that adopting an allocentric stance results in the person obtaining a fresh view of a phenomenon. It allows the person to get out of the usual ways of experiencing and representing the phenomena. If schools also want to produce creative students then there ought to be more leeway for students

158

6 Sensory Understanding

to explore without feeling they are “just messing around.” This can possibly lay the groundwork for bringing about deep conceptual change. 3. Conceptual change: If students gain a fresh view of a phenomenon this may provide a way of bringing about conceptual change. A great deal of research indicates that students have strongly held conceptions that run counter to formal scientific explanations. Some of this research shows that these are difficult to change especially at the elementary and middle school level. Various methods to bring about this type of change have relied heavily on verbal dialogue such as the so-called Socratic method. The results from these approaches provide some hope. I suspect that there also has to be a return to a direct experiencing of the phenomenon so as to get the student to perceive and represent the experience in a different way. No doubt, language is a critical ingredient in this process but the language is now based on a fresh way of considering the phenomenon. 4. A Holistic View of Education should be concerned with the involvement and education of the students’ emotional and intellectual development. I feel that this means more than preparing them for economic livelihood (without question extremely relevant for low-income children) and more than developing their rational intellectual abilities. However one would want to define a holistic approach or the spiritual element of education, it seems to me that this philosophical orientation of a special relatedness to objects and the natural world is just as relevant when considering the pedagogy of science education as when considering literature, the arts, and social studies. In fact, science education offers a rather special entry into this contentious issue. It is one of the few places in elementary and middle school where students can have direct contact with the natural world. It is one place where a deeply felt connection with nature can be promoted if approached in a sensitive manner. It is one place where a feeling for the natural world in a strong affective manner need not be made incompatible with a scientific conception of this same world.

References Atlas of Scientific Literacy (2003). American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC. Barsalou, Lawrence (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660. Bastick, Tony (1982). Intuition: How We Think and Act. New York, Wiley. Biasch, Eduardo (1988). Language without thought. In L. Weiskrantz (Ed.), Thought Without Language. Oxford, Clarendon, pp. 464–484. Bruner, Jerome and Clinchy, Blythe (1967). Towards a discipline intuition. In Jerome Bruner (Ed.), Learning About Learning, no 15. Washington, DC, Bureau of Research (Co-operative Research Monograph). Clark, Douglas and Jorde, Doris (2004). Helping students revise disruptive experientially supported ideas about thermodynamics: Computer visualizations and tactile models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(1), 1–23.

References

159

Classen, Constance (1993). Worlds of Sense: Exploring the Senses in History and Across Cultures. New York, Routledge. Clement, John (1991). Nonformal reasoning in experts and in science students. The use of analogies: Extreme cases, and physical intuition. In J. Voss, D. N. Perkins, and J. Segal (Eds.), Informal Reasoning and Education. Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum. Damasio, Antonio (1999). The Feeling of What Happens; Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. New York, Harcourt Brace. Dawkins, Richard (1998). Unweaving the Rainbow. Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin. Ferguson, Eugene (1977). The mind’s eye: Nonverbal thought in technology. Science, 197(4306), 827–836. Freeman, Walter (2001). How Brains Make Up Their Minds. New York, Columbia University Press. Gibbs, Raymond (2005). Embodiment and cognitive science. New York, Cambridge University Press. Gibson, James (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin. Gardiner, Howard (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York, Basic Books. Held, Richard and Hein, Allan (1958). Adaptation of disarranged hand-eye coordination contingent upon re-afferent stimulation. Perceptual Motor Skills, 8, 87–90. Holton, Gerald (1972). On trying to understand scientific genius. American Scholar, 41, 95–110. Jansons, Klavis (1988). A personal view of dyslexia and of thought without language. In Lawrence Weiskrantz (Ed.), Thought Without Language. Oxford, Clarendon, pp. 498–506. Kennedy, John (1997). How the blind draw. Scientific American, 276, 76–81. Klatzky, R., Loomis, J., Lederman, S., Wake, H., and Fujita, N. (1993). Haptic identification of objects and their depictions. Perception and Psychophysics, 54, 170–178. Marks, Lawrence (1978). The Unity of the Senses: Interrelations Among the Modalities. New York, Academic Press. Minogue, James and Jones, Gail M. (2006). Haptics in education: Exploring an untapped sensory modality. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 317–348. Ong, Walter J. (1977). “I see what you say”: Sense analogues for intellect. In Interfaces of the Word: In the Evolution of Consciousness and Culture. Ithaca, New York, Cornell University Press. Posner, Michael I. (1967). Characteristics of visual and kinaesthetic memory codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(1), 103–107. Ripple, Richard (1964). Readings in Learning and Human Abilities. New York, Harper & Row. Root-Bernstein, Robert and Root-Bernstein, Michele (1999). Sparks of Genius. Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin. Schachtel, Ernest G. (1959). Metamorphosis: On the Development of Affect, Perception, Attention and Memory. New York, Basic Books. Shepard, Roger (1988). The imagination of the scientist. In Kieran Egan and Dan Nadaner (Eds.), Imagination and Education. New York, Teachers College Press. Teghtsoonian, Martha and Teghtsoonian, Robert (1965). Seen and felt. Psychonomic Science, 3, 465–466. Turkle, Sherry (Ed.). (2008). Falling for Science: Objects in Mind. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Turvey, Michael, Solomon, Yosef, and Burton, Gregory (1989). An ecological analysis of knowing by wielding. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 52, 387–407. Varela, Franciso, Thompson, Evan, and Rosch, Eleanor (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Warren Richard and Rosylyn P. (1968). Helmholtz on Perception: Its Physiology and Development. New York, Wiley. Weiskrantz, Lawrence (Ed.). (1988). Thought Without Language. Oxford, Clarendon. West, Thomas G. (1997). In the Mind’s Eye: Visual Thinkers, Gifted People with Dyslexia and Other Learning Difficulties, Computer Images and the Ironies of Creativity. New York, Prometheus Books. Wertsch, James (1991). Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

160

6 Sensory Understanding

Zubrowski, Bernard (1996). Exploration with Siphoning: The Tenuous Growth of a Concept, in the series Learning to See: Observing Children’s Inquiry in Science[video]. Newton, MA, Education Development Center. Zubrowski, Bernard (2004). Siphons, Explore-it Curriculum Program [curriculum guide]. Kelvin, New York.

Chapter 7

Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

Ah, my poor friend, men have sunk very low, the devil take them! They’ve let their bodies become mute and they only speak with their mouths. But what d’you expect a mouth to say? (Zorba the Greek)

Scenario #4 Two boys (9- and 10-years-old) are sitting at a table, dropping food color in a tray of water having highly diluted white latex paint. They squeeze a few drops of food color from a container and then move a Popsicle stick through the drops. Depending on how smoothly and slowly they move the stick, various kinds of patterns are formed. Often a variety of vortex shapes appear which can be as big as 8 to 10 in. or as small as an inch. Also, the drops of food color can be moved to form straight and curved lines on the edges of the tray or in the middle of the tray in short segments. The two boys provide a running commentary of what they are doing. In the beginning of the session, they comment about how the different colors combine to form new ones (blue and yellow form green). One boy spends the whole session in his chair, while the other feels the need to stand up at times and react to the patterns with various kinds of hand and body gestures. The one who remains in his chair is more verbal, occasionally coming up with mini stories that are projections based on the patterns of food color seen in water. Dragons, a fox, and even a planet forming in outer space are examples of these kinds of projected images. For instance, in reacting to streams of brown and multicolor patches he says, “[I]t’s like a badger or fox digging through, making a hole, digging through the dirt.” Then, at another point after one of the boys dumps his whole tray of water with food color into the second boy’s tray, a very large vortex is formed almost as big as the tray. They make the following comments:

B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_7, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

161 161

162 162

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

First boy: “This looks like a planet … in the universe. It moves. Do you hear it?” Second boy: “Yeah. I hear it.” First boy: “It’s getting smaller.” Adult: “What’s happening to the planet?” First boy: “The planet is getting smaller.” Second boy: “It’s imploding.” First boy: “Oh yeah. There we go.” (Note: I am acting as the teacher in this situation.)1 During the whole activity, the boy who is less vocal is more expressive with gestures moving his hands and arms at certain points making dance-like movements. At one point when prompted by me to describe what is happening, this boy moves his hand over the tray pointing with his index finger where the colors are moving. He does this very precisely and in a smooth rhythmic manner. At other times, he makes playful movements with his hands and arms that are difficult to interpret, but the manner in which he does this suggests that they may be some playful enactment of a temporary role he has taken on. At one time, he pretends as if he has a camera in his hand taking a picture of the tray. It is readily apparent in watching the video of this scene that the two boys are exploring with different styles. One seems to have a need for kinesthetic enactment and expression, while the other always remains seated occasionally generating verbal narrative and descriptions. During open explorations such as the one just described there are different kinds of manipulations of the material. The manipulations of the material can be thought of as a dialogue with the materials. The hands act on the materials to produce an effect. The effects cause further manipulations. There is a back and forth between the students  This scenario is taken from the video “Water Dances and Water Stories,” which is part of the Learning to See series, Zubrowski, 1996. 1

Movement During Explorations

163

and the phenomenon. Some of these manipulations reveal what a student may be thinking of what is being observed. A student may reenact these manipulations later to report on what he or she observed as well as reveal his/her current understanding. Therefore, it is useful to give close attention to these manipulations. They can be a way of carrying out formative assessment and a way of helping to support students when they attempt to report observations or develop explanations. The action of one of the boys in the scenario provides a concrete example for examining the role of movement in the picking up of information during explorations and a possible connection to the role of gesture in making sense of these experiences. With this in mind, the next sections will elaborate on the significances of these gestures. Firstly, I think the boy whose reaction to the moving colors is mostly nonverbal exhibits kinesthetic enactments that can be characterized. A way of getting a sense of these characterizations is to study the art of the mime whose actions are a distillation of everyday experiences. Examining the techniques of the mime can provide a way of thinking about the transition from movements carried out while interacting with objects to ways that they can be represented. Secondly, some movements during explorations can be used as gestural representations during the reporting and sense-making phases of inquiry. They are a means of making explicit what has been assimilated and what are possible conceptualizations about the experience. Thirdly, recent research has given special attention to the role of gestures in the sense-making phase of inquiry. Some educators and researchers have taken the position that gestures are more than embellishments and are necessary accompaniments to sense making. Fourthly, there is some theoretical commentary and research about how these gestures are indicators of nonverbal thinking. This research can provide some kind of connection to the examples of scientists’ explorations described in the previous chapters and further develop how the role of kinesthetic-bodily intelligence contributes to the development of scientific thinking. Finally, in addition to examining these types of movements, I will also briefly connect both these types of movements to a less certain but still important connection. Some of the movements in the two scenarios that will be examined involve affective elements. Less often mentioned by those who write about science education are the affective foundations upon and through which students make connections to their prior experiences and begin to develop their own explanations. Looking at the movements of students can provide a way of establishing the importance of these affective elements.

Movement During Explorations A beginning can be made in the characterization of the movements of the body and the hands during explorations by comparing the actions of the more active student in the scenario to those of the mime. It is an art form that relies on gestures and movements of the body to portray mostly ordinary actions and objects. It has

164 164

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

characteristics that provide a background for illustrating some of the relationships between what is experienced and how this experience is then represented through gestures and the body. The mime represents these ordinary actions by distilling the essence of their form and movement using an economy of means to carry this out. The mime creates a story that we readily react to both through the visual display and an empathic reaction. Marianne Simmel in examining the action of the mime Marcel Marceau relates it to a psychology of perception. She characterized these actions as a type of visual illusion. How the mime has been able to represent objects and action with objects with gestures can reveal how we abstract information from our encounters with the environment particularly in terms of our kinesthetic interactions. What is most interesting is her characterization of the essential role given to the representation of the dynamic character of objects. She isolates the techniques that the mime uses in his acts that give some clues about the assimilation and representation of moving objects. The mime recreates objects of the world, a media of action such as of the wind, personalities, and even abstract concepts. The mime convinces us that objects are present without them being physically there. These perceptual objects are always objects of action, such as wine being lifted from a tray or a ball being bounced. It occurred to me that the students in their explorations have to carry out a similar process as the mime. They eventually have to represent the essential characteristics of a dynamic phenomenon in order to begin to conceptualize these in a scientific manner. By considering the techniques of the mime, we have a way of establishing a connection between the actions during explorations and the types of gestural and body movements during the sense-making phase of inquiry. This connection is more explicitly developed in the next section. Simmel isolates three kinds of techniques in her analysis: • Gestural defining of an object: Giving a sense of what the object is by outlining with the hands or body posture • Depictions of the impact of an object on a person • Articulation of the expressive properties of the object: What emotions or feelings arise in reaction to an object or situation The first technique of gestural definition conveys the essential features of the object. Simmel comments: Casual everyday behavior to which we are said to be so well attuned typically ignores the subtle variation that differentiate acts that are grossly much alike, and which are understood by the onlooker perhaps largely in terms of the visible object or medium of action. The mime must emphasize and enlarge the striking features of a given action while stripping it of the unessential. (Simmel, 1972, p. 194)

This could be related to the practice of the caricaturist who is able to capture the essential features of a person’s face with just a limited series of lines. With just a few strokes of the pen, the caricaturist can suggest a famous visage such as the current president or famous actor. Another example from the visual arts was the photograph of Picasso in the former Life magazine. In this photograph, Picasso has a small light in his hand. Using the technique of an extended exposure, the

Movement During Explorations

165

photographer captures Picasso drawing the outline of an object. His consummate skill as a visual artist captures the essence of the object in his quick continuous movement. However, in the case of the mime, this technique alone may not fully define what the object is. There still can be ambiguity. A gesture of making a circular form with the hands could suggest a variety of shapes. More gesturing or movement has to be done to reduce or eliminate this ambiguity. Returning to the activity with the food color in water, there was a time when I asked the one boy what he thought was happening with the food color in the water. During this comment, he placed his flat palm over the surface of the water. I interpreted this gesture to be his representation of the horizontal layering of the food colors. He had noticed that the food color appeared to be mainly near the surface of the water. This was a very good observation on his part and is indicative of how closely he was attending to the movement of the food color. He could have said the food color is on the surface, but this does not fully describe how it is on the surface. The flat hand indicates that the food color appears to be in a layer near the surface and not moving deeply in the water. The gesture is a quick and more graphic manner of expressing this observation. This gesture occurred during the course of the exploration. It could be used again when there is a follow-up discussion. The teacher can also make use of this type of gesture. For instance, suppose students are reporting on what happens when the moving water pulls three different food colors along. In words, the teacher can say that the three colors move alongside each other. In gestures, the teacher could bring his or her hands together and move them side by side, indicating that the two streams of color are moving side by side and are very close to each other. This gives a more complete dynamic representation of what the students have observed and provides a transitional way of communicating about these occurrences. In addition, it is an opening for introducing the concept of laminar flow that is a basic one in fluid dynamics. The second technique of the mime is the depiction of the impact of an object. Marceau exemplifies this when he assumes the position of a slanted body moving against a strong wind in the park or arms extended downward in the pulling of a heavy object. In some instances, this action reduces the ambiguity of the object. For instance, the outline of a circle as mentioned previously can be ambiguous until Marceau moves his hands and body in a way that shows that he is bouncing a large ball. This technique further defines the object through the type of movement made with the arms as he also shows that it is a spherical object. In a way, the manipulations of the stick by the student could be related to this kind of movement. The information picked up by the boy when he moves the stick can later be represented with movements of his hands giving attention to the speed of the movement while also defining the shape that results. How quickly the stick is moved through the patch of food color in the tray will determine whether a spiral forms or not and its rate of growth. Move the stick too quickly and you end up with a diffused shape; move it too slowly and you barely get a spiral. Feedback from carrying out this maneuver several times will provide the student with a sense of what amount of force is needed to produce a spiral pattern. The student then gains a sense of a relationship between the size of the spiral and the force needed to produce it.

166 166

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

In the follow-up reporting, the teacher can ask the student to use gestures to report on what he had observed. A gesture would be used to convey how he moved the stick in terms of speed and force, and then a gesture would be used to indicate the shape and size of the object. These two gestures could convey more than words and pictures what he did and what he observed. A visual representation of a spiral shape shows what kinds of formations occur with water. However, a visual representation doesn’t fully convey the dynamics by which it was formed and the way it dissipates. Nor does it give a sense of the amount of force involved to bring about the formation of the vortex. A sequence of photos or drawings of this movement can convey the dynamic element of what is occurring, but not totally. The dynamics of what is happening can be nicely given by the use of the right kind of gestures. According to Simmel the third technique involves expressive movements. These may be facial expressions or expressive movements of body parts. Her analysis presents several third types: “Those that directly express the quality of an object, those that represent the object’s impact on the actor” in an emotional sense, and “expressive movements that represent purely physiognomic characteristics” (Simmel, 1972, p. 196). An example is the mime reacting to the smell of a flower that his hand pretends to hold. The position of the hands and the movement of the head suggest the holding of the flower, while the expression on the face suggests the aroma of the flower. Simmel points out that there are problems with these kinds of distinctions. Is the reaction to the smell to be assigned to the flower or to the mime? She states that these kinds of movements present a complex problem in analysis because it is hard to separate the expressive properties of the object from the expressive reaction of the mime. She feels that the mime has the problem of attempting to express both types of expressiveness in one gesture. In fact, there is a shifting back and forth such as in one enactment, Marceau switches roles where he goes back and forth showing an object such as a bull and then the matador’s reaction to the bull. At one moment, the actions and posture of the body are the expression suggesting the bull, but a little later, a change in body posture conveys the reaction and the representation of the reaction to the bull. It is difficult to sort all these out and arrive at a clear understanding of how these different kinds of expressiveness can be represented.2 There is a back and forth where sensing is foreground and when it is background.There is a pedagogical significance regarding the inextricable complexity to the mime’s representations particularly as it relates to expressiveness. It reflects the complex involvement of emotions and feelings in the act of representation. It is difficult to separate out the pure depiction of the properties of an object from emotional reactions or the physiognomic characteristics of the object. I would propose that this has relevance for the teacher when they are observing student explorations and carrying out follow-up sense making discussions about the explorations.  Gibson comments on this problem. With the haptic system there is simultaneity of doing and feeling. When touching an object with our hands there is both the feeling of its texture and temperature acting on the skin, but at the same time there is the awareness of the grasping by the hand. Because of this inherent transactional involvement there is a need for a way of talking about the differentiation of the relatedness to an object. At times there is the sensing is of the object while at other times it is the awareness of the impact of the object on our skin. 2

Movement During Explorations

167

First, consider how a teacher reacts to students’ manipulations of materials during an open exploration. In monitoring these manipulations, the teacher can support and help move forward the student’s exploration or deliberately discourage some types of manipulations. This can be done very explicitly or subtly. If the teacher feels that some of the students’ manipulations are “just playing around” where it appears that they may not lead to productive discoveries or later useful representations, he or she may decide to intervene in a way that communicates to the student that such behavior is inappropriate. At times, there may be legitimacy to such interventions. But, often there is a fine line between productive playing around and frivolous behavior. There can be times when manipulations and behavior are part of an assimilation of the experience that appear to be playful. An instance of this ambiguity can be seen in the video mentioned in the scenario. One boy prefers to stand sometime during his exploration. Several times during this half an hour exploration, with the stick, he carries out maneuvers that are clearly not related to finding out how moving the stick affects the moving of the food color. At one point, he touches the surface lightly with the stick and them moves his hand away from the tray in a sweeping motion pulling the stick up to one side of his body. It was as if he were dancing, reacting to the movement of the patterns of food color in the tray. There were no verbalizations during this maneuver. Sometimes he pulls his hand to his face, and it appears as if he is taking a picture of the tray. Should the teacher discourage these sorts of maneuvers and playful actions? My feeling was that this was his way of taking in the experience, particularly the kinesthetic element. Some of the playing around may lead to discoveries that later can be represented by the manipulations that produce the discoveries. These maneuvers are in contrast to the other boy who is sitting throughout the whole session and occasionally throws out the comments about foxes chasing something or planets forming in outer space. These fanciful projections would seem to be the verbal analogue to the physical playful maneuvering of the other boy. They provide a mini-narrative by which observations can be assimilated and connected to the boy’s past experiences. More we said about this type of assimilation in the chapter on play and exploration. Because there is this verbal reaction, some teachers might value his comments more than the actions of the other boy. Second, there is another angle to viewing the involvement of students with materials in relationship to the expressiveness of an object. Open explorations have as one of their purposes in the science context the gathering of information. Affective reactions to a phenomenon are usually not considered an essential ingredient in good scientific habits of mind. However, there is some acknowledgment of the role of motivation. Some science educators speak of providing a “hook” whereby students “buy in” to the investigation. The reasons for the motivation do not seem to be as important as the fact that the students are motivated. Yet, as Simmel explains, it is difficult to separate expressive actions from actions of engagement or represen­ tations. One of the central points of this book is that the affective reaction is as important as result of the motivation. From my many experiences with children and adults, it can be said that exploring fluid patterns is an intrinsically engaging

168 168

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

activity. There is a compelling expressiveness to the patterns of food color that are produced. There is a resonance with them that engenders genuine emotional involvement. In this sense, it could be said that there is an authentic engagement. The point of bringing up the expressive properties as a consideration in explorations is that they are inextricably involved in the gathering of information about the phenomenon. There are affective reactions to the phenomenon. Because of these affective reactions, the whole body is reactive not just the hands. As Antonio Damasio develops in his theory of consciousness, the body is the theater for the emotions. He and others who have written about the emotions assign to them a cognitive function and an important factor in memory. For instance, he gives one example of this importance by citing a study that shows that “recall of new facts is enhanced by the presence of certain degrees of emotion during learning” (Damasio, 1999, p. 294). In a study, people were told stories where the facts in one have a high emotional content compared to the other. The facts from the story with the higher emotional context were better remembered. As the two examples just given of the playful maneuvers of one boy and the mini-narratives of the other, the imagination is stirred up. A connection is made to prior experience. The combination of the pleasure of observing the patterns of the food colors and the creation of the mininarratives may enhance the boy’s ability to recall these experiences later. The recall at least for the one boy can be through gestures and postures of the body. Considered in this way the viewing of emotional reactions to a phenomenon, the anthropomorphic utterances of children and even of adults might be the primordial predecessors of a more public representation. The next section examines how these enactments contribute to abstract representations and eventual conceptualizations.

Movement in Communication – Hand Gestures and Thinking There are a variety of body, arm, and head movements when children are attempting to report about their explorations or while attempting to verbalize an explanation. The science educator should give special attention to these gestures. They reveal what has been the focus of attention of the student and what may be his or her thinking even though it may not be expressed verbally. They can act as the beginning of representations and formulation of explanations, acting as a mode for bringing intuitive theories to the surface. These observations are derived from my own experience working with children, but are also confirmed by the work of psycho­ logists and linguist who have studied nonverbal communication and language. WolfMichael Roth’s research, in particular, has confirmed some of my own speculations. His thorough descriptions of gestures as they relate to student conceptualization and his aligning these with other work have been especially helpful. In addition, David McNeill’s commentary on nonverbal communication has provided a useful theoretical framework. There is a growing body of literature examining the relationship between gestures in the course of learning math and science concepts. These provide support

Movement in Communication – Hand Gestures and Thinking

169

for the notion that gestures are not just embellishments but are in fact, a transition from making an implicit understanding into an explicit representation. More signi­ ficant is the contention by some of these authors that the gestural component precedes verbalization, and that by implication, it is indicative of a possible path of development of understanding different from reliance on the language by itself. The findings in these reports are related to the kind of explorations of materials described above. The authors’ assertions lend support to the notion that manipulation of materials is a critical element of any kind of pedagogical approach that attempts to make science learning effective and meaningful. The movement of the manipulations can become the means for reporting observations and expressing understandings. Wolff-Michael Roth carried out a general review of gestures as they relate to education and in particular as they relate to the development of scientific communication and understanding. He reports that this is an area of research that had received little attention at the time of his paper (2001). He limits himself to hand gestures because he proposes that body language is not a useful concept for his purposes. He proposes that the latter is neither structured nor used like language (Roth, 2001, p. 368.). This is a curious omission that I think is unfortunate and I will return to this aspect later. Summarizing gesture studies, Roth (2001, p. 373) states that there are four claims: 1. Gestures reveal knowledge that is not expressed in speech. 2. Gestures reveal implicit or emergent knowledge that is expressed in speech only at some later point; gestures can be said to constitute the “leading edge” in children’s cognitive development. 3. The mismatch between gestures and speech is an indication of readiness to learn. 4. The changes in the gesture-speech relationship can be interpreted as reflecting a path of knowledge change. To get at the significance of these statements, it is useful to describe first the different types of gestures. The three most common classifications of gestures are deictic, iconic, and metaphoric. Deictic gestures are those that involve concrete or abstract pointing. In the scenario I described at the beginning of the chapter, the one boy performs both when pointing to specific features of the changing patterns of the food color. Iconic gestures happen “when their typology (i.e. surface structure) is isomorphic with their content.” This means that gestures are similar to those used with the materials in an exploratory activity (Roth and Welzel, 2001, p. 106). An example of this in the scenario is when the boy at one point makes a flat hand gesture over the surface of the water to represent the fact that the food color is layered in the water. Metaphoric gestures refer to abstractions (Roth and Welzel, 2001, p. 105). In the scenario of Chapter 6 where the same two boys are exploring the siphon bottles, one boy uses a variety of gestures pointing to the tubing and sometimes the

170 170

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

level of the water in the bottle. In addition, some of the gestures displayed in the course of his explanation may be metaphoric because they refer to the force of gravity acting on the water flowing through the tubing. What is meant by these claims and their interpretations was illustrated in a separate report by Wolff-Michael Roth and Manuela Welzel who carried out a detailed analysis of secondary school students’ exploration and discussion about static electricity. They picked this topic because the phenomenon is invisible and the conceptual entities are abstract in the sense that students need to develop understandings about such entities as electrons. Analyzing the videotapes, Roth and Welzel studied closely the relationship between the gestures used by the students as they reported on their manipulations and as they attempted to assimilate abstract concepts introduced by the teacher. They observed that hands and arms reenact movements done with the materials during the explorations. They assign a role to the manipulations with the materials describing it as background not only for reporting about what happened later, but also for constructing explanations using scientific terms and concepts introduced by the teacher. The initial reportings and explanations may not be clear and concise. Through further discussions, gestures and words become more closely coordinated. What is even more important is that they observed special gestures preceding the eventual verbally expressed explicit formulations of a scientific concept. The gestures both reenacted the experiences with the materials and the conceptual entities that were related to the phenomena being studied. For instance, in their report, a girl first carries out the actual action of rubbing a sheet of plastic film giving it an electric charge using her hands to represent this action. She later represents this action with gestures in the absence of the film. She also represents in her gestures an abstract notion of the action of what happens when an atomic shell is rubbed coordinating this representation of an abstract entity with the representation of the actual manipulation of the plastic sheet. These two gestures are coordinated into an explanation about the production of electric charges. They note that her verbal explanation by itself was insufficient to convey what she wanted to explain. Her gestures gave a greater coherence. In addition, they observed that over time the verbal representation takes over the meaning and that the gestures are either dropped or the full understanding is expressed through the words. In another study examining the relationship between gesture and conceptual understanding, Garber et al. (1998) studied the way elementary school children carry out solutions to math problems. From their study of fourth graders, they concluded that gestures reveal substantive knowledge that children possess and appear “to be encoded uniquely in a nonverbal representational system and not a verbal one.” They propose that this knowledge lies along a continuum from the implicit nonverbal to one that eventually becomes fully verbal. Most significant is their comment that the nonverbal to verbal transitional process is “truly one of transformation – the knowledge must be re-encoded and altered from a format that is easily conveyed in gesture into the codified format that speech demands” (p. 83). As Roth and Welzel observed, it takes time for this transition to happen.

Movement in Communication – Hand Gestures and Thinking

171

Roth and Welzel make two interesting points. They write about the embodiment of the scientific concept. “Meaning is associated not only with the words, but also with the sensorimotor schemata that are simultaneously enacted (or sometimes suppressed). What is in the body is the integration between the phenomenal and discursive experience” (p. 130). According to their interpretations, gestures provide a transition and function as “glue” connecting the initial experience with the phenomenon to the eventual formulation of an abstract concept. “Gestures allow students to construct complex explanations even in the absence of scientific language”(My emphasis) (Roth and Welzel, 2001, p. 111). This is an important observation because prevailing practice puts emphasis on prematurely introducing scientific terminology that stands for abstract concepts. Another important point is that gestures can be a way of coordinating the haptic with the visual. The girl’s gesture in representing the rubbing of the plastic sheets and in representing electric charges can be translated into a drawing of the plastic sheets and electric charges on the plastic sheet. The gestures make it easier to bring about this transition. In a more salient example, I have worked with students in a design challenge where they were launching model planes having a body of balsa wood and the wings of thin Styrofoam. The models have different flight patterns depending on how they are launched. As these models glide through the air, they can dive to the ground or rise up after they are launched. In a dialogue after these activities, it is not easy to communicate these actions in words alone. Gestures with the hands are an efficient and effective manner to carry this out. The movement of the hands imitates the movement of the model on a much smaller scale. Lines on a piece of paper can then represent the movement of the hand. The gestures can be a transitional bridge from observing the object in motion to representing it in a much smaller scale on the piece of paper. Both a visual representation such as a drawing and hand motions convey a richer and more detailed representation of what happened. Roth and Welzel also recommend that the materials be present when students are constructing explanations. This runs counter to the common classroom management practice of completely separating students from the materials. There are good reasons for doing this, especially if we are considering elementary age students. There is a very strong tendency for students to fiddle with the equipment and materials no matter how well behaved the students may be. I have even had the same problem with teachers in workshops. A useful compromise can be to still move the students away from the materials so that the teacher has their full attention, but have a set of the materials or equipment in front of the room or readily available. Establish the practice that when students are in the reporting and sense-making phases of inquiry, they come up front to demonstrate or to explicate with the materials. They can then convey more explicitly what they have observed or what they think is happening. Support for this practice of having students use materials can be found in a study done by Tracy Nobel at TERC. She had elementary age students explore the actions of a toy parachute and then discussed with them how it functioned. In a close analysis of videos of these discussions, she found that one of the students handled the

172 172

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

parachute as he developed his explanations. The manipulation of the parachute along with body motions helped him express and understand the force of the air on the downward movement of the cloth of the parachute as well as the gravitational pull of the plastic man hanging from the parachute (Nobel, 2007). In this situation, it appeared that the materials in hand were a needed prop to carry out the explanation.

Gesture and Talk The relationship between speech and gesture is a complex action that has differing explanations. Gibbs reviewed a great deal of research on embodied cognition regarding this issue. He reports there are at least three views about the relationship between speech and gesture. They span the range where speech and gesture are very separate to where they are strongly coordinated. His review can be summarized in this manner: 1. Speech and gesture are separate systems of communication so much so that gestures do not support speech production. 2. Speech and gesture are connected in a limited way where gesture can support concepts that a speaker had in mind. 3. Speech and gesture have a strong reciprocal relation in a communicative act. They appear to have their origin in common thought processes. (Gibbs, 2007, pp. 163–170) Gibbs cites behavioral studies and neuropsychological research that appear to support the third position. One who has been a strong advocate of this third position is David Mc Neill. In his book Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal About Thought (1992), he develops an extended argument with specific examples defending this view. At one point, he states: Gestures are not the product of a linear-segmented verbal plan, not translations of speech into visual-kinesic form, not like photographs. … They are closely linked to speech, yet present meaning in a form fundamentally different from that of speech. My own hypothesis is that speech and gesture are elements of a single integrated process of opposite modes of thought-global-synthetic and instantaneous imagery with linear-segmented temporally extended verbalization. Utterances and thoughts realized in them are both imagery and language. (McNeill, 1992, p. 35)

Language alone doesn’t convey the thoughts of the speaker. In addition, gestures alone are insufficient. McNeill attributes to gesture the function of complementing the verbal utterances. What he means by saying that they are not like photographs is that gestures are tied to the context in which they occur, whereas photographs are disconnected from their original context. What is not clear to me from this statement is where an extended development about gestures stands in relationship to the role of nonverbal thinking. He does associate the “global-synthetic” and “imagery” with gestures. He clearly states that gestures are a way of thinking and making thinking explicit, but

Gesture and Talk

173

“gestures do not just reflect thought but have an impact on thought.” “Gestures, together with language, help constitute thought” (McNeill, 1992, p. 245). He appears to be saying that it is the act of gesturing that is bringing out the imagery. A possible interpretation of this statement is that gestures are a type of external feedback loop. For instance, he takes issue with Rudolf Arnheim’s and Roger Penrose’s commentary about nonverbal thinking. Arnheim had occupied himself with the psychology of art and developed theories to account for the way artists think and produce works of art as well as how we take in a work of art. Arnheim did acknowledge that gestures reveal thought. However, his position is that there is thinking without language. Language is only a vehicle for conveying these thoughts. McNeill disagrees with this position: “[W]hile images are the medium of thought as we have seen, images and language also coexist as a single system” (McNeill, 1992, p. 268). Roger Penrose like Jacques Hadamard claims that mathematical thought is not verbal. McNeill accepts that their thought is nonverbal but still insists that when a mathematician communicates their mathematical thoughts, the gestures that occur are a medium of thought and that the process described by the mathe­ maticians has properties similar to language. The differences and distinctions may appear to be beyond the practicalities of everyday science teaching, but I feel there are important implications. Can there be thinking when there is neither gesture nor verbalization? Can there be thinking when there is manipulation of materials without verbalization or even interior speech? I may be misunderstanding McNeill’s position when he proposes that images and language coexist as a single system and when he proposes that the thinking occurs when the words and gestures are made. It is not clear to me whether the gestures are just externalized thinking that has already been developed and language is a re-representation of some process that is linear and segmented such as propositions or that the very act of speaking and gesturing creates the thought at the moment. The latter appears to be what he proposes. An apparent counterargument to McNeill comes from Damasio in his book The Feeling of What Happens. As reported in the previous chapter, he proposes that there are three levels of consciousness. What is relevant here is his conception of the middle level that he calls the core consciousness. He proposes that at this level, there is a nonverbal narrative warning that narrative is so strongly associated with language that the reader might assume this term means there is language involved. In his sense of narrative, there is “a nonlanguaged map of logically related events” (Damasio, 1999, p. 185). These may be images that are not necessarily visual. However, he does allow that this narrative is readily converted into language and done so rapidly. He claims that this narrative is at the core of our consciousness. Elaine Crowder in her work in the study of gestures came to the observation that students’ gesture differently when they are describing something already developed from past rote learning or when they are “in the moment” attempting to coordinate new experience with a model. In some cases, the model is physical or one that is more conceptual in form. She speculates that the “in the moment,” type of gesturing may be a situation where gestures “might do the work of leading the thinker toward

174 174

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

a new level of understanding and new ways of problem solving” (Crowder, 1996, p. 203). However, she cautions, “it is premature to speculate that gestures can change thinking” (Crowder, 1996, p. 203). Therefore, her take on the role of gestures appears to be different from O’Neill’s. Nevertheless, her analysis of student talk and gesture does suggest that they provide a way of gaining a sense of student thinking and that they are essential in sense making. Roth in the example mentioned above, establishes that manipulations carried out during the explorations with the plastic sheets are utilized in the representation of these actions and also as a way of representing abstract entities. Manipulations during explorations can be resources for transitioning to an externalization of what is understood about the significance of the experience. The gestures based on these manipulations provide a way of helping the speaker stay focused on the underlying conception and also are a way of bringing forth a conception. This still doesn’t recognize that maybe the conception has already been developed as the manipulations were being made during the exploration. The conception is not fully formed. Gestures and words are a means to better organize and communicate this thinking. I give emphasis to the role of nonverbal learning and representation because it is a way of justifying the need to manipulate materials and use materials as a prop when attempting explanations. Recall in Chapter 2 the history of Faraday and his explorations of electrostatic phenomenon where he used his hands to map the electrostatic field. Gooding and Tweeney proposed that there was hand and mind involvement both in the exploration and the concurrent formulation about the properties of the field. “Faraday clearly appeared to be using an eye–hand–-mind dynamic in constructing new spaces for both thought and action.” In the video series Search for Solutions, Linus Pauling is shown talking about how he used models in envisioning a new chemical structure. He tells the story of how he came up with the structure for the alpha helix – a type of protein structure. He wrote the chemical formula for this molecule on a piece of paper and started playing around with the paper. He folded it in a way that would represent a helical structure. In this instance, the paper freed Pauling to focus more on how the atoms in the molecules could rotate and twist without having to keep in mind their specific identities and their connections. We don’t know if he was talking to himself as he carried this out. In a way, the paper with the writing was acting like an external feedback loop. It could possibly be said that the manipulation of the paper brought about a change in thinking for Pauling. However, it is also possible that Pauling had already a sense of a helical structure and playing with the paper provided a way of externalizing his thinking. There may have been other prior experiences and nonverbal thinking which brought about the conception of a helical structure. The manipulation with the paper made it explicit. In another related example, Francis Crick and James Watson played around with physical molecular models before coming up with their structure for DNA. Their hands were directly involved in the construction and rearrangement of these models. One can either point to parts of the model to help keep track for oneself or for another and also rotate portions to see how new configurations line up. The models function as a way of externalizing visual and kinesthetic images that are

Gesture and Talk

175

in the mind. There is a type of dialectic of physical intuitions with the molecular model. It seems to me that this is a different type of thought process than the single system that McNeill proposes, “where images and language coexist as a single system” (McNeill, 1992, p. 268). These manipulations can in some way eventually be represented in gestures as was shown by the Roth and Welzel studies, but the essential point here is that the initial manipulations of the molecular models involved a spatial thought process that is different from language as Arnheim maintains. I would argue that it is not words or symbols that bring about the conceptualization about the molecular structure but the manipulation of the models or in the case of Pauling, a piece of paper. (These types of manipulations might be said to be a form of play. This will be discussed further in the chapter on play.) Curiously, McNeill relates a story that seems very similar to the scenario of the two boys playing with the food color and water. He gives an account of an incident in a course that he was teaching. Two subjects were challenged to describe a set of odors presented to them. One subject described objects in the world that were sources of odors resembling the one she was experiencing. This led her to create little narratives in which the objects appeared as if they were the character of the story. The other focused on the impact of the odors on the nose and conveyed the impact by way of facial expressions. The gestures were referenced to parts of his body. This second person had extensive theatrical experience. (McNeill, 1992, p. 271)

It sounds like this second person was using some of the techniques of the mime. In addition, this account struck me as very similar to the scenario I described at the beginning of this chapter where one boy generated mini-stories, while the other seems to act out thinking through his body. Here something as ineffable as an odor is represented in two different modes. Something as dynamic as the moving colors could be represented with drawings or words, but the dynamic characteristic is lost to some extent. Bodily enactment adds a deeper and richer dimension to the representation. It evokes and draws upon nonverbal memories and ways of representing experience that descriptive words alone can’t supply. On the other hand, the ministories of the more vocal boy were ones of action and highly evocative such as a planet forming in outer space. In some ways, they do capture the dynamic nature of the phenomenon. Both scenarios suggest that different people have different preferences for ways of assimilating and representing experiences. In science, it is a question of which of the ways of representing will result in a deeper and clearer understanding of the conceptual formalism of science. It will appear throughout this book that my inclination is to lean toward those who assimilate experiences in a more visceral manner. Presumably they will be in a better position to think about and represent science concepts. This may appear to be true to the extent that understanding is developed. Perhaps this isn’t the full story, though. The more creative and productive scientist or engineer is probably the one who also has the capability to transform his or her thoughts into the more socially relevant medium of visual representations and language. Much more research needs to be done to sort this out.

176 176

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

Gestures, Body Movement, and the Focusing of Attention There is another dimension to gestural communication that doesn’t directly bear on the learning of science concepts but is important to note particularly for the teacher while conducting sense-making discussions. Some researchers propose that gestures and body movement during communication are a means of focusing the communicators’ attention. In a way, they provide some support for O’Neill’s position. For instance, Norbert Freedman proposed the following hypothesis working within a Freudian psychoanalytic framework: Body movements have been linked to measures of cognitive style or linguistic competence, quite apart from the speaker’s cultural background or the power relationship in communicative discourse (Freedman et al., 1972; Freedman & Steingart, 1975) Even blind individuals, who have not learned the significance of gestures as signs or signals, move their hands, head or feet while they speak (Blass et al., 1974) From an information processing viewpoint, motions of the body during discourse are a requirement which sustain the processes of representing and focusing. (Freedman, 1977, p. 110)

According to his characterization of the communicative act, there are two discrete structures. One is organized for the representation of thought called the enactive kinesic system. The gestures described above would be part of this system. The other is organized toward attaining focal attention providing a supporting system. Effective communication is a balance between the enactive and supportive systems (Freedman, 1977, p. 111). Based on his observations and studies by others, Freedman proposes that the supporting system buttresses both the image that is being represented by the gesture and at times, the verbal report. In their studies of children (ages 4, 10, and 14), they observed that body touching preceded verbal definition (Freedman, 1977, p. 124). They assert that focusing behavior precedes representing behavior. (It should be noted that here they are including movement of the whole body, and parts of the body other than the hands. This goes beyond what Roth was analyzing in his studies.) What is interesting about these hypotheses is the added complexity of the dialogue. Mostly, we think in terms of the interaction between people as the act of communication, but here further distinctions are made. The child is also carrying on a type of communication with himself or herself. These other gestures of the student add yet another level of complexity to what the teacher needs to pay attention to when there is a communicative act. In the scenario of the two boys exploring the movement of food color in water, it becomes readily apparent that one of them has a cognitive style that might fit with Howard Gardiner kinesthetic intelligence. He moves around a lot and moves his stick at times following the path of the slowing evolving pattern of food color. It is possible that some of his movements are a way of focusing his attention. As I mentioned, they don’t seem to be related directly to what is happening with the food color in the water. I mention this because some educators view extraneous movement as being “off task.” The students are not being productive in their exploration.

Gestures, Body Movement, and the Focusing of Attention

177

In considering this characterization of a communicative act between persons, I wonder if this movement of the body and self-touching may also occur when children are “communicating what materials.” Some of the actions of the very active boy were gratuitous. Sometimes they seem unrelated to the movement of food color in the water. Several times he brings his hands together and touches the surface of the water and brings the two hands in an upward sweeping arc. It is not very evident from just this one video, but he appears to be a keener observer and discriminator of the food color patterns compared to his companion. Freedman mentions a study that involved two groups of college students who were equal in verbal fluency and competence. They were asked to name colors. The one group designated the symbolizers exhibited a greater ease on this task than the non-symbolizers. They observed that the symbolizers gave more complex gestural accompaniments to their words. Freedman proposes that “the beat-like accompaniment of motor acts kept the symbolizers in touch with the sensory ‘stuff’ of their mode of representation” (Freedman, 1977, p. 114). It is interesting to speculate here whether those who were the symbolizers were also those who are more exploratory and attentive when they are assimilating new experiences. It would seem to make sense that those who have accumulated a more diverse set of observations through manipulations of materials could use these to represent them in nonverbal gestures. This in turn would support their verbalizations and gesturing as Roth illustrated in his analysis of students’ manipulations of materials during explorations of static electricity. It also appears that it matters what kind of attention the teacher gives to a student during a dialogue. If the student feels that the teacher is not really paying attention to what he or she says, then his/her ability to express his/her thinking may be hindered. This is an implication from one study related to gestures. For instance, Freedman mentions a study where a therapist manipulated sessions where there was a cold and warm stance to the person being interviewed. It was observed that with the cold stance, the interviewee elicited more body touching. He interprets this action as a need for the interviewee to stay focused because of the distraction of what appeared to be the unreceptivity of the interviewer. The lack of interest can be a distraction. He/She may become upset because of this situation. These emotions can interfere with the ability to focus on the task of giving information. When students are not at ease, one can speculate that they will shift their focus of attention more to themselves than to the thought they need to represent verbally. Therefore, in both types of situations - exploration and sense making - it appears that body movement, gestures, and touching of the body may serve more than a communicative function. They can be a way of helping students remain focused and behaving in a productive manner. One of the most straightforward implications of the above commentary is that the teacher should encourage students to use hands, arms, and body in their talk. This seems straightforward but awkward in carrying it out. One can’t demand or even in some ways encourage students to do this. This type of behavior is mostly spontaneous. Some students will be embarrassed in attempting to be more “demonstrative” in their explanations. One way to encourage more gesturing is for the

178 178

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

teacher to model it by frequently using gestures. Additionally, a teacher could set up a supportive classroom culture where students are encouraged to express themselves when they make gestures. There may result a healthier balance between the two kinesic systems of maintaining focused attention and representing thought.

Expressive Movements and Expressive Stories As mentioned previously in the introductory scenario, one of the boys generated brief narrative comments in reaction to the patterns of food color in the trays. He interjected comments such as the patterns of food color look like a bird, and a little later – a curved arrow. At one point, he utters: “It’s like a badger or fox … making a hole, digging through the dirt.” And several times, he refers to large-scale images of the earth or planets associating it with images he had seen on television. “This looks like the earth’s core.” Another time toward the end of the session when the other boy pours his whole tray into the other boy’s, the more verbal one says that the large spiral formation is like a planet forming in outer space. This type of projection is not unusual. I have had adults make similar kinds of comments. The patterns of food color in the tray of water seem to have the potency of a Rorschach blot. The primordial forms and patterns elicit spontaneous comments. A similar kind of projection and empathy was noted and puzzled over in a special series of experiments by Michotte. He set up a device that was a series of parallel wheels that had dots on them. A person was to pay attention to the dots on the moving wheels. When the wheels moved at different speeds, the viewers would comment that one dot appear to cause another to move, or that the dots were following each other. As an aside, Michotte mentions that there was the frequent tendency of subjects in his experiments to project images on the series of these moving dots: The subjects in our experiments had an amazing tendency, in describing their impressions, to make comparisons with human or animal activity. They continually used the words “It as if…” e.g. “It is as if A gave B a kick in the pants and sent him flying.” … The occurrences of these expressions is so frequent that it must be regarded as something to note and indeed of considerable interest from the point of view of social psychology. Even if the expressions are justified by a clearly marked similarity in the combination of movements, the question still arises as to why people feel the need to make such comparisons and to produce such interpretations in connexion with phenomena which they have often described perfectly correctly in purely objective terms. (Michotte, 1963, p. 280)

I was particularly struck by his last comment. The observers did give what is considered an objective description but added an affective overtone. This seems to be related to the third technique of the mime as proposed by Simmel. Certain kinds of movement are expressive of specific emotional content. An example of this kind of projection occurred one time when I was trying out some activities with fourth graders having them play around with vibrating rods. I had anchored four welding rods into a piece of wood. These rods were thin and

Expressive Movements and Expressive Stories

179

flexible. They had a cork stuck into the top of each and a small piece of mirror close to the cork. These rods could be plucked to vibrate. A light was shone on the mirrors which

Cork with mirror

resulted in spots of lights dancing on the wall. In one class, observing these dancing lights, a girl said that it was a mother and a father fighting with each other. Another time, a boy expressed a feeling that the dancing light made him nervous. Michotte also comments on the often-observed connection between emotions and movement. He points out that such close connections are reflected in our languages. For instance: It shook me to pieces I was transported with joy It knocked me flat I am bursting with enthusiasm I feel drawn towards… (Michotte, 1963, p. 283)

Michotte notes that many of these types of expressions have a kinematic significance “they imply mechanical action” (Michotte, 1963, p. 77). He takes this observation further by proposing “emotions have a motor character more or less similar to that which appears in obvious cases of mechanical causality.” This apparently means that simple mechanical actions are represented in an affective manner. Arthur Zajonc and Hazel Markus in their review of some theories about the expression of emotion report: “[A]ll theories of emotion regard motor processes as having some indirect representational capacity.” In some type of reactions they assert: “[M] otor responses in themselves – without a cognitive mediation – can serve representational function.” This assertion would support Michotte’s observation. It would also mean that some students’ representations through gestures or words are not emotionally neutral. If their representations are not emotionally neutral, then the teacher needs to be careful in how he or she reacts to these representations (Zajonc and Markus, 1984, pp. 76, 77). Also, it appears though that such actions and commentary can serve a useful function. It can serve a mimetic function helping students recall at later times what they observed. It can also be a way of assimilating the experience by associating it to previous ones of similar features or emotional relatedness. This in turn can trigger possible ways of thinking about the experience. Recall the two students in Chapter 5 who brought previous experiences into their attempt at understanding

180 180

7 Movement in Explorations, Gestural Representations, and Communication

what was happening with the siphons. One talked about rides on a roller coaster, while the other mentions going down a slide in a playground. Movement appears to form the basis of all these comments. The dynamics of movement is closely tied to experiences of the body and the triggering of imaginative analogies. Finally, the expressiveness of movement, of course, is evident in any kind of movement of the whole body. To convey this expressiveness in print is very challenging. To end this chapter, I thought a piece of literature about a memorable character might capture the role of dance, movement in communication, and expression. Zorba the Greek is a larger-than-life character portrayed in a novel by Nikos Kazantzakis. At one point, Zorba is relating to his new friend his adventures in Russia. One night when he was drinking with a Russian, there was an attempt to communicate to each other about their adventures. Since they both had limited understanding of each other’s language, they work out an arrangement where each would start dancing to convey what had happened to them. After the Russian danced his adventure, Zorba took his turn. He says: I leapt up, pushed the chairs and tables away and began dancing. Ah, my poor friend, men have sunk very low, the devil take them! They’ve let their bodies become mute and they only speak with their mouths. But what d’you expect a mouth to say? What can it tell you? If only you have seen how the Russian listened to me from head to foot, and how he followed everything! I danced my misfortunes; my travels; how many times I’d been married: the trades I learned. … Even he, dense as he was, could understand everything, everything. (Kazantzakis, 1952, p. 73)

References Blass, T., Freedman, N., Steingart, I. (1974). Body movement and verbal encoding in the congenitally blind. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 39, 279–293. Crowder, Elaine M. (1996). Gestures at work in sense-making science talk, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(3), 173–208. Damasio, Antonio (1999). The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness, New York, Harcourt. Freedman, N., O’Hanlon, J., Oltman, P., Witkin, H.A. (1972). The imprint of psychological differentiation on kinetic behavior in varying communicative contexts. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 79(3), 239–258. Freedman, N., Steingart, I., Buchwald, C. (1975). Communicative behavior in schizophrenia: The relation of adaptive styles to kinetic and linguistic aspects of interview behavior. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 56(5), 872–876. Freedman, Norbert (1977). Hands, words and mind: On the structuralization of body movements during discourse and the capacity for verbal representation, in Norbert Freedman and Stanley Grand S (eds.), Communicative Structure and Psychic Structure, New York, Plenum, pp. 109–131. Garber, Philip, Alibali, Martha Wagner, and Goldin-Meadow, Susan (1998). Knowledge conveyed in gesture is not tied to the hands, Child Development, 69(1), 75–84. Gibbs, Raymond (2007). Embodiment and Cognitive Science, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

References

181

Kazantzakis, Nikos (1952). Zorba the Greek, Simon and Schuster, New York. Michotte, Albert (1963). The Perception of Causality, New York, Basic Books. McNeill, David (1992). Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal About Thought, Chicago, University Of Chicago Press. Nobel, Tracy, (2007). Unpublished Dissertation. Cambridge, MA, TERC. Roth, Wolff-Michael (2001). Gestures: Their role in teaching and learning. Review of Education Research, 71(3), 365–392. Roth, Wolff-Michael and Welzel, Manuela (2001). From activity to gestures and scientific language, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8(1), 103–136. Search for Solutions, videos series, available from National Science Teachers Association, www. teachingtools.com Simmel, Marian (1972). Mime and Reason: Notes on the Creation of the Perceptual Object, The Journal of Aesthetics of Art Criticism 31(2), 193–200. Zajonc, Robert and Marcus Hazel (1984). Affect and cognition: The hard interface, in Carroll Izard, Jerome Kagan, Robert Zajonc (Eds.), Emotions, Cognition and Behavior, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Zubrowski, Bernard (1996). Water Dances and Water Stories: A Study in Different Styles of Exploration in Learning to See: Observing Children’s Inquiry in Science [video], Center for Science Education, Education Development Center, Newton, MA.

Chapter 8

Empathy

“To hunt the deer, you have to become the deer” (Levi-Straussfrom a tribal saying). I found that the more I worked with them, the bigger and bigger (they) got, and when I was really working with them I wasn’t outside; I was down there with them, and everything was there. It surprised me because I actually felt as if I were right down there and these were my friends. (Barbara McClintock as related to Evelyn Fox-Keller)

Scenario #5 Raceway has been a popular exhibit at the Children’s Museum in Boston, Massachusetts, for many years. It is a collection of different games in which visitors roll golf balls down the tracks of several different configurations. Roller coaster, Ski jump, the big U are titles of some of these games that also describe the shape of the track. Visitors release a golf ball at the top of these tracks and excitedly watch as the ball rolls up and down the hills and valleys or rolls back and forth before it stops. At several of these games, an interesting type of behavior can sometimes be observed. One structure is a large barrel about 2.5 ft in diameter and 3 ft tall. A track is attached around the perimeter of the barrel forming a spiral. A ball released at the top moves around the spiraling track picking up speed along the way. Occasionally, some children will release the ball at the top and will follow it as it travels around the barrel. They stay with it for a while running around the barrel

B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_8, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

183

184

8 Empathy

until the speed is such that they can’t keep up with it. They seem to take real pleasure in moving along with the ball. Ball release

This type of accompanied motion also happens with another station in this exhibit. This is a long track 30 ft long with a slope at one end where there is a ball-release mechanism. When the ball is released, it rolls down the incline and travels at a relatively

Scenario #5

185

slow speed to the other end of the track. I have on video, preschoolers placing a golf ball at the top of an incline and then running along with the ball toward the other end. Yet, another kind of accompaniment to the movement of the ball on the track is sometimes seen on the one titled Loop the Loop. This has a 14 ft slope that has its starting point about 4 ft off the floor. When the ball reaches the bottom of the slope, it travels around a loop that is 3 ft in diameter. I have on video a boy playing this game. At one time, after he released the ball at the top of the track, he watches it closely, and as soon as it moves through the hoop, he does a small hop off the floor. He appeared to identify with the ball as it made its move around the loop. This imitation or shadowing of the movements of balls is not isolated to this particular exhibit or game. Observe how people move their bodies when playing at traditional pinball games, or as they follow the bowling ball after its release. They sometimes act as if they are the balls bouncing off the various rubber barriers, or have become the ball rolling down the lane. People at sporting events sometimes move their bodies as if they are catching the baseball or football. This behavior seems far from the habits and thinking practices of scientists. However, there are examples of a related kind of identification even with very creative scientists. Evelyn Fox-Keller in her biography of Barbara McClintock reports a related type of sympathetic involvement. McClintock studied the genetics of corn during the 1940s at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island. At that time, McClintock was involved with counting and identifying the chromosomes of the fungi Neurospora. McClintock was able to pick out the chromosomes well enough to be able to track them. The problem of determining what happened to the chromosome occupied McClintock entirely. At one point, she describes her intense involvement with them. I found that the more I worked with them, the bigger and bigger (they) got, and when I was really working with them, I wasn’t outside; I was down there with them, and everything was there. It surprised me because I actually felt as if I were right down there and these were my friends.

Latter McClintock continues: As you look at these things, they become part of you. And you forget yourself. The main thing about it is your forget yourself. (Fox-Keller, 1983, p. 16)

Robert Root-Bernstein in his book Discovering: Inventing and Solving Problems at the Frontiers of Scientific Knowledge gives other examples of scientists and inventors identifying with the phenomena. He reports that Peter Debye, a chemist, solved some of his problems by pretending to be atoms and imagining how they would react. Charles Kettering, the inventor of the electric starter for cars, also practiced this type of imaginative empathy. Root-Bernstein also mentions other important scientists like Jonas Salk, who discovered the Polio vaccine; Ramón y Cajal, who worked with the nervous system; and Michael Polaner who advocated, “one’s body include the object of study” (Root-Bernstein, 1989, pp. 96, 97) It is quite apparent that we identify with animals in many ways, but, perhaps, less acknowledged is the identification some of us have with living plants - in

186

8 Empathy

particular trees. Michael Perlman in his book The Power of Trees relates his conversations with people who have a strong identification with trees. Reflecting upon and researching the meaning of this, he at one point proposes that there are parallels between “the bodies of trees and human bodies.” In fact, he takes it further proposing that “a vertical tree stirs a movement of the vertical imagination” and that this movement is very concrete, physical, and kinesthetic - “the imagination of trees involves us in vertical motion, and involuntary perception of a force-upwelling, expansive, and downwardly stabilizing” (Perlman, 1994, p. 41). Now, here is an object that is stationary, much larger in scale than a human, and doesn’t look like a human, but engender this resonance that is deeply felt. In the above examples, we have several kinds of seemingly different engagements with natural and physical phenomena involving children, scientists, and the general population. One term that can capture this type of involvement is empathy. Generally, the use of this term is associated with human relationships, but there are observations such as the above as well as research that support the contention that empathic interactions are a common occurrence. As with the examples of McClintock and the other scientists and engineers, it appears that this psychological process is involved in scientific thinking. There is a complexity and subtlety to this type of interaction with objects that can lead to some deep pedagogical issues. Here I want to examine it in a very limited manner considering what some researchers have uncovered and show how a holistic conception of science education needs to include empathy as an essential component. For the development of much of what is being examined and proposed in this book, empathy can be said to be at the nexus of some basic epistemological and pedagogical issues. By acknowledging this type of interaction, it helps us gain a sense of how people assimilate the more tangible characteristics of a wide range of phenomena and technological artifacts. 1. It can be argued that this type of involvement with phenomena builds a sensorimotor foundation for the eventual gestural and body based representations. Research will be cited to support this contention. 2. It generates within the person’s emotions and feelings that are connected with aesthetic reactions to phenomenon. The aesthetics of some phenomena give rise to universal symbols that Jung has referred to as archetypical. 3. It can be conceived as the foundation for a dialogue with physical objects and natural phenomena operating as an analogue to the dialogue between persons.

The Art Experience and Empathy Our most familiar acquaintance with empathy is probably in the context of interpersonal communication, but it can as well apply to objects and the environment. Webster’s Dictionary acknowledges these two senses of the term. It is defined as the projection of one’s own personality into the personality of another in order to

The Art Experience and Empathy

187

understand him or her better, and it is the projection of one’s personality into an object, with the attribution to the object of one’s own emotions and responses. It is said that we have a similar feeling within ourselves on observing another person having the same feeling. Their behavior, postures, gestures, tone of voice, and what they say convey emotions that we understand because they arouse a similar kind of feeling in us. We can also empathize with a person’s intellectual state both through sensory shadowing (i.e., imitating the body posture and facial features) as illustrated in the examples given above and through the medium of verbal and gestural communication. When considering everyday objects, it would appear inappropriate to speak in terms of an empathic reaction. Some phenomena are so familiar that it seems strange to associate them with emotions and feelings. They are usually approached mainly in terms of their practical utility. To some extent, this is the view that pervades science education. The phenomena and associated set of materials introduced to students are seen and meant to be emotionally neutral. The emphasis is on those properties that illustrate basic science concepts. Yet, as the examples above illustrate, there are imitation, identification, and the potential arousal of emotions and feelings. To get some sense of a deeper understanding of empathy and to understand how it might also be applied to objects and phenomena, it is useful to consider domains of knowledge where it has received a great deal of attention. This would include the psychology of art and in-depth psychology such as those elaborated by Freud and Jung. Those writing about art and the interactions of people have tried to account for the way experiences with art objects or art presentations arouse within the viewer deep emotional reactions such as in sculpture, painting, drama, film, or music. There has been much speculation and research to characterize and understand this process. I think it is worthwhile to consider some of these accounts because they can provide insight into the role of exploratory activities in the context of science education. In light of the findings reported in the last chapter where it was established that manipulations during explorations could be utilized later to represent and make sense of what is happening with a phenomenon, it would be helpful to understand how exploratory experience comes to be assimilated. Imitation and empathy are processes by which this can occur. (For instance, Piaget in his work on play devotes considerable commentary on the role of imitation of young children.) Among those authors who summarized and evaluated the various explanations of empathy as they relate to art, I have selected Hans and Shulamith Kreitler and Rudolf Arnheim. They appear to have agreement on some of the issues, but differ in very important ways when it comes to explaining the origins of empathy. Arnheim, in particular, makes recommendations about art education based on implications of his understanding of the empathic response that could as well be applied to science education. The Kreitlers reviewed studies of one sense of empathy involving the interpersonal. Their evaluations of various studies concluded that these provide evidence for this psychological process being part of an innate response. They propose that these results establish a reasonable justification for considering it as a process that occurs with works of art. For instance, in one of their own studies, they carried out observations of the behavior of visitors in museums and how they reacted to sculptures. This study is relevant because of its possible analogy to aesthetically interesting objects

188

8 Empathy

that are not art. They picked out three sculptures and recorded in a randomly selected manner visitors’ reactions to these sculptures. “The results showed that 84 percent of the observed spectators displayed overt imitatory movements during their inspection of the statues, while an additional 3 percent displayed them after having left the statue when casting their eyes back on it” (Kreitler and Kreitler, 1972, p. 276). They make an additional interesting observation. Based on an analysis of the amount and type of displayed imitation, the authors conjectured that there might be more movement but for the inhibitions of the visitors being in a public space. They summarize two types of theories of how empathy occurs. The first type is labeled as a theory of representation that gives first priority to a person evaluating a reaction to an object intellectually and then associating an emotion with it. The reaction is mediated by a combination of cognitive operations and past associations. This position is open to a variety of criticisms and is found wanting, but it cannot be rejected completely because of the need to still account for past experiences. The alternative theory gives emphasis to the immediacy in the reaction of the observer to an object where it is seen as a direct unmediated perception. This approach gives much emphasis to the immediate reactions of the body to what is observed. The Kreitlers give special attention to Theodor Lipps who was one of the first to write about empathy as it relates to art. Lipps generalized this reaction not only to art objects but also to any aesthetic experience (Hunsdahl, 1967, p. 181). According to their reading of Lipps, there was a particular emphasis on the role of the body in the imitation of people or objects giving special emphasis to motor involvement. The manner in which one imitates something results in the body taking on specific kinds of tensions, positions, and shapes. These automatically give rise to specific kinds of emotions. The Kreitlers cite research to confirm this contention about the role of imitation and the accompanying emotional reactions. However, they proposed that the kinesthetic process is not automatic and direct (Kreitler and Kreitler, 1972, pp. 268–269). Rudolf Arnheim also wrote about empathy and focused on Lipps’ theory of empathy. He argued for a more direct reaction between a person and an object. In his close reading of Lipps’ works, he found that Lipps was at times obscure and also contradictory in what he proposed. However, Arnheim did allow that Lipps has important insights and in some places, anticipated some of the later work of Gestalt psychology. Arnheim argued strongly that there was a type of direct perception drawing heavily upon the findings and theories of Gestalt psychology. One of its basic conceptions is the principle of isomorphism which can be defined as “the relationship between the physical forces in the observed object and the psychical dynamics in the observer” (Arnheim, 1966, p. 58). These physical forces in the object are visual and kinesthetic. For instance, as we observe the downward movement of a ball rolling on a track, we also feel the pull of gravity on our bodies. The reactions of the children in the balls and tracks exhibit are one example of this type of reaction. Arnheim gave an example of this concept by pointing out that a weeping willow looks sad because of the way the branches hang and sag, conveying a type of passivity. This perception is related to the shape of a person’s body when he/she is experiencing sadness. We take on a certain kind of feeling when viewing a weeping willow that arises out of this identification.

The Art Experience and Empathy

189

More recent research supports the contention of Arnheim (1986). It has been proposed that there are simulation mechanisms that are involved in empathy. There are neural mechanisms that match a person’s actions to motor circuits in the viewer (Knuf et al., 2001). Gibbs’ summarizing research in this area states that there are “dedicated brain structures, called “mirror neurons,” that underpin a direct, automatic, nonpredictive, and noninferential simulation mechanism, by means of which the observer would be able to recognize, understand, and imitate the behavior of others (Gibbs, 2007, p. 36). This still leaves open the question about peoples’ reaction to objects and phenomena but it strongly suggest a similar reaction would occur. Closely related to the concept of empathy is that of physiognomic perception. Heinz Werner came up with this term based on the changing features of faces and how these features are expressive of different kinds of emotional reactions. Gestalt psychology also heavily influenced Werner. He observed through his own and other studies that movement plays a fundamental role in the interpretation of the environment for animals and children. Even for the adult, there are instances where objects are understood through their real or virtual movement. The latter instance meaning that the shape or overall configuration of the environment or object suggests a dynamic tension or movement. For instance, viewing people on a roller coaster about to race downwards on a steep slope gives rise to the anticipated tension these people would have as they approach the curve at the top. Werner proposed that the perception of faces and the movement of people is a situation where “objects are commonly perceived as directly expressing an inner life” (Werner, 1948, p. 69). An extended quote from Kandinsky describing his reaction to pigments is given. It illustrates in a vivid manner what is meant by this kind of reaction to objects and materials. The stub of a cigarette lying in an ash-tray, a patient, staring white button lying amidst the litter of the street, a willing, pliable bit of bark – all these have physiognomies for me. … As a thirteen- or fourteen-year old boy I bought a box of oil-colors with pennies slowly and painfully saved. To this very day I can still see these colors coming out of the tubes. One press of my fingers and jubilantly, festively, or grave and dreamy, or turned thoughtfully within themselves, the colors came forth. Or wild with sportiveness, with a deep sigh of liberation, with the deep tone of sorrow, with splendid strength and fortitude, with yielding softness and resignation, with stubborn self-mastery, with a delicate uncertainty of mood – out they came, these curious, lovely things that are called colors (Quoted from Werner, 1948. Originally from Wassily Kandinsky, 1913, “1901–1913.” Der Sturm)

Werner points out that this reaction is found more often in young children and adults who are suffering from delusional states such as schizophrenia. He maintains that as in the case of Kandinsky, some adults retain this state of mind, or one might call it an ability to react to objects and materials with such feeling. For some, it grows along with the more rational and logical faculties.1  There is actually a fascinating history associated with the term physiognomic (Magli, 1989). Physiognomics a pseudoscience attempted to develop interpretations of the inner person and their soul by studying their facial features. A system was developed that correlated facial features with personality types. The underlying process was an attempt to bring some kind of rationality to the constantly changing features of faces and by extension to the human body. In fact, physiognomics comes from the words phusis (nature) and gnomon (interpretation), which could be interpreted as “recognition, interpretations of nature” (Magli, 1989, p. 87). 1

190

8 Empathy

In Werner’s studies of this type of primitive perception, he asserts that perception and movement are so closely connected that one has to think in terms of a sensoritonic description or at a deep level that there are dynamic interrelationships that exist between sensory and motor functions. A perceptual field is structured, not as a sensory but as a sensoritonic field (Wapner and Werner, 1957). Werner proposes that physiognomic perception has priority over the geometric-technical. Arnheim as well other writers on art and Areti appear to agree with this position. Now, it is important to understand this differentiation between these two processes because I would maintain that it has fundamental implications for the way science investigations are allowed to proceed particularly at the elementary level. It is fundamental because it relates to the alternative pedagogical paradigms that I introduced in Chapter 4. First, consider how attention to the expressive properties of phenomena and objects would apply to a field seemingly far removed from science. Arnheim in Art and Visual Perception proposes a different pedagogical approach in the context of teaching art to students. He argued against precise visualization. Some art teachers direct students to draw from a model by asking them “to establish the exact length and direction of contour lines, the relative positions of points, the shape of masses.” This approach is focused on the geometric–technical properties. In a contrasting approach, the teacher asks the students to focus on the expression of the figure. What kind of energy does it express? Students would pay attention to proportions and lines, but as they relate to expression “the correctness and incorrectness of each stroke will be judged on the basis of whether or not it captures the dynamic ‘mood’ of the subject” (Arnheim, 1971, p. 432). There is a parallel in the teaching of science. Teachers will give much emphasis to isolating the geometric-technical properties of a phenomenon as well as focusing on the exact measurements of those properties. Much less time, if it is given at all, is given to gaining a feeling for the phenomenon, as Barbara McClintock had expressed. I am proposing that the latter approach ought to be the one taken in the early stages of a science inquiry investigation. The selection of the materials, the setting up of the situation, and the physical and social context should be one in which students are allowed to engage with the expressive features of a phenomenon.2 Another kind of parallel example to the different pedagogical approaches described by Arnheim could be made when introducing objects and phenomena to children and adolescents. Consider the balls and tracks activities mentioned in the beginning of this chapter. You can introduce the materials in a way that lets children explore with them, creating games while also allowing them to express fantasies about the games they are creating, e.g., cars speeding down mountains or skiers The fact that there is this long history of this practice and attempts at systemization suggests that it is an innate part of our reaction to the other person or by extension to the physical and natural environment. Werner puts it into a scientific understanding by drawing upon the multitude of more scientific reports and research. 2  Recall that adults in Michotte’s study of moving dots made spontaneous comments regarding the expressive features of what they were viewing.

The Relative Contributions of the Visual, Kinesthetic, and Tactile to Empathy

191

flying off of slopes. In fact, once I observed four boys pretending that the marble on the track was Evil Knevil. (Knevil was a famous stunt driver who would accelerate cars and fly over specially constructed ramps that were separated by a distance that appeared to be unmanageable.) The boys made a gap at the end of their ramp and attempted to get the marble to fly over this gap landing on a piece of track on the other side. Alternatively, they can be introduced in an explicit manner telling students that they will be studying about movement and learning about velocity and acceleration. Specific configurations can be given and formal experiments be proposed. One could make it a little more open by asking the students to propose and design the experiments. In this kind of scenario, the empathic reaction and resonance with the moving balls have been short-circuited. This doesn’t mean that the students will not feel and even display bodily reactions to the movements, or that they won’t covertly conjure up adventure scenarios. They probably will but this will set up a conflict. The expectation of the teacher has put students in the position where they should and in some instances must give their full attention to the geometric-technical properties of the balls and tracks. In a subtle and subversive manner, the teacher has worked against the natural tendency to react to the expressive or physiognomic characteristics of the phenomena. Does the immediate emphasis on the technical characteristics interfere with students’ eventual conceptualizations about linear motion? Maybe not. However, continual encounters with phenomena modulated by this type of cultural and environmental orientation, I would argue, does not promote the inherent curiosity of children and their sense of wonder; nor would it seem to fertilize their imagination. It is important to keep in mind Werner’s view that physiognomic perception in some individuals grows along with the more rational-analytical. Although physiognomic perception may be more strongly associated with artists, the examples I gave in previous chapters would suggest that the more creative scientists and engineers also make use of it.

The Relative Contributions of the Visual, Kinesthetic, and Tactile to Empathy My interest in giving attention to empathy and physiognomic perception is because of the explicit role theories given to the kinesthetic modality.3 As reported in the previous chapter, movement of the hands and the whole body appears to play an essential role in the development of explicit representations. Gestures as well as associated body postures are expressions of the kinesthetic modality functioning in a communicative mode.  Barbara Stafford in a wide-ranging review of neurophysiological research and historical developments in the visual arts asserts, “all perception is necessarily associated with a motor function” (Stafford, 2007, p. 201). 3

192

8 Empathy

It wasn’t very clear from the research reports about the roles of gestures as to how many of these gestures or body postures are derived from prior hands-on explorations. Roth and Alibali and Goldin-Meadow do address this issue but give most of their attention to the sense-making phase. It seems to me that recognizing the role of empathy and physiognomic perception is one way that a connection can be established between what happens during explorations with materials and what happens in the sense-making phase, especially as these are related to gestures or body movements. However, current pedagogical practice puts great emphasis on the visual modality. Not only is the kinesthetic modality neglected in its role of representation as Roth has reported, it seems to me that the picking up of kinesthetic information tends to be forgotten if not ignored. Therefore, it is important to give full recognition to the role that the kinesthetic plays in exploration. Nevertheless, there is still a need to reconcile a relationship between kinesthetic and the visual for, as Walter Ong points out, scientific representation relies heavily on the visual. Here again Kreitlers and Arnheim provide some useful reporting about this relationship, and although their aim is to explicate expressiveness in artistic mediums what they have to write, I would propose, is useful for the science educator. The Kreitlers summed up the important role of the kinesthetic as it relates to physiognomics and empathy, as it is observed among animals and humans, and as it is observed in the development of symbols: Many observations support the conclusions that perceptual sensitivity and attention to movement, response to external stimuli mainly by motor actions, motoric imitation, and perception of the world in terms of motions and dynamics predominate in earlier phylogenetic and ontogenetic stages of development. Yet, even when these modes of perception subside, kinesthesia undoubtedly remains an integral part of perception, the dynamical world-view and the early tendency to grasp all objects as things-of-action become compressed into one dimension of symbolic meaning and the earlier tendencies to actually imitate motorically survive mainly in the form of subdued kinesthetic imitation. (Kreitler and Kreitler, 1972, p. 117)

They and Arnheim made a critical point about the relationship between these motoric imitations and the eventual development of symbols that are associated with specific phenomenon. By dynamization, they meant a response from people to specific lines and forms whereby definite meanings are assigned to these forms. They and other researchers have found that people will assign motion to these forms. For instance, a “circle may represent infinity because movement along its circumference is endless and repetitive; a sharp angle may be experienced as thrilling because it involves a sudden change in direction of motion; and long curves stand for calmness and indolence because their motion is slow” (Kreitler and Kreitler, 1972, p. 116). Arnheim states that visual dynamics such as that just described is not a type of projection but a “phenomenon in its own right” (Arnheim, 1966, p. 780). The Kreitlers and Arnheim go further with these reactions relating them to the work of Carl Jung and his concept of archetypical forms. I will return to this in the next section. The other way to go is to consider the reverse process. By that, I mean consider how the kinesthetic experience becomes represented by visual graphics or drawing. This process is important because one of the ways to move students from

Intrinsically Interesting Phenomena and Archetypical Images

193

their hands-on experience to making sense of these experiences is to have them make schematic drawings or in the case of the study of living organisms, have them make drawings of these organisms. As reported in the previous chapter, food color can be used to map patterns that occur in water. The resulting patterns are spirals, parallel lines of different colors, or a chaotic mix. Similar kinds of patterns can be obtained by using the craft technique of marbling. Oil-based paints diluted to flow freely are dropped on the surface of the water. These are disturbed with different kinds of motions. Laying a piece of paper on top of these patterns and removing the paper carefully can pick up the resulting patterns. The result is a permanent visual record of these patterns. In this situation, there is a direct transfer of movement into a visual representation. It doesn’t take much to render motions of billiard balls on a table into a graphic representation nor to draw what one sees when waving a slinky or making wave patterns in water. We could also include phenomena that are static but are the result of equilibrium of forces, and there is also opportunity to make these implicit dynamic forces visible. I am thinking of such practices as iron fillings on a piece of paper caused to form patterns of magnetic fields when a magnet is placed under the paper. In this manner, there can be a way of helping students, moving them to get these experiences into a representational visual media that allows them to dialogue about it in a more public manner. In addition, these visual forms are often amenable to mathematical representation. This then leads to a way of carrying out measurements that can confirm or disconfirm hypothesis.

Intrinsically Interesting Phenomena and Archetypical Images The visual dynamics that Arnheim and the Kreitlers write about were also placed in a context beyond art and extended to all the various forms of visual and nonvisual representations expressed by the cultures of the world. According to Arnheim (the Kreitlers propose a similar explanation), there is an innate response to these universal cultural forms and patterns that arises from their expressive characteristics and therefore is dynamic in the person’s response. Dynamic here is associated with Gestalt psychology’s findings that there is an inherent, direct interaction between shapes and form. This is the concept of isomorphism. Direct in the sense that the phenomenon directly gives rise to feelings unmediated by prior experience or cognition. However, it does depend on what is meant by direct perception. Some recent research since the writings of Kreitlers and Arnheim provides some justification for characterizing the perceptual process in this manner. For instance, Semir Zeki writes about the close relationship between art and science and in particular his work in neurophysiology and some contemporary painters and sculptors of kinetic art. He states a central thesis that “the function of art is very similar to the function of the brain: to represent the constant, lasting, essential and enduring features of objects, surfaces, faces, situations, and so on, and thus allow us to acquire knowledge

194

8 Empathy

not only about the particular object, or face or condition represented on the canvas but to generalize from that to many objects or faces” (Zeki, 1999, pp. 9–10). He invokes the original Gestalt term of Einfuhling to write about the forms and line of modern art. He defines it as “a link between the ‘pre-existent’ forms within the individual and the forms in the outside world that are reflected back” (Zeki, 1999, p. 104). Einfuhling is the term originally used by Lipps and is closely associated with empathy. Drawing upon writers and art critics such as Guillaume Apollinaire as well as artists such as Malevich and Mondrian (Malevich emphasized the line and the fundamental shapes such as the square and rectangle, cross, and circle, while Mondrian in his later paintings had vertical and horizontal line forming open rectangles using this structure in a series of paintings), Zeki shows how in the development in some of the modern painters as well as kinetic sculptors there was a narrowing down of forms that were activating specific areas of the brain. He provides research evidence for his proposal that “there is a compelling relationship between much that modern art has produced and the single cell physiology of the visual brain” (Zeki, 1999, p. 104). His view is that such artists seem to be asking the same question as neurophysiologists. He doesn’t specifically invoke Jung or the concept of archetypes but does show that some modern artists seem to be conducting perceptual experiments with their art, selectively choosing lines and forms that achieve specific aesthetic effects which also in turn trigger responses in specific areas of the brain. Zeki proposes an analogy where the brain seeks the essentials in the perception of the world that is a way that he feels could characterize the artist. Both seek to arrive at essentials. This does not go very far in establishing the more complex images of Jung and neurophysiological reactions. It does suggest that artists are particularly sensitive to the resonances of external forms and their intuitive reactions to these forms. It also suggests that certain kinds of graphic symbols and forms can have direct unmediated reactions in the brain. This type of research appears to support Arnheim’s contention about direct perception. Arnheim observed that geometrically simple shapes emerge everywhere at an early stage of mental development because they are accessible to the limited organizing powers of the mind. They are retained in advanced civilizations for the purpose of schematic, symbolic, or so-called ornamental representations because they provide clear-cut images of the basic configurations of forces that continue to underlie man’s life, and therefore man’s thinking, even in refinement and complexity” (Arnheim, 1966, p. 243). Therefore, various art forms can be said to have a certain kind of universality. According to some writers, they have arisen not by a very old and common sociocultural heritage but came about from experience with basic phenomena that are continually encountered by all humans. This is a contention of Carl Jung and he gave particular attention to these forms. In his early formulation of his concept of archetypes, he distilled from these forms what he called “primordial images.” According to his analysis they have the following kinds of generic juxtapositions:

Intrinsically Interesting Phenomena and Archetypical Images

195

Chaotic complexity and order, duality, the opposition of light and darkness, above and below, right and left, the unification of opposites in the third, the quaternary (square, cross), the rotation (circle, sphere) and … centricity and radial arrangements organized, as a rule, according to a quaternary system. (Arnheim, 1966, p. 222)

It took me a long time to come to see how these traits might be related to what I was exploring as a science educator, but now I find significance to them. If one wants to consider how a more holistic approach to science education can be taken, these primordial images provide one type of criteria for the selection of phenomena and technological artifacts for a grade 1–8 curriculum framework. If there are basic phenomena that give rise to these primordial images, then why not have them be the core for a curriculum framework for grades 1–8? Over my years of exploring different kinds of phenomena and technological artifacts, I began to observe that some phenomena and artifacts have high appeal and were easy to introduce to students as well as to teachers. I came to call them intrinsically interesting phenomena. One of the first to bring about this realization was soap bubbles. Later, exploring ways of making air and water movement visible increased my realization that there were phenomena that seem to directly engage students in the sense that Arnheim and Werner propose. When I presented certain phenomena to students, I did not need to motivate them, they became totally engrossed in the exploration. Interesting spontaneous comments came from the students such as those mentioned in scenario #4 (Chapter 7), where the two boys are exploring the movement of food color in water. These phenomena deeply engage the students. Over time, I came to the realization that these two phenomena and others I have worked with could be designated as archetypical in two ways. 1. They give rise to primordial images such as those proposed by Jung. One can see chaotic complexity and order in observing the way the movement of food colors in water creates vortex patterns. In the case of exploring shadows or the daily and long-term observations of the sun, moon, and stars there is the opposition of light and dark. Duality appears in the reflection in mirrors. Rotation of circles is found with spinning tops, yo-yos, as well as in the working models of waterwheels and windmills and in the workings of the gear trains of mechanical clocks. 2. They can act as models in a scientific and engineering sense. Each of these phenomena and some of the technological artifacts can be physical models representing similar kind of phenomena and artifacts. They could be related to what Max Black (1962) has designated as conceptual archetypes. The rationale for this sense of the term was developed in Chapter 3. More also will be said about the role of archetypical phenomena in the chapter on models and modeling. This combination of universality and representativeness seems to me as what one would want in a curriculum framework for elementary and middle school especially if one of the goals is to provide for an authentic and holistic experience.

196

8 Empathy

To expand on this further, consider some history of my long involvement with bubbles and air and water movement. These two explorations illustrate the two senses of what I would mean by archetypical. In the chapter on dialoging with materials, I mentioned my experiences of exploring soap bubbles to children. There I pointed out that bubbles have an intrinsic appeal arising from strong aesthetic characteristics. I mentioned that I carried out these introductions in a variety of settings. I first started exploring soap bubbles with children in Kenya when I worked for the African Primary Science Program. Much later, I also had the opportunity to introduce them to children and adults in a refugee camp in Indonesia and to museum goers in Paris, Stockholm, and Osaka. It always impressed me how readily in these rather different cultural contexts children and adults became engaged in exploring bubbles. These experiences impressed upon me that certain phenomena had universal appeal. One can speculate as to what brings about this universal appeal. Free-floating bubbles are spherical in form appearing to be perfect in shape. Even ones that are not perfect spheres are very attractive possibly because of their dynamic shapes shifting from a perfect sphere to ellipsoids or other enclosed shapes. There are spots of light and very intense colors reflecting off the film. The bubbles move easily, although indoors and on nonwindy days outdoors, they do sink toward the ground. Since there is unpredictability as to when they will break, there is a buildup of tension and release. Perhaps, it is the perfection of their spherical shape that is the most appealing because in several instances I have had children act as if they wanted to get inside the bubbles. It seems to appeal to them as an inviting enclosure. (See the video “Explorations with Bubbles”: The origin of questions in the series Learning to See.) In addition, there is the juxtaposition of appearing to be as hard as glass but easily penetrable with a wet finger. Given their sharply defined geometric shapes, their high aesthetic appeal, their richness for exploration, and projection of images, I would propose that they resonate with basic perceptual tendencies and evoke feelings that are symbolically universal. In researching the various ways that bubbles were used in architecture, engineering, math, and science, I came across a book by Peter Peace who arrived at a significant role for soap bubbles. Drawing upon work of those who studied cellular structure in plants and grain structure in metals he proposed, “soap bubble packing can be taken as the model or type of all systems – biological, physical, chemical – in which there is an economical association of cellular modules” (Pearce, 1980, p. 9). He then elaborates on ways that triangulation and certain kinds of cellular arrangements (close packing) can be used to generate a variety of structural systems. One example of this application is the work of Frei Otto (1962) who used bubble arrays and sheets of soap film anchored among different supporting arrangements for modeling a variety of inflatable structures and tent-like structures. Pearce took this one step further by pointing out that the way that soap films join together could be a model for a wide range of structural systems. They were archetypical in a different sense from Jung and Arnheim’s use of the term, but there was still a way of thinking of them that was helpful in understanding and creating a variety of structures found in nature or created by architects and engineers. They provided a satisfying

Intrinsically Interesting Phenomena and Archetypical Images

197

aesthetic way of thinking about the structure and design of these different structures. In a way, this view of Pearce appears to be similar in intent with Paolo Portegeshei’s more comprehensive survey of various forms in nature and how they may have inspired different kinds of architectural styles and construction. (This was mentioned in Chapter 4.) In another book about the mathematics of minimal form, bubbles and arrangements of soap film in wire frames are presented as models for investigating some fundamental mathematical relationships in the branch of mathematics called the calculus of variations. They inspired mathematicians and scientist in their attempts to represent the concept of energy minimization. (See Mathematics and Optimal Form by Stefan Hildebrandt and Anthony Tromba (1985) for an extended account of the history of the relationship between the mathematics of optimization and soap bubbles).4 Given these wide-ranging examples, it is readily apparent that bubbles can act as models for a variety of natural and man-made systems and structures. At the same time, they resonate in a deep psychological way with people. Therefore, they could be said to be archetypical in the two senses of the term. There is another phenomenon that I have already introduced that also has an intrinsic appeal. This is the lines and spirals of moving food color in a tray of water. As described in the scenario of the previous chapter, these forms incited spontaneous movement and mini-stories from the two boys. Their reactions are fairly typical of how children react to these patterns. In the workshops I have done with teachers, there is also a strong reaction to these forms. What is of interest is that the recurring spiral is one of the Jungian archetypes. Having become quite taken by these shapes in my own explorations, I was on the lookout for commentary about these irresistible forms. I came across two books that confirmed my observations that these moving shapes also had a universal appeal. Theodor Schwenk in his book Sensitive Chaos (Schwenk, 1976) surveys a wide range of phenomena that exhibit vortex patterns. Jill Purce (1974) in the Mystic Spiral illustrates how the spiral appears in the mythologies and artistic practices of many cultures. Theodor Schwenk provides a descriptive analysis of the ways that the movement of water occurs and suggests that these are representative of what he calls the spiritual nature of water. He starts off with a characterization of the basic patterns of the movement of water. In categorizing these movements, he uses the term archetypal. Here, this term is initially associated with the phenomenal associations rather than forms having a deeper psychological associations proposed by Jung. These archetypal patterns include the wave, vortices, and undulating forms of the circulating systems of rivers and streams. A closer examination of the meander of the river or stream reveals that it is composed of vortices or other related patterns. He goes on to make a connection between these kinds of water movements and living creatures such as protozoa or parts of our bodies focusing on the spiral features of parts of the heart or certain bones. He gives special attention to

4  David Lovett (1979, 1981) in a series of papers shows how soap film situated between different kinds of frames can act as analogues for phase changes, Fermat’s principle, and Snell’s law.

198

8 Empathy

the rhythmical pulses of wave motion in water, drawing analogies to the growth of living substances. His close analysis of waves reveals how they are related to vortices. Movement of water past objects and mixing of streams of water result in a train of vortices. The vortex pattern occurs at several different scales going from the small and a quick wisp of steam coming off a cup of coffee to the whirlpool of a fast flowing river, onto the tornado, hurricane, and at an immense scale the spiral galaxy. The patterns of moving water are echoed in a variety of organisms and their parts. He carries out a similar descriptive analysis of the movement of air at different scales.5 Therefore, these patterns of undulations, rhythmical movements, and vortices or spirals appear in a wide range of organic, living, and even physical phenomena. That there is such ubiquity across phenomena and that it occurs across a wide range of scale conjures up a mystery or, as Schwenk wants to propose, a spiritual association. There is this deep resonance with these recurring forms that is associated with these elemental substances and familiar environmental occurrences. These multiple examples provided by Schwenk provide for us an aesthetic basis for viewing and assimilating these diverse objects and systems in nature. I find his approach highly appealing because of this sense of the connections one can make across these multiple phenomena. The connections are not made by way of abstract scientific concepts such as those of fluid dynamics although they could be. Most of the forms of these objects can be related to Jung’s archetypal forms such as centricity, rotation, and radiation from the center. The spiritual dimension that Schwenk partly develops is taken much further in Jill Purce’s book The Mystic Spiral. She makes reference to various religious use of the spiral symbol ranging across a variety of mystical traditions from the Kabbalah, Sufi, and Eastern philosophical tradition of the Tao. She elaborates on the relationship between the form and shape of the spiral and the meanings given to it in these different traditions. Jan DeBlieu in her extended account of wind phenomena reports that the wind plays a key role in creation myths throughout the world (DeBlieu, 1999, p. 22). This also provides a basis for Jung’s conception of an archetypical image. Water has been given special symbolic significance by most religions. In the Christian traditions, baptism by water is loaded with much symbolism. Even today in some Christian sects, there is the immersion of the whole body in a pool of water or a river. Artists throughout recorded history have portrayed the movement of water. In Eastern philosophy, the Tao is described as the Watercourse Way. The flowing patterns of water symbolize the course of nature and are a model for the way a person should interact with nature (Watts, Tao: the Watercourse Way, pp. 46–49), by starting with a widespread material, and consider its different manifestations. With this phenomenon, we have a combination of a strong affective response that appears to deeply resonate with individuals but also allows for scientific development in a qualitative and eventually in “formal quantitative theories.” In Chapter 4, there was a discussion about the dialectical interaction of student, material, and Hans Lutz gives a more formal and standard science account of the occurrences of the vortex pattern in nature but in his introduction also writes about the universality of this pattern. He remarks that the “spiral motif represents the fundamental process of biological creation” (Lutz, 1983, p. 16). 5

Intrinsically Interesting Phenomena and Archetypical Images

199

teacher. Here, we have gone deeper into this interaction. Gestalt psychology provides a deeper understanding of what is involved in this interaction and the perceptual basis by which it happens. We also gain a different understanding regarding Portoghesi’s comments about resonance mentioned in Chapter 4. His one sentence, “The deeper and more mysterious the bonds (between a building and themselves), the more the inhabitants will draw on their imagination without relying merely on memory,” takes on a certain meaning when considered in terms of what was just developed about bubbles and the patterns in water. The connection I want to make is between the two boys dropping food color in water to the other phenomena illustrated by Schwenk and the spiritual dimensions mentioned by Purce. In this simple activity, there is the potential for relating to a wide variety of objects and phenomena outside the classroom. The small vortices of food color in the tray of water can be models for the formation of hurricanes or the formation of galaxies in the sky. (Recall the comment of the one boy in the scenario where he spontaneously describes the formation of a large vortex as a planet forming in outer space.) At the same time, these same vortices have expressive characteristics that resonate with the deeper layers of children’s psyche. Instead of an exercise to illustrate that water moves in a certain way as might be presented in a standard textbook, there are these other dimensions that should be at least implicitly recognized. I am not advocating for an approach by which the students are asked to reveal some personal feelings that are elicited by these phenomena and then relating it to religious or spiritual systems. What I do think is important is to provide a classroom culture that allows for these more personal associations to be made by students. These experiences can sustain their curiosity about natural phenomena, stir their imaginations, and provide a stimulus for personal analogies that help them make a connection between formal scientific descriptions and their personal associations. These two examples provide another rationale for the phenomena and technological artifacts introduced in Chapter 3 in which I proposed those to be the focus of a grade 1–9 curriculum framework. The other proposed phenomena have similar kinds of aesthetic appeal and a potential for evoking universal symbols.6 It should be noted that most students have little encounter with water in an exploratory manner after kindergarten. It is true that they may mix small quantities in vials or in some small-scale manner, but it is a rare occurrence for them to put their hands in water or move water around such as making waves in a tank. Also, some of the patterns Schwenk portrays are part of the daily weather such as seen on television with satellite images. Because these images occur on such gigantic scales many elementary and middle school students have great difficulty assimilating their significance. Weather could be an interesting topic if dealt with through these kinds of images and patterns, but there needs to be much prior work before I feel students can make sense of them. Investigating weather in elementary and middle school tends to be done in a dry academic manner where students keep track of temperature, relative humidity, and related measurements. The emphasis is on the measurements and not the phenomena that the measurements are representing. Wouldn’t it be more interesting to start off by investigating the local air current around a school building or the movement of air in a classroom? Why not try to get a feeling for very small air currents before taking on the very large scale of weather fronts? And, as given in the scenario do it in a way that brings out strong affective reactions and associations. It would be a more holistic approach. 6 

200

8 Empathy

Difference/Distance and a Holistic Approach to Science Education Another implication of the concept of dynamization as put forth by Werner and interpreted by the Kreitlers and Arnheim is the interactional aspect. As mentioned above, empathy was initially characterized as a type of projection, but this characterization is limiting if not one-sided. This implies that there is already a type of differentiation, a separation, or a distancing from the object. For instance, Werner reports that for a child, certain angular lines are angry. The graphic representations of children are not merely optical phenomena, but are precipitates, so to speak, of a whole attitude which reaches expression in the physiognomy of the drawn object. The angularity and pointedness are experienced psychophysically by the whole body, and this experience is projected on the drawing paper by the child. (Werner, 1948, p. 75)

The act of drawing is the projection, but the experiencing of it is of a different nature. This type of distinction fits with the actions of the boy described in the previous chapter. At times, his hands move over the surface of the water following the movement of the food color. His whole body seems to react to these movements in the water in an empathic manner. How does one then characterize this interaction if it is neither a projection nor assimilation? Arnheim came up with the term resonance that captures well the type of interaction in empathy (Arnheim, 1966, p. 85). It is one that I have used in my own thinking about this interaction. Resonance has several different meanings and can be applied to a range of phenomena. (Recall that this is the term that Portoghesi used in describing the role of the “listening” architect.) One example that relates to the present context is that of two pendulums that are connected by a spring or an elastic.

Spring or Elastic

Activate one of the pendulums by swinging it back and then releasing it so that it continues to swing. The other pendulum through the connection feels a small tug. After a few of these small tugs, the second pendulum is caused to swing. Then the first moving pendulum comes to a stop, while the other continues to swing. Again after a while, the energy from the second moving pendulum is transferred to the other. This transference goes back and forth until the whole system runs out of energy. It seems as if the two pendulums had a conversation.

Difference/Distance and a Holistic Approach to Science Education

201

In an encounter with an intrinsically interesting phenomenon, there can be a resonance, which is at first more affective than cognitive. During the initial encounter, the person is impacted by the expressive characteristic of the phenomena. The resulting affective reaction moves the person to manipulate the materials, producing the phenomenon. The materials react to the manipulation and the person takes in more information. This, in turn, causes further manipulation with some slight or major variation. Such interaction can go back and forth multiple times and over short or long periods, which might happen over days instead of minutes. This reminds me of the approach described by Evelyn Fox-Keller that is mentioned at the beginning of this chapter. Fox-Keller quotes McClintock saying: “You let the material tell you where to go, and it tells you at every step what the next has to be” (Fox-Keller, 1983, p. 125). Embedded in this statement and expanded on through conversations with her biographer, Fox-Keller reveals her attitude to nature and the scientific establishment’s view of nature and research. McClintock makes a significant and deep distinction. Fox-Keller sums it up in this manner: The need to “listen to the material” follows from her sense of the order of things. Precisely because the complexity of nature exceeds our own imaginative possibilities, it becomes essential to “let the experiment tell you what to do.” Her major criticism of contemporary research is based on what she sees as inadequate humility. She feels that “much of the work done is done because one wants to impose an answer on it - they have the answer ready, and they (know what) they want the material to tell them, so anything it doesn’t tell them they don’t recognize as there, or they think its a mistake and throw it out. … If you’d only just let the material tell you.” (Fox-Keller, 1985, p. 162)

In a separate work, Fox-Keller expands on this relationship between the organism and the person defining the scientist relationship to the world as either a dynamic or static objectivity. Dynamic objectivity aims at a form of knowledge that grants to the world around us its independent integrity, but does so in a way that remains cognizant of, indeed relies on, our connectivity with that world. In this, dynamic objectivity is not unlike empathy. … By contrast, I call static objectivity the pursuit of knowledge that begins with the severance of the subject from object rather than aiming at the disentanglement of one from the other. (Fox-Keller, 1985, p. 117)7

Fox-Keller frames her view of McClintock’s work and her scientific outlook placing it beyond the issue of gender and beyond her particular research related to genetics. This is of interest to me because it directly bears on the kind of paradigm I proposed in Chapter 4. For McClintock, a fundamental epistemological distinction is made between distance from nature and difference from nature. In the traditional view of science, the scientist moves away from the object being studied to be more objective and allow a more abstract description to develop. (Recall the extended quote by Schachtel in Chapter 6. Fox-Keller also draws upon his view to support her distinction.) With this approach, there is a strong distinction between nature and mind. Situating oneself as part of nature but also different from nature, which is McClintock’s 7 This sounds similar to the concept of structural coupling which is at the heart of Varela, Thompson, and Rosch approach to cognition.

202

8 Empathy

position, colors and influences the whole scientific process. McClintock deliberately became intimate with her objects of study such as the corn plants. She intimates that there was even an affection for these plants. There was a feeling for the organism (Fox-Keller, 1985, pp. 116–164). As Fox-Keller points out, viewing the scientific enterprise from this position of difference versus distance changes the nature of the kind of questions that are asked. It also changes the way the purpose of science is viewed. My sense is that this particular position is a more appropriate and compatible one for a philosophy of science education. It is a healthier or more holistic one. I feel strongly that students at the elementary and middle school level need to work in a sociocultural environment that allows them to explore their feelings for the organisms and phenomena they investigate. In this manner, they can build up experiences that contribute to a deeper scientific conception of nature as well as come to discover what their own personal connection to a phenomenon is. From this point of view, there is not a contradiction between the personal and the abstract scientific. Rather the latter is built upon the former. There are other implications of this difference and distance distinction. FoxKeller also relates that McClintock had great sensitivity for individual differences paying very close attention to each corn plant. There was a respect for the plant and affection, if not a special empathy, for each plant. One could well substitute corn plant for student and use the description of an attitude here that could also be part of a philosophy of science education. Instead of wanting to impose answers on students, one needs to have a dialogue with the students and help bring forth their thinking. If approached in a certain manner, student’s conception and understanding will come forth. Imposing an answer on students is a lack of respect for their capacity to think for themselves.

References Arnheim, Rudolf (1966). Toward a Psychology of Art, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. Arnheim, Rudolf (1971). Art and Visual Perception, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. Arnheim, Rudolf (1986). New Essays on the Psychology of Art, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press. Black, Max (1962). Models and Metaphor, Ithaca, New York, Cornell University Press. DeBlieu, Jan (1999). Wind: How the Flow of Air Has Shaped Life, Myth and the Land, Boston, MA, Houghton Mifflin. Fox-Keller, Evelyn (1985). Reflection on Gender and Science, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, p. 117. Fox-Keller, Evelyn (1983). Feeling for the Organism, New York, W.H. Freeman. Gibbs, Raymond (2007). Embodiment and Cognitive Science, Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press. Hildebrandt, Stefan and Tromba, Anthony (1985). Mathematics and Optimal Form, New York. W.H. Freeman. Hunsdahl, Jorgen (1967). Concerning Einfuhlung (Empathy): A concept analysis of its origin and early development, Journal of Clinical Psychology, 3, 180–191. Kreitler, Hans and Kreitler, Shulamith (1972). Psychology of the Arts, Durham, NC, Duke University Press.

References

203

Knuf, L., Aschersleben, G., and Prinz, W. (2001). An analysis of ideomotor action, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 779–798. Lovett, David (1979). Soap films, phase changes and catastrophes, Physics Education, 14, 40–44. Lovett, David (1981). Soap film analogue of Fermat’s principle and Snell’s law, Physics Education, 16, 376–379. Lutz, Hans (1983). Vortex Flow in Nature and Technology, New York, Wiley. Magli, Patricia (1989). The face and the soul. In Michel Feher, Romona Naddaff, and Nadia Tazi (Eds.), Fragments for a History of the Human Body, Part Two, New York, Zone, pp. 87–127 Otto, Frei (1962). Tensile Structures, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Perlman, Michael (1994). The Power of Trees: The Reforesting of the Soul, Dallas, TX, Spring Publications. Purce, Jill (1974). The Mystic Spiral, New York, Thames and Hudson. Pearce, Peter (1980). Structure in Nature as a Strategy for Design, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Root-Bernstein, Robert (1989). Discovering: Inventing and Solving Problems at the Frontiers of Scientific Knowledge, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Schwenk, Theodor (1976). Sensitive Chaos: The Creation of Flowing Forms in Water and Air. New York, Schocken. Stafford, Barbara (2007). Echo Objects: The Cognitive Work of Images, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press. Wapner, Seymour and Werner, Heinz (1957). Perceptual Development: An Investigation Within the Framework of Sensorytonic Field Theory, Worcester, MA, Clark University Press. Watts, Allan (1975). Tao: The Watercourse Way, Pantheon Books, New York. Werner, Heinz (1948). Comparative Psychology of Mental Development, New York, International Universities Press, Revised Edition, 1980. Zeki, Semir (1999). Inner Vision: An Exploration of Art and the Brain, New York, Oxford University Press.

Chapter 9

Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in its proportions. (Francis Bacon)

Scenario #6 Two girls (10- and 11-years-old) sit in front of trays filled with water having a rheoscopic material. (This is a special paint having very fine suspended particles that readily show the movement of the water.) They place drops of food color at various points in the tray and either blow on the food color to make it move or move a Popsicle stick through these patches of color. The resulting patterns are either curved lines or spirals of different sizes. This is the same activity described at the beginning of Chapter 7. Because of the very fine particles, slight disturbance will appear when air is blown across the surface. The camera is fixed on one of the girls who is highly focused and systematic in her investigation. She starts out by placing some food color in the middle of the tray that is in front of her and moves the stick back and forth. This creates an undefined shape. She also blows on the surface to see what happens. This causes the amorphous shape to move away from her and expand slightly. At several points in her exploration, she carries out interesting and highly significant maneuvers. Several times she places drops of color in one corner of the tray and either blows on them or moves them with the stick. This is followed with a similar maneuver at the opposite corner. Another time, she drops food color in one corner and moves the stick diagonally across the tray. This is immediately followed by dropping food color at the opposite corner and moving the stick diagonally in the opposite direction from the previous one. Then she carries out the following series of maneuvers. She follows the movement of the food color as it moves along the side of the tray with a stick. B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_9, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

205

206

Scenario #6

207

Both the patterns that are formed and the action of the girl are representative of a few formal aesthetic properties. For instance, some of the patterns are the mirror images of each other. If the stick is moved slowly from one end of the tray to the other, alternating spirals are formed of varying sizes, or mushroom-type patterns occur.

The girl seems to be operating on impulses arising from symmetrical considerations. At various times, she places drops of color at opposite corners or makes strokes with the stick from opposite sides of the tray. The girl following the movement of the food color along the edge of the tray is something akin to tracing out a translational symmetry. From my past experience, I couldn’t recall most other children being this systematic in their explorations with this kind of material. Yet it does illustrate that some children act out behaviors that arise out of a sense of symmetry and related aesthetic properties. This type of example is not an isolated one. Recall my comments about the construction of mobiles in Chapter 1. There is a very strong preference to carry out a strict bilateral symmetry in terms of size and shape on each side of the main horizontal beam with simple mobiles. Karmiloff-Smith carried out a study where children (aged 4.6 to 9.5 years) were asked to balance blocks, some of which had been secretly weighted, some explicitly weighted, and some normal. The result is a block that does not balance in the center or symmetrically. She observed that one kind of heuristic the children used was that of spatial symmetry. Blocks were balanced based on lining up their centers. This was both implicit and explicit that at times they stack blocks lining them up in symmetrical ways. After observing these actions, she concluded that children do not only use symmetry as a heuristic in space, but they also use symmetry as a heuristic in their actions” (Karmiloff-Smith and Inhelder, 1974/75).

208

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

This heuristic was apparent in both adults and children when I had them constructing mobiles. There was a very strong preference for bilateral symmetrical mobiles. When I suggested to both age groups to make a special kind of asymmetrical mobile, they had much difficulty in constructing it and to some degree resisted the project. Even though they reacted favorably to the finished product, they still found it difficult to carry it out. Exploration with mirrors is another example where strong aesthetic impulses arise. Mirror images and multiple mirror images are very much engaging. In many sessions with elementary age children as well as adults, they took great pleasure in creating multiple images of their faces or small objects when placed between two or more mirrors. Further evidence of this fascination is the observation that some of the most popular exhibits in science centers are the ones involving mirrors. In addition, consider the tremendous appeal that miniatures or gigantic replicas of people, objects, or machines have on children and adults. A change of scale or proportion such as the sculptures of Claes Oldenburg, where he has created a very large baseball bat or glove, will readily attract our attention. There are also many toys which are small-scale models of people, animals, or technological artifacts. In these examples, we have various kinds of symmetry and self-similarity at different scales. There is an innate predisposition to paying attention to symmetrical arrangements, scaling, and proportionality. Special attention should be given to the aesthetic properties of phenomena as manifested in their inherent symmetry and to the fundamental heuristic of symmetry that children employ when exploring and playing around with materials. It is important because it will help in the design of science activities and in understanding how students assimilate experiences. In addition, symmetry is a fundamental heuristic in modern physics, especially quantum mechanics, and is implicit in the way scientists approach their investigations of living systems. Aesthetics is, of course, much broader than just the properties of symmetry. I am using this property as a concrete way of getting at a very broad and elusive way of experiencing and thinking about phenomena in terms of aesthetics. Aesthetically interesting phenomena attract children’s attention and resonate with them in terms of feelings and are involved with cognition. This is not a new proposal that others have also recognized the same need and attempted to develop a pedagogy based on it. The eminent pedagogues of Switzerland and northern Italy, Pestallozi, Steiner, Froebel, and Montessori are among some of the more prominent ones, who have recognized the role of aesthetics in learning. Rudolf Steiner in his conception of education made art and aesthetic central to his educational approach.

Scenario #6

209

However, an aesthetic consideration in the contemporary context of science education tends not to receive much attention when one examines curriculum programs. Textbooks and some curriculum programs have very attractive graphics, but there is a real difference between the aesthetics of the presentation and the exploration of the aesthetics of a phenomenon. It is my belief that the role that aesthetics plays in the teaching of science should receive much more attention than it does today. In fact, one can make a case that it plays an essential role in the movement from sensory experience to eventual visual or verbal representation and in the eventual abstract conceptual formulations. When examined closely, creative scientific thinking arises out of a strong aesthetic foundation. It can be found in the following ways: • • • •

The way perceptual skills are developed The manner in which representations are created and presented Certain habits of mind which sort out the relevant and the essential Theoretical formulations which are economical and simple

Justification for making these assertions can be found by drawing upon several different sources. Some historians of art such as Herbert Read have laid out theories that are broad in scope and are about the aesthetics of art and its impact on mathematical and scientific thinking. Others such as Philip Ritterbush have focused on a particular historical period examining how thinking in the arts such as poetry influenced the way naturalists viewed the plant and animal world. Still others have studied the lives of individual scientists and shown how artistic avocations or prior work as artists influenced their inventive capacity, their powers of observation, and the way they formulated theoretical views. By considering the aesthetic mode as a way of thinking and knowing, the previous development of sensory knowledge, empathy, and global thinking can be extended. Each of these ways of considering the experiential and perceptual foundations of scientific thinking can be subsumed and integrated into a broad conception of aesthetics. Much of what has been written about aesthetics centers around art objects, but there is recognition by some writers that aesthetics can be more broadly encompassing. It can include the perception of the natural environment as well as the utilitarian man-made objects. It is essential to keep this in mind because the context here is science education. Nevertheless, what is said about aesthetics as applied to art objects has relevance to these other kinds of objects and environments approached from a science perspective. With this in mind, I will also elaborate on the implications of what was found in the abovementioned historical accounts. I will illustrate how aesthetics enters into the pedagogical practices and the thinking that is required in making science education effective. Throughout this book, I am arguing for a more holistic conception of science education. I don’t think one can begin to discuss this issue without considering the role that aesthetics plays in curriculum design and teaching. It has been argued by writers such as Dewey that aesthetics provides a model for educational experiences. This will also be addressed briefly.

210

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

Historical Examples of the Impact of Aesthetic Impulses on Scientific Thinking The relationship between artistic practices, aesthetic dispositions, and its impact on science and scientific thinking can be illustrated and examined by considering three historical periods: • A broad sweep of the history of early man • A case study of the mutual influences of art and science in a given historical period • Case studies of the lives of individual scientists

A Broad Historical View Herbert Read (1955) in Icon and Idea examines artistic and aesthetic development taking a very long view of history. He contrasts the development of the material culture of the Paleolithic period with that of the later Neolithic. Whether he is approaching the vestiges of these periods through ideological blinders or the prejudices of his own time, his overall thesis is relevant to the kind of argument I have been developing in this book and is useful to consider because it gives a sense of the development of one kind of aesthetic approach evolving into another that lays a foundation for scientific thinking. In a way, it is possible to think of the relationship between the aesthetic approaches of the Paleolithic to that of the Neolithic as an analogue in thinking about the aesthetics of early exploratory stages of extended inquiry investigation to the latter stages of sense making. For instance, Read characterizes the cave paintings of Paleolithic times as naturalistic since he sees them as line drawings that are projections of memory images. There is vitality and energy in these drawings, but from his perspective, there is a lack of abstraction of forms. There appears to be more of a reaction to the expressive features of animals and other objects. On the other hand from his survey of the Neolithic period, he observes that there is a gradual shift to a more geometric art reflecting a change in aesthetics. In the latter case, the images are assembled and moved around in a frame. Images of natural objects take on a more abstract representation. “There is an isolation of form from its practical function and the transference of this form to quite a different context” (Read, 1955, p. 39). He speculates that a part of this shift can be accounted for in the increasing involvement with pottery and basketwork. He speculates that these may have been brought about by an awareness of pattern and volume. Weaving and the practice of transferring weaving on clay plus the shaping of clay to produce an object that has volume may have contributed to an unconscious awareness of pattern and volume. Also, an unconscious process may have occurred where the patterns created on the pots suggested a formal similarity between these patterns and objects in the potter’s environment.

Historical Examples of the Impact of Aesthetic Impulses on Scientific Thinking

211

There was a set up dialectic between the experience of creating images with clay and reeds and natural objects. Taking this speculation much further, he comes up with a formulation that is related to what I had written regarding sensory knowledge in a previous chapter. [O]ne must suppose that the muscular habits themselves involved in practical craft activities established somatically a formal prototype for expression. A correlation was made between the dawning visual image of bird or animal and the ready made physical pattern. The image flowed into the mentally ready made mold. (Read, 1955, p. 40)

What is intriguing about this insight is the role that he gives the somatic in the development of a geometrical aesthetic. His contention is that the feeling for abstract form came into human consciousness through the fingers, and “what the fingers had feelingly shaped, the eye perceived and approved” (Read, 1955, p. 43). He contends that the growing awareness of abstract forms in nature came from practical activities and a changing aesthetic sensibility. Frank Wilson (1998) in his fascinating book about the human hand appears to second this speculation about the relationship between the hand and the development of human consciousness. He concludes from a broad survey drawing on fields such as paleoanthropology and developmental and cognitive psychology that “the human hand speaks to the brain as surely as the brain speaks to the hand … the hand has a special role and status in the organization of movement and in the evolution of human cognition” (Wilson, 1998, p. 291). Briefly put, in the transition from primates to early man, there was a coevolution of hand and brain which in turn brought about growing cognitive abilities. Another aspect of this growing realization of form is a more conscious awareness of properties of symmetry. These are indicated in the geometric patterns that are much more prevalent in Neolithic artifacts compared to the Paleolithic. Neolithic artists were not just conscious of symmetry but also made conscious use of it. These developments reflect a change in consciousness in general. A greater awareness of symmetry, form, and balance changed the way humans assimilated the artifacts of nature and their thinking in general. Read’s conclusion after surveying this wide range of artifacts is as follows: Symmetry, balance, all the laws of geometrical composition were first made evident in art; the first science was a notation of the discoveries of the artist; mathematics arose as a meditation in and on these artifacts. (Read, 1955, p. 50)

Read’s views about these developments are relevant for a number of reasons. The historical time period is of a time when the visual did not dominate as much as it does today in our Western culture. Surveying such a panorama and on such a scale allows for clearer observations of trends and changes in style that also can be correlated with developments in technology and what might be called the scientific thinking of those times. The main point, however, is his proposition that the changing consciousness reflected in the aesthetic paved the way for abstracting forms from nature and for thinking in terms of abstract mathematical relationships.

212

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

Read’s survey of history is very broad and highly speculative. There are other scholars looking at the same historical periods who tend to support his contentions. For instance, in a more recent work by the archeologist, Steven Mithen (1996) in his The Prehistory of the Mind also ranges over a broad sweep of the prehistory of human ancestors, in particular, looking at material artifacts as indicators of changing cognitive abilities and as precursors to present-day human cognition. He proposes that art such as cave paintings, clothing, and other kinds of technological artifacts such as stone tools act as “stored information.” The change in these objects over time reflects a change from segmented type of skills and cognition to one where there is cognitive fluidity. Many tools of the Upper Paleolithic had elaborate designs on their surfaces. He speculates that “[m]any of the art objects can indeed be thought of as a brand new type of tool: a tool for storing information and for helping to retrieve information stored in the mind” (Mithen, 1996, p. 170). This is a somewhat different view regarding these artifacts compared to Read, but the essential point is that thinking was assisted if not occurred through the use of these objects. There are two parts to this comment. The designs and decorations are a graphical way of storing information. The actual operation of the tool is another kind of information in the sense that they are ways of operating on the environment and a way of coming to know the environment. Another historian who also studied older artifacts is Cyril Stanley Smith (1976). He drew upon his background as metallurgist and materials scientist to examine ancient artifacts focusing more on the processes of fabrication. He came to a counterintuitive conclusion. Aesthetic curiosity was the “mother of invention” not that of practical necessity as is commonly assumed today. For instance, useful techniques in metal working were first developed in the crafts and only later applied to making knives and other practical tools.1

A Case Study of a Historical Period However, because Read’s, Mithen’s, and Smith’s reach is so broad and speculative, it may not convince. To bolster these arguments, one can turn to a fair number of writers about the more recent history of scientific thinking and its relationship to the arts. Two of those who present interesting and supporting correlations of Read’s thinking are Philip Ritterbush and Robert Root-Bernstein.

 Another who has studied older artifacts and commented on the relationship between artists’ keen observation of changes and materials is Jon Eklund (1978). He gives examples of how the Greek potter must have been aware of chemical changes that occurred when certain amount of alkali glaze were added to the clay. This gave the blacken portion of these pots. He also observes that the practice of subjecting different materials to fire probably resulted in the discoveries of new materials for use by artist. These empirical types of explorations contribute toward a growing understanding of materials laying the foundation for a more scientific development. 1

Historical Examples of the Impact of Aesthetic Impulses on Scientific Thinking

213

Ritterbush studied the work and the sociocultural environment of some of the leading biologists of the nineteenth century. He places the development of biological thought in a larger cultural context relating how the then currently prevailing aesthetic theories such as those propounded by the poet Samuel Coleridge had a real impact on some biologists’ conception of nature. Closely tied to this conception of nature is the relationship between visual representation and scientific conception. In summarizing Coleridge’s aesthetic theories, Ritterbush comments that Coleridge defined “a work of art as that which displays the characteristics of an organism rather than a mechanical device” (Ritterbush, 1970, p. 20). Analogies were developed between work of art and organic forms such as those of plants or at a more abstract level the perceived similarity between artistic creation and the processes of living nature. This analogy involving organic form had an impact on the thinking of the biologists of these times. The progress of biology in the nineteenth century resulted largely from the pursuit of a program of investigation whereby the esthetic presuppositions of the idea of organic form were shown to be applicable to the scientific study of organisms (Ritterbush, 1970, p. 25). During this historical period, there was a particular emphasis on the concept of the whole preceding the parts. This general conception influenced those biologists who were working at characterizing the structure of tissues or more specifically the cells of living organisms. At that time, there still wasn’t a clear picture, depiction, and agreement on what was the fine structure of tissue and of plants. This was partly due to the limitations of the instrumentation of the microscopes. Ritterbush shows through multiple examples how an aesthetic concept shaped biologist’s thinking leading eventually to the conception that the cells were the parts of the organism which were responsible for its overall function. There is another aspect to the influence of aesthetic theory on scientific thinking that is most relevant to what I would emphasize in a science curriculum. As biologists developed greater skill with the microscope and began to formulate theories about the structure of cells and very small one-cell organisms, the concept of symmetry played an important and critical role. Ritterbush proposes: Symmetry is a property which figures in almost all serious efforts to explain esthetic responses and often is used as a synonym for harmony or proportion, but it is also susceptible of rigorous mathematical treatment and is, in a strict sense, a geometric concept. (Ritterbush, 1970, p. 46)

This contention is richly illustrated in that classic work of D’Arcy Thompson (1942), On Growth and Form, a work that continues to attract and fascinate readers. Although not a mathematician, Thompson makes use of symmetry principles, geometric properties, and simple mathematical formulas to show how a variety of living objects can be approached and characterized in a mathematical manner. Apparently, a number of scientists have been inspired by this book even though he ignored significant science developments happening during his lifetime.2  Evelyn Fox-Keller (2002, pp. 50–79) disputes the usefulness of D’Arcy Thompson’s approach in terms of providing a productive framework for research at least in the area of cellular biology. 2

214

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

Ritterbush extends his contention about symmetry principles relating it to cell theory but also makes a connection between the visual representation of the biologist and the visual arts. The progress of biology beyond the cell theory has consisted in large measure ofdemonstrating the existence of significant symmetry properties in the organisms themselves (or in forms abstracted to represent them). The tracing of symmetry conformed to the paradigm of the objectification of form. It consisted of a broadening of the idea of organic form to take into account the differences in the symmetry properties which sometimes exist between organic and inorganic forms. The geometric quality of the concept of symmetry greatly enhanced the scientific value of visual representation of organisms. At the same time, the manifold usefulness of symmetry principles in the interpretation of organic form further heightened the aesthetic character of biology, greatly increasing the likelihood that visual representations, while scientific, could be referred to esthetic principles (Ritterbush, 1970, p. 48).

There is another part of the element of visual representation that Ritterbush comments about which is pointed out by other historians of scientists. Some of these biologists were especially skillful in their drawings. For instance, he shows one of the illustrations of Thomas Henry Huxley, who on the one hand would avoid “ideal conceptions, and an explicit aesthetic bias nevertheless produces beautiful drawings of sea creatures” (Ritterbush, 1970, p. 58). These careful and very fine drawings are only a few examples where aesthetic factors are explicit. Despite Huxley’s disavowal, his thinking had a distinct aesthetic bias according to Ritterbush (1970, pp. 8–60). Huxley was among a number of biologists toward the end of the nineteenth century who were very gifted illustrators. Aside from his own examples, Ritterbush draws upon the comments of Richard Goldsmith who observed that there was a group of microbiologists in Germany at the end of the nineteenth century who were gifted illustrators. The implication is that these skills not only enhanced the communication of their findings but contributed to the way they observed and conceptualized about the phenomena they were studying. Summarizing the interplay between art and science as it relates to visual representation, it appears that Huxley was not an exception in his drawing ability or having a keen sense of the aesthetics of living organisms and plants. Especially during the transition from the nineteenth to the twentieth century, Ritterbush comments that [a]gain, and again at decisive turning points in its history, biology has adopted the esthetically satisfying interpretation of a problem that acknowledged the effect within the organism of principles of emergent order serving to distinguish it from inert structures. Organismal concepts of symmetry elucidated the phylogeny of invertebrates. The search for globules led to the cell. The recognition of symmetrical invariance in chromosomes opened the way to molecular genetics. The biological imagery of expressionism arises not from the factualness of science through the copying of illustrations but from the aspirations toward beauty that science and art hold in common. (Ritterbush, 1970, p. 85)

Ritterbush is claiming that the aesthetic principles put forth by artists as well as their creations directly influenced biologists’ thinking. In regard to the latter, this means that some of the artistic techniques used in representations such as in

Historical Examples of the Impact of Aesthetic Impulses on Scientific Thinking

215

drawing were also adopted by the biologists. Later, I will give some more contemporary examples of this kind of influence.3

Case Studies of Individual Scientists and Inventors A similar kind of view and examples of artistically gifted scientists is carried by Robert Root-Bernstein (1985). His particular focus was more on chemists and physicists. One interesting account is about Pasteur who practiced drawing and painting with great skill. Root-Bernstein points out that Pasteur was the first to recognize the different forms of crystalline tartrate which previously had been studied by other scientists. Root-Bernstein speculates that because the crystals are so small only a person with a practiced eye would have noticed these differences. In addition, the sensitivity to symmetry is proposed as a factor in this discovery. In a later work, Root-Bernstein (1989) took an unorthodox approach to the writing of a history of science. As a narrative device he set up a dialogue among a group of fictional scientists. He uses this literary device to present a discussion about a variety of issues that tend to be given less attention by the scientific community. One of these is the role of aesthetics in scientific thinking. To support his contention that many creative scientists have a strong aesthetic sense derived from the arts, he provides a long list of 12 pages of eminent scientists and inventors who had as avocations some kind of practice in arts or crafts, whether it be painting or music – Richard Feynman, music – Einstein, photography – James Clerk Maxwell, poetry – Humphrey Davy, fiction–Margaret Mead, etc. One of the more intriguing ones is Erwin Schrödinger who was a weaver (Root-Bernstein, 1989, p. 318–327). He proposes in a manner similar to Ritterbush that these artistic avocations helped to develop certain kinds of general skills and types of thinking or habits of mind that provided a basis for their creative thinking in science. He elaborates on this type of aesthetic approach and its relationship to scientific thinking. [A]nalogizing, pattern forming, pattern recognition, visual thinking (not just in three but in four or even n dimensions), modeling (both mental and physical), playacting (in the sense of becoming the thing you study), kinesthetic thinking (feeling how a system functions), manual manipulation, and aesthetics. (Root-Bernstein, 1989, pp. 3, 13)

These “tools of thought” are similar to what I have been elaborating upon in previous chapters. In a sense, all of these could be characterized as habits of body–mind. Other specific examples of what is meant by these skills and habits of body–mind are given by Brooke Hindle as they relate to inventions. Although Hindle in his work Emulation and Invention is examining the lives and practices of inventors, both he 3  This statement is a summary of a development of each of these assertions. The reader would do well to go to the original article to fully appreciate both the wonderful drawings and the developed argument showing how contemporary aesthetic theories seem to directly influenced not only the thinking of these biologists, but also the very observations they reported and the manner in which they render these visually.

216

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

and Root-Bernstein are proposing that the habits of body–mind apply to a broader array of scientists, inventors, and engineers. For instance, Fulton, the inventor of the steamboat, was a painter as well as Morse. Not well known is the fact that Morse was one of the most prominent artists of his day. He was the president of the National Academy of Design and professor of the literature of the arts of design at New York University (Hindle, 1981, p. 85). I cited in a previous chapter the account of Morse’s initial conceptualization of the telegraph. These initial sketches of a telegraph system have a close similarity to other sketches of his travels in Europe, and Hindle speculates that these two subjects share a common aesthetic approach. This contention suggests that there was a direct carryover from Morse’s habits of mind and in his drawing style to his conceptualizing about a telegraphic system. In this case, it would seem to be hard not to acknowledge that a direct transfer is happening. Root-Bernstein and Ritterbush have examined chemistry, physiology, and certain areas of biology. What about physicists, especially the theoreticians, who generally are several steps removed from the concrete everyday physical world? The aesthetic beauty of nature as revealed say in flowers, other kinds of plants, and in the animal world seems not only plausible but apparent. Where is the sense of aesthetic in the theoretical formulations of the physicist who mainly deals with abstract mathematical symbols? Wechsler (1978) summarizing direct reports and interpretations by historians of science who are central figures in the formulation of modern physical theory of quantum mechanics and relativity were highly conscious of an aesthetic factor in their thinking and in scientific theories. Frequently cited are Dirac and Poincare who make explicit their feeling for, and need of, an aesthetic to stir their imaginations and to guide it in eventually making conscious their mathematical formulations. Poincare was specifically concerned about the manner in which scientific theories are gestated and the way they are eventually brought to conscious attention. The scientist does not study nature because it is useful; he studies it because he delights in it, and he delights in it because it is beautiful. If nature were not beautiful, it would not be worth knowing, and if nature were not worth knowing, life would not be worth living. … I mean that profounder beauty which comes from the harmonious order of the parts which a pure intelligence can grasp. … It is, therefore, the quest of this especial beauty, the sense of harmony of the cosmos, which makes us choose the facts more fitting to contribute to his harmony, just as the artist chooses from among the features of his model those which perfect the picture and give it character and life. (Poincare (1913) quoted in Levy, Psychobiology of Aesthetics, p. 228)

Similar sentiments can be found in the writings of other theoreticians such as S. Chandrasekhar (1987) who titled his book Truth and Beauty: Aesthetics and Motivations in Science. He extols the beauty of the theoretical formulations of Einstein, Heisenberg, and Dirac. Although his concept of beauty is defined at a very abstract level, it is derivative of symmetrical considerations when he adopts Francis Bacon’s comments as his conception of beauty: There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportions! (Chandrasekhar, 1987, p. 70)

Shaping Experiences Aesthetically

217

Again symmetry appears as a fundamental guiding heuristic. It is most apparent when dealing with physical systems, but as Ritterbush mentions, it appears in the biological sciences. All of this historical scholarship and explicit accounts by eminent scientists would seem to be rather persuasive in establishing a deep and essential connection between aesthetics and scientific thinking.

Shaping Experiences Aesthetically The preceding historical accounts illustrate the avenues by which an aesthetic disposition can have an impact on scientific exploration and thinking. Before moving toward the practical implication of these accounts as applied to the context of science education, the idea of what is aesthetic should be expanded beyond the reaction to the symmetry properties of a phenomenon. Also, connections can be made with the observations of Water Ong, the “somatic maker hypotheses” of Antonio Damasio (1999), and the concept of schema as developed by Mark Johnson which has been mentioned in previous chapters. Aesthetics that is very broadly defined is concerned with the feelings that arise in our activated sensations on encountering objects in the environment. During our waking hours, we are continually receiving information from the environment and acting and reacting to this intake. Much of this happens at an automatic level. We drive our car to work on automatic pilot hardly even noticing the environment through which we are passing. At other times, there are moments when there may be a focused awareness of something which brings about an emotional reaction such as an unusual sunset as we drive home. Almost all that is written about aesthetics is in term of our reactions to objects and events made and organized by artists. Yet it is clear that we can have an aesthetic reaction to something which is not an art object such as the patterns of food color that arise in moving them in the rheoscopic fluid as well as the variations of bubbles formed on a wet tabletop. When I look at the vortex patterns of food color formed as a stick is moved through the special solution, there is a satisfying emotional quality. There is both the form and the gradual change as it enlarges in size and eventually diffuses. The growth of the spiral is an organized movement. There are growth and order. This form resonates with some deep innate structure that Jung designates as an archetypical symbol. Likewise, there is great appeal of the shapes of soap bubbles such as the perfect symmetry of a free-floating spherical one or the repeating patterns of an array of connected bubbles. There are order and organized movement in these phenomena, and we resonate with these characteristics in a deep manner. In these instances, I am referring to a type of innate response. In our reactions to art objects, some of these reactions arise because the shaping of our sensibilities has also occurred just by the fact that we are immersed in a particular sociocultural environment. Everyone has an innate sensibility to music, but as many different forms that exist around the world illustrate there are different aesthetic sensibilities

218

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

that make and react to music. There is also the training of sensibilities by studying a type of music with a master who initiates the novice into the finer structures and internal relationship of a particular kind of music. Therefore, our aesthetic response can be shaped by an educative process. This has implications for the curriculum designer and the teacher. It is here that we come back to Walter Ong’s statement mentioned in Chapter 6: “[A]ssimilating the wisdom of the past, is in great part learning how to organize the sensorium for intellectual purposes.” In observing the patterns of food color in the tray of solution, there are multiple features that can draw our attention. In fact, at the beginning of the session, the two boys mentioned in a previous chapter commented first on the way two different colors mixed to form a third. They did not say much about the fact that spirals were forming. The one boy whose responses were mostly verbal could have just reacted to the physiognomic or expressive characteristics of the patterns and not paid much attention to the structure of the spirals. By choosing certain kinds of materials for the exploration, making comments at the right moments, and emphasizing certain features of the patterns the teacher can begin to organize the sensorium of the children for the purpose of having them gain a scientific understanding of fluid movement. In the scenario, I described previously of the two boys exploring the patterns in the water, I performed that function by occasionally reacting to what they had created or asked questions to draw their attention to some pattern that had scientific implications. Over multiple sessions where there are variations in the manipulations of the materials resulting in similar kinds of patterns and through reflective discussions, the features of these patterns become differentiated and either implicitly or explicitly the educator can associate different values to these characteristics as they relate to a conception of fluid movement. At the early elementary level, this shaping of the sensorium, perception, and conception is an approximate one, happening more at an implicit level. At an older level, this process must become more directed and explicit. In Damasio’s somatic marker hypothesis, he proposes that intuitions sift through the multiple possible responses to a specific situation requiring action. His work was mostly in term of a cost-benefit analysis type of sifting of possibilities. If I understand his theory correctly, past experience has shaped the value given to different types of possible responses. Intuition runs through these weighted values narrowing down the possibilities for consideration. Then a more rational explicit process evaluates these fewer possibilities in making a considered decision. What could be happening at elementary and middle school level can be a shaping of students attention to specific characteristics of a phenomenon and as just mentioned giving different weights or values to these characteristics as they are related to formal scientific conceptions. During these early encounters, I would argue the priority is not for student to arrive at or somehow construct the “right scientific conception” in a very explicit formulation. It would be more to gently direct the attention of the student to what is most relevant and somehow making the student aware that paying attention to certain characteristics is what is of most value.

Shaping Experiences Aesthetically

219

What I am proposing here is more than just promoting the importance of experiencing the phenomenon and giving all the attention to the role of observation. Concurrently, with the shaping of the sensorium, there is also a shaping of the schemata that students either bring to the situation or are forming as they are having these experiences. Earlier in Chapter 5, I introduced Mark Johnson’s conception of schema which is closely tied to bodily perception and movement. It is an imaginative structure for organizing experiences. He gives particular emphasis to the dynamic nature of this structure. Schemata are “a pattern of action as well as a pattern for action.” (This is a Neisser quote in Johnson, 1987, p. 21.) He states that he does not go as far to claim that these image schematic structures can fit concepts (Johnson, 1987, p. 290), but does allow that they constrain the kind of inferences and reasoning that can determine how we assimilate and represent them. In the situation where students are exploring the food color in the water, the teacher can interact with them during the explorations but more productively in the transition between explorations and experimentations. For instance, one of the activities in investigating air and water movement is to observe the movement of food color in a soda bottle where the bottom is being heated. One bottle sits inside another. The top has cold water. The bottom has hot water. Food color is carefully introduced at the bottom of the top bottle by placing it in a drinking straw resting in the water. Over time, the food color will seep out of the bottom of the straw and will rise along the side of the bottle and then move downward in the middle of the bottle illustrating the phenomenon of convection. The teacher can have students generate visual representations of what they have observed and use these representations to conceptualize what is occurring. How and what gets represented is modulated by the teacher. This will be elaborated upon in the next section. Although Johnson points out that his conception of a schema is different from a mental picture, the schema is the source for the eventual production of a visual representation. This in turn can be the basis for developing conceptions about fluid movement. In these re-representations as Karmiloff-Smith (1992) would have it, the teacher also can play a role of shaping what gets represented and how it gets re-represented. Closely tied to this process in representations is the use of metaphors and analogies in making sense of experiences. This is a time-honored practice in teaching particularly in science. Johnson develops an extended account of how there is an image-schematic foundation to metaphor. Drawing upon research about people’s use of metaphor, he asserts that “people draw definite inferences based on their underlying metaphorical conceptions of the domain they are investigating” (Johnson, 1987, p. 112). People use image-schematic models and operations to understand various domains of experience and to solve problems. For instance, a possible metaphorical projection in attempting to understand convection cells is to align changing psychological states with the movement of the water in this cyclic action. When we feel happy, we are lighthearted or optimistic. Our mood is buoyant. When we feel sad or depressed, we are dejected or having a sinking feeling. This could be aligned to the fact that the water is changing its density in this cycle when the density is growing less due to the heat the liquid rises.

220

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

Food color from eye dropper

When it starts to cool at the top, the liquid grows in density and sinks. The Lava Lamp is a graphic example of this ongoing circulation. Whether we consider the Lava Lamp as art object or not, it has an intrinsic appeal as witnessed by the fact that it continues to be sold and bought many years after it was introduced. Geoffrey Vickers (1978) invokes the concept of a schema arguing that a sense of aesthetic form arises from an innate disposition but is shaped by the sociocultural environment. For instance, he uses the concept of a schema to explain how norms of classification arise in the individual, although his understanding of schema is somewhat broader than Johnson’s. According to his account, schemas are built up through experiences of being exposed to different examples of a phenomenon. From these many examples, we abstract common properties (Vickers, 1978, p. 150). Schemas develop not only through the experience of the individual but also through the interactions with others. In other words an educative context such as schooling would play a role in the shaping of a schema. Therefore, the recognition of form is not entirely innate but shaped by the social context in which they are developed. For instance, as Ritterbush related those who first looked through the microscope weren’t sure what they were looking at. The schema of what constituted a cell developed over time and it took on a particular understanding by way of the influence of a particular theoretical persuasion.

Aesthetics in the Selection and Organizing of Science Curriculum Experiences

221

Vicker’s comments then place aesthetics in a larger epistemological and pedagogical framework. Facts, observation, and encounters with the natural world are not directly given but are filtered by the schemas that reside in the observer. These schemas are continually being modified. In the educative environment, the schema can be shaped in a way that makes it ready for scientific conceptualization. The shaping of these schemas can happen by way of aesthetic criteria in the broadest sense of this term. He gives importance to the context in which learning happens and proposes that schema are influenced by the multiple context, of the physical, social, and cultural. There are several aspects of the preceding accounts which have a particular relevance to what I have written previously. These can be characterized in terms of the roles of how artifacts, visual representations, and conceptual tools enter into scientific explorations and thinking, and how their aesthetic character influences these processes. This will be elaborated upon in the next chapters.

Aesthetics in the Selection and Organizing of Science Curriculum Experiences If we are to take into account the strong emphasis given to aesthetic intuitions and thinking by scientists, it makes sense to consider how this could be infused in the elementary and middle school science curriculum. (I think it is also of central importance in high school curriculum, but the issues regarding this level are very problematic considering the very strong emphasis given to the mastery of subject matter.) In what sense can aesthetic consideration enter into the design and implementation of a science curriculum? I am proposing that this bears upon what is being presented to students and how it is being presented. There are six levels at which aesthetics enters into the design of curriculum and pedagogical practice: • • • • • •

In the selection of phenomena to be explored and investigated by students In the way that explorations and play with phenomena happen In the way the experiences with phenomena are structured In the way these experiences are represented kinesthetically, visually, and verbally In the way conceptualization is negotiated with students In the way a holistic conception of science education is characterized

Before expanding on each of these phases, it is necessary to narrow down how I will approach the general understanding of aesthetics as it applies in this very practical context. In the historical accounts, the role of symmetry in scientific thinking kept coming up. Ritterbush proposed that symmetry was a critical ingredient in the development of biological thought, and that it was a disposition and way of thinking which was shared by artists and scientists of the nineteenth century. This is also true of twentieth-century physical scientists in the development of quantum theory and its elaboration (see Curtin, 1982). In the latter realm, this consideration has appeared in the most austere realm of formal mathematical formulations. Suffice it

222

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

to say that some of the most creative scientists of the last 100 years had symmetrical considerations at the center of their theoretical developments. Given this great propensity for aesthetics as derived from symmetry both at a concrete level and the very abstract theoretical, it makes sense to consider how it would apply in the teaching of science at the elementary and middle school level. This attention to symmetry by no means captures the full involvement of an aesthetic sensibility. In previous chapters, the role of sensory engagement and empathy has been developed. These are also integral factors and should be kept in mind. Besides symmetry, there are other characteristics of aesthetic experiences such as beauty, coherence, simplicity, and unity which are very difficult to speak of when attempting to relate it to a specific pedagogical experience in a practical way. I will here and there mention some of these latter properties associated with aesthetics but stay mainly with the more tangible aspect of symmetry.

Choosing Aesthetically Interesting Phenomena In the contemporary Western cultural context, almost any object can be made into an art object partly by transforming it, placing it in the specialized context of an art gallery, or in some cases just by a declaration of a person who is considered an artist. By the change of context or designation, an aesthetic way of knowing is possibly engaged. In a parallel manner, it might be said that any object or system could be approached with an aesthetic attitude in the educational context. Concurrently, it might be said that any object or system might be investigated from a scientific point of view. As illustrated with the previous examples of practicing scientists and inventors, objects standing in for physical and living phenomenon can have an aesthetic dimension. This suggests for the science educator that any object can then be brought into the classroom and investigated in a way that would provide for both orientations. However, from a practical and pedagogical perspective, what objects can be brought into the classroom is in fact somewhat limited. Just in terms of safety, cost, or accessibility the list can be quickly narrowed. In addition, there are ethical, historical, and cultural factors which would further limit the possibilities. In the previous chapters, I gave specific examples of objects and materials elementary and middle school students have investigated that have a high aesthetic appeal and lend themselves to scientific investigation. For the purpose here, I want to focus on the inherent symmetry of the special phenomena I proposed in Chapter 3, where a rationale for an outline of a curriculum framework was initially developed. A further development of this rationale can be based on aesthetic properties. A list of phenomena and technological artifacts that I have introduced to students and found them to be especially engaging is given below:

Choosing Aesthetically Interesting Phenomena Phenomenon or technological artifact Air and water movement Waves Shadows Mirrors Sun, moon, stars movement Mobile, balancing toys Mechanical clocks Tops and yo-yos Trees Human body Insects and related organisms Windmills and waterwheels Soap bubbles

223

Symmetries and/or rhythmic variation Bilateral symmetry, self-similarity at different scales, rhythmic variation Translational symmetry, self-similarity at different scales, rhythmic variation, proportionality Self-similarity at different scales, proportionality Bilateral symmetry, repeating patterns, proportionality Rhythmic variation, changing proportionality (phases of the moon) Bilateral and rotational symmetry, proportionality Rotational symmetry of gears, rhythmic variation Rotational symmetry, rhythmic variation, self-similarity at different scales Rotational symmetry, self-similarity at different scales Bilateral symmetry, proportionality, self-similarity at different scales Bilateral symmetry, proportionality Rotational symmetry, rhythmic variation, proportionality, self-similarity at different scales Rotational symmetry, repeating patterns, proportionality

Besides these symmetries of form, there are other features inherent in some of the above phenomena which are other ways of thinking about symmetry. Rhythmic variation is sometimes separated from visual or kinesthetic symmetry but as Dewey (1934) in Art as Experience points out these are closely connected if not just another way of describing ways of experiencing an aesthetic object. For instance, waves in water are self-evident in terms of rhythmic variation, but what about the movement of the sun and the moon. The timescale is much longer as compared to waves or the up and down motion of a yo-yo, but the phases of the moon presents a variation that although predictable still fascinates. Single gears aren’t interesting, but when joined with others, a new rhythmic element is introduced. When stationary, they can be viewed as a translation of circles in space. When placed in a more complex arrangement such as a mechanical clock, the movement of the whole arrangement of gears is like a kinetic sculpture where each turn at different speeds and the alignment of circular forms have an appealing structural arrangement and rhythm. Another characteristic of some of these phenomena is the building up of tension and release. Each time a bubble is blown there is that special tension of knowing that at some point it will completely disappear. One never knows when a bubble will pop, when the spinning top will fall to the ground, if a ball on a shaky track will fall off, when the water waves will completely die out. This characteristic is found in the great works of music and drama. It is an aesthetic device used by artists to attract our attention and move us to become engage in what is being presented.

224

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

In the above list, I note that there can be self-similarity at different scales which is another way of saying that such phenomena or technological objects can be represented by scale models. The miniature and the gigantic have intrinsic appeal to everyone. Models of large-scale phenomena or of the enlargement of microscopic life have an affective and cognitive dissonance. Dolls, toy cars, airplanes, and model houses are universal playthings. They look and act in an analogous manner as the real thing, but we can hold it in our hand or arms. There is the dissonance of knowing the scale of the real thing and having it appear in our hands seemingly shrunken to a manageable size. Therefore, operating models of technological artifacts and natural objects already have a special appeal because of this fascination with the change of scale. The attraction to them is further enhanced when they involve motion and can be manipulated. (This is the difference between a workingscale model and a static one.) Models, windmills, and waterwheels draw upon this appeal. The aesthetic appeal of the circular motion of these moving wheels can be enhanced by having them lift a weight as it turns which results in a juxtaposition of circular with linear motion. A major criterion then for selecting phenomena for exploration is these readily apparent symmetries along with the type of sensory engagement described in previous chapter. These characteristics are part of their aesthetic appeal.

Aesthetics and Exploratory Behavior In the early stages of inquiry, students should have the opportunity to explore a phenomenon in an open way. Teachers need to trust that the aesthetic appeal will draw the students in and in subtle ways act as an implicit structure for guiding their manipulations. Dropping food color in water is a new activity for some students in elementary or middle school. Because of its novelty, it may engage the interest of the students for a while, and there are a variety of manipulations that can be carried out, resulting in a variety of discoveries that students will assimilate. This initial exploration of something new may appear to be fairly simple, but as revealed in various kinds of research and theoretical speculations, there are intricacies and complexities. If the science educator recognizes and comes to understand the nature of this type of exploration, it can help him or her find the right kind of role to take on, which both supports and spurs on the students’ engagement with the materials. One of the most influential researchers in recent times who dealt with the role of aesthetics in exploratory behavior was Daniel Berlyne. Through his research and theoretical speculations, he expanded the conception of what is aesthetic and how it might be studied empirically placing these studies in a historical context that he called “experimental aesthetics.” Partly deriving his theoretical orientation with information theory, he proposed that expressive, cultural, and syntactic information be considered as aesthetic information (Berlyne, 1974, p. 6). Two characterizations of exploratory behavior which he formulated have been adopted by other ­researchers

Aesthetics and Exploratory Behavior

225

in the domain of experimental aesthetics as well as those who studied the play of children and animals. He labeled these behaviors as inspective and diversive exploration. With the former, there is a search for a specific stimulus depending on certain defined properties while the latter is the person’s attempt to find a level of stimulation that is optimal, i.e., he or she is neither bored nor overwhelmed by the stimulus. Berlyne related these characterizations to the observation that the reaction to a work of art or aesthetically interesting object appears to arise from “two sets of factors, one tending to drive arousal upwards and the other tending to reduce arousal and keep it within bounds”(Berlyne, 1974, p. 9). He cites various writers who proposed similar characteristics. For instance, there is the “uniformity” and “variety” by Hutcheson, “order” and “complexity” by Birkhoff, and “coherence” and “mystery” by Kaplan (original citations in Berlyne, 1974, p. 9): Later, Joachim Wohlwill expanded on these behaviors and added affective exploration. This type is mainly involved in aesthetic exploration and is defined as “a response to a stimulus primarily oriented towards the elicitation of affective arousal, i.e., pleasure or enjoyment.” (Wohlwill, 1986, p. 64) These types of orientations and behaviors can be seen in a number of the videos in the Learning to See videos series (Zubrowski, 1996), which did have as its overall goal a documentary type of presentation of how elementary and middle school children explore and play. In particular, the one video described in scenario # 5 would be one to study closely. One can observe an ebb and flow in the way the two boys manipulate the food color in the water. In the initial stages, there are exclamations of what they are witnessing where there is arousal and excitement. They settle down and try out different ways of moving the stick through the food color. After about 10 min, one of the boys stands up and appears to be taking a break but then gets back into moving the food color around. At the time, when I make the move to end the session, one boy pours the content of his tray into the other. Their curiosity is stirred up again as they observe a very large vortex form. They become quite excited by this accidental discovery. The change in scale and its accidental occurrence incite them to go further with their exploration. Their waning involvement is recharged, and they want to go further. Berlyne and Wohlwill’s characterization of exploration can help in sorting out what the boys are doing. Their behavior is not random, can be differentiated, and is representative of the way a person becomes acquainted with a novel situation. During the session with the two boys, I was sometimes directly involved while at other times I stepped back. Because this was being videotaped for eventual distribution, I felt the pressure sometimes to be interacting with the boys, but if I were carrying out the same activity in a classroom, I probably would have said less and been more in the background. There is an essential tension for the teacher in this kind of situation. There may be times when students appear to “just fooling around” or doing nothing, while at other times, they may indeed be manipulating the materials but doing this in a repetitive manner. It is hard to decide if one should step in and perhaps suggest something new to try or just be supportive in a tacit manner. There are no scripts

226

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

here which can be followed, but keeping in mind that there is this ongoing optimization on the part of the student between inspective and diversive exploration, the teacher needs to develop a mind set to cope and eventually develop a watchful stance. Over time with experience and this mind-set, the teacher can develop intuitions of when to get involved and when to step back. In relating these descriptors of diverse, specific and affective exploration to a pedagogical context, it seems to me that a more general term could be used to subsume them. This would be the idea of “manageable complexity”.4 This means that the teacher sets up situations which are neither over stimulating nor uninteresting to the student. This could be in terms of the questions to guide the exploration, the kind and amount of materials, the amount of time given to the exploration, and the kind and the amount of interaction between student and teacher. This judgment comes about through the years of experience in teaching and through the guidance of master teachers. Good curriculum materials would have tested what phenomena are engaging to students, what ways the phenomenon can be investigated in an optimal manner. Interactions will depend highly on particular students, their past history of doing explorations, and the sensitivity and skill of the teacher. There are no prescriptions that can be used to know ahead of time just what are the right amounts and what is the right timing of questions or interactions. However, all these considerations in terms of setting up an optimal situation are still heavily influenced by the stance and goals of the teacher. If the teacher explicitly states that the sole purpose of manipulating the materials is to obtain specific kinds of information, then this sets up one kind of approach which shapes students attitudes and the way they might explore. If the teacher presents a more open situation where a permissive classroom culture has been developed, then students understand that open explorations are occasions during which they not only are gathering information but also making a personal connection with the phenomena. In each situation, the type of exploratory behavior can be different. As already mentioned in the previous chapters, there needs to be recognition of the roles of what is associated with the non rational aspects of experience. These include: • • • •

The highly sensual involvement with early encounters with physical materials The reactions to the physiognomic properties and less to the geometric–technical The essential role of the affective as much as rational processing of experience The need to incite wonder and fascination as much as intellectual curiosity

What I am drawing attention to is the experiencing of the phenomenon in a mode that is a total immersion of self. The third mode of exploration that Wohlwill proposes isn’t ordinarily recognized and usually not sanctioned. Letting students to explore just for the pleasure it may bring is considered an indulgence. Especially in science education, there is usually an orientation of collecting the essential facts about a phenomenon. This means picking out what are  This is a term that was used by one of the master teachers who was involved with the Elementary Science Study in the 1970s. 4

Structuring a Sequence of Experiences to Have an Aesthetic Orientation

227

the most relevant variables which will lead to the introduction of the targeted concept. This goal is certainly essential, but I would maintain that it is too narrowly conceived. There is still an important personal connection to be made between the student and that which he or she is encountering. As developed in previous chapters, the connection has to happen at a deep personal level and, therefore, will necessarily involve an affective dimension. Therefore, it is more than a matter of tolerating students’ personal responses to phenomenon. It is a matter of explicitly sanctioning these responses. Interestingly, sanction is derived from the Latin sancire, which means to render sacred. One meaning is that of giving support, encouragement, or approval. The other senses of the word are associated with authority, law, or a coercive measure (Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary). So, to chose this word results in a curious ambiguity. It should be quite clear from previous developments that I am emphasizing the meaning associated with encouragement, but other meanings and the original source give this choice of the term a sense of gravity. Just “messing about” has not been taken very seriously by the educational establishment. In fact, it is too often associated with indulgence and frivolity. For instance, Sparshott (1963) allows that there is a close connection between play and art but because of the manner in which he defines play concludes that play is basically incompatible with education. According to him, education is serious, deliberately functional, not spontaneous, and very much goal-oriented. Play, on the other hand, has the opposite of these qualities. He concludes that education cannot be play-like. He qualifies this sweeping conclusion by proposing that education could possibly be play-like, but it could only happen in a limited way. Given this relationship between play and education, it would appear that there also isn’t much room for aesthetic/artistic experiences in education. I will address this viewpoint regarding play in the next chapter. Meanwhile, I would argue that if science educators would accept the importance of an aesthetic approach in inquiry, then they would sanction the above-mentioned behaviors rather than just tolerate or indulge them.

Structuring a Sequence of Experiences to Have an Aesthetic Orientation I have already argued in previous chapters for the need to have extended investigations into one phenomenon or technological artifact. In addition, I have also presented a case for having students move through phases of inquiry. The curriculum designer and teacher need to carefully craft how the investigation could evolve and how guidance can be given to assist students in their movement through an investigation. Keeping in mind that there is a balance of student-generated directions and questions with the guidance of the teacher moving these into productive directions, there are still considerations of how to provide for coherence and integrity during the whole investigation. Coherence in the sense that each of the succeeding sessions build on, and relate to, the preceding and integrity in the sense that there is an underlying gestalt

228

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

which gives implicit structure to the explorations and the subsequent development of explanations. The coherence and integrity can be fostered by keeping in mind the aesthetics of the phenomenon that can structure the overall investigation. Given that investigations happen over time, a rough analogy could be made to extended musical compositions. Two characteristics of music have particularly appealed to me personally and are the ones that I have adopted in the development of most of my later efforts in curriculum design and work with students. The two characteristic I have in mind could be labeled as variations on a theme and juxtapositions of related themes. Music abounds with composers and musicians taking a few notes or a short theme and playing out variations on this theme. There is repetition, but the really artful and skillful musician does it in a way that keeps us interested and involved. Likewise, contrasting themes are also presented in many musical works such as in the symphonic form or in musical suites found in a variety of musical genres. In a later chapter, I will go into greater detail about these two processes, and how they can be used to structure an investigation.

Representing Experiences with Aesthetics in Mind In the scenario cited at the beginning of this chapter, there are several kinds of shapes, curving lines, and changing patterns which can be readily captured in drawings. These can also be represented by hand and arm gestures because they are well defined and continually changing. In the chapter on movement, gesture was seen as a means to transition from assimilating an experience to representing and thinking about the phenomenon being investigated. In a similar manner, the drawing of the vortexes and lines can be more than a recording of an observation. They can act as a transition to a way of conceptualizing about fluid motion. The drawing of bubble arrays is much more challenging for students because of their complex geometry. On the other hand, drawing balls rolling down tracks of different configurations is relatively easy. Different phenomena vary in their transferability to a two-dimensional graphic representation. Nevertheless, in all cases, conscious or unconscious decisions are made in the selection of what features will be selected and how they will be represented. What is selected for representation, and how it is rendered is important because they become a means for thinking about the phenomenon. They can be expressive of cognitive content. In addition, as Vickers had pointed out, there are standards which are established by the sociocultural context. In this case, it would come from the science of fluid dynamics. These standards influence how something is rendered and what details are emphasized. In addition, there are the shared cultural techniques of graphical representation in the scientific community because these visualizations provide the means for moving students to a more scientific conception of the phenomenon. I have already related Ritterbush’s history of the role of drawing for nineteenthcentury biologists and Hindle’s proposition that drawing was an instrument for

Representing Experiences with Aesthetics in Mind

229

Morse’s conceptualization about a telegraph system. More recent commentary reinforces their assertions. Those writings from an art history perspective have taken further the idea that visualization is a means for thinking and is also indicative of an aesthetic attitude. For instance, James Elkins (1999) writing as an art historian in his book The Domain of Images proposes that there is a much broader range of visual images than those of the fine arts and that these should also be examined from an aesthetic viewpoint. His scope is all encompassing but does give some specific attention to scientific illustrations including the sketches, photographs, or graphical representations by scientists in the development of their theories. According to Elkins, there is a long tradition where scientific illustration has drawn upon fine art conventions. For instance, this appears to especially evident in the relationship between anatomical drawings of artists and medical illustrators (Elkins, 1999, p. 8). Another example is Leonardo da Vinci who is paradigmatic in his role of artist, scientist, engineer, and inventor. For instance, he drew devices using the exploded view where parts of the device were expanded to clarify details. This functioned both as artistic expression and a useful means of representation. It later became useful in other domains (Kemp, 2000, pp. 12–13). Elkins lists a number of ways that this borrowing or influence is happening in contemporary practices with computer graphics commenting that some of the techniques regarding how light effects are rendered can be traced to Renaissance and Baroque paintings (Elkins, 1999, p. 8). With these examples in mind, he makes a rather important point by arguing against those who see scientific images as nonaesthetic. Scientists in their reports or in their communication with other scientists will carry out the practice of enhancing, highlighting, or in some way cleaning up of photographs, graphic representations, and images. He illustrates this practice by showing how aesthetics operates in the cleaning up of astronomical photographic images where there is an attempt to remove extraneous spots from the machine renderings so as to focus on the most salient and relevant features. Elkins argues that this practice of scientists is related to older conceptions of what is aesthetic. What happens in nonart images can be just as full of artistic choices, just as deeply engaged with the visual, and just as resourceful and visually reflective as in painting, even though its purpose might be entirely different. (Elkins, 1999, p. 11)

Taking this further, he emphasizes that there is still an underlying process which informs what the scientists do with images. These processes may not be consciously derived from art, but they appear to create similar results. These writers agree that not much is gained by comparing the scientists “criteria of elegance, clarity and simplicity” with artistic criteria and that the two senses of images are worlds apart - but in terms of attention scientists lavish on creating, manipulating and presenting images, the “two cultures” are virtually indistinguishable. (Elkins, 1999, p. 11) Scientists and artists use similar means to achieve very different ends. The similar means are being the inherent ways of simplifying what is experienced and then represented. As Ritterbush and scientists such as Poincare assert, symmetry is one

230

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

of the fundamental ways by which this simplification is carried out. It is difficult then to separate out the various representational practices in the use of images in the scientist public and private discourse from what some call habits-of-mind or what others might call conceptual tools. These practices arise out of innate dispositions such as preferences for symmetry, transferring of artistic techniques to scientific illustration, or a need to simplify visual data to clarify results and emphasize specific features. In all cases, it could be said that the scientists are operating with aesthetic standards. There are some implications from these studies which are relevant to teaching science to children. Techniques used by artists can be directly applied to representations that students use in science work. I recall being impressed by a first grader’s drawing of a goldfish compared to all the other students in the class. We know that some students have an ability to be good at drawing and I assumed that her skill was inborn. I found out later from the classroom teacher that this girl had been taking drawing classes at the museum of fine arts. You could see in the way she started off her drawing and added details that it had come from a tutored background. The proportions of the overall fish and details such as the fins were much better than the other students in the class. This is more than a matter of making good drawings. It was a way of making closer observations and knowing how to represent these observations. Other students were observing some of the same details as she was but did not have the means to make these explicit. So, although as Elkins and other art historians note the representations of the student may not be considered artistic, the skills and processes in producing the drawing are rooted in the same processes. This suggests that there ought to be a close collaboration between the science and art teacher at least on some occasions. This would be in the development of technique as well as in understanding different ways of rendering and representing objects. I mention this collaboration because it suggests that there can be useful transfer from the practices of art to the practices of representation in science. This in turn suggests that students would benefit if they also were exposed to and developed manual skills, habits of perception, and thinking in art classes. The perceptual, representational habits developed from the art classes could provide a means for them to more readily put forth their own sketches, make those sketches more useful in relationship to conceptualizing or, if viewing already created images, bring to the viewing of these ready ways of knowing how to interpret or “read” them. There are other reasons why it would be productive to have a deliberative and strong connection between the art and science teacher. In the art context phenomena can be explored at a more personal level because of a different goal. In this context, personal expression is emphasized. The transaction with the phenomenon and its representation can resonate with the individual as externalization of personal feelings and function as personal symbols. This process of exploring and creating these personal symbols can be the ground for generating visual analogies. The resulting representations can also be useful in thinking about the scientific conceptualization. Examples of this back and forth between the symbolic garnered from visual explorations and artistic expression are given by Martin Kemp (2000) in his book Visualizations: The Nature Book of Art and Science. He presents multiple

Representing Experiences with Aesthetics in Mind

231

examples of drawings and paintings accompanying these with brief discourses on the science that influences or is inherent in these images. His comments about Leonardo’s Mona Lisa are one example. The visual effects in Leonardo’s paintings were based on his keen observations of nature which he recorded in his journals. For instance, one law was formulated by da Vinci with regard to how the angle at which a light hits a plane and another was an explanation of how vortices occur (Kemp, 2000, p. 13). Kemp observes as an art historian that the manner in which the Mona Lisa was painted was influenced by these laws. Da Vinci did not create directly what he saw but recreated the visual effect based on the laws just mentioned. In one instance, he juxtaposed the vortex formations in water to the curly hair of a bearded man. The Mona Lisa has curly hair where the curls resemble vortexes. By itself this may seem minor but in the general context of Leonardo’s work and in an interpretation of this painting it takes on a special symbolic significance where Kemp draws a parallel between the background in the painting and the women. The woman and the landscape stand in profound harmony to each other and to the laws that govern the physical world. (Kemp, 2000, p. 13)

In the case of da Vinci, it is hard to separate the artistic from the scientific. The way he painted merged the restless scientific observation of nature with deep personal symbols. One implication of this view of pictorial representation is that the teacher needs to develop a classroom culture where drawing and sketching are not an onerous chore. Simple observations and measurements are necessary to record, but in some instances, it can be presented as more like an opportunity to exercise artistic skills and a way of empathizing with the phenomena or organism. It is also a way of focusing attention and closely observing what is happening. However, there are problems when it comes to having students draw. Some are inhibited because they feel they have to have very realistic representations. This can be overcome if throughout the grades drawing is approached both as a way of self-expression and a way of capturing the external world. In Waldorf education, there is an ongoing practice of having students draw. Others would do well to find ways of adapting this approach in public school practice so that drawing is the second nature to the students and they are not inhibited in attempting it. The idea here is that the representation is more than a mechanical undertaking. Although drawing, in a way, is a distancing of oneself from the object, it still can be done where affect is energizing the manner in which the drawing is being carried out. The whole person is engaged rather than just the eyes and hand in a mechanical sense. Elkins writes that “drawing is strongly tactile both in the way it is made and in the way it is seen” (Elkins, 1996, p. 226). He takes this even further and speculates that the whole body is involved with, and responds to, drawings. It is a transitioning from a more kinesthetic experience of the phenomena to one where it can be acted upon in a more cognitive way. (Recall the comment of Arnheim where it strongly recommended that the art teacher has students who start

232

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

with the expressive features of an object instead of the geometric technical.) The important point is that approaching drawing with this attitude can allow the innate aesthetic dispositions to more fully take hold and in turn guide the attention of the observer as well as dispose the observer to seek representations that can be both pleasing and of scientific use. This has been mostly from the perspective of the scientist or student selecting what will be drawn or pictured. In reporting his or her observations through drawings or through pictures obtained by technology, the scientist does have to follow some conventions in order to communicate with those in the field. These conventions arise because they determine how these representations are interpreted and how they relate to the theories being developed. These conventions are learned while in graduate school or through communications with other scientists. When images arise from new technologies, the scientist uses these in his or her work to make a connection to the theory he or she is proposing. The implication of this practice is that the teacher needs to bring into the attention of the student conventional drawings that appear in science text. The teacher needs to help students map what they have drawn to what are standard scientific drawings. Or, in the case of photographic images, the teachers needs to help students focus their attention of what is most relevant and how it relates to concepts being developed.

Aesthetics in Conceptualizations In the particular example, which I have been focusing on, it is not a large leap from the observation of patterns of food color moving in water to the drawings which represent these happenings and then on toward some conceptualizations about fluid movement. For instance, as mentioned above, one can observe very thin lines when several different colors are moving along side of each other.

blue yellow

red

Aesthetics in Conceptualizations

233

The teacher can ask the students to imagine the lines getting stretched out more and more till they are no longer visible to the eye but could be said to exist in one’s imagination. Taking this interpretation of such drawings even further down to individual liquid or air particles, the path traced by these particles can be envisioned as imaginary lines. This allows the teacher to introduce the concept of streamlines which can be used to develop conceptual models of fluid flow around objects. (In later developments of fluid mechanics, these imaginary lines can be related to mathematical representations.) Seeing small vortices expand into larger ones in the tray of colored water can suggest that the forces creating and acting within these vortices may also be of a similar nature for vortices that are much larger in scale such as a water spout, tornado, or hurricane. Does visual similarity at different scales mean that the same forces are acting at these different scales? In fact, there are ways of making comparisons by way of what is in some ways is a magical proportionality called the Reynolds number. It is applied usually in comparing small-scale models to real-life ones such as the model airplane tested in wind tunnels to determine how the full-scale one will function. The model and the full-scale one are geometrically similar. In comparing geometrical models, a few variables are manipulated. By choosing the right kind of values for the variables of length of a model, speed at which they move, and then adjusting the density and viscosity of the fluid medium in which the model is being tested a proportionality can be established where the model and the airplane can be compared (Vogel, 1988). The way the fluid medium moves around the small-scale model of an airplane can be compared to airflow of the very large 747 would perform in the sky. Playing around with these proportionalities results in a number that is useful and aesthetically satisfying. Peter Peace in Structure in Nature as a Strategy for Design (1980) focuses on the geometric properties of soap bubbles with especial attention to the structure of bubble cells. He cites others such as Cyril Smith who reported that tetrahedral arrangements appear in a variety of materials such as crystal boundaries in metals, the bony structure of the small organism, the radiolarian, and certain kinds of plant tissues. He also mentions the work of Matke (Pearce, 1980, p.6) who counted up the numbers of sides of fat cells and found that the average was close to 12. This number has significance in terms of the close packing of cells in a living system. It is close to the number of sides of a bubble cell in a three-dimensional array. Based on these analogous structures, Pearce then proposes that the soap bubble array can be a model for a variety of structural arrangements found in nature and could as well be for man-made structures. He is not proposing that this is a strict scientific model whereby what is learned about the soap bubble can be directly applied to these other structures. His point is that there is a special aesthetic appeal which brings together all these diverse materials and systems. It provides a heuristic device by which a person can think about structural arrangements. This same heuristic appeal is apparently what draws people to D’Arcy Thompson’s book. Although not much has directly followed from what he proposed in the book (at least according to Evelyn Fox-Keller, 2002), there is a strong aesthetic appeal to the connections he makes among different living organisms.

234

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

The idea then is that considering aesthetics in the context of science education goes beyond gaining the attention of the student and using aesthetics to motivating them. It is important in the way that reconceptualization can be brought about in the student.

Aesthetics Experiences as a Model for Science Education Experiences In the practical implementation of what I have suggested in the preceding sections, the overall flow of the pedagogy can have an aesthetic dimension. During the investigation, there would be a rhythmic variation between contact with the sensual tangible and the abstract conceptual. A sense of wholeness would be kept to the investigation by a focus on one phenomenon instead of multiple experiences with several phenomena. This focus could be given a wholeness and unity by emphasizing an underlying gestalt. Each activity would be designed to have its own integrity but at the same time have a meaningful connection to the whole, giving the overall investigation an affective and cognitive cohesiveness. One model for the teacher in leading this experience for his or her students is that of the musical conductor. In my vision of this process, I would associate it more with the conductor of a jazz ensemble rather a symphonic orchestra. One who particularly comes to mind is Duke Ellington. He went to great efforts and sometime financial sacrifice to keep together his orchestra. At various times, there were players in his ensemble who were recognized as great improvisers. Some remained with Ellington while others moved on to form their own small groups. As some commentators have observed, the individual musicians and the whole ensemble was his instrument through which and by which he composed his many fine musical compositions. What has intrigued me about his relationship with his orchestra was this balancing act of composing for specific players in mind and providing a structure and room for the rest of the orchestra. At times, he even let individual players stretch out as in the famous event during one of the happenings of the Newport Jazz Festivals where Harry Carney went on an extended improvisation with “Diminuendo in Blue” and “Crescendo in Blue.” With his ensemble, his piano playing provided part of the propulsive direction along with the other members of the rhythm section to inspire the rest of the musicians. Those who played with him and other knowledgeable musicians considered him a master accompanist – one of the best in the jazz tradition. According to their assessment, he was able to remain in the background adding just the right kind of notes at the right time. He both supported as well as spurred on the other player or players. I think this is a relevant model for the science teacher to consider if not emulate. A curriculum guide can be like a musical score. It can be followed exactly or it can be like an outline which provides an overall structure with specific directions where needed. It can be approached with the attitude that there is a

Aesthetics Experiences as a Model for Science Education Experiences

235

leeway in how it is played out. The musical ensemble can be compared to a class of students where there can be individual special contributions and collective improvisation but there is an underlying infrastructure that gives the pedagogical flow an aesthetic coherence. The sociocultural political pendulum in recent times has swung to the end of the arc where there is a great deal of emphasis on cooperative learning, group processes, and the social context of learning in contrast to giving full attention to the contributions of the individual student. I would not argue against the very strong case made for the essential contribution to learning that such a stance contributes. However, I think one needs to have a balance and recognition that there are individuals in any class who have certain ways of exploring, thinking, and expressing themselves. At times, they can play a critical role in providing fruitful discoveries, acting out specific kinesthetic representations or generating visual representations, as well as put the general thinking of the class into explicit thoughtful language by expressing analogies which provide a focal point for the whole class to be energized and direct their thinking. The teacher needs to have sensitivity to these individuals, know how to exploit, and shape these students’ potential contributions so that a productive direction can be given to the whole class’ investigation. The art is in being able to strike this balance between the individual and the group as well as between the improvisation and the structured background. Likewise, the teacher can be the sensitive accompanist leading the whole class but doing it in a way that he or she is providing the overall direction, inspiring further exploration, and critical thinking, while remaining somewhat in the background. At various times, he or she puts forth just the right amount of questioning at the right time to move the investigation forward and instigates critical and conceptual thinking. In my conception of guided inquiry, there is room for this balancing act to occur. Guided inquiry can be misconstrued as a highly prescriptive process. On the more liberal end of the continuum of open versus guided education, there are some who advocate for what is called integrated education (Beane, 1997). Students are solicited about what they want to study and are given a great deal of freedom in deciding the questions and how they will be answered. There is guidance, but it appears the direction is still heavily oriented to students’ interests. There is also free-form jazz and collective improvisation. At times, this type of playing can be quite exhilarating, but indeed limited to a very few gifted performers and a very sophisticated small population of listeners. Likewise, we have a long way to go to grow lots of master teachers who could work with well-prepared students to carry out “inquiry” in a completely open manner as the approach for what is called an “integrated education.” Students also have to be brought along to assume ­responsibility for their own learning and become creative and resourceful in their investigative abilities. The teacher of guided inquiry should “go with the flow,” in part generated by individual students keeping in mind the overall gestalt and the few basic concepts that underlie the investigation. But, I would argue that there is still a need for a curriculum guide that distills the accumulated experience of past attempts at exploring

236

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

a particular phenomenon. This experience comes from other teachers, researchers, as well as from the notes and reflections of the individual teacher who is using the curriculum. It is like the music chart that provides enough direction for the skilled performer to take off and make his or her own contribution.

Aesthetic Experience as a Model for Holistic Science Education Experiences Consideration of the aesthetic goes beyond representation and conceptualization. It can provide a model for moving toward a more holistic conception of science education. Dewey in Art and Experience provides a way of considering this broader application of an aesthetic experience. He associates the aesthetic more with the passive element of appreciation such as perceiving and enjoying but points out that this reaction cannot be easily separated from the making of art and its appreciation. In attempting to capture the active with the passive involvement of the aesthetic, he states that these should not necessarily be separated, and that it is an unfortunate problem of our language of not having a word that encompasses both. What appear to be the essential characteristics of an aesthetic experience are brought out when he is writing about the experience of thinking. What makes an act of thinking aesthetic is that “the experience itself has a satisfying emotional quality because it possesses internal integration and fulfillment reached through ordered and organized movement” (Dewey, 1934, pp. 16–17). I mentioned this level of engagement because the aesthetic is more often associated with the fundamental sensory engagement of a work of art or with a phenomenon and perhaps less so with the more cerebral part. Dewey is not separating out these seemingly different types of engagement. His conception of the aesthetic emotion is situated between two theoretical positions. On one extreme, there are those who would exaggerate the sensitivity of the artist, attributing the artist’s sensitivity to a special talent, which is the sole source of their artistic production. The other extreme proposes that there is no distinctive aesthetic emotion. Dewey’s view is that “esthetic emotion is thus something distinctive and yet not cut off by a chasm from other and natural experiences” (Dewey, 1934, p. 78), it is not extraordinary or plain ordinary. Given the right kind of conditions, what would have been ordinary becomes aesthetically involving. This is a fundamental characterization because it leaves open the possibility that aesthetic sensibility can occur or be developed even when there are encounters with objects that are not from the realm of art. It is also important because it also leaves open the possibility that educational experience can be shaped to have an aesthetic dimension. I found it interesting that he titled one of his chapters “The Organization of Energies” as distinguished from the organization of sensory experience or the organization of emotions and feelings. This approach allows him to write about aesthetic perception in a more distributed manner giving examples from all of the

Aesthetic Experience as a Model for Holistic Science Education Experiences

237

major art forms instead of just focusing on the visual or the aural as some have tended to do. Significantly, he did not favor the visual arts as a test case but gives examples from all. Thus, he assigns a fundamental role to the kinesthetic mode in aesthetic experiences using the phrase “motor equipment” as an analogous descriptor. This isn’t fully defined, nor does he elaborate a great deal on the full meaning of its application. He does propose through that without “motor preparation” aesthetic reactions will be confused and limited. The kinesthetic is then a way of giving coherence to an experience. I think this is a significant distinction and essentially added dimension. It is within this particular framework that he elaborates on the role of symmetry and rhythm as shapers of experience, which are two sides of a similar underlying process. Therefore, the visual doesn’t dominate the way that often is presented about the type of sensory engagement with phenomena. This added dimension is one among other sensory dimensions which contributes to the resulting unity and coherence of aesthetic experience. There is a problem in attempting to follow on Dewy and others who write about the aesthetic dimension in education because they tend to focus mainly on the appreciation of the arts and its integrations and infusion in education. For instance, can the child have a joyful appreciation of patterns of food color such as described in the opening scenario? I would propose that there are properties of natural phenomena for which one can have an aesthetic response without it being art? This may mean that aesthetic in this situation is referring to formal properties of the phenomena such as rhythm, symmetry, and balance. According to Dewey, inherent in any artistic experience are these properties. One way out of this difficulty is to consider the aesthetic as acting at different levels. Chen Ning Yang approaches this issue as a theoretical physicist who elucidates this differentiation in this matter. There are “three categories of beauty: the beauty of phenomena, the beauty of the theoretical description, and the beauty of the structure of the theory” (Curtin, 1982, p. 32). I have already written about the first level; the second and third are much more difficult to develop because they require a familiarity with a particular domain of knowledge. My point here is that aesthetics can be associated beyond the sensory engagement with the phenomenon. Indeed, Dewey acknowledges these other levels because he proposes that “thinking has its own esthetic qualities” (Dewey, 1934, p. 38). Or, a little later he writes “esthetic cannot be sharply marked off from intellectual experience since the latter must bear an esthetic stamp to be itself complete” (Dewey, 1934, p. 38.). I mention this because the aesthetic often may be associated with the early stages of inquiry where encounters with phenomena are mainly associated with sensory engagement. Yang and others like Chandrasekhar are taking this aesthetic dimension and applying it to the movement from the concrete to the abstract. This has implications for phases of inquiry where the student moves from open exploration which is sensorally engaging to a sense-making phase where there is a movement toward the cognitive abstract. There can be an appreciation of the manner in which mappings are made from the concrete to the abstract. At one level, there are characteristics or features of a phenomenon that excite and tend to draw attention. Part of the experience at a more surface level can be a reaction to the direct sensation

238

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

of these properties. There can also be a very abstract aesthetic such as Chandrasekhar and Poincare write about. Dewey does analyze and articulate the experience of art objects in a way that could be applied in a generic approach to other kind of experiences as I have outlined above. For instance, symmetry and rhythm are considered as two sides of a similar underlying process. Coherence and unity are placed as central characteristics of an aesthetic experience. In Art and Experience, Dewey does not present any extended development of the implications of his position for education. Others drawing on his thinking have attempted to propose ways that the two are connected. For instance, Monroe Beardsley and Donald Arnstine explicitly make a direct connection between aesthetics and education. Although they are also concerned about the arts being a significant part of education, they seem to allow that aesthetic experience could be infused into other subject matter areas and also act as a model for shaping the educational experience. Beardsley is ambivalent about the direct involvement of aesthetics in education in general proposing that there are “limits to the aesthetizing of instruction” but does allow for the possibility of using aesthetic experience as a model for ways of structuring educational practices (Beardsley, 1970, p. 190). Arnstine appears to be not so hesitant and attempts a lengthy alignment of learning and aesthetics. His fundamental argument appears to rest on the notion that there is some common ground between aesthetics and learning which arises out of evoked emotions. Here is how Arnstine (1970) lays out conditions for learning and aesthetic experiences keeping in mind that this description is a working hypothesis and is meant to be a way of moving toward a more definitive definition. Operating in the formal educational context, the teacher sets up situations which attract the attention of the student because what is being presented is either contextually relevant or intrinsically interesting. The teacher structures the situation in a way that there results an emotional or intellectual dissonance or “discrepancy” in the student while also doing it in a way that there is a “manageable complexity.” (This term is not Arnstein’s but if I understand his intention correctly, it would seem to capture what he is proposing.) As mentioned previously, this term is understood as an attempt to provide for optimal stimulation. Arnstein narrows the discrepant reaction of the student to a realization that there is a problem to be solved although there are other dimensions to this dissonance. He does not mention anything about the process which might be called problem finding, which in itself is as much a part of the learning as the eventual solution of the problem. One of his critical proposals is that there is a parallel between the tension inherent in attempting to solve a problem and the tension that arises in the contemplation of a work of art. Good art when contemplated in a certain state of mind and operating in a familiar cultural and social context also brings about a dissonance and a resulting resolution of this tension. Likewise, as Arnstein describes it, there is a change in disposition or an accompanying dissonance when the person has the realization, there is a problem and is moved to solve it. This change in disposition, if it is permanent, could be said to be an example of learning.

Aesthetic Experience as a Model for Holistic Science Education Experiences

239

For learning to have an impact and be meaningful or satisfying, there must be an associated emotional response. In certain circumstances, sensory qualities have patterns which constitute a form. The detection of these patterns and form is associated with an affective response. As Dewey describes this concept, it takes time to bring about a complete organization of the parts (Dewey, 1934, p. 55). Part of the dissonance arises from an attempt to discover the patterns and fit the parts within the whole. The directed purpose of the engagement is the integration of the parts. The learning of these patterns and forms is enhanced through this affective response. Arnstine and Dewey associate these responses with the aesthetic. How the food color is mapping the movement of water is not immediately evident. It takes time to see what the relationship is between the movement of the water and the patterns of the food color. The resulting patterns are pleasing as indicated by the comments of students who observe them. Realizing that there are repeating patterns and that they occur at different scales can be an aesthetic moment. In the situation that Arnstine is describing as problem finding, it is essential to recognize that it is one that intrinsically motivated. This means that the engagement with an object, phenomenon, and system is carried out for its own sake. The learner is not engaged for some kind of instrumental reward. This is a very critical point. It is one of the connections by which aesthetic experience can be aligned with educational experiences. Intrinsic motivation will be returned again in the next chapter when the conditions for play are examined. Arnstine only vaguely intimates what this formulation means in a practical sense. He suggests that there should be more of the traditional arts in the overall curriculum and that the teacher’s performance be judged as a “work of art” (Arnstine, 1970, p. 243). Not much is given about the students’ role. He seems to lean toward the position that the teaching of the arts will sensitize students in a way that their learning in other subject areas will be affected by these acquired sensitivities. I would take this somewhat further by proposing that sensitivity to aesthetic qualities could as well occur in the context of learning science because it is one of the few instances where there is direct engagement with physical materials and living natural phenomena. On the other hand, Beardsley maintains that what makes for good experiences in a variety of contexts including the educational is not necessarily what makes a good aesthetic experience. However, the characteristics of aesthetic experience which make it good and satisfying are highly generic applying across a variety of contexts. Therefore, there are affinities between the aesthetic and the educational. “Both artistic creation and instruction consist in the deliberate setting up of conditions for experiences, which implies a common concern about such matters as medium and form” (Beardsley, 1970, p. 13). He reacts to Arnstine’s characterization of the relationship between aesthetic and learning by reformulating them. It may be useful to the reader to consider this reformulation so that the difficult underlying concepts and connections may be made more evident. Beardsley puts it in this manner: [L]earning requires a certain intensity of experience.

240

9 Aesthetics in the Learning of Science

The peculiar intensity of aesthetic experienced derives from an integrative response to form and to aesthetic (regional) qualities, therefore, the techniques that achieve artistic success (in producing aesthetic experience) are conditions of instructional success as well. With this reformulation he agrees with Arnstein that “aesthetic experience does serve as a valid model of educational experience.” (Beardsley, 1970, p. 17)

Beardsley’s and Arnstine’s formulations suggest to me that the curriculum designer and the teacher can enhance the learning experience by adopting an approach which gives conscious attention to those features of the curriculum and teaching which focus attention and engage the whole of the student providing for a certain kind of “intensity” and a resulting engaging dissonance. The previous sections in this chapter suggest ways that this might happen. Echoing Dewey, they associate the aesthetics of experiences with a wholeness that can in part be related to the elements of rhythm and symmetry. The important point is that engagement with phenomena in the context of science education is not totally divorced from the concept of an aesthetic approach to education. To take the implications of this rather general formulation further, there is a need to find ways to make this approach more concrete. This can be done by examining a connection which historically has been made between art and play. Sparshott in reviewing a history of these two traces connections as far back as the Plato and more recent writers such as Schiller. The similarities between these two states of body-mind can be developed by examining some of the conditions for play and the various forms in which it is manifested. The next chapter will carry this out.

References Arnstine, Donald (1970). Aesthetic Qualities in Experience and Learning, in R. Smith (Ed.), Aesthetic Education, Urbana, IL, University of Illinois Press, pp. 21–44. Beane, James (1997). Curriculum Integration; Designing the Core of Democratic Education, New York, Teachers College Press. Beardsley, Monroe (1970). Aesthetic Theory and Educational Theory, in R. Smith (Ed.), Aesthetic Education, Urbana, IL, University of Illinois Press, pp. 3–20. Berlyne, Daniel (1974). Studies in New Experimental Aesthetics: Steps Toward an Objective Psychology of Aesthetic Appreciation, New York, Wiley. Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan (1987). Truth and Beauty: Aesthetics and Motivations in Science, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press. Curtin, Deane (Ed.). (1982). The Aesthetic Dimension of Science, New York, Philosophical Library. Cyril, Stanly Smith (1976). On Art, Invention and Technology, Technology Review, pp. 36–41. Damasio, Antonio (1999). Descarte’ Error: Emotion Reason and the Human Brain, New York, Grosset/Rutnam. Dewey, John (1934). Art as Experience, New York, Capricorn Books/Heineman. Eklund, Jon (1978). Art Opens Way for Science, Chemical and Engineering News, 5(1078), 25–32. Elkins, James (1996). The Object Stares Back, San Diego, CA, Harcourt. Elkins, James (1999). The Domain Of Images, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press. Fox-Keller, Evelyn (2002). Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors and Machines. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.

References

241

Hindle, Brooke (1981). Emulation and Invention, New York, W.W. Norton. Johnson, Mark (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press. Karmiloff-Smith, Annette (1992). Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Karmiloff-Smith, Annette and Inhelder, Barbel (1974/75). If You Want to Get Ahead, Get a Theory, Cognition, 3(3), 195–211. Kemp, Marcel (2000). Visualizations: The Nature Book of Art and Science, Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA, The University of California Press. Levy, Jerre. Cerebral Asymmetry and Aesthetic Experience, In Beauty and the Brain: Biological aspects of Aesthetics, Rentschler; Ingo, Herzberger, Barbara; Epstein, David; (eds) Birkhauser Verlag, Basel. Mithen, Steven (1996). The Prehistory of the Mind: The Cognitive Origins of Art and Science, London, Thames and Hudson. Pearce, Peter (1980). Structure in Nature Is a Strategy for Design, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Poincare, Henri (1913). The Foundations of Science, New York, The Science Press, pp. 366–367. Read, Herbert (1955). Icon and Idea, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Ritterbush, Philip (1970). The Art of Organic Forms, Washington, DC, Smithsonian Institution Press. Root-Bernstein, Robert (1985). Visual Thinking: The Art of Imagining Reality, Transactions American Philosophical Society, 75(6), 50–67. Root-Bernstein, Robert (1989). Discovering: Inventing and Solving Problems at the Frontiers of Scientific Knowledge. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Sparshott, Francis E. (1963). The Structure of Aesthetics, Toronto, University of Toronto Press. Thompson, D’Arcy (1942). On Growth and Form, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Republished by Dover in 1992, New York. Vickers, Geoffrey (1978). Rationality and Intuition, in Judith Wechsler (Ed.), On Aesthetics in Science, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, pp. 143–165. Vogel, Steven (1988). Life’s Devices, The Physical World of Animals and Plants, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, pp. 114–116. Wechsler, Judith (Ed.). (1978). On Aesthetics in Science, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Wilson, Frank (1998). The Hand: How Its Use Shapes the Brain, Language, and Human Culture, New York, Pantheon Books. Wohlwill, Joachim (1986). Varieties of Exploratory Activity in Dietmar Gorlitz and Joachim Wohlwill (Eds.), Curiosity, Imagination and Play: On the Development of Spontaneous Cognitive and Motivational Processes, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum. Zubrowski, Bernard (1996). Mapping Water Currents with Food Coloring: Variable Exploration, Learning to See: Observing Children’s Inquiry in Science [video], Newton, MA, The Education Development Center.

Chapter 10

Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

Man only plays when in the full meaning of the word he is a man, and he is only completely a man when he plays. (Johann Friedrich Von Schiller)

Scenario #7 In this scenario, a boy (9 years old) and a girl (11 years old) are playing around with rolling balls on a track in an after-school program where they have been specifically picked to participate in a videotaping. They are shown the materials and given very little direction on how to use them. Over the course of half an hour they set up several different arrangements with the tracks to see what will happen. The boy suggests that they try crashing marbles into each other by sending their respective marbles down a U-shaped track from both ends at the same time. Later in the session the girl suggests that they set up an arrangement where they try to get the ball to fly off the end of the track into a can. It is not clear that this might be a game because the boy suggests that they try different kinds of balls. He holds the far end of the track at different heights testing to see if the ball will travel faster. At one point the boy even races with the ball along the track when the girl releases it at one end. Overall, it appears that the boy is more interested in what determines the speed of the ball. The girl just wants to see if she can get the ball to fly off the end of the track into the can, turning this action into a game. There is a short discussion at the end of the session. When the two are asked what they have found out, the girl in particular runs down a list of properties that could affect how fast the balls travel on the track even though this was not explicitly asked for during the exploration. The boy in an amusing manner speaks of a bounce test to explain some of the results. He drops balls from both his hands to the floor to show how they bounce. He seems to be correlating the amount of bounce to how light in weight a ball is and therefore how slow it will travel on the track. Several comments during a follow-up discussion reveal that they have definite ideas about what properties may affect the speed of the ball on the track. (This is taken from Zubrowski, 1996.) B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_10, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

243

244

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

The arrangements of the track are fairly typical of what most children and youth do with these kinds of materials in open exploration. Often, if a container is present such as a can or cup, children will usually lean the track against two chairs with one end raised higher than the other. The cup is placed near the end of the track and the game is to roll the ball down the track and get it into the cup. Adjustments have to be made with the slope of the track or the distance of the cup from one end of the track. This is mostly about engineering the situation. Once the children get the ball to fall into the can several times in a row, they move on to another challenge. At other times children just roll balls down a track in the form of a U between two chairs to see how long a ball rolls back and forth or they crash balls into each other. There are several other kinds of explorations and games that can be carried out with the marbles and tracks because the flexible molding can be readily shaped into a variety of configurations. At the Children’s Museum in Boston an exhibit of balls and tracks has been captivating visitors for 20 years. Replicas of this exhibit can be found at other children’s museums and science centers. The curriculum for schools also takes advantage of this compelling activity (“Insights” and “Design-it” are among some of the published programs having activities with balls and tracks). In Design-it there are a series of design challenges. The essence of these different kinds of challenges is to see if the ball can travel over various configurations – ski jump, roller coaster, loop-the-loop – and land into or onto some kind of target. The challenge is mostly about adjusting the track to keep the ball rolling on it from start to finish. It has been found that these types of construction projects can engage children and adolescents for many hours. There are characteristics about this engagement with balls and tracks that are representative of exploration and play with other materials: • It is a rich sensory experience. There is a kinesthetic identification with the movement of the ball over the track. There is even an acoustic dimension when the ball rolls down tracks that are made of a certain kind of plastic. • The materials allow for the child to bend it into a variety of configurations, so in a sense there are open-ended possibilities for different kinds of manipulations, whether in the form of games or formal experiments. • It is affectively satisfying. If the ball doesn’t fall off the track, there is at least the satisfaction of having constructed something that works. • There is a buildup of tension and then release when constructing the different arrangements. The combination of this process and the movement over a defined curve could be said to have an aesthetic appeal. • The ball rolling down the track can be a model for a vehicle or a person such as skateboarding or bicycle stunts, and it offers many opportunities to experiment. Thus, these materials and activities are a rich context for studying force and motion. The behavior in this scenario as well as most of the behaviors in previous scenarios mentioned in this book can be considered examples of play and exploration. Viewers of the videos of each of these situations would probably agree that the children are playing or exploring. As many commentators on play have pointed out,

Scenario #7

245

it is easy to judge whether play is happening or not, but it is very difficult to come up with a definition that everyone can agree upon. A closer study of these behaviors as well as a review of some relevant research reveals that there can be a distinction made between play and exploration. Many educators conflate the behaviors of exploration and play. Given their close relationship it may not seem necessary to do so. However, this distinction has important pedagogical implications. It can be argued that both are essential in building a foundation for the construction of scientific concepts and processes. My interest here is not to go deeply into what defines play, but more into what are some of the conditions and structures that may determine if and how play and exploration happen. I will attempt to make some connections between some of the theories and research in the area of play as they may relate to pedagogical practices in science education. Despite a great deal of literature on play that spans a wide range of disciplines and the fact that two major figures who were highly influential in education, Piaget and Vygotosky, have placed play as a central element in their conception of child development, the word play and the concept of allowing play to happen in elementary and middle school receives very limited recognition. As some educators acknowledge, it is a term loaded with negative connotations. Even at the preschool level it is being pushed aside because of the current emphasis on literacy and numeracy. However, there are various practices, attitudes, and values that are occasionally mentioned and in fact are carried out by some teachers and curriculum designers that could be related to characteristics of play, if not, in fact, be described as play. This may appear to be contradictory. It has to do more with a political climate that overemphasizes academic performance. The point here is that children spontaneously explore and play despite the strictures put on them. Educators should recognize these tendencies and advocate for the importance of these kinds of behaviors. In addition, there are some general issues regarding play in the formal educational context that I think need consideration. Are play and schooling compatible? Can an environment be set up that allows play to happen in a way that it is integrated into an educational productive undertaking? Is play so much an open-ended behavior and set of attitudes that it is not possible to direct it? Is directed play and exploration a contradiction in terms? These are some of the questions I will consider here. Play covers a wide range of descriptors. In an attempt at a very inclusive summary Brian Sutton-Smith put forth a definition. Sutton-Smith has spent his whole career studying play in a variety of contexts ranging from folklore, socio-dramatic play, and even gambling. So, his view of this behavior is as wide-ranging as play itself is. He uses the following terms: Play practices across many cultures may be taken to have a heavy factorial loading on such terms as voluntary, fun, possibilistic, passionate, idling, flow, flexible, secrecy, metaphoric, pretending, joyful, arousing, inversive, power, transformations, variability, mimicry, dramatization. The general concept of play may well be taken to cover sensory-motor play, symbolic play, reverie, fantasy, daydreams, imitative play, socio-dramatic play, constructional play, contesting, exploratory play, games, play party games, sports, recreation and leisure. (Brian Sutton-Smith, 1980, p. 14)

246

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

Given this list it may appear that many kinds of behaviors could be subsumed under the category of play. In fact, as the second part of the list suggests, there are a variety of situations in which play can happen. With such inclusiveness and diversity it can be asked whether it is worthwhile even to consider the role of play in science education. It is my reasoning from years of observing children in mostly informal environments that play and exploratory behavior is an important part of their repertoire of getting acquainted with a phenomenon or artifact. In framing a way of thinking about the exploratory and sense-making phases of inquiry I feel that play can be a way of characterizing the state of mind of the student at these times. For my purposes in this book I want to focus mainly on what Sutton-Smith has described as sensorimotor, symbolic, and constructional play, relating these to the context of exploring and playing with materials as has already been elaborated upon in most of the previous examples in this book. Most of the terms mentioned in the first part can be applied to this kind of play. I want to focus on only a few of these characteristics, in particular, the voluntary, metaphoric, arousing, variability, and mimicry. I will be highly selective in the authors I mention so as to make connections to what has already been developed and some of which will follow. The literature is too broad and numerous to begin to bring together all the divergent theories.

Conditions for Play: Play and Intrinsic Motivation In the scenario described above the boy and girl freely entered into their exploration and type of game. The adult present did not tell them how to set up their game. Their continual involvement can be said to be intrinsically motivated. They created their own goals as they explored with the materials. Among some science educators there is the recognition that there needs to be “student buy-in” if there is going to be a meaningful or authentic educational experience for the students. I would argue that to provide for this “buy-in” careful consideration has to be given for ways of allowing play to happen in the school context. A broader issue is how to provide for ways for students to operate in an intrinsically motivated mode rather than continually be pulled through science classes by extrinsic rewards. Some of the above terms and games in Sutton-Smith’s comprehensive summary imply an intrinsic involvement on the part of the player. His summary is the same or overlaps much with others who have written about play. For instance, Piaget elaborates on several criteria for play in his oft-cited work Play, Dreams, and Imitation (1962). The characteristics would include play as an end in itself, spontaneity, pleasure, and lack of organization and freedom of conflicts. Each of these he proposes can be put on a continuum. With each of these characteristics he maintains that a clear distinction cannot be made between their polar opposite. Play is happening in proportion to an orientation to one of these poles and it begins “as

Conditions for Play: Play and Intrinsic Motivation

247

soon as there is a predominance of assimilation over accommodation” (Piaget, 1962, p. 150). For instance, the opposite of being an end in itself is the idea of work where something is done for some reward. In certain circumstance there is no clearcut distinction between work and play. Games can be carried out for the pleasure of it as compared to doing something that is socially controlled to bring about a productive result. On the other hand, some work can be carried out in a playful manner. Piaget states that play is not a behavior in itself, but a type of activity. It depends on the state of mind of a person. What seems to apply here is the difference between productive thought applied to a specific end as contrasted to fanciful imagination. To the extent that a child is assimilating an experience it may be said that he or she is at play. To the extent that a child is accommodating to the situation it is work. Piaget drew upon Freudian theory in describing what he meant by lack of conflict. He related this condition to the concept of egocentric thought where the child thinks only of himself or herself. Overall, the term “autotelic” is associated with this state of mind. It is where a child enjoys excising his or her powers and is aware of himself or herself as the cause of the activity. Another way of expressing this is to describe it as intrinsic motivation. It is difficult to draw upon Piaget’s theory of play and connect it to the more immediate classroom context. One way to bridge this distance is to associate the term autotelic with intrinsic motivation. This attitude or mind-set is an essential characteristic of play. It does not fully encompass all the aspects of play but it provides an entry into this ambiguous and difficult-to-define behavior. A general interpretation of whether a behavior is extrinsically or intrinsically motivated depends on both the control the player has over the situation and the kind of mind-set he or she is holding at a particular moment. The more the player is in control and acting upon his or her own feelings and thought, the closer it is to an intrinsic situation. The more the player acts out of coercion, external reward, or social control, the more it could be described as extrinsic (Duschl et al., 2007, p. 199). A great deal of formal schooling operates on extrinsic rewards such as grades, sanctions, and expectations about proper behavior, teacher and parent approval, and peer approval or disapproval. There exists an all-pervasive social and cultural atmosphere that is strongly oriented toward extrinsic motivation. School culture is pervasively controlled by extrinsic rewards, given that the contemporary emphasis on testing is now reaching the point where children in elementary school are to be tested every year. To add to this orientation, more recently, some people have proposed even giving money to students to achieve good grades. There has been a great deal of research on types of motivations. What is especially relevant in the context of considering the value of play are studies that found reward can have a negative effect on intrinsic motivation. The results, despite an extensive literature in this area, still appear to be debated. For instance, Judy Cameron with a research team carried out a meta-analysis of the literature from social psychology looking at the issue. She concluded that “the negative effects of reward occur under a circumscribed set of conditions and that, when appropriately arranged, rewards can be used to enhance motivation and performance” (Cameron, 2001, p. 29). Edward Deci, Richard

248

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

Ryan, and Richard Koestner responded to the Cameron group’s meta-analysis and conclusions with their own meta-analysis. Their previous results from their own research and a more recent meta-analysis challenged Cameron’s conclusion. Their summary conclusion was that “the results of the metaanalysis make clear the undermining of intrinsic motivation by tangible rewards is indeed a significant issue” (Deci et al., 2001, p. 15). They also point out that this is especially relevant for younger children. Their differences revolve around procedural issues, different theoretical frameworks, and the kinds of studies included in their analysis. It would be too involved to elaborate on these differences. Deci and his collaborators appear to concur that in some instances rewards do not undermine motivation but their argument centers on how rewards can undermine tasks or projects that seemingly do not need a reward. This contention can be clarified by considering the close analysis of intrinsic motivation and learning carried out by John Condry and James Chambers. They start off by focusing attention on “the process of learning,” and not just the rewards. They assume that “the effects of task-extrinsic rewards are different for the acquisition of skills and knowledge than for well learned habits” (Condry and Chambers, 1978, p. 63). They assert: “Poorly learned skills are variable, sloppy, show wide latitude between effort and outcome, and are easily undermined by any distracting circumstances” (p. 63). In situations where the learner is working on poorly learned skills it is a matter of great importance how their attention is directed. Condry and Chambers contend: “[W]hen a person’s attention is directed to a narrow aspect of the situation, e.g. producing a specific outcome in order to get a reward, it is not (perhaps it cannot be) directed to subtle aspects of the task” (Condry and Chambers, 1978, p. 66). They cite some studies where groups were paid for each problem solved and others were. Those who were not paid were more “answer-oriented.” Those participants who were paid carried out an inefficient strategy and made incomplete use of information. Citing this research and work of their own they came to this conclusion: [T]here is more to solving a problem or engaging in an activity than merely producing a product. The research above suggests that extrinsic contexts may sacrifice process for product. “Getting the answer” is satisfying when “success is the central goal,” but “solving the mystery” may be more important to development. Learning requires that one develop some skills and habits such as attention to specific aspects of the informational array, formation of meaningful questions, perceptions of relationships, and integration of information. Our research suggests that these skills, what we prefer to call strategies of learning, are different under the two motivational contexts we have described. Intrinsically motivated subjects attend to and utilize a wider array of information: they are focused on the way to solve the problem rather than the solution. They are, in general, more careful, logical, and coherent in their problem-solving strategies than comparable subjects offered a reward to solve the same problems. (Condroy and Chambers, 1978, p. 9)

Although their work predates the meta-analysis of Cameron and Deci it makes a critical point that is related to an issue in science education. They give strong emphasis to the process of acquiring skills and problem solving. This has a familiarity in science education because for some time there has been this debate about the relative priority

Conditions for Play: Play and Intrinsic Motivation

249

of “process versus content.” Some educators speak as if the two can be readily separated. The comments of Condry and Chambers would seem to question this separation. My interpretation is that they are trying to point out the importance of taking the time to move through an educational experience and at least at certain times allow for a more open situation where students are not pressured to produce answers. There is also a related practice that follows from their recommendation. In recent times there has been the realization that it is essential to have students reflect on both the conceptual development of their explanations and the process by which they develop these understandings and justify them. This has been described as operating at a meta-cognitive level. The point is that by having students reflect on how they experiment and arrive at explanations it will make them more aware of scientific processes such as the role of experimentation and evidence or the use of models and analogies. From a more general perspective, Dylan Wiliam and Paul Black have written about the importance of formative assessment. Central to their advocacy for more self-assessment is the students’ self-perception of their abilities and their efforts. They state at one point: “[T]he use of extrinsic rewards can be counter-productive if they (teachers) focus attention on ‘ability’ rather than on the belief that one’s effort can produce success” (Wiliam and Black, 1996, p. 24). They advocate for a type of self-assessment where students evaluate their own work. In the above-cited literature play is not mentioned. In fact, in certain kinds of problem solving the process can be quite serious and have a high affective investment such as occurs in design competitions. In some ways these competitions are more toward the pole of the continuum of work rather than toward play. In my conception of promoting inquiry with students I would propose that only some parts of the investigation be set up for playing around and exploring. This may best occur in the beginning of an investigation or at certain points where there is a need for gaining some new insights about a phenomenon. On the other hand, when formal experimentation is to be carried out to develop evidence for a hypothesis, there should be guidance from the teacher on how to conduct these experiments. A change of approach and mind-set on the part of the student is needed. After all, there need to be some rules developed with the students for what is considered good evidence. However, even at this stage intrinsic motivation can be promoted. If the teacher can get students strongly invested in their explanations and theories, students can be motivated to do the experiments to support their explanations, and if they have been involved in this kind of inquiry for some time, the students can make judgments about what is acceptable evidence. This still is giving students what some have called a “locus of control.” This concept of a locus of control can be taken further. In their development of the role of intrinsic exploration Condry and Chambers specifically mention this concept tracing it to Rotter et al. (1962). They emphasize that in a context where people and even animals perceive that they have choice and control “they are more persistent, creative, logical and coherent in their task activity” (Condry and Chambers, 1978, p. 69). Another author who has written about a related conception of intrinsic motivation and locus of control is Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. His attention was directed to the closely related concept of what he calls emergent motivation.

250

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

In his earlier works he focused on situations where “a person decides, more or less autonomously, that a certain goal or stimulus is rewarding” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1978, p. 209). The kind of situation he is describing is one where “neither the goals nor the rewards cold be specified in advance, because both emerge out of the interaction” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1978, p. 207). This was illustrated in one of his studies with Getzels (Csikszentmihalyi and Getzels, 1971), where they followed a group of young painters as they were starting a career in painting. The researchers observed a different approach with those who eventually came to be recognized as the more creative artists, compared to those who were less creative and productive. The former went about their initial engagement in an open-ended manner. They did not start out with strongly conceived images and goals but rather as they worked the painting came together. The plan of their work came after it was half over. Recall the chapter about an alternative paradigm where the approach of the Eskimo carver and artists like Michelangelo and Brancusi who also seem to operate in a similar fashion is described. Csikszentmihalyi argues that in certain situations neither goals nor rewards can be specified in advance. Rather they emerge out of the involvement in a situation that he labels as an open setting. Here, he claims, intrinsic motivation is a powerful causal factor. Csikszentmihalyi proposes that emergent rewards can occur in everyday life. He proposes the following requirements for activities in daily life which, by extension I would assume, could be applied to education: • “The activity should be structured so that the actor can increase or decrease the level of challenges being faced in order to match exactly his or her skills with the requirements of action. • It should be easy to isolate the activity at least at the perceptual level from other stimuli - external or internal - that might interfere with involvement in it. • There should be clear criteria for performance; one should be able to evaluate how well or how poorly one is doing at any time. • The activity should provide concrete feedback to the actor so that one can tell how well one is meeting the criteria of performance. • The activity ought to have a broad range of challenges, so that the actor may obtain increasingly complex information about different aspects of the self.” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1978, p. 213; These are direct quotes from p. 213, Intrinsic rewards: Emergent Motivation)

These criteria can be applied to the balls and track scenario mentioned at the beginning of this chapter: • The boy and the girl modified their manipulations of the materials based on their ability to catch the ball coming off the ramp or other effects they were trying to achieve. • The phenomenon of a ball rolling along on a track and getting it to fall into a cup effectively focused their attention. • At one point their criterion was clear: Get the ball to fall in the can.

Conditions for Play: Play and Intrinsic Motivation

251

• The criterion of performance was clear: The ball either stayed on the track and fell into the can or it didn’t. • Both the boy and the girl varied what they did with the track and the balls. This kind of gaming situation is a much simpler version of a more extended set of activities of what nowadays is called design engineering challenges. There are currently a variety of programs in school and outside of school where students at various grade levels are given very specific challenges with a limited set of materials and well-defined criteria. These are very popular and depending on the amount of adult input youth can become highly motivated. However, it is not clear whether one could describe some of these situations as ones that allow for emergent motivation or to what extent the students are intrinsically motivated. Some of the challenges have prizes associated with them as well as publicly acclaimed attention. Can one separate out these prizes and acclaim from the fun of working on the challenges? A less conspicuous approach is to provide children with limited materials and clear challenges in an informal situation such as an after-school program. There are no exams or grades that interfere. The general culture of after-school programming up until recently has been more open and conducive to play. Thus, a curriculum program like Design-it, a recently developed set of materials for after-school situations, may provide the affording structure for children to play at various kinds of challenges like the balls and tracks. Other challenges in this project are balloonpowered cars, paper airplanes, pinball games, sand and water clocks, and cranes. It was found in the field test of this program that even with this kind of initial structure, the manner in which the activity is implemented could be problematic. It depends greatly on the attitude and skill of the program leader to what extent children are given the right amount of support without the program leader directly interfering in what is to be done and if he or she fosters too strong a competitive atmosphere. It is not just a matter of a good challenge and well-crafted materials; there also has to be the right kind of guidance and support by the supervising adult. Csikszentmihalyi’s requirements seem to apply to these types of engineering challenges that mostly involve the design process. Some educators, particularly at the elementary and middle school level, tend to combine design and inquiry in their science activities. The projects do provide a very engaging context in which to move students to carry out some inquiry but overall my impression is that there is little development of scientific concepts or the design process. It can be done but in general practice it usually does not happen. The curriculum or the teacher should be spending much more time on these projects than they usually allow and there should be explicit and deliberate moves to separate out design from the inquiry. For instance, the balls and tracks activity can be turned into an inquiry investigation where questions center on how the mass of the ball may affect its motion along the track and how far it travels when propelled off the track. This could lead to discussions concerning the relative “speed” of balls, or their momentum. (Speed here is what children might bring up, but it can cover velocity and acceleration and

252

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

at the same time might actually be referring to the momentum of the ball). Experiments can be done where metal, plastic, glass, and wooden balls are compared to determine which travel farthest from the track in the configuration of a ski jump. The experiment by itself may or may not be of intrinsic interest to children. However, in the context of a design challenge where time is taken out to carry out this test, there may be genuine interest in the results. It will depend on how much it is related to the kind of effects the students are trying to achieve. When such an experiment is done outside the context of a design challenge, the curriculum and teacher need to find a way to get the students interested in seeing the need to carry out this test. In my experience in working with students, moving them to consider such a test is a much greater challenge than presenting them with the game-like structure of a design challenge. In the latter they are working to produce an effect while in the former they are working at a more intellectual level developing explanations about a result. The implications of this difference are that there are greater challenges to providing for a play orientation in certain stages of an inquiry investigation. There is a very delicate balance to be maintained between allowing students to be the locus of control and fulfilling one’s responsibility of helping students gain a more scientific understanding of basic phenomena such as objects in motion.

Conditions for Play – Frames and Contexts According to Sutton-Smith the establishing of the boundaries or frames of play is an essential part of the play experience (Sutton-Smith, 1979, p. 305). With preschoolers there are negotiations to determine who will participate and what will be the objects and rules. With adults various organizations such as in sports determine these boundaries. Using the concept of frames, the science educator can think about how, where, and when a play orientation might be appropriate. The scenario described at the beginning of this chapter can be situated in a series of nested contexts (frames). It is taking place after school in an informal institution of learning, the physical environment is informal, and the leader has set up an informal atmosphere as contrasted with a more structured and formal one of school. The possibilities for explorations and play with these materials could as well happen in school or at home. It is possible that the reactions to the materials and the social interaction might be the same in all three contexts. However, this is unlikely, given the expectations and culture of current school practice. Likewise, parents differ in the way they provide for, and encourage the education of, their children at home. Contrasting the atmosphere and general orientation of after-school programming and the formal education context can illustrate some of the problems of implementing a culture of play and exploration in school. It can also illustrate how implicit boundaries are present in different kinds of educational contexts. In addition, the materials mentioned here need not be limited to these. A variety of balls, other materials for tracks, plus other kinds of electronic equipment could be made available. When approached from a certain perspective it can be said that

The Boundaries of After-School Programming

253

these materials frame the explorations and play of the children. They also act as implicit boundaries for structuring this play. These two considerations of different social contexts and materials are ways that exploration and play can be considered bounded or framed. A closer examination of the sociocultural context and the materials made available to children can illustrate how these factors set up these conditions.

The Boundaries of After-School Programming Traditionally, after-school activities have been quite open in what students can do. The general consensus is that the locus of control is more with the child. There is structure within well-run programs but the children have a greater say and more choice in what and how activities happen. Program leaders often comment on the more informal relationship between adults and children in this context. Those who have been involved with after-school programming for some time view these as essential ingredients. In recent years after-school programming has received a great deal of attention. Within a period of 10 years federal funding has increased from $40 million to more than $1 billion to increase the availability of after-school programs and to upgrade what is offered. One contributing political force that seems to have brought about this greater attention is the increasing emphasis on the testing of students. Some educational leaders, parents, and community program leaders see after-school activity as a way of making up for the inadequacies of formal schooling. There is a greater demand for more homework, tutoring, and activities that are considered to be educational. This loading on of school responsibilities onto the after-school staff is understandable and maybe should be accommodated to some degree, but, in general, I would argue it is misguided in its intentions. The growing expectations of what after-school personnel should be addressing are running against the very limited skills of many after-school program leaders. Here again is an undervaluing if not an ignoring of the value of play. Traditionally, after-school programming has operated in a much more open-ended manner than schools have. It serves a rather useful if not fundamental function for many children who participate. It is one of the few places and times left where children can play and explore. One way of dealing with this problem is to make a clear differentiation between homework help, tutoring, and extra help with academics, separating these functions out from other kinds of “enrichment activities.” The tutoring types of activities really ought to be carried out by those who are either regular classroom teachers or who have received special training, and it should be made clear to the students that the purpose is to help them with their schoolwork. Those activity leaders who remain in after-school programs for multiple years are caring and in some areas very skillful, especially in relating to youth in a personal way. Yet, they do not have the educational background of elementary teachers both in terms of content or pedagogy. This does not mean that these activities have to be totally serious but it

254

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

does mean that the framing and purpose should be made very explicit to the students. It is possible to do this tutoring in a way that is engaging but given its purpose it will be confusing to students when there is an attempt to make it playful. On the other hand, there should be a recognition that the other activities of after-school programming can provide educational experience which may not be clearly seen as directly contributing to work in school but in the long run do in fact contribute to the social, affective, and cognitive development of children. These activities can be done in a more exploratory and playful manner and if conducted in a purposeful way as Condroy and Chambers point out, they help develop more subtle skills. There is still something very positive about the after-school situation. If the program leader can be educated to see the value of letting children explore and play, then there is at least a time and a space where children can explore in an intrinsically motivating manner. Given the right kind of stimulating materials, some welltimed constructive feedback, and careful setting of boundaries, the opportunity exists for real learning to occur. There is also an added bonus that became evident in the field testing of the Design-it curriculum in various sites around the country. Some program leaders came to learn that some of their children who were leaders and highly creative in their design projects were not performing well in school. Part of this difference comes from the chance to practice a different kind of learning style from school. It is my observation that kinesthetic learners tend to perform well in design challenges. These same children have problems in the school context because of the great reliance on language literacy. In addition, program leaders in after-school situations tend to pay more attention to the affective dispositions of children. They operate at a more personal level than school. All of this is relevant in providing for a structure for play. So, educators from the formal education context have something to learn from some of these program leaders which is a view that tends to run contrary to general perceptions because of the disparity in educational background and the tendency is to look down upon those working with children in the after-school situations. Educators in the formal setting can learn from practitioners in the informal setting what some of the hidden conditions for promoting exploration and play are.

The Boundaries of School Activities During a school week students shift from one kind of setting to another where they have to learn to behave in an appropriate manner. They experience various specialists such as the gym or art teacher who may have totally different expectations and teaching styles from their regular classroom teacher. They go to the cafeteria and act in a different way from their classroom behavior as well as when they go outdoors for recess. In fact, in the latter situation they are allowed to play.

The Boundaries of School Activities

255

The students come to learn the boundaries of good behavior in these different situations. I mention all of these varying contexts in school because open play and exploration could happen in the classroom as part of an extended design challenge or inquiry investigation. If the teacher sets up certain expectations and boundaries that are reasonable or flexible, the play of the children need not turn into chaos and inappropriate use of materials. Here again, I am not advocating that an extended inquiry investigation be a very open process from beginning to end. There is an art and a craft to knowing how to start off an investigation, when to move it toward a more restrictive experimental mode, and when to return to a more exploratory playful orientation. The boundaries are a combination of clear rules and values but presented in a way that communicates a respect for children and their inherent curiosity and sense of wonder. If the teacher wants to provide for a classroom culture where play and open exploration is encouraged and valued, attention has to be given to the conditions that Csikszentmihalyi outlined above. The concept of “manageable complexity” mentioned in the previous chapter is one that should be kept in mind in the selection of materials and the kind of challenges and questions presented to students. It is useful to think of curriculum design and teaching as a type of game because it provides a way of thinking about how one can structure student involvement. To some this may seem contradictory because the general association with play is that of complete freedom. In their perceptions play can only happen when the situation is turned over completely to the students. There are many examples of play where there are initial boundaries and rules that constrain the player. In the next section on the classification of play and explorations this concept will be further illustrated. Consider the many kinds of games that are played with balls - baseball, football, tennis, volleyball, handball, lacrosse, and billiards. For each sport there is a special kind of ball. There can be some exchanges across sports such as using a handball in a baseball game as used to be done in urban areas in the 1940s and 1950s. Basketball might be hard to play with a volleyball but it is possible. Using a football in volleyball would be difficult. The point I want to make is that the properties of the ball fit with the kind of game being played. They determine what can be done in the games. Likewise, each game has a physical space marked off and a set of rules that also acts as a type of boundary. It would be a different game if volleyball happened on a tennis court. Within these boundaries there are multiple possibilities for play. The outcomes are not always predicable. Each game is different with its variations and permutations. So, when one speaks of playing, it is not assumed that there is complete freedom. In fact, there wouldn’t be any play without boundaries. On the other hand, the physical boundaries and rules are not rigid. These can be changed. When this happens, new variations on playing happen. By choosing certain kinds of materials the educator can frame the kind of investigation that students might carry out. In a way, one can think of curriculum design or good inquiry teaching as a game framing the playing of the students as they explore with these different kinds of materials. The educator needs to triangulate

256

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

(as was developed in the chapter about a paradigm for science education) between the properties of the materials, the inclinations of the student in how they typically use these materials, and specific educational goals that are related to science content and process.

Differentiating Play and Exploration In the scenario described above, the girl attempted to get the ball to fly into a can. There was some variation by using different kinds of balls. In other involvements with balls and track youth will sometimes spend the same period of time just setting up, adjusting, and testing their arrangement of the track. In this instance the game is in the challenge of getting the ball to stay on the track and landing it consistently in a cup at the end of the track. It is more of a problemsolving situation. Another variation to this manipulation of the materials is for some children to quickly construct something but then use it for fantasizing where the physical arrangement acts as a prop. The ball might be pushed down the track with sound effects or a scenario might be developed of some kind of action story. These examples illustrate that there can be different kinds of behavior with the same set of materials. In the 1960s and 1970s play received much attention by some researchers. The close analysis of play-like activities by some researchers revealed that there is a difference in how a child can be engaged in these manipulations. Some researchers have made a distinction between play and exploratory behavior developing a theoretical framework to justify this categorization. It is worthwhile to consider some of the research and theories about these differences because it has implications for the manner in which educators can provide for and manage the environments (frames) and processes by which play and exploration happen in an inquiry investigation. Among many who have written about and developed experimental models for studying play, Corinne Hutt’s approach and writings have a special standing. Operating from a background as a biologist who studied with Niko Tinbergian she approached the activities of play and exploration by attempting to make connections among the neurophysiological, the perceptual, behavioral, and social levels. In addition, her work drew upon other previous related efforts such as the work of Daniel Berlyne, who was an important figure in experimental aesthetics. I think her work is relevant for my purposes here because part of it was concerned with the interaction of children with objects as differentiated from other kinds of research on play that focused more on the social context or the relationship to language development. In one of her papers she presents a taxonomy of play that I think could be useful for science educators to study. It provides a framework for examining the various stages and different ways that students interact with materials. Her categories could help the teacher think about the different ways students explore and play.

Differentiating Play and Exploration

257

Before commenting on this taxonomy of play it is useful to consider a series of studies that she carried out with preschoolers exploring and playing with a specially constructed toy. This play toy was a metal box with four legs standing several feet off the floor. It had a lever which when operated by the child caused different sounds such as a bell or buzzer to be activated. This toy had counters that could record the various manipulations carried out by the child. She found that the children first manipulated the device to find out what could be done with it. Only after these manipulations, sometimes over multiple sessions, did the child incorporate these findings into play activities. This is significant because of the general tendency to lump all kinds of behavior related to the use of material objects as play without discriminating the nature of these interactions (Hutt, 1966). In studies with this device Hutt observed that there was a change in the child’s affective state moving from one of highly focused attention to a more relaxed facial expression and relaxed attitude. This was correlated with heart rate measures which showed that the child during the play phase was involved in less mental effort and “less attentive to external sources of stimulation” (Hutt, 1981, p. 283). She characterized the differences between these two modes of action in terms of the child’s intention as “What does this object do?” to “What can I do with this object?” (Hutt, 1971, p. 246). This is an encapsulation of two general categories of behavior that are closely intertwined. The former refers to exploratory or epistemic behavior while the latter refers to playful or ludic behavior. Prior to Hutt’s work there had been a great deal of research that centered on exploratory and playful behavior in animals as well as humans. Out of this research and accompanying theories these general categories were subdivided according to their adaptative functions and, in some instances, their neurophysiological correlates. It would be quite involved to delineate all the different distinctions that were put forth. From the perspective of the classroom teacher even differentiating exploration and play may seem unnecessary. However, it would still be useful to consider in a general way how the two broad categories and some of the distinctions relate to curriculum design and classroom practice. In the previous section the concepts of “locus of control” and of “manageable complexity” were mentioned. With the former it was pointed out that students become more invested in schoolwork when they are given responsibility for their own learning. With the latter the boundaries of exploring and playing are carefully designed so that students are optimally engaged. These two concepts are closely connected. When most of the control of learning is with the student, it is the responsibility of the teacher to monitor their engagement. If the students are overwhelmed with taking on too much, they will get frustrated. Likewise, if the students are running out of their own ideas they will get bored. Part of the art of teaching is staying carefully attuned to where students are in their involvement with the activity or discussion. Experienced teachers know about this and plan ahead to make sure students are occupied at an optimal level.

258

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

Recognizing the different kinds of epistemic behaviors can help the teacher carry out formative assessment and know when to step back and observe or step in and provide guidance. For instance, there have been distinctions made between a search for stimulation and an inspection of the stimulus (Wohwill, 1987, p. 64). After a session or two with balls and tracks students may be at a stage where they are not sure how to proceed. They could move on to the development of a new game or return to manipulating the balls to see what more can be done. They may be searching for stimulation. The teacher might step in and with careful prompts or suggestions move the students to a new use of the balls and tracks. In another instance, some student may continue what appears to be an inspection but linger over the results or continually repeat the same manipulation. In this instance, it could be said that he or she is involved with an affective exploration where the interest is in exploring the pleasurable aspects of the stimuli and could be the result of an aesthetic response such as listening to the sound the ball makes as it rolls back and forth. In each of these new developments what appears to be random may also be a way of gaining new information. The example above from Hutt does reveal that following explorations a new mode of interaction takes over and the behavior becomes ludic. There are manipulations to achieve a certain effect or the object becomes a prop in a game or acted out story. This transition apparently is more evident in younger compared to older children. The flipping back and forth appears to occur more frequently with older children compared to younger children. There is sometimes a noticeable change in the affect of the student. In the context of a science lesson this is where intervention on the part of the teacher is highly problematic. For instance, some fifth or sixth graders start pretending that the marbles on the track are vehicles in a made-up story. They manipulate the marbles within the context of the story attempting to achieve certain results. Should the teacher intervene and redirect the students back to getting more direct information about the behavior of the marbles on the track? The implication of Hutt’s observations and theory is that there is a natural back and forth between exploration and play. After inspection and the gaining of some information about an object, children make use of this information to create some kind of game or make up simple problems they can solve. The playing is a way of adopting and adapting the newly gained information. Eventually, this information can be used in the generation of questions and the design of experiments. With the above studies in mind and the examples just given of how students could approach balls and tracks materials in different kinds of exploratory and playful modes, Hutt proposed a taxonomy of play. The following lists represent her categorization of behaviors representing in finer detail the different kinds of exploratory and playful behaviors. These are an adaptation of her original chart of categories. It is indicative of the close analysis she and others in the areas of research considered necessary because both general terms cover such a wide range of behavior. Hutt states that these two general categories of the epistemic and the ludic differ in many respects. Epistemic is focused on a specific stimulus while the ludic is not. Epistemic does not depend on the mood but the ludic does. Games have a structure that is in between but mostly can happen in a ludic state of mind.

Differentiating Play and Exploration

259

Under epistemic behavior are activities that are directed to achieve a well-defined goal. In exploration the behavior is more set, limited in scope, and generally sequential. Attention is highly focused (Wohwill, 1984, pp. 145–148). By productive she means activities that are designed to change the properties of materials in a specific way. This last subcategory is further subdivided in terms of bringing about changes in materials where the final goal may not be readily apparent to the outside observer, such as a child making something with modeling clay. It may not be apparent whether the child is just seeing what can be done with the clay or is actually trying to sculpt a figure. The other subcategory of acquiring skills could be found in pastimes such as sports or simple manipulative games such as jump rope. Under ludic behavior attention is less focused but behavior is varied. The subcategories of symbolic and fantasy are seen in all kinds of socio-dramatic play. Her subcategory of repetitive play is one that may at first not fit under the ludic, especially when she includes perseverative behavior. In some ways it might seem to fit better under epistemic where there is the goal of mastery of skills. Although it is quite apparent that repetition happens in play, there is a tendency not to realize its full significance. This means more than continual repetition of the very same behavior. It can cover variations of exploring the same phenomena within a limited repertoire of manipulations. I will give special attention to this aspect of play in a separate chapter where I will develop an argument for the need to have variations of explorations in an extended inquiry investigation. I feel it is an aspect of play that has not been given its full value. Hutt observes that during repetition novel elements can be introduced, thereby bringing out something new. The other category of games is self-evident and probably could be further subdivided. There are many kinds of traditional games that are now lost. These were the games passed on from one generation to another in the streets of the cities. Nowadays, some games are passed on through television or are packaged as commercial products.1 Overall, Hutt comments that the behaviors under the epistemic category are arrived at mostly in terms of their functions, while those under ludic are with respect to their forms. What especially characterizes the ludic is “repetition, its exaggeration, its lack of economy” (Hutt, 1981, p. 286). There is an important point she makes that should be kept in mind. Ludic is as much a state of mind and manner so that epistemic behavior can at times be done in a playful manner. Thus, problem solving in the construction of a track for the balls can be either a more focused attempt to find out how best to support the track getting it to work right or a more playful one of “let’s see if we can make it happen.” In her studies with preschoolers she observes that the exploratory responses change over multiple sessions, either resulting in a shift to play or boredom. She notes that for infants this cycling is less distinguishable but as one looks at older children and adults there is a more distinctive separation. In fact, with older children

These categories are an adaptation of a chart found in Day (1981).

1 

260

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

and adults there can be long separate periods of exploration and play. Making connections to the work of Freud, Piaget, and Vygotsky she proposes that there is a developmental link from childhood action on objects to adult imagination (Hutt, 1981, p. 287). A quote from Vygotsky sums up this connection: The old adage that child’s play is imagination in action can be reversed: we can say that imagination in adolescents and school-children is play without action. (Vygotsky, 1967, p. 8)

Under the division of ludic behavior Hutt has symbolic play as a major subcategory. She observes that this is the kind of play most associated with humans. Most of the others can be seen in the play of most mammals. Symbolic is easily observed in the socio-dramatic play of young children where they readily transform ordinary materials into imaginary objects. As children grow older overt symbolic play is less often apparent but it continues in various forms into adulthood. Klinger drawing upon his study of fantasy and an extensive review states that there is “continuity between children’s playful activity and adult’s playful fantasy” (Klinger, 1971, p. 32). Both Klinger’s and Vygotsky’s proposals seem to be based on the assumption that as children grow older they discontinue their exploration of objects and most of the play happens through structured games. Given how little provision is available for the schoolchild to explore materials in school these views have validity, but as illustrated by the personal histories of scientists like Maxwell and Einstein as mentioned in Chapter 6, it would seem that there is still a potential development of imagination by direct action with material objects among the more creative. Also cited previously is Sherry Turkle’s collection of stories by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) students who found pleasure in the exploration of objects during their elementary school years. Therefore, to speak of play as only happening with the preschooler is to fail to recognize the ongoing role of play with materials in older students and adults.

Exploration and Play During Different Time Intervals It can be helpful to gain a better sense of these various subcategories by relating them to a specific context. The investigation with balls and tracks can lend itself to this exemplification because of the relative simplicity of the materials, the complexity of the phenomena, and the intrinsic appeal of the movement of the ball on different configurations of track. It is also useful to put these in a temporal context because Hutt found that there is a cycling between exploration and play. Consider the following: • The first few minutes of encountering some balls and tracks • The changing focus of attention over the course of 45–50 min as a classroom activity

Exploration and Play During Different Time Intervals

261

• The changing focus of attention and varying manipulations over the course of an extended investigation of several weeks • The personal history of a student in their encounters with the same phenomenon during their movement through grades 1–9 where they explore and experiments with somewhat similar materials

The First Few Minutes Consider that a group of students have been given a set of materials that includes foam insulation, marbles, plastic balls, and wooden beads of the same dimension. They have duct tape and access to supports for the track such as chairs, tables, and boxes. The teacher has given them an open challenge to see how long they can get the balls to travel back and forth on a U-shaped configuration. Most likely students will not have encountered the foam insulation as a track previously. If a student takes it in hand, he or she can bend it to get a feel of its flexibility. Here, visual inspection is not enough even if one is watching someone else bend the track. Only the hands can feel the amount of resistance the foam exerts as a feedback. In fact, there are several different brands on the market that do have different feels. Some are stiffer than the others. One kind bends easily and has a tendency to become angular instead of resulting in a smooth curve. The latter limits the possibilities of what kind of configuration one can have with the track. Taken further, if the students were given a choice of other materials for the track, they would find that there are real differences. Some plastic molding such as the kind used in kitchens and bathrooms (one label being cove molding) is a less flexible and stiffer material. Curves made with this stiffer material are longer compared to those made with foam insulation. The sound of the marble on the cove molding is different than that on the insulation. These are some of the properties that the students pick up as they handle the track. The recognition of these properties is not often explicitly verbally expressed. Given these variations in the properties of materials used for the track, students would have to spend some time exploring the feel of these materials. They may quickly go back and forth manipulating the track, setting it up into a big U and stepping back. In their mind they may be imagining ways it can be supported, how the ball will roll down the track, and what might be a desirable configuration. This may best fit under Hutt’s subcategory of problem solving although it has elements of exploration and the subcategory under the ludic of the productive.

During a 45–50 Min Class Session Students vary greatly in how long they might handle the track. For the sake of illustration I will pick one possible configuration, the big U referred to previously. Some children quickly put the molding between chairs, giving little consideration

262

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

for the angles of the molding. They immediately roll balls on the molding. Others might take some time to arrive at an angle that looks correct to them. Balls can be released from different heights and in different ways on the track. They can be pushed down, held in place and then released, or dropped onto the top edge of the track. During these manipulations there is a picking up of information of a more epistemic character. During this time they are somewhat focused on getting the track up and concerned about making it workable. After some testing to see if the ball stays on the track, two students might start sending a ball down from each end crashing them together as the boy in the second example at the beginning of this chapter attempted to do. This manipulation can turn into a simple game to see who can knock the other ball off the track or how far they can force it back to the launcher. What students do with the balls on the track can vary greatly. Some are satisfied to keep sending one ball down the track and letting it continue until it fully stops, repeating this multiple times. Others might try one, two, three, or four marbles at the same time. Whether this is epistemic or ludic cannot be completely deciphered. It is all in the mind of the student. Within this first session we can see examples of problem solving - supporting the track so that it doesn’t fall and keeps its configuration. There is exploration of releasing balls different ways and productive work with the materials where some skill is developed in adjusting the track so that the ball does what the student wants it to. There is ludic behavior in the repetitive release of the ball possibly perseverative depending on the student. Some fantasy may quickly enter into the manipulations as students make sound effects pretending the balls are two cars colliding into each other or a competitive or cooperative game can arise as mentioned above. Therefore, within one session there is the possibility of having several of the ludic and epistemic subcategories occurring. (Some of these behaviors can be seen in the Explore-it videos series, Colliding Balls, available from the Center for Science Education of the Education Development Center Web site.)

Over Multiple Sessions of an Extended Investigation The teacher can follow up the initial sessions in a number of ways. He or she can continue to open the explorations widely letting students construct any kind of configuration or any kind of game. Alternatively in a guided inquiry type of investigation a series of problems or design challenges can be posed which build on each other but still allow for a fair amount of student input. The teacher would try to find that balance of “manageable complexity” mentioned previously. One sequence that is possible is ski Jump configuration, loop-the-loop configuration, spiral, jump the gap, roller coaster. There is an initial challenge in the construction of each of these shapes. Adjustments have to be made so that the ball travels at the right speed without falling off the track. A design challenge can be associated with each of these. For each

Exploration and Play During Different Time Intervals

263

new configuration there has to be some exploration and testing/engineering to get the track at the right angles and properly supported. With loop-the-loop, time is needed to find just the right amount of runway and angle to get the ball traveling around the loop. The size of a workable loop is not readily apparent. There has to be some trial and error to arrive at the right size. During these challenges there is a building up of a sense of what is possible with the track. The sequence could be described as innovative in Hutt’s sense of the term. Fantasy could pop up with each of these challenges. Each of the activities can be in the form of a design challenge that is a type of game. • How long can you get the ball to travel back and forth on a U-shaped configuration? • What is the greatest distance you can launch a ball from the ski jump configuration? • What is the most number of twists or loop-the-loops you can put in the track and have the ball travel over the whole track? • What is the most number of hills and valleys you can make in a roller-coaster configuration and have the ball travel to the end? • How many different kinds of the above configurations can you make with a given length of track? The results will be different for different kinds of tracks and balls. Each of these configurations can be the context for moving students to think about and develop explanations for objects (balls) in motion. The configurations and balls stand for other kinds of moving objects such as skiers, motorcycle daredevils, cars, or other kinds of vehicles. The configurations act as implicit models. The concepts of speed, velocity, acceleration, momentum, and potential and kinetic energy can be introduced. Depending on the grade level and prior science experience these concepts may only be developed in a qualitative descriptive manner. Computer probes and timing gates can be introduced and a quantitative approach taken in latter grades. The ski jump is one activity that can exemplify how exploration and play can happen in an open but productive manner with eventual development of some scientific understanding. The purpose of the set up is to roll the ball down the ramp and get it to fly into a cup near the end of the track. In my many experiences with introducing balls and tracks to students this is a natural undertaking. Without any suggestions they will spontaneously set up this kind of configuration. This game can be either cooperative or competitive, wherein former students can work together to arrange the angle of the downward slope as well as the angle of the end of the track so that the ball falls each time into the cup. In a more competitive manner one student can take turns moving the cup a little distance from the track while another tries to guess where to place the ball on the runway section so that it flies into the cup. The angle of the end of the track determines the distance it will move in the air before landing. It is analogous to the ballistic problem of landing a rocket or

264

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

other projectile at a given distance from the point of origin. It is a basic physics problem. During this exploration questions can arise. For example, why does the ball travel different distances from the end of the track when the angle of the launch section is changed? Why are there different results with the ski jump with different kinds of balls? Implicit in these questions are basic conceptual descriptions about objects in motion. As the students attempt to answer these questions they bring forth their own conceptions. These can be tested immediately while exploring with the materials and also be points for discussion during the sense making following the activity. In each design challenge there is a cycling back and forth between epistemic and ludic behavior. During the first few challenges the students are gaining a feel for the materials and what can be done with them. There is a very delicate balance between providing for student’s locus of control and the responsibility of schooling. As some educators have practiced and advocated, students should be asked to generate their own questions, which they can then go on to attempt to answer. Some have described this as open inquiry. Others see a need for more teacher intervention where the teacher also contributes questions so that it is a type of guided inquiry. It is my experience that it takes a great deal of enculturation of students to get them to the point where they can generate significant and relevant questions and carry through on answering them. But even here students may be doing this because they know this is what is expected from the teacher. It seems to me that there has to be some kind of negotiation between teacher and student where an understanding is developed. As much as possible students are allowed to explore freely, develop, and answer their own questions but there are times where the teacher sets boundaries, introduces his or her own questions, and sets certain standards for discourse. Also, at times explanations are directly given but only as a way of providing an alternative conception for students to consider. This can be done in a way where the interventions are not imposed but put out for students’ consideration. One way for this to happen is for teachers to model the students’ ways of generating questions, designing experiments, and thinking out loud about possible explanations. Now, it would not be enough for the students to just make discoveries with or without the help of the teacher. It would be essential that the teacher take time out and discuss these results getting the students to deal with the results in an explicit manner by first of all having the students report to the whole group. Following the sequence given in the pedagogical model in Chapter 2, the students could do schematic and graphical representations of the pathway of the ball. Further, generalization to other kinds of projectiles or objects in motion could be discussed. This second part is a shift away from the play-like involvement of the activity. It is a balancing of the open-ended exploration with that of sense making. Making this shift is a delicate undertaking. Convincing students of the usefulness of the need to carry out these kinds of discussions also requires sensitivity to where students are in their assimilation of the experience. It is this step that is clearly a critical one and in current practices the one that is the most difficult for teachers. It is the juncture where opportunity for conceptual change can be most likely brought about.

Exploration and Play During Different Time Intervals

265

Sense making involves clarifying verbally and pictorially what happened. During this phase there can be a form of verbal imaginative play whereby there is a conjuring of different explanations for what was observed. Students may spontaneously make comparisons to analogous situations in their life to what they observed with the balls and tracks. A big U is the configuration found in skate boarding. Rolling along hills and valleys of a road on a bike is analogous to the roller coaster. These experiences can be used to develop analogies to the games with the balls and tracks. These prior experiences can be the basis for moving toward a more scientific description of what was observed.

Over a 9-Year Period Over a 9-year period I would envision students coming back to almost the same set of materials and some added technology such as computer probes several times. In either first or second grade they explore, construct, and play around with configurations such as those mentioned above. There are discussions and attempted explanations about the experiences but these are more about clarifying experiences, making explicit some basic understanding, or attempting some explanations but the expectation is that the students have not fully developed or even corrected their “misconceptions.” In fifth or sixth grade they return to the same set of materials, similar configurations with some variations. One possible format is the design and construction of Rube Goldberg arrangements. Track and improvised devices are attached to a pegboard. The students are challenged to design arrangements of the track to get the ball to move as slowly as possible on a set number of tracks hung on the pegboard. They can add various devices at the end of the tracks to slow the ball down. The teacher at this point moves them to record their measurements more carefully. Their explanations are more directly challenged and attempts are made to align with standard scientific formulations. Students are made more aware of the inadequacy or lack of generality of their own explanations. In eight or ninth grade they work only with a few configurations of track such as the ski jump and loop-the-loop. They use technology such as timing gates connected to computers. Nowadays, a video of the movement of the ball could be put into the computer where frame-by-frame analysis can give a visual representation of its movement. This can be taken further where this visual representation can be measured and a quantitative relationship developed. These techniques are used to develop quantitative representations, helping them move to a more abstract representation of the phenomenon. A very direct challenge is given to their preconceptions and attempts are made to bring about conceptual change more aligned with standard physical science explanations. In these later stages the experience is probably less ludic in nature but there is still a classroom culture where the students’ locus of control is respected. (The extent to which this kind of close observation, experimentation, and interpreting visual representation can be carried out is highly dependent on the students’

266

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

prior experience with this phenomenon and materials in the formal educational context. They would have had to accumulate much information and habits of the mind to bring about a deeper reconceptualization.) At all these levels this kind of pedagogy is providing for a close connection between epistemic and ludic states of mind. There is a type of yin and yang relationship where one does not happen without the other. This seems obvious in some ways. If explanations are going to be developed by teachers and students, then there is the prerequisite of experience and experimentation. The question, though, is what comprises these experiences. General current practice puts more of the emphasis on formal experimentation and relies heavily on verbal representation. What I am suggesting by these descriptions of different levels of involvement with balls and tracks is that a more open exploration of the materials needs to be recognized and that sense making is partly approached from a ludic frame of mind. Students shouldn’t be led to formal experiments without first sorting out what they have experienced. They shouldn’t be pressured to immediately come up with explanations without trying out alternative ways of representing these experiences, especially verbally with gestures and then with visual representations. Accordingly, they need to “play around” with alternative conceptions to deal with the experience and experiments they have conducted. When approached from this perspective the transitioning between the exploration and the playing is a fundamental pedagogical issue. It seems to me that it is a critical step in the process of reconceptualization. Chandry and Comber, mentioned previously, emphasized process over the final product. Those students who are intrinsically motivated take in more information and pay more attention to the process by which they arrive at solutions to problems. This processing in light of what is understood about the relationship between exploration and play has to be related to the different mood states as Hutt and others have established. The next section elaborates upon this transition zone and the kind of role a teacher needs to adopt in allowing students to feel safe and respected during this critical time.

Symbolic Play and Conceptual Change In the chapter on sensory knowledge I drew upon Shepard’s and others’ work regarding the preliminary stages that creative scientists appear to go through. Common across this self-reporting and from interviews of scientists is that concrete images or representations usually occur that act as a way of thinking about very fundamental problems. It is my observation from watching students explore and play with materials over the years that there is a close relationship between their tendency to generate concrete analogies and their direct sensual engagement with the materials. The manipulation of the materials is a stimulus that brings to the surface these creative images that may not have come about if students spent their time just witnessing or

Fusion, Empathy and the Anthropomorphic Involvement

267

talking about phenomena. The full involvement of the body interacting with the materials acts as a kind of extension of the mind of the student. The involvement with the materials can be thought of as a type of external feedback loop that brings about connections and associations. It is at this level that I think deep conceptual change can be instigated and promoted. It is another kind of dialogue. This dialogue is unlike Socratic dialogue where students are brought along to accept a reconceptualization through conscious verbal exchanges. Rather, it is one that initially happens at an unconscious level where there is a free association of images. Symbolic play is a time and a state of mind where this can be promoted and utilized. Given this assumption it is useful to outline how a possible engagement with materials can bring about images, symbols, and concrete analogies. Then we can reconsider some of the comments made by students in the previously cited scenarios. Prior examples in the scenarios of student’s comments can be characterized somewhat broadly as anthropomorphic. This type of representation can be also found in adult reactions and commentary to various phenomena, as I will illustrate. It may be far removed from what is considered real scientific representation but some writers see a value to it. They propose that it is a precursor to a more scientific formulation. A theoretical framework for some of this speculation can be found in the work of Heinz Werner and Bernard Kaplan in their work on symbol formation.

Fusion, Empathy and the Anthropomorphic Involvement and Projection of Children and Adults As outlined in the chapter on empathy there can develop a feeling for an organism or a phenomenon. Assume that this empathic involvement is a precursor to symbolic play or in certain situations is very much a part of symbolic play. For instance, when we role-play we take on the persona of another, focusing on particular characteristics trying out how we feel and think with how they fit with our own affective state. When we play around with a material that embodies a basic phenomenon, we also can take on a feeling for the phenomenon arising from these encounters. Out of this empathy and feelings images and eventually symbols arise. In order to make this more concrete and set the stage for relating it to anthropomorphic projection and then its relationship to scientific thinking, consider two scenarios. To make a connection to a previous development consider in more detail how the Eskimo carver mentioned in the introduction might work with a piece of ivory and produce a sculptural object. Also, more relevant, let us also consider how an individual might play around with balls and tracks and move toward a scientific representation of these experiences. The Eskimo carver (keeping in mind that he stands in for a sculptural approach to materials) takes a piece of ivory in his hand, gazes upon the whole piece of material, feels the surface, and starts carving. As he works on the material, it both resists and gives in to his probes. There is a merging of his actions with the properties of

268

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

the materials. He loses himself in the process of working with the materials. Is it he or the material which is directing where he places the knife to cut and shape the piece? Some artists have described this state of involvement as becoming one with the material. There is still difference but not distance. An unconscious image or schema guides where and how he makes his cuts. This schema or image arises from some combination of deep symbolism in the unconscious, his personal history, as well as his sociocultural context. Eventually, the sculpture emerges having embedded in its form symbolic content. The Eskimo carver through his years of carving has developed sensitivity to the materials and a reservoir of cultural symbols embedded in his unconscious. Both shape the manner in which he interacts with the materials and the eventual symbolic object that results. This is a description in terms of an artist. Consider another example of how someone might approach the balls and tracks in a somewhat parallel manner. When the shape of a track is in the form of a big U, there are possibilities for interacting with it in a number of ways and at different levels. I can start off rolling marbles on it, observing them travel back and forth until they come to rest in the middle of the U. Losing myself in the exploration I can empathize with the ball’s motions, feeling a building up of tension as it rolls up one side and then a release of tension as it rolls back down the other side. There is a rhythmic change to this buildup and release that is not constant because the ball is losing energy each time it goes back and forth. Like the ending of a musical composition it eventually diminishes to a resting state. I could project upon this experience an image of a skateboarder or cyclist moving back and forth on a very large U. There might be other associations with the feeling tone of this experience of gradual dissipation of energy that I am only very vaguely aware of. The experience may have deep symbolic content that may become apparent only at a later time. Depending on my age, experience, and expertise, I might be able to bring to the surface these unconscious processes, begin to differentiate them, and move back and forth easily, bringing to the whole set of processes years of experience that would help me assign personal meaning to them while also formulating a more general way of describing objects in motion. The association of the movement of the ball on the big U with the skateboarder is only one kind of anthropomorphic projection. There are other possibilities, especially if one carries out a series of experiments with the balls colliding with each other at the bottom of the U. Recall from the chapter on movement that Michotte carried out extensive studies of adult reactions to moving dots on a specially constructed device. There were spontaneous comments by adults of an anthropomorphic nature. Also recall that in several of the scenarios previously described about children’s involvement with materials there were spontaneous comments that function as proto-symbols or symbols. They expressed varying degrees of anthropomorphisms. Thus, in Chapter 5, scenario #3, the boy places himself in a tube and compares the experience of sliding down the tube to the force experienced by water falling through a tube onto a model waterwheel. There is also the other example in Chapter 3, scenario #1, where the boy places a drop of food color in the container of syrup and oil with the food color ending up at the interface of the

Fusion, Empathy and the Anthropomorphic Involvement

269

syrup and oil. He exclaims: “It is like swimming in mud and water.” In the latter example the comment was made in the context of exploring and playing around with these liquids. These anthropomorphic projections are not limited to preschoolers or elementary schoolchildren. Andrea DiSessa found elements of anthropomorphic thinking with university students. He interviewed MIT students, asking them to elaborate on explanations of different kinds of problems related to physical phenomena some of which are related to the balls and tracks games. He found that even though these students did well in their high school science courses they showed a lack of a qualitative scientific understanding of basic phenomena. DiSessa attempted to get beyond the surface of the explanations. In his study of the students’ explanations he found some basic knowledge systems that are “ready schemata in terms of how one sees and explains the world” (DiSessa, 1993, p. 112). These schemata tended to be of an anthropomorphic nature. An important point he proposes is that these students are not operating with intuitive theories. This is a different understanding from other writers’ explanations of conceptual change. His view is that the novices, whether older or younger students, are operating with “knowledge in pieces” in their attempt to bring meaning to various physical phenomena. Upon studying their comments he found underlying mechanisms of explanations that could be described as “minimal abstractions of common events” (DiSessa, 1993, p. 105) that operate in a weakly organized system. He labeled these as phenomenological primitives (p-prim). These appear to underlie many common “misconceptions” that have received a great deal of attention by researchers over the past 30 years. His studies and findings are relevant here because the physical phenomena he presented in his special problems are related to the balls and tracks activities. The kind of explanations that students would use to explain events occurring in the different kinds of games mentioned above would probably make use of the same p-prims found with the MIT students’ explanations. DiSessa argues that it is exceeding the capacity of even experts to deal with all situations from first principles. In some way even the experts use the p-prims to narrow down ways of dealing with a phenomenon. However, there is a difference in their application. Experts utilize a rich background of experience to move from this primitive level to a more formal development. The point here is that the anthropomorphizing of elementary and middle school students has a value but needs to be reshaped and realigned so that it can be used to understand the formal scientific formulations. DiSessa, in proposing a model for the type of knowledge structures observed in his studies, speculates that “sensory schemata at fairly low levels may need to be recrafted or reselected to see the world in a different way” (DiSessa, 1993, p. 207). He makes an epistemological claim that “the development of scientific knowledge about the physical world is possible only through reorganized intuitive knowledge” (DiSessa, 1993, p. 108). There is a passage from Einstein’s writing that appears to be relevant to this assertion. I cited this passage in Chapter 2 but it is worthwhile mentioning it again because here the role of play is being considered.

270

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

Taken from a psychological viewpoint, (a certain) combinatory play seems to be the essential feature in productive thought – before there is any connection with logical construction in words or other kinds of signs which can be communicated to others. The above mentioned elements are, in my case visual and some of muscular type. Conventional words or other signs have to be sought for laboriously only in a secondary stage, when the mentioned “associated play” is sufficiently established and can be reproduced at will. (Einstein’s quote found in Erickson, 1977, p. 140)

Here Einstein is probably writing about thought experiments but ones based on sensory experience. The play is with imagining different kinds of situations that relate to a problem to be solved. For example, in one of Einstein’s thought experiments he places himself on a train at a station. There is the strange experience of sitting on a train at a station and having the feeling that the train is moving but it is not. The train next to the one he is sitting in starts to move creating this illusion. Einstein plays with this experience. He imagines that it is the station that is moving and not the train or that the tracks and station moved but the train didn’t. This change in frame of reference is a different way of thinking about, and having a feeling for, this scene. It symbolizes relative movement and is related to his theory of relativity. Here is an experience that can be representative in the usual way but can be viewed differently. Another example of this change in frame of reference is an art piece I once saw in a museum. The seat of a stool was on the floor instead of being in its usual position. The artist described it as the world sitting on the stool. Both of these “thought experiments” can be thought of as a playful way of symbolizing relative movement or position. The implication here is that deep conceptual change involves this kind of playing with symbolic content. One of Max Planck’s comments seems to express this view: “[I]t is impossible to express a really new principle in terms of a model following old laws” (quoted in Science News, January 31, 2003). It would be the role of the teacher to recognize in the commentary of students when these changes in symbolic content occur as students struggle with their prior “misconceptions.” DiSessa also reports that the MIT students he interviewed said that they did well in their courses, could solve the mathematical problems, but had a weak sense of the qualitative descriptions. As diSessa comments, “they really didn’t understand what was going on” (DiSessa, 1993, p. 206). Their basic intuitions were not engaged and restructured. They were not helped in moving from these basic intuitions to a qualitative understanding that mapped onto the mathematical formulation. The implications from diSessa’s speculations coupled with Einstein’s comments are that sense making originates in personal symbolic terms. My feeling is that this type of projection, evoking of the personal or about personal relationships is what we should attempt to incite and cultivate. It is at this level that personal and scientific meaning can be fostered and in some ways integrated. It also implies that the development of scientific conceptualization or reconceptualization involves personal psychological dynamics. This means that a special sensitivity is needed on the part of the teacher when dealing with these personal projections.

The Evolution of Generative Symbols

271

The Evolution of Generative Symbols A different kind of perspective can be brought to the anthropomorphic comments of children and adults by considering the work of Heinz Werner and Bernard Kaplan. Some of the characteristics that I have outlined above fit with their formulations about symbol formation. They proposed a set of conditions for the formation of symbols that are part of a larger theoretical framework labeled as organismic. Their central concept is that in the early stages of encounters with objects the individual interprets “the sensory stimuli issuing from physical objects, by reference to its own ongoing dynamic state” (Werner and Kaplan, 1963, p. 18). This is related to the commentary in the chapter on empathy. There I mentioned Werner’s concept of physiognomic perception where there is a fusion between one’s affective reactions and the expressive characteristics of objects. In organismic theory Werner and Kaplan propose a progressive differentiation between person and object. They take this further by proposing that there is an analogous separation between the person and the symbols he or she employs for representation (Werner and Kaplan, 1963, p. 49). The early stages of symbolization have meanings that are personal and individualized. Later, the symbol becomes less private and idiosyncratic, moving toward a shared public understanding. So, there is a two-part process that is involved in symbol formation. Their understanding of symbolic representation goes beyond the usual accounts that treat the symbol and its referent as fully formed entities that are connected by an external act of bringing these two entities together. Werner and Kaplan interpret this opposing view as a position that asserts that the symbolic vehicle is merely a set of markers connected to preformed correspondences. By this they mean there is more than just accepting what is a culturally assigned meaning to a symbol. If this were the process, there would be no creative role for the symbolizer in the “cognitive organization of experience and thought” (Werner and Kaplan, 1963, p. 15). Their approach emphasizes the constructive aspects of the symbolizer – “symbolizing enters directly into the construction of the ‘cognitive objects,’ determining how events are organized and what they mean”(Werner and Kaplan, 1963, p. 150). There is a transitioning between the personal symbol and the culturally given one. A student through his or her everyday experience has personal associations with the terms pressure and work. The science educator has to provide an educational environment where these personal associations are distanced but not entirely abandoned. Then he or she has to help the student come to understand and adopt the scientific conception of these terms. So, the student is both dealing with his or her own personal associations and reinterpreting them to be more in accordance with the scientific description. (This type of negotiation is related to the dialectic relationship mentioned in Chapter 4 where there is a diagram showing the different types of dialogues happening.) There is a way of viewing symbol formation in the context of science education when there are hands-on activities and sense making. Symbol formation is closely related to the development of analogies. So, if analogies are essential in bringing

272

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

about conceptual change, then it is important to consider how symbols are formed. Werner and Kaplan put forth several conditions for symbol formation. According to them it is related to: • • • •

The expressive features of objects The recognition of expressive features in other objects The intentions of the symbolic generator A dynamic process between the object being symbolized and the means (vehicle) that is acting as the symbolic medium

These conditions give some sense of the complexity of the process. I will relate these to what might be involved in the symbolic process in balls and tracks activities. 1. The term “expressive features” of an object is associated with the dynamic-vectorial features of the object as was previously mentioned in the comments of Rudolf Arnheim and the Kreitlers in empathic reactions to materials. The later terms refer to the affective reactions that result from an encounter with an object or situation. Werner and Kaplan differentiated these characteristics from the geometric-technical that are most often given prominent attention and are usually the focus of a science curriculum. Consider the case of the big U where there can be an identification with the back and forth movement on the track. This rhythmic motion can be considered an expressive feature having a dynamism and direction. Thus, as a ball rolls down the track there is a lessening of tension but then there is a buildup of tension as it rolls up the other side of a U-shaped configuration. As developed in the above scenario about a person playing around with the balls on the big U there are visceral, visual, and aural elements. Werner and Kaplan are proposing that there is a type of resonance between the expressive characteristics of this type of situation and the expressive arousal in the body of a person.   This can be observed in a way when children and adults were following the balls on the tracks of the Balls and Tracks exhibit at the Children’s Museum in Boston. You could observe their “body English.” In some situations children followed the ball as it rolled down the track. When Werner and Kaplan write about expressive features they imply an affective reaction. My understanding is that they are saying that feelings of this kind of a resonating situation are more than a motivational energizer. They are the very basis for symbol formation. In previous chapters I had mentioned that involvement with materials could be justified for more than motivational reasons. This resonance with the action of materials is integral to students’ involvement with the phenomenon and the beginning of symbolization.   Recall Wolf-Michael Roth and his noticing the transition of gesturing during the exploratory phase with the objects under study to gesturing without the objects and the beginning of conceptualization during the sense-making phase. The gesturing is initially an involvement with the phenomena but later the gesture becomes a way of representing and thinking about the phenomena. In the case of the big U there can be a progression from running back and forth

The Evolution of Generative Symbols

273

with the ball as it travels back and forth on the track to a back and forth moving of the hands while standing still. Then, the person can make sounds of increasing and decreasing volume or pitch to represent this movement or say the words “moving up” and “moving down” in a singsong manner. Each of these is a different representation setting the stage for a more formal term such as cyclic motion or oscillatory motion. With older students these representations could be coordinated with the abstract concepts of potential and kinetic energy and their interchange. The symbol arises out of an articulation of the feeling states generated from the ball rising and falling on the track. 2. They now look at the same expressive features in other kinds of dissimilar objects. They conceive of this recognition very broadly proposing that it can occur in objects that are very different from each other. Here I would suggest that there is the possibility of having the visceral feeling of the to-and-fro motion of the ball, drawing parallels with different objects with a somewhat similar action, such as the skateboarder on a constructed platform in the shape of a U, a simple pendulum, a musical composition, the wave motion of water, or a kinetic sculpture. The similarities are assimilated into a schema that is dynamic in form. It is not fixed in its make-up but arises from changeable reactions to different phenomena. Werner and Kaplan suggest that these comparisons are the beginnings of metaphors and analogies based on the common schema. (There would appear to be some connection here to Mark Johnson’s formulation of the role of schemas in his conception of how metaphors arise.) 3. There must be the intention to use one item of experience to denote another. Their point here is that expressive similarity of different things does not automatically result in a symbol. There has to be an intention involved. Thus, having the rhythmic sensations of watching a marble move back and forth on a track might result in the recall of a similar sensation of being on a swing, observing a pendulum, or listening to a piece of music. According to his or her position the person has to deliberately make a connection between these different situations.   It is here that there are pedagogical implications because Werner and Kaplan write about a sharing between individuals in the formation of symbols. This situation will be further developed below. It has a special significance. 4. This act of “denotative reference” is of a dialectical nature. It is realized only because it rests on twin form-building processes, one directed toward the establishment of meaningful objects (referents), the other directed toward the articulation of patterns expressive of meaning (vehicles). (Werner and Kaplan, 1963, p. 22)

This statement is dense and difficult to comment on because it is dependent upon an understanding of their larger framework of an organismic theory. I take it to mean that there is a back and forth between the exploring of the expressive characteristic of the object as well as the kind of feeling states that come about in the individual when interacting with an object. At the same time there is an articulation

274

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

of meanings associated with symbols like words. Over time, through meditation by teachers and parents these articulations are deliberately aligned to fit with the general cultural associations of the words. Meaning develops for the individual as these feelings are articulated. Recall in the report by Roth and Welzel in Chapter 7 that gestures are first the means of bringing forth conception and that these are closely tied to the original physical manipulations. Over time, words take over and are the main means of dealing with the conception. This means that educators perform a critical role. They can help the student bring about this alignment. A connection can be made here with Hutt’s categories under ludic behavior. There is symbolic play where objects are representative of others such as toys and there is innovative play coming out of repetitive manipulation as well. Although Werner and Kaplan do not explicitly mention play it seems the processes they ascribe to the building up of a denotative reference would occur during such behavior. Each of these conditions has real implications for the science educator both in terms of curriculum design and classroom practice. Condition 1: If students are at a stage where it is apparent that they are reacting to a phenomenon’s expressive features, will it be productive for the teacher to ask questions which are aimed at getting the students to think abstractly or at a meta-cognitive level? The teacher needs to tune in to the mood state of the student and match questions or comments with their behavior. Werner and Kaplan locate the origins of symbolic vehicles in the reaction to the expressive characteristics of objects. Focusing on the expressive characteristics would be associated more with the teaching of art than with the teaching of science. Interpreting DiSessa’s comment that sensory schemata at a low level have to be recrafted to bring about conceptual change I would associate this low level with the these expressive characteristics. This would be especially true if in fulfilling condition two we want to provide for new associations that could result in generative analogies. These in turn could be the means for making major structural changes in the conceptions of students’ thinking. DiSessa argues that he sees that this must happen if students are going to change how they operate with what he labels phenomenological primitives. Condition 2: Students will come up with an analogy which at first seems farfetched but upon further consideration reveals that their analogy is based more on the feeling state of the two objects than on their structural or technical properties. Werner and Kaplan assert that “such transcendence” prompts the formation of similes, metaphors, analogies, etc., or at least provides the basis for such formations. The concrete analogy that the student utters may offer possibilities for opening a dialogue between student and teacher, but the teacher must recognize at what level of engagement and of thought process the student is in. Condition 3: It is not clear to me to what extent someone other than the generator of the symbolic correspondence can help bring about this deliberative coupling. There would have to be a keen sensitivity on the part of the teacher to situations in which a student is making this type of connection. When an elementary schoolchild is playing around with the balls and tracks and comes up with a spontaneous

The Transitional Zone as the Primordial Play Situation

275

comparison it seems that would be a time to help the child realize that the connection made has value. By giving special attention to the utterance and spending time to elaborate on it the teacher could then foster this referential act. In the next section more will be said about the social context of early symbol formation and how this interaction between teacher and student might be conceptualized and carried out. Condition 4: This condition runs counter to a common practice found in textbooks and in traditional teaching practices. In working with elementary and middle school teachers I have found that great importance is given to the introduction of “vocabulary words.” There is a very strong tendency to prematurely introduce these terms and there seems to be the underlying assumption that just by giving the students these terms they will somehow understand the associated concepts. It is not so much the introduction of the term but the manner and timing in which it is introduced that is problematic. As outlined in previous chapters there needs to be a progression from the initial encounters with the phenomenon to an abstract representation of it. There is a need to help the students differentiate the experience with the phenomenon, how these features get represented, and how gesturing or visual representations apply to the introduced terms. There needs to be recognition that students have personal understandings of terms such as speed, velocity, and acceleration which can be confused or fused together in the mind of the student. For instance, to begin to differentiate velocity and acceleration the students need help in differentiating how the ball moves on the track in terms of time and space. Acceleration in the context of physical science has a very specific meaning but it can occur in other contexts such as history where it is used to describe rapidly changing political or technological changes. Likewise, terms such as work or pressure have one kind of meaning in everyday life but are given very specific definitions in physical science. There is some common ground to these different meanings but the differentiation has to be developed with the students to help them better align their emerging understanding with scientific conceptions.

The Transitional Zone as the Primordial Play Situation – Role Model for a Holistic Science Education On one occasion at the Children’s Museum in Boston I observed a father and his 10-year-old daughter play around at one of the stations of the Balls and Tracks exhibit. This was the big U. The track was 16 ft long and so the ball could travel a good distance between the two ends. The two took up stations at each end of the structure. They pushed a golf ball from their end to the opposite end – the father to the daughter, the daughter to the father. They must have sent the ball back and forth ten times doing this action in a deliberate manner. It was a curious use of this exhibit for most visitors acting, as individuals would place the ball at one end and then move to the center to wait

276

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

for the ball to slow down or stop. It was as if the father and daughter were having a conversation with each other where the ball took the place of words. In this museum situation members of a family interact with each other in a special sociocultural environment that encourages this kind of interaction and this kind of playing. There is a sense of trust between the two and an implicit recognition that their particular behavior is acceptable in this special environment. It can be described as representative of a special zone where people can make connections between their inner world and their outer environment through play. Object relation’s theory is a way of thinking about the dialogue that involves adult and child and object. D. Winnicott was a major proponent of this interaction. He proposed the concept of the transitional object to characterize the time when a very young child begins the transition of negotiating between his or her inner world and the outside environment. Winnicott locates the beginning of the transitional object at the time when the child at one point becomes attached to some kind of object that may or may not be at the instigation of the mother. This can be a toy, blanket, or any other kind of object that the child associates with the mother and a secure environment. According to some interpretations in psychotherapy this object is seen as becoming a substitute for the mother’s breast and the affective relationship between mother and child. Winnicott introduces his concept with the term “objects” but enlarges it to transitional phenomena and transitional areas. This concept drew much attention from psychotherapists and was found to be a useful way of getting at some basic issues about personal growth. He writes first about concrete objects because it is easier to see an object than to grasp an area of experience. Winnicot and others following his lead portray this transitional object as having the status of being part self and part outside world which eventually evolves into the adult’s attachment to cultural objects of many types, especially art (Spitz, 1985, p. 220). Some interpreters expand the transitional zone to larger human undertakings such as religion and culture and artistic creativity. So, it has a range of applications beyond the therapeutic context. Out of this initial formulation by Winnicott grew a rich literature of commentary among psychotherapists. Winnicott asserts that a view of human nature only in terms of human relationships is not enough. He also writes of a need of an inner reality but that this also is not enough. There is still a need for a third part. This is “an intermediate area of experiencing, to which inner reality and external life both contribute” (Winnicott, 1971, p. 3). Apparently, Jung anticipated this conception and proposed his own understanding of a bridge between inner and outer reality (Cwik, 1991, p. 102). From Winnicott’s writings and the works of those who worked with him play was closely associated with this transitional zone. He described the therapeutic situation as one where there was a playing together between the therapist and the patient. For instance, blocks and sand have been materials used by therapists to promote play and have been used as a way to enter into the transitional zone of the patient. Erick Erickson in his book Toys and Reason (1977) carried out multiple sessions with children as they made different constructions

The Transitional Zone as the Primordial Play Situation

277

with blocks. Different kinds of configurations of the blocks reflect personal concerns or the working out of personal problems. He summarizes his observations of these sessions. “The play construction, then can be seen to be inventively negotiating between the small builder’s inner universe and his society’s changing world view” (Erickson, 1977, p. 37). At a conference on play I was struck by the stories of play therapists relating how puppets, a sand table, or even costumes freed up their patients to deal with their problems. For instance, one therapist related the story of a teenager who made use of a puppet to talk about his work situation describing the difficulties he experienced in attempting to adopt a proper way of interacting with his supervisor. He acted out this situation with one puppet and after a few weeks adopted another puppet to carry on a dialogue between the two puppets describing how he acted at work and in his neighborhood. Now, it may have been possible to carry this out without ever using any puppets. Therapy could be all talk but the puppets provided an avenue to open up his feelings and thoughts. I was impressed at the role a physical object can play in freeing up a person to talk about themselves as well as the readiness to project on the physical object a personal agenda. Given the very strong bias in the school context to value verbalization, using the intermediary of a physical object is often neglected if not discouraged when it comes to promoting student talk. I am not implying here that teachers take on the role of therapists encouraging students to open themselves up to revealing personal concerns. My point is that physical objects can resonate with students in a way that touches a personal level. They are not necessarily engaging with them in a neutral or “scientific” mode. Some of their spontaneous metaphors and analogies may have personal meaning. Often these are probably opaque. If we want students to make the experience their own, engage in explorations in a deep way, and make sense of these experiences with meaningful connections, then they need to be operating in a classroom culture which has the above-mentioned conditions. It seems to me that these would have to hold if there is going to be an authentic learning experience. There are parallels between the therapist and the teacher. In the course of teaching science there are times when students are directly involved with materials. Depending on the pedagogical style of the teacher, students can be exploring a phenomenon with materials in an open way. The conditions that Winnicott and other therapists suggest for a good therapeutic situation I have observed as standard practice by some teachers. The following conditions are needed: • • • • •

There is a balanced stimulation. The problem or challenge is open-ended. There is a classroom culture of trust. The teacher assumes a certain kind of empathic relationship with the students. During certain times there are nonevaluative responses.

Each of these conditions has already been addressed previously but the last two need some more elaboration in this context. Russell Meares in his book The

278

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

Metaphor of Play (1992) discusses the role of empathy in the therapeutic situation as it relates to play. First, he points out that the ability to play depends upon the responsiveness of the environment that involves the therapist (Meares, 1992, p. 131). Then he makes an important distinction between sympathy and empathy. Operating within a model of play he sees empathy involving a perspective whereby one enters into the mind of another (Meares, 1992, p. 135). He states that empathy “requires a kind of identification which is “impersonal.” Sympathy according to his view does not help but may hinder. Most significantly as a parallel to teaching he recommends the following: It is essential, in using the emphatic approach, that the therapist recognizes that it is not his task to be clever and to accurately tell the patient what he or she is thinking or feeling. The task is to bring into being a state like play which must depend upon an understanding of experiences which are going on inside the patient. The therapist is not required to be a oracle or a seer, but a facilitator. The patient’s materials should not be used to display the therapist’s brilliance, but rather as means of amplification of the patient’s own awareness. The sense that the experiences are the patient’s own must not be tampered with. The “interpretations” of the therapist should not steal or contaminate the experience by, for example, explanations and decoding. (Meares, 1992, p. 137)

Here, one could as well substitute student for patient and personal psychological problems for students’ conceptual explanations for the phenomena they are experiencing. The last statement is particularly relevant to science teaching. There is a very strong tendency for teachers to jump in prematurely and take students’ attempts at explanations and provide what is considered the correct one. The traditional paradigm assigns the teacher the role as purveyor of knowledge. At some point they feel a very strong urge and need to tell the students the “right answer.” On the other hand, it is not a matter of taking the stance that there are no wrong answers. It is a question of when and how to lead students to evaluate their assertions in light of the evidence gathered and then consider that there may be alternative explanations that are better equipped to account for the results. I have seen some very sensitive teachers carry this out in practice. The point here is not that the teacher should be acting as a therapist, but rather as a facilitator. This is a very challenging stance to take on the part of the teacher. This open stance is not one that I think should be rigidly adhered to throughout an inquiry investigation. As I have mentioned previously there are two phases in an inquiry investigation where this stance would be applied: one during the early stages of explorations and the other during the early stages of developing explanations. At both these times students especially need to feel that there is a freedom to try out or play around with different kinds of manipulations or different kinds of strange or fanciful comparisons. There is wide variation in students’ ability to be playful and imaginative. Some will need coaching if not at times direct support. Nevertheless, the teachers need to provide for a transitional space as Winnicott calls it so that the students can adopt the mind-set of play. In this manner the goal of providing for a holistic science education experience takes on a certain kind of meaning. It recognizes the personal roots of learning that energizes and gives special meaning to the scientific explanations that students construct.

The Transitional Zone and Conceptual Change

279

The Transitional Zone and Conceptual Change It is important to consider object relations theory because it can help in putting science education into a more holistic orientation, but it can also be a way of thinking about how deep reconceptualization can come about - holistic orientation in the sense that there is recognition of the large investment on the part of the student in the conceptions they have of the workings of the world. As has been revealed through a great deal of research, intuitive theories about phenomena are deeply held. Some change results as students move along a developmental route because of a combination of maturation and an increased familiarity with various phenomena. In addition, they may have been exposed to correct explanations in their education but these apparently did not bring about real changes in their thinking as revealed by examples such as DiSessa’s interviews with MIT students. It appears that logical persuasion as it may have happened in their high school physics courses was not enough to bring about the deeper conceptual changes. One of his claims was that “the development of scientific knowledge about the physical world is possible only through reorganized intuitive knowledge” (DiSessa, p. 108). Recall that he also claims that the expert operates at times with intuitive knowledge. The expert reuses this intuitive knowledge to develop explanations that become formal scientific theories (DiSessa, p. 191). The question for him was how to make apparent components of this intuitive knowledge help the student reconceptualize in a way that their thinking is more in tune with formal science. For me the question is what kind of curriculum structure and classroom practices can allow students to return to their intuitive knowledge in a way that moves them to reorganize it so that it can be used to generate conceptions that are more in line with formal science. Bringing about conceptual change in this manner is not then entirely a matter of logical persuasion but one that recognizes the foundational role of generative symbols. These are products of the imagination that act as an organizer for reconsidering basic intuitions in respect to newly gained experiences and the alternative viewpoints of other students, the teacher, and the expert scientist. If generative symbols and their role as transformers of thinking are accepted as fundamental to reorganizing intuitive knowledge, then exploration and play would seem to me to be essential elements of an educational program. The general consensus among those who have conducted studies and who theorize about play and exploration is that these closely connected behaviors can be generative and transformative. It would be important then to consider how these behaviors can be allowed to occur in a manner that is respectful of students’ natural tendencies while working toward some balance of guidance toward understanding and competency in a particular field of knowledge such as science. In the next chapter I will elaborate on one characteristic of play that Hutt has as one of her subcategories. This is the repetitive nature of play. It involves varying the mani­ pulations of materials and objects that are representative of one kind of phenomenon.

280

10 Play and Exploration in the Teaching and Learning of Science

References Cameron J. (2001). Negative Effects of Reward on Intrinsic Motivation – A Limited Phenomenon: Comment on Deci, Koestner, and Ryan. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 29–42 Condry, J. and Chambers, J. (1978). Intrinsic Motivation and the Process of Learning, in M. Lepper and D. Greene, D (Eds.), The Hidden Costs of Reward: New Perspectives on the Psychology of Human Motivation, New York, Erlbaum. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1978). Intrinsic Rewards: Emergent Motivation, in M. Leeper and D. Greene (Eds.), The Hidden Costs of Reward: New Perspectives on the Psychology of Human Motivation, New York, Erlbaum. Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Getzels, J. W. (1971). Discovery-Oriented Behavior and the Originality of Creative Products. A Study with Artists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 19, 47–52. Cwik, A. (1991). Active Imagination as Imaginal Play-Space in Liminality and Transitional Phenomena, in N. Schwartz-Salant and M. Stein (Eds.), Liminality and Transitional Phenomena, Wilmette, IL, Chiron. Day, H.I. (1981). Toward a Taxonomy and Conceptual Model of Play, in Advances in Intrinsic Motivation And Aesthetics, New York, Plenum Press, p. 284. Deci, E., Ryan, R., and Koestner, R. (2001). The Pervasive Negative Effects of Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation: Response to Cameron (2001). Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 43–51. DiSessa, A. (1993). Toward an Epistemology of Physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2&3), 105–225. Duschl, R. Schweingruber, H., and Shouse A. (Eds.) (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-9, Washington, DC, National Academies Press. Erickson, E. (1977). Toys and Reasons, New York, W.W. Norton. Hutt, C. (1966) Exploration and play in children. Symposium of the Zoological Society of London, 18, 61–81. Hutt, C. (1971). R. E. Herron and B. Sutton-Smith (Eds.), Child’s Play, New York, Wiley, Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 18, 61–81. Hutt, C. (1981). Toward a Taxonomy and Conceptual Model of Play, in H. I. Day (Ed.), Advances in Intrinsic Motivation and Aesthetics, New York, Plenum, pp. 283–289. Klinger, E. (1971). Structure and Functions of Fantasy, New York, Wiley. Meares, R. (1992). The Metaphor of Play: On Self, the Secret and the Borderline Experience, Melbourne, Australia, Hill of Content. Piaget, J. (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood, New York, Norton. Rotter, J.B., Seeman, M., and Liverant, S. (1962). Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcements: A Major Variable in Behavior Theory. In N. F. Washburne (Ed.), Decisions, Values and Groups (Vol. 2), London, Pergamon Press. Spitz, E. (1985). Art and Psyche: A Study in Psychoanalysis and Aesthetics, New Haven, CT, | Yale University Press. Sutton-Smith, B. (1979). Epilogue: Play as Performance, in B. Sutton-Smith (Ed.), Play and Learning, New York, Gardner Press. Sutton-Smith, B. (1980). Children’s Play: Some Sources of Play Theorizing, in K. H. Rubin (Ed.), New Directions For Child Development, San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass. Vygotsky, L.S. (1967). Play and Its Role in the Mental Development of the Child. Voprosy pshikhologii, 12, 62–76. Translated in Soviet Psychology, pp. 6–18. Werner, H. and Kaplan, B (1963). Symbol Formation: An Organismic-Developmental Approach to Language and the Expression of Thought, New York, Wiley. Wiliam, D. and Black, P. (1996). Meanings and Consequences: A Basis for Distinguishing Formative and Summative Functions of Assessment? British Educational Research Journal, 22, 537–548. Winnicott, D.W. (1971). Playing and Reality, New York, Basic Books.

References

281

Wohwill, J. (1984). Relationships Between Exploration and Play, in T. Yawkey and A. Pellegrini (Eds.), Child’s Play: Developmental and Applied, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum. Wohwill J. (1987). Varieties of Exploratory Activity in Early Childhood, in D. Gorlitz and J. Wohlwill (Eds.), Curiosity, Imagination and Play: On the Development of Spontaneous Cognitive and Motivational Processes, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum. Zubrowski, B. (1996). Explorations with Balls and Tracks: Generating and Testing Hypotheses, in the video series Learning to See: Observing Children’s Inquiry in Science [video], Newton, MA, Education Development Center.

Chapter 11

Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations: The Stereoscopic Principle and Montage in the Design of Science Educational Experiences

Variability is the key to play (Brian Sutton-Smith)

Scenario #8 For the past 20 years one of the most popular exhibits at the Boston Children’s museum has been the Bubbles. If parents are patient and supportive, children will sometimes spend 5 hour playing there, with different ways of blowing bubbles having several different activities. In the context of museum visits this is a very long time to spend at one exhibit. Once, while videotaping activities at the exhibit I recorded the explorations of an 11-year-old. She and her brother were manipulating a large loop of string several feet in length attached to four vertical sticks. The sticks could be dipped into soap solution that was in a tray. Stick on stand

string Tray of soap solution

By carefully removing the string from the solution, the two could create a sheet of soap film that could be stretched into a horizontal rectangular sheet about 2 ft wide and 3 ft long. To make a “bubble” in this manner is exciting not only because of its size but also because of its shimmering colors and undulating surface. These two visitors played with the device for more than 20 min. On reviewing the tape afterwards, I noticed that they tried out several different kinds of manipulations. The sheet of soap film sometimes broke right away as they pulled the string from the soap solution. B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_11, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

283

284 284

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

Despite this source of frustration they persisted in trying out different ways of changing the shape of the soap film. The two hardly talked while doing this and they did not seem to have a conscious systematic program of exploring the soap film. In another example of this variable exploration I was leading a group of children (ages 8–10) through a series of activities in a summer program involving improvised tops and yo-yos. I introduced a hand strobe to view designs made on the tops. This is a device made from a circular piece of wood having 12 slots cut into the edge along the diameters of the circle. If a moving top having a geometric design is viewed through the moving slots of the strobe, the design will appear to be stationary. They were surprised at the effect, and tried a variety of designs to see what would happen when they were viewed through the hand strobe. While looking at the videotaping of this session, I noticed that one boy was quite intrigued with the strobe device. Several times during this session, he picked it up and spun it looking at the spinning tops, but also viewed other kids in the group, looked at the fluorescent lights in the ceiling, and other things around the room. There were breaks in this exploration sometimes lasting as long as 15 min during which he would go back to spinning the tops, but then come back to playing with the strobe. Here also there didn’t seem to be a conscious program of deliberate experimentation. In yet another example, I was working with four 11-year-olds in an after-school program. I introduced a material that has fascinating properties. By mixing equal parts of Elmer’s glue and liquid laundry starch, one obtains an elastic material that is similar in its characteristics to Silly Putty, a commercial product sold in stores. During this session the students played with this material in a wide variety of ways. At first, it was rolled into a ball and bounced around. They let a lump of it stretch into a thin strand as thick in diameter as a rope and used this as a lasso and as a jump rope. One boy spent 20 min letting it hang form his hand standing on top of a desk seeing how far it would eventually stretch. At one point I did suggest that they see how far it could be stretched, otherwise the uses they invented were their own. I had the feeling that they could have spent another 2 h exploring this material. Almost in all of the previous accounts of children exploring other phenomena such as food color in water, siphons, and balls and tracks, there was also this variation of manipulations. I mention all of these to indicate that this type of behavior may not be atypical. It is difficult to say whether the perturbation of a video camera prolonged this extended manipulation. However, from other observations without a video camera I have found that given an informal environment, intrinsically interesting materials, and a supportive social situation, it is possible that this focused attention and variable manipulation will occur. Since each of these explorations was on videotape, it was much easier to notice a focused approach where varied manipulations of the same materials were carried out. The slight differences in manipulations become more apparent. I have observed a similar kind of behavior with other materials where it was quite obvious that the student was also fixated on what was happening. Considering this type of behavior in another way, it should be noted that some

Scenario #8

285

traditional toys still being produced continue to engage children in extended play. Lego, K’nex and any kind of construction set will occupy some children for hours at a time, sometimes continuing to do so for weeks if not months. One can think of the different constructions as variations of a few basic structures. Children’s collection may be another manifestation of this variable exploration of objects and phenomena. Collection of objects such as rocks, seeds, seashells, or other kinds of natural objects is another expression of this intrinsic urge to view variations of things (Humphrey, 1974). In this case, such practices can span several years. Also recall the account of Faraday’s extended investigation of electrostatic phenomena mentioned in Chapter 2 where he used multiple techniques to make the field visible and mappable as it occurred in various containers. Another example is the practice of artists who produce paintings or sculptures that over time are variations of the same theme. We have here examples occurring with a variety of materials, in a variety of environments, and over several different timescales. Recall the classification of play by Hutt in the previous chapter where in one subcategory under the ludic she recognizes this behavior as a type of play. Sutton-Smith after years of thinking about the many kinds of enactments of play and the different ideological rationales for play arrives at the conclusion that “variability is the key to play, and that structurally play is characterized by quirkiness, redundancy, and flexibility.” He places this statement in the all-encompassing context of evolution, proposing that play variability is analogous to the adaptive variability of animals and humans both in terms of biological and cultural adaptation (Sutton-Smith, 1997, p. 229). With all this in mind variable exploration would seem to be an essential characteristic that would be part of any pedagogical model if the science educator wanted to tap into students’ natural inclination in exploring phenomena. It should be noted that I am focusing on the early stages of getting acquainted with a phenomenon. There still would be a need to follow up these explorations with more controlled experiments focusing on single variables. The idea of multiple experience of the same phenomenon runs counter to some pedagogical practices. For instance, at the secondary and postsecondary level it is common to expose students to demonstrations or carry out laboratory experiments that are meant to illustrate basic concepts. These are usually single exposures to complex phenomena. The demonstrations have been designed so that the most salient characteristics of a phenomenon have been accentuated and consequently a basic concept can be developed. One can judge from current science supply house catalogs where there are multiple examples of single demonstrations that this practice is still very much in use; otherwise these businesses wouldn’t sell them. From one perspective, the resulting experience is an emasculated phenomenon presented in a highly artificial interaction. Consider what Gerald Holton, who has studied deeply the lives and thought processes of creative scientists, said: Some of the best scientists have reported that during their student years their physics lecture did not attract them, as for example, Einstein reported in his Autobiographical notes. Indeed, one suspects that lecture demonstration may well offend the most perceptive

286 286

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

students. They must see through the fundamental misrepresentation in the typical lecture table “experiment” in which a subtle and beautiful phenomenon is distorted beyond all recognition in order that the visual clues can be amplified for the benefit of people seated at a distance. They must be aware of the fact that demonstrations tend to wrench phenomenon from their natural context in order to make a “main point” stand out clearly before the average student. (Holton, 1970, p. 62)

At the elementary level a similar kind of practice also prevails. Some curriculum programs’ and textbooks’ “hands-on activities” have essentially taken the demonstrations and put them on the desks of the students. In those textbooks that do provide for some kind of investigation, the “experiments” are single activities. These are usually meant to illustrate a basic science concept. There is little allowance for open-ended exploration. For example, from observing a beam of light reflect off a mirror during one encounter with this phenomenon lasting for a period of 20 min, the student is supposed to understand that light travels in straight lines. From my experience of working with students at the elementary level they need exposure to a variety of examples showing reflected light before they begin to understand the significance of representing light as moving in straight lines (see Zubrowski, 2001a, Mirrors). This is also true of many other basic concepts taught at the elementary level. There may be valid practical reasons for carrying out the practice of singular examples at the university level, but my experience of working with elementary and middle school children has led me to believe that it is a very questionable one. I have closely watched children explore a variety of materials over the past 30 years. At times they seem to have an innate tendency to seek out multiple ways of manipulating the same materials, repeating this frequently in a mode that is nonverbal and highly intuitive. The scenarios at the beginning of this chapter are examples of this behavior. My feeling is that the practice of limiting children to single examples of basic phenomena is to prematurely cut off their need for full assimilation and representation of the thing they are exploring. In the context of science education, because this kind of behavior may appear to be random or capricious, it may be dismissed as “just playing around,” and not considered as serving any informational or cognitive purpose. Even if viewed as useful it may not be seen as essential to a full and complete development of basic concepts that could arise out of an interaction with materials and discussion with the teacher. In addition, because this type of exploration often occurs in a nonverbal mode, some educators and researchers in the field of science education might assume that learning has not occurred since written and spoken language mediates learning. Should then this type of behavior be dismissed as inappropriate for the school classroom, especially in the context of science education where the emphasis is usually on clear and critical thinking and where conclusions are seemingly arrived at in a logical manner? Based on my observations in classrooms, afterschool programs, and behavior in museums, I am proposing that the variable manipulations exhibited in exploratory play serve a basic perceptual and cognitive need.

Collage and Visual Perception

287

We can return again to artistic practice to get a better understanding of the role of variable exploration. There is an intrinsic aesthetic appeal when there is repetition with variation. One art form where it is most explicit and frequently used is music. It is also found in the visual arts and literature. There are three artists in particular whose thinking about this form of expression and artistic practice are especially relevant. David Hockney, the painter, and Marcel Proust, the writer, particularly adopted the use of multiple images in their art. Goethe as writer and scientist adopted a process of multiple experiments that had an overall aesthetic similar in intent to Hockney’s and Proust’s. It is my feeling that their comments about their practice can provide a way of thinking, designing, and teaching in regard to science inquiry at the elementary and middle school level. At the same time, given its occurrences in a variety of different contexts, one must conclude that it is more than an aesthetic issue. It is connected with some deep epistemological issues. How do we build up images in the mind as well as representations that are a distillation of these experiences? The comments of these artists provide ways of considering how perception and conception may develop. Closely related to the use of multiple images is the practice of juxtaposition, montage, and similar techniques. Examining these practices as carried out by some artists can provide a way of thinking about how to design multiple experiences with the same phenomenon. Metaphors and analogies are a type of juxtaposition. They are frequently used to introduce new concepts. Some studies provide support for the contention that the juxtaposition of multiple analogies is needed for students to grasp the latent concept associated with these analogies. There are also comments of those who have closely studied the behavior of children such as Ernst Schachtel that focused attention with repetition is a means for mastering new situations. With this kind of background in mind I will give examples of how variable exposures to the same phenomenon can be carried out not just in the area of curriculum design but also in regard to the design of exhibits in children and science museums.

Collage and Visual Perception We can first briefly examine the practices of David Hockney and then move on to Goethe and Proust. All three exhibited a common aesthetic in their approach to their art. This aesthetic practice not only acted as a way of organizing their respective artistic productions, it also seems to be deeply rooted in how they represented and thought about their lived experiences. At one point in his prolific career David Hockney, although a painter, took thousands of photographs of friends, his local surroundings, and panoramic views of the southwest. He took up the Polaroid camera and used it in an unusual way. (Nowadays, some people may not be familiar with this type of camera. This photographic technology used a special film. After the shot was taken, a paper was pulled from one part of the camera and a single sheet of special paper with the photo on it

288 288

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

emerged. It took a minute or so for the image to develop.) Rather than taking single snapshots he would take multiple pictures of the same scene from different angles. Since the photos developed very quickly, he could compose his shots for the overall scene based on those he had already taken. Then he would lay these out producing a composite image that was similar to a collage. Initially, he used Polaroid film that had a white border when developed. This resulted in a rectangular grid. Later, he used a 35 mm camera and ended up with photo collages with an overall outline that was nonlinear and without a border. These collages had some similarity to the early Cubist paintings of Picasso and Braque. In an interview recounted in a book showing these collages Hockney (Weschler, 1984) discussed the reasons why he took time from his usual pursuit of painting and instead spent several years working with the camera. He stated that he found single photographs lacking in visual interest partly because of their static depiction. For him a painting was much more interesting to view because somehow the painter had incorporated time and many observations into one scene. By assembling single photographs into a photo collage he felt that he overcame the static nature of a single photograph. They were more like how we ordinarily view the world in the sense that we are continually sampling the environment rather than fixating upon a single element of it. Thus for Hockney the photo collages became a series of investigations of how we view our environment and how this viewing process can be represented. From that first day, I was exhilarated. First of all I immediately realized I’d conquered my problem with time in photography. It takes time to see these pictures – you can look at them for a long time. They invite that sort of looking. But more importantly, I realized that this sort of picture came closer to how we actually see, which is to say, not all at once but rather in discrete, separate glimpses which we then build up into our continuous experience of the world. (Hockney, 1984, p. 11)

The key issue here is the element of time, and the fact that the overall picture he is talking about is really composed of multiple photographs which weren’t mechanically taken or arranged because he could immediately decide where to focus the next shot based on the photo he had just taken. The artistic eye of Hockney chose the angle of each single shot taking into consideration the light, the features of the subject, and the fleeting glimpses of the mood of the subject. It also guided him in the assemblage of the final composition that was chosen out of many photos taken. This composition had to come together in a coherent whole or else it wouldn’t look right. One might assume as Hockney did that collectively they somehow were synthesized by the mind into a whole image. This is an important point to keep in mind, as this approach is developed further. As with any object, an art object can be viewed first as an expression of aesthetic intent, but also considered as a concrete manifestation of contemporary understandings of basic perceptual processes. According to Vitz and Glimcher (1984) there has been a conceptual parallelism between modern art and modern science. Both endeavors have developed similar interpretations of visual experience elaborating on such concepts as stereoscopic vision, depth perception, and different formulations of how we perceive color. For instance, Vitz and Glimcher comment on one of Manet’s paintings, A Bar at the Folies-Bergère, which illustrates this parallelism.

Collage and Visual Perception

289

It depicts a barmaid with two mirrors behind her. In the mirror are two reflections of a person at the bar that would not appear in a real situation. They have interpreted this painting as a forerunner of cubism with its representation of multiple viewpoints of the same phenomenon. Curiously, this type of aesthetic preoccupation of multiple viewpoints was occurring when different conceptions of geometry were being developed. Waddington (1970) in a similar but more limited survey of the relationship between painting and science cites the coincidence of Einstein’s publication of the theory of relativity and Picasso and Braque’s breakthrough of the Cubist style that in a visual manner represents the relationship between time and space. Vitz and Glimcher argue that these parallelisms are not accidental, but arise from common themes shared by artists and scientists. For instance, Crary in Techniques of the Observer (1991) develops an argument of how the fascination with the stereoscope and kaleidoscope among scientists, artists, and the general public is an example where a physical device acts as a metaphor for profound changes in the conception of visual representation, and in ways of experiencing the world. Recall also I mentioned in the chapter on empathy that Zemir Zeki, who studied the pictures of artists of the past century, proposed that there is a strong relationship between what they painted on the canvas and what neurophysiologists were discovering about visual perception and the specific areas of the brain. Hockney has explicitly acknowledged a debt to Picasso and to the Cubist style of painting: Cubism, I realized during those days … is about our own bodily presence in the world. It’s about the world, yes but ultimately about where we are in it. It’s about the kind of perception a human being can have in the midst of living. (Hockney, 1984, p. 23)

He later elaborates on what he means by this perceptual process in a discussion of what transpires as one views a Cubist collage or one of his photo collages. This is in the context where he is arguing that a single photograph is not very interesting to look at because of its static nature as contrasted with the multiplicity of images in a collage. It takes time to see these pictures [his photo collages] you can look at them for a long time, they invite that sort of looking. But, more importantly, I realized that this sort of picture came closer to how we actually see, which is to say, not all at once but rather in discrete glimpses which we tend to build up into our continuous experience of the world. Looking at you my eye does not capture you in your entirety, but instead quickly, in nervous little glances. I look at your shoulder, you ear, your eyes. (Hockney, 1984, p. 11)

Hockney’s paintings appear to be a contemporary example of this subtle interaction between art and science. His comment is interesting because it sounds very similar to some formulations by perceptual psychologists regarding the early stages of the visual process. For instance, Hochberg in reviewing various theories about the perception of pictures concludes that the theoretical approach which is most applicable is one that is a sampling process. Citing the fact that only part of the visual field is ever in focus on the retina – this being the foveal area – an integrated picture is built up under the guidance of a mental model that helps in an anticipatory manner (Hockberg, 1972, p. 68). It is not known whether Hockney had read about these theories of visual perception or arrived at his formulation by some kind of intuitive

290 290

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

approach. His collages are compelling and invite a sustained viewing. In a way they are more real than single photographs of the same scene because there is a dynamic element to them. One is compelled to look at the single photographs while at the same time continually integrating it into the entire scene. It is particularly this characteristic that is of most relevance here. Hockney and the Cubists had investigated how static visual elements interact with dynamic movement. Vision and kinesthesia are brought together and integrated in a highly active and productive manner. Although painting is purely a visual medium, the Cubists and, later, some painters such as Hockney have attempted to represent movement and time in their paintings. Cubism was a revolutionary breakthrough because for several hundred years the fixed viewpoint of Western painting dominated pictorial representation as well as formed a dominant metaphor for many of the arts and philosophical orientations. So, the issue here is more than aesthetic orientation. At a deeper and a more subtle level, it is a question of how different representations of experience can structure and determine ways of knowing. One way to begin to understand this concept of a dynamic comparison is to go back again to Hockney’s photo collages. A collage is not a random collection of items thrown together by the artist. Some artists such as John Cage, the musical composer, or Merce Cunningham, the choreographer, have played with chance findings or “found art,” combining objects, sounds, or movements in a totally random manner in the sense of chance happenings while looking for interesting aesthetic occurrences. However, in the case of a collage there is some kind of underlying aesthetic that guides the choice of items to be included in the painting or assemblage. Often these elements fit together because compositional features such as the contours give an impression of an overall integrated outline or the movement of a line connects all the segments together. Hockney in describing the method of taking the photos and combining them into a complete picture had this to say about this kind of composition: I realized that if the pictures weren’t clear enough, and if their relationship to each other wasn’t clear enough, the collage ended up looking like a jigsaw puzzle and your eye literally couldn’t stay on it. (Hockney, 1984, p. 9)

The difference Wechsler notes is that an entire panel of a Hockney collage has a movement to it. There is an integrated whole. Your eye is led from one point to another. This is in contrast to the juxtaposition of pictures in a comic strip where each scene may be totally different from the preceding one. In this instance a story line provides the continuity. This might be described as a kind of montage similar to the juxtapositions that occur in cinema. There are closely related images generating a visual continuity in a scene, but the viewing of these is guided by the overall story line. Therefore, when two scenes follow one after the other, and if there is a visual disruption, we will still be able to understand the juxtaposition because it is embedded in the story line. The technique called montage is frequently used in cinema. A story line provides the linkage from one frame to the next or the visual images are the same but are meant to convey a different meaning from the previous frame.

Collage and Visual Perception

291

An interesting and revealing comparison is the segmented photographs of Edward Muybridge. His approach was different from Hockney’s. He would photograph a moving person in a strict sequential manner. Each photo is clearly related to the preceding one but in a mechanical way in the sense that the camera automatically takes pictures every fraction of a second. Each succeeding photo continues the movement in small increments. There are experimental and aesthetic differences among these ways of presenting a collection of visual images. In certain instances these differences may at times seem to be very subtle and the distinctions unnecessary, especially in the latter example. It is Hockney’s intuition and stance that there is some kind of integration happening in a collage or in a series of observation experiments where the eye and the mind are guided by the aesthetic sensibilities of the artist. He seems to be saying that this does not happen with a technological device such as the camera or a series of highly controlled experiments. Working on these collages Hockney explains: I realized how much thinking goes into seeing – into ordering and reordering the endless sequence of details which our eyes deliver to our mind. Each of these squares assumes a different perspective, a different focal point around which the surroundings recede to background. The general perspective is built up from hundreds of micro-perspectives. Which is to say, memory plays a crucial role in perception? At any given moment, my eyes catch this or that detail – they really can’t keep any wide field in focus all at once – and it’s only my memory of the immediately previous details which allow me to form a continuous image of the world. (Hockney, 1984, p. 16)

This movement from one image to another and the ongoing integration that occurs simultaneously is important to keep in mind. Somehow, the movement itself is the means by which this integration happens. Vision is wedded to kinesthesia. To take in the whole of an object is not possible with the eye at a fixed position.1 The same is obviously true for the viewing of an object. As we walk around the object we see more of it, especially if we move slowly. The movement is the critical part of this different way of perceiving an object or phenomenon. Muybridge’s sequence of photos usually captured the movement of a person from one point to another. How would you capture an object that is moving in one spot? One interesting example is Hockney’s study of an ice-skater for an Olympic poster. Picture an ice-skater stopping and then spinning in one spot. How would a photograph capture what is happening to the skater as he or she is spinning? Hockney presents a collage comprised of a group of photos showing the arms, legs, and body of the skater in different positions representing him spinning around in one spot. At the top of the collage are three photos next to each other showing the head and one arm of the skater in three different positions.  An interesting experiment was done once where with a special device the eye of a person could only see one spot of light of the outside environment, i.e., the device moved with the saccadic movement of the eye to result in the same visual information hitting the fovea. The result was that the person stopped seeing the object. It disappeared (Ditchburn and Fender, quoted in Fiske and Maddi, 1961). 1

292 292

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

The four middle photos show the bent legs of the skater in three different positions. The bottom five photos show the skates in different positions. Now, think of what would happen if a single photograph were taken at a slow speed. There would be a blur of the arms or legs. Often this is how spinning skaters are represented in drawings or cartoons. On the other hand, if a single photo is taken at high speed, the skater is frozen in one position, and it is not clear whether he or she is in a pose or skating. It suggests but does not fully capture how the arms and legs are moving as the skater makes several rotations around a point. Hockney’s juxtaposition of several photos showing different positions of arms and legs conveys a sense of the movement of the skater. In taking in the whole collage at once we mentally form a picture of a spinning skater. It is both the group of pictures and how they are assembled and juxtaposed that give this impression. Out of the many photos that Hockney took, he chose those that would best convey this movement and placed them carefully next to each other. Substitute the term for pictures with a specific phenomenon as embodied in a set of materials. A single exposure as in a one-shot activity or demonstration only conveys a single aspect of the phenomenon. An extended exploration where the student manipulates the materials in multiple ways provides a fuller sense of its properties. Exploring the properties of the Silly Putty material mentioned in the scenario above for 10 min only provides a limited sense of its strange properties. An hour or more, as happened in this situation, gave rise to multiple properties that were not immediately evident. The multiple angles of exploring a phenomenon can go beyond one session and continue to multiple exposures. Drawing on Hockney’s comments, the curriculum designer needs to provide an aesthetic continuity for these multiple exposures. If new materials are introduced to further the exploration, they should allow the students to gain a deeper understanding of the same phenomenon. One can think of these sets of experiences as similar in impact to the visual collage of Hockney.

Proust and Stereoscopic Vision With Hockney we view multiple exposures of the same object or person where the viewing happens over a short period of time. Taking multiple photos of the same object and arranging them into a collage results in a juxtaposition of images. In this situation the images are very closely related to each other. Another kind of juxtaposition is to use multiple images of the same object or situation that have happened over a long time period. The purpose of this kind of juxtaposition would be to provide a fuller description of the object or situation. I think it is important to connect these two practices together because the use of these practices incorporated into a pedagogical model would give greater depth and a richer context for promoting conceptual change.

Proust and Stereoscopic Vision

293

According to Wechsler, Hockney studied Remembrance of Things Past by Proust, who incorporated an aesthetic based on multiple images into his wellknown novels. In fact, Proust makes a statement in one of his works similar to Hockney’s: And more than the painter, who has to have seen many churches to paint a single one, the writer, in order to obtain volume and consistency, generality and literary reality needs many beings for a single sentiment.” (Shattuck, 1993, p. 42)

Here “beings” refers to the characters and their different experiences as portrayed in his novels. Proust commented on this practice: Nevertheless, at the moment of my discovery, M. Verdurin’s character offered me a new and unsuspected aspect; and I had to concede the difficulty of presenting a fixed image of a character as much as of societies and of passions. For character changes as much as they do, and if one wishes to photograph, its relatively immutable aspect, one can only watch as it presents in succession different appearances (implying it does not know how to keep still, but keeps moving) to the disconcerted lens. (Shattuck, 1993, p. 23, translation)

According to Shattuck the underlying aesthetic of Proust’s great work was based on optical devices and optical science. Embedded in the text of his works and in separate writings Proust uses metaphors derived from the telescope, stereoscope, camera, and cinema projector. For instance, in one letter he uses the metaphor of a telescope that sums up his underlying aesthetic in attempting to capture the experience and thinking of his characters. Just as it “renders visible for us stars invisible to the naked eye, and I have tried to render visible to the consciousness unconscious phenomena, some of which, having been entirely forgotten, are situated in the past” (Shattuck, 1993, p. 46). Shattuck proposed that this statement gets at the essence of his method in his novels. The different descriptions of the characters in his books and the manner in which they are described in a type of suspended time are juxtapositions that collectively are meant to convey to the reader the full personality of each character. It is particularly the aspect of “juxtaposition” over time that is a critical part of his overall thinking. Proust is working on a timescale much longer than Hockney’s, which combined with his underlying “optical aesthetic,” is what makes his works relevant for an approach as a possible model for pedagogical practices in science education. Shattuck writes that the telescope metaphor is not as apt as the stereoscope. If one of the goals of Proust is to “see time” and produce some kind of juxtaposition, there is a need for temporal depth. One image, one present, is not enough, because a single event or impression isolated in the consciousness cannot sustain itself, has no dimensionality in time, remains “flat” to the mind; it can be kept alive only by voluntary memory or the sheer uncreative repetition of habit. (Shattuck, 1993, p. 46)

One of the characters in Proust’s extended novel comes to recognize the identities of various acquaintances in his life through “juxtaposition in memory of their different roles they have taken on throughout his life.” His memory combines them all simultaneously. Thus, Odette is not just a wife, but also hostess, widow, mother, and grandmother. “Multiplicity now brings not confusion but dimensionality and depth”

294 294

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

(Shattuck, 1993, p. 47). The collective montage would give us a sense of a full realization of who Odette was. Shattuck goes on to describe his interpretation of Proust’s stereoscopic project of time: With the provision that we imagine it employing several simultaneous images and not two only, the stereoscope comparison will carry us still further toward understanding Proust’s treatment of time. A mere succession of images, unequally retained and seen without uniform clarity produces an effect of “volume.” But a fuller grasp of the object comes only when all images including the closest, have been brought to rest “on a uniform plane” – just as two stereopticon views must be equidistant from the eyes. The act of ultimate recognition removes all images from the stream of time to set them up temporally equidistant in Time, equally available to our consciousness. (Shattuck, 1993, pp. 47–48)

The provision that this happens simultaneously should be kept in mind for it can be applied to curriculum design. To gain a better understanding of how this differs from other methods of juxtaposing images Shattuck describes three ways of “seeing the world – or of recreating it.” The first is the cinematographic principle, which “employs a sequence of separately insignificant differences to produce the effect of motion or animation in objects seen” (Shattuck, 1993, p. 49). An example of this effect is flip cards or a Zoetrope where there are multiple images of slightly varying positions. Flip the cards or spin the cylinder and movement is created. Muybridge and later artists heavily influenced by him practiced this technique. It has an aesthetic appeal and is used in some scientific experimentation. The second is the montage principle, which “employs a succession of large contrasts to reproduce the disparity and contradiction that interrupt the continuity of experience. The montage principle rejects the accumulation of small differences (cinematographic principle) for the exploitation of larger associative or dissociative leaps that suggest the meaning of a scene or situation by contrast” (Shattuck, 1993, p. 50). The essential aspect of this way of seeing is the large contrasts. In all that has been discussed so far this seems to be the least applicable to what is being expressed by Hockney as well as Proust. The third is the stereoscopic principle: [It] selects a few images or impressions sufficiently different from one another not to give the effect of continuous motion, and sufficiently related to be linked in a discernible pattern. This stereoscopic principle allows our binocular (or multiocular) vision of mind to hold contradictory aspects of things in the steady perspective of recognition, of relief in time. (Shattuck, 1993, p. 50)

Each of these artists has incorporated into their art and thinking this process and concept of multiple images. A fundamental issue is whether this is to be seen mainly as an aesthetic device – a means of representing experience – or is it possible that it is also indicative of a basic cognitive process. Is it a way of giving unity to our diverse experiences, and one route to the formation of schemas? Are these aesthetic devices applicable to the pedagogy of teaching science? The next sections consider these questions by examining the approach of a personality who straddled the worlds of art and science.

Goethe’s Alternative Approach to Understanding the Natural World

295

Goethe’s Alternative Approach to Understanding the Natural World Johan Goethe is mainly known for his literary works but he also spent significant time carrying out scientific studies. He saw himself as both poet and scientist and felt that his explorations would be an important part of the scientific legacy. He carried out extensive observations of natural phenomena, and is credited with the concept of morphology – the comparative study of related organisms. Two of his major works about plant development and a theory of color were scientific in intent. He challenged Newton’s theories of how we perceive color and questioned the foundations of the scientific process as practiced at that time. Particularly in his theory of colors, his methodology and his disassociation of the use of math for the modeling of phenomena and comments about the role of experimentation were controversial. His contemporaries as well as some historians of science questioned his scientific contributions and identity as a scientist. In more recent times he is still given attention not only for his literary contributions but also for his “scientific” explorations and thinking. Although some writers question his approach as being truly scientific in the contemporary sense of the term, they find that his exploratory approach was more holistic (Zajonc, 1983). Therefore, if one of the aims of my whole approach to science education is to foster a more holistic orientation, Goethe can provide some insight into how this might be done. His approach has parallels to the comments of Hockney and Proust regarding the way we perceive and the way we come to integrate our perceptual experience into a holistic image. Given that he had a scientific intent there is the possibility of adopting some of his approach for contemporary science education. Recall Proust’s comment that he needed to relate multiple incidents to define the essential personality of a character in his novel. Goethe starts out his work A Theory of Color describing the same aesthetic approach and states that he will be using this approach in developing a description of how we perceive color. In pursing this goal he carried out multiple explorations and simple experiments. He stated: “[A] single experiment proves nothing by itself” (Magnus, 1949, p. 223). After carrying out many observations and simple experiments he would eventually arrange individual phenomena into a continuous series that progressed from the simple to the complex. It was the juxtaposition of the individual phenomena within the entire series, viewing the series in a dynamic fashion rather than in a static manner, that would reveal the essential nature of that phenomenon. What is meant by dynamic and static is a challenging conception. It is related to the commentary about Proust where “images are brought on a uniform plane” to create “volume” or a synthesized image. This conception seems paradoxical because it runs counter to the general practice of modern science as well as contemporary science pedagogy. Arriving at this concrete but encompassing archetypical situation is a subtle and challenging task. Brady at a conference on Goethe gives an example of a perceptual experience that may help the reader. It sounds similar to Hockney’s musings about his pictures. Brady asks us to consider how we take in the experience of viewing a

296 296

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

piano or table as we walk around it. During this movement we take in views that differ greatly from each other. The question is how do we integrate these different views into a whole mental image of the piano or table. According to Brady: [I]n order for the mind to perform this little miracle that keeps the table constant, one has to be able to think the table in a form that is identical with no view of the table available to the senses. … To make sense of that table, one must think the table in a form that illuminates, as a law illuminates, all the exemplary views of the table, but always reveals each of them as partial … therefore, whatever this form is, it is not any of the views themselves. (Brady, 1987, p. 381)

He proposes that a similar process is what Goethe is undertaking with the multiple experiments and the juxtaposition of carefully selected experiments. My interest here is not so much the final image that results as Brady has described it. The important point for me is the process that brings about this result and the relationship of this “mental model” to contemporary scientific processes and thinking. Several writers who have studied his works have characterized Goethe’s thinking as an attempt to gain universals without abstractions (Zajonc, 1983; Amrine et al., 1987). However, this does not go far enough for contemporary scientific thinking and the eventual goal of bringing about conceptual change. Goethe does provide a way of arriving at a qualitative description of natural phenomena (Zajonc, 1983). After multiple explorations and carefully selected juxtapositions he arrives at a point which he designate as the ur-phenomenon or archetypical situation. In the case of his theory of colors it is described as a situation in which the observer encounters different kinds of situations where there is a dark and a light boundary (Zajonc, 1976). At the interface different colors are observed depending on how the juxtapositions are set up. This juxtaposition of contrasting boundaries is the simplest example that captures all the potential variations of the phenomenon of perceived color. The process was a searching for patterns and a synthesis of those patterns. We need not go into the details of this proposal. The point here is that Goethe felt that this captured in a concrete way the conditions of how color is detected. According to Brady (1987) and others who have reviewed Goethe’s works, the purpose of these archetypical phenomena was to provide a description, not an explanation. Goethe wished to remain true to the phenomenon. His insights came about through a heightened intuition. He objected to moving beyond these concrete intuitions. The problem is that this approach, if practiced as Goethe proposed, would not take the students far enough in aligning their intuitions with formal science. This process is part of a more general conception of the relationship between the observer and the environment. In Goethe’s approach man and nature are not separable. There is interplay between the sensations caused by the energy coming from the external environment, and the sensible state of man (Zajonc, 1976, p. 328). Goethe goes so far as to say that the sun created the eye. This is meant to be more than a metaphor, but rather a factual statement of the close relationship between how man perceives and the immediate environment. Reminiscence of this position is Barbara McClintock’s position of “difference not distance.” Goethe’s science then is a process where perception is a continual dialogue between the senses and what is accessible to the senses.

Variable Exploration of Children

297

Contemporary scientific practice and thinking goes much beyond the method of Goethe. There is the necessary role of working with provisional hypotheses and the testing of these by carefully designed formal experiments. There is also the generation of theoretical models to provide a structure for guiding these experiments. These models often become very abstract and mathematical. At some point it is difficult to see the connection between the model and the phenomenon in the real world. It is particularly the latter practice to which Goethe objected.

Goethe and Contemporary Science Education Given this essential difference, what then could we learn from Goethe that is still relevant for contemporary science pedagogy. Arthur Zajonc provides one answer by pointing out that Goethe’s approach can be seen as a training of intuition and the faculties of perception. Recall Ong’s observation that education is a training of the sensorium. Ong is approaching this from a different perspective but the intent appears to be similar. In addition, from my perspective it would be compatible with Maxwell’s admonition that one obtains a “good physical conception for a phenomenon” before moving on to the use of mathematical modeling. Drawing on the previous examples of Hockney and Proust together with Goethe’s methodology of exploration I would propose the following as practices which could be applied to science pedagogy: • Students should be given time during open explorations to manipulate materials in a repetitive manner. • The same phenomenon should be presented and studied in its different manifestations. • Sense making and the development of explanations is based on a cumulative juxtaposition of these variations in explorations. • Juxtapositions of two closely related phenomena can be used to develop concepts that can be applied to explaining these phenomena. Together these conditions have a similar intent to Goethe’s but go beyond his intent of gaining “universals without abstractions.” At some point, contemporary practice needs to move students toward abstract mental models by which they can realign their own theories to be more in line with formal science. To some degree these conditions have been examined and related to practical implementations in previous chapters. Here particular attention is being given to the concept of juxtaposition or what Shattuck calls the stereoscopic principle.

Variable Exploration of Children In the beginning of this chapter I gave several examples of children manipulating materials or devices where they repeat the same manipulations to see what will

298 298

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

happen. Each time slightly different results occur or something unexpected happens. This tendency to repeat and vary the manipulations of the materials appears to be a natural mode of exploring. This kind of behavior and mode of assimilating observations has been commented on by Schachtel. Recall that I quoted Schachtel at length when writing about the role of the senses in the engagement with phenomena. He proposed an approach to coming to know objects in themselves. Working within the psychoanalytic tradition he developed an explanation for what appears to be the compulsive behavior of some, if not most, children at a younger age. This is the common practice of wanting to hear the same story told over and over again, or manipulating a familiar object for long periods, or saying words or sounds repeatedly. Rather than viewing this as aberrant behavior Schachtel suggests that it serves an adaptive function. His term for this kind of behavior is focal attention. He describes it in the following manner: Each focal act as a rule, consists of not just one sustained approached to the object to which it is directed, but of several renewed approaches. These approaches explore different aspects and relations of the object. Not only are they made from different angles as it were, but often they are made repeatedly from the same angle and directed at the same facet of the object in an attempt to assimilate it more thoroughly. They also usually probably always – alternate or oscillate between a more passive, receptive, relative phase and a more active taking hold, structuring, integrating phase. Schachtel, 1954, p. 310)

It is significant that he also notes that this kind of behavior mostly happens in a tensionfree environment. Therefore, it implies a situation that involves a play-like mode. The examples I gave at the beginning of the chapter are all situations of that nature. Children’s museums and some after-school programs are supportive environments that encourage this kind of exploration. The girl’s manipulation of the soap film in the Bubbles exhibit fits well with Schachtel’s description almost in a literal sense. She attempts to have different views of the surface of the soap film, twisting it into a variety of configurations. Taking into considerations these observations and others of older children, it appears that older children also practice a type of focal attention. In fact, Schachtel maintains that it continues into adulthood appearing most often in artists. Schachtel proposes that it is an essential means of “assimilating the objects of the environment.” What is also intriguing about his description of the focal act is that it could be applied to David Hockney’s photo collages. With some modification the individual photographs of the collage represent the different angles by which Hockney viewed his subject. It has some similarity in intent to Goethe’s approach to arriving at a scientific understanding of basic phenomena in his sense of the term scientific. This similarity of approach may only be more apparent than real. Yet, in my view it suggests that it engages an underlying mental faculty. Schachtel’s description of the dynamic of this process of an alternating between a passive taking in and an active structuring phase is in line with a description of children’s play behavior.

Science Curriculum and Exhibits Using Multiple Examples

299

Science Curriculum and Exhibits Using Multiple Examples How would the aesthetic approaches of Hockney, Goethe, and Proust be incorporated in science education? Formal schooling and informal environments are contexts where the aesthetic principle of multiple examples and stereoscopic contrast could be translated into a pedagogical structure. By informal I mean the design of exhibits in children’s museums and science centers. In the process of considering both contexts we can gain some sense of what exhibits do compared to classroom explorations by means of this juxtaposition. As already mentioned, the prevailing practice is to use single examples in school curricula. A similar practice also prevails with a certain kind of exhibit in science centers and children’s museums. Suppose you wish to make an exhibit or include it as part of a science curriculum. If you follow the standard practice of most exhibit designers or textbook writers, there will be one or two stations with bubble-making devices or one or two experiments performed in the classroom. Although bubbles are encountered in daily life in washing dishes or washing one’s hands, most people have very little sense of the subtlety and complexity of this fascinating phenomenon. Even the perennial activity of children blowing bubbles with commercially available bubble blowers and soap solutions does not give them sufficient opportunity to come to know the fascinating properties of soap film. Currently, in a number of science centers in this country, as well as in several other countries, there are bubble exhibits. These are mostly single stations where a vertical sheet of soap film can be made by pulling up a horizontal bar along two vertical strings. Some exhibits also show various shaped wire frames being dipped into soap solution. When the frames emerge from the solution there are intersecting surfaces of the soap film. (Notably, this happens behind a Plexiglas enclosure inaccessible to the visitor.) Explanations are given about surface tension or the concept of interference of light. Apparently, these one or two examples are considered sufficient to convey properties of the soap film or to illustrate a general property of light such as interference. A similar kind of situation exists in school curricula based on experiments with bubbles. An alternate approach to a bubbles exhibit was one taken at the Children’s Museum in Boston and in a curriculum guide (Bubbles, Explore-it, 2000). The following are components of the bubble exhibit.

Stretch a Bubble Two lines of monofilament go from a tray of soap solution to the ceiling. Between the monofilament is a piece of wood that can be pulled up from the solution along the two monofilaments. As the wood is pulled, a soap film sheet is formed which can be 3 ft wide and sometimes 6 ft long.

300 300

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

Sheet of Soap film

Bar pull up along two monofilaments

Container of soap solution

Large Bubble Dome A table has a pool of soap solution and a plastic tubing with air coming out of it. The visitor places the end of the tubing into the soap solution and gradually pulls away. A large bubble dome as wide as 16 in. in diameter can be made. Tubing Connected To air pump

Large bubble dome

Small Bubble Dome A table has cups of soap solution and drinking straws. The visitor can make small bubble domes a few inches in diameter forming them into a group. They can also blow bubbles in and onto different kinds of containers.

Frame a Bubble A table has a bucket full of soap solution and wire frames of different geometric shapes such as tetrahedron, square, and octahedron. They can dip the frames into the soap solution and pull them out. When done carefully connected surfaces of soap film intersect within the frame.

Bubble Cells A table has a very narrow aquarium with a gap of 0.5 in. and is partially filled with soap solution. A tube of small diameter is fitted into this small gap and is connected

Large Bubble Dome

301

to an aquarium pump. By placing the end of the tubing just below the surface of the soap solution an array of bubble cells can be generated, producing a visual appearance similar to a honeycomb.

Bubble Writing A table has a tray with a very shallow soap solution. A tubing connected to an aquarium pump has air coming out of it. When the end of the tubing is run through the solution a small chain of bubbles are formed. These chains have a tendency to readily group together, forming a hexagonal matrix. In addition to these stations in the exhibit, occasional programs were conducted by staff. They could place a large sheet of Plexiglas (18 × 18 in.) horizontally over small pieces of wood and thus raise it 1 in. above a surface containing soap solution. Using drinking straws a visitor can blow bubbles between the sheet of Plexiglas and the surface making cylindrical bubbles or various shaped bubble cells having clearly defined intersections and boundaries.

Another program is to blow large spherical bubbles (6–8 in. in diameter) into a transparent container having carbon dioxide gas generated by dry ice or from a special container. The visitor blows these large bubbles using a tube of large diameter and launches them into this container. The large bubbles will float above the gas and remain for a minute or so. The bubbles take on perfect spherical shapes. One can think of these different stations as forming a collage of experiences with soap film. Each station has a different framing environment within which the soap film takes on different kinds of configurations or shapes. In going through the entire exhibit one can discover that the soap film behaves in similar and different ways within each framing environment. Groups of big bubbles will have walls that

302 302

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

intersect with a similar kind of geometry as small bubble cells confined to a thin chamber. In each environment the array of soap film will rearrange itself when one part of it is broken. An implicit question for the visitor is “What kinds of patterns can you discover among these activities?” Taken as a whole, the collection of stations could convey in a richer and more meaningful manner than a single station such concepts as surface tension and minimal surfaces. However, these concepts are quite complex and are not directly explained in the exhibit. More importantly, one comes away with an intuitive sense of the essential properties of bubbles. Another experience to take away is that the collection of activities models for the visitor how a phenomenon such as bubbles and soap film can be explored. This approach is different from that advocated by Goethe in having others come to the insight of an archetypical phenomenon. His approach calls for a more structured and carefully designed sequence of activities where the participant is supposed to notice specific features that are synthesized from the entire set of experiments. In this set of experiences there is some relationship to Proust’s practice of the stereoscopic vision. The activities all involve working with soap film, stretching it or framing it in different ways. The resulting configurations are sufficiently different in that there is a contrast between and among the results. Hopefully, the visitors will take with them not one image of a bubble or soap film but examples of a multitude of possibilities. Not that they have become fully acquainted with the bubbles in the museum, but that they now have a realization that there are a number of ways of observing, experimenting, and thinking about bubbles. The set of stations can be a concrete reference point for thinking about soap film and the beginning of assimilating such concepts as surface tension and minimal surfaces.

A Bubble Investigation in the Classroom Some of the same activities can be carried out in the classroom. Here is a sequence that provides for the students a variety of ways to explore the properties of soap film: 1. Launching of very large bubbles 2–3 ft in diameter 2. Launching of smaller bubbles a few inches in diameter 3. Making very large (12–18 in. in diameter) bubble hemispheres on a table top 4. Making smaller bubble hemispheres that formed a cluster 5. Blowing bubbles inside a container to form geometric configurations 6. Dipping different shaped frames in soap solutions to form geometric configurations 7. Blowing bubbles between a sheet of Plexiglas to form two-dimensional bubbles (See Zubrowski, 2006, for a description of these activities.) In the first activity the very large bubbles are not spherical in shape because they are so large, whereas in the second activity the smaller bubbles are spherical. Students can speculate what

A Bubble Investigation in the Classroom

303

it is about the soap film that might account for this difference. The device used to launch the bubbles is a string and drinking straw frame. There is an interesting observation to be made with this frame that can be shown to the students. straw

string

When the frame is pulled tight into a rectangle, the soap film fills the whole frame. When the frame is made smaller, the string is pulled together because of the tension of the soap film. Pointing this out alerts students to be on the lookout for this property in later activities. In the third activity when two small bubble domes are placed next to each other they will join together and form a common wall. If several bubble domes are formed next to each other, they will rearrange themselves to form a stable array until they pop. In the fourth to sixth activities the walls between a group of bubbles have a common pattern. In the seventh activity the soap film between the sheet of Plexiglas and the table top will behave in curious ways. Several bubbles can be blown underneath the glass to form a two-dimensional configuration. If one breaks one part of this configuration, the other remaining parts of the sheets of soap film will rearrange themselves. The pieces of soap film will be seen to move to a smaller area. Each of these activities can be thought of as different framing environments for bubbles and sheets of soap film. As students explore these different framing environments they can observe that soap film has a tendency to rearrange itself when disturbed in certain ways and that there is a regular pattern to the way a number of sheets of soap film will join together. One or two of these activities might convey these properties of soap film. Going through all of these activities provides an experiential collage if the teacher takes the time to draw attention to the way soap film connections can be made between the activities. Connections can be of the following types: the soap film always tries to shrink into the smallest possible area, and intersecting sheets of soap film always join in a regular way. These observations provide a way of getting students to think about the property of the soap film tending to pull itself together like a stretched rubber membrane. More specifically, the observation is about the property of surface tension. Understanding what is involved in surface tension is an entirely other investigation. Here, the idea is to focus students’ attention on the tension in soap film without getting into the molecular explanation. In the classroom these experiences are encountered sequentially, and therefore the element of time is part of the process. The different explorations can be thought of as

304 304

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

a collage of experiences. Taken as a whole, guided by careful teaching, the student in the classroom is encouraged to synthesize these encounters with bubbles and soap film into a working schema, which can be the foundation for representing and conceptualizing the basic properties of soap film. How effective the encounters with these experiences is as it incites and moves children to think about and arrive at a perception of bubbles will depend on how well the activities and materials have been designed as well as how well a teacher has conducted sense making follow-up discussions. These experiences of exploring bubbles in different ways are something like a mixture of montage and the stereoscopic principle outlined by Shattuch in his analysis of Proust’s aesthetic techniques. There is some contrast from activity to activity given the change in size and shape, but there is clearly a link from one activity to another since the students are still manipulating the soap film. The way in which bubbles join together has some similarity from activity to activity. In previous chapters I have also outlined the investigations where the development can happen in a similar process. In the first chapter there is a progression moving through a series of activities where a rectangular piece of cardboard is balanced vertically. In the previous chapter on play I outlined a possible series of activities with balls and tracks. This pedagogical practice then can be applied in the investigation of a variety of phenomena.

Juxtaposition of Phenomena There is another application of the stereoscopic principle that can be applied in curriculum design. In the previous examples the same phenomenon is being explored. A related approach is to follow up this type of progression with an investigation of a closely related phenomenon. Sometimes the very same materials are used. Sometimes different materials are used but the same phenomenon is being explored. It was mentioned previously that there is a recommendation that students experience problems in multiple contexts so that they can better grasp the commonalities in these contexts and gain a firmer hold on a new concept. One approach to carrying this out has been proposed by The Learning Technology Group at Vanderbilt. One of their design principles for curriculum is to present contrasting cases. Situations are set so that students notice relevant features of a problem in at least two contexts (Barron, 1998). In the examples about bubbles just mentioned above there are opportunities where the same materials or ones closely related could be used but different problems requiring a similar solution or conception are needed. Another example is the investigation of structures using drinking straws and paper clips. Students can be challenged to build a house, a bridge, and a tower using the same simple materials. The structural requirements are different in each problem but the solution to some of the problems encountered keeping each structure strong and stable is similar. A house rests on the ground and is supported at its base on all sides. A bridge spans a gap and is supported at two points. A tower in some

Analogies as Juxtapositions

305

ways is like a bridge and in some ways like a house. It is supported at its base like a house but there is the problem of countering strong lateral forces such as the wind resulting in the tendency to tip over. So, there can be some carryover of experience from one type of structure to another. Incorporating truss-like arrangements in all three types of structures can solve problems of stability and rigidity. Analysis of the forces acting in each type of structure provides the opportunity for students to look for similarities and apply a common solution. (See Zubrowski, 2001d, Drinking Straw Structures, published by Kelvin.) The balancing activities given in the first chapter are an example where the same materials such as pieces of cardboard, nails, and string are used throughout the balancing activities, where balancing is investigated in the vertical plane and then in the horizontal plane. Other kinds of juxtapositions that have been designed for extended investigations are the following.

Plane mirrors using silvered Plexiglas

Curved mirrors using sheets of Mylar

Shadow with different objects using clay (3 dimensions), paper, and wire (2 dimensions)

Visual images created by lenses

Waves in water and sheets of soap film

Wave motion in a device having connected rods

Model houses using drinking straws and paper clips

Model bridges using the same materials

Vertical waterwheels using plastic plates and cups

Horizontal waterwheels using the same materials

Water clocks

Mechanical clocks

Liquids sinking and floating in other liquids

Solid balls sinking and floating in the same liquids

Each of these examples appears in published curricula and children’s science trade books. (See Zubrowski, 2001a, b, c, d, e, Models in Technology and Science curriculum series published by Kelvin.)

Analogies as Juxtapositions In analogies or metaphors juxtaposition occurs where something familiar is compared to something not familiar. A mapping between some properties of each part is implied. There is an implication that there are correspondences between the two parts. The more creative analogies are surprising because of their unexpected juxtaposition. This is both in terms of single as well as closely related multiple analogies. With this in mind one can draw upon a line of research involving analogical

306 306

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

transfer. Most of this research has used stories, word problems, or math problems. This type of research can provide some insight into the role contrast plays in carrying out mappings in analogies and the more fundamental skill of noticing salient characteristics of phenomena or artifacts. Gick and Holyoak (1980, 1983) used stories to test the subject’s ability to use analogical reasoning in solving problems. They would present the subjects with one story and then follow it up with another, which on the surface appeared different. The second story was in the form of a problem which had a solution similar to the one found in the first story. Initially, they found that transfer did not occur unless the subjects were reminded about the first problem. They noted that subjects could solve the problem but they also needed to learn about the similarities between the analogs. However, mappings of relationships between the first story (the base) to that of the relationships in the second story (the target) appeared to be not readily obvious to the subjects. In addition, Gick and Holyoak located this mapping of similar structures between target and base in a larger context. They argued that the commonalties noticed between the target and the base can form a schema that can be used to solve other related problems. They found that multiple examples are needed to build a common schema and that coaching the subjects to find the common structure is necessary. John Clement along with various collaborators developed a process of using what he calls bridging analogies. The technique consists of first probing a student’s understanding of a particular problem, making a “misconception” of a student more explicit. Then an analogy is provided for the student to gain a formal scientific explanation. If this first direct analogy doesn’t help the students change their conceptions, another analogy or series of analogies are introduced that are intermediate between the target and the original base. The approach is to move the student along in smaller steps so that he or she sees a connection from one analogy to another. The analogies are closely related to each other. Clement and his collaborators have had some success in bringing about conceptual change with secondary students using this approach. An interesting by-product of their studies is that “the analogies appeared to help enrich [his italics] the students’ conception of the target situations rather than [or at least in addition to] helping them view the situations more abstractly” (Clement and Brown, 1989, p. 256). This enrichment may help in the eventual reconceptualization. There is another aspect to this overall process of developing analogies that should also be given special attention. Bransford et al. (1989) reviewed various literature about the use of analogies and drew on their own experience focusing on the problem of students not utilizing knowledge they already possess. They found that for various reasons this knowledge is inaccessible unless students are explicitly prompted to do so. Then they focused on a very critical point that I think has very important implications for explorations in inquiry. Citing writers such as the philosopher Ernst Cassier they argue that “[i]n theories of concept formation, for example, the focus was on discarding dissimilar features and retaining only those that were common to members of a concept: little emphasis was placed on the issue of noticing features in the first place.” They point out that one characteristic of

Analogies as Juxtapositions

307

the expert is the ability to “notice relevant and often subtle features” (Bransford et al., 1989, pp. 480–482). Elaborating on this issue they then drew upon theories about perceptual contrasts. These are situations where subjects notice features they might otherwise neglect. They give visual and verbal examples of how this might occur. In the visual example they show drawings of houses where it requires careful study to see the differences in doors and windows among the several examples given. It is in the juxtaposition of the different drawings that one can see the specific features of each house. Single examples of houses that are not juxtaposed don’t help the novice notice differences that may occur in the real world. However, they argue that even visual or video examples are still removed from everyday practice, and verbal instruction in pointing out contrast doesn’t work very well. Students need “experiences with a set of contrasts so that the features of particular events become salient by virtue of their differentiation from other possible events” [words in italics are mine] (Bransford et al., 1989, p. 484). Curiously, they don’t take this further and say that students need multiple explorations with the same phenomena or same physical materials although it could be implied. Each of these researchers emphasizes certain points that have implications for teaching science. There is a need for multiple analogies. However, just providing analogies to students is insufficient. It appears that students need some kind of coaching to recognize the relationships that are common when there are multiple analogies. There has to be some type of process whereby the students come to realize the deeper relationships between the target and the base among the analogies. The teacher has to help the students to think at a meta-cognitive level about these mappings to arrive at a productive schema and then at an explicit conceptualization. In an extended investigation I have proposed that students be involved with the same materials embodying the same phenomenon. Glick and Holyoak use multiple examples from situations that are noticeably different from each other. The question arises whether what I am proposing is too narrowly presented. What Bransford and his colleagues propose would seem to suggest that the different examples are more closely related. It is not clear from these studies how different the examples or contexts should be to promote the development of a schema that is the basis for the formation of mental models and to allow transfer of learning. Part of the problem may be that most of these studies have been done with older students (college and high school). In addition, a number of these studies involve word or math problems. There is a greater cognitive load when elementary and middle school students are involved with physical materials. There is more stimuli and information to take in and process. Richland and colleagues (2006) point out that the capacity to deal with analogies partly depends on working memory capacity because of the complexity of operations involved. The processing of the perceptual experiences associated with hands-on activities is a challenge for students. If they encounter phenomena completely different from each other using different materials within a short span of time, they have to process

308 308

11 Play and Variations in Explorations and Representations

these experiences, represent them, and develop mental models. This would be challenging even for an adult. Given this large cognitive load it would make sense to present contrasting situations where there are readily apparent similarities, the materials involved in the explorations are similar, and only a few concepts are targeted. In this manner attention of the students is narrowed and observations and explanations build on each other in a more organic manner. This approach would possibly be more conducive for students being coached to recognize similarities that are more structural and thereby recognize that a concept can be applied to different enactments of a phenomenon. What is being proposed here is at the level of a single investigation. The narrowing of focus to one phenomenon or closely related phenomena could also be considered to take place over multiple years as was proposed in Chapter 3, where archetypical phenomena and technological artifacts are the topics to be investigated. The next chapter presents an extended examination of the role of analogy and metaphor in learning science and provides a way of thinking about how to organize a grade 1–9 curriculum framework building on this concept of variations and juxtapositions.

References Amrine, F., Zucker, F. J., and Wheeler H. (Eds.) (1987). Goethe and the Sciences: A Reappraisal, Dordrecht/Boston, D. Reidel. Barron, B. (1998). Doing with Understanding: Lessons From Research on Problem and Project Base Learning, Journal of Learning Sciences, 7(3 & 4), 271–311. Brady, R. (1987). Form and Cause in Goethe’s Morphology in Goethe and the Sciences: A Reappraisal, Dordrecht/Boston, D. Reidel. Bransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., Vye, N. J., and Sherwood, R. D. (1989). New Approaches to Instruction: Because Wisdom Can’t Be Told, in S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Clement, J. and Brown, J. (1989). Overcoming Misconceptions Via Analogical Reasoning: Abstract Transfer Versus Explanatory Model Construction. Instructional Science, 18: 237–261. Crary, J. (1991). Techniques of the Observer: On Vision an Modernity in the Nineteenth Century, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Fiske, D. and Maddi, S. (1961). Ditchburn and Fender quoted in a chapter by mentioned in J. Platt, in Functions of Varied Experience, Homewood, IL, Dorsey Press. Gick, M. L. and Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical Problem Solving, Cognitive Psychology (1) 12, p. 306–355. Gick, M. L. and Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema Induction and Analogical Transfer, Cognitive Psychology 15, 1–38. Hockberg, J. (1972). The Representations of Things and People, in E. Gombrich, J. Hockberg, and M. Black (Eds.), Art, Perception and Reality, Baltimore, MD, John Hopkins University Press. Hockney, D. (1984). Cameraworks, New York, Knopf. Hochberg, J. (1972). The representation on things and people in Art, Perception and Reality, Gombrick, E., Hochberg, J., Black, M., Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press. Holton, G. (1970). What Is Conveyed by Demonstrations, in H. F. Meiners (Ed.), Physics Demonstration and Experiments, Vol. 1, New York, Ronald Press, pp. 61–82.

References

309

Humphrey, N. (1974). Variations on a theme, New Scientist, 1 August. Hutt, C. (1981). Toward a Taxonomy and Conceptual Model of Play, in H. I. Day (Ed.), Advances in Intrinsic Motivation and Aesthetics, New York, Plenum Press. Magnus, R. (1949). Goethe as a Scientist, New York, Henry Schuman. Richland, L., Morrison, R., and Holyoak, K., (2006). Children’s development of analogical reasoning, Insight’s from scene analogy problems, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 94, 249–273. Schachtel, E. G. (1954). The Development of Focal Attention and the Emergence of Reality, Psychiatry, 17, 309. Shattuck, R. (1993). Proust’s Binoculars, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press. Sutton-Smith, B. (1997). The Ambiguity of Play, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Vitz, P. and Glimcher, A. (1984). Modern Art and Modern Science: The Parallel Analysis of Vision, New York, Praeger. Waddington, C. H. (1970). Behind Appearance: A Study of the Relations Between Painting and the Natural Sciences in This Century, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Weschler, D. (1984). True to Life, in D. Hockney (Ed.), Cameraworks, New York, Knopf. Zajonc, A. (1976). Goethe’s Theory of Color and Scientific Intuition. American Journal of Physics, 44(4), 327–333. Zajonc, A. (1983). Facts as Theory: Aspects of Goethe’s Philosophy of Science. Teachers College Record, 85(2), 251–274. Zubrowski, B. (2001a) Mirrors, Models in Technology and Science curriculum series, [curriculum guide] Farmingdale, New York, Kelvin. Zubrowski, B. (2001b) Shadows, Models in Technology and Science curriculum series, [curriculum guide] Farmingdale, New York, Kelvin. Zubrowski, B. (2001c) Waves, Models in Technology and Science curriculum series. [curriculum guide] Farmingdale, New York, Kelvin. Zubrowkski, B. (2001d) Drinking Straw Structures, Models in Technology and Science curriculum series [curriculum guide] Farmingdale, New York, Kelvin. Zubrowski, B. (2001e) Water wheels, Models in Technology and Science curriculum series, [curriculum guide] Farmingdale, New York, Kelvin. Zubrowski, B. (2006) Bubbles, Explore-it curriculum series, [curriculum guide] Farmingdale, New York, Kelvin.

Chapter 12

The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education311

Scenario #9 For a full school year I worked with a second grade teacher carrying out an extended investigation on pond organisms. Several kinds of containers had been set up for the students to do extended observations of goldfish, tadpoles, crayfish, and snails. One container was 8 ft long, 10 in. wide, and 8 in. deep. Because of the size of the container, students could observe where the organisms spent most of their time. In the process, students discovered that the crayfish ate a few goldfish and that the snails could readily detect food dropped into the water near them. They even were fortunate to have many baby crayfish arrive in the spring. There were several sessions each week during which close observations of these organisms and follow-up discussions were conducted. This continued for 2 months in the fall. Then there was a break with occasional observations and discussions during the winter. In the spring they studied and discussed the behavior of the same organisms in short unedited videos. The overall goal was to provide for the students an extended time so that they could observe changing behaviors in the organisms not easily seen in a shorter time span. The students made drawings and carried out structured observations of the behavior of the organisms in the containers. Their interest was sustained through the whole school year. At one point I engaged the children in a discussion about how fish moved around, specifically trying to get them to articulate how they thought the fish moved their fins. During this discussion one girl demonstrated what she thought was the use of the fish’s pectoral fins. She shaped her arms and hands like a fin placing each next to her body. Then she wiggled one saying that when the fish waves its left fin the fish moves to the right and when it moves its right fin it moves to the left. This was done in a way that suggested she was making an analogy to swimming. In fact, the other children mentioned this. In another second grade class that had been carrying out the same kind of study with the same kind of tanks another comparison was introduced. This time I suggested that the goldfish move their fins as one moves the oars in a boat. Some students seem to be able to follow this comparison for they had been in canoes or rowboats. Then I asked them to think about the movement of the tadpole. One girl B. Zubrowski, Exploration and Meaning Making in the Learning of Science, Innovations in Science Education and Technology 18, DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-2496-1_12, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

311

312 312

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

stated something to the effect that a tadpole was like a motorboat. It didn’t have fins but a long tail that somehow propelled it. Although she didn’t go on to make a more detailed comparison, it appeared that her comparison seemed to be about the location of the propulsion. The tail of the tadpole was in back of the body as was the propeller on a boat. Given the age of the students I did not go further into the different ways in which a propeller and a tail move the water. Given their comments it did not seem appropriate at that time. It did provide an image for thinking about how the tadpole was able to move through the water even though it did not have fins like a goldfish. This discussion provided a context for introducing the concept of form and function in an implicit manner. The girl imported an example of a mechanical device to help explain the movement of a biological entity. This is one way of getting a handle on the way some things in the biological world work. How this comparison can help the students depends on how well the students know the working of the mechanical device. The girl’s comparison of the motorboat is possibly only a superficial one. In her mind, the motor on the back of the boat that moves it would be similar to the tail on the back of the tadpole that moves it. Possibly for her the important thing was the position of the means of the propulsion, not the manner in which the propulsion happens, because the screw propeller of the motorboat moves water differently than the tail of the tadpole. On the other hand, a comparison of the oars on a rowboat more closely approximates the action of the fins on a gold fish. However, even here there may be problems. If some students have no familiarity at all with rowing a boat this comparison may be difficult to conceive. These examples provide specific instances where analogies arise in science teaching and suggest that there are advantages and difficulties of using analogies. The context of the discussion with the students occurred within a year-long investigation. Taking this further the pond can become a focus of an extended investigation that students revisit several times during 8 years of schooling. It can act as a model for one kind of ecosystem providing a context for developing basic concepts in the life sciences. The investigations over the 8 years could take the following form: • In the first exposure, first and second grade students study larger organisms such as fish, tadpoles, snails, and crayfish. • In the second exposure, fifth or six graders investigate macro-invertebrates and smaller organisms such as dragon fly larvae, damsel fly nymphs, daphnia, flatworms, etc. • In the third exposure, the students investigate microorganisms such as protozoa and bacteria. Each of these investigations provides a specific context for the development of concepts such as biodiversity, structure/function, variation, and ecological relationships, and offers many opportunities for the practice of processes of science. The same concepts introduced in first grade in an implicit manner are revisited during these succeeding investigations. They are given greater definition and clarity, making for a developmental progression that is well grounded in a closely

Scenario #9

313

observed system. Connections can be made from one level to another through the particular organisms studied. For instance, fish are observed eating daphnia in second grade. Daphnia are found to eat algae and bacteria in the fifth grade study. In eighth grade microorganisms such as algae and bacteria are investigated. Connections can be made between these three investigations for students to have an understanding of what is meant by a food chain. Concepts such as form and function as they relate to organisms at different levels can be studied in some cases by direct observation of living organisms or through the use of videos. (See Investigating Pond Organisms Using Videos, Grades 1–2, Grades 5–8 distributed by Neo-Sci.) The containers with the different organisms act as a model of a simple ecosystem standing in place of the pond (Odum, 1988). Over the years of these investigations the complexity of the concept of ecosystem grows. Observing organisms and noting similarities to the human body and system as well as to other organisms is another approach. A perspective on taking this approach was given once by the noted biologist Edward Wilson. On a radio program he was asked about his thoughts on some current practices among contemporary biologists who were heavily oriented toward theory. He said the problem with some was that they had not spent enough time “getting to know their mollusks.” What he meant by this statement was that they had jumped too quickly into theorizing before getting well acquainted in a first-hand manner with the organisms or systems for which they were developing theories. The context of the discussion was about the writings and life of Darwin. Wilson pointed out that Darwin spent years in England and in traveling to different parts of the world collecting and studying multiple specimens while developing his theory of evolution. The idea of focusing on one part of the natural environment is to provide continuity for the students and to enable them to make a connection with something that may be present in their own community. (This is in contrast to studying tropical rain forests or the Arctic or some other system far removed from their immediate environment.) It also provides the opportunity to make environmental issues more meaningful. Within this strand spanning the 8 or 9 years there are multiple occasions for physical models, analogies, and modeling. The scenario above gives two examples where there is a spontaneous analogy and an introduced analogy that deal with form and function. In fifth and eight grade observation, containers can be set up that could be like small-scale, approximate models of a pond (Odum, 1988) acting as physical models. For example, the question of what constitutes a community of organisms that is self-sustaining could be pursued, or studies of changing levels of daphnia population could be carried out testing different kinds of food and chemical conditions. Then computer simulations could be used to model population studies of daphnia looking at the introduction of different food supplies. The activities described above as well as others involving pond studies already are part of curriculum programs. In some cases there are extended investigations spanning weeks and with environmental education programs measurements are carried out for a whole year. What is being proposed here is to return to the same system in the environment several times over the span of elementary and middle

314 314

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

school years. In Chapter 3 I proposed that a similar approach be taken for the study of trees/plants and the human body. These natural phenomena also would be returned to several times over 8 years. A similar development of basic concepts and a developmental progression would be carried out with these phenomena where similar concepts introduced in the pond studies could also be developed in these different natural contexts. A fundamental instructional question is whether such an approach is too narrow and limits students’ capacity to transfer knowledge to other objects and systems in the natural world. Most of this chapter provides a rationale for this approach and relates it to research about the role of models, modeling, and analogies in elementary and middle school practice. A rationale for taking this approach can be based on recent recommendations from the National Research Council reports and findings from the report of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). There is also a line of research extending back 30 years that establishes the position that the development of thinking skills and knowledge is best carried out by focusing on specific domains of knowledge. Research in the understanding of analogies and metaphors also indicates that students need to become well acquainted with a specific domain if there is a mapping of understandings from this domain to another when there are teacher-introduced analogies. There has also been some research in the role of models and modeling that often focuses students on one topic for an extended time period. Each of these areas of research will support the highly focused approach and will be discussed in the next section. Given the need to help students better articulate and understand the structure of a specific domain another essential pedagogical question is what kind of practices would help promote this learning. This issue will also be discussed below.

Mile-Wide–Inch-Deep Versus Narrow Focus and In-Depth The TIMSS project carried out several extended studies of student achievement and pedagogical practices involving three different countries. Part of this study examined curriculum frameworks and the amount of time given to the development of basic concepts. Comparisons were made between curriculum materials in the participating countries. With this larger study as a reference point, William Schmidt and his team carried out an analysis of US textbooks. The report presents a picture of fragmentation of student learning “because most US (text) books do not develop lengthy ‘strands’ focusing on a topic but are composed mostly of many short ‘strands’” (Schmidt, 2003, p. 2). Using categories of criteria such as coherence, rigor, focus, and persistence he and his group also examined National Science Foundation-supported materials. The criteria of focus are particularly relevant here. It was defined as “the in-depth coverage of a relatively small number of topics within a year’s time” (Schmidt, 2003, p. 70). Comparing these materials to texts of

Mile-Wide–Inch-Deep Versus Narrow Focus and In-Depth

315

several other top-tier countries in TIMSS, even the NSF materials were considered “unfocused and covering too many topics” (Schmidt, 2003). The National Research Council’s report “How People Learn” reviewing recent educational research arrives at a similar conclusion. “Attempts to cover too many topics too quickly may hinder learning and subsequent transfer because students (a) learn only isolated set of facts that are not organized and connected or (b) are introduced to organizing principles that they cannot grasp because they lack enough specific knowledge to make them meaningful” (Bransford et al., 2000). Recommendations in the National Research Council report “Taking Science to School” comments on this lack of depth and recommends an approach labeled “Learning Progressions.” It is defined as “descriptions of the successively more sophisticated ways of thinking about a topic that can follow one another as children learn about and investigate a topic over a broad span of time (e.g. 6 to 8 years of schooling)” (Duschl et al., 2007, p. 219). What is not clear for me from these recommendations is what is meant by a topic or theme. Is the topic or theme the development of basic concepts or what some call “big ideas”? Or, is it the investigation of basic phenomena or technologies through which basic concepts are developed? What is in the foreground and the background? To some degree this is the difference between an engineering approach to instructional design as compared to an artist’s approach. Particularly at the elementary level and from my experience with middle school students also, I feel that priority or what is in the foreground should be on providing students learning environments where they gain “specific knowledge” about basic phenomena so that “organizing principles” are meaningful. To some science educators and researchers these statements may immediately be interpreted as having students accumulate factual information. The modified pedagogical model introduced in Chapter 2 clearly does not outline this type of practice. The question is about priority and emphasis at the elementary and middle school levels. My opinion is that textbooks, curriculum programs, and the practice of some teachers tend to rush to introduce concepts. I would give priority to giving time to students to become well acquainted with a few basic phenomena and technological artifacts. The rationale for this approach is that a few can be selected and experiences designed so that they are basic models for closely related phenomena or technologies. What students learn about a pond as an ecosystem can be applied by analogy to rivers or oceans. What they learn about the organisms living in ponds could be applied to trees and plants. Taking this approach then brings up a question about the relationship between bodies of knowledge (physics, biology, and technology) and models and analogies. There is also the question as to what extent students can transfer understandings about a pond as a system and its organisms to rivers or oceans without first gaining some specific knowledge about these other systems. Likewise, to what extent can they understand analogies that involve two different general domains of knowledge such as physics and biology? There has been a great deal of research regarding this kind of transfer through metaphors and analogies. The following sections report on some of this research.

316 316

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

Defining a Domain and Subdomains In various literatures about the role of models and analogies in conceptual development the term domain appears frequently. The use of the term is loosely related to the standard dictionary definition. Depending on the researcher it can be associated with a very broad range of phenomena such as all living things or very narrowly defined to mean something like human occupations. If an educator would attempt to apply findings in this literature, knowing what is meant by a domain or subdomain is important because this research indicates that learning is domain-specific. According to these reports students’ understanding of metaphors and analogies depends on their prior experience in the development of the structure of things or systems within a specific domain. To the extent that they have come to have assimilated and accommodated to these structures they are able to make use of analogies that draw upon this specific domain. The variation in the use of the term domain can be illustrated by considering how some researchers use it. According to Frank Keil domains in metaphors can cover topics from animals, nonphysical objects, physical terms, and psychological characteristics to much more specific ones such as human vocalization, human occupations, and animals or properties of plants applied to ideas (Keil, 1984). Susan Carey proposed that the living and nonliving are broad domains for children, and argued based on an extensive review of the literature on children’s conceptions about living things that “biology does not become an independent domain of knowledge until the first decade of life” (Carey, 1985, p. 179). Vosniadou and Brewer carried out research on children’s conception of astronomy and designated this as a separate domain (Vosniadou and Brewer, 1992). Therefore, the term seems to cover some areas that might be considered traditional separations of disciplines as in Carey’s living and nonliving domains to ones that might in some way be considered subdomains of a discipline such as astronomy coming under the more general category of physical phenomena. One who did make an explicit but limited attempt to define what she would consider a domain is Annette Karmiloff-Smith. She writes: “From the point of view of the child’s mind, a domain is the set of representations sustaining a specific area of knowledge, language, number, physics, and so forth” (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992, p. 6). She then introduces the term “micro domain,” which as far as I can determine has not been used by others. For instance, she designates gravity as a microdomain within the broad domain of physics and pronoun acquisition within the domain of language. “These micro domains can be thought of as subsets within particular domains” (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992, p. 60). I find her use of this kind of subdivision particularly helpful. It does at least provide for some different levels of how to think about a domain and its subdivisions. Her rationale for taking this view is partly based on developmental neuropsychology. For instance, she gives the example of children who have Williams syndrome who can function in terms of language, face recognition, and theory of mind but are severely retarded when it comes to number and spatial cognition (Karmiloff-

Defining a Domain and Subdomains

317

Smith, 1992, p. 8). In this situation it appears that parts of the brain are associated with these abilities. This specialization of the brain is associated with the modular brain theory which proposes that there are specialized circuits for specific problems (Gazzaniga, 2008). Pascal Boyer and Clark Barrett provide a further rationale for taking this kind of approach. They write that findings in neuropsychology have led to the proposal that there is a mixture of different domains informed by different principles (Boyer and Barrett, forthcoming). They mention the research carried out with infants and young children. As a result of this research distinctions have been proposed between physical-mechanical, biological, social, and numerical competencies (Gelman, 1978; Gelman and Baillargeon, 1983). This and other research has led to the characterization of cognitive tendencies of what is called intuitive biology and intuitive physics. In addition, there appears to be a separate intuitive system for human-made objects. Based on these kinds of findings it would seem to make sense to describe general domains as ones related to biology, physics, and technological objects. Therefore, Karmiloff-Smith’s use of the term and the associated rationale based on neuropsychology findings appears to have some basis. It can be useful for providing a framework for thinking about how a multiyear curriculum framework could be designed. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Benchmarks lays out general categories that in some ways align with these intuitive psychologies. These categories are the Physical Setting, the Living Environment, and the Nature of Technology. There are other general categories such as Human Society and the Mathematical World. For purposes of my discussion about metaphors and models I will associate the term “general domain” with these categories. Then subdomains and microdomains would be concrete contexts or objects that are part of these categories. Thus, ponds would be a subdomain of the living environment. The behavior of pond organisms would be a microdomain. Air and water movement would be a subdomain under the physical setting. Houses and bridges would be a microdomain under the subdomain of structural systems and the general domain of the nature of technology. My attempt here at this type of categorization is to make a connection between the concepts and “big ideas” expressed in the national standards and specific phenomena and technological artifacts. The benchmarks are not defined in this manner. They are a mixture of concepts, principles, and to some degree descriptions of phenomena with which students should have some familiarity. What I am proposing is a curriculum of concrete objects and phenomena that can be associated with these benchmarks. The objects and phenomena would be the same as those proposed in Chapter 3 where I outlined a grade 1–9 curriculum framework. I mention this framework again here to relate it to what has been written about metaphors, models, and analogies and use the research literature that refers to domains as a further rationale for this approach. From the viewpoint of the student they are investigating ponds, not an ecosystem. Eventually, as they become familiar with the organisms in the pond and their interrelationship, the concept of an ecosystem becomes an organizing concept for understanding ponds. When they attempt to imagine an ecosystem, the pond

318 318

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

creatures can be their concrete anchor for that concept. From the perspective of the science educator, there is a need to come up with concrete contexts for engaging students in a meaningful manner while addressing the benchmarks or state standards. The proposed curriculum framework of archetypical phenomena and technological artifacts is one way of doing this.

Domain Specificity and the Learning of Analogies Among many who have carried out studies in the use of metaphors and analogies and their involvement in bringing about conceptual change, Frank Keil and Stella Vosniadou and their collaborators propose some summary findings. Their conclusions support the contention that learning needs to happen within specific domains. Students need to develop a sense of the structure of a domain before they can make comparisons across domains or subdomains. To put their research in a larger context, a comparison can be made between the traditional approach and the conceptual change approach in science education. Vosniadou describes the traditional approach in science education as empiricist. (Others have labeled it a transmission model.) This is characterized as one that is mostly enrichment by way of factual knowledge and the gradual improvement of conceptual understanding. Students’ learning proceeds from the more concrete to the more abstract. Contrasted with this approach is a conceptual change framework. “It focuses on knowledge acquisition in specific domains and describes learning as a process that requires the significant reorganization of existing knowledge structures and not just enrichment” (Vosniadou et al., 2001, p. 384). The key phrase here is “significant reorganization.” To bring about this reorganization requires a complexity of pedagogical practices based on a constructivist orientation. The role of metaphor and analogy is central to pedagogical practices to bring about this reorganization as is becoming more evident in various research programs. Therefore, understanding the changing ability of students’ use and understanding of metaphor is an essential element of pedagogical practice. It can help provide a better sense of how the concept of domain of knowledge is related to the design of specific educational experiences. This is an area that has received a great deal of attention. Keil carried out studies examining children’s (ages 6–9 years) understanding of metaphor looking to gain some insight into the process of conceptual development. It should be kept in mind that his use of the term domain is not broadly defined as described in the previous section but of a more local nature. Using verbal tasks he asked the children to compare domains involving animate properties to characteristics of cars, human vocalizations to properties of wind, work of people to animals, properties of plants to properties of ideas, eating terms to reading activities, weather to types of person, texture to types of person. Keil found that children who demonstrated an understanding of one metaphor from two domains were able to

Domain Specificity and the Learning of Analogies

319

understand other metaphors drawing upon these same domains. Metaphoric comprehension depended on children’s level of understanding of the objects or terms in each domain (Keil, 1984). Summarizing his conclusions about these and other related studies, Keil proposed that in the initial involvement with a particular domain the students use general principles of learning such as generating prototypes and noticing correlations of properties. These are relatively content-independent ways of reasoning that are applied in a variety of learning situations. As children learn more about a domain, however, their knowledge appears to become structured so that future learning in that domain changes from being governed mostly by domain-general principles to being heavily governed also by structural principles that are specific to that area of knowledge. Thus, the child’s hypothesis space becomes narrowed more and more by local, knowledge-specific constraints as opposed to general ones … conceptual growth is increasingly a function of how prior knowledge in the domain has been organized. (Keil, 1991, p. 248)

What is most important about his summary is the emphasis on “how prior knowledge in the domain has been organized.” This has critical implications for pedagogical practice. Keil also associates his conception of this kind of change to other theoretical accounts that propose a similar developmental progression. He mentions Heinz Werner in his account of symbol development. He also cites Vygotsky’s sense of development from concrete to abstract thought (Vygotsky, 1962), and Kemler and Smith who describe it in terms of moving from that which is integral to what is separable (Kemler and Smith, 1978). Keil (1984) took this further and attempted to determine the developmental sequence of how children develop this understanding within a domain. For instance, animate versus inanimate were acquired before metaphors based on animal/human or physical/nonphysical object. Vosniadou and Ortony (1989) built on this study and came to similar conclusions as Keil. Combining their two descriptions there were several stages that could be described in reaching a point where conceptual understanding developed. Moving from the earliest to the last stage these developments are as follows: • Descriptive properties are salient. Metaphors are taken literally. • Characteristic properties of the two domains were recognized but not aligned properly. • Characteristic properties are evaluated in terms of personal feeling or human emotion. These were attributed to inanimate things and alignment between domains is based on these feelings. • Structural and functional characteristics begin to be aligned so that metaphors are interpreted in a more appropriate manner. • Causal properties as well as plans and goals are taken into consideration so that alignments become more precise. (Vosniadou, 1987, p. 881) The first three steps happen at a more global level. These have some similarities to Schon’s stages of generative metaphor mentioned in Chapter 2. The third and fourth

320 320

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

would seem to happen most productively in an educational context under the direction of a teacher.1 There are important pedagogical implications when considering these stages. Vosniadou concludes from her review of her own research and that of others such as Keil that “the process of distinguishing one conceptual domain from another seems to occur over a long period of time” (Vosniadou, 1987, p. 881). She asserts and has some agreement with others that there has to be a radical restructuring of children’s knowledge base to bring it more in line with formal scientific reasoning. More recent research about analogical reasoning appears to support Vosniadou’s proposal that there is a factor of maturation involved. According to Richland et al. (2006), there are three major hypotheses proposed for age-related differences in analogical reasoning: increased domain knowledge, relational shift from object similarity to relational similarity, and increased working memory capacity for manipulating relations. Relational shift refers to children’s reasoning on relational similarity such as functional and structural features. Ratterman and Gentner (1998) proposed that relational shift is domain-specific in nature and varies at different ages for different domains. Working memory is a factor because using an analogy involves multiple functions. This has been shown to be associated with areas of the prefrontal cortex that undergo developmental changes as children mature (Waltz et al., 2000). The implication from the above-cited research suggests that curriculum design and teacher intervention play an essential role in the development of metaphorical ability. The learning environment of the students has to be designed so that they gain a deeper understanding of the properties and structure of phenomena associated with a particular domain of knowledge. If there is a maturation factor involved, then care has to be taken particularly with younger students of the kind and manner in which analogies are introduced and used. It would also suggest that practice in the generation and utilization of analogies is also an important pedagogical practice.

Analogies Within Domains and Subdomains Vosniadou in a later work expanded on her conception about analogical mechanisms. Acknowledging the general view that “analogy involves transfer of structural information from a source to a target” (Vosniadou and Ortony, 1989 p. 414),

 Linda Smith proposes that in the early stages of the perception of phenomena “we understand the similarities between objects in terms of two dimensionally nonspecific relations: global resemblances and global magnitude. … The basic developmental notion is one of differentiation, from global syncretic classes of perceptual resemblance and magnitude to dimensionally specific kinds of sameness and magnitude.” In this one paper she does not mention Werner’s or Werner and Kaplan’s conception of symbol formation, but it sounds to me that there are real similarities (see chapter by Smith in Vosniadou and Ortony, 1989). 1

Analogies Within Domains and Subdomains

321

she makes a very useful distinction that has implications for curriculum and teaching. Analogies can be between domains and within domains. As an example she used the proposed similarity of an atom and the solar system to show the relationship between different domains, and that within domains as the relationship between a Styrofoam cup and a ceramic mug. I think the idea of within-domain analogies is important because it lends support to the approach I have been developing throughout this book that is focusing on only a few topics over the elementary and middle school years. Vosniadou points out that some have argued that within-domain analogies are not true analogies (Gentner, 1988). Therefore, it would appear that analogies within subdomains are also not true analogies with the implication that there is no impact on conceptualization. This would appear to be an academic argument but I think it has important implications for the way one thinks about a grade 1–9 curriculum framework. Simple statements connecting one object of a particular domain with another of the same domain may not appear to offer useful insights. Vosniadou maintains that it depends on the student’s current representations of a particular domain. The way she develops this argument would seem to be relevant to a subdomain and a microdomain. A student may make comparisons that appear to be based on surface similarity but upon the teacher’s questioning reveal that the student does not have an understanding of deeper relationships. The teacher needs to determine what these deeper relationships are and whether they offer a way of mapping between objects in a domain. Vosniadou provides an example of this. She cites some of her previous work with children’s thinking within the domain of astronomy. Her example goes like this. Saying the earth is like the moon appears not to be an analogy as compared to saying the atom is like the solar system. The former is comparing two objects in the solar system that have similar shapes and other kinds of surface similarities. From one viewpoint these are just objects moving around in the universe. From another, the relationship between the planets and the sun in the solar system and the electrons and the nucleus of an atom come from two entirely different subdomains of the general domain of physical systems, and this distance would presumably make the comparison more potent. These relative relationships are salient so that mapping can easily occur and a basis for conceptualization develops. However, going beyond the visual similarities of the earth and the moon to the movement of each can provide opportunities for comparisons. She proposed that we consider the rotation of the earth. There can be the useful analogy developed regarding the day/night cycles of the earth and the possible day/night cycles of the moon since it is not readily apparent that such a cycle occurs with the moon. Therefore, Vosniadou maintains that when considering within-domain and between-domain analogies the defining characteristic of analogical reasoning is its underlying structure. The level and definition of this structure will depend to a large extent on what previous educational experiences the students had had with the phenomenon that is used as the base of the analogy (Vosniadou and Ortony, 1989). Here again the students need to have the opportunity to become familiar with these different phenomena and differentiate their characteristics.

322 322

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

Accessing Analogies There is another part of Vosniadou’s critique of the research on analogical development that also has pedagogical implications. There is the question of how analogies are accessed, and what constitutes the similarity between the target and the base. In Vosniadou’s account of accessing similarity what is important is that there are easily accessible properties. However, she maintains that similarity does not have to be in descriptive properties. “It can be similarity in relational, abstract, or conceptual properties, as long as these properties are salient with respect to people’s underlying representations” (Vosniadou and Ortony, 1989, p. 419). Vosniadou points out that what constitutes surface similarity and salient similarity changes during the process of knowledge acquisition (Vosniadou and Ortony, 1989, p. 421), implying that the educational environment and the pedagogical practices of the teacher can make a difference in what students will come to find salient and accessible. Summarizing what is the basis for accessing and making analogies Vosniadou writes: What develops is not, it would seem, the ability to engage in analogical reasoning per se but the content and organization of the knowledge base on which analogical reasoning is applied. The richer and more tightly structured one’s representation of a system is, the easier it becomes to see the structural similarities between it and other systems and the greater the possibility of identifying productive analogies. The development of the knowledge base makes it possible to access more and more remote analogies, to see the structural relationships between superficially unrelated systems, and to map increasingly complex structures. Thus, although critically limited by the information included in the knowledge base, analogical reasoning can act as a mechanism for enriching, modifying and radically restructuring the knowledge base itself. [Italics are mine] (Vosniadou and Ortony, 1989, p. 434)

This statement appears to be in agreement with the opinion of others (Brown, 1990; Carey, 1985) who have written about domain-specific development. It suggest that students need to go beyond surface familiarity and come to see structural and causal relationships between characteristics of one object or system if they are going to be able to map these characteristics in a meaningful way to that of another object or system. In order to get to this deeper sense of structure this implies that students need to spend a much longer time with fundamental phenomena than is currently practiced. There is also a need for the teacher to carry out a much more conscious process to help students differentiate structures and see relationships while investigating a specific phenomenon.

Models and Modeling Following through on Vosniadou’s statement about content, organization, and structure the next pedagogical question is what kind of educational experience would support and provide guidance for students so that they can effectively map these characteristics between phenomena or within and between subdomains.

Models and Modeling

323

A number of researchers have focused attention to the role of models and modeling as a way to address this issue (Coll et al., 2005; Duit and Treagust, 2003; Glynn and Duit, 1995; Gobert and Buckley, 2000; Gentner and Stevens, 1983). One understanding of what is associated with model formation states that it involves “the integration of pieces of information about the structure, function/ behavior, and causal mechanism of the phenomenon, mapping from analogous systems or through induction” (Gobert and Buckley, 2000, p. 892). This is a very general statement that can cover many kinds of educational experiences. The keywords are analogous systems and induction. There are different understandings of models and modeling so it is important to delineate the differences. Gilbert and Boulter (1998) in their description include design technology in their definitions of models. This inclusion goes beyond what some others would include and works well with the curriculum framework proposed in Chapter 3.2 One proposition is as follows: • “Expressed models are ones expressed in the public discourse through aural and written communication. Expressed models can also include the models used in teaching. These would include two-dimensional models in textbook diagrams, physical models such as scale models, visual and verbal metaphors and analogies from teachers and students. • Consensus Models are expressed models that have become part of public scientific discourse. • Scientific models are ones that are in current use by the scientific community.” (Coll et al., 2005) This type of classification gives a sense of the relationship between the models in practice in science and those related to classroom and general public use. These categories are more in terms of the practice of science moving from the novice to the expert and from the general public to a limited highly select audience. As mentioned above expressed models can take on different forms in different media. Drawing upon some traditional approaches to modeling and models as well as recent research, especially in the use of computers, there can be three types of modeling activities that can provide for a concrete context of bringing about conceptual change and learning about the processes of science: • Students model something from their immediate environment or the real world using simple physical materials. There is a clear relationship between the model and the real-world object.

 The definition and range of design projects differ somewhat in the UK compare to the USA. In the former it covers a very broad range of activities from designing a greeting card or a sandwich to more familiar ones such as a model car. In the latter there tends to be more focus on engineering type of activities. 2

324 324

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

• Students first explore, experiment, and then develop simple visual models or work with computer simulations. The context can either be explicitly related to the real world or be an approximation. • Students work mainly with software specifically designed to allow them to either create simulations or explore already created models.

Simple Physical Models Related to Real Objects An example of the first type of modeling is a study carried out by David Penner, Richard Leher, and Leona Schauble. They worked with third grade children to build the model of a hand. (In an earlier study they worked with first and second graders on designing a human elbow.) Some educators described this project as a type of design challenge. In fact, they presented it in that manner. Because they were working with parts of the body, there was an implicit evaluation of the model throughout the design process, whereby the students could immediately compare the model with their own hand. In addition to the activity of making and understanding the role of a model, the educators also had students investigate their design as an example of a lever. Some types of measurements were carried out to determine what force was needed to lift weights using the devices of the students. Reflecting on these activities the authors came to some conclusions related to what was mentioned in the above sections. When there was an attempt to relate how the model elbows were working by using an analogy of a seesaw (some call it a teeter-totter), the researchers found students not readily taking up this analogy. They state: “This suggests that helping children to understand the human body in terms of physical principles, such as leverage, may require considerable attention to the development of appropriate analogies.” They also observed that “children need considerable time to reflect, explain and justify their beliefs, to focus on how they know and what they learned.” Therefore, these types of activities require an extended time period (Penner et al., 1998, p. 446–447). There are other kinds of design projects that can be carried out with technological artifacts. There are some technologies that are part of the students’ environment that can be readily modeled in the classroom. Houses and bridges, vehicles, windmills or waterwheels, and clocks are examples where there is a clear relationship between the real-world object and some kind of model that can be constructed in the classroom. Each of these technologies can be modeled using simple materials. Other projects such as rubber band or mousetrap-powered cars are only very approximate mappings of real objects such as cars but still retain some meaningful connection to real objects for the students. In this sense I would describe these types as explicit models. Students can readily see that they are making models. They can begin to develop an understanding of the function of models and how they are the same and different from the real thing. As with the model of the elbow, the construction and testing of these models also provides a concrete context for developing basic science concepts. I mention

Conflating Design and Inquiry

325

these in particular because there already exist many curriculum and design projects that focus on these types of artifacts. However, some of these may not go deep enough to make an impact on student learning.

Current Problems with Design Challenges Design challenges during which students are given simple materials and challenged to make models of technological artifacts or other objects such as the human body have become popular because they can be highly motivating for students. However, there are some problems in the current implementations of these projects that need to change if significant learning is to happen. From my experience in working on several curriculum projects, I have observed that there are several problems in the implementation of design challenges: • Insufficient time is allowed for students to carry out multiple iterations. • Insufficient attention and time is spent on visual representations. • There is neglect in developing and understanding the function of a model and how it is different or the same from the real thing. • There is a conflation of design and inquiry. • Science concepts are not sufficiently developed. • Assessment is weighted more toward the completion of a project than the overall process.

Time I have been involved in a number of field tests of curriculum for the Society of Automotive Engineers. We have continually found that teachers are constrained in the amount of time they can spend on these projects. They felt a great deal of pressure to cover a number of curriculum topics during the whole school year. Because of this pressure, they reported that they could not spend several weeks on one topic such as the design challenge that they were testing. This means that students did not have the chance to carry out multiple iterations, which is an essential element of the design process. It appears that until there is a change in the number of state standards this will continue to be a problem.

Conflating Design and Inquiry Many design engineering projects are often presented as an integrated undertaking. Both engineering and science processes are to be developed and science concepts introduced.

326 326

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

From my observations of classroom implementations most of the time is spent on the design and construction of the project. Teachers tend not to allow the time for students to reflect on these experiences in such a way as to get them thinking about what is the role of their model and how it differs from the real object or system. Others too have made similar observations (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). In addition there appears to be the assumption that specific science concepts are being assimilated in the course of these activities because they are briefly introduced and discussed. Even if controlled experiments are carried out where these concepts are introduced, there is insufficient discussion and development. For instance, during the course of constructing and testing drinking straw constructions the concepts of tension and compression may be introduced but time is usually not given to students to fully understand how these forces differ and how they interact in a structure; nor does there seem to be the time to get students thinking about the deeper conception of equilibrium of forces. In another example, a teacher may describe the wound-up rubber band or spring on the mousetrap model car as having potential energy, but usually there is insufficient time to further develop what this concept means in terms of energy transformation. To address this issue I had proposed that there be a three-phase process that integrates design and inquiry. (See Zubrowski, 2002, Integrating Science into Design Technology Projects: Using a Standard Model in the Design Process.) The initial phase is an open design process where students try out a variety of their own designs. When there begins to be a convergence toward a common design among the groups, the teacher moves the class to take time to carry out some inquiry on the system they have assembled.3 Salient characteristics are isolated and formal experiments conducted to determine causal relationships. The idea is to confirm or disconfirm observations made during the first phase. The results of these experiments and the growing understanding of the system are used to introduce relevant science concepts. Then, after this kind of experimentation and sense making, students can return to changing their initial designs. Their changes are now based on what they learned from their experimentation. Introducing a few new materials can open up the type of designs. There is some resistance by teachers and students to take the time to carry out systematic inquiry in the course of a design project. Students become highly invested in their designs and are very reluctant to carry out any systematic experimentation where they have to make changes in their design. Teachers feel under pressure to complete the project in a short period of time. These are problems that will need to be resolved if design projects are going to be a context for conceptual change.

 When a limited set of materials is given to students, there is a convergence of designs because the materials constrain what constructions can be assembled and operate effectively. 3

Visual Modeling

327

Visual Representations Most teachers do follow the practice of having students make sketches of the project they are carrying out. These are usually preliminary ones used to plan how the designs will be constructed and final ones for a final presentation. What can be neglected is the use of these same drawings or closely related ones that are used to analyze what is happening in the system under construction. In a drinking straw construction of houses or bridges time might be taken to consider how the members hold up the house or bridge but more time might not be taken for the students to think about the forces acting in the structure by using different kinds of drawings. Here, computer simulations could be of great use, but only after students have spent time testing physical models. This sequence would be essential if one of the goals of the project is to have students learn science concepts.

Assessment Recent research in assessment has found that having students reflect on their work as an ongoing process has had a positive impact both in terms of students’ selfimage and their performance (White and Frederiksen, 1998; Black et al., 2004). One of the very attractive features of design engineering projects is immediate feedback for students. As in the Penner study, students can immediately compare the model elbow to their own, or students can readily see whether their model house is holding up and where immediate changes can be made. Initial criteria of performance act as an explicit measure of how the students’ constructions are performing. However, there is a tension that is set up. Whether the teacher attempts to downplay competition or not, there is always a comparison of results among the groups of students resulting in an implicit competition. Some students do not do well with competition. The teacher needs to develop a classroom culture where this type of student feels his or her work is still recognized as measuring up to agreed-upon criteria.

Visual Modeling There are some physical phenomena that can be directly experienced but are not easily represented in terms of their movements and actions. For instance, heat can be felt but what is occurring during heat transfer can be confusing for the student. There are intuitions about heat that run contrary to scientific description (Linn and Lewis, 2003). Giving students interesting activities involving heat transfer and engaging them in visual representations of the process can help them to better differentiate what is happening so that they begin to reconcile their prior knowledge with evidence encountered during the investigation.

328 328

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

An example of this type of investigation is the making of ice cream in a familiar container such as a coffee can. There can also be the concurrent testing of ways of making a cardboard box into an oven using a light bulb as a heat source. The students can carry out experiments of cooling hot water in different kinds of containers (metal, glass, or plastic) to determine what would be the best for making ice cream. This comparison provides a way of developing the concept of heat conduction. Graphs generated from the collected data show a difference in cooling rates for the different materials but this alone may not help students develop a mental model of what is happening. They can be asked to make a series of drawings showing with arrows and other pictorial symbols what they think is happening with the movement of heat from the container to the surrounding cooling environment. This type of modeling can be a way of discussing conduction and convection. A parallel investigation can be carried out with the cardboard box using different types of light bulbs and different types of insulation. They can be challenged to make drawings of how they think light bulbs inside the cardboard box are heating up the air inside the box. This would include the heat leaving the box. In this situation they can also observe how a steady state is achieved when a constant temperature is maintained. The coffee can in a bucket of ice and water and the cardboard box covered with different kinds of insulation can be thought of as the physical models. The drawings of what students think is happening are both visualizations and the beginning of a model of heat transfer between an object and the surrounding environment. During this process of experimentation, measurement, and visualizations students are gaining a sense of the salient properties of the materials, causal relationships, and a more detailed understanding of what happens in heat transfer. All these pedagogical practices do not necessarily result in all the students bringing their prior conceptions and theories more in line with formal science as studies by researchers such as Marcia Linn (Linn and Lewis, 2003) have shown. This is not a complete movement toward a more scientific explanation of heat transfer but these types of activities appear to be more effective than traditional approaches.

Visual Modeling Combining Hands-On Activities with the Use of a Computer The use of computers has been a frequent means to involve students in modeling (White, 1993). Some studies have combined hands-on activities with simulations on the computer. Smith et al. (1992) carried out two studies with middle school students focusing on understandings about weight-density differentiation. They used a combination of hands-on activities with physical materials, paper and pencil modeling, and computer modeling. In this study there did not appear to be an effort to make a connection between the activities and real-world situations. Students carried out sink-and-float tests with a variety of materials of equal-sized pieces.

Visual Modeling Combining Hands-On Activities with the Use of a Computer

329

Then they tested one material in different sizes that floated in water. They also tested cylinders of equal size and weight made of different materials. Following these hands-on activities, computer programs were introduced where objects were displayed pictorially. The object was of a specified size and color or it was rep­ resented with a more abstract visual of a grid and dots to represent different densities. Different number of dots in a box in the grid represented objects of different density. The models offer the possibility of making quantitative comparisons. Students used these models in simulations of sinking and floating materials. The overall conclusion based on pre- and post-study interviews was that the curriculum was a moderate success. Some students arrived at a conceptual understanding of density while others still had problems with weight–density differentiation. In a second study, students also did hands-on activities with similar materials that were used in the first study. The focus in this study was on thermal expansion where the density of a material could change after heating. There was also a combination of hands-on and computer work. There was more attention to quantitative reasoning. After these activities students were challenged to invent a model that would show the density of materials. Moderate success in understanding was also achieved. What is interesting in this study was the use of simple visual representations. Grids were used with different number of dots in each box of the grid. The different numbers of dots represent different materials.

The more the dots, the higher is the density. Different number of boxes represents different quantities of a substance. This type of modeling illustrates that visual representations can be quite simple. However, the movement toward the use of these types of drawings depends on a developmental progression that provides a concrete context for helping students understand what they represent. Drawings such as these can act as a useful way of helping students think about a challenging concept.

330 330

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

From my perspective there was one observation made in this study about the use of the activities and the computer models that is very significant: there was the need for students to develop a qualitative understanding before getting into quantitative relationships among size, weight, and density. This takes on significance because there is a tendency among some teachers to jump quickly to the use of formulas for calculating densities before there has been much investigation with the materials.

Modeling with Computers An example where computers played a major role in student exploring models is the extended study of White and Frederiksen (1998). Computer games were designed which involved students manipulating a moving dot on the screen to hit a target. They could control the movement of the dot by applying an impulse to it. This game and other similar computer simulations were designed in a way for students to understand Newton’s laws of motion. There were also simulations more closely connected to real-world examples where a billiard ball is hit with a device and sent rolling along a surface. This was recorded on a videotape, which students studied. They made measurements of the ball’s movement by placing transparencies on the video screens. The overall goal was to help students develop a conceptual model for analyzing complex projectile motion. There was some success with this type of pedagogical process. However, some students gave correct answers on the written test but interviews revealed that some still held some common misconceptions about objects in motion. In this type of curriculum enactment there is a heavy reliance on the simulation. It is my sense that much more experience with real world phenomena is needed for students to appreciate the connection between the simulation and the real world phenomena.

The Modeling of the Particulate Nature of Matter There are some physical phenomena that are readily observable but the underlying causes of change are not easily visualized. This happens with chemical changes. Research indicates that moving students to understandings of a particulate nature of materials has been found to be very challenging (Briggs et al., 1984; Gabel et al., 1987; Novick and Nussbaum, 1981). Students are sometimes introduced to atoms and molecules before they have a sound understanding of the macroscopic properties of matter (Duschl et al., 2007, p. 237). Despite the exposure to these concepts some students persist with misconceptions about the particulate nature of matter. There is a difference in views of when and how the particulate nature of matter can be introduced to students. Developing a learning progression that provides concrete experiences with physical materials and concurrently has students develop simple visual models of the particulate nature of matter is one way of addressing this problem.

First or Second Grade – Dyes and Pigments

331

In Chapter 3, in an outline for a curriculum framework I proposed that dyes and pigments can be the basic material for study throughout the 8 years as a concrete context for introducing concepts for understanding the properties of materials. Focusing on dyes and pigments, especially returning to them several times over the 8 years, would seem to be a very narrow approach. Such an approach goes against recommendations for exposing students to multiple contexts in applying a concept. I proposed to focus on dyes, pigments, and colored substances for several reasons: • • • •

They have a high aesthetic appeal and are sensory-engaging. They have some familiarity to students. Their changes in properties can be readily observed. They can act as a physical model.

An overall rationale for this approach comes from a history of materials. Smith (1976), a metallurgist, became very interested in the study of the history of materials in his later life. Digging into collections at art museums and natural history museums he arrived at an interesting conclusion about the origin and history of these materials. Based on this study and on archeological records, he proposed that necessity wasn’t the mother of invention – aesthetic curiosity was. Ancient people appeared to have collected and transformed materials to produce pleasing objects, developing techniques that later were of a more practical value. Substances that would color these objects were among materials that were either discovered through close observation of the natural and physical environment or synthesized by a trial and error process. He reports that minerals and many organic materials were explored for use as pigments. Archeologists have shown that flowers were cultivated before practical agriculture. Colored substances have an appeal that can stir people’s curiosity and their interest in using them for decoration. Here is one way of providing for a strand or learning progression that addresses the different standards under properties of materials while providing materials that have a high aesthetic appeal and can be readily investigated.

First or Second Grade – Dyes and Pigments The overall goal of this first investigation would be to make colored substances for use in painting. Students would extract pigments from fruits, vegetables, leaves, and other organic matter. They would grind up colored rocks and colored clay. Commercial food color would also be used. The extracted color solutions and ground-up minerals would be mixed with different substances for doing paintings. Different tests would be carried out to see what vehicles work for binding these solutions or solid materials to paper (water-soluble glue, egg white, etc.). Other tests could be carried out to see how to concentrate the solutions, what happens when these solutions are heated to the point of burning, which of these solutions start to have growth on them (bacterial composition), and so on. During all these activities there would be discussions about the properties of the materials. This kind of investigation does not lend itself very well to modeling but students could begin to make drawings of what they think the

332 332

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

composition of the initial materials is. This investigation provides an experiential foundation for later investigations because some of these same materials could be returned to in later grades for further study.

Third or Fourth Grade – Crystals An investigation of growing crystals is carried out. Crystals of colored substances are grown over several weeks. Comparisons are made among the crystal shapes and how they grow. An interesting additional experiment can be set up for growing crystals in air because the substance used sublimates easily. This experiment provides a context for discussing the gaseous properties of matter.4 Crystals lend themselves to thinking about matter at smaller scales. Students can see changes happening where very small crystals viewed with magnifiers can continually grow into shapes several inches long while keeping the same form. They observe that although the scale changes the form remains the same. Physical models using marbles can be introduced. Very simple visual models can be developed by students of what they think is happening as crystals grow. This can lead to a discussion about very small crystals. There still will be misconceptions about what happens as the size of the crystal decreases but this process gets students thinking about the relationship between the macroscopic visible properties of matter and the microscopic aspect. There can also be useful discussions about the material that sublimates. How does the material get from the bottom of the bottle to the side? This investigation can build on the previous one and start students thinking about visible properties of matter.

Sixth Grade – Salad Dressing Physics Observing sinking and floating liquids is fascinating for many people. A device can be made for students to observe this phenomenon. As mentioned previously in Chapter 3, scenario #1 has a special arrangement of two soda bottles joined together using a Tornado tube as a connector. Two different liquids that do not mix are in each of the bottles. Different colored solutions are in the bottles. (Liquids such as water, cooking oil, mineral oil, alcohol, and salt water are poured in these bottles in pairs, and food color is added to water, alcohol, salt, and water.) When the contraption is turned over, the two liquids flow past each other because of their different densities. Students are quite fascinated by the aesthetics of this movement. The investigation then is for the students to figure out what is in the bottles. They are given the same liquids, vials, and balances. In the course of solving this problem they  Moth crystals which can be bought in stores are of two types – naphthalene and paradichlorobenzene. When some paradichlorobenzene is placed in a transparent sealed jar near a heat source, it readily sublimates. When there is cooling, crystals will form near the top of the jar. Over a week or so, the crystals will become platelets. 4

Eighth Grade – Investigating Special Inks

333

carry out solubility tests, comparative weighing of the liquids as well as comparisons of viscosities. These properties are used to identify the liquids in the special bottles. The visual modeling done by Snir and Smith can be used here. Grids and dots can be used to represent the different liquids. Similar kinds of computer programs could be used to further their understanding of models of the density of substances such as liquids and solids. There are two follow-up investigations to this first problem. Another set of bottles is given to the students where colored beads of different densities are present. The beads sink or float differently in the different liquids. The students carry out tests with the beads to determine what they are. Visual modeling again with grids and dots can be done. Then the students are shown with an improvised device that works like a lava lamp. This device has a very high appeal and fascinates students. It gets the students thinking about how the density of a liquid changes when it is heated.5

Seventh Grade – Chromatography A follow-up to the first grade activities with colored solutions and painting can be done at this level. There is a special appeal to dropping colored solutions such as food color onto porous paper such as hand towels. When water and other liquids are dropped on food color or ink from pens, interesting patterns result from the liquid spreading out. When there are mixtures of inks, separation can be observed. An inquiry can be conducted on the cause of this separation. Comparisons can be made between water-based and permanent pens. Chromatography tests can be carried out using different inks. Some of the same liquids used in making colored solutions and in salad dressing are used here also. At this point the students are taking a look at different physical properties of some of the same materials investigated previously. Here also a visual model can be developed in attempting to understand what is happening. The students can be introduced to a particulate model of matter but this would be done in a preliminary way.

Eighth Grade – Investigating Special Inks There are commercially available pen sets with which special effects can be created. In one such set using a special pen over writing with the other colored pens will make these colors disappear. Another kind of novelty pen set is one where a  Mineral oil floats in 90% isopropyl alcohol and sinks in 70% alcohol. If the two alcohols are mixed in the right proportion, a glob of the mineral oil will just about sink in this mixture. The mixture of alcohols plus the glob of mineral oil is placed in a 2 l soda bottle. The bottle is turned upside down and the neck is placed in a container of hot water. After a while the glob of mineral oil will float to the top of the solution, while after cooling a little it will start to sink. 5

334 334

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

special pen in the set causes the color of the inks of the other pens to change color. These sets of pens can be used to investigate irreversible and reversible chemical changes. The special pen from the first set is a type of bleaching agent that changes the color of the ink. The special pen from the second set is either an acid or a base acting on the inks of the other pens. The inks of the other pens act as chemical indicators. Regular bleach added to ink from these pens as well as food color will make the color disappear. Variables that affect the bleaching of the inks or food color in water can be investigated. The bleach can be used in different concentrations or heated to different temperatures to observe how these variables affect the disappearance of the color in the solution. The pens from the other special pen set can be soaked in water to give a colored solution. Using liquids such as vinegar, lemon juice, baking soda solution, and highly diluted ammonia, the color of the inks in one set can be changed with these acids or bases. Then the effect can be reversed with one of these liquids. Students are asked to develop simple visual models involving a particulate model of matter. Computer animations could build on these simple models, helping students envision the role of variables such as temperature and concentration. There is continuity through all of these investigations. Some of the same substances are investigated during each of these investigations with a focus on different properties. Liquids such as food color, inks, water, alcohol, cooking oil, and syrup are investigated in terms of the properties of solubility, density, viscosity, and chemical reactivity. They stand in for different classes of materials. Previous experiences with these materials in the earlier grades provide a rich background that has been examined and differentiated. Therefore, in later grades the investigation of these materials can be better focused on a particular property. During investigation in the latter grades visual modeling of the particulate nature of materials is returned to several times and the model is refined and made more explicit. These investigations can act as concrete contexts for a developmental progression that provide a way for students to change their thinking about properties of matter. In the above examples it can be seen that there are a variety of ways of providing an educational experience that supports the students’ use of models as well as the development of mental models.

Comparison Across Subdomains If modeling and use of analogies become an explicit and essential practice of the investigations in elementary and middle school years, then this whole time span has to be carefully planned. Implications from research suggest that students need to have developed some deep understanding of the base of an analogy to apply it to the target of an analogy. For instance, a standard analogy in helping students understand electrical circuits is to compare the flow of electricity to the flow of water in pipes or a special kind of plumbing system.

Comparison Across Subdomains

335

Dedre Gentner and Albert Stevens carried out a study to find out how students (high school and college) used analogies in the case of electrical circuits. They set up different problems about circuits to see whether a water system analogy and a moving people analogy would result in different understandings. What was significant was the comment that many people in their study had limited understanding of the base domain, which was a water system. They propose that this limited understanding may have hampered their ability to fully apply and understand the analogy. Another matter of significance they observe is that “accepting a new model often requires considerable time and practice” (Gentner and Stevens, 1983, p. 1270). Recall Keil and Vosiandou’s findings that students need to have some understandings of the base of the analogy as well as the target. There has to be some sense of structure and causal relations with both. It is not surprising that there is this observation about the subjects in Gentner’s study having a limited understanding of water systems. As mentioned in a previous chapter where there was the scenario about siphon bottles, students typically have very little exposure to investigating water systems. The activity can be messy. Therefore, teachers tend to avoid carrying out investigations using water. One would conclude that at some point students should have the opportunity to investigate water systems and develop a deeper understanding of their properties. This would be especially helpful if water systems are going to be the basis for helping students understand electrical circuits in later grades. There are other types of analogies and models introduced in elementary and middle school that have a similar kind of problem. Related to water systems is the operation of a pump with valves. A mechanical pump is sometimes used to help students understand an operation of the heart. The opportunity to design or investigate the operation of this kind of pump probably doesn’t present itself for most students before they encounter this analogy. Another instance of an analogy where the students have had limited experience with the base of the analogy is the comparison of water waves to properties of sound and light. From my survey of a number of textbooks there are only a few activities with water and maybe a slinky. An extended development of wave phenomena usually doesn’t occur, nor does there seem to be a careful mapping of properties of sound or light with properties of waves. From my perspective students need an extended investigation just focusing on wave phenomena such as water waves using various devices that can act as physical models of waves. This should happen before there are any analogies developed between sound and light phenomena. These problems suggest that a curriculum framework for grades 1–9 needs to be planned with a consideration of how different subdomains can be related to each other. A framework should be set up that provides experiences with different phenomena or technological artifacts that will prepare students for analogies used across different subdomains such as the one where an electrical circuit is compared to a water system. This consideration adds to another criterion for the framework proposed in Chapter 3.

336 336

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

Concluding Comments This last chapter on the role of analogies and metaphors takes us to the point where we can think back to the original proposal mentioned in the introduction. I proposed that there is a close connection between sensory interaction, aesthetic perception, play, and metaphor. At this point a quick review of what has been developed and illustrated can make this connection more apparent. One of the central goals of contemporary science education is to bring about conceptual change in students’ thinking. Some researchers and science educators consider the use of models and modeling an essential pedagogical practice in promoting conceptual change. As reported in the last chapter some also propose that current pedagogical practices associated with conceptual change do not give enough attention to affective factors in students’ involvement in inquiry. There is a need to introduce pedagogical practices that involve more attention to the affective aspect. These findings and proposals suggest that models and modeling can be a context where some kind of balance can be achieved that addresses both goals. I proposed that there were some basic phenomena and technological artifacts that could function as physical models. I also proposed that these could be archetypical in two senses of this term. They lend themselves to providing a concrete context for developing basic science concepts, thereby addressing most of the science standards. They also have characteristics that resonate with the affective nature of students. They can stir the students’ imagination, resulting in spontaneous analogies. These analogies serve to help students to make personally meaning connections to the phenomenon being investigated. The overall rationale for proposing the concept of archetypical phenomena comes from the changing understanding about the role of metaphorical thinking and from the insights gathered through experimental aesthetics and in-depth psychology. Recall that I cited Max Black’s assertion that there is embedded in some metaphors a potential model. There is a close relationship between modeling and metaphorical thinking. Then there is the basic hypothesis of Lakoff and Johnson that a great deal of the metaphor implicit in language is grounded in physical experiences. They also assert that the mind is embodied and depends largely on the commonalities of our bodies and of the environments we live in. Support for this assertion to some degree comes from research in embodied cognition. I cited Gibbs’s summary of major findings in this area of research. He emphasized the role of action and multimodal perception, and empathy in a person gaining understanding about the world. He reported on a growing literature to support a view that imagery, memory, and reasoning are closely tied to bodily activity such that cognitive processes are situated and embedded in it. This relationship between embodied cognition and metaphorical thinking suggests that attention should be given to the kind of embodied experience students have with different phenomena. It can determine what information they pick up, how they assimilate these experiences, and how these experiences might change basic schemata

Concluding Comments

337

that bring about conceptual change. I cited the work of Wolf-Michael Roth who pointed out the importance of the connection between hands-on experiences and the eventual representations of these experiences through gestures. Drawing upon Rudolf Arnheim’s account of our aesthetic relationship to our environment, I reported that Gestalt psychology provides some guidance on how we empathize with phenomena and how our perceptions with these phenomena can be represented in basic visual signs that appear to have universality. Therefore, the aesthetics of a phenomenon can be seen to have an important role in terms of embodied cognition and eventual representations in the form of the gestural and the visual, as well as students’ feeling for their environment. Play is a state of mind that is a natural way people engage in getting acquainted with their environment and assimilating these experiences. There are some characteristics of play that also provide guidance in the way educators can structure and shape the kind of experience students have with basic phenomena and in the kind of relationships educators have with their students. Antonio Damasio’s somatic marker hypothesis has important implications when associated with the above comments. Recall that he proposes that feelings become associated with experiences we have and these can be positive or negative. These affective markers “increase the accuracy and efficiency of the decision process” (Damasio, 1994, p. 173). This proposition also has implications for the way educators shape the experience of students with their environment. Another way to think about this is to say that students’ intuitions can be shaped and developed. These intuitions can shape the way students move toward conceptual change. Recall also the Japanese philosopher Yuasa Yuasa’s comments about the relationship between mind and body. He pointed out that in eastern culture the mindbody modality changes through the training of the mind and body by means of cultivation or exercise. In other words, intuition does not just grow through experiences with the environment but can be shaped through carefully designed educational experiences. Finally, this takes us to the more philosophical question about the relationship between the person and the environment. Recall Barbara McClintock’s stance in her relationship to the objects of her research. This stance provides a model for enacting a set of values and orientation that is related to this basic issue. Recall that her stance is based on a fundamental epistemological distinction between distance from nature and difference from nature. In the traditional view of science, the scientist moves away from the object being studied to be more objective and allows for a more abstract description to develop. With this approach there is a strong distinction between nature and mind. Situating oneself as part of nature but also different from nature, which is McClintock’s position, colors and influences the whole scientific process. McClintock deliberately became intimate with her objects of study such as the corn plants. She intimates that there was even affection for these plants. There was a feeling for the organism. This stance provides for a more holistic approach to science education. It is a way of achieving some kind of balance between the rational and the affective.

338 338

12 The Role of Metaphor, Models, and Analogies in Science Education

References Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajeik, J. S., Guzdial, M., and Palinscar, A. (1991). Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning, Educational Psychologist, 26, 369–398. Briggs, H., Brook, A., and Driver, R. (1984). Aspects of Secondary Students’ Understanding of the Particulate Nature of Matter. Leeds: Children’s Learning in Science Project. Centre for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education, University of Leeds, England. Boyer, P. and Barett, C. (2007). Domain Specificity and Intuitive Ontology, in D. Buss (Ed.), Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, New York, Wiley. Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., and Cocking, R. (Eds.) (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, Washington, DC, National Academy Press. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., and William, D. (2004). Working Inside the Black Box. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 9–28. Brown, A. L. (1990). Domain Principles Affect Learning and Transfer in Children. Cognitive Science 14, 107–133. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Coll, R. K., France, B., and Taylor, I. (2005). The Role of Analogies in Science Education: Implications from Research. International Journal of Science, 27(2), 183–198. Damasio, Antonio (1994). Descartes’ Error, Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. Grosset/ Putnam, New York. Duit, R. and Treagust, D. (2003). Conceptual Change: A Powerful Framework for Improving Science Teaching and Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688. Duschl, R., Schweingruber, H., and Shouse A. (2007). Taking Science to School, Washington, DC, National Academies Press. Gabel, D. L., Samuel, K. V., and Hunn, D. (1987). Understanding the Particulate Nature of Matter. Journal of Chemical Education, 64, 695–687. Gazzaniga, M. (2008). Human: The Science Behind What Makes Us Unique, New York, HarperCollins. Gelman, R. (1978). Cognitive Development. Annual Review of Psychology, 29, 297–332. Gelman, R. and Baillargeon, R. (1983). A Revision of Some Piagetian Concepts. In J. H. Flavell and E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 3: Cognitive Development, New York, Wiley. Gentner, D. (1988). Metaphor as Structure Mapping: The Relational Shift. Child Development, 48, 1034–1039. Gentner, D. and Stevens, A. L. (1983). Mental Models, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum. Gilbert, J. and Boulter, C. (1998). Learning Science Through Models and Modeling, in B. Fraser and K. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education, Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 52–66 Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C., and Elmer, R. (2000). Positioning Models in Science Education and Is Design and Technology Education, in J. Gilbert and C. Boulter (Eds.), Developing Model in Science Education, Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 3–18. Glynn, S. and Duit, R. (Eds.) (1995). Learning Science in the Schools: Research Reforming Practice, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum. Gobert, J. D. and Buckley, B. C. (2000). Introduction to Model-Based Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 891–894. Greca, I. M. and Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental Models, Conceptual Models and Modeling. International Journal of Science Education, 22 (1), 1–11. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity: A Developmental Perspective on Cognitive Science, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press. Keil, F. C. (1984). Semantic Fields and Acquisition of Metaphors. Unpublished manuscript.

References

339

Keil, F. (1991). Intuitive Belief Systems and Informal Reasoning in Cognitive Development. In J. Voss, D. Perkins, and J. Segal (Eds.), Informal Reasoning and Education, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum. Kemler, D. and Smith L.B. (1978). Is There a Developmental Trend from Integrality to Sepratebility in Perception? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 26, 498–507. Linn, M. C. and Lewis, E. L. (2003). Heat Energy and Temperature Concepts of Adolescents, Adults, and Experts: Implications for Curricular Improvements. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(Supplement), S155–S175. Novick, S. and Nussbaurm, J. (1981). Pupils Understanding of the Particulate Nature of Matter: A Cross Age Study. Science Education, 65, 187–196. Odum, H. (1988). Self-Organization, Transformity, and Information, Science, 242, 1132–1136. Penner, D., Lehrer, R., and Schauble, L. (1998). From Physical Models to Biomechanics: A Design-Based Modeling Approach. Journal of Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 429–449. Ratterman, M. J. and Gentner, D. (1998). More Evidence for a Relational Shift in the Development of Analogy: Children’s Performance on a Causal-Mapping Task. Cognitive Development, 13, 453–478. Richland, L. E., Morrison R. G., and Holyoak, K. J. (2006). Children’s Development of Analogical Reasoning: Insights from Scene Analogy Problems. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 94, 249–273. Rummelhart, David, Norman Donald (1981). Analogical Processes In Learning. In Cognitive Skills and their Acquistion, Anderson, J. R. Lawerence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N. J. p.338. Schmidt, W. H. (2003). NSF Supported Instructional Materials: Something New and Something Old, paper presented at NSF Mathematics and Science Curriculum Developers Conference. Smith, C., Snir, J., and Grosslight, L. (1992). Using Conceptual Models to Facilitate Conceptual Change: The Case of Weight-Density Differentiation. Cognition and Instruction, 9(3), 221–283. Vosniadou, S. (1987). Children and Metaphor. Child Development, 58, 870–885. Vosniadou, S. and Brewer W. F. (1992). Mental Models of the Earth: A Study of Conceptual Change in Childhood, Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535–585. Vosniadou, S. and Ortony, A. (1989). Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, Cambridge/New York, Cambridge University Press. Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., and Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing Learning Environments to Promote Conceptual Change in Science. Learning and Instruction, 11, 381–419. Vygotsky, Lev (1962). Thought and Language, edited an translated by Eugenia Hanfmann and Gertrude Vakar, MIT press, Cambridge, Mass. Waltz, J. A., Lau, A., Grewal, S. K., and Holyoak, K. J. (2000). The Role of Working Memory in Analogical Mapping. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1205–1212. White, B. (1993). ThinkerTools: Causal Models, Conceptual Change, and Science Education. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 1–100. White, B. and Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, Modeling and Metacognition: Making Science Accessible to All Students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118. Zubrowski, B. (2002). Integrating Science into Design Technology Projects: Using a Standard Model in the Design Process. Journal of Technology Education, 13(2), 46–64.

Index

A Aesthetic impulse-historical, 210–217 Aesthetics, 16–18 Aesthetics in curriculum design in conceptualizations, 232–234 in explorations, 224–227 in a holistic education, 236–240 in representations, 228–232 in selecting curriculum, 222–224 Aesthetics in scientific thinking, 234–236 Affect and learning, 90 Affective coherence, 61, 71–74 After school programming, 253–254 Alternative pedagogical approaches, 131–135 Archetypical images, 193–199 Archetypical phenomena, 15 Architect as more for curriculum design, 80–81 Artistic paradigm, 86–89 Authenticity, 80, 95–97, 154–158

B Ball and track activities, 190, 244 Body image, spatial orientation, 120–123

C Categories of play and exploration, 256–258 Cognitive style, 109, 120–123 Collage and visual perception David Hockney, 287 Johan Goethe, 287 Marcel Proust, 287 Conceptual change, 81, 89–93, 96, 100 Concrete images, 53–55 Conditions for play, 246–253 Constructivism, 86, 89–90, 93, 95, 98

Context and learning, 15 Curriculum framework of archetypical phenomena and technological archetypes, 49–74 Cycles in guided inquiry, 44–46

D Darwin and the symbol of the tree, 58, 66 Developmental progression, 35–38 Dialectical process, 80, 84–86, 88, 89 Dialogue with materials, 79 Domain and sub domains of knowledge, 320–321 Domains and analogies, 320–321

E Elaborating symbol, 60–62, 64–66, 73 Embodied cognition, 108, 109, 111, 112, 120 Embodied curriculum, 123–126 Emergent rewards, 250 Emotions and feelings, 112, 116–120 Empathy, 8, 13, 14, 16 art experiences, 186–191 physiognomic perception, 189–192 visual, kinesthetic and tactile contribution, 191–193 Engineering paradigm, 86–89 Exploration and play, 17–18 Exploration and play during different time intervals during and extended investigation, 262–265 during the first few minutes, 261 during one activity, 263–265 Exploring water movement, 176, 219 Expressive movement, 178–180

341

342 F Field dependence and field independence, 121, 122

G Generative metaphor, 30–32, 34, 51, 60 Gestalt psychology, 188, 189, 193, 199 Gestures focusing attention, 176–178 and talk, 172–175 and thinking, 168–172 Guided inquiry, 21–47 Guide inquiry pedagogical practices, 21–47 phases data gathering/experimentation, 40–41 exploratory, 39–40 meaning making, 41–42 modeling, 42 psychological movement during, 36

H Holistic approach, 77–102 Holistic education, 158, 186, 195, 200–202

I In-depth curriculum, 314–315 Intrinsically interesting phenomena, 193–199 Intrinsic motivation, 246–251 Intuition, 53, 54 concrete image, 130, 138 empathy, 139, 153 multimodal imagination, 135–141 physiognomic, 137

J James Clerk Maxwell analogies, 27–30, 36 clear physical conception, 27, 30–34, 36 generative symbolic image, 30 models, 27–32 Jung, C., 57–60, 65, 66, 74, 186, 187, 192, 194–198 Juxtaposition of phenomena, 304–305

K Key Symbols, 52, 57–71

Index L Lakoff and Johnson, 113, 116, 123 Learning cycle model, 42–44, 46 Levels of consciousness-Antonio Damasio, 116, 117 Locus of control, 249, 252, 253, 257, 264, 265

M Metaphoric projection, 112–116 Michael Faraday multisensory exploration, 23–25 thought experiments, 26 use of analogies, 26 visualization, 25 Mobiles and balancing toys, 3, 4 Models, 195, 197, 199 Models and analogies, 18–19 Models and modeling physical models, 331 use of computers, 328–330 visual models, 328–330 Models and the particulate nature of matter, 330–331 Multiple examples in curriculum design, 304 in exhibit design, 287 Multiple examples of the same phenomena, 307

N Nonverbal thinking, 140–142 Nonverbal thought, 118

P Paradigm (for science education), 77–102 Pedagogical archetypes, 62–71 Pedagogical model, 21–47 Pedagogical practices, 86, 93–95 Personal analogies, 52, 66, 74 Play and conceptual change, 266–267 definition, 275 and empathy, 278 and a Holistic education, 275–278 and the transitional zone, 275–278 Play and exploration-differentiating, 256–260 Pond investigation-in depth, over 8 years, 314 Portoghesi, 80–84 Prior knowledge of student, 90–93 Psychological movements in learning, 13–14

Index

343

R Root metaphor, 62–71

T The mime and gestural definition, 164

S Schema, 108, 114–116, 118, 120, 123 Sensorimotor coupling, 147–148 Sensual imagery, 53, 54 Siphon bottle exploration, 127–135, 140, 145, 149 Soap bubble activities, 299–302 Soap bubbles, 78, 79, 82, 83, 99 Spontaneous analogies, 107, 110 Symbolic thought, 30 Symmetry in basic phenomena, 208

V Variable exploration, 284, 285, 287, 297–298 Visualism, 149–154 Visual thinking, 142, 145

W Water wheel activity, 105, 112