Journal Menu
Submit Manuscript via ScholarOne

EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education
Volume 7, Issue 1 (February 2011), pp. 29-39

DOI: 10.12973/eurasia.203

Downloaded 1833 times.

Research Article

Published online on Jun 29, 2016

How to reference this article?

 

Analogies as Tools for Meaning Making in Elementary Science Education: How Do They Work in Classroom Settings?

Maria Teresa Guerra-Ramos

Abstract

In this paper there is a critical overview of the role of analogies as tools for meaning making in science education, their advantages and disadvantages. Two empirical studies on the use of analogies in primary classrooms are discussed and analysed. In the first study, the ‘string circuit’ analogy was used in the teaching of electric circuits with students aged 8-9. In the second study, the ‘making a cake’ analogy was introduced within the study of photosynthesis with students aged 10-11. Outcomes of both studies are scrutinised to assess the effectiveness of analogies as tools for meaning making. How the analogies are presented, their contexts, and how much students are involved in mapping the analogical relations appear to be determinant. This strongly suggests that research and pedagogical practice should shift from determining the effectiveness of analogy in cognitive transfer, from analogue to target domains, towards the recognition of its role in generating engagement in developing meaningful explanations through discourse. Finally, most salient aspects of the use of analogies are considered for contexts in which they are used to promote understanding of scientific ideas. Analogy can play and important role in that task if it is seen as a resource to promote understanding and meaning making but its strengths and limitations are not ignored.
Keywords:Analogy, Primary Education, Classroom Settings, Research Analysis 


References
  1. Adúriz-Bravo, A., Bonan, L., Galli, L. G., Chion, A. R. and Meinardi, E. (2005) Scientific Argumentation in PreService Biology Teacher Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 1(1), 76-83.
  2. Akgul, E. M. (2006) Teaching Science In An Inquiry-Based Learning Environment: What It Means For Pre-Service Elementary Science Teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(1), 71-81.
  3. Arnold, M. & Millar, R. (1996). Exploring the use of analogy in the teaching of heat, temperature and thermal equilibrium, in G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in Science Education in Europe: Current Issues and Themes. London: Farmer Press.
  4. Asoko, H. (1996). Developing scientific concepts in the primary classroom: Teaching about electric circuits, in G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in Science Education in Europe: Current Issues and Themes. London: Farmer Press.
  5. Blake, A. (2004). Helping young children to see what is relevant and why: supporting cognitive change in earth science using analogy. International Journal of Science Education, 26 (15), 1855-1873.
  6. Clement, J.; Brown, D. & Zietsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: finding ‘anchoring conceptions’ for grounding instruction on students’ intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 554- 565.
  7. Dagher, Z. (1995). Analysis of analogies used by science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32 (3), 259- 270.
  8. Driver, R.; Asoko, H.; Leach, J.; Mortimer, E. & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23 (7), 5-12.
  9. Duit, R. & Glynn, S. (1996). Mental modelling, in G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in Science Education in Europe: Current Issues and Themes. London: Farmer Press.
  10. Duit, R. (1991). The role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75 (6), 649-672.
  11. Erduran, S., Ardac, D. and Yakmaci-Guzel, B. (2006) Learning To Teach Argumentation: Case Studies Of Pre-Service Secondary Science Teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(2), 1-14.
  12. Eynseck, H. J. (2000). Intelligence: A New Look. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers. Glynn, S. (1991). Explaining science concepts: a TeachingWith-Analogies Model, in S.
  13. Glynn, R. Yeanny & B. Britton (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning Science. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
  14. Harré, R. (1972). The philosophies of science: an introductory survey. London: Oxford University Press.
  15. Harrison, A. & Treagust, D. (1993). Teaching with analogies: A case Study in Grade-10 Optics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30 (10), 1291-1307.
  16. Hewson, P.; Beeth, M.; & Thorley, R. (1998). Teaching for conceptual change, in B. F. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education. Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  17. Heywood, D. (2002). The place of analogies in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35, 233-247.
  18. James, M. & Scharmann, L. (2007). Using analogies to improve the teaching performance of preservice teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 (4), 565- 585.
  19. Mason, L. (1994). Analogy, metaconceptual awareness and conceptual change: a classroom study. Educational Studies, 20 (2), 267-291.
  20. Nagel, E. (1971). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. London: Routledge.
  21. Schwedes, H. & Dudeck, W.-G. (1996). Teaching electricity by help of a water analogy: How to cope with the need for conceptual change, in G. Welford, J. Osborne J. & P. Scott (Eds.), Research in Science Education in Europe: Current Issues and Themes. London: Farmer Press.
  22. Sizmur, S. & Ashby, J. (1997). Introducing scientific concepts to children. Great Britain: National Foundation for Educational Research.
  23. Treagust, D.; Duit, R.; Joslin, P. & Lindauer, I. (1992). Science teachers’ use of analogies: observations from classroom practice, International Journal of Science Education, 14, (4), 413-422.
  24. Venville, G. & Treagust, D. (1996). The role of analogies in promoting conceptual change in biology. Instructional Science, 24, 295-320.