The ED3U SCIENCE
MODEL: TEACHING SCIENCE FOR CONCEPTUAL CHANGE
Dr. Richard E.
Shope III, Director
World Space
Foundation, Education Division
Abstract
Conceptual
change theory addresses the challenge of how teachers can help science learners
advance from error-laden but personally relevant conceptions toward broader,
deeper, and more coherent conceptions of scientific phenomena (Strike &
Posner, 1992; Tobin, 1993; Hewson, 1992). The teacher’s role is to notice
indicators of precursor understandings, misconceptions, emerging notions, and
original ideas in order to become aware of the range of personal science
conceptions that need to be addressed and then to select differentiated
teaching strategies. (Karplus & Thier, 1967; Project 2061, 1993). One highly
useful approach is the ED3U teaching science for conceptual change
model proposed by McComas (1995). The ED3U Model offers specific
strategies for teachers to guide students through a five-phased iterative
process of shifting from naïve toward more advanced scientific understanding.
In particular, this model highlights diagnosis as of central importance in
forming a true teacher-student partnership that takes advantage of students’
personally relevant conceptions regarding science phenomena, using scaffolding
strategies to guide, challenge, and move students through scientific inquiry
experiences in proximal leaps toward advanced scientific conceptualization. The
author is an experienced practitioner of this science teaching model, in the
context of space science education programs throughout the past decade.
Introduction
Teaching
for conceptual change has its roots in the post-Sputnik research and reform period, as an innovative approach that
applies constructivist learning theory and responds in various ways to the
situation revealed by misconception research that has shown that existing
conceptions are surprisingly difficult to change (Hewson, 1992). Conceptual
change research has inspired a variety of approaches that tend to share common
distinguishing features. In the research literature the expression “teaching
for conceptual change” refers to instructional strategies that (a) consider
prior student knowledge and experience; (b) identify common misconceptions; (c)
plan activities through which students shift from less accurate to more
accurate understanding of science concepts; and (d) guide students to modify or
create a niche for newly constructed knowledge within their conceptual ecology.
Before
instruction commences, teachers must find ways to obtain an accurate picture of
students’ existing conceptions in their own context of meaning, within a
totality of interconnected conceptual components, that is, their conceptual
ecology (Strike and Posner, 1992). Based on diagnostic insight, the teacher designs
subsequent learning experiences that are likely to result in the construction
of more accurate, more expert, conceptions. This often involves dislodging
misconceptions in favor of conceptions that more closely reflect the prevailing
expert understanding. Successful instruction hinges on the ability of the
teacher to guide students through an active process of conceptual change
through which students question, discuss, and test the viability of their own
ideas in ongoing and ever-evolving ways. Models of teaching for conceptual
change strive to engage students in authentic learning experiences that
initiate students into the way scientists think
about and do science.
The ED3U teaching for conceptual change model
(See Figure 1), proposed by McComas (1995), emphasizes the centrality of
diagnosing personal conceptions, for the teacher in partnership with the
students, to gain insight into their existing conceptions and the dynamics of
their conceptual ecologies. ED3U is a constructivist extension of the
learning cycle that is sensitive to and specially designed for focusing on
teaching science for conceptual change. ED3U refers to five phases through which the
teacher diagnoses personal conceptions, guides exploration, mentors individual
progress, challenges ideas, and scaffolds instruction for students: ED3U = Explore +
Diagnose + Design + Discuss + Use.
The
premise of the ED3U model is that the teacher plays a strategic
role guiding the self-regulated learner purposefully from a loosely organized
system of personal conceptions toward a more informed and coherent system of
conceptions connected to the world of science.
Conceptual change is modeled as a selectional system, in that as students
encounter a science phenomenon, they initially draw upon a diverse substrate of
personally relevant ideas, then, through discussion, propose alternative
explanations, and proceed to test their ideas for viability. The teacher guides
students through differentiated zones of proximal development toward
Figure 1. The ED3U Model,
Teaching Science for Conceptual Change
ED3U=
Explore + Diagnose+ Design + Discuss + Use
Diagnosis of Personal
Science Conceptions
understanding of science concepts in the
midst of active inquiry, as they work both independently and collaboratively
(See Figure 2). Utilizing this framework, the teacher diagnoses the nature of
the students’ personal conceptions throughout the lesson: in the midst of
exploration of the phenomenon; in the midst of generating questions, making
proposing explanations; in the midst of designing and carrying out
investigations; and in the midst of participatory discourse that actively
involves students.
Diagnosis
informs decisions, in the teachable moment, about activating or
contraindicating the selection of
instructional strategies from the teacher’s repertoire. Conceptual change
strategies are indicated when student-generated inquiry produces several
plausible explanations, likely to evoke rigorous exploration and discussion,
and amenable to devising personally relevant tests of the viability of proposed
explanations.
Comparable
to the widely practiced BSCS 5 E’s Model[1] (See Table 1. The 5 E’s
and ED3U Compared), the
ED3U model can be viewed through its
underlying learning cycle structure (Exploration, Term Introduction/Concept
Formation, Concept Application) in overlapping differentiated zones of proximal
inquiry, as it moves through its phases:
Exploratory
Zone (E=Explore the Phenomenon), in which students explore the phenomenon,
generate questions, make speculations, and propose explanations; then explore
the phenomenon in a deeper way, framed by the student-generated questions and
explanations in mind; teacher diagnoses by actively listening to a range of
questions, speculations, and explanations to gain insight into conceptual
change potential, returning questions with guiding questions.
Table 1. The 5 E’s and ED3U Models Compared
|
Phase |
5 E’s
(Bybee, 1997) |
Phase
|
ED3U (Shope & Chapman, 2001) |
Engage
|
Make connections between past and
present learning experiences, and anticipate activities and organize
students’ thinking toward the learning outcomes of current activities. |
Explore
|
Students explore the phenomenon: in the
form of a discrepant event, a visual display, a hands-on activity, an
observation, or exposure to a variety of information sources, print, videos,
film clips, internet sites. Object is to think toward proposing explanations
of the phenomenon, selecting from a substrate of ideas. |
|
Explore |
Provide students with a common base of
experiences within which concepts, processes, and skills are identified and
developed. |
Diagnose
|
Evoke expression of students' personal
conceptions; assess how students see alternative conceptions as plausible;
select strategy that brings misconceptions to student awareness; guide
student to search for more accurate explanations. |
|
Explain |
Focus attention on particular aspects
of engagement and exploration. Provide
opportunities to demonstrate conceptual understanding, process skills, or
behaviors. Introduce new concepts, processes, or skills. |
Design |
Students design
personally-relevant tests of their ideas; create a context for a crucial
experiment or prediction to test strength or weakness of a proposed
explanation in both its explanatory and predictive value. The process of
thinking out a personally-relevant test allows the students to explore the
phenomenon in new ways. |
|
Elaborate |
Challenge and extend
students’ conceptual understanding and skills. Through new experiences, students
develop deeper and broader understanding, more information, and adequate
skills. |
Discuss |
Students discuss the
implications. If the results suggest that a new conception is needed to
replace a misconception, such alternative ideas are considered. Students may
come up with their own ideas or their readiness may be open to exposure to a
new theory presented by the teacher or other information source. |
|
Evaluate |
Encourage students to assess their
understanding and abilities and provide opportunities for teachers to
evaluate student progress. |
Use |
Students apply new understanding; place
the new conception in relation to other related knowledge; may also lead to a
new cycle that further confirms or disconfirms the validity of the new
conception. |
Constructive
Zone (D3= Diagnose,
Design, Discuss), in which students utilize scientific inquiry tools to think
through their own understandings, design personally-relevant tests of proposed
explanations, carry out investigations, interpret results, and discuss ideas
and implications all along the way; in which the teacher diagnoses student
progress, introduces scientific discourse, and guides the use of science
instruments in the midst of direct encounters with the phenomenon.
Application
Zone (Use), in which students show evidence of putting the new knowledge to
use, by communicating findings, by applying the knowledge in a new situation,
by solving a new problem, by amplifying differentiated features, or by
graphically reorganizing concepts into more coherent “big picture”; in which
teacher and students evaluate progress.
The ED3U model operates on the premise that encounters with science
phenomena initiate impressions and activate curiosities that will quite often vary from advanced
scientific understanding and this variance is inherent in the nature of
scientific inquiry. Carey (2000, p. 19) asserts definitively that:
Teachers and science educators should be made aware of the
important and perhaps surprising consequences of looking at the problem of
science education in terms of conceptual change. For example, I have often
heard teachers and science educators blame student misconceptions on faulty
education at an earlier stage in the curriculum. Rather, student misconceptions
are inevitable. Not having the target concepts is not an undesirable stage in
students but an absolutely necessary one. Indeed, students will construct
intermediate steps and misconceptions that do not conform with the views of
developed science, and educators should recognize when these steps constitute
progress, not problems.
This viewpoint shifts
the discussion of misconceptions and conceptual change from an emphasis on what
students lack in their conceptual
understanding, toward understanding what students bring into the classroom as
conceptual assets, taking advantage of diagnostic insights to utilize existing
personal science conceptions as the rich substrate out of which scientific
conceptual understanding can emerge.
References
Bybee, R.W. 1997. Achieving Scientific Literacy. NH: Heinemann, p. 178-179.
Carey, S. (2000). Science
education as conceptual change. Journal
of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 21, 13-19.
Hewson. P. W. (1992, June). Conceptual change in science teaching and teacher education. Paper presented at a
meeting on “Research and Curriculum Development in Science Teaching,” under the auspices of the National
Center for Educational Research, Documentation,
and Assessment, Ministry for Education and Science, Madrid, Spain.
Karplus, R. & Thier, H. D. (1967). A new look and elementary school science: Science curriculum
improvement study. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally & Company.
McComas, W.F. (1995). ED3U
model. Class notes taken by Richard Shope.
Project 2061, American Association for the Advancement of
Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Shope, R. and L. Chapman (2001). The Space Exploration Team
Inquiry Model: Linking NASA to
Urban Education Initiatives (ASTE Proceedings).
Strike. K. A. & Posner,
G.J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In Duschl, R. A.
& Hamilton, R. J. (Eds.) (1992). Philosophy
of science, cognitive psychology,
and educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Tobin, K. (1993). The
practice of constructivism in science education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers.