Semiotic multiplicities and contradictions in science learning

MARIA-ELENI CHACHLIOUTAKI, PANAGIOTIS PANTIDOS

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the notion of situated and modally defined learning, aiming to identify and describe action structures as thought structures. Our focus is on investigating modal patterns that emerge during the learning process, using a case study involving a 5-year-old preschool child's conceptualization of mechanical equilibrium. To achieve this, we designed three identical tests, each eliciting different modal responses from the student. These tests comprised three tasks that varied semiotically. They were administered at different time points and interspersed with two distinct teaching interventions. The findings revealed that during the conceptualization of mechanical equilibrium, the student displayed semiotic multiplicities, employing various modalities and semiotic systems to represent the same conceptual dimensions of the phenomenon. Interestingly, the student's thinking exhibited regressions between compatible and non-compatible conceptualizations in line with school knowledge, leading to apparent contradictions. These observations highlight the concept of variability and underscore how multiplicities and contradictions are integral components of the dynamic learning process.

Keywords

Science education, mechanical equilibrium, semiotic multiplicities, semiotic contradictions, science learning

Full Text:

PDF

References

Adam, H., & Galinsky, A. D. (2012) Enclothed cognition. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(4), 918-925.

Beilock, S. L., Lyons, I. M., Mattarella-Micke, A., Nusbaum, H. C., & Small, S. L. (2008). Sports experience changes the neural processing of action language. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Proceedings of the national academy of sciences (pp. 13269-13273). USA, 105 36). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0803424105.

Chachlioutaki, M.-E., Pantidos, P., & Kampeza, M. (2016). Changing semiotic modes indicates the introduction of new elements in children’s reasoning: The case of earthquakes. Educational Journal of the University of Patras UNESCO Chair, 3(2), 198-208.

Chang, N. (2012). What are the roles that children’s drawings play in inquiry of science concepts? Early Child Development and Care, 182(5), 621-637.

Church, R. B. (1999). Using gesture and speech to capture transitions in learning. Cognitive Development, 14(2), 313-342.

Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7-19.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.

Einarsdottir, J., Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2009). Making meaning: Children’s perspectives expressed through drawings. Early Child Development and Care, 179(2), 217-232.

Fragkiadaki, G., Fleer, M., & Ravanis, K. (2019). A cultural-historical study of the development of children’s scientific thinking about clouds in everyday life. Research in Science Education, 49(6), 1523-1545.

Garbarini, F., & Adenzato, M. (2004). At the root of embodied cognition: Cognitive science meets neurophysiology. Brain and Cognition, 56(1), 100-106.

Givry, D., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). Toward a new conception of conceptions: Interplay of talk, gestures, and structures in the setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 1086-1109.

Goldin-Meadow, S. (2017). What the hands can tell us about language emergence. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 24, 213-218.

Goodchild, M. F., & Janelle, D. G. (2010). Toward critical spatial thinking in the social sciences and humanities. GeoJournal, 75(1), 3–13.

Han, I. (2013). Embodiment: A new perspective for evaluating physicality in learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49, 41-59.

Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2002). A study of the development of the concept of mechanical stability in preschool children. Research in Science Education, 32, 373-391.

Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Anastasiou, L., Konsolas, M., & Prevezanou, B. (2009). A study of the effect of preschool children’s participation in sensorimotor activities on their understanding of the mechanical equilibrium of a balance beam. Research in Science Education, 39, 39-55.

Hardiman, P. T., Pollatsek, A., & Well, A. D. (1986). Learning to understand the balance beam. Cognition and Instruction, 3(1), 63-86.

Hegarty, M. (2010). Components of spatial intelligence. In B. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (vol. 52, pp. 265-297). Academic Press.

Herakleioti, E., & Pantidos, P. (2016). The contribution of the human body in young children’s explanations about shadow formation. Research in Science Education, 46(1), 21-42.

Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence: An essay on the construction of formal operational structures. Psychology Press.

Kontra, C., Goldin-Meadow, S., & Beilock, S. L. (2012). Embodied learning across the life span. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4, 731-739.

Lakatos, G., Gácsi, M., Topál, J., & Miklósi, Á. (2012). Comprehension and utilisation of pointing gestures and gazing in dog-human communication in relatively complex situations. Animal Cognition, 15(2), 201-213.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. Basic Books.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (2004). The world of perception. Routledge.

Orabona, F., Caputo, B., Fillbrandt, A., & Ohl, F. W. (2009). A theoretical framework for transfer of knowledge across modalities in artificial and biological systems. In 2009 IEEE 8th International Conference on Development and Learning. IEEE. 10.1109/DEVLRN.2009.5175515

Ortiz, L. G., Heron, P. R., & Shaffer, P. S. (2005). Student understanding of static equilibrium: Predicting and accounting for balancing. American Journal of Physics, 73(6), 545-553.

Pantidos, P., & Givry, D. (2021). A semiotic approach for the teaching of energy: linking mechanical work and heat with the world of objects and events. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 15(2), 5-30.

Ping, R., Church, R. B., Decatur, M. A., Larson, S. W., Zinchenko, E., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2021). Unpacking the gestures of chemistry learners: What the hands tell us about correct and incorrect conceptions of stereochemistry. Discourse Processes, 58(3), 213-232.

Pizzuto, G., & Cangelosi, A. (2019). Exploring deep models for comprehension of deictic gesture-word combinations in cognitive robotics. In 2019 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). IEEE. 10.1109/IJCNN.2019.8852425

Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2006). An exploratory study of teachers’ and students’ use of multi‐modal representations of concepts in primary science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1843-1866.

Roth, W. (2003). From epistemic (ergotic) actions to scientific discourse: The bridging function of gestures. Pragmatics and Cognition, 11, 141-170.

Roth, W.-M., & Welzel, M. (2001). From activity to gestures and scientific language. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 103-136.

Roth, W. M., Goulart, M. I. M., & Plakitsi, K. (2012). Science Education during early childhood: A cultural-historical Perspective. Springer Science and Business Media.

Sarıoğlan, A. B., & Küçüközer, H. (2014). 11th grade students’ conceptual understanding about torque concept: A longitudinal study. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 6(2), 162-175.

Siegler, R. S., & Klahr, D. (1982). Why do children learn? The relationship between existing knowledge and the acquisition of new knowledge. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 121-211). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Shapiro, L. (2019). Embodied cognition. Routledge.

Thompson, L. A., & Massaro, D. W. (1994). Children’s integration of speech and pointing gestures in comprehension. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 57(3), 327-354.

Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wilson, A. D., & Golonka, S. (2013). Embodied cognition is not what you think it is. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 58. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00058

Yildirim, I., & Jacobs, R. A. (2013). Transfer of object category knowledge across visual and haptic modalities: Experimental and computational studies. Cognition, 126(2), 135-148.

Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21, 317-331.

Zhang, D., & Grégoire, É. (2011). The landscape of inconsistency: A perspective. International Journal of Semantic Computing, 5(03), 235-256.


DOI: https://doi.org/10.26220/rev.4510

View Counter: Abstract | 336 | times, and PDF | 122 | times



Re S M ICT E | ISSN: 1792-3999 (electronic), 1791-261X (print) | Laboratory of Didactics of Sciences, Mathematics and ICT, Department of Educational Sciences and Early Childhood Education - University of Patras.

Pasithee | Library & Information Center | University of Patras