Skip to main content
Log in

Should physicists preach what they practice?

Constructive modeling in doing and learning physics

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Does one need to think like a scientist to learn science? To what extent can examining the cognitive activities of scientists provide insights for developing effective pedagogical practices? The cognition and instruction literature has focused on providing a model of expert knowledge structures. To answer these questions, what is needed is a model of expert reasoning practices. This analysis is a step in that direction. It focuses on a tacit dimension of the thinking practices of expert physicists, “constructive modeling”. Drawing on studies of historical cases and protocol accounts of expert reasoning in scientific problem solving, it is argued that having expertise in physics requires facility with the practice of “constructive modeling” that includes the ability to reason with models viewed generically. Issues pertaining to why and how this practice of experts might be incorporated into teaching are explored.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bhatta, S. & Goel, A.: 1993, “Learning generic mechanisms from experience for analogical reasoning”, Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bobrow, D.G. (ed.): 1985, Qualitative Reasoning About Physical Systems, MIT/Bradford Books, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J.S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P.: 1989, ‘Situated cognition and the culture of learning”, Educational Researcher 18, 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N.: 1989, Nature's Capacities and Their Measurement, Clarendon, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P.J. & Glaser, R.: 1981, “Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices”, Cognitive Science 5, 121–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M.T.H. & Glaser, R.: 1988, The Nature of Expertise, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clement, J.: 1989, “Learning via model construction and criticism”, in G. Glover, R. Ronning, and C. Reynolds (eds.), Handbook of Creativity: Assessment, Theory, and Research, Plenum, New York, 341–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craik, K.: 1943, The Nature of Explanation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Kleer, J. and Brown, J.S.: 1983, ‘Assumptions and Ambiguities in Mechanistic Mental Models”, in Gentner & Stevens, 155–190.

  • Driver, R. & Easley, J.: 1978, “Pupils and Paradigms: A Review of Literature Related to Concept Development in Adolescent Science Students”, Studies in Science Education 5, 61–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R.A.: 1990, Restructuring Science Education: The Importance of Theories and Their Development, Teachers College Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K.A. & Smith, J.: 1991, Toward a General Theory of Expertise, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faraday, M.: 1835–55, Experimental Researches in Electricity, Dover, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feynman, R.P., Leighton, R.B. & Sands, M.: 1964, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentner, D. and Gentner, D.R.: 1983, “Flowing Waters or Teaming Crowds: Mental Models of Electricity”, in Gentner & Stevens, 99–130.

  • Gentner, D. and Stevens, A.L.: 1983, Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilhooly, K.J.: 1986, “Mental Modelling: A Framework for the Study of Thinking”, in J. Bishop, J. Lochhead, and D. Perkins (eds.), Thinking: Progress in Research and Teaching, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersy, 19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giere, R.N.: 1988, Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooding, D.C.: 1980, “Metaphysics vs measurement: the conversion and conservation of force in Faraday's physics”, Annals of Science 37, 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooding, D.C.: 1990, Experiment and the Making of Meaning: Human Agency in Scientific Observation and Experiment, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, M. & Carlson, B.: 1990, “Interpreting invention as a cognitive process: the case of Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas Edison, and the telephone”, Science, Technology, and Human Values 15, 131–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halloun, I.A. & Hestenes, D.: 1985: “Common sense concepts about motion”, American Journal of Physics 53, 1056–1065.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J.D.: 1962, Classical Electrodynamics, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P.N.: 1983, Mental Models, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Larid, P.N.: 1989, “Mental Models”, in M. Posner (ed.), Foundations of Cognitive Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 469–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. & Wills, L.: 1993, “Case-based creative design”, in AAAI Spring Symposium on AI and Creativity, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D.P. and Simon, H.A.: 1980, “Models of competence in solving physics problems”, Cognitive Science 11, 65–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J.C.: 1890, The Scientific Papers of James Clerk Maxwell, W.D. Niven (ed.), Cambridge University, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J.C.: 1855–6, “On Faraday's lines of force”, in Scientific Papers, vol. 1, 155–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J.C.: 1861–2, “On physical lines of force”, in Scientific Papers, vol. 1, 451–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, J.C.: 1864, “A dynamical theory of the electromagnetic field”, in Scientific Papers, vol. 1, 526–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L.: 1984, “An Overview of Research on Conceptual Understanding in Physics”, unpublished manuscript.

  • Nersessian, N.J.: 1984, Faraday to Einstein: Constructing Meaning in Scientific Theories, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N.J.: 1985, “Faraday's field concept”, in D.C. Gooding and F.A.J.L. James (eds.), Faraday Rediscovered: Essays on the Life & Work of Michael Faraday, Macmillan, London, 377–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N.J.: 1989, “Conceptual change in science and in science education”, Synthese 80, 163–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N.J.: 1992, “How Do Scientists Think? Capturing the Dynamics of Conceptual Change in Science”, in R. Giere (ed.), Cognitive Models of Science, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15, U. of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 3–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N.J.: 1993, “In the theoretician's laboratory: thought experimenting as mental modeling”, PSA 1992, vol. 2, D. Hull, M. Forbes, & K. Okruhlik (eds.), 291–301, PSA, East Lansing, Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, N.J.: in press, “Abstraction via Generic Modeling in Concept Formation in Science”, in N. Cartwright & M.R. Jones (eds.), Idealization in Science, Editions Rodophi, Amsterdam.

  • Nersessian, N.J.: in process, Creativity and Conceptual Change: A Constructivist View, (MIT/Bradford Books).

  • Nersessian, N.J. & Greeno, J.G.: in process, “Constructive Modeling in Creating Scientific Understanding”, manuscript.

  • Nersessian, N.J. & Resnick, L.B.: 1989, “Comparing Historical and Intuitive Explanations of Motion: Does ‘Naive’ Physics Have a Structure?”, in Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society 11, 412–420, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panofsky, W. & Phillips, M.: 1962, Classical Electricity and Magnetism, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrig, W. & Kintsch, W.: 1985, “Propositional and Situational Representations of Text”, Journal of Memory and Language 24, 503–518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1954), Induction and Analogy in Mathematics, Vol. 1., Princeton University, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ram, A., Wills, L., Domeshek, E., Nersessian, N. & Kolodner, J.: in press, “Understanding the creative mind”, AI Journal.

  • Simon, D.P. & Simon, D.: 1978, “Individual differences in solving physics problems”, in R.S. Seigler (ed.), Children's Thinking: What Develops?, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stroulia, E. & Goel, A.: 1992, “Generic Teleological Mechanisms and their Use in Case Adaptation”, Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 319–324, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P., Gochfeld, D. & Hardy, S.: 1993, “Visual analogical mapping”, Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tweney, R.D. & Gooding, D.C.: in process, “Qualitative Skills in Quantitative Thinking: Faraday as a Mathematical Philosopher”, manuscript.

  • White, B.Y.: 1993, “Thinker Tools: Causal Models, Conceptual Change, and Science Education”, Cognition and Instruction 10.

  • Wills, L.M. & Kolodner, J.L.: 1994, “Explaining Serendipitous Recognition in Design”, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiser, M.: 1992, “Mental models and computer models of thermal physics”, unpublished manuscript.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nersessian, N.J. Should physicists preach what they practice?. Sci Educ 4, 203–226 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00486621

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00486621

Keywords

Navigation