HR: 17:30h
AN: ED22F-07    [PDF]
TI: Prototypical Concepts and Misconceptions of Plate Tectonic Boundaries
AU: * Sibley, D F
EM: sibley@msu.edu
AF: Dept. Geological Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824 United States
AU: Patino, L C
EM: patinol@msu.edu
AF: Dept. Geological Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824 United States
AB: Students of geology encounter many prototypical/exemplar concepts* that include representative, but not necessarily defining, features and characteristics. This study of students' prototypical representations of plate tectonic boundaries indicates that their representations are rich sources of information about their misconceptions about plate tectonics. After lectures in plate tectonics and mountain building, 353 students in a general education geology class were asked to draw a continent-continent convergent boundary. For this study, a correct answer is defined as having the major features in correct proportions as depicted in the plate boundary diagrams on the USGS web. Fifty-two percent of the drawings were either incorrect or incomplete such that they could not be interpreted. Only 48% were readily interpretable, and of these 22% drew the boundary correctly, showing a thickening of crust where two continents collide. Thirty-three percent drew the boundary showing concave slabs of continental crust as one might imagine two pieces of firm rubber pushed together on a rigid surface and 45% depicted mountains as one might imagine inverted ice cream cones on a rigid plank. Twenty-one senior class geology majors and graduate students were given the same assignment. Forty-eight percent rendered a correct drawing, whereas 38% drew the same ice cream cone on a plank type picture that 45% of the general education students drew. In a second class of 12 geology majors, only 1 student drew a cross section of a continent-ocean boundary similar to standard representation. Four of 12 drew mountains on the top of continental crust over a subduction zone but did not draw a compensating mass within the crust or lithosphere. Prototypical drawings provide more information about students' concepts than do most multiple-choice questions. For example, sixty-two percent of theses students who drew mountains similar to foam rubber pads pushed together on a desk or ice cream cones on a plank correctly answered a multiple-choice question that would appear to indicate a better understanding than the drawings reveal. Furthermore, 12 interviewed students made statements that could be interpreted to indicate that they understood the concept of mountain building at plate tectonic boundaries better than their drawings suggest. Incoherence of multiple-choice responses, verbal statements and drawings may be common in novice learners. If cognitive scientists are correct in their model of multiple types of mental representations for the same term, then the fact that novices may hold inconsistent representations is not surprising. The fact that students at various academic levels draw very similar prototypes that are incorrect is evidence that students have distinct and persistent prototype misconceptions. * Cognitive scientists define a prototypical/exemplar concept as a mental representation of the best examples or central tendencies of a term.
DE: 6605 Education
SC: Education and Human Resources [ED]
MN: 2003 Fall Meeting