Domain of validity framework: a new instructional theory for addressing students’ preconceptions in science and engineering

ABSTRACT

We propose a new instructional theory, the Domain of Validity (DoV) Framework, which offers a new way forward for designing teaching for conceptual change, while also resolving conflicts between existing theories related to common, difficult-to-change conceptions students have about particular scientific topics. We propose that knowledge consists of two connected elements: a model and a domain of validity (or DoV). Foregrounding the notion of DoV for given models allows us to reconceptualise and diagnose many problematic preconceptions as examples of an oversized DoV. Mapping the different elements of knowledge – both the model and its domain of validity – allows teachers to pinpoint precisely the cognitive conflict that students need to confront in a conceptual change approach to teaching. We highlight the instructional implications related to these scientific learning difficulties and conclude by proposing particular teaching strategies based on this new framework, emphasising the domains of validity of particular scientific models.

KEYWORDS:

• Misconception
• conceptual change
• science education
• model-based learning
• threshold concept

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Terms translated by the authors from the French corresponding terms: ‘intériorité’, ‘facilité’, ‘positivité’, ‘ambiguïté’, ‘polymorphie’ and ‘récursivité’.

2. The term ‘model’ is used here in accordance with the definition given in Subsection 3.1.

3. For these consequences, we do not need to assume that the DoV exists inside individuals’ minds, so the following considerations may be thought of as outside of individuals.

4. The existence of this cognitive structure is consistent with the ideas that (1) humans tends to generalise their experiences in order to find some regularity and (2) the DoV is more implicit than the model itself. Indeed, such a cognitive structure could, for example, result from the following situation: (1) The teacher, having presented ‘white dot’ experiences to the student (including exercises in class, for example), has always told students they were ‘right’ when giving correct answers using M1; (2) the student has not been exposed to the ‘black-dot’ experience yet; (3) the student, by generalising these white dot experiences, implicitly builds an overgeneralised DoV of M1 since neither the student nor the teacher consider knowledge as having any component other than the model itself.

5. It is worth noting that, scientifically speaking, the planet Earth is neither flat nor round. Using the round Earth model (M2) without taking on board its domain of application (for instance, by considering this model as appropriate for any context) may consist in a new preconception. Therein lies the recursive aspect of learning in the DoV framework.

6. We follow here a constructivist approach since the teacher, instead of immediately giving the final explanation, guides the student via questions and reasoning to make him/her infer it him/herself.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Raoul Sommeillier

Raoul Sommeillier is a Ph.D. candidate in science education specialising in didactics in applied sciences, a teaching assistant in electricity and electronics at the Bio-, Electro- And Mechanical Systems (BEAMS) department, and an engineer in electromechanics. His research focuses on higher education students’ preconceptions in scientific fields and the development and testing of teaching strategies to help students overcome these learning obstacles. He holds a double Master of Engineering in mechatronics and constructions from Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB) and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), an Advanced Master in technological & industrial management from Solvay Business School and an upper secondary teaching certificate in engineering sciences.https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4903-3386http://beams.ulb.ac.be/users/raoul-sommeillierhttps://be.linkedin.com/in/raoul-sommeillier

Kathleen M. Quinlan

Kathleen M. Quinlan is Professor of Higher Education and Director of the Centre for the Study of Higher Education at the University of Kent. Before joining the University of Kent in 2016, she held academic and leadership positions in educational development at the University of Oxford, The Australian National University and Cornell University’s College of Veterinary Medicine. She holds a Ph.D. in education from Stanford University and a bachelor’s degree in psychology from the University of Maine.  Her research focuses on teaching and learning in higher education, with special attention to discipline-specific pedagogical concerns and the development of students’ interest in their subjects.https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3606-4148https://www.kent.ac.uk/cshe/people/staff/quinlan2.htmlhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/kathleen-m-quinlan-12a0111b/

Frédéric Robert

Frédéric Robert is Dean and Professor in electricity and electronics at the Brussels Faculty of Engineering. He has held various positions within the Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB): Advisor to the Rector for teaching and learning in higher education, Vice-Dean of the École polytechnique de Bruxelles and Head of the Embedded Electronics research unit of the Bio-, Electro- And Mechanical Systems (BEAMS) department. From 2005, he supervised the engineering education department of the École polytechnique de Bruxelles: the Bureau d’Appui Pédagogique en Polytechnique (BAPP). His research interests include science education (project-based learning, conceptual change, cognitive obstacles) and both advanced engineering in electricity and electronics (high frequency transformers, high energy physics instrumentation, industrial electronics). He holds a Ph.D. in Applied Sciences and a Master of Engineering in electronics and telecommunications.https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6520-5873http://beams.ulb.ac.be/users/frédéric-roberthttps://www.linkedin.com/in/frédéric-robert-3881253/