I see your point. I would like to rejoin that, of the sciences, physics in
particular is definitely a very strange language game.
It does go farther than that. In the work I did with Paul Horwitz and Ed
Taylor, I found research indicating the reason for one kind of difficulty
with visually observing objects in motion, to be traced to eye-tracking.
The human visual system tends to track objects in such a way that makes it
difficult to 'percieve' an event the way a physicist conceptualizes it. A
good example of this phenomenon is to observe an airplane landing while
driving on the highway. The airplane appears not to be moving. The human
visual system is comparing the motion of the aircraft image on your retina
with respect to the much faster motion of the image of the ground. Such
perceptions are not socially, mutually negotiated with some other person.
It is you in the car looking at an airplane.
Folks, please make sure someone else is driving as you make your
observations. (Visitors to San Diego can travel south on I-5 and watch the
oncoming landing aircraft as you pass the airport exit - oops. )
As to aircraft viewed from moving cars, I have trained myself not to
believe my eyes. BTW, I have an unproven hypothesis that is this effect
that makes it notoriously difficult for a hockey goaltender to stop a puck
shot to the left when the shooter is moving to the right. There also is
the phenomena with small children who observe that 'the moon is following
our car".
Describing the aircraft in the linguistic pattern according to physics is
indeed a strange language game to many people. I suppose that is the
point. But with this airplane observation you use everyday language to say
the plane is not moving and that alone is strange.
I agree that it is problematic to write "Children come to the classroom
with notions about the physical world that are often quite different from
scientists and often quite resistent to change. " (sic) as I have done. I
wish to recant that statement because of the problems encountered when one
begins to think about childrens *possessing* knowledge as the studies by
Cole and Scibner and others have uncovered. Rather I should write that
"Children participate in situations with patterns of description about the
physical world that are often quite different from scientists and often
quite resistent to change. "
Neo-Piagetians attibute the difficulty to pre-conceptions, mis-conceptions,
etc. which is a problematic conceptualization with students 'having' these
ideas. You can say that the conceptualizations are "socially, reciprocally
constituted" but you still arrive at the same problem. One can say that
it is difficult to socially, reciprocally constitute situations in which
the students describe the physical world using the same language game as
scientists or one can say the students have difficulty learning the
pre-ordained science. I have not yet been able to advantage the former to
formulate better interventions.
While the language of 'preconceptions' etc. can be considered a stumbling
block for science education in some ways, in other ways it is very
powerful. Twenty years ago, many science educators acted as if students
came to their classrooms as 'tabula rasa' and only if they would pay
attention, they would learn what it was the teacher was telling. It was
always the students' fault for their lack of performance. What was twenty
years ago is still today in a lot in U.S. secondary high schools. The
interesting thing is that the conceptual change movement has resulted in
new ways of socially, reciprocally constituting situations. Teachers are
now starting to do interviews, conduct diagnostic tests, engage students in
discussions, support student-centered projects and investigations, etc and
teach the students rather than teach the subject. As a model for the
developmental process, conceptual change has considerable utility.
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Technology in Education
Lesley College, 29 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]