The possibility that students can learn counterintuitive science concepts as the result of reading and then discussing ideas within a social context was examined in this study. Students read one of two texts, narrative and expository, that taught students Newtonian principles related to projectile motion. After reading, they (a) answered questions about ideas in the text, (b) participated in a scaffolded discussion with another student and a researcher to answer the same questions, or (c) participated in a control activity. Students who read expository text and students who participated in scaffolded discussion performed better on posttests than did those who read narrative and participated in question/answer sessions. Students who answered questions after reading had inappropriate search strategies, and they twisted information to make it consistent with their own nonscientific understandings. Students who discussed the text evidenced the same behaviors; however, the scaffolded discussion helped them focus more accurately on the text.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alvermann et al. (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: