View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Springer - Publisher Connector Resnick et al. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications (2017) 2:21 Cognitive Research: Principles DOI 10.1186/s41235-017-0054-7 and Implications ORIGINAL ARTICLE Open Access Using analogy to learn about phenomena at scales outside human perception Ilyse Resnick1*, Alexandra Davatzes2, Nora S. Newcombe3 and Thomas F. Shipley3 Abstract Understanding and reasoning about phenomena at scales outside human perception (for example, geologic time) is critical across science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Thus, devising strong methods to support acquisition of reasoning at such scales is an important goal in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. In two experiments, we examine the use of analogical principles in learning about geologic time. Across both experiments we find that using a spatial analogy (for example, a time line) to make multiple alignments, and keeping all unrelated components of the analogy held constant (for example, keep the time line the same length), leads to better understanding of the magnitude of geologic time. Effective approaches also include hierarchically and progressively aligning scale information (Experiment 1) and active prediction in making alignments paired with immediate feedback (Experiments 1 and 2). Keywords: Analogy, Magnitude, Progressive alignment, Corrective feedback, STEM education Significance statement alignment and having multiple opportunities to make Many fundamental science, technology, engineering, and alignments are critical in supporting reasoning about mathematic (STEM) phenomena occur at extreme scales scale, and that the progressive and hierarchical that cannot be directly perceived. For example, the Geo- organization of scale information may provide salient logic Time Scale, discovery of the atom, size of the landmarks for estimation. Finally, we found that active universe, and rapidly developing field of nanotechnology prediction and corrective feedback are valuable in foster- are all based on phenomena occurring at scales that ing a linear representation of magnitude. These findings humans cannot directly experience. Unfortunately, nov- have practical implications, as they can guide development ices have trouble reasoning about phenomena outside hu- of supports for the acquisition of reasoning at extreme man perception, at least in part, because they do not scales, which is an important goal in STEM education. understand the relative magnitudes at these scales. Across two experiments we develop and test two successful in- structional analogies designed to teach geologic time. Background ’ These findings add to our theoretical understanding of How can we improve students reasoning about large how people reason about scale, and the role of analogical magnitudes? reasoning and active prediction in learning. We find that Skills in reasoning about size and scale are central to per- reasoning about different kinds of magnitude (that is, tem- formance across STEM disciplines (for example, Hawkins, poral and abstract) at different scales (that is, inside and 1978; Tretter, Jones, Andre, Negishi, & Minogue, 2006). outside human perception) have shared properties, and Many fundamental science, technology, engineering, and that people are able to use a spatial representation of tem- mathematic (STEM) phenomena occur at extreme scales poral magnitude to develop a more accurate understand- that cannot be directly perceived. For example, a core ing of geologic time. Our findings suggest that structural geologic concept is that geologic events can last billions of years (for example, the Earth formed approximately 4.6 billion years ago). Reasoning about geologic time allows * Correspondence: [email protected] 1 geologists to reconstruct the surface conditions of ancient Department of Psychology, Penn State University Lehigh Valley, 2809 ’ Saucon Valley Road, Center Valley, PA 18034, USA Earth, produce an accurate time line of Earthshistory, Full list of author information is available at the end of the article and understand the imperceptibly slow processes that © The Author(s). 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Resnick et al. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications (2017) 2:21 Page 2 of 17 have led to the current environment. Practically, under- corresponding relations between the base concept and standing geologic time allows people to reason about the target concept (for example, Gentner, 1983; Kotovsky & sustainability of non-renewable resources and the conse- Gentner, 1996). It can also be difficult to identify the quences of anthropogenic climate change. Given the relevant relations to align if the base concept and target importance of reasoning about scale, it should be no sur- concept are different in many ways (Gentner, 1983; prise that the National Research Council in AFramework Gentner, 2001; Markman & Gentner, 1996, 1997; Kokinov for K-12 Science Education (National Research Council, & French, 2003). For example, Earth’s history is also 2011) and the American Association for the Advancement commonly mapped onto a 24-hour clock. However, this of Science in Benchmarks for Science Literacy (American analogy contains at least two differences in addition to Association for the Advancement of Science, 1993) identi- differences in magnitude (24 hours versus billions of fied “size and scale” as fundamental scientific concepts, and years): clocks are cyclical whereas Earth’s history is linear, suggested them as a unifying theme in science education. and clocks are composed of equal temporal divisions Unfortunately, novices have trouble reasoning about whereas geologic time comprises unequal temporal phenomena outside human perception. Although nov- divisions based on major geologic events. Thus, students ices are sometimes reasonably accurate at ranking may not be able to identify the appropriate analogy to phenomena in a correct sequence, they have difficultly make and, subsequently, draw incorrect conclusions comparing the magnitude between phenomena at (Brown & Salter, 2010; Gentner, 1983). In this instance, extreme scales (for example, Delgado, Stevens, Shin, students may erroneously believe that, just like the Yunker, & Krajcik, 2007; Jones, Tretter, Taylor, & Oppewal, 24-hour clock, periods of Earth’s history are also evenly 2008; Libarkin, Anderson, Dahl, Beilfuss, & Boone, 2005). spaced, and fail to make the appropriate analogy between For example, although students are fairly accurate in iden- relative magnitudes of time between events. tifying a correct sequence of events in Earth’s geologic A review of analogical reasoning literature offers three history (Trend, 2001), they fail to understand the magni- techniques that may be useful in the development of tude of time between events (Tretter et al., 2006). effective analogies for phenomena at extreme scales. Analogy is potentially valuable for learning and First, the base concept and target concept should be reasoning about phenomena outside human perception structurally aligned; that is, as similar as possible with because such phenomena cannot be directly experienced just one “alignable difference” (Goldstone, 1994; Markman (Jones, Taylor, & Broadwell, 2009). Analogy refers to a & Gentner, 1993a, 1993b; Medin, Goldstone, & Gentner, process of aligning structural similarities between a base 1993). An alignable difference is a common relation concept and a target concept (Gentner, 1983). In fact, shared by the base concept and target concept which analogy is frequently used to teach phenomena at differs along one dimension. In the case of aligning an ex- extreme scales (for example, Clary & Wandersee, 2009; treme scale with a human scale, both scales should be Petcovic & Ruhf, 2008; Semken et al., 2009; Sibley, constructed in the same format (for example, a linear 2009). Unfortunately, even with a wide range of analo- number line), with the only difference being magnitude. gies, students struggle to comprehend phenomena However, because the difference in magnitude between outside human perception (for example, Delgado et al., extreme and human scales is so vast, it may not be 2007; Jones et al., 2008; Libarkin et al., 2005). Moreover, possible for the base concept and target concept to be analogies can mislead students (Brown & Salter, 2010; structurally aligned. Thus, a second technique to align Duit, 1991). For example, geologic time is often repre- very different concepts is called progressive alignment sented using a spatial analogy that compresses the time (Kotovsky & Gentner, 1996; Thompson & Opfer, 2010). before life on Earth becomes relatively more complex. Using progressive alignment, an analogy may consist of Although functional, learning from this nonlinear repre- more than one analogical step, beginning with a com- sentation can mislead students into thinking that parison of a base concept and a highly similar intermedi- biologic events occurred very early in the Earth’s history ate concept. Comparing two very similar concepts as an (Resnick, Davatzes, Newcombe, & Shipley, 2016;