In this dissertation I analyze the process of crafting definitions whose purpose is classification. The context I examine is undergraduate upper-division physical science majors defining and naming sub-categories of a physical phenomenon in the context of a design task over an extended period of time. The goal of the design task is one of classification: help people better identify the phenomenon out in the world.
I first develop an analytic framework for the process of improving a definition. This framework involves an interplay between four main elements: the current state of the definition, criteria for what makes a good definition, examples, and definitionally unarticulated knowledge (DUK). By DUK, I mean implicit judgments that definers make about categorization that have not been incorporated into the definition, per se. I show how criteria and the practices associated with meeting them guide the refinement work.
Once participants craft their definition a question emerges: to what extent does it serve them as a tool when they make sense of new examples? I zoom in on moments where new examples are introduced by participants or the facilitator and describe the extent to which students rely on their own crafted definition. The consideration of a new example can sometimes lead to participants naming a new sub-category and I analyze this process as well.
The detailed empirical analysis is bookended by a set of workshop design principles that made the analysis possible and some educational implications of the work. I lay out a set of design principles for creating activities wherein people engage productively in collaboratively defining. I conclude by exploring the educational implications for college physics teaching as well as more general instances where one is interested in crafting a definition for the purpose of classification.
|Advisor:||diSessa, Andrea A.|
|Commitee:||Schoenfeld, Alan H., Sweetser, Eve E.|
|School:||University of California, Berkeley|
|Department:||Science & Mathematics Education|
|School Location:||United States -- California|
|Source:||DAI-A 75/08(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Keywords:||Authentic science, Classifying, College physics, Definitions, Process of defining, Threshold|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be