Sweater Article Response

The article, Teaching for Conceptual Change: Confronting Children's Experience, was both eye-opening and relatable. The constructivist model of teaching is beneficial because it allows children to construct knowledge through experience and through the creation of various hypotheses. However, this model of teaching is a slower process and, consequently, not as much material can be covered. On the other hand, many teachers simply teach the curriculum -- they cover the material rather than allow students to discover through experience and hypotheses. I can relate to this form of teaching. When I was in elementary school, many of my teachers taught for memorization and testing. As young students, we learned to memorize facts and ideas solely for the purpose of passing a test. Once the test was over, the facts and ideas would be forgotten.

In the article, Deb O'Brien teaches a science lesson about heat for "conceptual change." According to Watson and Konicek, "Her students, allowed to examine their own experiences, must confront the inconsistencies in their theories. In the process they find the path toward a deeper understanding of heat, have a great time with science, and refine their thinking and writing skills" (1990, pg. 35-36). As she taught for "conceptual change," she found the process to be slow. The children would not surrender their own ideas about how heat works. There are a few different strategies that can help teachers to overcome obstacles related to teaching for "conceptual change." The strategies include: stressing relevance, making predictions, and stressing consistency. In my future classroom, I will connect new concepts to my students' everyday lives, I will let my students make predictions and reflect on those predictions, and I will teach my students how to confront inconsistencies within their thought processes. In my future classroom, I will teach for understanding, not for memorization.