Chapter 6, page 105
evidence at all. The second one tells the source of the evidence (ice core samples).
#3: The second paper talks about a counterargument, and it rebuts the counterargument.
The first paper doesn’t do this.
#4: The papers are about global warming. They both think that something should be done
about global warming. They both talk about glaciers.Response:
Student #1 mentions only surface characteristics of the essays; this is characteristic of
novices.
Student #2 refers to evidence and sources. These are not mentioned explicitly in the
essays; Student #2 is aware of these deeper categories of argumentation because she is
more expert about the structure of argumentative essays.
Student #3 refers to counterarguments and rebuttals—also indicative of understanding
the deeper structure of argumentative essays, and more characteristic of experts.
Like Student #1, Student #4 makes no reference to argumentation categories that are
not explicitly mentioned in the essays. He refers only to more surface-level features of
the essays (topic is global warming; both talk about glaciers).CONCEPTUAL RESOURCESConceptual resources are the fourth type of prior conception. Even when students lack prior
schemas or have strong alternative conceptions or strong novice conceptions, they will almost certainly
have some conceptions that teachers can draw on to help them learn the new ideas (Hammer, 1996; J. P.
Smith, III, diSessa, & Roschelle, 1993/1994). We call these conceptions conceptual resources because
they are ideas that students can use to build new knowledge. There are four types of conceptual resources
that are often useful to help students build new conceptions: knowledge of relevant evidence, conceptions
from previously learned topics, conceptions derived from prior experiences, and conceptions about
analogical situations.
Knowledge of Relevant Evidence
Sometimes students who have an alternative conception may be aware of evidence that is contrary
to their own conception. This evidence may help them realize that their conception is in error. Knowledge
of relevant evidence is especially helpful in promoting a change in beliefs. For instance, when asked how
cells let substances in through their membrane, some middle school students say that the cell can identify
what chemicals should be let in, and then it allows only those “good” chemicals to enter (Dreyfus,
Jungwirth, & Eliovitch, 1990). However, this conception is contradicted by a piece of evidence that most
students know about—namely, that poisons sometimes get into cells. When students come up with the
alternative conception that cells can identify which chemicals should be let in, they do not notice that their
idea is inconsistent with what they know about poisons. Teachers can help students start to build new
ideas by reminding them of evidence that they know about—in this case, that poisons sometimes enter the
cell.