返回首页
 【公告】 1. 本网即日起只接受电子邮箱投稿,不便之处,请谅解! 2. 所有文章的评论功能暂时关闭,主要是不堪广告骚扰。需要讨论的,可到本网留言专区。 
学界动态
好汉反剽
社科论丛
校园文化
好汉教苑
好汉哲学
学习方法
心灵抚慰
好汉人生
好汉管理
学术服务
好汉网主
说好汉网
English
学术商城
学术交友
访客留言
世界天气
万年日历
学术吧台
各国会议
在线聊天
设为首页
加入收藏

首页  »  English

Piaget logic of meanings: Still relevant today

作者  |  来源于  |  编辑于2011/5/8 23:07:34  |  浏览  次
分享到新浪微博+ 分享到QQ空间+ 分享到腾讯微博+ 分享到人人网+ 分享到开心网+ 分享到百度搜藏+ 分享到淘宝+ 分享到网易微博+ 分享到Facebook脸谱网+ 分享到Twitter推特网+ 用邮件推荐给朋友+ 打印

Wavering, M. J. (2011). Piaget's logic of meanings: Still relevant today. School Science and Mathematics, 111(5), 249-252. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00083.x

In his last book, Toward a Logic of Meanings (Piaget & Garcia, 1991), Jean Piaget describes how thought can be categorized into a form of propositional logic, a logic of meanings. The intent of this article is to offer this analysis by Piaget as a means to understand the language and teaching of science. Using binary propositions, conjunctions, and disjunctions, a table of binary operations is used to analyze the structure of statements about conclusions drawn from observations of science phenomena. Two examples from science content illustrate how the logic of binary propositions is used to symbolize typical reasoning of secondary-school science students. The content areas are the period of a pendulum and the Archimedes' Principle, which were chosen based on observations in secondary science classrooms. The analyses of the student responses in these two observations demonstrate the commonalities of arguments used by students of science as they try to make sense of observations. The analysis of students' reasoning, demonstrates that Piaget's logic of meanings is a useful and relevant tool for science educators' understanding of the syntactical aspects of pedagogical content knowledge.

The key insight:
“Many of the phenomena studied in science classrooms fall into the category of equivalence relationships. Knowing this and recognizing the use of the logic entailed help[s] teachers to recognize not only correct structures of reasoning but maybe more importantly [to] recognize faulty reasoning or the application of scientific misconceptions. Teachers are then able to provide more effective instruction and activities to help students improve their understanding based on deeper knowledge of how students derive meaning from what they are learning” (p. 251).