Constructing Analogies: Developing Critical Thinking through a Collaborative Task
Saved in:
| Title: | Constructing Analogies: Developing Critical Thinking through a Collaborative Task |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Constantine Kapetanakis, Samantha Conflitti, Sarah Abdo, L. Kate Wright (ORCID |
| Source: | Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. 2024 52(5):569-579. |
| Availability: | Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 11 |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Sponsoring Agency: | National Science Foundation (NSF) |
| Contract Number: | 1757477 2149957 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Critical Thinking, Logical Thinking, Skill Development, Thinking Skills, Knowledge Level, College Students, Biology, College Science, Science Instruction, Scientific Concepts, Genetics, Difficulty Level, Cooperative Learning, Teaching Methods |
| DOI: | 10.1002/bmb.21843 |
| ISSN: | 1470-8175 1539-3429 |
| Abstract: | Analogies are used to make abstract topics meaningful and more easily comprehensible to learners. Incorporating simple analogies into STEM classrooms is a fairly common practice, but the analogies are typically generated and explained by the instructor for the learners. We hypothesize that challenging learners to create complex, extended analogies themselves can promote integration of content knowledge and development of critical thinking skills, which are essential for deep learning, but are challenging to teach. In this qualitative study, college biology students (n = 30) were asked to construct a complex analogy about the flow of genetic information using a familiar item. One week later, participants constructed a second analogy about the same topic, but this time using a more challenging item. Twenty participants worked on the challenging analogy in pairs, while the other 10 worked alone. Analysis of the 50 interviews resulted in a novel-scoring scheme, which measured both content knowledge (understanding of biology terms) and critical thinking (alignment of relationships between elements of the analogy). Most participants improved slightly due to practice, but they improved dramatically when working with a partner. The biggest gains were seen in critical thinking, not content knowledge. Having students construct complex, sophisticated analogies in pairs is a high-impact practice that can help students develop their critical thinking skills, which are crucial in academic and professional settings. The discussion between partners likely requires students to justify their explanations and critique their partner's explanations, which are characteristics of critical thinking. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2024 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1448604 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Analogies are used to make abstract topics meaningful and more easily comprehensible to learners. Incorporating simple analogies into STEM classrooms is a fairly common practice, but the analogies are typically generated and explained by the instructor for the learners. We hypothesize that challenging learners to create complex, extended analogies themselves can promote integration of content knowledge and development of critical thinking skills, which are essential for deep learning, but are challenging to teach. In this qualitative study, college biology students (n = 30) were asked to construct a complex analogy about the flow of genetic information using a familiar item. One week later, participants constructed a second analogy about the same topic, but this time using a more challenging item. Twenty participants worked on the challenging analogy in pairs, while the other 10 worked alone. Analysis of the 50 interviews resulted in a novel-scoring scheme, which measured both content knowledge (understanding of biology terms) and critical thinking (alignment of relationships between elements of the analogy). Most participants improved slightly due to practice, but they improved dramatically when working with a partner. The biggest gains were seen in critical thinking, not content knowledge. Having students construct complex, sophisticated analogies in pairs is a high-impact practice that can help students develop their critical thinking skills, which are crucial in academic and professional settings. The discussion between partners likely requires students to justify their explanations and critique their partner's explanations, which are characteristics of critical thinking. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1470-8175 1539-3429 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/bmb.21843 |
