Üstkavramsal öğretim etkinliklerinin 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin hukuk ilintili kavramları anlamalarına ve tutumlarına etkisi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı üstkavramsal faaliyetleri aktif hale getirici etkinliklerin geleneksel öğretimle karşılaştırıldığında 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin sosyal bilgiler dersindeki hukuk konularına ilişkin kavramsal anlamalarına ve sosyal bilgiler dersindeki kavramlara ilişkin tutumlarına etkisini araştırmaktır. Bu araştırma yarı deneysel araştırma deseni kullanarak tasarlanmıştır. Çalışma grubu uygun örnekleme yöntemi kullanarak oluşturulmuştur. Bu çalışma bir sosyal bilgiler öğretmeninin dört sınıfında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sınıflardan ikisi deney ve diğer iki sınıf da kontrol grubu olarak rastgele atanmıştır. Bu dört sınıf, Ankara ilinin merkez ilçesinde okumakta olan toplam 114 7. sınıf öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Deney grubundaki katılımcılara üstkavramsal faaliyetleri aktif hale getiren öğretim etkinlikleri uygulanırken, kontrol grubunda ise mevcut olan geleneksel öğretim programı kullanılmıştır. Ölçme aracı olarak araştırmacı tarafından geliştirilen hukukla ilgili kavramsal anlama testi ve öğrencilerin kavramlara ilişkin tutumlarını belirlemek üzere bir tutum ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre, üstkavramsal faaliyetleri kolaylaştıran etkinliklerin, öğrencilerin hukuk ilintili kavramlara yönelik kavramsal anlamaları ve tutumları üzerinde daha olumlu bir etkisi olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

• Hukuk ilintili,Kavramsal anlama,Sosyal bilgiler,Tutum,Üstkavramsal öğretim etkinlikleri

The effect of metaconceptual teaching activities on 7th grade students’ understandings of and attitudes towards law related concepts

Abstract

The aim of the study is to examine the effect of teaching activities supported with metaconceptual processes on 7th grade students’ conceptual understandings and attitudes of law related concepts in social studies course when compared with traditional instruction. In this quasi-experimental study, convenience-sampling method was used. This study was conducted in four classes of a social studies teacher. Two of the classes were randomly assigned as experimental group and the other two classes were randomly assigned as control group. The participants composed of 114 7th grade middle school students enrolled in a state school in Ankara. Experimental group was exposed to teaching activities supported with metaconceptual processes while control group was exposed to traditional teaching based on the current teaching program. For data collection, conceptual understanding and attitudes tests developed by researcher were used. The results indicate that teaching activities facilitating metaconceptual processes had more positive impact on students' conceptual understanding and attitudes towards law related concepts.

Keywords

• Attitude,Conceptual understanding,Metaconceptual teaching activities,Law-related,Social studies

References

1. Akın, A., Abacı, R., & Çetin, B. (2007). Bilişötesi farkındalık envanteri’nin Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the metacognitive awareness inventory]. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 7(2), 7-32. ISSN-1303-0485
2. Akın, A., & Abacı, R. (2011). Biliş ötesi [Metacognition] (First edition). Ankara: Nobel.
3. Anderson, C. W., & Smith, E. L. (1984). Children’s preconceptions and content-area textbooks. In G. G. Duffy, L. R. Rochler, & J. Mason (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: perspectives and suggestions (pp. 187–201). New York, NY: Forgman.
4. Anderson, L. W. (Ed.), Krathwohl, D. R. (Ed.), Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Abridged edition). New York, NY: Longman.
5. Atwood, R. K., & Atwood, V. A. (1996). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of the causes of seasons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 553–563. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199605)33:5<553:AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-Q
6. Barnett, M., & Morran, J. (2002). Addressing children’s alternative frameworks of the moon’s phases and eclipses. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 859–879. DOI: 10.1080/09500690110095276
7. Barton, K. C. (2010). Providing elementary teachers with experience of children’s thinking in social studies. In E. E. Heilman, R. F. Amthor, & M. T. Missias (Eds.), Social studies and diversity education: What we do and why we do it (First edition, pp. 312-315). New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
8. Beal, C., Bolick, C. M., & Martorella, P. H. (2009). Teaching social studies in middle and secondary schools (Fifth edition). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

9. Beeth, M. E. (1998). Teaching for conceptual change: using status as a metacognitive tool. Science Education, 82(3), 343- 356. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199806)82:3<343:AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-C
10. Bell, B. (1993). Children’s science, constructivism and learning in science. Victoria: Deakin University.
11. Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: a problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12. Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
13. Cheng, M. F. (2012). The role of metaconceptual evaluation in fifth grade students' construction of explanatory models of magnetic phenomena. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Illinois.
14. Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Second edition). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (Fourth edition). Boston: Pearson Education.
17. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (2008). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
18. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve Lisrel uygulamaları [Multivariate statistics for social sciences: SPSS and Lisrel applications] (First edition). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
19. Delgado, C. (2015). Navigating tensions between conceptual and metaconceptual goals in the use of models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2-3), 132-147. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-014-9495-7
20. Demir, M. (2010). Üstkavramsal faaliyetlerle zenginleştirilmiş kavramsal değişim metinlerinin fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının kuvvet ve hareket konularını anlamalarına etkisi [The effect of conceptual change texts enriched with metaconceptual processes on preservice science teachers’ conceptual understanding about force and motion]. (Unpublished master's thesis). Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
21. diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2–3), 105–225. DOI: 10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008
22. diSessa, A. A. (2008). A Bird’s-eye view of the “pieces” vs. “coherence” controversy (from the “pieces” side of the fence). In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (First edition, pp. 35–60). New York, NY: Routledge.
23. Dove, J. E. (1998). Students’ alternative conceptions in Earth science: a review of research and implications for teaching and learning. Research Papers in Education, 13(2), 183–201. DOI: 10.1080/0267152980130205
24. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes, U.K.: Open University Press.
25. Duit, R., Treagust, D. F., & Widodo, A. (2008). Teaching science for conceptual change: theory and practice. S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 629–646). New York, NY: Routledge.
26. Ezberci, E. (2014). Üstkavramsal faaliyetleri aktif hale getirici etkinliklerle desteklenmiş 5E öğrenme döngüsü modelinin 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin Ay’ın evreleri konusundaki kavramsal anlamalarına etkisi [The effect of 5E learning cycle model supported with metaconceptual processes on 7th grade students' understanding of Moon phases] (Unpublished master's thesis). Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
27. Farris, P. J., & Whealon, T. (2012). Social studies and integrated instruction: a look at social studies. P. J. Farris. (Ed.). Elementary and middle school social studies: an interdisciplinary, multicultural approach (Sixth edition). Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press.
28. Farris, P. J., Kuhrt, B. L., Sandburg, C., & Werderich, D. E. (2012). Facilitating learning through strategic instruction in social studies. P. J. Farris. (Ed.). Elementary and middle school social studies: an interdisciplinary, multicultural approach (Sixth edition). Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press.
29. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental ınquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
30. Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education (Eight edition). New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill.
31. Garner, R. (1987). Metacognition and reading comprehension. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
32. Georghiades, P. (2004). Making pupils' conceptions of electricity more durable by means of situated metacognition. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 85-99. DOI: 10.1080/0950069032000070333
33. Gilbert, J. K., Osborne, R. J., & Fensham, P. J. (1982). Children's science and ıts consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623-633. DOI: 10.1002/sce.3730660412
34. Goertz, G. (2006). Social science concepts: a user’s guide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35. Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2007). Statistics for the behavioral sciences (Seventh edition). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
36. Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2014). Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences. (Eighth edition). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
37. Güneş, B. (Ed.). (2017). Doğru bilinen yanlışlardan, yanlış bilinen doğrulara: Fizikte kavram yanılgıları [From well-known mistakes to wrong-known truths: Misconceptions in physics]. Ankara: Palme Yayıncılık.
38. Güriz, A. (2011). Hukuk felsefesi [Philosophy of law] (Nineth edition). Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
39. Hall, K. L. (1993). The power of comparison in teaching about constitutionalism, law and democracy (Reports, pp. 1–24). U.S.:United States Constitution, ERIC ED 369 727.
40. Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Brindle, M., & Sandmel, K. (2009). Metacognition and children’s writing. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graessser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (First published, pp. 131–153). New York, NY: Routledge.
41. Hartman, H. J. (2002a). Developing students’ metacognitive knowledge and skills. H. J. Hartman (Ed.). Metacognition in learning and instruction: theory, research and practice. (Second printing, pp. 33–68). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
42. Hartman, H. J. (2002b). Teaching metacognitively. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: theory, research and practice (Second printing, pp. 149–172). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
43. Helm, H. (1980). Misconceptions in physics amongst South African students. Physics Education, 15, 92–105.
44. Hennessey, M. G. (1991). Analysis of conceptual change and status change in sixth-graders' concepts of force and motion. (Unpublished dissertation). University of Wisconsin-Madison.
45. Hennessey, M. G. (1999). Probing the dimensions of metacognition: Implications for conceptual change teaching-learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Boston, MA.
46. Hennessey, M. G. (2003). Metacognitive aspects of students’ reflective discourse: implications for intentional conceptual change teaching and learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 105–134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47. Hewson, P. W. (1981). A conceptual change approach to learning science. European Journal of Science Education, 3(4), 383–396. DOI: 10.1080/0140528810304004
48. Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G. A’B. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13(1), 1–13. DOI: 10.1007/BF00051837
49. Hewson, P. W., Beeth, M. E., & Thorley, N. R. (1998). Teaching for conceptual change. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 199–218). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
50. Huang, K. (2011). Metaconceptually-enhanced simulation-based inquiry learning: Effects on the 8th grade students’ conceptual change and science epistemological beliefs. (Unpublished dissertation). University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.
51. Kalaycı, Ş. (2010). SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri [Multivariate statistical techniques with SPSS] (Fifth Edition). Ankara: Asil.
52. Kepenekci, Y. K. (2011). Eğitim yöneticilerinin hukuk eğitimi [Education of educational administrators’ about law]. Ankara University Journal of Educational Sciences, 44(1), 1-16. DOI: 10.1501/Egifak_0000001213
53. Kepenekci, Y. K., & Taşkın, P. (2017). Eğitim hukuku [Law of Education]. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
54. Kırbulut, Z. D. (2012). The effect of metaconceptual teaching instruction on 10th grade students’ understanding of states of matter, self-efficacy toward chemistry, and the nature of metaconceptual processes. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
55. Kırbulut, Z. D., Uzuntiryaki-Kondakçı, E., & Beeth, M. E. (2016). Development of a metaconceptual awareness and regulation scale. International Journal of Science Education, 38(13), 2152-2173. DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2016.1230791
56. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (Third edition). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
57. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology (Second edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
58. Kun, H. (2011). Metaconceptually-enhanced simulation-based inquiry learning: effects on the 8th grade students' conceptual change and science epistemological beliefs. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma.
59. Luque, M. L. (2003). The role of domain-specific knowledge in intentional conceptual change. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
60. Mason, L. (2001). Introducing talk and writing for conceptual change: a classroom study. Learning and Instruction, 11(4-5), 305-329. DOI: 10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00035-9
61. Metcalfe, J., & Shimamura, A. P. (1994). Metacognition: knowing about knowing. Massachusetts: A Bradford Book, The MIT Press.
62. Naylor, D. T. (1981). Educating for citizenship with law-related education. Theory into Practice, 20(3), 194–198. DOI: 10.1080/00405848109542952
63. Nelson, M. R. (1998). Children and social studies: creative teaching in the elementary classroom (Third edition). Orlando, FL: Hartcourt Brace College.
64. Novak, J. (1987). Proceedings of the second international seminar on misconceptions in science and mathematics. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University.
65. Nwankwo, M. C., Achufusi, N., & Offiah, F. C. (2019). Effect of metaconceptual teaching intervention on students’ conceptual understanding in physics. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 8(5), 1484-1489. ISSN: 2319-7064
66. Özsoy, G. (2007). İlköğretim beşinci sınıfta üstbiliş stratejileri öğretiminin problem çözme başarısına etkisi [The effect of metacognitive instruction on problem solving achievement of fifth grade primary school students]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
67. Pallant, J. F. (2005). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Australia: Allen & Unwin.
68. Pintrich, P. R., Wolters, C. A., & Baxter, G. P. (2000). Assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning. In G. Schraw, & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 43–97). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurement.
69. Pitts, A. B. (2003). What’s in a name: law-related and civic education. A. R. Poliakoff (Ed.). Basic education: a journal of teaching and the liberal arts, 47(4), 23-27. Washington, D.C.: Council for basic education.
70. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227. DOI: 10.1002/sce.3730660207
71. Saçkes, M. (2010). The role of cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational variables in conceptual change: preservice early childhood teachers' conceptual understanding of the cause of lunar phases. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Ohio State, Ohio.
72. Saçkes, M., & Trundle, K. C. (2016). Change or durability? The contribution of metaconceptual awareness in preservice early childhood teachers’ learning of science concepts. Research in Science Education, 46, 1-17. DOI: 10.1007/s11165-016-9522-1
73. Schneider, W. (2008). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents: major trends and implications for education. Mind, Brain and Education, 2(3), 114- 121. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-228X.2008.00041.x
74. Schnotz, W., & Preuß, A. (1999). Task-dependent construction of mental models as a basis for conceptual change. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (First edition, pp. 193–222). Oxford: Pergamon (Elsevier Science).
75. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What’s all the fuss about metacognition? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189–215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
76. Schraw, G. (2002). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: theory, research and practice. (Second printing, pp. 3–16). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
77. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 351–371. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-017-9413-7
78. Schwartz, B. L., & Perfect, T. J. (2002). Introduction: toward an applied metacognition. In B. L. Schwartz, & T. J. Perfect (Eds.). Applied metacognition (First published). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
79. Sharma, S. (1996). Applied multivariate techniques. United States of America: John Wiley & Sons.
80. Sinatra, G. M., & Mason, L. (2008). Beyond knowledge: student characteristics influencing conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Eds.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (First published, pp. 560–582). New York, NY: Routledge.
81. Sinatra, G. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of intentions in conceptual change learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 1–17). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
82. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 211- 231). London: Academic Press.
83. Şencan, H. (2005). Sosyal ve davranışsal ölçümlerde güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik [Reliability and validity of social and behavioral measures] (First edition). Ankara: Seçkin.
84. Thorley, N. R., (1990). The role of the conceptual change model in the interpretation of classroom interactions. (Unpublished dissertation). Wisconsin-Madison University, Wisconsin.
85. Thyer, B. A. (2012). Quasi-experimental research designs. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.
86. Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159–169. DOI: 10.1080/0950069880100204
87. Ülgen, G. (2004). Kavram geliştirme kuramlar ve uygulamalar [Concept development theories and applications] (Fourth edition). Ankara: Nobel.
88. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69. DOI: 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90018-3
89. Vosniadou, S. (2003). Exploring the relationships between conceptual change and intentional learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 373–402). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
90. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language (E. Hanf-mann & G. Vakar, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
91. Wenning, C. J. (2008). Dealing more effectively with alternative conceptions in science. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 5(1), 11–19.
92. West, L., & Pines, L. (1984). An interpretation of research in ‘conceptual understanding’ within a sources-of-knowledge framework. Research in Science Education, 14, 47–56. DOI: 10.1007/BF02356790
93. Yıldız, E. (2008). 5E modelinin kullanıldığı kavramsal değişime dayalı öğretimde üst bilişin etkileri: 7. sınıf kuvvet ve hareket ünitesine yönelik bir uygulama [The effects of metacognition during the instruction based on conceptual change used with 5E model: An application regarding the force and motion subject in the 7th grade]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
94. Yıldızlar, M. (2009). Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri [Teaching principles and methods] (First edition). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
95. Yürük, N. (2005). An analysis of the nature of students’ metaconceptual processes and the effectiveness of metaconceptual teaching practices on students’ conceptual understanding of force and motion, (Unpublished dissertation). University of Ohio State, Ohio.
96. Yürük, N. (2007). A case study of one student’s metaconceptual processes and the changes in her alternative conceptions of force and motion. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(4), 305–325. DOI: 10.12973/ejmste/75411
97. Yürük, N. (2014). Özdüzenlemede üstbiliş [Metacognition in self-regulation.]. G. Sakız (Ed.). Özdüzenleme: Öğrenmeden öğretime özdüzenleme davranışlarının gelişimi, stratejiler ve öneriler [Self-regulation: development of self-regulation behaviors from learning to teaching, strategies and suggestions] içinde (p. 28-53). Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
98. Yürük, N., & Eroğlu, P. (2016). The effect of conceptual change texts enriched with metaconceptual processes on pre-service science teachers’ conceptual understanding of heat and temperature. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(6), 693-705. Retrieved from http://oaji.net/articles/2016/987-1482502823.pdf ISSN: 1648-3898
99. Yürük, N., Beeth, M. E., & Andersen, C. (2009). Analyzing the effect of metaconceptual teaching practices on students’ understanding of force and motion concepts. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 449–475. DOI: 10.1007/s11165-008-9089-6
100. Yürük, N., Selvi, M., & Yakışan, M. (2017). Investigation of the nature of metaconceptual processes of pre‐service biology teachers. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 68 (2017), 121-150. DOI: 10.14689/ejer.2017.68.7
101. Zirbel, E. L. (2006). Teaching to promote deep understanding and instigate conceptual change. In Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 38, 1220.