 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 11, Issue 1,
Foreword (Jun., 2010) John K. GILBERT The role of visual representations in the learning and teaching of science: An introduction
|
|
|
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 11, Issue 1,
Foreword (Jun., 2010) John K. GILBERT The role of visual representations in the learning and teaching of science: An introduction
|
Metaphor and analogy: the central drives of representation
A metaphor is a relation between two entities (X and Y) of the form ‘an X is a Y’, meaning that the two are identical, for example ‘the sun is a furnace’. A metaphor enables entities from different realms to be brought together, so that which is familiar can be used to explain that which is less familiar. Some metaphors seem fairly self-evident (for example , the sun does look like a furnace) and are said to involve the near transfer of ideas. However, others are far less self-evident (e.g. the ‘fishing net’ metaphor for space-time) and are said to involve the far transfer of ideas (Gentner 1989). While far transfers are often more intellectually productive than near transfers, in that they result in more radical interpretations of new experiences, all metaphors are implicit comparisons that have to be ‘unpacked’ to reveal the scope and limitations of the insights that they provide. This is done by the means of analogy, where the relationship between X and Y takes the form ‘X is like Y’.
In general terms, that entity about which an analogy is to be produced is known as the ‘target’, the entity from which the comparison is drawn is called the ‘source’, whilst the outcome of ideas ‘mapped’ from the source to the target is the resulting analogical representation. Hesse produced a useful way of depicting the scope of that mapping (Hess 1966). For her, the positive analogy was that which could be usefully drawn because it had an explanatory outcome, the negative analogy was that which was not of value because it could not explain anything, whilst the significance of the neutral analogy was that for which the status was not clear. The source of the metaphor, the ‘distance’ of its transfer, the balance of value within the ensuing analogical analysis, all detirmine the explanatory scope of particular modes of representation.
The range of media in which visualizations can possibly be expressed and in which external representations can be constructed may be called the generic modes of representation. These generic modes are the gestural, the concrete/material, the visual, the symbolic, the verbal (Gilbert, Boulter et al. 2000). In the course of human intellectual development, each of these modes has acquired a series of specific sub-modes or forms which differ from each other in often significant ways. Each of these modes, and hence forms, relates a particular model of a phenomenon to an external representation though a code of representation which defines the range of its features that can be successfully depicted.
Copyright (C) 2010 HKIEd APFSLT. Volume 11, Issue 1, Foreword (Jun., 2010). All Rights Reserved.
