Reconceptualizing momentary engagement through the lens of conceptual change learning
Main Article Content
Abstract
This commentary reviews the five papers featured in this special issue, which foster a cross-disciplinary discussion on momentary engagement (ME). The papers represent diverse theoretical perspectives and address key research questions central to understanding students’ ME. The commentary approaches each paper through the lens of conceptual change, focusing on the learning processes needed when the information to be acquired is inconsistent with the existing theoretical frameworks. Methodological challenges in measuring ME within the context of conceptual change are explored, moving beyond traditional acquisition type of learning. The variation in quality and depth of momentary engagement is also discussed, distinguishing between different modes of active learning and engagement. Further attention is given to the complex, dual role of factors such as learner characteristics, prior knowledge, and epistemic beliefs in shaping ME, especially in domains requiring radical reorganization of initial beliefs. Finally, the potential for constructing an integrated model of ME is discussed, in alignment with the holistic approach to ME implied by the papers in this issue. The author emphasizes the importance of studying ME’s interconnected components within both the individual and the context, employing varied methodologies and accounting for different learning types. The implications of integrating different theoretical frameworks are discussed in relation to developing interventions aimed at enhancing students’ ME in the classroom context.
Article Details
FLR adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Creative Common License (BY-NC-ND). That is, Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors with, however, first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.
References
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of school psychology, 44(5), 427-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002 Fulmer
Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual review of psychology, 54(1), 579-616. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030
Broughton, S. H., Sinatra, G. M., & Nussbaum, E. M. (2013). “Pluto has been a planet my whole life!” Emotions, attitudes, and conceptual change in elementary students’ learning about Pluto’s reclassification. Research in Science Education, 43, 529-550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9274-x
Chevrier, M., Muis, K. R., Trevors, G. J., Pekrun, R., & Sinatra, G. M. (2019). Exploring the antecedents and consequences of epistemic emotions. Learning and instruction, 63, 101209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.05.006
Chi, M. T. (2009). Active‐constructive‐interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in cognitive science, 1(1), 73-105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
Chi, M. T. (2021). Translating a theory of active learning: An attempt to close the research‐practice gap in education. Topics in Cognitive Science, 13(3), 441-463. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12539
Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational psychologist, 49(4), 219-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Chi, M. T., Adams, J., Bogusch, E. B., Bruchok, C., Kang, S., Lancaster, M., ... & Yaghmourian, D. L. (2018). Translating the ICAP theory of cognitive engagement into practice. Cognitive science, 42(6), 1777-1832. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12626
Cordova, J. R., Sinatra, G. M., Jones, S. H., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Lombardi, D. (2014). Confidence in prior knowledge, self-efficacy, interest and prior knowledge: Influences on conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(2), 164-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.03.006
D’Mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.10.001
D’Mello, S., Lehman, B., Pekrun, R., & Graesser, A. (2014). Confusion can be beneficial for learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 153-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.05.003
Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptalizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational psychologist, 33(2-3), 109-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1998.9653294
Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763-782). Boston, MA: Springer US.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Fulmer, S. M., & Frijters, J. C. (2009). A review of self-report and alternative approaches in the measurement of student motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 21(3), 219-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9107-x
Gregoire, M. (2003). Is It a Challenge or a Threat? A Dual-Process Model of Teachers' Cognition and Appraisal Processes During Conceptual Change. Educational Psychology Review 15, 147–179. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023477131081Hektner, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2007). Experience sampling method: Measuring the quality of everyday life. Sage.
Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (2013). Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity. In D. Faulkner, K. Littleton, & M. Woodhead, Learning relationships in the classroom (pp. 276-292). Routledge
Hickendorff, M., Edelsbrunner, P. A., McMullen, J., Schneider, M., & Trezise, K. (2018). Informative tools for characterizing individual differences in learning: Latent class, latent profile, and latent transition analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 66, 4-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.001
Inagaki, K., Hatano, G., & Morita, E. (1998). Construction of mathematical knowledge through whole-class discussion. Learning and Instruction, 8(6), 503-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00032-2
Inkinen, J., Klager, C., Juuti, K., Schneider, B., Salmela‐Aro, K., Krajcik, J., & Lavonen, J. (2020). High school students' situational engagement associated with scientific practices in designed science learning situations. Science Education, 104(4), 667-692. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21570
Johnson, M. L., & Sinatra, G. M. (2013). Use of task-value instructional inductions for facilitating engagement and conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(1), 51-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.09.003
Jones, S. H., Johnson, M. L., & Campbell, B. D. (2015). Hot factors for a cold topic: Examining the role of task-value, attention allocation, and engagement on conceptual change. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 62-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.04.004
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2013). ‘Microgenetics’: No Single Method Can Elucidate Human Learning. Commentary on Parnafes and diSessa. Human Development, 56(1), 47-51. https://doi.org/10.1159/000345541
Lawson, M. J., Van Deur, P., Scott, W., Stephenson, H., Kang, S., Wyra, M., Darmawan, I., Vosniadou, S., Murdoch, C., White, E., & Graham, L. (2023). The levels of cognitive engagement of lesson tasks designed by teacher education students and their use of knowledge of self-regulated learning in explanations for task design. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125, 104043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.10404
Lee, K., & Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2002). Macro-and microdevelopmental research: Assumptions, research strategies, constraints, and utilities. In N. Granott & J. Parziale (Eds.) Microdevelopment: Transition processes in development and learning, (p.p. 243-265), Cambridge University Press
Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School psychology review, 31(3), 313-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2002.12086158
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Pugh, K. J., Koskey, K. L., & Stewart, V. C. (2012). Developing conceptual understanding of natural selection: The role of interest, efficacy, and basic prior knowledge. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80(1), 45-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2011.55949
Luebeck, J. L., & Bice, L. R. (2005). Online discussion as a mechanism of conceptual change among mathematics and science teachers. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education/Revue internationale du e-learning et la formation à distance, 20(2), 21-39.
Mason, L., Gava, M., & Boldrin, A. (2008). On warm conceptual change: The interplay of text, epistemological beliefs, and topic interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(2), 291. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.291
McNeill, K. L. (2009). Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93(2), 233-268. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20294
Mikkilä-Erdmann, M., Penttinen, M., Anto, E., & Olkinuora, E. (2008). Constructing mental models during learning from science text: Eye tracking methodology meets conceptual change. In D. Ifenthaler, P. Pirnay-Dummer & J.M. Spector (Eds.). Understanding Models for Learning and Instruction:: Essays in Honor of Norbert M. Seel, (p.p.63-79), Springer doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-76898-4_4
Miyake, N. (1986). Constructive interaction and the iterative process of understanding. Cognitive science, 10(2), 151-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(86)80002-7
Muis, K. R., Pekrun, R., Sinatra, G. M., Azevedo, R., Trevors, G., Meier, E., & Heddy, B. C. (2015). The curious case of climate change: Testing a theoretical model of epistemic beliefs, epistemic emotions, and complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 39, 168-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.06.003Muis et al.,2015;
Murphy, P. K., & Alexander, P. A. (2004). Persuasion as a dynamic, multidimensional process: An investigation of individual and intraindividual differences. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 337-363. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312041002337
Murphy, P. K., Holleran, T. A., Long, J. F., & Zeruth, J. A. (2005). Examining the complex roles of motivation and text medium in the persuasion process. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(4), 418-438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.05.001
Nadelson, L. S., Heddy, B. C., Jones, S., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Johnson, M. (2018). Conceptual change in science teaching and learning: Introducing the dynamic model of conceptual change. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 7(2), 151-195. https://doi.org/10.17583/ijep.2018.3349
Parnafes, O., & Disessa, A. A. (2013). Microgenetic learning analysis: A methodology for studying knowledge in transition. Human Development, 56(1), 5-37.
Pekrun, R., Vogl, E., Muis, K. R., & Sinatra, G. M. (2017). Measuring emotions during epistemic activities: the Epistemically-Related Emotion Scales. Cognition and Emotion, 31(6), 1268-1276. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1204989
Pintrich, P.R., & Schragben, B. (1992). Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom tasks. In D. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom: Causes and consequences (pp.149-184), Routledge
Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational research, 63(2), 167-199. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543063002167
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.
Renninger, K. A., & Bachrach, J. E. (2015). Studying triggers for interest and engagement using observational methods. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 58-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.999920
Schneider, M., & Hardy, I. (2013). Profiles of inconsistent knowledge in children’s pathways of conceptual change. Developmental psychology, 49(9), 1639-1649 https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0030976
Siegler, R. S. (2006). Microgenetic analyses of learning. In D. Kuhn, & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, 2, 464-510.
Sinatra, G. M. (2005). The" warming trend" in conceptual change research: The legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational psychologist, 40(2), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4002_5
Sinatra, G. M., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The Role of intentions in conceptual change learning. In G., Sinatra & P., R., Pintrich (Eds.). Intentional conceptual change, 10-26. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606716
Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educational psychologist, 50(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children's behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and psychological measurement, 69(3), 493-525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233
Stathopoulou, C., & Vosniadou, S. (2007). Exploring the relationship between physics-related epistemological beliefs and physics understanding. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 255-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.12.002
Symonds, J. E., Kaplan, A., Upadyaya, K., Salmela-Aro, K., Torsney, B., Skinner, E. & Eccles, J. S. (2021) Momentary Engagement as a Complex Dynamic System. PsyArXiv. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/fuy7p.
Torsney, B. M., & Symonds, J. E. (2019). The professional student program for educational resilience: Enhancing momentary engagement in classwork. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(6), 676-692. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2019.1687414
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and instruction, 4(1), 45-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90018-3
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). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606716
Vosniadou, S, (2013). Model based reasoning and the learning of counter-intuitive science concepts, Infancia y Aprendizaje, 36(1), 5-33, DOI: 10.1174/021037013804826519
Vosniadou, S. (2017). Initial and scientific understandings and the problem of conceptual change. In T. G. Amin, & O. Levrini (Eds.) Converging perspectives on conceptual change, 17-25. Routledge.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive psychology, 24(4), 535-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90018-W
Vosniadou, S., & Mason, L. (2012). Conceptual change induced by instruction: A complex interplay of multiple factors. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, T. Urdan, S. Graham, J. M. Royer, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook, Vol. 2. Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors (pp. 221–246). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13274-009
Vosniadou, S., Skopeliti, I., & Ikospentaki, K. (2004). Modes of knowing and ways of reasoning in elementary astronomy. Cognitive Development, 19(2), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.12.002
Vosniadou, S., Vamvakousi, X., & Skopeliti, E., (2008). The Framework Theory Approach to the Problem of Conceptual Change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change, 3-34. Routledge.
Vosniadou, S., Lawson, M. J., Bodner, E., Stephenson, H., Jeffries, D., & Darmawan, I. G. N. (2023). Using an extended ICAP-based coding guide as a framework for the analysis of classroom observations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 128, 104133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104133