For the last few decades it has frequently been argued that analogies may be valuable tools in teaching and learning difficult scientific concepts. The present paper first tries to present an overview of those previous arguments in accordance with three major categories (Text-Based Analogy, Teacher-Based Analogy, and Child-Based Analogy), pinpoints various problems raised by the previous studies, and considers them from an overall perspective. The present paper is summarized as follows: (1) There is a growing consensus on the meaning of the term 'analog' among cognitive psychologists. But neither science educators nor articles on science teaching have used 'analogy' in connection with the differences between 'analog' and the other terms (e. g., metaphor, simile, and model). (2) The effectiveness of using analogies in science learning and teaching is questionable, as has been attested by the conflicting results of previous studies. To examine such effectiveness more accurately, future research needs to describe and analyze each factor (e. g., teachers, capability, students' attitudes toward experimental lessons, communication in science lesson, and class management) in detail in order to construct effective science lessons.
抄録全体を表示