COGNITIVE CONFLICT AS A TEACHING STRATEGY IN SOLVING CHEMISTRY PROBLEMS - A DIALECTIC-CONSTRUCTIVIST PERSPECTIVE

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of teachin g experiments within a dialectic-constructivist framework based on the following considerations: (a) Cognitive conflicts used in the teachin g experiments must be based on problem-solving strategies that student s find relatively convincing; (b) after having generated a cognitive c onflict, it is essential that the students be provided with an experie nce that could facilitate the resolution of the conflict; and (c) the teaching strategy developed is used by an interactive constructivist a pproach within an intact classroom. The study was based on two section s of freshman students who had registered for Chemistry I at the Unive rsidad de Oriente, Venezuela. One of the sections was randomly designa ted as the control group and the other as the experimental group. To i ntroduce cognitive conflict, the experimental group was exposed to two teaching experiments dealing with stoichiometry problems based on the concept of limiting reagent. Students in the control group were expos ed to the same problems-however, without the cognitive conflict teachi ng experiment format. To evaluate the effect of the teaching experimen ts, both groups were evaluated on five different problems at different intervals during the semester, referred to as posttests. All posttest s formed part of the regular evaluation of the students. Results obtai ned show the advantage of the experimental group on four of the postte sts. It is concluded that the experimental treatment was effective in improving performance on the immediate posttests. It was observed that some students protect their core belief [see Lakatos, I. (1970). Fals ification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge ( pp. 91-196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press] in stoichiometry ( establishing equivalent relations between different elements or compou nds) by ignoring the conflicting data, just as conflicting (anomalous) data do not necessarily convince a scientist to abandon a particular theory.