Skip to Main Content
Book Chapter

Counting tectonic plates: A mixed-methods study of college students' conceptions of plates and boundaries

By
Karen M. Kortz
Karen M. Kortz
Physics Department, Community College of Rhode Island, Lincoln, Rhode Island 02865, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Scott K. Clark
Scott K. Clark
Department of Geological Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Kyle Gray
Kyle Gray
Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa 50614, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Jessica J. Smay
Jessica J. Smay
Physical Science Department, San José City College, San José, California 95128, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Brendalee Viveiros
Brendalee Viveiros
Physics Department, Community College of Rhode Island, Lincoln, Rhode Island 02865, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
David Steer
David Steer
Department of Geology and Environmental Science, University of Akron, Akron, Ohio 44325, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Published:
March 01, 2011

We explored students' conceptions of plate tectonics using a combined qualitative and quantitative approach consisting of multiple-choice ConcepTest questions, questionnaires, and interviews. When shown schematic images illustrating plate tectonics, half of the students were unable to determine the correct number of tectonic plates. These students appeared to have the most difficulty determining whether or not to count a divergent boundary as a plate boundary, but additional difficulties include confusion between continent-ocean boundaries (shorelines) and plate boundaries, and failure to see the larger picture as a result of focusing on individual boundaries. We propose that the underlying causes for these difficulties stem from the tendency for students to construct their understanding of plate tectonics based on inappropriately applied prior knowledge. For example, when viewing a divergent boundary, many students activate two lines of prior knowledge: (1) if entities are the same (such as ocean plates on both sides of a divergent boundary) then they are not considered separate; and (2) if there is no obvious break (which is not seen on diagrams of divergent boundaries), then they are also not considered separate. The application of both of these lines of prior knowledge results in students concluding the two sides of a divergent boundary are the same plate. Retention of these alternative concepts prevents conceptual change from occurring during the period of instruction and results in students not recognizing divergent boundaries as plate boundaries, leading them to incorrectly count the number of plates.

You do not currently have access to this article.
Don't already have an account? Register

Figures & Tables

Contents

GSA Special Papers

Qualitative Inquiry in Geoscience Education Research

Anthony D. Feig
Anthony D. Feig
Department of Geology & Meteorology, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, Michigan, USA
Search for other works by this author on:
Alison Stokes
Alison Stokes
Experiential Learning Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, University of Plymouth, UK
Search for other works by this author on:
Geological Society of America
Volume
474
ISBN print:
9780813724744
Publication date:
March 01, 2011

References

Related

A comprehensive resource of eBooks for researchers in the Earth Sciences

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Subscribe Now