One of my conference contributions is:
Taber, K. S. (1994). Can Kelly's triads be used to elicit aspects of chemistry students' conceptual frameworks? Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Oxford.
Abstract
A great deal of research within science education is undertaken from a ‘constructivist’ viewpoint, which is grounded in the ideas of George Kelly. Although enquiry into conceptual development in science has drawn heavily on this theory, Kelly’s technique of using triads to elicit constructs has been neglected in favour of alternative approaches. This paper argues that although Kelly himself developed and used his technique in a context of psychotherapy, his writing demonstrates that he recognised its wider potential. Kelly did not see the cognitive and affective aspects of personality as distinct, and he did not define his meaning of ‘construct’ as being very different to ‘concept’. As part of an inquiry into the development of understanding of chemical bonding, 'A level' students have been presented with triads of cards showing chemical species, and then asked to discriminate between them. The type of construct labels elicited are considered, as is the utility of this data. It is argued that the triads approach, when used as part of a repertoire of complementary techniques, may make a valuable contribution to exploring student thinking about chemistry, and how it changes over time.
Contents
§1. Introduction.
§2. Constructivism and science education.
§3. Constructs and concepts – is the triadic method appropriate to studies of conceptual development?
§3.1 Can concepts be studied as constructs?
§3.2 Can Kelly’s theory be applied to studies of conceptual development?
§3.3 Repertory Grid – and the method of Triads.
§3.4 The ‘elements’ used in the present study.
§4. Responses elicited from chemistry students.
§4.1 A simple classification of students ‘constructs’.
§4.2 Do the elicited ‘constructs’ satisfy Kelly’s dichotomy criterion?
§4.3 Dichotomies and continua.
§4.4 Qualities, categories and names?
§5. Usefulness and limitations of the method.
§5.1 Quantitative or qualitative research?
§5.2 Analysis of a grid.
§5.3 The map metaphor.
§5.4 The toolbox analogy.
§5.5 Triad procedures used.
§5.6 An example of a comparison between students.
§5.7 Comparisons made over time.
§6. Can Kelly’s triads be used to elicit aspects of chemistry students’ conceptual frameworks?
§6.1 Examples of ‘inappropriate constructs’.
§6.2 Student reaction to Kelly’s triads.
§7. Conclusion.
Download a copy of the paper here.
