Uncovering Challenges and Pitfalls in Identifying Threshold Concepts: A Comprehensive Review

Knowledge Pub Date : 2024-01-30 DOI:10.3390/knowledge4010002
Paulo R. M. Correia, Ivan A. I. Soida, Izabela de Souza, Manolita C. Lima
{"title":"Uncovering Challenges and Pitfalls in Identifying Threshold Concepts: A Comprehensive Review","authors":"Paulo R. M. Correia, Ivan A. I. Soida, Izabela de Souza, Manolita C. Lima","doi":"10.3390/knowledge4010002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The exploration of threshold concepts, which represent a transformed way of understanding, interpreting, or viewing something necessary for a learner’s progress, has significantly influenced teaching and learning in higher education, gaining broad acceptance in academic circles. Despite widespread enthusiasm, the scientific development of the field faces obstacles, especially epistemological and ontological uncertainties, directly implying the reliability of identification techniques and, by extension, raising questions about the validity of previous findings. This comprehensive review delves into 60 articles sourced from the Web of Science database to scrutinize the literature on threshold concept identification. The findings confirm the adaptability of threshold concepts across diverse disciplines. However, the fluid definition inherent in these concepts introduces ontological challenges, influencing biases in the identification process. The review highlights the diverse identification methods influenced by knowledge area specificities, community affinities, and research practice traditions. A diagram depicting the methods employed to identify threshold concepts is offered to highlight five central decisions to be considered. Acknowledging professors as pivotal mediators adept at navigating the epistemological and ontological dimensions of threshold concepts while integrating theoretical and applied knowledge, this study enhances our nuanced understanding of threshold concept identification. Emphasizing methodological validity and reliability, it acknowledges the crucial role of experienced educators in this issue and presents future perspectives for advancing current research, fostering the maturation of the field.","PeriodicalId":510293,"journal":{"name":"Knowledge","volume":"80 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/knowledge4010002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The exploration of threshold concepts, which represent a transformed way of understanding, interpreting, or viewing something necessary for a learner’s progress, has significantly influenced teaching and learning in higher education, gaining broad acceptance in academic circles. Despite widespread enthusiasm, the scientific development of the field faces obstacles, especially epistemological and ontological uncertainties, directly implying the reliability of identification techniques and, by extension, raising questions about the validity of previous findings. This comprehensive review delves into 60 articles sourced from the Web of Science database to scrutinize the literature on threshold concept identification. The findings confirm the adaptability of threshold concepts across diverse disciplines. However, the fluid definition inherent in these concepts introduces ontological challenges, influencing biases in the identification process. The review highlights the diverse identification methods influenced by knowledge area specificities, community affinities, and research practice traditions. A diagram depicting the methods employed to identify threshold concepts is offered to highlight five central decisions to be considered. Acknowledging professors as pivotal mediators adept at navigating the epistemological and ontological dimensions of threshold concepts while integrating theoretical and applied knowledge, this study enhances our nuanced understanding of threshold concept identification. Emphasizing methodological validity and reliability, it acknowledges the crucial role of experienced educators in this issue and presents future perspectives for advancing current research, fostering the maturation of the field.
揭示确定阈值概念的挑战和陷阱:全面回顾
阈限概念代表着一种对学习者进步所必需的事物的理解、解释或看待方式的转变,对阈限概念的探索极大地影响了高等教育中的教与学,得到了学术界的广泛认可。尽管这一领域受到广泛关注,但其科学发展仍面临重重障碍,尤其是认识论和本体论方面的不确定性,这直接影响到识别技术的可靠性,进而引发对以往研究成果有效性的质疑。本综述从 Web of Science 数据库中检索了 60 篇文章,仔细研究了有关阈值概念识别的文献。研究结果证实了阈值概念在不同学科中的适应性。然而,这些概念固有的多变定义带来了本体论方面的挑战,影响了识别过程中的偏差。综述强调了受知识领域特性、社区亲和力和研究实践传统影响的各种识别方法。本文提供了一个图表,描述了识别阈值概念所采用的方法,并强调了需要考虑的五项核心决策。本研究承认教授是善于驾驭阈值概念的认识论和本体论维度,同时又能将理论知识和应用知识融为一体的关键调解人,从而增强了我们对阈值概念识别的细致入微的理解。本研究强调方法的有效性和可靠性,承认经验丰富的教育工作者在这一问题上的关键作用,并提出了推进当前研究的未来展望,促进这一领域的成熟。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信