Using conflicts, tensions, and paradoxes for theory building: the case of conceptual change

Many issues in the learning sciences are expansive and multi-faceted, and therefore open to diverse interpretations that often lead to contrasting, even conflicting, theoretical accounts. Relatively little attention has been paid to the opportunities offered by conflicts, tensions, and paradoxes among theoretical accounts for theory building. In this presentation, four modes of dealing with opposing theoretical accounts are outlined: (1) taking contrasting theoretical perspectives as incommensurable; (2) holding opposites not as conflicting but as complementary; (3) dissolving or surpassing oppositions by blending perspectives; and (4) preserving paradoxes by recognizing the interdependence of constitutive oppositions. These four modes are exemplified by application to the long-standing debate of knowledge as theory like versus knowledge as piece-like in research on conceptual change.