A Conceptual Understanding Procedure, or CUP, is a teaching procedure designed to aid development of understanding of concepts that students find difficult. They have been developed in physics but could be designed for other areas of study such as chemistry, mathematics and biology.
They are constructivist in approach, i.e. they are based on the belief that students construct their own understanding of concepts by expanding or modifying their existing views. The procedure also reinforces the value of cooperative learning and the individual student's active role in learning.
CUPs are set in real-world rather than idealised or contrived situations so they encourage the learner to explore authentic contexts. For example, in situations concerned with motion, students are expected to qualitatively consider the friction between objects moving relative to one another, air resistance, and energy losses to the surroundings. They should not expect to assume that they are working in an idealised world where friction can be modelled as negligible.
CUPs were developed in 1996 by David Mills and Susan Feteris (Department of Physics, now School of Physics at Monash University) and Pam Mulhall and Brian McKittrick. This website was updated most recently in 2014 by Pam Mulhall and Brian McKittrick.Top of page
Master copies of both A4 and A3 problem sheets are provided in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format. (Acrobat Reader is available free on the Web.) These are suitable for senior high school, college or first year university students and may be copied without changes and distributed for educational purposes.
|Title||Worksheet Masters||Concepts targeted|
|1. Driving to Hilary's||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Displacement, velocity and acceleration in 1-D.|
|2. Throwing a hockey ball||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Velocity and acceleration during vertical flight.|
|3. Hitting a golf ball||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Action/reaction pairs (Newton's third law). Dependence of motion on net force.|
|4. Dropping a golf ball and a foam ball||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Forces acting on falling objects.|
|5. Forces on a can of peaches||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Forces on an object coming to rest on a surface.|
|6. Swinging the billy can||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Forces on an object moving in a vertical circular path.|
|7. Rudolph's trouble with Newton's third law||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||The motion of an object depends on the net force on the object.|
|8. Hot stuff||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Heating and temperature change.|
|9. What is the current?||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||The electrical current in basic series and parallel circuits.|
|10. What is the reading on the voltmeter?||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||The potential difference (voltage) between points in basic series and parallel circuits.|
|11. Energy of a soccer ball in flight||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Conservation of energy.|
|12. Momentum and traffic accidents||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Conservation of momentum.|
|13. Where did the light go?||A4 sheet, A3 sheet||Reflection and refraction of light at an interface|
The procedure involves students considering a qualitative question requiring an answer in a diagrammatic form. There are three distinct stages:
The link below provides access to a 'Step-by-Step' guide on how to use a CUP in your classroom.
DOWNLOAD: A Step-by-Step Guide (.pdf 45kb)
This guide explains the procedure in detail and describes how to best set up the room, how to select students for the triplets and how to approach the class discussion in a way that encourages your students to do the thinking.Top of page
Most teachers find the third stage, the interpretive discussion, to be the most challenging to conduct. You need to facilitate the class discussion of the understandings shown on the A3 sheets rather than simply telling the class the correct scientific view. The potential for students to develop a strong conceptual understanding of the ideas is more likely to be realised when they have had a chance to grapple with the range of ideas advanced in the class. This requires the teacher to relinquish familiar techniques of leading students straight to the accepted scientific view or confirming correct ideas by an agreeing nod or other non verbal body language.
Another challenging stage can occur when you put up all the A3 sheets and wonder “What I am going to do with such a wide range of ideas?” Two possible suggestions:
In such a case, students will probably leave the class dissatisfied unless you provide some reassurance that you will return to the problem next class. Summarise the stage reached, e.g. “We haven’t reached agreement yet and that’s OK. You’re at the stage where four groups think A … and the other groups think B … Think a bit more about these options before our next class. We will complete the discussion then.”
As the designers of CUPs, we are yet to hear of a whole class reaching an incorrect consensus, although of course it may be possible. In that case, rather than just telling the class that they are wrong and giving them the accepted scientific view, you may need to devise other strategies, e.g.
Some examples of approaches you could use to help the groups to think about their present understanding of the situation:
Some of the more timid students will. Teachers using CUPs report this occurs much less than they expected, probably because the procedure requires explaining the ideas held by the group rather than their own personal views. Also, it is important to encourage an atmosphere of trust where all initial contributions are considered equally important and respected. You, the teacher, needs to lead by example here.
It is essential that students have time alone to really consider their understanding of the situation presented so that they can formulate a personal view which can then be presented and tested by argument in the subsequent group discussion.
While CUPs employ valuable learning procedures that you probably use on other occasions, it is envisaged that CUPs would be used only occasionally, as they may take 40 to 60 minutes to successfully implement. However, teachers using CUPs tend to report that the time is well spent as the students are often highly engaged and frequently achieve greater understanding of the concepts. The vast majority of students find a well managed CUP exercise challenging, rewarding and most enjoyable.
Research suggests that three is the optimum size for effective, engaged small-group discussion. Where the class size is not a multiple of three, four is preferable to two. Researchers also found that involvement increases when the group is of mixed ability, and that female students' engagement is greater if there is at least another female in the triplet.Top of page
These quotes from teachers and students were recorded during research into the use of CUPs at senior high school and first year university level (where "T" indicates teachers and "S" students).
S: Normally when we get asked something most people don’t think about it. They just say “We don’t know” and you just get told by the teacher, but in CUPs you’ve got time to think about it.
T: One of the best parts to the CUP format was that the students had time to sit down individually and sort out what they were thinking before I led them to a discussion, and that allowed real insight.
S: If we were just one big group then I’m sure some people just wouldn’t say anything. With the triplets you had to say something.
S: When you were in the whole-class discussion it’s not as intimidating because it’s not just you ... because you have a combined opinion on your A3 sheet.
T: I reckon you get a really good insight into what they’re thinking. … All sorts of kids [contributing] that don’t normally… It’s quite a non-threatening sort of process.
T: Normal class discussion is just one way. You’re directing it whereas this way they’re telling you what they really think.
T: I don’t think it hurts to have a touch of confusion. You often learn best, don’t you, when you realise there’s something not quite right here!
S: Everyone usually got their say about what they thought was right … You had to understand it a bit better to be able to answer questions people asked you.
S: Yeah, you had to actually think in class (laughs)!
S: That’s the hardest I’ve had to think in any subject this year [this was two-thirds through the academic year] and it was great.
S: You get different ideas. … Where as if you just get told it and write it down … you feel “Yeah, sure, whatever.”
T: You actually got to hear what the kids were thinking, whereas in a normal class discussion you leap on the first person that says something right, whereas in this you heard all those misconceptions. I found it really valuable to hear those things that they were thinking that I’d forgotten they would think, because I don’t think like that any more.
T: Seeing them get that passionate about a discussion in physics was good.
T: There was a sort of intimacy in the whole-class discussion. All the different [students contributing] ... and obviously not being threatened about it, and also enjoying it.
T: The second CUP was easier because they knew there wasn’t going to be that embarrassing feeling of “I’m going to be put on the spot; I’m going to be laughed at.”
T: For me the CUPs were very important in a formative sense of trying to … determine where … the greatest needs lie and how … to adjust my classes over the next few weeks to address some of those needs. And … recognising where the shortfalls were in … kids’ understanding of problems.
T: I was delighted, absolutely delighted! At recess they were still going, no one moved.
T: At the end of the class they did not want to leave until they had the right answer.
T: Not telling them the right answer!
T: Thinking on your feet when you put all the A3 sheets up, “What am I going to do with all this variation?”
T: [From using CUPs] I became very much more aware that normally you’re forcing your agenda on the kids, so you’ve got to try to avoid that, that’s the hardest thing.
For further informationabout CUPs contact Pam Mulhall at the Faculty of Education, Monash University.Top of page