Analysing Problem Structuring in a Collaborative Explanation Dialogue to Capture Conceptual Change

In medical law education, discussion of real-world cases is frequently used to complement conventional lecture-based learning. However, it is currently unclear how to evaluate whether a discussion does promote the desired understanding of medical law concepts. We report an analysis of conceptual change in dialogues between medical students as they attempted to explain the verdicts in several negligence cases. The analysis relies on a generic cognitive model of conceptual change through problem structuring which indicates how conceptualisations will manifest themselves in dialogues. Our approach offers a basis for developing a framework for evaluating conceptual change in collaborative case based learning. We present arguments for its heuristic value and potential trajectories for further development.