ABSTRACT
Analogy presents us with a dilemma: A good analogy conveys large amounts of information with very little explanation, it inspires scientific discovery, and it provides new information about unfamiliar domains. But, despite all these benefits, analogy is very hard to do. For example, you are trying to explain the physics of heat flow to a (very) young scientist and want to use an analogy. Can you think of a domain in which the principles that apply to heat flow also hold true? This domain must be simple enough for a child, familiar enough that it will not have to be taught, and complete enough to provide useful information. This is the dilemma faced by educators trying to teach complex topics such as physics, biology, chemistry, and of course, mathematics, to students at various levels of knowledge. In the preceding chapters, researchers from different domains of inquiry and different theoretical viewpoints have described the many ways in which analogies can help, or in some cases, hinder the learning process. My goal for this commentary is to provide a context for their work, discussing its place within the study of analogy and within the interdisciplinary viewpoints espoused by the authors.
