Dear Siddharth:

If I understand it well you are mainly interested in the difference between concept achievement and conceptual understanding. As you say are these two words -- concept achievement and conceptual understanding -- the same or do they differ?

I know of no study that addresses explicitly your question. However, Piaget's theory, for example, is highly relevant to tackle with the question you raise. Why this is so? This is so for several reasons. First, Piaget made it clear that a child can grasp a concept without understanding it. This may happen, for example, when a teacher intends to teach to a given child a concept (e.g. the proportionality concept) that is much above his/her ability to understand. At his/her best, the child memorizes (i.e.,rote learning) the concept at hand. It is clear the case that in this example no significant teaching/learning occurs, and no assimilation/accommodation takes place. Second, according to Piaget, to understand is to invent or to reconstruct by reinvention. This is not the case, when an individual memorizes rather than understands the supposedly taught concept. It is true that Piaget admitted the possibility of training a given child to achieve a certain concept (e.g., number conservation). When this was the case Piaget had, for example, the following to ask: For how long such an acquisition or achievement endures? Is it transferred to non-trained concepts (e.g., weight conversation)? All of this shows that Piaget clearly distinguished between to achieve or to grasp a concept and understanding it.  In a nutshell, when we understand a concept we also grasp it. In contradistinction, we can grasp a concept (concept achievement) without understanding it (conceptual understanding). It is a sad reality that several teachers are more simple transmitters of knowledge and, say, achievement-oriented teachers, than mentors and organizers of learning situations such that their students, say, reconstruct, reinvent and really understand what is taught to them. These teachers may be considered conceptual understanding-oriented teachers- Of course it would be interesting to measure through an appropriate neural method what happens in one's brain when one grasps or is successful at attaining/achieving a certain concept an when one really understands it.

I hope I have got  you question and that this helps.

Best regards, Orlando

Thank you very much Sir, your answer really help me a lot and the answer of my question is described in such a way that really help me to sort out my confusion and i am highly obliged. Now I have a clear cut difference between these two words. Now i shall go with these two word and differentiate and try to find out links between conceptual understanding with concept itself, concept formation, concept attainment., concept achievement and procedural understanding.  Thanking you once again for your support.  

                                          Siddharth kumar

Concept  has an important feature that knowing them will help the learner in better understanding of concept. It includes concept attribute, value of concept attribute, number of concept adjectives, adjectives of index, defining attributes, the original model, sample, classify concepts, objective and abstract concepts, concepts of combination and non- combination . Concept attainment is search and list of manifestations that can be used to detect examples from non-examples of classes. Conceptual understanding requires focused inferential work. Being helped to generalize from one’s specific knowledge is key to genuine understanding. Knowledge of procedures is no guarantee of conceptual understanding. Students understand which ideas are key and that they grasp the heuristic value of those ideas. They are thus better able to use them strategically to solve problems – especially non-routine problems  and avoid common misunderstandings as well as inflexible knowledge and skill.

Thank you for your answer and this will really help me in Understanding the different between these two words.