Teaching about gauss’s law by combining analogical and extreme case reasoning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36681/Keywords:
Gauss’s law, superposition of electric field, analogies, extreme case reasoningAbstract
It is well known that many students have tremendous difficulties with applying Gauss’s law for purposes of solving quantitative as well as qualitative problems. In this study, it was investigated how understanding of Gauss’s law can be facilitated by analyzing the superposition of electric field vectors for increasingly complex geometric configurations of charges. Actually, in the spring semester of academic year 2016/2017, a pretest-posttest quasi-experiment was performed with 180 students from the Faculty of Chemical Engineering and Technology in Zagreb, Croatia. The student sample has been divided into three control subgroups and three experimental subgroups. Control subgroups (Nc=93) received a traditional teaching treatment while in the experimental subgroups (Ne=87) students showed how reasoning about superposition of electric field vectors can be transferred from relatively simple configurations of charges to more complex ones. At the posttest, students from the experimental group proved to be significantly more effective in solving qualitative problems on Gauss’s law. The results from our study support the idea that development of analogical, visually rich models facilitates the meaningful learning.
Downloads
References
Adams, N. (2015). Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive learning objectives. Journal of Medical Library Association, 103, 152–153. Doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.103.3.010
An, S., & Wu, Z. (2012). Enhancing mathematics teachers’ knowledge of students’ thinking from assessing and analyzing misconceptions in homework. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 717-753. Doi: 10.1007/s10763-011-9324-x
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C., & Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to Research in Education. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage.
Aubrecht, G. J., & Raduta, C. (2005, September). Contrasts in student understanding of simple E&M questions in two countries. In AIP Conference Proceedings, 790 (1), 85-88. AIP: New York. Doi: 10.1063/1.2084707
Bagno, E., & Eylon, B. S. (1997). From problem solving to a knowledge structure: An example from the domain of electromagnetism. American Journal of Physics, 65, 726- 736. Doi: 10.1119/1.18642
Bagno, E., Eylon, B. S., & Ganiel, U. (2000). From fragmented knowledge to a knowledge structure: Linking the domains of mechanics and electromagnetism. American Journal of Physics, 68 (1), 16-26. Doi: 10.1119/1.19515
Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. New York: Longmans.
Bollen, L., van Kampen, P., & De Cock, M. (2015). Students’ difficulties with vector calculus in electrodynamics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 11, 020129. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.019905
Bowling, A. (2005). Techniques of questionnaire design. In A. Bowling & S. Ebrahim (Eds.), Handbook of health research methods: Investigation, measurement and analysis (pp. 394-428). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Clement, J. (1991). Nonformal reasoning in experts and in science students: The use of analogies, extreme cases, and physical intuition. Informal Reasoning and Education, 1, 345-362.
Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1241-1257. Doi: 10.1002/tea.3660301007
Clement, J. (1988). Observed methods for generating analogies in scientific problem solving. Cognitive Science, 12, 563-586. Doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1204_3
Clement, J. (2008). Creative Model Construction in Scientists and Students: The Role of Imagery, Analogy, and Mental Simulation. Dordrecht: Springer.
Cohen, R. J., & Swerdlik, M. (2009). Psychological Assessment: An Introduction to Tests and Measurements. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Demirci, N., & Çirkinoglu, A. (2004). Determining Students' Preconceptions/Misconceptions in Electricity and Magnetism Concepts. Journal of Turkish science education, 1(2), 51- 54.
Einstein, A., & Infeld, L. (1938). The Evolution of Physics. London: The Scientific Book Club.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE.
Giambattista, A., McCarthy Richardson, B., & Richardson, R. C. (2007). College Physics, 2nd edition. New York: McGraw Hill.
Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (1997). The kinds of mental representations models, propositions and images used by college physics students regarding the concept of field. International Journal of Science Teaching, 19, 711-724. Doi: 10.1080/0950069970190607
Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1-11. Doi: 10.1080/095006900289976
Grundmeier, T. A., Hansen, J., & Sousa, E. (2006). An exploration of definition and procedural fluency in integral calculus. Primus, 16, 178-191. Doi: 10.1080/10511970608984145
Guisasola, J., Almudí, J. M., Salinas, Zuza J. K., & Ceberio M. (2008). The Gauss’s and Ampere laws: different laws but similar difficulties for student learning. European Journal of Physics, 29, 1005-1016. Doi:10.1088/0143-0807/29/5/013
Heck, A., & Van Gastel, L. (2006). Mathematics on the threshold. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37, 925-945. Doi: 10.1080/00207390600819003
Howell, D. (2013). Statistical methods for psychology. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
Isvan, Z., & Singh, C. (2007, January). Improving student understanding of Coulomb’s law and Gauss’s law. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 883, No. 1, pp. 181-184). AIP: New York.
Jackson, J. D. (1999). Classical electrodynamics - 3rd edition. New York: Wiley.
Johnstone, A. H., & Al-Naeme, F. F. (1991). Room for scientific thought? International Journal of Science Education, 13, 187-192. Doi: 10.1080/0950069910130205
Kim, E., & Pak, S. (2002). Students do not overcome conceptual difficulties after solving 1000 traditional problems. American Journal of Physics, 70, 759-765. Doi: 10.1119/1.1484151
Kline, P. (2015). A handbook of test construction (psychology revivals): introduction to psychometric design. New York: Routledge.
Li, J., & Singh, C. (2017). Investigating and improving introductory physics students’ understanding of the electric field and superposition principle. European Journal of Physics, 38, 055702. Doi: 10.1088/1361-6404/aa7618
Lin, J. W., & Chiu, M. H. (2017). Evaluating Multiple Analogical Representations from Students’ Perceptions. In D. F. Treagust, Duit, R. & Fischer, H. E. (Eds), Multiple Representations in Physics Education (pp 71-91). Cham: Springer.
Lin, S. Y., Maries, A., & Singh, C. (2013). Student difficulties in translating between mathematical and graphical representations in introductory physics. In AIP Conference Proceedings, 1513 (1), 250-253). New York: AIP. Doi: 10.1063/1.4789699
Lopac, V., Kulišić, P., Volovšek, V., & Dananić, V. (1992). Iz elektromagnetskih pojava i strukture tvari [Electromagnetism and structure of matter]. Zagreb: Školska knjiga.
Maloney, D., O’Kuma, T.,Hieggelke, C., & Heuvelen, A. V. (2001). Surveying students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism. American Journal of Physics, 69, 12-23. Doi: 10.1119/1.1371296
Maries, A., Lin, S.-Y., & Singh, C. (2017). Challenges in designing appropriate scaffolding to improve students’ representational consistency: The case of a Gauss’s law problem. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13, 020103. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.020103
Marušić M., & Sliško, J. (2012). Influence of Three Different Methods of Teaching Physics on the Gain in Students' Development of Reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 301-326. Doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.582522
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43-52. Doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
Mayer, R. E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S.,& Campbell, J., (2005). When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 256-265. Doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.11.4.256
Maymoona, A. H., & Sulaiman, A. B. (2015). Rectifying Analogy-Based Instruction to Enhance Immediate and Postponed Science Achievement. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 12 (1), 3-17.
Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (Eds.) (2006). The new taxonomy of educational objectives. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
McKagan, S. B., Perkins, K. K., & Wieman,C. E. (2010). Design and validation of the quantum mechanics conceptual survey. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 6, 020121. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020121
Mešić, V., Hajder, E., Neumann, K., & Erceg, N. (2016). Comparing different approaches to visualizing light waves: An experimental study on teaching wave optics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12, 010135. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010135
Moller, P., Kramer, B., & Bernd, B. (1991). Review: Electric fish. BioScience, 41 (11), 794- 796. Doi: 10.2307/1311732
Nersessian, N. J. (1999). Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Springer.
Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Creating Scientific Concepts. London: The MIT Press.
Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual - 4th edition. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill Education.
Pepper, R. E., Chasteen, S. V., Pollock, S. J., & Perkins, K. K. (2010, October). Our best juniors still struggle with Gauss’s Law: Characterizing their difficulties. In AIP
Conference Proceedings, 1289 (1), 245-248. New York: AIP. Doi: 10.1063/1.3515212
Pepper, R., Chasteen, E. S. V., Pollock,S. J., & Perkins, K. K (2012). Observations on Student Difficulties with Mathematics in Upper-Division Electricity and Magnetism. Physical Review Special Topics- Physics Education Research, 8, 010111. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.010111
Planinic, M., Ivanjek, L., & Susac, A.(2010). Rasch model based analysis of the Force Concept Inventory. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 6, 010103. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.010103
Podolefsky, N. S., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2006). Use of analogy in learning physics: The role of representations. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 2, 020101. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.020101
Raduta, C. (2005). General students' misconceptions related to Electricity and Magnetism. arXiv preprint physics/0503132.
Redish, E. F. (2003). Teaching Physics With the Physics Suite. New York: Wiley.
Serway, R. A., & Faughn, J. S. (2006). Holt Physics. Austin: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Sevim, S. (2013). Promoting Conceptual Change in Science Which is More Effective: Conceptual Change Text or Analogy? Journal of Turkish Science Education, 10 (3), 24-36.
Shepherd, M. D., Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2012). University Students' Reading of Their First- Year Mathematics Textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 14, 226-256. Doi: 10.1080/10986065.2012.682959
Silva, C. C. (2007). The role of models and analogies in the electromagnetic theory: a historical case study. Science & Education, 16, 835–848. Doi: 10.1007/s11191-006-9008- z
Singh, C. (2005). Student understanding of Symmetry and Gauss’s law. In AIP Conference Proceedings, 790 (1), 65-68. New York: AIP. Doi: 10.1063/1.2084702
Singh, C. (2006). Student understanding of symmetry and Gauss’s law of electricity. American Journal of Physics, 74, 923–936. Doi: 10.1119/1.2238883
Sorden, S. D. (2005). A Cognitive Approach to Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning.
Informing Science Journal, 8, 264-279.
Stephens, A. L., & Clement, J. J. (2009). Extreme case reasoning and model based learning in experts and students. In Proceedings of the 2009 Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 17-21 April, Garden Grove, CA.
Stephens, A. L., & Clement, J. J. (2010). Documenting the use of expert scientific reasoning processes by high school physics students. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 6, 020122. Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020122
Stewart, J. V. (2001). Intermediate Electromagnetic Theory. Singapore: World Scientific.
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296. Doi: 10.1023/A:1022193728205
Traxler, A. L., Black, K. E., & Thompson, J. R. (2007). Students’ use of symmetry with Gauss’s law. In AIP Conference Proceedings, 883 (1), 173-176. New York: AIP. Doi: 10.1063/1.2508720
Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 147- 177. Doi: 10.1007/s
Viegas, J. (2007). Critical Perspectives on Natural Disasters. New York: The RosenPublishing Group.
Viennot, L. & Rainson, S. (1992). Students’ reasoning about the superposition of electric fields. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 475-487. Doi: 10.1080/0950069920140409
Zietsman, A., & Clement J., (1997). The role of extreme case reasoning in instruction for conceptual change. Journal of Learning Sciences, 6, 61-89. Doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0601_4
Downloads
Issue
Section
Published
Versions
- 15.09.2018 (2)
- 15.09.2018 (1)
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
