Knowledge Elements Used by Pre-Service Primary Teachers to Explain Free Fall
Research Article
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36681/Keywords:
Physics education, free fall, phenomenological primitives (p-prims).Abstract
As well as knowledge structures can be complex and coherent, they might be small and disconnected. This study focuses on knowledge elements of pre-service teachers using diSessa’s phenomenological primitives (p-prims) framework. Based on group interviews, a test was developed regarding the knowledge fragments used for explaining free fall in three different contexts—the Earth, the Moon, and Mars—for both vertically released and kicked balls. The test was then implemented to 274 pre-service primary teachers. The results indicated that teacher candidates used six different p-prims such as force as a mover, closer means stronger, bigger is greater, overcoming, dynamic balance, and dying away to explain free fall. The use and appropriateness of p-prims differed due to context both qualitatively and statistically.
Downloads
References
Ameh, C. (1987). An analysis of teachers’ and their students’ views of the concept ‘Gravity.’ Research in Science Education, 17(2), 212-219. DOI: 10.1007/BF02357189
Atasoy, Ş., & Akdeniz, A. R. (2007). Newton’un hareket kanunları konusunda kavram yanılgılarını belirlemeye yönelik bir testin geliştirilmesi ve uygulanması. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(1), 45-59. Web: https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/658
Bao, L. (1999). Dynamics of student modeling: A theory, algorithms and application to quantum mechanics [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Maryland, College Park. Web:
https://www.per-central.org/items/detail.cfm?ID=4760
Bao, L., & Redish, E. F. (2006). Model analysis: Representing and assessing the dynamics of student learning. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 2, 010103, 1-16. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010103
Burde, J. P., & Wilhelm, T. (2020). Teaching electric circuits with a focus on potential differences. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16, 020153, 1-24. DOI: 0.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020153
Champagne, A., Klopfer, L., & Anderson, J. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48(12), 1074-1079. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.12290
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1998). The theories of knowledge acquisition. In B.J. Fraser & K.G. Tobin (Eds.), Handbook of science education (pp. 97- 113). Great Britain: Kluwer Academics Publishers.
Didiş, N., Eryılmaz, A., & Erkoç, Ş. (2010). Pre-service physics teachers’ comprehension of quantum mechanical concepts. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 6(4), 227235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75243
Didiş, N., Eryılmaz, A., & Erkoç, Ş. (2014). Investigating students’ mental models about the quantization of light, energy and angular momentum. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 10(2), 020127, 1-28. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020127
diSessa, A. A. (1983). Phenomenology and the evolution of intuition. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp.15-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman & P. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp.49-70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2&3), 105-225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008
diSessa, A. A. (1996). What do 'just plain folk' know about physics? In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching and schooling (pp.709-730). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M., & Esterly, J. B. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28, 843-900. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2806_1
Gönen, S. (2008). A study on student teachers’ misconceptions and scientifically acceptable conceptions about mass and gravity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 70–81. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-007-9083-1
Halloun, I., & Hestenes, D. (1985). Common sense concepts about motion. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1056-1065. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.14031
Hammer, D. M. (1994). Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics. Cognition and Instruction, 12(2), 151-183. Web: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3233679
Hammer, D. (1996). Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), 97-127. Web: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1466772
Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 68(7), S52-S59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19520
Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_3
Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2343497
Hrepic, Z. (2002). Identifying students’ mental models of sound propagation [Unpublished master’s thesis].
Kansas State University, Manhattan. Web: https://www.phys.ksu.edu/ksuper/dissertations/hrepic-ms.pdf
Hrepic, Z. (2004). Development of a real time assessment of students’ mental models of sound propagation [Unpublished doctoral dissertation] Kansas State University, Manhattan. Web: https://www.phys.ksu.edu/ksuper/dissertations/hrepic-phd.pdf
Hrepic, Z., Zollman, D. A., & Rebello, N. S. (2010). Identifying students’ mental models of sound propagation: The role of conceptual blending in understanding conceptual change. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 6(2), 020114 1-18. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020114
Itza-Ortiz, S. F., Rebello, S., & Zollman, D. (2004). Students’ models of Newton’s second law in mechanics and electromagnetism. European Journal of Physics, 25, 81-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/25/1/011
Jelicic, K., Planinic, M., & Planinsic, G. (2017). Analyzing high school students’ reasoning about electromagnetic induction, Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13, 010112, 1-18. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010112
Kaltakçı, D., & Didiş, N. (2006). Fizik öğretmenliği son sınıf öğrencilerinin farklı ortamlar için yerçekimi kavramını yorumlayabilmeleri. VII. National Science and Mathematics Education Conference Prooceeding Book (pp. 946- 950), Ankara.
Kavanagh, C., & Sneider, C. (2007). Learning about gravity I. Free fall: A Guide for teachers and curriculum developers. The Astronomy Education Review, 2(5), 21-52. DOI: 10.3847/AER2006018 Kocakülah, M. S., & Kenar Açıl, Z. (2011). İlköğretim öğrencilerinin gözüyle “Yerçekimi nerededir?”. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 8(2), 135-152. Web: http://tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/572
Kruger, C., Summers, M., & Palacio, D. (1990). An investigation of some English primary school teachers’ understanding of the concepts of force and gravity. British Educational Research Journal, 16(4), 383-397. Web: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1500775
Palmer, D. (2001). Students’ alternative conceptions and scientifically acceptable conceptions about gravity. The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 33(7), 691- 706. DOI: 10.1080/09500690010006527
Redish, E. F. (2004). A theoretical framework for physics education research: Modeling student thinking. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), International school of physics “Enrico Fermi,” research in physics education: Course CLVI (pp. 1-60). Netherlands: IOS Press.
Reif, F. (1995). Millikan Lecture 1994: Understanding and teaching important scientific thought processes. American Journal of Physics, 63(1), 17-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17764
Reif, F. (1997). How can we help students acquire effectively usable physics knowledge? In E. F. Redish & J. S. Rigden (Eds.), International Conference on Undergraduate Physics Education: The changing role of physics departments in modern universities (pp. 179-195). Woodbury, NY: American Institute of Physics.
Scherr, R. (2007). Modeling student thinking: An example from special relativity. American Journal of Physics, 75(3), 272-280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2410013
Sharma, M. D., Millar, R. M., Smith, A., & Sefton, I. M. (2004). Students‟ understandings of gravity in an orbiting space-ship. Research in Science Education, 34, 267-289. DOI: 10.1023/B:RISE.0000044605.00448.bd
Syuhendri, S. (2017). Student teachers’ misconceptions about gravity. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1185(1), 012047, 1-6. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1185/1/012047
Taber, K. S. (2008). Conceptual resources for learning science: Issues of transience and grain-size in cognition and cognitive structure. International Journal of Science Education, 30(8), 1027-1053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701485082
Taber, K. S. (2014). The significance of implicit knowledge for learning and teaching chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15, 447-461. DOI: 10.1039/c4rp00124a
Tan K. C. D., & Taber K. S. (2005). What comes after stable octet? Stable sub-shell! Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 28(1), 81–102. Web: http://hdl.handle.net/10497/15470
Ueno, N. (1993). Reconsidering p-prims theory from the viewpoint of situated cognition. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2&3), 239-248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9649010
Volfson, A., Eshach, H., & Ben-Abu, Y. (2020). Identifying physics misconceptions at the circus: The case of circular motion. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16, 010134, 1-11. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010134
Wannous, J. & Horváth, P. (2019). Momentum as a maintaining agency: A different approach to teaching force. The Physics Teacher, 57, 373-375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.5124273 Watts, D. (1982). Gravity- Don’t take it for granted! Physics Education, 17(4), 116-121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/17/3/306
Watts, D., & Zylbersztajn, A. (1981). A survey of some children’s ideas of force. Physics Education,
(6), 360-365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/16/6/313
Wittmann, M. C. (1998). Making sense of how students come to an understanding of physics: An example from mechanical waves [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Maryland, College Park. Web: http://www.physics.umd.edu/perg/dissertations/Wittmann/
Wittmann, M. C., Steinberg, R. N., & Redish, E. F. (1999). Making sense of how students make sense of mechanical waves. The Physics Teacher, 37(1), 15- 21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.880142
Young, D. E., & Meredith, D. C. (2017). Using the resources framework to design, assess, and refine interventions on pressure in fluids. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13, 010125, 1-16. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010125
Downloads
Issue
Section
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Journal of Turkish Science Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
