Bat-Sheva Eylon

Learning and Instruction: An Examination of Four Research Perspectives in Science Education

Recent research in science education examines learning from four perspectives which we characterize as a concept-learning focus, a developmental focus, a differential focus, and a focus on problem solving. This paper illustrates how these perspectives, considered together offer new insights into the knowledge and reasoning processes of science students and provide a framework for identifying mechanisms governing how individuals change their knowledge and thinking processes. An integrated examination of the four research perspectives strongly suggests that in-depth coverage of several science topics will benefit students far more than fleeting coverage of numerous science topics.

Potential difference and current in simple electric circuits: A study of students’ concepts

A study which was designed to identify students’ concepts of simple electric circuits is reported. A diagnostic questionnaire was administered to a sample of 145 high school students and 21 physics teachers. The questionnaire included mainly qualitative questions which were designed to examine students’ understanding of the functional relationships between the variables in an electric circuit. The main findings obtained from the analysis of the responses are current is the primary concept used by students, whereas potential difference is regarded as a consequence of current flow, and not as its cause. Consequently students often use V=IR incorrectly. A battery is regarded as a source of constant current. The concepts of emf and internal resistance are not well understood. Students have difficulties in analyzing the effect which a change in one component has on the rest of the circuit. This is probably due to the more general difficulty students have in dealing with a simultaneous change of several variables.

Macro‐micro relationships: the missing link between electrostatics and electrodynamics in students’ reasoning

In analysing students’ reasoning about simple electric circuits, it is useful to think in terms of three aspects: (a) quantitative relationships, which are defined by algebraic expressions between circuit parameters; (6) functional relationships, which involve qualitative considerations, and lead to a correct description of the interplay between circuit variables; and (c) processes involving macro‐micro relationships, where the macroscopic circuit parameters are tied with microscopic models and rules. We argue that all three aspects are necessary for a proper understanding of the topic. While there is considerable information about the first two aspects with regard to student reasoning, little is known about the third. In this study, we have investigated this aspect with students in an advanced high school course. We find that even in very simple situations, most students do not tie concepts from electrostatics into their description of the phenomena. This leads to severe inconsistencies in student answer...

From problem solving to a knowledge structure: An example from the domain of electromagnetism

An investigation of students’ knowledge after a traditional advanced high-school course in electromagnetism shows deficiencies of their knowledge in three major areas: (1) the structure of knowledge—e.g., realizing the importance of central ideas, such as Maxwell’s equations (expressed qualitatively); (2) conceptual understanding—e.g., understanding the relationships between the electric field and its sources; and (3) application of central relationships in problem solving. To remedy these deficiencies we propose an instructional model which integrates problem solving, conceptual understanding and the construction of the knowledge structure. The central activity of the students is a gradual construction of a hierarchical concept map organized around Maxwell’s equations as central ideas of the domain. The students construct the map in five stages: (1) SOLVE—they solve a set of problems that highlight the central ideas in the domain; (2) REFLECT—they reflect on the conceptual basis of their solutions; (3) CONCEPTUALIZE—they perform activities that deal with relevant conceptual difficulties; (4) APPLY—they carry out complex applications; (5) LINK—they link their activities to the evolving concept map. This integrative model (experimental treatment) was compared to an isolated treatment of drill and practice or treatment of conceptual difficulties without linkage to the proposed knowledge structure. The comparison shows that students in the experimental treatment performed better than the other students on measures of recall, conceptual knowledge and problem solving. Students in the experimental treatment were also able to transfer and extract central ideas in a domain different than physics.

Evidence-based professional development of science teachers in two countries

The focus of this collaborative research project of King’s College London, and the Weizmann Institute, Israel is on investigating the ways in which teachers can demonstrate accomplished teaching in a specific domain of science and on the teacher learning that is generated through continuing professional development (CPD) programmes that lead towards such practice. The interest lies in what processes and inputs are required to help secondary‐school science teachers develop expertise in a specific aspect of science teaching. It focuses on the design of the CPD programmes and examines the importance of an evidence‐based approach through portfolio‐construction in which professional dialogue paves the way for teacher learning. The set of papers highlights the need to set professional challenges while tailoring CPD to teachers’ needs to create an environment in which teachers can advance and transform their practice. The cross‐culture perspective adds to the richness of the development and enables the researchers to examine which aspects are fundamental to the design by considering similarities and differences between the domains.

From Fragmented Knowledge to a Knowledge Structure: Linking the Domains of Mechanics and Electromagnetism.

The traditional teaching of physics in separate domains leads to a fragmented knowledge structure that has an adverse effect on the comprehension and recall of the central ideas. We describe a new program: MAOF (“overview” in Hebrew), which relates large parts of mechanics and electromagnetism to each other via the key concepts of field and potential, and at the same time treats students’ conceptual difficulties. The MAOF program can accompany any conventional course in mechanics and electromagnetism as part of the review process. The instructional model integrates problem solving, conceptual understanding, and the construction of a knowledge structure. It consists of five stages: solve, reflect, conceptualize, apply, and link. In order to construct the relationships within a domain, students solve simple and familiar problems, reflect on their solution methods, identify the underlying principles, and represent them in visual form, forming concept maps. Additional activities deal with conceptual difficult...

Knowledge Integration and Displaced Volume.

This study contrasted spontaneous and reflective knowledge integration instruction delivered using a computer learning environment to enhance understanding of displaced volume. Both forms of instruction provided animated experiments and required students to predict outcomes, observe results, and explain their ideas. In addition, the reflective instruction diagnosed specific inconsistencies in student reasoning and encouraged students to reflect on these dilemmas as well as to construct general principles. We distinguished the impact of instruction on students who believed scientific phenomena are governed by principles (cohesive beliefs) versus students who believed that science is a collection of unrelated “facts” (dissociated beliefs). Students typically held multiple models of displacement, using different explanations depending on the form of assessment. For example, we found that 17% of these middle school students made accurate predictions about displacement experiments prior to instruction and 25% could construct an accurate general principle. However, only 12% consistently used the same explanation across assessments. After instruction, students were more accurate and more consistent: over 50% accurately predicted experimental outcomes, 79% gave an accurate general principle, and about 40% gave consistent responses. We found no advantages for enhanced animations over straightforward animated experiments. The reflective integration instruction led to more substantial long-term changes in student understanding than did spontaneous integration instruction. Furthermore, on a delayed posttest we found that students with cohesive beliefs not only sustained their understanding of displaced volume, but, when exposed to reflective integration instruction, actually continued to construct more predictive views following instruction. In contrast, students with dissociated beliefs made no long-term progress independent of the form of instruction.

School and out-of-school science: a model for bridging the gap

Children learn in formal (school) and informal (out-of-school) contexts. Do these children integrate what they learn in these different contexts? While some research shows that they do most of the literature points to a serious lack of contact between these contexts when dealing with related content. During the last two decades, many education researchers have called to bridge this gap. The aim of this paper is to develop a model to guide dialogue and cooperation between staff members within formal and informal educational contexts, in order to foster this integration. We present: (1) a rationale for bridging between formal and informal learning contexts, including the need for a comprehensive and practical model to guide this effort; (2) a design-based research methodology for developing the model; and (3) the resulting 4 × 4-bridging model. We argue that this model can help educators, engaged in formal and informal learning, to develop practical and productive partnerships with each other.

“Physics with a Smile”—Explaining Phenomena with a Qualitative Problem-Solving Strategy

Various studies indicate that high school physics students and even college students majoring in physics have difficulties in qualitative understanding of basic concepts and principles of physics.1–5 For example, studies carried out with the Force Concept Inventory (FCI)1,6 illustrate that qualitative tasks are not easy to solve even at the college level. Consequently, “conceptual physics” courses have been designed to foster qualitative understanding, and advanced high school physics courses as well as introductory college-level courses strive to develop qualitative understanding. Many physics education researchers emphasize the importance of acquiring some qualitative understanding of basic concepts in physics as early as middle school or in the context of courses that offer “Physics First” in the ninth grade before biology or chemistry.7 This trend is consistent with the call to focus the science curriculum on a small number of basic concepts and ideas, and to instruct students in a more “meaningful wa...

Explaining the Unexplainable: Translated Scientific Explanations (TSE) in public physics lectures

This paper deals with the features and design of explanations in public physics lectures. It presents the findings from a comparative study of three exemplary public physics lectures, given by practicing physicists who are acknowledged as excellent public lecturers. The study uses three different perspectives: the lecture, the lecturer, and the audience (high school physics teachers and students). It concludes with a grounded theory explanatory framework for public physics lectures. The framework demonstrates that a “Translated Scientific Explanation” (TSE) draws upon four clusters of explanatory categories: analogical approach, story, knowledge organization, and content. The framework suggests how the lecturer fits the content of the presentation to the audience’s knowledge throughout the lecture, taking into account the listeners’ lack of necessary prior knowledge.