- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Analyzing high school students’ reasoning about polarization of light

Karolina Matejak Cvenic1,*, Lana Ivanjek2, Maja Planinic1, Katarina Jelicic1, Ana Susac3, and Martin Hopf4

  • 1Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, Bijenicka 32, HR—10000 Zagreb, Croatia
  • 2Faculty of Physics, Physics Education Research, Technische Universität Dresden, Haeckelstraße 3, 01069 Dresden, Germany
  • 3Department of Applied Physics, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb, Unska 3, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
  • 4University of Vienna, Austrian Educational Competence Centre Physics, Porzellangasse 4/2/2, 1090 Wien, Austria

  • *karolina@phy.hr
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010136 – Published 19 May, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010136

Abstract

Polarization of light is one of the topics in the Croatian high school physics curriculum. It is taught in the final year of high school education. Twenty-seven Croatian high-school students (aged 18–19 years) were interviewed after regular instruction about their understanding of polarization of light and the model of light itself. This paper reports on the observed students’ reasoning strategies and conceptual difficulties. Some of the reported difficulties correspond with previously identified difficulties, but some new difficulties were also found. Students often based their explanations on the remembered but misinterpreted common schematic representations of polarization. Explanations seemed to be created on the spot, suggesting the absence of prior models of polarization.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (42)

  1. H. D. Young and R. A. Freedman, Sears and Zemansky’s University Physics: With Modern Physics (Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2016).
  2. J. Walker, R. Resnick, and D. Halliday, Halliday & Resnick Fundamentals of Physics (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2014).
  3. E. Etkina, M. J. Gentile, and A. van Heuvelen, College Physics (Pearson Education, San Francisco, 2014).
  4. E. Hecht, Optics (Addison-Wesley, San Francisco, London, 2002).
  5. B. S. Ambrose, P. R. L. Heron, S. Vokos, and L. C. McDermott, Student understanding of light as an electromagnetic wave: Relating the formalism to physical phenomena, Am. J. Phys. 67, 891 (1999).
  6. B. S. Ambrose, P. S. Shaffer, R. N. Steinberg, and L. C. McDermott, An investigation of student understanding of single-slit diffraction and double-slit interference, Am. J. Phys. 67, 146 (1999).
  7. P. Colin and L. Viennot, Using two models in optics: Students’ difficulties and suggestions for teaching, Am. J. Phys. 69, S36 (2001).
  8. L. Maurines, Geometrical reasoning in wave situations: The case of light diffraction and coherent illumination optical imaging, Int. J. Sci. Edu. 32, 1895 (2010).
  9. V. Mešić, E. Hajder, K. Neumann, and N. Erceg, Comparing different approaches to visualizing light waves: An experimental study on teaching wave optics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010135 (2016).
  10. K. Wosilait, P. R. L. Heron, P. S. Shaffer, and L. C. McDermott, Addressing student difficulties in applying a wave model to the interference and diffraction of light, Am. J. Phys. 67, S5 (1999).
  11. H. D. Park, K. Kim, M. Kwon, C. Lee, S. Kim, and J. B. Kim, Students’ conceptions about polarized electromagnetic waves, in teaching and learning of physics in cultural contexts, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Physics Education in Cultural Contexts, edited by Y. Park and Y. Park (Cheongwon, South Korea, 2001), pp. 190–196.
  12. E. M. Colombo, M. Jaen, and L. C. de Cudmani, The concept of coherence of learning physical optics, in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 2525, edited by M. J. Soileau (SPIE International Society for Optics and Photonics, Bellingham, WA, 1995), pp. 452–458.
  13. M. H. P. Kesonen, M. A. Asikainen, and P. E. Hirvonen, University students’ conceptions of the electric and magnetic fields and their interrelationships, Eur. J. Phys. 32, 521 (2011).
  14. M. Wilson and R. J. Beichner, A comparison of visual representation of E&M plane waves, in Proceedings of the 2018 Physics Education Research Conference, Washington, D.C., edited by A. Traxler, Y. Cao, and S. Wolf (AIP, New York, 2018).
  15. N. S. Podolefsky and N. D. Finkelstein, Analogical scaffolding and the learning of abstract ideas in physics: An example from electromagnetic waves, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 3, 010109 (2007).
  16. D. M. Watts, Student conceptions of light: a case study, Phys. Educ. 20, 183 (1985).
  17. C. Haagen-Schützenhöfer, Students’ conceptions on white light and implications for teaching and learning about colour, Phys. Educ. 52, 044003 (2017).
  18. Croatian curriculum (available at https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2019_01_10_210.html).
  19. T. Andreis, M. Plavčić, and N. Simić, Fizika 4, Za 4. razred gimnazija i srodne škole četverogodišnjih programa fizike (Profil, Zagreb, 2007).
  20. D. Horvat and D. Hrupec, Fizika 4, Pojmovi i koncepti. Udžbenik B (Neodidacta, Zagreb, 2010).
  21. J. Labor, Fizika 3, udžbenik za 3. razred gimnazije (Alfa, Zagreb, 2008).
  22. S. Vosniadou, International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (Routledge, London, 2008).
  23. G. Özdemir and D. B. Clark, An overview of conceptual change theories, Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 3, 351 (2007).
  24. S. Vosniadou, Reframing the classical approach to conceptual change: Preconceptions, misconceptions and synthetic models in Second International Handbook of Science Education, edited by B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, and C. J. McRobbie (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2012), pp. 119–130.
  25. G. J. Posner, K. A. Strike, P. W. Hewson, and W. A. Gertzog, Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change, Sci. Educ. 66, 211 (1982).
  26. A. A. diSessa, Knowledge in pieces, in Constructivism in the Computer Age, edited by G. Forman and P. Pufall (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1988), pp. 49–70.
  27. A. A. diSessa, Toward an epistemology of physics, Cognit. Instr. 10, 105 (1993).
  28. E. F. Redish, A theoretical framework for physics education research: Modeling student thinking, in International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi”; Course; Research on physics education (IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2004), pp 1–64.
  29. D. Hammer, Student resources for learning introductory physics, Am. J. Phys. 68, S52 (2000).
  30. D. Hammer and A. Elby, Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics, J. Learn. Sci. 12, 53 (2003).
  31. S. Rozier and L. Viennot, Students’ reasonings in thermodynamics, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 13, 159 (1991).
  32. K. Jelicic, M. Planinic, and G. Planinsic, Analyzing high school students’ reasoning about electromagnetic induction, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 13, 010112 (2017).
  33. Laurence Viennot, Reasoning in Physics (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004).
  34. E. Charters, The use of think-aloud methods in qualitative research: An introduction to think-aloud methods, Brock Educ. J. 12, 68 (2003).
  35. U. Kuckartz, Qualitative Text Analysis, A Guide To Methods, Practice & Using Software (SAGE, Los Angeles, 2014).
  36. P. Colin, F. Chauvet, and L. Viennot, Reading images in optics: Students’ difficulties and teachers’ views, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 24, 313 (2002).
  37. J. Ametller and R. Pintó, Students’ reading of innovative images of energy at secondary school level, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 24, 285 (2002).
  38. F. Stylianidou, Analysis of science textbook pictures about energy and pupils’ readings of them, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 24, 257 (2002).
  39. A. Elby, What students’ learning of representations tells us about constructivism, J. Math. Behav. 19, 481 (2000).
  40. D. L. Schwartz, Reasoning about the referent of a picture versus reasoning about the picture as the referent: an effect of visual realism, Mem. Cogn. 23, 709 (1995).
  41. V. López and R. Pintó, Identifying secondary-school students’ difficulties when reading visual representations displayed in physics simulations, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 39, 1353 (2017).
  42. R. Ploetzner, S. Lippitsch, M. Galmbacher, D. Heuer, and S. Scherrer, Students’ difficulties in learning from dynamic visualisations and how they may be overcome, Comput. Hum. Behav. 25, 56 (2009).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010136– Published 19 May, 2021
  • Received 7 December 2020
  • Accepted 12 April 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation