- Open Access
Probing student understanding of scientific thinking in the context of introductory astrophysics
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 5, 020104 – Published 30 September, 2009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.020104
Abstract
Common forms of testing of student understanding of science content can be misleading about their understanding of the nature of scientific thinking. Observational astronomy integrated with related ideas of force and motion is a rich context to explore the correlation between student content knowledge and student understanding of the scientific thinking about that content. In this paper, we describe this correlation in detail with a focus on a question about the relative motion of the Sun and the Earth. We find that high achieving high school students throughout New York City struggle with what constitutes scientific justification and thought processes, but can improve these skills tremendously in an inquiry-oriented summer astronomy-physics program.
Article Text
References (23)
- This study takes place entirely in New York. A description of the standardized exams for high school science can be found at http://www.nysedregents.org/index.html.
- For varying perspectives and contexts, in addition to references below see R. N. Steinberg, Away from the ivory tower: Real challenges teaching high school physics in an urban environment, Forum on Education Newsletter, American Physical Society (Fall, 2008); N. B. Songer and M. C. Linn, How do students' views of science influence knowledge integration? J. Res. Sci. Teach. 28, 761 (1991); S. Carey, R. Evans, M. Honda, E. Jay, and C. Unger, An experiment is when you try it and see if it works: A study of grade 7 students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 11, 514 (1989); W. F. Perry, Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years (Holt, Rinehart, & Wilson, New York, 1970); A. B. Arons, Development of Concepts of Physics (Addison Wesley, New York, 1965).
- M. P. Schneps, A Private Universe, Video (Astronomical Society of the Pacific, San Francisco, 1989).
- For a summary and further references, see and J. M. Bailey and T. F. Slater, A review of astronomy education research, AER 2, 20 (2003).
- B. Gregory, W. M. Luzader, and H. P. Coyle, Project STAR: The Universe in Your Hands (Kendall-Hunt Publishing, Dubuque, IA, 1995).
- L.C. McDermott and the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington, Physics by Inquiry (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1996).
- I. A. Halloun and D. Hestenes, Common sense concepts about motion, Am. J. Phys. 53, 1056 (1985); L. C. McDermott, Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics, Phys. Today 37 (7), 24 (1984).
- J. Clement, Students’ preconceptions in introductory mechanics, Am. J. Phys. 50, 66 (1982).
- D. P. Maloney, Rule-governed approaches to physics: Newton’s third law, Phys. Educ. 19, 37 (1984).
- L. C. McDermott, P. S. Shaffer, and the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington, Tutorials in Introductory Physics (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998).
- For an integrated account of the development of the concepts, processes, and epistemologies of observational astronomy and related ideas, see A. B. Arons, Development of Concepts of Physics (Addison Wesley, New York, 1965); G. Holton and D. Roller, Foundations of Modern Physical Science (Addison Wesley, New York, 1958); G. Holton, Introduction to Concepts and Theories of Physical Science (Addison Wesley, New York, 1953).
- For a detailed account of Galileo’s observations of the moons of Jupiter and subsequent scientific reasoning, see A. E. Lawson, What does Galileo's discovery of Jupiter’s moons tell us about the process of scientific discorvery? Sci. Educ. 11, 1 (2002).
- Only matched data, that is only results from students who completed both the pretest and post-test, are included. Drop rate each summer is less than 10%, attendance exceeds 95%, and selecting for matched data does not significantly change the quantitative data provided.
- All names are pseudonyms but intend to reflect the gender and race of the student.
- L. C. McDermott, A perspective on teacher preparation in physics and other sciences: The need for special science courses for teachers, Am. J. Phys. 58, 734 (1990); National Research Council, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School (National Academic Press, Washington, DC, 1999); E. F. Redish, Implications of cognitive studies for teaching physics, Am. J. Phys. 62, 796 (1994).
- W. K. Adams, K. K. Perkins, N. S. Podolefsky, M. Dubson, N. D. Finkelstein, and C. E. Wieman, New instrument for measuring student beliefs about physics and learning physics: The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2, 010101 (2006).
- A. Elby, http://www2.physics.umd.edu/~elby/EBAPS/home.htm
- I. Halloun, “Views About Science and Physics Achievement. The VASS Story,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Undergraduate Physics Education (American Institute of Physics Press, College Park, MD, 1997, pp. 605–613.
- N. G. Lederman, F. Abd-El-Khalick, R. L. Bell, and R. S. Schwartz, Views of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 39, 497 (2002).
- E. F. Redish, J. M. Saul, and R. N. Steinberg, Student Expectations in introductory physics, Am. J. Phys. 66, 212 (1998).
- D. Hammer, Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics, Cogn. Instruct. 12, 151 (1994).
- J. Minstrell, in Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, Proceedings of an International Workshop (IPN, Kiel, Germany, 1992), pp. 110–128.
- L. Louca, A. Elby, D. Hammer, and T. Kagey, Epistemological resources: Applying a new epistemological framework to science instruction, Educ. Psychol. 39, 57 (2004).
