Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 36, Issue 4, pp 419–439 | Cite as

Year 12 Students' Mental Models of the Nature of Light

  • Peter Hubber
Original Paper

Abstract

This article reports on the third year of a three-year longitudinal investigation into six secondary students' understanding of optics at a secondary school level. In the third year of this investigation the students, who by now were in Year 12, underwent a teaching sequence that centred on the teaching and learning of physical optics and quantum ideas. The students' mental models of the nature of light were explored prior to, and following this teaching sequence. The researcher took on the dual roles of teacher and researcher. This paper will outline the findings of the third year of this study and the implications they have for the teaching and learning of optics at secondary school level.

Key words

case study interpretive research methodology mental models optics scientific models secondary school teaching and learning models of light teacher researcher 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ambrose, B. S., Shaffer, P. S., Steinberg, R. N., & McDermott, L. C. (1999). An investigation of students' understanding of single-slit diffraction and double-slit interference. American Journal of Physics, 67(2), 146–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Board of Studies (1994). Physics VCE study design. Carlton, Victoria: Board of Studies.Google Scholar
  3. Chi, M. T. H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: Examples from learning and discovery in science. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (pp. 129–186). MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  4. de Jong, E., Armitage, F., Brown, M., Butler, P., & Hayes, J. (1991). Physics two. Port Melbourne, Victoria: Rigby Heinemann.Google Scholar
  5. Driver, R. (1995). Constructivist approaches to science teaching. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 385–400). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.Google Scholar
  7. Feynman, R. P. (1985). QED: The strange theory of light and matter. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Frisch, O. R. (1972). The nature of matter. London: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
  9. Galili, I., Bendall, S., & Goldberg, F. (1993). The effects of prior knowledge and instruction on understanding image formation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(3), 271–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Galili, I., & Lavrik, V. (1998). Flux concept in learning about light: a critique of the present situation. Science Education, 82, 591–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilbert, J. K. (Ed.) (1994). Models and modelling in science education. Hatfield: The Association for Science Education.Google Scholar
  12. Gilbert, J. K. (1995). Studies and fields: directions of research in science education. Studies in Science Education, 25(2), 173–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gilbert, J. K., & Boulter, C. (1995, April). The role of models and modelling in some narratives of science learning. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  14. Goldin, G. A. (1990). Epistemology, constructivism, and discovery learning mathematics. In R. B. Davies, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (Monograph 4, pp. 31–50). Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  15. Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & Smith, C. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 799–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1991). What is the constructivist paradigm? In D. S. Anderson & B. J. Biddle (Eds.), Knowledge for policy improving education through research (pp.158–170). London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  17. Halloum, I. (1996). Schematic modelling for meaningful learning of physics. International Journal of Science Education, 33(9), 1019–1041.Google Scholar
  18. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Johnston, I. D., Crawford, K., & Fletcher, P. R. (1988). Student difficulties in learning quantum mechanics. International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 427–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Justi, R., & Gilbert, J. (2000). History and philosophy of science through models: Some challenges in the case of ‘the atom.’ International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 993–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marburger, J. H. (1996). What is a photon? The Physics Teacher, 34, 482–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Munn, A. M. (1973). From nought to relativity – Creating the physical world model. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  23. Nadeau, R., & Desautels, J. (1984). Epistemology and the teaching of science. Ottawa: Science Council of Canada.Google Scholar
  24. Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 7–14). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Ohanian, H. C. (1985). Physics. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  26. Posner, G. L., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ronchi, V. (1970). The nature of light. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  28. Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., & Joram, E. (1995). Assessing students' misclassifications of physics concepts: an ontological basis for conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 373–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smit, F. F. A., & Finegold, M. (1995). Models in physics: perceptions held by final-year prospective physical science teachers studying at South African universities. International Journal of Science Education, 17(5), 621–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Steinberg, R. N., Oberem, G. E., & McDermott, L. C. (1996). Development of a computer-based tutorial on the photoelectric effect. American Journal of Physics, 64(11), 1370–1379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Steinberg, R., Wittman, L. B., Bao, L., & Redish, E. F. (1999, March). The influence of student understanding of classical physics when learning quantum mechanics. Paper presented at the annual meeting National Association for Research in Science Teaching.Google Scholar
  32. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modelling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4(1), 45–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Deakin UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations