Science & Education

, Volume 16, Issue 3–5, pp 441–460 | Cite as

Physics and Art – A Cultural Symbiosis in Physics Education



This paper presents and discusses examples of works of art which, if included in science curricula, could prompt an understanding by students of some concepts in optics through a discussion of the context in which they were created. Such discussion would elucidate the meaning of the artworks and, at the same time, challenge students’ misconceptions, attracting their attention to the scientific aspects of the art works concerned. This type of learning represents a culturally rich approach to modern science curricula. The simplified contrasting of science and humanities is criticized.


Science Teaching Conceptual Change Plane Mirror Image Transfer Artistic Representation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alonso M., Finn E.J. (1968). University Physics. Addison-Wesley, Reading MA, Vol. 3, pp. 403–411Google Scholar
  2. Bendall S., Goldberg F., Galili I. (1993). ‘Prospective Elementary Teachers’ Prior Knowledge about Light’. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30(9): 1169–1187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chapin, J. (ed.): 1957, A Treasury of Catholic Reading, Farrar, Straus & Cudahy, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen M.R., Drabkin I.E. (1966). A Source Book in Greek Science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  5. Crombie A.C.(1959). Medieval and Early Modern Science. Anchor/Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Dreyfus A., Jungwirth E., Eliovitch R. (1990). ‘Applying the “Cognitive Conflict” Strategy for Conceptual Change – Some Implications, Difficulties, and Problems’. Science Education 74: 555–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ernst B. (1978). Der Zauberspiegel des M.S. Escher. Verlag Heinz Moos, MunchenGoogle Scholar
  8. Ferguson G. (1961). Signs and Symbols in Christian Art. Oxford University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Frege G. (1892/1966). ‘On Concept and Object’. In: Geach P., Black M. (eds), Translations from Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 42Google Scholar
  10. Galili I., Goldberg F. (1993). “Left–Right Conversions in a Plane Mirror”. The Physics Teacher 31 (8): 463–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Galili I., Hazan A. (2000a). ‘Learners’ Knowledge in Optics: Interpretation, Structure, and Analysis’. International Journal in Science Education 22(1): 57–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Galili I., Hazan A. (2000b). ‘The Influence of a Historically Oriented Course on Students’ Content Knowledge in Optics Evaluated by Means of Facets - Schemes Analysis’. American Journal of Physics 68(7): S3–S15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Galili I., Hazan A. (2001a). ‘Experts’ Views on Using History and Philosophy of Science in the Practice of Physics Instruction’. Science & Education 10(4): 345–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Galili I., Hazan A. (2001b). ‘The Effect of a History-Based Course in Optics on Students’ Views about Science’. Science & Education 10(1–2): 7–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Galili, I. & Hazan, A.: 2004, Optics – the Theory of Light and Vision in the Broad Cultural Approach, Textbook for high school, Science Teaching Center, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, IsraelGoogle Scholar
  16. Galili I., Goldberg F., Bendall S. (1991). Some Reflections on Plane mirrors and Images. The Physics Teacher 29(7): 471–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Galili I., Goldberg F., Bendall S. (1993). ‘Effects of Prior Knowledge and Instruction on Understanding Image Formation’. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30(3): 271–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hewson, P. W., Beeth, M. E. & Thorley, N. R.: 1998, ‘Teaching for Conceptual Change’, in B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (eds.), International Handbook of Science Education, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 199–218.Google Scholar
  19. Langer J. (1988). ‘A Note on the Comparative Psychology of Mental Development’. In: Strauss S. (ed), Ontogeny, Phylogeny & Historical Development. Ablex, Norwood, NJ, pp. 68–85Google Scholar
  20. Lawler R. (1995). Sacred Geometry. Philosophy and Practice. Thames & Hundson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Lindberg D.C. (1976). Theories of Vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  22. McCloskey M. (1983). “Intuitive physics”. Scientific American 248(4): 122–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McCloskey, M., Kargon R. (1988). ‘The Meaning and Use of Historical Models in the Study of Intuitive Physics’. In: Strauss S. (eds), Ontogeny, Phylogeny and Historical Development. Ablex, Norwood, NJ, pp. 49–67Google Scholar
  24. Niedderer, H. & Goldberg, F.: 1996, ‘Learning Processes in Electric Circuits’, Paper presented at NARST conference, St. Louis MO, USA.
  25. North W. (1995). Handbook of Semiotics. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, INGoogle Scholar
  26. Park D. (1997). The Fire within the Eye. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 126–136Google Scholar
  27. Piaget J. (1970). Genetic Epistemology. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Piaget J. (1974). Biology and Knowledge. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  29. Piaget, J.: 1985, The Equilibrium of Cognitive Structures, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, p. 10Google Scholar
  30. Ronen M., Eylon B.-S. (1993). ‘To See or Not to See: the Eye in Geometrical Optics – When and How? Physics Education 28: 52–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schiller G. (1971). Iconography of Christian Art, New York Graphic Society. Greenwich, ConnecticutGoogle Scholar
  32. Shlain L. (1991). Art and Physics. William Morrow, New York, p. 16Google Scholar
  33. Snow C.P. (1961). Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Steadman P. (2002). Vermeer’s Camera. Oxford University Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Tseitlin, M. & Galili, I.: 2006, ‘Science Teaching: What Does it Mean?’, Science & Education 15(5), 393–417Google Scholar
  36. Tseitlin M., Galili I. (2005b). ‘Teaching Physics in Looking for its Self: from a Physics-Discipline to a Physics-Culture’. Science and Education 14(3–5): 235–261Google Scholar
  37. Wind G.D. (2002). Correggio. Hero of the Dome. Silvana Editoriale, MilanoGoogle Scholar
  38. Wiser M. (1988). ‘The Differentiation of Heat and Temperature: History of science and Novice – Expert Shift Use of Historical Models in the Study of Intuitive Physics’. In: Strauss S. (eds), Ontogeny, Phylogeny and Historical Development. Ablex, Norwood, NJ, pp. 29–48Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Science Teaching CenterThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations