Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Design, Development and Refinement of a Teaching-Learning Sequence on the Electromagnetic Properties of Materials

  • Chapter
Iterative Design of Teaching-Learning Sequences

  • 757 Accesses

Abstract

We describe a process of designing, developing, and gradually refining a teaching-learning sequence (TLS) on electromagnetic properties of materials (EPM). The design of the teaching-learning sequence draws on principles from the frameworks of inquiry-oriented teaching-learning and learning through technological design. Combining these two frameworks was intended to lead to an instructional context that would likely sustain student interest for the extended time that is necessary to attain conceptual understanding of magnetic interactions and electromagnetic phenomena. Also, it was expected to facilitate the development of students’ epistemological awareness regarding the interconnections and distinction between science and technology. The development process involved a series of six implementation-evaluation-revision cycles (two in upper secondary classes in a school setting, two in a science summer club for highschool students, and two in a science content course for pre-service elementary teachers), with a total of 294 participants. In each implementation, we collected data on students’ learning outcomes through various sources, including open-ended assessment tasks and student-constructed artefacts (e.g., technological products and accompanying posters and written reports). After each implementation, we drew not only on the collected data but also on the feedback provided by the teachers, so as to refine the teaching-learning sequence with the intent to enhance its potential to promote its targeted learning objectives. In this study, we illustrate how the empirical data collected during the implementation of the teaching-learning sequence could serve to guide its refinement. We report on particular instances in which the data on student learning outcomes led us to identify specific limitations of the teaching-learning sequence in terms of its facility to promote certain learning objectives and we elaborate on the revisions we undertook so as to address those limitations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agassi, J. (1980). Between science and technology. Philosophy of Science, 47(1), 82–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arageorgis, A., & Baltas, A. (1989). Demarcating technology from science: Problems and problem solving in technology. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 20(2), 212–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudreaux, A., Shaffer, P. S., Heron, P. R. L., & McDermott, L. C. (2008). Student understanding of control of variables: Deciding whether or not a variable influences the behavior of a system. American Journal of Physics, 76(2), 163–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 2, 141–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chabay, R., & Sherwood, B. (2006). Restructuring the introductory electricity and magnetism course. American Journal of Physics, 74(4), 239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A. (1992). Towards a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O’shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15–22). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Constantinou and the Learning in Science Group at the University of Cyprus. (2009). Electromagnetic properties of materials – Teachers’ manual. Learning in Science Group, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus: ISBN: 978-9963-689-59-0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantinou, C. P., Hadjilouca, R., & Papadouris, N. (2010). Students’ epistemological awareness concerning the distinction between science and technology. International Journal of Science Education, 32(2), 143–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Custer, R. L. (1995). Examining the dimensions of technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 5(3), 219–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.). (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2007). Science Education now, A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gago, J. M., Caro, P., Constantinou, C. P., Davies, G., Parchmann, I., Rannikmae, M., Sjoberg, S., & Ziman, J. (2004). Europe needs more scientists: Increasing human resources for science and technology in Europe. Report of the High Level Group on Human Resources for Science and Technology in Europe. Brussels: European Commission, DG Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, P. L. (1993). Textbook representations of science-technology relationships. Research in Science Education, 23, 85–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, P. L. (1994). The relationship between technology and science: Some historical and philosophical reflections. Part I. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4(2), 123–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandy, R., & Duschl, R. A. (2007). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Analysis of a conference. Science & Education, 16, 141–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Technology Education Association. (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston: International Technology Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg, W. A. (1990). Qualitative artifact analysis. In: Proceedings of the IFIP International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT), Cambridge, UK, pp. 193–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry: Bases for an accommodation between science and technology education in the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 255–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McComas, W. F. (1998). The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L. C. (1993). How we teach and how students learn – A mismatch? American Journal of Physics, 60(4), 295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L., & The Physics Education Group at the University of Washington. (1996). Physics by inquiry (Vol. I and II). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1996). National science εducation standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NSF. (2003). The science and engineering workforce realizing America’s potential. Arlington: NSF.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2006). Women in scientific careers: Unleashing the potential. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What “ideas-about-science” should be taught in school science? A delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanel, Z., & Erol, M. (2008). Students’ difficulties in understanding the concepts of magnetic field strength, magnetic flux density and magnetisation. Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 2(3), 184.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the contribution of Professors Mathilde Vicentini and Roser Pinto, who provided valuable feedback for improving the teaching-learning sequence. We also acknowledge Lilian C. McDermott and the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington for continued support and collaboration in our curriculum design efforts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Learning in Science Group, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Nicos Papadouris, Costas Constantinou, Marios Papaevripidou, Michalis Livitziis, Argyro Scholinaki & Rodothea Hadjilouca

Authors
  1. Nicos Papadouris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Costas Constantinou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marios Papaevripidou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michalis Livitziis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Argyro Scholinaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rodothea Hadjilouca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicos Papadouris .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Dimitris Psillos

  2. School of Education, University of Western Macedonia, Florina, Greece

    Petros Kariotoglou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Papadouris, N., Constantinou, C., Papaevripidou, M., Livitziis, M., Scholinaki, A., Hadjilouca, R. (2016). Design, Development and Refinement of a Teaching-Learning Sequence on the Electromagnetic Properties of Materials. In: Psillos, D., Kariotoglou, P. (eds) Iterative Design of Teaching-Learning Sequences. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7808-5_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7808-5_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-7807-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-7808-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation