Goedhart, Martin J.

Stadermann, H.K.E.

English

University of Twente Research Information

1 The Interaction Between Learning About Nature of Science and Quantum Physics  in Secondary Education Kirsten Stadermann and Martin Goedhart, University of Groningen, Netherlands Literature cited Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10) Baily, C., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2015). Teaching quantum interpretations: Revisiting the goals and practices of introductory quantum physics courses. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 11(2), Greca, I. M., & Freire, O. (2014). Meeting the challenge: Quantum physics in introductory physics courses. International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 183-209) Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. Hadzidaki, P. (2008). `Quantum mechanics' and `Scientific explanation' an explanatory strategy aiming at providing `Understanding'. Science & Education, 17(1), 49-73.  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.  Lederman, N. G., & O'Malley, M. (1990). Students perceptions of tentativeness in science - development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74(2) Michel, H., & Neumann, I. (2016). Nature of science and science content learning: The relation between students' nature of science understanding and their learning about the concept of energy. Science & Education, 25(9-10), 951-975. Stadermann, H. K. E., van den Berg, E., & Goedhart, M. J. (2019). Analysis of secondary school quantum physics curricula of 15 different countries: Different perspectives on a challenging topic. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 010130.      h.k.e.stadermann@rug.nl For questions or comments: Just ask me, send me an email or look here for information: NOS aspect Uninformed view Informed view Scientific models Scientific models repre-sent reality as much as possible. Scientific models show as-pects of phenomena in a simplified way.  Tentativeness of scientific knowledge Scientific knowledge is unchangeable and certain. Scientific knowledge is always open to change and improvement.  Creativity in science  Scientists always follow strict rules. Scientists use their creativity and imagination.  Subjectivity in science Science is universal, and scientists are objective;  Science is influenced by personal, historical, cul-tural and social aspects.  Controversies in science New scientific know-ledge is directly accepted. Only one interpretation can be correct.  Discussions and dis-agreements are essential in science. Different inter-pretations may exist. Introduction  In many countries, quantum physics (QP) is taught in secondary schools (Stadermann, van den Berg & Goed-hart, 2019). Literature reports that QP in secondary education is challenging because QP phenomena do not align with students’ classical and mainly positivist ideas about physics know-ledge (Greca & Freire 2014).  In other fields of physics, it is shown that explicitly addressing Nature of Science (NOS) in lessons can im-prove students’ concept knowledge (Michel & Neumann, 2016). The connection between QP and NOS is even more obvious (Hadzidaki 2008). We shown some of the connections between QP and NOS in examples below.  However, little empirical research has been done on the connection between students NOS-views and their conceptual knowledge of  QP in secondary education. Method Participants and data collection: 240 Dutch pre-university students (grade 12) from six different schools and their teachers participated. The students had followed regular physics lessons from teachers who were not specially trained for this study. Nine of the ten teachers did not focus on teaching NOS. To uncover possible connections between students’ NOS views in QP and their content knowledge, we interviewed students with different levels of conceptual knowledge, based on a QP concept test. The semi-structured NOS interviews in the context of QP used questions from research on QP interpretations (Baily & Finkelstein, 2015) and the Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire (Lederman & O'Malley, 1990).          Overall setup: Quantitative study QP concept test  240 students from 6 schools Statistical  analysis Output for  Students:  Individual test  results Output for  teachers: Statistical overview  of whole class Qualitative study Purposive  selection of  interviewees Results NOS interviews  N = 24 students (6 high - , 12 medium and  6 low - performing) Teacher interviews for  background information N =  10  teachers  Qualitative  analysis Lesson observations  Lesson artefacts Conclusion and discussion  The results were unexpected be-cause other research showed that only an explicit and reflective NOS teaching yields informed students’ views (Khishfe & Abd-El-Khalick 2002).  We see some possible explanations for these results: 1. Our NOS questions are highly contextualised, unlike most other NOS tests.  2. Students experience the problem of explaining the double-slit experiment them-selves. In other historical examples, the solution is found long ago. Alternative ideas for those problems seem unscientific to students now. (Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman, 2000). Further research should indicate if insights in the nature of QP also make students aware of NOS in other contexts.  In Newton's physics, it is impossible to  understand phenomena like the double- slit experiment; new theories had to be developed.  To find out if the wave function is more than  a conceptual tool, scientists develop creative experiments to test their interpretations.  The Einstein and Bohr discussions show  how different philosophical positions result  in contrasting interpretations. The open atmosphere without strict ideologies made  new developments in QP possible. Wave model and particle  model for electrons or light. Einstein said  ‘God does not play dice.’ because he was convinced that QP is not  complete; he could  not accept the randomness of  QP as fundamental.  Research Questions What are upper secondary students’ NOS views after following regular lessons about QP? What, if any, is the connection between students’ QP content knowledge and their views of NOS? Results On average the students scores 7,6 of possibly 20 points on the QP test. Nevertheless, nearly all (23/24) students were, able to describe the setup and result of the double-slit experiment correctly, independent from their QP test score.  Additionally, all students showed informed NOS views on all investigated aspects. Some students said that interpretations of QP should not belong to physics lessons because there are no right or wrong answers. Examples of NOS in QP 

Investigating the interaction between learning about the nature of science and quantum physics in secondary schools

https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/files/282599145/ESERA_2019_StadermannGoedhart_poster1.2.pdf

Investigating the interaction between learning about the nature of science and quantum phys-ics in secondary schools

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Twente Research Information