Archives
Current issue
About
About us
Aims and Scope
Abstracting and Indexing
Editorial Office
Open Access Policy
Publication Ethics
Journal History
Publisher
Follow us: Twitter
Contact
For Authors
Editorial Policy
Peer Review Policy
Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
Copyright & Licencing
Publication Fees
Fee Waiver Policy for Doctoral Students
EJMSTE Language Editing Service
More
Statistics
Special Issues
Special Issue Announcements
Published Special Issues
RESEARCH PAPER
Assessment of students’ understanding of physical phenomena through argumentative qualities of written texts
1
Institución Educativa Gilberto Alzate Avendaño; Facultad de Educación, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, COLOMBIA
2
Facultad de Educación, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, COLOMBIA
3
Instituto de Matemáticas, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, CHILE
4
Instituto de Matemáticas, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, COLOMBIA
Online publication date: 2023-02-25
Publication date: 2023-03-01
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2023;19(3):em2239
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
We present a qualitative study aimed at devising a theoretical-methodological tool to assess
students’ conceptual understanding of physical phenomena through the argumentative qualities
of their written texts. The proposed relationship between argumentation and understanding is
elaborated through the notions of knowledge, purposes, methods, and communicative forms, as
well as the use of data, warrants, modal qualifiers, claims, and rhetorical resources. In order to
exemplify the tool’s use, the current understanding of six students attending a physics seedbed
course was assessed according to four levels: naïve, novice, apprentice, and mastery. We then
discuss the possibilities and limitations of the tool and the need to broaden the assessment of
students’ understanding to include argumentative tasks in the classroom.
REFERENCES (33)
1.
Abbott, D. (2003). Assessing student understanding of measurement and uncertainty [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. North Carolina State University.
2.
Basson, I. (2002). Physics and mathematics as interrelated fields of thought development using acceleration as an example. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 33(5), 679-690. https://doi.org/10.1080/002073....
3.
Benegas, J., & Zavala, G. (2013). Evaluación del aprendizaje en Física [Assessment of learning in Physics]. In J. Benegas, M. C. Pérez de Landazabal, & J. Otero (Eds.), El aprendizaje activo de la física básica universitaria [Active learning of basic university physics] (pp. 179-192). Andavira Editora.
4.
Blythe, T. (2002). La enseñanza para la comprensión: Guía para el docente [Teaching for understanding: A teacher’s guide]. Paidós.
5.
Castro, W. F., Durango-Urrego, J. H., & Pino-Fan, L. R. (2021). Preservice teachers’ argumentation and some relationships to didactic-mathematical knowledge features. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(9), em2002. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmst....
6.
Chiu, M., Guo, C., & Treagust, D. (2007). Assessing students’ conceptual understanding in science: An introduction about a national project in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 379-390. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
7.
Dai, R., Fritchman, J., Liu, Q., Xiao, Y., Yu, H., & Bao, L. (2019). Assessment of student understanding on light interference. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(2), 020134. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRe....
8.
Díaz, Á. (2009). La argumentación escrita [The written argument]. Editorial Universidad de Antioquia.
9.
Driver, R., Leach J., Scott P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Young people’s understanding of science concepts: Implications of cross-age studies for curriculum planning. Studies in Science Education, 24, 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/030572....
10.
Durango-Urrego, J. H. (2017). Argumentación en geometría por maestros en formación inicial en práctica pedagógica: Un estudio de caso [Argumentation in geometry by teachers in initial training in pedagogical practice: A case study] [Unpublished doctoral thesis, Facultad de Educación, Departamento de Educación Avanzada, Universidad de Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia].
11.
Fagúndez, T., & Castells, M. (2012). La argumentación en clases universitarias de física: Una perspectiva retórica [Argumentation in university physics classes: A rhetorical perspective]. Enseñanza de las Ciencias [Science Education], 30(2), 153-174. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ec....
12.
Flores, S., Trejo, A., & Trejo, L. (2003). ¿Cómo mejorar el proceso enseñanza-aprendizaje mediante la evaluación-regulación? El caso de la termodinámica [How to improve the teaching-learning process through evaluation-regulation? The case of thermodynamics]. In Proceedings of the Terceras Jornadas Internacionales de la Enseñanza Universitaria de la Química [Memories of the 3rd International Conference on University Teaching of Chemistry].
13.
Fusch, P., Fusch, G., & Ness, L. (2018). Denzin’s paradigm shift: Revisiting triangulation in qualitative research. Journal of Social Change, 10, 19-32. https://doi.org/10.5590/JOSC.2....
14.
Gutiérrez, M. (2017). Escritura colaborativa de textos en quinto grado: Razonamiento y argumentación causal sobre un fenómeno físico [Collaborative writing of texts in fifth grade: Reasoning and causal argumentation about a physical phenomenon]. Revista Actualidades Investigativas en Educación [Research News in Education Magazine], 17(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.15517/aie.v....
15.
Hetland, L., Hammerness, K., Unger, C., & Gray Wilson, D. (2003). ¿Cómo demuestran los niños que comprenden? [How do children show they understand?] In M. S. Wiske (Ed.), La enseñanza para la comprensión [Teaching for understanding] (pp. 257-298). Editorial Paidós.
16.
Kaya, E. (2018). Argumentation in elementary science education: Addressing methodological issues and conceptual understanding. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(4), 1087-1090. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422....
17.
Ledezma, C., Sol, T., Sala-Sebastià, G., & Font, V. (2022). Knowledge and beliefs on mathematical modelling inferred in the argumentation of a prospective teacher when reflecting on the incorporation of this process in his lessons. Mathematics, 10(18), 3339. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10....
18.
Macías, A., & Maturano, C. (2017). ¿Qué dificultades tienen los alumnos para escribir sobre contenidos de física? [What difficulties do students have to write about physics content?] Revista de Investigación e Innovación Educativa [Journal of Educational Research and Innovation], 35, 85-104.
19.
Mansilla, V., & Gardner, H. (1999). ¿Cuáles son las cualidades de la comprensión? [What are the qualities of understanding?] In M. S. Wiske (Ed.), La enseñanza para la comprensión [Teaching for understanding] (pp. 215-257). Editorial Paidós.
20.
Martinez-Garza, M., Clark, D., & Nelson, B. (2013). Digital games and the US National Research Council’s science proficiency goals. Studies in Science Education, 49, 170-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/030572....
21.
McDermott, L. (2001). Oersted medal lecture 2001: Physics education research-the key to student learning. American Journal of Physics, 69(11), 1127-1137. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1389....
22.
Oñorbe, A. & Sánchez, J. (1996). Dificultades en la enseñanza-aprendizaje de los problemas de física y química. I. Opiniones del alumno [Difficulties in teaching-learning of physics and chemistry problems. I. Student opinions]. Enseñanza de las Ciencias [Science Education], 14(2), 165-170. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/en....
23.
Osborne, J. (2001). Promoting argument in the science classroom: A rhetorical perspective. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1(3), 271-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/149261....
24.
Park, M., & Liu, X. (2016). Assessing understanding of the energy concept in different science disciplines. Science Education, 100(3), 483-516. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21....
25.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (2006). Tratado de la argumentación: La nueva retórica [Treatise on argumentation: The new rhetoric]. Editorial Gredos.
26.
Perkins, D. (1999). ¿Qué es la comprensión? [What is understanding?] In M. S. Wiske (Ed.), La enseñanza para la comprensión [Teaching for understanding] (pp. 69-94). Editorial Paidós.
27.
Ponce, V. (1997). La comprensión de los fenómenos físicos en alumnos del bachillerato [The understanding of physical phenomena in high school students]. Revista Electrónica Sinéctica [Synectic Electronic Magazine], 11, 1-11.
28.
Sánchez, S. (1998). Fundamentos para la investigación educativa: Presupuestos epistemológicos que orientan al investigador [Fundamentals for educational research: Epistemological assumptions that guide the researcher]. Editorial Magisterio.
29.
Stone, M. (1999). La enseñanza para la comprensión. Vinculación entre la investigación y la práctica [Teaching for understanding. Linkage between research and practice]. Editorial Paidós.
30.
Toulmin, S. (2007). Los usos de la argumentación [The uses of argument]. Península.
31.
Van Eemeren, F., Grootendorst, R., & Snoeck-Henkemans, A. (2007). Argumentative indicators in discourse: A pragma-dialectical study. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-....
32.
Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. (2001). Introductory thermal concept evaluation: Assessing students’ understanding. The Physics Teacher, 39, 495-504. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1424....
33.
Zacharia, Z. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 120-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365....
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1305-8223 |
| ISSN: | 1305-8215 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
