Many research results show that students often highlight “mixed-type” reasoning when tackling
problematic situations and problems. This reasoning is based on the simultaneous use of
common-sense and mere descriptions of facts, perceived as sufficient to build an “explanation”
of observed or proposed situations and problems. This fact can be interpreted as a lack of
coherence. In this paper, we study the coherence of responses that a sample of undergraduate
chemical engineering student give when they are asked to face real-life situations, to create
explanations, and to use models in different contexts. We administered open-ended
questionnaires before and after a twenty-hour Inquiry-Based workshop related to phenomena
activated by a thermal overcoming of a potential barrier. Based on the Physics Education Research
literature on student understanding of relevant physics contents, the student responses are
analysed by using researcher-generated categories of reasoning and their coherence is studied.
Finally, we discuss some implications of the results to improve the development of students’
explicative skills.
REFERENCES(34)
1.
Bao, L., & Redish, E. F. (2006). Model Analysis: Representing and Assessing the Dynamics of Student Learning. Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research, 2, 010103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRe....
Battaglia, O. R., Bonura, A., & Sperandeo-Mineo, R. M. (2009). A pedagogical approach to the Boltzmann factor through experiments and simulations. European Journal of Physics, 30(5), Article 1025. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0....
Battaglia, O. R., Di Paola, B., Persano Adorno, D., Pizzolato, N., & Fazio, C. (2019). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Modelling-Oriented Workshops for Engineering Undergraduates in the Field of Thermally Activated Phenomena. Research in Science Education, 49(5), 1395-1413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165....
Besson, U. (2010) Calculating and Understanding: Formal Models and Causal Explanations in Science, Common Reasoning and Physics Teaching. Science & Education, 19, 225-257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191....
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Carlson Powell, J., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Biological Sciences Curriculum Study.
Çalik M., Kolomuc A., & Karagolge Z., (2010). The effect of conceptual change pedagogy on students’ conceptions of rate of reaction. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(5), 422-433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956....
Corpuz, E. D., & Rebello, N. S. (2011). Investigating students’ mental models and knowledge construction of microscopic friction. I. Implications for curriculum design and development. Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research, 7, 020102. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRe....
Dieks, D. (2019). Mechanisms, Explanation and Understanding in Physics. In B. Falkenburg & G. Schiemann (Eds.), Mechanistic Explanations in Physics and Beyond (pp. 47-64). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-....
Engel-Clough, E., & Driver R. (1986). A study of consistency in the use of students’ conceptual frameworks across different task contexts. Science Education, 70, 473-496. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.37....
Fazio, C., Battaglia, O. R., & Di Paola, B. (2013). Investigating the quality of mental models deployed by undergraduate engineering students in creating explanations: The case of thermally activated phenomena. Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research, 9(2), Article 020101, https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRe....
Geller, B. D., Gouvea, J., Dreyfus, B. W., Sawtelle, V., Turpen, C., & Redish, E. F. (2019). Bridging the gaps: How students seek disciplinary coherence in introductory physics for life science. Physical Review Physics Education Researh, 15, 020142. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRe....
Hrepic, Z., Zollman, D. A., & Rebello, N. S. (2005). Eliciting and representing hybrid mental models. In J. Shymansky, J. Tillotson, J. Staver and G. Richmond (Eds.), Proceedings of the NARST 2005 Annual Meeting. National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
Karam, R., Cyrino de Mello Forato, T., & Pietrocola M., (2011). Explanation versus Description: Philosophical Debate and Implications for Physics Teaching. In D. Raine, C. Hurkett, & L. Rogers (Eds.), Physics Community and Cooperation: Selected Contributions from the GIREP-EPEC & PHEC 2009 International Conference (pp. 171-179). Lulu / The Centre for Interdisciplinary Science.
Kuhn, D., & Pease, M. A. (2008). What Needs to Develop in the Development of Inquiry Skills? Cognition and Instruction, 26(4), 512-559. https://doi.org/10.1080/073700....
Leach, J., Millar, R., Ryder, J., & Séréc, M. G. (2000). Epistemological understanding in science learning: the consistency of representations across contexts. Learning and Instruction, 10, 497-527. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-....
Maloney, D. P., & Siegler, R. S. (1993). Conceptual Competition in Physics Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 283-295. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
Nottis, K., Prince, M., & Vigeant, M. (2010). Building an understanding of heat transfer concepts in undergraduate chemical engineering courses. US-China Education Review, 7(2), 1-8.
Redfors, A. (2003). University physics students’ use of explanatory models. In P. Zetterberg, T. Brage, G. Jonsson, & E. Nilsson (Eds.), Proceedings of the GIREP 2002: Physics in New Fields and Modern Applications. Teach support.
Redfors, A., & Ryder, J. (2001). University physics students’ use of models in explanations of phenomena involving interaction between metals and radiation. International Journal of Science Education, 23(12), 1283-1301. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
Sikorski T. R., & Hammer, D. (2017). Looking for coherence in science curriculum. Science Education, 101(6), 929-943. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21....
Sperandeo-Mineo, R. M., Fazio, C., & Tarantino, G. (2006). Pedagogical content knowledge development and pre-service physics teacher education: A case study. Research in Science Education, 36(3), 235-268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165....
Streveler, R. A., Litzinger, T., Miller, R. L., & Steif, P. S. (2008). Learning conceptual knowledge in the engineering sciences: Overview and future research directions. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 279-294. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168....
Supasorn, S., & Promarak, V. (2015). Implementation of 5E inquiry incorporated with analogy learning approach to enhance conceptual understanding of chemical reaction rate for grade 11 students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16, 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RP00....
Târziu, G. (2018). Can we have mathematical understanding of physical phenomena? Theoria: An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science, 33(1), 91-109. https://doi.org/10.1387/theori....
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.