European Journal of Physics Education Volume 1 Number 1 June

Transkript

!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
"##$%!&'()*+,(,!
!
-./012!,!"3302!&!
European Journal of
Physics
Education
Volume 1 Number 1 June 2011
!
!
!
!
&
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
"#$%&'(!)!*&+,#(-.%-/0+'1!
!"#$"%&'("$)*+&,$-.#/)&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
2'3+#%45!*&+,#(6!
5"6*-"&4/787$/)-*+&9/7$:/&;")<.1:371&01.2/$).3#+&01.3/8&=3"3/)&
>7).?&=6.)(7+&5/)/"$-</$&"3&3</&@"-*63"&8/&A./1-.")&@B).-7&C"3/%D3.-")+&C/E.-7&
&
*&+,#(+45!7#4(&!8'9:'(6!
A/)"$&C7$"+&8/6&F1)3.3*37&G76.3H-1.-7&I"-.71"6+&C/E.-7&
J"6/$./&KL&'(/$)71+&F18."1"&01.2/$).3#+&01.3/8&=3"3/)&
M6.2/$&N"O(72+&C"-/871."+&4</&@7$%/$&5/?*P6.-&7Q&R*:7)6"2&
S)%".6&C"$*6-*+&,$-.#/)&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
'Q).1&T"$.?/$+&,$-.#/)&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
U")"1&T"#"+&,$-.#/)&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
&
*&+,#(+45!2';+'<!7#4(&!
F:1"3.*)&>7<1+&A"?/&G/1.1)*6"&01.2/$).3#&7Q&4/-<1767:#+&=7*3<&'Q$.-"&
>"%/)&!*.-(+&01.2/$).3#&7Q&G7$3)%7*3<+&01.3/8&T.1:87%&
=L&471:"71("$+&C776O.&>".3<"&A766/:/+&F18."&
97*$.)"1("$&57#+&9723&V'*37W&A766/:/+&F18."&
J"1."&,L&!"$6/33/+&01.2/$).8"8/&@/8/$"6&87&G"%?"+&!$"X.6&
S$/1&YX:Z1&I"6["-\+&,$-.#/)&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
FL&I/1:"<&=*"$3.("+&01.2/$).3#&7Q&G/18.8.("1&9"1/)<"+&F1871/)."&
'8]"1&'6^'O.6.+&01.2/$).3#&7Q&96"):7]+&01.3/8&T.1:87%&
'<%"8&IC&N".1+&01.2/$).3.&=".1)&C"6"#)."+&C"6"#)."&
'%.3&9"$:+&'-<"$#"&I"$/18$"&_/2&A766/:/+&F18."&
=.$."&C"3"&G6")-/1-."+&01.2/$).8"8&8/&9*"8"6"O"$"+&C/E.-7&
C*)3"Q"&C/3.1+&'$32.1&`7$*<&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
G7?"3&="2"6/$"%&4"%P"8/+&G$7QL&5"%($.)<1"&C7$/&A766/:/+&F18."&
>7).?&=6.)(7+&5/)/"$-</$&"3&3</&@"-*63"&8/&A./1-.")&@B).-7&C"3/%D3.-")+&C/E.-7&
I.6ZQ/$&_.8.)+&01.2/$).3#&7Q&C"$#6"18+&01.3/8&=3"3/)&
A</1&T*.&@*+&A<.1"&':$.-*63*$"6&01.2/$).3#+&A<.1"&
G")$"<&5"<%"1&9*1"]"1+&F1871/)."&
U")"1&T"#"+&,$-.#/)&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
S)%".6&C"$*6-*+&,$-.#/)&01.2/$).3#+&4*$(/#&
'.8.1&'%.$)<7(77<.+&@".$Q./68&01.2/$).3#+&01.3/8&=3"3/)&
C"<)"&T"X/%?7*$+&G/11&=3"3/&01.2/$).3#&V!/$()W+&01.3/8&=3"3/)&
!
!
!
!
4564!-./012!,!"3302!&!
=4:5'!#1!/#%,'%,6!
Research Articles
"#$%&'(%)*!+'*,!-.)'/01!2%)3414(
!"!"#$%&'$%(')*"+","-.'/01""
PAGES
1-11
2,56'/6!766%66(%)*!0)3!*,%!8%9%1.$(%)*!.:!0!;0#.).(5
2'310"45"6789(""
12-27
;.+0&36!"::%/*'9%!<)6*&4/*'.)6!')!")9'&.)(%)*01!"34/0*'.)=!7!-&'*'/01!>%9'%+!.:!?'*%&0*4&%
:.31;"6'<;'(""
28-37
7**'*43%6!;.+0&36!2,56'/6!?%66.)6!0)3!2,56'/01!"#$%&'%(%)*6!.:!*,%!@'A,!B/,..1!B*43%)*6
='0'%"-'<'*">&7)"6$<7(""
38-49
2%&/%$*'.)6!.:!*,%!B*43%)*6!*.+0&3!B*43'.!2,56'/6
#$?&'"@$(""
50-66
"90140*')A!-.11%A%!B*43%)*6C!-.)/%$*401!D).+1%3A%!.:!E.3%&)!2,56'/6=!;%6*!.:!F)3%&6*0)3')A!
.)!-.)/%$*6!.:!E.3%&)!2,56'/6!G;F-HIE2J
6'<)'3":(')07"
!
67-79
European J of Physics Education Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202 Tongaonkar & Khadse
!
Experiment with Conical Pendulum

S.S. Tongaonkar and V.R. Khadse
Department of Physics, Moolji Jaitha College, Jalgaon (M.S.) I NDI A, 425002
E.mail: [email protected]
Abstract
Conical pendulum is similar to simple pendulum with the difference that the bob, instead of moving back
and forth, swings around in a horizontal circle.Thus, in a conical pendulum the bob moves at a constant
speed in a circle with the string tracing out a cone .This paper describes an experiment with conical
pendulum, with determination of g from the dynamics of the pendulum bob.. The fact that, with increasing
speed of revolution, the horizontal plane of rotation shifts towards the point of suspension is
demonstrated with the governing equation Z2 h = constant = g. It is also shown that, in this case, the
tension on the string approaches the centripetal force on the bob. Possible demonstrations like revolving
planet with spin motion and vertical pendulum are discussed.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
This experiment was selected amongst the best ten entries of NCIEP-08 (National
Competition for Innovative Experiments In Physics - 2008 ) conducted by IAPT and was
presented during its 23rdAnnual Convention (17-19 OCT. 2008) at Bangalore,India
______________________________________________________________________________
1
!
I NTRODUCTI ON
Pendulums in physics are very basic and are of historic importance. ("Pendulus" means
"hanging") .Galileo (around 1602) studied pendulum properties after watching a swinging lamp
in the cathedral of Pisa's domed ceiling. Robert Hooke (around 1666) studied the conical
pendulum and was the first one to design simple experiments which he presented in the Royal
Academy, in order to understand the planetary orbits of the solar system 1, 2, 3. Through centuries,
conical pendulum is attracting scientists, teachers and finding its applications in different
disciplines modern science. Few recent examples are Chaos in Robert Hooke's Inverted Cone 4,
Robert Hooke's Conical Pendulum from the modern viewpoint of Amplitude Equations and its
Optical Analogues 5.
Just as simple harmonic motion can be best understood with simple pendulum, the
uniform circular motion can be demonstrated with conical pendulum. Conical pendulum is an
extension of simple pendulum in which the bob, instead of moving back and forth, moves at a
constant speed in a circle in a horizontal plane. Thus together with the string the bob traces out a
cone. Spherical pendulum and vertical pendulum are the special cases of conical pendulum. In
the spherical pendulum the bob traces an ellipse where as in the vertical pendulum object is free
to execute a vertical circle about the point of suspension. Conical pendulum illustrates uniform
circular motion, and the other cases are representative of a non uniform circular motion.
Although demonstrations of conical pendulum are much easier, actual experiments
yielding correct results are not trivial. This is because the precise measurements of the angle of
the cone or the height of revolving plane from the point of suspension are difficult.
THEORY
As shown in the figure 1. A bob of mass m is attached to the end of a light inextensible
string of length " whose other end is attached to a rigid support. The bob moves with angular
velocity Z such that it executes a horizontal circular orbit of radius r. Let h be the vertical
distance between the support and the plane of the circular orbit and T be the angle subtended by
the string with the downward vertical.
2
!
T
"
h
r
T
T
Tsin T
TcosT
mg
mg
Fig. 2. Forces Resolved
Fig.1. Conical Pendulum
As shown in Figure 1, the two external forces are acting on the bob of conical pendulum
1.
The tension T in the string which is exerted along the line of the string acting
towards the point of suspension
2.
The weight of the bob mg acting vertically downwards.
Tension T on the string can be resolved
into vertical and horizontal components .As
seen in figure 2, the component T cosT acts vertically upwards and the component T sin T acts
towards the center of the circle.
Force balance in the vertical direction yields
T cos T = mg
...
..
..(1)
In other words, the vertical component of the tension force balances the weight of the
object.In a horizontal direction the system is imbalanced. The horizontal component of the
tension in the string gives the bob acceleration towards the centre of the circle (Centripetal
force).
3
!
Thus,
T sin T = m v2 / r = m Z2 r
...
..
.. (2)
Taking ratio of equations 2 & 1 we get
tan T = Z2 r / g
...
..
.. (3)
By simple geometry of Figure 1, tan T = r / h, substitution in equation (3) gives
Z2 h = g = constant
..
..
..
(4)
Thus as Z , the angular frequency of the revolving bob increases, the projection of
pendulum length on the vertical axis decreases to keep the product Z2 h
constant. That is the
revolving horizontal plane of the bob gets lifted towards the point of suspension. This fact is
demonstrated during experiment. Moreover the constant gives the value is of gravitational
acceleration g.
EXPERI M ENTAL
Experimental procedure lies in measuring the periodic time Tc of revolution and the
vertical height h . The angular frequency Z is simply 2S/Tc . However generally, it is difficult to
measure height h of the rotating pendulum with precision.
4
!
Figure 3(a) shows our experimental arrangement. Photographs of the setup are given in
Figure 3(b) . A pendulum of length " is attached to the shaft of a small 6 V DC motor whose
rotational speed can be varied by changing the voltage. The length " and the speed of motor are
so adjusted that the period for 20 revolutions is measurable with a necked eye , at least for four to
five values of angles of rotation . Focusing the telescope of the cathetometer on the revolving
pendulum and noting down the corresponding reading on the scale with respect to the point of
suspension ,
measures the height h of the rotating pendulum. With increasing speed of
revolution, the plane of revolution it becomes slightly difficult to trace out the pendulum
trajectory in the telescope. The observations are tabulated as in Table I.
OBSERVATI ON & RESULTS
Mass of pendulum bob m = 72 gm
Length of pendulum
" = 19.90 cm
5
!
Table 1: Experimental Observations
Obs.
No.
Height
(cm)
Time for
20rev. (sec)
Periodic
Time
Tc(sec)
Angular Frequency
Z = 2S/Tc (radian /sec)
Z2
g = Z2 h cm/s2
1
18.7
17.0
0.85
7.392
54.65
1021
2
15.9
15.5
0.775
8.108
65.74
1045
3
9.75
12.5
0.625
10.05
101.09
985
4
5.1
9.2
0.46
13.66
186.63
951
5
4.0
8.0
0.4
15.71
246.80
987
We see that the product Z2 h is fairly constant within the range of experimental errors.
Its average value is 997 cm/s2 which are close to the standard value of gravitational acceleration
980 cm/s2. Improving on experimental measurements, a better agreement can still be arrived.
Now we proceed to compute physical quantities related to circular motion of the bob ie.
centripetal force and tension on the string. For this we use eq.(2) and do little substitution in
terms of measured parameters h and " .Thus,
T sin T = m v2 / r = m Z2 r
..
.... (2)
Tension T = m Z2 (r / sin T ) and from figure 1. , r = " sin T ,we get
Tension T = m Z2"
..
«
(5)
Also from figure 1, cos T = h/ " ,with sin2 T + cos 2T = 1, we get sin T as
sin T = {sqrt ("2 - h2 )} / "
and the centripetal force becomes
Centripetal Force = T sin T = m Z2 {sqrt ("2 - h2 )} .. . .. (6).
6
!
Table II summarizes these results.
Table I I : Parameters related to Circular Motion
Obs. Height Angular Tension T Centripetal
No.
h
Frequency on string
Force
cm
dyne
dyne
Z rad /s
4
1
18.7
7.392
7.83 x 10 2.67x 10 4
2
15.9
8.108
9.36 x 10 4 5.66x 10 4
3
9.75
10.05
14.4 x 10 4 12.62x 10 4
4
5.1
13.66
26.5 x 10 4 25.80x 10 4
5
4.0
15.71
35.1 x 10 4 34.58x 10 4
The variation of tension T and centripetal force with the angular frequency of revolution is
plotted in figure 4.
40
35
T
T , C.P. Force ( x 10 4 )
30
C.P. Force
25
20
15
10
5
0
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Ang. Freq. w
Figure 4 : Variation of Tension T and C.P. Force with Angular Frequency
7
!
We see that initially when the bob rotates slowly at lower frequencies, the tension on the
string is larger than the centripetal force on the bob. As the speed of rotation increases both of
them increase in the same fashion and finally they attain almost the same value. In the actual
experiment , the revolving horizontal plane of the bob gets lifted towards
the point of
suspension and the conical trajectory of the string becomes a circular one. For circular motion
tension T and centripetal force are the same.
CONCLUSI ON
In conclusion the Conical Pendulum is well illustrative of uniform circular motion and
determination of gravitational acceleration g is possible with simple arrangements. We are trying
other possibilities to improve on measurements of h and period of oscillation. Still, the present
measurements are quite accurate as the maximum percentage error ranges from +6.63 % to ±
2.9 % .
FURTHER DEM ONSTRATI ONS
1.
Centrifugal Reaction
When we replace the bob with a small plastic cylindrical container filled with water, while
revolving the water does not come out even when it is horizontal to table at highest speed of
revolution. This demonstrates the effect of centrifugal reaction on the revolving water.
2.
Vertical Pendulum
In vertical pendulum the motor is clamped horizontal to table so that the bob describes a circle
in a vertical plane. Photograph of the vertical pendulum is shown in Figure 5(a) and the forces
acting on it at different radial positions are shown in given in Figure 5(b)
8
!
It is shown by Richard Fitzpatrick 6 that the condition for the object to execute a complete
vertical circle without the string becoming slack is
Z2 r ! 5 g
If the object is attached to the end of a rigid rod, instead of a piece of string, the condition is
Z2 r ! 4 g
The motion is much easier when a solid rod instead of a string is used.
This is simply because a solid rod can bare a negative tension when the bob is at the top
position above the pivot point ,rather than a string. The rigidity of the rod helps to support the
object at this position. In the demonstration we note that the motor draws smaller current with
the rod in stead of a string for the bob execute a vertical circle of same radius r.
3. Planetary Motion
In conical pendulum when the bob is replaced by another small motor to which a ball is
attached, the system is reduced to a one in which the ball while spinning about its own axis
revolves simultaneously. Figure 6 illustrates this concept. With an elliptical path it represents a
motion of a planet. We are trying for this demonstration.
9
!
References
1. Patterson L.D , Pendulums of Wren and Hooke. Osiris. , 10, 277±321,1952.
2. Gal O. Stud. Hist. Phil. Sci. 27, 181±205 , 1996 ( Cross Ref )
3.a. Nauenberg M ,Am. J. Phys. 73, 340±348 ,2005 ( Cross Ref )
b.Nauenberg M , Phys. Perspect. 7, 4±34 ,2005 (Cross Ref )
4. G. Rousseaux , P. Coullet and J.M. Gilli , Proc. R. Soc. A , 462 (2066 ) , 531-540
8 February 2006
5. M. Argentina , P. Coullet , J. M. Gilli ,M. Monticelli and G. Rousseaux Proc. R.
Soc. A , 463 (2081) 1259-1269 8 May 2007
6. Richard Fitzpatrick, http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/301/lectures/node90.html
10
Physics Assessment and the Development of a Taxonomy
J. M. Buick
Faculty of Technology
Anglesea Building
Anglesea Road
University of Portsmouth
Portsmouth PO1 3DJ
UK
Tel: +44 (0)23 92 84 2318
Fax: +44 (0)23 9284 2351
Email: [email protected]
Related topic: Evaluation and Assessment
(Received 10 September 2010: accepted 18 December 2010)
European J of Physics Ed., Vol. 2, No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
12
Abstract
Aspects of assessment in physics are considered with the aim of designing assessments that will
encourage a deep approach to student learning and will ultimately lead to higher levels of
achievement. A range of physics questions are considered and categorized by the level of knowledge
and understanding which is require for a successful answer. Taxonomy is then proposed to aid
classification.
Keywords: Physics; Assessment; Taxonomy
Introduction
Assessment is an essential component of teaching in any institute of higher
education. Here assessment in physics is considered in the context of taxonomy. In general
taxonomy is a classification system. In education, taxonomies have focused primarily on
evaluation and objectives. Bloom's Taxonomy (Bloom et al. 1956) was the first model
developed to provide a systematic classification of cognitive operations for use in education.
It provided six hierarchical levels of cogitative complexity in which each level must be
mastered before progressing to the next. Bloom’s Taxonomy, including modifications and
variations, which have been developed since its inception, is now widely used in course
development in higher education to ensure that that both teaching and assessment strike the
right balance between low level skills such as memorizing, and higher level skills such as
analyzing and applying. An alternative approach is provided by Biggs SOLO (Structure of
Observed Learning Outcomes) taxonomy (Biggs and Collis 1982). This identified that
learning initially improves as the level of detail in a student’s response increases, and later as
the detail becomes integrated into a more structured answer.
This paper investigates assessment in physics. A spectrum of assessment methods are
considered with the main emphasis placed on examination. This is generally the principle
method for determining student grades when certification is required. Historically
examination has been used as the main mechanism for assessment and this is likely to remain
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 13
the case since it ensures equity of treatment for students and provides a level of quality
assurance and accountability. A number of examples of potential exam questions are
considered along with the level of knowledge, skill and understanding that is required in
answering them. From this taxonomy for physics is produced to aid classification.
Unit Composition
Any physics unit must satisfy a number of criteria. There is a body of knowledge that
students must take from the unit. This can be divided into two main categories: information
which the students require as a prerequisite for future units; and knowledge which would be
expected of a physics graduate wishing to continue their studies at a higher level, undertake
research in physics or enter employment. It is, however, important that students take more
from the unit than simply a bundle of knowledge. The students must also learn skills. This
includes skills that they can apply in other units to different subject matter, as well as skills
that they can transfer to other arenas outwit the university. Students undertaking physics
major must acquire the skills necessary to undertake a career in physics. In addition, they
must also learn skills that are required by most employers. These include practical
components such as computing as well as other skills such as time-management, ability to
work as a team, presentation skills and information literacy. Thus an educator must ensure
that a portion of a unit must follow the traditional discipline-based approach (Toohey 1999:
49) while also incorporate aspects of the personal relevance approach (Toohey 1999: 59).
Assessment Design
From the point of view of the students, certainly for surface learners, the curriculum
of the units is defined by the assessment (Ramsden 1992: 187). It is therefore essential that
the assessment tasks cover the whole curriculum, both in terms of knowledge and skill bases.
A non-exhaustive list of assessment methods commonly applied to a physics unit is included
below, along with a discussion of the merits of each approach. Assessments can have two
objectives: summative or formative (Biggs 2003: 141). Summative assessment provides
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
14
results that are used to grade students while formative assessment provides students with
feedback during the learning process. Assessment can take many forms; written, on-line, oral
presentation; however, they can generally be divided into three types: assignments;
laboratory/project reports; and tests/exams.
Assignments: A number of assignments throughout a unit provide a useful method for
ensuring that students are keeping up and identifying any problems. They also provide
essential feedback to the student indicating the level of knowledge or ability that is expected
from them and also the extent to which they are achieving this. Assignments should be
mainly for formative purposes. Since they provide important information for both the student
and the lecturer regarding the progress of the students, these should be a compulsory part of
the assessment, possibly with some weight in the overall summative assessment. This gives
the students an incentive to put effort into the assessment ensuring that the student gains
maximum benefit and that the formative aspects of the assignment is meaningful. The ability
to build up marks prior to a final exam is also beneficial to the student and can make any
final exam less threatening. When designing and marking assessment it is important to
ensure that assignment questions cover as much of the material as possible and are of a
similar standard as the test/exam questions. This ensures that students are given a clear
indication that the whole of the curriculum is important. It also gives the students an
opportunity to judge how they are performing in the unit and offers a source of feedback in
areas where they are having difficulties.
Laboratory/Project Report: Practical work is an important aspect of physics and so
its assessment should reflect this importance. Assessing practical work generally assesses
skills rather than knowledge. Some knowledge of the subject matter is required to undertake
the practical work, but significantly less than any other part of the unit assessment. The skills
assessed are also generally different to those assessed in a test or exam. The main skills
assessed are communication, teamwork and practical ability. Assessing laboratory work is
commonly done through a formal report. To produce a high quality report a student must
work well during the laboratory session and exhibit skills such as teamwork. The importance
of these skills must be recognised by giving them a significant weighting. Aspects of the
assessment of laboratory work are also formative. Ensuring that practical assessment is done
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 15
in small chunks, for example, every week, allows students to learn from the assessment and
improve their skills in the same manner as discussed for assignments. This means that the
assessment can be both formative and summative.
Exams and tests: These methods of assessment are primarily summative. They are used
primarily to measure the knowledge and acquired skills of the student. Assessment through
tests and exams will be considered in the remainder of this paper.
Reflections on Assessment through Tests and Exams in Physics
Having determined that the test and exam cover both the material in the course
description and the learning objectives, it is important to investigate the level of knowledge
and understanding, which a student requires to answer the exam or test questions.
Two frameworks have traditionally been used for evaluating the different level of
questions and the corresponding answers in a range of educational settings. These are
provided by the SOLO Taxonomy of Biggs and Collis (1982), and by Blooms Taxonomy
(Bloom et al. 1956). Before considering assessment in test and exams in physics the two
taxonomies will briefly be reviewed.
Biggs SOLO Taxonomy
Five levels are identified:
Prestructural level
Students acquire pieces of unconnected information
No organization
Unistructural level
Students make simple and obvious connections
The significance of the connections is not demonstrated
Multistructural level
Students make a number of connections
Significance of relationship between connections not demonstrated
Relational level
Students demonstrate relationship between connections
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
16
Students demonstrate relationship between connections and the whole
Extended abstract level
Students make connections beyond the immediate subject area
Students generalise and transfer principles from the specific to the abstract
Bloom’s Taxonomy
Six levels are identified:
Knowledge
Recall of data
Comprehension
Understanding the meaning
State a problem in one’s own words
Application
Use a concept in a new situation
Applies what was learned in the classroom into novel situations in the workplace
Analysis
Separates material or concepts into component parts to understand structure
Distinguished between facts and inferences
Synthesis
Builds a structure or pattern from diverse elements
Put parts together to form a whole, with emphasis on creating new meaning or structure
Evaluation
Make judgements about values, ideas or materials.
It is important to consider that the term ‘application’ in Bloom’s Taxonomy is used in
a different sense to how it may be used in a syllabus or unit description. In the latter it may
be used, for example, as ‘application of Maxwell’s equations’ or ‘application of Newton’s
laws’. In terms of an exam question this could involve a problem similar to, or even identical
to, a problem that the student has already seen, for example in an assignment question or as a
lecture example. The implication in Bloom’s Taxonomy is that the situation or problem is
‘new’ is not present in this definition. It is also important to notice that the word ‘analysis’ is
often used to describe mathematical manipulation.
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 17
Both Taxonomies apply to cases where the answer to a question can have a range of
answers that illustrate the different levels of the student’s thinking. The following example is
based on material from Biggs and Collins (1982). Two answers to the question ‘Why is the
side of a mountain that faces the coast usually wetter than the side facing the interior’ are:
“Because it rains more on the coastal side.”
Because the prevailing winds are from the sea, which is why you call them sea
breezes. They pick up moisture from the sea and as they meet the mountain they’re forced up
and get colder because it’s colder the higher you get from the sea level. This makes the
moisture condense which forms rain on the side going up. By the time the winds cross the
mountain they are dry. Answer 2 clearly shows a deeper understanding of the process, while
answer 1 simply states a fact.
Both taxonomies have been applied to a wide range of topics; however, there are
some limitations. In the field of computer science education Johnson and Fuller (2006)
suggested modifying Bloom’s taxonomy by adding an additional top level entitled ‘Higher
Application’ to account for “the application informed by a critical approach to the subject,
but where the criticism is not, as such, the focus of the work”. Limitations have also been
observed in the field of mathematics by Smith et al. (1996) who proposed a modification to
Bloom’s taxonomy for structuring assessment tasks in mathematics. Smith’s MATH
(Mathematical Assessment Task Hierarchy) taxonomy (Smith et al. 1996, Wood et al. 2002)
consists of three groups A, B and C as detailed below:
Group A
Factual knowledge
Comprehension
Routine use of procedures
Group B
Information transfer
Application in new situations
Group C
Justifying and interpreting
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
18
Implications, conjecture and comparisons
Evaluation.
Like mathematics, the application of both Bloom’s and Biggs’ taxonomies have
limitations when applied to physics assessments, particularly above the elementary level. In a
typical physics unit, for example, electromagnetism, there is no scope for ‘evaluation’ or
‘extended abstract level’ arguments as defined in the taxonomies. This level of reasoning
may be applicable in areas of physics that are current areas of research such as the Big Bang
Theory or the Grand Unified Theory. Advanced units in these, or similar topics, may include
the latest theories and possibly evidence that contradicts established theories. These are
topics of current research. In an exam question a student might describe such evidence, for
example an experiment demonstrating CP violation, and discuss its consequences. Such an
answer could demonstrate ‘comprehension’ and ‘multiscructural’, or even ‘relational’
thinking. This answer would consist of arguments initiated by others, and not by the student
answering the exam question, and so in terms or the taxonomies could not be classified as
‘analysis’ or ‘synthesis’. It could not be expected that an exam answer would exhibit
‘evaluation’ or ‘extended abstract level’. Further, in a unit such as electromagnetic theory,
the material covered is well established and there are no areas of speculation. It is also not
practical to question the use of concepts such as electric fields.
Often a question can only be answered at a single level. For example, consider a
question asking for the force on a particle of charge q, moving with velocity v in a magnetic
field B. The correct answer is that F = qv!B. A student could state this and then continue
“Now if we observe this from a reference frame in which the charge is at rest the magnetic
force will be zero. Thus we can conclude that the apparent magnetic force is actually an
electrostatic force which can be understood due to a Lorenz contraction”. This level of
insight was not asked for in the question and so no marks can be given for it. In a unit where
the ideas expressed by the student had not been covered, this answer might appear to be at
the extended abstract level in Biggs’ taxonomy or synthesis/ evaluation in Bloom’s
Taxonomy. It is, however, unlikely that this answer represents a flash of inspiration on the
part of the student during the exam. It is more likely that the answer represents information,
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 19
which the student has read and is repeating (possibly with no understanding of its meaning).
In either case no marks can be awarded for this insight. The example, however, illustrates the
limitation of applying either Bloom’s or Biggs’ taxonomy.
The project report is one area of physics where Bloom’s or Biggs’ taxonomies can be
truly applied. Here the students have a chance to display a high degree of reasoning and
judgement concerning the interpretation of their results. For example, the student may
criticise the procedure and suggest improvements; compare with other techniques/ methods;
and identify other fields where such methods can be applied. This is typically the only
opportunity a student will have to demonstrate ‘extended abstract’ or ‘evaluation’ within the
evaluation process.
Although mathematics and physics have a number of similarities, the differences
between them mean that the application of Smith’s MATH taxonomy to a physics unit also
encounters limitations. In the following section, different types of physics questions will be
considered with a view to determining a taxonomy suitable for structuring assessment in
physics.
Taxonomy for Physics
The concept considered in this section can be applied generally to most topic areas in
physics; however, the examples considered will be taken from electromagnetic theory. In
physics exams and tests it may be possible to ask question similar to the one above giving
students the opportunity to answer according to their level of knowledge, understanding and
insight. For example, consider the following question:
A1: Describe the three major classes of magnetic materials, giving details of their
differences and the physics behind these differences.
This question offers students a chance to display their knowledge and/or
understanding at different levels. Students can list facts they have learnt about magnetic
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
20
materials - factual knowledge. There is also scope to demonstrate comprehension in the
second part of the question explaining the physics behind the differences. While it is possible
in some instances to use questions such as the example above, generally it is only possible to
answer a question on a single level. Consider the following questions:
B1: State the expression for the electric field E at position r due to a point charge q at
position r".
B2: Sate Gauss’s Law
B3: State the Lorentz force equation, describing each parameter and stating any requirements
with regards the particle’s motion.
B4: State Ampere’s circuit law.
Each of these questions requires a statement of facts and the answers would be classified as
factual knowledge. To enable students to demonstrate a higher level of understanding it is
necessary to extend the scope of the question with a second part which either leads on from
the initial statement of facts (B1-B4) or can be the starting point for the question. Consider
the following examples that could be set as a second part to questions (B1-B4):
C1: Consider a region containing two different dielectrics characterised by e1 and e2. By
considering the normal and tangential components of E at the interface and applying
Maxwell’s equations in integral form, determine the boundary conditions at the interface.
C1": A total charge Q is spread evenly over the surface of a disk of radius a defined by
x 2 + y 2 ! a 2 , z = 0. Find the electric field on the axis of symmetry (z = 0). Hence, or
otherwise, show that the potential on the axis is given by $ axis ( z ) =
Q
2"# 0
[(z
2
+ a2
)
1/ 2
]
!z,
where f(#) = 0.
C2: a) Explain how Gauss’s Law leads to the relationship
! D " dS = ! # dv .
s
v
v
b) Consider a sphere with radius a and uniform charge density rv. Determine D everywhere.
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 21
C3: A charged particle moves with a uniform velocity 4ax m/s in a region where E = 20ay
V/m and B = B0az Wb/m2. Determine B0 such that the velocity of the particle remains
constant (Sadiku 2001: 313).
C4: A hollow conducting cylinder has inner radius a and outer radius b and carries current I
along the positive z-direction. Derive expressions for H everywhere.
Questions C1 and C2 a) can be classified as bookwork. The answer to these questions
can be found in any standard textbook and will (presumably) have been covered in the
lectures. As such a student could memorise the answer and reproduce it without any
understanding. In this case the answer would not show any greater level of knowledge or
understanding than the answers to questions B1-B4. In practice, unless a student memorises
every page of the textbook and/or the lecture notes, simply reproducing the proof from
memory is not possible. Despite not being able to recall the answer verbatim, a student will
have some memory of looking at or working through the appropriate section of the textbook.
Guided by this memory or by the approach suggested in the question (By considering the
normal and tangential components of E at the interface and applying Maxwell’s equations in
integral form), which may be omitted to change slightly the level of difficulty, the student
must also exhibit a level of knowledge and understanding to produce the required answer.
Thus a bookwork question generally requires more than simply reproducing factual
knowledge, it also requires comprehension of the material and the ability to reproduce some
standard work.
Questions C1", C2b), C3 and C4 require the use of the facts that were asked for in
questions B1-B4 respectively. This would normally be termed an application of the
electrostatic force equation, Gauss’s Law, Lorentz force equation and Ampere’s circuit law
respectively. Crucially, it should be noted that each question may or may not contain the
novelty required in Bloom’s taxonomy. The ability demonstrated by a student correctly
answering one of these questions cannot be determined solely by examining the questions.
Undoubtedly methods for using these laws to determine physical properties will have been
presented to the students previously, either through examples in the lecture/ textbook or
through assignments questions. The questions must be subdivided into three categories:
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
22
A question that is identical or virtually identical to a question that the student has
•
already been exposed to or has already solved. This can be classified as application previously solved.
A question that is broadly similar to a question already encountered, classified as
•
application - routine procedure.
A question that is significantly different (in terms of the application of the law or the
•
method of mathematical solution) that it can be classified as application - novel.
If two students give the same answer to a question they should both be awarded the
same mark. If the students have different background the level of understanding exhibited by
the students to obtain the same number of marks is different. Within any single class,
however, the background of the students (at least with respect to the subject taught in the
unit) should be similar. All students will have attended the same lectures, been directed
towards the same textbook, and attempted and seen the solutions to the same assignment
questions. Backgrounds will vary slightly where students have accessed alternative
resources, for example, alternative book in the library. In this case a question that is
‘application - novel’ for one student may be classified as ‘application – routine procedure’
for another. In such a case the student with a larger pool of background knowledge is
benefiting from this extra reading and understanding of the subject.
A further category requires a student to take their knowledge and understanding of
one area and relate it to another. For example consider D1 and D2 below that could follow
questions C1" and C2.
D1: Given the azimuthal symmetry of the problem, the potential must take the form
$
* An
'
+ Bn r n %Pn (cos ! ) for a << r, where Pn is the Legendre polynomial. Determine
n +1
&
n =0 ) r
" = #(
the coefficients An and Bn.
D2: For r > a describe how the solution relates to that for a point charge.
D2 requires the expression for D that has previously been calculated in terms of the
charge density to be compared with the expression for a point charge Q that must be known.
This involves determining a relationship between the total charge and the charge density. It
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 23
requires relating the answer given in the previous part of the question to knowledge obtained
elsewhere in the unit and determining the consequence of the comparison. This can be
categorised as ‘relation – within topic’. (Provided this comparison had not been considered
previously in lectures or an assignment in which case the question would be categorised as
‘application – previously solved’.)
D1 requires an understanding of the solution of the Laplace equation in spherical
coordinates. Although the form of the general solution is given, it would be difficult to
answer the question without some understanding. This could relate to a different part of the
unit, or possible a different unit on another topic, for example, mathematical methods.
Knowledge and understanding of Legendre polynomials and the Binomial expansion and
double factorials are also required. This is something that would most likely have been
covered in a different unit. Thus a full answer required the student to bring together
knowledge and understanding from other aspects of their physics course and also to
determine a method to relate the two forms for the potential. This type of question can be
categorised as ‘relation – outwith topic’. Given the limited time constraints of a test or exam
it may be desirable to include a number of hints that will decrease the difficulty of the
question without changing the level of categorisation of the question. This could include all
or some of the following: Expanding your solution for f using a Binomial expansion, noting
that " (!) = 0 , and comparing the solutions on the axis (r = z), show that Bn = 0 and
$0, for n odd
!
An = # (- 1)n / 2 (n + 1)!!a n
! (n + 1)(n / 2)!! , for n even.
"
It has been suggested that by altering the form in which a question is put, it is
possible to change the level of understanding that a student displays in an answer (Pollard
1993). This work refers to first-year level physics and deals with the problem of students
simply remembering formulae and inserting values to obtain a correct answer without
understanding the underlying physics. Both questions C2 and C4 require more than simply
putting numbers in an equation. The students need to understand the concept of a Gaussian
surface or Amperian path, the symmetry of the problem and the appropriate integral to
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
24
perform. Pollard (1993) suggests re-writing a question to explicitly ask about the Gaussian
surface. This prevents students from answering the question without understanding the
concept. In, for example, C2 it is necessary for the students to use two different Gaussian
surfaces.
Thus the student needs to understand and use the concept to correctly and fully
answer the question. Hence a student must display a higher level of thinking/ understanding
to answer this question, without the need for Gaussian surfaces to be mentioned in the
question. Further, by not mentioning Gaussian surfaces in the question it is necessary for
students to be aware of the approach, which is required to proceed with the solution.
Conclusion
A progression has been highlighted in the type of exam questions that provide the
opportunity for students to express higher levels of knowledge and understanding. These
correspond to a) factual knowledge; b) comprehension; c) book work; d) application –
previously solved; e) application – routine procedure; f) relation – within topic; and g)
relation – outwith topic.
It is important to implement procedures that encourage deep learning rather than
surface learning. Toohey (1999: 13) indicates that surface learning is encouraged by
assessment strategies that reward low level outcomes. Thus assessment tasks must require
the students to produce high-level outcomes. It is hoped that the taxonomy detailed here will
be an aid to designing assessment tasks in physics and therefore help encourage deep
learning for students. Other aspects, which encourage a deep approach to learning, include
(Biggs 1989): an appropriate motivational context; a higher degree of learner activity,
interaction between peers and teachers; and a well-structured knowledge base. It is important
to also consider these features within a unit.
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 25
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Robyn Smyth and the members of PDLD490-04 for
advice and useful discussions. The author would also like to thank Peter Osborne for
bringing questions C1 and D1 to his attention.
References
Biggs, J.B. and Collis, K.F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning- the SOLO Taxonomy.
New York: Academic Press.
Biggs, J.B. (1989). Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching, Higher Education
Research and Development 8:7-25.
Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. The Society for Research into
Higher Education/ Open University Press, Buckingham.
Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., and Krathwohl, D. (1956).
Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I:
Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans, Green.
Johnson, C. G. and Fuller, U. (2006). Is Bloom's taxonomy appropriate for computer
science? In Baltic Sea ’06 Proceedings of the 6th Baltic Sea Conference on Computing
Education Research (Koli Calling), pp120-122. Available online at
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.100.3548&rep=rep1&type=pdf#pa
ge=130 (accessed December 2010).
Pollard, J. (1993). Developing physics understanding through guided study. In Bain, J.,
Lietzow, E. and Ross, B. (Eds.) Promoting teaching in higher education, reports from the
National Teaching Workshop, Goprint, Brisbane, pp. 355-370.
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick
26
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education, London, Routledge.
Sadiku, M. N. O. (2001). Elements of Electromagnetics, 3rd edition, New York, Oxford
University Press.
Smith, G., Wood, L., Coupland, M., Stephenson, B., Crawford, K. and Ball, G. (1996).
Constructing mathematical examinations to access a range of knowledge and skills,
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 27: 65-77.
Toohey, S. (1999). Designing courses for higher education. The Society for Research into
Higher Education/ Open University Press, Buckingham.
Wood, L.N., Smith, G.H., Petocz, P. and Reid, A (2002). Correlation between student
performance in linear algebra and categories of a taxonomy. In 2nd International Conference
on the Teaching of Mathematics (at the undergraduate level). Crete, Greece, John Wiley &
Sons. Available online at http://www.math.uoc.gr/~ictm2/Proceedings/pap338.pdf (accessed
December 2010).
ISSN 1309 7202
Buick 27
Towards Effective Instructions in Environmental Education: A Critical Review of
Literature
Ahmet Baytak
Harran University
Urfa, Turkey
[email protected]
Harran University
Abstract
The tendency that there is a global warming issue and the environmental disaster through out the world
became top news in media. While scientist and politicians are gathering to find solution for the
environmental issues, educators are aware of that a sustainable future needs an effective education for
today’s children. However, how these children should be educated on environmental issues and what they
should be required in this technology age is still a question. This paper, thus, provides an intensive review
of the literature on environmental education and how different instructional strategies could be used
effectively in educational programs.
Keywords: Environmental education, effective education, educational programs
Keywords: Environmental education, children’s education, technology integration, educational
technology, games.
European J of Physics Education
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
28
Introduction
Recently, there has been a growing interest in environmental issues, and in
particular, global climate change. This interest extends not only to researchers and
educators in science but also nonprofit organizations (NGO), governments, concerned
citizens and advocacy groups who aim to raise awareness on environmental issues. The
international community has increasingly paid more attention to the importance of
environmental education to environmental protection.
In the literature, the term environmental education (EE) began to be used in the
1960s as an effort “to produce citizens who are knowledgeable about the biophysical
environment and its problems, aware of strategies that can be used to deal with those
problems, and actively engaged in working toward their solution” (Stapp et al., 1969,
cited in Fisman, 2005, p.39). A few years later, The United Nations Education Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and United Nations Environment Program
(UNEP) announced three major declarations that structured the objectives of
environmental education courses.
The first declaration, the Stockholm Declaration, was created in 1972. Three years
later, UNESCO and UNEP with representative from 60 countries, announced the
Belgrade Charter in former Yugoslavia. According to this charter, the goal of EE is “to
develop a world population that is aware of and concerned about the environment, its
associated problems, so that the population will have the knowledge, skills, attitudes,
motivation and commitment to work individually and collectively towards the solutions
of current problems and prevention of new ones” (1996, p. 94). The Tbilisi declaration, in
1977, by the same international communities, focused on local environmental issues
(Fisman, 2005). More recently, former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, stated the
importance of current environmental problems and how humans are causing these
problems. He also called nations and individuals to take action to end thoughtless or
deliberate waste and destruction (Annan, 2004, cited in Haigh, 2006).
Academicians established a US-based international NGO, the Earth watch
Institute, in 2003 “to work together to promote environmental education and the cause of
sustainable development” (Haigh, 2006 p.330). With similar goals, there are different
organizations such as TEMA in Turkey (2009) and the Worldwatch Institute in the US
(2009), companies such as Shell in Malaysia (Said, Yahaya, Ahmadun, 2007) and several
worldwide NGOs such as The National Audubon Society, Sierra Club, and GRACE
(2009). Recently, Live Earth organization, which is founded by producer Kevin Wall, in
partnership with former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, organized a worldwide concert on
07.07.07 called “round the world”. The aim of this event was to increase people’s
awareness on environmental issues and global change.
In addition, special days and events focused on the environment are
commemorated worldwide, and are often familiar to children in schools: Earth Day on
April 22nd of each year and World Environment Day on June 5th of every year. These
initiatives are designed to stimulate worldwide awareness of the environment and
enhance political attention and action (UNEP, 2009). Tree Planting Day is also organized
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
29
in different countries such as China, Turkey, Australia, Iran, and Ireland in order to
increase awareness of nature among young generations by planting trees.
Research on Environmental Education
Studies on environmental education from the 1960s and 1980s were mainly
concerned with the identification, prediction, and the control of variables for
environmental behavior (Palmer & Suggate, 2004). In the last decade, however,
researchers have examined various perspectives related to the environment such as
students’ environmental knowledge (Morgil, et al. 2004), environmental awareness and
concerns (Sherburn & Devlin 2004; Zimmer et al. 1994), behavior (Negev et al. 2008),
and comprehension and participation (Said, Yahaya, Ahmadun, 2007).
Table 1: Summary of reviews for the studies about environmental education
Sample Study
Country-Age
Level
Greece, 11-12
years old
N
Methods and Purposes
12
Shobeiri, Omidvar,
& Prahallada,
(2007)
Barraza and
Walford (2002)
India-Iran,
secondary school
991
Qualitative study to explore the
development of decision making skills
and environmental skills
Comparison of students environmental
awareness in two different countries
Mexico-UK, 7-9
years old
246
Jinliang et al, (2004)
1179
Duan & Fortner
(2005)
China, primary
and high school
students
Madagascar 8- to
21-year-old
Israel, Middle and
High school
students
Malaysia,
secondary school
students
China, university
students
Palmer & Suggate
(2004),
UK, adults and
children
322
Tuohino, (2003)
Finland, adults
586
Haigh, (2006)
Dresner & Gill
(1994)
UK, adults
USA, 10-13 years
old
450
28
Nicolaou, et al.
(2009)
Korhonen &
Lappalainen, (2004)
Negev et al. (2008)
Said, Yahaya, &
Ahmadun, (2007)
Vol. 2
212
3101
Comparison to find possible reasons of
influencing the environmental knowledge
and perceptions
Quantitative study to analyzes the status
and characteristics of environmental
awareness
Quantitative study to examines
environmental awareness
Quantitative study to evaluate students’’
environmental literacy
306
Quantitative study about environmental
education and behavior changes
108
Quantitative study to examine students
perceptions about internal and external
factors of environmental issues
Longitudinal study to investigate the
acquisition and development of
environmental knowledge, awareness and
concern
Quantitative study to measure participants
attitudes towards environmental
sustainability
Case study of an NGO
Quantitative study about camping and
environmental education
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
30
Evans & Gill,
(1996)
Morgil et al. (2004)
Uzunboylu, Cavus
& Ercag, (2009)
Day, (2004)
Heo (2004)
Pacheco, Motloch,
& Vann, (2006)
UK, Middle and
High School
Turkey,
University
Students
North Cyprus,
University
students
USA, Elementary
school students
173
Korea,
Elementary school
students
USA, 6th grade
NA
88
41
23
NA
Quantitative study about attitudes and
environmental awareness
Quantitative study to measure the effects
of computer-assisted education on
environmental knowledge and awareness
Quantitative study to investigate use of
mobile technologies and environmental
awareness
Quantitative study to examine how
artwork increase students awareness about
environment
Quantitative study to investigate story
telling and environmental education in
web-based learning environments
Case study to explore games and
environmental education
N: Sample size NA: Not applicable
I. External Factors in Environmental Education
As Nicolaou, et al. (2009) stated, environmental problems are complex and ill
structured, and these problems involve consideration of values, tradeoffs, social interests,
and culture. For instance, Shobeiri, Omidvar, and Prahallada, (2007) found cultural
differences between Indian and Iranian students’ perceptions of identifying
environmental problems in their countries.
Barraza and Walford (2002) found that students have different perceptions about
environmental issues in each country. For example, students in Mexico ranked population
growth whereas students in England ranked nuclear waste as the most dangerous
environmental issues. In another study conducted in China, students listed the quality of
water and pollution as the main environmental problem (Jinliang et al, 2004). Similarly,
lack of water was identified in a study in Madagascar (Korhonen & Lappalainen, 2004),
and air pollution in studies in Israel (Negev et al. 2008) and in Malaysia (Said, Yahaya,
Ahmadun, 2007).
Similarly, when examining Chinese students’ awareness of global problems and
local problems, Duan and Fortner (2005 p.30) claim “It is reasonable that people would
determine that an issue is real if they can see or smell it. The most significant issues are
the certain ones that can be directly sensed.” They suggest further “educators should
choose effective sources and formats to make more complicated environmental issues
tangible and understandable” (p.30). However, none of these studies focused on a diverse
classroom environment.
Barraza and Walford (2002, p.178) stated, “Children’s environmental knowledge
varies according to the school ethos, the teacher, and their access to information through
books, media such as television, computer games, and other social activities. Thus, when
children are exposed to situations that involve environmental dilemmas, their reactions
vary according to four major factors: (1) culture; (2) experience; (3) affiliation for a
particular animal; and (4) school ethos”. Shobeiri, Omidvar, and Prahallada (2007) stated
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
31
that type of school management, private or public, also has an impact on environmental
awareness of students.
II. Cognitive Structure of Environmental Education
Some studies also focused on how people’s environmental knowledge and
awareness is structured. According to Palmer and Suggate (2004), “environmental
problems are socially constructed in terms of their conceptualized effects on individuals,
groups, other living things and systems, [and accordingly,] research based on
constructivist principles provides not only a coherent framework in which to theorize
about learning, but also a context for understanding socially constructed issues and
knowledge” (p. 208).
Students’ perceptions about environmental issues, however, seem mainly
influenced by media coverage (Barraza & Walford, 2002; Jinliang et al. 2004). For
example, survey results from Jinliang et al (2004) showed that students learned their
environmental knowledge from TV (34.259 percent), followed by the press (27.350
percent), teachers (13.746 percent), and only 4.630 percent from the parents.
Even though most prior studies explored students’ environmental knowledge and
awareness, there are still concerns about transferring knowledge into action. For instance,
in one study, it was found that people were aware of environmental aspects but was not
prepared to transfer their environmental beliefs into consumer behavior (Tuohino, 2003).
A similar finding was also reported in the Barraza and Walford study (2002) in Mexico
and England where students perceived environmental issues and had a high level of
knowledge of environmental issues, but, they were not able to transfer this knowledge
into action. Thus, in order to deal with such problems, Nicolaou, et al. (2009 p.49)
suggest that “students should be able to reason cause and effects, advantages and
disadvantages, and alternative outcomes to the decision making process.”
Since today’s children will be responsible for the remaining natural resources,
children’s environmental knowledge, environmental awareness, and attitudes toward
environment is important (Korhonen & Lappalainen, 2004). To address that problem,
UNESCO has urged educators, institutions, and governments to design environmental
education curricula for students that provide learning modules that bring skills,
knowledge, reflections, ethics, and values together in a balanced way (Haigh, 2006).
Since the 7-9 age group is at a state where the child’s mind undergoes a
developmental change, some researchers specifically examined these students’
environmental awareness (Barraza, Walford, 2002). According to Palmer and Suggate
(2004), “the analysis of understanding shows that children as young as 4 years of age are
capable of making simple accurate statements about the effects of major environmental
change on habitats and living things. Occasionally by the age of 8 and certainly by the
age of 10, pupils are capable of appreciating and explaining the complexity of some of
the relationships that exist among plants, animals and their habitats, and to provide
accurate reasoned explanations of some of the effects of significant changes to global
environments” (p. 205).
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
32
III. Instructional Strategies for Environmental Education
In order for students to have sustainability, educators start teaching
Environmental Education courses either as part of science class, or a separate course.
Environmental education as conservation was established in the second half of the 20th
century. For example, formal environmental education started in England in the 1950s
and in Mexico in the 1980s (Barraza & Walford, 2002). In the US, conservation
education started in 1953 and current environmental education started with U.S. Congress
Environmental Education Act in 1970 (McCrea, 2006).
In environmental education classes, there have been different programs and
activities organized to increase awareness and knowledge of students about
environmental issues. Some of them are traditional class lectures, media coverage,
camping (Dresner & Gill 1994), or involving students in “the use of facilities, such as
botanic or zoological gardens, or museums, as educational resources” and “involvement
of the local community in the management of resources” (Evans & Gill, 1996, p. 245).
Computer-based instruction is also used for environmental education (Morgil et al. 2004).
Even though environmental issues have an effect on several subject areas, it is
rarely integrated with subject areas other than science in formal schooling. Some areas of
integration in the research are as follows; math (Jianguo, 2004; Foorest, Schnabel &
Williams, 2006), geography, science, moral education, and life skills (Said, Yahaya,
Ahmadun, 2007), web-based storytelling (Heo 2004), mobile technologies (Uzunboylu,
Cavus & Ercag, 2009), and art (Day, 2004) in order to increase students’ environmental
awareness. Day (2004), for instance, designed a study where students created artwork to
increase their environmental awareness. The results showed that the artwork reached
students on an emotional level, affected critical thinking, and assisted memory retention.
Another traditional instructional strategy for learning about environmental
education is outdoor education where students visit certain area to lively experience the
environmental perspective of the area. With outdoor experience students have
opportunity to explore the relationship within the environment and the impact of human
being on the environment (Priest & Gass, 2005).
According to Bhandari & Abe outdoor activities have most impact on transferring
environmental education from theory to practice (2000). These activities help students
acquire knowledge, attitudes and skills in school as well as out of school. Moreover, there
are some other similar activities that give students opportunities to explore and apply
environmental education in real-life cases. Some of these are eco-clubs, green clubs,
nature clubs, and summer camps. Based on the researchers study scope of countries in
Asia, Indonesia Nepal and Fiji are countries that implemented outdoor education as part
of their environmental education programs (Bhandari & Abe, 2000).
Outdoor education could be effective instruction in for environment education but
it generally requires technical and physical skills for participation in and professional
instruction of adventure activities (Thomas, 2005). In addition, schools in metropolitan
areas could not have that many options for outdoor education.
UNESCO that for the adults learning about environmental issues and increase
their awareness about these issues also purposed it, experimental learning strategy could
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
33
be implemented (Bélanger, 1997). Other than specific environmental education courses,
most science teachers with project-based teaching approach, gives students task to test
certain environmental issues to see results (Boss & Krauss, 2007). Besides the lab
experiments that teachers do in class by following the textbooks there are websites (e.g.
terrificscience.org) that have several examples of different experiments that students can
try at home and at school.
Pedagogically similar to learning with experiment, experiential learning approach
provide eeducation strategies where the students able to develop their skills and
understanding through an active involvement in their learning. Maloof, as a teacher in the
field, pointed how the experiential approach could be effective learning strategy for
environmental education where students could take real world cases as their homework to
act upon them (2006). Even though these approaches are found effective for learning
about environmental issues, it becomes a physical barrier to extend learning more about
environmental issues. There also could be schools that not have enough lab equipments
or adequate solution for some possible lab hazards.
Researchers have acknowledged that children’s and adolescents’ opinions and
knowledge concerning the environment have been under-researched (Korhonen &
Lappalainen, 2004). In addition, some scholars believe that environmental education
should not be restricted to formal education class time since environmental education is a
lifelong process (Haigh, 2006). Accordingly, Evans and Gill (1996) suggested having
cross-curriculum teaching for environmental education.
Given the growing interest in including more environmental content in education,
efforts to increase students’ knowledge and awareness of environmental issues are
valuable. However, “young people will not act immediately because there is an inevitable
time lag before the children or students, who are being educated, are in planning or
decision-making roles” (Evans & Gill, 1996, p.245). Likewise, some scholars have
criticized the learning strategies employed in environmental education classrooms. Heo
(2004), for instance, argued that most classrooms focus solely on learning facts and
principles of environment. Others note that studies are focusing solely on local problems
(Evans and Gill 1996). Students, therefore, fail to consider environmental issues from a
global perspective.
Game play also has been explored as a formal and informal learning environment
about environmental issues. For instances, 6th graders were asked to play the game
Second Chance to increase their environmental awareness (Pacheco, Motloch, & Vann,
2006). In another study, 6th grade students designed games about global warming
(Pinkard, 2007). However, this study only focused on girls’ engagement in programming.
It was found in this study that designers should have clear definition of their
responsibility during collaboration.
Conclusion
In sum, most of the previous studies have focused on educational strategies and
tactics to improve students’ environmental knowledge and increase their environmental
awareness. However, there is a lack of studies that explore children’s behaviors in the
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
34
environment. The previous researches have not measured in a long-term process whether
the children’s achieved environmental knowledge and awareness affects their behaviors
and attitudes toward the environment. It has to be accepted that there are various ways to
teach about environmental issues and instructional strategies such as outdoor education
learning or learning with experiments could be also enjoyable for children. However, as
mentioned previously, the down side of these approaches and children desires for the new
styles of education requires for educators to provide alternative instructional strategies for
an effective environmental education. Especially with the growing interest of children’s
in technology and games could be a powerful instructional strategy to teach these
children about environmental education and to increase their awareness about
environmental issues.
References
Barraza, L. & Walford, R. A. (2002). Environmental Education: A comparison between English and
Mexican school children. Environmental Education Research, 8, 171–186.
Bhandari, B. B. & Abe, O., (2000). Environmental Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Some Problems
and Prospects. International Review for Environmental Strategies 1(1), pp. 57 – 77
Boss, S. & Krauss, J. (2007). Reinventing Project-Based Learning: Your Field Guide to Real-World
Projects in the Digital Age. ISTE
Bélanger, P., (1997). Adult environmental education: awareness and environmental action. Fifth
International Conference on Adult Education (CONFINTEA V), Hamburg, 1997
Day, J. (2004). Connections: Combining environmental education and artwork in the primary grades for
sustainability. Unpublished master thesis, University of Phoenix
Dresner, M. & Gill, M. (1994). Environmental education at summer nature camp. Journal of
Environmental Education, 25(3), 35-41.
Duan, H. & Fortner, R., W. (2005). Chinese college students’ perceptions about global versus local
environmental issues. The Journal of Environmental Education, 36(4), 23-32.
Earth Watch (2009). Retrieved April 15, 2009 from EarcthWatch website: www.earthwatch.org
Evans, S.M. & Gill, M.E. (1996). School children as educators: The indirect influence of environmental
education in schools on parents’ attitudes towards the environment. Journal of Biological
Education, 30(4), 243-248.
Filho, W. L., Murphy, Z., & O’Loan, K. (1996). A sourcebook for environmental education: A practical
review based on the Belgrade Charter. Bradford/Carnforth, UK: ERTCEE/Parthenon Press.
Fisman, L. (2005). The Effects of local learning on environmental awareness in children: An empirical
investigation. The Journal of Environmental Education. 36(3), 39-50.
Forrest, K., Schnabel, D., & Williams, M. (2006). Earth day. Teaching Children Mathematics, 12(8), 408409.
GRACE (2009). Retrieved April 10, 2009 from global resource action center for the environment website:
http://www.gracelinks.org/
Haigh, M. J. (2006). Promoting environmental education for sustainable development: The Value of links
between higher education and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Journal of Geography in
Higher Education, 30(2), 327–349.
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
35
Heo, H. (2004). Inquiry on storytelling for the web-based environmental learning environment. Association
for Educational Communications and Technology. 19-23
Korhonen, K., & Lappalainen, A. (2004). Examining the environmental awareness of children and
adolescents in the Ranomafana region, Madagascar. Environmental Education Research, 10(2),
195-216.
Jianguo, M. (2004). Teaching environmental awareness in mathematics. Chinese Education and Society,
37(4), 53–56.
Jinliang, W., Yunyan H., Ya, L., Xiang, H., Xiafei, W., & Yaunmei W. (2004). An analysis of
environmental awareness and environmental education for primary school and high school
students in Kunming. Chinese Education and Society, 37(4), 24–31.
Liveearth, (2009). One world. One climate. Be the change. Last accessed on April 16, 2009 liveearth.org
McCrea, E. J. (2006). The roots of environmental education: How the past supports the future.
Environmental Education and Training Partnership (EETAP). Retrieved April 16, 2009 from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1b/c6/41.p
df
Maloof, J., (2006). Experience this! The experiential approach to teaching environmental issues. Applied
Environmental Education and Communication, 5:193–197
Morgil, I., Arda, S., Secken, N., Yavuz, S., & Oskay, O. O. (2004). The influence of computer assisted
instruction on environmental knowledge and environmental awareness. Chemistry Education:
Research and Practice, 5(2), 99-110.
Negev, M., Sagy, G., Garb., Salzberg, A., & Tal. A. (2008). Evaluating the environmental literacy of Israeli
elementary and high school students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(2), 3-20.
Nicolaou, C., Korfiatis, K., Evagorou, M., & Constantinou, C. (2009). The development of decisionmaking skills and environmental concerns through computer-based, scaffolded learning activities.
Environmental Education Research, 15(1), 39-54.
Pacheco, P., Motloch, J., & Vann, J. (2006). Second chance game: local (university-community)
partnerships for global awareness and responsibility. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14, 848-854.
Palmer, J. A. & Suggate, J. (2004). The development of children’s understanding of distant places and
environmental issues: report of a UK longitudinal study of the development of ideas between the
ages of 4 and 10 years. Research Papers in Education, 19(2), 205-237.
Pinkard, N. (2007). Girl power, encouraging sixth grade girls to give video games a try. Retrieved April 2,
2009
from
http://spotlight.macfound.org/main/entry/pinkard_girl_power_encouraging_girls_games/
Priest, S. & Gass, M. (2005). Effective leadership in adventure programming, 2 nd ed . Human Kinetics:
Champaign, IL.
Said, A., M., Yahaya, N., & Ahmadun, F. (2007). Environmental comprehension and participation of
Malaysian secondary school students. Environmental Education Research, 13(1), 17–31.
Sherburn, M. & Devlin, A. S. (2004). Academic major, environmental concern and arboretum use. The
Journal of Environmental Education, 35(2), 23-48.
Shobeiri, S. M., Omidvar, B., & Prahallada, N. N. (2007). A comparative study of environmental
awareness among secondary school students in Iran and India. International Journal of
Environmental Reservation, 1(1), 28-34.
TEMA (2009). Turkiye Erozyonla Mucadele Agaclandırma ve Dogal Varlıkları Koruma Vakfı. Retrieved
April 10, 2009, from http://tema.org.tr/
Thomas, G (2005). Traditional adventure activities in outdoor environmental education. Australian Journal
of Outdoor Education, 9(1), 31-39
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
36
Tuohino, A. (2003). Environmental awareness and environmentally friendly behavior–case Sulkava
Rowing Event. Environment Papers Series,6(2), 1-11.
UNESCO (1976). The Belgrade Charter. New York: United Nations.
UNEP
(2009). World Environment Day
http://www.unep.org/wed/2009/english/
2009.
United
Nations
Environment
Program.
Uzunboylu, H., Cavus N., & Ercag E. (2009). Using mobile learning to increase environmental awareness.
Computers & Education, 52, 381–389.
World Watch Institute (2009). Accessed http://www.worldwatch.org
Zimmer, M. R., Stanfford, J. F., & Stanfford, R., M. (1994) Green issues: Dimensions of environmental
concern. Journal of Business Research, 30, 63–74.
Vol. 2
No. 1
ISSN 1309 7202
Baytak
37
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
ATTI TUDE TOWARDS PHYSI CS LESSONS AND PHYSI CAL EXPERI M ENTS OF
THE HI GH SCHOOL STUDENTS
Hasan Kaya and 8÷XU%|\N
Department of Science Education, Education Faculty, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
In order that students can develop researching, questioning, critical thinking, problem solving and
decision making skills, so that they become lifelong learning individuals, they should be improved
regarding their knowledge, understanding and attitude towards natural sciences. Attitudes towards
physics lessons and physical experiments of high school students have been examined for this purpose.
The research has been designed as a scanning study, population of which consists of high school students
(9th, 10th and 11th grades) from the schools in the Kayseri province centre. Sample of the study is the 295
students selected among the population by random sampling. A questionnaire including 12 items
UHJDUGLQJ VWXGHQWV¶ DWWLWXGe towards physics lessons and 8 items regarding physical experiments were
used in the study. Acquired data have been analyzed by using SPSS 16.0 software. Appropriate statistical
methods were used for examination of data distribution. Reliability factor of the test is found to be as
&URQEDFK¶V $Opha=0.73. It was found that VWXGHQWV¶ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUGV SK\VLFV lessons and physical
experiments were 63.07, which is some higher than the indecisive level, 60 in this research. Same of the
students are indecision about physics lessons and physical experiments, and also, there are as many
students of negative opinion as those with a positive opinion. Furthermore, it was examined whether
general attitude towards physics lessons and physical experiments of the students varied with respect to
gender, grade and age variables, and no significant variation with respect to gender was found. It was
determined WKDWVWXGHQWV¶grade and age differences effect on students' attitudes.
Keywords: High School, Physics Education, Physical Experiments, Attitude
38
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
I ntroduction
As a science, Physics plays an important role in explaining the events that occur in the
universe. In all events that around us can be found physical laws and principles. The
developments in physics in the 20th century, it has been extremely successful in that it also
greatly benefited to the other basic and applied sciences from these developments (Fishbein
1975). Although physics is in every area in our life and facilitate our lives, national and
international studies show that success in physics education is lower than other disciplines (Gok
and Silay 2008; Dieck 1997; Rivard and Straw 2000, Mattern and Schau, 2002).
In physics education, various methods and techniques can be used according to the
content. Laboratory methods, which are the mostly used method that provides permanent
learning, is an educational method encouraging mental activities and allowing students to work
individually or in groups (Staeck 1995). Laboratory methods ensure that students learn ways to
use the knowledge with this method rather than memorising it. Students improve their skills to
better understand of concepts, and adapt them to daily life as well as their personal skills, and it
provides a positive attitude towards physics lessons (Algan 1999, Staeck 1995).
Physics education is in a continual evolving together with the changing world conditions.
Therefore, creation of new learning media in the continuously improving educational programs
and determining of the students towards physics lessons and physical experiments in a selection
of learning materials and methods are essential for effective learning of the lectures. Attitudes are
related to coping with and management of the emotions occurring during learning process, and
they play an important role in directing human behaviour. Whether attitudes occurring as part of
a system of values and beliefs are positive or negative affects learning process in a direct manner
and influences future lives of individuals (Seferoglu, 2004; Sunbul et al., 2004).
According to Hendrickson, attitudes are WKH EHVW SUHGLFWRU IRU HVWLPDWLRQ RI VWXGHQWV¶
success (Hendrickson, 1997). Activities must be planned, organized and implemented so that
students may develop more positive attitudes (Pintrich, 1996). Many attitude scales have been
developed for the GHWHUPLQDWLRQRIVWXGHQWV¶DWWLWXGHVtowards Natural Sciences. Regarding these
scales, Hewitt (1990), Oliver and Simpson (1988), House and Prison (1998), Geban et all.
(1994), Kind et al. (2007) Pell and Jarvis (2001), Reid and Skrybina (2002), Selvi (1996), Bilgin
et al. (2006), Nuho÷OX%R]GR÷DQDQG<DOoÕQhave developed attitude scales
toward physics lessons, physics laboratories, and science lessons Budak (2001) has developed an
attitude scale toward chemistry laboratory; Ekici (2002) has developed an attitude scale toward
biology laboratory; and ùLPúHN.DQand $NEDúhave developed an attitude scale
toward chemistry lessons. Researchers mostly examined attitudes of primary and high school
students or candidate teachers, or investigated to the relationship between VWXGHQWV¶DWWLWXGHDQG
their success.
The objective of this study is to investigate the attitude of high school students towards
physics lessons and physical experiments. It has been observed that studies that focus on all
grades of high school (9th, 10th and 11th) at once, especially regarding physics lessons and
physical experiments, are limited in our country. However, any research about relating to attitude
toward physics lessons and physical experiments of students in the province centre of Kayseri
have not been available.
39
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
Limitations of the Study
1. This study is limited to 295 students randomly selected from 9th, 10th and 11th grades of 7 high
schools in Kayseri in academic year 2009-2010.
2. Positive opinion scale of the students measured in this study is limited to responding of the
students to the questions.
Assumptions of the Study
1. Sample of the research represents the population.
2. Opinion scales of the students show their level of positive opinions regarding physics lessons
and physical experiments.
M ethod
In this study, we aimed to research students' attitudes towards physics lessons and
experiments, carried out together with scanning model in the Kayseri province centre in
academic year 2009-2010
Population and sample
Population of the study is the high school students in schools of the Ministry of National
Education in the Kayseri province centre in academic year 2009-2010. It is very difficult to
reach the entire population, sampling was made and the study was carried out on 295 students.
Data collection tool
Before deciding on the questionnaire to be used as a data collection tool, former studies
were examined. The questionnaire developed by Barmby et al. (2005) to question attitudes
towards physics lessons and physical experiments of the students was decided to be used. Data
collection tool was made end of this study was to pre-trial form, and than expert opinion was
taken to ensure the validity of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was applied to a group of
students to determining its clarity and understandability, and necessary revisions were made.
Pilot study of the questionnaire was made on 25 students. Reliability of the questionnaire was
checked at this stage. Reliability factor of the applied scale regarding the sampling area came out
to be as &URQEDFK¶V$Opha =0.73.
The questionnaire consists of two sections. First section is composed of multiple choice
questions checking the demographical features of the students, gender, grade and age. Second
section of the questionnaire is consisting 20 items in total, 12 items are about WKH VWXGHQWV¶
attitude towards physics lessons and 8 items DERXW WKH VWXGHQWV¶ DWWLWXGH WRZDUGV SK\VLFDO
experiments. The students participating in the survey were asked to mark their level of agreement
for the given statement which have five degrees. Before making statistical analyzes, it was
checked whether questionnaires were fully answered by the students and it was observed that
some questionnaires had been missed and filled randomly. After eliminating 23 such
questionnaires, it was found out that there were 295 valid questionnaires. Therefore, analyzes
were executed on the data of these 295 students.
Data analysis
Acquired data were analysed by using Statiscal Package for Social Sciences 16.0 (SPSS
16.0) program. In this analysis, primarily descriptive statistics (frequency, percentage, mean,
40
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
standard deviation) was calculated and the distribution characteristics have been revealed. For
each question in the survey, VWXGHQWV¶ OHYHO RI SDUWLFLpations as [(1) strongly disagree, (2)
disagree, (3) neither agree nor disagree, (4) agree, (5) strongly agree] for the positive comments, and
as [(1) strongly agree, (2) agree, (3) neither agree nor disagree, (4) disagree, (5) strongly
disagree] for the negative comments. Therefore, maximum students' attitude scores are 100 points,
minimum is 20 points. End of these ratings, level of meaningful differences has been tested as
p<0.05 using by t-test and analysis of variance, and Tukey test was applied as post-hoc test when
needed. t-test was used for point out whether there is a meaningful difference between averages
of two variable characteristics, and also, single factor variance analysis (ANOVA) was used for
point out whether there is a meaningful difference more than two variables.
Findings
Findings related to the characteristics of the students
Results of the some VWXGHQWV¶ SURILOHV of the high school students (9th, 10th and 11th
grades) in the Kayseri province centre are given in Table 1. Gender distribution of the surveyed
students came out as 125 girls (42.4%) and 170 boys (57.6%). According to their grades, students
were distributed as 192 students at 9th grade (65.1%), 77 students at 10th grade (26.1%) and 26
students at 11th grade (8.8%). According to VWXGHQWV¶ ages, students were distributed as 14 yearold 5 students (38.0%), 15 year-old 138 students (46.8%), 16 year-old 105 students (35.6%), 17
year-old 42 students (14.2%), 18 year-old 2 students (0.7%) and 19 year-old 3 students (1.0%).
Accordingly, most of the students answering the questionnaire were from 9 th and 10th grades and
of age 15-16.
Tablo 1. Distribution of participating students according to different variables
Gender
Age
Percentage
(f)
(% )
Boy
170
57.6
Girl
125
42.4
th
9
Grade
Frequency
192
65.1
10
th
77
26.1
11
th
26
8.8
14
5
1.7
15
138
46.8
16
105
35.6
17
42
14.2
18
2
0.7
19
3
1.0
41
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
Attitude towards physics lessons of students
Spring semester of the 2009-2010 academic years, studying students that 295 people and
randomly selected from seven different high schools of the Ministry of National Education in the
Kayseri province centre, frequency and percentage values of the answers from survey questions
of the attitudes towards physics courses are given in Table 2.
As can be seen from table 2, students who participated to the survey and replied to
questions of 1th, 2th, 3th, 9th, 10th and 12th positive attitudes items such as ³We learn interesting
things in Physics lessons´ 12.5%, ³I look forward to physics lessons´ 28.5%, ³Physics lessons
are exciting´ 23.0%, ³I get good marks from Physics lessons´ 30.8%, ³I easily learn Physics
topics´ 23.4%, and ³I understand everything lectured in Physics lessons´ 26.4% in low rates
reported opinions of ³6WURQJO\ $JUHH´ or ³$JUHH´. On the other hand, students replied to
questions of 6th, 8th and 11th negative attitude items such as ³3K\VLFV lessons DUH ERULQJ´
53.2%, ³, RQO\ IDLO LQ SK\VLFV lessons´ 67.2%, and ³, IHHO KHOSOHVV ZKHQ GRLQJ P\ 3K\VLFV
KRPHZRUN¶V´ 58.3% in somehow high rates reported opinion ³6WURQJO\$JUHH´or ³$JUHH´.
Regarding attitudes items such as 4th, 5th and 7thWKHVWXGHQWV¶opinions and percentages
of ³'HILQLWHO\$JUHH´and ³$JUHH´ were as follows: ³I would like to have more physics lessons
at school´ 42.0%, ³I like Physics lessons PRUHWKDQWKHRWKHUV´ 44.0%, and ³Physics lessons are
difficult´ 34.6%.
In addition, scores of attitude towards physics lessons giving up points from 1 to 5
according to the level of agreement were calculated for each question. As a result of this
questionnaire with 12 attitude items that could be maximum 60 points, the average of student
attitude scores was calculated as X =35.27. In addition, the attitude scores of students in the
lowest 12, highest was 48 points. When it is considered that in a scenario of entirely indecisive
population the average score should be 36, it can be concluded from these results that students
are in an almost negative attitude towards physics lessons, and they have a low rate of interest,
expectation and success in physics lessons. All of the students, even if indecisive, the average
score should be around 36, these results show that students have negative attitudes towards
physics lessons, and also interests in physics classes, is understood to be low expectations and
achievements.
42
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
SORULAR
f
%
f
%
f
%
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neither Agree Nor
Disagree
Learning physics at school.
Do you agree with these views?
Agree
Strongly Agree
Table 2. Attitude distribution of participating students towards physics lessons
f
%
f
%
1
We learn interesting things in physics
lessons
23
7.8
14
4.7
51
17.3
157
53.2
50
16.9
2
I look forward to physics lessons.
41
13.9
43
14.6
77
26.1
92
31.2
42
14.2
3
Physics lessons are exiting.
31
10.5
37
12.5
83
28.1
104
35.3
40
13.6
4
I would like to have more physics
lessons at school.
64
21.7
60
20.3
81
27.5
62
21.0
28
9.5
5
I like physics lessons more than the
others.
50
16.9
80
27.1
83
28.1
62
21.0
20
6.8
6
Physics lessons are boring.
88
29.8
69
23.4
75
25.4
25
8.5
38
12.9
7
Physics lessons are difficult.
38
12.9
64
21.7
60
20.3
99
33.6
34
11.5
8
I only fail in physics lessons.
94
31.9
104
35.3
58
19.7
33
11.2
6
2.0
9
I get good marks from physics lessons.
24
8.1
67
22.7
81
27.5
90
30.5
33
11.2
10
I easily learn physics topics.
27
9.2
42
14.2
93
31.5
91
30.8
42
14.2
11
I feel helpless when doing physics
KRPHZRUN¶V
80
27.1
92
31.2
65
22.0
44
14.9
14
4.7
12
I understand everything lectured in
physics lessons.
29
9.8
49
16.6
110
37.3
82
27.8
25
8.5
Attitude towards physical experiments of the students
In order to determine the SDUWLFLSDWLQJVWXGHQWV¶attitude towards physical experiments, 8
attitude items were asked to the students. Frequency and percentage values of the replies given
by the students for each attitude items are given in Table 3. As shown in Table 3, students who
participated in the survey replied to attitude items of answered affirmative questions such as
43
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
³3K\VLFDO H[SHULPHQWV DUH H[FLWLQJ´ 20.3%, ³, OLNH SK\VLFV H[SHULPHQWV EHFDXVH , GRQ¶W NQRZ
what will happen´ 19.3%, ³Physics experiments are useful, because I can work with my friends´
16.6%, ³I like physics experiments, because I can decide what to do myself´ 28.5%, ³I would
like to have more experiments in Physics lessons´ 12.6%, ³We learn physics lessons better when
we do physics experiments´ 8.4%, and ³I look forward to doing experiments in Physics lessons´
18.3% in low rates reported opinions of ³DeILQLWHO\ $JUHH´ or ³$JUHH´. On the other hand,
students replied to 8th attitude item reading as ³Physics experiments in the physics lessons are
boring´ was replied opinion of ³Strongly $JUHH´ or ³$JUHH´ in range of 75.6% by the
participating students.
An overall view of the answers of students¶ regarding attitude towards physical
experiments, as shown in Table 3, most of the students think that physics experiments are boring
and not exciting.
6WXGHQWV¶attitude scores towards physics experiments were calculated in the same way of
the attitude scores towards physics lessons. As a result of this questionnaire with 8 attitude items
that could be maximum of 40 points, the average attitude scores towards physics experiments of
student was calculated as X =27.80. In addition, the attitude scores towards physics experiments
of students in the lowest 8, highest was 42 points. When it is considered that in generally view to
entirely indecisive students the average score attitude scores towards physics experiments should
be 24, from the statistical results, it can be concluded that students have negative interest and
attitude towards physics experiments, is understood to be low rate of interest, expectation and
success in physics experiments.
Questions
f
%
f
%
f
%
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly Agree
About experiments in physics lessons.
Do you agree with these views?
Neither Agree Nor
Disagree
Table 3. Attitude distribution of participating students towards physical experiments
f
%
f
%
1
Physics experiments are exiting.
29
9.8
31
10.5
46
15.6
103
34.9
86
29.2
2
I like SK\VLFVH[SHULPHQWVEHFDXVH,GRQ¶WNQRZ
what will happen.
25
8.5
32
10.8
40
13.6
111
37.6
87
29.5
3
Physics experiments are useful, because I can
work with my friends.
19
6.4
30
10.2
53
18.0
117
39.7
76
25.8
4
I like physics experiments, because I can decide
what to do myself.
38
12.9
46
15.6
83
28.1
89
30.2
39
13.2
5
I would like to have more experiments in the
physics lessons.
15
5.1
22
7.5
34
11.5
87
29.5
137
46.4
6
We learn physics lessons better when we do
physics experiments.
14
4.7
11
3.7
46
15.6
87
29.5
137
46.4
7
I look forward to doing experiments in physics
lessons.
35
11.9
19
6.4
59
20.0
96
32.5
86
29.2
8
Physics experiments in the physics lessons are
boring.
147
49.8
76
25.8
41
13.9
16
5.4
15
5.1 44
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
Assessment of sWXGHQWV¶attitude towards physics lessons and physical experiments according to
Different Variables
It was statistically analyzeGZKHWKHUVWXGHQWV¶WRWDOVFRUHLQWKHLUDWWLWXGHWRZDUGVSK\VLFV
lessons and physical experiments varied according to the variables of gender, grade or age
variables. In this analysis, independent t-test was used for the group with two variables (the
relationship between attitude score and gender) and one-way variance analysis to determine
differences among groups with more than two variables (the relationship between attitude score
and grade and age).
Independent t-test was applied to the gender variable which has a binary group to show its
LQIOXHQFHRQWKHVWXGHQWV¶DWWLWXGH scores towards in the physics lessons and physics experiments.
The results are given in Table 4.
Table 4. 6WXGHQWV¶DYHUDJHDWWLWXGHVFRUHVDFFRUGLQJWRJHQGHUDQGt-test results
Gender
N
X
sd
Girl
125
62,74
10,15
Boy
170
63,32
8,61
df
t
p
293
0.52
0.60
It can be seen from Table 4, the average attitude scores towards physics lessons and
physics experiments of students is below the desired level. Besides, although the attitude scores
of male students were found slightly higher than average value, average attitude scores of the
male and female students were close to each other. However, the difference is statistically
insignificant (p=0.60). In other words, there are no differences between the scores of students
according to gender.
One-way variance analysis (ANOVA) was used to determine the influence of grade and
age variables having more than two groups on the attitude scores, and results were given in Table
5.
Table 5. 6WXGHQWV¶DWWLWXGHscores according to grade and age variables and ANOVA results
Variance Source
Grade
Age
Sum of
Squares
df
M ean Squares
Between group
1114,122
2
557,061
Within groups
24196,237
292
82,864
Between group
3505,528
5
701,106
Within groups
21804,832
289
75,449
F
p
6,723
0,00
9,292
0,00
From variation analysis results, it can be say that grade-level differences of students' have
been affected to scores of attitudes toward physics lessons and physics experiments (p=0.00).
From the statistical analysis, it was found out that students from 10th grade had a more positive
attitude in comparison with the other grades in this research.
45
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
When it was examined whether the age difference affected the students¶ attitude towards
physics lessons and physical experiments, the meaningful differences in favour of 16 (p=0.00)
was found between students of age 16 and 17. Meaningful difference between the attitudes scores
among other grades have not found in this research.
Discussion, Results and Suggestions
According to Mbajiorgu and Reid (2006) and Reid (2006), attitudes have four issues that are important in
physics. These are attitudes towards physics, attitudes towards physics subjects, attitude toward learning physics,
and scientific (the methods) attitude. Attitude scale in this study is agreed with to attitudes towards physics,
attitudes towards physics subjects, attitude toward learning physics.
0DQ\ DWWLWXGHV VFDOHV KDYH EHHQ GHYHORSHG IRU GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI VWXGHQWV¶ DWWLWXGHV
towards Natural Sciences. Same of these have been developed by El-Gendy, (1984), Misiti et al.
(1991), Geban et al. (1994), Selvi (1996), Boone (1997), Morrell and Lederman (1998), Francis
ve Greer (1999), Pell and Jarvis (2001), Kan (2005), Bilgin et al. (2006), Budak (2001), Reid
and Skryabina (2002), <HúLO\XUW 1XKR÷OX DQG <DOoÕQ ùHQJ|UHQ HW DO hQDO DQG (UJLQ Kind, et al. (2007), 1XKR÷OX 2008), $]L]R÷OX DQG dHWLQ and
.XUQD]DQG<L÷LWfor attitudes towards science lessons and science laboratories.
The Cronbach-Alpha reliability coefficient is changes between in rang of 0.65-0.98. For
example, the Cronbach-Alpha reliability coefficient (0.73) calculated in this work is some higher
than the reliability coefficient values 0.63 and 0.67 REWDLQHG E\ hQDO DQG (UJLQ DQG
$]L]R÷OXDQGdHWLQ in respectively. But, the value of reliability coefficient (0.73) in this
work some smaller than the values 0.79 and 0.83 obtained by %R]GR÷DQDQG<DOoÕQ2005) and
El-Gendy (1984) in respectively. It can be said that attitude scaled are similar in terms of
reliability.
In this study, it was examined whether the attitudes of the students varied according to
gender, grade and age. As a result of the analysis, the average attitude scores of student was
calculated as = 63.07 with a minimum of 20 points and maximum of 81 points. Considering that
the attitude towards physics lessons and physical experiments came out as slightly higher than 60
points indicating indecisive neutral attitudes (63.07), it was found WKDWVWXGHQWV¶DWWLWXGHWRZDUGV
physics lessons and physics experiments are below the desired level.
The average attitude score of the students regarding physics lessons was calculated as
35.27, which is below the indecision level of SRLQWV$FFRUGLQJO\VWXGHQWV¶DWWLWXGHWRZDUGV
physics lessons is mostly indecisive and somewhat negative. 6WXGHQWV¶ DYHUDJH attitude scores
towards physics experiments were calculated as X =27.80 with a minimum of 8 points and
maximum of 42 points. It was seen from the results, students have negative attitude towards
physics experiments, and interest inphysics experiments, in low rate from the expected level.
Furthermore, iW ZDV VWDWLVWLFDOO\ DQDO\]HG ZKHWKHU VWXGHQWV¶ WRWDO VFRUH LQ WKHLU DWWLWXGH
towards physics lessons and physical experiments varied according to gender, grade or age
variables. In this analysis, independent t-test was used for the group with two variables (the
relationship between attitude score and gender) and one-way variance analysis to determine
differences among groups with more than two variables (the relationship between attitude score
and grade and age). Meaningful differences have not observed between attitudes of boys and
girls by using t-taste. But, it was seen from ANOVA analysis, grade-level differences of students'
is affect on the attitudes scores toward physics lessons and physics experiments.
46
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
6LPLODUUHVXOWVREWDLQHGE\<HúLO\XUW and ùHQJ|UHQHWDO<HúLO\XUW
ZDV IRXQG QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV¶ JURXSV RI DWWLWXGHV WRZDUGV
physics laboratory. And also, meaningful difference was not observed between of boys and girls
RIKLJKVFKRROVWXGHQWV¶for the attitudes towards optic course obtained by ùHQJ|UHQHWDO
7KHVH UHVXOWV DUH LQ JRRG DJUHHPHQW ZLWK WKH VWXGHQWV¶ RSLQLRQV REWDLQHG LQ WKLV VWXG\. The
following suggestions can be posed with the hRSH WKDW VWXGHQWV¶ LQWHUHVW DQG DWWLWXGH WRZDUGV
physics lessons and physics laboratory in their education life may be constituted.
Physics lessons being held in the classroom on the sole theoretical basis is one of the
factors that influence attitude of the students toward these lessons in a negative manner. Thus,
physical topics consist abstract concepts should be lectured in WKHVWXGHQWV¶GDLO\OLIH, together
with simulations, animations and other videos to keep the attention of the students alive.
Learning by discovery is better than passive listening, so it should be shown how to associate
physical concepts with their daily life of the students. Instead of increasing physics laboratory
OHVVRQV¶ KRXUV KDQGs-on-science experiments which may be executed with effective, attract
attention with simple materials should be developed. Studio physics which is a method of
teaching that provides an integrated learning environment with hands-on lab measurements
coupled with active student problem-solving should be apply in the physics lessons. In order to
make physics lessons more interesting, physics instructors should convince students that physics
serves them. Physics instructors should spend more efforts to associate physics±technology±
daily life. Physics instructors should like their profession and reflect this to others. Such manners
of instructors will improve the attitude of students towards physics lessons and physical
experiments. However, it should be research whether WHDFKHUV¶ WUDLQLQJ, teaching methods,
VWXGHQWV¶ IDPLOLHV DQG HQYLURQPHQWDO IDFWRUV on LQIOXHQFH VWXGHQWV¶ DWWLWXGH WRZDUGV SK\VLFV
lessons.
References
$OJDQù(1999). The Effect of physics lessons supported by lab experiments to student's
success and modern mathematics and science programmes conducted in Turkey between
1962-1985. Master Thesis, Gazi University Institute of Science, Ankara.
$]L]R÷OX1dHWLQ*6L[$QG6HYHQWK*UDGH6WXGHQWV¶/HDUQLQJ6W\OHVAttitudes
Towards Science And Motivations, Kastamonu Education Journal, 17, 171-182.
Barmby, P., Kind. P. M., Jones, K., Bush, N., (2005). Evaluation of Lab in a Lorry, Final
Report Durham University, CEM Centre of School and Education.
%LOJLQøg]DUVODQ0%DKDU0Comparison of the Attitude to Science Lesson
and Success on the Nature of Matter of the Primary 8th grade Field Dependent and
Independent Students' Cognitive Students. VII. National Science and Mathematics
Education Congress, Ankara-Turkey.
Boone, W. J. (1997). Science attitudes of selected middle school students in China: A
preliminary investigation of similarities and differences as a function of gender. School
science and mathematics, 97 (2): 96-103.
BozGR÷DQ$(& <DOoÕQ1(2005). Attitudes of the basic education school students grade 6,
47
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
7 and 8 towards subjects of the physics in the science courses. Gazi University Journal of
.ÕUúHKLU(GXFDWLRQ)DFXOW\, 6(1), 241-247.
Budak, E. (2001). The Effects of constructivist instructional method on students conceptual
change, achievement, attitude and perceptions in the analytical chemistry laboratory,
Master Thesis, Gazi University Institute of Education Sciences, Ankara-Turkey.
Dieck, A. P. (1997). $QHIIHFWRIDQHZVOHWWHURQFKLOGUHQ¶V interest in an attitude toward
science. 8QSXEOLVKHGPDVWHU¶VWKHVLV, Arizona State University.
Ekici, G., (2002). The attitude scale of biology teachers laboratory lesson (ASBTTLL).
Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 22, 62-66.
El-Gendy, O. E. (1984). A Study of the Student Understanding of the Basic Chemistry
Concepts in Egyptian Secondary School. Ph. D. University of Cardiff, UK.
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to
theory and research. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley
Francis, L. J. & Greer, J. E. (1999). Attitude toward science among secondary school pupils in
Northern Ireland: Reltionship with sex, age and religion. Research in Science &
Technological Education, 17 (1): 67-74.
*HEDQ2(UWHSÕQDU+<ÕOPD]*$WODQ$ùDKED]2Effect of students'
science achievement and science interests of computer assisted instruction. I. National
Science Education Symposium, University of Dokuz EyOO,]PLU
*|N76ÕOD\,7KHHIIHFWVRISUREOHP-solving strategies teaching on problem
solving attitude, in the cooperative learning groups in physics education. Journal of
Theory and Practice in Education, 4 (2), 253-266
Hendrickson, A. B. (1997). Predicting student success with the learning and study strategies
14. inventory (LASSI). 8QSXEOLVKHG0DVWHU¶V7KHVLV, Iowa State University,
Hewitt, P.G. (1990). Conceptually speaking. The Science Teacher, 55-57.
House, J.D. & Prison S.K. (1998). Student attitudes and academic background as predictors of
achievement in college. English. Journal of Instructional Media, 25 (1): 29-43.
.DQ$$NEDú$ A study of developing an attitude scale towards chemistry.
Mersin University Journal of Education, 1(2, 227-237.
Kind, P., James, K. & Barmby, P. (2007). Developing attitudes towards science measures.
Internatial Journal of Science Education, 29 (7): 871-893.
.XUQD]0$DQG1HY]DW<øöø713K\VLFV$WWLWXde Scale: Development, Validity
and Reliability, Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and
Mathematics Education 4, pp. 29-49.
Mattern, N. & Schau, C. (2002). Gender difference in attitude-achievement relationships over
time among white middle-school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39,
(4), 324-340.
Mbajiorgu, N. & Reid, N. (2006). Factors influencing curriculum development in higher
education physics: A Physical sciences practice guide. Hull: Higher Education Academy,
Physical Sciences Centre Press.
Misiti, F. L., Jr., Shrigley, R. L. & Hanson, L. (1991). Science attitude scale for middle school
students. Science education. 75, 525-540.
Morrell, P. D. & Lederman N. G. (1998). Students' attitudes toward school and classroom
science: Are they independent Phemonema, School Science and Mathematics, 98, (2): 7683.
1XKR÷OX+<DOoÕQ1The development of attitude scale for physics laboratory
48
Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Kaya & Boyuk
DQG WKH DVVHVVPHQW RI SUHVHUYHV WHDFKHUV¶ DWWLWXGHV WRZDUGV SK\VLFV ODERUDWRU\ Gazi
8QLYHUVLW\-RXUQDORI.ÕUúHKLU(GXFDWLRQ)DFXOW\5, 2: 317-327.
1XKR÷OX+2008). The development of an attitude scale for science and technology course.
Elementary Education Online, 7(3), 627-639.
Oliver, J.S. & Simpson, R.D. (1988). Influences of attitude toward science, achievement
motivation, and science self concept on achievement in science: A longitudinal study.
Science Education, 72 (2), 143-155.
Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, Research, and 15.
Application. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Pell, T. & Jarvis, T. (2001). Developing Attitude to Science Scales for Use with Children of
Ages From 5 to 11. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (8): 847-862.
Reid, N. (2006). Thoughts on Attitude Measurement. Research in Science & Technological
Education. 24(1), 3±27.
Reid, N. & Skryabina, E. A. (2002). Attitudes toward physics, Research in Science and
Technology Education, 20 (1), 67-81.
Rivard L. P. & Straw, S. P. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An
exploratory study. Science Education, 84, 566-593.
6HIHUR÷OX66Attitudes to WHDFKHUV¶ of the teacher candidates. XII. National
Congress of Education Sciences, Ankara-Turkey: 413-425.
Selvi, K. (1996). Measurement of attitudes, and program evaluation, Anadolu University
Journal of Education, 6 (2), 39-53.
Staeck, L.,(1995). Perspectives for biological education-challenge for biology instruction at
the end of the 20th century. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, (11), 29±35
6QEO0$I\RQ$<D÷Õ]' & Aslan, O., (2004). The predicting the academic success,
effect of learning strategy, style and attitudes of students in the predicting the academic
success in the science lessons in primary 2 stage. XII. National Congress of Education
Sciences, Ankara-Turkey, 1573-1588.
ùHQJ|UHQ6.Tanel R. & Kavcar, N., (2006), The development of an attitude scale for optic
course, Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 20, 63-68
ùLPúHN13UHSDUDWLRQRIDQDWWLWXGHFULWHULRQIRUFKemical education and the making
of various assessments in this regard. Master Thesis, Hacettepe University Institute of
Science, Ankara-Turkey.
hQDO*& (UJLQg%XOXú<ROX\OD)HQg÷UHWLPLQLQg÷UHQFLOHULQ
Akademik %DúDUÕODUÕQD g÷UHQPH <DNODúÕPODUÕQD YH 7XWXPODUÕQD (WNLVL Journal of
TurkiVK6FÕHQFH(ducation, 3, 36-52.
<HúLO\XUW0 (2004) Student tHDFKHUV¶attitudes about basic pK\VÕFVlaboratory, the Turkish
Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(4), 49-57.
49
European Journal of Physics Education Vol. 2 No. 1 ISSN 1309 7202
Gok
Perceptions of the Students toward Studio Physics
Tolga Gok
University of Dokuz Eylul, Torbali Technical School of Higher Education
Izmir, TURKEY
Colorado School of Mines, Physics Department, 80401, CO, USA.
Phone: 0 232 853 18 20
Fax: 0 232 853 16 06
Abstract
The purpose of this study was not only to report the development process of the studio model,
EXWDOVRWRGHWHUPLQHWKHVWXGHQWV¶SHUFHSWLRQVDERXWWKH studio model. This model retains the large
lecture component but combines recitation and laboratory instruction into studio model. This research
was based on qualitative analysis. The data of the study was collected with survey and interview done
about studio model during two semesters in Colorado School of Mines, U.S. The results of the study
showed that the students found the interactive-engagement method of learning physics to be a positive
experience. They liked the integration of homework and laboratory activities, working in groups, and
having the opportunity to interact, individually, with lecturers. In short, the teaching-learning method
presented here, studio model KDGPDGHDSRVLWLYHLPSDFWRQVWXGHQWV¶SHUFHSWLRQVDERXWWKHSK\VLFV
course.
Keywords: Active Learning Environment; Higher Education; Physics Education; Studio Model;
Studio Physics
49
Gok
I ntroduction
In recent years, researchers have realized and documented higher education students¶
poor understanding of various topics through traditional lectures. It was reported that
traditionally tDXJKW FRXUVHV ZHUH QRW DEOH WR LPSURYH VWXGHQWV¶ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH
fundamental concepts even if students could solve topic-related problems (Hake, 1998). It is
known that students learn more physics in lectures where they interact with faculty,
collaborate with peers on interesting tasks, and are actively involved with the material they
are learning (Mazur, 1997). Research on learning and curriculum development has resulted in
instructional materials and teaching methods that can correct many of the drawbacks of
traditional physics instruction (McDermott, 1991; Redish & Steinberg, 1999; Van Heuvelen,
1991). Careful studies of these research-based introductory curricula in small classes point out
WKDWWKH\FDQVLJQLILFDQWO\LPSURYHVWXGHQWV¶FRQFHSWXDOXQGerstanding (Hake, 1998; Redish et
al., 1997; Laws, 1991; Heller et al., 1992). However, the introductory physics lecturers with
large classes who want to incorporate active learning into their classrooms must typically
choose between a) hands-on activities (Beichner et al., 1999) in small recitation or laboratory
sections that supplement the lecture (McDermott et al., 1998) and b) interactive lecture
activities for larger classes such as Peer Instruction (Mazur, 1997) and interactive lecture
demonstrations (Sokoloff & Thorton, 1997) that do not allow hands-on experiments and limit
faculty interactions with individual groups.
7KHUHIRUH5HQVVHODHU3RO\WHFKQLF,QVWLWXWH³53,´KDVLQWURGXFHGDQHZPRGHOIRUWKH
large enrollment undergraduate courses that has been become known as the studio model
(Wilson, 1994; Young, 1996). After RPI had developed the studio model, other universities
and institutions developed the different studio models. For examples, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology (Technology Enabled ActLYH /HDUQLQJ ³7($/´ see Fig. 1), North Carolina
State University (Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs
³6&$/(-83´ see Fig. 2), Dickinson College (Workshop Physics see Fig. 3), etc.
50
Gok
Fig. 1: The studio physics at MIT for the TEAL classroom and student groups working in the
classroom (http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/teal_tour.htm Accessed 23.12.2010)
Fig. 2: The studio physics at NCSU for the SCALE-UP classroom and student groups working
in the classroom (http://serc.carleton.edu/sp/pkal/scaleup/index.html Accessed 23.12.2010)
Fig. 3: The studio physics at DC for the Workshop Physics classroom and student groups working in
the classroom (http://physics.dickinson.edu/~wp_web/wp_overview.html Accessed 23.12. 2010)
The studio model is based on a learning environment which was designed to facilitate
VWXGHQWV¶DELOLW\WRLQWHUDFWZLWKRQHDQRWKHUZLWKWKHOHFWXUHUDQGZLWKWKHFRXUVHPDWHULDO
during their time in lecture (Wilson, 1994). The studio model was the first created, and it has
since been adapted to various courses in chemistry, biology, engineering, and economics, etc.
These studio courses have been introduced to replace some of the large introductory lecturebased courses in science and engineering with a format including daily lectures, in-class
activities, homework assignments, hands-on activities which are more integrated and
incorporate technology. These studio courses present better interactive learning environments
for students and a better teaching environment for faculty (Wilson & Jennings, 2000).
A dynamic teaching environment which integrates the traditional instruction activities
(lecture, recitation, and laboratory) is created by student workstations, tabletop experiments,
computer software, and traditionDO WH[WERRNV LQ WKLV V\VWHP RI OHDUQLQJ 6WXGHQWV¶
communication skills are improved with the design and analysis done in workstation
computers and they learn to be a part of a team. Students can discuss their results with their
51
Gok
neighbors. The student-centered activities also offer a friendly lecture to students and even to
those lecturers who tend toward the traditional style of classroom. The lecturer acts more as a
guide and/or advisor and can move freely from lecture into hands-on activity in a facility with
a configuration of a theater-in-the-round classroom. The studio classroom provides an
excellent opportunity to introduce large-scale undergraduate level courses to students in an
interactive learning environment with its technology and team-based learning (Wilson, 1994).
Many lecturers have successfully used cooperative learning in their classrooms; studio
teaching is a logical extension of that approach. Studio classrooms have many different
manifestations but all share common elements. They involve longer, fewer, class sessions
with focused, intense, student activity. Any disconnect between laboratory and lecture time is
absent because lab and lecture are combined. In fact, lectures are de-emphasized or
eliminated. Students work on in-depth projects instead, generally in groups, sometimes
moving from one workstation to another. Tables are arranged so students face each other
instead of the front of the classroom. The interactive classrooms promote holistic skills,
including thinking, inquiry, creativity and reflection by students, often involving peer review
and critiquing. Table 1 compares some characteristics of a course taught as a studio class with
those of a more traditionally taught physics class (Perkins, 2005).
An important feature of studio class is that students have more control and
responsibility for outcomes than in traditional class. Lecturers and Teaching Assistants (TAs)
are mentors, acting as learning guides, providing the learning environment and materials
needed for students to create their own learning. Lecturers help students to start on projects
and are on hand as resources for students to use (Perkins, 2005).
Table 1: Comparison a studio class with a traditional class
Features
Traditional Class
Studio Class
Meeting Times
Two or three 50 or 90-minute Two times per week in 50 min for
lectures and one lab per week
lecture; two times per week in 90 min
for studio
Lab Exercises
Completely
separate
from Not separated from studio; generally
lecture; generally individual group activities
activities
Group Activities Sometimes in lab sessions
The focus of the studio
Lecturer¶V5ROH
Authority, lecturer
Learning guide, class coordinator, a
resource for students when needed
Lecturer¶V7LPH About 3 contact hours per week; About 6 contact hours per week; both
generally only in lecture sections studio and lecture activities
7$V¶5ROH
Assist lecturers
Aid lecturer, acts as student resource,
7$V¶5ROH
About 3 contact hours per week; About 9 contact hours per week; both
52
6WXGHQWV¶5ROH
Syllabus
Materials
Grading
generally only lab activities
Passive learner, learn what it
required, mostly work as
individual
Cover many topics but not all in
great depth
Only textbook and sometimes
worksheets
Based on class averages
Gok
studio and lecture activities
Active learner, group participant,
control
their
own
learning
environment, learn by doing
Cover a smaller number of topics in
great depth
Most on-line materials offsite
thorough web access, supplemental
study guides, problems, exams, etc.
Based on individuals and teams
In the studio concept, computers and developed software are used to reinforce the
interactive learning with tutorials and simulations for the lecture courses. Also, computers are
integrated into the experiments for data gaining and analysis in laboratories. Individualized
assignments for both lecture and hands-on activities can be created by computer programs.
For this study, the features of the studio model constructed at Colorado School of
Mines (CSM) were given as follows. CSM is a public university located in Golden, Colorado,
serving about 4000 undergraduates. The school offers science and engineering majors almost
exclusively, and all students take the same core of math and science courses. This core
includes Physics I and Physics II, the first and second semesters of introductory calculusbased physics (Kohl et al., 2008). In the mid 1990s, CSM constructed a cross departmental
Center for Technology and Learning Media (CTLM) building, and the department
successfully lobbied for the creation of a studio room in that building. Sections of Physics I
were immediately converted to Hybrid Studio Format (HSF) including two one-hour lectures
per week, and two two-hour blocks of studio time. Retaining a lecture component in the
course, rather than switching to a total studio mode, reduces load on the studio facilities and
has also aided acceptance from more traditional elements of the institution (Furtak & Ohno,
2001). This mode strongly connects lectures and studios. Course material can be separated
into two-day blocks, where new principles are introduced in the lecture in one day, and
students study applications the next day in the studio. Studio Physics I resulted in significant
student progress, with Force Concept Inventory (FCI) gains on the order of 50%, compared to
20-25% pre-studio. Also, student surveys, course evaluations, and exit interviews demonstrate
greater student satisfaction with the studio than with the traditional format (Kohl et al., 2008).
53
Gok
(http://scaleup.ncsu.edu/groups/adopters/wiki/bdddf/ Accessed 23.12. 2010)
Fig. 4: The physics studio at CSM for the SCALE-UP classroom and a student group working
in the physic II studio
CSM, each semester, about 300 students are divided into three class sections taught by
two lecturers. All students enrolled in a given course follow the same syllabus, do the
individually assigned homework, and take common exams as a single group, both at finals
and during the semester. A standard course design including daily lectures, in-class activities
and solutions, homework assignments and solutions, and reading assignments is provided by a
course supervisor for use by all lecturers.
The studio class contains ten tables for groups of up to three/four students; the chairs
have wheels to increase the mobility of the students around the table. Each table (workstation)
is equipped with four computers. The computers contain the LON-CAPA (Learning Online
Network with Computer-Assisted Personalized Approach) software and are connected to the
Internet. One printer in the room is shared by all groups. The room has daily lab demo
equipment storage. Also near each table, there is a small whiteboard for chalk-talks among
students or between students and lecturers. At the front center, there are two mobile lecture
tables, two overhead projectors, and two large whiteboards for the lecturer. The ceiling has a
grid of beams capable of supporting apparatus as showed in Fig. 4.
Each studio section of roughly 100 students is staffed by two faculty members, two
graduates, and one or two undergraduate teaching assistants. The purpose of this assistant
team is to communicate with students and help them. This cooperation leads to
communication both in the studio physics (a certain time of the week) and outside the class.
Faculty members or graduate teaching assistants then give a minilecture of 10-15 minutes that
serves to introduce the basic concepts and experimental approaches that the students use to
H[DPLQH WKDW GD\¶V PDWHULDO 'XULQJ WKH ODUJHVW SRUWLRQ RI HDFK FODVV SHULRG aWZR KRXUV
54
Gok
students work in pairs or groups of three/four, with lecturers moving around the room,
answering and asking questions. Thus, students are exposed to teamwork and active learning,
and the multiple learning modalities used provide formats friendly to students with various
learning styles. The last ten minutes or so of each class period are a wrap-up session in which
the lecturer reviews the important concepts and student share data and summarize their
findings.
As a summary, LWVKRXOGEHNQRZQWKDWVWXGLRSK\VLFVLVDPRGHOLVQ¶WDPHWKRG7he
foundation of the studio model LVWKHFRQYLFWLRQWKDWVWXGHQWVOHDUQPRUHE\³GLVFXVVLQJDQG
GRLQJ´ WKDQ E\ ³OLVWHQLQJ DQG ZDWFKLQJ´ 7KH HVVHQFH RI studio teaching lies in increased
interaction at all levels, from peer-to-peer discussions to one-on-one exchanges between
student
and
lecturer.
A
typical
studio
science
course
replaces
the
traditional
lecture/recitation/lab, normally requiring 5-6 hours per week, with 4 hours of studio. Instead
of sitting passively in large, impersonal lecture halls, students work in teams of 3 or 4 in
small, 25-45 seat computer classrooms. In a given class, a brief conceptual introduction to the
day¶V DFWLYLWLHV LV IROORZHG E\ H[HUFLVHV ZKLFK HQJDJH VWXGHQWV LQ JXLGHG DFWLYLWLHV 7KH
lecturer circulates through the classroom, asking and answering questions as students work on
simulations, multimedia modules, web-based exercises, problem solving, and data analyses
(Lister, 2005).
Previous studies on studio model tKH VWXGHQWV¶ FRQFHSWXDO OHDUQLQJ ZLWK )&, )RUFH
Concept Inventory) (Hoellwart et al., 2005), FMCE (Force and Motion Conceptual
Evaluation) (Cummings et al., 1999), and CSEM (Conceptual Survey of Electricity and
Magnetism) (Kohl & Kuo, 2009) were examined. This study presents detailed investigation
on studio model with students¶ opinions in Introductory Calculus-Based Physics II course.
The perceptions of the students about studio models have not been explained in the open
literature as of 2010.
M ethod
The purpose of this study was not only to report the development process of the studio
model EXW DOVR WR GHWHUPLQH WKH VWXGHQWV¶ RSLQLRQV DERXW WKH VWXGLR model. This study was
based on qualitative analysis. The data of the research was collected with surveys and
interview. The sample of the study consisted of 220 participants (45% male and 55%female)
for both semesters )DOO³)´-6SULQJ³6´ The fundamental research question
of this study was given as follows. Do students find studio model as a positive learning
experience?
55
Gok
The Data Collection Tools
The data collection tools-written survey including six open-ended questions about
studio model, satisfaction survey consisting ten questions about studio model, and interview
about studio model in which students asked seven questions were used in the study for both
semesters.
Written Survey
The mainly goal of the study was to improve the format of the Introductory CalculusBased Physics II course by giving the students a better learning experience, finding out their
opinions. A written survey about studio model (Churukian, 2002) was given to the students
during their studio time at the end of each semester. The students were informed about why
the survey was given and they were under no obligation to complete it. Some students opted
to take the time to study for another class rather than complete the survey. However, generally
giving the students the opportunity to tell us what they would change, not only reinforced the
sense that we cared about what they think, it also gave us valuable suggestions of what we
FRXOG LPSURYH IURP WKH VWXGHQWV¶ EHOLHI 7KH RSHQ-ended questions included in the written
survey reflected what the students liked and disliked about studio model in general and about
working in teams in particular. The author also wanted to know what the students would
change about studio model. The responses of the students to six questions were grouped and
analyzed statistically.
Satisfaction Survey
Satisfaction survey (seven items of ten) (Churukian, 2002) probed how well the
student felt studio model met criteria such as coordination between lecture, homework, and
hands-on activity work. The remaining items examined the communication among the
students and between the students and lecturers. Five-level Likert item format (Table 2) was
RUGHUHG DV ³-Strongly Disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Neutral, 4-Agree, 5-6WURQJO\ $JUHH´ 7KH
survey was given in both semesters (F08-S09) and the responses were analyzed statistically
with SPSS software.
Interview
In the interview stage, students were asked to be interviewed voluntarily throughout
both semesters (F08-S09) about studio model. The purpose of the interviews was to learn
VWXGHQW¶VDSSroaches to the exam questions, if they use the strategy that they learned in the
course and comments to improve the studio model. By the end of the semesters, 125 students
were interviewed (554 interviews). Seven open-ended questions (Appendix) were asked three
times during the semester-after each exam except the final. The interviews were usually
56
Gok
conducted within a week after the exams were returned to the students. The interviews were
conducted in a semi-structured format. A predetermined set of questions was used as a guide
so certain topics would be included in all interviews. At their first interview, the students were
informed about the purpose of the interviews and how the interviews fit into the greater
scheme of the evaluation process of the change made to the Introductory Calculus-Based
Physics II course. They were also reminded that if, at any time they felt uncomfortable with
the process they were free to withdraw from the study with no penalty. Students had the
opportunity to lead the conversation. They sometimes answered questions before being asked.
7KHH[DPVJDYHDVWDUWLQJSRLQWRIFRQYHUVDWLRQDVZHOODVSURYLGLQJLQVLJKWLQWRWKHVWXGHQWV¶
thinking process. The responses of the students were classified and analyzed statistically with
the same procedure used in Likert scales (Table 3-4).
Data Analysis
The data of the study were analyzed by using SPSS statistical package. Data analysis
for this study was reported in three subsections.
The first subsection was the analysis of the open-ended questions. For open-ended
question, students were asked six open-ended questions about what they liked and disliked
about studio and working in groups as well as what they would change or keep the same about
the course. In analyzing the open-ended questions for each question, the researcher wrote
down the individual comments and either binned them into categories of similar ideas or left
them as individual comments if they were singular in thought. Then the researcher determined
which of the categories comments were made by at least ten percent of the students in that
course. The choice of ten percent was based on the return ratio normally expected from
mailed surveys. Several of the categories were common throughout the two courses.
The second subsection was the analysis of the satisfaction survey. Students were asked
ten questions in satisfaction survey. The answers of the statements were ranked from
³VWURQJO\GLVDJUHH´WR³VWURQJO\DJUHH´7KHVWDWHPHQWVwere related to VWXGHQWV¶perception of
the connections among components of the course, their satisfaction with physical aspects of
the course, and their perceptions of how the course related to their learning of physics. The
UDQNLQJVZHUHFRQYHUWHGLQWRQXPHULFDOIRUPZKHUHLV³VWURQJO\GLVDJUHH´DQG LV³VWURQJO\
DJUHH´DQGWDEXODWHGin Table 2.
The last subsection was the analysis of the interview about studio model. The purpose
of the interviews was to find out student perceptions of course content and structure as the
course progressed. The interviews were also to ascertain how students approached the exams
57
Gok
as the course progressed. To analyze the interviews, the researcher used a similar method to
that which the researcher had used with the open-ended questions on the written survey.
While reading WKURXJKUHVHDUFKHU¶QRWHVRIWKHLQWHUYLHZVWKHUHVHDUFKHUIRFXVHGRQZKDWZDV
said for six main topics: influences, likes, dislikes, distracters, changes, and collaborative
teams. For analysis purposes, the students were also divided into two categories: female and
male.
Results and Discussion
The results of the research were reported in three subsections as follows.
Open-Ended Questions: Six open-ended questions were asked to 220 students to learn
VWXGHQWV¶ RSLQLRQV DERXW OHDUQLQJ WKLV FRXUVH ZLWK VWudio model. For each question, the
researcher classified the responses to obtain the general opinion about this teaching/learning
method. The questions and most frequent responses are listed below.
1. What did you like about studio model?
x
Hands-on nature of studio model (93% of students)
x
Homework problems solved on LON-CAPA (The Learning Online Network
CAPA) (85% of students)
x
Integration and/or incorporation of the hands-on activities with going over the
homework (all students)
x
Collaborative working in small teams (90% of students)
x
Experiments on the concepts discussed in lecture (92% of students)
x
Opportunity for one-on-one interaction with lecturers (98% of students)
x
No hands-on activity assignment outside the studio classroom (all students)
x
Friendly working environment (95% of students)
2. What did you dislike about studio model?
x Individual studio periods seemed too long from time to time (91% of students)
x Some of the hands-on activities were pointless, unhelpful, and poorly planned
(9% of students)
x The grading was unfair from time to time (12% of students)
x Being quizzed over material that was not showed (35% of students)
x Felt rushed to finish hands-on activities and/or homework sessions from time
to time (89% of students)
3. What did you like about collaborative working in teams?
x Everyone brought new ideas and opinions to the workstation (94% of students)
58
Gok
x Getting to meet new people and make new friends (93% of students)
x Learning from team members (97% of students)
x Team members helped when a member had questions (all students)
x Helped learn cooperation and communication skills (90% of students)
x Easier to work out problems and to learn (92% of students)
4. What did you dislike about collaborative working in teams?
x Unequal effort given by team members (87% of students)
x Some team members are easier to work with than others (%93 of students)
x Exchange teams after each mid-term exam (76% of students)
5. For next semester, what would you change about studio model?
x Allow more time for hands-on activity work or fewer hands-on activities (86%
of students)
x Devote more time to solving homework problems on LON-CAPA (75% of
students)
x Clarify the goals and refine the procedures of the hands-on activities (92% of
students)
6. What would you keep the same about the way studio model is taught?
x Checking out the homework problems at LON-CAPA (85% of students)
x Collaborative working in small teams (78% of students)
x Some hands-on activities are perfect (64% of students)
x Incorporating homework with the hands-on activities (59% of students)
Satisfaction Survey: Five-Likert survey was given to 220 students and their responses
ZHUHDQDO\]HG7KHRIVWXGHQWVDJUHHGRQWKHLWHPRI³LQWHUDFWLRQRISUREOHPVROYLQJ
and hands-RQDFWLYLW\KHOSHGPHOHDUQSK\VLFV´7KHRIVWXGHQWVGLVDJUHHGRQWKe item
RI³WKHUHLVVWURQJFRPPXQLFDWLRQEHWZHHQlecturers DQGWHDPV´
According to survey results, students felt that connections between the homework,
hands-on activity, and lecture parts of the course were clear and obvious. They were satisfied
with the amount that computers were used in the studio as well as the physical studio
classroom arrangement. In addition, they were satisfied with the amount of interaction they
had with the lecturers and felt to integrate homework with hands-on activity work helped
them learn physics. However, the students pointed out that, as a team, they often interacted
with the teaching assistants while students less interacted with the course lecturers. The
lecturers did not stay in the studio classroom the entire time and students could not ask their
59
Gok
questions about LON-CAPA problems. But this was the main point; encourage them to work
cooperatively with their team members. Also there were teaching assistants to give sufficient
hints.
Neutral
Agree
Strongly
Agree
The connections between the homework and the
hands-on activity were always very clear and
apparent.
The connections between the hands-on activity and
lecture were always very clear and apparent.
The connections between lecture and homework
were always very clear and apparent.
I am satisfied with the level of use of computers in
studio.
I am satisfied with the physical arrangement of the
studio classroom.
There is more to physics than problem solving.
The interaction of problem solving and hands-on
activity helped me learn physics.
I am satisfied with the amount of interaction I had
with the studio lecturers.
There is strong communication between teaching
assistants and teams.
There is strong communication between lecturers
and teams
Disagree
I tems
Strongly
Disagree
Table 2: Satisfaction survey about studio model and the results of analysis for both semesters
2.4%
9.9%
23.8%
53.3%
10.6%
1.3%
1.6%
24.3%
63.7%
9.1%
5.4%
10.1%
24.5%
54.2%
5.8%
7.0%
7.3%
24.1%
53.8%
7.3%
2.3%
10.9%
23.2%
50.4%
13.2%
0.5%
12.3%
24.9%
60.6%
1.7%
5.5%
4.5%
22.6%
58.2%
9.2%
5.0%
5.9%
24.8%
57.6%
6.6%
4.3%
12.9%
24.3%
55.1%
3.4%
7.6%
14.2%
21.2%
45.3%
11.7%
Note: Total number of the students for F08 and S09 is 220.
Interviews about Studio Model: Students were asked to be interviewed voluntarily
throughout the semesters. Interview questions toward studio model were modified
(Churukian, 2002). The purpose of the interviews was to take student opinions about studio
model. The number of 125 students attended in the interviews 554 times.
60
Gok
The responses were classified in six main topics: influences, distracters, changes,
likes, dislikes, and collaborative teams. Studio model was found as the highest influencing
IDFWRUIRUIHPDOHDQGPDOHVWXGHQWV¶VFRUHV7KHVWXGHQWV distracted by other classes
(24%). Also they declared that they learned too much information in very short time. They
mostly liked not having hands-on activity assignment outside studio classroom (96%). While
the students mentioned several changes which they felt could improve the studio, they only
PHQWLRQHGDERXWWLPHGHILFLHQF\IRUFRPSOHWLQJDVVLJQPHQWVDVD³GLVOLNH´,QWKH
topics which they have difficulty to understand, they get help from their team members.
Table 3: Statistical analysis of interview on the influences, distracters, and changes in studio model
Question Number
1a, 1b, 2a, 3a, 4
Influences
Studio Model Format
Hands-on Activity
Homework
Review Sessions
Lectures
Wrap-up/Quiz
Distracters
5
Nothing
Other classes
Too much information too fast
Time management
Team Members
Lack of interest/motivation
Being Tired
Changes
2b, 3b, 4a, 6e
No Change
Need more class sessions: lecture and/or studio
Exchange the grading scale
Focus more on problem solving and less hands-on activity
Have weekly review/help periods
Need more Faculty/Assistant helping in studio classroom
Improve the hands-on activity worksheet
Females
Males
Total
41.88%
40.00%
42.72%
36.98%
37.50%
53.84%
58.11%
60.00%
57.27%
63.01%
62.50%
64.86%
93.60%
92.00%
88.00%
58.40%
44.80%
41.60%
40.77%
36.66%
27.58%
46.15%
41.66%
40.90%
36.84%
59.22%
63.33%
72.41%
53.84%
58.33%
59.09%
63.15%
82.40%
24.00%
23.20%
20.80%
19.20%
17.60%
15.20%
40.47%
36.36%
45.00%
52.63%
33.33%
23.52%
43.75%
59.29%
63.63%
55.00%
47.36%
66.66%
76.47%
56.25%
90.04%
17.60%
16.00%
15.20%
14.40%
13.60%
12.80%
1RWH7KHQXPEHURIWKHVWXGHQWVZKRZHUHLQWHUYLHZHGLV³4XHVWLRQQXPEHUV´SUHVHQWVWKHTXHVWLRQVRIWKH
interview (Appendix).
61
Gok
Table 4: Statistical analysis of interview on the likes, dislikes, and collaborative teams in studio model
Note: The number of the students who were intervLHZHGLV³4XHVWLRQQXPEHUV´SUHVHQWVWKHTXHVWLRQVRIWKH
interview (Appendix).
Question Number
Likes
6a, 6b
No hands-on activity assignment outside studio classroom
Like in general
Combining homework and hands-on activity
Going over homework
The hands-on activities
Friendly working environment
Exchange the teams
Dislikes
6a, 6d
Time deficiency for completing assignment
Collaborative Teams
6c
Learning from team members
Some team members not interested in doing the hands-on
activities
Females
Males
Total
42.50%
42.60%
42.85%
43.51%
45.37%
43.56%
40.35%
57.50%
57.39%
57.14%
56.48%
54.62%
56.43%
59.64%
96.00%
92.00%
89.60%
86.40%
86.40%
80.80%
45.60%
43.83%
56.16%
58.4%
39.81%
60.18%
86.40%
53.84%
46.15%
31.20%
Conclusion
Studio model is important for creating active learning environment in physics
education. In fact, traditional lecture classes convert to studio classes. Traditionally most of
the courses included in physics education are performed in classrooms. Also, applications of
the courses are implemented in laboratory. In active learning environment these two activities
are combined in studio model. Students work as collaborative groups in studio class while
they work individually in traditional class.
Many studies performed on studio models in U.S. focused on conceptual learning
)RUFH &RQFHSW ,QYHQWRU\ ³)&,´ )RUFH DQG 0RWLRQ &RQFHSWXDO (YDOXDWLRQ ³)0&(´
Conceptual Surve\ RI (OHFWULFLW\ DQG 0DJQHWLVP ³&6(0´ HWF $OVR PRWLYDWLRQ-learning
VWUDWHJLHV 0RWLYDWHG IRU 6WUDWHJLHV IRU /HDUQLQJ 4XHVWLRQQDLUH ³06/4´ DFDGHPLF
performance (homework, exams, projects etc.) and attitude (Colorado Learning Attitudes
about Science SuUYH\³&/$66´0DU\ODQG([SHFWDWLRQV6XUYH\³03(;´HWFRIWKHVWXGHQWV
were examined. It was reported that academic performance, motivation, attitude, and
conceptual learning achievement of the students enhanced by studio model (Cooper et al.,
1996; Cummings et al., 1999; Gaffney et al., 2008; Hoellwarth et al., 2005; Sorensen et al.,
2006).
In present study, an investigation was conducted with studio model in the Introductory
Calculus-Based Physics II for two semesters to enhance the format of the course by giving the
students a better learning experience by finding out their opinions; to probe how well the
62
Gok
student felt studio physics met criteria such as coordination between lecture, homework, and
hands-on activity work; to learn VWXGHQW¶VDSSURDFKHVWR the exam questions.
The students declared in the interviews and surveys that they liked the opportunity for
one-on-one interaction with lecturers, collaborative study, checking the problems on LONCAPA. Further, the students felt that connections between the homework, hands-on activity,
and lecture parts of the course were clear and obvious.
Studio model was observed as an effective teaching/learning method by converting
novice students to more experienced students and these findings agreed with the ones reported
in the literature (Churukian, 2002; Gatch, 2010; Kohl et al., 2008; Kohl & Kuo, 2009;
Montelone et al., 2008; Perkins, 2005; Shieh et al., 2010). The student-centered activities also
offered a friendly lecture to students and even to those lecturers who sometimes tend toward
the traditional style of classroom. Studio model provided an excellent opportunity to introduce
large-scale undergraduate level courses to students in an interactive learning environment
with its technology and team-based learning. All of these data collection provide different
viewpoints into the fabric of the science, engineering, math, and social courses etc.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks the support of the Colorado School of Mines and the participation
of the students enrolled in the targeted classes.
63
Gok
Appendix: I nterview Questions about Studio M odel
1. How did you feel while taking the exam?
1a. Did you understand the questions?
1b. Did you think you were prepared? Why?
2. You did particularly well on this problem. Which strategy did you follow?
2a. What can you think of from studio model which relates to this?
2b. What else could we have done to help?
3. I noticed you did not do well on this problem. What were you thinking?
3a. What can you think of studio model?
3b. What else could we have done to help?
4. Think about the course and the exam. What did influence you in the course while you
were taking the exam?
4a. What could we do to do better job?
5. What about the course distracts you from learning what you would like?
6. /HW¶VFRQVLGHUstudio model by itself for a moment.
6a. How do you feel about studio model now compared to the beginning of the
semester?
6b. What do you like about studio model?
6c. How do you like working in collaborative teams?
6d. What do you dislike about studio model?
6e . What changes would you make?
7. Do you have any further comments you want to make?
64
Gok
References
Beichner, R., Bernold, L., Burniston, E., Dail, P., Felder, R., Gastineau, J., Gjertson, M., &
Risley, J. (1999). Case study of the physics component of an integrated curriculum.
American Journal of Physics, 67, S16-S24.
Churukian, D. (2002). Interactive engagement in an introductory university physics course:
Learning gains and perceptions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Kansas State, Kansas.
&RRSHU60$2¶'RQQHOO$0,QQRYDWLRQDQGSHUVLVWHQFH7KHHYDOXDWLRQRI
the CUPLE studio physics course. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association. April 12, NY.
Cummings, K., Marx, J., Thornton, R., & Kuhl, D. (1999). Evaluating innovation in studio
physics. American Journal of Physics, 67(7), S38-S44.
Furtak, T. E., & Ohno, T. R. (2001). Installing studio physics. Physics Teacher, 39, 11-15.
Gaffney, J. D., Richards, E., Kustus, M. B., Ding, L., & Beichner, R. J. (2008). Scaling up
education reform. Journal of College Science Teaching, 18-23.
Gatch, D. B. (2010). Restructuring introductory physics by adapting an active learning studio
model. International Journal for the Scholarship of Technology and Learning, 4(2).
Hake, R. (1998). Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand-student
survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of
Physics, 66, 64-74.
Heller, P. M., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem-solving through
cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem-solving. American
Journal of Physics, 60(7), 627-636.
Hoellwarth, C., Moelfer, M. J., & Knight, R. D (2005). A direct comparison of conceptual
learning and problem ability in traditional and studio style classrooms. American
Journal of Physics Education, 73(5), 459-462.
Kohl, P. B., Kuo, H. V., & Ruskell, T. G. (2008). Documenting the conversion from
traditional to studio physics formats at the Colorado School of Mines: Process and
early results. Physics Education Research Conference, 1064, 135-138.
Kohl, P., & Kuo, V. (2009). Introductory physics gender gaps: pre- and post- studio
transition, Physics Education Research Conference AIP Conference Proceedings, 179,
173-176.
Laws, P. (1991). Workshop physics: Learning introductory physics by doing it. Change
Magazine, 23, 20-27.
65
Gok
Lister, B. (2005). Next generation studio: A new model for interactive learning. EDUCAUSE,
October 18-21, Orlando-Florida.
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McDermott, L. C. (1991). Millikan Lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned closing
the gap. American Journal of Physics, 59, 301±315.
McDermott, L. C., Shaffer, P. S., & P. E. Group. (1998). Tutorials in Introductory Physics.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Montelone, B. A., Rintoul, D. A., & Williams, L. G. (2008). Assessment of the effectiveness
of the studio format in introductory undergraduate biology. CBE-Life Sciences
Education, 7, 234-242.
Perkins, D. (2005). The case for a cooperative studio classroom: Teaching petrology in a
different way. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(1), 101-109.
Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., & Steinberg, R. N. (1997). On the effectiveness of activeengagement microcomputer-based laboratories. American Journal of Physics, 6, 4554.
Redish, E. F., & Steinberg, R (1999). Teaching physics: Figuring out what works. Physics
Today, 52, 24±30.
Shieh, R. S., Chang W., & Tang, J. (2010). The impact of implementing technology-enabled
active learning (TEAL) in university physics in Taiwan. The Asia-Pacific Education
Researcher, 19(3), 401-415.
Sokoloff, D. R., & Thornton, R. K. (1997). Using interactive lecture demonstrations to create
an active learning environment. Physics Teacher, 35, 340-347.
Sorensen, C. M., Churukian, A. D., Maleki, S., & Zollman, D. A. (2006). The new studio
format for instruction of introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 74(12),
1077-1082.
Van Heuvelen, A. (1991). Learning to think like a physicist: a review of research-based
instructional strategies. American Journal of Physics, 59, 891-897.
Wilson, J. M. (1994).The CUPLE physics studio. Physics Teacher, 32, 518-523.
Wilson, J. M., & Jennings, W. C. (2000). Studio courses: How information technology is
changing the way we teach, on campus and off. IEEE, 88(1), 72-79.
Young, J. E. (1996). The studio classroom. ASEE Prism, 15.
66
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
!
(YDOXDWLQJ&ROOHJH6WXGHQWV¶&RQFHSWXDO.QRZOHGJHRI0RGHUQ3K\VLFV
Test of Understanding on Concepts of M odern Physics (TUCO-M P)
Bayram Akarsu
[email protected]
Department of Science Education
School of Education, Erciyes University
Kayseri, TURKEY
!
Abstract
In preVHQWSDSHUZHSURSRVHDQHZGLDJQRVWLFWHVWWRPHDVXUHVWXGHQWV¶FRQFHSWXDONQRZOHGJHRISULQFLSOHVRI
modern physics topics. Over few decades since born of physics education research (PER), many diagnostic
LQVWUXPHQWV WKDW PHDVXUH VWXGHQWV¶ FRQFHSWXDO XQderstanding of various topics in physics, the earliest tests
developed in PER are Force Concept Inventory (FCI, Newtonian concepts), Force & Motion Conceptual
Evaluation (FCME), Electric Circuits Conceptual Evaluation (ECCE), and Test of Understanding Graphs Kinematics (TUG-K). Although these tests were generated and tested on the fields, they were mainly interested
on freshman physics courses. Maybe only diagnostic test developed above freshman was the one initially used by
researchers to investigate coOOHJH VWXGHQWV¶ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI TXDQWXP SK\VLFV FRQFHSWV EXW XQIRUWXQDWHO\ LWV
source or history is not known. The main purpose of this study is to declare of a new diagnostic test and reveal
initial results of the diagnostic test of Test of Understanding on Concepts of Modern Physics (TUCO-MP).
Keywords: Physics education, science education, diagnostic tool, modern physics.
I ntroduction
This paper discusses a new type of assessment instrument that measure student knowledge of
major modern physics concepts for instance relativity, wave mechanics, nuclear physics,
elementary physics, and statistical physics. A research-based, multiple choice and easy to
DGPLQLVWHU GLDJQRVWLF WHVW ZDV GHYHORS WR JDWKHU LQIRUPDWLRQ UHJDUGLQJ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV¶
conceptual learning of modern concepts in physics. It can be utilized for two purposes: 1)
Administration at colleges especially in freshmen science courses to collect student
knowledge of modern concept prior to taking initial modern physics course (pre-test) and 2)
"#!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
Applying to senior and junior level students to check their learning in the courses (post-test) to
evaluate the effectiveness of the course. Additionally, it can be used in AP physics courses at
high schools.
Over last three decades, assessing student knowledge of various physics concepts such
DV 1HZWRQ¶V /DZV (Thornton et al., 1998), Force and motion (Hestenes et al., 1992),
kinematics (Beichner, 1994), electricity (Sokoloff, 1993). The need for generating testing
measurements emerged in 1990s when physics education research (PER) was initiated as
becoming an independent area of research from the roots of science education research (SER).
First versions of instruments for that purposes were generally quantitative and still most of
them were quantitative probably because of statistical method prevalence on research among
social sciences over 150 years. Also, qualitative method is too young to be developed in
another young research discipline. However, some qualitative methods (Otero et al., 2009;
Ireson, 1999) do exists in PER.
Description of TUCO-M P (Test of Understanding on Concepts of M odern Physics)
TUCO-MP consists of 30 multiple choice questions. It was generated in order to investigate
FROOHJHVWXGHQWV¶FRQFHSWXDOlearning of modern physics knowledge including pure knowledge
of concepts such as theory of special relativity, real world applications, history of science
questions, applied problems and some general knowledge questions for example lasers and
radars. TUCO-MP includes various topics which are typically studied in modern physics
courses (Pietrocola, 2005) in sophomore year at various science departments including
physics, chemistry, science education and math education. Such subtopics, total number of
lectures spent on each item is shown in table 1.
"$!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
Selected Concepts of Number of Lectures
Descriptions (Subtopics)
M odern Physics
& Question numbers
Particle properties of 7- lectures
Review of electromagnetic waves, the
waves
1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 16, 24,
double-slit experiments: waves versus
bullets, diffraction of X-rays by crystals,
photoelectric effect, X-ray production,
Compton effect, blackbody radiation, what
is light? photons and waves, Doppler
effect, special relativity
Wave
properties
of 3-lectures
Double-slit again: electrons, diffraction of
particles
14, 19, 23
particles by crystals (1927) and by "light
crystals"(1999), De Broglie waves,
Heisenberg uncertainty principle, wave
packets, applying the uncertainty principle
Atomic Structure
4- lectures
Pre-history: the atomic models of
20, 25, 28, 30
Thomson and Rutherford, Spectral lines,
History: Bohr's atom - its successes and
failures, Energy levels and atomic
excitations
The quantum theory
7- lectures
6FKU|GLQJHUHTXDWLRQDZDYHHTXDWLRQIRU
6, 8, 9, 10, 17, 21, 27
matter, wave function and probability,
stationary states & expectation values,
bound states, particle in a box: infinite and
finite wells, harmonic oscillator, barriers
and tunneling,
The Hydrogen atom
2- lectures
6FKU|GLQJHU HTXDWLRQ IRU WKH K\GURJHQ
18, 22
atom, quantum numbers, radial probability
density, radioactive transitions
Two- level systems
2- lecture
The
Ammonia
molecule,
lasers,
26, 29
holograms, atomic lasers
Statistical Physics
2- lectures
Microstates and macro states, temperature
13, 15
& entropy, Maxwell velocity and speed
distributions,
classical
equipartition,
quantum distributions: bosons & fermions
Gases of bosons
2- lectures
Photons
and
black-body radiation
12
revisited, phonons and the heat capacity of
solids, Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC),
super fluids
Nuclear Physics
1- lecture
Models of the atomic nucleus, radioactive
11
decay, nuclear reactions: fission & fusion
Elementary Particles
1- lectures
The four basic forces, particles &
3
antiparticles, particle interactions and
decay, quarks, the Standard Model
!
Table 1. Modern Physics Concepts in TUCO-MP
In creating TUCO-MP, several research papers on developing diagnostic tests, modern
physics textbooks ((Beiser, 2002) and (Cuttnell et al., 2009) FROOHDJXHV¶ FRPPHQWV DQG
previous tests on university entrance exams (UEE) were utilized. UEE is a general entrance
exam that takes place every year and every graduating high school student who wishes to
"%!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
study in college must take it. In a physics education seminar, nineteen physics professors and
three physics educators were asked to review the questions in the test to check their technical,
logical sides, and content. They also overviewed it according to the importance of the
concepts. Based on their comments, it was revised to the present version.
As stated in Table 1, one item was written for each particular concept according to
dedicated number of lectures on each chapter. Although it was noted that several outside
sources e.g. textbooks and previous research studies were utilized in providing items, most of
them were generated by the researchers. An effort made to construct a more balanced
measurement and to assess the concepts among the students. For example, generating two
questions for corresponding concepts increase quality of TUCO-MP. In addition, each
TXHVWLRQ ZDV GHVLJQHG SXUSRVHO\ WR PHDVXUH VWXGHQWV¶ SXUH NQRZOHGJH RI FRQFHSWV DQG WR
make them attractive for them to answer all of the questions.
M ethodology
The data collection process took place during second term of 2009-10 academic years at
Erciyes University in Kayseri in Turkey. Participants of the study were selected among three
different faculties, school of science, school of engineering and school of education.
Disciplines at both faculties were the only students enrolled in modern physics similar content
in science education, physics and chemistry.
Taken as a whole, approximately 7500 students are studying in these departments.
TUCO-MP was administered to around 2350 students and data collected from 540 among
them. Participated students were enrolled in different grades freshman to senior year. Some of
them already took a modern physics mandatory course already but all of them studies modern
physics topics at high school. Therefore, they are familiar and learned the concepts before. A
typical modern physics course offered at the university consists of major concepts in special
theory of relativity, atomic models, photoelectric effect, quantum mechanics, photons, and
6FKU|GLQJHUHTXDWLRQV
In order to assess student learning in modern physics courses, a new diagnostic
instrument was developed and administered to 540 students. In order to overcome linguistic
problems, the test is a 30 multiple choice questions and was assessed in their primary
language (Turkish). English version of the selected questions is included in appendix section.
The questions measure their conceptual knowledge of modern physics topics rather than
mathematical ability of problem solving. It does not include any types of problem based
#&!
!
@A'#0"!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
!
questions and calculations. However, there are some real life questions to probe their learning
of applications of the concepts.
Students were asked to answer questions in the test in 30 minutes and most of them
finished it earlier. We strongly believe that allowed answering time is enough for the students
to read and answer whole questions in TUCO-MP.
Analysis of TUCO-M P
Following data collection process, the corresponding results according to each department are
constructed as illustrated in Table 2.
Faculty
Department
Grade
Number of Average
Standard
students (n)
scores (% )
Deviation (% )
Education
Physics Education
Freshman
102
36
19.2
Education
Physics Education
Sophomore
45
35
19.2
Education
Physics Education
Junior
177
43
19.8
Education
Physics Education
Senior
99
41
23.9
Science
Physics
Sophomore
38
51
33.6
Science
Chemistry
Sophomore
60
39
20.0
Sophomore
19
45
20.2
Total
540
41
22.3
Engineering EE
Table 2. Participating student body and their achievement scores on TUCO-MP
Data analysis of the first version of TUCO-MP has revealed that the developed test
measurements reflect reliable and valid data related to accepted value in the research
community and statistical terms.
In order to test the quality of test items, we used two standard measures using SPSS:
difficulty and item discrimination. Difficulty simply shows how difficult the item is based on
the correct response to corresponding question. A difficulty values basically ranges between
0.0 and 1.0 with 0.0 being the worst and 1.0 being the best average. A difficulty level of 0.0
indicates that no one answers the item correctly and 1.0 means that everyone gets it correctly.
A difficult value of 0.5 of responses is usually considered as the ideal. Figure 1 is designed
according to percentages of correct responses by combined science and education programs.
The difficulty level of TUCO-MP items range between around 0.10 (10% in the figure) and
0.75 with an average score of 41 (out of 100), which can be considered a feasible value.
#'!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
Item discrimination is the single best measure of the effectiveness of an item is its
ability to separate students who vary in their degree of knowledge of the material tested, and
their ability to use it. If one group of students has mastered the material and the other group
had not, a larger portion of the former group should be expected to correctly answer a test
item. Item discrimination is the difference between the percentages correct for these two
groups (Testing and evaluation services, 2010). Item discrimination can be calculated by
ranking the students according to total score and then selecting the top 27% and the lowest
27% in terms of total score. For each item, the percentage of students in the upper and lower
groups answering correctly is calculated. The difference is one measure of item discrimination
(ID). The formula is specified as:
ID = (Upper Group % Correct) ± (Lower Group % Correct)
Maximum item discrimination difference is 100%. This would occur if all those in the
upper group answered correctly and all those in the lower group answered incorrectly. Zero
discrimination occurs when equal numbers in both groups answer correctly. Negative
discrimination, a highly undesirable condition, occurs when more students in the lower group
then the upper group answer correctly. Negative IDs means unacceptable and between 40%
and 100% is related to excellent items. Items with 24% or above IDs are usually seen as
acceptable. For items on the TOCU-MP, discrimination values of responses are ranging from
approximately 0.26 to about 0.63, which are certainly considered acceptable and reasonable
values.
#(!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
FIG. 1. Difficulty levels of TUCO-MP items in percentages by each question!
#)!
!
@A'#0"!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
!
Next, we need to check the items in terms of their validity and reliability
corresponding to the quality of the instrument. Validity is the measure of how well each item
measures what it should measure. We asked 19 professors at physics department and 3
professors at school of education review the questions at the same university where data was
collected. They rated each item with scoring them as 10 being the high and 0 being low for
both reasonableness and appropriateness of them. The resultant of their scoring is displayed in
Table 3. All of the items were rated as appropriate and reasonable for the students.
Question
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Content
Mean SD
9.32
1.41
9.12
1.98
9.01
1.87
9.50
1.45
8.98
2.10
9.68
1.65
9.52
1.54
9.32
1.58
9.45
1.65
9.52
1.69
9.48
1.70
9.49
1.87
9.29
1.32
9.32
1.98
9.45
2.30
9.12
1.85
8.65
1.80
8.85
1.65
8.98
1.20
9.12
1.45
9.98
1.69
9.95
1.49
9.80
1.58
9.75
1.54
9.70
1.65
8.95
1.66
9.25
1.53
9.30
1.75
9.20
1.36
9.45
1.35
Logical
Mean SD
9.12
1.51
9.85
0.52
9.98
0.58
9.00
0.75
9.23
0.15
9.52
1.27
8.20
0.95
9.85
0.69
9.24
1.88
9.45
1.40
9.30
1.26
9.21
0.96
9.20
1.48
9.54
1.56
9.45
0.99
9.47
1.57
9.12
1.69
8.95
1.33
9.12
1.89
9.60
1.88
9.50
1.35
9.48
0.69
9.12
1.03
9.32
1.53
9.18
1.98
9.21
1.43
9.85
0.12
8.98
1.18
8.95
1.90
9.10
1.62
Appropriate
Mean SD
9.09
1.57
9.45
1.59
9.55
2.02
9.41
1.42
9.12
0.98
9.87
1.65
9.01
1.78
8.58
1.87
9.87
1.98
9.65
1.85
9.54
1.26
9.89
1.56
9.65
1.41
9.23
1.23
9.12
1.85
9.15
1.45
9.54
1.47
9.36
1.59
9.85
1.65
9.12
1.98
9.25
1.75
9.58
1.32
9.78
1.98
9.23
1.45
9.10
1.99
9.15
2.25
9.19
1.20
9.27
1.30
9.53
1.50
8.98
2.00
Table 3. Validity (Content, logicalness and appropriateness) of the TUCO-MP questions
Reliability refers to how reliable the test items are or the consistency of a measure. A
test is considered reliable if we get the same result repeatedly (Marshall et al., 1971). In order
to check the reliability of the test items, we utilized a general technique Kuder-Richardson
#*!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
Formula (KR 20) (Triola, 2010). Values can range from 0.00 to 1.00 (sometimes expressed as
0 to 100); with high values indicating that the examination is likely to correlate with alternate
forms (a desirable characteristic). The KR20 is affected by complexity, spread in scores and
length of the examination. A high reliability score indicates more homogeneous test materials.
A typical calculation is given by,
!
Where K is the number of items in the test, p is the number of students who answered
the questions correctly; q is the number of students who answered the question incorrectly.
And variance in the denominator is calculated by,
!
If KR 20 value ranges between 0.9 and 1.0, it is a reliable, perfect test but it is very
rare. If it runs from 0.8 to 0.9 it is very high reliable. Values between 0.7 and 0.8 are
considered good and reliable tests. If is below 0.65 it is considered very weak test. When we
run the reliability test for TUCO-MP, we calculated KR 20 value for TUCO-MP is around
0.73 that is a very reasonable value.
Discussion
We aimed to generate a qualitative diagnostic instrument for physics and science educators to
use for both as pre and post test for any students in college studying modern physics. Teachers
or professors can also use this test to get an idea of how students are learning the concepts at
any time during courses periods. Besides, we intended to create a useful data collection tool to
assess prevalence student ideas regarding concepts of modern physics. We believe we have
achieved both goals.
Test mean score of 41 PLJKW EH VHHQ ORZ VFRUH EXW FRPSDUHG WR WKH VWXGHQWV¶
grades in a regular modern physics course, it is considered an average score. Averages scored
of midterms and finals in modern physics course can be even lower because of difficult
concepts related to quantum physics topics (e.g. wave function and hydrogen atom
application). Although it is not our goal to discuss how difficult the concepts of quantum
physics is (Akarsu, 2010)ZKHQHYDOXDWLQJVWXGHQWV¶DFKLHYHPHQWVFRUHVRI78&2-MP, one
should take this into account to make sure the potential explanation of the results.
#+!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
As indicated in the previous sections, TUCO-MP passed tests of validity and reliability
which shows that it can be easily adapted and utilized. Although 0.73 is a very good result for
a reliable data collection instrument, test can be revised to reach a higher score. Possible
reason for the outcome might be unclear questions (e.g. question 21) as discussed before.
Another cause for such low scores of some items in the test might stem from the language
because students sometimes learn technical conceptual terms differently therefore if we use it
for different meaning then they failed to answer it correctly. We can alter these questions and
HOLPLQDWHVWXGHQWV¶PLVXQGHUVWDQGLQJVWRJHWFRrrect responses.
The only items of the test with averages lower than 20% percent of responded
correctly were questions 1, 2, 14, 15, 17, 21, 22, and 30. As we predicted above, these
questions focus on fundamental concepts of quantum theory so maybe when we prepare
questions about it we should be more careful to misguide the students to the incorrect
answers. In conclusion, the performance of TUCO-MP implies that additional research on
instructional approaches of the concepts is needed to investigate the test. In this article, we
provided preliminary results of a new diagnostic measurement tool for concepts of modern
physics and hope as more researchers use it to evaluate and to create more effective data
collection materials.
Acknowledgement
We would like to show appreciation the following colleagues for their insightful thought
about questions in TUCO-03DQGWKHLUFRQWULEXWLRQVWRWKLVVWXG\'U.D]ÕP.HVOLR÷OXDr.
$KPHW (UGLQo Dr. Osman Canko, Dr. Hasan Kaya and other physics faculty members who
reviewed and commented on the questionnaire. Also, we would like to express gratitude our
research assistant $IúLQ.DULSHU DQG1DJLKDQ7DQÕN for their contributions.
References
Akarsu (2010). (LQVWHLQ¶V5HGXQGDQW7ULXPSK³4XDQWXP3K\VLFV´$QH[WHQVLYH6WXG\RI
Teaching/Learning Quantum Mechanics in College. Latin American Journal of
Physics Education, 4 (1), 273- 285.
Beichner, R.J. (1994). Testing Student Interpretation of Kinematics Graphs, American Journal
of Physics, 62, 750-762.
Beiser, A. (2002). Concepts of Modern Physics: New York. McGraw-Hill
#"!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
Science/Engineering/Math.
Cuttnell, J. D., Johnson, K. W. (2009). Introduction to Physics: Boston. Wiley.
Cortina, J.M., (1993). What Is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and
Applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.
Hestenes, D., Wells, M & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory, Physics
Teacher, 30, 141-151.
Ireson, G. (1999). A PXOWLYDULDWH$QDO\VLVRI8QGHUJUDGXDWH3K\VLFV6WXGHQWV¶&RQFHSWLRQV
Of Quantum Phenomena, European Journal of Physics, 20, 193-199.
Marshall, J.C. & Hales, L.W. (1971). Classroom Test Construction: Boston. Addison
Wesley, Reading, MA.
Otero, V. K. & Harlow, D. B. (2009). Getting Started in Qualitative Physics Education
Research, Qualitative Research, 10, 1-66.
Pietrocola, M. (2005). Proceedings of the International Conference on the International
Conference on Physics Education, Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi.
Testing and Evaluation Services (2010), University of Wisconsin.
Sokoloff, D.R (1993). Teaching Electric Circuit Concepts Using Microcomputer-Based
Current and Voltage Probes, Chapter in Microcomputer-Based Labs: Educational
Research and Standards, Series F, Computer and Systems Sciences, 156, 129±146,
edited by Robert F. Tinker. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer Vela.
Thornton R. K., & Sokoloff, D. R. (1998). $VVHVVLQJ6WXGHQWOHDUQLQJRI1HZWRQ¶V/aws: The
Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and the Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory
and Lecture Curricula, American Journal of Physics, 66(4), 338-352.
Triola, M. F. (2010). Elementary Statistics. New Jersey: Pearson International Edition.
Appendix
Sample TUCO-M P questions
Q1. An astronomer measures the Doppler change in frequency for the light reaching the earth from a
distant star. From this measurement, can the astronomer tell whether the star is moving away from the
earth or whether the earth is moving away from the star? What are the possible explanations?
(A) The earth is moving away from the star
(B) The star is moving away from the earth
(C) The star and earth are moving away from each other
(D) The star and the earth are not moving but materials between them are
##!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
Q2. The earth spins on its axis once each day. To a
person viewing the earth from an inertial frame in space.
Which clock runs slower, a clock at the North Pole or one
at the equator? Why?
(A) At the North Pole, because earth rotates faster at the
equator
(B) At the North Pole, because earth rotates slower at the
equator
(C) At the equator, because earth rotates faster at the
equator
(D) At the equator, because earth rotates slower at the
equator.
(E) The earth spins with the same speed both at the North
Pole and at the equator
!
Q4. If the absolute temperature of a blackbody is increased by a factor of 3, the energy radiated per
second per unit area does which of the following?
(A) Decreases by a factor of 81
(B) Decreases by a factor of 9
(C) Increases by a factor of 9
(D) Increases by a factor of 27
(E) Increases by a factor of 81.
Q5. When (7-4) Be transforms into (3-7) Li, it does so by
(A) Emitting an alpha particle only
(B) Emitting an electron only
(C) Emitting a neutron only
(D) Emitting a positron only
(E) Electron capture by the nucleus with emission of a neutrino
Q6:KLFKRIWKHIROORZLQJVWDWHPHQWVLVFRUUHFWIRUWKHIROORZLQJ6FKU|GLQJHUHTXDWLRQ"
$ȌLVDZDYHIXQFWLRQWKDWUHSUHVHQWVDSDUWLFOHRUDZDYH
(B) V describes voltage difference
&PLVWKHSDUWLFOH¶VPRPHQWXP
(D) ƫ is Planck energy
Q7. Which of the following quantities will two observers always measure to be the same, regardless of
the relative velocity between the observers:
I- the time interval between two events II- the speed of light in a vacuum
III-the relative speed between the observers
(A) Only I
(B) I and III
(C) Only II
(D) I and II
(E) Only III
Q14. Why is it easier to accelerate an electron to a speed that is close to the speed of light, compared
to accelerating a proton to the same speed?
(A) Because electron is charged
(B) Because proton is charged particle
(C) Because a proton has larger mass than an electron
(D) Because an electron has more mass than a proton
Q16. A stone is dropped from the top of a building. At the stone falls, what happens to its de Broglie
wavelength?
(A) It increases
(B) It decreases
#$!
!
!"#$%&'()*$"#('+)$,)-./0120)!3"2'41$()) )))))5$+6)7)8$6)9))))))))))))):;;8)9<=>)?7=7)
@A'#0"!
!
(C) It stays the same
(D) Firstly, it increases and then decreases
Q19.
-Driving a car may be safe.
-Using a cell phone may also be safe
-However, doing both of them at the same time might not be safe
Above statements explain a physics principle with using daily life example. Which physics principle is
that?
(A) Principle of electrical attritional force
(B) Compton phenomena
(C) Heisenberg uncertainty principle
(D) Diffraction of light
Q24. Why do ĮDQGȕGHFD\SURGXFHQHZHOHPHQWVEXWȖGHFD\GRHVQRW"
$%HFDXVHȖLVQRWGLVWXUEHGE\DPDJQHWLFILHOG
%%HFDXVHȖFDUULHVVPDOOHUPDVVWKDQĮRUȕ
&%HFDXVHȖFRQVLVWVRIFKDQJHGSDUWLFOHV
'%HFDXVHĮDQGȕFRQVLVWVRIFKDQJHGSDUWLFOHV
#%!
!

European Journal of Physics Education Volume 1 Number 1 June

Transkript

Benzer belgeler

studıo v

Contact Information Neighborhood Council

Özgeçmiş Dosyası İndir - İstanbul Medeniyet Üniversitesi Akademik

3200-3204

indir - SORGUN - Mehmet Akif Ersoy Ortaokulu

Aḥmad Mukhtār: Ghāzī Aḥmad Mukhtār Pasha