Curriculum Emphases, Mathematics and Teaching Practices: Swedish Upper-Secondary Physics Teachers’ Views
Tóm tắt
This article addresses physics teachers’ views about physics teaching in upper-secondary school. Their views have been investigated nationwide through a web-based questionnaire. The questionnaire has been developed based on several published instruments and is part of an ongoing project on the role of mathematics in physics teaching at upper-secondary school. The selected part of the results from the analysis of the questionnaire reported on here cross-correlate physics teachers’ views about aims of physics teaching with their view of physics classroom activities, and perceived hindrances in the teaching of physics. Three hundred seventy-nine teachers responded to the questionnaire (45% response rate). The result indicates that teachers with a high agreement with a
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Angell, C., Guttersrud, Ø., Henriksen, E. K., & Isnes, A. (2004). Physics: Frightful, but fun pupils’ and teachers’ views of physics and physics teaching. Science Education, 88, 683–706.
Angell, C., Lie, S., & Rohatgi, A. (2011). TIMSS Advanced 2008: Fall i fysikk-kompetanse i Norge og Sverige. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 7(1), 17–31.
Belo, N. A., van Driel, J. H., van Veen, K., & Verloop, N. (2014). Beyond the dichotomy of teacher-versus student-focused education: A survey study on physics teachers’ beliefs about the goals and pedagogy of physics education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 39, 89–101.
Buabeng, I. (2015). Teaching and learning of physics in New Zealand high schools (Doctoral dissertation). School of Educational Studies and Leadership, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
Chen, S. (2006). Development of an instrument to assess views on nature of science and attitudes toward teaching science. Science Education, 90(5), 803–819.
de Putter-Smits, L. G. A. (2012). Science teachers designing context-based curriculum materials: Developing context-based teaching competence (Doctoral dissertation). Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit.
de Putter-Smits, L. G. A., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2013). Mapping context-based learning environments: The construction of an instrument. Learning Environments Research, 16, 437–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-013-9143-9.
de Putter-Smits, L. G. A., Taconis, R., Jochems, W. M. G., & van Driel, J. (2011). De emphases van docenten biologie, natuurkunde en scheikunde en de gevolgen voor curriculum vernieuwingen [Science teachers’ emphases and consequences for curriculum innovations]. Tijdschrift voor Didactiek der bèta-wetenschappen, 28, 32–48.
Due, K. (2009). Fysik, lärande samtal och genus: en studie av gymnasieelevers gruppdiskussioner i fysik [Physics, learning conversations – a study of group discussions in physics in upper secondary school] (Doctoral dissertation). Umeå; Umeå universitet.
Erduran, S., & Dagher, Z. R. (2014). Reconceptualizing the nature of science for science education: Scientific knowledge, practices and other family categories. Dordrecht: Springer.
Grigutsch, S., & Törner, G. (1998). World views of mathematics held by university teachers of mathematics science, Schriftenreihe des Fachbereichs Matematik, Preprint 420. Duisburg: Gerhard Mercator University.
Hansson, L., Hansson, Ö., Juter, K., & Redfors, A. (2015). Reality – theoretical models – mathematics: A ternary perspective on physics lessons in upper-secondary school. Science & Education, 24(5–6), 615–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9750-1.
Hansson, L., Hansson, Ö., Juter, K., & Redfors, A. (2019). A case study of the role of mathematics in physics textbooks and in associated lessons. In G. Pospiech, M. Michelini, & B. Eylon (Eds), Mathematics in Physics Education (pp. 293–316). Dordrecht: Springer.
Hansson, L., & Leden, L. (2016). Working with the nature of science in physics class: Turning “ordinary” classroom situations into nature of science learning situations. Physics Education, 51(5).
Hobden, P. (1998). The role of routine problem tasks in science teaching. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 219–231). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
IEA. (2014). TIMSS advanced 2015. Trends in international mathematics and science study. Teacher questionnaire physics. Boston: IEA.
Johansson, A., Andersson, S., Salminen-Karlsson, M., & Elmgren, M. (2018). Shut up and calculate: The available discursive positions in quantum physics courses. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13, 205–226.
Kaiser, G., & Sriraman, B. (2006). A global survey of international perspectives on modelling in mathematics education. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 38(3), 302–310.
Krey, O. (2014). Learners’ beliefs and conceptions about the role of mathematics in physics. In C. P. Constantinou, N. Papadouris & A. Hadjigeorgiou (Eds.), E-Book Proceedings of the ESERA 2013 Conference: Science Education Research For Evidence-based Teaching and Coherence in Learning. Part [2] (co-ed. J. Lavonen and A. Zeyer). Nicosia: ESERA.
Kuo, E., Hull, M. M., Gupta, A., & Elby, A. (2013). How students blend conceptual and formal mathematical reasoning in solving physics problems. Science Education, 97, 32–57.
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
McComas, W. F. (2017). Understanding how science works: The nature of science as the foundation for science teaching and learning. School Science Review, 98(365), 71–76.
Michelsen, C. (2006). Functions: A modelling tool in mathematics and science. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 38(3), 269–280.
Mostafa, T., Echazarra, A., & Guillou, H. (2018). The science of teaching science: An exploration of science teaching practices in PISA 2015 (OECD Education Working Papers No. 188). Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f5bd9e57-en.
Pask, C. (2003). Mathematics and the science of analogies. American Journal of Physics, 71(6), 526–534.
Pospiech, G., Michelini, M., & Eylon, B. (Eds.). (2019). Mathematics in physics education. Dordrecht: Springer.
Roberts, D. A. (1982). Developing the concept of ‘curriculum emphases’ in science education. Science Education, 66(2), 243–260.
Roberts, D. A. (1988). What counts as science education? In P. J. Fensham (Ed.), Development and dilemmas in science education (pp. 27–54). London: Falmer Press.
Roberts, D. A. (1995). Junior high school science transformed: Analysing a science curriculum policy change. International Journal of Science Education, 17(4), 493–504.
Swedish National Agency for Education. (2011). Curriculum for the upper secondary school – Revised 2013, 2018. Stockholm: Fritzes.
Torigoe, E. T., & Gladding, G. E. (2011). Connecting symbolic difficulties with failure in physics. American Journal of Physics, 79(1), 133–140.
Turşucu, S., Spandaw, J., Flipse, S., & de Vries, M. J. (2018). Teachers’ beliefs systems about improving transfer of algebraic skills from mathematics into physics in senior pre-university education. International Journal of Science Education, 40(12), 1493–1519. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1486520.
Uhden, O., Karam, R., Pietrocola, M., & Pospiech, G. (2012). Modelling mathematical reasoning in physics education. Science & Education, 21(4), 485–506.
van Driel, J. H., Bulte, A. M., & Verloop, N. (2008). Using the curriculum emphasis concept to investigate teachers’ curricular beliefs in the context of educational reform. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40(1), 107–122.