RETHINKING PHYSICS CONTENT

HOW WE TEACH IMPACTS ON WHAT WE TEACH

or
HAVING RESPECT FOR THE CONTENT OF PHYSICS
(or SOME THINGS I WISH ID KNOWN WHEN I STARTED TEACHING PHYSICS)
Dick Gunstone
Professor of Science and Technology Education
Monash University
(Keynote address to the STAVA!P V"E Physics Teachers# conference$ Monash University$ %e& '(()*
INTRODUCTION
! &egan teaching high school +hysics (and science and ,aths* in -./'$ at 0ake 1olac 2igh School3
At the end of '(() ! retire3 So in this +a+er !#, &eing a tad self4indulgent 5 !#ll discuss so,e of the
things ! have found out a&out +hysics teaching and learning$ fro, ,y o6n teaching and research$ in
the intervening years3 Three titles for the +a+er is e7cessive 5 a fourth could have &een 8So,e
e7a,+les of co,+le7 things that 6e actually ,ake ,uch ,ore difficult &y trying to unreasona&ly
si,+lify the,39
There are four &road issues considered:
(-* so,e e7a,+les of +hysics content that 6e need to rethink in order to hel+ learners 4 rethinking
+hysics and its content 5 having res+ect for +hysics
('* so,e false dichoto,ies that distort and da,age out thinking a&ut +hysics teaching and learning
(;* the crucial need to conce+tualise and descri&e a +rescri&ed +hysics curriculu, (e3g3 V"E +hysics*
as ,ore than content 4 6hy state,ents of content alone are damagingl inade<uate as curriculu,
docu,ents
(=* a data4&ased res+onse to the 8all this is irrelevant 6hen you are teaching >ear -'9 +osition3
"oncern 6ith i,+lications for the +ractice of +hysics education has &een a feature of research on
learning +hysics (alternative conce+tionsconce+tual change research* throughout the ') years of
+o+ularity of this field3 The first t6o influential &ooks in this area (Driver$ Guesne ? Ti&erghien$
-.@)A Bs&orne ? %rey&erg$ -.@)* re+orted research$ &ut did so 6ith the e7+licitly stated intention of
&eing 6ritten for a teacher audience3 1oth &ooks have a su&stantial thrust to6ards considering
i,+lications for +ractice$ and re,ain influential today a,ong +hysics teachers and +hysics education
researchers3 A nu,&er of later &ooks have had an even stronger focus on the i,+lications for +ractice
of alternative conce+tionsconce+tual change research$ and so,e have cha+ters 6ritten &y teacher4
researchers rather than &y acade,ics (e3g3 %ensha,$ Gunstone ? Chite$ -..=A Glynn ? Duit$ -..)A
2and ? Prain$ -..)A MintDes$ Candersee ? Eovak$ -..FA Treagust$ Duit ? %raser$ -../A Chite ?
Gunstone$ -..'*3 The i,+lications advanced in these 6ritings include descri+tions of likely
conce+tions held &y students &efore for,ally studying a conce+t$ teaching a++roaches for
constructively using these +rior conce+tions$ teaching a++roaches for intellectually engaging students
6ith the +hysics they are to learn$ and alternative a++roaches to the assess,ent of student learning3
!t is this for, of research that has occu+ied ,uch of ,y thinking for the last ;( years$ and that
gives rise to the data4&ased +ositions in the rest of this +a+er3
RETHINKING PHYSICS AND ITS CONTENT HAVING RESPECT FOR PHYSICS
There are a nu,&er of 6ays in 6hich 6e have over the years co,e to teach in 6ays that +retend
that +hysics ideas are si,+le and straightfor6ard and o&vious 6hen this is certainly not true3 This
,akes the learning (and teaching* of these ideas very ,uch ,ore difficult$ and very ,uch re+resents
not having res+ect for the ideas of +hysics3
-3 !na++ro+riate si,+lifications of content
-
Much of school +hysics has a&stract conce+tual &ases3 Bf course the learning of these a&stract
conce+ts can &e enhanced &y a++ro+riate si,+lification of the conce+ts$ even 6hen the si,+lification
is kno6n to &e incorrect3 An o&vious e7a,+le is the introduction of ato,ic ,odels &y using the
notion that 8the ato, is like the solar syste,9 (kno6n to &e incorrect*$ and leaving until a later ti,e
the ideas of electron shells and energy levels3
-
1ut not all si,+lifications lead to i,+roved learning3
!ndeed so,e co,,on si,+lifications di,inish learning3 ! consider three 6ays in 6hich research has
sho6n a negative i,+act on learning fro, ina++ro+riate si,+lifications$ although it should &e noted
that these are not at all necessarily discrete3
(a* The si,+lification clearly increases learning difficulty: The o&vious e7a,+le of such a
si,+lification is at the centre of ,uch of the co,,on difficulty e7+erienced &y students in learning
the conce+t of nor,al reaction3 The co,,on conte7t used to introduce nor,al reaction$ in teaching
and in te7t &ooks$ is consideration of an o&Gect on a ta&le or &ench3 !n the large ,aGority of cases the
ta&le or &ench surface is si,+lified H it is +resented as invariantly horiDontal3 2ere is the difficulty3
!f the surface is indeed unchanged &y the o&Gect sitting on it$ then there is no evident cause of the
nor,al reaction force3 2ence the failure to recognise an as+ect of co,+le7ity (the ta&le or &ench is
distorted &y the o&Gect +laced on it* results in increased learning difficulty (there is a++arently no
reason for the ta&le&ench to &e +ushing u+ on the o&Gect*3
(&* The si,+lification &eco,es the reality$ and thus di,inishes learning: This +ro&le, arises not
&ecause of ina++ro+riate si,+lification$ &ut &ecause a++ro+riate si,+lifications continue to &e used
6hen learning 6ould &e enhanced &y a&andoning the si,+lification and e,&racing the reality3 A
co,,on s+ecific e7a,+le is the use of +articular light rays in o+tical ray diagra,s3 Bften students#
learning does not go &eyond the rays used to esta&lish a++roaches to deter,ining i,age +osition for an
o&Gect (e3g3 a ray +arallel to the +rinci+le a7is is refracted &y a converging lens so as to +ass through
the focal +oint of the lens*3 The learning conse<uence of this is that ,any students 6ho can correctly
deter,ine the i,age +osition for a given o&Gect cannot co,+lete the +ath of a ray fro, the o&Gect that
is not one of the standard rays$ even 6hen they kno6 the +osition of the i,age3 The initial and very
valua&le si,+lification of considering only ; of the infinite nu,&er of rays +assing fro, i,age to
o&Gect has &eco,e the reality 5 and only these three rays are recognised3
A ,ore general case of this +ro&le, is learning a&out classifications3 Science has used 6idely
classification syste,s as a 6ay of validly si,+lifying a continuous 6orld &y categorising that 6orld
into grou+s 6ith +articular features for +articular +ur+oses3 And this has clearly &een a highly
valua&le for, of si,+lification3 2o6ever$ learning in these classifactory for,s is often di,inished &y
failure to seriously link classification 6ith reality3 A good e7a,+le is the classification of ,atter into
solid$ li<uid$ gas3 !n ,y teacher education 6ork 6ith science graduates ! find ,any graduates 6ho can
easily 8define9 a li<uid (occu+ies the sha+e of the container$ can &e +oured*$ &ut 6ho &eco,e
confused 6hen ! sho6 the, a container of sand and +our this3 Their res+onses to the <uestion of
6hether sand is a li<uid are co,,only associated 6ith an a++arent failure of their definition of li<uidA
they do not see the <uestion as sho6ing that their definition is not universally useful3 The learning
+ro&le, here is that their +revious e7+osure to e7a,+les of solid$ li<uid$ gas has not included
e7a,+les that are +ro&le,atic in ter,s of the classification3 2ence the classification has &eco,e
reality3
(c* The si,+lification is so clearly incorrect that it cannot &e a++ro+riately used: Bne of the ,ost
6ides+read e7a,+les of this for, of ina++ro+riate si,+lification is the a&surd suggestion that
Galileo#s insight a&out falling &odies (all fall 6ith the sa,e acceleration in the a&sence of air
resistance* 6as so,eho6 e,+irically derived3 This is a <uite e7traordinarily 6idely used
si,+lification 5 and it is$ une<uivocally$ 6rongI Many$ ,any te7ts and ,any$ ,any teachers assert
(erroneously* that Galileo o&served falling &odies of different ,ass arrive at the sa,e ti,e at the &ase
-
! have &een considering for so,e ti,e ho6 so,e such si,+lifications have co,e to &e seen as legiti,ate
+edagogical a++roaches even though they are kno6n to &e incorrect$ and 6hy other a++arently si,ilar
si,+lifications are not seen as legiti,ate3 (A clear e7a,+le of a si,+lification that is seen as totally
unacce+ta&le$ des+ite the learning advantages of the si,+lification having &een de,onstrated$ is heat
conce+tualised as a fluid3* My current$ and very tentative$ conclusions are that (i* infor,ed considerations of
learning have never under+inned 6hat is and is not an acce+ta&le si,+lification$ and (ii* the strongest
deter,inant of 6hat si,+lifications 6e acce+t is the nature of scientific understanding late last century as
science &egan to &e incor+orated into for,al school education (thus electricity4as4fluid 6as acce+ta&le$ heat4as4
fluid 6as not*3
'
of the 0eaning To6er of Pisa3 !n ter,s of the learning of this conce+t$ there are clearly ,aGor
+ro&le,s for any student 6ho has hi,herself dro++ed o&Gects of different ,ass over any su&stantial
distance and thus vie6ed the heavier o&Gect arrive first (and ,any students have*3 There is su&stantial
evidence fro, ,any studies that the essential conse<uence of this incorrect assertion$ intended to
so,eho6 ,ake learning easier$ is to confuse students and inhi&it+revent understanding of the +hysics
involved3 !n ,ore general ter,s$ the use of this <uite incorrect si,+lification has the unfortunate
conse<uence of di,inishing the intellectual achieve,ent of Galileo3 Galileo$ in co,ing to his
e7+lanation of the ,otion of falling o&Gects$ used a co,+le7 ,i7 of e,+iricis, (e7+eri,ents 6ith
&alls rolling do6n inclined +lanes$ not dro++ed fro, a great height* and +o6erful intellectual
reasoning3 The e7+lanation is not e,+iricalA it cannot &e induced solely fro, direct o&servation3
Physics is a co,+le7 ,i7 of e,+irically and non4e,+irically derived insights$ and students 6ho learn
that +hysicsscience is solely e,+irical have a di,inished and incorrect vie6 of +hysicsscience and its
conce+ts3
'3 !na++ro+riate definitions of ideas
The o&vious$ and +rofoundly i,+ortant$ e7a,+le of ina++ro+riate definition is the conce+t of
energy3 !t is sadly very co,,on for this conce+t to &e defined in +hysics courses3 That in itself is an
unGustified si,+lification that has negative learning conse<uences (see &elo6*3 Associated 6ith such
an a++roach is a da,aging e+iste,ological si,+lification 5 a da,aging and clearly incorrect
assu,+tion a&out the nature of +hysics kno6ledge3 The &est ,inds in the +hysical sciences s+ent half
of the nineteenth century struggling 6ith the develo+,ent (the "JEAT!BE* of the conce+t of energy3
To reduce this to five ,inutes of dictating a definition is to distort the nature and origin of the conce+t
&y trivialiDing the conce+t3
The 8definition9 of energy that is offered in ,any$ ,any +hysics te7ts and courses is 8Energy is
the ca+acity to do 6ork39 This is so ,uch in contradiction to the 6ays in 6hich energy is conceived
of and used in che,istry and &iology that it is not +ossi&le to reconcile these other uses 6ith the
8definition39 So,e defenders of this indefensi&le 8definition9 of energy 6ill say 8&ut of course 6e
only ,ean ,echanical energy39 The o&vious res+onse to this is to ask 86hy not say soK9 The ,ore
i,+ortant res+onse is to note that this ,odified 8definition9 is totally circular 5 after all the only
res+onse to the <uestion 86hat is ,echanical energyK9 is that it is energy that can &e transfor,ed into
86ork39
To ,e$ the solution to this +ro&le, is o&vious 5 the +hysics 8definition9 is 6rong and should
never &e used3 Jather$ it is ,uch ,ore i,+ortant to hel+ students understand 6hy energy is not
defina&leI
;3 "onfusing analogies 6ith reality
The ,ost co,,on +hysics conte7t in 6hich to find learning +ro&le,s arising fro, analogies
&eco,ing reality is electricity3 The ,ost e7tre,e case of this ! have found is an A,erican senior high
school +hysics te7t 6ritten in the -.;(s (%uller$ 1ro6nlee ? 1aker$ -.;F*3 This volu,e does not once
use the ter, 8+otential difference9 in its treat,ent of electricityA this conce+t is al6ays referred to as
8electrical +ressure93 That is$ an analogy (the so4called 86ater analogy9* has &eco,e the conce+t3
The conse<uence of this is that ,any confusing state,ents that 6ould clearly inhi&it learning occur in
the &ook3 So,e e7a,+les are 86hatever electricity is$ it 6ill not ,ove unless it is acted u+on &y a
force or +ressure9 (+3).'*$ 8The volt is defined as the +ressure re<uired to +ush an a,+ere of current
through a resistance of one oh,9 (+3).;*$ 8The +ressure lost in forcing a current through any +art of a
circuit is called the fall of +otential in that +art of the circuit9 (+3/''*$ 8!t is the +ressure and not the
current that is used u+ in ,aintaining the flo6 of electricity through the circuit9 (+3/';*$ in discussing
transfor,ers 8the +ressure is reduced near the +lace of use &y a ste+4do6n transfor,er9 (+3F-;*3
Chile this +articular e7a,+le is /)L years old$ the sa,e general +ro&le,s are still co,,on 6ith
the use of analogies 5 turning the analogy into so,e for, of co,+lete re+resentation of the
conce+t+heno,enon (turning the analogy into reality*3 This then leads to t6o serious issues that
negatively i,+act on +hysics learning3 The first is the failure to acce+t that analogies 6ill enhance
learning only 6hen the learner can &oth discri,inate &et6een and a++ro+riately link the analogy and
the target conce+t3 The second is the failure to recognise that the links &et6een an analogy and the
target conce+t are s+ecific$ and that no single analogy 6ill ever validly link 6ith all as+ects of a
co,+le7 conce+t3 !f the analogy is taken &eyond these s+ecific links$ then it &eco,es a learning
;
inhi&itor rather than a learning facilitator3 This is 6ell illustrated &y the a&ove te7t &ook case3 Even
the ,ost su+erficial analysis +oints to the 6ater analogy having links onl 6ith flo6 +heno,ena in
electric circuits (e3g3 current in series and +arallel circuit ele,ents*3 Energy4related +heno,ena such
as +otential difference cannot &e linked hel+fully 6ith the 6ater analogyA an energy analogue is
needed3 Too often in +hysics education atte,+ts are ,ade to use a single analogy for all as+ects of a
co,+le7 conce+t$ rather than using ,ulti+le analogies for different as+ects of the conce+t3 !n fact it
see,s to ,e to &e <uite reasona&le to see too ,any +hysics teachers and te7t&ook 6riters as &eing
rather o&sessed 6ith creating T2E single analogy for electricity3 This is &eyond ,e 5 there are
e7cellent and different (and a++ro+riately 0!M!TED* analogies for (i* flo6 +heno,ena in electricity$
(ii* energy +heno,ena in electricity$ (iii* 6ays of discri,inating energy and flo6 issues (6ays of
thinking a&out funda,ental issues like Mcurrent# is conserved in a circuit &ut Menergy# is transfor,ed*3
!t is logically i,+ossi&le for there to &e a single analogy to validly re+resent all electrical +heno,ena
5 the only such +ossi&le thing to do that is so,e e7a,+le of electrical +heno,ena3
=3 !na++ro+riate si,+lifications of the nature of +hysics
The e7a,+le of the 6ays 6e have distorted Galileo#s ,ethods and achieve,ents 6ith <uite false
suggestions that Mall# he did 6as Gust 6atch a cou+le of things dro++ed fro, the 0earning To6er of
Pisa (a&ove* is also a +o6erful illustration of so,e essential +oints a&out the nature of +hysics and the
6ays +hysics a++roaches the generation of ne6 kno6ledge3
Physics is:
&oth e,+irical AED non4e,+irical
&oth ,ethodical AED creative
&oth logical AED s+eculative
&oth o&Gective AED hu,an3
Too often +hysics is +resented as if only the left hand of each of these +airs is relevant3 This
di,inishes +hysics 5 it is a co,+letely unGustified and erroneous si,+lification of the nature of
+hysics3 School +hysics should reflect &oth sides of these +airs 5 and in its essence$ not at its edges
(and thus trivially*
A harsh &ut not unrealistic +osition that is another 6ay of stating the sa,e +oint:
T2E 8scientific ,ethod9 is an invention of school te7t&ook 6riters and does not reflect anything
of value a&out 8the nature of science+hysics93
THE ISSUE THAT RUNS ACROSS A!! THE A"OVE E#AMP!ES OF
THE NEED TO REGAIN RESPECT FOR THE CONTENT OF PHYSICS
All the +oints ,ade and e7a,+les given a&ove arise fro, ,y &eing totally co,,itted to teaching
+hysics in 6ays that enhance student engage,ent 6ith +hysics$ and focus on student understanding of
+hysics3 ! find it difficult to conceive of teaching that does not have these t6o intert6ined foci3 The
t6o issues of student engage,ent and student understanding are e<ually i,+ortant in the rest of this
+a+er3
FA!SE DICHOTOMIES THAT DISTORT THINKING A"OUT TEACHING AND
!EARNING PHYSICS
These are cases 6here co,+le7 issues of learning and teaching are distorted &y &eing
unreasona&ly si,+lified to a dichoto,y3 That is$ co,+le7 situations are distorted &y &eing descri&ed
as 8either A or 193 ! ter, these false dichoto,ies &ecause the descri+tion of 8either A or 19 cannot &e
GustifiedA the reality is ,ore co,+le7 than this3
Each of the three false dichoto,ies ! &riefly discuss &elo6 has had an unfortunately strong
influence on considerations of the +ractice of +hysics education3 Each of the dichoto,ies has &een
sho6n &y research to &e false3 %urther$ research on +hysics learning has sho6n that recognising and
res+onding to the co,+le7ity that is hidden &y these false dichoto,ies leads to higher <uality learning
(greater understanding* and greater student engage,ent 6ith +hysics3
=
-3 Student centredTeacher controlled
This is a good e7a,+le of the general class of situations considered in this section: in one sense it
is co,,only recognised that the dichoto,y is a si,+lification$ &ut the +hrase is 6idely used in the
sense of 8either student centred or teacher controlled93 This then hides co,+le7ity that ,ust &e
addressed for <uality +hysics learning3 A++roaches that focus on student +hysics learning are &oth
student centred and teacher controlled3
This is the necessary co,+le7ity that is hidden &y the false dichoto,y3 The i,+lications of
+hysics learning research (in any of the fields considered in this +a+er* are clear3 Nuality +hysics
learning re<uires classroo,s that are &oth student centred (in that teaching$ curriculu,$ assess,ent are
deter,ined &y kno6ledge of student learning and are s+ecifically sha+ed &y kno6ledge of e7isting
understandings$ ,otivations$ attitudes$ etc3 of the +articular students in a class* and teacher controlled
(in that the teacher +lans and directs and controls the nature and +ace of learning activities*3
'3 Discovery learning (or la&oratory 6ork*Trans,issive teaching (or rote learning*
This false dichoto,y has a nu,&er of for,s of e7+ression3 !t re+resents a +osition of 8either
active or +assive93 !t is false in that it si,+lifies the nature of la&oratory 6ork to &eing necessarily
active and the o++osite of rote learning3 Jeality is ,ore co,+le7$ in t6o &road 6ays3 %irst$ 8active9
is significant to learning 6hen it ,eans 8intellectually active93 Physical activity does not ,ean
intellectual activityA +hysical activity does not necessarily lead to intellectual activity3 Second$ there is
a&undant evidence that$ in ter,s of intellectual activity$ la&oratory 6orkdiscovery learning can
involve student a++roaches that are Gust as rote as the ,ost undesira&le for,s of trans,issive teaching
(e3g3 Tasker$ -.@-*3 The reality is that la&oratory 6orkdiscovery learning can often &e highly
ritualised$ that ,any students do not kno6 the +ur+ose of the activity or kno6 (or even &elieve they
should kno6* anything &y 6ay of links &et6een the activity and the +hysics it is intended they should
&e learning3 Bne as+ect that contri&utes to these +ro&le,s$ and that is another conse<uence of this
false dichoto,y$ is$ +arado7ically$ that too ,uch is clai,ed for la&oratory 6ork33
;3 !nde+endent learning8S+oon feeding9
This dichoto,y is not at all s+ecific to +hysics learning$ &ut research 6hich +oints to the
inade<uacies of the dichoto,y has largely &een conducted in +hysicsscience learning conte7ts3 The
essence of the distortion that arises fro, this false dichoto,y is the vie6 that inde+endent learners can
&e created &y 6ithdra6ing teacher guidance3 The falseness of the dichoto,y is then the assu,+tion
that$ since 8s+oon feeding9 involves very close teacher direction$ inde+endent learners re<uire little or
no teacher direction3 !n fact the 6ithdra6al of teacher direction creates highly de+endent learners$
6ith the de+endence &eing on 6hat is availa&le to the learners 6hen teacher direction is not +resent H
te7t &ooks and student notes3 The fostering of inde+endent learners re<uires su&stantial teacher
direction$ &ut it is direction 6ith <uite different +ur+oses and of <uite different for, than that involved
in s+oon feeding (e3g3 1aird ? Eorthfield$ -..'A Chite ? Mitchell$ -..=*3
WHY STATEMENTS OF CONTENT A!ONE ARE DAMAGING!Y INADE$UATE
AS CURRICU!UM DOCUMENTS
At the heart of the several e7a,+les of different issues laid out a&ove is one central +oint 5 6hat
6e teach and ho6 6e teach this are closely intert6ined$ and to the +oint that ho6 6e teach actually
i,+acts on 6hat 6e teach3 A teacher 6ho teaches the falsehoods a&out Galileo discussed a&ove$ or
6ho teaches BE0> that nor,al reaction is a logically necessary conse<uence of &elieving in
Ee6ton#s 0a6s$ is teaching different content fro, a teacher 6ho teaches that 6hich ! have advocated
a&ove3 The co,,on +ractice that 6e have lived 6ith for years of defining a curriculu, solely in
ter,s of content to &e taught is Gust not good enough3 As 6ell as laying out the content$ the
curriculu, needs also to s+ecify teaching a++roaches$ +articularly those 6here different a++roaches
,eans different content is &eing taught3
A further issue that thus far ! have not ,entioned also needs clear s+ecification in the curriculu,
if the curriculu, is to &e understood at all &y those 6ho have to teach it 5 that is the detail of the
assess,ent of student learning3 Assess,ent is crucial to a range of things funda,ental to +hysics
)
teaching and learning$ to student understanding and engage,ent3 ! no6 &riefly list the ,ost i,+ortant
of these3
So,e +rinci+les for assess,ent that are consistent 6ith teaching to engage students$ 6ith fostering
student understanding
! set out &elo6 so,e +oints that &riefly indicate the essential +hiloso+hy of assess,ent of +hysics
learning that has guided our research$ develo+,ent and teaching at Monash in this area for ,any
years3
(i) Trivial testin lea!s to trivial learnin"
That is$ if a++roaches to testing focus on$ for e7a,+le$ rote recall$ then it is of course this for,
of lo6 level learning that 6ill &e undertaken &y ,ost students3
2ence$ the +oint can &e stated ,ore strongly as:
(ii) O#r a$$roa%&es to assess'ent tell st#!ents (&at (e (ant t&e' to learn an! &o( (e (ant
t&e' to learn it3
That is$ it is the a++roaches to assess,ent that are the strongest and ,ost o&vious ,essages
given to students a&out 6hat is e7+ected in any given class (+hysics or other su&Gect$ school or
university*3
! &elieve that these t6o +oints are 6idely understood3 2o6ever there is a further addition that
is central to ,y thinking a&out and a++roaches to assess,ent$ an addition that is not as 6idely
recogniDed3
(iii) Assess'ent s&a$es not onl) (&at st#!ents learn* &o( t&e) learn it + it also s&a$es &o(,i- t&e)
val#e (&at t&e) learn"
That is$ assess,ent a++roaches influenced 6hether or not students see value in 6hat they are
learning3 This +oint is relevant across schooling$ and of increasing i,+ortance as students get
older3 !t is ,ost i,+ortant at undergraduate levels3
(iv) St#!ents i!eas an! .elie-s a.o#t assess'ent i'$a%t on t&e e/tent to (&i%& t&at assess'ent
(ill -oster t&e learnin o- t&ese st#!ents"
That is$ 6hen students &elieve that assess,ent tasks are a++ro+riate$ then they 6ill engage
6holeheartedly 6ith these tasks3 (The ,ost co,,on e7a,+le of this occurs in the conte7t of high
stakes assess,ent such as end of school$ 6here only tasks that are seen &y students to relate to the
end of year e7a,inations are seen as validA tasks not seen as valid are not taken seriously3*
!t is co,,on for students to see the for,ative role of assess,ent as ,uch less i,+ortant than
the su,,ative role3 "hanging this strongly held &elief is an i,+ortant +art of ,aking sound use
of for,ative assess,ent$ and re<uires assess,ent a++roaches that are consistent and +ersistent3
(v) Assess'ent in $&)si%s is too o-ten %onverent3
That is$ assess,ent in +hysics classroo,s is too often concerned 6ith using tasks that$
une<uivocally$ have a single ans6er3 Such convergence is very often associated 6ith strong
e,+hasis on rote learning and re+roduction in assess,ent (usually via solution of standard
+ro&le,s*$ and is the antithesis of assess,ent concerned 6ith fostering in students vie6s of the
value of 6hat is &eing learned3
The o&vious corollary of this +oint is that assess,ent in +hysics should ,ore often &e
divergent3 That is$ assess,ent in +hysics should ,ore often involve tasks for 6hich$ &ecause of
the o+enness of the task$ there is ,ore than one +lausi&le ans6er3 This corollary leads to a si7th
+oint that is central to our research$ develo+,ent and teaching a&out assess,ent3
(vi) Diverent assess'ent re0#ires %lear %riteria -or 1#!in t&e $ro!#%ts o- t&e assess'ent tas2*
(it& t&ese %riteria .ein 2no(n to t&e st#!ents #n!erta2in t&e tas2"
(vii) Goo! tea%&in a$$roa%&es are oo! assess'ent a$$roa%&es* an! vi%e versa"
(viii) Tea%&in &as 'an) $#r$oses3 learnin &as 'an) -or's
Chile the first +art of this state,ent is o&vious$ that the second +art is a necessary
conse<uence is not 6ell recognised3 The essence of this +oint is that$ as learning has ,any for,s$
then a++roaches to assessing that learning should have ,any ,odes3
(i/) T&ere is no s#%& t&in as 4o.1e%tive assess'ent5"
A00 a++roaches to assess,ent involve value Gudge,ents3 So,e$ such as ,ulti+le choice
<uestions$ involve ,ore of the ,aking of value Gudge,ents &efore and during the setting of
<uestions$ others$ such as essay <uestions$ involve ,ore of the ,aking of value Gudge,ents after
students have given ans6ers3
/
A DATA%"ASED RESPONSE TO THE &A!! THIS IS IRRE!EVANT WHEN YOU
ARE TEACHING YEAR '() POSITION
Bne co,,ent is very fre<uently ,ade to ,e &y senior high school and university +hysics teachers
6hen discussing teaching for intellectual engage,ent$ teaching for understanding3 That co,,ent is
that 6hile these a++roaches are no dou&t very good$ they 8take too ,uch ti,e to 6ork$9 they 8cannot
&e used &ecause of the e7a, and 6hat it re<uires39 1ecause of such vie6s ! have recently co,+leted$
6ith Pa, Mulhall and 1rian McKittrick$ a three4year AJ" funded research study in senior high
school +hysics classroo,s in Victoria3 The research 6as therefore conducted in a conte7t of a
+rescri&ed curriculu, 6ith s+ecific content that has to &e taught in s+ecific ti,e (V"E*$ and 6hich is
then e7a,ined &y reasona&ly conventional a++roaches (standard +ro&le,s* in the e7ternal e7a,s3 !n
the research 6e had t6o grou+s of teachers 6ho taught +hysics 6ith different +ur+oses and 6ith
different a++roaches: one grou+ 6as concerned to develo+ student understanding of +hysics conce+ts
(to intellectually engage students 6ith +hysics*$ the other 6as concerned to train students in solving
standard +hysics +ro&le,s (focus on e7a, +re+aration*3 Students fro, the classroo,s of these
teachers 6ere tested$ in ,echanics and electricity$ 6ith t6o for,s of test 5a test of conce+tual
understanding$ a test co,+rising standard <uestions of the for, used on the V"E e7a,s3 The results
6ere very clear 5 students fro, the classroo,s focused on understanding sho6ed su&stantially &etter
understanding of conce+ts$ and did at least as 6ell as students fro, the conventional classroo,s on the
conventional tests3 !ndeed on ,echanics those 6ho 6ere in classes focused on develo+ing
understanding did significantly &etter on the conventional$ e7a,4ty+e test than those in the classes
focused on &eing a&le to do these e7a,4ty+e <uestions3 This is clear evidence that focusing on
understanding does not lead to +oorer +erfor,ance on standard e7a,s$ and in so,e content areas
(,echanics* can lead to &etter +erfor,ance on standard e7a,s3
So,e e7a,+les of teaching a++roaches used &y those teachers focused on understanding and
engaging their +hysics students are outlined in the A++endi73
ACKNOW!EDGEMENTS
! noted at the &eginning of this +a+er that ! 6as &eing a tad self4indulgent &y focusing here on so,e of
the things ! have found out a&out +hysics teaching and learning$ fro, ,y o6n teaching and research$
since ! started +hysics teaching in -./'3 "entral to this have &een ,any +eo+le ! have &een fortunate
to have &een a&le to 6ork 6ith$ 6hose various contri&utions are gratefully ackno6ledged:
at Monash: Peter %ensha,$ Dick Chite$ Paul Gardner$ the late Oeff Eorthfield$ !an Mitchell$ Oohn
1aird$ Pa, Mulhall$ 1rian McKittrick$ Oohn 0oughran$ Jo&in Gray$ Peter Searle$ David Mills $
Susan %eteris$ ,y (,any* research students$ and othersA
else6here: Audrey "ha,+agne ? 0eo Klo+fer (Univ Pitts&urgh*$ the late Jos Driver ? Phil Scott
(Univ 0eeds*$ Gaalen Erickson ? Oi, Gaskell (Univ 1ritish "olo,&ia*$ 2ans Eeidderer (Univ
1re,en*$ Peter 2e6son (Univ Cisconsin*$ Piet 0inGse (Univ of Utrecht*$ "liff Malcol, (no6 Univ
K6aPulu Eatal*$ Jick Duschl (King#s "ollege 0ondon ? Jutgers Univ*$ 0illian McDer,ott (Univ
Cashington*$ Sung Oae Park and his students (Seoul Eational Univ*$ Paul 1lack (King#s "ollege*$
the late Joger Bs&orne ? Alister Oones (Univ Caikato*$ Ooe Jedish (Univ Maryland*$ Joser Pinto
? her students (Autono,ous Univ 1arcelona*$ and others
F
A &it of further reading: (a fe6 e7a,+les of things that e7+and &oth +ractices and underlying +rinci+les outlined
a&ove*
1erry$ A3$ Mulhall$ P3$ Gunstone$ J3 ? 0oughran$ O3 (-...*3 2el+ing students learn fro, la&oratory 6ork3
Australian Science Teachers# Oournal$ ==(-*$ 'F4;-3 (la. (or2 %onsi!ere! -ro' t&e $ers$e%tives o- t&is
$a$er + an! -ro' !ata)
Duit$ J3 ? 2aeussler$ P3 (-..=* 0earning and Teaching Energy3 !n P3 %ensha,$ J3 Gunstone ? J3 Chite (eds*
The "ontent of Science3 0ondon: %al,er3 (so'e ver) &el$-#l i!eas a.o#t tea%&in ener) in (a)s t&at
a%%e$t t&e %o'$le/it) o- t&e %on%e$t)
Gunstone$ J3%3 (-..)*3 "onstructivist learning and the teaching of science3 !n 13 2and ? V3 Prain (Eds3*
Teaching and learning in secondary school science3 Sydney: 2arcourt 1race$ ;4'(3 (o#tline o- &o( s%&ool
learnin o%%#rs* an! tea%&in i'$li%ations)
Gunstone$ J3%3 ? Mitchell$ !3O3 (-..F*3 Metacognition and conce+tual change3 !n O3O3 MintDes$ O323 Candersee ?
O3D3 Eovak (Eds3* Teaching science for understanding3 San Diego: Acade,ic Press$ -;;4-/;3 (a se0#en%e
-or tea%&in so'e 'e%&ani%s %on%e$ts* (it& e/$lanations o- (&) t&e se0#en%e is as it is)
2art$ "3 (-.@F*3 A teaching se<uence for introducing forces to year -- +hysics students3 Australian Science
Teachers# Oournal$ ;;(-*$ ')4'@3 (an o#tline o- a tea%&in se0#en%e t&at is %onsistent (it& t&e $ositions
ar#e! a.ove* $arti%#larl) (it& res$e%t to nor'al rea%tion)
2art$ "3$ Mulhall$ P3$ 1erry$ M3$ 0oughran$ O3 ? Gunstone$ J3 ('(((*3 Chat is the +ur+ose of t&is +racK or "an
students learn so'et&in fro, doing e7+eri,entsK Oournal of Jesearch in Science Teaching ;F$ /))4/F)3
(so'e -#rt&er !etail o- t&e resear%& !es%ri.e! in 6err)* M#l&all** G#nstone 7 8o#&ran + a.ove)
McKittrick$ 13$ Mulhall$ P3 ? Gunstone$ J3 (-...*3 !,+roving understanding in +hysics: An effective teaching
+rocedure3 Australian Science Teachers Oournal$ ==(;*$ 'F4;;3 (ives in-or'ation a.o#t t&e nat#re an! #se
o- t&e tea%&in strate) .rie-l) !es%ri.e! in $oint 9 o- t&e A$$en!i/ + C:Ps)
Ti&erghien$ A3$ Oosse,$ E303 ? 1aroGas$ O3 (eds*(-..@*3 "onnecting research in +hysics education 6ith teacher
education3 !nternational "o,,ission on Physics Education3 Pu&lished electronically at
htt+:6663+hysics3ohio4state3eduQGosse,!"PE1BBKS3ht,l (e/tre'el) (i!e ranin an! val#a.le
reso#r%e + .oo2 $ro!#%e! .) International Co''ission on P&)si%s E!#%ation to $resent relevant resear%&
to $&)si%s tea%&ers an! tea%&er e! st#!ents)
Chite$ J3T3$ ? Gunstone$ J3%3 (-..'*3 Pro&ing understanding3 0ondon: %al,er Press3 (!es%ri$tion an! #se o- a
rane o- tea%&in an! assess'ent $ro%e!#res)
Also the range of +u&lications fro, the ProGect for the Enhancing of Effective 0earning (PEE0*A see
htt+:6663+eel6e&3org
JE%EJEE"ES:
1aird$ O3J3 and Eorthfield$ O J3 (eds*(-..'*3 0earning fro, the PEE0 e7+erience3 Mel&ourne: %aculty of
Education$ Monash University3
Driver$ J3$ Guesne$ E3 and Ti&erghien$ A3 (eds*(-.@)*3 "hildren#s ideas in science3 Milton Keynes$ U3K3: B+en
University Press3
%ensha,$ P3O3$ Gunstone$ J3%3 and Chite$ J3T3 (eds*(-..=*3 The content of science3 0ondon: %al,er3
%uller$ J3C3$ 1ro6nlee$ J313$ and 1aker$ D303 (-.;F*3 %irst +rinci+les of +hysics3 Ee6 >ork: Allyn ? 1acon3
Glynn$ S3M3 and Duit$ J3 (eds*(-..)*3 0earning science in the schools: Jesearch refor,ing +ractice3 Mah6ah$
E3O3: 0a6rence Erl&au,3
2and$ 13 and Prain$ V3 (eds*(-..)*3 Teaching and learning in science: The constructivist classroo,3 Sydney:
2arcourt 1race3
MintDes$ O3O3$ Candersee$ O323 ? Eovak$ O3D3 (eds3*(-..F* Teaching science for understanding3 San Diego:
Acade,ic Press
Bs&orne$ J3O3 and %rey&erg$ P3S3 (eds*(-.@)*3 0earning in science: The i,+lications of children#s science3
Auckland: 2eine,ann
Sch6a&$ O3O3 (-./'*3 The teaching of science as en<uiry3 !n O3 Sch6a& and P3 1rand6ein (eds*3 The teaching of
science3 "a,&ridge$ MA: 2arvard University Press3
Tasker$ J3 (-.@-*3 "hildren#s vie6s and classroo, e7+eriences3 Australian Science Teachers Oournal$ 'F(;*$ ;;4
;F3
Treagust$ D3%3$ Duit$ J3 and %raser$ 13O3 (eds* (-../*3 !,+roving teaching and learning in science and
,athe,atics3 Ee6 >ork: Teachers# "ollege Press3
Chite$ J3T3 and Gunstone$ J3%3 (-..'*3 Pro&ing understanding3 0ondon: %al,er3
Chite$ J3T3 and Mitchell$ !3O3 (-..=*3 Metacognition and the <uality of learning3 Studies in Science Education$
';$ '-4;F
@
A++endi7: So,e e7a,+les of teaching strategies to intellectually engage students and focus
on student understanding of +hysics
(a* Predict4B&serve4E7+lain (PBE* :
This strategy$ develo+ed at Monash University ') years ago$ is &asically a restructuring of the
co,,on de,onstration in +hysics teaching3 !t involves asking students to +redict the outco,e of
so,e event and to Gustify their +rediction (i3e3 give reasons for the +rediction*$ then to descri&e 6hat
they see 6hen the event occurs$ then to reconcile any conflict &et6een +rediction and o&servation3
Bur e7tensive e7+erience in develo+ing and using PBEs leads to a nu,&er of +oints of i,+ortance
in the use of this strategy3 !n &rief so,e of these are:
The PBE situation ,ust &e one for 6hich the students feel a&le to give a +rediction H +ure
guessing is not at all useful &ecause the reasons students have for +redictions are of
funda,ental i,+ortance to teaching 6ith PBEs3
!n so,e situations$ the o&servations students ,ake are not unifor, 4 so,eti,es o&servations
are influenced &y theory (in this case &y the +rediction*3 2ence$ it is i,+ortant to esta&lish Gust
6hat o&servations students have ,ade3
As far as +ossi&le the result of the PBE should &e clear3 !f +ossi&le$ it should not rely on
,easure,ents such as a ,eter reading3 (These are rather a&stract$ it is &etter if the result is as
concrete as +ossi&le3*
Jeconciling +rediction and o&servation is of course at the heart of the learning value of PBEs3
!t is rarely an easy issue3 The teacher telling 6ill al,ost never achieve it3 Again$ students need
a chance to talk out their atte,+ts to e7+lain any difference$ and often further e7+eri,ents 6ill
&e suggested3
!t is i,+ortant to try to get so,e co,,it,ent to a +rediction fro, every student
&efore the o&servation3 T6o 6ays of atte,+ting this are: (i* to vote on all
suggested +redictions$ or (ii* to have each student 6rite do6n her or his
+rediction and reasons &efore discussing reasons for +redictions3
There are a nu,&er of +ur+oses in using a PBE3 These include:
!t is a very good diagnostic +ro&e3
!t is very sti,ulating and interest4arousing3
!t is a +o6erful 6ay of generating change in students# ideas 5 conce+tual change3 1y
challenging e7isting ideas through o&servations at odds 6ith +redictions$ it is ,ore likely that
you 6ill have students &egin the +rocess of revie6ing and changing their vie6s3
!t is a +o6erful sti,ulus for discussion3
There is an e7tensive discussion of PBEs$ and ,any e7a,+les fro, across the curriculu,$ in J3
Chite ? J3 Gunstone (-..'* Pro&ing Understanding$ 0ondon: %al,er Press3 There are ,any
6e&sites that give infor,ation a&out PBEs3 T6o e7a,+les are
htt+:6663hed3s6in3edu3aucleasresearchCorksho+sPBE,ain3ht, (a university +hysics
de+art,ent +age*$ and htt+:science3uniserve3edu3auschoolsu++ortstrategy3ht,lRTBP (contains a
6ide range of teaching resources via links to other sites$ including PBEs and conce+t ,a+s 5 see
&elo6*3
(&* Jelational (Venn* Diagra,s :
These are Venn diagra,s Gust as used in ,athe,atics 4 and are therefore a 6ay of having students
diagra,,atically re+resent their understanding of relationshi+s &et6een related
conce+tssituationsclasses of eventsetc3 Bur e7+erience suggests that it is often &etter to call these
8Jelational Diagra,s9 6hen using the, in +hysics teaching$ as ,any students see, to have had M&ad
e7+eriences# 6ith Venn Diagra,s in ,athe,atics3 That is$ ,any students think that Venn Diagra,s
in +hysics 6ill &e a&stract and re,ote and therefore of little value in +hysics learning$ &ecause they
found Venn Diagra,s in ,athe,atics a&stract and re,ote3
Jelational Diagra,s can &e used as individual tasks (including on tests$ +rovided students
understand 6ell the nature of the task and 6hat is re<uired fro, the,*$ as s,all grou+ discussion and
6hole class discussion a++roaches (these can &e in the sa,e ,anner as "UPS can &e used 5 see (d*
&elo6*3
Jelational Diagra,s have &een used ,uch less in +hysics teaching than PBEs$ and hence there are
far fe6er resources availa&le a&out the,3 (They are discussed fully in Chite ? Gunstone 5 see
a&ove3*
.
(c* "once+t Ma+s
"once+t Ma+s have &een 6idely used and descri&ed$ in +hysics learning teaching$ in other
sciences and in other areas of the curriculu,3 My e7+eriences suggest that ,any +hysics teachers
have heard of these$ and so,e use the, no63 2ence$ ! ,ake only ' +oints a&out conce+t ,a+s here$
&ut &oth are crucial to the use hel+ful of conce+t ,a+s in +hysics learning and teaching3
The first +oint is that$ in general$ conce+t ,a+s should not &e seen as hierarchical (even though
so,e authors have 6ritten ,uch a&out this su++osed characteristic of conce+t ,a+s*3 Cithin the
sciences$ it is &asically only conce+t ,a+s a&out classifications (e3g3 rocks$ sedi,entary$ ,eta,or+hic$
igneous$ 333* that are validly hierarchical3 Atte,+ts to ,ake conce+t ,a+s hierarchical 6hen they
involve non4hierarchical areas of kno6ledge distort that kno6ledgeI This is +articularly i,+ortant in
+hysics3 ! have yet to see a conce+t ,a+ in +hysics that ! 6ould regard as validly hierarchical3
Therefore$ state,ents such as the first ste+ in doing a conce+t ,a+ is to find the overarching conce+t
(a very co,,on state,ent in ,any USA discussions of conce+t ,a+s* are 6rong in +hysics conte7tsI
The second +oint is that it is the links that students 6rite to sho6 the relationshi+s they see
&et6een conce+ts that are the i,+ortant as+ect of conce+t ,a+s3 !f these are not generated$ then 6hat
is +roduced is EBT a conce+t ,a+3
There is a huge nu,&er of 6e& sites that refer to conce+t ,a+s (a search on Google using
8conce+t ,a+s +hysics learning9 gave a&out '@/(( hits*3 Many of these sites have hierarchy as
central to conce+t ,a+s$ andor do not al6ays have the nature of +erceived relationshi+s indicated on
the links on conce+t ,a+s 5 that is ,any of these sites do not satisfy the ' +oints a&ove that ! see as
crucial to conce+t ,a+s3 ! give e7a,+les of 6e& sites 6ith so,e reluctanceI
An e7tensive discussion of conce+t ,a+s$ including hy+er,edia uses$ is at
htt+:ksi3c+sc3ucalgary3caarticles"once+tMa+s"M3ht,l3 Discussion of conce+t ,a+s and
assess,ent$ and a nu,&er of links to other sites$ is at
htt+:66636cer36isc3edunisecl-flagcatcon,a+con,a+)3ht,3 (Chite ? Gunstone also has an
e7tensive discussion of conce+t ,a+s and their uses in teaching and assess,ent3*
(d* "once+tual Understanding Procedures ("UPs*
This final e7a,+le is a teaching strategy that 6e have develo+ed at Monash$ for use in &oth senior
high school and undergraduate +hysics3 !t is a strategy 6ith the s+ecific +ur+ose of develo+ing
conce+tual understanding &y having students discuss +hysics ideas in a conte7t 6here they are focused
on s+ecific conce+ts3
The a++roach uses <ualitative +hysics tasks in the follo6ing 6ay:
first each student s+ends a&out ) ,inutes on the task individually (this ,eans that ,ost
students have thought a&out the task &efore ,oving into grou+s$ and this greatly reduces the
nu,&er 6ho chose to not engage 6ith the grou+ discussions*A
then students are +laced in grou+s of ;$ 6ith the task of +roducing a single res+onse to the
taskA this single res+onse is +laced on an A; sheet of +a+er (large enough to &e seen at a
distance in the ne7t and final stage*A
then all the s,all grou+ res+onses are +laced on the 6all of the classroo,$ and the teacher
runs a discussion in 6hich students defendconsider their res+onses$ 6ith the intention of
,oving the class to a single (correct* res+onse3
!t is a +o6erful strategy for having students reconsider conce+tions (a +o6erful strategy then for
conce+tual change*$ &ut +laces considera&le de,ands on the teacher in the 6hole class discussion
+hase 4 this is the ,ost likely stage for students to start to reconsider ,isconce+tions$ &ut only if the
teacher is genuinely running a discussion &et6een students3 !f the teacher treats this +hase as one
6here heshe 6ill tell the correct ans6er$ then the strategy is not 6orth the ti,e it takes3
There is ,ore infor,ation a&out "UPS and their uses$ and a nu,&er of e7a,+les of "UPS tasks $ at
htt+:6663education3,onash3edu3au+roGects+hysics3
-(