We report on an experimental course in geometrical optics which heavily incorporates historical models accounting for light, vision, optical images, and others. The design and contents of the course were guided by previously elicited knowledge of high school students regarding optical phenomena. We utilized the course in a year-long experiment. The content knowledge of students expressed in a facets-scheme structure was compared with the same under regular instruction. We made qualitative and quantitative assessments based upon facets-scheme frequencies. Clear differences found in students’ conceptual knowledge may support the adopted rationale and teaching approach: using appropriately selected historical materials that address knowledge issues relevant for the students can significantly promote meaningful learning of the subject matter.
REFERENCES
1.
See, e.g., H. Niedderrer and H. Schecker, “Towards an Explicit Description of Cognitive Systems for Research in Physics Learning,” in Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies (IPN, Kiel, Germany, 1992), pp. 74–99.
2.
M. Matthews, Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science (Routledge, New York, 1994).
3.
I. Galili and A. Hazan, “Experts’ Views on Using History and Philosophy of Science in Practice of Physics Instruction” (unpublished).
4.
J. Losee, A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science (Oxford U.P., Oxford, 1972), p. 38.
5.
E. Mach, “The Significance and Purpose of Natural Laws,” in Philosophy of Science (Meridian, New York, 1908/1960).
6.
(a) J. Bruner, The Process of Education (Vintage, New York, 1960);
(b) J. Bruner, Toward a Theory of Instruction (Harvard U.P., Cambridge, MA, 1966).
7.
T. Hawkes, Structuralism and Semiotics (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1977).
8.
(a) E. von Glaserfeld, “A Constructivist View of Learning and Teaching,” in Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies (IPN, Kiel, Germany, 1992), pp. 29–40;
(b) E. von Glaserfeld, “Cognition, Construction of Knowledge and Teaching,” in Constructivism in Science Education (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1998), pp. 11–30.
9.
J. Piaget, The Child’s Conception of Physical Causality (Littlefield, Adams & Co, Totowa, NJ, 1972).
10.
(a)
J. K.
Gilbert
, R. J.
Osborne
, and P. J.
Fensham
, “Children’s Science and Its Consequences for Teaching
,” Sci. Educ.
66
(4
), 623
–633
(1982
);(b) R. Driver, E. Guesne, and A. Tiberghien, “Children’s Ideas and Learning of Science,” in Children’s Ideas in Science (Open U.P., Philadelphia, 1985);
(c)
M.
Mariani
and J.
Ogborn
, “Towards an Ontology of the Commonsense Reasoning
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
13
, 69
–85
(1991
).11.
(a) A. diSessa, “Knowledge in Pieces,” in Constructivism in Computer Age (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1988); (b)
A.
diSessa
, “Toward an Epistemology of Physics
,” Cognit. Instr.
10
, 105
–225
(1993
).12.
J. Minstrell, “Facets of Student’s Knowledge and Relevant Instruction,” in Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies (IPN, Kiel, Germany, 1992), pp. 110–128.
13.
J. Hiebert and P. Lefevre, “Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Mathematics: An Introductory Analysis,” in Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1986), pp. 1–27.
14.
(a) A. Arons, A Guide to Introductory Physics Teaching (Wiley, New York, 1990);
(b)
I.
Galili
, “Mechanics Background for Students’ Misconceptions in Electro-Magnetism
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
17
(3
), 371
–387
(1995
).15.
I.
Galili
and V.
Lavrik
, “Flux Concept in Learning about Light. A Critique of the Present Situation
,” Sci. Educ.
82
(5
), 591
–614
(1998
).16.
I.
Galili
and A.
Hazan
, “Learners’ Knowledge in Optics: Interpretation, Structure, and Analysis
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
22
(1
), 57
–88
(2000
).17.
I.
Galili
and V.
Lavrik
, “Flux Concept in Learning about Light. A Critique of the Present Situation
,” Sci. Educ.
82
(5
), 591
–614
(1998
).18.
H. Pfundt and R. Duit, Bibliography: Students’ Alternative Frameworks and Science Education (Kiel, IPN, 1994).
19.
S. J.
Brush
, “History of Science and Science Education
,” Interch.
20
(2
), 60
–70
(1989
);M.
Matthews
, “A Role for History and Philosophy in Science Teaching
,” Interch.
20
(2
), 3
–15
(1989
).20.
P. Duhem, The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory (Princeton U.P., Princeton, NJ, 1906/1954), p. 268.
21.
I. Galili and A. Hazan, “Experts’ Views on Using History and Philosophy of Science in Practice of Physics Instruction” (unpublished).
22.
M. Matthews, Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science (Routledge, New York, 1994).
23.
24.
See, e.g., (a)
B.
Andersson
and C.
Karrqvist
, “How Swedish Pupils Understand Light and Its Properties.
” Eur. J. Sci. Educ.
5
(4
), 387
–402
(1983
);(b) E. Guesne, “Light,” in Children’s Ideas in Science (Open U.P., Philadelphia, 1985), pp. 10–32;
(c)
I.
Galili
, S.
Bendall
, and F.
Goldberg
, “The Effects of Prior Knowledge and Instruction on Understanding Image Formation
,” J. Res. Sci. Teach.
30
(3
), 271
–301
(1993
);(d)
N. J.
Selley
, “Children’s Ideas on Light and Vision
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
18
(6
), 713
–723
(1996
).25.
(a) V. Ronchi, The Nature of Light (Harvard U.P., Cambridge, MA, 1970);
(b) D. C. Lindberg, Theories of Vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1976);
(c) D. Park, The Fire Within the Eye (Princeton U.P., Princeton, NJ, 1997).
26.
(a) V. Ronchi, The Nature of Light (Harvard U.P., Cambridge, MA, 1970);
(b) D. C. Lindberg, Theories of Vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1976).
27.
I.
Galili
and A.
Hazan
, “Learners’ Knowledge in Optics: Interpretation, Structure, and Analysis
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
22
(1
), 57
–88
(2000
).28.
See, e.g., (a)
I.
Galili
, S.
Bendall
, and F.
Goldberg
, “The Effects of Prior Knowledge and Instruction on Understanding Image Formation
,” J. Res. Sci. Teach.
30
(3
), 271
–301
(1993
);(b)
I.
Galili
and A.
Hazan
, “Learners’ Knowledge in Optics: Interpretation, Structure, and Analysis
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
22
(1
), 57
–88
(2000
).29.
J. L. Bruning and B. L. Kintz, “Test of Significance of Difference Between the Proportions,” in Computational Handbook of Statistics (Scott, Foresman and Co., Glenview, IL, 1977), pp. 223–224.
30.
K.
Rice
and E.
Feher
, “Pinholes and Images: Children’s Conceptions of Light and Vision
,” Sci. Educ.
71
, 629
–639
(1987
).31.
S.
Bendall
, F.
Goldberg
, and I.
Galili
, “Prospective Elementary Teachers’ Prior Knowledge about Light
,” J. Res. Sci. Teach.
30
(9
), 1169
–1187
(1993
).32.
(a)
I.
Galili
, S.
Bendall
, and F.
Goldberg
, “The Effects of Prior Knowledge and Instruction on Understanding Image Formation
,” J. Res. Sci. Teach.
30
(3
), 271
–301
(1993
);(b)
I.
Galili
and A.
Hazan
, “Learners’ Knowledge in Optics: Interpretation, Structure, and Analysis
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
22
(1
), 57
–88
(2000
).33.
I.
Galili
, S.
Bendall
, and F.
Goldberg
, “The Effects of Prior Knowledge and Instruction on Understanding Image Formation
,” J. Res. Sci. Teach.
30
(3
), 271
–301
(1993
).34.
D. C. Lindberg, Theories of Vision from Al-Kindi to Kepler (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1976).
35.
I.
Galili
, “Student’s Conceptual Change in Geometrical Optics
,” Int. J. Sci. Educ.
18
(7
), 847
–868
(1996
).36.
M. T. H.
Chi
, J. D.
Slotta
, and N.
De Leeuw
, “From Things to Process: A Theory of Conceptual Change for Learning Science Concepts
,” Learn. Instruc.
4
(1
), 27
–43
(1994
).37.
See, e.g., CPU projects in the SDSU: http:/cpuproject.sdsu.edu/CPU/
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2000 American Association of Physics Teachers.
2000
American Association of Physics Teachers
AAPT members receive access to the American Journal of Physics and The Physics Teacher as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.
