Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지

An Analysis of the Features of 'Typically-Perceived-Situation(TPS)' for in-depth Understanding of Students' Ideas: The Case of Four Elementary School Students' TPSs related to the Action of Force

  • Published : 2004.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

A Typically-Perceived-Situation(TPS) is a situation which might be useful for conceptual learning of science, rising spontaneously in an individual's mind when someone is thinking about, or in relation to, any object such as physical object, concept, situation, etc. But, for a discussion about the TPS' usefulness in depth, we need to analyze the specific features of the TPS in relation to conceptual learning of science. This study investigated four elementary school students' TPSs related to the topic of the action of force, especially (a) 'the situation where force is being acted on an object', and (b) 'the situation where force is not being acted on an object', with an interview as well as with a drawing-and-explanation type questionnaire. Their TPSs were then compared with their concepts, checked by a misconception questionnaire of choice-and-explanation type. The results showed that the students' TPSs illustrated not only their conceptions about the action of force, but also gave more fruitful details of their ideas, including (a) clues of their conceptions, (b) concrete situations, and (c) their past experiences with emotional components. On the whole, the TPS's appeared to be rather stable, affected by their past experiences, and needed to be analyzed into their sub-units for more subtle details. Finally, some practical ways of how to apply the ideas of the TPS to the conceptual learning of science are suggested.

Keywords

References

  1. Andersson, B.(1986). The experiential gestalt of causation: a common core to pupils preconceptions in science. European Journal of Science Education, 8(2), 155-171 https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528860080205
  2. diSessa, A. A.(1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2 & 3), 105-225 https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008
  3. Dreyfus, A., & Jungwirth, E.(1980). A Comparison of the 'Prompting effect' of out-of-school with of in-school contexts on certain aspects of critical thinking. European Journal of Science Education, 2(3), 301-310 https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528800020310
  4. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Open University Press: Milton Keynes, Philadelphia
  5. Duit, R.(1991). Students' conceptual frameworks: Consequences for learning science. In S. M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany, & B. K. Britton, (Eds.) The psychology of learning science. Lawrence Erlbaum : NJ, 65-85
  6. Duit, R.(2004). Bibliography - Students' and Teachers Conceptions and Science Education. at: http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse
  7. Feher, E., & Rice, K. (1988). Shadows and anti-images: Children' s conceptions of light and vision II. Science Education, 72(5), 637-649 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730720509
  8. Gagne, R. M.(1970). The conditions of learning. Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York
  9. Hashweh, M. Z.(1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 229-249 https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528860080301
  10. Howard, E. W. (1987). Concepts and schemata. Cassell Educational: London
  11. Kim, I.(2004). Physics of 'force and motion'. In J. Song, I. Kim. Y.-M. Kim, S.-G. kwon, W. Oh, & J. Park(Eds.). Map of students' physics misconceptions. Bookshill: Seoul, p. 31-123
  12. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O'Loughlin (1988). The Development of scientific thinking skills. Academic Press: London
  13. M. O. E. of Korea (1997). The 7th Curriculum of Science. Seoul
  14. Mori, I., Kitagawa, O., & Tadang, N.(1974). The effect of religious ideas on a child’ s concept of time: a comparison of Japanese and Thai children. Science Education, 58(4), 519-522 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730580412
  15. Newell, A. & Simon, H.(1972). Human problem-solving. Prentice- Hall. Englewood Cliffs: NJ
  16. Novak, J. D.(1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept Maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Lawrence Erlbaum : NJ
  17. Rosch, E., Marvis, C. B., Gray, W., Johnson, D., & Boyes-Braem, P.(1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605 https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9
  18. Shin, H. J. (2000). Concepts and categorization. Acanet: Seoul
  19. Song, J.(1997). Review and analysis of the students on contexts in science education. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 17(3), 273-288
  20. Stepans, J.(1991). Developmental patterns in students' understanding of physic.s concepts. In S.M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany, & B. K. Britton, (Eds.) The psychology of learning science. Lawrence Erlbaum : NJ, 89-115
  21. Strike, K. L., & Posner, G. J.(1982). Conceptual change and science teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 1982, 4(3), 231-240 https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528820040302
  22. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.) Cognitive structure and conceptual change. Academic Press: Orlando, 211-231
  23. White, R. (1985). Importance of context in educational research. Research in Science Education, 15, 92-102 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356530
  24. Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J., & Novak J. D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science education. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, Macmillan Publishing Company: New York, 357-387