Diagnosis of Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Conceptions in Geometric Optics

Author(s):

Derya KALTAKCIAli Eryilmaz

Conference:

ECER 2008

Network:

9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement

Format:

Paper

Session Information

09 SES 10A, Examination Practice within Teacher Education Praxis: Meaningful & Valid

Paper Session

Time:

2008-09-12

14:45-16:15

Room:

AK2 139

Chair:

Rolf Lander

Contribution

Students’ conceptions and reasoning in science have been studied over the last three decades. With this aim several studies have been conducted to depict students’ understanding in different physics topics such as mechanics (Clement, 1982; Halloun & Hestenes, 1985; McCloskey, 1983), electricity (McDermott & Shaffer, 1992; Shipstone, 1988), heat and temperature (Erickson, 1979, 1980; Rogan, 1988) or light (Guesne, 1985; Shapiro, 1989; Watts, 1985). Students’ conceptions affected by several factors including the teacher’s viewpoints (Gilbert, Osborne & Fensham, 1982). For this reason studying teacher conceptions would be beneficial in interpreting student conceptions. In order to measure conceptions different diagnostic tools have been developed and used. Interviews (Osborne & Gilbert, 1979; 1980; White & Gunstone, 1992), multiple choice tests (Hestenes, Wells, & Swackhamer, 1992; Tamir & Trembath as cited in Chen, Lin & Lin, 2002), and multiple-tier tests (Chen et al., 2002; Eryılmaz & Surmeli, 2002; Kaltakci & Didis, 2007; Kutluay, 2005; Pesman, 2005; Tsai & Chu, 2002) are used commonly to diagnose conceptions. Interviews have advantages as flexibility and obtaining in-depth information; but can be conducted on limited number of individuals. Multiple choice tests can be administered to a large number of individuals; but cannot investigate the students’ responses deeply (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000). For this reason, researchers extended multiple choice tests into two or three-tier tests in order to compensate the limitations of interviews and the ordinary multiple choice tests used in diagnosing students’ conceptions. In two tier tests (Chen et al., 2002) students are asked the reason of their choice in the first tier. In three-tier tests (Eryılmaz & Sürmeli, 2002; Kaltakci & Didis, 2007; Kutluay, 2005; Peşman, 2005) in addition to the reasoning, in the third tier the students are asked about their confidence in the first two tiers. In this study senior pre-service physics teachers’ conceptions in geometrical optics will be diagnosed with a three-tier test and compared with the results of a previous study on eleventh grade high school students.

Method

Three-Tier Geometric Optic Misconception Test developed by Kutluay (2005) was administered to 30 senior pre-service physics teachers at Middle East Technical University (METU) in Turkey in 2006-2007 fall and spring semesters. The test consists 16 items with three-tiers each. Kutluay (2005) administered the test to 114 eleventh grade high school students and analyzed the test results. In the present study the same test was administered to pre-service teachers and the results will be compared with the previous results with eleventh grade students.

Expected Outcomes

The preliminary analysis of the tests results on pre-service physics teachers show some similarity between the conceptions of eleventh grade high school students and pre-service teachers. This result may suggest the importance of teacher education for scientific conceptions of high school students.

References

Chen, C. C., Lin, H. S., & Lin, M. L. (2002). Developing a two-tier diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding- the formation of images by plane mirror. Proc. Natl. Sci. Counc. ROC(D), 12(3), 106-121. Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 66-71. Erickson, G. L. (1979). Children’s conceptions of heat and temperature. Science Education,63, 221-230. Erickson, G. L. (1980). Children’s viewpoints of heat: A second look. Science Education, 64, 223-236. Eryılmaz, A., & Sürmeli, E. (2002). Üç-asamalı sorularla ögrencilerin ısı ve sıcaklık konularındaki kavram yanılgılarının ölçülmesi. Proceeding of V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, Ankara, 110-115. Frankel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education (4th ed.). US: McGraw-Hill Comp. Gilbert, J. K., Osborne, R. J., & Fensham, P. J. (1982). Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623-633. Guesne, E. (1985). Light. In R. Driver, E. Guesne & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children’s ideas in science (pp. 10-32). Phidelphia: Open University Press. Halloun, I., & Hestenes, D. (1985). Initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1043-1055. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141-158. Kaltakci, D., & Didis, D. (2007). Identification of pre-service physics teachers’ misconceptions on gravity concept: A study with a 3-tier misconception test. In S. A.Çetin, & İ. Hikmet (Eds.), Proceedings of the American Institute of Physics, USA, 899, 499-500. Kutluay, Y. (2005). Diagnosis of eleventh grade students' misconceptions about geometric optic by a three-tier test. Unpublished master thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara. McCloskey, M. (1983). Naive theories of motion. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 299-324). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. McDermott, L. C., & Shaffer, P. S. (1992). Resrach as a guide for curriculum development: an example from introductory electricity. American Journal of Physics, 60(11), 994-1003. Osborne, R. J., & Gilbert J. K. (1979). Investigating student understanding of basic physics concepts using an interview-about-instances approach. Research in Science Education, 16, 40-48. Osborne, R. J., & Gilbert J. K. (1980). A method for investigating concept understanding in science. European Journal of Science Education, 2, 311-321. Pesman, H. (2005). Development of a three-tier test to assess ninth grade students’ misconceptions about simple electric circuit. Unpublished master thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara. Rogan, J. M. (1988). Development of a conceptual framework on heat. Science Education,72(1), 103-113. Shapiro, B. L. (1989). What children bring to light: Giving high status to learners’ views and actions in science. Science Education, 73(6), 711-733. Shipstone, D. (1988). Pupils’ understanding of simple electrical circuits. Physics Education, 23, 92-96. Tsai, C. C., & Chou, C. (2002). Diagnosing students’ alternative conceptions in science. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 157-165. Watts, D. M. (1985). Student conceptions of light. A case study. Physics Education, 20, 183-187. White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.

Author Information

Derya KALTAKCI

Middle East Technical University

Departmant of Secondary Science and Mathematics Education

Ankara

212

Ali Eryilmaz

Middle East Technical University, Turkey

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER.

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.