From everyday life experiences to physics understanding occurring in small group work with context rich problems during introductory physics work at University

Research in Science Education

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 449-467

  Enghag, Margareta ^a   Gustafsson, Peter ^a   Jonsson, Gunnar ^a  

^a MÄLARDALEN UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Context rich problems; Everyday life experiences; Ownership of learning; Physics teaching

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548177081     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-006-9035-4     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1977). Communication and learning in small groups. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
2. Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1995). Communication and learning revisited: Making through talk. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
3. Benckert, S., Pettersson, S., Aasa, S., Johansson, O., & Norman, R. (2005). Gruppdiskussioner runt kontexrika problem i fysik - hur ska problemen utformas? (Group discussions around context rich problems in physics - how to design them?). NorDiNa, 2, 36-50.
4. Benson, H. (1996). University physics. New York: Wiley.
5. Crawford, B., Marx, R., & Krajcik, J. (1999). Developing collaboration in a middle school project-based science classroom. Science Education, 83(6), 701-723.
6. Dewey, J. (1938/1997). Experience & education. New York: Touchstone.
7. Dudley-Marling, C., & Searle, D. (1995). Who owns learning? Questions of autonomy, choice, and control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.
8. Edwards, J.-A. (2005, February). Exploratory talk in peer groups: Exploring the zone of proximal development. Paper presented at the Fourth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME 4), Sant Feliu de Guíxols, Spain. 17-21 Feb 2005.Available at: http://cerme4.crm.es/Papers%20definitus/8/ JulieAnnEdwards.pdf.
9. Enghag, M. (2004). Miniprojects and context rich problems. Case studies with analysis of motivation, learner ownership and competence in small group work in physics. Studies in Science and Technology Education, Licentiate Thesis1, Linköping University, Sweden.
10. Enghag, M., & Niedderer, H. (2005). Physics learning with exploratory talks during a miniproject - a case study of four girls working with electric circuits. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 1(7), 5-11.
11. Heller, P., & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part II. Designing problems and structuring groups. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 637-644.
12. Heller, P., Keith, R., & Anderson, S. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving. American Journal of Physics, 60(7), 627-636.
13. Hewson, P.W., & Hennessey, M.G. (1991). In R. Duit, F. Goldberg & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies. Proceedings of an International Workshop at the University of Bremen, March 4--8, 1991.
14. Jenkins, E. E. (1994). Public understanding of science and science education for action. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26, 601-612.
15. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1992). Positive interdependence: Key to effective cooperation. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 174-199). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Lindahl, B. (2003). Lust att lära naturvetenskap och teknik? En longitudinell studie om vägen till gymnasiet. Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet Doctoral Thesis. (In Swedish).
17. Milner-Bolotin, M. (2001). The effects of topic choice in project-based instruction on undergraduate physical science students' interest, ownership, and motivation. Austin, TX: University of Texas. (Unpublished doctoral thesis).
18. Moore, M. G. (1973). Towards a theory of independent learning and teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 44, 661-679.
19. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
20. Niedderer, H., Buty, C., Haller, K., Hucke, L., Sander, F., Fischer, H. E., et al. (2002). Talking physics in labwork contexts - A category based analysis of videotapes. In D. Psillos & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the science laboratory (pp. 31-40). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
21. Niedderer, H., & Goldberg, F. (1996). Learning processes in electric circuits. Paper presented at NARST Annual Meeting in St. Louis, Missouri. Available at: http://didaktik.physik.uni-bremen.de/pubs.
22. OECD. (2005). Evolution of student interest in science and technology studies 2006, Available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/30/ 36645825.pdf.
23. Osborne, J. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079.
24. Rennie, L. J., & Parker, L. H. (1996). Placing physics problems in real-life context: Students' reactions and performance. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 42(1), 55-59.
25. Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and narrative, Vol 1. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
26. Ricoeur, P. (1992). Oneself as another (K. Blamey, Trans). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
27. Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31-38.
28. Sjøberg, S. (1998). Naturvetenskap som allmänbildning. (Scientific literacy). Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
29. Stemler, S. E. (2004). A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9 (4), 1-20, Available at: http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=4.
30. Taber, K. S. (2001). Shifting sands: A case study of conceptual development as competition between alternative conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 731-754.
31. Tobias, S. (1990). They're not dumb. They're different. A new "tier of talent" for science. Change, 22(4), 11-30.
32. Weber, M. (1991). Vetenskap och politik - samhällsvetenskapernas objektivitet. I; Tre klassiska texter. (Science and politics - objectivity within social science). Göteborg, Sweden: Korpen.
33. Whitelegg, E., & Parry, M. (1999). Real-life contexts for learning physics: Meanings, issues and practice. Physics Education, 34(2), 68-72.