Conceptual change in physics

International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 121-137

  Brown, David E ^a   Hammer, David ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84979504405     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203154472     Document Type: Chapter

References (95)

1. Andre, T., & Windschitl, M. (2002). Interest, epistemological belief, and intentional conceptual change. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 173-197). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
2. Atkins, L. J. (2004). Analogies as categorization phenomena: Studies from scientific discourse. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
3. Baillargeon, R. (1992). The object concept revisited: New directions. In C. E. Granrud (Ed.), Visual perception and cognition in infancy (pp. 265-315). Carnegie-Mellon Symposia on Cognition, Vol. 23. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
4. Barsalou, L. W. (1987). The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization (pp. 101-140). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
5. Benezet, L. P. (1935). The teaching of arithmetic I, II, III: The story of an experiment. Journal of the National Education Association, 24(8), 241-244, 24(9), 301-303, 25(1), 7-8
6. Brown, D. E. (1989). Students' concept of force: The importance of understanding Newton's third law. Physics Education, 24, 353-358
7. Brown, D. E. (1993). Refocusing core intuitions: A concretizing role for analogy in conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1273-1290
8. Brown, D. E., and Clement, J. (1989). Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning:Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science, 18(4), 237-261
9. Brown, D. E., & Hammer, D. (2008). Conceptual change in physics. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change, pp. 127-154. New York, NY: Routledge
10. Champagne, A. B., Klopfer, L. E., & Anderson, J. H. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48, 1074-1079
11. Cheng, M. F., & Brown, D. E. (2012). The role of metacognition in students' development of explanatory ideas of magnetism. Paper to be presented at the annual conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Indianapolis, IN
12. Clark, D. B., D'Angelo, C. M., & Schleigh, S. P. (2011). Comparison of students' knowledge structure coherence and understanding of force in the Philippines, Turkey, China, Mexico, and the United States. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20, 207-261
13. Clement, J. (1982). Student preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 66
14. Clement, J. (1989). Learning via model construction and criticism: Protocol evidence on sources of creativity in science. In J. Glover, R. Ronning, and C. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity: Assessment, theory and research (341-381). New York, NY: Plenum
15. Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1241-1257
16. Clement, J., Brown, D., & Zietsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: Finding "anchoring conceptions" for grounding instruction on students' intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 554-565
17. Clement, J. J., & Steinberg, M. S. (2002). Step-wise evolution of mental models of electric circuits: A "learningaloud" case study. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(4), 389-452
18. Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13-20
19. Dagher, Z. (1998). The case for analogies in teaching science for understanding. In J. Mintzes, J. Wandersee, & J. Novak (Ed.), Teaching science for understanding (pp. 195-211). San Diego, CA: Academic Press
20. DeCoste, D. (2003, May). Personal communication with David Brown
21. diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105-225
22. diSessa, A. A. (2008). A bird's-eye view of the "pieces" vs. "coherence" controversy (from the "pieces" side of the fence). In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 35-60). New York, NY: Routledge
23. diSessa (2007, April). Personal communication with David Brown
24. diSessa, A. A., Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2002). J's epistemological stance and strategies. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 237-290). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
25. diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M., & Esterly, J. B. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28, 843-900
26. diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (1998). What changes in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1155-1191
27. Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84
28. Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children's ideas. New York, NY: Routledge
29. Duckworth, E. (1987). "The having of wonderful ideas" and other essays on teaching and learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press
30. Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 30, 1241-1257
31. Duit, R. (2009). Bibliography: Students' and teachers' conceptions and science education. Kiel, Germany: IPN
32. Easley, J. (1993, April). Personal communication with David Brown
33. Elby, A. (2000). What students' learning of representations tells us about constructivism. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 481-502
34. Frank, B. W. (2009). The dynamics of variability in physics students' thinking: Examples from kinematics. Doctoral thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, MD
35. Frank, B. W. (2010). Multiple conceptual coherences in the speed tutorial: Micro-processes of local stability. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 873-880). Chicago, IL: International Society of the Learning Sciences
36. Frederiksen, J. R., White, B. Y., & Gutwill, J. (1999). Dynamic mental models in learning science: The importance of constructing derivational linkages among models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 806-836
37. Gautreau, R., & Novemsky, L. (1997). Concepts first: A small group approach to physics learning. American Journal of Physics, 65, 418-428
38. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170
39. Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-241). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press
40. Gilbert, J. K., & Boulter, C. J. (2000). Developing models in science education. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers
41. Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Constructivism and metacognition: Theoretical issues and classroom studies. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 129-140). Kiel, Germany: IPN
42. Gupta, A., Hammer, D., & Redish, R. F. (2010). The case for dynamic models of learners' ontologies in physics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(3), 285-321
43. Gutwill, J. P., Frederiksen, J. R., & White, B. Y. (1999). Making their own connections: Students' understanding of multiple models in basic electricity. Cognition and Instruction, 17(3), 249-282
44. Halloun, I. A., & Hestenes, D. (1985). Common sense concepts about motion. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1056
45. Hammer, D. (1996). Misconceptions or p-prims:How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 97-127
46. Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 68(S1), S52-S59
47. Hammer, D. (2004). The variability of student reasoning, lectures 1-3. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI (pp. 279-340). Bologna, Italy: Italian Physical Society
48. Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53-91
49. Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E., & Redish, E. F. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 89-119). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing
50. Hennessey, M. G. (2002). Metacognitive aspects of students' reflective discourse: Implications for intentional conceptual change teaching and learning. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 103-132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
51. Heron, P. R. L. (2004a). Empirical investigations of learning and teaching, part I: Examining and interpreting student thinking. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI (pp. 341-350). Bologna, Italy: Italian Physical Society
52. Heron, P. R. L. (2004b). Empirical investigations of learning and teaching, part II: Developing research based instructional materials. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI (pp. 351-366). Bologna, Italy: Italian Physical Society
53. Hewson, M. G., & Hewson, P. W. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743
54. Hewson, P. W. (1985). Epistemological commitments in the learning of science: Examples from dynamics. European Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 163-172
55. Hiebert, J., Stigler, J. W., Jacobs, J. K., Givvin, K. B., Garnier, H., Smith, M., et al. (2005). Mathematics teaching in the United States today (and tomorrow): Results from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(2), 111-132
56. Ioannides, C., & Vosniadou, S. (2002). The changing meanings of force. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2, 5-61
57. Leander, K. & Brown, D. E. (1999). "You understand, but you don't believe it": Tracing the stabilities and instabilities of interaction in a physics classroom through a multidimensional framework. Cognition and Instruction, 17(1), 93-135
58. Maloney, D. P., & Siegler, R. S. (1993). Conceptual competition in physics learning. International Journal of Science Education, 15(3), 283-296
59. May, D. B., Hammer, D., & Roy, P. (2006). Children's analogical reasoning in a third-grade science discussion. Science Education, 90(2), 316-330
60. Mayer, R. E. (1995). The search for insight: Grappling with Gestalt psychology's unanswered questions. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 3-32). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
61. McCloskey, M. (1983). Naïve theories of motion. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 299-324). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
62. McDermott, L. C., & Shaffer, P. S. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I. Investigation of student understanding. American Journal of Physics, 60, 994-1003
63. Mestre, J., Thaden-Koch, T., Dufresne, R., & Gerace, W. (2004). The dependence of knowledge deployment on context among physics novices. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI. Bologna, Italy: Italian Physical Society
64. Minstrell, J. (1982). Explaining the "at rest" condition of an object. Physics Teacher, 20, 10-20
65. Minstrell, J. (1984). Teaching for the development of understanding of ideas: Forces on moving objects. In C. W. Anderson (Ed.), Observing classrooms: Perspectives from research and practice, Columbus, OH: Ohio State University
66. Minstrell, J. (1992). Facets of students' knowledge and relevant instruction. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 110-128). Kiel, Germany: IPN
67. Minstrell, J. (2000). Student thinking and related assessment: Creating a facet-based learning environment. In N. S. Raju, J. W. Pellegrino, M. W. Bertenthal, K. J. Mitchell, & L. R. Jones (Eds.), Grading the nation's report card: Research from the evaluation NAEP (pp. 44-73). Washington DC: National Academy Press
68. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press
69. Parnafes, O. (2007). What does "fast" mean? Understanding the physical world through computational representations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16, 415
70. Peters, P. C. (1981). Even honors students have conceptual difficulties with physics. American Journal of Physics, 50(6), 501
71. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227
72. Radoff, J., Goldberg, F., Hammer, D., & Fargason, S. (2010). The beginnings of energy in third graders' reasoning. In C. Singh, M. Sabella, & S. Rebello (Eds.), 2010 Physics Education Research Conference (Vol. 1289, pp. 269-272), Portland, OR
73. Redish, E. F. (2004). A theoretical framework for physics education research: Modeling student thinking. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI (pp. 1-63). Bologna, Italy: Italian Physical Society
74. Rosenberg, S. A., Hammer, D., & Phelan, J. (2006). Multiple epistemological coherences in an eighth-grade discussion of the rock cycle. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 261-292
75. Roth, W.-M., & Duit, R. (2003). Emergence, flexibility, and stabilization of language in a physics classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 869-897
76. Scherr, R. E., & Hammer, D. (2009). Student behavior and epistemological framing: Examples from collaborative active-learning activities in physics. Cognition and Instruction, 27, 147-174
77. Shaffer, P. S., & McDermott, L. C. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development-An example from introductory electricity. Part II: Design of instructional strategies. American Journal of Physics, 60, 1003-1013
78. Siegler, R. S. (1996). Emerging minds: The process of change in children's thinking. New York, NY: Oxford University Press
79. Smith, J., diSessa, A., & Roschelle, J. (1993/1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163
80. Spelke, E. S., Katz, G., Purcell, S. E., Ehrlich, S. M., & Breinlinger, K. (1994). Early knowledge of object motion: Continuity and inertia. Cognition, 51, 131-176
81. Spelke, E. S. (1991). Physical knowledge in infancy: Reflections on Piaget's theory. In S. Carey & R. Gelman (Eds.), The epigenesis of mind: Essays on biology and cognition (pp. 133-169). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
82. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. A. Duschl and R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press
83. Thelen, E., & Bates, E. (2003). Connectionism and dynamic systems: Are they really different? Developmental Science, 6(4), 378-391
84. Thelen, E., & Smith, L. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press
85. Trowbridge, D. E., & McDermott, L. C. (1980). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of velocity in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 48(3), 1020-1028
86. Tytler, R. (1998). The nature of students' informal science conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 20(8), 901-927
87. van Heuvelen, A. (1991). Overview, case study physics. American Journal of Physics, 59, 898-907
88. Viennot, L. (1979). Spontaneous reasoning in elementary dynamics. European Journal of Science Education, 1(2), 205-221
89. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning & Instruction, 4, 45-69
90. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535-585
91. Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning & Instruction, 11(4-5), 381-419
92. Whitaker, R. J. (1983). Aristotle is not dead: Student understanding of trajectory motion. American Journal of Physics, 51(4), 352
93. White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118
94. Wong, E. D. (1993a). Self-generated analogies as a tool for constructing and evaluating explanations of scientific phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(4), 367-380
95. Wong, E. D. (1993b). Understanding the generative capacity of analogies as a tool for explanation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1259-1272