530 Physik
Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (3)
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (3) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (3)
Schlagworte
- University physics (1)
- enacted PCK (1)
- entrance test (1)
- field experience (1)
- generational comparison (1)
- instructional (1)
- instructional explanation (1)
- practicum (1)
- professional knowledge (1)
- quality (1)
Institut
Professional knowledge is an important source of science teachers' actions in the classroom (e.g., personal professional content knowledge [pedagogical content knowledge, PCK] is the source of enacted PCK in the refined consensus model [RCM] for PCK). However, the evidence for this claim is ambiguous at best. This study applied a cross-lagged panel design to examine the relationship between professional knowledge and actions in one particular instructional situation: explaining physics. Pre- and post a field experience (one semester), 47 preservice physics teachers from four different universities were tested for their content knowledge (CK), PCK, pedagogical knowledge (PK), and action-related skills in explaining physics. The study showed that joint professional knowledge (the weighted sum of CK, PCK, and PK scores) at the beginning of the field experience impacted the development of explaining skills during the field experience (beta = .38**). We interpret this as a particular relationship between professional knowledge and science teachers' action-related skills (enacted PCK): professional knowledge is necessary for the development of explaining skills. That is evidence that personal PCK affects enacted PCK. In addition, field experiences are often supposed to bridge the theory-practice gap by transforming professional knowledge into instructional practice. Our results suggest that for field experiences to be effective, preservice teachers should start with profound professional knowledge.
The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey (CLASS) is an instrument which is widely used in physics education to characterize students' attitudes toward physics and learning physics and compare them with those of experts. While CLASS has been extensively validated for use in the context of higher education institutions in the United States, there has been less information about its use with European students. We have studied the structural, content, and substantive aspects of validity of CLASS by first doing a confirmatory factor analysis of N = 642 sets of student answers from the University of Helsinki, Finland. The students represented a culturally and demographically different subset of university physics students than in previous studies. The confirmatory factor analysis used a 3-factor, 15-item factor structure as a starting point and the resulting factor structure was similar to the original. Just minor modifications were needed for fit parameters to be in the acceptable range. We explored the differences by student interviews and consultation of experts. With the exception of one item, they supported the new 14-item, 3-factor structure. The results show that the interpretations made from CLASS results are mostly transferable, and CLASS remains a useful instrument for a wide variety of populations.
Over the last decades, the percentage of the age group choosing to pursue university studies has increased significantly across the world. At the same time, there are university teachers who believe that the standards have fallen. There is little research on whether students nowadays demonstrate knowledge or abilities similar to that of the preceding cohorts. However, in times of educational expansion, empirical evidence on student test performance is extremely helpful in evaluating how well educational systems cope with the increasing numbers of students. In this study, we compared a sample of 2322 physics freshmen from 2013 with another sample of 2718 physics freshmen from 1978 at universities in Germany with regard to their physics knowledge based on their results in the same entrance test. Previous results on mathematics knowledge and abilities in the same sample of students indicated that there was no severe decline in their average achievement. This paper compares the physics knowledge of the same two samples of students. Contrary to their mathematics results, their physics results showed a substantial decrease in physics knowledge as measured by the test.