Case study of the understanding that graduate and advanced students in physics have about potential difference and EMF

Authors

  • Maria Cecilia Pocoví Fac. Ciencias Exactas, Dpto de Física, Universidad Nacional de Salta Avda Bolivia 5150 – (4400) Salta - Argentina
  • Elena Hoyos Fac. Ciencias Exactas, Dpto de Física, Universidad Nacional de Salta Avda Bolivia 5150 – (4400) Salta - Argentina

Keywords:

potential difference, emf, ontology

Abstract

A case study on the ideas that two advanced physics students and two graduate students have about the potential difference and emf concepts is presented. This study is carried out through clinical interviews specially designed to elicit the ontological characteristics of their conceptions. The importance of this analysis is rooted in previous works that have signaled the problems that an incorrect ontological characterization can carry in learning science concepts. The conceptual frame used for this analysis is the one presented by Chi (1992) and the methodology adjusts to the case study that is described in Merriam (1998). This analysis might throw some light on possible teaching strategies that can be designed to bridge the gap between scientific and spontaneous ideas produced by the incorrect ontolo gical categorization of concepts.

References

BORGES, A. T. y GILBERT J. K. (1999), Mental models of electricity, International of Science Education, (21), 1, pp. 95-117.

CHI, M. T. H. (1992). ‘Conceptual Change Within and Across Ontological Categories: Examples From Learning and Discovery in Science’, in Giere, R. (ed.) Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science Vol XV, 129-186, (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis).

CHI, M. T. H., SLOTTA, J. D., y de LEEUW, N. (1994). From Things to Processes: a Theory of Conceptual Change for Learning Science Concepts, Learning and Instruction 4, 27-43.

COHEN, R., EYLON, B., & GANIEL, U. (1982). Potential Difference and Current in Simple Circuits: A Study of Students’ Concepts. American Journal of Physics, 51, (5), 407 – 412.

DE JONG, M. (1993). Graphing Electric Potential, The Physics Teacher, 31, 271 – 272.

EYLON, B. & GANIEL, U. (1990). Macro-Micro Relationships: the Missing Link Between Electrostatics and Electrodynamics in Students’ Reasoning, International Journal of Science Education 12 (1), 79-94.

FURIÓ, C. & GUISASOLA, J. (1998) Difficulties in learning the concept of electric field, Science Education 18, (7), 511-526.

HELLER, P. (1998) Planning, Conducting, and Analyzing Classroom Research. [Course Studies in Science Education, University of Minnesota].

JIMENEZ GOMEZ, E & FERNANDEZ DURAN, E. (1998). Didactic Problems in the Concept of Electric Potential Difference and an Analysis of its Philogenesis, Science and Education,7, 129-141.

Keil, F. C. (1979). Semantic and Conceptual Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

LEE, Y. & LAW, N. (2001) Explorations in promoting conceptual change in electrical concepts via ontological category shift. International Journal of Science Education, 23, (2) 111– 149.

MAC MILLAN C., y SWADENER, M.(1991). Novice Use of Qualitative Versus Quantitative Problem Solving in Electrostatics, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 28,(8), 661-670.

MERRIAM, S.B. (1998) Qualitative Research and Case Applications in Education, Segunda Edición, (Jossey Bass Publishers, San Francisco).

MILLAR, R. (1993). Students’ Understanding of Voltage in Simple Series Electric Circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 15, (3), 339 – 349.

PAGE, C. (1977). Electromotive Force, Potential Difference, and Voltage, American Journal of Physics, 45, (10), 978 – 980.

Reiner, M., Slotta, J. D.,Chi, M.T.H. & Resnick, L.B. (2000). Naive physics reasoning: a commitment to substance – based conceptions. Cognition and Instruction, 18 (1), 1-34.

Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., Joram, E. (1995). Assessing students’ misclassifications of physics concepts: an ontological basis for conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 13 (3), 373-400.

Slotta, J. D. & Chi, M. T. H. (1999). Overcoming robust misconceptions through ontology training. Manuscript Submitted for publication.

TURLEY, M. (1994). A model of potential difference in a simple electric circuit. Australian Science Teacher Journal, 40, 60-61.

TANKERSLEY, L. & MOSCA, E. (2003). Introducing Faraday´s Law. Physics Department de la USNA, manuscrito facilitado por el autor.

VARNEY, R. & FISHER, L. (1980). Electromotive Force: Volta´s Forgotten Concept. American Journal of Physics, 48 (5), 405-408.

VELAZCO, S. & SALINAS, J. (1999). Dificultades de estudiantes universitarios en la comprensión de la noción de potencial eléctrico, Actas de REF XI, 240 – 245.

Downloads

Published

2007-12-01

How to Cite

Pocoví, M. C., & Hoyos, E. (2007). Case study of the understanding that graduate and advanced students in physics have about potential difference and EMF. Investigations in Science Education, 9(3), 337–348. Retrieved from https://ienci.if.ufrgs.br/index.php/ienci/article/view/929

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 3 (2004): December of 2004

Section

Artigos

License

IENCI is an Open Access journal, which does not have to pay any charges either for the submission or processing of articles. The journal has adopted the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), which states that the users have the right to read, write down, copy, distribute, print, conduct searches and make direct  links with the complete texts of the published articles.

The  author responsible for the submission  represents all the authors of the work and when the article is sent to the journal, guarantees that he has the permission of his/her co-authors to do so. In the same way, he/she provides an assurance that the article does not infringe authors´ rights and that there are no signs of plagiarism in the work. The journal is not responsible for any opinions that are expressed.

All the articles are published with a Creative Commons License Attribution Non-commercial  4.0 International. The authors hold the copyright of their works and must be contacted directly if there is any commercial interest in the use of their works.