Abstract
This paper is the first part of a multiphase study examining students’ mental models about the quantization of physical observables—light, energy, and angular momentum. Thirty-one second-year physics and physics education college students who were taking a modern physics course participated in the study. The qualitative analysis of data revealed six variations in students’ mental models about the quantization of physical observables: scientific model, primitive scientific model, shredding model, alternating model, integrative model, and evolution model. These models were determined to be context dependent. In addition, some students are in a mixed-model state where they use multiple mental models in explaining a phenomenon and use these models inconsistently.3 MoreReceived 8 January 2014DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020127This article is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.Published by the American Physical Society
Highlights
IntroductionOne of the theories about knowledge organization is “mental modeling.”
We considered the issues mentioned in Miles and Huberman ([63], pp. 60–63) and the following steps were taken: (1) the codes were named by considering their closeness to the concepts, (2) detailed definitions of the codes were made, and (3) double coding was done by a different researcher
We named each mental model identified in this study due to the characteristics of its conceptual framework
Summary
One of the theories about knowledge organization is “mental modeling.”. A mental model, briefly, is “an internal representation which acts out as a structural analogue of situations or processes. Craik [2] is accepted as the pioneer of the theory of mental models. 50) and provided smallscale models to explain processes After forty years, the mental model term was used in two different books with the same name, Johnson-Laird’s [3] and Gentner and Stevens’s [4] “Mental Models.”. While Johnson-Laird’s (1983) book explained the theory from the perspective of psychology, Gentner and Stevens’s [4] book clarified it from the perspective of “science education” by editing different researchers’ studies and identifying students’ mental models of science concepts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
