Abstract
We introduce resource graphs, a representation of linked ideas used when reasoning about specific contexts in physics. Our model is consistent with previous descriptions of resources and coordination classes. It can represent mesoscopic scales that are neither knowledge-in-pieces or large-scale concepts. We use resource graphs to describe several forms of conceptual change: incremental, cascade, wholesale, and dual construction. For each, we give evidence from the physics education research literature to show examples of each form of conceptual change. Where possible, we compare our representation to models used by other researchers. Building on our representation, we introduce a new form of conceptual change, differentiation, and suggest several experimental studies that would help understand the differences between reform-based curricula.
Highlights
In this paper, we present a simple representation of student understanding of physics that allows us to represent many different types of learning which have been observed and described in the physics education research literature
A different approach to modeling student learning has been suggested by researchers starting with Posner et al in 1982.14 They built a model of conceptual change theorywhich we refer to as “classic” conceptual change theorybased on Piagetian accommodation and the idea of the Kuhnian paradigm shift[29] internalized into a single individual
To illustrate the applicability of our approach, we describe four types of conceptual change taken from Demastes et al.:[17] incremental, cascade, wholesale, and dual construction
Summary
We present a simple representation of student understanding of physics that allows us to represent many different types of learning which have been observed and described in the physics education research literature. We build on ideas such as phenomenological primitives,[1,9] facets,[3] resources,[2,4,5,12,13] coordination classes,[9] and conceptual change theory[14,15,16,17] and find common ground with descriptions of specific student difficulties,[18] conceptual dynamics,[19,20,21,22] and certain kinds of analogical reasoning.[23] Our work is consistent with discussions of a “theoretical superstructure” to guide physics education research.[24] Our purpose is to help in creating a common language that is consistent with the community’s work in research, curriculum development, and instruction. VI with a discussion of the role of modeling in physics education research and a brief summary of our results
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
