Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Physics classroom interactions: Teaching strategies and practices

Isaac Buabeng 1 *
1 University of Cape Coast* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 1, Issue 3, September 2018, pp. 311-328
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 954 DOWNLOADS: 546 Publication date: 15 Sep 2018
ABSTRACT
This study investigated the interactions that occurred as part of the learning from a national survey of high school physics teachers in New Zealand (NZ) in relation to decile ranking.  Specifically, the study investigated how often particular teaching strategies and practices such as: teaching approaches, teacher feedback and guidance, and ICT usage, occurred during physics teaching. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistical and inferential statistics – MANOVA. Among other things, the study revealed that learners were not exposed to the teaching methods that potentially give them the chance to observe, engage and/or discover expert strategies in context. There was a lack of use of problem-based or inquiry learning models for learning. However, there was no significant difference between teaching in the various decile rankings.  The implications of the findings are discussed.
KEYWORDS
Classroom interactions, Teaching strategies, Teaching practice, Physics teaching.
CITATION (APA)
Buabeng, I. (2018). Physics classroom interactions: Teaching strategies and practices. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1(3), 311-328. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.134
REFERENCES
  1. Archibald, S. (2006). Narrowing in on educational resources that do affect student achievement. Peabody Journal of Education, 81(4), 23-42.
  2. Bencze, J. L., Alsop, S., & Bowen, G. M. (2009). Student-teachers’ inquiry-based actions to address socioscientific issues. Journal of Activist Science & Technology Education, 1(2), 78-112.
  3. Berry, A., Gunstone, R., Loughran, J., & Mulhall, P. (2001). Using laboratory work for purposeful learning about the practice of science. In R. Duit (Ed.), Research in science education-past, present, and future (pp. 313-318). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  4. Berryman, S. E. (1991). Designing effective learning environments: cognitive apprenticeship models. IEE Brief.
  5. Black, P. (1998). Testing: Friend or foe? The theory and practice of assessment and testing. London: Falmer Press.
  6. Brass, C., Gunstone, R., & Fensham, P. (2003). Quality learning of physics: Conceptions held by high school and university teachers. Research in Science Education, 33(2), 245-271.
  7. Buabeng, I. (2015). Teaching and Learning of Physics in New Zealand High Schools. (PhD), University of Canterbury, Christchurch. Retrieved from https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/11396/Buabeng,%20Isaac_Final%20PhD%20Thesis.pdf;sequence=1
  8. Buabeng, I., Conner, L., & Winter, D. (2015). The lack of physics teachers:“Like a bath with the plug out and the tap half on”. American Journal of Educational Research, 3(6), 721-730.
  9. Buabeng, I., Conner, L., & Winter, D. (2016). Physics Teachers’ Views on their Initial Teacher Education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(7), 36-55.
  10. Buabeng, I., Conner, L., & Winter, D. (2017). High school physics teachers’ conceptions about teaching: The ideal versus enacted. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX, USA.
  11. Cahyadi, M. V. (2007). Improving teaching and learning in introductory physics. (Doctoral dissertation), University of Canterbury, Christchurch.
  12. Centre for Inspired Teaching. (2008). Inspired issue brief: Inquiry-based teaching. Retrieved from www.inspiredteaching.org
  13. Chandra, V., & Watters, J. J. (2012). Re-thinking physics teaching with web-based learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 631-640.
  14. Cobern, W. W. (1998). Socio-cultural perspectives on science education: An international dialogue (Vol. 4): Springer.
  15. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator, 6(11), 38-46.
  16. Conner, L. (2013). Meeting the needs of diverse learners in New Zealand. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 57(3), 157-161.
  17. Conner, L. (2014). Students’ use of evaluative constructivism: comparative degrees of intentional learning. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(4), 472-489.
  18. Conner, L. i. (2016). The promise of science education research. In B. Akpan (Ed.), Science Education: A Global Perspective (pp. 313-330). New York: Springer.
  19. Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J. (2005). A good teacher in every classroom: Preparing the highly qualified teachers our children deserve. San Fransisco, CA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
  20. Dennen, V. P. (2004). Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: Research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2, 813-828.
  21. Dennen, V. P., & Burner, K. J. (2007). The cognitive apprenticeship model in educational practice. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology: A Project of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 2, 425.
  22. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
  23. Ell, F., & Grudnoff, L. (2013). The politics of responsibility: Teacher education and “persistent underachievement” in New Zealand. Educational Forum, 77(1), 73-86. doi: 10.1080/00131725.2013.739023
  24. Eteokleous, N. (2008). Evaluating computer technology integration in a centralized school system. Computers & Education, 51(2), 669-686.
  25. Freitas, I. M., Jiménez, R., & Mellado, V. (2004). Solving physics problems: The conceptions and practice of an experienced teacher and an inexperienced teacher. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 113-133.
  26. Golla, E. F., de Guzman, E. S., Ogena, E., & Brawner, F. (1998). Teacher preparation in science and mathematics education: A situational analysis. Science education in the Philippines: Challenges for development, 1, 41-77.
  27. Gunstone, R., Mulhall, P., & McKittrick, B. (2009). Physics teachers’ perceptions of the difficulty of teaching electricity. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 515-538.
  28. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.
  29. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement [IEA]. (2012). In M. O. Martin, P. Foy & G. M. Stanco (Eds.), TIMSS 2011 international results in science. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
  30. Keser, Ö. F., Akdeniz, A. R., & Yyu, V.-T. (2010). Assessment of the constructivist physics learning environments. Paper presented at the Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching.
  31. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary issues in technology and teacher education, 9(1), 60-70.
  32. McDermott, C. L. (2001). Oersted medal lecture 2001: Physics education research – the key to student learning. American Journal of Physics, 69, 1127-1137. doi: 10.1119/1.1389280
  33. McDermott, C. L., & Shaffer, P. S. (2000). Preparing teachers to teach physics and physical science by inquiry. Physics Education, 35(6), 411-416.
  34. Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealnd curriculum Wellington Learning Media Limited.
  35. New Zealand Qualifications Authority[NZQA]. (2012). Annual report on NCEA and New Zealand scholarship data and statistics. Retrieved from http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/About-us/Publications/stats-reports/ncea-annualreport-2012.pdf
  36. Shih-Hsiung, L. (2011). Factors related to pedagogical beliefs of teachers and technology integration. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1012-1022.
  37. Smart, J. B., & Marshall, J. C. (2012). Interactions between classroom discourse, teacher questioning, and student cognitive engagement in middle school science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 249-267. doi: 10.1007/s10972-012-9297-9
  38. Smeets, E. (2005). Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education? Computers & Education, 44(3), 343-355.
  39. Sokoloff, D. R., & Thornton, R. K. (1997). Using interactive lecture demonstrations to create an active learning environment. The Physics Teacher, 35, 340-347. doi: 10.1119/1.2344715
  40. Sunal, W. D., Sunal, S. C., Dantzler, A. J., Turner, P. D., Harrell, J. W., Stephens, M., & Aggawal, M. (2015). Teaching physics in our high school classroom. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) Annual International Conference, Chicogo, IL, U.S.A.
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.