Teacher Explanation of Physics Concepts: a Video Study
- David Geelan
- … show all 1 hide
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Video recordings of Year 11 physics lessons were analyzed to identify key features of teacher explanations. Important features of the explanations used included teachers’ ability to move between qualitative and quantitative modes of discussion, attention to what students require to succeed in high stakes examinations, thoughtful use of analogies, storytelling and references to the history of science, the use of educational technology, and the use of humor. Considerable scope remains for further research into teacher explanations in physics.
- Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
- Charmaz, K. (2001). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. Gubrium & J. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: context and method (pp. 675–694). Thousand Oaks: Sage. CrossRef
- Geelan, D. R. (1997). Epistemological anarchy and the many forms of constructivism. Science Education, 6(1–2), 15–28.
- Geelan, D. R. (2010). Technological and methodological challenges of using classroom video to analyze physics teachers’ explanations. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 4(3), 225–232. CrossRef
- Geelan, D. R. (2012). Teacher Explanations. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 987–999). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Guba, E. G. (1981). ERIC/ECTJ annual review paper: criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Development, 29, 75–91.
- Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. Educational Technology Research And Development, 30(4), 233–252.
- Horwood, R. H. (1988). Explanation and description in science teaching. Science Education, 72, 41–49. CrossRef
- Mayer, R. E. (2005). Introduction to multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 1–16). New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Nashon, S. M. (2004). The nature of analogical explanations: high school physics use in Kenya. Research in Science Education, 34(4), 475–502. CrossRef
- Pearce, C., Arnold, M., Phillips, C., & Dwan, K. (2010). Methodological considerations of digital video observation: beyond conversation analysis. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 4(2), 90–99. CrossRef
- Podolefsky, N.F. & Finkelstein, N.D. (2007). Analogical scaffolding and the learning of abstract ideas in physics: Empirical studies. Physics Review Studies—Physics Education Research 3, 020104.
- Ruben, D.-H. (1990). Explaining explanation. London and New York: Routledge. CrossRef
- Ruben, D.-H. (1993). Explanation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Sevian, H., & Gonsalves, L. (2008). Analyzing how scientists explain their research: a rubric for measuring the effectiveness of scientific explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 30(11), 1441–1467. CrossRef
- Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.
- Thagard, P. (1992). Analogy, explanation and education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 537–544. CrossRef
- Treagust, D. F., & Harrison, A. G. (1999). The genesis of effective scientific explanations for the classroom. In J. J. Loughran (Ed.), Researching teaching: Methodologies and practices for understanding pedagogy (pp. 28–43). London: Falmer Press.
- Treagust, D. F., & Harrison, A. G. (2000). In search of explanatory frameworks: an analysis of Richard Feynman’s lecture “Atoms in motion”. International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1157–1170. CrossRef
- Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: a framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43(1), 49–64. CrossRef
- Zacharia, Z. C. (2005). The impact of interactive computer simulations on the nature and quality of postgraduate science teachers’ explanations in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 27(14), 1741–1767. CrossRef
- Teacher Explanation of Physics Concepts: a Video Study
Research in Science Education
Volume 43, Issue 5 , pp 1751-1762
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- David Geelan (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia