Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Meeting the Challenge: Quantum Physics in Introductory Physics Courses

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching

Abstract

Teaching quantum theory is a legendary difficult task, not only due to its weirdness, but also because it is philosophically sensitive. Examples from the history and philosophy of science show that one of the main challenges is to find a balanced approach between introducing the most basic quantum concepts while taking into account interpretational issues. Although there is no privileged interpretation for QT, teaching and research about QT must make the interpretational choice used explicit. In addition any introductory course should emphasize the strictly quantum features in order to prevent students from establishing undesirable links with classical concepts. While teaching focused on the mathematical formalism remains a choice, pictures may be exploited, but in this case complementarity should be explicitly and carefully introduced. Finally, we argue that the teaching of QT, maybe more than other areas in physics, must be informed by the history and philosophy of science.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 749.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Physicists interchangeably use quantum theory, quantum physics, quantum mechanics, or wave mechanics to describe the same physical theory. While using sometimes quantum physics, we will privilege quantum theory as it emphasizes its role as a scientific theory given that theories are central to the culture of physics.

  2. 2.

    Short introductions to most of these interpretations may be obtained in Greenberger et al. (2009). This compendium includes the following interpretations: Bohm interpretation, Bohmian mechanics, complementarity principle, consistent histories, Copenhagen interpretation, GRW theory, hidden variables models of quantum mechanics, Ithaca interpretation, many worlds interpretation, modal interpretations, Orthodox interpretation, probabilistic interpretation, and transactional interpretation. While there is some redundancy in this list, it is not comprehensive; one could still include, for instance, stochastic interpretation, ensemble interpretation, and Montevideo interpretation. Indeed, this list has been growing in recent decades.

  3. 3.

    The case of quantum physics in relation to this philosophical thesis is discussed in Cushing (1999, pp. 199–203). A general discussion of the Duhem-Quine thesis may be found in Harding (1976).

  4. 4.

    We chose to present the issue of completeness of QT in terms of Bell’s theorem and its conflict between QT and local hidden variables or local realism. This choice was due to the influence of this approach on mainstream physics leading, through theory and experiments, to the identification of entanglement as a key quantum physical effect (Shimony 2009). Other approaches, however, are possible. A fine epistemological analysis of Einstein’s assumptions would lead us, according to Howard (1985), to identify them as separability (mutually independent existence of spatially distant things) and locality. Another possibility is the Kochen-Specker theorem, formulated in 1967, which contrasts QT with non-contextuality; however, the impact of this theorem in experimental physics has been scant (Held 2012).

  5. 5.

    On the early experiments on Bell’s theorem, see Freire (2006).

  6. 6.

    For brief introductions to these topics, see Greenberger et al. (2009). On the debates on the concept of photon, see Silva and Freire (2013). The Concept of the Photon in Question: The Controversy Surrounding the HBT Effect circa 1956–1958, Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, forthcoming; on quantum optics, see Bromberg (2006); for historical studies on decoherence, see Camilleri (2009b) and Freitas (2012), The many ways to decoherence, unpublished monograph.

  7. 7.

    For experiments with single electrons in the two-slit interference experiments and debates about their interpretations and dispute of priorities, see Rosa (2012). As an example of the ongoing controversy surrounding the foundations of quantum physics, Marshall and Santos (1987) considered that Aspect’s 1986 typical quantum results could be compatible with the classical wave theory of light as the latter were interpreted in terms of Stochastic Optics.

  8. 8.

    Alain Aspect, interview with O. Freire and I. Silva, 16 December 2010 and 19 January 2011, American Institute of Physics.

  9. 9.

    Incidentally, we remark that Aspect considers wave-particle duality for single photons the best way to introduce, both theoretically and experimentally, the full quantum treatment of light on optics courses. See his proposal in (Jacques et al. 2005).

  10. 10.

    We use image and picture as equivalent words. Psychology of learning uses image as picture may be associated with drawings. Physicists use both without distinction, while in QT, both are always associated to concepts from classical physics.

  11. 11.

    The empirical equivalence of several QT interpretations in the nonrelativistic domain does not mean that all interpretations have been equally fruitful in the development of QT, in particular in the new field of quantum information. An interesting discussion on this aspect considering the case of “entanglement swapping” is Ferrero et al. (2012).

  12. 12.

    Fischler and Lichtfeldt (1992), Greca and Freire (2003), Johnston et al. (1998), and McKagan et al. (2008).

  13. 13.

    In several countries, the most widely used textbooks in physics are American ones thus the spread of this approach.

  14. 14.

    Greca and Freire (2003), Hadzidaki (2008a, b), McDermott and Redish (1999), and Wuttiprom et al. (2009).

  15. 15.

    We have researched articles from the period 2000–2011 that tackle physics education in any level in the following journals: American Journal of Physics, European Journal of Physics, International Journal of Science Education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Physical Review Letters – Special Topics, Research in Science Education, Science Education, and Science & Education.

  16. 16.

    For example, Goff (2006), Magalhães and Vasconcelos (2006), McKagan et al. (2008), Singh (2008), and Zollman et al. (2002).

  17. 17.

    Carr and McKagan (2009), Greca and Freire (2003), Holbrow et al. (2002), and Müller and Wiesner (2002).

  18. 18.

    For example, Barton (1997), Jacques et al. (2005), Schenzle (1996), and Zeilinger (1999).

  19. 19.

    We have named the interpretations as stated by the authors, without evaluating superpositions or duplications.

  20. 20.

    The categorization we have used is a rough approximation, useful only to grasp analogies between physics teaching research and physics research. Realism and objectivity are not univocally defined in philosophy of science, and quantum physics practice has brought meaningful constraints to the use of these terms.

  21. 21.

    Recent studies, however, have shown both the diversity of perspectives behind the term “Copenhagen interpretation” and the context of its coinage, for example, Camilleri (2009a) and Howard (2004). See also Beller (1999) for the nuances among the founding fathers of QT which are usually smoothed over in the term Copenhagen interpretation.

  22. 22.

    Exposing students to an open scientific controversy may bring some discomfort to physics teachers as this may weaken the dogmatic feature some think it is inseparable to science training. The question reminds us of an old dilemma well posed by Stephen Brush (1974, p. 1170): “Should the History of Science Be Rated X?” In this now classic paper, Brush suggests to science teachers this dilemma in the following terms: “I suggest that the teacher who wants to indoctrinate his students in the traditional role of the scientist as a neutral fact finder should not use historical materials of the kind now being prepared by historians of science: they will not serve his purposes.” Then, he continues, “on the other hand, those teachers who want to counteract the dogmatism of the textbooks and convey some understanding of science as an activity that cannot be divorced from metaphysical or esthetic considerations may find some stimulation in the new history of science.” No doubt about the mind and heart choice of this talented scientist and historian of science awarded in 2009 with the Abraham Pais Prize for the History of Physics. There is a growing literature on the history of this controversy. In addition to the works already cited, the interested reader may consult Bromberg (2008), Jacobsen (2012), Kaiser (2011), and Yeang (2011). We also highlight the English translation of most of the original papers in the history of this debate in Wheeler and Zurek (1983).

References

  • Aspect, A. (1999). Bell’s Inequality test: more ideal than ever. Nature, 398, 189–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aspect, A. (2007). To be or not to be local. Nature, 446, 866–867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aspect, A., Grangier, P., and Roger, G. (1989). Dualité onde-particule pour un photon unique. J. Optics 20(3), 119–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baily, C., Finkelstein, N. D. (2010). Refined characterization of student perspectives on quantum physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research 6, 020113 (1–11).

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, M. B., Garner, J. & Reid, D. (2004). The Pendulum as a Vehicle for Transitioning from Classical to Quantum Physics: History, Quantum Concepts, and Educational Challenges. Science & Education 13, 417–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, G. (1997). Quantum dynamics of simple systems. Contemporary Physics, 38(6), 429–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beller, M. (1999). Quantum Dialogue – The making of a revolution. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, D. (1989). Quantum theory [unabridged republication of 1951]. New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohm, D., Hiley, B. (1988). Nonlocality and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Experiment as Understood through the Quantum-Potential. In F. Selleri (ed.), Quantum Mechanics Versus Local Realism, New York: Plenum Press, 232–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, N. (1987). Natural Philosophy and Human Cultures. [1938]. In Bohr, N. The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr, Essays 1933–1957 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. Woodbridge, US-CT: Ox Bow Press, 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromberg, J. L. (2006). Device physics vis-a-vis fundamental physics in Cold War America: The case of quantum optics. ISIS, 97(2), 237–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bromberg, J. L. (2008). New instruments and the meaning of quantum mechanics. Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 38(3), 325–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brush, S. (1974). Should the History of Science Be Rated X? Science, 183(4130), 1164–1172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (2003). Twenty-Five Centuries of Quantum Physics: From Pythagoras to Us, and from Subjectivism to Realism. Science & Education 12(5–6), 445–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camilleri, K. (2009a). Constructing the myth of the Copenhagen interpretation. Perspectives on Science, 17(1), 26–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camilleri, K. (2009b). A history of entanglement: Decoherence and the interpretation problem. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 40, 290–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, L. D., McKagan, S. B. (2009). Graduate quantum mechanics reform. American Journal of Physics, 77(4), 308–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cataloglou, E., Robinett, R. W. (2002). Testing the development of student conceptual and visualization understanding in quantum mechanics through the undergraduate career. American Journal of Physics, 70(3), 238–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clauser, J. F. (2002). Oral history. Interviewed by Joan Lisa Bromberg, Niels Bohr Library, American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clauser, J. F. and Shimony, A. (1978). Bell’s theorem: experimental tests and implications. Reports on Progress in Physics, 41, 1881–1927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuppari, A., Rinaudo, G., Robutti, O., Violino, P. (1997). Gradual introduction of some aspects of quantum mechanics in a high school curriculum. Physics Education, 32(5), 302–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cushing, J. (1999). Quantum mechanics: historical contingency and the Copenhagen interpretation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dehlinger, D., Mitchell, M. W. (2002). Entangled photon apparatus for the undergraduate laboratory. American Journal of Physics, 70(9), 898–910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisberg, R. (1976). Applied Mathematical Physics with Programmable Pocket Calculators. New York: McGraw–Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrero, M., Gómez Pin, V., Salgado, D., Sánchez-Gómez, J. L. (2012). A Further Review of the Incompatibility between Classical Principles and Quantum Postulates. Foundations of Science, DOI 10.1007/s10699-012-9290-y, published online: 15 May 2012.

  • Fischler, H., Lichtfeldt, M. (1992). Modern physics and students’ conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 14(2), 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire Jr. O. (2006). Philosophy Enters the Optics Laboratory: Bell’s Theorem and its First Experimental Tests (1965–1982). Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 37, 577–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire Jr. O. (2009). Quantum dissidents: Research on the foundations of quantum theory circa 1970. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 40, 280–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García Quijás, P. C., Arévalo Aguilar, L. M. (2007). Overcoming misconceptions in quantum mechanics with the time evolution operator. European Journal of Physics, 28, 147–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galvez, E. J., Holbrow, C. H., Pysher, M. J., Martin, J. W., Courtemanche, N., Heilig, L., Spencer J. (2005). Interference with correlated photons: Five quantum mechanics experiments for undergraduates. American Journal of Physics, 73(2), 127–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gingerich, O. (2004). The book nobody read: chasing the revolutions of Nicolaus Copernicus. New York: Walker & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gleick, J. (2011). The information: a history, a theory, a flood, New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goff, A. (2006). Quantum tic-tac-toe: A teaching metaphor for superposition in quantum mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 74(11), 962–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottfried, K. (1978). Quantum physics series, films 1–10, film review. American Journal of Physics, 46, 315–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, L. (1993). Science in Russia and the Soviet Union: A short history, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grangier, P.; Roger, G. and Aspect, A. (1986). Experimental Evidence for a Photon Anticorrelation Effect on a Beam Splitter: A New Light on Single-Photon Interference. Europhysics Letters 1(4), 173–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greca, I. M. & Freire Jr., O. (2003). Does an Emphasis on the Concept of Quantum States Enhance Students’ Understanding of Quantum Mechanics? Science & Education 12(5–6), 541–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greca, I. M., Moreira, M. A. (1997). The kinds of mental representations - models, propositions and images - used by college physics students regarding the concept of field. International Journal of Science Education 19, 711–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greca, I. M., Moreira, M. A. (2002). Mental, physical and mathematical models in the teaching and learning of physics. Science Education, 86, 106–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberger, D.; Hentschel, K. and Weinert, F. (eds) (2009). Compendium of Quantum Physics: Concepts, Experiments, History and Philosophy. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenstein, G. and Zajonc, A. (1997). The Quantum Challenge – Modern Research on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, D. J. (2005). Introduction to Quantum Mechanics [2nd ed.]. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gröblacher, S., Paterek, T., Kaltenbaek, R., Brukner, C., Zukowski, M., Aspelmeyer, M., & Zeilinger, A. (2007). An experimental test of non-local realism. Nature, 446, 871–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadzidaki, P. (2008a). Quantum mechanics and scientific explanation: an explanatory strategy aiming at providing understanding. Science & Education, 17(1), 49–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadzidaki, P. (2008b). The Heisenberg microscope: a powerful instructional tool for promoting meta-cognitive and meta-scientific thinking on quantum mechanics and the “nature of science”. Science & Education, 17(6), 613–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (ed) (1976). Can Theories Be Refuted? Essays on the Duhem-Quine Thesis. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbron, J. (2001). The earliest missionaries of the Copenhagen spirit. In P. Galison, M. Gordin, D. Kaiser (Eds). Science and Society - The history of modern physical science in the twentieth century. Vol. 4 - Quantum Histories. New York: Routledge, 295–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, C. (2012). The Kochen-Specker Theorem, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/kochen-specker/>.

  • Hirshfeld, A. C., Henselder, P. (2002). Deformation quantization in the teaching of quantum mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 70(5), 537–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holbrow, C. H., Galvez, E., Parks, M. E. (2002). Photon quantum mechanics and beam splitters. American Journal of Physics, 70(3), 260–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, D. (1985). Einstein on locality and separability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 16(3), 171–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, D. (2004). Who invented the “Copenhagen interpretation”? A study in mythology. Philosophy of Science, 71, 669–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, A. (2012). Léon Rosenfeld - Physics, Philosophy, and Politics in the Twentieth Century. Singapore: World Scientific.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacques, V. et al. (2005). Single-photon wavefront-splitting interference – An illustration of the light quantum in action. European Journal of Physics D 35, 561–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jammer, M. (1974). The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics – The Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, I. D., Crawford, K., Fletcher, P. R. (1998). Student difficulties in learning quantum mechanics. International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 427–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, D. (2007). Turning physicists into quantum mechanics. Physics World (May 2007), 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, D. (2011). How the Hippies Saved Physics – Science, Counterculture, and the Quantum Revival. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalkanis, G., Hadzidaki, P., Stavrou, D. (2003). An Instructional Model for a Radical Conceptual Change Towards Quantum Mechanics Concepts. Science Education, 87, 257– 280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karakostas,V., Hadzidaki, P. (2005). Realism vs constructivism in contemporary physics: the impact of the debate on the understanding of quantum theory and its instructional process. Science & Education, 14(5), 607–629.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kragh, H. (1992). A Sense of History: History of Science and The Teaching of Introductory Quantum Theory. Science & Education, 1, 349–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kragh, H. (1999). Quantum Generations: A History of Physics in the Twentieth century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lévy-Leblond, J-M. (2003). On the nature of quantons. Science & Education 12, 495–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lévy-Leblond, J.-M. & Balibar, F. (1990). Quantics – Rudiments of Quantum Mechanics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magalhães, A. L., Vasconcelos, V. P. S. (2006). Particle in a Box: Software for computer-assisted learning in introductory quantum mechanics courses. European Journal of Physics, 27, 1425–1435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, T. and Santos, E. (1987). Comment on “Experimental Evidence for a Photon Anticorrelation Effect on a Beam Splitter: a New Light on Single-Photon Interferences”. Europhysics Letters, 3, 293–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L.C. & Redish, E. F. (1999). Resource letter: PER-1: Physics education research. American Journal of Physics, 67(9), 755–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKagan, S. B.,. Perkins, K. K., Dubson, M., Malley, C., Reid, S., LeMaster, R., Wieman, C. E. (2008). Developing and researching PhET simulations for teaching quantum mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 76(4 & 5), 406–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKagan, S. B., Perkins, K. K., & Wieman, C. E. (2010). Design and validation of the Quantum Mechanics Conceptual Survey. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research 6, 020121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michelini, M., Ragazzon, R., Santi, R., Stefanel, A. (2000). Proposal for quantum physics in secondary school. Physics Education, 35, 406–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, R., Wiesner, H. (2002). Teaching quantum mechanics on an introductory level. American Journal of Physics, 70(3), 200–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nashon, S. Nielsen, W., Petrina, S. (2008). Whatever happened to STS? Pre-service physics teachers and the history of quantum mechanics. Science & Education, 17, 387–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian, Nancy. (1992). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In: Ronald N. Giere (ed). Cognitive models of science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 3–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Níaz, M., Klassen, S., Mc Millan, B., Metz, B. (2010). Reconstruction of the History of the Photoelectric Effect and its Implications for General Physics Textbooks Science Education, 94, 903–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omnès, R. (2000). Comprendre la mécanique quantique. Paris: EDP Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osnaghi, S., Freitas, F., and Freire, O. (2009). The origin of the Everettian heresy. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 40, 97–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pais, A. (1991). Niels Bohr's times: in physics, philosophy, and polity. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passon, O. (2004). How to teach quantum mechanics. European Journal of Physics, 25, 765–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paty, M. (1999). Are quantum systems physical objects with physical properties? European Journal of Physics 20, 373–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paty, M. (2000). Interprétations et significations en physique quantique. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 212, 2, 17–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pospievich, G. (2003). Philosophy and quantum mechanics in science teaching. Science & Education, 12, 559–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redhead, M. (1987). Incompleteness, Nonlocality, and Realism - A Prolegomenon to the Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics. Oxford: Clarendon Press - Oxford Univ. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosa, R. (2012). The Merli–Missiroli–Pozzi Two-Slit Electron-Interference Experiment, Physics in Perspective, 14(2), 178–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schenzle, A. (1996). Illusion or reality: the measurement process in quantum optics. Contemporary Physics, 37 (4), 303–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweber, S. (1986). The empiricist temper regnant: theoretical physics in the United States 1920–1950. Part 1. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, 17, 55–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shankar, R. (1994). Principles of Quantum Mechanics. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shimony, A. (2009). “Bell’s Theorem”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2009/entries/bell-theorem/>.

  • Silva, I., Freire, O. (2013). The Concept of the Photon in Question: The Controversy Surrounding the HBT Effect circa 1956–1958, Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 43(4), 453–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, C. (2001). Student understanding of quantum mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 69(8), 885–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, C. (2006). Assessing and improving student understanding of quantum mechanics. In P. Heron, L. McCullough, and J. Marx (Eds) 2005 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings. Melville, NY: AIP Press, 69–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, C. (2008). Interactive learning on quantum mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 75(4–5), 400–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaller, B. (2000). Visual quantum mechanics: selected topics with computer-generated animations of quantum-mechanical phenomena. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorn, J. J., Neel, S. M., Donato, V. W., Bergreen, G. S., Davies, R. E., Beck, M. (2004). Observing the quantum behavior of light in an undergraduate laboratory. American Journal of Physics, 72(9), 1210–1219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsaparlis, G., Papaphotis, G. (2009). High-school students’ conceptual difficulties and attempts at a conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 895–930.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velentzas, A., Halkia, K. (2011). The ‘Heisenberg’s Microscope’ as an Example of Using Thought Experiments in Teaching Physics Theories to Students of the Upper Secondary School. Research in Science Education, 41, 525–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velentzas, a., Halkia, K., Skordoulis, C. (2007). Thought Experiments in the Theory of Relativity and in Quantum Mechanics: Their Presence in Textbooks and in Popular Science Books. Science & Education, 16, 353–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, J. A., Zurek, W. H. (Eds.). (1983). Quantum theory and measurement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuttiprom, S., Sharma, M. D., Johnston, I. D., Chitaree, R., & Soankwan, C. (2009). Development and use of a conceptual survey in introductory quantum physics. International Journal of Science Education, 31(5), 631–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeang, C-P. (2011). Engineering Entanglement, Conceptualizing Quantum Information. Annals of Science, 68(3), 325–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeilinger, A. (1999). In retrospect: Albert Einstein: philosopher – scientist. Nature, 398(6724), 210–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zollman, D., Rebello, N. S., Hogg, K. (2002). Quantum mechanics for everyone: Hands-on activities integrated with technology. American Journal of Physics, 70(3), 252–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

 We are thankful to CAPES, CNPq, FAPESB, and Universidade Estadual da Paraiba, Brazil, for the support to this research. We are grateful to the editor, Michael Matthews, and the reviewers for their critical comments; to David Kaiser, for reading and commenting the paper; and to Denise Key for her help with the English.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Didácticas Específicas, Facultad de Humanidades y Educación, Universidad de Burgos, Burgos, Spain

    Ileana M. Greca

  2. Instituto de Física, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador, Brazil

    Olival Freire Jr.

Authors
  1. Ileana M. Greca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olival Freire Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ileana M. Greca .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    Michael R. Matthews

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Greca, I.M., Freire, O. (2014). Meeting the Challenge: Quantum Physics in Introductory Physics Courses. In: Matthews, M. (eds) International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation