Science & Education

, Volume 23, Issue 6, pp 1309–1338 | Cite as

Teaching Energy Concepts by Working on Themes of Cultural and Environmental Value

Article

Abstract

Energy is a central topic in physics and a key concept for understanding the physical, biological and technological worlds. It is a complex topic with multiple connections with different areas of science and with social, environmental and philosophical issues. In this paper we discuss some aspects of the teaching and learning of the energy concept, and report results of research on this issue. To immerse science teaching into the context of scientific culture and of the students’ cultural world, we propose to select specific driving issues that promote motivation for the construction of science concepts and models. We describe the design and evaluation of a teaching learning path developed around the issue of greenhouse effect and global warming. The experimentation with high school students has shown that the approach based on driving issues promotes students’ engagement toward a deeper understanding of the topic and favours further insight. The evolution of students’ answers indicates a progressively more correct and appropriate use of the concepts of heat, radiation, temperature, internal energy, a distinction between thermal equilibrium and stationary non equilibrium conditions, and a better understanding of greenhouse effect. Based on the results of the experimentation and in collaboration with the teachers involved, new materials for the students have been prepared and a new cycle of implementation, evaluation and refinement has been activated with a larger group of teachers and students. This type of systematic and long term collaboration with teachers can help to fill the gap between the science education research and the actual school practice.

References

  1. Andersson, B., & Kärrqvist, C. (1983). How Swedish pupils, aged 12–15 years, understand light and its properties. European Journal of Science Education, 5(4), 387–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson, B., & Wallin, A. (2000). Students’ understanding of the greenhouse effect, the societal consequences of reducing CO2 emissions and problem of ozone layer depletion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1096–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold, M., & Millar, R. (1996). Learning the scientific story: A case study in the teaching and learning of elementary thermodynamics. Science Education, 80(3), 249–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baierlein, R. (1999). Thermal physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baracca, A., & Besson, U. (1990). Introduzione storica al concetto di energia. Firenze: Le Monnier.Google Scholar
  6. Besson, U. (2003). The distinction between heat and work: An approach based on a classical mechanical model. European Journal of Physics, 24, 245–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Besson, U. (2009). Paradoxes of thermal radiation. European Journal of Physics, 30, 995–1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Besson, U. (2012). The history of cooling law: When the search for simplicity can be an obstacle. Science & Education, 21(8), 1085–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Besson, U., De Ambrosis, A., & Mascheretti, P. (2010a). Studying the physical basis of global warming: Thermal effects of the interaction between radiation and matter and greenhouse effect. European Journal of Physics, 31, 375–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Besson, U., Borghi, L., De Ambrosis, A., & Mascheretti, P. (2010b). A three-dimensional approach and open source structure for the design and experimentation of teaching learning sequences: The case of friction. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 1289–1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bevilacqua, F., & Falomo, L. (2010). Energia questa trasformista—Laboratorio storico interattivo. Pavia: La Goliardica Pavese.Google Scholar
  12. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3), 369–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (1993). The greenhouse effect: Children’s perception of causes, consequences and cures. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 531–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chauvet, F. (1996). Teaching colour: Designing and evaluation of a sequence. European Journal of Teacher Education, 19(2), 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coelho, L. R. (2009). On the concept of energy: How understanding its history can improve physics teaching. Science & Education, 18, 961–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cordero, E., Todd, A. M., & Abellera, D. (2008). Climate change education and the ecological footprint. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89(6), 865–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cotignola, M. I., Bordogna, C., Punte, G., & Cappannini, O. M. (2002). Difficulties in learning thermodynamic concepts: Are they linked to the historical development of this field? Science & Education, 11, 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. De Ambrosis, A., & Levrini, O. (2010). An empirical study for reconstructing the appropriation path in the case of special relativity. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 6(020107), 1–11.Google Scholar
  19. de Berg, K. C. (2008). The concepts of heat and temperature: The problem of determining the content for the construction of an historical case study which is sensitive to nature of science issues and teaching-learning issues. Science & Education, 17, 75–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Felice, F. (2000). Gli incerti confini del cosmo. Milano: Bruno Mondadori Editore.Google Scholar
  21. Domenech, J. L., Gil-Perez, D., Gras-Martì, A. G., Guisasola, J., Martinez-Torregrosa, J., Salinas, J., et al. (2007). Teaching of energy issues: A debate proposal for a global reorientation. Science & Education, 16, 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Duit, R. (1986). In search of an energy concept. In R. Driver & R. Millar (Eds.), Energy matters (pp. 67–101). Leeds: University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  23. Edelson, D., Gordin, D., & Pea, R. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3), 391–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Erickson, G., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Heat and temperature. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children’s ideas in science (pp. 52–84). Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Goldring, H., & Osborne, J. (1994). Students’ difficulties with energy and related concepts. Physics Education, 29, 26–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Groves, F., & Pugh, A. (1999). Elementary pre-service teacher perception of the greenhouse effect. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 75–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Guesne, E. (1985). Light. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children’s ideas in science (pp. 10–32). Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hecht, E. (2007). Energy and change. Physics Teacher, 45, 88–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Helmholtz, H. (1847). Über die Erhaltung der Kraft (On the Conservation of Force). Berlin: G. Reimer.Google Scholar
  30. Hicks, N. (1983). Energy is the capacity to do work—or is it? Physics Teacher, 21, 529–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hirn, C., & Viennot, L. (2000). Transformation of didactic intention by teachers: The case of geometrical optics in grade 8 in France. International Journal of Science Education, 22(4), 357–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2007). Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). http://www.ipcc.ch/index.htm.
  33. Kaminski, W. (1989). Conceptions des enfants et des autres sur la lumière. Le BUP, 716, 973–996.Google Scholar
  34. Kilinc, A., Stanisstreet, M., & Boyes, E. (2008). Turkish students’ ideas about global warming. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 3(2), 89–98.Google Scholar
  35. Koulaidis, V., & Christidou, V. (1999). Models of students’ thinking concerning the greenhouse effect and teaching implications. Science Education, 83, 559–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Bass, K., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3), 313–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lee, H. S., & Liu, O. L. (2010). Assessing learning progression of energy concepts across middle school grades: The knowledge integration perspective. Science Education, 94, 665–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lehrman, R. L. (1973). Energy is not the ability to do work. Physics Teacher, 11, 15–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lester, B. T., Li, Ma., Lee, O., & Lambert, J. (2006). Social activism in elementary science education: A science, technology and society approach to teach global warming. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 315–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lijnse, P. L., Eijkelhof, H., Klaassen, C., & Scholte, R. (1990). Pupils’ and mass-media ideas about radioactivity. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Loverude, M. E., Kautz, C. H., & Heron, P. R. L. (2002). Student understanding of the first law of thermodynamics: Relating work to the adiabatic compression of an ideal gas. American Journal of Physics, 70, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maxwell J. C. (1871, 10th ed. 1891). Theory of heat. London: Longmans, Green & Co, reprint 1902.Google Scholar
  43. Meadows, G., & Wiesenmayer, R. (1999). Identifying and addressing students’ alternative conceptions of the global warming: the need for cognitive conflict. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 235–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Meltzer, E. D. (2004). Investigation of students’ reasoning regarding heat, work, and the first law of thermodynamics in an introductory calculus-based general physics course. American Journal of Physics, 72, 1432–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Millar, R. (1994). School students’ understanding of key ideas about radioactivity and ionizing radiation. Public Understanding of Science, 3(1), 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ogborn, J. (1986). Energy and fuel: The meaning of the ‘go of things’. School Science Review, 242, 30–35.Google Scholar
  47. Onorato, P., Mascheretti, P., & De Ambrosis, A. (2011). ‘Home made’ model to study the greenhouse effect and global warming. European Journal of Physics, 32, 363–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Osterlind, K. (2005). Concept formation in environmental education: 14-year olds’ work on the intensified greenhouse effect and the depletion of the ozone layer. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 891–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Papadimitriou, V. (2004). Prospective primary teachers’ understanding of climate change, greenhouse effect, and ozone layer depletion. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13, 299–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Papadouris, N., & Constantinou, C. P. (2011). A philosophically informed teaching proposal on the topic of energy for students aged 11–14. Science & Education, 20(10), 961–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pinto, R. (2005). Introducing curriculum innovations in science: Identifying teachers’ transformations and the design of related teacher education. Science Education, 89, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rant, Z. (1956). Exergie, ein neues Wort für “Technische Arbeitsfähigkeit” (Exergy, a new word for “technical available work”). Forschung auf dem Gebiete des Ingenieurwesens, 22, 36–37.Google Scholar
  53. Redfors, A. (2001). University physics students’ use of models in explanations of phenomena involving interaction between metals and electromagnetic radiation. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 1283–1301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rego, F., & Peralta, L. (2006). Portuguese students’ knowledge of radiation physics. Physics Education, 41, 259–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuILE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263–305). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  57. Romer, R. H. (2001). Heat is not a noun. American Journal of Physics, 69, 107–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rozier, S., & Viennot, L. (1991). Students’ reasoning in thermodynamics. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rye, J. A., Rubba, P. A., & Wiesenmayer, R. L. (1997). An investigation of middle school students’ alternative conception of global warming. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 527–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sandoval, W., & Reiser, B. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shayer, M., & Wylam, H. (1981). The development of the concepts of heat and temperature in 10–13 years-olds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 419–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Solbes, J., Guisasola, J., & Tarin, F. (2009). Teaching energy conservation as a unifying principle in physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(3), 265–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Solomon, J. (1983). Learning about energy: How pupils think in two domains. European Journal of Science Education, 5, 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stavy, R., & Berkovitz, B. (1980). Cognitive conflict as a basis for teaching quantitative aspects of the concept of temperature. Science Education, 64(5), 679–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Svihla, V., & Linn, M. C. (2012). A design-based approach to fostering understanding of global climate change. International Journal of Science Education, 34(5), 651–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Trenberth, K. E., Fasullo, J. T., & Kiehl, J. (2009). Earth’s global energy budget. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 90, 311–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Viennot, L. (2001). Reasoning in physics, the part of common sense. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  68. Viglietta, L. (1990). Efficiency in the teaching of energy. Physics Education, 25, 317–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Watts, D. M. (1983). Some alternative views of energy. Physics Education, 18, 213–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zemanski, M. W. (1957). Heat and thermodynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhysicsUniversity of PaviaPaviaItaly

Personalised recommendations