Advertisement

Research in Science Education

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 106–113 | Cite as

Combining issues of “girl-suited” science teaching, STS and constructivism in a physics textbook

  • Reinders Duit
  • Peter Häussler
  • Roland Lauterbach
  • Helmut Mikelskis
  • Walter Westphal
Article

Abstract

This paper outlines the design of a physics textbook that addresses issues of gender-inclusive physics teaching, STS and constructivism. Difficulties of addressing these issues in a textbook for normal classes, which has to compete with other textbooks on the market will be discussed.

Keywords

Science Teaching Physic Teaching Normal Classis Physics Textbook 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Driver, R. (1989). Changing conceptions. In P. Adey (ed.).Adolescent development and school science. London: Falmer Press, 79–99.Google Scholar
  2. Duit, R. (in press). The constructivist view: a both fashionable and fruitful paradigm for science education research and practice. In L. Steffe (ed.),Constructivism in education, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Duit, R. & Häussler, P. (1992). Learning and teaching energy—combining aspects of constructivist, girl suited and STS approaches. Paper presented at the “Science content and pedagogy” workshop. Monash University, Melbourne, Austrlia, June 29 to July 8, 1992.Google Scholar
  4. Fensham, P. (1987). Physical science, society and technology: a case study in the sociology of knowledge. In K. Riquarts (ed.).Science and technology and the quality of life. Vol. II. Kiel: IPN, 714–722.Google Scholar
  5. Guzzetti, B.J. & Glass, G.V. (1992). Promoting conceptual change in science: a comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April.Google Scholar
  6. Häussler, P. (1987). Measuring students' interest in physics—design and results of a cross sectional study in the Federal Republic of Germany.International Journal of Science Education, 9, 79–92.Google Scholar
  7. Häussler, P. & Hoffmann, L. (1990). Wie Physikunterricht für Mädchen interessant werden kann.Naturwissenschaften im Unterricht-Physik, 34, 12–17Google Scholar
  8. Herron, J.D. (1983). What research say and how it can be used.Journal of Chemical Education, 10, 888–890.Google Scholar
  9. Millar, R. (1989). Bending the evidence: the relationship between theory and experiment in science education. In R. Millar (ed.).Doing science: Images of science in science education, London: Falmer Press, 38–61.Google Scholar
  10. Scott, P., Asoko, H., & Driver, R. (1992). Teaching for conceptual change: a review of strategies. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer, (eds.),Research in physics learning: theoretical issues and empirical findings. Proceedings of an International Workshop at the University of Bremen, March 1991, Kiel: IPN, 310–329.Google Scholar
  11. Strube, P. (1989). The notion of style in physics textbooks.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 291–299Google Scholar
  12. Stinner, A. (1992). Science textbooks and science teaching: from logic to evidence.Science Education, 76, 291–299.Google Scholar
  13. Sutton, C. (1989) Writing and reading science: the hidden message. In R. Millar (ed.).Doing science: Images of science in science education. London: Falmer Press, 137–159.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Australasian Science Education Research Association 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reinders Duit
    • 1
  • Peter Häussler
    • 1
  • Roland Lauterbach
    • 1
  • Helmut Mikelskis
    • 1
  • Walter Westphal
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Science EducationUniversity of KielKielGermany

Personalised recommendations