Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations PDF
Preview Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations
Models and Modeling in Science Education Billie Eilam John K. Gilbert Editors Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations Models and Modeling in Science Education Volume 8 Series Editor Professor Emeritus John K. Gilbert The University of Reading and King’s College London, UK Editorial Board Professor Mei-Hung Chiu Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan Dr. Gail Chittleborough Faculty of Education, Deakin University, Australia Professor Barbara Crawford Department of Mathematics and Science Education, The University of Georgia, USA Assoc. Prof. Billie Eilam Department of Learning, Instruction, and Teacher Education, University of Haifa, Israel Professor David Treagust Science and Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin University, Western Australia Professor Jan Van Driel ICLON-Graduate School of Teaching, Leiden University, The Netherlands Dr. Rosaria Justi Faculty of Science, University of Minas Gerais, Brazil Dr. Ji Shen Faculty of Science, University of Florida, USA For further volumes: http://www.springer.com/series/6931 Billie Eilam (cid:129) John K. Gilbert Editors Science Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations Editors Billie Eilam John K. Gilbert Faculty of Education King’s College London and The University University of Haifa of Reading Haifa, Israel Mayford, Woking, UK ISSN 1871-2983 ISSN 2213-2260 (electronic) ISBN 978-3-319-06525-0 ISBN 978-3-319-06526-7 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-06526-7 Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London Library of Congress Control Number: 2014944380 © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014 T his work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifi cally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfi lms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifi cally for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this publication or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s location, in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Permissions for use may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations are liable to prosecution under the respective Copyright Law. T he use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifi c statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication, neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein. Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) Contents Part I Research into Teaching with Visual Representations 1 The Significance of Visual Representations in the Teaching of Science ....................................................................... 3 Billie Eilam and John K. Gilbert 2 Teaching and Researching Visual Representations: Shared Vision or Divided Worlds?......................................................... 29 Shaaron Ainsworth and Len Newton Part II Teachers’ Selections, Construction, and Use of Visual Representations 3 Representing Visually: What Teachers Know and What They Prefer ............................................................................ 53 Billie Eilam , Yael Poyas , and Rachel Hashimshoni 4 Slowmation: A Process of Explicit Visualization .................................. 85 John Loughran 5 Secondary Biology Teachers’ Use of Different Types of Diagrams for Different Purposes ............................................ 103 Yang Liu , Mihye Won , and David F. Treagust 6 Teaching Stoichiometry with Particulate Diagrams – Linking Macro Phenomena and Chemical Equations ....................................... 123 Maurice Man Wai Cheng and John K. Gilbert v vi Contents Part III Teachers’ Use of Visual Representations in Culturally-Diverse Classrooms 7 Teachers’ Thoughts on Visualisations in Diverse Cultural Settings: The Case of France and Pakistan ........................... 149 Erica de Vries and Muhammad Ashraf 8 The Implications of Culture for Teachers’ Use of Representations .................................................... 171 Bruce Waldrip , Franco Rodie , and Sutopo Sutopo 9 The Interplay Between Language and Visualization: The Role of the Teacher .......................................................................... 195 Liliana Mammino 10 Visualizations in Popular Books About Chemistry .............................. 227 John K. Gilbert and Ana Afonso Part IV Teachers Supporting Student Learning from Visual Representations 11 Teachers Using Interactive Simulations to Scaffold Inquiry Instruction in Physical Science Education .......... 249 David R. Geelan and Xinxin Fan 12 Transformed Instruction: Teaching in a Student-Generated Representations Learning Environment ............................................... 271 Orit Parnafes and Rotem Trachtenberg-Maslaton 13 The Laboratory for Making Things: Developing Multiple Representations of Knowledge ............................................................... 291 Jeanne Bamberger Part V Overview 14 Developing Science Teachers’ Representational Competence and Its Impact on Their Teaching ................................... 315 John K. Gilbert and Billie Eilam Index ................................................................................................................. 331 Contributors Ana Afonso Department of Education , University of Minho , Minho , Portugal Shaaron Ainsworth L earning Sciences Research Institute, School of Education, Jubilee Campus University of Nottingham , Nottingham , UK Muhammad Ashraf Laboratory of Educational Sciences , Université Grenoble Alpes , Grenoble , France Jeanne Bamberger Music Department , UC-Berkeley , Berkeley , CA , USA Maurice Man Wai Cheng Division of Science, Mathematics and Computing Education , University of Hong Kong , Pokfulam, Hong Kong , China Billie Eilam Faculty of Education , University of Haifa , Haifa , Israel Xinxin Fan School of Education , The University of Queensland , Brisbane , QLD , Australia David R. Geelan School of Education and Professional Studies , Griffi th University Gold Coast , Southport , QLD , Australia John K. Gilbert Kings’s College London and The University of Reading , Mayford, Woking , UK Rachel Hashimshoni Herzliya Museum of Contemporary Art , Herzliya , Israel Yang Liu Science and Mathematics Education Centre , Curtin University , Perth , WA , Australia John Loughran Department of Education , Monash University , Clayton , VIC , Australia Liliana Mammino Department of Chemistry , University of Venda , Thohoyandou , South Africa Len Newton Learning Sciences Research Institute, School of Education , Jubilee Campus University of Nottingham , Nottingham , UK vii viii Contributors Orit Parnafes Ben-Gurion University of the Negev , Beer Sheva , Israel Yael Poyas D epartment of Graduate Studies, O ranim, College of Education, Q iryat Tivon , Israel Franco Rodie Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development , Solomon Islands Sutopo Sutopo State University of Malang , Malang, Indonesia Rotem Trachtenberg-Maslaton Ben-Gurion University of the Negev , Beer Sheva , Israel David F. T reagust Science and Mathematics Education Centre , Curtin University , Perth , WA , Australia Erica de Vries Laboratory of Educational Sciences , Université Grenoble Alpes , Grenoble , France Bruce Waldrip Faculty of Education , University of Tasmania , Launceston , Australia Mihye Won Science and Mathematics Education Centre , Curtin University , Perth , WA , Australia Part I Research into Teaching with Visual Representations 1.1 Introduction The two chapters in this part provide the backdrop against which research studies into key aspects of the practicalities of teaching with visualizations are subsequently presented. In the fi rst of them, Eilam and Gilbert (this volume, Chap. 1 ) justify attention being paid to visualizations and identify the themes that make research into science teachers’ use of visualizations a matter of great importance. The central role of models in scientifi c methodology is assumed and visualization is identifi ed as a key component in the creation and employment of all models. This emphasis is gaining ever- greater importance as the ways in which visualizations can be presented with the aid of computers become more accessible and intellectually more powerful, this leading to their heightened role in teaching. The bulk of the chapter is devoted to identifying the myriad factors that may control the effectiveness of that teaching. First, teachers may have, like many of their students, ‘alternative conceptions’ of the central concepts of science. Where this occurs, the visualizations accompanying them will be, at best, inaccurate and, at worst, misleading to their students. Second, the fragmentation of ideas in the typical school science curriculum, a very common event, means that the relationships between visualizations of the many component concepts in that curriculum will lack a necessary coherence across and between them. Third, teachers’ prior knowledge about visualizations as such will, in the absence of previous systematic professional development activities, probably be defi cient in some respects. Teachers may well only have a partial knowledge of the conventions that govern the nature of the different types of visualization and the codes of relationship to what they represent (the referents). In particular, teachers may lack an overt awareness of the intellectual demands of the learning tasks that they have to address. These will be governed by the natures of the referents involved and the implications of whether they are: concrete or abstract; explicitly or implic- itly identifi ed. Also, are the events in which these referents are involved: simple or complex; linear or cyclic in nature; have a clear directionality or are they in
The list of books you might like
