Teachers’ content knowledge: the Galileo Galilei freefall thought experiment
Abstract
Studies on science teachers’ professional knowledge suggest little or no integration between the dimensions that constitute content knowledge (e.g., cognitive, didactic, and epistemological). In this paper, we investigate which integrated dimensions we can study through a thought experiment. We carried out qualitative research with three physics secondary teachers and conducted a think-aloud interview using Galileo Galilei’s free-fall thought experiment as an instrument. We find that it is possible to study the cognitive and epistemological dimensions of content knowledge. We point out some difficulties of teachers with processes to imagine the situation and experiment in thought. We conclude that the suggested lack of integration of the content knowledge dimensions in other studies is methodological and not ontological.
Keywords
Content knowledge, Thought experiments, Mental model, Free fall, Galileo GalileiReferences
Blown, E. J. y Bryce, T. G. K. (2013). Thought-Experiments About Gravity in the History of Science and in Research into Children’s Thinking. Science & Education, 22(3), 419-481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9548-3
Clement, J. J. (2003). Imagistic Simulation in Scientific Model Construction. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 6. http://works.bepress.com/john_clement/10/
Corbin, J. y Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. SAGE Publications.
Deng, Z. (2001). The distinction between key ideas in teaching school physics and key ideas in the discipline of physics. Science Education, 85(3), 263-278. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1009
El Skaf, R. (2018). The Function and Limit of Galileo’s Falling Bodies Thought Experiment: Absolute Weight, Specific Weight and the Medium’s Resistance. https://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/purchase?openform&fp=croatjphil&id=croatjphil_2018_0018_0001_0037_0058
Fischer, H. E., Borowski, A. y Tepner, O. (2012). Professional Knowledge of Science Teachers. En B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin y C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 435-448). Países Bajos: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_30
Gendler, T. (2010). Intuition, Imagination, and Philosophical Methodology. Oxford University Press.
Giere, R. N. (1997). Cognitive Models of Science. MIT Press.
Kavanagh, C. y Sneider, C. (2006a). Learning about Gravity I. Free Fall: A Guide for Teachers and Curriculum Developers. Astronomy Education Review, 5(2), 21-52. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2006018
Kavanagh, C. y Sneider, C. (2006b). Learning about Gravity II. Trajectories and Orbits: A Guide for Teachers and Curriculum Developers. Astronomy Education Review, 5(2), 53-102. https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2006019
Laverty, J. T. y Caballero, M. D. (2018). Analysis of the most common concept inventories in physics: What are we assessing. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(1), 0101231-01012310. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010123
Leighton, J. P. (2017). Using Think-Aloud Interviews and Cognitive Labs in Educational Research. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199372904.001.0001
McConnell, T. J., Parker, J. M. y Eberhardt, J. (2013). Assessing Teachers’ Science Content Knowledge: A Strategy for Assessing Depth of Understanding. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(4), 717-743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9342-3
Miščević, N. (1992). Mental models and thought experiments. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 6(3), 215-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698599208573432
Nersessian, N. J. (1988). Reasoning from Imagery and Analogy in Scientific Concept Formation. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1988, 41-47.
Nersessian, N. J. (2002). The cognitive basis of model-based reasoning in science. En P. Carruthers, S. Stich y M. Siegal (Eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science (pp. 133-153). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613517.008
Nersessian, N. J. (2010). Creating Scientific Concepts. MIT Press.
Neumann, K., Kind, V. y Harms, U. (2019). Probing the amalgam: The relationship between science teachers’ content, pedagogical and pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 41(7), 964-978. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1497217
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Talanquer, V. (2015). Razonamiento Pedagógico Específico sobre el Contenido. Educación Química, 25(3), 391-397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(14)70554-3
Published
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2021 José Manuel Ruvalcaba Cervantes, Ricardo Quintero Zazueta, Alma Adrianna Gómez Galindo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
