Physics Teaching in the Search for Its Self

The crisis in physics education necessitates searching for new relevant meanings of physics knowledge. This paper advocates regarding physics as the dialogue among discipline-cultures, rather than as a cluster of disciplines to be an appropriate subject of science education. In a discipline-culture one can distinguish elements of knowledge as belonging to either (1) central principles and paradigms – nucleus, (2) normal disciplinary area – body of knowledge or (3) rival knowledge of the subject – periphery. It appears that Physics cannot be represented as a simple dynamic wholeness, that is, cannot be arranged in a single tripartite (triadic) structure (this result presents a deconstruction), but incorporates several discipline-cultures. Bound together by family similarity, they maintain a conceptual discourse. Teaching physics as a culture is performed in polyphonic space of different worldviews; in other words, it is performed in a Kontrapunkt. Implications of the tripartite code are suggested with regard to representation of scientific revolutions, individual conceptual change, physics curricula and the typology of students learning science.

[1]  Edward F. Redish,et al.  Millikan Lecture 1998: Building a Science of Teaching Physics , 1999 .

[2]  S. Carey.  Conceptual Change in Childhood , 1985 .

[3]  M. R. Matthews,et al.  Time for science education , 2000 .

[4]  M. Limón.  On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: a critical appraisal , 2001 .

[5]  M. Bunge.  Twenty-Five Centuries of Quantum Physics: From Pythagoras to Us, and from Subjectivism to Realism , 2003 .

[6]  P. Hewson,et al.  The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom , 1989 .

[7]  J. Lacan.  Les quatre concepts fondamentaux de la psychanalyse , 1973 .

[8]  L. Landau.  Quantum Mechanics-Nonrelativistic Theory , 1958 .

[9]  Kenneth A. Strike,et al.  A revisionist theory of conceptual change , 1992 .

[10]  F. Lobkowicz,et al.  Physics for Scientists and Engineers, Vol. I , 1976 .

[11]  Amos Dreyfus,et al.  Applying the cognitive conflict strategy for conceptual change - some implications, difficulties, and problems , 1990 .

[12]  S. Engel.  Thought and Language , 1964 .

[13]  Mario Bunge,et al.  Philosophy of Physics , 1972 .

[14]  I. Prigogine,et al.  Order out of chaos , 1984 .

[15]  Robert J. Whitaker,et al.  Aristotle is not dead: Student understanding of trajectory motion , 1983 .

[16]  I. Galili,et al.  Motion implies force: where to expect vestiges of the misconception? , 1992 .

[17]  Henri Poincaré.  Science and Method , 1914 .

[18]  I. Lakatos.  Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1976 .

[19]  Igal Galili,et al.  Mechanics background influences students’ conceptions in electromagnetism , 1995 .

[20]  J. Derrida.  Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences , 2001 .

[21]  P. Hewson,et al.  Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change , 1982 .

[22]  Max Jammer,et al.  The conceptual development of quantum mechanics , 1966 .

[23]  Ibrahim A. Halloun,et al.  Common sense concepts about motion , 1985 .

[24]  R. Feynman,et al.  Space-Time Approach to Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics , 1948 .

[25]  J. Bruner.  The Process of Education , 1960 .

[26]  W. Heisenberg,et al.  Physics and Philosophy , 1943, Nature.

[27]  R. W. Bass,et al.  Remark on Cosmological Models , 1957 .

[28]  D. Bohm.  A SUGGESTED INTERPRETATION OF THE QUANTUM THEORY IN TERMS OF "HIDDEN" VARIABLES. II , 1952 .

[29]  A. Gopnik.  The Scientist as Child , 1996, Philosophy of Science.

[30]  F. David Peat,et al.  Science, Order, and Creativity , 1987 .

[31]  Ola Halldén,et al.  Re-framing the problem of conceptual change , 1994 .

[32]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[33]  Richard T. White,et al.  Metalearning and conceptual change , 1989 .

[34]  R. Driver,et al.  The Pupil as Scientist , 1983 .

[35]  Karl Raimund Sir Popper,et al.  Quantum theory and the schism in physics , 1982 .

[36]  Igal Galili,et al.  Experts' Views on Using History and Philosophy of Science in the Practice of Physics Instruction , 2001 .

[37]  Joseph J. Schwab.  Problems, Topics, and Issues , 1967 .

[38]  J. Nussbaum,et al.  Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and accommodation: Toward a principled teaching strategy , 1982 .

[39]  Yu. M. Lotman,et al.  On the Semiotic Mechanism of Culture , 1978 .

[40]  Godfrey Vesey,et al.  A History of ‘Ideas’ , 1982, Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series.

[41]  A. diSessa.  Toward an Epistemology of Physics , 1993 .

[42]  J. Becker,et al.  The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory , 1955 .

[43]  Raymond A. Serway,et al.  Printed test bank to accompany Physics for scientists and engineers with modern physics , 1982 .

[44]  D. A. Dunnett.  Classical Electrodynamics , 2020, Nature.

[45]  Igal Galili,et al.  Learners' knowledge in optics: interpretation, structure and analysis , 2000 .

[46]  I. Galili,et al.  Changing approach to teaching electromagnetism in a conceptually oriented introductory physics course , 1997 .

[47]  M. Foucault.  The archaeology of knowledge , 1970 .

[48]  H. Everett.  "Relative State" Formulation of Quantum Mechanics , 1957 .

[49]  Bat-Sheva Eylon,et al.  From problem solving to a knowledge structure: An example from the domain of electromagnetism , 1997 .