ABSTRACT:The procedural understanding of university students at the freshman level, prior to instruction, has been investigated in the context of experimental work in physics. A written instrument was used to explore students' ideas about data collection, data processing, and data comparison; in particular, the need to repeat measurements and the implications of the scatter associated with numerical and graphical data. Two types of reasoning used by students in the laboratory, viz. point and set reasoning, are proposed and used to classify students' responses. The findings show a high degree of consistency of these modes of reasoning across the experimental phases of data collection and data processing. A framework is suggested from which a laboratory teaching program may be developed.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The Salters' curriculum development projects provide complete applications‐led science or chemistry programs for students ages 11‐18. In terms of the scale of their adoption by teachers in the UK and the interest they have generated in other countries, the developments have been successful. This article is a retrospective analysis of the process of large scale curriculum development. It locates the projects and their development within the range of approaches advocated in science education and considers the practical decisions taken during the development in relation to theories of curriculum development and change. A case is made for regarding large scale curriculum development as a form of technological problem solving, starting from an analysis of the needs of teachers and the formulation of design criteria, and then drawing, when needed, on a range of theoretical ideas concerning content selection, how young people learn and how change is managed. The implications of this view for curriculum evaluation are considered. © 1994 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Traditionally physics laboratory courses at the freshman level have aimed to demonstrate various principles of physics introduced in lectures. Experiments tend to be quantitative in nature with experimental and data analysis techniques interwoven as distinct strands of the laboratory course.1 It is often assumed that, in this way, students will end up with an understanding of the nature of measurement and experimentation. Recent research studies have, however, questioned this assumption.2,3 They have pointed to the fact that freshmen who have completed physics laboratory courses are often able to demonstrate mastery of the mechanistic techniques (e.g., calculating means and standard deviations, fitting straight lines, etc.) but lack an appreciation of the nature of scientific evidence, in particular the central role of uncertainty in experimental measurement. We believe that the probabilistic approach to data analysis, as advocated by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), will result in a more coherent framework for teaching measurement and measurement uncertainty in the introductory physics laboratory course.

The purpose of the study reported here was to analyse the ways in which unversity entrant science students carry out and communicate experimental activities and to identify a model to explain characteristic communication practices. The study was prompted by a need to inform the development of an introductory laboratory course. The students studied shared an educational background characterised by a lack of experience with laboratory work and scientific writing. Seven groups of three students were studied. The investigative strategies of these groups were observed. Laboratory reports were used to identify the ways in which students communicated these strategies. Data are presented that show a discrepancy between the strategies used and those reported. The results suggest that: (i) students' perceptions of the purpose of a laboratory task influence their decisions on what to report; (ii) understandings of laboratory procedures greatly influence their decision on what to report and on how much detail to include in a report and; (iii) knowledge of discourse rules contributes to effective reporting. It is concluded that students' communication of an investigation results from the differential operation of various perceptual filters that determine both the procedural and discourse elements of their reports. It is recommended that the communication of science should be taught explicitly and alongside the procedures and concepts of science. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 37: 839–853, 2000