1985
DOI: 10.1119/1.14031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Common sense concepts about motion

Abstract: Common sense beliefs of college students about motion and its causes are surveyed and analyzed. A taxonomy of common sense concepts which conflict with Newtonian theory is developed as a guide to instruction.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
359
1
45

Year Published

1997
1997
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 615 publications
(421 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
11
359
1
45
Order By: Relevance
“…Their thesis, which has since inspired an entire field of inquiry into students' ''conceptual understanding'' of various topics, is that students begin the study of physics with an existing set of commonsense beliefs about why the world works in the way it does (Halloun & Hestenes, 1985a). Students do not begin the study of physics (or biology as seen in Bishop and Anderson, 1990, chemistry as seen in Sandoval, 2003, engineering as seen in Streveler, Litzinger, Miller, and Steif, 2008, history as seen in Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, and Pastorelli, 1996, mathematics as seen in Sandoval and Çam, 2011 or computer science as seen in Sarewitz, 2004) with a blank slate to be written on by lectures and textbooks.…”
Section: Conceptual Understandingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their thesis, which has since inspired an entire field of inquiry into students' ''conceptual understanding'' of various topics, is that students begin the study of physics with an existing set of commonsense beliefs about why the world works in the way it does (Halloun & Hestenes, 1985a). Students do not begin the study of physics (or biology as seen in Bishop and Anderson, 1990, chemistry as seen in Sandoval, 2003, engineering as seen in Streveler, Litzinger, Miller, and Steif, 2008, history as seen in Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, and Pastorelli, 1996, mathematics as seen in Sandoval and Çam, 2011 or computer science as seen in Sarewitz, 2004) with a blank slate to be written on by lectures and textbooks.…”
Section: Conceptual Understandingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the paper [3] published by Champagne A.B, Klopfer L.E & Andersson J.H shows that heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects. The fact that the speed of an object descending along an incline increases with its mass is explained in [4] by Halloun I.A & Hestenes D and in [5] by Karpp E.R & Anderson N.H. the relation between mass & speed of a falling object has been investigated in [6], [7] by Sequeira M & Leite L and Shanon B. The various methods used for construction of analytical solutions-the traditional approach is explained in [8], [9] by Benacka J, Vial A.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kipnis 1998, Matthews 2000, McComas 2008, National Research Council 2011; to provide scientific clarification of the concept to be taught (Duit et al, 2005); to overcome conceptual difficulties by drawing on the similarity between philo-and onto-genesis of knowledge (e.g. McCloskey 1983, Halloun & Hestenes 1985, Galili & Hazan 2000. Despite the intensive support for using the HPS in science teaching, however, "the issue continues to be complex and controversial" (Galili 2011; see also Galili & Hazan 2001, Monk & Osborne 1997).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%