2017
DOI: 10.3390/educsci7040084
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What Really Makes Secondary School Students “Want” to Study Physics?

Abstract: This paper reports on a mixed-methods study with high school students. The study focused on the reasons they give with regard to "what they find interesting about their physics lesson" and "what makes them want to study their physics lesson" during a school year. The sample consisted of 219 students, who attended public high schools, located in various geographical regions of Greece. Journal entries made by all students-that is, students from junior high and senior high schools-were content-analyzed through a … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
4

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
(31 reference statements)
0
8
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…4 This includes affective aspects like imagination, aesthetic experience, sense of wonder and personal involvement, completing conceptual and logical modes of thinking in science learning in an important way (Hadzigeorgiou 2005;Hampp and Schwan 2015). These aspects have been widely discussed in the context of science education, in particular for younger children (Girod and Wong 2002;Kokkotas and Rizaki 2011;Murmann and Avraamidou 2016), and even shown to be at work in secondary-level students (Hadzigeorgiou and Schulz 2017). While an investigation of this line of thought was not in the scope of the present study, we feel that it represents an important approach for further research and development of interventions like Valentina and Leo.…”
Section: Affective Domain and Appreciationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 This includes affective aspects like imagination, aesthetic experience, sense of wonder and personal involvement, completing conceptual and logical modes of thinking in science learning in an important way (Hadzigeorgiou 2005;Hampp and Schwan 2015). These aspects have been widely discussed in the context of science education, in particular for younger children (Girod and Wong 2002;Kokkotas and Rizaki 2011;Murmann and Avraamidou 2016), and even shown to be at work in secondary-level students (Hadzigeorgiou and Schulz 2017). While an investigation of this line of thought was not in the scope of the present study, we feel that it represents an important approach for further research and development of interventions like Valentina and Leo.…”
Section: Affective Domain and Appreciationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, almost half of the teachers involved in the survey consider that the climate in the school unit they serve is largely effective. In addition, less than half say they are happy with the quality of the educational process in the school unit they serve [20]. However, others expressed a different view because of problems at the organizational and operational levels.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the notion of engagement should not be conflated specifically with the notion of student "interest" either. Apart from the conceptual problems inherent in the notion of interest itself, there is empirical evidence that what students think is interesting (e.g., a topic, an issue, an idea) does not necessarily motivate them to study it, let alone to study it further-that is, to try to learn more about it and move beyond the class situation (Hadzigeorgiou and Schulz, 2017).…”
Section: The Problem Of Students' Engagement With Science Content Knomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…He had argued that the methods of logic are insufficient for describing science as a human endeavor: "logical tools are of limited use in understanding the development of science or, what is even more important, in the teaching of science" (Elkana, 2000, p. 473). Private science, as Hadzigeorgiou and Schulz (2017) argued, is inevitably phenomenological but the prevailing insistence on the "logic" of science, when formulated in public language of "final form science" as found in textbooks, does not give students the picture of science as a human activity, or even a proper historical activity (though the presented history is too often mythical-Allchin, 2013), as pointed out by several previous researchers (see Matthews, 1994Matthews, , 2015Hodson, 1998;Donnelly, 2004). A "Romantic Understanding" of science, if it takes place in a narrative learning context, in addition to 3 There are, no doubt, certain limitations regarding the intervention.…”
Section: "Romantic Understanding" As a Way To Be Engaged With The Conmentioning
confidence: 99%