Prospective Physics Teachers’ Understanding of the Speed of Light within the Scope of Special Relativity
Abstract views: 302 / PDF downloads: 211
Keywords:Special Relativity, prospective physics teachers, speed of light
This study employs the qualitative method to investigate the concept structures of prospective physics teachers regarding the speed of light. For data collection, 46 prospective physics teachers were asked to draw concept maps related to special relativity. A total of 77 propositions were found in the maps. Content analysis was used for data analysis. 4 themes and 14 sub-themes were found as a result of the analysis. “The effect of the speed of light” theme had the highest number of propositions written by the prospective teachers. Some statements claiming the existence of speeds higher than the speed of light were found in “the property of the speed of light” theme. The findings can be interpreted as that students had difficulties with understanding the second postulate of special relativity.
Aragoneses, A., Salán Ballesteros, M. N., & Hernández Fernández, A. (2017). Disclosure day on relativity: a science activity beyond the classroom. World Journal on Educational Technology, 9(2), 59-66.
Arlego, M., & Otero, M. R. (2017). Teaching basic special relativity in high school: The role of the classical kinematics. International Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 9(1), 9-12.
Aslanides, J., & Savage, C. (2013). Relativity concept inventory: Development, analysis and results. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 9(1), 010118.
Astin, C. (2005). Teaching relativity to 10-years-olds. School Science Review, 316, 34–35.
Austin, L. B., & Shone, B. M. (1995) Using concept mapping for assessment in physics. Physics Education, 30(1), 41-45.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive Viewpoint. New York, NY: Rinehart & Winston.
Ausubel, D. P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7.
Bendall, S., Goldberg, F., & Galili, I. (1993). Prospective elementary teachers' prior knowledge about light. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(9), 1169-1187.
Bilgin, N. (2000). Icerik Analizi [Content analysis]. Izmir, Turkey: Ege University Publication.
Cansungu, O. (2002). Ilkogretim ogrencilerinin (5., 6., 7. siniflar) isik ve isikla ilgili kavramlari algilama sekillerinin tespiti uzerine bir arastirma [Primary school 5th and 6th grade students misconceptions about light and speed of light and forms of construction of these conceptions], Gazi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 22(1), 11-11.
Daley, B. J. (2004). Using concept maps in qualitative research. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Concept Mapping. Pamploma, Spain. Retrieved from http://cmc.ihmc.us/papers/cmc2004-060.pdf
De Hosson, C., Kermen, I., & Parizot, E. (2010). Exploring students’ understanding of reference frames and time in galilean and special relativity. European Journal of Physics, 31, 1525–1538.
Dimitriadi, K., & Halkia, K. (2012). Secondary students’ understanding of basic ideas of special relativity, International Journal of Science Education, 34(16), 2565-2582.
Dimitriadi, K., Halkia, L., & Skordoulis, C. (2004). Prerequisites for the conceptual change of key concepts essential for the teaching of the theory of special relativity. Paper presented at EARLI Conference. Delphi, Greece. Retrieved from http://old-asel.primedu.uoa.gr/PAPERS/PrerequisitesForTheConceptualChangeOfKeyConceptsEssentialForTheTeachingOfTheTheoryOfSpecialRelativity.pdf
Dorough, D.K., & Rye, J.A. (1997). Mapping for understandingusing concept maps as windows to students’ minds. Sci Teacher, 64(1), 36–41.
Eroglu, G. M., & Kelecioglu, H. (2011). Kavram haritasi ve yapilandirilmis gridle elde edilen puanlarin gecerlik ve guvenirliklerinin incelenmesi [An analysis on the validity and reliability of concept map and structural communication grid scores]. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 40, 210-220.
Fabri, E. (2005). Insegnare relativita nel XXI secolo: dal ‘navilio’ di Galileo all’espansione dell’Universo [Teaching relativity in the XXI century: the 'ship' Galileo expansion of the universe]. Paper presented at Quaderno 16. La Fisica nella Scuola. Retrieved from http://micheleandreoli.org/public/Didattica/libri/Fabri-insegnare-relativita.pdf
Galili, I., & Hazan, A. (2000). “Learner’s knowledge in optics: interpretation, structure and analysis”. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 57-88.
Ghani, I. A., Ibrahim, N. H., Yahaya, N. A. & Surif, J. (2017). Enhancing students' HOTS in laboratory educational activity by using concept map as an alternative assessment tool. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 849-874.
Gim, J. (2016). Special theory of relativity in South Korean high school textbooks and new teaching guidelines. Science and Education. 25, 575–610.
Gousopoulos D. , Kapotis E. & Kalkanis G. (2015). Students’ difficulties in understanding the basic principles of Relativity after standard instruction. In J. Lavonen, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselkä, A. Uitto & K. Hahl (Eds.), Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2015 Conference. Science education research: Engaging learners for a sustainable future, Part 1(co-ed. [O. Finlayson & R. Pinto]) (pp. [169 – 175]). Helsinki, Finland: University of Helsinki. ISBN 978-951-51-1541-6. Retrieved from https://www.dropbox.com/s/wrb22 pgeociw8dr/ eBook2015_ Part_1_links.pdf?dl=0.
Gousopoulos, D., Kapotis, E., & Kalkanis, G. (2016). Students’ difficulties in understanding the basic principles of relativity after standard instruction. Paper presented at ESERA Conference 2016, Finland. Retrieved from http://users.uoa.gr/~ekapotis/publications/pdf/Enephet/Students_difficulties_in_understanding_t.pdf
Guisasola, J., Solbes, J., Barragues, J. I., Morentin, M., & Moreno, A. (2009). Students’ understanding of the special theory of relativity and design for a guided visit to a science museum, International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 2085-2104.
Hartmeyer, R., Bølling, M., & Bentsen, P. (2017). Approaching multidimensional forms of knowledge through Personal Meaning Mapping in science integrating teaching outside the classroom. Instructional Science, 45(6), 737-750.
Henry, P., & Moscovici, S. (1968). Problemes de l'analyse de contenu [Problems of concent analysis]. Langages, 11, 36-60.
Henriksen, E. K., Bungum, B., Angell, C., Tellefsen, C. W., Frågåt, T., & Bøe, M. V. (2014). Relativity, quantum physics and philosophy in the upper secondary curriculum: challenges, opportunities and proposed approaches. Physics Education, 49(6), 678.
Heron, M., Kinchin, I., & Medland, E. (2018). Interview talk and the co-construction of concept maps. Educational Research.
Heywood, D. S. (2005). Primary trainee teachers’ learning and teaching about light: some pedagogic implications for initial teacher training. International Journal of Science Education, 27(12), 1447-1475.
Horton, P. B., McConney, A. A., Gallo, M., Woods, A. L., Senn, G. J., & Hamelin, D. (1993). An investigation of the effectiveness of concept mapping as an instructional tool. Science and Education, 77, 95–111.
Kandil-İngeç, Ş. (2008). Kavram Haritalarının Değerlendirme Aracı Olarak Fizik Eğitiminde Kullanılması. [Using Concept Maps As An Assestment Tool In Physics Education]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35, 95-206.
Kandil-İngeç, Ş (2009). Analysing Concept Maps as an Assessment Tool in Teaching Physics and Comparison with the Achievement Tests. International Journal of Science Education,3 1(14),1897-1915.
Kandil-İngeç, Ş. & Tinni, A. (2016). Uzunluk Büzülmesi ve Zaman Genişlemesine ilişkin Kavram Karikatürü Ölçeği Geliştirilmesi [Development of Concept Cartoon Scale on Length Contraction and Time Dilation]. 1st International Management Research Congress, Interaction on Management and New Paradims, International Management Research Congress (InMaR Congress)’te sözlü bildiri olarak sunulmuştur.
Kara, I., Avci, D. E., & Cekbas, Y. (2008). Investigation of the science teacher candidates’ knowledge level about the concept of light. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 16, 46-57.
Korkmaz, S. D., Aybek, E. C., & Orucu, M. (2016). Special relativity theorem and Pythagoras’s magic. Physics Education, 51(2), 025010.
Langley, D., Ronen, M., & Eylon, B. (1997). Light propagation and visual patterns: preinstruction learners’ conceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 399-424.
Levrini, O. (2002). The substantivalist view of spacetime proposed by minkowski and its educational implications. Science and Education, 11(6), 601–617.
Martinez, G., Perez, A. L., Suero, M. I., & Pardo, P. J. (2013). The effectiveness of concept maps in teaching physics concepts applied to engineering education: Experimental comparison of the amount of learning achieved with and without concept maps. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(2), 204-214.
Miles, M. & Hubermann, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. (Second edition). London, UK: SAGE Publication.
Montanero, M., & Montanero, M. (1995). Didactica del momento angular de una partícula [Didactics of the angular momentum of a particle]. Badajoz, Spain: ICE.
Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Novak, J. D. & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Onsal, G. (2015). Ozel Gorelilik kuramiyla ilgili kavram yanilgilarini belirlemeye yonelik dort asamali bir testin gelistirilmesi ve uygulanmasi [Development and application of o four-tier test to assess misconcepitions about special relativity theory] (Unpublished master thesis). Gazi Universitesi, Ankara, Turkey.
Otero, M. R., & Arlego, M. (2018). Relativity of simultaneity in secondary school: an analysis based on the theory of the conceptual fields. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 12 (1), 61-83.
Otero, M. R., Arlego, M., & Prodanoff, F. (2016). Teaching the basic concepts of the Special Relativity in the secondary school in the framework of the Theory of Conceptual Fields of Vergnaud. Il Nuovo Cimento, 38(3), 108.
Ozcan, O., & Abak, M. (2007). What are the students’ difficulties in special relativity?, Balkan Physics Letters Special Issue, 588-592.
Patterson, M. E., Dansereau, D. F., & Newbern, D. (1992). Effects of communication aids and strategies on cooperative teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 453–461.
Perez, A. L., Suero, M. I., Pardo, P. J., & Montanero, M. (2006). Utilización de mapas conceptuales para mejorar los conocimientos relativos a la corriente electrica continua mediante su “reconstrucción colaborativa” [Using concept maps to improve knowledge relating to electrical current continues through "collaborative reconstruction”]. In A. J. Canas, J. D. Novak & F. M. Gonzalez (Eds.), Concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology proceedings of the second international conference on concept mapping 1 (pp. 629-636). San Jose, Costa Rica: Universidad de Costa Rica.
Perez, H., & Solbes, J. (2003). Algunos problemas en la ensen˜anza de la Relatividad [Some problems in teaching relativity]. Ensenanza de las Ciencias, 21(1), 135–146.
Pietrocola, M., & Zylbersztajn, A. (1999). The use of the Principle of Relativity in the interpretation of phenomena by undergraduate physics students. International Journal of Science Education, 21(3), 261-276.
Popov, O., Zackrisson, I., & Olofsson, K. U. (2001). Communicating physics in drawings and words: The case of propective science teachers. Retrieved from
Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Rhetoric and reality in science performance assessments: An update. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 1045–1063.
Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2004, September). Examining concept maps as an assessment tool. In A. J. Cañas, J. D. Novak & F. M. Gonzalez (Eds.), Concept maps: Theory, methodology, technology. Proceedings of the 1st international conference on concept mapping I. Pamplona, Spain: Universidad Pública de Navarra.
Scherr, R., Schaffer, P., & Vokos, S., (2002). The challenge of changing deeply held student beliefs about the relativity of simultaneity. American Journal of Physics, 70, 1238–48.
Sen, A. I. (2003). Ilkogretim ogrencilerinin isik, gorme ve aynalar konusundaki kavram yanilgilarinin ve ogrenme zorluklarinin incelenmesi [Investigation of the misconceptions and learning dıifficulties of elementary students on light, vision and mirrors]. Hacettepe Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 25, 176-185.
Sen, A. I. & Aykutlu, I. (2008). Using concept maps as an alternative evaluation tool for students’ conceptions of electric. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 31, 75-92.
Senthilkumar, R. D. (2017, April). Concept maps in teaching physics concepts applied to engineering education: An explorative study at the Middle East College, Sultanate of Oman. In Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2017 IEEE (pp. 107-110). IEEE.
Serway, R.A. & Beichner, R. J. (2000). Fen ve muhendislik icin fizik [Physics for scientists and engineers] (5th Edition). Ankara, Turkey: Palme Yayincilik.
Sezgin Selcuk, G., (2011). Addressing pre-service teachers' understandings and difficulties with some core concepts in the special theory of relativity. European Journal of Physics, 32(1), 1-13.
Shivalingaswamy, T. & Rashmi, P.E. (2014). I am the speed of light c, you ‘see’ …..!. European Journal of Physics Education, 5(1), 51-58.
Slotte, V. & Lonka, K. (1999). Spontaneous concept maps aiding the understanding of scientific concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 515–531.
Stannard, W. B. (2018). A new model of special relativity and the relationship between the time warps of general and special relativity. Physics Education, 53(3), 035013.
Stoyanova, N. & Kommers, P. (2002). Concept mapping as a medium of shared cognition in computer-supported collaborative problem solving. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13, 111–133.
Toledo, B., Arriasseco, I., & Santos, G. (1997). Analisis de la transicion de la física clasica a la relativista desde la perspectiva del cambio conceptual [Analysis of the transition from classical physics to relativity from the point of view of conceptual change]. Ensenanza de las Ciencias, 15(1), 79–80.
Turgut, U., Gurbuz, F., Salar, R., & Toman. U. (2013). The viewpoints of physics teacher candidates towards the concepts in special theory of relativity and their evaluation designs. International Journal of Academic Research Part B; 5(4), 481-489.
Quinn, H. J, Mintzes, J.J., & Laws, R.A. (2004). Successive concept mapping: assessing understanding in college science classes. J. Coll. Sci. Teach., 33(3), 12–16.
Van Zee, E. H., Hammer, D., Roy ,M.B.P., & Peter, J. (2005). Learning and teaching science as inquiry: a case study of elementary school teachers' investigations of light. Science Education, 89(6), 1007- 1042.
Villani, A. & Arruda, S. M. (1998). Special theory of relativity, conceptual change and history of science. Science and Education, 7(1), 85-100.
Walker, J. M. T. & King, P. H. (2003). Concept mapping as a form of student assessment and instruction in the domain of bioengineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(2), 167–179.
Won, M., Krabbe, H., Ley, S. L., Treagust, D. F., & Fischer, H. E. (2017). Science teachers’ use of a concept map marking guide as a formative assessment tool for the concept of energy. Educational Assessment, 22(2), 95-110.
Yildirim, A. & Simsek, H. (2008). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Arastirma Yontemleri [Qualitative research methods fort he social sciences]. Ankara, Turkey: Seckin Yayincilik.
Yildiz, I. (2000). Ilkogretim 6. sinif ogrencilerinin isik unitesindeki kavram yanilgilari [The 6th class students’ misconceptions about light subjects] (Unpublished master thesis), Karadeniz Teknik Universitesi, Trabzon, Turkey.
Zhang, J. (2005). Why and how to teach the Special Theory of Relativity in an Electrodynamics course. The China Papers, 5, 13-15.
Zieneddine, A. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Doing the right thing versus doing the right thing right: Concept mapping in a freshmen physics laboratory. European Journal of Physics Education, 22, 501–511.
How to Cite
Copyright © Authors