Students’ External Representation Patterns of Suspending Objects in Static Fluid
Jusman Mansyur
,
I Komang Werdhiana
,
Darsikin Darsikin
,
Sarintan N. Kaharu
,
Nurgan Tadeko
This study aims to explore the pattern of external representation of suspending objects in a static fluid. The study used a qualitative descriptive me.
- Pub. date: April 15, 2022
- Pages: 805-820
- 321 Downloads
- 464 Views
- 0 Citations
This study aims to explore the pattern of external representation of suspending objects in a static fluid. The study used a qualitative descriptive method involving 57 elementary, junior, senior school, and university students. Data collection implemented a 30-item test covering the dominant context of suspending and partially floating and sinking. Some of phenomenographic steps were adapted in data analysis. Based on the data analysis, it can be concluded that there is a dominant external representation pattern, where there is a simplification of the depiction of suspending objects. Suspending position tends to be locked in a limited area, namely in the middle of the depth of the liquid. In the context of suspending objects' cuts, the cuts were generally represented by an upward shifting pattern. Factors that influence the pattern of representation are the involvement of intuition in conceptualizing the phenomena presented, and the conceptual aspect of density has not been integrated into the reasoning process for compiling external representations, both diagrams, and texts. Research limitation is presented in this article.
Keywords: External representation pattern, floating, sinking, static fluid, suspending.
References
Bao, L., & Fritchman, J. C. (2021). Knowledge integration in student learning of Newton’s third law: addressing the action-reaction language and the implied causality. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 20116. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020116
Bao, L., & Koenig, K. (2019). Physics education research for 21st century learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0007-8
Canlas, I. P. (2019). Using visual representations in identifying students’ preconceptions in friction. Research in Science and Technological Education, 39(2), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2019.1660630
Castillo, R. D., Waltzer, T., & Kloos, H. (2017). Hands-on experience can lead to systematic mistakes: A study on adults’ understanding of sinking objects. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 28, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0061-8
Çepni, S., & Keleş, E. (2006). Turkish students’ conceptions about the simple electric circuits. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(2), 269–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-005-9001-z
Chien, S., Hsiung, C., & Chen, S. (2009). The development of young children’s science-related concept regarding “floating and sinking”. Asia-Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, 3(2), 73–88. http://www.newnonmun.com/article=21791
Coll, R. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Learners’ mental models of metallic bonding: A cross-age study. Science Education. 87(5), 685–707. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10059
Deliyianni, E., Gagatsis, A., & Elia, I. (2016). Representational flexibility and problem-solving ability in fraction and decimal number addition: A structural model. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, S397–S417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9625-6
Duit, R. (2007). Science education research internationally: Conceptions, research methods, domains of research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75369
Furlough, C. S., & Gillan, D. J. (2018). Mental models: Structural differences and the role of experience. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12(4), 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555343418773236
Gette, C. R., Kryjevskaia, M., Stetzer, M. R., & Heron, P. R. L. (2018). Probing student reasoning approaches through the lens of dual-process theories: A case study in buoyancy. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(1), 010113. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010113
Gönen, S., & Kocakaya, S. (2010). A cross-age study on the understanding of heat and temperature. International Journal of Physics & Chemistry Education, 2(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.51724/ijpce.v2i1.116
Havu-Nuutinen, S. (2005). Examining young children’s conceptual change processin floating and sinking from a social constructivist perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 259–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000243736
Kafiyani, F., Samsudin, A., & Saepuzaman, D. (2019). Development of four-tier diagnostic test (FTDT) to identify student’s mental models on static fluid. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1280, 052030. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1280/5/052030
Kaharu, S. N., & Mansyur, J. (2021). The development of a test to explore the students’ mental models and external representation patterns of hanging objects. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 11(4), 110-125. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.11.04.11
Kohl, P. B., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2005). Student representational competence and self-assessment when solving physics problems. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 1(1), 010104. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.1.010104
Kohn, A. S. (1993). Preschoolers’ reasoning about density: Will it float?. Child Development, 64(6), 1637–1650. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1993.tb04204.x
Kurnaz, M. A., & Eksi, C. (2015). An analysis of high school students’ mental models of solid friction in physics. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(3), 787–795. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.3.2526
Lin, J. W. (2017). A cross-grade study validating the evolutionary pathway of student mental models in electric circuits, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 3099–3137. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00707a
Loverude, M. E., Kautz, C. H., & Heron, P. R. L. (2003). Helping students develop an understanding of Archimedes’ principle. I. Research on student understanding. American Journal of Physics, 71(11), 1178-1187. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1607335
Mansyur, J., Kaharu, S. N., & Holdsworth, J. (2020). A simple approach to teach Newton’s third law. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(1), 79-90. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i1.21775
Matlin, M. W. (2009). Cognition (7th ed.) John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Minogue, J., & Borland, D. (2016). Investigating students’ ideas about buoyancy and the influence of haptic feedback. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 187-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9585-1
Qonita, Q., Syaodih, E., Suhandi, A., Maftuh, B., Hermita, N., Samsudin, A., & Handayani, H. (2019). How do kindergarten teachers grow children science process skill to construct float and sink concept?. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157, 022017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022017
Sahin, Ç., Ipek, H., & Ayas, A. (2008). Students’ understanding of light concepts primary school: A cross-age study. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 9(1), 1–19. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ832105
Shen, J., Liu, O. L., & Chang, H. Y. (2017). Assessing students’ deep conceptual understanding in physical sciences: an example on sinking and floating. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9680-z
Shivakumar, M. (2016). The law of buoyancy force. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology, 5(02), 183–185. https://doi.org/10.17577/ijertv5is020264
Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., & Joram, E. (1995). Assessing students’ misclassifications of physics concepts: An ontological basis for conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 373-400. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1303_2
Smith, C., Maclin, D., Grosslight, L., & Davis, H. (1997). Teaching for understanding: A study of students’ pre-instruction theories of matter and a comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching about matter and density. Cognition and Instruction, 15(3), 317–393. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1503_2
Solaz-Portolés, J. J., & Lopez, V. S. (2007). Representations in problem solving in science: Directions for practice. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 1-17. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/v8_issue2/joan/index.htm
Teo, T. W., Yan, Y. K., & Ong, W. L. M. (2017). An investigation of Singapore preschool children’s emerging concepts of floating and sinking. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 12(4), 325-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2017.1374186
Türk, C., Kalkan, H., Kiroğlu, K., & Iskeleli, N. O. (2015). Elementary school students’ mental models about formation of seasons: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Education and Learning 5(1), 7-30. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n1p7
Viyanti, V., Cari, C., Sunarno, W., & Prastyo, Z. K. (2017). The development rubrics skill argued as alternative assessment floating and sinking materials. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 909, 012057. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/909/1/012057
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90018-W
Vosniadou, S., & Ioannides, C. (1998). From conceptual development to science education: A psychological point of view. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1213–1230. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980201004
Walsh, L. N., Howard, R. G., & Bowe, B. (2007). Phenomenographic study of students’ problem solving approaches in physics. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3(2), 020108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.020108