Vol. 6 No. 1 December 2009 ISSN: 2094-1064
CHED Accredited Research Journal, Category B
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
Science and Technology Section
Attitude towards Physics and Physics
Performance, Theories of Learning, and Prospects
in Teaching Physics
Rolando A. Alimen, Ph. D.
[email protected]
John B. Lacson Maritime Foundation University-Molo
Date Submitted: September 3, 2008
Final Revision Accepted: November 25, 2008
Abstract - This study aimed to determine the performance
and attitude towards Physics using comparative data-analysis for
the period of five years last 2000 and 2005. The data gathered
were further utilized to investigate learning theories and
prospects in teaching Physics. The sources of data were obtained
from the “GPA” and “attitude towards Physics” for the period of
five years. The researcher employed “System Theory” proposed
by L. von Bertalanffy (1968) known as “General System Theory,”
a multidisciplinary field. Results revealed that attitude and
performance in Physics among engineering students had declined
in the period of five years. Theories of learning that explored
in the two studies were: Bandura Theory of Social Learning,
Operant Conditioning by B.F. Skinner, John Dewey’s Experiential
Learning, David Kolb’s Experiential Learning, and Kurt Lewin’s
Field. Rethinking the lecture method, creative activities in the
teaching of Physics, necessity of a substantial teacher re-training,
starting with the existing curriculum and culture as the starting
point of educational reform, and formulation of a set of learning
objectives, strategies, and activities for fostering creativity in
Physics were the prospects in teaching Physics underscored by
this investigation.
Keywords - Physics performance, Teaching physics, attitude
towards physics
301
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
INTRODUCTION
Identifying students’ learning styles help educators understand
how people perceive and process information in different ways.
Hendrickson (1997) found that motivation and attitude were the
best predictors of student grade point average.
Attitudes towards physics were considered in this study. A
person’s favorable outlook or attitude about a particular object or
situation can have an impact on his liking or disliking it. As what
Lupdag in 1989 has emphasized in this statement that the attitude
of a student reveals his level of learning toward a particular
subject, thus, makes him enthusiastic to learn than those who have
unfavorable attitudes towards it.
Cheng (2004), in a study conducted regarding student learning
in Physics, found out that in the student evaluation, consistent
with the nature of most creative activities, most students felt that
these Physics creative activities are interesting, playful and quite
different from normal learning activities. Some students agreed
that these activities make them think more, and think wider, and
enhance their creativity, whereas other students who were aware
that their creativity is not enough, need to put effort on this area.
Besides learning outcomes in creativity domain, these activities
also have impact on students’ perception and attitudes in Physics
learning. They discovered that Physics is more interesting, and
more related to daily-life and creativity than they think before. To
some students, these activities made them think more deeply in
Physics and realized that their Physics knowledge is not enough.
In short, the creative thinking activities in Physics are not merely
useful in fostering creativity of students, but also for promoting
“better” Physics learning.
Edward Price, Physics professor, asserts that research in a similar
area is concerned with assessing students’ beliefs about the nature
of science and learning, and developing and evaluating teaching
302
practices that help students develop more expert-like beliefs. Thus,
learn in the end of the learning experience.
The present study also considered the fact that certain learner
attitudes have an impact in whatever learning experience, as in any
physics course. This is supported by Darley and associates cited
from the study of Allport and Allport in 1976 further incorporated
in Alimen’s study, in their argument that has defined a student’s
personality to include his set of beliefs and attitudes, as an enduring
trait that characterizes an his/er adaptation to a situation, such as
learning.
In the last quarter of this century, the emphasis on science
teaching has shifted from the teaching of science as a body of
established knowledge towards science as a human activity. Instead
of teaching students to think critically and independently; science
teaching, to a large extent, has taught students to accept scientific
knowledge without question; learn existing theories and present
alternative explanations (Torre, 1997).
Physics, as a dynamic branch of science is difficult to describe.
Thus, in learning physics, this should not be taught as a series of
formulas to be memorized and applied just for ‘cultural’ purposes
but must be taught as a dynamic branch of science which should
provide questions and explanations on how the world works
(Jensen, 1995).
This investigation was based on the belief that Filipino students
must somehow develop the level of performance in physics,
as a prerequisite and foundation course of almost all courses,
specifically engineering and other science related courses. This
belief lies on epistemological issues that are of fundamental
importance in physics. Physics likewise claims to discover
not only things about the `objective’ world, but also subjective
aspects of how these things are understood. Ideas of modeling,
interpretation, and the use of language are of key interest to the
physicist. How students learn these ideas are therefore of crucial
importance. Physics has always prided itself on being the cutting
edge in science, of developing genuinely new concepts and ways
of looking at the world. The remark attributed to Lord Rutherford
303
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
that “only physics is science, all else is stamp collecting”, while
perhaps facetiously meant, represents a genuine feeling on the part
of many physicists. Yet such concerns are rarely explicitly thought
about in teaching. Research on Physics is one way of grappling
with those kind of underpinning issues which are normally taken
for granted by practicing physicists. It is also true that the mission
of physics teaching in the eyes of its clients seems to be changing. It
is as though they no longer feel the need to understand the subject
in the same way teachers do particularly with its traditional heavy
emphasis on mathematics. Again physics education researchers are
in an ideal position to re-evaluate the link between what is taught
and how learning is promoted to students. It follows therefore that
teachers of physics have a professional responsibility not only to
present the subject matter but also to propose strategies to enhance
learning.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The present study aimed to determine the attitude and
performance in Physics among engineering students utilizing two
research studies conducted by the researcher last 2000 and 2005.
It further used to investigate theories in learning applicable in
Physics and prospects in teaching Physics.
Specifically, this study sought to answer the following
objectives:
1. to describe the attitude and performance in Physics among
engineering students towards Physics for a period of five
years;
2. to determine the theories of learning are applicable in Physics
utilizing the data conducted by the researcher; and,
3. to select the prospects in teaching Physics among instructors
in private university.
FRAMEWORK
A system is composed of interacting parts that operate together
to achieve some objective or purpose. A system is intended to
304
“absorb” inputs, process them in some way and produce outputs.
Outputs are defined by goals, objectives or common purposes.
Hegel developed this theory in the 19th century to explain
historical development as a dynamic process. Marx and Darwin
used this theory in their work. System theory (as we know it) was
used by L. von Bertalanffy, a biologist, as the basis for the field of
study known as ‘general system theory’, a multidisciplinary field
(1968).
The Theory Cluster Website (TCW) provides ample explanations
about System theory. As a theory, it is the transdisciplinary study
of the abstract organization of phenomena, independent of
their substance, type, or spatial or temporal scale of existence. It
investigates both the principles common to all complex entities, and
the (usually mathematical) models which can be used to describe
them. A system can be said to consist of four things. The first is
objects – the parts, elements, or variables within the system. These
may be physical or abstract or both, depending on the nature of
the system. Second, a system consists of attributes – the qualities
or properties of the system and its objects. Third, a system had
internal relationships among its objects. Fourth, systems exist in an
environment.
A system, then, is a set of things that affect one another within
an environment and form a larger pattern that is different from
any of the parts. The fundamental systems-interactive paradigm
of organizational analysis features the continual stages of input,
throughput (processing), and output, which demonstrate the
concept of openness/closedness. A closed system does not
interact with its environment. It does not take in information and
therefore is likely to atrophy, that is to vanish. An open system
receives information, which it uses to interact dynamically with its
environment.
Openness increases its likelihood to survive and prosper. Several
system characteristics are: wholeness and interdependence (the
whole is more than the sum of all parts), correlations, perceiving
causes, chain of influence, hierarchy, suprasystems and subsystems,
self-regulation and control, goal-oriented, interchange with the
environment, inputs/outputs, the need for balance/homeostasis,
change and adaptability (morphogenesis) and equifinality: there
305
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
are various ways to achieve goals.
With the System theory proposed by L. von Bertalanffy,
this researcher has arrived to the conceptual framework of this
investigation. The input used were the attitude and performance of
students in Physics, the process was the comparative analysis done
with the utilization of the two research papers conducted in 2000
and 2005 respectively, and the output are the prospects to be derived
after the results of the analysis have been established. The feedback
refers to the reflective nature of the output. The output has to
review the input to offer suggestions or propose actions to improve
Physics instruction. Figure 1 has the conceptual framework.
Input
Process
Output
Attitude
&
Performance
Comparative
Analysis
Prospects
On Physics
Teaching
Feedback
Figure 1: The Conceptual Framework
METHODOLOGY
The present study employed quantitative approach in analyzing
the data using comparative –data analysis. The data were obtained
from the two studies conducted by the researcher using “GPA”
and “attitude” towards Physics. Theories in learning Physics and
prospects in teaching Physics were obtained utilizing “System
306
Theory” by L. von Bertalanffy (1968).
PROCEDURE
The researcher used the data from the two studies entitled
“Performance in Physics, Ascendance-Submission in Personality,
and Attitudes among Marine Engineering Students” and “Physics
Performance, Attitudes, and Habits among Engineering Students
at a Private University.” The first study was presented last April 11,
2003 in the Regional Convention of Western Visayas Association of
Physics Instructors, Inc. (WVAPI) held at John B. Lacson Colleges
Foundation-Molo, Iloilo City. The second study was presented
also in the International Research Conference sponsored by West
Visayas State University held at Amigo Terrace Hotel, Iloilo City
last February 27-29, 2008. The “GPA” obtained from the two studies
were used in the comparative analysis of the performance in Physics
of the present study. Data from the attitudes were also obtained
from the two studies to analyze the attitudes among engineering
students for the period of five years. Theories of learning and
prospects in teaching Physics were also generated from the two
studies using “System Theory” by L. von Bertalanffy (1968) via
Internet Network.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of the present study are discussed in the following
sections: (a) attitude towards Physics and performance in Physics
among engineering students utilizing the two studies conducted
by the researcher for the period of five years, (b) theories applicable
in teaching Physics, (d) prospects in teaching Physics among
instructors in the private university.
A. Attitude towards Physics and Performance in Physics
Two studies were included in this investigation to determine
the attitude and Physics performance of the students used in the
two research papers. The first study was conducted by this lecturer
307
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
as a final requirement in a master’s thesis entitled “Performance
in Physics, Ascendance-Submission in Personality, and Attitudes
among Marine Engineering Students,” and the second study
was also a requirement for a master’s degree program, “Physics
Performance, Attitudes, and Habits among Engineering Students
in a Private Institution.”
Based on the results of the two studies conducted, the attitude
and Physics performance of the students had significantly declined
in the period of five years. The scales used are as follows:
For Attitude
Scale
Description
2.34 – 3.00
1.69 – 2.33
1.00 – 1.68
Positive
Uncertain
Negative
For Physics Performance
Scale
Description
2.34 - 3.00
1.69 - 2.33
1.00 - 1.68
High
Average
Low
Results in Figure 2 show a significant difference in both the
attitude and performance of the students in Physics. Certain studies
further state that students need facility with many mathematical
representations in learning physics such as interpreting physical
phenomena based on graphical representation, constructing
graphs from experiments, appreciating related quantities from
given graph, and tying different representations to a well defined
coordinate system. These explanations on the ability and facility
in trigonometry are different from studying physics. This premise
might have been central considerations in the decline of students’
308
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
2000
2005
Attitude
Performance
performance in physics.
Figure 2. Attitude and Physics Performance of the Students in
the studies conducted in 2000 and 2005
Capistrano and associates (1992) stress that students need a good
grasp of the sciences by stating that physics is an identifying factor
of developed country, it becomes part of the lives of every Filipino
that man can not live to the fullest with out taking consideration the
impact of physics. However, it is sad to note that students’ attitude
and performance has obviously deteriorated in the last five years.
Thorndike (in Alimen), Fale and others have underscored that
there is a need to emphasize and encourage positive attitude among
the students in any learning area. They said that the more positive
are the attitudes, the more positive are the students’ actions in all
activities. The students who have positive attitudes in their subject
are also positive and look their study. Even though the students are
more inclined into design, operation and computation, in learning
physics, they need more positive attitude the more because the
subject is dealing with activities that could improve and enhance
their awareness on phenomenal changes in the surroundings and
by fostering positive attitudes, they will be able to develop and
improve their performance as a whole.
309
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
B. Theories of Learning and their Application to Physics
This study has considered different theories to support this
investigation in understanding students’ academic difficulties in
science courses like Physics and provide a basis for helping them
improve their performance and thus help them realize their best
potentials.
One of these is the theory of Bandura on social learning. This
theory states that individuals learn specific cognitive structures
from observing the behavior of others and that these strategies
account for the acquisition of social behaviors. Thus, imitation
often leads to reinforcers individuals seek. It also embodies the
principle of vicarious reinforcement. Reinforcement, in this regard
as stipulated in this model is sufficient to reinforce behavior, and
involves conceptual learning as asserted also by Bustos and Espiritu.
In relation to learning Physics, the process is also considered a
social learning process, specifically in laboratory activities. Students
work cooperatively with one another to achieve successful output.
Another is the theory of operant conditioning by B.F. Skinner.
According to this theory, reinforcement is defined as any behavioral
consequence that strengthens behavior; it increases the likelihood
of the recurrence of particular type of response. Reinforcement
refers to any event that increases the probability that a particular
response will increase in frequency. Responses may be reinforced
by the presentation (positive) or removal (negative) of particular
consequences.
In learning Physics, students are exposed to a number of stimuli
to provide them avenues for discovery.
Another theory of equal importance in John Dewey’s
experiential learning otherwise termed as problem solving. He
says that genuine education comes about through experience. He
believed there are two important aspects of quality educational
experience. Experience should be engaging and have positive
effects on subsequent experience. He spoke of a continuity of
experience, meaning that experience modified “the doer” and that
education was at its core a process of growth. Experiential learning
as a specific educational strategy will be prominent in the learning
of physics. Experiences in this regard, are known to engender and
310
strengthen problem solving and other related skills. The researcher
believes that self-directed and active learning strategies will best
prepare students to achieve more.
Another conceived Dewey’s concept in a different light. David A.
Kolb’s (with Roger Fry) experiential learning has created his famous
model out of four elements: concrete experience, observation and
reflection, the formation of abstract concepts and testing in new
situations. He represented these in the famous experiential learning
circle. Kolb and Fry argue that the learning cycle can begin at any
one of the four points - and that it should really be approached as a
continuous spiral. However, it is suggested that the learning process
often begins with a person carrying out a particular action and then
seeing the effect of the action in this situation. Following this, the
second step is to understand these effects in the particular instance
so that if the same action was taken in the same circumstances it
would be possible to anticipate what would follow from the action.
In this pattern the third step would be understanding the general
principle under which the particular instance falls. Generalizing
may involve actions over a range of circumstances to gain
experience beyond the particular instance and suggest the general
principle. Understanding the general principle does not imply,
in this sequence, an ability to express the principle in a symbolic
medium, that is, the ability to put it into words. It implies only the
ability to see a connection between the actions and effects over a
range of circumstances.
Finally, the theory of Kurt Lewin is also needed in this study.
This is also known as the “field theory.” In this theory, the focus is
on psychological field or life space of an individual. Lewin’s theory
points to the fact that in order to understand the motivation of a
particular learner, the teacher has to develop the ability to transcend
the tension (needs) of the learner, the learner’s abilities, and the
properties of the learner’s perceived environment.
In a classroom for instance, each individual child has his own
psychological field apart from others; the teacher, therefore, must
try to suit the goals and activities of the lessons to the learner’s
needs to ensure desired learning.
There is no limit as far as theories of learning are concerned
because learning is a dynamic process. This is why the above
311
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
mentioned theories were needed in the discussion on attitudes
and performance in physics among students and how to improve,
modify, strengthen, enhance and build up the teaching-learning
situations to achieve the objectives of physics as a foundation
subject in many of the courses in higher education.
C. Prospects in Teaching Physics
A lot more studies show the poor performance of students in
the sciences like Physics, but where is the study going to proceed
and gain its significance?
This is at this juncture that this researcher looks for avenues
or prospects that may offer hope to those who take interest in the
study and teaching of Physics.
1. Rethinking the Lecture Method
2. Creative activities in the teaching of Physics
3. Necessity of a substantial teacher re-training
4. Start with the existing curriculum and culture as the starting
point of the educational reform
5. Formulation of a set of learning objectives, strategies, and
activities for fostering creativity in Physics
If instructors really want their students to learn, then they
must require them to use the ideas being taught to them through
homework and other out-of-class activities.
Another according to Freedman is: rethinking the lecture and
discussion section of the Physics lesson. He emphatically points to
the misuse of the lecture method. Although it is one of the ancient
teaching methods, it must not be abuse so as to deprive students to
learn the most important concept in Physics. He writes:
In the teaching of physics, it is typically used to
demonstrate physical phenomena, to present derivations; and
to show examples of how to solve problems. The first of these
uses of the lecture is an important one, and is often neglected
by instructors who feel compelled to “cover more material”
or who regard the demonstrations as a distraction. My own
experience is that good lecture demonstrations are absolutely
indispensable as tools for helping students to relate physical
concepts to the real world. Good lecture demonstrations also
312
have the strength of being memorable. I have had students
come to me a decade after taking one of my classes and tell
me how they still remember a certain demonstration and the
physics that they learned from it.
Thus, the Lecture-demonstrator became a big element in the
teaching of Physics. Moreover, it is also stressed that the use of
lecture in the presentation of derivations is ineffective. Far and away,
however, the least effective use of lecture time is for presenting the
solutions to physics problems. The essential difficulty here is that
physics problem-solving is a skill that has to be learned by repeated
practice. In learning a skill, it can be useful to first watch an expert
exercise that skill, but that is by no means the most important part
of the learning process. He adds that:
A derivation presented on the blackboard is less useful
to the student than the same derivation presented in the
textbook, where it can be traced through repeatedly at the
student’s leisure. My suspicion is that instructors tend to
present derivations in lecture because they doubt that their
students read the book. While this is indeed a valid concern,
it would seem that using the lecture to reiterate the contents
of the book is ultimately counterproductive; it merely helps to
ensure that the students won’t read the book.
Also, lecture model with active learning promises better Physics
learning. A. Van Heuvelen’s “Learning to think like a physicist: A
review of research-based instructional strategies, Am. J. Phys. 59,
891 (1991), posits this as a prospect in the teaching of Physics.
Numerous instructors, myself included, have found that
lectures become more useful when students are forced to
become active participants in the lecture. In my own classes,
I speak briefly about each new topic (proceeding under the
assumption that students have read the required material
from the textbook before class), and do a lecture demonstration
or two as appropriate. I then give the students an exercise to
work out. They then spend several minutes working out this
exercise, which is chosen to be specific to the topic at hand:
it may involve tasks such as drawing free-body diagrams,
313
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
writing down (but not necessarily solving) the key equations
for a group of related but distinct situations, or making
graphs of different types of motion. While this is going on,
I roam around the classroom inspecting the students’ work.
I then instruct the students to confer with their neighbor to
compare their responses and to resolve any discrepancies.
Remarkably, this works very well even in a large lecture hall;
the sound level from the discussions among 300 students
can be quite impressive! Finally, I discuss with the students
the correct way to tackle the exercise, being careful to point
out common errors to the students. I typically do two or
three sequences of instructor description --- student work --instructor discussion during a typical lecture.
The lecture method with active learning is meritorious is used in
the teaching of Physics. This technique has several merits according
to Freedman. First, the students have something constructive to
do during the lecture; it is a sure-fire cure for the torpor that grips
students midway through a conventional lecture. Second, students
are forced to discuss physics with their peers and to defend their
ideas. Third, students get immediate feedback as to whether or not
they understand a concept that has been presented in class, and any
points of confusion can be corrected at an early stage in the students’
apprehension of the concept. Last, the instructor can learn a great
deal about her or his students’ understanding of the material. Thus,
a workbook is the best way for students to learn Physics as they are
given ample time to do the exercises on it.
In the same source, Freedman also offers Physics teachers that
for the discussion sections of the actual process, two strategies offer
help: teaching problem solving and cooperative learning. This
is intended to “principally to be a forum in which students gain
insight into problem-solving technique by observing the discussion
leader, by practicing solving problems, and by discussions with
other students.”
In cooperative groups, students are given opportunities for
“context-rich” problems. These are problems that are too difficult
and challenging for students to work on their own. In order to solve
such problems, cooperative groups of three students can be organized.
314
Freedman describes the strategy whereby students in each group
were required to work together to produce a group solution to
the assigned problem, using the problem-solving strategy that
they had been taught. All students in the group received the same
grade for their group assignment. The students in each group were
assigned the roles of Manager (who keeps the group on task and
manages the sequence of steps), Skeptic (who helps the group to
avoid overly quick agreement and asks questions like “Are there
other possibilities?”), and Checker/Recorder (who checks for
consensus among the group and who writes up and hands in the
group solution). These roles were rotated among the students each
week. The use of such definite roles, and the challenging nature
of the assigned “context-rich” problems, kept the students from
simply working independently.
Heller et al. (1992) found that over two quarters of using these
methods, the problem-solving technique of students of all ability
levels improved. It may not be surprising that this proved to be the
case for students in the lowest third and middle third of the class.
The structured problem-solving strategy and the requirement to
discuss ideas with other students seems well-suited to helping
students whose understanding of problem-solving was initially only
fair or poor. What is remarkable is that participation in cooperative
groups also helped the best students in the class to improve their
problem-solving skills, and that these students improved at about
the same rate as the students in the lowest and middle thirds.
For example, the percentage of students in the lowest third of the
class whose individual solutions followed a logical mathematical
progression improved from 20% to 50% over two quarters; this
percentage for students in the upper third improved from 60% to
90%. Furthermore, this improvement of all students was found in
both group problem-solving and individual problem-solving. The
use of cooperative groups and “context-rich” problems can have a
very beneficial effect on student problem-solving skills.
Creative activities in the teaching of Physics is another prospect
according to Cheng (2004). In this study, Cheng contends that
based on the students’ evaluation, they find creative activities as
contributing to their Physics learning. They said their learning
is consistent with the nature of most creative activities. Most
315
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
students felt that these Physics creative activities are interesting,
playful and quite different from normal learning activities. Some
students agreed that these activities make them think more, and
think wider, and enhance their creativity, whereas other students
aware that their creativity is not enough, and need to be put effort
on this area. Besides learning outcomes in creativity domain, these
activities also have impact on students’ perception and attitudes in
Physics learning. They discovered that Physics is more interesting,
and more related to daily-life and creativity than they think before.
To some students, these activities made them think more deeply in
Physics and realized that their Physics knowledge is not enough.
In short, the creative thinking activities in Physics are not merely
useful in fostering creativity of students, but also for promoting
“better” Physics learning.
First, in activity design, this study has proposed twenty-two
different categories of creative thinking activities in Physics. Most
of them include multiple learning objectives, both cognitive and
affective ones. Exemplars in Physics for each category of activities
were developed. Some of the activities or exemplars are well
designed while some others may not, and need improvement. For
example, the questions on comparing the similarities and differences
between “force and love” came up with a lot of interesting and
meaning answers (ibid).
Necessity of a substantial teacher re-training is another prospect.
Cheng (2004) observe that the teachers’ evaluation results revealed
that teachers do not have confidence in designing, conducting and
assessing this kind of creative activities, though they are suitable
for students and the Physics curricula. Due to the “non-creative
background” of the teachers, substantial teacher re-training is
necessary, even though these creative activities are rather simple.
The results also suggest that teachers feel more comfortable to tryout these creative activities outside classroom.
Start with the existing curriculum and culture as the starting
point of the educational reform. In the same investigation by Cheng,
it is indicated that instead of adapting the advanced instructional
designs from western world, societies should take their existing
curriculum and culture as the starting point of their educational
reform. They should infuse creative or other thinking elements in
316
gradual steps into their existing curriculum, explore their own ways
of fostering creativity of their students, take into consideration of
the difficulties their students and teachers may have, and provide
adequate support to them. This study has suggested a set of learning
objective, rationales of selecting activities, strategies for generating
new activities, and exemplars of activities that may serve as useful
reference for educators in contexts. The researcher also underscores
that after gaining some experience in doing this kind of activities,
it is more preferably to encourage teachers to design their own
creative activities to suit their own environment. Future study on
how to train teacher in self-developing creative learning activities
in their own contexts are of greatest importance.
Formulation of a set of learning objectives, strategies, and
activities for fostering creativity in Physics is the final prospect. A
comprehensive set of learning objectives, strategies, and activities
for fostering creativity in Physics, and shed light on creative learning
of other subjects must be accomplished to sustain the success of
Physics teaching. It demonstrates systematically to teachers and
educators how learning activities suitable to their own contexts can
be developed. It highlights that researchers should not only look
for some “model” instructional methods that have ideal learning
outcomes, but also develop some simple and practical ones that can
be widely-accepted and implemented.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Roger A. Freedman in, “Challenges in Teaching and Learning
Introductory Physics” has agreed to the fundamental importance
of Physics. He emphasized that the relative importance of teaching
in the physics enterprise has increased dramatically in recent years;
however, it is noticeable that despite the efforts done, the attitude
and performance of students in Physics has deteriorated.
Even at research universities, Physics teaching is now playing
a larger role in promotions and tenure decisions. In this brave new
world, a physics graduate student who aspires to an academic
career dare not neglect the teaching side of her or his graduate
training. This is tantamount to saying that indeed there is a need
for students to be good at Physics.
317
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
This study implies that Physics instructors have the
responsibility to conceptualize questions especially in their
presentation of problems to students, especially in their giving of
homework. The significant result of the decline of the students’
physics performance is supported by the study by Freedman in his
observation that instructors commonly assign homework and exam
problems that involve computation or calculation, in the belief
that these are “real” physics problems. A corollary to this belief is
the assumption that a student’s ability to successfully solve such
problems is evidence of complete understanding. In fact, research
shows that such is not the case. By comparing student performance
on a set of conceptual questions posed both before and after a first
course on mechanics, they found that conventional instruction
(including the assignment of conventional homework problems)
produces only marginal gains in conceptual understanding.
LITERATURE CITED
Alimen, Rolando A. Physics Performance, Attitudes, AscendanceSubmission in Personality. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis, John
B. Lacson Colleges-Foundation, Iloilo City, 1999).
Arons, A. B. Teaching Physics, Wiley, New York (1997). Bozack, M. J. Tips for TA’s: The role of the physics teaching assistant,
Phys. Teach. 21, 21 (1983). Bustos, Alicia S. and Espiritu, Socorro C. Psychological,
Antropological, and Sociological Foundations of Education.
Quezon City, Philippines: Katha Publishing, 1996).
Bustos, Alicia S. and Espiritu, Socorro C. Psychological,
Antropological, and Sociological Foundations of Education.
(Quezon City, Philippines: Katha Publishing, 1996), 34.
Cheng, Vivian Mo Yin. (August, 2004).Developing Physics learning
activities for fostering student creativity in Hong Kong context.
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume
5, Issue 2, Article 1 (Aug., 2004).
Hestenes, D. M. Wells, and G. Swackhamer, Force concept inventory,
Phys. Teach. 30, 141 (1992). [First appearance in article]
318
Edward F. Redish, Richard N. Steinberg, , and Jeffrey M. Saul.
Student Difficulties with Math in Physics: Giving Meaning
to Symbols. University of Maryland, College Park. Physics
education Research Group. (2002).
Goldberg, F.M. and L. C. McDermott, An investigation of student
understanding of the real image formed by a converging lens
or concave mirror, Am. J. Phys. 55, 503 (1987). [First appearance
in article] Halliday David, Robert T. Resmick, Jearl C. Walker.
Fundamentals of Physics. University of Maryland, College
Park. Physics education Research Group,(1994). http:/www.
yahoo.com//learning theories.htm.
Halloun, I. and D. Hestenes, The initial knowledge state of college
physics students, Am. J. Phys. 53, 1043 (1985). [First appearance
in article]
Halloun, I. and D. Hestenes, Common-sense concepts about motion,
Am. J. Phys. 53, 1056 (1985). [First appearance in article]
Heller, P., Keith, R. and Anderson, S. Teaching problem solving
through cooperative grouping, Part 1: Group versus individual
problem solving, Am. J. Phys. 60, 627 (1992). [First appearance
in article]
Heller, P., and M. Hollabaugh, Teaching problem solving through
cooperative grouping, Part 2: Designing problems and
structuring groups, Am. J. Phys. 60, 637 (1992). [First appearance
in article]
Jensen, Ronald. Instructional Modules for Physics. (Manila,
Philippines: University of the Philippines, 1995.
Kurt Lewin <../thinkers/et-lewin.htm>
Lawson, R.A. and L. C. McDermott, Student understanding of the
work-energy and impulse-momentum theorems, Am. J. Phys.
55, 811 (1987). [First appearance in article]
Lupdag, R. A. Technique for Measurement of Attitudes. (Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1977).
Maybelle, Fale. The Effectiveness of TESDS as Influenced by
Familiarity and Attitude among the Program Implementors in
Western Visayas. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis, West Visayas
State University, Lapaz, Iloilo City. 2000).
McDermott, L. C. and P. S. Shaffer, Research as a guide for
curriculum development: an example from introductory
319
Liceo Journal of Higher Education Research
electricity, Part I: Investigation of student understanding, Am.
J. Phys. 60, 994 (1992). McDermott, L.C. Physics by Inquiry, Wiley, New York (1996). [First
appearance in article]
P.S. Capistrano, G.S. Rizaldo & E.E. Santos. New Physics Textbook
for Fourth Year. (Manila: Philippine Book, 1992).
Sidney University Physics Education Research Group. Physics
Education Research: Education or Physics? : November 1, 2001.
Torre, John. The Journal of Educational Research, 1997.
Van A. Heuvelen, Learning to think like a physicist: A review of
research-based instructional strategies, Am. J. Phys. 59, 891
(1991). [First appearance in article]
Van A. Heuvelen, Overview, Case Study Physics, Am. J. Phys.
59, 898 (1991); R. D. Knight, Student Workbook for Physics: A
Contemporary Perspective (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA,
1998). For information on how to obtain the ALPS Kit, contact
Professor Alan Van Heuvelen, Department of Physics, Ohio
State University, Columbus OH 43210-1106. [First appearance
in article]
Young, H.D. and R. A. Freedman, University Physics, 9th edition,
Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (1996). [First appearance in
article]
320