Group Topic - Contextualised Learning

Sub Topic - Contextualised Learning in Physics Education

The social and cultural context of learning is evident through the theory of constructivism, which
considers the social and cultural experiences of the learner. Constructivism proposes that knowledge
is constructed through meaningful experiences within a broader social and cultural discourse
(Vygotsky, 1967). Contextualised learning of physics is aligned with constructivism, which
emphasises learning embedded within a social and cultural discourse. The constructivist perspective
enables the learner to be an active agent in their learning (Bächtold, 2013). Anchoring instruction can
be an effective pedagogic approach to contextualise learning (Lin & Singh, 2015; Lopes, Viegas, &
Cravino, 2010). This can present problems that are embedded within an actual context, and can
provide an authentic role to students by drawing upon their prior experiences. Furthermore, anchoring
instruction places significance and importance on group work and teacher facilitation (Lin & Singh,
2015). Often students are not guided towards a scientific understanding, this is evident when students
enter at the university level. Frequently they enter into their course with beliefs and preconceptions
which are inconsistent with the laws of physics (Kaltakci-Gurel, Eryilmaz, & McDermott, 2016; Liu
& Fang, 2016; Lopes et al., 2010). These misconceptions of physics concepts were evident amongst
Harvard graduates who confused the seasons and rotation of the moon (Gilbert & Watts, 1983).
Further studies have identified that reverting towards prior beliefs and personal experience is a
common characteristic of physics graduates soon after completing formal assessment within their
course (Liu & Fang, 2016; Lopes et al., 2010; Wieman & Perkins, 2005).

Contextualised learning of physics requires the learner to be provided with real world experiences that
draws upon their cognitive schemas which are embedded within the emotional and social experience
of the learner. Therefore, the students’ feelings and emotions can influence how students learn physics
concepts. Some authors have critiqued physics education for not appropriately considering the social
and emotional learning needs of students, so that differences in interest, feelings or desires are not
accommodated (Hake, 1998; Laws et al., 1999; Murphy et al., 2006; Wieman & Perkins,
2005). Differences in student affects have also not been given sufficient consideration in the teaching
of physics education. These factors are inherently linked to constructivist teaching. Some researchers

1
have considered the low enrolment in physics to be associated with student affects including student
motivation, desires, and feelings (Hake, 1998; Laws et al., 1999; Wieman & Perkins, 2005). It is
important for students to experience science within a broadened dynamic identity, which describes the
understanding of physics concepts within social and emotional constructs that are related to real-world
applications (Hake, 1998; Laws et al., 1999; Murphy et al., 2006; Wieman & Perkins, 2005). More
broadly, there are studies in neuroscience indicating the importance of positive emotions and
experience to learning (Immordino‐Yang & Damasio, 2007).

Often it has been common practice in physics education of introducing the application and real world
meaning after majority of students may have lost motivation and drive.(Hake, 1998; Laws et al., 1999;
Lin & Singh, 2015; Murphy et al., 2006; Wieman & Perkins, 2005). So that physics concepts are
taught without a context and real world application, thus students are no longer interested and
engaged with the content. In contrast to this approach evidence indicates that context based learning
in physics can enhance motivation and student interest (Enghag, 2004; Hake, 1998; Laws et al., 1999;
Lin & Singh, 2015; Murphy et al., 2006; Wieman & Perkins, 2005). Students are more likely to relate
to in-school activities that resemble their activities outside of school(Enghag, 2004; Murphy et al.,
2006; Wieman & Perkins, 2005). Success in activities that exist in everyday life verse failing in
formal academic settings indicates that problems should be provided within a familiar everyday
experience. Often everyday experiences are set within a social context for the individual, and within
school physics, practicals create a situation and where social context is not applied and solutions are
prescriptive in nature. By selecting a context, students are provided a platform to solve problems, and
the nature of learning shifts away from a didactic to one that meets the social needs of students thus
promoting self-esteem and motivation (Enghag, 2004; Laws et al., 1999; Murphy et al., 2006;
Wieman & Perkins, 2005).

Studies indicate that physics practicals are often completed in a prescriptive restrictive manner which
provides littles scope for students to be active in their learning (Harrison, 2016; Wieman & Perkins,
2005). In these cases, the results of the experiment will most likely be known and thus students are
not being actively engaged in the learning process. Despite the limitations of this method, most
secondary and university level physics practicals are done in this manner (Enghag, 2004; Hake, 1998;
Harrison, 2016; Laws et al., 1999). Moreover, when students work on the equations and solve
problems the emphasis is on finding the correct answer by manipulating the variable. This approach
may not reflect a student's understanding of the physics law or mechanism, and thus does not provide
the student with a deep understanding of the physics concepts or a real world application. Focusing on

2
manipulating variables within an equation without understanding the concepts and laws within the
equation can provide an incomplete understanding of physics concepts (Lin & Singh, 2015; Wieman
& Perkins, 2005). This can result in students memorising step by step rote methods of solving physics
equations resulting in an insufficient understanding of the physics concepts (Kuo, Hull, Gupta, &
Elby, 2013; Lin & Singh, 2015; Wieman & Perkins, 2005). Several studies have implemented group
work to promote collaboration and contextualised learning of physics. Results have been positive,
indicating greater student engagement and deeper understanding of physics concepts.

In comparison to traditional methods, context based instruction in physics can promote problem
solving, motivation and enhance student outcomes. Furthermore, context based learning can limit
some of the negative perceptions that surrounds physics courses as being abstract subject that is not
relevant to the everyday life. Several studies have indicated that context base learning can improve the
understanding of physics concepts. These studies have one methodological concern of not including
pre-test results therefore making it difficult to interpret post test results (Briscoe & Prayaga, 2004;
Cooper, Yeo, & Zadnik, 2003; Murphy et al., 2006; Rayner, 2012). Game based science learning
(GBSL) may be an alternative pedagogic tool in providing context and everyday experiences for
students. Meta-analysis has indicated that GBSL can be effective in improving student engagement
and motivation (Li & Tsai, 2013). However, one of the findings of the review is that often GBSL has
the gap with game practice and scientific knowledge within the game (Li & Tsai, 2013). This is the
pertinent question for future research - to develop games that can also develop the understanding of
physics concepts. Teaching physics from the Socioscientific Issues (SSI) can promote motivation and
engagement by providing science issues embedded within a social and ethical paradigm (Zeidler,
Sadler, Simmons, & Howes, 2005). A critique of embedding SSI may not provide sufficient
knowledge of science concepts. The findings of both SSI and GBSL indicate the need for embedding
stronger science concepts within these pedagogical approaches.

In conclusion, contextualised learning of physics is consistent with constructivism which focuses on

meaningful learning within a social and cultural context. This contrast with traditional physics
education, which can be prescriptive, and have negative impacts on student motivation and
engagement, with the emphasis on de-contextualised pedagogy and curriculum. In contrast, a clear
finding of research is that contextualised learning can improve student motivation and engagement.
One of the concerns has been incorporating sufficient science content when using different contexts,
such as including SSI and GBSL. Results from the literature indicate that students can have enhanced

3
understanding of physics concepts through contextualised learning. However, further conclusive
research will need to completed, due to methodological concerns with existing studies.

4
Part B: Data Collection Protocol –

Arising from the review the literature, key themes to contextualised learning of physics is based
around how students learn within a social and cultural context, and the accompanying engagement
and motivation associated with their learning. An over-arching research theme is how motivation
varies according to contextualised learning. Contextualised learning of physics can help develop a
deeper understanding of physics concepts. It is important to gather data on how students recalled their
physics education courses. If engagement and motivation was increased with contextualised learning,
some reasonable research questions arise, “How does motivation and engagement decrease with de-
contextualised learning of physics?” and “What are some of the experiences of the students through
this perspective of de-contextualised learning?” Alternatively, if students had been provided
contextualised learning, what pedagogic strategies were used to contextualise content?

In the proceeding section, the following research questions are proposed.

1. How do physics graduate recall teacher practises during their education?

2. Was context applied to their learning of physics concepts?
3. How did the teaching of physics help challenge your prior misconceptions of physics
concepts?
4. How did motivation and emotions change throughout the course and did this overlap with
contextualised learning?
5. How does de-contextualised learning impact on long term engagement of physics concepts.

Data Collection Method

The use of structured interviews, such as administering a questionnaire with predetermined questions
provided little scope to further probe the subjects on the overriding research questions. It was critical
to the research question to follow up participants with further probing questions to gather a deeper
understanding of their experiences. The use of unstructured interview processes that did not reflect the
overriding research questions may not have elicited appropriate data from subjects, and therefore was

5
not the preferred mode of collecting data. A semi- structured interview was used, which composed of
questions specific to the research concepts. This mode of data collection allowed the interviewee to
explore the subjects in more detail and depth. This also provided the subjects with guidance
surrounding concepts and allowed for data to emerge through the probing of questions.

The use of open questions was used to allow for further probing questions to follow.

Research Question & Concept Examples Participant questions

How do physics graduate recall teacher
practises during their education?
Concept; Student experiences
 What was the type of instructional
strategies used throughout your
course?
 What was the emphasis on?
 Did the content make sense with your
learning preference?
 How do you recall assessment?
 What type of skills did assessment
focus on?

Was context applied to their learning of
physics concepts?
Concept; Contextualised learning
 How was content and theory
provided?
 If theory was provided before the
application, what is your thoughts on
this approach?
 How did you feel when physics
concepts were taught in this manner?
 How do you think that the curriculum
could have been adjusted to help you
understand physic concepts?
 How do you recall the manner in that
mass, acceleration, and velocity was
taught and assessed?

6

How did the teaching of physics help
challenge your prior misconceptions of
physics concepts?
Concept;
Challenging everyday misconceptions and
rethinking of physics concepts.
 When you reflect back on your study,
how did the course draw upon your
prior experiences and ideas of physics?
 Can you think of examples when your
prior ideas had been challenged
throughout your study?
 How did the courses challenge your
experience of physics concepts?
 What are some examples of real world
experiences and observations that your
teachers guided you towards?

How did your motivation and emotions
change throughout the course and did this
overlap with contextualised learning?
Concept; Pedagogical differences and
student emotions and motivation.
 What did you find interesting in your
study of physics?
 How was the information provided?
 How did your motivation vary
throughout the course?

 How was your experience of physics

How does de-contextualised learning
impact on long term engagement of
physics concepts?
Concept; Impacts of de-contextualised
learning
practicals?
 How do you find the content of course
to impact your interest of physics
outside of the course?
 Did you a particular experience that
you found within a practical or class
that changed your perception of
physics?

Developing the interview

Prior to the interview, the participants were informed about the purpose of the study and provided
ethical protocol document, which elaborated on anonymity and confidentiality. This helped provide
participants with the research process. The interview was planned to be conducted within a controlled
environment. The purpose of this was to limit distractions and noise. The WSU library was booked.
Emphasis was made by the researcher to use neutral body language cues, so that the subjects was not
influenced by cues.

7
Inclusion criteria

Participants studied 2 Units of Undergraduate Physics and had graduated within the last 18 months.
Participates would also have to studied stage 6 HSC physics.

Exclusion criteria

Participants meet the minimum attendance requirements of their course and passed their Units within
the first attempt. If students did not attend classes and had poor academic performance. These
variables may contribute to why students did not gain a full understanding of physics concepts
following the completion of their degrees.

Audio recording software

http://www.nch.com.au/software/soundrec.html?gclid=CLvRt5e3iM4CFUOSvQodqKYGLg

Data will be encrypted and password protected. This will ensure that the participates privacy is not
violated.

Instructions for data encryption available at;

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ff404223.aspx

8
STRUCTURE OF FIELD NOTES

Date:

Time:

Start:

End:

Name:

DOB:

Location:

Audio recording:

FIELD NOTES TEMPLATE

Table size adjusted as needed.

Time Description Questions

9
Data Analysis

Emergent Codes

It will be anticipated codes will emerge from the analysis of data. The emergent codes will be
concepts and themes that arise following the interview.

Emergent Codes Template

Table size adjusted as needed.

Emergent Codes Category Themes

10
Dear Potential Participant:
I am working on a project titled Contextualised learning in Physics for the class, ‘Researching
Teaching and Learning 2,’ at Western Sydney University. As part of the project, I am collecting
information to help inform the design of a teacher research proposal.
I understand the purpose of the study is gather data information on experiences of my Physics education
courses. This includes being interviewed for 1 hour at Western Sydney University Kingswood Campus
library in a private room. I understand that the interview will be audio recorded and the information will
be stored on USB with an encryption password. I understand the interview will be conducted by Mr Vic
Sharma, UWS Masters of Teaching student.

By signing this form, I acknowledge that:

 I have read the project information and have been given the opportunity to discuss the
information and my involvement in the project with the researcher/s.
 The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained to me, and
any questions I have about the project have been answered to my satisfaction.
 I consent to be interviewed for the purposes of this research project.
 I understand that my involvement is confidential and that the information gained during this
data collection experience will only be reported within the confines of the ‘Researching
Teaching and Learning 2’ unit, and that all personal details will be de-identified from the
data.
 I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my
relationship with the researcher/s, now or in the future.

Participation in this research study is voluntary.

By giving your consent to take part in this study you are telling us that you:

 Understand what you have read.

 Agree to take part in the research study as outlined
 Agree to the use of your personal information as described.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time university

student who is 17 years old.
Signed: __________________________________

11
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________
By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17 years old,
and provide my consent for the person’s participation.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________

12
Part C: Data Collection Protocol Explanation

The group’s topic will be contextualised learning. The two other students in the group will be
reviewing contextualised learning from the social sciences perspective. This provides a broad and
diverse topic of contextualised learning across both social sciences and physics perspectives that can
synthesise any overarching characteristics and themes. Moreover, a clear emergent theme will likely
arise from the social science and physics perspectives that will guide the future proposed action
research study for assignment 3.

The individual protocol was designed to gather student experiences within their physics courses, and
further understand whether the information was presented in a contextualised or de-contextualised
manner. Specifically, the research questions would start on students recalling their experiences, and
examine if their courses presented information in a contextualised manner. Furthermore, a key
component of inquiry is to resemble how scientists work. Often this process includes identifying and
evaluating scientific misconceptions and replacing this with valid scientific concepts (Minner, 2010).
Therefore, it was important to examine if students had been exposed to an authentic scientific inquiry
within their course. This was evident in question 3, which examined if their physics courses helped
them identify scientific misconceptions. It is important to understand the reasoning behind a student’s
misconceptions of physics concepts and, if so, whether these misconceptions are associated with de-
contextualised or contextualised learning of physics. The next research question focuses on the
relationship between context and motivation, as research has indicated the need for providing context
before introducing abstract science concepts. This can assist students by presenting content in a
meaningful manner. The final question looks at the effects that de-contextualised teaching of physics
has on learning, and establishes how this impacts the long term understanding of physics. Will a de-
contextualised physics course restrict a student’s interest to apply physics concepts to experiences
within their daily life?

Data will be analysed according to emergent codes, and effort will be made to identify the research
questions embedded into the emerging codes. Themes will be extrapolated from codes to categories
and then to themes (Saldana, 2015). Moreover, the research is designed to examine how context based
physics improves motivation and engagement. Research findings confirm that contextualised learning
can improve motivation and engagement. However, further research needs to be undertaken in order

13
to understand how motivation and engagement changes throughout a physics course, and what are the
long term impacts of de-contextualised learning of physics. Research on context based physics has not
provided specific recommendations on how pedagogy, assessment, and curriculum can be adjusted to
include contextualised learning, and concurrently promote the understanding of physics
concepts. Previous attempts to contextualise physics education through the use of SSI and GBSL has
enhanced motivation though did not successfully include sufficient science content. It is the aim of
the research question to have data that can impact curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. This is also
consistent with the quality of purpose of action research, which aims to have impacts on teaching
practice (McKernan, 2013).

14
References

Bächtold, M. (2013). What do students “construct” according to constructivism in science

education? Research in Science Education, 43(6), 2477-2496.
Briscoe, C., & Prayaga, C. S. (2004). Teaching future K‐8 teachers the language of Newton: A case
study of collaboration and change in university physics teaching. Science Education, 88(6),
947-969.
Cooper, S., Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. (2003). Australian students' views on nuclear issues: Does teaching
alter prior beliefs? Physics Education, 38(2), 123.
Enghag, M. (2004). Miniprojects and context rich problems. Case studies with analysis of motivation,
learner ownership and competence in small group work in physics.
Gilbert, J. K., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions:
Changing perspectives in science education.
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student
survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American journal of Physics,
66(1), 64-74.
Harrison, M. (2016). Making practical work work: using discussion to enhance pupils’ understanding
of physics. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-17.
Immordino‐Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of
affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, brain, and education, 1(1), 3-10.
Kaltakci-Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2016). Identifying pre-service physics teachers’
misconceptions and conceptual difficulties about geometrical optics. European Journal of
Physics, 37(4), 045705.
Kuo, E., Hull, M. M., Gupta, A., & Elby, A. (2013). How students blend conceptual and formal
mathematical reasoning in solving physics problems. Science Education, 97(1), 32-57.
Laws, P., Sokoloff, D., & Thornton, R. (1999). Promoting active learning using the results of physics
education research. UniServe Science News, 13, 14-19.
Li, M.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Game-based learning in science education: A review of relevant
research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(6), 877-898.
Lin, S.-Y., & Singh, C. (2015). Effect of scaffolding on helping introductory physics students solve
quantitative problems involving strong alternative conceptions. Physical Review Special
Topics-Physics Education Research, 11(2), 020105.
Liu, G., & Fang, N. (2016). Student Misconceptions about Force and Acceleration in Physics and
Engineering Mechanics Education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(1), 19-
29.
Lopes, J., Viegas, C., & Cravino, J. (2010). Improving the learning of physics and development of
competences in engineering students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 26(3),
612-627.
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry‐based science instruction—what is it and does
it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of research in
science teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
Murphy, P., Lunn, S., & Jones, H. (2006). The impact of authentic learning on students' engagement
with physics. The Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 229-246.
Rayner, A. (2012). Reflections on context-based science teaching: a case study of physics for students
of physiotherapy. Paper presented at the Proceedings of The Australian Conference on
Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference).
Saldana, J. (2009). An introduction to codes and coding. The coding manual for qualitative
researchers, 1-31.

15
Vygotsky, L. S. (1967). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet psychology,
5(3), 6-18.
Wieman, C., & Perkins, K. (2005). Transforming physics education. Physics today, 58(11), 36.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based
framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.

16