Skip to main content

Students’ Conceptions of Quantum Physics

  • Chapter
Thinking Physics for Teaching

Abstract

…after people read the paper a lot of people understood the theory of relativity in some way or other, certainly more than twelve. On the other hand, I think I can safely say that no one understands quantum mechanics….do not keep saying to yourself, if you possibly can avoid is, ‘But how can it be like that?’ because you will get “down the drain”, into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped. nobody knows how it can be like that (Feynmann, 1967, p. 129).

Particularly over the last fifteen years there has been considerable research interest in the student’s perceptions of phenomena in such areas as energy, motion, the particulate nature of matter, electricity, and light. However, ninety years after the genesis of quantum physics significant research on students’ understanding of such revolutionary phenomena is only beginning to emerge. This new study is designed to build on and complement previous work carried out principally by research groups in Bremen, Berlin and València. The aim of the Students’ Conceptions of Quantum Physics Project is to elicit students’ conceptions of quantum phenomena, investigate their use of metaphors and analogies in constructing conceptual models, and evaluate the efficacy of the incorporation of quantum physics at the pre-university level. The study should lead to more effective teaching and learning strategies, and inform policy and curriculum decision-making.

…nobody really understands quantum theory

—Richard Feynmann

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anderson, B., 1986, “The experimental Gesalt of causation: A common core to pupils’ preconceptions in science”, European Journal of Science Education , 8 (2), 155–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D., 1968, Educational Psychology , Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bethge, T., 1988, Aspekte des Schülervorverständnisses zu grundlegenden Begriffen der Atomphysik (Aspects of student’s matrices of understanding related to basic concepts of atomic physics), PhD thesis, University of Bremen, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bormann, M., 1987, DasSchülervorverständnisses zum Themenbereich “Modellvorstellungen zu Licht und Elektronen ” (Students ’Alternative Framework in the Field of Particle and Wave Models of Light and Electrons), in W. Kuhn (ed.), Didaktik der Physik, Vorträge, Physikertagung 1987, Gießen, Berlin..

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, G. and Morgan, G., 1979, Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis, Heinemann Educational Books, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cushing, J. T., 1990, “Copenhagen hegemony: Need it be so?” in P. Lahti (ed.), Symposium on the Foundations of Modern Physics (1990), Joensuu (Finland), 13–17 August 1990, Peter Mittelstaedt Publisher, World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., 1981, “Pupils’ alternative frameworks in science”, European Journal of Science Education, 3(1), 93–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R. and Bell, B., 1986, “Students’ thinking and the learning of science: A constructivist view”, School Science Review, 443–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, G., 1979, “Children’s conceptions of heat and temperature”, Science Education, 63, 221–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faucher, G., 1987 “Pragmatical Conceptions in the Atomic Domain”, in Proceedings of 2nd International Seminar on “Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics ”, J. Novak (ed.), Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feynmann, R., 1967, The Character of Physical Law, MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, A., 1986, The Shaky Game, University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischler, H. and Lichtfeldt, M., 1992, “Modern physics and students’ conceptions”, International Journal of Science Education, 14, 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Castañeda, M., 1985, “An abuse with the wave properties of matter”, American Journal of Physics, 53, 373–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gil, D. and Solbes, J., 1993, “The introduction of modern physics: overcoming a deformed vision of science”, International Journal of Science Education, 15, 255–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. and Watts, D., 1983, “Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: changing perspectives in science education”, Studies in Science Education ,10, 61–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harré, R., 1961, Theories and Things, Sheed and Ward, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidd, R., Ardini, J. and Anton, A., 1989, “Evolution of the modern photon”, American Journal of Physics, 57, 27–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrman, R. L., 1982, “Confused physics: a tutorial critique”, The Physics Teacher, 20, 519–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muncaster, R., 1993, A-Level Physics, Stanley Thornes, Cheltenham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niedderer, H., 1987, “Alternative framework of students in mechanics and atomic physics, Methods of research and results”, in Proceedings of 2nd International Seminar on “Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics ”, J. Novak (ed.), Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niedderer, H., Bethge, T. and Cassens, H., 1990, “A simplified quantum model: A teaching approach and evaluation of understanding”, in Relating Macroscopic Phenomena to Microscopic Particles -A Central Problem in Secondary Science Education, P. L Lijuse et al. (eds.), CD-ß Press, Utrecht, 67–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, M. and Freyburg, P., 1985, Learning in Science: Implications of Children s Knowledge, Heineman, Auckland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R. and Gilbert, J., 1980, “A technique for exploring students’ views of the world”, Physics Education, 15, 376–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, M. and Gilbert, J., 1983, “Explanation and metaphor in some empirical questions in science education?”, European Journal of Science Education, 5, 249–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K., 1963, Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge and Kegan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shay er, M. and Adey, P., 1981, Towards a science of science teaching: Cognitive development and curriculum demand, Heinemann Educational Books, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, C., 1992, Words, Science and Learning, Open University Press, Buckingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R. and Gunstone, R., 1992, Probing Understanding, Falmer Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mashhadi, A. (1995). Students’ Conceptions of Quantum Physics. In: Bernardini, C., Tarsitani, C., Vicentini, M. (eds) Thinking Physics for Teaching. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1921-8_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1921-8_25

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5786-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-1921-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics