EDUCATIONAL RECONSTRUCTION OF THE PHYSICS CONTENT TO BE
TAUGHT AND PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE
IMPLEMENTATION BY USING INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION
TECHNOLOGIES
Dissertation – reference
Author: Claudio Fazio
Reference: doc. RNDr. Viera Lapitkova, PhD. Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and
Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava
In his dissertation, C. Fazio analyzes those problems, which I would call the key
problems in the current science didactics. Many researches in this area deal with the
problems. His work on the application of constructivist theory in the teachers training
and in the new physics concepts introduction is unique, at least in the Slovak physics
didactics.
He focuses on the development of teachers’ competencies during their training.
Particularly it is the ability to develop students’ cognitive strategies and informal
knowledge and to reformulate their “spontaneous model” into an objective scientific
knowledge he works with.
Fazio’s dissertation consists of two main parts. In the first part, he summarizes the
theoretical background for the problems he further deals with and also the methods he
uses. The second part is the research itself, descriptions of the research approach,
examples of the research tools and the achieved results.
The part on theoretical background consists of:
1. Introduction, where the author reasons the necessity to develop new methods
in teaching physics and also in teachers training. He comes with a detailed
overview of future teacher knowledge and competencies, the university
training should comprise.
2. Teaching/learning pathways and sequences (TLPs, TLSs) chapter deals
with the cognitive constructivist approaches that should help to recognize
students’ misconceptions and to construct students’ correct understanding of
physics concepts. Fazio introduces here his elaborated general frameworks in
designing TLPs and TLSs. He also includes the methods to research the
efficiency of the teaching process directed to change a student thinking.
3. Research methods, the author compares here qualitative and quantitative
research methods. Fazio stresses that while the quantitative analysis tends to
generalization covering big populations, the qualitative analysis does not have
this effect. But he still sees the importance to use both methods in a research.
Further he analyzes three types of case studies – exploring, explaining and
descriptive case. The chapter on research methods is complex offering also the
categories to process the research data. It has a character of overview based on
literature.
My comments and objections to the first part:
p. 4-5 The figure 1.2 shows the generalization of the cyclic process of building a
model and empirical evaluating.
While the previous text mentions the phenomenon / situation description as a
part of a model construction, in the particular model this activity is missing. Is
this intentional?
I suggest describing the model application on a particular model during the
dissertation defense.
p. 10-14 The pages deal with pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching.
But the author does not mention using information and communication
technologies. What is the relation between using information and
communication technologies and pedagogical content knowledge for science
teaching, according to Fazio?
The second part, the research itself:
4. Relevant points in previous research about Thermal Processes
Research analyzes student concepts such as heat, cooling, thermal contact, energy
etc. All these are concepts used also in everyday life. The research of Stavy and
Berkovitz showed (1980) that experience concepts in thermodynamics are very deep
in students’ minds. They resemble very closely the theory „Calorica “. It reminds
me of the Kuhn’s idea that „cognitive ontogenesis repeats the science
development“. It seems that as long as we do not consider also the experience
concepts of students we will not be able to develop procedures leading to student’s
phenomena and concepts understanding.
The mentioned researches lack the analyses of a teaching process by particular age.
My question would be: What thermal processes concepts an Italian student
normally deals with? Is there a sufficient number of impulses for a student to
change his experience concepts?
The author analyzes the current state of matters into a detail in the areas that are
related to his dissertation. But the work lacks analysis of the current state of thermal
processes teaching at the basic or secondary school in Italy; or at least in a particular
program of physics education.
As for didactics, the work brings interesting results of students’ answers on
qualitative and quantitative questions in Thermal Processes (p. 66-67). Here again it
confirms the fact that if a particular situation is described to students in numbers the
students concentrate only on an operation with numbers but not on a physical
process. I personally consider this part to be written very interesting way.
5. Educational reconstruction of chosen Physics contents
There are two goals levels in the research part. One is TTs preparation and
realization and other T/L environment. Goals and their realization are well
described so a reader gets a clear idea about the realization.
It is common though by dissertations of this kind to formulate hypothesis and test
them. The hypothesis formulating, setting dependent and independent variables in
a mutual relation visualizes a contribution of a researcher in a field, in this case
physics didactics. Formulated hypothesis helps also to analyze results and to search
for logic of relations. The dissertation by Fazio lacks its research hypothesis.
The research follows several dimensions and so it naturally requires teamwork.
It seems that an Italian school just as a Slovak school needs a change following the
catchword „education through a real work“. This is most likely the way to fulfill the
goals of education aiming for competences of students and requiring specific
competences of teachers as well.
The analyzing of concepts in thermal processes by high school students and also by
future teachers represents an important section of this part to me. It seems that the
teachers training and teaching results would not be so successful without the
analysis, as the conclusion suggests. It is a very clear contribution of the
pedagogical constructivist theory application in the physics didactics. Chapters 5.2.3
A description of the TLP, 5.2.4 A descriptive model for the „rate of variation“ of
a variable with STELLA and 5.2.5 Building an interpretative model of the heat
transfer process are very well written, bringing new approaches in conception
constructions and concepts application in thermodynamics.
6. Teaching-Learning Pathway experimental data analysis and research
findings
In the final chapter of his dissertation, Fazio analyzes his experience from the
research and evaluates the results of the applied methods, qualitative as well as
quantitative. To be particularly valuable, I consider the introduced and statistically
reviewed categories describing the nature of the students’ explanations in the preand post- tests.
Conclusion
The subject of Fazio’s dissertation is a very currents issue and brings new views on
the teacher training didactics and on procedures and strategies in the high school
physics education.
Fazio proved his abilities:
- to analyze a current state of problem,
- to relate several aspects of teachers training to each other – Subject Matter
Knowledge, Pedagogical Knowledge and Pedagogical Content Knowledge,
- to create a research strategy and a strategy of research tools,
- to draw logical conclusion from results.
From my point of view, the dissertation means contribution on the field of physics
teachers training didactics and high school physics education didactics as well.
I recommend C. Fazio to be given the title PhD in Physics Education Theory,
conditioned by a successful dissertation defense.
Bratislava, February 9, 2006
_______________________________
Doc. RNDr. Viera Lapitkova, PhD.