Half-life and Lifeworld: The Omission of School Knowledge in Writing about Radioactive Waste

Michael M. Hull; Florian Budimaier; Rita Elisabeth Krebs

doi:10.51724/ijpce.v15i1.359

Authors

Michael M. Hull University of Alaska Fairbanks https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1551-9553
Florian Budimaier University of Vienna https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2625-2639
Rita Elisabeth Krebs University of Vienna https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8341-0328

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51724/ijpce.v15i1.359

Keywords:

half-life, radioactivity, radioactive waste, student understanding, writing assessment, epistemological framing, lifeworld

Abstract

We report on a pilot study investigating student writing about radioactive waste before and after instruction on half-life. We found that none of the (N = 21) 12^th-grade students mentioned half-life on the post-test writing task, despite the post-test being separated from the intervention by only a short amount of time. This is consistent with previous research conducted by Eijkelhof et al. which showed that, even after formal learning, students are unlikely to be influenced in terms of their views about topics in the lifeworld (such as where to store waste from nuclear power plants). Our study, though small, is pioneering in that we analyze both student writings and responses to survey questions in our assertion that the issue is neither student writing ability nor conceptual understanding. We hypothesize, rather, that students (at least on a sub-conscious level) do not think the topic of half-life is relevant to the writing task. This suggests that instruction aiming to improve student writing about science issues in the lifeworld should provide scaffolding to emphasize the usefulness of school knowledge in that writing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adams, W. K., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., Dubson, M., Finkelstein, N. D., & Wieman, C. E. (2006). New instrument for measuring student beliefs about physics and learning physics: The Colorado learning attitudes about science survey. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 2(010101), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010101

Bishop, K., & Denley, P. (2007). Learning science teaching. Maidenhead, England: McGraw Hill/Open University Press.

Bonnet, A. (2004). Chemie im bilingualen Unterricht. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: principles and classroom practices. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.

Butler, M., & Goschler, J. (2019). Sprachsensibler Fachunterricht. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27168-8

Carlson, J., Daehler, K. R., Alonzo, A. C., Barendsen, E., Berry, A., Borowski, A., Carpendale, J., Chan, K. K. H., Cooper, R., Friedrichsen, P., Gess-Newsome, J., Henze-Rietveld, I., Hume, A., Kirschner, S., Liepertz, S., Loughran, J., Mavhunga, E., Neumann, K., Nilson, P., … Wilson, C. D. (2019). The refined consensus model of pedagogical content knowledge in science education. In A. Hume, R. Cooper, & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Teachers’ Knowledge for Teaching Science (pp. 77–94). Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5898-2_2

Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970–977. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1374249

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy. In Bilingual Education et Bilingualism. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853596773

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy, & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Future Perspectives for English Language Teaching (pp. 139–157).

Eijkelhof, H. (1986). Dealing with acceptable risk in science education: the case of ionizing radiation. In M. J. Frazer, & A. Kornhauser (Eds.), Ethics and social responsibility in science education (pp. 189–199). Pergamon. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-033911-5.50029-8

Eijkelhof, H. M. C. (1990). Radiation and risk in physics education. Utrecht: CD-β Press.

Eijkelhof, H. M. C., Klaassen, C. W. J. M., Lijnse, P. L., & Scholte, R. L. J. (1990). Perceived incidence and importance of lay-ideas on ionizing radiation: Results of a delphi-study among radiation-experts. Science Education, 74(2), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730740205

Eijkelhof, H., & Millar, R. (1988). Reading about Chernobyl: the public understanding of radiation and radioactivity. School Science Review, 70(251), 35–41.

El-Showk, S. (2022). Final resting place. Science, 375(6583), 806–810. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ada1392

Halloun, I., & Hestenes, D. (1998). Interpreting VASS dimensions and profiles for physics students. Science Education, 7, 553. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008645410992

Hammer, D. (1989). Two approaches to learning physics. The Physics Teacher, 27, 664–670. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2342910

Hammer, D. (1994). Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics. Cognition and Instruction, 12(2), 151–183. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1202_4

Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E., & Redish, E. F. (2006). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (Vol. 1, pp. 89–121). IAP.

Hedge, T. (2019). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford University Press (Oxford English).

Henriksen, E. K. (1996). Laypeople’s understanding of radioactivity and radiation. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 68(3–4), 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.rpd.a031863

Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88-140. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170620

Hull, M. M., & Hopf, M. (2020). Student understanding of emergent aspects of radioactivity. International Journal of Physics & Chemistry Education, 12(2), 19–33.

Hull, M. M., & Hopf, M. (2022). Vor- und Nachteile gängiger Analogien in der Radioaktivität. Plus Lucis.

Hull, M. M., Holzinger, E., Jeidler, M., & Wintersteller, M. (2022). Student understanding of half-life and background radiation. PhyDid B - Didaktik der Physik - Beiträge zur DPG-Frühjahrstagung, 267–273.

Hull, M. M., Jansky, A., & Hopf, M. (2021). Probability-related naïve ideas across physics topics. Studies in Science Education, 57(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1757244

Hull, M. M., Jansky, A., & Hopf, M. (2022). Does confidence in a wrong answer imply a misconception? Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18(2), 020108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.020108

Hutchison, P., & Hammer, D. (2010). Attending to student epistemological framing in a science classroom. Science Education, 94(3), 506–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20373

International Atomic Energy Agency. (2017). How nuclear power helps meet global energy demand the role of the IAEA.

Jansky, A. (2019). Die Rolle von Schülervorstellungen zu Wahrscheinlichkeit und Zufall im naturwissenschaftlichen Kontext [Doctoral dissertation, University of Vienna].

Klaassen, C. W. J. M., Eijkelhof, H. M. C., & Lijnse, P. L. (1990). Considering an alternative approach to teaching radioactivity. In P. L. Lijnse, P. Licht, W. de Vos, & A. J. Waarlo (Eds.), Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles: A central problem in secondary science education (pp. 304–315). Utrecht: CD-β Press.

Kniffka, G. (2013). Scaffolding - Möglichkeiten, im Fachunterricht sprachliche Kompetenzen zu vermitteln. In M. Michalak, & M. Kuchenreuther (Eds.), Grundlagen der Sprachdidaktik Deutsch als Zweitsprache (pp. 208-225). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.

Kowalski, L. (1981). Simulating radioactive decay with dice. The Physics Teacher, 19(2), 113. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2340711

Laszlo, P. (2013). Towards teaching chemistry as a language. Science & Education, 22(7), 1669–1706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9408-6

Lising, L., & Elby, A. (2005). The impact of epistemology on learning: A case study from introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 73(4), 372-382. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1848115

Lloyd, P., & Fernyhough, C. (1999). Lev Vygotsky. In Critical assessments of leading psychologists. Routledge. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/772310840

Lucas, A. M. (1987). Public knowledge of radiation. Biologist (London), 34(3), 125–129.

Markic, S., Broggy, J., & Childs, P. (2013). How to deal with linguistic issues in chemistry classes. In I. Eilks & A. Hofstein (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry – A Studybook. A Practical Guide and Textbook for Student Teachers, Teacher Trainees and Teachers (pp. 127–152). Rotterdam: SensePublishers (Educational Research E-Books Online, Collection 2005-2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-140-5_5

Mönch, C., & Markic, S. (2022). Science teachers’ pedagogical scientific language knowledge—A systematic review. Education Sciences, 12(7), 497. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070497

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2016). Uranium 2016: resources, production and demand.

Paltridge, B. (1996). Genre, text type, and the language learning classroom. ELT Journal, 50(3), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/50.3.237

Perkins, K., & Gratny, M. (2010, July 21-22). Who becomes a physics major? A long-term longitudinal study examining the roles of pre-college beliefs about physics and learning physics, interest, and academic achievement. Proceedings of the 2010 Physics Education Research Conference, Portland, Oregon, 253–256.

Perkins, K., Gratny, M., Adams, W. K., Finkelstein, N. D., & Wieman, C. E. (2005, August 10-11). Towards characterizing the relationship between students’ interest in and their beliefs about physics. Proceedings of the 2005 Physics Education Research Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, 137–140.

Petersen, I., & Tajmel, T. (2015). Bildungssprache als Lernmedium und Lernziel im Fachunterricht. In Bildungssprache als Lernmedium und Lernziel im Fachunterricht (pp. 84–111).

Prather, E. E. (2000). An investigation into what students think and how they learn about ionizing radiation and radioactivity [Doctoral dissertation, The University of Maine].

Prather, E. E. (2005). Students’ beliefs about the role of atoms in radioactive decay and half-life. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 345–354. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-53.4.345

Redish, E. F. & Hammer, D. (2009). Reinventing college physics for biologists: Explicating an epistemological curriculum. American Journal of Physics, 77(7), 629-642. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.3119150

Redish, E. F. (2003). Teaching physics with the physics suite. John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Redish, E. F. (2004). A theoretical framework for physics education research: Modeling student thinking. Arxiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0411149

Redish, E. F. (2014). Oersted lecture 2013: How should we think about how our students think? American Journal of Physics, 82(6), 537-551. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4874260

Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., & Steinberg, R. N. (1998). Student expectations in introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 66(3), 212-224. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18847

Rösch, H. (2011). Deutsch als Zweit- und Fremdsprache. In Akademie Studienbücher - Sprachwissenschaft. Akademie Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1524/9783050052816

Rosenberg, S., Hammer, D., & Phelan, J. (2006). Multiple epistemological coherences in an eighth-grade discussion of the rock cycle. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_4

Singh, C. (2008). Assessing student expertise in introductory physics with isomorphic problems. I. Performance on nonintuitive problem pair from introductory physics. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 4(1), 010104. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.010104

Singh. (2002). When physical intuition fails. American Journal of Physics, 70(11), 1103-1109. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1512659

Tajmel, T. (2017). Naturwissenschaftliche Bildung in der Migrationsgesellschaft. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-17123-0

United Nations. (2015). Resolution adopted by the general assembly on 25 September 2015 70/1. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315843223

Wallace, C. S., Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2004). Writing and learning in the science classroom. Springer Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2018-6