uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Refine search result
1234567 1 - 50 of 356
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the 'Create feeds' function.
  • 1.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Building on higher education research - How can we take a scholarly approach to teaching and learning2018Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 2.
    Airey, John
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Larsson, Johanna
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy.
    Developing Students’ Disciplinary Literacy?: The Case of University Physics2018In: Global Developments in Literacy Research for Science Education / [ed] Kok-Sing Tang, Kristina Danielsson, Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2018, p. 357-376Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The main data set used in this chapter comes from a comparative study of physics

    lecturers in Sweden and South Africa. (Airey 2012; 2013: Linder et al 2014). Semistructured

    interviews were carried out using a disciplinary literacy discussion matrix

    (Airey 2011b), which enabled us to probe the lecturers’ disciplinary literacy goals in the

    various semiotic resource systems used in undergraduate physics (i.e. graphs, diagrams,

    mathematics, language, etc.).

    The findings suggest that whilst physics lecturers have strikingly similar

    disciplinary literacy goals for their students, regardless of setting; they have very different

    ideas about whether they themselves should teach students to handle these disciplinaryspecific

    semiotic resources. It is suggested that the similarity in physics

    lecturers’disciplinary literacy goals across highly disparate settings may be related to the

    hierarchical, singular nature of the discipline of physics (Bernstein 1999; 2000).

    In the final section of the chapter some preliminary evidence about the disciplinary

    literacy goals of those involved in physics teacher training is presented. Using Bernstein’s

    constructs, a potential conflict between the hierarchical singular of physics and the

    horizontal region of teacher training is noticeable.

    Going forward it would be interesting to apply the concept of disciplinary literacy

    to the analysis of other disciplines—particularly those with different combinations of

    Bernstein’s classifications of hierarchical/horizontal and singular/region.

    References

    Airey, J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala  Retrieved 2009-04-27, from http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

    Airey, J. (2011a). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the disciplines, 8(3).

    Airey, J. (2011b). Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education: Disciplinary Literacy and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections (pp. 57-65). Cape Town, South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

    Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79.

    Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

    Airey, J. (2015). Social Semiotics in Higher Education: Examples from teaching and learning in undergraduate physics In: SACF Singapore-Sweden Excellence Seminars, Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research in Higher Education (STINT), 2015 (pp. 103). urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266049.

    Airey, J., & Larsson, J. (2014). What Knowledge Do Trainee Physics Teachers Need to Learn? Differences in the Views of Training Staff. International Science Education Conference ISEC 2014, National Institute of Education, Singapore. 25-27 November 2014.

    Airey, J., Lauridsen, K., Raisanen, A., Salö, L., & Schwach, V. (2016). The Expansion of English medium Instruction in the Nordic Countries. Can Top-down University Language Policies Encourage Bottom-up Disciplinary Literacy Goals? Higher Education. DOI: 10.1007/s10734-015-9950-2

    Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2008). Bilingual Scientific Literacy? The use of English in Swedish university science programmes. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 145-161.

    Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2011). Bilingual scientific literacy. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. Roberts, P.-O. Wickman, G. Ericksen & A. MacKinnon (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 106-124). London: Routledge.

    Airey, J. & Linder, C. (in press) Social Semiotics in University Physics Education. In D. Treagust, R. Duit, R. & H. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple Representations in Physics Education Springer.

    American Association of Physics Teachers. (1996). Physics at the crossroads   Retrieved from http://www.aapt.org/Events/crossroads.cfm

    Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Bennett, K. (2010). Academic discourse in Portugal: A whole different ballgame? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 21-32.

    Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology Education, 20(2), 157-173.

    Bernstein, B. (2000). pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research and critique. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Björk, L., & Räisänen, C. A. (2003). Academic Writing: A university writing course (3 ed.). Lund: studentlitteratur.

    Bogdan, R. C., and Biklen, S. R. 1992. Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

    CHE-SAIP. (2013).  Review of undergraduate physics education in public higher education institutions. http://www.saip.org.za/images/stories/documents/documents/Undergrad_Physics_Report_Final.pdf

    Duff, P. (2010). Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30(March 2010), 169-192.

    European Commission Expert Group. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

    Forsman, J. (2015). Complexity Theory and Physics Education Research: The Case of Student Retention in Physics and Related Degree Programmes. Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Retrieved from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A846064&dswid=-4668

    Fortanet-Gomez, I. (2013). CLIL in Higher Education. Towards a Multilingual Language Policy. Bristol UK: Multilingual Matters.

    Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

    Fredlund, T., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Linder, A. (2014). Unpacking physics representations: Towards an appreciation of disciplinary affordance. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 10(020128 (2014)).

    Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2015). Enhancing the possibilities for learning: Variation of disciplinary-relevant aspects in physics representations. European Journal of Physics, 36(5), 055001.

    Gee, J. P. (1991). What is literacy? In C. Mitchell & K. Weiler (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3-11). New York: Bergin & Garvey.

    Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127-143). Boston: Houghton Miffin.

    Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). The analysis of scientific texts in English and Chinese. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 124-132). London: Falmer Press.

    Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.

    Hurd, P. d. H. (1958). Science literacy: Its meaning for American schools. Educational Leadership, 16, 13-16.

    Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.

    Johannsen, B. F. (2013). Attrition and retention in university physics: A longitudinal qualitative study of the interaction between first year students and the study of physics (Doctoral dissertation, University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Science, Department of Science Education).

    Josephson, O. (2005). Parallellspråkighet [parallel language use]. Språkvård, 2005(1), 3.

    Korpan, C. A., Bisanz, G. L., Bisanz, J., & Henderson, J. M. (1997). Assessing literacy in science: Evaluation of scientific news briefs. Science Education. Science Education, 81, 515-532.

    Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.

    Kuteeva, M., & Airey, J. (2014). Disciplinary Differences in the Use of English in Higher Education: Reflections on Recent Policy Developments  Higher Education 67(5), 533-549.

    Larsson, J., & Airey, J. (2014). Searching for stories: The training environment as a constituting factor in the professional identity work of future physics teachers. British Educational Research Association Conference BERA 2014, London, September 2014.

    Larsson, J., & Airey, J. (2015). The "physics expert" discourse model – counterproductive for trainee physics teachers' professional identity building? Paper presented at the 11th Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) Helsinki, August 31 to September 4, 2015.

    Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84:, 71–94.

    Lea, M. R., & Street, B.V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.

    Lemke, J. L. (1998). Teaching all the languages of science: Words, symbols, images, and actions  Retrieved September 16, 2005, from http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/education/jlemke/papers/barcelon.htm

    Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining academic literacies research: issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(4), 5–32.

    Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294

    Martin, J. R. (2011). Bridging troubled waters: Interdisciplinarity and what makes it stick. In F. Christie & K. Maton (Eds.), Disciplinarity (pp. 35-61). London: Continuum International Publishing.

    Moje, E. B. (2007). Developing Socially Just Subject-Matter Instruction: A Review of the Literature on Disciplinary Literacy Teaching. Review of Research in Education 31(March 2007), 1–44.

    McDermott, L. (1990). A view from physics. In M. Gardner, J. G. Greeno, F. Reif, A. H. Schoenfeld, A. A. diSessa, & E. Stage (Eds.), Toward a scientific practice of science education (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    National Research Council. (2013). Adapting to a Changing World --- Challenges and Opportunities in Undergraduate Physics Education. Committee on Undergraduate Physics Education Research and Implementation. Board on Physics and Astronomy Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

    Nordic Educational Research Association. (2009). Literacy as worldmaking. Congress of the Nordic Educational Research Association: Available from http://www.neracongress2009.com.

    Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240.

    Northedge, A. (2002). Organizing excursions into specialist discourse communities: A sociocultural account of university teaching. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century. Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 252-264). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

    Parodi, G. (2012) University Genres and Multisemiotic Features: Accessing Specialized Knowledge Through Disciplinarity. Fórum Linguístico. 9:4, 259-282.

    Phillipson, R. (2006). English, a cuckoo in the European higher education nest of languages. European Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 13–32.

    Roberts, D. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy: Threats and opportunities. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729-780). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter?. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7-18.

    Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Swales, J., & Feak, C. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Tang, K. S. K., Ho, C., & Putra, G. B. S. (2016). Developing Multimodal Communication Competencies: A Case of Disciplinary Literacy Focus in Singapore. In Using Multimodal Representations to Support Learning in the Science Classroom (pp. 135-158). Springer International Publishing.

    UNESCO. (2004). The Plurality of Literacy and its Implications for Policies and Programmes. Paris: UNESCO.

    Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86(5), 601-623. 

  • 3.
    Euler, Elias
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Playful, scientific inquiry in an open-ended physics software2018Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 4.
    Johansson, Anders
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Centre for Gender Research.
    Andersson, Staffan
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Salminen-Karlsson, Minna
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Centre for Gender Research.
    Elmgren, Maja
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Chemistry, Department of Chemistry - Ångström, Physical Chemistry.
    “Shut up and calculate”: the available discursive positions in quantum physics courses2018In: Cultural Studies of Science Education, ISSN 1871-1502, E-ISSN 1871-1510, Vol. 13, no 1, p. 205-226Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Educating new generations of physicists is often seen as a matter of attracting good students, teaching them physics and making sure that they stay at the university. Sometimes, questions are also raised about what could be done to increase diversity in recruitment. Using a discursive perspective, in this study of three introductory quantum physics courses at two Swedish universities, we instead ask what it means to become a physicist, and whether certain ways of becoming a physicist and doing physics is privileged in this process. Asking the question of what discursive positions are made accessible to students, we use observations of lectures and problem solving sessions together with interviews with students to characterize the discourse in the courses. Many students seem to have high expectations for the quantum physics course and generally express that they appreciate the course more than other courses. Nevertheless, our analysis shows that the ways of being a “good quantum physics student” are limited by the dominating focus on calculating quantum physics in the courses. We argue that this could have negative consequences both for the education of future physicists and the discipline of physics itself, in that it may reproduce an instrumental “shut up and calculate”-culture of physics, as well as an elitist physics education. Additionally, many students who take the courses are not future physicists, and the limitation of discursive positions may also affect these students significantly.

  • 5.
    Johansson, Anders
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Undergraduate quantum mechanics: lost opportunities for engaging motivated students?2018In: European journal of physics, ISSN 0143-0807, E-ISSN 1361-6404, Vol. 39, no 2, article id 025705Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Quantum mechanics is widely recognised as an important and difficult subject, and many studies have been published focusing on students' conceptual difficulties. However, the sociocultural aspects of studying such an emblematic subject have not been researched to any large extent. This study explores students' experiences of undergraduate quantum mechanics using qualitative analysis of semi-structured interview data. The results inform discussions about the teaching of quantum mechanics by adding a sociocultural dimension. Students pictured quantum mechanics as an intriguing subject that inspired them to study physics. The study environment they encountered when taking their first quantum mechanics course was however not always as inspiring as expected. Quantum mechanics instruction has commonly focused on the mathematical framework of quantum mechanics, and this kind of teaching was also what the interviewees had experienced. Two ways of handling the encounter with a traditional quantum mechanics course were identified in the interviews; either students accept the practice of studying quantum mechanics in a mathematical, exercise-centred way or they distance themselves from these practices and the subject. The students who responded by distancing themselves experienced a crisis and disappointment, where their experiences did not match the way they imagined themselves engaging with quantum mechanics. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to efforts to reform the teaching of undergraduate quantum mechanics.

    The full text will be freely available from 2018-11-17 13:00
  • 6.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Etkina, Eugenia
    Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
    Planinsic, Gorazd
    University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
    A New Way of Using the Interactive Whiteboard in a High School Physics Classroom: A Case Study2017In: Research in science education, ISSN 0157-244X, E-ISSN 1573-1898Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In recent decades, the interactive whiteboard (IWB) has become a relatively common educational tool in Western schools. The IWB is essentially a large touch screen, that enables the user to interact with digital content in ways that are not possible with an ordinary computer-projector-canvas setup. However, the unique possibilities of IWBs are rarely leveraged to enhance teaching and learning beyond the primary school level. This is particularly noticeable in high school physics. We describe how a high school physics teacher learned to use an IWB in a new way, how she planned and implemented a lesson on the topic of orbital motion of planets, and what tensions arose in the process. We used an ethnographic approach to account for the teacher’s and involved students’ perspectives throughout the process of teacher preparation, lesson planning, and the implementation of the lesson. To interpret the data, we used the conceptual framework of activity theory. We found that an entrenched culture of traditional white/blackboard use in physics instruction interferes with more technologically innovative and more student-centered instructional approaches that leverage the IWB’s unique instructional potential. Furthermore, we found that the teacher’s confidence in the mastery of the IWB plays a crucial role in the teacher’s willingness to transfer agency within the lesson to the students.

  • 7.
    Heijkenskjöld, Filip
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Edvardsson, Bengt
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Theoretical Astrophysics.
    Marcus, Lundberg
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Chemistry, Department of Chemistry - Ångström, Theoretical Chemistry.
    Aktiva studenter gör demonstrationsexperiment (1)2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Aktiva studenter gör demonstrationsexperiment

    Filip Heijkenskjöld, Institutionen för fysik och astronomi avd. Fysikens didaktik

    Bengt Edvardsson, Institutionen för fysik och astronomi, avd. Astronomi

    Marcus Lundberg, Institutionen för kemi - Ångström, Teoretisk kemi

    Sammanfattning

    Projektet avser att aktivera studenterna och gör dem till deltagande aktörer i föreläsningarna genom att ge studenterna ansvar för att designa sina egna experiment som kan visa på centrala begrepp inom fysiken. Studenterna får använda ett mätverktyg (IOLab) för att enkelt kunna experimentera och samla in data. För information om IOLab se http://www.iolab.science

    Vi låter studenterna i kursen 1KB302, Fysik för kemister, ta ansvar för en del av undervisningen. De väljer själva ut vad de vill illustrera med experiment. Studenterna bidrar med var sitt ca 5 minuter långt demonstrationsexperiment och deltar i en efterföljande diskussion på 10 minuter. Efter godkänd insats får de en tentamensdel godkänd. Detta ökar studenternas engagemang och även kopplingen till andra kurser som studeras inom programmen.

  • 8.
    Heijkenskjöld, Filip
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Edvardsson, Bengt
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Theoretical Astrophysics.
    Lundberg, Marcus
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Chemistry, Department of Chemistry - Ångström, Theoretical Chemistry.
    Aktiva studenter gör demonstrationsexperiment (2)2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Aktiva studenter gör demonstrationsexperiment

    Filip Heijkenskjöld, Institutionen för fysik och astronomi avd. Fysikens didaktik

    Bengt Edvardsson, Institutionen för fysik och astronomi, avd. Astronomi

    Marcus Lundberg, Institutionen för kemi - Ångström, Teoretisk kemi

    Sammanfattning

    Projektet avser att aktivera studenterna och gör dem till deltagande aktörer i föreläsningarna genom att ge studenterna ansvar för att designa sina egna experiment som kan visa på centrala begrepp inom fysiken. Studenterna får använda ett mätverktyg (IOLab) för att enkelt kunna experimentera och samla in data. För information om IOLab se http://www.iolab.science

    Vi låter studenterna i kursen 1KB302, Fysik för kemister, ta ansvar för en del av undervisningen. De väljer själva ut vad de vill illustrera med experiment. Studenterna bidrar med var sitt ca 5 minuter långt demonstrationsexperiment och deltar i en efterföljande diskussion på 10 minuter. Efter godkänd insats får de en tentamensdel godkänd. Detta ökar studenternas engagemang och även kopplingen till andra kurser som studeras inom programmen.

  • 9.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Bodin, Madelen
    Department of Science and Mathematics Education, Umeå University, Sweden.
    Algodoo: A Tool for Encouraging Creativity in Physics Teaching and Learning2017In: Physics Teacher, ISSN 0031-921X, E-ISSN 1943-4928, Vol. 55, no 1, p. 25-28Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Algodoo (http://www.algodoo.com) is a digital sandbox for physics 2D simulations. It allows students and teachers to easily create simulated “scenes” and explore physics through a user-friendly and visually attractive interface. In this paper, we present different ways in which students and teachers can use Algodoo to visualize and solve physics problems, investigate phenomena and processes, and engage in out-of-school activities and projects. Algodoo, with its approachable interface, inhabits a middle ground between computer games and “serious” computer modeling. It is suitable as an entry-level modeling tool for students of all ages and can facilitate discussions about the role of computer modeling in physics.

  • 10.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    CLIL: Combining Language and Content2017In: ESP Today, ISSN 2334-9050, Vol. 5, no 2, p. 297-302Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 11.
    Amin, Tamer G.
    et al.
    American University of Beirut, Lebanon.
    Jeppsson, Fredrik
    Linköping University.
    Haglund, Jesper
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Conceptual metaphor and embodied cognition in science education2017Book (Refereed)
  • 12.
    Volkwyn, Trevor
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of the Western Cape.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Stockholm University.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Heijkenskjöld, Filip
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy.
    Linder, Cedric
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of the Western Cape.
    Coordinating multiple resources to learn physics2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    It has been argued that for any given physics task there is a critical constellation of resources that students need to become proficient in handling in order for physics learning to take place. This is because different resources offer access to different information i.e. they have different pedagogical and disciplinary affordances. A laboratory exercise requiring coordination of multiple resources was designed to help students appreciate the movability of coordinate systems. Initially students were unable to coordinate the manipulation of a hand-held measuring device (IOLab) and observe changes in three readouts on a computer screen, whilst simultaneously drawing conclusions in their discussions with each other and the facilitator. However, the introduction of a paper arrow allowed students to quickly coordinate the resources and begin to experience the movability of coordinate systems. The study confirms earlier work on critical constellations of resources and the functioning of persistent resources as coordinating hubs.

  • 13.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance: Teaching the Multimodal Discourse of University Science2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance: Teaching the

    Multimodal Discourse of University Science

    The natural sciences have been extremely successful in modeling some specific aspects

    of the world around us. This success is in no small part due to the creation of generally

    accepted, paradigmatic ways of representing the world through a range of semiotic

    resources. The discourse of science is of necessity multimodal (see for example Lemke,

    1998) and it is therefore important for undergraduate science students to learn to

    master this multimodal discourse (Airey & Linder, 2009). In this paper, I approach the

    teaching of multimodal science discourse via the concept of affordance.

    Since its introduction by Gibson (1979) the concept of affordance has been debated by a

    number of researchers. Most famous, perhaps is the disagreement between Gibson and

    Norman (1988) about whether affordances are inherent properties of objects or are

    only present when perceived by an organism. More recently, affordance has been

    drawn on in the educational arena, particularly with respect to multimodality (see

    Fredlund, 2015 for a recent example). Here, Kress et al (2001) have claimed that

    different modes have different specialized affordances.

    In the presentation the interrelated concepts of disciplinary affordance and pedagogical

    affordance will be presented. Both concepts make a radical break with the views of both

    Gibson and Norman in that rather than focusing on the perception of an individual, they

    refer to the disciplinary community as a whole. Disciplinary affordance is "the agreed

    meaning making functions that a semiotic resource fulfills for a disciplinary community".

    Similarly, pedagogical affordance is "the aptness of a semiotic resource for the teaching

    and learning of some particular educational content" (Airey, 2015). As such, in a

    teaching situation the question of whether these affordances are inherent or perceived

    becomes moot. Rather, the issue is the process through which students come to use

    semiotic resources in a way that is accepted within the discipline. In this characterization

    then, learning can be framed in terms of coming to perceive and leverage the

    disciplinary affordances of semiotic resources.

    In this paper, I will discuss: the disciplinary affordances of individual semiotic resources,

    how these affordances can be made “visible” to students and how the disciplinary

    affordances of semiotic resources are ultimately leveraged and coordinated in order to

    make science meanings.

    References:

    Airey J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis   Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala  Retrieved 2009-04-27, from   http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

    Airey, J. (2011b). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education.   Across the disciplines, 8(3), unpaginated.  Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/clil/airey.cfm

    Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik (pp. 41-58): Gleerups.

    Airey, J. (2014) Representations in Undergraduate Physics. Docent lecture, Ångström Laboratory, 9th June 2014 From   http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-226598

    Airey, J. (2016). Undergraduate Teaching with Multiple Semiotic Resources: Disciplinary Affordance vs Pedagogical Affordance.   Paper presented at 8icom. University of Cape Town, Cape Town.

    Airey, J., & Eriksson, U. (2014). A semiotic analysis of the disciplinary affordances of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram in   astronomy. Paper presented at the The 5th International 360 conference: Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge,   Aarhus, Denmark.

    Airey, J., Eriksson, U., Fredlund, T., and Linder, C. (2014). "The concept of disciplinary affordance "The 5th International 360   conference: Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge. City: Aarhus University: Aarhus, Denmark, pp. 20.

    Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). "A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical   constellation of modes." Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27-49.

    Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2015) Social Semiotics in Physics Education: Leveraging critical constellations of disciplinary representations   ESERA 2015 From http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Auu%3Adiva-260209

    Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2017) Social Semiotics in University Physics Education: Multiple Representations in Physics Education   Springer. pp 85-122

    Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Who needs 3D when the Universe is flat? Science Education, 98(3),   412-442.

    Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Introducing the anatomy of disciplinary discernment: an example from   astronomy. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 167‐182.

    Fredlund 2015 Using a Social Semiotic Perspective to Inform the Teaching and Learning of Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

    Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students   sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

    Fredlund, T, Airey, J, & Linder, C. (2015a). Enhancing the possibilities for learning: Variation of disciplinary-relevant aspects in   physics representations. European Journal of Physics.

    Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015b). Towards addressing transient learning challenges in undergraduate physics: an   example from electrostatics. European Journal of Physics. 36 055002.

    Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015c). A social semiotic approach to identifying critical aspects. International Journal for   Lesson and Learning Studies 2015 4:3 , 302-316.

    Fredlund, T., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Linder, A. (2014). Unpacking physics representations: Towards an appreciation of disciplinary   affordance. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 10(020128).

    Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127-143). Boston: Houghton   Miffin.

    Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as a social semiotic. London: Arnold.

    Hodge, R. & Kress, G. (1988). Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294

    Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching and learning (Vol. 323). Gothenburg: Göteborgs Universitet.

    Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. New York: Routledge.

    Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

    Mavers, D. Glossary of multimodal terms  Retrieved 6 May, 2014, from http://multimodalityglossary.wordpress.com/affordance/

    Thibault, P. (1991). Social semiotics as praxis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. London: Routledge.

    Wu, H-K, & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Pedagogical Affordances of Multiple External Representations in Scientific Processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 754-767.

  • 14.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Planinsic, Gorazd
    University of Ljubljana.
    Etkina, Eugenia
    Rutgers University.
    Doing science by waving hands: Talk, symbiotic gesture, and interaction with digital content as resources in student inquiry2017In: Physical Review Special Topics : Physics Education Research, ISSN 1554-9178, E-ISSN 1554-9178, Vol. 13, no 2, article id 020104Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we investigate some of the ways in which students, when given the opportunity and an appropriate learning environment, spontaneously engage in collaborative inquiry. We studied small groups of high school students interacting around and with an interactive whiteboard equipped with Algodoo software, as they investigated orbital motion. Using multimodal discourse analysis, we found that in their discussions the students relied heavily on nonverbal meaning-making resources, most notably hand gestures and resources in the surrounding environment (items displayed on the interactive whiteboard). They juxtaposed talk with gestures and resources in the environment to communicate ideas that they initially were not able to express using words alone. By spontaneously recruiting and combining a diverse set of meaning- making resources, the students were able to express relatively fluently complex ideas on a novel physics topic, and to engage in practices that resemble a scientific approach to exploration of new phenomena.

  • 15.
    Euler, Elias
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Experiencing Variation and Discerning Relevant Aspects Through Playful Inquiry in Algodoo2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Educational simulations in physics tend to be designed to help students learn selected concepts and thus are typically limited in their potential for open-ended and creative exploration. We are interested in the educational potential of a simulation environment, Algodoo, which does not address any one specific physics phenomenon, but rather provides a creative platform for users to design their own simulations using basic building blocks (e.g. massless springs, rigid bodies). In this study, we investigate the ways in which the Algodoo software supports the learning of physics concepts when it is used as an open environment for students’ inquiry through a case study of a pair of students using Algodoo for the first time. Our study suggests that Algodoo promotes learning in two main ways. First, not unlike more traditional educational simulations, it makes purposeful variation of relevant physics parameters possible and allows the user to experience variation in multiple ways. Second, in contrast to traditional educational simulations (and more like ‘messy’ real experiments), it requires the user to discern the relevant parameters to be varied.

  • 16.
    Euler, Elias
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Exploring how students use sandbox software to move between the physical and the formal2017In: PERC Proceedings, Cincinnati, OH, 2017, p. 128-131Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper, we present a theoretical framework based on Hestenes's discussion of modeling in physics and diSessa's early theories on creativity-based digital learning environments. We use this framework to formulate new understandings of how a pair of students work with an open-ended physics sandbox software, Algodoo, alongside a physical laboratory setup. Algodoo is a digital environment that makes it possible for students to create simple, two-dimensional models of physical phenomena. We identify Algodoo's role as that of a semi-formalism, whereby the students made use of the software in their process of modeling as a means of moving between the physical, experimental context and the formal, mathematical representations associated with that context. We propose a hypothesis to be tested in future research and suggest further avenues for exploration in relation to the proposed theoretical framework.

  • 17.
    Larsson, Johanna
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Stockholm University, Department of Mathematics and Science Education .
    Four discourse models of physics teacher education2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    In Sweden, as in many other countries, the education of high-school physics teachers is typically carried out in three different environments; the education department, the physics department and school itself during teaching practice. Trainee physics teachers are in the process of building their professional identity as they move between these three environments. Although much has been written about teacher professional identity (see overview in Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004) little is known about how encounters with the potentially disparate notions of “what counts” in these three environments feed into trainee physics teachers’ professional identity work.

    In this paper we try to capture the different ways the educational practice of teacher education is valued in the discourse of teacher educators. We use the concept of discourse models (Gee, 2005). Our research questions are as follows:

    1. What is signalled as valued (and not valued) by members of the three environments physics teachers meet during their training (school, education department, physics department)?

    2.What discourse models can be identified from these value statements? 


    We carried out semi-structured interviews with instructors from the three environments. Our analysis involved iterative coding of the interview transcripts (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992) to construct discourse models. We identify four competing discourse models and discuss the ways in which these models can be seen to be at work, dictating how educational practice is valued.

     

  • 18.
    Haglund, Jesper
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Good use of a ‘bad’ metaphor: Entropy as disorder2017In: Science & Education, ISSN 0926-7220, E-ISSN 1573-1901, Vol. 26, no 3, p. 205-214Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Entropy is often introduced to students through the use of the disorder metaphor. However, many weaknesses and limitations of this metaphor have been identified, and it has therefore been argued that it is more harmful than useful in teaching. For instance, under the influence of the disorder metaphor, students tend to focus on spatial configuration with regard to entropy but disregard the role of energy, which may lead their intuition astray in problem solving. Albeit so, a review of research of students’ ideas about entropy in relation to the disorder metaphor shows that students can use the metaphor in developing a more nuanced, complex view of the concept, by connecting entropy as disorder to other concepts such as microstates and spreading. The disorder metaphor—in combination with other explanatory approaches—can be used as a resource for learning, in giving students an early flavour of what entropy means, so long as we acknowledge its limitations; we can put this “bad” metaphor to good use in teaching.

  • 19.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Stockholm University.
    Learning and Sharing Disciplinary Knowledge: The Role of Representations2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Learning and Sharing Disciplinary Knowledge: The Role of Representations.

    Abstract

    In recent years there has been a large amount of interest in the roles that different representations (graphs, algebra, diagrams, sketches, physical models, gesture, etc.) play in student learning. In the literature two distinct but interrelated ways of thinking about such representations can be identified. The first tradition draws on the principles of constructivism emphasizing that students need to build knowledge for themselves. Here students are encouraged to create their own representations by working with materials of various kinds and it is in this hands-on representational process that students come to develop their understanding.

    The second tradition holds that there are a number of paradigmatic ways of representing disciplinary knowledge that have been created and refined over time. These paradigmatic disciplinary representations need to be mastered in order for students to be able to both understand and effectively communicate knowledge within a given discipline.

    In this session I would like to open up a discussion about how these two ways of viewing representations might be brought together. To do this I will first present some of the theoretical and empirical work we have been doing in Sweden over the last fifteen years. In particular there are three concepts that I would like to introduce for our discussion: critical constellations of representations, the disciplinary affordance of representations and the pedagogical affordance of representations.

    References 

    Airey, J. (2006). Physics Students' Experiences of the Disciplinary Discourse Encountered in Lectures in English and Swedish.   Licentiate Thesis. Uppsala, Sweden: Department of Physics, Uppsala University.,

    Airey J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis   Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala  Retrieved 2009-04-27, from   http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547

    Airey, J. (2014) Representations in Undergraduate Physics. Docent lecture, Ångström Laboratory, 9th June 2014 From   http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-226598

    Airey, J. (2015). Social Semiotics in Higher Education: Examples from teaching and learning in undergraduate physics In: SACF   Singapore-Sweden Excellence Seminars, Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research in Higher   Education (STINT) , 2015 (pp. 103). urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-266049.

    Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2015) Social Semiotics in Physics Education: Leveraging critical constellations of disciplinary representations   ESERA 2015 From http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn%3Anbn%3Ase%3Auu%3Adiva-260209

    Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). "A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical   constellation of modes." Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27-49.

    Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2017) Social Semiotics in Physics Education : Multiple Representations in Physics Education   Springer

    Airey, J., & Eriksson, U. (2014). A semiotic analysis of the disciplinary affordances of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram in   astronomy. Paper presented at the The 5th International 360 conference: Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge,   Aarhus, Denmark.

    Airey, J., Eriksson, U., Fredlund, T., and Linder, C. (2014). "The concept of disciplinary affordance"The 5th International 360   conference: Encompassing the multimodality of knowledge. City: Aarhus University: Aarhus, Denmark, pp. 20.

    Eriksson, U. (2015) Reading the Sky: From Starspots to Spotting Stars Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

    Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Who needs 3D when the Universe is flat? Science Education, 98(3),   412-442.

    Eriksson, U., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Redfors, A. (2014). Introducing the anatomy of disciplinary discernment: an example from   astronomy. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 167‐182.

    Fredlund 2015 Using a Social Semiotic Perspective to Inform the Teaching and Learning of Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

    Fredlund, T., Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2012). Exploring the role of physics representations: an illustrative example from students   sharing knowledge about refraction. European Journal of Physics, 33, 657-666.

    Fredlund, T, Airey, J, & Linder, C. (2015a). Enhancing the possibilities for learning: Variation of disciplinary-relevant aspects in   physics representations. European Journal of Physics.

    Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015b). Towards addressing transient learning challenges in undergraduate physics: an   example from electrostatics. European Journal of Physics. 36 055002.

    Fredlund, T. & Linder, C., & Airey, J. (2015c). A social semiotic approach to identifying critical aspects. International Journal for   Lesson and Learning Studies 2015 4:3 , 302-316

    Fredlund, T., Linder, C., Airey, J., & Linder, A. (2014). Unpacking physics representations: Towards an appreciation of disciplinary   affordance. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res., 10(020128).

    Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127-143). Boston: Houghton   Miffin.

    Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as a social semiotic. London: Arnold.

    Linder, C. (2013). Disciplinary discourse, representation, and appresentation in the teaching and learning of science. European   Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(2), 43-49.

    National Research Council. (2012). Discipline Based Education Research. Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.

    Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

    Mavers, D. Glossary of multimodal terms  Retrieved 6 May, 2014, from http://multimodalityglossary.wordpress.com/affordance/

    van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. London: Routledge.

    Wu, H-K, & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Pedagogical Affordances of Multiple External Representations in Scientific Processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 754-767.

     

     

  • 20.
    Johansson, Anders
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Centre for Gender Research.
    Learning the right physics: Master’s students’™ negotiations of legitimacy2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The last years have seen an increase in science education research focused on social identity. Studies of university physics education have used identity frameworks to address issues of gender and equality in transitions to and from University educations. This study highlights the specific situation of physics students starting on an international Master’s programme and the identity negotiations that take place there. With a poststructuralist discourse analytical framework, I analyse negotiations of legitimacy in interviews with first-semester Master’s students. Several themes emerge from the analysis, pointing out negotiations of legitimacy related to discourses about the perceived quality of educations from different universities, the central value of knowledge and ‘smartness’ in physics, and the ranking of different directions of physics along lines of ‘coolness’ or ‘smartness’. This relates to norms about masculinity connected to physics practices. In the ends my study contribute to a picture of a physics education discourse that is still constructing some positions as more ‘valued’ and legitimate than others, on grounds that partly appear unjustified and discriminatory.

  • 21.
    Berge, Maria
    et al.
    Umeå universitet.
    Johansson, Anders
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts, Centre for Gender Research.
    Lecture Jokes - a Litmus Test of Physics Discourse?2017Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Earlier studies in physics education research have shown the importance of analysing students' processes of ‘becoming a physicist' in a wider sense. For example, it is often expected of physicists to have a kind of ‘authentic intelligence' or ‘smartness', which is generally perceived as male. In this study we contribute to this area of research by analysing an area often forgotten in educational research: humour. Empirically, this study is based on 177 jokes from physics lectures, collected from three different higher education contexts, the US and two Scandinavian countries. With a discourse analytical framework we explore the question of how teacher's jokes in physics lectures portray physics and physicists. In the analysis of the teacher's jokes, physics is constantly constructed as difficult and very advanced, mainly through ironically speaking of it as ‘easy'. Physicists are portrayed as single minded and very passionate, not to say obsessed, about physics. In this study we argue that although none of the jokes were mean the jokes contributed to a discourse that can be perceived as problematic in limiting the conceptions of who a physicist may be.

  • 22.
    Samuelsson, Christopher Robin
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Haglund, Jesper
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Elmgren, Maja
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Chemistry, Department of Chemistry - Ångström, Physical Chemistry.
    Looking for solutions: University chemistry and physics students interacting with infrared cameras2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Infrared (IR) cameras can be used to support the learning and understanding of thermodynamics. Previous research shows that the technology enables university physics students to observe otherwise invisible thermal phenomena. In the present study, the focus is extended to the use of IR cameras in an educational chemistry laboratory setting with a comparison to the physics labs. Depending on the communicative actions made to interact with the cameras, different affordances of the IR cameras are accessed. For example, some students compare what they see with the IR camera with their sense of touch. The kinds of actions students make depend on aspects like their disciplinary experience and the discipline of study. Predict-Observe-Explain is used to probe students’ potential actions for interaction with the IR camera. Data is collected by video recording and iterative transcription to find contrasting or shared patterns of interaction across the groups. A multimodal approach to conversation analysis is used to find these patterns. The result shows that the physics and chemistry students use the technology to confirm or disconfirm predictions made, but differ in the coordination of actions to achieve that goal. The physics students move around and use the sense of touch together with IR-camera observations, while the chemistry students focus on IR-camera observations from one perspective alone.

  • 23.
    Etkina, Eugenia
    et al.
    Graduate School of Education, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08904, USA..
    Gregorcic, Bor
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Vokos, Stamatis
    Department of Physics, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California 93407, USA..
    Organizing physics teacher professional education around productive habit development: A way to meet reform challenges2017In: Physical Review Special Topics : Physics Education Research, ISSN 1554-9178, E-ISSN 1554-9178, Vol. 13, no 1, article id 010107Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Extant literature on teacher preparation suggests that preservice teachers learn best when they are immersed in a community that allows them to develop dispositions, knowledge, and practical skills and share with the community a strong vision of what good teaching entails. However, even if the requisite dispositions, knowledge, and skills in pursuing the shared vision of good teaching are developed, the professional demands on a teacher’s time are so great out of, and so complex during class time that if every decision requires multiple considerations and deliberations with oneself, the productive decisions might not materialize. We argue that the link between intentional decision making and actual teaching practice are teacher’s habits (spontaneous responses to situational cues). Teachers unavoidably develop habits with practical experience and under the influence of knowledge and belief structures that in many ways condition the responses of teachers in their practical work. To steer new teachers away from developing unproductive habits directed towards “survival” instead of student learning, we propose that teacher preparation programs (e.g., in physics) strive to develop in preservice teachers strong habits of mind and practice that will serve as an underlying support structure for beginning teachers. We provide examples of physics teacher habits that are to be developed during the program, propose mechanisms for the development of such habits, and outline possible future research agendas around habits.

  • 24.
    Volkwyn, Trevor
    et al.
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of the Western Cape.
    Airey, John
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics. Stockholm University.
    Gregorcic, Bor
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Heijkenskjöld, Filip
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.
    Linder, Cedric
    Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Physics, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Physics Didactics.