Understanding Students’ Conceptions of Electromagnetic Induction A Semiotic Analysis 2013 Jennifer Yeo.pdf

该【Understanding Students’ Conceptions of Electromagnetic Induction A Semiotic Analysis 2013 Jennifer Yeo 】是由【阳仔仔】上传分享，文档一共【12】页，该文档可以免费在线阅读，需要了解更多关于【Understanding Students’ Conceptions of Electromagnetic Induction A Semiotic Analysis 2013 Jennifer Yeo 】的内容，可以使用淘豆网的站内搜索功能，选择自己适合的文档，以下文字是截取该文章内的部分文字，如需要获得完整电子版，请下载此文档到您的设备，方便您编辑和打印。:.
Chapter21
UnderstandingStudents’Conceptions
ofElectromagneticInduction:
ASemioticAnalysis
JenniferYeo
1Introduction
Students’conceptuallearninginsciencecanbeperceivedintwoways–asan
acquisitionoftheknowledgestructuresofscienceorasaparticipationinthe
scientiflcpracticesofscience().Theacquisitionframeworkper-
ceivessciencelearningtobeacquiringsomeknowledge,storedintheheadsof
students,
cognitivelenshavegeneratedmuchknowledgeaboutthemisconceptionsstudents
haveinscience,andtheinternalconceptualstructurestheymightpossessafter
instruction,theextentinwhichtheseexternalizationsarerepresentativeofwhat
,
whichmaystillremainablackbox,aparticipationapproachprovidesanalterna-

learningisaprocessoflearningtobeengagedinthetheory-buildingpracticesthat

inquiryprocessesoftheorybuildingandtheuseofphysicaltoolsthatscientistsuse
toconstructmodelsandtheoriesbutalsotheconceptualtoolsthatscientistsuseto
thinkandreasonabouttheworld’
signsandsymbols(.,linguistictools,pictorialrepresentations,gestures,math-
ematicalsymbols)thatscientistsusetorepresentoftenabstractandinvisibleentities
andprocessesinferredfromthephenomenonandtocommunicatetheinterpretation
ofthemembersofthesciencecommunity.
Electromagneticinduction(EMI)isoneexampleinsciencethatmakesextensive
useofsemiotictoolssuchasvisualimagery,linguisticrepresentations,gestures,
(*)
NanyangTechnologicalUniversity,Singapore,Singapore
e-mail:jennifer.******@
èreetal.(eds.),TopicsandTrendsinCurrentScienceEducation:9thESERA339
ConferenceSelectedContributions,ContributionsfromScienceEducationResearch1,
-94-007-7281-6_21,©SpringerScience+BusinessMediaDordrecht2014:.

andmathematicalsymbolstotheorizetheproductionofcurrentwhenaconductor
experiencesachangeinmagneticfleld(Rieber1995).Nersessian(1985)found
thatMichaelFaradayhimselfmadeuseof“lines”offorceasapictorialrepresen-
tationofamagneticfleldtothinkabouttheactionstakingplacethatledtothe
,studentsneedto
appropriatethesevisualtoolsinthinkingandexploringthephenomenonofEMI
inordertomakesenseofthatphenomenonandinteractwithoneanotherinthe

understandtheconventionsoftheseculturallyconsistentsemiotictoolsandto

whilestudiestakingacognitiveperspectivemightgeneratealistofmisconcep-
tionsrelatedtoEMI,itdoesnotinformwhatittakestothinkandcommunicate
,ontheotherhand,couldinformone’s
competenciesinusingculturallyspeciflctoolsinthisenculturationprocessof
,students’useofculturallyconsistent
toolsinmakingsenseofEMIshouldthusbeonekeyfactorwhenconsidering
students’conceptualizationofthetopic.
Studiesinscienceeducationonstudents’visualizationcapabilityhavetypi-
callymadeuseofinstrumentstakenoradaptedfromeducationalpsychologyfor
testingstudents’spatialoperations,suchasthePurduevisualizationandrotation
test(PVRT)(BodnerandGuay1997),mentalrotationtests(MRT)(Vandenberg
andKuse1978),ortheWechsleradultintelligencescaleforchildren(Wechsler
1974),tomeasurestudents’capacityinspatialperception,spatialvisualization,
mentalrotation,spatialrelations,andspatialorientation(Sorby1999).While
thesestudiesmayinformaboutstudents’visual-spatiallearningcapacity,the
decontextualizedtestitemsfromanyscientiflccontentmaynotprovidemuch
usefulinformationtohelpusunderstandhowstudents’abilitytorecognizecul-
turallyspeciflcvisualtoolsusethemtocommunicateinformationorapplythem
tosolveproblemscouldcontributetoorhindertheirconceptualunderstandingof
,analternativeperspective,consistentwiththesign-makingprac-
ticesofscience,couldperhapsbeborrowedfromthefleldofsemiotics,inparticular
socialsemiotics.
Socialsemioticsisabranchofstudythatperceivessignsandsymbolstobe
imbuedwithameaningbycommunity/contextwhichinturnshapesthecontextin
whichtheserepresentationsareused(HallidayandHasan1985).AdoptedbyLemke
(1990)asatheoreticallenstohighlighttheimportanceofthelanguageofsciencein
sciencelearning,heshowedhowstudents’conceptionscouldbeanalyzedinterms
ofthethematicpatternsoflanguageuseandotherformsofmeaningfulhuman
(1998)laterextendedtheframeworktoanalyzehowmultimodal

drawupontheworksofLemke(1998)andothersinmultimodality(.,Kressetal.
2001)toproposetheuseofamultimodalframeworktoanalyzestudents’visualiza-
tionofEMIandtounderstandstudents’
thatIaskis,“WhatmeaningsofEMIweremadebystudentsusingsemiotictools
whenconstructinganexplanationofanEMIphenomenon?”:.
21UnderstandingStudents’ConceptionsofElectromagneticInduction…341

2TheoreticalFramework
Fromtheperspectiveofsocialsemiotics,scienceisadiscourseaboutthemateriality
ofthenaturalworld,construedwithasystemofinterdependentrepresentationsthat
thesciencecommunityhasinstitutionalized(Lemke1998).Thisideacanbeillus-
tratedwithaphenomenonofEMI–acopperrodslowingdownwhenitmoves
betweenthepolesofamagnet().Thisphenomenoncanberecon-
structedwithdifferentformsofsignsandsymbolsatdifferentrepresentationallev-
els–macroscopic,submicroscopic,andsymbolic(Gilbert2007).
Atthemacroscopiclevel,iconicflguresareusedtorepresentthephysicalobjects
(magnet,copperrod,andconductingframe‒),construingthe
spatialrelationshipsamongthevisibleobjects,thusconstructingthephenomenonat


submicroscopiclevel,arrowsaredrawnasindexicalsigns()to
construemeaningsofpropertiesoftheinferredentities(strengthanddirectionof
magneticflelds)abstractedfromthephenomenonandtheinteractionprocesses

symbols()thatconstruethequantitativerelationshipsamongtheinferred
entities,-
tionlevelsisareconstructionofthesamephenomenon,albeitatdifferentlevelsof
,makingsenseofan
EMIphenomenonisessentiallyasign-makingpracticethatentailstheuseofrepre-
-
otictoolswhich,wheninstitutionalized,becomethematerialstoolsforscientiststo
thinkabouttheinteractionofthe(visibleorinferred)entitiesaswellasservingas
:.

withsemiotictoolsthatmeaningsareconstructed,constitutingthedevelopmentof
,scienceisessentiallyasign-makingenterprise,
describedtobespeciflc,abstract,andconventionbased(HallidayandMartin1993;
;Schleppegrell2004).Studentslearningsciencewillneedtoappro-
priatethissign-makingprocess,whichentailsunderstandingtheculturallyspeciflc
meaningsimbuedinthesesignsandsymbols,selectingappropriatesemiotictoolsto
constructmeanings,andtransformingthemtoascribethemnewmeaningsinagiven
,sciencelearningisessentiallyanactiveprocessofsign
making,,itis“an
activeshapingandreshapingofresourcesthatonehasavailable,inthewishtomake
representationsmatchintentionsascloselyaspossible”(,).
Thepracticeofusingsignsinsensemakingisinfluencedbyone’sculturalback-
,theorganizationofthetools,andtheirtrans-
formationtoindicaterelationshipsandprocessesoftheperceivedcontextarereflections
ofone’
ofanEMIphenomenon,thegeneralpublicmayunderstanditasanaction(shakingof
thetorch)producingaconsequence(bulblightsup),construedwithmainlyiconicflg-
ures;ontheotherhand,someoneschooledinphysicswouldprobablyvisualizeitusing
diagrammaticarrowsasindexicalsignstothinkaboutthecausalrelationsarisingfrom
,thekinds
ofmeaningsmadearethusareflectionofone’swayofthinkingaboutaphenomenon
(Lemke1990)and,hence,one’-
tionsandmeaningconstruedreflectone’scompetencyinmakingsenseofaphenom-
.(2001)refertothiscompetency
as“scientiflcness.”Inotherwords,studyingstudents’useofsignsandsymbolsintheir
interpretationoftheworld’sphenomenawouldprovideinsightsintotheextentto
whichstudentshaveappropriatedtheculturallyconsistentsemiotictoolsinmaking
senseoftheworld,andhencetheirconceptionoftheworld.
Derivedfromtheframeworkofsocialsemiotics,semiotictoolscanconstruedif-
ferentformsofmeanings,whichHallidayandMatthiessen(2004)refertoasmeta-
(1998),theselection,usage,andcombinationof
theseresourcescanprovideinformationabouttheeventsandrelationsonemakes
(presentationalmeaning),theattitudeonehastowardsthecontentandothers(ori-
entationalmeaning),andthedegreeofcoherenceofthetext(organizationalmean-
ing).Thepresentationalmeaning“deflnesthesenseinwhichwespeakabout
something,constructathemeortopic,makepredictionsandargument”(Lemke
1998,).Drawingaparallelwithasimilarconceptusedinlinguistics(ide-
ationalmeaning),ourdeploymentofsemioticresources(includinglinguistics,ges-
tures,diagrams)canbeusedtospecifyprocessesorrelationships,semiotic
participants,,,themathematicalequa-
tionconstruesidentiflcationrelationsamongthethreeentitiesofthephenomenon,
electromotiveforce(E),magneticflux(Φ),andtime(t).Semioticresourcescanthus
presentwhatissupposedtobe“there”tobehappening,-
sentingthestateofaffairs,semioticresourcescanalsoconstrueanorientational
stancetowardthatstateofaffairsatthesametime,whichLemke(1998)referstoas
,
semioticresourcescanconstruearelativepositioningoftheproducerand“text”:.
21UnderstandingStudents’ConceptionsofElectromagneticInduction…343

PresentationalOrientationalOrganizational
IdentiflesthekindsofIdentiflesthelevelofabstrac-Identiflestherulesand
relationsconstruedamongtionsbystudyingthekindsconventionsused,by
semioticresourcesinofsemioticresourcesusedstudyinghowsemiotic
termsofeventsandinmeaning-makingresourcesareorganized
relationshipsamongthe(.,theexpression,(.,theexpression,
entitiesinthephenomenonΦ=BA,indicatestheuseΦ=BA,makesuseof
(.,Φ=BAindicatesofmathematicalsymbols,mathematical
identifyingrelationswhichinturnindicatestheconventionsasarulein
amongmagneticfleldlevelofabstractionmadeoutitsorganization)
strength(B),area(A),ofthephenomenon)
andmagneticflux(Φ))
(semioticproduction),indicatedbyone’schoiceofrepresentationsinthewhole
-
ple,,theconstructionofthephenomenonatthesymboliclevelagainst
theotherpossibleviewpointsanddepictions(macroorsubmicro)isanindicationof
thelevelofabstractionatwhichtheproducerisorientatingthereaders/audiences.
Whilethepresentationalandorientationalmeaningsdemonstratethefunctionsof
semioticresourcesintheconstructionofcontentan