Secondary school science teachers' arguments for the particulate nature of matter

Abstract

How do secondary school science teachers justify the model of a particulate nature of matter, and how do the arguments they use relate to historical arguments? To find out, we individually interviewed 11 in‐service secondary school science teachers (certified to teach chemistry and/or physics in secondary school, and with 2 to 30 years of teaching experience) regarding their arguments for the particulate nature of matter and experiments that could demonstrate the existence of particles. The collected data were qualitatively analyzed. Three qualitatively different categories of arguments could be constructed from data: philosophical arguments, indirect experimental arguments, and direct experimental arguments. The indirect experimental arguments which is the largest category could be further divided into qualitatively different subcategories: nonspecific research and experiments, and chemical, physical, and subatomic experiments. Even though several experiments and arguments were suggested by the informants in our study, the arguments regarding the validity of the experiments were quite uncertain and vague. The experiments and arguments were used to corroborate the particulate nature of matter and taken for granted in advance rather than used to justify a model with particles. The outcome was discussed in relation to scientific arguments and experiments and in view of results from previous science education research. Based on our data, teacher education and in‐service teacher training, as well as teacher guides, were suggested to be more elaborate regarding contemporary knowledge, with direct experimental evidence for the particulate nature of matter being presented.

Science Teachers’ Conceptions of Atomic Models

“…Moreover, when following the historical approach, teachers have to avoid frequently mixing the use of different atomic models as this can lead to confusion among students (Eilks, 2015). Furthermore, Gunnarsson et al (2018) highlight that teachers' knowledge of different atomic models and the relationship between them is vital for a successful introduction of the particulate nature of matter in the classroom.…”

The development of students' justifications for their positions regarding two theoretical models: Electron cloud or sodium chloride crystal—After engaging in different learning activities

“…Such research would move researchers' understanding forward as little is known of the influence of different types of active learning strategies on individuals' lines of thinking when studying science. In addition, since students' attention during the debating activity shifted more to the structural orientation of the theoretical constructs under study, further research is needed to explore the potential role of using debating in promoting positive conceptual change with respect to theoretical and submicroscopic constructs of science; one of the most challenging aspects of science as classified by science researchers (Gunnarsson, Hellquist, Stromdahl, & Zelic, ; Ozmen, ; Snir et al, ). Such research would enable researchers to explore the cognitive demands of a set of different active learning activities, such as small discussion groups, debating activities, collaborative practical work, and field trips.…”