University Students' Strategies for Constructing Hypothesis when Tackling Paper-and-Pencil Tasks in Physics

Abstract

The study we present tries to explore how first year engineering students formulate hypotheses in order to construct their own problem solving structure when confronted with problems in physics. Under the constructivistic perspective of the teachingYlearning process, the formulation of hypotheses plays a key role in contrasting the coherence of the students' ideas with the theoretical frame. The main research instrument used to identify students' reasoning is the written report by the student on how they have attempted four problem solving tasks in which they have been asked explicitly to formulate hypotheses. The protocols used in the assessment of the solutions consisted of a semi-quantitative study based on grids designed for the analysis of written answers. In this paper we have included two of the tasks used and the corresponding scheme for the categorisation of the answers. Details of the other two tasks are also outlined. According to our findings we would say that the majority of students judge a hypothesis to be plausible if it is congruent with their previous knowledge without rigorously checking it against the theoretical framework explained in class.

How can Teachers Help Students Formulate Scientific Hypotheses? Some Strategies Found in Abductive Inquiry Activities of Earth Science

“…In contrast, abductive inquiry emphasises the development of hypotheses which can effectively explain observed phenomena (Kim, 2003;Oh, 2008). It is a rather recent trend for science educators and researchers to study the process of hypothesis generation and abductive reasoning (Guisasola, Ceberio, & Zubimendi, 2005;Kim, 2003;Oh, 2008;Park, 2006). In line with this new research tradition, this study used abductive inquiry activities as contexts in which high school students were challenged to formulate scientific hypotheses to explain earth-scientific phenomena.…”

Different People in Different Places

“…Other studies in the field of science education (e.g. Guisasola et al 2006;Karelina and Etkina 2007) also adopted this descriptive-interpretive analytical method, with similar results in terms of understanding localised empirical results within broader educational scholarship. …”

Prospective elementary teachers' abilities in tackling a contextualized physics problem as guided inquiry

“…In this sense, the formulation of hypotheses should be underpinned in systematic and organized knowledge bearing in mind the current state of that knowledge [23]. Guisasola, Ceberio and Zubimendi [24] distinguish three types of hypotheses, depending on the nature of the scientific inquiry: (i) descriptive hypotheses, which affirm something that has not yet been confirmed, and are related to factual knowledge (events, phenomena, facts, etc. ); (ii) explanatory hypotheses, which speculate on the causes of phenomena (relationships between two or more variables), and whose predictions are based on deductive reasoning; and (iii) procedural hypotheses, which refer to knowledge of how to carry out experiments, measurements, and other procedural practices.…”