Journal Menu
Submit Manuscript via ScholarOne

EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education
Volume 13, Issue 6 (June 2017), pp. 1723-1736

DOI: 10.12973/eurasia.2017.00694a

Downloaded 255 times.

Research Article

Published online on Apr 18, 2017

How to reference this article?

 

South African Learners’ Conceptual Understanding about Image Formation by Lenses

Merlin John, Jacob M. Molepo & Max Chirwa

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to explore South African Grade 11 learners’ conceptual understanding of ‘image formation by lenses’. The participants for this study were 70 Grade 11 learners from a selected senior secondary school in Mthatha, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. The qualitative approach employed in the study made use of a two-tier open-ended questionnaire as the data collection instrument. The study explored several alternative conceptions the learners had held in terms of the roles that the lens and the screen play in the image formation and the characteristics of the image formed when a lens with a larger diameter is used and when a portion of the lens is covered. Most of the participants could not respond correctly in the situations presented in the questionnaire. However, almost all of them were found to have adequate conceptual understanding about the role of a lens in the image formation.

Keywords: conceptual understanding, lenses, alternative conceptions, image formation


References
  1. Aydin, S. (2012). Remediation of misconceptions about geometric optics using conceptual change texts. Journal of Education Research and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 001-012.
  2. Caleon, I. & Subramaniam, R. (2010a). Development and application of a three-tier diagnostic test to assess secondary students. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 939-961.
  3. Caleon, I. & Subramaniam, R. (2010b). Do students know what they know and what they don’t know? using a four-tier diagnostic test to assess the nature of students’ alternative conceptions. Research in Science Education, 40, 313-337.
  4. Chang, H. P., Chen, J. Y., Guo, C. J., Chen, C. C., Chang, C. Y., Lin, S. H., … Lin, J. L. (2007). Investigating primary and secondary students’ learning of physics concepts in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 465-482.
  5. Chen, S. M. (2009). Shadows: Young Taiwanese children’s views and understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 31(1), 59-79.
  6. Chen, C., Lin, H. & Lin, M. (2002). Developing a two-tier diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding - The formation of images by a plane mirror. Proceedings of National Science Council ROC (D), 12, 106-121.
  7. Chu, H. E., Treagust, D. F. & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2008). Naïve students’ conceptual development and beliefs: the need for multiple analyses to determine what contributes to student success in a university introductory physics course. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 111-125.
  8. Corni, F. (2010). Lens studies without screen. Physics Education, 45, 21-22.
  9. Eshach, H. (2010). An analysis of conceptual flow patterns and structures in the physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 32(4), 451-477.
  10. Galili, I. & Hazan, A. (2000). Learners' knowledge in optics: interpretation, structure and analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 57-88.
  11. Goldberg, F. M. & McDermott, L. C. (1986). Student difficulties in understanding image formation by a plane mirror. The Physics Teacher, 24(8), 472-480.
  12. Goldberg, F. M. & McDermott, L. C. (1987). An investigation of student understanding of the real image formed by a converging lens or concave mirror. American Journal of Physics, 55(2), 108-119.
  13. Haney, J. & McArthur, J. (2002). Four case studies of prospective science teachers’ beliefs concerning constructivist teaching practices. Science Education, 86, 783-802. doi: dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.10038.
  14. Kaewkhong, K., Emarat, N., Arayathanitkul, K., Soankwan, C. & Chitaree, R. (2008). Students’ misunderstanding in using ray diagram in light refraction. Thai Journal of Physics, 1, 175-176.
  15. Kaewkhong, K., Mazzolini, A., Emarat, N. & Arayathanitkul, K. (2010). Thai high-school students' misconceptions about and models of light refraction through a planar surface. Physics Education, 45, 97-107.
  16. Langley, D., Ronen, M. & Eylon, B. S. (1997). Light propagation and visual patterns: Preinstruction learners' conceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 399-424.
  17. Lawson, R. (2010). People cannot locate the projection of an object on the surface of a mirror. Cognition, 115(2), 336-342.
  18. Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P. & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
  19. Rice, K. & Feher, E. (1987). Pinholes and images: Children’s conceptions of light and vision, I. Science Education, 71(4), 629-639.
  20. Saxena, A. (1991). The understanding of the properties of light by students in India. International Journal of Science Education, 13(3), 283-289.
  21. Selley, N. (1996). Children's ideas on light and vision. International Journal of Science Education, 18(6), 713-723.
  22. Sengören, S. (2010). How do Turkish high school graduates use the wave theory of light to explain optics phenomena? Physics Education, 45, 253-263.
  23. Tao, P. (2004). Developing understanding of image formation by lenses through collaborative learning mediated by multimedia computer-assisted learning programs. International Journal of Science Education, 26(10), 1171-97.
  24. Tynjälä, P. (1999). Towards expert knowledge? A comparison between a constructivist and a traditional learning environment in the university. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(5), 357-442.
  25. Viennot, L. & Kaminski, W. (2006). Can we evaluate the impact of a critical detail? The role of a type of diagram in understanding optical imaging. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1867-1885.