The study of physics teachers' responses to student explanations using the Content Knowledge for Teaching Energy frameworkDodlek, Danijela (Avtor) Planinšič, Gorazd (Mentor) Etkina, Eugenia (Komentor) Content Knowledge for Teaching EnergyTasks of Teachinginterpreting student ideaseffective feedbackmetacognitionbuilding on productive ideasaddressing problematic ideasWell-prepared teachers possess the knowledge, skills, and pedagogical techniques necessary to provide high-quality instruction, establish inclusive learning environments, and promote student learning. One of the important aspects of learning physics is developing explanations of physical phenomena. Numerous research in the fields of science and mathematics investigated how pre-service and in-service (elementary/middle/high school) teachers interpret and respond to student explanations but none focused on physics teachers exclusively. This study aims to fill this gap by studying how physics teachers interpret and respond to student explanations of a complex phenomenon. We investigated pre- and in-service physics teachers’ responses to students’ written explanations of their answer choices to a non-traditional problem involving momentum and energy. The survey administered to several different groups of participants (including in- and pre-service teachers from different countries) included the problem statement and four student explanations. The participants were asked to describe what they thought the student's strengths and weaknesses were and to provide a response to that student. To analyse the responses provided by the participants, we developed a coding scheme using the Content Knowledge for Teaching Energy (CKT-E) framework and expert responses. Specifically, we utilised a component of that framework called Tasks of Teaching. We compared what experts and participants wrote for each of the codes, and quantified the differences between their responses by developing numerical scores for each of the codes (0, 1, or 2). Our findings were similar for both partially incorrect and mostly correct students’ explanations. Overall, our findings showed that the participants were relatively successful in identifying productive and incorrect/problematic aspects of students’ reasoning. Although the feedback that the participants provided was somewhat deficient as it usually focused on one aspect of the student's reasoning rather than focusing on both correct and incorrect/problematic elements, the participants in their responses generally engaged students in metacognition. Furthermore, we found that the participants were more successful in addressing perceived problematic elements than in building on students' productive ideas. However, we must note that our findings were different for different groups of participants. A group of in-service teachers, who voluntarily participate in everyday discussions on social media focusing on a student-centred teaching approach, demonstrated better performance for the majority of codes than other groups of in-service teachers. This finding suggests that targeted professional development, in addition to teaching practice, could influence how in-service teachers respond to the students. Surprisingly, responses from pre-service teachers who went through the program that emphasised the development of the skills involving listening to the students and providing feedback on their ideas were often comparable, and at times better than responses from the in-service teachers. This indicates that through not only the teaching practice and professional development but also through carefully crafted teacher preparation programs we can help future teachers learn to respond productively to students’ explanations.20242024-04-28 08:15:19Doktorsko delo/naloga156022VisID: 139783COBISS_ID: 194251779sl