The Role of Language in Learning Physics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE IN LEARNING PHYSICS BY DAVID T. BROOKES A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School—New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Physics and Astronomy Written under the direction of Prof. Eugenia Etkina and approved by New Brunswick, New Jersey October, 2006 c 2006 David T. Brookes ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION The Role of Language in Learning Physics by David T. Brookes Dissertation Director: Prof. Eugenia Etkina Many studies in PER suggest that language poses a serious difficulty for students learn- ing physics. These difficulties are mostly attributed to misunderstanding of specialized terminology. This terminology often assigns new meanings to everyday terms used to describe physical models and phenomena. In this dissertation I present a novel ap- proach to analyzing of the role of language in learning physics. This approach is based on the analysis of the historical development of physics ideas, the language of modern physicists, and students’ difficulties in the areas of quantum mechanics, classical me- chanics, and thermodynamics. These data are analyzed using linguistic tools borrowed from cognitive linguistics and systemic functional grammar. Specifically, I combine the idea of conceptual metaphor and grammar to build a theoretical framework that accounts for • the role and function that language serves for physicists when they speak and reason about physical ideas and phenomena, • specific features of students’ reasoning and difficulties that may be related to or derived from language that students read or hear. ii The theoretical framework is developed using the methodology of a grounded theo- retical approach. The theoretical framework allows us to make predictions about the relationship between student discourse and their conceptual and problem solving dif- ficulties. Tests of the theoretical framework are presented in the context of “heat” in thermodynamics and “force” in dynamics. In each case the language that students use to reason about the concepts of “heat” and “force” is analyzed using the theoretical framework. The results of this analysis show that language is very important in stu- dents learning. In particular, students are • using features of physicists’ conceptual metaphors to reason about physical phe- nomena, often overextending and misapplying these features, • drawing cues from the grammar of physicists’ speech and writing to categorize physics concepts; this categorization of physics concepts plays a key role in stu- dents’ ability to solve physics problems. In summary, I present a theoretical framework that provides a possible explanation of the role that language plays in learning physics. The framework also attempts to account for how and why physicists’ language influences students in the way that it does. iii Preface The dissertation is organized in the following way: In Chapter 1 I will provide a brief introduction to the broad issues of learning physics, with some theoretical background on the approaches I will take. I will explain why language is important in the broader context of representations of physics knowl- edge. I will also try to recreate for the reader, some of my thought process that led me to think that language might be more important than generally thought. In Chapter 2, I will present a broad survey of related literature. This survey will cover relevant research on the topics of analogy, linguistics, cognitive linguistics, metaphor, systemic functional grammar, and student learning of physics. This chapter will also serve as an introduction to some of the linguistic analysis techniques that will be im- plemented in later chapters. The goal of Chapter 3 will be to try and draw the literature of Chapter 2 together, present a theoretical framework of how language in physics works, and how students interpret that language. This chapter will also cover all the methodological approaches applied to later chapters. Testing the theoretical framework and presenting the data on which it was con- structed, is the goal of Chapter 4. This will be done entirely in the field of quantum mechanics. I will show how the linguistic framework presented in Chapter 3 success- fully describes the way physicists talk about quantum mechanical ideas. I will then use the analysis to show how the theoretical framework is applicable to student reasoning in quantum mechanics. I will present two case studies that can be explained with the theoretical framework. iv Chapter 5 will be the largest chapter of my dissertation. Here I will take the theo- retical framework developed in the context of quantum mechanics and show how can be applied to the fields of thermodynamics and Newtonian mechanics. I will show how physicists’ language can be analyzed with the tools I have developed. I will make pre- dictions about features of students’ reasoning and test these predictions in an interview study. I will also apply the linguistic analysis to reexamine the old “misconceptions” literature about force in Newtonian mechanics and show that many so-called student “misconceptions” may be reinterpreted as linguistic difficulties. Finally, I will extend the linguistic perspective beyond the theoretical framework I developed. I will attempt a second hypothesis that really connects cognition and language together as one act rather than two separate ones. This means that we can understand our students’ thought processes by listening more carefully to what they say. Listening to them through the linguistic framework can profoundly change what we hear students saying and asking. Chapter 6 is the concluding chapter. Here I will show how the theoretical frame- work may help us to understand physics better. I will summarize what the thesis has accomplished, discuss future directions of research (particularly testing experiments) and make some general suggestions about the role of language in teaching. v Acknowledgements Although a dissertation can list only one author, I cannot claim that such a difficult intellectual endeavor is the work of one individual person. The first group of people I wish to thank are those who made a significant intellectual contribution in the form of ideas, suggestions or challenges to my ideas. Without my advisor, Prof. Eugenia Etk- ina, none of these pages would exist. You have encouraged and supported me without question, offered deep insight, and challenged me more than anyone else. The idea to explore the role of language came from my sister, Heather Brookes. Your two reading recommendations have formed the basis of this thesis. I wish to thank Prof. George Horton for questioning my work. Without those challenges, I would never have started exploring the role of grammar in the language of physics. Leslie Atkins’ quiet sug- gestions and prodding helped me to understand the cognitive mechanism of metaphor comprehension in terms of ad hoc categorization. Prof. Alan Van Heuvelen has tire- lessly supported and advocated my research, and was one of the people who inspired me to focus on representation. Finally, Prof. “Joe” Redish has listened to my ideas, encouraged and supported me and offered many helpful suggestions. Sometimes I have felt that every idea that has ever been thought has already been thought of by someone else before me. I wish, therefore, to acknowledge my “intellec- tual parents”, the people who, through their writing and ideas, transformed how I saw the world. They are: Michelene Chi, Eugenia Etkina, Michael Halliday, Mark Johnson, George Lakoff, Jay Lemke, Nancy Nersessian, Michael Reddy, Clive Sutton. I want to thank Andi and Michael for help with translating German to English. vi My thanks also go out to: All my dear friends for your friendship, for your insight, help and support and for great conversations. Alain, Brian, Brigitte, Bronwen, Indranil, Isabel, Retha, Sahana. Yuhfen for supporting me, reading my thesis, and caring for me. My family for their support. In particular, my father has had a profound influence on my views about education. The entire physics education research group at Rutgers University, especially Aaron, Alan, Anna, David R., Eugenia, Marina, Maria, Michael, Sahana, and Suzanne. Work- ing with all of you was a lot of fun and made it all worth while. Members of the PER community with whom I have had the most wonderful and con- structive discussions. My thesis committe for advice and support during my research. The staff of the Center for International Faculty and Student Services for their support in the daily struggle with the U.S. bureaucracy. vii Dedication To Eugenia. ‘You are sad,’ the Knight said in an anxious tone: ‘let me sing you a song to comfort you.’ ‘Is it very long?’ Alice asked, for she had heard a good deal of poetry that day. ‘It’s long,’ said the Knight, ‘but very, VERY beautiful. Everybody that hears me sing it–either it brings the TEARS into their eyes, or else–’ ‘Or else what?’ said Alice, for the Knight had made a sudden pause. ‘Or else it doesn’t, you know. The name of the song is called “HAD- DOCKS’ EYES.”’ ‘Oh, that’s the name of the song, is it?’ Alice said, trying to feel interested. ‘No, you don’t understand,’ the Knight said, looking a little vexed. ‘That’s what the name is CALLED. The name really IS “THE AGED AGED MAN.”’ ‘Then I ought to have said “That’s what the SONG is called”?’ Alice corrected herself. viii ‘No, you oughtn’t: that’s quite another thing! The SONG is called “WAYS AND MEANS”: but that’s only what it’s CALLED, you know!’ ‘Well, what IS the song, then?’ said Alice, who was by this time completely bewildered. ‘I was coming to that,’ the Knight said. ‘The song really IS “A-SITTING ON A GATE”: and the tune’s my own invention.’ (Lewis Carroll) “A serious difficulty in the study of the development of a scientific concept lies in the necessarily inherent vagueness of its definition.