Análisis de la metodología utilizada en la búsqueda de lo que el alumno sabe sobre fuerza

  1. Solano Martínez, Isabel
  2. Jiménez Gómez, Enrique Gonzalo
  3. Marín Martínez, Nicolás
Journal:
Enseñanza de las ciencias: revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas

ISSN: 0212-4521,  2174-6486

Year of publication: 2000

Volume: 18

Issue: 2

Pages: 171-188

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5565/REV/ENSCIENCIAS.4037 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDDD editor

More publications in: Enseñanza de las ciencias: revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas

Sustainable development goals

Bibliographic References

  • ABIMBOLA, I.O. (1988). The problem of terminology in the study of student conceptions in Science. Science Education, 72(2), pp. 175-184.
  • ACEVEDO, J.A., BOLÍVAR, J.P., LÓPEZ MOLINA, E.J. y TRUJILLO, M. (1989). Sobre las concepciones en dinámica elemental de los adolescentes formales y concretos y el cambio metodológico. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 7(1), pp. 27-34.
  • BAR, V. (1989). Introducing mechanics at the elementary school. Physics Education, 24, pp. 348-352.
  • BAR,V., ZINN, B., GOLDMUNTZ, R. y SNEIDER, C. (1994). Children’s concepts about weight and free fall. Science Education, 78(2), pp. 149-169.
  • BOEHA, B.B. (1990). Aristotle, alive and well in Papua New Guinea science classrooms. Physics Education, 25, pp. 280- 283.
  • BROWN, D.E. (1989). Students’ concept of force: the importance of understanding Newton’s third law. Physics Education, 24, pp. 352-358.
  • CARMICHAEL, P. et al. (1990). Research on students’ conceptions in science: a bibliography. Children’s learning in Science: University of Leeds.
  • CLEMENT, J., BROWN, D.E. y ZIETSMAN, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: finding «anchoring conceptions» for grounding instruction on students’ intuitions, International Journal of Science Education, 11, pp. 554-565.
  • CONFREY, J. (1990). A Review of the Research on Student Conceptions in Mathematics, Science and Programming, pp. 3-56, en Cazden, C. (eds.). American Education Research Association. Michigan State University. Review of Educational Research.
  • DUSCHL, R.A. (1994). Editorial policy statement and introduction. Science Education, 78(3), pp. 203-208.
  • FINEGOLD, M. y GORSKY, P. (1991). Students’ concepts of force as applied to related physical systems: A search for consistency, International Journal of Science Education, 13(1), pp. 97-113.
  • GALILI, I. (1993). Weight and gravity: teachers’ ambiguity and students’ confusion about the concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 15(2), pp. 149-162.
  • GALILI, I. y BAR, V. (1992). Motion implies force: where to expect vestiges of the misconception? International Journal of Science Education, 14(1), pp. 63-81.
  • GILBERT, J.K. (1995). Studies and fields: directions of research in Science Education. Studies in Science Education, 25, pp. 173-197.
  • GIORDAN, A. y DE VECHI, G. (1987). Les origenes du savoir. París: Dalachaux. Traducción cast. (1988). Los orígenes del saber. Sevilla: Díada.
  • GUNSTONE, R.F. y WHITE, R.T. (1981). Understanding of gravity. Science Education, 65(3), pp. 291-299.
  • HELM, H. (1980). Misconceptions in physics amongst South African students. Physiscs Eduaction, 15, pp. 92-105.
  • HIERREZUELO, J. y MONTERO, A. (1989). La ciencia de los alumnos. Barcelona: Laia/MEC.
  • IVOWI, U.M.O. (1984). Misconceptions in physics amongst Nigerian secondary school students. Physics Education, 19, pp. 279-285.
  • JIMÉNEZ GÓMEZ, E., SOLANO, I. y MARÍN, N. (1994). Problemas de terminología en estudios realizados sobre «lo que el alumno sabe» en ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 12(2), pp. 235-245.
  • JIMÉNEZ GÓMEZ, E., SOLANO, I. y MARÍN, N., (1997). Estudio de la progresión en la delimitación de las «ideas» del alumno sobre fuerza, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 15(3), pp. 309-328.
  • KRUGER, C., PALACIO, D. y SUMMERS, M. (1992). Surveys of English Primary Teachers’ Conceptions of Force, Energy and Materials. Science Education, 76(4), pp. 339-351.
  • KUIPER, J. y MONDLANE, E. (1994). Students’ ideas of science concepts: alternative frameworks? International Journal of Science Education, 16(3), pp. 279-292.
  • MALONEY, D.P. (1984). Rule-governed approaches to physicsNewton’s third law. Physics Education, 19, pp. 37-42.
  • MARÍN, N., SOLANO, I. y JIMÉNEZ GÓMEZ, E. (1996). Las ideas previas del alumno dependen del cristal con que se miran. XVII Encuentros de Didáctica de Ciencias Experimentales. La Rábida (Huelva).
  • MILLAR, R. (1989). Constructive criticisms. International Journal of Science Education, 11, pp. 587-596.
  • MONTANERO, M. y PÉREZ, A.L. (1995). A survey of students’ understanding of colliding bodies. Physics Education, 30(5), pp. 277-283.
  • MOREIRA, M.A. (1994). Diez años de la revista Enseñanza de las Ciencias: de una ilusión a una realidad, Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 12(2), pp. 147-153.
  • NOCE, G., TOROSANTUCCI, G. y VICENTINI, M. (1988). The floating of objects on the moon: Prediction from a theory or experimental facts? International Journal of Science Education, 10(1), pp. 61-70.
  • POSNER et al. (1982). Accomodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change. Science Education. 66, pp. 211-227.
  • REYNOSO, H.E., ENRIQUE FIERRO, H., GERRDO TORRES, O., VICENTINI MISSONI, M. y PÉREZ DE CELIS, J,H. (1993). The alternative frameworks presented by Mexican students and teachers concerning the free fall of bodies. International Journal of Science Education, 15(2), pp. 127-138.
  • RUGGIERO, S., CARTELLI, A., DUPRE, F. y VICENTINIMISSONI, M. (1985). Weight, gravity and air pressure: Mental representations by Italian middle school pupils. European Journal of Science Education, 17(2), pp. 181- 194.
  • SANMARTÍ, N. y AZCÁRATE, C. (1997). Reflexiones en torno a la línea editorial de la revista Enseñanza de las Ciencias. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 15(1), pp. 3-9.
  • SELMAN, R.L., KRUPA, M.P., STONE, C.R. y JAQUETTE, D.S. (1982). Concrete operational thought and the emergence of the concept of unseen force in children’s theories of electromagnetism and gravity. Science Education, 66(2), pp. 181-194.
  • TERRY, C. y JONES, G. (1986). Alternative frameworks: Newton’s third law and conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education, 8(3), pp. 291-298.
  • TERRY, C., JONES, G. y HURFORD, W. (1985). Children’s conceptual understanding of forces and equilibrium. Physics Education, 20, pp. 162-165.
  • THIJS, G.D. (1992). Evaluation of an Introductory Course on «Force» considering students’ preconceptions. Science Education, 76(2), pp. 155-174.
  • TWIGGER, D., BYARD, M., DRIVER, R., DRAPER, S. et al. (1994). The conception of force and motion of students aged between 10 and 15 years: an interview study designed to guide instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), pp. 215-229.
  • VIENNOT, L. (1979). Spontaneous reasoning in elementary dynamics. European Journal of Science Education, 1(2), pp. 205-221.
  • VILLANI, A. y PACCA, J. (1990). Conceptos espontáneos sobre colisiones. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 8 (3), pp. 238- 243.
  • WATTS, D.M. (1982). Gravity-don’t take it for granted. Physics Education, 17, pp. 116-121.
  • WATTS, D.M. (1983). A study of schoolchildren’s alternative frameworks of the concept of force. European Journal of Science Education, 5(2), pp. 217-230.
  • WATTS, D.M. y ZYLBERSZTAJN, A. (1981). A survey of some children’s ideas about force. Physics Education, 16(6), pp. 360-365.
Data source: Dialnet