You are here

Home » Content

STUDENTS’ AFFORDANCE OF TELEOLOGIC EXPLANATIONS AND ANTHROPOMORPHIC LANGUAGE IN ELICITING CONCEPTS IN PHYSICS

Journal Name:

  • Journal of Technology and Science Education

Publication Year:

  • 2015
DOI: 
htp://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.137

Key Words:

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
This study ascertains that the students’ afordance of teleologic explanatons and anthropomorphic language in elicitng concepts in Physics is infuenced by their age and learning exposure and experience. Using Explicatve- Reductve Method of Descriptve Research, this study focused on the determinants of students’ afordance of teleologic-anthropomorphic reasoning to select concepts in Physics: Kinematcs, Dynamics, Statcs and Introducton to Thermodynamics. It was found out that the respondents had intermitently commited teleologic-anthropomorphic languages across age and nature of their secondary educaton. Furthermore, teleologic-anthropomorphic languages were found correctble by classroom interventons as indicated by the test results on age and curricular exposure.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-students-affordance-teleologic-explanations-and-anthropomorphic-language-eliciting-concepts-physics.pdf
  • 1
31
40
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Caporael, L.R., & Heyes, C.M. (1997). Why Anthropomorphize? Folk Psychology and Other Stories. In Mitchell,
R.W, Thompson, N.S, & Miles, H.L eds.), Anthropomorphism, Anecdotes, and Animals (pp. 59-73). Albany, New
York: State University of New York Press.
Chartrand, T.L., et al. (2008). Automatc Efects of Anthropomorphized Objects on Behavior. Social Cogniton,
26(2), 198-209. htp://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.198
DiSalvo, C., & Gemperle, F. (2003). From Seducton to Fulfllment: The Use of Anthropomorphic Form in Design,
67-72.
Dorion, K. (2011). A Learner’s Tactc: How Secondary Students’ Anthropomorphic Language may Support
Learning of Abstract Science Concepts. Electronic Journal of Science Educaton, 12(2), 1-22. Retrieved from:
htp://ejse.southwestern.edu
Guthrie, S.E. (1997). Anthropomorphism: A Defniton and a Theory, in Anthropomorphism, Anecdotes, and
Animals (pp. 50-58) (Mitchell, R.W, Thompson, N.S, Miles, H.L eds.). Albany, New York: State University of New
York Press.
Jackson, M. (2002). Familiar and Foreign Bodies, A Phenomenological Exploraton of the Human-Technology
Interface. Journal of The Royal Anthropology Insttute, 8, 333-346. htp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.00006
Kelemen, D., & Rosset, E. (2009). The Human Functon Compuncton: Teleological Explanaton in Adults.
Cogniton, 111, 138-143. htp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogniton.2009.01.001Leboe, J., & Whitlesea, B. (2002). The Inferental Basis of Familiarity and Recall: Evidence for a Common
Underlying Process. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 804-829. htp://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2828
Picket, J.P., et al. (2000). Anthropomorphism. The American Heritage Dictonary of the English Language (4th
Ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifin Company.
Taber, K.S. (2008). Exploring Student Learning from a Constructvist Perspectve in Diverse Educatonal Contexts.
Journal of Turkish Science Educaton, 5(1), 2-21.
Taber, K.S., & Wats, M. (1996). The Secret Life of the Chemical Bond: Students’ Anthropomorphic and Animistc
References to Bonding. Internatonal Journal of Science Educaton, 18(5), 557-568.
htp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0950069960180505

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com