Investigating STEM course choices through physics knowledge surveys
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7346/sird-012024-p47Keywords:
STEM, gender balance, education, survey, nuclear physicsAbstract
The choice of STEM courses is often influenced by previous educational career. In particular, in the scien-tific field, the learning of specific and at the same time paradigmatic topics plays a fundamental role. This research aims to assess nuclear physics knowledge in a sample of high school and university students through a multiple-choice survey. We analyzed and compared the results between the two samples and against a fixed threshold value. We also examined subgroups within the high school and university sam-ples. The study considered influences from school background, learning continuity, and gender differences. We found a significant correlation between teaching hours and test results. The analysis provides insights into physics education and the quantitative relationship between teaching and knowledge acquisition. A specialistic knowledge that students can use as a tool for orientation towards STEM university choices.
References
Borghi, L., De Ambrosis, A., Mascheretti, P. (2000). Reform in Science Teacher Education in Italy.
Abell, S.K. (eds) Science Teacher Education. Science & Technology Education Library, vol. 10 Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47222-8_3
Baker, F. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory. http://ericae. net/irt/baker.
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & Van Heerden, J. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological review, 111 (4): 1061.
Burcham, W. E., & Moon, P. B. (1956). The Teaching of Atomic and Nuclear Physics. Physics Bulletin 7(7): 175.
Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2009). A review of research methodologies used in studies on mobile handheld devices in K-12 and higher education settings. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,25(2).
De Leeuw, E. D. (2005). To mix or not to mix data collection modes in surveys. Journal of official statistics,21(5): 233-255.
Education ministerial decree D.M. 211 7/10/2010, section F.
Ellis, B. B., & Mead, A. D. (2004). Item analysis: Theory and practice using classical and modern test theory. Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology: 324-343.
Eurostat. https://www.openpolis.it/esercizi/il-divario-di-genere-nelle-materie-stem/
Eurostat. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/edn-20220211-2
Guidicini P. (2012). Questionari, interviste, storie di vita (Surveys, interviewes, life histories). Franco Angeli, Milano: Franco Angeli.
Higgins J. S. (2015). Visions for Science education. 101st Italian National Congress of Italian Physics Society. Rome.
Iezzi D. F. (2009). Statistica per le scienze sociali. Dalla progettazione dell’indagine all’analisi dei dati (Statistics for the social sciences. From survey design to data analysis). Roma: Carrocci.
ISTAT, overview of socio-economical conditions (BES) of the sample area. https://www.asr-lombardia.it/asrlomb/asp-monza-brianza/it/11802monzabrianzaindicatori-bes-e-altri-indicatori-di-sintesi-provincia-di-monza-brianza-lombardia-e
Jamsen J., Corley K. (2007). Electronic Surveys and Measurements. IGI Global Publisher of Timely Knowledge, chapters 1, 9, 21.
Maragliano, R. (1997). Summary of the works of the technical-scientific commission of the Italian Ministry of Education 13 maggio 1997. Studi e documenti degli Annali della Pubblica Istruzione: 78. Rome.
Presidential decree DPR 89/2010.
Restivo, T., Chouzal, F., Rodrigues, J., Menezes, P., & Lopes, J. B. (2014). Augmented reality to improve STEM motivation. 2014 IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON): 803-806.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Viegas, C., Lopes, J. B., & Cravino, J. (2007). Real work in physics classroom: Improving engineering students competences. Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education.
Vision for science and mathematics education. 2014. The Royal Society Science Policy Centre report 01/14, DES3090, ISBN: 978-1-78252-081-8: 19
Walters, W. H. (2021). Survey design, sampling, and significance testing: Key issues. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47 (3): 102344.
Wellington, J. J. (1982). Teaching the unteachable-physics education and nuclear weapons. Physics Education,17(3): 106.
Zani, M., Bozzi, M. (2018). La fisica tra la scuola secondaria e l’università. Riflessioni e orientamenti (Physics between secondary school and university. Reflections and orientations). Nuova Secondaria: 84-88.
Zeidler, D. L. (2016). STEM education: A deficit framework for the twenty first century? A sociocultural socioscientific response. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11: 11-26.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based framework for socio scientific issues education. Science education, 89 (3): 357-377.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Nicola Ludwig, Paolo Teruzzi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors who publish in this magazine accept the following conditions:
- The authors retain the rights to their work and give the magazine the right to first publish the work, simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons License - Attribution which allows others to share the work indicating the intellectual authorship and the first publication in this magazine.
- Authors may adhere to other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the version of the published work (eg deposit it in an institutional archive or publish it in a monograph), provided that the first publication took place in this magazine.
- Authors can disseminate their work online (eg in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and increase citations of the published work.
