Pt of force, and so forth.). We anticipate coherence between image and description. Within the motivation sections, we wanted to gather why the student considers his own representation helpful on the didactic level from collect why and on the disciplinary level on the other side (PK and CK within the Shulman PCK perspective [29,30].Educ. Sci. 2021, 11,6 of2.three. Evaluation Strategies To carry out the evaluation in the RWJ-67657 MedChemExpress representations we setup two rubrics: a initial rubric incorporated the disciplinary elements inherent within the concept of force (see Table A1 in Appendix B); the second emerged as a synthesis of literature articles on the conceptual representations of learning on the concept of force (see Table A2 in Appendix C and connected references). The two rubrics had been realized as final results of two preliminary research, realized in line with the Model of Educational Reconstruction frame and, respectively, connected to the elementarization and reconstruction from the force idea for didactic purposes along with the evaluation of students’ studying complications around the subject [1]. The categories of analysis had been defined a priori as outlined by the taxonomy stated in rubrics A and B. A redefinition of categories was performed a posteriori including new elements introduced by students and choosing examples of students’ representations and sentences, creating an operational definition of categories. The elementary and usually poor nature in the representations has allowed the attribution of a role and a meaning only by integrating the arguments essential in the other Phenol Red sodium salt Purity sections of the investigation tool, in the exact same way in which the representations of kids in conceptual investigations should be integrated with verbalization. The initial three regions of evaluation concerned the kind of scenario represented. Each and every representation was integrated inside a mutually exclusive category. A1–The 1st location analyzed is that in the typology of proposed situations, which have been divided into three categories. A priori we only talked about situations–a posteriori we should really distinguish between systems and circumstances. A1.1 Common situations/sequence of events–This category contains all the representations made with schematic drawings, realistic or inside the type of a vignette or sequence of pictures, which concern daily scenarios, sequences of events, with no specific abstract iconic aspects getting present, such as vectors, arrows, formulas, graphics, and so forth., and in which representations of single objects/systems are also grouped (provided that they are not explicitly metaphorical). A1.two Notion situations–This category incorporates three distinct groups of representations: representations of systems which are not a part of everyday life and constitute representative models, including the solar technique or the atom; representations in which iconic elements appear, which include arrows, trajectories, field lines; metaphorical representations or models for example these of a muscular arm or physique, of an animal for instance the lion. A1.three Scenarios with particular formal symbols–This category contains illustrations in which situations are represented also accompanied by particular formal symbols like vectors indicating the acting forces, distinct formulas, graphics. The standard prevalent sense representations on the concept of force, summarized in Table A2 (Appendix C) oriented the A2 and A3 analyzes. In reality, we know that a standard thought of widespread sense is for example that force produces a movement tout court (and not an acceleration), that you can find no force.
