Browsing by Author "Naude, Karen Louise"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Semantic awareness of foundation-year and first-year physics learners at the University of Pretoria
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2005-03) Naude, Karen Louise; Bitzer, E. M.; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Education. Dept. of Education Policy Studies.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This study investigates and measures the correlation (or "gap") between the perceptions held by learners and lecturers of learners' knowledge of selected Physics terms and the accuracy of such perceptions. Several theorists have pointed to the differences between meaning(s) of vocabulary used by specialists and vocabulary used by lay people. One of the primary sources of confusion is that the scientific terminology and lay words are identical in spelling and pronunciation but fundamentally different in meaning. With reference to a variety of social and educational researchers, this study endorses the view that, in a Physics classroom at higher education level, the lecturer and the learners occupy two separate worlds - each with unique (and potentially exclusive) terms of reference. The success of any Physics tuition in such a setting rests upon the ability of learners and lecturers to bridge the comprehension "gap" between the two worlds. Three related but independent sub-disciplines were consulted in studying this phenomenon: educational theory (specifically Science education); semantics and communication theory. Principles from each discipline are referred to in order to show that successful Science education at the foundation and first-year level of higher education could be as much a matter of communication as is it of science. The study propounds that communication in a setting where vocabulary crucial to the subject is not understood adequately by the learners, often fails. On the basis of the literature review, a pilot study was done using a modified version of Jacobs's 1989 questionnaire. The questionnaire required the respondents to indicate their confidence in their vocabulary knowledge, and then tested their actual vocabulary knowledge. As the main study, a modified formal test was administered to 216 learners and four lecturers. One group of learners (numbering 100) was registered in a foundation year programme, another group (numbering 59) was registered in an extended programme, while the third group (numbering 57) was registered in a BSc course in the Faculty of Agricultural and Natural Sciences at the University of Pretoria. Learners were asked to indicate which of four possible explanations matched the word being investigated (which in all 16 cases was a very specific Physics term which has a matching lay word which bears little resemblance in terms of meaning). In making the selection, the respondents were also asked to indicate the confidence level with which they were making the selection - in other words, how confident they were that they understood the word. The results were rated both in terms of correctness of understanding and whether the prediction of confidence matched the outcome. In addition, four lecturers were asked to indicate their prediction of the learners' outcomes - they predicted what percentage of the learners would answer correctly. In this way, the gap between learners' actual knowledge and lecturers' expectations was highlighted. In an additional exercise, the correlation between the learners' results in terms of correctness and their performance in a standard language proficiency test, Language Proficiency course scores and Physics course scores were investigated. The results showed a very low positive correlation between performance in this study and performance in the Physics and Language Proficiency courses. The results confirmed the existence of a significant gap between learners' perceived knowledge and their actual knowledge. Although the responses of the three participating groups differed from word to word (with some groups scoring higher than others on certain words), overall, the learners' perception of their knowledge differed significantly from their actual knowledge. Furthermore, a significant difference between lecturers' perceptions and the actual knowledge of learners was shown. On average, lecturers expected their learners to understand the words used 81.02% of the time, while learners only understood the words 48.53% of the time, as shown in the tests. The study concludes with recommendations (with reference to the literature) for overcoming the gap in vocabulary knowledge between lecturers arid learners.