A Theoretical Framework for Physics Education Research: Modeling student thinking

By Edward F. Redish. 2004

287 citations recorded by the source corpus.

A sketch of a cognitive/neuroscience/behavioral science based model for understanding student thinking in science education.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c39a30ead52bd96f93aba673dc6499a3279b4732

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

(Re)Framing Educational Possibility: Attending to Power and Equity in Shaping Access to and within Learning Opportunities (2013, background): “…around perceptions of physics as either a set of facts owned by an outside authority and distributed to the students by the teacher through classroom tasks, or as a body of ideas and problems to be addressed creatively and jointly by teachers and students [Redish, 2004; Redish & Hammer, 2009].”
Learning Processes in Chemistry: Drawing Upon Cognitive Resources to Learn About the Particulate Structure of Matter (2010, background): “This perspective, which has been considered as “fine-grained constructivism,” asks “what existing resources are activated and how are they used” when students construct their explanations (Redish, 2004, p. 9).”
EFFICIENCY AND INNOVATION IN TRANSFER (2005, background): “Research on preconceptions provides an example of paying attention to what people transfer in because it will profoundly affect what they learn (see, e.g., Clement, 1993; Mestre, 1994; Mestre, Thaden-Koch, Dufresne, & Gerace, in press; Minstrell, 1989; Redish, in press ).”
Multiple Epistemological Coherences in an Eighth-Grade Discussion of the Rock Cycle (2006, background): “They may also connect to phenomena of “framing” (MacLachlan & Reid, 1994; Tannen, 1993) identified in anthropology and linguistics (Hammer et al., 2005; Redish, 2004).”
Responsive teaching and the beginnings of energy in a third grade classroom (2012, background): “In this way, we argue, “understanding energy” involves not only the canonical features of the concept - that energy is conserved, transformed, etc - but also an epistemological framing (Redish, 2004; Hammer et al., 2005) of a particular kind of conversation.”
Framing in cognitive clinical interviews about intuitive science knowledge: Dynamic student understandings of the discourse interaction (2012, background): “…in framing suggests that picking out of different types of knowledge elements is precisely what framing – in particular of epistemological framing – does (e.g. Hammer, et al., 2005); epistemological framing is the cognitive “structure for choosing knowledge-building tools” (Redish, 2004, p. 31).”
On Cognitive Constraints and Learning Progressions: The case of “structure of matter” (2009, background): “…to tacit or implicit presuppositions (Vosniadou, 1994), core hypothesis (Chi, 2008), background assumptions (Vosniadou, 2007), phenomenological primitives (diSessa, 1993, 2006), core intuitions (Brown, 1993), or conceptual resources (Redish, 2004) that guide or support thinking in a domain.”
Synthesis of Discipline-Based Education Research in Physics. (2014, background): “Framing in anthropology and linguistics [479–482] and more recently science education [135,483] is used to describe how an individual makes sense out of context and decides what is important and what to pay attention to.”
Language of Physics, Language of Math: Disciplinary Culture and Dynamic Epistemology (2014, background): “…by the Physics Education Research (PER) community for analyzing student thinking in physics (diSessa, 1988; Hammer, 2000; Hammer, et al., 2004; Redish, 2004; Redish, 2014).6 In this framework, an individual’s reasoning is modeled as resulting from the activation of a subset of cognitive…”
Framing for scientific argumentation (2012, methodology): “Our use of the idea here is guided primarily by Goffman (1974) and Tannen (1993), within the original framing literature, as well as by accounts of epistemological framing (Hammer, Elby, Scherr, & Redish, 2005; Redish, 2004).”
Looking Beyond Content: Skill Development for Engineers (2008, background): “But the understanding of the mechanisms of thinking and learning has grown dramatically in the past few decades and one may hope to begin the development of a theoretical framework that can guide, constrain, and learn from our experiments ( Redish, 2005 ).”
Epistemological resources and framing: a cognitive framework for helping teachers interpret and respond to their students' epistemologies (2010, methodology): “To make this argument, we first review and extend the resources perspective to include epistemological framing (Hammer, Elby, Scherr, & Redish, 2005; Redish, 2004), which corresponds closely to the phenomena of coherent personal epistemologies documented in the literature (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997).”