Search

The importance of valuing student ideas in science education stands on firm empirical, theoretical, and moral grounds. However, the reasons for which one might value student ideas are often not explicitly distinguished, even if implicit distinctions are made in the literature. In this paper, I define and distinguish between three ways of valuing student ideas: moral, instrumental, and intellectual. I demonstrate that novice teachers in the Seattle Pacific University (SPU) Learning Assistant (LA) Program instantiate all three ways of valuing student ideas. Not only this, over the course of their participation in the LA Program, novice teachers shift from foregrounding the moral and instrumental value of student ideas toward highlighting their intellectual value.

Case-oriented physics education research - which seeks to refine and develop theory by linking that theory to cases - incorporates distinct practices for selecting data for analysis, generalizing results, and making causal claims. Unanswered questions about these practices may constrain researchers more familiar with the recurrence-oriented research paradigm - which seeks to inform instructional predictions by discerning reproducible, representative patterns and relationships - from participating in or critically engaging with case-oriented research. We use results from interviews with physics education researchers, a synthesis of the literature on research methodologies, and published examples of case-oriented and recurrence-oriented research to answer "hard-hitting questions" that researchers may pose. In doing so, we aim to substantiate our position that both case-oriented and recurrence- oriented PER are rigorous but that the rigor is of a different nature in each paradigm., Comment: submitted to Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research

In this paper, we describe two paradigms in physics education research (PER): recurrence-oriented and case-oriented PER. We connect theory on research methodologies in the social sciences to interviews with physics education researchers and examples of published PER to articulate the specific assumptions of recurrence- and case-oriented PER. We show that the different assumptions made in these two paradigms bear out in specific aims and research designs taken up by physics education researchers. In particular, recurrence-oriented research seeks reproducible, representative patterns and relationships; human behavior is modeled as governed by lawful (albeit probabilistic) relationships. Case-oriented research, in contrast, seeks to refine and develop theory by linking that theory to cases; human action is assumed to be shaped by the meanings that participants make of their local environments. We briefly offer examples in which researchers take up both the recurrence- and case-oriented research paradigms.