Palmira Jucevičienė
Kaunas University of Technology

Violeta Karenauskaitė
Vilnius University

Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Crete, 22-25 September 2004

Physics constitutes the most important background for many sciences, as the links between physics and other sciences have been expanding in the contemporary world. So, the demand for physics knowledge has been growing together with the influence of the discipline of physics upon different study programs at the university. However, the world physicist community argues that physics education has been undergoing a crisis: the interest in physics is decreasing, a learning motivation is declining, and the examination results are getting worse; less time is allotted for the discipline of physics in various study programs, there is a growing gap between basic schools and institutions of higher education. Moreover, students do not wish to learn any physics, not directly applicable and useful for their future professional life. This has been proved by different authors and organizations in their research (Garwin, Ramsier, 2003; Manogue and Krane, 2003; Karenauskaitė, Dikčius, Streckytė, 2001; TIMSS, 1995, 1999; Zhaoyao, 2002 and others.).

What has caused the crisis?

In the contemporary world, everyone faces new and rapidly changing situations which require solving complex problem decisions and, thus, possessing new knowledge and skills. In order to prepare a student for the unknown activities in the future and for a constant change, traditional teaching oriented towards a passive transfer and receipt of knowledge is no longer effective (Barnett, 1994; Bowden and Marton, 1998, Ramsden, 2000 and others). Therefore, a modern university should stimulate self-development of an active and creative personality, which is possible to achieve by releasing a student through his/her independent, self-regulating learning. In addition, according to the constructivism theory, learning is carried out in different spaces of human life and activity and the learner actively constructs knowledge from experience in his/her personal learning environment¹ (Ahlberg, Dillon, 1999; Longworth, 1999; Jucevičienė, 2001 and others). However, traditional study programs at universities are often oriented towards teaching and formal transfer of knowledge, while active advanced students and professors aim at conscious self-study. In other cases, study programs at modern contemporary universities concentrate on learning, development of competencies and are student-centered, but students do not accept new ideas; moreover, they are not ready for consistent and independent studies. In both cases, problems occur at the interface between teaching and learning paradigms: on the one hand, due to a traditional attitude towards teaching and, on the other hand, due to the wish to resist this point of view accepting a learning, but not a teaching paradigm. The interface between these views constitutes the first reason of crisis in teaching physics.

Therefore, in a modern society which aims at sustainable development, ecological and societal aspects are highlighted, as their harmony ensures safety and creates a favorable environment for the humankind to live. The knowledge in natural sciences, especially in physics, and the appliance of sciences in such areas as environment protection, health care system, energy production, etc., plays an extremely important role (Alhberg, Dillon, 1999; Appelquist, 2001; Boeker, 2003; Garwin, Ramsier, 2003; Rudzikas, 2003). However, university study programs, their content, and teaching methods often do not reflect this, as they are limited to the acquisition of formal knowledge. Besides, many physics courses are detached from a real life context, employment, society, and the environment, that is, the process of acquiring knowledge and the goal of integrating knowledge into the surrounding environment is ignored² (Alhberg, Dillon, 1999; Zhaoyao, 2002; Zoller, 2000). This may be called the interface between a normative paradigm (oriented towards scientific knowledge as an object) and an interpretative paradigm (which highlights the interpretative character of knowledge and the process of acquiring knowledge itself in the context of a physics study content). The interface grounds the second reason for the crisis in teaching physics (Jucevičienė, Karenauskaitė, 2002).

To avoid the crisis in teaching physics and to escape an extreme confrontation, growing between the interfaces, we argue that physics education has to undergo a double paradigm shift.

Firstly, in recent decades, a dynamic character of knowledge and a wider understanding of its value have been emphasized: in a rapidly changing environment, academic knowledge is not only valuable in itself, but it is becoming a tool for the development of particular personal qualities and competencies. Thus, in modern education, major attention is paid to individual’s ability to evaluate and comprehend a situation effectively, to solve complex problems. This requires a constant knowledge renewal and reflection, its correlation with the knowledge already possessed and the creation of a new meaning. It is possible to achieve the above only through an ongoing, self-regulating individual’s learning and through the development of competencies necessary for future activities in different changing and unknown situations. Consequently, a modern university has to transfer its performance from traditional teaching to learning of a new quality (Barnett, 1994; Bowden, Marton, 1998; Longworth, 2000; Novak, Gowin, 1999; Ramsden, 2000). It is a qualitative and fundamental revolutionary shift from a teaching to a learning paradigm, based on constructivism, and occurring in a pedagogical system.

An educational theory based on constructivism argues that learning by environment is a constructive activity pursued by an individual; it cannot be transmitted. Every individual who is involved in learning, by continuously rethinking his/her knowledge already possessed at the theoretical level (not passively or actively absorbed) and testing it in practice, constructs his/her own theory and develops his/her competence integrating various concepts into the whole which is significant for him/her. This theory emphasizes developing not only knowledge, but also general and specialized skills, and relates learning to values. A constructive approach to learning emphasizes the ability to reflect, to listen to other people’s opinions, to have an independent opinion, problem solving skills, collaboration, responsibility for one’s ideas and opinions, the ability to take care of others, active participation in one’s community life (e.g. academic, urban, etc.), perception of outcomes and results of one’s work/study, etc. Therefore, while organizing a study process, a university aims at implementing a new learning paradigm: to use methods, forms and tools stimulating active, independent and self-directed students’ learning which will become life-long learning in all spheres of life (Alhberg, Dillon, 1999;Bowden, Marton, 1998; Jucevičienė, Stanikūnienė, 2002; Laurillard, 1993; Ramsden, 2000, and others).

Secondly, the main traditional aim of physics studies at the university, together with the studies of other disciplines, is a cognitive approach to the discipline (acquisition of formal knowledge and their reflection in action). Today, however, another aim is emerging, i.e. the aim of cohesion of an individual and the environment, which is expressed by a conceived relationship to nature and which is very important to society. A contemporary university should not only provide knowledge in science and technology, but also show the importance of knowledge in the context of interaction of science, technology, environment, and society (Appelquist, Shapero, 2001; Boeker and others, 2003; Hobson, 2003; Zoller, 2000), so that it could motivate learners and disseminate physics knowledge in society in a popular and understandable way. However, a strict normative content of physics and a normative attitude towards teaching physics at the university is the main barrier preventing the implementation of the objectives. Thus, only a gradual evolutionary shift of a normative approach into an interpretative approach in physics content, emphasizing different viewpoints towards the knowledge itself and towards knowledge in the context of the environment, as well as towards the very process of acquiring knowledge, can ensure successful studies of physics. In a study process, physics knowledge has to be acquired considering both, the context of selected future activities and the surrounding environment. That is, the content has to be illustrated with the examples of knowledge usage and application, of possible benefits and damage for the environment, and it has to be adapted according to the level of students’ practical knowledge. Moreover, the importance of physics science knowledge in various spheres of society activities has to be demonstrated and its influence on the quality of human life and protection of the planet is to be emphasized (Appelquist, 2001; Boeker, 2003; Garwin, Ramsier, 2003; Karenauskaitė, Jucevičienė, 2002; Manogue and Krane, 2003; Rudzikas, 2003; Zoller, 2000); only then students will understand their relationship with the environment and will seek harmony among economic, technological, ecological, and social development in their activities. Forgetting these aims may lead to educating university students with no sense of responsibility concerning a fair and safe use of knowledge in their activities.

Thus, only a parallel shift of two paradigms at the university will enable students to study in a modern way, to acquire competencies necessary for managing ever-changing surroundings, and to develop the sense of responsibility for the environment. The implementation of this double shift is possible looking for new physics learning strategies and creating the empowering learning educational environments³ (further in the article "educational environments") at the university that is, creating conditions which stimulate self-study and activity, as well as reflection and evaluation. Consequently, it is important to help a student build and control his/her cognitive processes and demonstrate social aspects of scientific knowledge (physics) to him, the use of knowledge in real social situations which are important in the context of building student values (Bowden, Marton, 1998; Jucevičienė, Karenauskaitė, 2002; Ramsden, 2000; Ogborn, 2003 and others).

Learning environments have been discussed and analyzed in a number of research works by the researchers from different countries. Jonassen and Land (2000) have investigated psychological, technological and cultural aspects of learning environments and present the main values, the developers of learning environments should base their activities on. Bowden and Marton (1998) have been dealing with the learning environment that is being characterized by a high responsibility degree, possibilities to access the necessary resources any time one needs them, the tolerance of mistakes, and effective feedback. A learning environment of this kind strengthens student’s self-confidence and motivation. Vermunt (2003) has analyzed the importance of educational environment for the quality of students’ learning, classified educational environments on the basis of teaching methods. Jucevičienė (2001) has revealed general features of educational and learning environments; Lipinskienė (2002) has worked on the conditions and characteristics of educational environment that empowers students for studying; Tautkevičienė (2002) has focused on the peculiarities of university library learning environment. Different educational aspects of physics and learning environments have been investigated by representatives of natural sciences: Boeker and others (2003), Britton (2000), Garwin and Ramsier (2003), Christensen (2001), Joiner, Malone and Haimes (2002), Mills, McKittrick, Mulhall, and Feteris (1999), Ogborn (2003), Reigosa and Jimenez-Aleixandre (2001).

The shift of the above-mentioned paradigms, first of all, should be enabled at the individual level (student’s and teacher’s). Their attitudes towards physics, as one of the most important natural sciences, should be transformed; their attitudes to learning as a process should be changed. Many scientists have investigated the beginning of a learning paradigm in different aspects and have grounded its necessity. However, no works on a systematic analysis of educational physics and student’s individual learning environments in the conditions of a double paradigm shift have been detected and no evaluation of their harmony has been found.

Therefore, the following issues of the research problem have to be considered: how to enable a qualitative paradigm shift from teaching to learning and to shift from a normative approach to an interpretative approach in an educational environment at an individual level (that of a student and a teacher)? In what ways maximal identification and acceptance of student’s individual learning environment should be striven for?

Trying to find answers to these problematic issues, the analysis of scientific literature and theoretical modelling has been performed. In the first part of the article, the principles of creating educational learning environments suggested by different authors are substantiated and systemized; in the second part, on the basis of other authors and on our own educational ideas, a systematic approach to the process of physics study is justified, considering the context of realizing main principles for educational environment creation.

Increasing volumes of information and improved information technologies, empowering individuals to get more information in more efficient ways, cause constant change of knowledge. This rapid vicissitude of knowledge raises new challenges for universities: they are demanded to be flexible in constructing new study programs which meet society and/or business needs, to be able to change the content of disciplines in consideration to study programs, and to look for effective ways for assimilating the changing contents (Bowden, Marton, 1998; Jucevičienė, 2001; Lipinskienė, 2002; Novikienė, 2003; Vermunt, 2003 and others). That is why, in an educational environment at the university, the principle of flexibility has to be realized which is one of the main principles in creating educational environments. It meets the fundamental principle of modern higher education, dynamics, which is also one of the basic principles of Lithuanian higher education reform (Jucevičienė, 1997) and ensures the possibility of choosing a study program at student’s level and a flexible satisfaction of his/her educational needs. At the levels of a teacher and an institution, this principle is understood as an efficient ability to adjust courses and their content, and to change teaching methods, looking for most suitable ones for each group and an for individual student (Jucevičienė, 1997; Ogborn, 2003; Ramsden, 2000), in order to secure both support for learners and an interpretative attitude to the content of a discipline.

This principle (as well as the principles of individualization and integration) in physics studies is possible to implement through modular teaching (Jucevičienė, 1989), which enables constructing a discipline content in a fast and flexible way. For example, constructing the content of physics from separates modules learners from different study programs can choose module content relevant to their future speciality (Karenauskaitė, Rotomskis, Streckytė, 2001). Provision with information communication technologies and ensuring their effective usage (virtual practical tasks and demonstrations, teaching materials on CDs and on the Internet) gives perfect possibilities for learners to refresh their knowledge or to obtain new knowledge at the most convenient time and place for them, thus, using their study time in the most effective way (Laurillard, 1993; Targamadzė, Normantas, Rutkauskienė, Vidžiūnas, 1999; Karenauskaitė, Dikčius, Streckytė, 2001). Using active teaching/learning methods in study process, flexible schedule, thus meeting different students needs (Ogborn, 2003) the principle of flexibility is implemented.

Students who enter a modern higher education system are very different in their knowledge and interest, since higher education is becoming a mass phenomenon (Barnett, 1990; Jucevičienė, 1997, 2001; Ogborn, 2003, etc.). Moreover, a humanistic and constructivistic approach to education emphasizes conditions which stimulate the expression of personal individuality. Thus, the principle of individualization has to be implemented in educational environments at the university. This principle provides students with the possibility to choose a study program, a learning content, and assessment forms according to differences in personality, interests, skills, experience, reasoning peculiarities, and motivation for studies. The need for individualization is based on students’ differing attitudes towards learning, deep or surface (Bowden, Marton, 1998; Ramsden, 2000), on different styles and pace of learning, on the scientific knowledge they already have, and on other personal characteristics (Joiner and others, 2002; Scott, 2000; Šiaučiukėnienė, 1997). Revealing the importance of his/her personality to a student strengthens motivation, thus developing student’s individual lerning style and discovering potential possibilities (that is, creating conditions for self-realization). Individualization of a study process can be achieved in different ways: by using Learning Contracts or Study Agreements (Lipinskienė, 2002), with the help of modern information technologies (Laurillard, 1993; Targamadzė and others, 1999), applying different teaching methods (Garwin, Ramsier, 2003; Mills and others, 1999; Ramsden, 2000; Jucevičienė, Lipinskienė, 2002), or differentiating tasks and accepting various learning styles (Šiaučiukėnienė, 1997). For example, a student who has deeper and wider practical knowledge in some physics area should be given more complicated and problematic tasks which create conditions for further analysis, indicate extra information sources and involve them in the study process with weaker students, as individuals learn teaching others.

According to Alhberg (1999), every individual, aiming at high quality learning and meaningful congnition, constructs the latter relating the knowledge he/she already has to particular problematic life and environment situations, at the same time, integrating separate conceptions into a meaningful whole. In order to achieve a balanced development of a particular community and/or of the whole society, a favourable environment, and decent living conditions, continuing learning is necessary at the levels of an individual, a group, or an organization which involves learning from each other, learning from the best practices, and studying individual’s understanding as well as general understanding. This is called ‘learning to work in the network’ and ‘using the network’. In order to ensure such learning in an educational environment at the university, it is essential to implement the principle of integration: to look for and find the ways to effectively integrate the knowledge, feelings, and actions at an individual and collective levels, aiming at a balanced development of student’s learning and striving for meaningful and creative educator’s performance.

In a modern high-technology society, problems can be solved effectively only in collaboration among representatives of various sciences and society members. Therefore, the knowledge in different sciences is required for a student to form an solid picture of the surrounding world or to get an integral understanding of a particular phenomenon. Therefore, the knowledge of different sciences has to be integrated in every discipline of studies, specifically considering the context of a selected study program or real life situations (Bowden and Marton, 1998; Boeker, 2003; Britton, 200; Christensen, 2001; Mills and others, 1999; Ramsden, 2000; Zoller, 2000).

In our opinion, a very important aspect of integrating knowledge and values when seeking for a meaningful cognition has been justified by Ahlberg and Dilon (1999). In their view, a valuable cognition can be only achieved when knowledge is revised and checked in definite problematic life situations and environment settings, meeting major human values and respect for the surrounding environment. Thus, for instance, concepts, phenomena, rules, and methods of physics in the study program of medicine, should be discussed in the context of medicine, biology, chemistry and real life, emphasizing advantages and disadvantages of physics knowledge upon the world (e.g., positive influence of using ionized radiation in medicine versus its harmful effects on a human body).

In the context of economic globalization of the 21st century, in many countries of the world, including Lithuania, the importance of science and technology for society progress is being highlighted. However, new contemporary technologies cause ethical, social, and ecological problems. As a matter of fact, expanding one’s influence on the environment, an individual has to change himself/herself. Thus, scientific knowledge is to be investigated against the background of the harmony between a human being and the environment. At the same time, however, dissemination of any scientific knowledge and its proper application when considering the needs of society and the environment brings social benefit (Ahlberg, 1997; Appelquist, 2001; Boeker, 2003; Christensen (2001), Zhaoyao, 2002; Zoller, 2000). So, seeking to prepare a student for a diverse activity in society and developing his/her responsibility for fair and safe use of knowledge in action, it is necessary to socialize the content of physics knowledge and the study process, that is, to implement the principle of socialization which ensures the presence of an interpretative paradigm in the educational environment. By socialization of the curriculum and teaching/ learning methods of natural sciences (including physics) studies we mean topics and social aspects of the discipline which are important for society development emphasizing, for showing the applied side of these sciences in the specific area of study, and for underscoring the teaching/learning methods (interdisciplinary projects, problem-based methods, etc.), which help develop the skills of constructive learning through collaboration.

In the process of learning physics, it is often possible to identify a social context in the problem analyzed and to relate students’ knowledge to social variations. For example, physics knowledge in a study program of medicine has to be illustrated not only with general examples, but with the examples of physics for medicine diagnostics and therapy, of operation principles of medical equipment, or processes in a human body.

In the postmodernist world, pursuing the control of rapidly growing information flows and changing specialized knowledge, an individual needs the skills of self-directed continuing learning, since he/she can revise and update knowledge only having mastered various means of learning, only analyzing and evaluating critically his/her learning, and perceiving him/herself as a learner. Meaningful and deep learning for oneself in all spheres of life, acquiring new ways of reasoning and acting, help an individual design the future and prepare for the future activity. Thus, the principle of meta-learning becomes relevant in the educational environment at the university, taken the level of a student and a teacher. This principle is universal and extremaly weighty in the context of a learning paradigm. Student’s meta-learning competence, which can be applied in many professional areas, has to be developed at the university. This competence enables a student to plan, analyse, and critically evaluate his/her performance, comprehension, and the study process, to expose his/her views for other people’s criticism, assessment, and discussion; it empowers him/her to master the methodology of learning (Barnet, 1996; Joiner and others, 2002; Novak, Gowin, 1999; Vermunt, 2003) ensuring student’s skills, necessary for continuing learning in action and playing other roles in life. Students with such a competence will be able to create and control knowledge, to comprehend the process of creation, to pursue meaning while working with information, and, most importantly, to realize their own responsibility in learning. For example, having acquired the skills of working with the microscope in a physics laboratory and having understood the factors influencing the quality of the object viewed, a student of biology will be further able to develop this method; will learn to work with more modern equipment, i.e. the new microscopes, easier and faster.

Having mastered the competence of meta-learning, essential for a contemporary university teacher and for the development of his/her work, lecturers can help students develop this competence. Therefore, it is important to create conditions for the continuing learning of educators, enabling continuous reflective analysis of their activities, experience, environment, cognition, and personality (Joiner and others, 2002; Jucevičienė, Stanikūnienė 2003; Ramsden, 2000).

From a constructivistic point of view, meaningful learning is achieved when knowledge is regularly reflected and checked in particular problematic life situations. From the viewpoint of action science (Schon ir Argyris, 1974), in analyzing particular life situations, the ability to envisage alternative perspectives and the whole spectrum of values is necessary. A learner can do this with the help of reflection, analyzing not only his/her own strategies and results, but also values, attitudes, or beliefs influencing his/her actions. Reflection can be considered the tool empowering a student and a teacher to cognize theories of one’s performance, to develop them, to create new knowledge and check it in practice, and to think critically. For instance, a student who has made an experiment in a laboratory has to rethink his/her actions and results, and to find the answers to the following: why such results were obtained, if it was possible to get the same result working in a defferent way, if the result matches theoretical statements and his/her knowledge, etc. A teacher observing student’s work, carrying out discussions with him/her, analyzing his/her own teaching and student’s learning process has to answer whether he has done everything to motivate students to study, if he could reach teaching objectives in another way, etc.

Concluding the first part, an important objective should be singled out for a contemporary university: students should not only acquire basic concepts of physics and competences essential in a modern society, but should also develop appropriate values. This is possible to achieve by the creation of the empowering learning educational environments based on the main principles of flexibility, individualization, socialization, meta-learning, and integration. Such environments are extremely beneficial for a qualitative shift from a teaching to a learning paradigm, as well as for the change from normative to interpretative approach and, most importantly, for the transformation into an individual learning environment.

A learning environment of an individual/learner is more comprehensive than an educational environment created at the university, as under the constructivism theory, every individual creates his/her individual learning environment based on experience and influenced by all his/her life environments (including an educational one). Meaningful learning of an individual is determined and stimulated by an educational environment and by various life environments of a person. In the context of the constructivism theory and a learning paradigm, explicit knowing based on self-created concepts, theories, and their relations is acquired in the educational environment. Whereas individual’s living environments influence spontaneous experimental learning when a person is developing his/her knowledge and competence without having planned in advance, thus, acquiring tacit knowing; this knowing, however, can substantially influence student’s learning in an educational environment (Stankevičiūtė, Jucevičius, 2001; Jucevičienė, Stanikūnienė, 2002).

When observing the surrounding nature and natural phenomena, a learner already has some understanding about the phenomena and rules of physics. In a properly organized educational environment, with the help of a teacher, a student is able to "recognize" this experience, name it in the terms of physics and further develop his/her world cognition in the context of physics. Today, extended use of various technologies in different spheres of life (everyday life, health care, etc.) is influencing a student and forming his/her attitude towards physics as a science and to learning activity (for instance, well prepared and attractive teaching/learning material in information media stimulates student’s learning). A social environment, dominating attitudes to learning and learning traditions (in a family, among friends, community, in the country), makes an essential influence on student’s learning alongside with the availability of information references and dissemination of a learning experience in society. All this may either stimulate learning or stifle it, as, according to Vygotski, a social environment is important for the development of person’s cognition. For example, after the restoration of independence in Lithuania in 1991-1993, the number of candidates to enter universities decreased dramatically due to a dominating viewpoint in society that it was possible to run business and become rich without education.

Obviously, the necessity to look for connections between a university educational environment and individual learning environments of each student, to create conditions enabling every student to recognize his/her experience and direct it towards an effective personal development becomes urgent. An educational process has to be organized in such a way as to enable and teach students to apply and change ideas, to develop his/her deep attitude to learning, to improve personal competences empowering adaptation to the ever-changing environment; in other words, a learner should be able to prepare for life in the broadest sense, but not only for a particular profession or work activity (Joiner and others, 2002; Ramsden, 2000; Lepaitė, 2003; Vermunt, 2003). Thus, in our point of view, a systematic approach to physics study process, when implementing essential principles of an educational environment, has to be launched at the university considering essential principles of an educational environment. That is, physics module objectives have to be formulated in the context of the whole study program and the expected competences, and not in the context of knowledge in physics as a separate discipline, seeking to avoid a conflict between normative and interpretative paradigms.

A few decades ago, the objectives and contents of physics as a discipline were similar for different study programs. Students could often not understand why they had to learn about a particular physics phenomenon when they did not see any links with their study program. That is why, according to a systematic approach, the first requirements for educators and for an institution are formulation of the objectives of the physics module and only then, after the evaluation of the particular study program objectives and after application of the principle of integration, building physics module content (Fig.1, 1), since general and special educational objectives obtain sense through a definite discipline content where they are expressed (Boeker, 2003; Britton, 2000; Ramsden, 2000; Karenauskaitė, Dikčius, Streckytė and others, 2001). This step also implies the realization of the principle of socialization, since teaching objectives of a discipline match the study program which the student has chosen and which is important to him/her. For example, an objective of the physics module, "to analyze and interpret the results of an experiment, to evaluate measuring errors", meets the objective of a study program in medicine which is "to be aware of the "norm" concept when interpreting patient’s test results; or the objective "to comprehend and be able to explain physical changes in a human body and their importance for vital functions of different organs" correspond to the objective of medicine "to know normal physiological and pathological processes". That is why a student has to be exposed to the importance of interpreting precision measurements and the results received in medical diagnostics as only this way a student will be able to relate the issues already learnt to a general study program.

A student brings his/her explicit and tacit knowing about the surrounding world together with the values and attitudes towards learning, when entering the educational environment at the university. After classing this knowing in the teaching process, this information could be used for further acquisition of the new knowledge, for comprehension of new concepts and phenomena, as very often students are not able to trace the links between the knowledge obtained at school, especially tacit knowing, and university requirements (Ramsden, 2000, Bowden, Marton, 1998). Due to this, at the second step of a systematic approach to physics studies (Fig.1, 2) the principle of knowledge integration has to be implemented, that is, experiential knowledge of physics acquired at school and in life environments has to be assessed (these levels are very different in Lithuania; Karenauskaitė, Dikčius, and others, 2001); moreover, a student has to perceive their importance for further physics studies. In the educational process, a student has to be taught to relate the knowledge already possessed with the new one; he/she should be exposed to the ways of constructing knowledge.

In the beginning of the physics course, it is important to identify student’s attitudes towards learning and his/her meta-learning competence. As a matter of fact, they differ a lot among students, since learners are guided by different experience and motives. So, it is advisable to teach first year students the principles of studying: to reveal learning methods, to formulate learning objectives, to identify the necessary resources, to choose an individual learning strategy, to evaluate one’s learning results; in other words, to implement a meta-learning principle in the educational environment.

In order to implement the principle of socialization, an educator has to discuss experiental knowledge and learning competence assessment with every student individually. This has to be accomplished as the third step of the systematic approach, negotiating/discussing conditions (Fig.1, 3). In the context of a study program and physics module objectives, individual student’s study objectives which meet student’s interests have to be identified (Fig.1, 4). Such negotiations and discussions about individual learning objectives are the key point to student motivation in the study process, as they ensure the realization of an individualization principle: a student can understand that knowledge depends on his/her experience and activity; this makes him/her feel equal in decision making, stimulates self-confidence and motivates a deep attitude to learning (Garvin, Ramsier, 2003; Lipinskienė, 2002).

Figure 1. Systematic Approach to Physics Study Process

The content of an individual student’s module is constructed in the context of the content of basic physics course and learner’s real potential (Fig.1, 5). It has to contain a compulsory minimum of knowledge for the chosen study program and to reflect the influence of physics on the surrounding environment, as presenting the contents of a definite discipline is not enough to in the context of an interpretative paradigm. In addition, in order to ensure the principle of socialization, it is necessary to demonstrate how this content helps a student to become a doctor or an engineer (Ramsden, 2000). An individual module content (Fig.1, 6) is constructed applying the principle of individualization: considering student’s interests, specifics of a chosen study program, student’s experiental knowledge, and his/her meta-learning competence. Constructing such a module enables more capable and experienced students to expand and deepen their knowledge effectively exploiting their possibilities; at the same time, weaker students are not made feel "obscure". Besides, meeting a principle of creating educational environments at the university, that is, flexibility in observing and evaluating a student’s progress, such a module has to be regularly reviewed and/or its content updated (Šiaučiukėnienė, 1997; Joiner and others, 2002).

In order to achieve student learning objectives and the general objectives of a physics module, to master the content of the course, a further step, study tactics, is essential (Fig.1, 7). Methods, ways, and tools of teaching are selected in the educational environment in order to most effectively reflect each student’s experiental knowledge in physics, his/her learning experience, and style. However, due to large number of students in groups in Lithuania, it is difficult for university teachers to launch this practice at the university, considering the interests of all students. Such individualized tactics which reflects the principle of individualization can be implemented at the eighth step of a systematic approach (Fig.1, 8), within the study process of a definite physics discipline, and it would take the shape of practical work (laboratory works) in physics. At this stage, it is essential to apply the principles of flexibility and socialization together, using the methods which stimulate individual work, self-study, and collaborative learning, involving more capable, active, and experienced students into the teaching process, organizing student-oriented activities and involving students into active, but not passive, participation during practical sessions.

At this stage, in order to develop students’ self-study skills, critical thinking, and problem solving abilities, it is necessary to launch the principle of meta-learning, using, for example, modern learning methods which enabling self-reflection, such as drawing concept maps and/or Vee diagrams (Novak, Gowin, 1999; Balevičienė, Jucevičienė, Stanikūnienė, 2003). They help students summarize the results of practical work, relate his/her experiental knowledge to the newly obtained one, link theoretical part of work to the methods, and allow to compare the results to theoretical statements (applying the principle of integration, the shift from concrete to abstract is realized). Reflexive learning methods help a student evaluate one’s own performance and learn from it, enables him/her to summarize the results of the experiment, to better understand theoretical models, to expand the concepts of physics, and even to form moral values.

Since every student is different in his/her intellectual and thinking abilities and experience, therefore, when aiming at constructing learner’s correct understanding during the learning process, it is advisable to organize a group discussion – collective reflection of work results and of their theoretical background. It helps a student generalize the results of an individual and frontal experiment and allows learning other students’ cognitive structures (Bowden, Marton, 1998; Garwin, Ramsier, 2003; Joiner and others, 2002; Mills and others, 1999), to identify mistakes, and to form a correct understanding of the phenomenon, rule, or concept researched. Besides, through discussion, students learn to think, argue, communicate, and collaborate; they improve oral communicative abilities and enrich their individual experience. Thus, a general objective is being achieved, which is to help all the students change their understanding. Besides, conditions for implementing the principle of socialization in the educational environment are created and an effective feedback, based on a new learning paradigm (not limited to a formal evaluation by marks in teaching paradigm) (Lipinskienė, 2002; Wood, 2004), is established. Informal and timely approval of the acquired knowledge, positive critics, and an ongoing perception of one’s own progress stimulates student’s learning motivation, active involvement in discipline studies, and creates a favourable educational environment for a student, since this environment considers student’s individual needs and experiential knowledge. In such a way, conditions are created to ‘recognize’ and ‘accept’ the knowledge acquired in the educational environment, competences, and the learning experience ‘into one’s individual learning environment’.

A teacher receives feedback about class activities when organizing discussions and participating in them, while observing students and analyzing concept maps or Vee diagrams. He/she can evaluate student progress, recognize their strong and weak sides of perception, evaluate the suitability of methods and other teaching aids; a teacher has a tool to evaluate not only knowledge of physics (Fig.1, 9), but skills as well, he/she can identify student’s competences obtained during classes and their independent studies (Fig.1, 9). This is one of the most important factors in a successful educator’s performance, emphasizing positive aspects of work, enabling to find mistakes in student perception, providing information how to improve and change the content of an individual module or the tactics of study.

In conclusion, it can be stated that seeking to ensure an educational process of high quality in a physics course, it is necessary to implement a Systematic Approach to Physics Study Process. It is possible by implementing and applying the principles of meta-learning, flexibility, socialization, individualization and integration, by considering learner’s individual experience, his/her learning objectives, and by forming the objectives of a physics module in the context of a selected study program. A systematic approach meets interpretative and learning paradigms, emphasizes the openness of the empowering learning educational environment, connects teaching, related to the peculiarities of an educational environment, a student (individual’s learning environment), and the teaching content into one whole, when aiming at cooperation with learners in the teaching process and seeking their deep attitude towards learning.

This system is directed towards students who study physics not as their major at the university. Further, it is planned to test the effectiveness of the system and its influence upon students in medicine, odontology and public health study programs at Vilniaus University.

Notes:

¹ A learning environment is a space, in which a learner acquires knowledge, skills and values, communicating with sources of information and individuals who have more experience, and using the advantages of a constructive, strong-willed, deliberate activity, based on expedience and reflexion

² The term ‘environment‘ defines not only natural conditions, but also technological, social, political, economic and cultural environment.

3 The empowering learning educational environments (further in the article “educational environments”) containing multi-variant potential to be transformed into learning environments for individuals are created by educators

This document was added to the Education-line database on 02 December 2004