Defining Friction Force: A Proposed Solution to a Textbook Problem

Abstract

Scientific concepts are the building blocks of scientific thought and science communication. Therefore, to achieve scientific literacy it is necessary to construct and define the concepts accurately. In this study, the concept of friction force, which is frequently encountered in science textbooks, is discussed. The explanations of the concept in science textbooks have been found to be inadequate in effectively explaining several situations. To address this issue, this study aimed to examine the concept of friction force in the textbooks and to propose a more comprehensive definition. The study was conducted using the document analysis method. A total of 26 resource books (11 university physics textbooks, 4 science-term glossaries, 2 secondary school physics textbooks, 6 middle school science textbooks, and 3 popular science textbooks) were analyzed in the study. Several inconsistencies in the explanations for the concept of friction force were found. Based on the analysis, a more comprehensive definition was proposed to fully and consistently explain the effects and the direction of friction force. 

Keywords

• Textbooks,Friction force,Science education

References

1. Akbulut, H. İ. (2013). Examining the effect of instruction with dual situated learning model on students' cognitive achievement and conceptual change: Force and Motion unit sample. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Karadeniz Teknik University. Trabzon.
2. Akgün, A., Gönen, S., & Yılmaz, A. (2005). Misconceptions of preservice science teachers regarding the structure and conductivity of mixtures. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 28, 1-8.
3. Atasoy, Ş., & Akdeniz, A. R. (2007). Newton’un hareket kanunları konusunda kavram yanılgılarını belirlemeye yönelik bir testin geliştirilmesi ve uygulanması (Developing and applying a test related to appearing misconceptions about newtonian laws of motion). Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(1), 45-49.
4. Atasoy, Ş., Küçük, M., & Akdeniz, A. R. (2011). Remedying science student teachers’ misconceptions of force and motion using worksheets based on constructivist learning theory. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 3(4), 519-534.
5. Aydoğan, S., Güneş, B., & Gülçiçek, Ç. (2003). The misconceptions about heat and temperature. Gazi University Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 23(2), 111-124.
6. Ayverdi, İ. (2008). Misalli büyük Türkçe sözlük. İstanbul, Turkey: Kubbealtı Neşriyatı
7. Bilgin, İ., & Geban, Ö. (2001). The use of anology to remove 10th grade students' misconception related to chemical equilibrium concepts. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 20, 26-32.
8. Çapa, Y. (2000). An analysis of 9th grade students’ misconceptions concerning photosynthesis and respiration in plants, Unpublished master’s thesis. Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.

9. Chee, C. T. (1996). Common misconceptions in frictional force among university physics students. Teaching and Learning, 16(2), 107-116.
10. Chiappetta, E. L., Sethna, G. H., & Fillman, D. A. (1991). A quantitative analysis of high school chemistry textbooks form scientific literacy themes and expository learning aids. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 939-951.
11. Coştu, B., Ayas, A., & Ünal, S. (2007). Misconceptions about boiling and their possible reasons. Kastamonu Education Journal, 15(1), 123-136.
12. Cushing, J. T. (1998). Philosophical concepts in physics I: The historical relations between Philosophy and scientific theories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Dixon, S., J. (2005). Diagnostic assessment of preparedness of level one sports science students for biomechanics modules. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 36(1), 49-63.
14. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children's ideas in science. Philadephia, PA: Open University Press
15. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E.(1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher. 23(7), 5-12
16. Driver, R., & Easley, J. A. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development inadolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5 (1), 61-84.
17. Flodin, V.S. (2009). The necessity of making visible concepts with multiple meanings in science education: The use of the gene concept in a biology textbook. Science and Education, 18(1), 73-94.
18. Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students in electrochemistry: electric currents and oxidation - reduction reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29 (2), 121-142.
19. Genç, G. (2008). 6th grade primary school students’ understanding level and misconception in the subject of force and motion. Unpublished master’s thesis. Atatürtk University, Erzurum, Turkey.Günbatar, S., & Sarı, M. (2005). Developing models for difficult and abstract concepts in electrics and magnetism. Gazi University Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 25(1), 185-197.
20. Gunstone, R., White R., & Fensham, P. (1988). Developments in style and purpose of research on the learning of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 513-530.
21. Güzel, H., Oral, İ., & Yıldırım, A. (2009). Lise II fizik ders kitabının fizik öğretmenleri tarafından değerlendirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 133-142.
22. Hançer, H. A. (2007). Fen eğitiminde yapılandırmacı yaklaşıma dayalı bilgisayar destekli öğrenmenin kavram yanılgıları üzerine etkisi. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 31(1), 69-81.
23. Hapkiewicz, A. (1992). Finding a list of science misconceptions. MSTA Newsletter, 38(Winter), 11-14.
24. Kinchin, I. M. (2000). Concept mapping in biology. Journal of Biological Education, 34 (2), 61–68.
25. Jimoyiannis, A, & Komis, V. (2003). Investigating Greek students’ ideas about force and motion. Research in Science Education. 33 (3), 375-392.
26. Küçük, M. (2005). Farklı öğrenim seviyelerindeki öğrencilerin ve fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının yerçekimi kuvveti hakkında sahip oldukları kavramların incelenmesi. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 2(1), 32-45.
27. Kumandaş, B., Ateskan, A., & Lane, J. (2018). Misconceptions in biology : a meta-synthesis study of research , 2000 – 2014. Journal of Biological Education, 1–15. http://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2018.1490798
28. Kurnaz, M. A., & Ekşi, Ç. (2015). An analysis of high school students’ mental models of solid friction in physics. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(3), 787-795.
29. Leite, L. (1999). Heat and temperature: An analysis of how these concepts are dealt with in textbooks. European Journal of Teacher Education, 22(1), 75-88.
30. Linn, M. C. (2006). The knowledge integration perspective on learning and instruction. In R. Sawyer, Keith (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 243–264). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press
31. McDermott, L. C., & Redish, E. F. (1999). RL-PER1: Resource letter on physics education research. The American Journal of Physics, 67, 755–767.
32. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
33. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34. Novak, J. D., & D. Musonda (1991). A twelve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning. American Educational Research Journal. 1 (28), 117–153.
35. Nuhoğlu, H. (2008). Evaluation of the secondary school pupils’ view about force and motion. İnönü University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 9(16), 123-140.
36. Osborne, R., & Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children's science. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
37. Özalp, D. ve Kahveci, A. (2011). Maddenin tanecikli yapısı ile ilgili iki aşamalı tanılayıcı soruların ontoloji temelinde geliştirilmesi.[Development of two-tier diagnostic item based on ontology in the topic of particulate nature of matter]. Eğitim ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 40(191), 135-156.
38. Palmer, D. (1997). The effect of context on students’ reasoning about forces. International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 681–696
39. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
40. Prasitpong, S., & Chitaree, R. (2009). What Thai students think about directions and types of frictional forces. International Conference on Physics Education, 1263, 66-69.
41. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Sanger, M.J., & Greenbowe, T.J. (1999). Analysis of college chemistry textbooks as sources of misconceptions and errors in electrochemistry. Journal of Chemical Education. 76(6), 853- DOI: 10.1021/ed076p853
43. Shen, J., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Connecting scientific explanations and everyday observations: A technology enhanced curriculum on modeling static electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 33(12), 1597–1623.
44. Staver, J. R., & Lumpe, A. T. (1993). A content analysis of the presentation of the mole concept in chemistry textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(4), 321-337.
45. Sung, S., Shen, J., Stanger-Hall, K. F., Wiegert, C., Li, W. I., Brown, S., & Robertson, T. (2015). Toward interdisciplinary perspectives: Using osmotic pressure as an example for analyzing textbook explanations. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(4), 76-87.
46. Tavukçuoğlu, E. (2018). Investıgating high school students’ cognitive structures about friction, acceleration and inertia concepts, Unpublished master’s thesis, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
47. Tekkaya, C., Çapa, Y., & Yılmaz, Ö. (2000). Biyoloji öğretmen adaylarının genel biyoloji konularındaki kavram yanılgıları. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 18, 140-147.
48. Tery, C., Jones, G., & Hurford, W. (1985). Children’s conceptual understanding of forces and equilibrium. Physics Education, 20, 162-165.
49. Trumper, R. & Gorsky, P. (1996). A cross-college age study about physics students’ conceptions of force in pre-service training for high school teachers. Physics Education, 31 (4), 227-236.
50. Trumper, R. & Gorsky, P. (1997). A survey of biology students’ conceptions of force in pre-service training for high school teachers. Research in Science & Technological Education, 15 (2), 133-149.
51. Ünsal, Y., & Güneş, B. (2003). The investigation of the primary school 6th class science textbook by the physics issues. Gazi University Gazi Faculty of Education Journal, 23(3), 115-130.
52. Wong C.L., & Chu H.E. (2017) The conceptual elements of multiple representations: A study of textbooks’ representations of electric current. In (Eds) Treagust D., Duit R., Fischer H. Multiple Representations in Physics Education (pp. 183-206). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
53. Yağbasan, R., & Gülçiçek, Ç. (2003). Describing the characteristics of misconceptions in science teaching. Pamukkale University Faculty of Education Journal, 13(13), 102-120.
54. Yıldız, A & Büyükkasap, E. (2006). Misconceptions of the students in the department of physics about force and motion subjects and the conjecture of the teaching staff on this matter. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30, 268-277.